Environmental Protection Agency
2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents
Introduction and Overview
EPA's Mission and Goals i-1
Annual Plan and Budget Overview i-3
Organization of the Annual Performance Plan and Budget i-13
Resource Tables
Resources by Appropriation RT-1
Resources by Goal/Appropriation RT-3
Resources by Goal/Objective RT-8
Goal 1: Clean Air and Global Climate Change 1-1
Healthier Outdoor Air 1-14
Healthier Indoor Air 1-65
Protect the Ozone Layer 1-92
Radiation 1-100
Reduce Greenhouse Gas Intensity 1-111
Enhance Science and Research 1-133
Subject Index 1-147
Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water H-l
Protect Human Health H-12
Protect Water Quality H-50
Enhance Science and Research 11-86
Subject Index 11-98
Goal 3: Land Preservation and Restoration ffl-l
Preserve Land IH-14
Restore Land 111-39
Enhance Science and Research 111-87
Subject Index 111-97
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems IV-1
Chemical, Organism, and Pesticide Risks IV-22
Communities IV-80
Ecosystems FV-103
Enhance Science and Research IV-134
Subject Index IV-176
Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship V-l
Improve Compliance V-17
Improve Environmental Performance through Pollution Prevention and Innovation V-40
Build Tribal Capacity V-69
Enhance Science and Research V-78
Subject Index V-89
Enabling/Support Programs
Office of Air and Radiation ESP-1
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response ESP-3
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance ESP-5
Office of Administration and Resources Management ESP-8
Office of Environmental Information ESP-15
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents
Office of the Chief Financial Officer ESP-29
Office of International Activities ESP-34
Office of the Administrator ESP-36
Office of the General Counsel ESP-45
Inspector General ESP-49
Subject Index ESP-56
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Clean Air and Global Climate Change 1
Clean and Safe Water ; 22
Land Preservation and Restoration 33
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 43
Compliance and Environmental Stewardship 68
Special Analysis
Annual Performance Plan Components SA-1
Major Management Challenges SA-3
EPA User Fee Program SA-15
Working Capital Fund SA-17
STAG—Appropriation Account SA-18
STAG—Categorical Grants Program SA-19
STAG—Statutory Authority and Eligible Uses SA-25
STAG—Infrastructure Financing SA-37
Program Projects SA-41
Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) SA-50
Subject Index SA-64
-------
Introduction/Overview
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents
Introduction and Overview
EPA's Mission and Goals i-1
Annual Plan and Budget Overview i-3
Organization of the Annual Performance Plan and Budget i-13
-------
EPA's Mission
The mission of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is to protect and safeguard
human health and the environment, with a new focus on collaboration and partnerships with our
Geographic and Regional partners. This budget supports the Administration's commitment to
environmental results — making the air cleaner, water purer, and better protecting our land. The
Agency's proposal for FY 2005 also reflects our primary goal of compliance with national
standards, which support neighborhood solutions. It will enable the Agency to take a giant step
toward national market-based solutions, boosting our nation to the next level of environmental
protection.
EPA's Goals
EPA has five strategic, long-term goals hi its Strategic Plan that guide the Agency's
planning, budgeting, analysis, accountability, and implementation processes.
• Clean Air and Global Climate Change: EPA will protect and improve the air so it is
healthy to breathe and risks to human health and the environment are reduced. EPA will
reduce greenhouse gas intensity by enhancing partnerships with businesses and other sectors.
EPA and its partners will protect human health and the environment by attaining and
maintaining health-based air-quality standards and reducing the risk from toxic air pollutants,
and will encourage voluntary actions to improve indoor air in homes, schools, and office
buildings. Through worldwide action, ozone concentrations in the stratosphere will improve,
reducing the risk to human health from overexposure to ultraviolet radiation. EPA and its
partners will also work to minimize unnecessary releases of radiation and be prepared to
minimize impacts should unwanted releases occur. In addition, EPA will provide and apply
sound science and conduct leading-edge research in support of air programs.
• Clean and Safe Water: EPA will ensure drinking water is safe. EPA will also 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.
EPA will protect human health by reducing exposure to contaminants in drinking water, in
fish and shellfish, and hi recreational waters. EPA will also protect the quality of rivers,
lakes, and streams on a watershed basis, and protect coastal and ocean waters. EPA's water
program will be supported by providing and applying a sound scientific foundation through
the conduct of leading-edge research and development of a better understanding and
characterization of the environmental outcomes.
• Land Preservation and Restoration: EPA will 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.
EPA will reduce waste generation, increase recycling, and ensure proper management of
waste and petroleum products at facilities in ways that prevent releases. EPA will also work
to 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. EPA's
land preservation and restoration efforts will be supported by the application of sound
science and the conduct of leading-edge research.
• Healthy Communities and Ecosystems: EPA will protect, sustain, or restore the health of
people, communities, and ecosystems using integrated and comprehensive approaches and
partnerships.
EPA will prevent and reduce potential pesticide, chemical, and genetically-engineered
biological organism risks to humans, communities, and ecosystems. EPA will work to
protect, sustain, and restore the health of communities, natural habitats, and ecosystems,
including brownfield sites, the United States-Mexico border, wetlands, and specific
ecosystems such as the Great Lakes, Chesapeake Bay, and Gulf of Mexico. The Agency will
work to enhance the Nation's capability to prevent, detect, and recover from acts of terror
through research, enhanced data collection and sharing, and provision of technical support to
infrastructure. In addition, EPA will provide a sound scientific foundation for protecting,
sustaining, and restoring the health of people, communities, and ecosystems through leading-
edge research.
• Compliance and Environmental Stewardship: EPA will improve environmental
performance through compliance with environmental requirements, preventing pollution, and
promoting environmental stewardship. EPA will protect human health and the environment
by encouraging innovation and providing incentives for governments, businesses, and the
public that promote environmental stewardship. Additional funds and resources provided in
2004 and continued into 2005 will allow resumption of targeted inspections and enforcement
activities in both the civil and criminal context.
EPA will maximize compliance through compliance assistance, compliance incentives, and
enforcement. EPA will also work to improve environmental protection and enhance natural
resource conservation on the part of government, business, and the public through the
adoption of pollution prevention and sustainable practices, the reduction of regulatory
barriers, and the application of results-based, innovative, and multimedia approaches. In
addition, EPA will assist Federally recognized tribes hi assessing the condition of their
environment, help build their capacity to implement environmental programs, and carry out
programs in Indian country where needed to address environmental issues. EPA will also
strengthen the scientific evidence and research supporting environmental policies and
decisions on compliance, pollution prevention, and environmental stewardship.
i-2
-------
Annual Plan and Budget Overview
The EPA's FY 2005 Annual Plan and Budget requests $7.8 billion in discretionary
budget authority and 17,904 Full Tune Equivalents (FTE). This budget request supports the
Agency's core programs and implementation of critical components of the President's
Management Agenda. Additionally, this request emphasizes the importance of adequate
resources and vision necessary to reach our Nation's environmental goals. Resources also
support the Agency's efforts to work with its partners toward protecting air, water, and land, as
well as providing for EPA's role hi safeguarding the Nation from terrorist acts. The request
supports the Administration's commitment to setting high environmental protection standards,
while focusing on results and performance, and achieving goals outlined in the President's
Management Agenda.
This Annual Plan and Budget submission demonstrates EPA's commitment to protecting
human health and the environment, building and enhancing relationships with our Geographic
and Regional partners, and improving environment results. EPA's budget request places a strong
emphasis on working with stakeholders to protect human health. For example, the Agency
requests $65 million for grants to retrofit the Nation's school buses with cleaner technologies,
thereby reducing diesel emissions. The budget will also assist our state and local partners in
meeting national environmental quality standards. EPA requests $20 million and $45 million
respectively to support the Agency's request for Water Quality Monitoring and the Great Lakes
Legacy Act. These efforts exhibit EPA's commitment to collaborative environmental protection.
Clean Air and Global Climate Change
The FY 2005 President's Budget expands EPA's Clean School Bus USA program to $65
million in grant funding for projects that reduce diesel emissions from school buses through bus
retrofit or replacement. Clean School Bus USA helps ensure that school buses - which are the
safest way for kids to get to school - also are the cleanest possible transportation for this
generation of school children. EPA initially launched the program in April 2003 using $5
million hi grant funding. The initial grant offering garnered 120 grant applications from every
region of the country totaling nearly $60 million hi requests and offering some $36 million hi
matching resources. EPA supported 17 of these projects with the given resources. By expanding
this program, additional resources are available to communities for localized solutions that
address an issue important to children and parents across the nation.
The Clear Skies initiative draws on EPA's experience to modernize the Clean Ah- Act.
Using a market-based approach, the Clear Skies initiative will dramatically reduce power plant
emissions of three of the most significant air pollutants—sulfur dioxide (802), nitrogen oxides
(NOX), and mercury. Reductions in SC»2 and NOX emissions will also reduce airborne fine
particulate matter (PM2.s), which is associated with these two pollutants. EPA's approach builds
upon the success of the acid rain cap-and-trade program created by the Clean Air Act
amendments in 1990. The Clear Skies initiative will achieve substantially greater reductions in
air pollution from power plants more quickly and with more certainty than the existing Clean Air
Act. The initiative requires mandatory reductions of SOa, NOX, and mercury (Hg) by an average
of 70% from today's levels and ensures that these levels are achieved and sustained through caps
on emissions. EPA has also proposed an Interstate Air Quality Rule that also utilizes a cap and
i-3
-------
The number of people living in areas with
monitored ambient ozone concentrations below
the NAAQS for the one-hour ozone standard will
increase by 4% for a cumulative total of 53%.
trade program to reduce SOa and NOX as well as a
proposed Utility Mercury Reductions Rule that
seeks comments on two approaches for reducing
the estimated 48 tons of mercury currently emitted
each year by coal-burning power plants in the
United States. Despite these reductions, some states will need to implement further measures to
meet National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). To help states and localities develop
cost-effective strategies, EPA also will need to provide assistance to states to implement
reductions. One approach is to strengthen air models by developing emission factors and
improving emission inventories.
A key to achieving the Clean Air Goal is $313.0 million included in this budget for air
grants that support states and tribes. This total includes resources to assist states, tribes and local
governments in devising additional stationary and mobile source strategies to reduce ozone,
particulate matter, and other pollutants.
Air toxics emissions nationwide from stationary and
mobile sources combined will be reduced by an additional
1% of the updated 1993 baseline of 6.0 million tons for a
cumulative reduction of 38%.
The Agency will develop
strategies and rules to help states and
tribes reduce emissions and exposure to
hazardous air pollutants, particularly in
urban areas, and reduce harmful
deposition in water bodies.
EPA's air research program will continue to provide a strong scientific basis for policy
and regulatory decisions and explore emerging problem areas.
Climate Change
This budget request includes $130.1
million to meet the Agency's climate change
objectives by working with business and other
sectors to deliver multiple benefits — from
cleaner air to lower energy bills — while
improving overall scientific understanding of
climate change and its potential consequences. The core of EPA's climate change efforts are
government/industry partnership programs designed to capitalize on the tremendous
opportunities available to consumers, businesses, and organizations to make sound investments
hi efficient equipment and practices. These programs help remove barriers in the marketplace,
resulting m faster deployment of technology into the residential, commercial, transportation, and
industrial sectors of the economy.
Clean and Safe Water
Over the 30 years since enactment of the Clean Water and Safe Drinking Water Acts,
government, citizens, and the private sector have worked together to make dramatic progress hi
improving the quality of surface waters and drinking water.
Greenhouse gas emissions will be reduced from
projected levels by approximately 90 MMTCE
per year through EPA partnerships with
businesses, schools, state and local governments,
and other organizations.
i-4
-------
Thirty years ago, much of the nation's tap water had either very limited treatment or no
treatment at all. About two-thirds of the surface waters assessed by states were not attaining
basic water quality goals and were considered polluted. Some of the Nation's waters were open
sewers posing health risks, and many waterbodies were so polluted that traditional uses, such as
swirnming, fishing, and recreation were impossible.
By 2005 the percentage of the population served by
community water systems will receive drinking water that
meets health-based standards with which systems need to
comply as of December 2001 will be 94%.
By 2005, using both pollution prevention and restoration
approaches, so that 500 of the Nation's watersheds, water
quality standards are met in at least 80% of the assessed
water segments.
Today drinking water systems
monitor and treat water to assure
compliance with drinking water
standards applicable to a wider range of
contaminants. In addition, drinking
water sources are now protected, which
reduces treatment costs in the long run.
The number of polluted waters has been
dramatically reduced and many clean
waters are even healthier. A massive investment of Federal, state, and local funds resulted in a
new generation of wastewater treatment facilities able to provide "secondary" treatment or
better. Discharges from over 50 different categories of industries are now regulated and efforts
to implement 'best management practices' have helped reduce runoff of pollutants from diffuse
or 'nonpoint' sources.
In FY 2005, EPA will focus on four strategies toward achieving the Nation's clean and
safe water goals. To better address the complexity of the remaining water quality challenges,
EPA will promote local watershed approaches to execute the best and most cost effective
solutions to local and regional water problems. To protect and build on the gains of the past,
EPA will focus on its core water programs. To maximize the impact of each dollar, EPA will
continue to strengthen vital partnerships with states, tribes and local governments, and others
working toward the common goal of improving the Nation's waters. To leverage progress
through innovation, EPA will promote water quality trading, water efficiency, and other market
based approaches.
In FY 2005, to further support states and tribes in implementing CWA programs, EPA is
making a significant investment in water quality monitoring to strengthen and upgrade state
programs through state grants, improved data management systems and improved monitoring
tools.
EPA's water research program will continue to provide a strong scientific basis for policy
and regulatory decisions and explore emerging problem areas.
Water Quality Monitoring
The FY 2005 water quality monitoring investment will be a major step toward solving the
well-documented shortcomings of the Nation's water quality monitoring. EPA can make the
most of scarce resources through information-based management, using tools-such as prevention,
source water protection, watershed trading, and permitting on watershed basis. Monitoring is the
foundation of information-based management and it is imperative that the data and information
gaps be closed as quickly as possible. To strengthen and upgrade water quality monitoring
i-5
-------
programs across the country, EPA proposes two components: State grants targeted specifically
to enhance state monitoring programs as well as support and enhancement of state data
management systems.
Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) and Storm Water
States are struggling with implementation of the NPDES permitting programs, as shown
by withdrawal petitions and permit backlogs. Compounding the problem is that the regulated
universe has increased by tenfold due to new requirements for concentrated animal feeding
operations and storm water runoff. Additional resources in the form of state grants will assist
states in implementing the NPDES CAPO programs and issuing storm water permits.
Water Quality Trading
In FY 2005 EPA will advance water quality trading in voluntary partnerships on a
watershed basis. It capitalizes on economies of scale and cost differences among sources.
Trading allows one source to meet its regulatory obligations by using pollutant reductions gained
by another source and provides incentives for voluntary reductions at a reduced cost to all. It
encourages earlier and/or greater reductions than required, more cost effective programs, and
incentives for innovative solutions to complex water quality problems.
Water Efficiency
Growing populations place increasing demands on water sources. In addition, the nation
faces a multi-billion dollar gap between water and wastewater infrastructure needs over the next
20 years. The touchstone of a long-term strategy to manage and maintain water and wastewater
infrastructure is sustainability. An important component of that strategy is promoting sustainable
systems. EPA will work in partnership with the states, utility industry and others to enhance the
operating efficiencies of systems. These efficiencies will help systems make necessary
investments to meet growing demand and sustain gains made over the past three decades. EPA
will also help mitigate the infrastructure needs by investing hi efforts to reduce water demand
and wastewater flows, allowing for deferral or downsizing of capital projects. Added benefits to
reduced demand include: maintaining streamflows, protecting aquatic habitat, avoiding
overdrawn aquifers, and conserving supply sources.
Land Preservation and Restoration
This budget continues a commitment to clean up toxic waste sites with $1.4 billion for
Superfund. The Agency will also work to maximize the participation of responsible parties in
site cleanups while promoting fairness in the enforcement process. EPA will continue the
progress we have made in cleaning up toxic waste sites while protecting public health and
returning land to productive use. As of January 6, 2004, approximately 700 cleanup construction
projects were underway at over 430 Superfund National Priority List (NPL) sites construction
was complete on over 890 sites, or 59% of NPL sites. EPA has completed all final cleanup plans
at over 1,100 NPL sites, undertaken 7,900 removals at hazardous waste sites to immediately
reduce human health and environmental threats, assessed over 45,300 sites, and removed more
than 33,400 sites from the national toxic waste site list to help promote the economic
i-6
-------
redevelopment of these properties. The waste research program continues to support the
Agency's objective of reducing or controlling potential risks to human health and the
environment at contaminated waste sites by accelerating scientifically-defensible and cost-
effective decisions for cleanup at complex sites, mining sites, marine spills, and Brownfields in
accordance with CERCLA.
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems
Ensuring Safe Food
The FY 2005 request includes $156.7
million to meet implementation challenges of the
Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996 so
, ,, . . .,, . _ required to be reassessed over ten years.
that all Americans will continue to enjoy one of
By the end of 2005, EPA will reassess a
cumulative 88% of the 9,721 pesticide tolerances
the safest and most affordable food supplies in the world. The Agency's implementation of
FQPA focuses on science-driven policies for pesticides review, seeks to encourage the
development of reduced risk pesticides to provide an alternative to the older versions on the
market, and works to develop and deliver information on alternative pesticides/techniques and
best pest control practices to pesticide users. The Agency is also working to help farmers'
transition—without disrupting production—to safer substitutes and alternative farming practices.
Reassessing existing tolerances ensures food safety, especially for infants and children, and
ensures that all pesticides registered for use meet current health standards. This budget request
also supports FQPA research. That research seeks to reduce uncertainties in risk assessment by
developing tools to reduce reliance on default assumptions and support the development of new
assessment methodologies.
Chemical Programs
EPA's strategy to prevent and reduce potential risks posed by chemicals and
microorganisms comprises three primary approaches: preventing the introduction into U.S.
commerce of chemicals that pose unreasonable risks; effectively screening the stock of
chemicals already in use for potential risk; and developing and implementing action plans to
reduce use of and exposure to chemicals that have been demonstrated to harm humans and the
environment. EPA will continue to work with states and Tribes, other federal agencies, the
private sector, and international entities to implement this strategy and, hi particular, to make
protection of children and the aging a fundamental goal of public health and environmental
protection in the United States and around the world. Both the New Chemicals and Existing
Chemicals programs have initiated work to develop long-term, ambitious targets not only in
response to the FY 2004 PART process but also hi conjunction with the EPA Strategic Plan
revision effort. Both have made significant improvements since the FY 2004 review, with new
chemicals program receiving one of the highest ratings of EPA programs reviewed by the PART
for FY 2005. Both programs are continuing its efforts to improve performance measurement in
response to FY 2005 PART findings by developing long-term and associated annual efficiency
measures.
i-7
-------
Great Lakes
To advance the Agency's efforts regarding innovative and effective partnerships, EPA is
making a significant investment in the Great Lakes Legacy Act program to address cleanup of
contaminated sediments. EPA and its Great Lakes community partners will collaborate on
remedial action within the Areas of Concern identified as potential Legacy Act sediment
remediation sites in 2005.
Chesapeake Bay
The FY 2005 President's Budget includes $30 million for the Chesapeake Bay. Of that
total, $10 million in the Targeted Watershed program is directed toward Chesapeake Bay for a
regional pilot program that will help sewage treatment plants reduce nutrient discharges to the
Bay through nonpoint source projects. Partners in the effort to protect the Bay include
Maryland, Virginia and Pennsylvania; the District of Columbia; the Chesapeake Bay
Commission, a tri-state legislative body; EPA, which represents the Federal government; and
participating citizen advisory groups.
Brownfields
Additionally, the Agency is committed to building innovative and effective partnerships
that allow states and tribes to make environmental decisions on local levels. This budget
provides $210 million for Brownfields. As one of the Administration's top environmental
priorities and a key to restoring contaminated sites to productive use, the Brownfields program
will draw on some of these resources to enhance state and Tribal response programs. By
protecting land and revitalizing contaminated sites throughout the US, EPA continues to expand
efforts to foster healthy and economically sustainable communities and attract new investments
to rejuvenate areas.
Homeland Security
EPA's FY 2005 Annual Plan and Budget requests $97 million and 151 FTE to support
the Agency's Homeland Security responsibilities in accordance with the Public Health Security
and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002, the National Strategy for Homeland
Security, and Presidential Directives (PDD) 39, 62, 63. In addition, EPA will conduct research
and provide guidance and technical support for Federal, state, local governments, and other
institutions hi the areas of biological agents, water security, and rapid risk assessment.
Compliance and Environmental Stewardship
Many of the environmental
improvements in this country during
the past 30 years can be attributed to a
strong set of environmental laws and
EPA's efforts to ensure compliance
with those laws through a smart violations-
A strong enforcement program identifies and reduces
noncompliance problems, assists the regulated community in
understanding environmental laws and regulations, responds to
complaints from the public, strives to secure a level economic
playing field for law-abiding companies, and deters future
enforcement program. A smart
i-8
-------
Increase the regulated community's compliance
with environmental requirements through then-
expanded use of compliance assistance. The
Agency will continue to support small business
compliance assistance centers and develop
compliance assistance tools such as sector
notebooks and compliance guides.
enforcement program uses a mix of integrated strategies, partnerships, and innovative
approaches to provide cleaner air, purer water, and better protected land. An integrated approach
considers the appropriate tools to use when addressing environmental problems, and uses data
analysis and other relevant information to marshal and leverage resources to target significant
noncompliance and address the associated environmental risks. The program uses a combination
of tools such as compliance assistance and incentives, monitoring, and civil and criminal
enforcement, in cooperating with our regulatory partner, to provide a broad scope of actions
designed to protect public health and the environment. State, Tribal, and local governments bear
much of the responsibility for ensuring compliance. EPA works in partnership with them and
other Federal agencies to promote environmental protection.
The FY 2005 request will continue to
support the regulated community's compliance
with environmental requirements through
voluntary compliance incentives and assistance
programs. The Agency will provide information
and technical assistance to the regulated
community through the compliance assistance
program to increase its understanding of all
statutory or regulatory environmental requirements, thereby reducing risk to human health and
the environment and gaining measurable improvements in compliance. The program will also
continue to develop strategies and compliance assistance tools that will support initiatives
targeted toward improving compliance at Federal facilities, in specific industrial and commercial
sectors, or with certain regulatory requirements.
The President's FY 2005 request continues to support pollution prevention. Increasingly,
the nation is recognizing the value of pollution prevention as an environmental strategy, as a
sustainable business practice, and as a funding principle of our society. It is also a vehicle for
"reinventing" traditional EPA programs and devising innovative alternative strategies to protect
public health and the environment. Through EPA's leadership, pollution prevention has become
a key element of initiatives to improve federal environmental management, empower state and
tribal programs, encourage corporate stewardship, and better inform the public.
Enhancing Environmental Performance
To further EPA's goal of promoting environmental stewardship, the Agency will make
investments in programs to support State innovation and pollution prevention in FY 2005. A
new State and Tribal Performance Fund provides $23 million in competitive grants to develop
projects with tangible, performance-based environmental and health outcomes that can be
models for implementation across the nation. EPA will also continue its emphasis on working
with Tribal governments to build the capacity of their environmental programs.
Strong Science
The FY 2005 budget supports EPA's efforts to further strengthen the role of science in
decision-making by using sound scientific information and analysis to help direct policy and
establish priorities. This budget request includes $572 million for the Office of Research and
i-9
-------
Development to develop and apply strong science to address both current and future
environmental challenges. These resources support a balanced research and development
program designed to address Administration and Agency priorities, and meet the challenges of
the Clean Ah- Act (CAA), the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA), and other
environmental statutes. The budget request includes important new or increased research efforts
in the following areas: computational toxicology, data quality, and IRIS.
In accordance with the Administration's Investment Criteria for Research and
Development (relevance, quality, and performance), the Agency will continue to improve the
application of the Criteria to achieve maximum environmental and health protections. Efforts
include applying the highest quality scientific methods, models, tools, and approaches.
Relevance
EPA's Office of Research and Development (QRD) has developed Multi-Year Plans
(MYPs) for each of its major research programs. These MYPs describe the scientific context and
present clear goals and priorities for each research program. Reflecting the inherently long-term
nature of research, each MYP has identified annual and long-term (five to eight years out) goals
that contribute to achievement of the Agency's strategic outcome goals and objectives. Each
MYP is regularly updated to reflect scientific and budgetary changes, and is independently peer-
reviewed.
The Agency is also exploring options for establishing periodic evaluations of EPA
research programs. Beginning hi FY 2005, regular evaluations by independent and external
panels will provide prospective and retrospective reviews of program relevance, quality, and
performance to date. Specifically, evaluators will determine whether EPA research programs
have complete plans with clear goals and priorities, articulate potential public benefits, are
relevant to National, scientific, and customer needs, and identify appropriate output and outcome
measures, schedules, and decision points. Evaluations will also include an examination of
program design to determine the appropriateness of a program's short-, intermediate-, and long-
term goals and its strategy for attaining these. Recommendations and results from these reviews
will improve the design and management of EPA research programs and help to measure
progress under the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA). EPA Program Offices
and Regions actively participate in setting goals and priorities for Agency research. This input is
used on an annual basis to inform and identify the performance impacts of budgetary decisions.
Quality
The Agency will continue to rely upon peer review as a critical means of ensuring that
Agency science activities are technically adequate, competently performed, properly
documented, and satisfy established quality requirements. To ensure quality, all scientific and
technical work products undergo either internal or external peer review, with major or significant
products requiring external peer review.
EPA's Science to Achieve Results (STAR) program is a competitive, peer-reviewed,
extramural grants program whose goal is to enhance EPA's research efforts by engaging the
i-10
-------
nation's best scientists to provide high-quality, innovative research and solutions to protect
human health and the environment. The STAR program uses external scientific peer reviewers
to rate applications based on scientific merit.
Performance
In response to recommendations from the National Research Council, EPA's Science
Advisory Board, and OMB, ORD is continually working to improve the performance of its
research programs. Because of the inherent challenge in measuring research results, EPA is
taking a multi-faceted approach in tracking and communicating the performance of its research
programs.
Specifically, EPA has developed multi-year plans for each of its research programs using
a program design/evaluation logic model to help identify the outputs, customers, transfer needs,
and short-, intermediate-, and long-term outcomes of each research program. ORD has
incorporated these critical elements its long-term and annual performance goals to illustrate how
research contributes to the achievement of Agency outcomes. The Agency has included specific
long-term goals and annual performance goals which represent significant research
accomplishments in the individual goal chapters of the budget request. EPA will also determine
success in achieving each program's research commitments not only by its timeliness in meeting
annual performance goals, but will also hold external independent reviews on a regular basis to
evaluate the relevance, quality, and performance of its research programs.
EPA believes that taking a multi-year approach to its research planning, incorporating the
elements of logic model design in the development of outcome-oriented performance
information, and initiating external independent reviews of its research programs are important
improvements in support of achieving significant research results and contributing to the
achievement of Agency environmental and health outcomes.
The President's Management Agenda: A Commitment to Reform and Results
The Agency is committed to achieving the Administration's management reform
priorities for a government that is results-oriented, citizen-centered, and market-based. This
Annual Plan and Budget represents a strong commitment to reduce regulatory burdens and
streamline Agency operations, so that the Agency's focus is on positive and measurable
environmental results while working more effectively with our partners and stakeholders. Since
FY 1999, EPA has undertaken significant management reform by restructuring its budget to
match the strategic goals and objectives of its strategic plan. Since then, EPA has worked
consistently to improve its ability to manage for results. The Agency's current management
reform agenda fully supports the goals of the President's Management Agenda, and EPA has
made demonstrable progress in carrying out the five government-wide initiatives as reflected in
Executive Branch Scorecard updates and in delivering environmental results to our ultimate
customer~the American public.
Implementation of the President's Management Agenda is a major focus of the Agency's
FY 2005 budget request. EPA has identified major efforts to accelerate its progress in "getting
to green" in all five initiatives: Budget and Performance Integration, Improved Financial
-------
Performance, Expanding E-Government, Competitive Sourcing, and Strategic Management of
Human Capital. The Agency's plans are described throughout this justification. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) rated EPA's progress as "green" in all five of the five areas and
its status as "green" in Improved Financial Performance.
EPA continues to place a great emphasis on improving performance measures. The
results of the Administration's Performance Assessment Rating Tool (PART) were used to
inform the Agency's FY 2005 budget request. For example, EPA is investing in water quality
monitoring to ensure adequate information is available to link programmatic outputs to
environmental outcomes, and the Agency is better targeting pollution prevention (P2) efforts by
enhancing P2 programs that have shown outcome results. In addition to and complementing the
Agency's outcome-based environmental performance measures, some programs have developed
or are in the process of developing efficiency measures. These measures are structured as a ratio
of key program inputs (e.g. time, dollars, FTE) to program outputs or outcomes. They are
intended to provide EPA program managers with additional information to be used as a tool for
sound decision-making in program management.
The Agency has also incorporated Measurement Development Plans (MDPs) into this
year's Annual Plan and Budget. MDPs, which recognize that environmental performance does
not necessarily improve in one year, describe efforts to fill identified measurement gaps so that
progress toward developing fully functioning measures, whether long-term or short-term, can be
tracked. MDPs provide a road map for developing unproved long-term and short-term
performance measures for inclusion in the next strategic plan, tracking current strategic targets
that cannot be measured annually, and assessing progress in addressing performance
measurement gaps.
i-12
-------
Organization of the Annual Performance Plan and Budget
The Agency's Commitment to Results-based Management
The Agency's approach to results-based management under the Government
Performance and Results Act (GPRA) is based on a full integration of long-term strategic
planning, annual planning, budgeting, and accountability. The organization of EPA's FY 2005
Annual Plan and Budget Request reflects the Agency's continuing commitment to link planning
and budgeting in an integrated process. This integrated Annual Plan and Budget promotes fiscal
accountability through a connection between resources and outcomes.
The Annual Plan and Budget presents the Agency's Goals and Objectives, and identifies
the resource levels and activities associated with them. For each Objective, the Budget sets forth
a set of annual performance goals and measures to gauge progress towards the goals. These
goals and measures represent intermediate, measurable levels of performance needed to achieve
the Agency's Objectives contained in the Agency's five-year Strategic Plan. The Agency will
continue to work with partners and stakeholders to take into account our performance over the
past years, and lay out new and innovative tools and approaches to advance our progress in
environmental protection.
Implementing the New Strategic Architecture
The Agency has taken the opportunity to couple the development of our new Strategic
Plan with a revision to the planning, budgeting, accounting, and performance structure. EPA has
developed a five goal structure hi the revised Strategic Plan. The change in the Agency's
strategic architecture from ten goals to five goals opened the way for a fresh look at how we
plan, budget, and execute our resources, and the relationship of our resources to our
performance.
We have built upon the Agency's success since 1999 hi presenting our resource request
hi a combined Annual Plan and Budget. We are introducing the concepts of "program/project"
and "activity" into our budget formulation and budget execution processes. These elements
allow the Agency to budget, account, and manage its resources at a refined level, and improve
the integration of budget and performance linkages. The program/project describes "what" EPA
does and arrays our resources in a structure that communicates effectively with our partners and
stakeholders. Our activity structure shows "how" EPA does its work and is hi compliance with
the government-wide Business Reference Model, allowing for cross-Federal agency comparisons
as needed.
Annual Plan Components
EPA's Annual Performance Plan, as for the past 6 years, is integrated into the annual
Budget request. To fully explain the Agency's resource needs, the Budget contains annual
performance goals and performance measures that the Agency uses to achieve its results. EPA
submits a stand-alone Annual Plan to Congress to meet the concern expressed hi GPRA that
"annual plans not be voluminous presentations describing performance for every activity. The
i-13
-------
Annual Plan and reports are to inform, not overwhelm the reader." (See the Special Analysis
section of this document for the Annual Performance Plan components.)
Due to timing and ongoing work on the Agency's Operating Plan, resources from the FY
2004 Consolidated Appropriations Bill are not included in this document.
Annual Performance Plan and Budget;
Resource Tables
The resource tables provide a summary of the resources that the Agency is requesting for
FY 2005 by Goal, Objective, and Appropriation.
Goal Chapters include:
• Strategic Goal Statement: Provides the long-term objective of the Goal.
• Resource Summary: Provides a summary of the resources by each Goal, Objective, and
Appropriation. (The dollar amounts in these and other tables may not add due to independent
rounding.)
• Background and Context: Set the broad context for the Goal and briefly explains why it is
of National importance.
• Means and Strategy: Broadly describes the Agency's approach to achieving the Strategic
Goal.
• Highlights: Provide an overview of major activities and programs in FY 2005 that contribute
to achieving the Goal.
• Strategic Objectives and Annual Performance Goals: Includes all the Objectives under
each Goal and link those Objectives to all FY 2005 Annual Performance Goals.
• External Factors: Address external-Agency factors, such as participation hi environmental
programs by state and local governments and other stakeholders, or economic and
technological factors that may enhance or impede EPA's progress toward achieving the
Strategic Goals.
Objective Sections Include:
• Objective Statement: Objectives are a critical part of the planning and budgeting process
and they respond to the GPRA requirement to plan achievable Objectives. Each Objective
supports the attainment of a specific long-term Goal.
i-14
-------
• Resource Summary: Reports resources by Appropriation account and Program/Project for
the Objective. Enabling Support Programs do not have resource charts because these
resources are accounted for in the five Goals.
• Results to be Achieved under this Objective: Elaborates on the Objective and describes
the programmatic results or outcomes to be achieved under it in FY 2005.
• Program/Projects: Reports program activities under each Program/Project, which are major
program areas of responsibility. Resources listed under an Objective may not represent the
total Program/Project resources, as a Program/Project may support more than one Objective.
• FY 2005 Request: This section describes specific Agency plans and activities required to
meet performance goals.
• FY 2005 Change from FY 2004: Describes major changes, by appropriation account, in
programmatic funding within the Objective.
• Annual Performance Goals and Performance Measures: Annual Performance Goals are
the annual incremental effort to measure progress toward achieving the long-term Objective.
They can be either outcomes or outputs, and as such, are quantifiable standards, values, or
rates against which actual achievement can be compared. They help establish the connection
between the day-to-day activities in the Agency's programs to longer-term objectives and are
used by managers to determine how well a program or activity contributes to accomplishing
objectives. In the Objective sections of this Annual Plan and Budget, performance
mformation is provided for three years: FY 2003 - FY 2005. This Annual Plan and Budget
also contains a section providing performance information for six years, FY 2000 - FY 2005,
to fulfill the Office of Management and Budget requirement to show six years of
performance information. Performance Measures provide the means for determining the
extent to which annual goals and multi-year objectives are achieved and whether efficiency is
improving. As such, they are essential to program evaluations that help guide the Agency's
strategic planning. As with the Annual Performance Goals, this Annual Plan and Budget
includes Performance Measure data for three years.
• Verification and Validation of Performance Measures: This section describes how
Performance Measurement data is verified and validated. It includes a description of the
source of performance data as well as procedures for ensuring quality. It may also include
information on the methodology of data collection and review.
• Efficiency Measures/Measurement Development Plans: Efficiency measures quantify the
ratio of a unit of result relative to a unit of input. Programs that have been reviewed with the
Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) have developed at least one efficiency measure.
Measurement Development Plans are written plans that discuss a multi-year approach to
developing performance measures. These plans have annual milestones for tracking
performance progress.
i-15
-------
• Coordination with Other Agencies: This section describes partnerships with other Federal,
state, local, and Tribal governments crucial to the success of EPA's environmental programs.
• Statutory Authority: This section cites the public laws that authorize the Agency to carry
out the various program activities to achieve the long-term Objective.
• Enabling/Support Programs (ESP)
This section includes a narrative, resource data, an explanation of change, and
performance information for the Agency's Enabling and Support Programs.
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
This section provides performance information for six years: Actual accomplishments for
FY 2000 through FY 2002, the estimated performance based on the FY 2003 enacted budget,
and performance estimates based on the budget requests for FY 2004 and FY 2005.
Special Analyses
This final section of the Annual Performance Plan and Budget includes:
• Major Management Issues: Describes the nature of EPA's most pressing management
problems, actions taken, and progress to date in addressing major management challenges
faced by the Agency.
• Annual Performance Plan Components: Defines the Annual Plan components of the
Annual Performance Plan and Budget.
• User Fees: Describes the Agency's user fee programs. User fees are currently authorized as
the proposed collection of fees charged to Agency customers, which partially cover the cost
of selected permitting, testing, registration, and approval actions.
• Working Capital Fund: Provides information on the Working Capital Fund, a revolving
fund authorized by law to finance a cycle of operations, where the costs of goods and
services provided are charged to the Agency users on a fee-for-service basis.
• State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG): Provide tables on STAG components,
categorical grants, and statutory authorities for the STAG appropriation.
• Program/Projects: Reports totals for Agency Program/Projects across Goals and Objectives.
As noted above, Program/Project resource data represents 100% of the Agency's budget.
• Capital Planning and Investment Control (CPIC) Summary: Summarizes the Agency's
proposals for and reviews of major Information Technology (IT) acquisitions.
i-16
-------
• Administration's Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART): Provides information for
the Agency's assessment of program purpose and design, strategic planning, program
management, and program results. PART is tailored to the following seven distinct types of
Federal programs—competitive grant, block/formula grant, regulatory-based, capital assets
and service acquisition, credit, research and development, and direct Federal.
• Agency Activities by National Program Manager (NPM): Identifies resources by Agency
activity for each NPM.
• Agency Activities: Provides resource data by Agency activity. Activity data represent
100% of the Agency's budget.
Relationship between the Annual Performance Plan and the Strategic Plan
The Annual Performance Plan makes no substantive changes to the Agency's draft
Strategic Plan that was submitted to OMB in August 2003.
Long-term Relationship between Budgeted Resources and Annual Performance Goals and
Measures
Annual Performance Goals are related to the resource levels contained in each Objective.
Annual Performance Goals for FY 2005 in this Annual Performance Plan are based upon the
resource levels in the Agency's FY 2005 Budget request. However, resources may contribute
not only to the budget year's Annual Performance Goals, but also to the accomplishment of
Goals in future years. For example, a performance goal to complete a number of Superfund site
cleanups, or develop research methods and models, generally requires a period longer than one
year. Thus, FY 2005 activities will contribute to completion of work in FY 2005 or beyond.
Likewise, some FY 2005 Annual Performance Goals are achievable only with funding provided
in prior years.
Given this multi-year characteristic of some of the resources requested, it is not always
possible to establish direct linkages between resources requested for a particular year and the
achievement of performance goals for that year. Nevertheless, when developing regulatory
impact analyses or justifications for programs and legislation, EPA regularly makes estimates
that link activities by EPA, states, tribes, regulated communities, and citizens to outcomes by
some future date. In doing so, EPA estimates not only its costs but also society's costs (of which
EPA's is a subset) to achieve health and environmental benefits of clean air, clean water, or
better handling and disposal of hazardous chemicals. The Agency is able to leverage its
resources to achieve such benefits as avoiding excess cancer risk, premature mortalities, asthma-
related hospital visits, mitigation of crop losses, and loss of visibility in our National Parks.
i-17
-------
Resource Tables
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents
Resource Tables
Resources by Appropriation RT-1
Resources by Goal/Appropriation RT-3
Resources by Goal/Objective RT-8
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION SUMMARY
Budget Authority
Full-time
(Dollars in Thousands)
Credit Subsidy Re-estimate
Budget Authority
Environmental Program & Management
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Envir. Program & Mgmt - Reim
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Science & Technology
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Science and Tech. - Reim
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Building and Facilities
Budget Authority
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Budget Authority
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Oil Spill Response
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
FEMA - Reim
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Inspector General
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Rereg. & Exped. Proc. Rev Fund
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Superfund Reimbursables
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
FY 2003 Actuals include carryover dollars.
FY2003
Actuals*
$905.5
$2,102,760.1
11,055.4
43.3
$679,088.6
2,440.6
3.2
$38,486.3
$3,902,106.7
$71,412.8
73.5
$15,582.7
87.3
6.8
$34,502.5
257.1
190.9
$1,343,273.9
3,365.4
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$0.0
$2,219,659.0
11,214.7
1.5
$731,482.6
2,460.5
3.0
$42,918.0
$3,121,200.0
$72,545.4
80.3
$16,208.8
100.0
0.0
$36,807.7
271.6
187.2
$1,389,715.8
3,346.7
FY2004
Omnibus
$0.0
$2,280,045.9
0.0
0.0
$781,684.7
0.0
0.0
$39,764.0
$3,877,387.6
$75,551.6
0.0
$16,113.4
0.0
0.0
$37,336.4
0.0
0.0
$1,257,536.5
0.0
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$0.0
$2,316,958.0
11,271.0
1.5
$689,185.0
2,460.5
3.0
$42,918.0
$3,231,800.0
$72,545.0
79.3
$16,425.0
100.0
0.0
$37,997.0
271.6
187.2
$1,381,416.0
3,352.7
1.9
83.5
0.0
77.5
RT-1
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION SUMMARY
Budget Authority
Full-time
(Dollars in Thousands)
WCF-REIMB
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Offsetting Receipts
Budget Authority
Total
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
FY2003
Actuals*
96.0
$0.0
$8,188,119.1
17,621.4
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
99.7
($4,000.0)
$7,626,537.3
17,848.7
FY2004
Omnibus
0.0
$0.0
$8,365,420.1
0.0
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
99.7
($30,000.0)
$7,759,244.0
17,904.0
FY 2003 Actuals include carryover dollars.
RT-2
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
GOAL, APPROPRIATION SUMMARY
Budget Authority
Full-time
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY2003
Actuals
Clean Air and Global Climate Change
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Environmental Program & Management
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Envir. Program & Mgmt - Reim
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Science & Technology
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Science and Tech. — Reim
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Building and Facilities
Budget Authority
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Budget Authority
FEMA - Reim
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Inspector General
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
WCF-REIMB
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
$882,811.6
2,702.6
$416,801.6
1,919.0
1.2
$197,661.1
703.2
3.2
$8,560.5
$252,531.8
6.8
$4,198.2
31.3
$3,058.4
18.7
19.2
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$915,983.1
2,737.9
$451,848.7
1,948.8
0.5
$199,500.1
702.7
3.0
$8,710.1
$247,750.0
0.0
$5,147.0
38.0
$3,027.2
17.3
27.6
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$1,004,615.5
2,756.6
$467,758.4
1,963.7
0.6
$205,788.5
702.9
3.0
$9,387.0
$312,750.0
0.0
$5,724.6
40.9
$3,207.1
18.2
27.3
Clean and Safe Water
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
$3,725,201.9
2,941.4
$2,959,731.8
3,053.6
$2,936,968.6
3,041.4
RT-3
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
GOAL, APPROPRIATION SUMMARY
Budget Authority
Full-time
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Envir. Program & Mgmt - Reim
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Science & Technology
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Building and Facilities
Budget Authority
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Budget Authority
Inspector General
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
WCF-REEMB
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
FY2003
Actuals
$452,771.1
2,262.4
15.0
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$469,732.3
2,404.3
0.2
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$476,512.4
2,396.8
0.2
$119,803.6
489.6
$5,776.0
$3,126,602.1
$20,249.1
150.9
$123,635.7
489.8
$5,876.0
$2,341,564.0
$18,923.9
139.6
$102,236.8
489.7
$6,323.0
$2,333,033.0
$18,863.3
134.8
23.4
19.7
19.9
Land Preservation and Restoration
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Environmental Program & Management
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Envir. Program & Mgmt - Reim
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Science & Technology
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Building and Facilities
Budget Authority
$1,706,796.3 $1,779,473.5 $1,798,171.0
4,675.2 4,744.8 4,708.5
$195,863.6
1,204.0
2.8
$16,748.6
48.6
$4,518.8
$202,941.3
1,233.6
0.1
$10,374.9
- 48.5
$6,480.5
$201,365.1
1,208.4
0.1
$9,112.3
48.3
$5,052.2
RT-4
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
GOAL, APPROPRIATION SUMMARY
Budget Authority
Full-time
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Budget Authority
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Oil Spill Response
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Oil Spill Response - Reim
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
FEMA - Reim
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Inspector General
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Superfund Reimbursables
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
WCF-REEMB
Full-time equivalents (FTE) '
FY2003
Actuals
$119,942.0
$71,412.8
73.5
$15,582.7
87.3
6.8
11.1
81.3
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$118,350.0
$72,545.4
80.3
$16,208.8
100.0
0.0
83.5
6.1
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$144,350.0
$72,545.0
79.3
$16,425.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
$1,927.0
14.4
$1,280,800.7
3,137.1
$2,310.2
17.0
$1,350,262.3
3,175.7
$2,510.2
17.9
$1,346,811.1
3,173.1
77.5
3.9
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Credit Subsidy Re-estimate
Budget Authority
Environmental Program & Management
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
$1,211,267.2
3,923.7
$905.5
$567,462.7
2,577.4
$1,262,441.0
3,824.4
$0.0
$592,145.4
2,510.1
$1,298,932.0
3,850.1
$0.0
$648,213.7
2,529.8
RT-5
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
GOAL, APPROPRIATION SUMMARY
Budget Authority
Full-time
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY2003
Actuals
Envir. Program & Mgmt - Reim
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Science & Technology
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Building and Facilities
Budget Authority
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Budget Authority
Inspector General
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Rereg. & Exped. Proc. Rev Fund
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
WCF-REJMB
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Compliance and Environmental Stewardship
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Environmental Program & Management
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Envir. Program & Mgmt - Reim
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Science & Technology
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
29.1
$291,540.9
977.7
$13,335.9
$294,762.4
$5,441.5
40.5
190.8
$37,818.4
71.7
36.4
$662,042.0
3,492.9
$469,861.0
3,107.4
14.1
$53,334.4
221.4
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
0.5
$341,698.2
995.5
$13,561.5
$292,736.0
$7,000.8
51.7
187.2
$15,299.1
42.7
36.7
$712,907.9
3,489.3
$502,991.3
3,119.2
0.2
$56,273.7
223.9
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
0.5
$321,578.6
997.4
$14,651.1
$297,867.0
$7,220.1
51.6
187.2
$9,401.5
43.8
39.9
$750,556.9
3,547.4
$523,108.4
3,172.3
0.2
$50,468.8
222.2
RT-6
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
GOAL, APPROPRIATION SUMMARY
Budget Authority
Full-time
(Dollars in Thousands)
Building and Facilities
Budget Authority
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Budget Authority
Inspector General
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
WCF-REIMB
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
FY2003
Actuals
$6,295.1
$108,268.4
$2,686.8
20.0
$21,596.3
121.3
8.7
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$8,289.9
$120,800.0
$3,425.8
25.3
$21,127.2
111.0
9.6
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$7,504.7
$143,800.0
$3,678.7
26.3
$21,996.3
117.6
8.8
Total
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
$8,188,119.1 $7,630,537.3 $7,789,244.0
17,735.7 17,850.0 17,904.0
RT-7
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
GOAL, OBJECTIVE SUMMARY
Budget Authority
Full-time
(Dollars in Thousands)
Clean Air and Global Climate Change
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Healthier Outdoor Air
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Healthier Indoor Air
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Protect the Ozone Layer
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Radiation
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Reduce Greenhouse Gas Intensity
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Enhance Science and Research
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
FY2003
Actuals
$882,811.6
2,702.6
$557,907.1
1,706.6
$44,299.1
152.0
$18,145.2
39.2
$30,046.8
168.1
$99,836.4
251.3
$132,577.0
385.2
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$915,983.1
2,737.9
$579,059.2
1,751.5
$48,042.5
149.9
$19,069.4
36.1
$34,858.9
185.0
$106,936.5
244.1
$128,016.6
371.2
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$1,004,615.5
2,756.6
$659,876.2
1,765.9
$48,954.7
153.2
$21,813.7
36.7
$34,718.0
183.9
$108,389.3
244.6
$130,863.6
372.4
Clean and Safe Water
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Protect Human Health
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Protect Water Quality
Budget Authority
$3,725,201.9
2,941.4
$1,259,787.6
859.7
$2,959,731.8
3,053.6
$1,192,187.1
916.8
$2,346,144.8 $1,647,043.1
$2,936,968.6
3,041.4
$1,170,339.6
910.9
$1,645,669.9
RT-8
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
GOAL, OBJECTIVE SUMMARY
Budget Authority
Full-time
(Dollars in Thousands)
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Enhance Science and Research
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
FY2003
Actuals
1,546.0
$119,269.5
535.7
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
1,610.2
$120,501.6
526.7
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
1,603.9
$120,959.1
526.5
Land Preservation and Restoration
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Preserve Land
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Restore Land
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Enhance Science and Research
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
$1,706,796.3
4,675.2
$205,443.3
717.7
$1,454,821.4
3,772.7
$46,531.6
184.8
$1,779,473.5
4,744.8
$210,990.1
740.9
$1,508,646.8
3,822.6
$59,836.6
181.4
$1,798,171.0
4,708.5
$237,149.8
725.4
$1,503,465.6
3,796.7
$57,555.6
186.4
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems
Budget Authority $1,211,267.2 $1,262,438.1 $1,298,932.0
Full-time equivalents (FTE) 3,923.7 3,824.4 3,850.1
Chemical, Organism, and Pesticide Risks
Budget Authority $345,298.1 $364,126.3 $383,305.4
Full-time equivalents (FTE) 1,819.1 1,837.0 1,859.8
Communities
Budget Authority $313,167.7 $317,572.9 $319,958.4
Full-time equivalents (FTE) 327.5 372.0 369.6
Ecosystems
Budget Authority $171,169.4 $160,698.1 $200,844.5
Full-time equivalents (FTE) 546.0 384.8 390.8
RT-9
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
GOAL, OBJECTIVE SUMMARY
Budget Authority
Full-time
(Dollars in Thousands)
Enhance Science and Research
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
FY2003
Actuals
$380,878.7
1,230.8
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$420,040.9
1,230.4
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$394,823.7
1,230.0
Compliance and Environmental Stewardship
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Improve Compliance
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Improve Environmental Performance
through Pollution Prevention and
Innovation
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Build Tribal Capacity
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
Enhance Science and Research
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
$662,042.0
3,492.9
$395,964.4
2,555.4
$712,907.9
3,489.3
$418,998.2
2,529.4
$750,556.9
3,547.4
$431,695.1
2,587.4
$123,311.5
544.2
$70,556.6
99.8
$72,209.6
293.5
$137,968.5
556.1
$78,759.3
99.5
$77,181.8
304.4
$169,802.0
562.6
$78,931.1
98.4
$70,128.7
299.0
Total
Budget Authority
Full-time equivalents (FTE)
$8,188,119.1
17,735.7
$7,630,537.3
17,850.0
$7,789,244.0
17,904.0
RT-10
-------
Goal 1: Clean Air and! Global
Climate Change
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents
Goal 1: Clean Air and Global Climate Change 1-1
Healthier Outdoor Air 1-14
Healthier Indoor Air 1-65
Protect the Ozone Layer 1-92
Radiation 1-100
Reduce Greenhouse Gas Intensity 1-111
Enhance Science and Research 1-133
Subject Index ; 1-147
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Clean Air and Global Climate Change
STRATEGIC GOAL; 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.
Resource Summary
(Dollars in thousands)
Clean Air and Global Climate Change
Healthier Outdoor Air
Healthier Indoor Air
Protect the Ozone Layer
Radiation
Reduce Greenhouse Gas Intensity
Enhance Science and Research
Total Workyears
FY2003
Actuals
$882,811.6
$557,907.1
$44,299.1
$18,145.2
$30,046.8
$99,836.4
$132,577.0
2,702.6
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$915,983.1
$579,059.2
$48,042.5
$19,069.4
$34,858.9
$106,936.5
$128,016.6
2,737.9
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$1,004,615.5
$659,876.2
$48,954.7
$21,813.7
$34,718.0
$108,389.3
$130,863.6
2,756.6
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres
Bud
$88,632.4
$80,817.1
$912.1
$2,744.3
($141.0)
$1,452.9
$2,847.1
18.7
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT
Based on air quality trends measured at more than 5000 monitoring sites across the U.S.,
air quality has improved steadily since the 1970s. This improvement has occurred even as Gross
Domestic Product has increased by 164 percent, miles traveled by cars and trucks have increased
155 percent, energy consumption has increased by 42 percent; and population has increased by
38 percent.1
Concerted efforts and steady progress have achieved cleaner, healthier air, but air
pollution continues to be a human health and environmental problem in the U.S. and around the
world. The average adult breathes over 3,400 gallons of air every day. Children are more
susceptible to air pollution because they breathe even more air per pound of body weight than
adults. Children also are at greater risk because they are more active outdoors and their lungs are
still developing. The elderly are more sensitive to air pollution because they often have heart or
lung disease.2
Pollutants hi the ah" cause cancer or other serious health effects, including respiratory,
developmental, and reproductive problems. Certain pollutants, such as some metals and certain
organic chemicals, that are emitted from industrial and other sources can be deposited into water
1 U.S. EPA, Latest Findings on National Air Quality: 2002 Status and Trends Report, 454/K-03-001 (August 2003),
http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/.
2 Ibid
1-1
-------
bodies and magnified through the food web, adversely affecting fish-eating humans and animals.
Air pollution also damages crops and forests, makes soil and waterways more acidic, reduces
visibility, and accelerates corrosion of buildings and monuments.3
In addition, air pollutants diminish the protective ozone layer in the upper atmosphere.
Human activities also affect the mixture of gases in the atmosphere and contribute to the
potential for world climate change.
Outdoor Air Pollution: The Clean Air Act4 addresses three general categories of
outdoor air pollution: "criteria" pollutants, air toxics, and acid rain. Criteria pollutants include
six common pollutants: particulate matter (PM), ozone, sulfur dioxide (SOa), nitrogen dioxide
(NOa), carbon monoxide (CO), and lead, for which EPA sets National Ambient Air Quality
Standards to protect public health and the environment. Air toxics, also called hazardous air
pollutants (HAPs), are pollutants that are known or suspected to cause cancer or other serious
health problems, such as reproductive effects or birth defects, or adverse ecological effects. The
Clean Air Act lists 188 HAPs. Examples include: dioxin, mercury, benzene, toluene, and
xylene. Acid rain is formed when SOa and nitrogen oxides (NOX) react in the atmosphere with
water, oxygen, and oxidants to form acid droplets.
The paragraphs below summarize the health and environmental effects associated with
the six criteria pollutants, air toxics, and acid rain.5
• Particulate matter. PM is associated with a wide variety of health and
environmental problems. When exposed to higher concentration of fine PM, people with
existing lung or heart diseases - such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease,
congestive heart disease, or coronary artery disease — are at increased risk of health
problems requiring hospitalization or of premature death. Similarly, children and people
with existing lung disease may not be able to breathe as deeply or vigorously as they
normally would and they may experience symptoms such as coughing and shortness of
breath. Fine PM can increase susceptibility to respiratory infections and can aggravate
existing respiratory diseases, such as asthma and chronic bronchitis, causing more use of
medication and more doctor visits.
PM also is a major cause of haze and reduced visibility in parts of the U.S., including
many of our national parks. Particles can be carried over long distances by wind and then
settle on ground or water. The effects of certain PM settling may include acidifying lakes
and streams, changing the nutrient balance in coastal waters and watersheds, depleting
the nutrients hi soil, damaging sensitive forests and farm crops, and decreasing the
diversity of ecosystems.
• Ground-level ozone (smog). When breathed at any concentration, ozone can
irritate and inflame a person's airways. Health effects attributed to exposures to ozone,
generally while individuals are engaged in moderate or heavy exertion, include
3 Ibid
4 Clean Air Act Title 1, Part A and Part D, Subparts 3 and 5 (42 U.S.C. 7401-7431, 7512-7512a, 7514-7541a)(15 U.S.C. 2605);
Clean Air Act Amendments Title II (42 U.S.C. 7521-7590); Clean Air Act Amendments, Title IV (42 U.S.C. 7651-7661); Clean
Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q)
Latest Findings on National Air Quality: 2002 Status and Trends Report
1-2
-------
significant decreases in lung function and increased respiratory symptoms such as chest
pain and cough as concentrations rise. Exposures to ozone result in lung inflammation,
aggravate respiratory diseases such as asthma, and may make people more susceptible to
respiratory effects. Other at-risk groups include adults who are active outdoors and
individuals with respiratory disorders such as asthma.
Ground-level ozone interferes with the ability of many plants to produce and store food.
This reduces crop and forest yields by making plants more susceptible to disease, insects,
other pollutants, and harsh weather. Ozone also damages the leaves of trees and other
plants, affecting the appearance of cities, national parks, and recreation areas.
• Sulfur dioxide. Peak levels of SO2 can cause temporary breathing difficulty for
people with asthma who are active outdoors. Longer-term exposure to a combination of
SO2 and fine particles can cause respiratory illness, alter the defense mechanisms of
lungs, and aggravate cardiopulmonary disease. People who may be most susceptible to
these effects include individuals with cardiovascular disease or chronic lung disease, as
well as children and the elderly. SOa also is a major contributor to acidic deposition.
• Nitrogen dioxide. Exposure to NOa causes respiratory symptoms such as
coughing, wheezing, and shortness of breath in children and adults with respiratory
diseases such as asthma. Even short exposures to NOa affect lung function. NO2 also
contributes to acidic deposition, eutrophication in coastal waters, and visibility problems.
• Carbon monoxide. The health threat from even low levels of CO is most serious
for those who suffer from heart disease, like angina, clogged arteries, or congestive heart
disease. For a person with heart disease, a single exposure to CO at low levels may cause
chest pain and reduce that person's ability to exercise. Even healthy people can be
affected by high levels of CO. People who breathe higher levels of CO can develop
vision problems, experience reduced ability to work or learn, have reduced manual
dexterity, and have difficulty performing complex tasks. CO is most dangerous hi
enclosed or confined spaces and will cause death.
• Lead. Lead causes damage to the kidneys, liver, brain and nerves, and to other
organs. Excessive exposure to lead causes seizures, mental retardation, behavioral
disorders, memory problems, and mood changes. Low levels of lead damage the brain
and nerves in fetuses and young children, resulting in learning deficits and lowered IQ.
* Air toxics: Air toxics or HAPs, are pollutants that are known or suspected to
cause cancer or other serious health problems, such as reproductive effects or birth
defects, or adverse environmental effects. HAPs are emitted from thousands of sources,
including automobiles, utilities, and industries. HAPs also can contribute to the levels of
PM and volatile organic compounds (VOCs), precursors to ozone. Adverse effects to
human health and the environment due to HAPs can result from even low level exposures
to air toxics from individual facilities, exposures to mixtures of pollutants found in urban
settings, or exposures to pollutants emitted from distant sources that are transported
through the atmosphere over regional, national, or even global airsheds.
1-3
-------
Compared to information for the six criteria pollutants, the information about the ambient
concentrations of HAPs and their potential health effects is relatively incomplete. Most
of the information on the potential health effects of these pollutants is derived from
experimental data. Of the 188 HAPs, almost 60 percent are classified by the Clean Air
Act (section 112 (f)(2)(A)) as known, probable, or possible carcinogens. One of the
often-documented ecological concerns associated with toxic air pollutants is the potential
to damage aquatic ecosystems.
• Acid rain. Emissions of SO2 and NOX react in the atmosphere and fall to earth as
acid rain, causing acidification of lakes and streams and contributing to the damage of
trees at high elevations. Acid deposition also accelerates the decay of building materials
and paints and contributes to degradation of irreplaceable cultural objects, such as statues
and sculptures. NOX deposition contributes to eutrophication of coastal waters, such as
the Chesapeake Bay and Tampa Bay. Before falling to earth, SO2 and NOX gases form
fine particles (fine PM) that affect public health by contributing to premature mortality,
chronic bronchitis, and other respiratory problems.
Indoor Air Pollution: Indoor air levels of many pollutants may be two to five times,
and occasionally more than 100 times, higher than outdoor levels. There is no comprehensive
monitoring of the quality of indoor air in the U.S. and the actual levels for many pollutants are
not well understood. Indoor air pollutants are of particular concern because most people spend
as much as 90% of their tune indoors. Common sources can include burning kerosene, wood, or
oil; smoking tobacco products; releases from household cleaners, pesticides, building materials;
and radon. Inadequate ventilation can increase indoor pollutant levels by not bringing in enough
outdoor ah" to dilute emissions from indoor sources and by not carrying indoor air pollutants out
of the home. High temperatures and humidity levels can also increase concentrations of some
pollutants.
Poor indoor air quality can cause short-term problems, including headaches, fatigue,
dizziness, nausea, and a scratchy throat. Other effects include cancer - particularly from long-
term exposure to high secondhand smoke and radon concentrations - and aggravation of chronic
respiratory diseases such as asthma. Exposure to naturally occurring radon gas is the second
leading cause (after smoking tobacco) of lung cancer among Americans.6
Climate Change: The buildup of greenhouse gases—primarily carbon dioxide, methane,
and nitrous oxide—has heat-trapping properties that may impact climate on Earth. These
potential regional climate changes could alter forests, crop yields, and water supplies. These
changes could also threaten human health, and harm birds, fish, and many types of ecosystems.
Stratospheric Ozone Depletion: A protective ozone layer is located in the stratosphere
about six to 30 miles above the Earth's surface. This layer protects humans and other species
from the sun's harmful ultraviolet radiation (UV). This protective shield is being damaged by
chemicals such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), halons, and methyl bromide, and can lead to
Institute of Medicine, Clearing the Air: Asthma and Indoor Air Exposures (Washington, DC: The National Academy Press,
200). Available at http://books.nap.edu/books/0309064961/html/Rl.html.
1-4
-------
harmful health effects such as skin cancer and cataracts.7 Increased UV also can lead to reduced
crop yield and disruptions in the marine food chain.
Ozone depletion and climate change are separate environmental issues but are related in
some ways. Specifically, some substances that deplete the ozone layer also are potent and very
long-lived greenhouse gases that absorb outgoing radiation and warm the atmosphere.
Radiation: Radiation occurs naturally (e.g., radon), but we also use radioactive materials
hi electricity generation, in industrial processes, and in medical diagnoses and treatments. Any
activity that produces or uses radioactive materials generates radioactive waste. Mining, nuclear
power generation, and various processes in industry, defense, medicine, and scientific research
produce byproducts that include radioactive waste. Radioactive waste can be in gas, liquid, or
solid form, and the level of radioactivity can vary. The waste can remain radioactive for a few
hours or several months or even hundreds of thousands of years. Frequent exposures to radiation
can cause cancer and other adverse health effects.
Science and Research: EPA relies on sound science in its clean air programs. EPA uses
sound science to determine the relative risks that air pollution poses to human health and the
environment. In addition, the Agency utilizes science in an attempt to identify the best means to
detect, abate and avoid environmental problems associated with air pollutants.
MEANS AND STRATEGY
The air problems that now remain are some of the most difficult to solve. EPA's strategy
to address the overall goals of the clean air program includes a combination of national and local
measures that reflect the different roles of Federal, state, Tribal, and local governments. EPA,
states, and local agencies work together as partners to meet clean ah" goals cost-effectively by
employing an array of regulatory, market-based, and voluntary approaches and programs.
Federal assistance and leadership are essential for developing and implementing cooperative
programs to prevent and control air pollution; for ensuring that national standards are met; and
for providing tools for states, Tribes, and local communities to use hi preparing and
implementing their clean air plans and programs.
Healthier Outdoor Air: Problems with broad regional, national or global impact -
emissions from power plants and other large sources, pollution from motor vehicles and fuels,
and stratospheric ozone depletion - are best handled primarily at the multi-state, regional, or
Federal level. A national approach allows for the use of traditional, regulatory tools where
appropriate, and enables EPA to implement innovative, market-based techniques such as
emissions trading, banking, and averaging, and other national programs cost-effectively.
States, Tribes, and local agencies can best address the regional and local problems that
remain after Federal measures have been fully applied. Many of these approaches employ
7 June 1999, "Synthesis Report of the Reports of the Scientific, Environmental Effects, Technology and Economic Assessment
Panels of the Montreal Protocol: A Decade of Assessments for Decision Makers Regarding the Protection of the Ozone Layer:
1988 - 1999"; January 2003, Report of the Montreal Protocol Science Assessment Panel, "Scientific Assessment of Ozone
Depletion: 2002"; March 2003, Report of the Montreal Protocol Environmental Effects Assessment Panel, "Environmental
Effects of Ozone Depletion: 2002".
1-5
-------
innovative techniques, such as diesel retrofits and community-based approaches to toxics that are
well-suited to the local nature of many air-related problems. EPA works closely with public- and
private-sector partners and stakeholders to develop the tools - such as monitoring, modeling, and
emission inventories — that allow states, Tribes, and localities to address these more localized
problems.
EPA will also work to build the institutional capacity within developing countries and
regionally manage air pollution, focusing on those countries that have demonstrated potential
and commitment to affect human health and the environment globally. Programs include those
that address clean fuels, reduction of mercury and lead emissions, training on various air quality
issues, and partnering with existing clean air initiatives.
To improve air quality and address the highest health and environmental risks, EPA will
proceed with Federal stationary and mobile source programs aimed at achieving large,
nationwide, cost-effective reductions in emissions of PM and its contributors such as SC«2, NOX,
and elemental and organic-carbon; ozone-forming NOX; and volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
The President's Clear Skies Initiative is a cornerstone of the EPA strategy. The proposed
legislation, re-introduced hi the Congress in February 2003, would create a mandatory program
that is designed to reduce dramatically power plant emissions of SOa, NOX, and mercury, three of
the most harmful air pollutants from power generators, from FY 2000 levels.8 (Alternatively, the
Interstate Air Quality and Utility Mercury Reduction Rules are integrated air rules proposed by
EPA in December 2003 to achieve many of Clear Skies' objectives absent new legislation.).9
Both Clear Skies and the proposed integrated air rules would create a market-based program,
with results guaranteed by emissions caps instituted over a period of time, an approach that
proved successful in reducing acid rain. As the Clear Skies Initiative moves forward, through
enactment of new legislation or promulgation of the proposed Interstate Air Quality and Utility
Mercury Reduction Rules, EPA will continue to implement the Acid Rain Program to reduce
SOa and NOX emissions from electric power generators and address the interstate transport of
ozone and NOX through the NOX Budget Program, a multi-state emissions allowance trading
program under the NOX SIP Call. In addition, EPA is implementing national programs that will
dramatically reduce future emissions from a wide range of mobile sources, including cars,
minivans, sport utility vehicles (SUVs), trucks, buses, motorcycles, and nonroad engines.
EPA will propose whether to update the particulate matter standards in FY 2005 and will
continue the work necessary to propose whether to update the ozone standard in FY 2006. EPA
also will provide guidance and technical support to states, Tribes and local communities to help
meet multiple air quality standards and regional haze progress goals, especially for those
pollutants that share common precursors or emission sources.
Healthier Indoor Air: EPA implements two primary strategies to meet its human health
objective for indoor air quality, increasing public awareness and increasing partnerships with
non-governmental and professional entities. EPA raises public awareness of actual and potential
indoor air risks so that individuals can take steps to reduce exposure. Outreach activities, in the
8 Senate and House of Representatives, Clear Skies Legislation Act of 2002, S. 2815 (July 29, 2002) and H,R. 5266 (My 26,
2002), http://www.epa.gov/clearskies/bill.pdf
9 40CFR Parts 51, 72, 75, 96 Rule to Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone (Interstate Air Quality
Rule) web site www.epa.gov/interstateairquality/
1-6
-------
form of educational literature, media campaigns, hotlines, and clearinghouse operations, provide
essential information about indoor air health risks not only to the public, but to the professional
and research communities as well.
Underpinning EPA's outreach efforts is a strong commitment to environmental justice,
community-based risk reductions, and customer service. Through partnerships, EPA
disseminates multi-media materials encouraging individuals, schools, and industry to take action
to reduce health risks in their indoor environments. In addition, EPA uses technology transfer to
improve the ways hi which all types of buildings, including schools, homes, and workplaces, are
designed, operated, and maintained. To support these voluntary approaches, EPA incorporates
the most current science available as the basis for recommending ways that people can reduce
exposure to indoor contaminants.
Reduce Greenhouse Gas Intensity: In 2002, President Bush announced a new
approach to global climate change designed to harness the power of the marketplace and
technological innovation. The President committed America to cut greenhouse gas intensity by
18 percent over the next decade.10 EPA's voluntary climate programs play a major role hi
meeting this goal by working in partnership with businesses and other sectors through programs
that deliver multiple benefits while improving overall scientific understanding of climate change
and its potential consequences. The core of EPA's climate change efforts are voluntary
government/rndustry partnership programs — such as the ENERGY STAR program - designed to
capitalize on the tremendous opportunities available to consumers, businesses, state and local
governments, and organizations to make sound investments in energy efficient equipment and
practices. These voluntary programs remove barriers to existing and emerging technologies in
the marketplace, resulting hi faster deployment of energy efficient technology into the
residential, commercial, transportation, and industrial sectors of the economy.
Through its Clean Automotive Technology (CAT) program, EPA develops unique new
technologies with high potential for improving air quality and dramatically improving vehicle
efficiency. Through partnerships with industry, significant elements of EPA's technologies will
be introduced commercially by vehicle manufacturers before the end of the decade. In addition,
EPA works with other key stakeholders in promoting the development and commercialization of
fuel cell technology in support of U.S. environmental, energy, and national security goals.
Protect the Ozone Layer: EPA's strategy for restoring the ozone layer includes
carrying out a program that includes domestic rules and international technology transfer. As a
signatory to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, the U.S. is
obligated to regulate and enforce the terms of the treaty domestically. In accordance with this
treaty and related Clean Air Act requirements, EPA will continue to implement the domestic
rule-making agenda for the reduction and control of ozone-depleting substances (ODSs) and
enforce rules controlling their production, import, and emission. This includes combining
market-based regulatory approaches with sector-specific technology guidelines and facilitating
the development and commercialization of alternatives to methyl bromide and HCFCs. EPA will
strengthen outreach efforts to ensure efficient and effective compliance, and continue to identify
10 The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, President Announces Clear Skies & Global Climate Change Initiatives
(February 14,2002), http://m\w.whitehouse.gov/news/reieases/2002/02/20020214-5.html
1-7
-------
and promote safer alternatives to curtail ozone depletion. To help reduce international
emissions, EPA will assist with the transfer of technology to developing countries and work with
them to accelerate the phase-out of ODSs. EPA estimates that the worldwide phase-out of ODS
will save 6.3 million lives from fatal cases of skin cancer, avoid 299 million cases of nonfatal
skin cancers, and avoid 27.5 million cases of cataracts in the U.S. alone between 1990 and 2165.
Because the ozone layer is not expected to recover until the middle of this century at the
earliest, the public will continue to be exposed to higher levels of UV radiation than existed prior
to the use and emission of ODS. Recognizing this and the public's current sun-exposure
practices, EPA will continue education and outreach efforts to encourage behavioral changes the
primary means of reducing UV-related health risks.
Radiation: EPA continues to meet the statutory mandates for managing radiation waste
and controlling radioactive emissions and to fulfill its responsibilities under Presidential
Decision Directives for radiological emergency preparedness and response. These
responsibilities form the core of our strategy to protect the public and the environment from
unnecessary exposure to radiation. EPA works with states, Tribes, and industry to develop
innovative training, public information and voluntary programs to minimize these exposures.
Science and Research: To support achievement of its clean air objectives and the
overall goal of clean air for American communities and surrounding ecosystems, EPA will
ensure that efforts to reduce environmental risks are based on the best available scientific
information. In addition, EPA will continue to integrate critical scientific assessment with
policy, regulatory and non-regulatory activities.
EPA's air pollution research supports the Agency's mandated responsibilities under the
Clean Air Act. This research falls into two distinct groups: 1) research supporting the
development and achievement of the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS), and 2)
research on hazardous air pollutants. NAAQS-related research focuses on tropospheric ozone
and particulate matter (PM), while the Air Toxics Research program provides the scientific
underpinnings of the Agency's activities to reduce hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) as identified
hi the Clean Air Act.
PM research provides methods, models, and data on the health risks associated with
exposure to PM, alone and in combination, focusing on exposures, health effects, mechanisms of
injury, and identification of PM components that affect public health. In addition, both PM and
tropospheric ozone research provide implementation tools to support efforts by industry, state,
Tribal, and local regulators to develop and improve State Implementation Plans (SIPs) to attain
the NAAQS.
Research on air toxics investigates the root causes of the environmental and human health
problems hi urban areas related to these pollutants. Efforts in this area provide the necessary
health effects data, measurements, methods, models, information, and technical support to
Federal, state, Tribal, and local regulators and industry to estimate human health effects and
aggregate exposures to hazardous air pollutants. Research also supports atmospheric and
emission modeling hi order to estimate fate, ambient concentrations, and mobile source
emissions of air toxics at a more refined scale. With this information, the Agency will be hi a
better position to determine risk and develop alternative strategies for maximizing risk reduction.
1-8
-------
Several mechanisms are in place to ensure a high-quality air research program at EPA.
The Research Strategies Advisory Committee (RSAC) of EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB),
an independent chartered Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) committee, meets annually
to conduct an in-depth review and analysis of EPA's Science and Technology account. The
RSAC provides its findings to the House Science Committee and sends a written report on the
findings to EPA's Administrator after every annual review. Moreover, EPA's Board of
Scientific Counselors (BOSC) provides counsel to the Assistant Administrator for the Office of
Research and Development (ORD) on the operation of ORD's research program. Also, under
the Science to Achieve Results (STAR) program all research projects are selected for funding
through a rigorous competitive external peer review process designed to ensure that only the
highest quality efforts receive funding support. Our scientific and technical work products must
also undergo either internal or external peer review, with major or significant products requiring
external peer review. The Agency's Peer Review Handbook (2nd Edition) codifies procedures
and guidance for conducting peer review.
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES AND FY 2005 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS
Healthier Outdoor Air
• The number of people living hi areas with monitored ambient ozone concentrations
below the NAAQS for the 1-hour ozone standard will increase by 4% (relative to 2004) for a
cumulative total of 53% (relative to 1992).
a The number of people living in areas with monitored ambient PM concentrations below
the NAAQS for the PM-10 standard will increase by 1% (relative to 2004) for cumulative total
of 7% (relative to 1992).
a Air toxics emission nationwide from stationary and mobiles sources combined will be
reduced by an additional 1% of the updated 1993 baseline of 6.0 million tons for a cumulative
reduction of 38%.
Healthier Indoor Air
• 843,300 additional people will be living hi homes with healthier indoor air.
• 1,312,500 students, faculty and staff will experience unproved indoor air quality in their
schools.
Protect the Ozone Layer
• Restrict domestic consumptioOn of class II HCFCs below 9,906 ODP-weighted metric
tons (ODP MTs) and restrict domestic exempted production and import of newly produced class
I CFCs and halons below 10,000 ODP MTs.
Reduce Greenhouse Gas Intensity
• Greenhouse gas emissions will be reduced from projected levels by approximately 90
MMTCE per year through EPA partnerships with businesses, schools, state and local
governments, and other organizations.
1-9
-------
Radiation
" Certify that 40,000 55-gallon drums of radioactive waste (containing approximately
120,000 curies) shipped by DOE to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant are permanently disposed of
safely and according to EPA standards.
Enhance Science and Research
• Transfer hybrid powertrain components, originally developed for passenger car
applications, to meet size, performance, durability, and towing requirements of Sport Utility
Vehicle and urban delivery vehicle applications with an average efficiency improvement of 30%
over the baseline.
HIGHLIGHTS
Ensure Healthier Outdoor Air
In FY 2005, EPA will significantly expand its efforts to reduce children's exposure to
diesel exhaust and the amount of air pollution created by diesel school buses through its Clean
School Bus USA program. More than 24 million children in the US ride a bus to and from
school every day and research has found that these children can be exposed to high levels of
diesel exhaust. The Agency's Clean School Bus USA program is designed to help reduce this
exposure by providing grant funds to State, tribal, or local government entities to upgrade (or
"retrofit") newer school buses with better emission control technologies and/or fuel them with
cleaner fuels or to replace the oldest school buses in the fleet with new, less polluting buses. In
FY 2005, EPA will develop a grant solicitation process that will award these funds on a
competitive basis.
In FY 2005, EPA will complete an assessment of how sources create Fine PM in the air
and, with along with mercury emissions, the effect on downwind areas. This assessment will
support the Fine PM NAAQS implementation, the Interstate Air Quality Rule and the Utility
Mercury Reductions Rule. This work will also support the President's legislative proposal on
Clear Skies. EPA will begin implementation efforts for both the Interstate Air Quality Rule and
the Utility Mercury Reductions Rule.
The Agency will also continue to work with states, Tribes and local communities to
reduce exposure to air pollution through implementation of the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards. We will provide technical support to states in developing State Implementation Plans
to aid them in considering the transport of pollution on a regional level hi their plans. For
particulate matter, EPA will be finalizing attainment designations while working with states and
local areas to develop control strategies to reduce emissions. For ozone, since designation will
be finalized in 2004, the Agency will be supporting SIP development efforts while working with
localities on innovative measures to provide early emission reductions.
For the HAPs, FY 2005 will be a critical year for implementing the national air toxics
strategy. The Agency will continue its transition from a technology-based to a risk-based control
program. The Agency is still required to set technology-based standards for area sources.
1-10
-------
In FY 2005, EPA will, as required by the Clean Air Act, continue the extensive residual
risk analyses for already promulgated maximum achievable control technology (MACT)
standards to determine if additional standards are necessary to reduce the remaining risks from
these sources. The Agency will continue to develop the state, local, and Tribal component of the
Air Toxics Program so that state, local, and Tribal agencies can address emission issues that are
of concern on a state-wide, area-wide, or community-wide basis. As part of this effort, EPA will
continue to support community assessment and risk reduction projects. The EPA will release an
integrated final version of the national emission inventory (NEI) using data collected from 2002.
This integrated inventory will include air toxics emissions data for analyzing public health risks
from air toxics and strategies to reduce them, and to manage the risks posed by air toxics
emission. The Agency will continue to develop the national ambient air toxic network to
improve characterization of both national and community air toxic levels. Also in FY 2005, we
will be promulgating the Utility Mercury Reductions Rule. This program may utilize a cap and
trade approach that would allow emissions trading in lieu of a MACT standard which is less
flexible and more costly. (The proposed rule seeks comment on both the cap and trade and
MACT approaches.)
In FY 2005, EPA will establish and implement Federal standards to require cleaner motor
vehicles, nonroad equipment, locomotives, marine engines, and fuels that are cost-effective and
technically feasible. The Agency will continue implementation of the Tier II and gasoline sulfur
standards. The Agency will also continue work on the 2007 heavy-duty highway engine and
diesel sulfur requirements. In addition, EPA is promulgating new standards and fuel
requirements for nonroad diesel fuel that will take effect for new engines starting as early as
2008.
In addition, EPA will continue to monitor industry compliance with vehicle, engine, and
fuel standards, and to proceed with advancements in vehicle emission control technologies. The
type and amount of testing required at EPA's National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory
continues to expand greatly to meet the much more stringent and complex regulations for cars,
heavy-duty diesel engines, and gasoline and diesel fuels.
Ensure Healthier Indoor Air
In FY 2005, EPA will build on the success of its national "Indoor Air Quality (IAQ)
Tools for Schools" (TfS) program and expand implementation of this program to more schools.
Adoption of EPA's low-cost/no-cost guidelines for proper operation and maintenance of school
facilities results in healthier indoor environments for all students and staff, but is of particular
help to children with asthma, lessening the degree to which they are exposed to indoor asthma
triggers. By increasing the number of schools where TfS indoor air quality guidelines are
adopted and implemented, healthier indoor air will be provided for over a million students, staff,
and faculty.
EPA expects, as a result of Agency programs, that over three quarters of a million people
will be living in healthier residential indoor environments hi FY 2005. Part of meeting this goal
includes expanding the Agency's successful education and outreach efforts to the public about
sound indoor environmental management techniques with respect to asthma. In addition, the
Agency will continue to focus on ways to assist the health-care community to raise its awareness
of, and attention it pays to, indoor asthma triggers and their role in provoking asthma attacks in
1-11
-------
those with the disease. EPA, in conjunction with the Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS), will continue to seek opportunities to interact with managed care organizations and
health insurers to promote effective asthma care practices and to encourage greater emphasis on
avoidance of asthma triggers, as part of a comprehensive asthma treatment regimen.
Greenhouse Gases
The President's greenhouse gas program builds on the accomplishment of EPA's
voluntary climate programs. EPA's voluntary climate change programs have made significant
progress to date. However, opportunities remain to achieve further pollution reductions and
energy bill savings from energy efficiency programs and greater use of cost-effective renewable
energy. In the U.S., energy consumption causes more than 85 percent of the major air emissions
such as NOX, SOa, and CC>2. At the same time, American families and businesses spend over
$600 billion each year on energy bills.
In FY 2005, EPA will continue to build upon its successful partnership programs such as
ENERGY STAR, the clean energy programs, Climate Leaders, Smart Way Transport Partnership,
and Best Workplaces for Commuters programs. Under these innovative programs we will
expand our work with companies to encourage them to take on new voluntary commitments to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Stratospheric Ozone
To protect the earth's stratospheric ozone layer in accordance with the United States'
commitment to the Montreal Protocol, EPA will continue to regulate ozone-depleting
compounds, foster the development and use of alternative chemicals in the U.S. and abroad,
inform the public about the dangers of overexposure to UV radiation, and use pollution
prevention strategies to require the recycling of ozone-depleting substances (ODS) and
hydrofluorocarbons.
Radiation
In FY 2005, EPA will continue to protect people and the environment from harmful and
avoidable exposure to radiation by oversight of radioactive waste disposal in the Waste Isolation
Pilot Plant, setting protective limits on radioactive emissions, providing guidance and training to
other Federal and state agencies in preparing for domestic emergencies and other incidents that
may involve radiation, and develop guidance for cleaning up radioactively-contaminated
Superfund sites. We will ensure that the Agency employs appropriate methods to manage
radioactive releases and exposures. These include health-risk site assessments; risk modeling,
cleanup, and waste management activities; voluntary programs to minimize exposure to radiation
hi commercial products and industrial applications; national environmental radiation monitoring;
radiological emergency response; and provision of Federal guidance to our international,
Federal, state, and local partners.
Enhance Science and Research
The Tropospheric Ozone and Particulate Matter (PM) Research Programs will upgrade
methods and models to guide states in the development of State Implementation Plans (SIPs)
1-12
-------
used to achieve the NAAQS. In FY 2005, the Agency will release an upgraded version of the
Models-3 Community Multi-scale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system with upgraded
mechanisms for speeding up the model run time. This will be an important tool for developing
state and tribal SIPs. PM research will continue to strengthen the scientific basis for the periodic
review of the PM NAAQS, through work that includes epidemiological and exposure studies.
The PM program will also develop tools and methods to characterize PM sources and health
effects that will move the Agency toward its objective of reducing Americans' exposure to PM.
Important products of the FY 2005 PM research program will include improved receptor models
and data on chemical compounds to help identify sources that contribute to ambient PM so that
states and tribes can develop more effective control strategies
Air toxics research provides information on effects, exposure, and source
characterization, as well as other data to quantify existing emissions and to identify key
pollutants and strategies for cost-effective risk management. In FY 2005, research will focus on
providing health hazard and exposure methods, data, and models to enable the Agency to reduce
uncertainty in risk assessments, and the production of tools that enable national, regional, state,
or local officials to identify and implement cost-effective approaches to reduce risks from
sources of air toxics.
EXTERNAL FACTORS
Stakeholder participation: To achieve clean air, EPA relies on the cooperation of Federal,
state, Tribal, and local government agencies; industry; non-profit organizations; and individuals.
Success is far from guaranteed, even with the full participation of all stakeholders. EPA has
significant work to accomplish just to reach the annual targets that lead to the longer-term health
and environmental outcomes and improvements that are articulated in the Clean Air goal.
Meeting the Clean Air goal necessitates a strong partnership among all the stakeholders, but in
particular among the states, Tribes, and EPA; the Environmental Council of States; and
organizations of state and local air pollution control officials. EPA will be working with various
stakeholders to encourage new ways to meet the challenges of "cross regional" issues as well as
to integrate programs to address airborne pollutants more efficiently.
Environmental factors: In developing clean air strategies, states, Tribes, and local
governments assume normal meteorological patterns. As EPA develops standards and programs
to achieve the Clean Air goal, it has to consider weather as a variable in the equation for
implementing standards and meeting program goals. For example, even if an area is
implementing a number of air pollution control programs under normal meteorological patterns,
a hot humid summer may cause an area to exceed standards for days at a time, thereby exposing
the public to unhealthy air.
1-13
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Clean Air and Global Climate Change
OBJECTIVE: Healthier Outdoor Air
Through 2010, EPA and its partners will protect human health and the environment by
attaining and maintaining health-based air quality standards and reducing the risk from toxic air
pollutants.
Resource Summary
(Dollars in Thousands)
Healthier Outdoor Air
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Building and Facilities
Inspector General
Total Workyears
FY2003
Actuals
$557,907.1
$231,825.3
$75,701.8
$243,116.5
$4,583.4
$2,680.1
1,706.6
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$579,059.2
$250,509.5
$81,059.9
$239,600.0
$4,645.2
$3,244.6
1,751.5
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$659,876.2
$261,196.7
$85,302.2
$304,600.0
$5003.2
$3,774.1
1,765.9
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$80,817.1
$10,687.3
$4,242.3
$65,000.0
$358.0
$529.5
14.4
Program Project
(Dollars in Thousands)
Clean School Bus
Categorical Grant: State and Local Air Quality
Management
Children and other Sensitive Populations
Categorical GrantTribal Air Quality
Management
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Federal Stationary Source Regulations
Federal Support for Air Quality Management
Federal Support for Air Toxics Program
Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and
Certification
International Capacity Building
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure
Protection
Administrative Projects
TOTAL
FY2003
Actuals
$0.0
$229,633.4
$50.6
$13,483.1
$15,667.4
$12,724.8
$19,120.1
$92,966.1
$28,116.6
$55,525.5
$3,570.0
$0.0
$87,049.5
$557,907.1
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
$1,500.0
$228,550.0
$235.0
$11,050.0
$21,814.9
$0.0
$23,702.2
$96,657.4
$28,655.1
$60,446.8
$1,541.3
$1,106.2
$103,800.3
$579,059.2
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
$65,000.0
$228,550.0
$127.0
$11,050.0
$22,857.5
$0.0
$24,302.0
$102,849.9
$27,358.7
$64,466.5
$1,633.9
$1,110.8
$110,569.9
$659,876.2
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$63,500.0
$0.0
($108.0)
$0.0
$1,042.6
$0.0
$599.8
$6,192.5
($1,296.4)
$4,019.7
$92.6
$4.6
$6,f69.7
$80,817.1
1-14
-------
FY 2005 REQUEST
EPA's strategy for achieving clean outdoor air includes a comprehensive, multi-pollutant
approach that combines national and local measures, with implementation responsibilities carried
out by the most appropriate and effective level of government. Problems with broad national or
global impact - emissions from power generators, petroleum refineries, chemical plants, and
other large sources, as well as pollution from motor vehicles and fuels - are best handled at the
Federal level. States, Tribes, and local agencies can best address the regional and local air
quality problems that remain after Federal measures have been fully applied. This approach
allows for the use of traditional, regulatory tools, where appropriate, and enables EPA to
implement innovative, market-based techniques - such as President Bush's Clear Skies Initiative
or the suite of integrated air rules proposed in December 2003 - where most effective. These
Federal programs help states and Tribes both meet National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) and reduce public exposure to harmful levels of air toxics.
Under the Act, EPA has established NAAQS for six "criteria" pollutants: particulate
matter (PM), ozone, sulfur dioxide (SOa), nitrogen dioxide (NOa), carbon monoxide (CO), and
lead. The Act also lists 188 pollutants that are categorized as Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs)
or air toxics. Finally, EPA has established the Acid Rain Program required by the Act to reduce
emissions of SO2 and nitrogen oxides (NOx), that adversely affect the health of Americans and
of our ecosystems.
The Clean Air Act requires states to develop State Implementation Plans (SIPs) to
implement the six NAAQS. The Act authorizes Tribes to develop similar clean air plans. Also,
the Act provides a framework for addressing air toxics at the local level. EPA works closely
with public and private sector partners and stakeholders to develop the tools - such as
monitoring, modeling, and emission inventories - that allow States, Tribes, and localities design
programs to address local problems. States, Tribes, and localities may employ innovative
approaches, such as diesel retrofits and community-based approaches for air toxics that are well
suited to the local nature of these problems. EPA also provides capacity building training and
support hi order for its international partners to address air quality issues.
EPA implements the Healthier Outdoor Air Objective through eight Program/Projects.
Three of the Program/Projects include primarily Federal measures:
1. Federal Stationary Source Regulations;
2. Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs; and
3. Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certification.
The other five Program/Projects primarily support, state, Tribal, and local efforts to meet
NAAQS requirements and reduce public exposure to harmful levels of air toxics. These include:
4. Federal Support for Air Quality Management;
5. Federal Support for Air Toxics Programs;
6. Clean School Bus Initiative;
7. Categorical Grant: State and Local Air Quality Management; and
8. Categorical Grant: Tribal Air Quality Management.
1-15
-------
Results to be Achieved under this Objective
Implementation of this objective will result in cleaner air for Americans. By 2010, the
reductions in the levels of fine particles and ozone from Clear Skies and other air pollution
control programs are projected to result in 7,900 fewer premature deaths and $55 billion in
annual health and visibility benefits nationwide each year. New diesel truck and bus standards
will reduce the level of sulfur in highway diesel fuel by 97 percent by 2006. Beginning in 2007,
each new truck and bus will be more than 90 percent cleaner than current models, resulting in
annual emission reductions of 2.6 million tons of NOx and 109,000 tons of PM by 2030.11 The
non-road program will provide annual emission reductions of 825,000 tons of NOx and 125,000
tons of PM when fully implemented.12
Implementation of EPA's international programs will lead to an increase in the number of
air quality management strategies established in key countries and regions and an increase in the
amount and quality of information and technical capacity available for decision-makers. These
strategies, information, and capacity will provide the necessary institutional framework for
reductions of industrial and mobile source air pollution in key countries and regions,
harmonization with U.S. standards, and reductions in long-range transport to the U.S.
Federal Stationary Source Regulations
Under the Clean Air Act, EPA is responsible for setting, reviewing, and revising the
NAAQS, as well as for setting emission standards for sources of air toxics. These national
standards form the foundation for air quality management and air toxics programs implemented
at the national, state, local and tribal levels, and establish goals that protect public health and the
environment.
NAAQS Review: EPA is responsible for periodic review and revision, when necessary,
of the NAAQS for the six "criteria" pollutants: PM, ozone, SO2, NO2, CO, and lead. Currently,
EPA is reviewing the following NAAQS:
PM. Review of the PM NAAQS is well underway. EPA is currently developing drafts
of the Staff Paper and health risk assessment and will complete them in FY 2004. In FY
2005, the Agency will propose whether to retain or revise the NAASQS for fine
particulates (PM2.s), and in FY 2006 will make a final decision.
Ozone. In FY 2004, EPA will carry out the exposure analysis and health risk assessment
for the ozone NAAQS, in conjunction with development of the Staff Paper. The Agency
will complete final work in FY 2005 and propose to retain or revise the ozone NAAQS in
FY 2006. EPA will make a final decision on the standard by the court-ordered deadline
of December 15, 2006.
11 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation. December 2000. Regulatory Announcement: Heavy-
Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards and Highway Diesel Fuel Sulfur Control Requirements. EPA420F-00-057. Washington,
DC:GPA. Available online at http.vVwww.epa.gov/otaq/regs/hd2007/fhii/fi)0057.pdf. Date of Access: December 2, 2003.
12 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation. April 2003. Regulatory Announcement: Public Health
and Environmental Benefits of EPA 's Proposed Program for Low-Emission Nonroad Diesel Engines and Fuel. EPA420-F-03-
010. Washington, DC: GPO. Available online at http://wuw.epa.gov/nonroad'ffl3010.pdf. Date of Access: December 2, 2003.
1-16
-------
CO. EPA is currently reviewing the NAAQS for CO and has completed the CO Criteria
Document. The Agency anticipates continuing work on the Staff Paper in FY 2004.
After taking into account CASAC review and public comment, EPA will propose a
decision or whether to retain or revise the standards.
Air Toxics: Air toxics or HAPs may have a number of health and environmental impacts
when hi the air or deposited on soils or surface waters. People exposed to certain toxic air
pollutants at sufficient concentrations and for sufficient periods of time are at increased risk of
cancer or other serious health effects. These health effects may include damage to the immune
system, neurological system, reproductive system (e.g., reduced fertility), and/or developmental
and/or respiratory problems. Numerous studies also conclude that air toxics contribute to birth
defects, reproductive failure, and disease hi animals, as well as humans. Persistent toxic air
pollutants are of particular concern hi aquatic ecosystems where pollutants may accumulate hi
sediments and biomagnify in tissues of animals at the top of the food chain to concentrations
many times higher than in the water or air.
The Clean Air Act includes a variety of provisions that address air toxics from all
categories of sources. The 188 HAPs listed in the Act are emitted from mobile sources, major
stationary sources, and area stationary sources.13 EPA also has classified diesel particulate
matter and diesel exhaust organic gases as air toxics. Title II of the Act requires EPA to develop
standards to control HAPs from motor vehicles and vehicle fuels. Title III provides authority to
regulate HAPs from stationary sources. A major source is defined as a stationary sources or a
group of stationary sources located within a contiguous area and under common control that
emits or has the potential to emit considering controls, in the aggregate, 10 tons per year or more
of any HAP or 25 tons per year or more of any combination of HAPs. An area source is defined
as any stationary source of HAPs that is not a major source.
EPA's Air Toxics program has five elements:
1. Developing source-specific and sector-based Federal standards;
2. Carrying out national, regional, and community-based programs that focus on
multi-media and cumulative risks;
3. Using actual, measured, and modeled data to set priorities and guide programs;
4. Filling toxicity data gaps; and
5. Providing public education and outreach.
Priorities for the Air Toxics program include:
• Implementing a residual risk program to address risks at facilities post-MACT
standards; working to reduce toxics from mobile sources;
• Developing generally-available, control technology-based standards for the
highest priority area source categories; and
% Working with stakeholders to identify and address the risk reductions that matter
most to local citizens, and developing tools, taming, handbooks, and websites to
provide information on how to assess risks, convene multi-stakeholder groups to
make local decisions, and steps to go through to reduce risks.
13 http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/pollsour.html
1-17
-------
EPA implements a two-phase program to reduce emissions of air toxics from major
stationary sources. In the first phase, which is technology-based, EPA set Maximum Achievable
Control Technology (MACT) standards for approximately 180 source categories emitting one or
more of the 188 HAPs listed in the Act. MACT standards create a level playing field by
requiring all major sources to achieve the level of control already being achieved by the better
performing sources in each category. Although MACT standards are primarily for major
sources, they also may address important area source categories, such as chrome electroplaters
and secondary lead smelters that emit some of the most toxic pollutants.
When fully implemented, the MACT rules, in combination with efforts by states and
industry, will decrease toxic emissions from large industrial facilities by 1.7 million tons per year
or 63 percent from 1990-1993 baseline levels.14 As of September 1, 2003, EPA had issued 92
standards for 168 source categories. The Agency plans to'issue another four standards for six
source categories by February 2004.
In the second phase, which is risk-based, EPA examines each MACT standard eight years
after promulgation to determine if the health risk remaining from each industrial category is
considered safe. EPA will develop more stringent residual risk standards, when appropriate, to
reduce cancer and non-cancer health risks.
In FY 2005, EPA will continue residual risk analyses for already promulgated MACT
standards to determine if additional, tighter standards are necessary to reduce the remaining
health risks from these sources. EPA is working to develop the significant amounts of
information (e.g., emissions, source characterization, exposures) required to determine whether
additional standards are needed. EPA also is developing an approach so that only those facilities
within a source category that pose risks at a level of concern will have to comply with these
standards. Guidance is being developed so facilities can perform facility-by-facility risk
analyses to determine whether they have low risks and are, therefore, already in compliance with
the standards.
EPA also must set technology-based standards for select area sources. Area source
categories currently constitute approximately 55 percent of the air toxics emissions.15
Projections that include consideration of standards in place show that area source categories
constitute a significant proportion of unaddressed emissions. Area sources are an important
source because they frequently occur in clusters in congested areas with high populations. EPA
is evaluating these sources and has started work on those with the greatest emissions and
toxicity. As of September 1, 2003 the Agency has listed 70 area source categories that were
required to be finalized in 2000. Standards for 14 of these source categories have been
completed. EPA is negotiating promulgation dates for the remaining 56 source categories as part
of settlement discussions.
In addition to these standards, EPA determined in December 2000 that regulation was
necessary and appropriate for coal-fired and oil-fired electric utility steam generating units.
14 The EMS-HAP (Emissions Modeling System for Hazardous Air Pollutants) is used to estimate annual emissions of air toxics
for the 1996 NTI and 1999 NEI for HAPS (and for all years in-between), http://www.epa.gov/scram001/tt22.htmtfaspen
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/proiection/emshap.html http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/proiection/emshap.html
15 National Emission Inventory Data, http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/index.html
1-18
-------
According to an existing settlement agreement, these regulations were proposed in December
200316 with scheduled promulgation in December 2004, and will bring these units into
compliance by December 2007. The Utility Mercury Reduction Rule includes provisions for a
cap and trade approach, consistent with the President's Clear Skies proposal, that would allow
emissions trading in lieu of "maximum achievable control technology" (MACT). The proposed
rule seeks comment on the two approaches for reducing the mercury emitted by coal-fired power
plants.
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs
EPA's strategy for achieving clean air includes a series of innovative market-based
programs: the Clear Skies Initiative proposed by President Bush, the Interstate Air Quality Rule
and Mercury Reduction Rule proposed by EPA in December 2003, the Acid Rain Program
established by the 1990 amendments to the Clean Air Act, and the NOX Budget Programs
developed under the NOX SIP Call (which, as of March, 2003 incorporates the initial NOX Budget
Program under the Northeast Ozone Transport Commission). The Acid Rani Program is
designed to reduce SC>2 and NOX emissions; the NOx Budget Programs address the interstate
transport of ozone and NOX. EPA will continue to implement the two established market-based
programs while awaiting passage of Clear Skies legislation or promulgation of the Interstate Air
Quality Rule and the Mercury Reduction Rule.
Clear Skies: The legislation proposed under the Clear Skies Act will take the best of
what we have learned and modernize the existing Clean Air Act. Using a market-based
approach, the Clear Skies Act will dramatically cut power plant emissions of three of the worst
air pollutants - SOa, NOX, and mercury (Hg). Emissions of SC>2 and NOX result in airborne fine
particles (PM^s); reductions in emissions of these pollutants will reduce PM2.5. EPA's approach
builds upon the success of the Acid Rain cap-and-trade program created in 1990. The Acid Rain
Program has reduced more pollution in the last decade than any of the Clean Air Act command-
and-control programs for stationary sources and achieved these reductions at 25 percent of the
projected costs at the inception of the program.
The Clear Skies Act, as proposed, will achieve substantially greater reductions in air
pollution from the power sector more quickly and with more certainty than the existing Clean
Air Act. The Initiative requires mandatory cuts of SOa, NOX, and Hg by an average of 70
percent from year 2000 levels and ensures that these levels are achieved and sustained through
caps on emissions. The alternative approach, based on the proposed Interstate Air Quality Rule
and the Utility Mercury Reduction Rule, would also achieve significant reductions in air
pollution from the power sector, absent new legislative authority.
The types of actions that the Agency would need to take for implementation of either the
Clear Skies Act or the rules proposed in December 2003 include:
(1) Prepare the data and tools for completing the rules and/or implementing the Act.
Design a cap-and-trade program, promulgate rules, and develop implementing tools and
mechanisms.
16 http://www.epa.gov/mercury/actions.htm
1-19
-------
(2) Support the rules with technical and economic analyses. Determine control
technology options and investigate the regulatory impacts on the U.S. economy, the
environment, small business, and local communities.
(3) Develop baselines and prepare to assess program benefits. Establish an integrated
assessment program to include enhanced ambient and deposition monitoring and develop
a baseline prior to implementation of the program.
(4) Ensure the program's credibility and results. Successful trading programs require
accurate and consistent monitoring of emissions from affected sources. Investigate
monitoring alternatives (particularly as they relate to mercury), propose performance
specifications, and develop mercury monitoring protocols.
(5) Maximize flexibility for affected sources. Allow for optimum trading of
emissions by building on existing Acid Rain electronic allowance trading and emissions
reporting systems.
(6) Develop the operating infrastructure. Operation of this program will be
dependent upon E-Gov infrastructure that must be developed. The data collection
requirements must be determined and operating software and hardware specifications
developed. Initial software development should also begin.
EPA projects that enactment and implementation of the Clear Skies Act, hi combination
with existing programs, will bring 246 of the counties currently not hi attainment with the 8-hour
ozone standard into compliance with the standard by 2010, leaving 44 counties predicted to
monitor violation of this standard. For PMa.s, preliminary 1999-2001 data indicate that 129
counties monitor violation of this standard (are not in attainment). Under Clear Skies, in
combination with existing programs, 87 of these counties are expected to attain the standard by
2010. By 2020, three additional counties are projected to come into attainment with the 8-hour
ozone standard and 35 additional counties are projected to come into attainment with the PlV^.s
standard. Furthermore, emissions caps instituted over a period of tune under Clear Skies (or the
integrated Interstate Air Quality Rule) allow for flexible and cost-effective compliance with far
greater certainty of achieving the anticipated environmental results. These integrated interstate
air quality programs would eliminate costly source-by-source regulation and will most likely
reduce the incidence of costly litigation, inspection, and enforcement actions while achieving
results with compliance rates similar to those of the Acid Rain Program, which has emission
reduction compliance rates of nearly 100 percent.
EPA projects benefits to human health could approach $110 billion annually by 2020,
due primarily to avoided premature deaths. In addition, emission reductions resulting from Clear
Skies will help to significantly address several other of our nation's major air pollution-related
environmental problems caused by PMi.5, ozone, acid rain, nitrogen deposition, and visibility
impairment. Visibility benefits in select national parks and wilderness areas are projected to be
approximately $3 billion annually. Clear Skies offers the opportunity to significantly reduce the
expected collective cost to the state and Federal environmental agencies .of developing and
implementing programs to address PMa.s and regional haze issues, not to mention the cost of
regulated entities under the current Clean Air Act programs.
1-20
-------
Acid Rain Program: Emissions of SOi, mostly from electric power generation and other
industrial sources, and NOX, mostly from electric power generation sources and motor vehicles,
react in the atmosphere and fall to earth as acid deposition or "acid rain." Acid rain causes
acidification of soils, lakes, and streams, making the water unsuitable for some fish and other
wildlife and contributing to the damage of trees at high elevations. Acid rain also speeds the
decay of buildings, statues, and sculptures that are part of our national heritage. Before falling to
earth, SC^ and NOX gases form fine particles that adversely affect human health by contributing
to premature deaths, chronic bronchitis, and other respiratory problems. The fine particles also
contribute to reduced visibility and impair some of our most scenic vistas at national parks. Acid
rain and its precursor SOa and NOX emissions are carried by the wind, sometimes hundreds of
miles, across state and national borders. NOX emissions also are a major precursor of ozone,
which contribute to asthma and other respiratory illnesses and damages crops, forests, and
materials. NOX deposition also contributes to eutrophication of coastal waters, such as the
Chesapeake Bay and Tampa Bay.
Title IV
Utility SO2 and NOX Emissions Reductions
Emissions (million tons)
20-
15-
10-
5-
J7.5
18.7
0
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Year
Source: U.S. EPA. Office of the Chief Financial Officer. EPA Strategic Plan. EPA-190-R-00-002. page
4. September 2000.
The Acid Rain Program, authorized under Title IV of the Clean Air Act Amendments of
1990, has numerous statutory deadlines. Title II of the Clean Air Act Amendments requires
reductions in NOX emissions from mobile sources. The U.S. also is committed to reductions in
SC<2 and NOX emissions under the U.S.-Canada Air Quality Agreement of 1991. EPA's Acid
Rain Program uses market-based approaches to achieve these emission reductions. The Program
provides affected sources with flexibility to meet required emission reductions at the lowest cost
(both to industry and government). The SOi component features tradable units called
"allowances" (one allowance authorizes the emission of one ton of SOa), accurate and verifiable
measurements of emissions, and a cap on total emissions. The Acid Rain Program continues to
be recognized as a model for flexible and effective regulation, both in the U.S. and abroad.
Major Acid Rain Program activities include: measurement, quality assurance, and
tracking of SOi, NOX, and COa emissions, as recorded by Continuous Emissions Monitors
1-21
-------
(CEMs) or equivalent continuous monitoring methods at more than 3,000 reporting electric
utility units; conducting field audits and certifying emissions monitors; recording transfers of
emission allowances in the SOi allowance tracking system; and reconciling emissions and
allowances for all affected sources to ensure compliance.
The Acid Rain Program developed through two phases. Phase I of the Program began in
1995 requiring SOa reductions from approximately 400 electric utility units. Phase I also
required approximately 250 of these units to make NOX reductions beginning hi 1996. Phase II
of the Program began in 2000 and required reductions in SOa emissions from more than 2,500
operating electric utility units (gas-fired, oil-fired, and coal-fired) and reductions in year-round
NOX emissions from approximately 1,000 coal-fired units. In addition, the number of affected
sources is increasing steadily as new capacity is built into the system to meet the Nation's
expanding energy demands. Since 2000, approximately 700 new operating sources have been
added to the system, an increase of over 20 percent (many are peaking, not full-time load, units).
This growth has resulted in a steady increase in the number of units affected by the
trading program and a significant increase in emissions tracking, SOa allowance trading, and
account reconciliation activities conducted by EPA each year. To manage this workload, lower
operating costs, and improve customer service, the Program has incorporated selected e-Gov IT
practices compatible with the responsibility of administering the Allowance Tracking System
(ATS) and the Emissions Tracking System (ETS). In 1999, the Program required direct modem
or Internet transfer of emissions data. The ETS provides instant feedback to submitters
identifying data reporting problems, format errors, and inconsistencies, so they can understand
and correct problems promptly. In 2001, 4,900 allowance transfers that affected over 22 million
SC>2 allowances were recorded in the ATS, the accounting system developed to track holdings of
allowances. EPA launched the On-Line Allowance Transfer System (OATS) in December 2001.
This timesaving electronic system enables allowance market participants to record trades directly
on the Internet, rather than submitting paper forms. Approximately 90 percent of all allowance
transfers are now completed on-line.
Allowance Trading
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
9 Between Economically Related Organizations
* Between Economically Distinct Organizations
Source: U.S. EPA. Office of Air and Radiation. Clean Air Markets Program. EPA Acid Rain Program
2001 Progress Report. EPA-430-R-02-009. page 13. November 2002
1-22
-------
In addition to these operational activities, the Acid Rain Program is responsible for
managing the Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNet), a dry deposition monitoring
network, as well as for providing critical operational support for the National Atmospheric
Deposition Program (NADP), a wet deposition monitoring network. These monitoring efforts
play a crucial role hi the Program's ongoing assessment activities, including reporting outcomes
under the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) and the Government Performance and
Results Act (GPRA), and fulfilling assessment responsibilities under the US-Canada Air Quality
Agreement and Title IX of the Clean Air Act. In addition, the Program provides analytical
support for the interagency National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP). NAPAP
coordinates Federal acid deposition research and monitoring of emissions, acidic deposition, and
then: effects, including assessing the costs and benefits of Title IV. In 2005, the Acid Rain
Program will continue analyzing the costs and benefits of the Program for inclusion in NAPAP's
Integrated Assessment Report.
EPA estimates that, when fully implemented in 2010, the SOa reductions alone under
Title IV will provide $50 billion (1997 dollars) in health benefits (mostly from an estimated
reduction in premature mortality of 9,000 cases per year) and $1 billion hi additional benefits due
to unproved visibility from an expected 30 percent improvement in visibility at national parks hi
the eastern US.17 The Acid Rain Program also will produce significant benefits in terms of
lowered surface water acidity and less damage to materials and high-elevation forests.
Nevertheless, after full implementation of the current program, significant residual risks will
remain to human health, ecological systems, and quality of life. Thus, Clear Skies (or the
alternative approach under the Interstate Air Quality Rule, proposed hi December 2003) is
needed to address this deficiency as well as issues related to visibility impairment and attainment
of the NAAQS for fine particles and ozone.
A report, Response of Surface Water Chemistry to the Clean Air Act Amendments of
1990, released hi January 2003 by EPA's Office of Research and Development (ORD) concludes
that measurable improvements in surface water chemistry (lower sulfate concentrations and
decreases hi acidity) have resulted from reductions hi emissions and in wet sulfate deposition
under the Acid Rain Program. EPA with collaborators (researchers at universities, U.S.
Geological Survey, and other organizations) conducted this assessment to determine if there have
been reductions in the level of acidity hi lakes and streams in five geographic areas of the Upper
Midwest and Northeastern US - those areas most affected by acid rain. Study results indicate
that hi three of the five areas, one-quarter to one-third of lakes and streams previously affected
by acid rain are no longer acidic, although they are still highly sensitive to future changes hi
deposition. In other areas, signs of recovery are not yet evident, suggesting that further
reductions such as those proposed in the Clear Skies Act will further assist in ecosystem
recovery.
y Budget Program: At the request of participating states, EPA will continue to operate
the NOX emission reduction and multistate trading program for controlling transported ozone and
NOX hi the eastern United States. The initial NOX Budget Program under the Ozone Transport
Commission (OTC) went into effect hi the summer of 1999. During the 2001 ozone season, nine
states plus the District of Columbia were participating in this voluntary regional control program
17 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act 1990-2010: EPA Report to
Congress. EPA: Washington, DC. November 1999.
1-23
-------
for the ozone transport region (OTR). NOX emissions from approximately 970 affected sources
were reduced by over 250,000 tons (60 percent) from the 1990 baseline and 12 percent below the
2001 allowance allocations. Approximately the same reduction was maintained for the 2002
ozone season with emissions 11% below the 2002 allowance allocations. In March 2003, the
OTC NOX Budget Program ended as a separate entity, integrating fully with the broader regional
NOX Budget Program under the NOX SIP Call.
Implementation of the NOX SIP Call rule began in 2003 for the OTR states and will begin
in 2004 for other states. Emissions data for affected sources in these states (with one exception)
will be reported to the ETS beginning with the second quarter 2003. Approximately 1,000
sources (400 sources that have not reported previously) will begin submitting electronic
emissions and monitor certification data. In 2004, the initial compliance year for the NOX SIP
Call, up to 2000 units in as many as 20 states and D.C. will be reporting seasonal NOX data to
ETS.
NOX Emissions (OTR- Ozone Season)
193 19S
Source:U.S. EPA. Office of Air and Radiation. Clean Air Markets Program with Ozone Transport Commission.
NOX Budget Program 1999-2002 Progress Report. EPA-430-R-03-900. March 2003.
EPA will continue to assist the states with implementation, especially related to the
emissions trading program, compliance supplement pool, and monitoring. Following the 2003
and 2004 ozone seasons, EPA will conduct an analysis to assess and determine the actual
emission reductions achieved. Initial compliance emission reductions from this regional
program are required to begin hi the summer ozone season of 2004. NOX emission reductions
from this program are projected to be approximately 800,000 tons per season.
Federal Vehicle and Fuel Standards and Certification
Despite great progress in achieving cleaner, healthier air, air pollution continues to be a
widespread human health and environmental problem hi the U.S., and mobile sources continue to
be major contributors to outdoor air pollution. Over the past 30 years, EPA's national standards
for vehicles, engines, and fuels have made major advances in reducing mobile source emissions.
1-24
-------
However, continued increases in vehicle miles traveled have offset some of these advances, and
additional work in a variety of areas is needed to provide further environmental benefits. In
addition, EPA needs to focus on the implementation of recently promulgated programs to protect
the environmental and health benefits expected hi the future. Thus, much work remains to be
done hi FY 2005 to ensure the successful implementation of regulatory programs designed to
address remaining mobile sources that contribute significantly to air pollution.
In the last few years, EPA has established important regulatory programs that will
significantly reduce emissions from highway and non-road sources. It is critical for EPA to
continue supporting the implementation activities of important environmental programs, such as
the Tier II program, the 2007 Heavy-Duty (HD) standards, and the Non-road Diesel standards, hi
order to ensure the successful delivery of cleaner vehicles/equipment and cleaner fuel.
The Agency promulgated the Tier II program for Light-Duty Vehicles (LDVs) and Light-
Duty Trucks (LDTs) hi 2000. This program established new tailpipe standards for all passenger
vehicles and new limits for sulfur in gasoline reducing, NOX emissions by 74 percent (i.e., 2
million tons per year by 2020 and nearly 3 million tons per year by 2030). The new tailpipe
standards will begin hi 2004, with a phase-in schedule between 2004 and 2007. The new
gasoline sulfur requirements will also begin in 2004. The Tier II Program also will require a new
corporate average for refineries, which is being introduced between 2005 and 2007.18
In 2001, the Agency promulgated new engine standards and diesel fuel requirements to
significantly reduce emissions for highway HD trucks and buses. The new vehicle standards,
beginning hi 2007, will require that the level of sulfur in highway diesel fuel be reduced by 97
percent by 2006. As a result of this program, each new truck and bus will be more than 90
percent cleaner than current models, resulting hi annual emission reductions of 2.6 million tons
of NOX and 109,000 tons of PM by 2030.19 Thus, the Agency will be actively working on the
implementation of this program hi FY 2005. This work includes continued assessment of the
development of clean engine and fuel technologies to evaluate progress toward implementation
of the program.
For non-road diesel engines (i.e., those used hi construction, agricultural, and industrial
equipment), EPA is promulgating new standards and new fuel requirements for non-road diesel
fuel in 2004. The new regulation will take effect for new engines starting as early as 2008. For
the first time ever, advanced emission control systems will be incorporated into non-road
equipment. In addition, the sulfur content of non-road diesel fuel will be significantly phased
down from the current uncontrolled level of 3,400 ppm to 500 ppm beginning hi 2007, and then
to 15 ppm hi 2010 - a 99 percent reduction.20 These drastic changes hi non-road engines and
diesel fuel will require close scrutiny by the Agency to ensure a smooth transition into
18 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation. December 1999. Regulatory Announcement: EPA's
Program for Cleaner Vehicles and Cleaner Gasoline. EPA420-F-99-051. Washington, DC: GPO. Available online at
http:/.''wwvv.epa.gov/otaq/regs/ld-hw>'/tier-2.;fmv'f99051 .pdf. Date of Access: December 2, 2003.
19 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation. December 2000. Regulatory Announcement: Heavy-
Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards and Highway Diesel Fuel Sulfur Control Requirements. EPA420-F-00-057. Washington,
DC: GPO. Available online at http:/Avww.epa.gov/otaq/regs'hd2007/fim/fD0057.pdf. Date of Access: December 2, 2003.
20 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation. April 2003. Regulatory Announcement: Summary of
EPA's Proposed Program for Low Emission Nonroad Diesel Engines and Fuel. EPA420-F-03-008. Washington, DC: GPO.
Available online at http://www.epa.gov/nonroad/fD3008.pdf. Date of Access: December 2, 2003.
1-25
-------
compliance. This important program will provide annual emission reductions of 825,000 tons of
NOX and 125,000 tons of PM, when fully implemented.21
The successful implementation of the programs described above will ensure that air
quality improvements and environmental and health benefits are accrued. EPA calculates that by
2030, compliance with the Tier II rule will prevent as many as 4,300 deaths, more than 10,000
cases of chronic and acute bronchitis, and tens of thousands of respiratory problems a year.22
The emission reductions resulting from the 2007 Highway Heavy-Duty Engine Regulations will
prevent as many as 8,300 premature deaths, more than 9,500 hospitalizations, and 1.5 million
workdays lost.23 The new Non-road Diesel program will prevent over 9,600 premature deaths,
8,300 hospitalizations, 16,000 heart attacks, 14,000 acute bronchitis attacks and 260,000
respiratory problems in children, and nearly a million workdays lost due to illness.24
In FY 2005, EPA also will continue implementing other important mobile source
programs addressing ozone and PM. For example, the phase-in of emission standards for
locomotives, which will result in more than 60 percent reduction in NOX and more than 40
percent reduction in PM, began in 2000.25 More stringent standards on locomotives will take
effect in 2005. In FY 2002, EPA finalized regulations addressing emissions from a range of
unregulated non-road sources, including industrial gasoline engines (e.g., forklifts and
generators), recreational vehicles (e.g., snowmobiles), and recreational marine diesel engines.
The new standards are expected to reduce hydrocarbon (HC) and NOX emissions by nearly 80
percent when fully implemented.26 The standards for industrial engines will begin to phase-in in
2004, while the standards for recreational vehicles and marine engines will begin in 2006.
In FY 2005, EPA will continue implementing the Phase II standards for gasoline
handheld engines (e.g., trimmers, brush cutters, and chainsaws). The phase-in schedule of these
new standards began with the 2002 model year, with more stringent standards coming into effect
in 2005. This program will reduce HC and NOX emissions by 70 percent, resulting in annual
reductions of 500,000 tons of HC and NOX by 2027.27
21 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation. April 2003. Regulatory Announcement: Public Health
and Environmental Benefits of EPA's Proposed Program for Low-Emission Nonroad Diesel Engines and Fuel. EPA420-F-03-
010. Washington, DC: GPO. Available online at http://wvt'w.epa.gov/nonrpad/
-------
In FY 2005, the Agency will continue to seek further reductions in mobile source
emissions to attain and maintain the new ozone and PM NAAQS. For example, locomotives and
commercial marine engines contribute significantly to NOX and PM emission inventories in
many urban areas and their contribution will grow over time compared to other mobile sources.
It is estimated that in 2020, these engines will contribute to 20 percent of mobile source diesel
PM and 30 percent of mobile source NOX emissions.28 To address these significant contributors
of air pollution, the Agency is planning a proposal hi 2005 that will apply advanced after-
treatment technologies to these sources and require low sulfur in their fuel. For locomotives, the
Agency also plans to address idle emissions and the possibility of retrofit PM requirements. In
addition, the Agency is committed to further reduce emissions from large commercial ships with
a final rule by April 2007.
EPA also plans to continue to address emissions from small gasoline engines (under 50
horsepower) hi FY 2005. The requirement to develop a regulation addressing these engines was
included in the FY 2004 Consolidated Appropriations Bill. The regulatory program would
include exhaust and evaporative emission standards for marine engines, non-handheld engines
(such as those used hi lawnmowers), and handheld engines (such as those used in trimmers,
chainsaws). The program would also include exhaust emission controls for small engines used
hi youth all-terrain vehicles (ATVs). According to the Appropriations Bill, the statutory
deadline for this program would be December 2004 for a proposal, with a final rule in December
2005.
Currently, there are no on-board diagnostic (OBD) standards for engines used in heavy-
duty (HD) trucks. Because of the recently promulgated 2007 HD truck standards, these vehicles
will become more complex and dependent on electronic controls and exhaust emission control
technology. Having OBD requirements hi place will help ensure that the full benefits of the
emission standards will be realized in-use, hi particular by monitoring for failure of the exhaust
emission control system. A proposal is planned for 2004, with a final rule hi 2005. EPA will
work together with California, Japan, and the European Union to develop world-harmonized
OBD requirements. A similar OBD program is planned for non-road diesel engines, with a
proposal expected in 2005.
In-use compliance is an important element of EPA's regulatory programs. EPA has
entered into a settlement agreement with the Engine Manufacturers Association and several
engine manufacturers that resolves several lawsuits related to non-compliance. Under this
agreement, EPA is initiating a consultative process with regard to establishing through regulation
an in-use compliance surveillance program for non-road diesel engines. This program is vital to
ensuring that new engine standards are actually met in-use under real-world conditions. The
program will deter the use of defeat devices, as well as detect emission malfunctions that could
cause emissions to exceed standards. A proposal is planned for 2004 with a final rule hi 2005.
Another important area of work hi FY 2005 is mobile source ah toxics. In FY 2001,
EPA issued the Mobile Source Air Toxics Rule (MSAT) to address emissions of air toxics from
mobile sources. This 2001 MSAT rule identified 21 mobile source air toxics, which include
several volatile organic compounds and metals, as well as diesel particulate matter and diesel
28 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation. April 2003. Draft Regulatory Impact Analysis: Control
of Emissions from Nonroad Diesel Engines. EPA420-F-03-008. Washington, DC: GPO. Available
http:,vwww.epa.gov/no»road'W3008.pdf. Date of Access: December 8,2003.
1-27
-------
exhaust organic gases. The MSAT rule also evaluated the effectiveness of existing mobile
source emission control programs in reducing highway emissions of the identified mobile source
toxics. Air toxic reductions of about 1.4 million tons are expected between 1996 and 2020 from
existing programs that reduce ozone and particulate matter (PM), including: the reformulated
gasoline program, the national low emission vehicle program, the emission standards for
passenger vehicles, trucks and buses, gasoline sulfur control requirements, and diesel fuel sulfur
control requirements.
The 2001 MSAT rule committed the Agency to conduct further research and perform
additional rulemaking to re-evaluate the need for and feasibility of additional toxics controls.
EPA intends to finalize this rulemaking in FY 2005. EPA already has promulgated additional
regulations that will reduce air toxic pollutants, including standards for large gasoline industrial
equipment and recreational vehicles (finalized in 2002) and standards for non-road diesel
equipment and fuel (to be finalized in 2004).
The MSAT rule EPA intends to finalize in FY 2005 will be based on synthesis and
analysis of the ongoing analyses that EPA originally committed to in the 2001 rule's Technical
Analysis Plan. This includes analyses of toxics emissions from non-road vehicles and
equipment, estimation of exposure in microenvironments, consideration of the range of total
public exposure to air toxics, and effectiveness and costs of control measures. EPA will be
continuing to collect and analyze toxic emissions data from on-road and non-road mobile
sources. In addition, the Agency will be analyzing data from several exposure assessment
projects to characterize the role of mobile sources in creating toxic hot spots and high-end
exposure. This is relevant to the FY 2005 MSAT rule as well as other policy development
involving state/local and non-regulatory programs.
In addition to the assessment necessary to support the FY 2005 toxics rale, EPA will be
conducting analyses to respond to mobile source air toxics issues that are becoming increasingly
important. These include: near-roadway exposure, the mobile source contribution to emissions
of persistent bioaccumulative toxics (such as mercury), and health effects from advanced
technology vehicles.
The Agency's National Vehicle and Fuels Emissions Laboratory (NVFEL) provides
critical support to EPA, the states, the fuels industry, the automobile industry, and non-road
engine manufacturers by testing vehicles and engines for compliance with Federal clean air
standards. The NVFEL will continue to conduct vehicle emission tests as part of the pre-
production tests, certification audits, in-use assessments, and recall programs to support mobile
source clean air programs. Tests are conducted on motor vehicles, heavy-duty engines, non-road
engines, and fuels to: (1) certify and/or confirm that vehicles and engines meet Federal air
emissions and fuel economy standards; (2) ensure engines comply with in-use requirements; and
(3) ensure fuels, fuel additives, and exhaust compounds meet Federal standards. In FY 2005,
EPA will continue to conduct testing activities for fuel economy, LDV and HD engine
characterization, Tier II testing, reformulated gasoline, future fleets, OBD evaluations,
certification audits, and recall programs.
EPA also will continue to conduct separate in-use testing on HD diesel engines to
ascertain compliance with consent decrees related to violations of defeat device prohibitions and
will expand its in-use presence to include non-consent decree engines and non-road diesel
1-28
-------
engines. EPA will test HD diesel engines to support implementation of 2007 HD diesel
requirements, non-road diesel engine rulemaking activities and develop Portable Emission
Measurement Systems (PEMS). In addition, NVFEL will conduct energy efficiency tests of
electric vehicles, including hybrids, in collaboration with the Department of Energy, as well as
non-road vehicle emission testing in support of non-road regulatory development. EPA also will
continue testing hydrogen fuel cell vehicles in support of demonstration programs, technical
assessments, measurement method development, and compliance activities. To support on-going
confirmatory and compliance programs, the NVFEL will conduct certification and fuel economy
tests on LDV, LDT, and Light Heavy-Duty Vehicles (LHDV) and will conduct compliance tests
on in-use LDVs and LDTs. NVFEL will also test LDV and HD engines for regulatory
development.
The new Tier II (ultra-low emission vehicle) standards will increase the annual costs of
generating and maintaining compliance program data, as well as create a completely new and
different standards structure. The new Tier II program provides great flexibility, including
corporate fleet averaging standards, multi-year phase-in, incentives for early innovation, and
extensive banking and trading provisions. These provisions give manufacturers flexibility, but
increase the EPA compliance program costs. In FY 2005, EPA also will begin to implement new
durability provisions to replace regulations under the CAP 2000 program, in response to a D.C.
Circuit Court of Appeals decision in FY 2002 that instructed the Agency to establish test
methods and procedures by regulation.
Beginning in 2003-2004, manufacturers will shift product offerings toward extremely
low emitting vehicles and cleaner diesel vehicles. Furthermore, new Federal test procedures
took effect in 2003 for measuring emissions over test cycles to characterize the appropriate
acceleration rates, accessory loads, and evaporative systems. These new requirements required
the NVFEL laboratory to achieve greater data measurement stability/accuracy at extremely low
levels as well as introduced new testing cycles and capabilities, resulting in increased annual
operations and maintenance expenses for advanced testing systems and testing flexibilities. The
new CAP 2000 database system to collect, process, store, and analyze a large volume of in-use
data provided by the regulated industry also resulted in new annual maintenance and upgrade
costs. The regulated industry depends on NVFEL laboratory accuracy to benchmark its own
laboratories and to ensure consistent compliance stringency in the marketplace.
To ensure achievement of the goals of the Clean Air Act through Tier II and the
2004/2007 Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine standards, EPA completed an extensive equipment
upgrade of vehicle and engine testing capabilities at the NVFEL. Included with this upgrade was
the capability to test vehicles in four-wheel and all-wheel drive modes of operation. The
implementation of a four-wheel drive dynamometer also allowed for the testing of hybrid
vehicles with regenerative braking in a more representative fashion.
The mobile source compliance program will oversee more than 225 original equipment
manufacturers to ensure that vehicles and engines (both on-highway and non-road) will meet the
applicable emission standards throughout then- useful life. The program issues nearly 2,200
certificates of conformity annually. Compliance is audited and ensured through pre-production
certification and confirmatory testing, assembly line testing, various special audit programs, and
in-use testing and recall. For light-duty vehicles and trucks, there also is a fuel economy
compliance program, which in FY 2005 will issue about 1,000 fuel economy consumer labels,
1-29
-------
data for the EPA/DOE Gas Mileage Guide and "gas guzzler" tax collection, and data to calculate
the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) values for all light-duty manufacturers.
EPA must continue to strengthen the new compliance-testing program to serve HD
engine manufacturers certifying to the new 2004 emission standard requirements. This program
must be as robust as the compliance program for LDVs and LDTs to prevent a recurrence of the
use of emissions control defeat devices that has taken place in the past. HD engine
manufacturers have requested that EPA establish a correlation program similar to the vehicle
manufacturers' program. This will triple the size and operation of EPA's current correlation
program.
In addition, non-road sources are a major certification and compliance workload priority,
as new standards are now taking effect. In FY 2005, EPA will issue about 1,700 certificates for
non-road sources up from zero in 1996. These non-road engines require unique test procedures
because the range of products requires different testing, facility operation, and information
technology costs to collect and process data and to calculate emissions levels.
For all mobile source industries, EPA will increase compliance and technical assistance.
Since 1996 the number of manufacturers and the number of certificates issued by EPA has
tripled. Complex requirements, phase-ins, and new test procedures have greatly increased the
need for EPA-provided compliance and technical assistance to all mobile source industries,
including: cars, trucks, large and small non-road equipment, forklifts, chainsaws, lawnmowers,
generators, ground service equipment, recreational vehicles, commercial and recreational marine,
and locomotives.
Another important element of the Agency's work in controlling air emissions is to ensure
that accurate emission data is obtained from the different categories of mobile sources. In FY
2000-2001, the Agency increased its focus on the development of a portable emission
measurement system that will allow the Agency to acquire in-use emission data in a cost-
effective manner. From FY 2001 to FY 2004, EPA refined its in-use NOX measurement
capability and developed its PM measurement capability. In FY 2005, EPA will continue to test
and develop the complete system to include air toxics measurement capability. The Agency plans
to continue using portable systems to characterize in-use emissions from light-duty vehicles,
heavy-duty highway vehicles, and non-road equipment. The newly acquired emission data will
enhance EPA's emission models.
The Agency also will emphasize improvements hi its transportation emission models in
FY 2005. EPA has developed an architectural framework for a new generation model that will
greatly improve the Agency's ability to support the development of emission control programs,
as well as provide support to the states in their determination of program needs to meet air
quality standards. The Agency will continue developing the new transportation emission model
hi FY 2005, as well as providing guidance and training hi the use of mobile source models.
The Agency will continue to develop partnerships that emphasize the development of
innovative transportation control and technology-based strategies and voluntary mobile source
programs. The Agency will continue providing technical guidance for implementing the
National Low Emission Vehicle program.
1-30
-------
EPA also will continue implementing Phase II of the reformulated gasoline (RFG)
program, which will result in additional HC, NOX, and toxic emission reductions in 17 states and
the District of Columbia. RFG is designed to substantially reduce vehicle emissions of ozone-
forming and toxic pollutants, which is estimated to reduce VOC emissions by 27 percent, toxic
emissions by 22 percent, and NOX emissions by 6.8 percent.29 This is the equivalent of taking 16
million vehicles that burn conventional gasoline off the road.30
EPA will continue to address issues associated with the use of oxygenates (e.g., MTBE
and ethanol) in RFG and will review the industry's retail station survey plan. Several states have
banned the use of MTBE and have submitted or may submit requests for waivers from the
oxygen requirement of RFG. EPA will evaluate these waiver requests to determine whether a
waiver from the requirement should be granted. In addition, 1-hour non-attainment areas that are
bumped up to "severe" will be required to have RFG hi place, and EPA will help implement the
new programs as they become RFG-covered cities. The Agency will also continue to collect and
review data submitted by manufacturers of motor fuels and fuel additives to assess whether
fuels/additives different from conventional fuels (e.g. oxygenated fuels) cause any unexpected
toxic effects.
Federal Support for Air Quality Management
EPA develops Federal measures that reduce emissions from stationary and mobile
sources. States and Tribes must develop the additional clean air measures necessary to meet
NAAQS. Current plans for NAAQS review are summarized below.
PM: The Agency will propose the PM-2.5 rule in 2004 and finalize it in late 2004. Area
designations for PM-2.5 will be final by December 2004. EPA is working with States to develop
strategies that will be effective hi reducing emissions as well as voluntary actions that can be
implemented early to provide for the health protection sooner than required under the Act. The
Agency is coordinating its efforts to implement the ozone and PM-2.5 standards with the
Regional Haze rule to maximize the ability of the States, Tribes and regulated community to
respond to these requirements hi an integrated fashion.
A major focus of the PM program hi FY 2005 will be to complete the assessment of
PMa.5 as it moves from point, area, and mobile sources and source regions to downwind areas
and to identify major contributing sources of precursor pollutant emissions (e.g., SOX, NOX). The
Agency proposed an Interstate Air Quality Rule to reduce emissions of SO2 and NOx hi the
eastern U.S. This is an important component of EPA's efforts to implement the new NAAQS for
fine particles and 8-hour ozone. The Agency also proposed a rule for implementing the
transportation conformity program under the new NAAQS and expects to publish a final rule hi
FY 2004.
Ozone: EPA will continue to implement the national program for the 1-hour ozone
standard, providing technical support to states required to submit mid-course reviews hi 2004.
This includes preparing example model applications, 10-year trends analyses, and other factors
29 "Protection of Environment." Code of Federal Regulations. 2003 ed. Title 40, Pt. 80, Sec. 80.41 (f).
30 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation. February 2002. Reformulated Gasoline Transition Fact
Sheet. EPA420-F-02-001. Washington, DC: GPO. Available online at http:/ymTO^epa.gov/otaq/regs/faeis/rfa/'fD200t.pdf..
Date of Access: December 2, 2003.
1-31
-------
that can be used as part of the weight-of-evidence relative to demonstrating progress in
attainment. EPA will review 1-hour data for the purpose of publishing determinations of
attainment and to support redesignation from non-attainment. Where air quality data show that a
non-attainment area has failed to meet its required attainment date, EPA will implement the
reclassification provisions in the Clean Air Act.
EPA proposed a rule for implementing the 8-hr ozone NAAQS in June 200331 and
expects to publish a final rule in 2004. In FY 2003, states and Tribes submitted
recommendations for non-attainment and attainment areas. EPA will review and modify the
recommendations (working with the states and Tribes) and prepare designation rulemaking,
which is scheduled to be completed by the court ordered deadline of April 15, 2004. As
mentioned above, EPA also proposed a rule for implementing the transportation conformity
program under the new ozone and participate matter NAAQS. In FY 2004, EPA will also
propose changes to the regulations governing vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) under
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The Agency expects to publish the final changes in FY 2005.
EPA will announce its plan to review and possibly revise its policy on the reactivity of
VOCs in FY 2004, seeking input from stakeholders. The review and potential revision of this
policy will address the impact of the policy on other environmental concerns, such as the impact
on PM emissions, toxicity, ozone depletion, global warming, and water quality to assure an
integrated, holistic approach. In FY 2004 and 2005 we will be addressing these impacts through
guidance documents and where appropriate issuing rules.
SCte: Currently, there are only a limited number of areas that do not monitor attainment
of the SO2 standard. EPA and States will continue the implementation program currently in
place. EPA will also continue to evaluate data encouraging States that show high short-term
peaks to continue monitoring.
CO: Improvements in vehicle and emissions control technology have greatly reduced
emissions of carbon monoxide. EPA is currently involved in review of the CO NAAQS standard
as described under work on federal stationary source regulations.
Lead: Human exposure to lead in the ambient air has been significantly reduced as a
result of the phase-out of lead in gasoline. EPA will continue a relatively low level of on-going
work, emphasizing the few remaining problems in the vicinity of sources such as battery plants
and lead smelters.
Supporting States and Tribes: In providing support to states and Tribes, EPA will give
priority to attaining the NAAQS for PM2.5 and ozone. EPA will review and finalize the
attainment/non-attainment area designation recommendations from the states and Tribes. The
Agency will complete the implementation rules that will guide the states and Tribes in the
development of their implementation plans. EPA also will work with states and local areas to
develop control strategies to reduce emissions of PM2.5, ozone and their precursors. The focus
will be on early reductions and innovative strategies that can provide.the nation with public
health benefits sooner. EPA will work directly with areas having the greatest problem in
meeting the standards, using new, innovative approaches to achieve early emission reductions.
31 68 FR 32802
1-32
-------
These programs have the potential to provide substantial public health benefits as a result of
early planning, implementation, and emissions reduction leading to expeditious attainment and
maintenance of the NAAQS for ozone and PM-2.5.
Early Action Compacts for implementing the 8-hour ozone standard will play an
important role hi the national ozone management program for FY 2005.32 The purpose of this
program is to support and reward voluntary, early emission reductions to reduce ozone around
the country. Through these Early Action Compacts, EPA is supporting the innovative efforts of
33 communities around the country that have pledged to reduce air pollution ahead of the
deadlines under the Clean Air Act. Communities with Early Action Compacts will voluntarily
start reducing air pollution ahead of schedule. These communities will bring substantial and
sustainable health and environmental improvements to their residents much sooner than would
have been achieved without these agreements. By December 31, 2004, states with Compact
areas are required to submit adopted measures for these areas to EPA as a SIP revision to satisfy
one of the Compact milestones and to continue being eligible for a deferral from the effective
date for non-attainment designation (for any Compact area that is designated non-attainment by
April 15, 2004). EPA will continue tracking progress of all Compact areas.
EPA will continue to work with the States of North Carolina (NC) and South Carolina
(SC) and local officials in the Charlotte, NC/Rock Hill, SC region to develop a model integrated
air quality plan for the Central Carolinas Region. EPA's goal for this pilot project is to integrate
efforts to address multiple air quality problems -- ground-level ozone, PM, and toxic air
pollutants - and to incorporate energy, transportation, economic development, and land-use
planning into a single, model plan that can be used hi different areas across the country. EPA
will provide technical support in air quality planning, transportation planning, modeling for
criteria pollutants and air toxics as well as decision support tools for testing various options for
integrated planning for clean air.
Air quality monitoring is essential to providing a firm scientific basis for designing the
national clean air program and measuring the results of Federal, state, Tribal, and local efforts.
EPA will continue to fund and oversee the national air quality monitoring network operated by
states. The Agency is working with states, Tribes, and local agencies to develop an integrated
ambient monitoring strategy that will refocus the existing air monitoring program towards
current data collection needs for ozone, PM, and air toxics. This national monitoring strategy
will provide agencies with more flexibility in designing their networks. The final strategy and
proposed implementing rules will be issued hi FY 2004. Final rules will be promulgated within
one year. To ensure source and ambient monitoring measurements are credible, EPA will
continue developing quality assurance protocols and conducting quality assurance audits.33
In FY 2005, EPA will continue to provide technical support to the states and Tribes to
help implement and assess the effectiveness of alternative control strategies on local and regional
air quality. Tools such as development of the national monitoring strategy, source
characterization analyses, emission factors and emission inventories, statistical analyses and
source apportionment techniques, quality assurance protocols and audits, and unproved source
testing and monitoring techniques will be developed. EPA will continue to analyze ambient
32 www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/ozone/eac/
33 National Air Monitoring Strategy, http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/monitor.html
1-33
-------
monitoring data to provide insight into how precursors contribute to the PM-2.5 and ozone
problem. Additionally, EPA will evaluate pollutant management programs, develop emissions
inventories to determine the most important sources of emissions, and conduct modeling to
develop alternative national and/or local control strategies to attain the PM-2.5 and ozone
standards. EPA, states, Tribes, and Regional Planning Organizations will work collaboratively
in developing and improving urban and regional-scale numerical grid models and evaluating
their accuracy and applicability to complex air quality issues, including international/border
issues.
EPA will partner with states, Tribes, and local governments to create a comprehensive
compliance program to ensure that vehicles and engines pollute less. EPA will use advanced in-
use measurement techniques and other sources of in-use data to monitor the performance of
OBD systems on vehicle models to make sure that OBD is a reliable check on the emissions
systems as part of vehicle I/M programs. In FY 2004, basic and/or enhanced vehicle I/M testing
was being performed in over 30 states with technical and programmatic guidance from EPA. In
FY 2005, EPA will continue to assist states in incorporating OBD inspections into their I/M
programs. EPA will also support states in evaluating I/M programs, as directed by the Clean Air
Act and recommended by the National Academy of Sciences. With this information, EPA will
work to establish an integrated information system that allows for assessment and action on those
vehicles and engines that present the greatest environmental risk.
As part of implementing the ozone and PM standards, EPA plans to provide state and
local governments with substantial assistance hi implementing the conformity rule during this
period, because the first conformity determinations for the new standards will be due hi the
spring of 2005. EPA will continue to ensure national consistency in adequacy findings for motor
vehicle emissions budgets in air quality plans. In addition, EPA will work with states and local
governments to ensure the technical integrity of the mobile source controls in the SIPs. EPA will
also assist areas in identifying the most cost-effective control options available.
Through EPA's Air Pollution Training Institute (APTI), technical air pollution training is
provided to state, Tribal, and local air agency professionals. The APTI facilitates professional
development by enhancing the skills necessary to understand and implement environmental
programs and policies. The training is provided through a variety of formats, including
classroom and satellite courses hosted nationwide, self-instructional courses in print and Internet-
based format.
Visibility Implementation: EPA's regional haze program is aimed at improving the
visibility at our National Parks and Wilderness areas. Visibility is impaired by the same types of
pollutants that EPA is addressing in the PM2.5, ozone, and Acid Rain programs. Because of
regional variations hi natural conditions which combine with man-made pollution to produce
regional haze, EPA believes that regional haze should be addressed through a region-specific
program that accounts for these variations. EPA will continue supporting Regional Planning
Organizations concerned with regional haze and associated PM impacts through the set up and
application of regional scale models.
1-34
-------
In July of 1999, EPA promulgated a Regional Haze rule to address this problem.34 On
May 24, 2002, a decision by the DC Circuit Court vacated EPA's proposed Best Available
Retrofit Technology (BART) requirements within the Regional Haze rule. As a result of this
decision, BART guidelines are expected to be re-proposed in FY 2004, with a final rulemaking
to be issued in FY 2005. The rulemaking will include guidance on determining individual
facilities' contribution to haze versus cumulative contribution and on evaluating "reasonable
progress" control strategies under the Regional Haze rule.
EPA also will continue working with the United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA) to develop a data system linking wildland and prescribed fire emission tracking systems
and supporting databases used to assess air quality impacts and improve emission models. While
EPA acknowledges the use of fire as an efficient and economical land management tool in
maintaining the health of fire-tolerant and fire-dependent plant and animal ecosystems, EPA
continues to work with Federal land management agencies to address the effective use of fire
while minimizing public health and air quality impacts. EPA also continues to work with USD A
and the Department of the Interior to include EPA data needs in the national fire database. EPA
collaborates with the Departments of Agriculture and Interior on identifying and developing
innovative information technologies to provide the land management community with tools to
improve burn planning and air quality management.
EPA will continue assisting states and Tribes with regional scale models, including
identifying meteorological and emissions inputs and developing emission projections. These
model applications will provide the basis for assessing regional emission control strategies for
PM2.5 SIPs, and regional haze goals. The strategies for improving visibility will provide
additional health and welfare benefits, since many of the pollutants that lead to visibility
impairment also contribute to PM, ozone, and acidic deposition. EPA estimates that when the
regional haze goals are folly achieved in 60 years, additional benefits will be worth up to $20
billion per year.
Cross-Pollutant Operating Permits and New Source Review (NSR): In FY 2004, EPA
will continue efforts to finalize the certain monitoring requirements rule by mid-January 2004
and to develop additional rules on periodic monitoring and on monitoring issues in underlying
Federal and state rules. EPA will also continue to provide technical support to states, Tribes, and
local agencies on the permit program. By December 2003, states and local agencies were to
have completed issuance of the first round of Part 70 permits. As of October 1, 2003, 82 percent
of all initial permits had been issued with a projection of this rising to 95 percent by December
2003. In FY 2004, the EPA intends, with assistance from state and local permitting authorities,
to continue to address permit issuance with a focus on permit renewals EPA plans to continue its
4-year effort of evaluating all state permitting programs. The EPA will expand training and
technical support efforts to ensure smooth incorporation into operating permits of rules that have
recently become effective. In FY 2004, efforts on a web-based Title V training effort for citizens
will be completed. By early FY 2005, the EPA will decide if area sources subject to six MACT
standards will need to obtain Title V permits.
In FY 2003, the EPA promulgated the final Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)
and non-attainment NSR rule. This rule, which was published in the Federal Register on
34 64 FR 35714
1-35
-------
December 31, 2002,35 finalized five reforms to the PSD and NSR programs that will streamline
the program, and remove barriers and create incentives for environmentally beneficial projects.
The EPA promulgated additional changes on March 10, 2003 incorporating these changes for
states with NSR/PSD delegation36. The final rules became effective in March 2003. On
November 7, 2003, EPA completed its response to a number of petitions requesting EPA to
reconsider these rules37. Although the rulemaking is now complete, it remains under legal
challenge, and this litigation will be moving forward during FY 2004 and likely 2005.
During FY 2004, the EPA will continue work on additional improvements to the NSR
program. In FY 2003, the EPA proposed a definition for "routine maintenance" that would add
certainty for sources and states (December 31, 2002)38. The EPA finalized the equipment
replacement provisions of this proposal on October 27, 200339. EPA will determine whether
additional action is needed on other parts of this proposal.
In FY 2004 and FY 2005, the EPA will work with states to implement these revisions to
the PSD and NSR rules. In states that administer Federal NSR and PSD rales under delegation
agreements with EPA, the EPA will work with states to complete updates to the delegation
agreements and to begin implementing the revised rales. In states that administer their own NSR
and PSD rales, as approved into their SIPs by EPA, the EPA will work with states to ensure that
new rules are adopted by states and approved by the EPA consistent with the revised rules.
Changes to these rales must be adopted within 3 years, (i.e., by FY 2006).
In FY 2005, EPA will complete the 2-year cooperative agreement supported by the
RACT/BACT/LAER Clearinghouse (RBLC) to fully implement the New and Emerging Air
Technology (NEAT) Web database as a self-sustaining data source. In addition, EPA will
continue to maintain, operate and acquire and enter data into the RBLC. In FY 2004, the EPA
will complete work integrating the RBLC Web data base with other EPA data bases that contain
data on air emission sources and reduce the number of RBLC data fields by approximately 40
percent to lower the resource burden on state and local agency and EPA staff. In FY 2003, the
Clearinghouse completed the acquisition and entry of missing permits issued in the last 10 years
(begun in 2002), awarded the NEAT cooperative agreement, and implemented many complex
system improvements.
Federal Support for Air Toxics Programs
EPA has a number of programs to provide information and tools to communities in
reducing air toxics emissions and risk.
Reductions in the total annual emissions of HAPs are compiled in EPA's National
Emissions Inventory (NEI)40. The NEI provides only a crude indicator of reductions in
population exposure and generally does not capture local scale risks. To provide this additional
information, EPA has an ongoing comprehensive evaluation of air toxics called the National Air
35 67 FR 80186
36 68 FR 11316
37 68 FR 63021
38 67 FR 80920
39 68 FR 61248
40 National Emission Inventory Data, http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/index.html
1-36
-------
Toxics Assessment (NATA). NATA began with emissions data for 1996, estimated ambient
concentrations for 33 HAPs in each of the approximately 62,000 census tracts nationwide,
estimated average exposures to people, and calculated the potential cancer and non-cancer risks
associated with those exposures. This ongoing assessment has been reviewed by the Science
Advisory Board (SAB) and by state and local agencies. The NATA information is used by the
EPA air toxics program to help set priorities, measure progress against goals, and develop study
plans for more detailed local assessments, which will help identify the potentially higher
exposures (i.e., hotspots) that may exist in urban environments and link these concerns to local
risk reductions. The NATA is updated periodically.
In FY 2005, EPA will assemble an air toxic version of the NEI for the year 2002, which
can be used by EPA, states, and others to analyze the public health risks from air toxics and
strategies, and to manage that risk. The Agency will work with partners to develop improved
emission factors. This effort will include gathering improved activity databases and using
geographic information systems (GISs) and satellite remote sensing, where possible, for key
point, area, mobile, and fugitive source categories and global emission events. In FY 2005, EPA
will continue to update NATA.
EPA will continue to work with state and local agencies in a joint Air Toxics Monitoring
Steering Committee to implement a national air toxics monitoring network. The SAB expressed
clear support to the Steering Committee's approach for developing this capacity through
monitoring pilots carried out under the sponsorship of the Committee. The data analysis phase
of the initial assessment work, reflected in a 10-city air toxics monitoring pilot project, was
completed in mid-2003. Data from this effort will be used to complete the design of a network
for a national air toxics characterization by early calendar year 2004. The Steering Committee
developed an initial design based on a limited, strategic network of national sites, coupled with
more extensive community-scale monitoring, to provide the most representative assessment of
the nation's air toxic pollution and enable EPA to better gauge the success of Agency efforts in
reducing overall risks from air toxics.41
In FY 2005, EPA will continue to develop the state, local, and Tribal component of the
Air Toxics Program so state, local and Tribal agencies can address emission issues that are of
concern on a state-wide, area-wide, or community-wide basis. As part of this effort, EPA will
continue to support community assessment and risk reduction projects. Community assessments
are conducted to characterize the level of risk from toxic pollutants in specific areas. The
geographic areas evaluated can vary from a neighborhood to entire towns and cities. EPA will
provide information to states and communities through case examples, documents, websites, and
workshops on tools to help them in conducting assessments and identifying risk reduction
strategies. This will allow state, local and Tribal governments, industry, public interest groups,
and local citizens to work together to determine if actions are needed, and if so, what should be
done. EPA will also compile and analyze the information collected from the community
assessments and use it to better characterize risk and assess priorities for further action.
Although EPA recently promulgated new rules regulating diesel emissions, the benefits
of these rules will not be realized for at least five years. In the meantime, older, dirtier vehicles,
41 Draft National Air Toxics Trends Sites Technical Assistance Document,
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amric/files/ambient/airtox/o^afttad.pdf
1-37
-------
often on the road for a million miles or more, will continue to adversely affect the nation's
health. To date, voluntary diesel retrofit projects have resulted in over 150,000 commitments to
retrofit diesel engines, equivalent to reductions of approximately 60,000 tons of harmful
pollution. During FY 2002, through this program, EPA worked with fuel companies to begin
delivering ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel to centrally fueled fleets throughout certain parts of the
country - four years before it is required. EPA has also developed several emissions testing
protocols that will provide potential purchasers of emission control technology a consistent, third
party evaluation of emission control products. EPA has developed partnerships with state and
local governments, industry, and private companies to create project teams to help fleet owners
create the most cost-effective retrofit programs.
EPA will also continue to provide technical expertise and support to state, local, and
Tribal air toxics programs in assessing and reducing mobile source air toxics. This support
includes models and other assessment tools; guidance on the application of such tools for
evaluating impacts of proposed transportation facilities and the benefits of voluntary mobile
source control programs; and education and outreach materials.
Through increased data collection efforts on air toxics in FY 2005, EPA also will be
focusing on local hotspots and providing support on environmental justice issues. The Agency
will evaluate and improve local-scale modeling efforts to support local evaluations or community
assessments. The EPA also plans to continue air deposition hot spot analyses for water quality
problems. These analyses will utilize air dispersion and deposition modeling to identify the most
likely emission sources contributing to the problem.
EPA has continued its efforts under the Air-Water Interface Work Plan to address and
prevent adverse effects of atmospheric deposition to coastal and inland waterways (i.e., Great
Waters http://www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/gr8waterA). This work involves collaboration within EPA
offices and with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). In FY 2004,
EPA is updating the Air-Water Interface Work Plan and will continue to implement it in FY
2005. These efforts involve the development and support of multi-media approaches to reduce
risk and achieve water quality standards, such as enhancing technical tools and developing
demonstration projects that facilitate Federal, state, Tribal and Regional deposition reduction
strategies. The EPA will also provide up-to-date information regarding air deposition, emission
sources, monitoring technologies, and toxic effects through education and outreach efforts.
Planned outreach efforts include both synthesizing current trends information and sponsoring
workshops/conferences.
Urban encroachment on farming communities and a growing number of large animal
feeding operations (AFOs) have resulted in increased citizen complaints and rising concerns that
air emissions from AFOs may have impacts on the environment and public health. At the
present time, the EPA does not have emission factors sufficient to support regulatory
determinations for animal agriculture. In some cases, there may not even be adequate technical
approaches for characterizing the emissions.
EPA contracted the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to review the scientific issues
and make recommendations related to characterization of the swine, beef, dairy, and poultry
AFO industries; measuring and estimating emissions; and analyzing potential best management
1-38
-------
practices, including costs and technological feasibility. The NAS findings.42 identified numerous
deficiencies in EPA's methodologies and technical tools for estimating emissions for this
industry. As a result of the NAS study, EPA is working with industry, the US Department of
Agriculture (USDA), academia, and non-governmental organizations to develop a two year
monitoring program to fill data gaps in the emission estimates. EPA hi partnership with USDA,
is prioritizing a research agenda to ensure critical research is initiated immediately. Concurrent
with the monitoring program, in FY 2004, EPA is beginning the development of a regulation for
AFOs. The Agency will prepare an announcement of its strategy and hold public meetings
around the country. Following public comments, a proposed rule will be drafted.
In FY 2005, the Agency will continue the two year monitoring program and development
of a final rule. The Agency will also develop various non-regulatory approaches to reduce air
emissions from AFOs, including voluntary measures, Agency guidance materials, training and
outreach. EPA will continue to work cooperatively with the agricultural industry, academia, the
USDA, and the Congressionally established Agricultural Air Quality Task Force to develop
scientifically valid emission estimates from AFOs for PM, PM10, PM2.5, hydrogen sulfide,
ammonia, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
Clean School Bus Initiative
In FY 2005, EPA will expand its efforts to help create voluntary diesel retrofit projects to
reduce diesel emissions from school buses. In FY 2003, the Agency launched the Clean School
Bus USA initiative. This program will help ensure that school buses - which are the safest way
for kids to get to school — are also the cleanest possible transportation for this generation of
school children.
More than 24 million children in the U.S. ride a bus to and from school every day.
Because school buses often remain in service for 20 or more years, this program will help equip
our nation's school bus fleet with low-emission technologies and practices sooner than would
otherwise occur through bus fleet turnover. Older buses can now be equipped with safe,
affordable and more effective technology that will reduce emissions to very low levels - some
that will be close to the performance standards required for new bus engines starting in 2007.
The expanded program provides grants to governmental entities to replace pre-1991 school buses
with new clean school buses offering state-of-the-art emission control and safety features and to
retrofit post-1990 school buses with similar advanced emission controls. Clean School Bus USA
brings together school districts and administrators, bus-fleet operators, health advocates, fuel
providers, bus manufacturers and emissions-technology innovators to craft a collaborative, cost-
effective program to protect the health of school children and the public.
Categorical Grant: State and Local Air Quality Management
This program funds over 100 state and local agencies to implement the requirements of
the Clean Air Act Amendments described above. It also funds regional planning organizations
to develop the regional haze implementation strategies. Funding for the development and
maintenance of ambient air monitoring networks is also included in this program/project.
42 http://www.nap.edu/catalog/10586.html
1-39
-------
Categorical Grant: Tribal Air Quality Management
This program funds Tribal bodies to build their capacity and develop the measures
needed to implement the Clean Air Act Amendments as described above.
International Capacity Building
Despite recent improvements, poor air quality is still a major concern throughout the
world. In the developing world, urban air pollution has worsened in most large cities, a situation
driven by population growth, industrialization and increased vehicle use. The World Health
Organization (WHO) estimates that as many as 1.4 billion urban residents throughout the world
breathe air exceeding the WHO ah" quality guidelines.43
The health consequences of air pollution are considerable. On a global basis, estimates of
mortality due to outdoor air pollution run from around 200,000 to 570,000 people, representing
about 0.4 to 1.1 percent of total annual deaths.44 Moreover, air pollution contributes significantly
to respiratory disease in children. In developing countries, acute respiratory infections (ART) are
the leading cause of death of children under the age of five.
Air pollution from other countries also affects the U.S. in a number of ways. First, it
affects the U.S.'s ability to meet domestic air quality goals. Recent studies show the adverse
impacts of air pollution from Asia on the U.S. Pacific coast, haze from fires in Central America
and Mexico on the southern U.S., dust storms from Africa on Florida, and air pollutant flows
between the US and Europe. Additionally, persistent and bioaccumulative pollutants are
transported throughout the world. Finally, greenhouse gases, black carbon particles, and ozone
from throughout the world contribute to global climate change.
To achieve our objective of preventing further degradation of air quality, both
domestically and internationally, EPA will work to build the institutional capacity within
developing countries and regionally to manage air pollution. EPA's focus will be on those
countries that have demonstrated potential to affect human health and the environment globally
and those that are leaders globally and regionally. Key regions and countries include Asia
(China and India), NIS (Russia), Central America (Guatemala and Panama), South America
(Chile and Brazil), Africa (Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa, Ghana, and Uganda), and our
neighbors (Canada and Mexico). Specifically, EPA's international air quality capacity building
programs will focus on:
• Development of credible information, innovative tools, and training on air quality,
emissions, transport, and health impacts hi order to build the infrastructure needed to
address critical needs worldwide; and
• Development of regional strategies and collaborative work with partners, particularly
with the World Bank's series of regional Clean Air Initiatives - Clean Air Initiative for
Latin American Cities; Clean Air Initiative for Asian Cities, and Clean Air Initiative for
Sub-Saharan African Cities.
43 World Resources Institute, U.N Enviornmental Programme, U.N. Development Programme, and the World Bank. "1998-1999
World Resources: A Guide to the Global Environment." Oxford University Press, 1998.
44 World Resources Institute, U.N Enviornmental Programme, U.N. Development Programme, and the World Bank. "1998-1999
World Resources: A Guide to the Global Environment." Oxford University Press, 1998.
1-40
-------
EPA's most important strategy internationally is to build capacity over the long-term to
manage air pollution. People and institutions are the foundation on which key programs are
carried out and agreements implemented on-the-ground. Without this basic infrastructure, the
programs will not be sustainable or replicable. As a thread that runs through the international air
quality management program, capacity building programs will help enhance air quality in the
U.S. and developing countries, leading to improvements in human health and the environment.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
• (+$3,300,000): Increased funding is requested to develop the emission factors and
inventories needed by the states to help them develop SIPs. To develop these tools, EPA will
develop good testing data based PM2.5 emission factors (with speciation profiles) for 3 to 6
industrial processes prioritized by their contribution to the PM2.5 inventory. Coal and wood
waste combustion, metals processing, mineral products and pulp and paper are candidates for
this effort. Together these sources represent 65 percent of industrial sources of PM2.5. We will
also develop factors for processes where new testing was not required. This assumes that some
emissions factors would be paid for by industry.
Additional funding will develop and improve the following products and services used by
states as they develop their State Implementation Plans to implement the NAAQS:
• new methods for ambient measurements, including: (1) routine testing for nitric
acid, ammonia, and true nitrogen dioxide, and (2) unproved artifact-free aerosol carbon
measurements (e.g., to better address abatement of diesel PM);
• source characterization for measuring: (1) VOC on an actual mass basis, (2)
sulfuric acid/sulfur trioxide in the presence of ammonia, (3) higher-resolution fugitive
ammonia emissions from sources such as animal feeding operations, and (4) low
concentration/high flow rate NOx emissions from sources such as internal combustion
engines and stationary gas turbines;
• emission factors for source types that contribute substantial quantities of
carbonaceous PM2.5. For each source category, factors will be developed for primary and
filterable PM2.5 and PMio, condensable PM, SO2, NOx, VOC, 16 specific Polycyclic
Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH), and all other compounds and elements analyzed in the
speciation trends network;
• highly resolved fire emission inventories for the entire U.S., to allow separation of
their effects from local sources of carbonaceous PM2.5;
• guidance and methods for using source-receptor analysis to untangle the
contributions that different source types make to ambient concentrations of carbonaceous
PM2.5;
• speciation profiles for important source types, better reflecting eastern U.S.
conditions than the profiles currently available;
1-41
-------
• ready-to-use temporal and spatial allocation procedures and data files, so that air
quality modeling with improved emission inventories can be used to assist hi determining
just how much contribution each source type makes to non-attainment; and
• information on the effectiveness and costs of regulatory and non-regulatory
approaches for reducing emissions.
• (+$800,000): Increased funding is requested for the Clear Skies Initiative, a program that
will cost-effectively reduce emissions of multiple pollutants from the power sector. This
innovative approach addresses the major issues facing the Air Program — the adverse health and
environmental effects caused by excessive PM2.5, ozone, and air toxics in our communities - by
replacing or streamlining the multitude of existing, uncoordinated regulatory approaches aimed
at controlling emissions from the power sector with a single, national program that is
comprehensive, cost-effective, and ensures emission reductions. With additional funding, we
will establish an integrated assessment program to include enhanced ambient and deposition
monitoring and develop a baseline prior to implementation of the program. Absent progress on
enactment of Clear Skies legislation, we will direct these resources to comparable activities for
the development and implementation of the Interstate Air Quality Rule.
• (-$1,500,000): Funding is redirected from the EPM appropriation Federal Support for
Air Toxics Program to the STAG appropriation to support the Clean School Bus Initiative.
• (-$1,300,000): Funding is redirected to Federal Stationary Source Regulations and
Federal Support for Air Quality Management. These resources will support the residual risk and
areas source rules programs as well as implementation of the particulate matter and ozone
NAAQS.
• There are additional increases for payroll, cost-of-living, and enrichment for existing
FTE.
S&T
• (+$2,700,000): Increased funding is requested for an initiative to deliver more accurate
and comprehensive mobile source modeling tools for states to use in identifying cost-effective
control strategies as part of then" SIP development for the new ozone and PM Air Quality
Standards.
This initiative has two major components. First component is the collection of more
accurate emission data from vehicles operating hi the field, under real-world conditions. This
effort would be the first attempt at designing a nationwide emissions study of light-duty and
heavy-duty vehicles using portable emission measurement systems (PEMS). The PEMS system
was developed by EPA personnel at the OAR Laboratory hi Ann Arbor, MI, and is an extremely
cost-effective and highly accurate method for collecting real-world data. The resulting data will
allow EPA and states to better identify potential sources of uncontrolled emissions hi the existing
fleet and evaluate the effectiveness of current and future emission control programs. In addition,
this program will improve the underlying data that is used hi the emission models used by the
states.
1-42
-------
The second component of this effort is the development of a new generation model based
on real-world data with the flexibility required to meet today's and future modeling needs for the
states. This new model will allow the states to conduct modeling at all levels of resolution —
from area-wide inventories to evaluating changes hi emissions on a street corner (i.e., micro-
scale modeling) as a result of a control strategy. This new generation of emission model will
include all mobile source pollutants of interest, and can be used by states for all mobile source-
modeling purposes.
• There are additional increases for payroll, cost-of-living, and enrichment for existing FTE.
STAG
• (+$65,000,000): In FY 2005, EPA will expand its efforts to help create voluntary diesel
retrofit projects to reduce diesel emissions from school buses. This program will help ensure that
school buses - which are the safest way for kids to get to school - also are the cleanest possible
transportation for this generation of school children. EPA initially launched the program in April
2003 using $5 million in grant funding. The initial grant offering garnered 120 grant
applications from every region of the country totaling nearly $60 million in requests and offering
some $36 million in matching resources. EPA supported 17 of these projects with the given
resources. By expanding this program, additional resources are available to communities for
localized solutions that address an issue important to children and parents across the nation. The
expanded program will provide grants to governmental entities to replace pre-1991 school buses
with new clean school buses offering state-of-the-art emission control and safety features and to
retrofit post-1990 school buses with similar advanced emission controls. Clean School Bus USA
brings together school districts and administrators, bus-fleet operators, health advocates, fuel
providers, bus manufacturers and emissions-technology innovators to craft a collaborative, cost-
effective program to protect the health of school children and the public. With this new funding,
EPA can greatly multiply the number of buses and children affected.
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
Reduce Air Toxic Emissions
In 2005 Air toxics emissions nationwide from stationary and mobile sources combined will be reduced by an
additional 1% of the updated 1993 baseline of 6.0 million tons for a cumulative reduction of 38%.
In 2004 Air toxics emissions nationwide from stationary and mobile sources combined will be reduced by an
additional 2% of the updated 1993 baseline of 6.0 million tons for a cumulative reduction of 37%.
In 2003 End-of-year- FY 2003 data will be available in late 2009 to verify that air toxics emissions nationwide
from stationary and mobile sources combined will be reduced by an additional 1% of the updated 1993
baseline of 6.0 million tons for a cumulative reduction 35%.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Combined Stationary and Mobile Source Data Lag 2 - 1 Percent
Reductions in Air Toxics Emissions
Mobile Source Air Toxics Emissions .71 .80 Million
Reduced Tons
Stationary Source Air Toxics Emissions 1.59 1.59 Million
1-43
-------
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Reduced Tons
Major Sources, Area and All Other Air +.13 +.14 Million
Toxics Emissions Reduced Tons
Baseline: In 1993, the last year before the MACT standards and mobile source regulations developed under the
Clean Air Act began to be implemented, stationary and mobile sources are now estimated to have
emitted 6.0 million tons of air toxics. (EPA's prior estimate was 4.3 million tons and was updated with
improved inventory data.) Ah" toxics emission data are revised every three years to generate
inventories for the National Toxics Inventory (NTT). In the intervening years between the update of the
NTI, the model EMS-HAP (Emissions Modeling System for Hazardous Air Pollutants) is used to
estimate and project annual emissions of air toxics. EMS-HAP projects emissions, by adjusting point,
area and mobile emission data to account for growth and emission reductions resulting from emission
reduction scenarios such as the implementation of the Maximum Achievable Control Technology
(MACT) standards.
Reduce SO2 Emissions
In 2005 Keep annual emissions below level authorized by allowance holdings and make progress towards
achieving the year 2010 SO2 emissions cap for utilities. Annual emissions reduction target is 6.9
million tons from the 1980 baseline.
In 2004 Maintain or increase annual SO2 emission reduction of approximately 5 million tons from the 1980
baseline. Keep annual emissions below level authorized by allowance holdings and make progress
towards achievement of Year 2010 SO2 emissions cap for utilities.
In 2003 End of year 2003 data will be available in the last quarter of 2004 to verify that annual emissions
reduction of approximately 5 million tons from utility sources were maintained or increased during
2003.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
SO2 Emissions Data Lag 5,000,000 6,900,000 Tons
Reduced
Baseline: The base of comparison for assessing progress on the annual performance goal is the 1980 emissions
baseline. The 1980 SO2 emissions inventory totals 17.4 million tons for electric utility sources. This
inventory was developed by National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP) and used as,
the basis for reductions in Title IV of the Clean Air Act Amendments. This data is also contained in
EPA's National Air Pollutant Emissions Trends Report. Statutory SO2 emissions cap for year 2010
and later is at 8.95 million tons which is approximately 8.5 million tons below 1980 emissions level.
"Allowable SO2 emission level" consists of allowance allocations granted to sources each year under
several provisions of the Act and additional allowances carried over, or banked, from previous years.
Reduce NOx Emissions
In 2003 End of year 2003 data will be available in Summer 2004 to verify that the Agency has achieved the
annual emission reduction goal.
1-44
-------
Performance Measures:
NOx Reductions
FY 2003
Actuals
Data Lag
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
Tons
Reduced
Baseline: Performance Baseline: The base of comparison for assessing progress on this annual performance goal
is emissions that would have occurred in the absence of Title IV of the Clean Air Act Amendments.
Reduce Exposure to Unhealthy Ozone Levels - 1 Hour
In 2005 The number of people living in areas with monitored ambient ozone concentrations below the NAAQS
for the 1-hour ozone standard will increase by 4% (relative to 2004) for a cumulative total of 53%
(relative to 1992).
In 2004 The number of people living in areas with monitored ambient ozone concentrations below the NAAQS
for the 1-hour ozone standard will increase by 4% (relative to 2003) for a cumulative total of 47%
(relative to 1992).
In 2003 Maintained healthy air quality for approx. 161.5 million people living in monitored areas attaining the
ozone std; certified that 5 areas of the remaining 54 nonattainment areas have attained the 1-hour
NAAQS for ozone thus increasing the no. of people living in areas with healthy air by 5.8 million.
Performance Measures:
Cumulative Percent Increase in the
Number of People who Live in Areas with
Ambient 1-hour Ozone Concentrations
Below the Level of the NAAQS as
Compared to 1992
Cumulative Percent Increase in the
Number of Areas with Ambient 1-hour
Ozone Concentrations Below the Level of
the NAAQS as Compared to 1992
Total Number of People who Live in Areas
Designated to Attainment of the Clean Air
Standards for Ozone
Areas Designated to Attainment for the
Ozone Standard
Additional People Living in Newly
Designated Areas with Demonstrated
Attainment of the Ozone Standard
VOCs Reduced from Mobile Sources
NOx Reduced from Mobile Sources
FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Data Lag 47 53
Data Lag
55
40
5,800,000 5,800,000 7,276,790
1,900,000 2,040,000 855,624
1,400,000 1,653,000 1,693,259
Percent
Percent
161,485,900 167,300,000 174,562,000 People
Areas
People
Tons
Tons
Baseline: The 1992 baseline for population is the population in areas not classified or designated as attainment
for the clean air national ambient air quality standards. The 1992 baseline for areas is those areas that
are designated as non-attainment of the NAAQs. Through FY 2003, 161,485,905 are living in areas
designated to attainment; 51 areas are designated to attainment for this/these pollutants. The 2000
MOBILE 6 inventory is used as the baseline year for mobile source emissions as of FY 2005. The
2000 baseline for VOC emissions is 7.7 million tons; the baseline is 11.8 million tons. The 2000
MOBILE 6 inventory is used as the baseline year for mobile source emissions as of FY 2005. The
1-45
-------
2000 baseline for VOC emissions is 7.7 million tons; the baseline is 11.8 million tons. Beginning in
FY 2004, EPA changed the basis for evaluating progress for this measure to reflect actual measured
levels of air quality. Previously, EPA had not defined an area as having clean air until the area was
formally classified as having met health-based standards. The procedural requirements for
classification may require a year or more to complete. The previous total population numbers were for
2000 - 33.4 million (m) 2001 - 382.m; 2002 - 41.7m; 2003 - 47.8m.
Reduce Exposure to Unhealthy PM Levels - PM-10
In 2005 The number of people living in areas with monitored ambient PM concentrations below the NAAQS
for the PM-10 standard will increase by 1% (relative to 2004) for a cumulative total of 7% (relative to
1992).
In 2004 The number of people living in areas with monitored ambient PM concentrations below the NAAQS
for the PM-10 standard will increase by 1% (relative to 2003) for a cumulative total of 6% (relative to
1992).
In 2003 Maintained healthy air quality for 120 million people living in monitored areas attaining the PM
standards; increased by 252 thousand the number of people living in areas with healthy air quality that
have newly attained the standard.
Performance Measures:
Cumulative Percent Increase in the
Number of People who Live in Areas with
Ambient PM-10 Concentrations Below the
Level of the NAAQSas Compared to 1992
Cumulative Percent Increase in the
Number of Areas with Ambient PM-10
Concentrations Below the Level of the
NAAQSas Compared to 1992
Total Number of People who Live hi Areas
Designated in Attainment with Clean Air
Standards for PM
Areas Designated to Attainment for the
PM-10 Standard
Additional People Living in Newly
Designated Areas with Demonstrated
Attainment of the PM Standard
PM-10 Reduced from Mobile Sources
PM-2.5 Reduced from Mobile Sources
FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Data Lag 6 7 Percent
Data Lag
40
50 Percent
120,379,036 120,700,000 122,308,000 People
5
252,387
25,000
18,000
Areas
380,000 1,549,648 People
18,000
13,500
62,161 Tons
61,217 Tons
Baseline: The 1992 baseline for population is the population in areas not classified or designated as
attainment for the clean air national ambient air quality standards. The 1992 baseline for areas is
those areas that are designated as non-attainment of the NAAQs. Through FY 2003, 120,379,036
are living in areas designated to attainment; 5 areas are designated to attainment for this/these
pollutants. The 1995 baseline for PM-10 reduced from mobile sources is 880,000 tons. The
2000 MOBILE 6 inventory is used as the baseline for mobile source emissions as of FY 2005.
The 2000 baseline for PM 2.5 from mobile sources is 500,000 tons; the 2000 baseline for PM 2.5
from mobile sources is 613,000 tons. Beginning in FY 2004, EPA changed the basis for
evaluating progress fro this measure to reflect actual measured levels of air quality. Previously,
EPA had not defined an area as having clean air until the area was formally classified as having
met health-based standards. The procedural requirements for classification may require a year or
1-46
-------
more to complete. The previous total population numbers were for 2000 - 1.2 million (m) 2001 -
1.2m; 2002 - 3.4m; 2003 - 6.2m.
Reduce Exposure to Unhealthy CO, SO2, NO2, Lead
In 2005 The number of people living in areas with monitored ambient CO, NO2, SO2, or Pb concentrations
below the NAAQS will increase by less than 1% (relative to 2004) for a cumulative total of 53%
(relative to 1992).
In 2004 The number of people living in areas with monitored ambient CO, NO2, SO2, or Pb concentrations
below the NAAQS will increase by 4% (relative to 2003) for a cumulative total of 53% (relative to
1992).
In 2003 Maintained healthy air quality for 53 million people living in monitored areas attaining the CO, SO2,
NO2, and Lead standards; increased by .74 million the number of people living in areas with healthy
air quality that have newly attained the standard.
Performance Measures:
Cumulative Percent Increase in the
Number of People who Live in Areas with
Ambient CO, SO2, NO2, or Pb
Concentrations Below the Level of the
NAAQS as Compared to 1992
Cumulative Percent Increase in the
Number of Areas with Ambient CO, SO2,
NO2, or Pb Concentrations Below the
Level of the NAAQS as Compared to 1992
Total Number of People Living in Areas
Designated in Attainment with Clean Air
Standards for CO, SO2, NO2, and Pb
Areas Designated to Attainment for the
CO, SO2, NO2, and Pb Standards
Additional People Living in Newly
Designated Areas with Demonstrated
Attainment of the CO, SO2, NO2, and Pb
Standards
CO Reduced from Mobile Sources
Total Number of People Living in Areas
with Demonstrated Attainment of the NO2
Standard
FY2003
Actuals
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
53
53 Percent
87
77 Percent
167,860,905 174,000,000 174,222,000 People
19
435,309 6,150,000
12,636,000
n/a
8 Areas
209,991 People
-841,971 Tons
n/a People
Baseline: The 1992 baseline for population is the population in areas not classified or designated as
attainment for the clean air national ambient air quality standards. The 1992 baseline for areas is
those areas that are designated as non-attainment of the NAAQs. Through FY 2003, 167,860,905
are living in areas designated to attainment; 108 areas are designated to attainment for this/these
pollutants. The 1995 baseline for mobile source emissions for CO was 70,947,000 tons. For
mobile sources, the 2000 MOBILE 6 inventory is used as the baseline for FY 2005; the 2000
baseline for CO emissions is 79 million tons. While on-road CO emissions continue to decrease,
there is an overall increase in mobile source CO emissions due to a growth in nonroad CO.
Beginning in FY 2004, EPA changed the basis for evaluating progress fro this measure to reflect
actual measured levels of air quality. Previously, EPA had not defined an area as having clean air
until the area was formally classified as having met health-based standards. The procedural
1-47
-------
requirements for classification may require a year or more to complete. The previous total
population numbers were for 2000 - 27.7 million (m) 2001 - 36.3m; 2002 - 36.7m; 2003 - 53.7m.
Reduce Exposure to Unhealthy Ozone Levels - 8 Hour
In 2005 The number of people living in areas with monitored ambient ozone concentrations below the NAAQS
for the 8-hour ozone standard will increase by 4% (relative to 2004) for a cumulative total of 7%
(relative to 2001).
In 2004 The number of people living in areas with monitored ambient ozone concentrations below the NAAQS
for the 8-hour standard will increase by 3% (relative to 2003) for a cumulative total of 3% (relative to
2001).
Performance Measures:
Cumulative Percent Increase in the Number of
People who Live in Areas with Ambient 8-hour
Concentrations Below the Level of the NAAQS
as Compared to 2001
Cumulative Percent Increase in the Number of
Areas with Ambient 8-hour Ozone
Concentrations Below the Level of the NAAQS
as Compared to 2001
FY2003
Actuals
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
<1
<1
Percent
Percent
Baseline: EPA will designate the attainment status for areas in April 2004. With that data, we will have the
population baseline as well as the number of areas that are not in attainment for the 8-hour ozone
standard.
Reduce Exposure to Unhealthy PM Levels - PM- 2.5
In 2005
In 2004
In 2003
The number of people living in areas with monitored ambient PM concentrations below the NAAQS
for the PM-2.5 standard will increase by 1% (relative to 2003) for a cumulative total of less than 1%
(relative to 2001).
The number of people living in areas with monitored ambient ozone concentrations below the NAAQS
for the PM-2.5 standard will increase by 1% (relative to 2003) for a cumulative total of less than 1%
(relative to 2001).
Performance Measures:
Cumulative Percent Increase hi the Number of
People who Live in Areas with Ambient PM-2.5
Concentrations Below the Level of the NAAQS
as Compared to 2001
Percent Increase in the Number of Areas with
Ambient PM-2.5 Concentrations Below the Level
of the NAAQS as Compared to 2001
FY2003
Actuals
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
1
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
1
Percent
Percent
Baseline: EPA will designate the attainment status for areas in FY 2005. With that data, we will have the
population baseline as well as the number of areas that are not in attainment for the PM-2.5 standard.
Increase Tribal Air Capacity
1-48
-------
In 2004 Increase the number of tribes monitoring air quality for ozone and/or particulate matter from 42 to 45
and increase the percentage of tribes monitoring clean air for ozone from 64% to 67% and particulate
matter from 71% to 72%.
In 2003 39 tribes monitored air quality for ozone and/or particulate matter; 66% of tribes monitored clean air
for ozone and 68% monitored for particulate matter.
Performance Measures:
Percent of Tribes with Tribal Lands
Monitoring for Ozone and/or Particulate
Matter
Percent of Monitoring Tribes Monitoring
Clean Air for Ozone
Percent of Monitoring Tribes Monitoring
Clean Air for Particulate Matter
Number of Tribes Implementing Air
Programs
FY2003
Actuals
39 tribes
66
68
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
13
67
72
30
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
Percent
Percent
Percent
Tribes
Baseline:
Acid Rain
In 2005
In 2005
In 2004
In 2004
There are 570 Federally recognized Tribes with 341 Tribes having Tribal lands (Alaska Native
Villages (Tribes) number 229 entities but only one 'reservation"). During 2003, 39 Tribes
conducted monitoring for ozone and/or particulate matter 15 Tribes monitored their airsheds for
ozone (10 of which recorded clean air), and 37 Tribes monitored for particulate matter (25 of
which recorded clean air). EPA will continue to work with the Tribes to increase the number
and/or percentage of Tribes that monitor for clean air.
Reduce total annual average nitrogen deposition and ambient nitrate concentrations 5% from baseline.
Reduce total annual average sulfur deposition and ambient sulfate concentrations 27% from baseline.
Reduce total annual average nitrogen deposition and mean ambient nitrate concentrations 5% from
baseline.
Reduce total annual average sulfur deposition and mean ambient sulfate concentrations 25% from
baseline.
Performance Measures:
Total Annual Average Sulfur Deposition
and Ambient Sulfate concentrations
reduced (percent from baseline)
Total Annual Average Nitrogen Deposition
and Ambient Nitrate concentrations
reduced (percent from baseline)
FY2003
Actuals
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
25
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
27
Baseline: Sulfur and nitrogen deposition contribute to acidification of lakes and streams, making them
unable to support fish and other aquatic life. Reductions in both total sulfur and nitrogen
deposition is critical to reducing the number of chronically acidic water bodies. Ambient sulfate
and ambient nitrate ("acid rain particulate") contributes to unhealthy air and respiratory problems
in humans, especially children and other sensitive populations. The baseline is established from
1-49
-------
monitored site levels based on consolidated map of 1989-1991 showing a three year of deposition
levels produced from the CASTNet site (http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/casmet/sites.html).
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMACE MEASURES
FY 2005 Performance Measure:
• Combined Stationary and Mobile Source Reductions in Air Toxics Emissions
• Mobile Source Air Toxics Emissions Reduced
• Stationary Source Air Toxics Emissions Reduced
• All Other Air Toxics Emissions Reduced
Performance Database: National Emissions Inventory (NEI) for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(HAPs)
Data Source: The NEI for HAPs includes emissions from large and small industrial sources
inventoried as point sources, smaller stationary area and other sources, such as fires inventoried
as non-point sources, and mobile sources.
Prior to 1999 NEI for HAPs, there was the National Toxics Inventory (NTI). The baseline NTI
(for base years 1990 - 1993) includes emissions information for 188 hazardous air pollutants
from more than 900 stationary sources and from mobile sources. It is based on data collected
during the development of Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards, state
and local data, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) data, and emissions estimates using accepted
emission inventory methodologies. The baseline NTI contains county level emissions data and
cannot be used for modeling because it does not contain facility specific data.
The 1996 NTI and the 1999 NEI for HAPs contain stationary and mobile source estimates that
are used as input to National Air Toxics Assessment (NATA) modeling. The 1996 NTI and
1999 NEI for HAPs contain estimates of facility-specific HAP emissions and their source
specific parameters necessary for modeling such as location (latitude and longitude) and facility
characteristics (stack height, exit velocity, temperature, etc.)
The primary sources of data in the 1996 and 1999 NTI are state and local air pollution control
agencies and Tribes. These data vary in completeness, format, and quality. EPA evaluates these
data and supplements them with data gathered while developing MACT and residual risk
standards, industry data, and TRI data. To produce a complete model-ready national inventory,
EPA estimates emissions for approximately 30 non-point source categories such as wildfires and
residential heating sources not included in the state, local and Tribal data. Mobile source data
are developed using data provided by state and local agencies and Tribes and the most current
onroad and nonroad models developed by EPA's Office of Transportation and Air Quality. The
draft 1996 NTI and 1999 NEI for HAPS underwent extensive review by state and local agencies,
Tribes, industry, EPA, and the public.
For more information and references on the development of the 1996 NTI, please go to the
following web site: www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/nti/rndex.htmltfnti. For more information and
1-50
-------
references on the development of the 1999 NEI for HAPs, please go to the following web site:
www.epa.gov/tfti/chief/net/mdex.htmlffl999
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: The EMS-HAP (Emissions Modeling System for
Hazardous Air Pollutants) is used to estimate annual emissions of ah" toxics for the 1996 NTI and
1999 NEI for HAPS (and for all years in-between). EMS-HAP is an emissions processor that
performs the steps needed to process an emission inventory for input into the NATA model.
These steps include: spatial allocation of nonpoint stationary area and mobile source emissions
from the county level to the census tract level, and temporal allocation of annual emission rates
to annually averaged (i.e., same rate for every day of the year) 3-hour emission rates. In addition,
EMS-HAP can project future emissions, by adjusting stationary source emission data to account
for growth and emission reductions resulting from emission reduction scenarios such as the
implementation of the Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards.
For more information and references on EMS-HAP, please go to the following web sites:
http://www.epa,gov/scramQ01/tt22,htm#asp.enand
,g^^
The growth and reduction information used for the projections are further described on the
following website: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/emch/proiection/emshap.html
QA/QC Procedures: The NTI and the NEI for HAPs are databases designed to house
information from other primary sources. The EPA performs extensive quality assurance/quality
control (QA/QC) activities, including checking data provided by other organizations, to improve
the quality of the emission inventory. Some of these activities include: (1) the use of an
automated format QC tool to identify potential errors of data integrity, code values, and range
checks; (2) use of geographical information system (GIS) tools to verify facility locations; and
(3) automated content analysis by pollutant, source category and facility to identify potential
problems with emission estimates such as outliers, duplicate sites, duplicate emissions, coverage
of a source category, etc. The content analysis includes a variety of comparative and statistical
analyses. The comparative analyses help reviewers prioritize which source categories and
pollutants to review in more detail based on comparisons using current inventory data and prior
inventories. The statistical analyses help reviewers identify potential outliers by providing the
minimum, maximum, average, standard deviation, and selected percentile values based on
current data. The EPA is currently developing an automated QC content tool for data providers
to use prior to submitting their data to EPA. After investigating errors identified using the
automated QC format and GIS tools, the EPA follows specific guidance on augmenting data for
missing data fields. This guidance is available at the following web site:
http:/yw\^v.epa.gov/ttn//chie£/enicii/invent/qaaugmementationmemo99nei 60603.pdf
The NTI database contains data fields that indicate if a field has been augmented and identifies
the augmentation method. After performing the content analysis, the EPA contacts data
providers to reconcile potential errors. The draft NTI is posted for external review and includes
a README file, with instructions on review of data and submission of revisions, state-by-state
modeling files with all modeled data fields, and summary files to assist in the review of the data.
One of the summary files includes a comparison of point source data submitted by different
organizations. During the external review of the data, state and local agencies, Tribes, and
industry provide external QA of the inventory. The EPA evaluates proposed revisions from
external reviewers and prepares memos for individual reviewers documenting incorporation of
1-51
-------
revisions and explanations if revisions were not incorporated. All revisions are tracked in the
database with the source of original data and sources of subsequent revision.
The external QA and the internal QC of the inventory have resulted in significant changes in the
initial emission estimates, as seen by comparison of the initial draft NEI for HAPs and its final
version. For more information on QA/QC of the NEI for HAPs, please refer to the following
web site for a paper presented at the 2002 Emission Inventory Conference in Atlanta. "QA/QC -
An Integral Step in the Development of the 1999 National Emission Inventory for HAPs", Anne
Pope, et al. www.epa.gov/ttn/cMefycotrference/eill/qa/pope.pdf
EPA's Office of Environmental Information (OEI) has created uniform data standards or
elements, which provide "meta" information on the standard NEI Input Format (NIF) fields.
These standards were developed by teams representing states, Tribes, EPA and other Federal
agencies. The use of common data standards among partners fosters consistently defined and
formatted data elements and sets of data values, and provides public access to more meaningful
data. The standards relevant to the NEI for HAPs are the: SIC/NAICS, Latitude/Longitude,
Chemical Identification, Facility Identification, Date, Tribal and Contact Data Standards. The
1999 NEI for HAPs is compliant with all new data standards except the Facility Identification
Standard because OEI has not completed its assignment of Facility IDs to the 1999 NEI for
HAPs facilities.
For more information on compliance of the NEI for HAPs with new OMB Information Quality
Guidelines and new EPA data standards, please refer to the following web site for a paper
presented at the 2003 Emission Inventory Conference hi San Diego. "The Challenge of Meeting
New EPA Data Standards and Information Quality Guidelines in the Development of the 2002
NEI Point Source Data for HAPs", Anne Pope, et al.
u^av.epa.gov/ttn/chief/conference/ei 12/drn/pope.pdf
The 2002 NEI for HAPs will undergo scientific peer review.
Data Quality Review: EPA staff, state and local agencies, Tribes, industry and the public
review the NTI and the NEI for HAPs. To assist in the review of the 1999 NEI for HAPs, the
EPA provided a comparison of data from the three data sources (MACT/residual risk data, TRI,
and state, local and Tribal inventories) for each facility. For the 1999 NEI for HAPs, two periods
were available for external review - October 2001 - February 2002 and October 2002 - March
2003.
Both the full draft 1996 National Air Toxics Assessment and several of the individual
components of the assessment have been subjected to the scrutiny of leading scientists
throughout the country hi a process called "scientific peer review." This ensures that EPA uses
the best available scientific methods and information. In 2001, EPA's Science Advisory Board
(SAB) reviewed the 1996 national-scale assessment. The review was generally supportive of the
assessment purpose, methods, and presentation; the committee considers this an important step
toward a better understanding of air toxics. Many of the SAB comments related to possible
improvements for future assessments (additional national-scale assessments are being planned
for the base year 1999 and for every 3 years thereafter) and raised technical issues that would
merit further investigation. EPA will follow up on these issues. Additional information is
available on the Internet: www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/nata/peer.html.
1-52
-------
The following describes the various scientific peer review activities that are associated with the
1996 national air toxics assessment:
• EPA's Science Advisory Board peer-reviewed the ASPEN dispersion model used in the
Cumulative Exposure Project (CEP). The Science Advisory Board issued their report in
1996. It can be found at http://wmv.epa.gov/sab/fiscal96.htai.
• The HAPEM exposure model underwent a peer review by EPA scientists and an external
peer review in the summer of 2000. While the peer review identified several limitations
inherent in the current methodology, it is still acknowledged as an appropriate tool to help
better understand the relation of human exposures to ambient concentration levels.
Data Limitations: The NTI and the NEI for HAPs contain data from other primary references.
Because of the different data sources, not all information in the NTI and the NEI for HAPs has
been developed using identical methods. Also, for the same reason, there are likely some
geographic areas with more detail and accuracy than others. Because of the lesser level of detail
in the 1993 NTI, it is not suitable for input to dispersion models.
For a discussion of the data limitations in the 1999 NEI for HAPs, please refer to the discussion
of Information Quality Guidelines in the documentation at:
wwwr.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/index.html#haps99 .
New/Improved Data or Systems: The 1996 NTI and 1999 NEI for HAPs are a significant
improvement over the baseline 1993 NTI because of the added facility-level detail (e.g., stack
heights, latitude/longitude locations), making it more useful for dispersion model input. Future
inventories (2002 and later years) are expected to improve significantly because of increased
interest in the NEI for HAPs by regulatory agencies, environmental interests, and industry, and
the greater potential for modeling and trend analysis. During the development of the 1999 NEI
for HAPs, all primary data submitters and reviewers were required to submit their data and
revisions to EPA in a standardized format using the Agency's Central Data Exchange (CDX).
For more information on CDX, please go the following web site:
www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/nif/cdx.html
References: The NTI and NEI data and documentation are available at the following sites:
ftp site: ftp:/yftp.epa.gov/EmisInventorv/
Available inventories: 1996 NTI, 1999 NEI for HAPs
Contents: Modeling data files for each state
Summary data files for nation
Documentation
README file
Audience: individuals who want full access to NTI files
NEON: http://ttnwww.ripnc.epa.goy/Neon/
Available inventories: 1996 NTI and 1999 NEI for HAPs
Contents: Summary data files
Audience: EPA staff
1-53
-------
CHIEF: mvw.epa.gQy/ttn/chief
1999 NEI for HAPs data development materials
1999 Data Incorporation Plan - describes how EPA compiled the
1999 NEI for HAPs
QC tool for data submitters
Data Augmentation Memo describes procedures EPA will use to
augment data
99 NTI Q's and A's provides answers to frequently asked
questions
NIF (Input Format) files and descriptions
CDX Data Submittal Procedures - instructions on how to submit
data using CDX
Training materials on development of HAP emission inventories
Emission factor documents, databases, and models
Audience: State and local agencies, Tribes, industry, EPA, and the public
FY 2005 Performance Measures:
emissions reduced (tons/year from baseline)
• Total annual average sulfur deposition and mean ambient sulfate concentrations
reduced (% from baseline)
• Total annual average nitrogen deposition and mean ambient nitrate concentrations
reduced (% from baseline)
Performance Databases:
• Emissions Tracking System (ETS) - SOi and NOx emissions collected by Continuous
Emission Monitoring Systems (CEMS) or equivalent continuous monitoring methods.
• Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNet) - dry acid deposition; weekly average
ambient concentrations of sulfate, nitrate, sulfur dioxide, nitric acid, ammonium;
meteorological data required for calculating deposition rates.
• National Atmospheric Deposition Program (NADP) - wet acid (sulfur and nitrogen)
deposition.
Data Sources: On a quarterly basis, ETS receives and processes hourly measurements of SO2,
NOX, volumetric flow, COa, and other emission-related parameters from more than 2,500 fossil
fuel-fired utility units affected under the Title IV Acid Rain Program. For the 5-month ozone
season (May 1 - September. 30), ETS receives and processes hourly NOX measurements from
electric generation units (EGUs) and certain large industrial combustion units affected by NOX
Budget Programs under the NOX State Implementation Plan (SIP) Call. In 2004, the initial
compliance year for the NOX SIP Call, up to 2000 units in as many as 20 states and D.C. will be
reporting seasonal NOX data to ETS. Over 900 units have been reporting these data since 1999
under the OTC NOX Budget Program.
1-54
-------
CASTNet measures particle and gas acidic deposition chemistry. Specifically, CASTNet
measures sulfate and nitrate dry deposition and meteorological information at approximately 70
monitoring sites, primarily in the East. CASTNet is a long-term dry deposition network funded,
operated and maintained by EPA's Office of Air and Radiation (OAR).
NADP is a national long-term wet deposition network that measures precipitation chemistry and
provides long-term geographic and temporal trends in concentration and deposition of
precipitation components. Specifically, NADP provides measurements of sulfate and nitrate wet
deposition at approximately 230 monitoring sites. EPA, along with several other Federal
agencies, states, and other private organizations, provide funding and support for NADP. The
Illinois State Water Survey/University of Illinois maintains the NADP database.
The deposition monitoring networks have been in operation for over 25 years. They provide
invaluable measurements on long-term trends and episodes in acid deposition; such data are
essential for assessing progress toward the program's intended environmental and welfare
outcomes. These networks are aging and need to be modernized to ensure the continued
availability of these direct environmental measures. Much of the equipment is beyond its useful
life, replacement parts are difficult to procure, and the data processing is outmoded and
expensive. To date, modernization of this network has not been considered a priority. Unless
this situation changes, the Agency's ability to assess long-term performance measures will be
compromised.
Methods, Assumption, and Suitability: Consistent, well-defined methods for data aggregation
and monitor tests have been incorporated into program regulations (40 CFR Part 75 (Continuous
Emissions Monitoring). Original final rule issued 58 FR 3701-3757 (Jan 11, 1993). Rule
revisions to improve program issued 60 FR 26510 (May 17, 1995), 61 FR 59142 (Nov 20, 1996),
63 FR 57356, 573581 and 57499 (Oct 27, 1998), 64 FR 28564 (May 26, 1999), and 67 FR 40394
(June 12, 2002)).that were promulgated in notice and comment (public) rulemakings. These
methods are used to aggregate data across all affected utilities for each pollutant and related
source operating parameters. They specify how to calculate the baseline and test for quality
assurance.
QA/QC Procedures: QA/QC requirements in the program regulations require that a series of
quality assurance tests are performed at least annually to assure valid CEMS performance. For
these tests, emissions data are collected under highly structured, carefully designed testing
conditions, which involve either high quality standard reference materials or multiple
instruments performing simultaneous emission measurements. The resulting data are screened
and analyzed using a battery of statistical procedures, including one that tests for systematic bias.
If a CEM fails the bias test, indicating a potential for systematic underestimation of emissions,
the source of the error must be identified and corrected or the data are adjusted to compensate for
the measurement bias. Further information available on the Internet:
http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/reporting/index.html
CASTNet established a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) in November 2001; The QAPP
contains data quality objectives and quality control procedures for accuracy and precision. {U.S.
EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Clean Air Status and Trends Network
(CASTNet) Quality Assurance Project Plan (Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S. EPA, November
2001). Available at http://www.epa,gQv/castnet/l.ibrary/qapp.htnil.
1-55
-------
NADP has established data quality objectives and quality control procedures for accuracy,
precision and representation, available on the Internet: http://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu/QA/. The
intended use of these data is to establish spatial and temporal trends in wet deposition and
precipitation chemistry.
Data Quality Review: The ETS provides instant feedback to sources on data reporting
problems, format errors^ and inconsistencies. The electronic data file QA checks are described at
http://www.epa.gov/aiiinarkets/reportmg/index.html (see Electronic' Data Report Review
Process, ETS Tolerance Tables, Active ETS Error Codes/Messages and Range Format Errors},
All quarterly reports are analyzed to detect deficiencies and to identify reports that must be
resubmitted to correct problems. EPA also identifies reports that were not submitted by the
appropriate reporting deadline. Revised quarterly reports, with corrected deficiencies found
during the data review process, must be obtained from sources by a specified deadline. All data
are reviewed, and preliminary and final emissions data reports are prepared for public release
and compliance determination.
CASTNet underwent formal peer review in 1997 by a panel of scientists from EPA and the
National Oceanographic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Findings are documented in
Examination of CASTNet: Data, Results, Costs, and Implications (United States EPA, Office of
Research and Development, National Exposure Research Laboratory, February 1997).
The NADP methods of determining wet deposition values have undergone extensive peer
review, handled entirely by the NADP housed at the Illinois State Water Survey/University of
Illinois. Assessments of changes in NADP methods are developed primarily through the
academic community and reviewed through the technical literature process.
Data Limitations: In order to improve the spatial resolution of CASTNet, additional monitoring
sites are needed. CASTNet has no geographic coverage for the middle of the country and very
limited coverage in the Northwest.
Error Estimate: None
New/Improved Data or Systems: EPA is investigating ways to modernize aging CASTNet
equipment; streamline site operation, data collection and processing methods; reduce system
operating costs; and provide a foundation for mutipollutant measurement compatible with other
networks.
References: For additional information about CASTNet, see http://www.epa.gov/castnet/ and
for NADP, see http://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu/. For a description of EPA's Acid Rain program, see
http://www.epa.gov/airrnarkets/arp/mdex.htrnl/ and hi the electronic Code of Federal Regulations
at http://www.epa.gov/docs/epacfr40/chapt-I.info/subch-C.htm (40 CFR parts 72-78.)
FY 2005 Performance Measures:
• Cumulative percent increase in the number of people who live in areas with ambient
criteria pollutant concentrations below the level of the NAAQS.
1-56
-------
• Cumulative percent increase in the number of areas with ambient criteria pollutant
concentrations below the level of the NAAQS.
• Areas designated to attainment for the NAAQS.
Performance Databases:
AQS —The Air Quality Subsystem (AQS) stores ambient air quality data used to evaluate an
area's air quality levels relative to the NAAQS.
FREDS—The Findings and Required Elements Data System is used to track progress of states
and Regions in reviewing and approving the required data elements of the State Implementation
Plans (SIP). SIPs are clean air plans and define what actions a state will take to improve the air
quality in areas that do not meet national ambient air quality standards
Data Sources:
AQS: State & local agency data from State and Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS).
Population: Data from Census-Bureau/Department of Commerce
FREDS: Data are provided by EPA's Regional offices.
Methods, Assumptions, and Suitability: Air quality levels are evaluated relative to the level of
the appropriate NAAQS. Next the populations in areas with ah- quality concentrations above the
level of the NAAQS are aggregated. This analysis assumes that the populations of the areas are
held constant at 2000 Census levels. Data comparisons over several years allow assessment of
the air program's success.
QA/QC Procedures: AQS: The QA/QC of the national air monitoring program has several
major components: the Data Quality Objective (DQO) process, reference and equivalent methods
program, EPA's National Performance Audit Program (NPAP), system audits, and network
reviews (Available on the Internet: www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/npaplist.html) To ensure quality
data, the SLAMS are required to meet the following: 1) each site must meet network design and
site criteria; 2) each site must provide adequate QA assessment, control, and corrective action
functions according to minimum program requirements; 3) all sampling methods and equipment
must meet EPA reference or equivalent requirements; 4) acceptable data validation and record
keeping procedures must be followed; and 5) data from SLAMS must be summarized and
reported annually to EPA. Finally, there are system audits that regularly review the overall air
quality data collection activity for any needed changes or corrections. Further information
available on the Internet: http://www.epa.gov/cludygxb/programs/namslam.html and through
United States EPA's Quality Assurance Handbook (EPA-454/R-98-004 Section 15)
Populations: No additional QA/QC beyond that done by the Census Bureau/Department of
Commerce.
FREDS: No formal QA/QC procedures.
Data Quality Review:
AQS: No external audits have been done in the last 3 years. However, internal audits
are regularly conducted.
1-57
-------
Populations: No additional QA/QC beyond that done by the Census Bureau/Department of
Commerce.
FREDS: None
Data Limitations:
AQS: None known
Populations: No additional QA/QC beyond that done by the Census Bureau/Department of
Commerce.
FREDS: None known
Error Estimate: At this time it is not possible to develop an error estimate. Uncertainty in
projections (from modeling) and near term variations in air quality (due to meteorological
conditions for example) exist.
New/Improved Data or Systems:
AQS: In January 2002, EPA completed the reengineering of AQS to make it a more user
friendly, Windows-based system. As a result, air quality data will be more easily accessible via
the Internet. AQS has also been enhanced to comply with the Agency's data standards (e.g.,
latitude/longitude, chemical nomenclature). Beginning in July 2003, agencies submitted air
quality data to AQS thru the Agency's Central Data Exchange (CDX). CDX is intended to be
the portal through which all environmental data coming to or leaving the Agency will pass.
Population: None
FREDS: None
References: For additional information about criteria pollutant data, non-attainment areas, and
other related information, see: http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/.
FY 2005 Performance Measures:
• Estimated Mobile Source VOC Emissions
• Estimated Mobile Source NOx Emissions
• Estimated Mobile Source PM 10 Emissions
• Estimated Mobile Source PM 2.5 Emissions
• Estimated Mobile Source CO Emissions
Performance Database: National Emissions Inventory Database. See:
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/trends/
Data Source: Mobile source emissions inventories. Estimates for on-road, off-road mobile
source emissions are built from inventories fed into the relevant models, which hi turn provide
input to the National Emissions Inventory Database.
1-58
-------
The MOBILE vehicle emission factor model is a software tool for predicting gram per mile
emissions of hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen, carbon dioxide, particulate
matter, and toxics from cars, trucks, and motorcycles under various conditions.
The NONROAD emission inventory model is a software tool for predicting emissions of
hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxides from
small and large off road vehicles, equipment, and engines.
Certain mobile source information is updated annually. Inputs are updated annually only if there
is a rationale and readily available source of annual data. Generally, Vehicle Miles Traveled
(VMT), the mix of VMT by type of vehicle (Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)-types),
temperature, gasoline properties, and the designs of Inspection/Maintenance (I/M) programs are
updated each year. Emission factors for all mobile sources and activity estimates for non-road
sources are changed only when the Office of Transportation and Air Quality requests that this be
done and is able to provide the new information in a timely manner. The most recent models for
mobile sources are Mobile 6 and Nonroad 2002. (Available on the Internet at
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/models.htm.)
Methods, Assumptions, and Suitability: EPA issues emissions standards that set limits on how
much pollution can be emitted from a given mobile source. Mobile sources include vehicles that
operate on roads and highways ("on road" or "highway" vehicles), as well as nonroad vehicles,
engines, and equipment. Examples of mobile sources are cars, trucks, buses, earthmoving
equipment, lawn and garden power tools, ships, railroad locomotives, and airplanes. Vehicle and
equipment manufacturers have responded to many mobile source emission standards by
redesigning vehicles and engines to reduce pollution.
EPA uses models to estimate mobile source emissions, for both past and future years. The
estimates are used in a variety of different settings, like ralemaking.
The most complete and systematic process for making and recording such mobile source
emissions estimates is the "Trends" inventory process executed each year by the Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards' (OAQPS) Emissions, Monitoring, and Analysis Division
(EMAD). The Assessment and Modeling Division, within the Office of Transportation and Air
Quality, provides EMAD information and methods for making the mobile source estimates. In
addition, EMAD's contractors obtain necessary information directly from other sources; for
example, weather data and the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) Vehicle Miles
Traveled (VMT) estimates by state. EMAD creates and publishes the emission inventory
estimate for the most recent historical year, detailed down to the county level and with over 30
line items representing mobile sources. At irregular intervals as required for regulatory analysis
projects, EMAD creates estimates of emissions for future years. When the method for estimating
emissions changes significantly, EMAD usually revises its older estimates of emissions in years
prior to the most recent year, to avoid a sudden discontinuity in the apparent emissions trend.
EMAD publishes the national emission estimates in hardcopy; county-level estimates are
available electronically. Additional information about transportation and air quality related to
estimating, testing for, and measuring emissions, as well as research being conducted on
technologies for reducing emissions is available at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/research.htm
1-59
-------
QA/QC Procedures: The emissions inventories are continuously improved.
Data Quality Review: The emissions inventories are reviewed by both internal and external
parties.
Data Limitations: The limitations of the inventory estimates for mobile sources come from
limitations hi the modeled emission factors (based on emission factor testing and models
predicting overall fleet emission factors in g/mile) and also hi the estimated vehicle miles
traveled for each vehicle class (derived from Department of Transportation
data).htip;//www.epa.gov/otaq/m6.htm. For nonroad emissions, the estimates come from a
model using equipment populations, emission factors per hour or unit of work, and an estimate
of usage. This nonroad emissions model accounts for over 200 types of nonroad equipment. Any
limitations in the input data will carry over into limitations in the emission inventory estimates.
Error Estimate: Additional information about data integrity is available on the Internet:
New/Improved Data or Systems: To keep pace with new analysis needs, new modeling
approaches, and new data, EPA is currently working on a new modeling system termed the
Multi-scale Motor Vehicles and Equipment Emission System (MOVES). This new system will
estimate emissions for on road and off road sources, cover a broad range of pollutants, and allow
multiple scale analysis, from fine scale analysis to national inventory estimation. When fully
implemented, MOVES will serve as the replacement for MOBILE6 and NONROAD. The new
system will not necessarily be a single piece of software, but instead will encompass the
necessary tools, algorithms, underlying data and guidance necessary for use hi all official
analyses associated with regulatory development, compliance with statutory requirements, and
national/regional inventory projections. Additional information is available on the Internet:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ngm.htm
References: For additional information about mobile source programs see:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/.
EFFICIENCY MEASURES/MEASUREMENT DEVELOPMENT PLANS
EPA continues to place a great emphasis on improving its set of performance measures.
In addition to and complementing the Agency's outcome-based environmental performance
measures, some programs are developing efficiency measures. Efficiency measures are
structured as a ratio of key program inputs (e.g. time, dollars, FTE) to program outputs or
outcomes. They are intended to provide EPA programs with additional information that can be
used for sound decision-making and program management.
1-60
-------
Below are EPA's proposed efficiency measures for selected programs.
Acid Rain
EPA is in the process of developing efficiency measures to evaluate progress in reducing
transaction costs for Acid Rain and related market-based programs. These transactions cost
efficiencies deal with e-Gov practices and minimizing emissions data reporting transaction costs.
For example, the Agency plans by 2005 to reduce annual emissions and monitor certification
data reporting costs by 50% from approximately $4,000 per unit in the baseline year of 2000.
Air Toxics
EPA is working to improve long-term measures to better understand the risks from air
toxics. Currently we measure the tons of toxics reduced as a result of our programs. To better
understand the risks we are reducing, we are exploring the potential to develop
measures/efficiency measures, indicators, including:
• Toxicity-weighted emissions: Using our National Emissions Inventory, we would
estimate the tons of emissions reduced and then weight each air toxic by health criteria, such as
the Unit Risk Estimate. With this weighted inventory, we would have a relative risk ranking of
the reductions, providing some indication of the degree to which we are reducing the most
harmful toxics.
• Reductions hi ambient levels of toxics: We are developing a national air toxics
monitoring network and will use these sites as well as certain existing state monitoring sites to
track reductions in ambient levels of toxics over tune. These sites cover a defined set of air
toxics and will provide useful trend information over the longer-term.
• Reductions in risks across the population: As part of the National Air Toxics Assessment
(NATA) that we update every three years, we can evaluate the cumulative risk levels for the
general population from 32 air toxics and measure changes in these risk levels over tune (e.g.,
number of people below one hi a million cancer risk). Currently NATA considers only
inhalation risks.
• Local-scale risk reductions: We have several local-scale modeling and monitoring efforts
underway. Through these assessments we can track changes hi risk levels over time for specific
geographic areas. Unlike the other tools that we've developed at this point, these local-scale
analyses may be able to consider multiple pathways of exposure, not just inhalation.
Measure development is referenced hi the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART)
summary hi the Special Analysis section.
Mobile Source Standards and Certification
The Motor Vehicle and Engine Compliance Program (MVECP) is responsible for the
certification and compliance of light-duty vehicles and trucks, heavy-duty highway vehicles and
engines, highway motorcycles, and certain non-road vehicles and engines.
1-61
-------
A certificate of conformity is generally required when a manufacturer decides to market
new vehicles or engines in the United States. Before issuing that certificate, EPA must perform
certain activities necessary to ensure compliance with regulations implemented within the
MVECP.
A possible efficiency measure could be the costs per certificate issued within each class
of vehicles and engines covered by the MVECP (e.g., light duty vehicles and trucks; non-road CI
engines; heavy-duty highway engines; etc.).
School Bus Retrofits
In FY 2005 EPA will collect and assess data from the FY 2003 and earlier school bus
demonstration projects to develop projections that relate funding levels to specific program
measures. This assessment will allow us to develop specific, outcome-oriented measures such as
the overall number of buses that will be retrofitted each year, along with the associated emission
benefits.
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
EPA cooperates with other Federal, state, Tribal, and local agencies in achieving goals
related to ground level ozone and PM. EPA continues to work closely with the Department of
Agriculture and the Forest Service in developing its burning policy and reviewing practices that
can reduce emissions. EPA, the Department of Transportation (DOT), and the Army Corps of
Engineers work with state and local agencies to integrate transportation and air quality plans,
reduce traffic congestion, and promote livable communities. EPA continues to work with the
Department of the Interior, National Park Service, in developing its regional haze program and
deploying the IMPROVE visibility monitoring network. The operation and analysis of data
produced by the PM monitoring system is an example of the close coordination of effort between
the EPA and state and Tribal governments.
For pollution assessments and transport, EPA is working with the National Aeronautics
and Space Administration (NASA) on technology transfer using satellite imagery. In FY 2005,
EPA will be working to further distribute NASA satellite products to Regions, states, local
agencies, and Tribes to assist with PM forecasting and to provide better understanding of air
quality on a day-to-day basis. EPA will also work with NASA in FY 2005 to develop a better
understanding of PM formation using satellite data. EPA works with the Department of the
Army, Department of Defense on advancing emission measurement technology and with the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce for
meteorological support for our modeling and monitoring efforts.
To better understand the magnitude, sources, and causes of mobile source pollution, EPA
works with the Department of Energy (DOE) and DOT to fund research projects. The DOT's
mobile source projects include TRANSIMS (TRansportation ANalysis and SIMulation System)
and other transportation modeling projects; DOE is funding these projects through the National
Renewable Energy Laboratory. EPA also works closely with DOE on refinery cost modeling
analyses for EPA's clean fuel programs. For mobile sources program outreach, the Agency is
participating in a collaborative effort with DOT's Federal Highway Administration and the
1-62
-------
Federal Transit Administration designed to educate the public about the impacts of transportation
choices on traffic congestion, air quality, and human health. This community-based public
education initiative also includes the Centers for Disease Control. In addition, EPA is working
with DOE to identify opportunities in the Clean Cities program. EPA will also be working with
other Federal agencies such as the U.S. Coast Guard on air emission issues. EPA works with the
Department of Energy (DOE) on several fuels programs. Other programs targeted to reduce air
toxics from mobile sources are coordinated with the Department of Transportation (DOT).
These partnerships can involve policy assessments and toxic emission reduction strategies in
different regions of the country.
To develop new continuous source monitoring technology for toxic metals emitted from
smokestacks, EPA has partnered with the Department of Defense (DOD). This partnership will
provide a new source monitoring tool that will streamline source monitoring requirements that a
number of DOD incinerators are required to meet and improve the operation of DOD
incinerators with real-tune emissions information resulting in reduced releases of air toxics to the
environment. In time, this technology is expected to be available for use at non-DOD facilities.
For the clean fuel programs, EPA works closely with the DOE on refinery cost modeling
analyses. For mobile sources program outreach, the Agency is participating in a collaborative
effort with DOTs Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration
(FTA) designed to educate the public about the impacts of transportation choices on traffic
congestion, air quality, and public health. This community-based public education initiative also
includes the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). In addition, EPA works with DOE to identify
opportunities in the Clean Cities program. EPA also works cooperatively with DOE to better
characterize gasoline PM emissions and characterize the contribution of gasoline vehicles and
engine emissions to ambient PM levels.
To reduce air toxic emissions do not inadvertently increase worker exposures, EPA is
continuing to work closely with the Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) to coordinate the development of EPA and OSHA standards. EPA also
works closely with other health agencies such as the CDC, the National Institute of
Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and
Health on health risk characterization. To assess atmospheric deposition and characterize
ecological effects, EPA works with the Department of Commerce's National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration and the Department of the Interior's U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
The Agency has worked extensively with the Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS) on the National Health and Nutritional Evaluation Study to identify mercury
accumulations in humans. EPA also has worked with DOE on the 'Fate of Mercury' study to
characterize mercury transport and traceability in Lake Superior.
To determine the extent to which agricultural activities contribute to air pollution, EPA
will continue to work closely with the USDA through the joint USDA/EPA AAQTF. The
AAQTF is a workgroup set up by Congress to oversee agricultural air quality-related issues and
to develop cost-effective ways in which the agricultural community can improve air quality. In
addition, the AAQTF coordinates research on agricultural air quality issues to avoid duplication
and ensure data quality and sound interpretation of data.
1-63
-------
In developing regional and international air quality programs and projects, EPA works
primarily with the Department of State, the Agency for International Development, and the
Department of Energy as well as with regional organizations. EPA's international air quality
management program will complement EPA's programs on children's health, Trade and the
Environment, and trans-boundary air pollution. In addition, EPA will partner with others
worldwide, including international organizations such as the United Nations Environment
Programme, the European Union, the OECD, the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank,
and our colleagues in Canada, Mexico, Europe, and Japan.
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
Alternative Motor Fuels Act of 1988
Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401-7671g)
Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
National Highway System Designation Act
1-64
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Clean Air and Global Climate Change
OBJECTIVE; Healthier Indoor Air
By 2008,22.6 million more Americans than in 1994 will be experiencing healthier indoor
air in homes, schools, and office buildings.
Resource Summary
(Dollars in Thousands)
Healthier Indoor Air
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Buildings & Facilities
Inspector General
Total Workyears
FY2003
Actuals
$44,299.1
$32,649.2
$1,611.8
$9,415.3
$417.0
$205.8
152.0
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$48,042.5
$37,916.4
$1,289.0
$8,150
$414.6
$272.5
149.9
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$48,954.7
$38,695.1
$1,367.3
$8,150
$465.0
$277.3
153.2
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$912.1
$778.6
$78.3
$0
$50.4
$4.8
3.4
Program Project
(Dollars in Thousands)
Categorical Grant: Radon
Indoor Air: Asthma Program
Indoor Ah*: Environment Tobacco Smoke
Program
Indoor Air: Radon Program
Indoor Air: Schools and Workplace
Program
Administrative Projects
TOTAL
FY2003
Actuals
$9,415.3
$9,062.6
$2,832.8
$5,843.6
$9,005.2
$8,139.6
$44,299.1
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$8,150.0
$11,097.0
$3,617.5
$5,871.1
$11,176.2
$8,130.7
$48,042.5
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$8,150.0
$11,197.3
$3,695.1
$6,065.6
$11,258.2
$8,588.5
$48,954.7
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$0.0
$100.3
$77.6
$194.5
$82.0
($457.7 '
lister'
1-65
-------
FY 2005 REQUEST
Health effects of indoor air pollution. Research conducted by the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and others, beginning in the late 1970's, indicates that Americans
spend about 90 percent of their time indoors, where they are exposed to levels of pollutants that
are often higher than those outdoors.45 Indoor air pollution can pose high risks to human health,
especially to sensitive populations. Estimates of the economic costs to the nation of poor indoor
air quality, including lost worker productivity, direct medical costs for those whose health is
adversely affected, and damage to equipment and materials, are on the order of tens of billions of
dollars per year.46 In 2000, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) affirmed the significance
of indoor triggers of asthma and the alarming increase in asthma rates nationwide.47
Indoor air pollutants continue to have significant impacts in our homes, schools, and
workplaces:
" An estimated 20 million people in the United States have asthma.48 The number of
children with asthma has more than doubled since 1980. In 2001, an estimated 6.3 million
children had asthma, of which nearly one hi 13 are school-aged. Each year over 14 million
school days are missed by children with asthma. There also continues to be significant racial and
ethnic disparities in asthma morbidity and mortality in the United States; African-Americans
continue to have higher rates of asthma emergency room visits, hospitalizations, and deaths than
Caucasians.49
• In 2000, there were 214,000 hospitalizations and more than 1.8 million emergency room
visits.50 Asthma's estimated annual cost to the Nation is $14.0 billion.51
" There is substantial evidence that indoor exposures to secondhand smoke (ShS, also
known as environmental tobacco smoke or ETS) and indoor allergens from dust mites, pests,
molds, and pets play a significant role hi triggering asthma episodes, and, in some instances (ShS
and dust mites), are causally linked to the development of the disease. Indeed, estimates suggest
that approximately 80% of asthma in children (or 5 million children) is allergic asthma.52
" As of 1998, young children were exposed to ShS in approximately 20.3 percent of U.S.
homes, increasing their risk for asthma and causing thousands of lung infections and other
45 Report to Congress on Indoor Air Quality. EPA/400/1-89-001.
46 Mendell et al, Improving the Health of Workers in Indoor Environments, Am. J. Pub. Health, 92, 1430 2002.
47 Clearing the Air: Asthma and Indoor Air Exposures. ISBN 0-309-06496-1. January 2000.
48 American Lung Association. "Trends in Asthma Morbidity and Mortality." ALA: New York, NY. March 2003.
49 Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, Surveillance Summaries, Surveillance for Asthma 1980-1999: CDC. March 29,
2002; Asthma Prevalence, Health Care Use and Mortality, 2000-2001: yyww.cdc.gov.
50 Asthma Prevalence, Health Care Use and Mortality, 2000-2001: www.cdc.gov. Accessed 12/01/03
51 National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, (NHLBI) Chartbook, 2002: www.nhlbi.nih.eov/resources/docs/02 chtbkpdf.
52 Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences. U.S. Committee on the Assessment of Asthma and Indoor Air. Clearing
the Air: Asthma and Indoor Air Exposures. 2000. Washington. National Academy Press.
1-66
-------
Children 6 & Under Regularly Exposed
to Secondhand Smoke at Home
IB Children |
1994
1998
Source: National Center for Health Statistics, National
diseases.53 ShS contains more than 4,000
substances of which more than 40 are known
as carcinogens under the EPA Carcinogen
Assessment Guidelines.54
" In 1999, indoor air quality was
reported to be unsatisfactory in about one hi
five schools hi the U.S., while ventilation was
reported as unsatisfactory in about one-quarter
of public schools. This translates to over 11
million students attending public schools
reporting unsatisfactory indoor air quality and
about 14 million students attending public
schools reporting unsatisfactory ventilation.55
• Radon is the second leading cause of
lung cancer and is estimated to be responsible
for an estimated 21,000 deaths per year.56 In 1992, EPA estimated that nearly one out of every
15 homes had radon concentrations above the EPA recommended action level.57
• Molds have the potential to cause health problems. Molds produce allergens, irritants,
and in some cases, potentially toxic substances. Inhaling or touching mold or mold spores may
cause allergic reactions in sensitive individuals. Allergic responses include hay fever-type
symptoms, such as runny nose, red eyes, and skin rash. Allergic reactions to mold are common.
They can be immediate or delayed. Molds can also cause asthma attacks in people with asthma
who are allergic to mold. In addition, mold exposure can irritate the eyes, skin, nose, throat, and
lungs of both mold-allergic and non-allergic people.58
Indoor environments program strategies. EPA implements two primary strategies to
meet its human health objective to improve indoor air quality. These strategies focus on
protecting sensitive populations, including children and the elderly, as well as the chronically ill.
Increase Public Awareness: EPA raises public awareness of actual and potential indoor
air risks so that individuals can take steps to reduce exposure. Outreach activities, in the form of
educational literature, media campaigns, hotlines, and clearinghouse operations, provide
essential information about indoor air health risks not only to the public, but to the professional
and research communities as well. Underpinning EPA's outreach effort is a strong commitment
to environmental justice, community-based risk reduction, and customer service.
53 Results of a national telephone survey entitled "Radon Risk Communication and Results Study," commissioned by EPA in
1994. EPA expects updated results in 2004.
54 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Respiratory Health Effects of Passive Smoking. 1993. Available at
http://www.epa.gov/iaq/pubs/etsfs.html Accessed 12/22/03.
55 Condition of America's Public School Facilities: 1999, National Center for Education Statistics, Office of Educational
Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education, NCES2000-032, June 2000.
56 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA Assessment of Risks from Radon in Homes. June 2003.
57 National Residential Radon Survey, 1992.
58 Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences (U.S.). Committee on the Assessment of Asthma and Indoor Air.
Clearing the Air: Asthma and Indoor Air Exposures. 2000. Washington. National Academy Press.
1-67
-------
Increase Partnerships: Through partnerships with non-governmental and professional
entities, EPA disseminates multi-media materials encouraging individuals, schools, and industry
to take action to reduce health risks in their indoor environments. In addition, EPA uses
technology transfer to improve the ways in which all types of buildings, including schools,
homes, and workplaces, are designed, operated, and maintained. To support these voluntary
approaches, EPA incorporates the most current science available as the basis for recommending
ways that people can reduce exposure to indoor contaminants.
To reach people at the community level, EPA uses assistance agreements and cooperative
partnerships to collaborate with organizations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics, the
Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America, the National Association of Counties, the National
Education Association, the American Lung Association, the Consumer Federation of America,
and the National Environmental Health Association. These partnerships allow EPA to
successfully reach and educate target audiences with messages about how to reduce public health
risks posed by indoor air contaminants. Targeted audiences include: health care providers who
treat children with asthma, school personnel who manage the environments where children spend
many hours each day, county and local environmental health officials, and disproportionately
affected and disadvantaged populations. Through this national partner network of over 100 state,
local, and nonprofit organizations and more than 1,000 local field affiliates, EPA leverages the
personnel, expertise, and credibility of these groups to provide the tools to their target audiences,
and to the general public, to make informed decisions about reducing health risks hi their indoor
environment.
EPA broadens awareness and encourages action through national organizations focused
on addressing indoor asthma triggers, as well as other indoor health risks, and partners with other
local community-based organizations for implementation. These agreements will provide
maximum flexibility for states and communities to design programs that address critical indoor
air quality problems, including radon, asthma, mold contamination, and secondhand smoke in
homes, child care, and school facilities, and other residential environments.
Results to be Achieved under this Objective
Indoor Air: Asthma
Although there is no known cure for asthma at this tune, the medical community agrees,
and it is established hi national, evidence-based guidelines,59 that both pharmacologic treatment
and environmental management are needed to effectively control asthma. However, indoor
environmental management is often not practiced and often not part of the prescription for
managing asthma. Beginning hi 1999, .hi accord with the President's Task Force on
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks to Children (co-chaired by EPA and CDC), EPA
launched a national, multi-faceted asthma education and outreach program that stresses the
importance of incorporating environmental management into asthma education, outreach, and
management strategies. The initiative, which primarily focuses on populations
disproportionately impacted by asthma, is based on Asthma and the Environment: A Strategy to
Protect Children, which currently serves as the framework for the Department of Health and
59 NIH Publication No. 02-5075, June 2002 at http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov
1-68
-------
Human Services (HHS), EPA, and other Federal agencies to collaborate on asthma issues.60
In FY 2005, the EPA will build on the success of our national, multi-faceted asthma
education and outreach program designed to improve and expand the delivery of comprehensive
asthma care programs to reach more people, more effectively. This program reaches out to the
general public; schools and child care communities; and the health care community through
partnerships with Federal agencies and non-governmental organizations committed to improving
the quality of life for children with asthma. EPA will continue to implement our asthma program
through:
• National public awareness and media campaigns
" Community-based outreach and education, and
• Enhancement and application of programmatic support data
EPA expects, as a result of Agency programs, that well over three quarters of a million people
will be living in healthier residential indoor environments, in FY 2005.
National public awareness and media campaigns: Through public awareness and media
campaigns, EPA strives to raise the public's awareness about asthma and indoor environmental
triggers and the importance of prompt action to reduce exposure to indoor triggers as part of a
comprehensive asthma management plan. In FY 2005, EPA will continue to expand efforts to
reach populations disproportionately impacted by asthma.
EPA's national public service announcement (PSA) campaign, "fish out of water,"
effectively targets low-income adults and children who are disproportionately impacted by
asthma. This campaign - launched hi May 2001 ~ generated more than 400,000 web visits to
the No-Attacks website, as well as 11,000 hot-line calls during the first year of the campaign.
Additionally, a tracking study conducted after the first six months of the campaign indicated that
viewers of the PSA reported a 20% increase hi activities related to managing their asthma.61 In
September 2003 EPA released a second PSA that continues to build upon the success of the first
wave. In FY 2004 and 2005, EPA will build on the campaign's continuing momentum to create
both targeted outreach and a third PSA directed at an urban audience with limited reading skills.
EPA plans to accomplish this through development of a website and educational publications
specifically designed to reach this audience.
World Asthma Day, established hi 1999 by the Global Initiative for Asthma, is a joint
project of the World Health Organization and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute at
the National Institutes of Health. For the past two years, EPA has supported efforts to generate
local events designed to raise public awareness about asthma and encourage the incorporation of
environmental management as a component of comprehensive asthma management. For
example, hi FY 2002, EPA developed a World Asthma Day event planning kit, which provides
ideas for planning asthma events in schools, hospitals, state capitol buildings, or other
community settings. EPA's promotion of the new World Asthma Day Event Planning Kit in FY
2003 motivated more than 1,000 school nurses, health clinics, hospitals, local health departments
and other asthma organizations and educators to order EPA environmental asthma educational
60 President's Task Force on Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks to Children. January 28, 1999. Revised May 2000.
61 Ad Council summary report. Available on request from USEPA, Indoor Environments Division.
1-69
-------
materials to support local outreach activities during the month of May. EPA doubled its goal,
which was to raise awareness and motivate 500 individuals or organizations to sponsor asthma
education events in then- local communities. Additionally, 156 organizations listed their World
Asthma Day events on EPA's web site so that families across the country could locate and
participate in an event in their area. In FY 2004 and 2005, we will work with other Federal
agencies and our partnering organizations to capitalize on past efforts to raise awareness and
motivate over 1000 individuals or organizations to sponsor asthma education events in their local
communities.
Community-based outreach and education: EPA partners with non-governmental
organizations and Federal agencies to implement community-based outreach and education
activities designed for schools and child care communities, the public, and the health care
community. In FY 2005, EPA will continue to work with our partnering organizations to expand
programs offered to these communities. Additionally, EPA will develop multi-media materials
designed for people with limited-reading skills to support community-based outreach and
education activities.
Schools and Child Care: EPA is committed to supporting school and child care programs
that teach children, school officials, child care providers, and parents about asthma management,
including the control of indoor environmental triggers. By working with nongovernmental
organizations and established school-based and child-care asthma education programs, through
FY 2003 we have:
™ Held over 2,000 Open Airways for Schools education classes, educating nearly
14,000 students with asthma (Source: American Lung Association cooperative
partner status reports).
» Trained more than 3,000 school nurses—providing service and one-on-one
education for more than 48,000 children with asthma (Source: National
Association of School Nurses cooperative partner status reports).
" Trained over 6,000 child-care providers nationwide. Approximately 90% of the
76participants implemented changes in the child-care setting to reduce exposures
to indoor asthma triggers influencing indoor air quality for approximately 50,500
children, of which an estimated 12,000 have asthma (Source: Asthma and
Allergy Foundation of America cooperative partner status reports).
In FY 2005, EPA will increase the level of work accomplished in the past by continuing
to support national organizations with existing, results-based school and day-care asthma
education programs. EPA will also continue to coordinate internally to ensure that asthma
management in the school and child-care setting is efficiently addressed.
In-home asthma education; For the past three years, EPA has sponsored community-
based, in-home asthma environmental education and management interventions through a
competitive grant process. These grants support existing community-based, in-home programs
to develop performance-based pilot asthma education and management programs that educate
families about how to control indoor environmental triggers in their homes. In FY 2003 the first
two grantees completed then- projects. For example, the Community Asthma Prevention
Program at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia showed reductions hi the number of children
with emergency room visits (60%) and hospitalizations (34%) for asthma as a result of their in-
1-70
-------
home environmental intervention program (Source: status report from grantee). In FY 2004,
EPA will maintain its comprehensive program by managing existing grants, awarding new
grants, and highlighting effective program strategies. In FY 2005, EPA will refine strategic
directions using the information gamed from these projects and continue to maintain our
comprehensive program. Additionally, EPA will disseminate a series of case studies to support
adoption of best practices determined to be most effective at teaching practical skills as well as
motivating behavioral change.
In FY 2004, EPA also will support efforts to educate parents with limited reading skills
who have children with asthma by developing outreach publications such as an asthma brochure,
a children's activity book, and videos on asthma triggers (all of which will be available in
Spanish and English). These publications, designed to supplement existing community-based
outreach and education programs, will assist in efforts to reach audiences disproportionately
impacted by asthma. In FY 2005, EPA will continue outreach efforts and, where appropriate,
update publications based on feedback received from target audiences.
Health Care Communities: Through partnerships with the medical and health insurance
communities, EPA promotes the incorporation of environmental controls into clinical practices
and standards of care. We accomplish this by raising the health care community's awareness of
environmental risk factors and encouraging public and private health insurers to develop
comprehensive asthma management programs. For example, through FY 2003, EPA has:
• Trained over 150 health care providers in health clinics nation-wide, reaching
approximately 25,000 asthma patients (Source: Bureau of Primary Health Care
semi-annual status reports).
• Educated 600 pediatric patients and their families and trained 2,400 respiratory
therapists, ultimately educating up to 15,000 asthma patients (Source: American
Respiratory Care Foundation annual cooperative partner status report).
" Trained 360 health care professionals to provide integrated environmental trigger
control and asthma management education to patients (Source: Asthma and
Allergy Foundation of America annual cooperative partner status report).
In FY 2004 and 2005, we will continue to leverage relationships with Federal agencies
(such as the Department of Health and Human Services) and' key healthcare organizations to
integrate environmental controls into clinical practices and standards of care as well as
collaborate with health plans to integrate environmental management into comprehensive asthma
care management programs.
In FY 2004, EPA also will develop materials to support outreach efforts to the health care
community. The "Asthma Home Environment Checklist," will provide the information
necessary to include (or strengthen) an environmental assessment component of a home visit
program. The "How to Get Started Guide," will assist health plans hi developing an in-home
visit program offered to asthma disease management program participants. Finally, EPA will
develop case studies highlighting successful asthma care management programs demonstrating
effective integration of environmental controls and distribute these to the health care community
1-71
-------
in an effort to replicate effective approaches. In FY 2005, EPA will update publications based
on feedback received from target audiences.
Enhancement and Application of Programmatic Support Data: While asthma cannot be
prevented or cured and continues to be a major public health problem in the U.S., national
experts agree that it can be controlled with medical treatment and management of environmental
triggers, which includes indoor allergens, secondhand smoke, and outdoor air pollutants.62
Recent data suggest an overall downward trend in asthma hospitalizations and asthma mortality
that may indicate early successes by asthma intervention programs since 1991. It is notable that
African-Americans, however, continue to have higher rates of emergency room visits,
hospitalizations, and deaths related to asthma than do Caucasians.63
Building on the National Academy of Science's report,64 in FY 2004 and 2005, EPA will
continue to evaluate emerging scientific evidence supporting the link between environmental
exposures and asthma.
EPA supports several studies to advance the understanding of the role environmental
triggers play as a component of comprehensive asthma management, as well as to quantify the
impact our program has at the national level. For example, in FY 2003, EPA:
• Conducted a nation-wide telephone survey to assess awareness and action
regarding indoor environmental asthma triggers. In FY 2004, EPA will complete
the analysis and communicate results from the national survey. This information
will help inform the strategic program direction for FY 2005.
• Collaborated with the University of Michigan, School of Public Health, to
determine best practices and interventions of asthma management programs
achieving health outcomes. In FY 2004, EPA will produce a review based on this
work that will provide guidance for EPA outreach and education programs. In
addition, this work will form the basis of a "real-time" repository of information
and resources to support and enhance national asthma management programs. In
FY 2005, EPA and its partners will continue to evaluate emerging programs and
update the repository.
• Assisted our partnering organizations to develop strong evaluation components to
their outreach and education programs. In both FY 2004 and 2005, EPA will
continue to provide support and technical assistance to track and report initiative
results.
Additional Asthma Programs: EPA also will target low-income adults with asthma and
disproportionately impacted members of the public who are more vulnerable to poor indoor
conditions such as the elderly. For example, hi FY 2003, EPA conducted a comprehensive
literature search on indoor health risks for the elderly, and convened a group of more than 20
stakeholders to discuss indoor environment issues that impact aging populations directly. As an
outgrowth of that meeting, EPA is collaborating hi FY 2004 with organizations that advocate for
62 Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences (U.S.)- Committee on the Assessment of Asthma and Indoor Air.
Clearing the Air: Asthma and Indoor Air Exposures. 2000. Washington. National Academy Press.
63 Centers for Disease Control. "Asthma Prevalence, Health Care and Use Mortality, 2000-2001". Available at
www.cdc.gov/nceh/airpollution/asthma/asthmadata.htm Accessed December 23. 2003.
64 Clearing the Air: Asthma and Indoor Air Exposures. ISBN 0-309-06496-1. January 2000.
1-72
-------
the protection of the elderly to focus selected outreach and education efforts on reducing
exposure to possible indoor environmental contaminants. In FY 2005, these efforts will be
expanded as part of a cross-Agency strategy to improve the environmental health of the elderly.
Indoor Air: Schools and Workplace Programs
Schools: Schools and school districts across the nation are realizing the benefits of
improved indoor air quality after successfully implementing the indoor air quality (IAQ) Tools
for Schools (TfS) kit and Program. In 2002, a national survey of school operation and
maintenance practices of a representative sample of schools was completed. The survey used a
comprehensive database of private and public schools and helped estimate the number of schools
adopting and implementing IAQ practices consistent with EPA's IAQ TfS guidance. The key
finding was that 22% percent of respondents had IAQ management plans, consistent with EPA
guidelines. EPA will continue to update its schools materials as new information becomes
available, and as it analyzes information from schools case studies about how implementation
proceeded and what costs and benefits were realized.
In FY 2005, EPA will continue to build on the success of its national IAQ TfS program
(www.epa.gov/iaq/schools) and expand implementation of this program to more schools.
Adoption of EPA's guidelines for proper operation and maintenance of school facilities results hi
healthier indoor environments for all students and staff, but is of particular help to children with
asthma, lessening the degree to which they are exposed to indoor asthma triggers. By increasing
the number of schools where TfS indoor air quality guidelines are adopted and implemented,
healthier indoor air will be provided for over a million students, staff, and faculty. As the
program grows, EPA continues to be particularly concerned about those schools in inner city
areas that are experiencing significant facility deterioration, but have extremely limited funding
for repair or replacement. These schools represent a distinct challenge for TfS adoption and we
continue to target this population by working collaboratively with several urban school-based
organizations to determine appropriate strategies to encourage adoption of indoor air quality
guidelines.
In 2003, EPA released an additional tool in the TFS program, Design Tools for Schools
(DTfS) (www.epa.gov/iaq/schooldesign). DTfS is web-based guidance to assist school districts
in integrating indoor environmental quality and high performance goals into the design,
construction, and renovation of school buildings. In FY 2005, the program will continue to
increase the number of existing and new schools that protect students and staff from, the health
risks posed by poor school environments. EPA will actively seek feedback from users of the
newer DTfS design guidance to refine the information we offer to the target community. To
increase awareness of the TfS Program and the DTfS guidance, the Agency will continue to
partner with various non-governmental organizations to promote widespread adoption, including
sponsoring an annual schools symposium, bringing together school officials, nurses, teachers,
facility managers and planners, parents, and others to discuss current issues and the potential
negative effect poor indoor air quality can have on our children's health.
In FY 2003, the IAQ Tools for Schools National Symposium attracted well over 500
participants with attendance growing each year since its inception hi FY 2000, indicating
growing interest on the part of schools and school districts nationwide. In 2003, the Symposium
coincided with Children's Health Month and featured nationally renowned experts speaking on
1-73
-------
topics of vital interest to the school community. Increasing numbers of school decision-makers
such as superintendents, school business officials, facility managers, and school board officials
attended the symposium.
In FY 2005, EPA will continue to expand its efforts to address children's asthma health
concerns in schools by funding implementation of comprehensive environmental and asthma
management systems that use IAQ Tools for Schools as the framework for addressing all
potential asthma-related children's health risks in school environments. Indoor air is the primary
exposure route to asthma triggers as well as to a wide range of chemical respiratory irritants
commonly found in and around schools (e.g., science labs, art supplies, cleaning agents, and
pesticides) that may also be associated with exacerbation of asthma. In addition, exposure to
school bus diesel exhaust is linked to asthma.65
EPA also will expand the number of schools in which school-based asthma education
programs, such as the American Lung Association's (ALA) "Open Airways" and the National
Association of School Nurses' (NASN) "Managing Asthma Triggers: Keeping Students
Healthy, " are offered. We will continue to place emphasis on reaching inner city schools with
disproportionately affected populations. These programs teach students with asthma to identify
and control their exposure to asthma triggers in their environment and help staff and teachers
understand the steps they can take to improve their school's asthma management.
IAQ TfS is a proven environmental management system for schools that stresses
teamwork, comprehensive "whole building" strategies, and multi-media approaches, as schools
struggle to finance critical education priorities while ensuring a safe and healthy learning
environment for children, it is critical that the Federal government better integrate its existing
environmental management programs for schools. This integration, through IAQ TfS, allows
schools to efficiently manage their limited resources so they can target the most pressing
environmental health issues, such as asthma. EPA will continue to fund several national,
regional, or community based results-oriented programs that utilize a multi-media approach to
addressing all potential asthma triggers, through effective and innovative integration of existing
proven programs such as IAQ TfS and Open Airways for Schools as well as programs
addressing other environmental triggers of asthma.
Workplaces: In FY 2005, EPA will continue to use its premiere tool, Indoor Air
Quality—Building Education and Assessment Model (I-BEAM) to aid office building owners
and managers to understand the benefits of good indoor air quality in their buildings and how to
achieve it (www.epa.go v/iaq/largebldgs/ibeam_page.htm). This tool informs building owners
and managers of the proactive steps to improve indoor air quality thereby improving the health
and productivity of their office workers. We will continue to expand our efforts to inform our
targeted audience through additional partnerships. Over 35,000 copies of guidance documents
related to building air quality, e.g., "Building Air Quality, A Guide for Building Owners and
Facility Mai agers, 1991," I-BEAM, and "Mold Remediation in Schools and Commercial
Buildings," are downloaded from www.epa.gov/iaq every montbu
65 Health Assessment Document for Diesel Engine Exhaust. USEPA EPA/600/8-90/057F. 01 May 2002. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Center for Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC).
1-74
-------
Indoor Air: Environmental Tobacco Smoke Program
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS):
Nonsmokers* with Detectable Serum Cotinine Levels*
Porcont wilh detectable serum cotinine 988-94 Baseline | || 1999-2000
87.4
I
88.3
64.2
Ages 4-17
Ages 18+"
1 95% confidence Interval
• Nonsmokers defined by swum cotirtne levels < 11 ng/mL. (Active smoker
"DetedaUe swum cotinine levels: > .05 ng/mL and < 10 ng/mL.
•"Age adjusted to the 2000 standard population,
almost always have cotinine leveb >10ng/mL. sometimes >500ng/mL)
EPA addresses secondhand smoke
(ShS) risks as part of its overall
program to educate the public
about indoor air pollution.
Although EPA's mission
addresses all involuntary exposure
to ShS, EPA is particularly
concerned about the risks to
millions of children age 6 and
younger. While secondhand
smoke is a health risk for
everyone exposed, very young
children are especially vulnerable
because their respiratory, immune,
and nervous systems are still
developing. Children are most likely to be exposed in homes with smokers, but may also be
exposed in other settings, such as hi cars, day care facilities and schools, and public buildings.
As of 1998, 20% of young children aged six and below were regularly exposed to ShS in
U.S. homes.66 EPA estimates that exposure to ShS contributes 150,000 to 300,000 lower
respiratory tract infections annually in infants and children up to 18 months of age, resulting in
up to 15,000 cases requiring hospitalization.67 ShS exposure is causally associated with an
increased risk of acute and chronic middle ear disease.68 Asthmatic children are especially at
risk, as ShS exposure increases the number of episodes and severity of symptoms for up to a
million asthmatic children.69 Additional findings related to the health effects of ShS suggest
links between ShS exposure and sudden infant death syndrome.70
Smoke free environments are the most effective method for reducing ShS exposure.
Healthy People 2010 (http://www.heaithvpeople.gov) objectives address this issue and seek
optimal protection of nonsmokers through policies and actions that promote smoke-free
environments hi schools, work sites, and public places. The two Healthy People 2010 objectives
most relevant to EPA's ShS program are: (1) Reduce the proportion of children age 6 and under
who are regularly exposed to tobacco smoke at home from 27% in 1994 to 10% hi 2010, and (2)
Reduce the proportion of nonsmokers exposed to environmental tobacco smoke from 65% of
nonsmokers aged 4 years and older (defined as having a serum cotinine level above O.lOng/mL
in 1988-94 (age adjusted to the year 2000 standard population)) to 45% by 2010.71
Nicotine, one of more than 4,000 chemicals found in the smoke from tobacco products
such as cigarettes, cigars, and pipes, is metabolized in the body into several components.
66 National Health Interview Survey, DHHS, 1998. ETS exposure increases the risk of lower respiratory tract infections such as
bronchitis and pneumonia (Respiratory Health Effects of Passive Smoking: Lung Cancer and Other Disorders, U.S. EPA,
December 1992)
67 Respiratory Health Effects of Passive Smoking: Lung Cancer and Other Disorders, U.S. EPA, December 1992.
68 International Consultation on ETS and Child Health Report, World Health Organization, January 1999
69 Respiratory Health Effects of Passive Smoking: Lung Cancer and Other Disorders, U.S. EPA, December 1992
70 Health Effects of Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke, California EPA, September 1997.
71 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), NCHS, CDC.
1-75
-------
Cotinine, one of the major metabolites, persists in the body and is considered a very good
biomarker of exposure. Exposure can be measured by analyzing the cotinine levels in the blood,
saliva, urine, or hah-. While cotinine persists in the body for only a discrete amount of time and
is therefore only a good short-term indicator of ShS exposure, EPA has begun to use cotinine
measurement as a tool to indicate short-term dose to ShS exposure from all environments (note:
cotinine cannot be isolated or differentiated between home exposure versus other exposures (e.g.,
from a daily child care provider), given currently collected data. Based on the most current data,
cotinine levels have fallen significantly among non-smokers over the last several years.
EPA is pursuing a multi-media effort on ShS to promote behavior change associated v, ith
children's exposure to ShS. In April, 2003, EPA, under a cooperative agreement with a national
partner, launched a Public Service Campaign entitled, "My Mom's My Hero," to motivate
parents to make their homes smoke free. It is estimated that this PSA has received
approximately $10.3 million in donated media time and 100,000 airings (from April 2003 -
October 2003).72 In 2004, EPA anticipates continued outreach with a 30-minute educational
video which will follow a smaller, more targeted distribution method (unlike the previous mass
media distribution). The distribution is tentatively planned to be given to approximately 5,000
physicians and aired on select TV outlets. In FY 2005, there will be continued results from the
FY 2004 project as well as potential media results from an independent media outreach
collaboration between the Ad Council and the American Legacy Foundation that involves no
EPA resources.
The Agency also provides technical support directly to state, local government, and
public health organizations to develop and make available tools and resources that promote
behavior changes in parents and guardians that result in smoke-free homes. In 2003, it is
estimated that there were 400+ partner organizations in the ShS database with an additional 300+
calls for technical assistance from organizations other than those currently listed. In FY 2004
and FY 2005 there will be a continued effort to develop new partnerships. The Agency expects
to double the numbers of partners in FY 2004 and projects an additional increase of 50% in FY
2005.
Additionally, EPA is focusing on expanding participation in the "Smoke Free Homes
Pledge" program, which targets the parents of young children, advising them of the health
consequences of exposing children to secondhand smoke inside the home. Through calendar
year 2003, approximately 12,000 Smoke-free Home Pledges were tracked through the hotline
and the web. With the increase in partner organization activity and momentum, the Smoke-free
Homes Programs projects an additional 17,000 pledges in FY 2004 and 22,000 pledges in FY
2005. See http://www.epa.gov/smokefree for information on taking the "Smoke Free Home
Pledge" or to view the PSA, "My Mom's My Hero."
In FY 2003, the Agency, through a competitive selection process, awarded two
Cooperative Agreements. The first focused on changing clinical practices in pediatric offices to
heighten parent awareness and promote smoke-free homes, and the other concentrated on
disparities and reducing risk among at-risk populations. Through FY 2004 and FY 2005, EPA
will continue to provide competitive funding to organizations that provide real-life results and
inform the Agency about approaches that achieve results.
72 Consumer Federation of America Foundation. Independent Tracking 2003.
1-76
-------
EPA is also working closely with CDC on developing the U.S. position on ShS for the
Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). The FCTC is an international treaty to
address all aspects of tobacco control, including health, trade, advertising, and taxation. The
World Health Organization recently adopted a final draft of the treaty and the Interagency
Working Group has recommended that the White House sign the treaty.
Indoor Air: Radon Program/ Categorical Grant: Radon
Radon is Estimated to Cause Thousands of
Cancer Deaths Annually in the U.S.
25,000-,
20,000
15,000-
10,000-1
5,000
0
Radon Dnjnk FaMs in Fires Drownings
Drivingthe Home
(Source: National Academy of Sciences
1998 Radon data and 2001 National
Safety Council reports.)
Radon, a naturally occurring
radioactive gas, is the second leading
cause of lung cancer in the United
States. It is estimated to cause about
21,000 lung cancer deaths each year.73
Radon enters the indoor air primarily
from soil under homes and other
buildings. Found all over the U.S.,
radon comes from the radioactive decay
of uranium in soil, rock, and
groundwater. It emits ionizing radiation
during its radioactive decay to several
radioactive isotopes known as radon
decay products. Radon is a known
human lung carcinogen and is the largest source of radiation exposure and risk to the general
public. Most inhaled radon is rapidly exhaled, but the inhaled decay products readily deposit in
the lungs, where they irradiate sensitive cells in the airways increasing the risk of lung cancer.
Radon typically moves up through the ground to the air above and into the home through cracks
and other holes in the foundation.
In 1988 Congress passed the Indoor Radon Abatement Act of 198874 directing the EPA to
work toward a long term national goal: "The air within buildings in the United States should be
as free of radon as the ambient air outside of buildings." EPA's indoor radon program promotes
voluntary public actions to reduce the risks from indoor radon. EPA and the U.S. Surgeon
General recommend that people do a simple home test and if levels above EPA's guidelines are
confirmed, reduce those levels by a home mitigation using straight-forward techniques. It is also
recommended that new homes be built radon-resistant using techniques described in national
building codes.75 Since the mid-1980s, there has been significant progress in reducing the risk
from exposure to radon. This progress is the result of continued efforts between EPA, citizens,
non-profit organizations, state and local governments, the business community, and other Federal
agencies working together. Through the State Indoor Radon Grant Program, EPA provides
assistance through categorical grants to the states to develop, implement, and enhance programs
to assess and mitigate radon risks.
' EPA Assessment of Risks from Radon in Homes. U.S. EPA. 2003. EPA 402-R-03-003.
1CFR. Title 15-Commerce and Trade, Chapter 53-Toxics Substance Control, Subchapter III - Indoor Radon Abatement
' National Fire Protection Association 5000, International Residential Code 2003
1-77
-------
In June 2003, EPA updated its risk assessment for radon. The results show that EPA had
underestimated the risk from radon.76 Given the revised estimates of increased risk, in FY 2004
and FY 2005, EPA will continue to promote public action to test homes for indoor radon, reduce
elevated levels, and build new homes in high radon areas with radon-resistant features while
highlighting the risk information. This will continue to be accomplished through national
outreach and education campaigns in collaboration with the states, private non-profit
organizations, Tribes, and other Federal agencies such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture
Cooperative Research, Extension, and Education Service.
Through FY 2003, EPA conservatively estimates that 690,000 homes have been
mitigated based on existing consumer surveys conducted before 1996 and radon mitigation fan
sales provided by the three major U.S. radon vent fan manufacturers after 1996. In the last year
for which data were available (2002), approximately 70,000 homes were mitigated.
Based on an annual survey of builder home building practices done by the National
Association of Home Builders Research Center, the number of homes built radon resistant from
1990-2001 is estimated to be 1,015,000 with 610,000 of those homes being located in high radon
potential areas (Zone 1). Approximately 560 lives are saved annually from radon mitigation and
radon-resistant new construction performed to date.77
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
• (+3.0 FTE): This increase shows a redirection of workyears from within Goal 1 to
expand our outreach efforts on innovative ways to reduce health risks from asthma and indoor
air. With more resources in implementation we will be able to increase our outreach efforts to
inform and educate the public about the effects of poor indoor air quality and indoor air
pollutants and steps they can take to improve the indoor air quality in their schools, residences
and workplaces.
• There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for new and
existing FTE.
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
Healthier Residential Indoor Air
In 2005 843,300 additional people will be living in homes with healthier indoor air.
In 2004 834,400 additional people will be living in healthier residential indoor environments.
In 2003 End-of-year FY 2003 data will be available in late 2004 to verify that 834,400 additional people were
living in healthier residential indoor environments.
76 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA Assessment of Risks from Radon in Homes. June 2003. Available at
http://www.epa.gov/radiation/docs/assessment/radon_in_homes.pdf
77 Based on U.S. EPA's updated risk assessment for radon, EPA Assessment of Risks from Radon in Homes (June 2003), and the
methodology outlined in EPA's Technical Support Document for the 1992 Citizen's Guide to Radon.
1-78
-------
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
People Living in Healthier Indoor Air _ „_, „„„ „...,„„„
r & Data Lag 834,400 843300 People
Baseline: 1. By 2005, increase the number of people living in homes built with radon reducing features to
4,539,000 from 1,862,280 in 1994 (cumulative) .* 2. By 2005, decrease the number of children
exposed to ETS from 27,502,000 in 1994 to 24,119,404 (cumulative) .** 3. By 2005, increase by
500,000 the number of people with asthma and their caregivers who are educated about indoor air
asthma triggers. * The 1994 baseline for the number of new homes built with radon-resistant design
features has changed from 684,000 tO 384,000. This is due to a recent review of historical NAHB
Research Center reports wehich determined that a significant number of "rough-in" installations were
reported as radon-resistant new construction. "Rough-in" installations are not complete radon-
reduction systems and do not provide any risk reduction, and they should not be considered when
estimating the number of homes built with radon-resistant new construction. In order to improve the
integrity of the results that are being reported, EPA is dropping homes with rough-in installations when
estimating the amount of homes built with radon-resistant construction. The baseline of existing
homes mitigated remains the same at 300,000 in 1994.
** The 1995 Census Report that EPA was using for a baseline population (19,500,000) for children 0
to 6 years of age represented only childeren 0 to 4 years of age. This recently came to our attention
after an internal review of the baselines. The actual baseline population of children from the ages of 0
to 6 should be 27,502,168. In order to improve the integrity of the results that are being reported, EPA
is correcting the baseline population to the comprehensive number which includes the ages 0 to 6 years
old. Our 2005 goal of decreasing the percentage of childern exposed, remains at 15% and the starting
point remains at 27.3%.
Healthier Indoor Air in Schools
In 2005 1 ,3 12,500 students, faculty and staff will experience improved indoor air quality in their schools.
In 2004 1,575,000 students, faculty and staff will experience improved indoor air quality in their schools.
In 2003 End-of-year FY 2003 data will be available in late 2004 to verify that 1,050,000 students, faculty and
staff experienced improved indoor air quality in then' schools.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Students/Staff Experiencing Improved
DataLag lfajm ,312500
Baseline: The nation has approximately 117,000* schools with an average of 525 students, faculty and staff
occupying them for a total baseline population of 61,425,000. The IAQ "Tools for Schools" Guidance
implementation began in 1997. For FY 2004, the program projects an additional 3,000 schools will
implement the guidance and seeks to obtain implementation commitments from 15 of the 100 largest
school districts in the U.S. with an average of 140,000 per district. (Additional, not cumulative since
there is not an established baseline for good IAQ practices in schools.)
* According to the U.S. Department of Education National Center for Education Statistics, between
1994 and 2002, 7,000 new schools were built. For the revised strategic plan we increased our baseline
to incorporate the increase. Our FY 2008 strategic goal incorporates the additional school.
1-79
-------
Healthier Indoor Air in Workplaces
In 2005 150,000 additional office workers will experience improved air quality in their workplaces.
Performance Measures: FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
150,000 additional office workers will
experience improved air quality in their
workplaces. , „ . _n „ ,
* 150,000 People
Baseline: There are approximately 750,000 office buildings with 12 billion square feet. The mean worker
density is 1 office worker per 500 square feet. Therefore, a total of 24 million office workers work in
office buildings. Our 2005 goal is to get 5% of all office buildings to adopt good IAQ measures
which translates into 1.2 million office workers (cumulative from 1994). Our 2008 goal is to get an
additional 3% of all office buildings to adopt good IAQ measures which translates to 720,000 office
workers (cumulative at 240,000 per year).
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
FY 2005 Overarching Performance Measure: People Living in Healthier Indoor Air
FY 2005 Performance Measure; People Living in Radon Resistant Homes
Performance Database: Survey
Data Source: The survey is an annual sample of home builders in the United States most of
whom are members of the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB). NAHB members
construct 80% of the homes built in the United States each year. Using a survey methodology
reviewed by EPA, NAHB Research Center estimates the percentage of these homes that are built
radon resistant. The percentage built radon resistant from the sample is then used to estimate
what percent of all homes built nationwide are radon resistant. To calculate the number of
people living in radon resistant homes, EPA assumes an average of 2.67 people per household.
NAHB Research Center has been conducting this annual builder practices survey for over a
decade, and has developed substantial expertise in the survey's design, implementation, and
analysis. The statistical estimates are typically reported with a 95 percent confidence interval.
Methods, Assumptions, and Suitability: NAHB Research Center conducts an annual survey of
home builders in the United States to assess a wide range of builder practices. NAHB Research
Center voluntarily conducts this survey to maintain an awareness of industry trends in order to
improve American housing and to be responsive to the needs of the home building industry. The
annual survey gathers information such as types of houses built, lot sizes, foundation designs,
types of lumber used, types of doors and windows used, etc. The NAHB Research Center
Builder Survey also gathers information on the use of radon-resistant design features hi new
houses, and these questions comprise about two percent of the survey questionnaire.
In January of each year, the survey of building practices for the preceding calendar year is
typically mailed out to home builders. For the most-recently completed survey, for building
practices during calendar year 2001, NAHB Research Center reported mailing the survey to
about 44,000 active United States home building companies, and received about 2,800 responses
1-80
-------
which translates to a response rate of about 6.4 percent. This is the response rate for the entire
survey. The survey responses are analyzed with respect to State market areas and Census
Divisions in the United States, and are analyzed to assess the percentage and number of homes
built each year that incorporate radon-reducing features. The data are also used to assess the
percentage and number of homes built with radon-reducing features in high radon potential areas
hi the United States (high risk areas). Other analyses include radon-reducing features as a
function of housing type, foundation type, and different techniques for radon-resistant new home
construction. The data are suitable for year-to-year comparisons.
QA/QC Procedures: Because data are obtained from an external organization, QA/QC
procedures are not entirely known. According to NAHB Research Center, QA/QC procedures
have been established, which includes QA/QC by the vendor that is utilized for key entry of data.
Data Quality Review: Because data are obtained from an external organization, Data Quality
Review procedures are not entirely known. NAHB Research Center indicates that each survey is
manually reviewed, a process that requires several months to complete. The review includes
data quality checks to ensure that the respondents understood the survey questions and answered
the questions appropriately. NAHB Research Center also applies checks for open-ended
questions to verify the appropriateness of the answers. In some cases, where open-ended
questions request numerical information, the data are capped between the upper and lower three
percent of the values provided in the survey responses. Also, a quality review of each year's
draft report from NAHB Research Center is conducted by the EPA project officer.
Data Limitations: The majority of home builders surveyed are NAHB members. The NAHB
Research Center survey also attempts to capture the activities of builders that are not members of
NAHB. Home builders that are not members of NAHB are typically smaller, sporadic builders
that hi some cases build homes as a secondary profession. To augment the list of NAHB
members in the survey sample, NAHB Research Center sends the survey to home builders
identified from mailing lists of builder trade publications, such as Professional Builder magazine.
There is some uncertainty as to whether the survey adequately characterizes the practices of
builders who are not members of NAHB. The effects on the findings are not known.
Although an overall response rate of 6.4 percent could be considered low, it is the response rate
for the entire survey, of which the radon-resistant new construction questions are only a very
small portion. Builders responding to the survey would not be doing so principally due to their
radon activities. Thus, a low response rate does not necessarily indicate a strong potential for a
positive bias under the speculation that builders using radon-resistant construction would be
more likely to respond to the survey. NAHB Research Center also makes efforts to reduce the
potential for positive bias in the way the radon-related survey questions are presented.
Error Estimate: See Data Limitations
New/Improved Data or Systems: None
References: The results are published by the NAHB Research Center in annual reports of
radon-resistant home building practices; see http://www.nahbrc.org/. The most recent report,
"Builder Practices Report: Radon Reducing Features in New Construction 2001," Annual
1-81
-------
Builder and Consumer Practices Surveys by the NAHB Research Center, Inc., January 2,2003.
Similar report titles exist for prior years.
FY 2005 Performance Measure: People Living in Radon Mitigated Homes
Performance Database: External
Data Source: Radon fan manufacturers report fan sales to the Agency. EPA assumes one fan per
radon mitigated home and then multiplies it by the assumed average of 2.67 people per
household.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: N/A.
QA/QC Procedures: Because data are obtained from fan manufacturers, EPA relies on the
business practices for reporting data.
Data Quality Review: Data are obtained from fan manufacturers. EPA reviews the data to
ascertain their reliability and discusses any irregularities with the relevant manufacturer.
Data Limitations: Reporting by radon fan manufacturers is voluntary and may underestimate
the number of radon fans sold. Nevertheless, these are the best available data to determine the
number of homes mitigated. There are other methods to mitigate radon including: passive
mitigation techniques of sealing holes and cracks in floors and foundation walls, installing sealed
covers over sump pits, installing one-way drain valves in untrapped drams, and installing static
venting and ground covers in areas like crawl spaces. Because there are no data on the
occurrence of these methods, there is again the possibility that the number of radon mitigated
homes has been underestimated.
No radon vent fan manufacturer, vent fan motor maker or distributor is required to report to
EPA; they provide data/information voluntarily to EPA. There are only four (4) radon vent fan
manufacturers of any significance; one of these accounts for an estimated 70% of the market.
Error Estimate: N/A.
New/Improved Data or Systems: None
References: See http://www.epa.gov/iaq/radon/pubs/rndex.html for National
performance/progress reporting (National Radon Results: 1985-1999) on radon, measurement,
mitigation and radon-resistant new construction.
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Number of people with asthma who have taken steps to
reduce their exposure to indoor environmental asthma triggers.
Performance Database: The performance database consists of quarterly Partner status reports
used to document the outcomes of individual projects; a media tracking study used to assess
behavior change within that sector of the public viewing the public service announcements; and a
national telephone survey (National Survey on Environmental Management of Asthma) which
1-82
-------
seeks information about the steps taken by people with asthma, and parents of children with
asthma, to minimize exposure to indoor environmental asthma triggers. Additional information
about asthma morbidity and mortality in the US is obtained from the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDC). Annual expenditures for health and lost productivity due to asthma are
obtained from the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) Chartbook.
Data Source: Each component of the database has a unique source. Partner status reports are
generated by those organizations receiving funding from EPA and are maintained by individual
EPA Project Officers. An independent initiative of the Advertising Council provides media
tracking of outcomes of all of their public service campaigns and this is publicly available
information. The National Survey on Environmental Management of Asthma (OMB control
number 2060-0490) source is EPA. Data on asthma morbidity and mortality is available from
the National Center for Health Statistics at the CDC (www.cdc.gov/nchs). Data on annual
expenditures for health and lost productivity due to asthma are obtained from the NHLBI
Chartbook (www.nhlbi.nih.gov/resources/docs/02_chtbk.pdf).
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability:
Partner status reports: EPA requires all funded organizations to provide quarterly reports
identifying the numbers of children, adults, and health care professionals educated about indoor
asthma triggers, the numbers of homes, schools, and child care centers in which triggers have
been identified, and the type of mitigation actions taken in these environments. In addition,
decreases in the number of emergency room visits, hospitalizations, and other markers of asthma
morbidity are requested from those partner organizations with access to such data. EPA believes
that the information reflects progress made at achieving performance measures.
National Survey on Environmental Management of Asthma: (OMB control number 2060-0490):
This survey is the most robust data set for this performance measure, but it is not administered
annually. EPA has designed a survey instrument (telephonic survey) in consultation with staff
from EPA and the CDC National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) to ensure that respondents
will understand the questions asked and will provide the type of data necessary to measure the
Agency's objectives. In addition, care has been taken to ensure that the survey questions target
the population with asthma by using the same qualifier question that appears on other national
surveys on asthma collected by the CDC.
EPA estimates that of the 26,600 households which make up the sampling frame, 60 percent, or
approximately 16,000, will be contacted successfully and will agree to participate in the
screening survey. Of these approximately 16,000 individuals, EPA expects that 15 percent, or
approximately 2,400 individuals, will either have asthma or live with someone who does. Only
those individuals who have asthma or live with someone who does are considered to be eligible
respondents.
Respondents are asked to provide primarily yes/no responses. In some cases, respondents are
given a range of responses in the form of multiple choice questions and are asked to indicate the
one which best defines their response. The survey seeks information on those environmental
management measures that the Agency considers important in reducing an individual's exposure
to known indoor environmental asthma triggers. By using yes/no and multiple choice questions,
the Agency has substantially reduced the amount of time necessary for the respondent to
complete the survey and has ensured consistency in data response and interpretation.
1-83
-------
The information collected may be used to establish a baseline to accurately reflect the
characteristics of our nation's asthma population and by which to evaluate progress made at
achieving performance measures.
QA/QC Procedures: It is assumed that partner organizations report data as accurately and
completely as possible; site-visits are conducted by EPA project officers as warranted. The
National Survey is designed in accordance with approved Agency procedures. Additional
information is available on the Internet: http://www.epa.gov/icr/plavers.html.
Data Quality Review: EPA reviews the data from all sources in the performance database to
ascertain reliability and resolves any discrepancies.
Data Limitations: The primary limitation associated with Partner organization status reporting
is that limitation inherent to self-reporting. For the National Survey, random digit dialing
methodology is used to ensure that a representative sample of households has been contacted;
however, the survey is subject to inherent limitations of voluntary telephone surveys of
representative samples. Limitations of phone surveys include: 1) inconsistency of interviewers
following survey directions (i.e., an interviewer might: ask the questions incorrectly or
inadvertently lead the interviewee to a response); or 2) call at an inconvenient time. For
example, the respondent might not want to be interrupted at the time of the call and may resent
the intrusion of the phone call. The answers will reflect this attitude. In addition, a telephone
survey is limited to those households with a telephone.
Error Estimate: The Agency expects to achieve results within the following percentage points
of the true value at the 90 percent confidence level (survey instrument):
Adult Asthmatics plus or minus 3.0%
Child Asthmatics plus or minus 4.0%
Low Income Adult Asthmatics plus or minus 6.5%
These precision rates are sufficient to characterize the extent to which the results measured by
the survey accurately reflect the characteristics of our nation's asthmatic population.
New/Improved Data or Systems: Data from the National Survey on Environmental
Management of Asthma (OMB control number 2060-0490) was collected from August 4-
September 17, 2003 and represents the first data collection with this instrument.
References: National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(www.cdc.gov/nchs)
NHLBI Chartbook (www.nhlbi.nih.gov/resources/docs/02mchtbk.pdf).
EPA Indoor Environments Division (www.epa.gov/iaq/).
Survey results will be available in early March 2004. Questions may be directed to the Indoor
Environment Division.
1-84
-------
FY 2005 Performance Measure; Number of Children under 6 not Exposed to Secondhand
Smoke (ShS) in the Home.
Performance Databases: The performance database consists of Smoke-free Home Pledges that
are tracked through a hotline and website and that are documented hi a monthly pledge report
generated by EPA staff; Cooperative Agreement Partner status reports used to document the
outcomes of individual projects; a media tracking study used to assess behavior change within
that sector of the public viewing ShS public service announcements; and a national telephone
survey (National Survey on Environmental Management of Asthma) which includes a series of
questions about whether respondents allow smoking in their home, and if so, whether young
children are in the household. Expenditures for medical costs of childhood illness attributable to
ShS were taken from an analysis of previous studies and reports on medical costs. Information
about ShS in the US is obtained periodically from the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) including the National Health Interview Survey (for use hi benchmarking and
national tobacco/ShS exposure data), the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (for
use of cotinine data), and the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey (for use of state
tobacco/ShS exposure data).
Data Sources: Each component of the database has a unique source. Partner status reports are
generated by those organizations receiving funding from EPA and are maintained by individual
EPA Project Officers. As part of their Cooperative Agreement, Consumer Federation of
America Foundation provides media tracking of outcomes of all of their public service
campaigns and this is publicly available information. The National Survey on Environmental
Management of Asthma (OMB control number 2060-0490) source is EPA. The medical costs
associated with SHS were from 2002 Medical Costs of Childhood Illness Attributable to
Environmental Tobacco Smoke: Total National Costs and Cost to Managed Care Organizations,
a report prepared by Abt Associates Inc., an EPA funded contractor. Additional references are
the US Surgeon General's report on tobacco (which includes the 1986 seminal document on
involuntary smoking and demographic profiles of smoking/ShS exposure hi US), the National
Cancer Institute's (NCI) Tobacco Monograph Series (the sum of current knowledge of clinical
trials, clinical guidelines and the validation of EPA and California EPA risk assessments), the
NCI funded Tobacco Use Supplement portion of the US Census Bureau's Current Population
Survey (contains fundamental policy questions regarding tobacco/ShS including smoking hi the
home ), and Healthy People 2010 (which includes information on cotinine, ShS exposure and
children).
Other related sources: National Health Interview Survey and National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey are part of the National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs); Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey,
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (http://www.cdc.gov/brfss/hidex.htm).
This information contributes to the knowledge set that helps us to calculate end of year results.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: Partner status reports: EPA requires all funded
organizations to provide status reports on their activities identifying, for example, number of
presentations given, pledges signed, number of people trained (i.e. health officials, daycare
providers), number of parents reached, and projected number of children no longer exposed as a
1-85
-------
result of their activities. EPA believes that the information reflects progress made at achieving
performance objectives.
National Survey on Environmental Management of Asthma (OMB control number 2060-0490):
This survey is the most robust data set for the FY 2005 performance measure, however it is not
administered annually. EPA has designed a survey instrument (telephonic survey) in
consultation with staff from EPA's Indoor Environments Division (IED), EPA's Regional
offices, and the CDC National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) to ensure that respondents
will understand the questions asked and will provide the type of data necessary to measure the
Agency's objectives.
EPA estimates that of the 26,600 households, which make up the sampling frame, 60 percent, or
approximately 16,000, will be contacted successfully and will agree to participate in the
screening survey. SHS information will be obtained from these individuals. The sample will be
large enough to yield the number of responses necessary to achieve an estimated two percent
precision rate at a 95 percent confidence level.
Respondents are asked to provide primarily yes/no responses. In some cases, respondents are
given a range of responses in the form of multiple choice questions and are asked to indicate the
one which best defines their response. By using yes/no and multiple-choice questions, the
Agency has substantially reduced the amount of time necessary for the respondent to complete
the survey and has ensured consistency hi data response and interpretation.
EPA believes that the information collected may be useful in establishing a benchmark, in
addition to the 1994 and 1998 National Health Interview Survey, for the number of children, ages
6 and under, who are exposed to ShS in the home.
QA/QC Procedures: It is assumed that partner organizations report data as accurately and
completely as possible; site-visits are conducted by EPA project officers as warranted. The
National Survey was designed in accordance with approved Agency procedures. Additional
information is available on the Internet: http://www.epa.gov/icr/plavers.html.
Data Quality Review: EPA reviews the data from all sources in the performance database to
ascertain reliability and resolves any discrepancies.
Data Limitations: The primary limitation associated with Cooperative Agreement Partner status
reporting is that self-reporting has an inherent limitation. For the National Survey, random digit
dialing methodology is used to ensure that a representative sample of households has been
contacted; however, the survey is subject to Inherent limitations hi voluntary telephone surveys
of representative samples. Limitations of phone surveys include: 1) possible inconsistency of
interviewers following survey directions. For example, an interviewer might; ask the questions
incorrectly or inadvertently lead the interviewee to a response; or 2) call at an inconvenient time.
For example, the respondent might not want to be interrupted at the time of the call and may
resent the intrusion of the phone call. The answers will reflect this attitude. In addition, a
telephone survey is limited to those households with a telephone or.households that speak
English. Currently available cotinine survey data does not address 50% of the age specific
portion of EPA's target population. It does not include birth to three years old, the portion of
children most susceptible to the effects of ShS.
1-86
-------
Error Estimate: EPA's survey has been designed to ensure that, at the 95 percent confidence
level, its estimate of the number of children fewer than 6 not exposed to ShS hi the house is
within approximately two percentage points of the true value. EPA is confident that these
precision rates are more than adequate.
New/Improved Data or Systems: Data from the National Survey on Environmental
Management of Asthma (OMB control number 2060-0490) was collected from August 4-
September 17, 2003 and represents the first data collection with this instrument. This survey
utilized the exact questions on SHS from the 1994 and 1998 National Health Interview Survey
and will continue to assist hi evaluating progress made at achieving our goal. In the future,
medical cost data could be collected from a possible expansion of CDC's Smoking Attributable
Morbidity and Mortality Economic Costs (SAMMEC) software.
References: EPA Indoor Environments Division (www.epa.gov/iaq/) Survey results will be
available in early March 2004. Questions may be directed to the Indoor Environments Division.
National Health Interview Survey and National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey are
part of the National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(http://www.cdc.gov/nchs)
Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(http://www.cdc.gov/brfss/index.htm),
US Surgeon General's report on tobacco (http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/sgr/nidex.htm),
National Cancer Institute's (NCI) Tobacco Monograph Series
(http://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/tcrb/monographs/),
NCI funded Tobacco Use Supplement portion of the US Census Bureau's Current Population
Survey (http://riskfactor.cancer.gov/studies/tus-cps/).
Healthy People 2010 (http://www.healthvpeople.gov/).
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Students, faculty and staff experiencing improved indoor
air quality in their schools
Performance Database: The performance database consists of cooperative partner status
reports, annual results reports from the regions, and tracking numbers of disseminated kits. A
survey of a representative sample of schools was completed during 2002. The survey serves to
verify the number of schools using indoor air quality management plans consistent with EPA's
guidance.
Data Source: The sources for the database include cooperative partners, regional data,
information from EPA's National Clearinghouse on numbers of kits disseminated, and the
statistical sample of all public and private schools in the nation during the 1999 - 2000 school
year. (United States Department of Education National Center for Education Statistics).
1-87
-------
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: Calculations for the number of people experiencing
improved IAQ are based upon an estimated average of 525 students, staff and faculty per school
(data are from the United States Department of Education National Center for Education
Statistics). Estimates of the number of schools implementing IAQ management plans, consistent
with EPA's guidance, are conservative, and based upon a small percentage of the number of kits
distributed, and the number of schools implementing IAQ management plans reported by
cooperative partners and regions. A total of 809 completed questionnaires were returned for a
survey response rate of 40%. There was no evidence of systematic error or selection bias
associated with the response rate. The survey helped determine the number of schools adopting
and implementing good indoor air quality (IAQ) practices consistent with EPA's IAQ Tools for
Schools (TfS) guidance.
The distribution of returned and targeted questionnaires was similar with respect to the
stratification criteria of geographic region and public/private schools. Academic resource,
demographic, and socioeconomic characteristics of schools that returned the survey were
approximately equal to those of schools that did not return the questionnaire. IAQ management
practices were independent of the amount of follow-up effort required to elicit return of a
questionnaire. These findings indicate that the EPA can use the survey results to make national
projections regarding IAQ practices in schools.
Survey results were evaluated against the IAQ Practice Index, a scoring system developed by
weighting possible responses to questions regarding Integrated Pest Management (IPM) practices
and ventilation rates. An IAQ Practice Index score of >70 was considered indicative of an
adequate IAQ management plan.
QA/QC Procedures: A small sample of returned questionnaires was selected at random and the
manual data transcription from the original paper copy to the electronic database was reviewed
for completeness and accuracy. A total of 3,670 entries were cross-referenced between the
database and the paper copy of the survey. A few minor typographical errors in results from the
first page of the questionnaire were identified (e.g., a period missing in P.O. Box or letters
inverted in a name). Otherwise, all responses to the actual survey questions were accurately
entered into the database.
As a quality control procedure, a random sample of surveys was scored manually and the IAQ
Management Practice Index was computed by hand. The scores and indices were compared to
the corresponding values generated by the computerized scoring program. In total, 140 data
points were checked. The results of all the surveys that were hand-scored matched the values
from the computerized scoring. In addition, the IAQ Practices in Schools Survey Analysis
procedures and report underwent technical review by a qualified party at Environmental Health
and Engineering, Inc. (EH&E), EPA's contractor, not involved in the original analysis. Survey is
designed in accordance with approved Agency procedures. Additional information is available
on the Internet: http://www.epa.gov/icr/players.html
Data Quality Review: Entries were cross-referenced between the database -and the paper copy
of the survey to ensure completeness and quality of responses. See QA/QC procedures, above.
Data Limitations: The primary limitation associated with Cooperative Agreement Partner status
reporting is that self-reporting has an inherent limitation. For the National Survey, random digit
1-88
-------
dialing methodology is used to ensure that a representative sample of households has been
contacted; however, the survey is subject to inherent limitations in voluntary telephone surveys
of representative samples. Limitations of phone surveys include: 1) possible inconsistency of
interviewers following survey directions. For example, an interviewer might; ask the questions
incorrectly or inadvertently lead the interviewee to a response; or 2) call at an inconvenient time.
For example, the respondent might not want to be interrupted at the tune of the call and may
resent the intrusion of the phone call. The answers will reflect this attitude. In addition, a
telephone survey is limited to those households with a telephone or households that speak
English.
Error Estimate: The sample size was selected to ensure that the survey response yields a
statistically valid result with a +/- three percent margin of error at the 95th percent confidence
level.
New/Improved Data or Systems: Prior to the survey, EPA tracked the number of schools
receiving the Tools for Schools (TfS) guidance and estimated the population of the school to
determine the number of students/staff experiencing unproved indoor air quality. With this
survey, EPA queried a statistically representative sample of schools, to estimate the number of
schools that have actually adopted and implemented good IAQ management practices consistent
with the TfS guidance.
References: See the United States Department of Education National Center for Education
Statistics,http://nces.ed.gov/. See also Indoor Air Quality Tools for Schools Kit (402-K-95-001)
at http://www.epa.gov/iaq/schools. There is no website specifically relating to the survey.
Inquiries may be made directly to the EPA Office of Indoor Environments.
FY 2005 Performance Measure; Office Workers improved indoor air quality in their
workplaces.
Performance Database: The performance database consists of two sources, requested copies of
building indoor air quality guidance documents, (e.g. Building Air Quality, I-Beam, and related
guidance Mold Remediation in Schools and Commercial Buildings) and training conducted
through cooperative agreements or other government agencies (e.g., General Services
Administration (GSA)) using EPA's documents. In addition, EPA conducted a voluntary, pilot
survey of building owners and managers in 2001 to determine the use of indoor air quality (IAQ)
management practices hi U.S. office buildings.
Data Source: The survey was developed by EPA and distributed by Building Owners and
Managers Association (BOMA). The survey's purpose and design received approval from the
Office of Management and Budget. The survey is not administered on an annual basis.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: EPA developed a seven-page survey of multiple-
choice questions that requested each building owner or manager to supply, information regarding:
the size and uses of a selected building; documentation of management practices employed in the
building; how the heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning systems are managed; how pollution
sources are addressed; housekeeping and pest management practices; remodeling and renovation
activities; and responses to tenant complaints regarding IAQ. EPA's contractor developed a
1-89
-------
project database to facilitate entry, storage and reporting statistics obtained from the survey.
Based upon random sampling of membership lists from BOMA, the International Facilities
Managers Association (IFMA) and buildings managed by the General Services Administration
(GSA), the contractor generated a sampling frame. The final sample size, (and survey recipient
list) was 3,612 and we received 591 completed surveys. The survey results identified both
strengths and weaknesses in building management practices hi U.S. office buildings.
QA/QC Procedures: The survey was focus group tested and peer-reviewed by IAQ
professionals to ensure that respondents would understand the questions and provide accurate
responses. It was also designed by a statistician to ensure reliability of the data collected. Each
survey mailed was assigned a unique identifier to facilitate the tracking of survey responses
within the database. BOMA, EPA's cooperative partner, ensured accuracy and completeness of
submitted surveys by reviewing each submission prior to data entry. A double-entry protocol for
all data entry was implemented to ensure an accuracy rate of at least 99%; each survey form was
entered into the database twice, after which a computer program identified any variances. Two-
percent of the records were randomly checked to ensure that accuracy goals were met. BOMA
was responsible for tracking survey responses, entering the survey responses into the database,
maintaining the data hi a secure environment and providing quality assurance/quality control of
all survey activities.
After the quality assurance checks on the data were performed, EPA's contractor aggregated the
data analyses. EPA and the contractor developed a method to score the responses for each item
on the questionnaire and computed an index of IAQ management practices. The quality of the
scoring program results was assured by random inspection and correction, if necessary. The IAQ
indices were analyzed using analysis-of-variance techniques to identify covariates of IAQ
practices that could be used in considering future program initiatives.
Data Quality Review: BOMA had responsibility for the accuracy of data entered into the
database. Quality assurance safeguards were used in the data entry. BOMA, and EPA's
contractor reviewed individual survey responses and data for accuracy during the aggregation
and analyses activities.
Data Limitations: The primary limitation associated with basing estimates on requests for
guidance documents and training is the unknown factor of how many of the requests result hi
actions resulting hi improved indoor air quality. The survey provides a reference point on
progress. The survey results are subject to the limitations inherent hi survey sampling. The
response rate of 14% for the survey was low due to the timing of the survey administration and
subsequent events hi September and October 2001.
Error Estimate: 4% precision at a 95% confidence level.
New/Improved Data or Systems: None
References: There is no website specifically relating to this survey. Inquiries may be made
directly to EPA's Office of Ah- and Radiation, Indoor Environments Division.
1-90
-------
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
EPA works closely through a variety of mechanisms with a broad range of Federal, state,
Tribal, and local government agencies, industry, non-profit organizations, individuals as well as
other nations to promote more effective approaches to identifying and solving indoor air quality
problems. At the Federal level, EPA works closely with:
* The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) to develop and conduction
programs aimed at reducing children's exposure to known indoor triggers of asthma,
including secondhand smoke;
• Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) on home health and safety
issues, especially those affecting children;
• Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) to identify and mitigate the health
hazards of consumer products designed for indoor use;
• Department of Education (DoEd) to encourage construction of schools with good
indoor air quality; and
" Department of Agriculture (USDA) to encourage USDA Extension Agents to conduct
local projects designed to reduce risks from indoor air quality.
EPA plays a leadership role on the President's Task Force on Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks to Children, particularly with respect to asthma and school environmental
health issues.
As Co-chair of the interagency Committee on Indoor Air Quality (CIAQ), EPA works
with the CPSC, the Department of Energy, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and
Health, and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration to review EPA draft
publications, arrange the distribution of EPA publications, and coordinate the efforts of Federal
agencies with those of state and local agencies concerned with indoor air issues.
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAA)
Indoor Radon Abatement Act (IRAA), Section 306
Radon Gas and Indoor Air Quality Research Act of Title IV of the Superfund Amendments and
Re-authorization Act (SARA) of 1986
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), section 6, Titles II, and Title III (15 U.S.C. 2605 and
2641-2671), and Section 10
1-91
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Clean Air and Global Climate Change
OBJECTIVE; Protect the Ozone Layer
By 2010, through worldwide action, ozone concentrations in the stratosphere will have
stopped declining and slowly begun the slow process of recovery, and the risk to human health
from overexposure to ultraviolet (UV) radiation, particularly among susceptible subpopulations,
such as children, will be reduced.
Resource Summary
(Dollars in Thousands)
Protect the Ozone Layer
Environmental Program & Management
Buildings & Facilities
Inspector General
Total Workyears
FY2003
Actuals
$18,145.2
$17,892.5
$164.4
$88.3
39.2
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$19,069.4
$18,802.0
$152.8
$114.6
36.1
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$21,813.7
$21,516.2
$164.7
$132.8
36.7
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$2,744.3
$2,714.2
$11.9
$18.2
0.6
Program Project
(Dollars in Thousands)
Stratospheric Ozone: Domestic Programs
Stratospheric Ozone: Multilateral Fund
Administrative Projects
TOTAL
FY 2003
Actuals
$5,994.8
$9,518.9
$2,631.5
$18,145.2
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$5,786.6
$11,000.0
$2,282.8
$19,069.4
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$5,839.6
$13,500.0
$2,474.1
$21,813.7
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$53.0
$2,500.0
$191.3
$2,744.3
FY 2005 REQUEST
The stratospheric ozone layer protects life on earth by preventing harmful UV radiation
from reaching the earth's surface. Scientific evidence amassed over the past 25 years has shown
that chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), halons, hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), methyl bromide,
and other halogenated chemicals used around the world are destroying the stratospheric ozone
layer.78 Increased levels of UV radiation due to ozone depletion may lead to a greater chance of
overexposure to UV radiation and consequent health effects such as skin cancer, cataracts, and
78 World Meteorological Organization (WMO). "Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2002." WMO: Geneva,
Switzerland. February 2003.
1-92
-------
other illnesses. Skin cancer is the most common type of cancer and may account for more than
50 percent of all cancers in adults.80 Increased UV levels have also been associated with other
human and non-human endpoints, including immune suppression and effects on aquatic
ecosystems and agricultural crops. However, additional research is necessary to quantify and
model these effects.
Results to be Achieved under this Objective
EPA will achieve this objective in FY 2005 through implementation of significant goals
in the domestic and international phase-out of ozone depleting substances (ODSs). EPA
estimates that, in the United States alone, the worldwide phase-out of ODSs will save 6.3 million
lives from fatal cases of skin cancer, and will avoid 299 million cases of non-fatal skin cancers
and 27.5 million cases of cataracts between 1990 and 2165.81 This estimate is based on the
assumption that international ODS phase-out targets will be achieved, which will allow the
ozone layer to begin recovering by the middle of this century. According to current atmospheric
research, the ozone layer is not expected to recover until the mid-21st century at the earliest, due
to the very long lifetimes of ODSs.82 Given that ozone recovery will take several decades, EPA
will continue education and outreach efforts to encourage behavioral changes that reduce UV-
related health risks.
Stratospheric Ozone: Domestic Programs
EPA will implement the provisions of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (the Act)
and the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal Protocol),
which will lead to the reduction and control of ODSs in the U.S. and lower health risks to the
American public due to exposure to UV radiation. The Act provides for a phase-out of
production and consumption of ozone-depleting chemicals, and requires controls on various
products containing ODSs. As a signatory to the Montreal Protocol, the U.S. also is committed
to regulating and enforcing its terms domestically. In carrying out the requirements of the Act
and the Montreal Protocol, EPA will continue to implement the domestic rulemaking agenda for
reduction and control of ODSs and will enforce rales controlling their production, import, and
emissions. EPA's program will combine market-based regulatory approaches with sector-
specific technology guidelines and will facilitate the development and commercialization of
alternatives to methyl bromide and HCFCs.
79 World Health Organization. "Solar Radiation and Human Health: Fact Sheet No. 227." August 1999. Accessed Decenber 30,
2003. Available on the Internet at: www.who.int/inf-fs/en/fact227.hrml.
80 American Cancer Society. "What are the Key Statistics for Melanoma?" Accessed December 30, 2003. Available on the
Internet at: www.cancer.org/docroot/CRI/CRI_0.asp.
81 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act 1990-2010: EPA Report to
ss. EPA: Washington, DC. November 1999.
1-93
82 WMO, February 2003.
-------
Pollution prevention is an
important element in achieving the
ozone protection objective. The
National Emission Reduction Program
will require recovery and recycling or
reclamation of ODSs, primarily in the
air-conditioning and refrigeration
sectors. Also, under the Significant
New Alternatives Policy (SNAP), EPA
will review newly developed
alternatives to ODSs and, if necessary,
will restrict use of alternatives for a
given application that are more
harmful to human health and the
environment on an overall basis. In
addition, EPA will join with other
Federal agencies to facilitate the
transition away from remaining uses of
ODSs such as methyl bromide and HCFCs,
agencies to curb illegal imports of ODSs.
U.S. Significant Goals in
Controlling Ozone-Depleting Substances
I CFCs j! Methyl Bromide iH HCFCs
and will work with Federal and international
Given that Americans will be exposed to higher levels of UV radiation even after
program goals have been met, EPA will undertake efforts to inform the public about health risks
associated with UV radiation exposure and encourage sun safely behaviors that help to reduce
risk. The Agency is placing special emphasis on education and outreach to children, who are
particularly vulnerable to UV overexposure, through the SunWise School Program.
Accomplishments of the Domestic Stratospheric Ozone Protection Program include:
" Implementation of the phase-out of the following Class I chemicals: CFCs,
halons, methyl chloroform, carbon tetrachloride, chlorobromomethane, and
hydrobromofluorocarbons (HBFCs).
• In FY 2002 and FY 2003, development of a marketable allowance allocation
program to ensure graduated phaseout of HCFCs, leading to full phaseout by
2030, in compliance with the Montreal Protocol. In FY 2003, EPA implemented
the phase-out of HCFC-141b.
Implementation of a graduated phase-out of methyl bromide, employing marketable
allowances and also allowing for quarantine, pre-shipment, emergency and critical uses. In FY
2002, EPA reduced methyl bromide production and import by 50 percent from the 1991 baseline.
In FY 2002, EPA collaborated with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the
Department of State, among other Federal agencies, to receive, analyze, compile arid submit the
first U.S. nomination for critical use exemptions from the 2005 methyl bromide phase-out. In
FY 2003, EPA reduced'methyl bromide production and import by 70 percent from.the 1991
baseline. Simultaneously, EPA collaborated with the USDA and industry to test and register
alternatives to methyl bromide. To date, EPA has registered sufuryl fluoride, a significant
1-94
-------
methyl bromide alternative for stored traits, nuts, and grains, and estimates that up to 20% of nut
crops, 40% of dried fruit and 2% of stored grains will transition to this newly available chemical.
In addition, EPA has registered some herbicides that may be effective alternatives to methyl
bromide when used in combination with 1,3-dichloropropene, a widely used fumigant.
Combination alternatives to methyl bromide are particularly of use in the southeastern U.S.,
where heavy wind pressures render some alternatives ineffective. EPA registered halosulfuron-
methyl, an herbicide that may be used on tomatoes, eggplants, peppers, and cucurbits, in 2002
and also recently registered trifloxysulfuron, an herbicide for use on tomatoes.
• Monitoring, interception, and prosecution of illegal imports of ODSs, through
collaboration with the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland
Security.
• Implementation of an essential use allowance program for production and
importation of CFCs and other ODSs needed for vital applications, particularly
metered-dose inhalers for asthma and other respiratory illnesses. An estimated 20
million patients had asthma in 2001; most of these patients rely on metered-dose
inhalers for treatment.83 Medical consensus is that primary treatment of asthma
and COPD should be by the inhaled route, and MDIs are the dominant inhaled
delivery system for all categories of drugs.
• Continued recovery and recycling of ODSs and alternatives in the U.S. and
abroad.
• Regulatory review and outreach under the SNAP to ensure that substitutes for
ozone-depleting chemicals used across major industry and consumer sectors are
safer for public health and the environment than the ODSs they replace. During
FY 2002 and FY 2003, EPA listed 30 additional possible alternatives to ODSs as
acceptable for use in refrigeration and air-conditioning, solvent cleaning, aerosols,
insulating foams, fire protection, adhesives, coatings and inks, bringing the
combined total of acceptable substitutes to approximately 410 since 1994. EPA
also restricted the use of several proposed substitutes to prevent unacceptable
risks to the environment, consumers, and worker health and safety.
" Implementation of the SunWise School Program, with the goal of reducing the
health risks to children and their caregivers from overexposure to UV radiation.
During the 2002-2003 school year, the SunWise program grew from 3,750 to
7,277 participating schools in 50 states, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia.
SunWise also broadened its reach as seven science museums incorporated
SunWise into their programming.
Stratospheric Ozone: Multilateral Fund
Under the Montreal Protocol, the U.S. and other developed countries contribute to the
Multilateral Fund to support projects and activities that eliminate the production and use of
ODSs by developing countries. As of June 2, 2003, the United States and 184 other countries are
Parties to the Montreal Protocol. The United States has repeatedly affirmed its commitment to
this international treaty and to demonstrating world leadership by phasing out domestic
production of ODSs, as well as helping other countries find suitable alternatives. Because the
Protocol makes developing country compliance contingent on support from the Multilateral
83 American Lung Association. "Trends in Asthma Morbidity and Mortality." ALA: New York, NY. March 2003.
1-95
-------
Fund, continued support for the Fund is critical if we are to ensure restoration and protection of
the ozone layer.
Accomplishments of the Multilateral Fund include:
• To date, the fund has supported over 4,480 activities in 134 countries that, when fully
implemented, will prevent annual emissions of more than 174,000 metric tons of
ODSs. Approximately 60% of projects have been implemented to date, and the
remaining projects are expected to be implemented by 2008.
• In addition, the fund has reached long-term agreements to dismantle over two-thirds
of developing country CFC production capacity and virtually all of developing
country halon production capacity. Final closure of related facilities depends on
continued funding.
• EPA's FY 2003 contribution to the Multilateral Fund helped the fund support cost-
effective projects designed to build capacity and eliminate ODS production and
consumption in over 60 developing countries. OK
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
• (+2,500,000): This increase assists the U.S. in meeting its funding commitment to the
Montreal Protocol Multilateral Fund.
• There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for existing
FTE.
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
Restrict Domestic Consumption of Class II HCFCs
In 2005 Restrict domestic consumption of class II HCFCs below 9,906 OOP-weighted metric tonnes (OOP
MTs) and restrict domestic exempted production and import of newly produced class I CFCs and
halons below 10,000 OOP MTs.
In 2004 Restrict domestic consumption of class n HCFCs below 9,906 ODP-weighted metric tonnes (ODP
MTs) and restrict domestic exempted production and import of newly produced class I CFCs and
halons below 10,000 ODP MTs.
In 2003 End of year FY 2003 data will be available in late 2004 to verify restriction of domestic consumption
of class II HCFCs below 9,906 ODP-weighted metric tonnes (ODP MTs) and restriction of domestic
exempted production and import of newly produced class I CFCs and halons below 10,000 ODP MTs.
1-96
-------
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Domestic Consumption of Class II
HCPCs
Data Lag <9,906 <9,906 ODPMTs
Domestic Exempted Production and
Import of Newly Produced Class I CFC s
andHalons Data Lag <10,000 <10,000 ODPMTs
Baseline: The base of comparison for assessing progress on the 2005 annual performance goal is the domestic
consumption cap of class II HCFCs as set by the Parties to the Montreal Protocol. Each Ozone
Depleting Substance (ODS) is weighted based on the damage it does to the stratospheric ozone - this is
its ozone-depletion potential (ODP). Beginning on January 1, 1996, the cap was set at the sum of 2.8
percent of the domestic ODP-weighted consumption of CFCs in 1989 plus the OOP-weighted level of
HCFCs in 1989. Consumption equals production plus import minus export.
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
FY 2005 Performance Measure; Restrict Domestic Consumption of Class II HCFCs
Restrict Domestic Exempted Production and Import of Newly Produced Class I CFCs and
Halons
Performance Database: The Allowance Tracking System (ATS) database is maintained by the
Global Programs Division (GPD). ATS is used to compile and analyze quarterly information on
U.S. production, imports, exports, transformations, and allowance trades of ozone-depleting
substances (ODS).
Data Source: Progress on restricting domestic exempted consumption of Class I CFCs and
halons is tracked by monitoring industry reports of compliance with EPA's phaseout regulations.
Data are provided by U.S. companies producing, importing, and exporting ODS. Monthly
information on domestic production, imports, and exports from the International Trade
Commission is maintained hi the ATS. Corporate data are typically submitted as quarterly
reports. Specific requirements as outlined in the Clean Air Act are available on the Internet at:
http://www.epa.gov/oar/caa/caa603 .txt
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: Data are aggregated across all U.S. companies for
each individual ODS to analyze U.S. total consumption and production.
QA/QC Procedures: Reporting and record-keeping requirements are published in 40 CFR Part
82, Subpart A, Sections 82.9 through 82.13. These sections of the Stratospheric Ozone
Protection Rule specify the required data and accompanying documentation that companies must
submit or maintain on-site to demonstrate their compliance with the regulation.
The ATS data are subject to a Quality Assurance Plan. In addition, the data are subject to an
annual quality assurance review, coordinated by OAR staff separate from those on the team
normally responsible for data collection and maintenance. The ATS is programmed to ensure
consistency of the data elements reported by companies. The tracking system flags inconsistent
data for review and resolution by the tracking system manager. This information is then cross-
1-97
-------
checked with compliance data submitted by reporting companies. The GPD maintains a user's
manual for the ATS that specifies the standard operating procedures for data entry and data
analysis. Regional inspectors perform inspections and audits on-site at the facilities of
producers, importers, and exporters. These audits verify the accuracy of compliance data
submitted to EPA through examination of company records.
Data Quality Reviews: The Government Accounting Office (GAO) completed a review of U.S.
participation in five international environmental agreements, and analyzed data submissions
from the U.S. under the Montreal Protocol on Substances the Deplete the Ozone Layer. No
deficiencies were identified hi then- January 2003 report.
Data Limitations: None. Data are required by the Clean Air Act.
Error Estimate: None
New/Improved Data or Systems: The GPD continues to explore an improved system whereby
direct electronic reporting would be possible.
References: See http://www.epa.gQy/ozone/desc.html for additional information on ODSs. See
http://www.unep.ch/ozone/montreal.shtnil for additional information about the Montreal
Protocol. See http://wvoy.unmfs.org/ for more information about the Multilateral Fund.
EFFICIENCY MEASURES/MEASUREMENT DEVELOPMENT PLANS
EPA continues to place a great emphasis on improving its performance measures. In
addition to and complementing the Agency's outcome-based environmental performance
measures, some programs are developing efficiency measures. Efficiency measures are
structured as a ratio of key program inputs (e.g. tune, dollars, FTE) to program outputs or
outcomes. They are intended to provide EPA programs with additional information that can be
used for sound decision-making and program management.
Below are EPA's proposed efficiency measures for selected programs.
Stratospheric Ozone: For every $50 invested by EPA in the domestic ODS phaseout
program and the Multilateral Fund, the US will avoid 1 skin cancer fatality related to UV
radiation exposure. This outcome assumes that the US and other Parties to the Montreal Protocol
achieve planned phaseout targets, and that present funding levels are continued.
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
In an effort to curb the illegal importation of ODSs, an interagency task force was formed
consisting of representatives from EPA, the Departments of Justice, Homeland Security, State,
and Commerce, and the Internal Revenue Service. Venting of illegally imported chemicals has
the potential to prevent the United States from meeting the goals of the Montreal Protocol to
restore the ozone layer.
1-98
-------
EPA works very closely with the Department of State and other Federal agencies, as
appropriate, in international negotiations among Parties to the Protocol. EPA works with the
Office of the United States Trade Representative to analyze potential trade implications hi
stratospheric protection regulations that affect imports and exports.
EPA is working with the USDA and the Department of State to facilitate research and
development of alternatives to methyl bromide. EPA collaborates with USDA and the
Department of State to prepare U.S. requests for emergency and critical use exemptions of
methyl bromide. EPA is providing input to USDA on rulemakings for methyl bromide-related
programs. EPA consults with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on the potential for
domestic methyl bromide needs.
EPA also coordinates closely with FDA to ensure that sufficient supplies of CFCs are
available for the production of life-saving metered-dose inhalers for the treatment of asthma and
other lung diseases. This partnership between EPA and FDA combines the critical goals of
protecting public health and limiting damage to the stratospheric ozone layer.
EPA works with the Centers for Disease Control and the National Weather Service to
coordinate the UV Index and the health messages that accompany index reports. EPA is a
member of the Federal Council on Skin Cancer Prevention, which educates and protects all
Federal employees from the risks of overexposure to UV radiation.
In addition to collecting its own UV data, EPA coordinates with the National Aeronautics
and Space Administration (NASA) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to
monitor the state of the stratospheric ozone layer. EPA also works with NASA on assessing
essential uses and other exemptions for critical shuttle and rocket needs, as well as effects of
direct emissions of high-speed aircraft flying in the stratosphere.
EPA coordinates with the Small Business Administration to ensure that proposed rules
are developed in accordance with the Small Business Regulatory Flexibility Act.
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAA), Title I, Parts A and D (42U.S.C. 7401-7434, 7501
7515), Title V (42 U.S.C. 7661-7661f), and Title VI (42 U.S.C. 7671-7671q)
Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 13101-13109)
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (42 U.S.C. 6921-6926 and 6938) sections 3001-3006
and 3017
The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer
1-99
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Clean Air and Global Climate Change
OBJECTIVE: Radiation
Through 2008, working with partners, EPA will minimize unnecessary releases of
radiation and be prepared to minimize impacts to human health and the environment should
unwanted releases occur.
Resource Summary
(Dollars in Thousands)
Radiation
Environmental Program & Management
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Science & Technology
Building & Facilities
Inspector General
Total Workyears
FY 2003
Actuals
$30,046.8
$19,881.9
$3,058.4
$6,284.3
$715.4
$106.6
168.1
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$34,858.9
$21,060.8
$3,027.2
$9,797.7
$817.4
$155.8
185.0
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$34,718.0
$20,914.1
$3,207.1
$9,574.9
$868.7
$153.2
183.9
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
($141.0)
($146.7)
$179.8
($222.8)
$51.3
(-$2.6)
-1.2
Program Project
(Dollars in Thousands)
Radiation: Protection
Radiation: Response Preparedness
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response,
and Recovery
Administrative Projects
TOTAL
FY 2003
Actuals
$15,743.2
$4,128.8
$998.3
$9,176.5
$30,046.8
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$17,392.7
$4,081.2
$3,703.6
$9,681.4
$34,858.9
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$15,620.4
$4,849.9
$4,144.3
$10,103.4
$34,718.0
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
($1,772.3)
$768.7
$440.7
$421.9
($141.0)
FY 2005 REQUEST
EPA will continue to meet the statutory requirements for management of radioactive
wastes and control of radioactive emissions. The Agency also will fulfill its responsibilities
under Presidential Decision Directives for radiological emergency preparedness and response.84
Information about authorizing and relevant laws, presidential decision directives, executive orders, federal plans, and
regulations related to EPA's radiation program can be accessed at: http://www.epa.gov/radiation/laws/
1-100
-------
These responsibilities form the core of our strategy to protect the public and the
environment from unnecessary exposure to radiation.85 EPA also is positioned to anticipate
emerging issues and identify non-traditional mechanisms of exposure to the public and the
environment.
EPA works with other Federal agencies, states., Tribes, and industry to develop
innovative ways to minimize radiation exposures through training, public information, and
voluntary programs.
Results to be Achieved under this Objective
EPA helps prevent public exposure to harmful levels of radiation hi the environment by
working with other Federal, state, Tribal, and local agencies to assess exposure risks, manage
radioactive releases and exposures, ensure proper disposal of radioactive materials, and provide
the public with information about radiation and its hazards.86 Should an event occur, EPA
maintains a high level of preparedness to respond to radiological emergencies.
Radiation: Protection
To help protect Americans from exposure to harmful levels of radiation in the
environment, EPA is charged with responsibility for a number of activities. One of EPA's major
radiation-related responsibilities is to certify that all radioactive waste shipped by the Department
of Energy (DOE) to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) is permanently and safely disposed
of, consistent with EPA standards.87 EPA conducts inspections of waste generator facilities and
biennially evaluates DOE's compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations.
Every five years EPA must re-certify that the WIPP will comply with EPA's radioactive waste
disposal regulations.
Mining and processing of naturally-occurring radioactive materials for use hi medicine,
power generation, consumer products, and industry generates emissions and waste. EPA protects
people and the environment from harmful and avoidable exposure to radiation by assessing
exposure risks and providing information about radiation and its hazards. EPA is the lead
Federal agency for responding to international emergencies involving radioactive materials.
EPA also provides guidance and training to other Federal and state agencies in preparing for
emergencies at U.S. nuclear plants, for transportation accidents involving shipments of
radioactive materials, and for acts of nuclear terrorism. EPA sets protective limits on radioactive
emissions for all media—air, water, and soil—and develops guidance for cleaning up
radioactively-contaminated Superfund sites.
We will ensure that the Agency has appropriate methods to manage radioactive releases
and exposures. Approaches to meet this objective will include health risk site assessments, risk
modeling, clean-up, and waste management activities; voluntary programs to minimize exposure
to radiation hi commercial products and industrial applications, national radiation monitoring,
and radiological emergency response; and provision of Federal guidance to our international,
Federal, state, and local partners.
85 Additional information can be accessed at: http://www.epa.gov/radiation/
86 Additional information can be accessed at: http://www.epa.gov/radiation/assessment/
87 Additional information can be accessed at: http://www.epa.gov/radiation/WIPP/
1-101
-------
EPA will continue working with other Federal agencies such as the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC), DOE, the Border and Transportation Security directorate of the Department
of Homeland Security (DHS), and the Department of State, as well as with state agencies and
international organizations to prevent metals and finished products suspected of having
radioactive contamination from entering the country. EPA also will create partnerships with
states, local agencies, and Tribes to locate and secure lost, stolen, or abandoned radioactive
sources within the U.S. and develop voluntary programs with state and local agencies and
industry to investigate and promote pollution prevention, operational practices, and technologies
to reduce industrial releases of radioactivity.
EPA will continue to evaluate human health and environmental risks from radiation
exposure. EPA is implementing its strategy to address Technologically Enhanced Naturally
Occurring Radioactive Material (TENORM) by developing and compiling sector-specific
technical information, by interacting with Regional offices and Tribal governments on
educational and clean-up efforts, and by exploring ways to partner with governmental and non-
governmental interests.8
In FY 2005, EPA will provide national-level guidance on the risks posed by radioactive
materials in the environment, including technical guidance for conducting risk assessments. EPA
will accomplish this by working with the public, industry, states, Tribes and other governmental
agencies to inform and educate people about radiation risks and promote actions that reduce
human exposure. EPA, in partnership with other Federal agencies, will promote the management
of radiation risks in a consistent and safe manner at Superfund, DOE, Department of Defense
(DOD), state, local and other Federal sites by:
" Evaluating human health and environmental risks from radiation site exposure,
developing models of the environmental fate and transport of radionuclides, and
providing a basic understanding of the biological effects of radiation.
• Developing risk assessments, remediation technologies, and measurement and
information systems.
• Providing training and direct site assistance including laboratory, field, and risk
assessment support at sites with actual or suspected radioactive contamination.
The radiation program also maintains an on-going capability to provide radioanalytical
and mixed waste analytical data on environmental samples to support site assessment, clean-up,
and response activities. Finally, EPA coordinates with other nations on select radiological
issues, including risk assessment methodologies and risk management approaches.
Radiation: Response Preparedness
To help protect Americans from unexpected radiological events, EPA is charged with
maintaining a high level of preparedness to respond to radiological emergencies. In FY 2005,
EPA's Radiological Emergency Response Team (RERT), a component of the Agency's
emergency response structure, will continue to prepare for incidents for which EPA is the Lead
Federal Agency under the Federal Radiological Emergency Response Plan, as well as prepare to
Additional information can be accessed at: http://www.epa.gov/radiation/tenorm/about.htm
1-102
-------
support other Lead Federal Agencies, as appropriate. EPA will coordinate with its interagency
partners to revise Federal radiation emergency response plans, develop radiological emergency
response standard operating procedures and guidance for coordination of Agency support to
other Federal and state response agencies, and conduct training and exercises to enhance the
ability of the RERT to fulfill its responsibilities in response actions.89
EPA will conduct exercises and training along with planning and participating in
international, Federal, and field exercises including anti-terrorism activities with the NRC, DOE,
and DOD. We will train state, local and Federal officials and provide technical support to state
radiation, solid waste, and health programs that participate in Radiological Emergency Response.
We also will maintain and update Protective Action Guides (PAGs) for use by Federal, state and
local officials and provide training on the use of the PAGs. This includes conducting Protective
Action Guide workshops and radiological emergency response exercises.90
We will provide policy development and on-site technical support, and asset
management, and plan intra-Agency coordination and field exercises for EPA's counter-
terrorism program. We also will provide information to the public on EPA Emergency Response
activities and capabilities. We will continue to provide scientific data and analysis on radiation
emergency response programs across the Agency. We will maintain readiness for radiological
emergency responses, which includes participation in mock emergency response situations.
Homeland Security: Preparedness Response and Recovery
Under the National Strategy for Homeland Security and Federal response plans, EPA has
specific response and recovery responsibilities. The Agency will continue to strengthen its
response capabilities, clarify its roles and responsibilities to ensure an effective response, arid
promote improved response capabilities across government and industry in areas where EPA has
unique knowledge and expertise.
EPA's Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitoring System (ERAMS) is the only
nationwide environmental radiation monitoring program that provides information about the
wide-scale spread of radioactive material from nuclear or radiological incidents.91 ERAMS
includes a network of sampling stations throughout the United States that routinely monitors air,
water (precipitation and drinking water), and milk for radioactive contamination. Data from
ERAMS provide timely information for making protective action decisions in the event of a
major nuclear or radiological event.
ERAMS has operated for over 30 years with an average of one sampling site for each
type of media (air, precipitation, drinking water and milk) per state resulting in air monitoring
coverage for approximately 24 percent of the population. The current response time for results is
measured in days, allowing time for collection of samples, shipment to the laboratory, and
performance of analyses.
Planned upgrades to the National Monitoring System in FY 2005 will improve our
response time and data dissemination from days to hours. These upgrades will provide the
89 Additional information can be accessed at: http://www.epa.gov/radiation/rert/rert.htm
90 Additional information can be accessed at: htrp://www.epa.gov/radiation/rert/pags.htm
91 Additional information can be accessed at: http://www.epa.gov/narel/erams/
1-103
-------
Agency with greater access to near real-time data, enabling officials to make rapid decisions
about protecting public health, thereby improving preparedness for radiological incidents. When
fully implemented hi FY 2009, ERAMS will have 180 fixed air monitoring stations increasing
U.S. population coverage from 24 percent to 70 percent. Planned improvements to the
monitoring system during FY 2005 include:
• Production and development of 60 air samplers with real-time gamma
spectrometric monitoring capability
" A contract to deploy and maintain ambient air radiation samplers
• Agreements with site operators
• Testing of 40 deployable monitoring systems at remote sites
The monitoring system is supported by an electronic database and telemetry system that
gathers data from the National Monitoring System, RERT, and other sources. In FY 2005, the
database will be tested for the ability to review data, perform dose/risk calculations, and transmit
the results in a secure mode. Once testing is complete, the database will come online.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
« (+ $209,900): This increase represents a redirection of resources from Radiation:
Protection to Radiation: Response Preparedness. This increase will allow us to work with local
emergency responders to ensure that they can respond to emergencies involving radiation.
• (- $521,100): This decrease represents a redirection of resources from Radiation
Protection to Radiation: Response Preparedness. Two workyears have also been redirected to
Goal 1, Objective 2.
S&T
• (+ $558,800, +9.0 FTE): This increase to Radiation: Preparedness represents a
redirection of resources and workyears from Radiation: Protection in order to better fund
emergency preparedness and response activities. We will work with communities and local
responders to ensure that the adequate lab protocols are followed in situations involving
radiation.
• (+ $440,700, +4.1 FTE): This increase represents a redirection from Radiation:
Protection to expand and upgrade the existing radiation monitoring system (ERAMS). With
additional resources we will continue to expand the ERAMS network to cover more areas as well
as upgrade the data system supporting it.
• (- $1,237,900, -13.1 FTE): This decrease represents a redirection in resources and
workyears from Radiation: Protection to higher priority work in two other Radiation objective
areas: (1) Radiation: Preparedness; (2) Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and
Recovery.
1-104
-------
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
Ensure WIPP Safety
In 2005 Certify that 40,000 55-gallon drums of radioactive waste (containing approximately 120,000 curies)
shipped by DOE to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant are permanently disposed of safely and according to
EPA standards.
In 2004 Certify that 36,000 55-gallon drums of radioactive waste (containing approximately 108,000 curies)
shipped by DOE to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant are permanently disposed of safely and according to
EPA standards.
In 2003 36,041 drums (55 gallon) of radioactive waste shipped by DOE to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant were
permanently disposed of safely and according to EPA standards.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Number of 55-Gallon Drums of
Radioactive Waste Disposed of
According to EPA Standards •*<• nAt •>* A™ ,,«««« T^_
& 36,041 36,000 40,000 Drums
Baseline: The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) near Carlsbad, NM was opened in May 1999 to accept
radioactive transuranic waste. By the end of FY 2003, approximately 73,000 (cumulative) 55 gallon
drums will be safely disposed. In FY 2005, EPA expects that DOE will ship an additional 40,000 55-
gallon drums of waste. Through FY 2004, EPA expects that DOE will have shipped safely and
according to EPA standards, approximately 13% of the planned waste volume, based on disposal of
860,000 drums over the next 40 years. Number of drums shipped to the WIPP facility on an annual
basis is dependent on DOE priorities and funding. EPA volume estimates are based on projecting the
average shipment volumes over 40 years with an initial start up.
Build National Radiation Monitoring System
In 2005 EPA will purchase 60 additional state of the art monitoring units and initiate deployment to sites
selected based on population and geographical coverage. All old sampling will be replaced and
population coverage will be expanded to 60%.
In 2004 EPA will purchase 60 state of the art radiation monitoring units thereby increasing EPA radiation
monitoring capacity and population coverage from 37% of the contiguous U.S. population in FY 2002
to 50% in FY 2004.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Purchase and Deploy State-of-the Art .
Monitoring Units "f s
60 60 Purchased
Baseline: The current fixed monitoring system, part of the Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitoring
System, was developed in the 1960s for the purpose of monitoring radioactive fallout from nuclear
weapons testing. The system currently consists of 52 old, low-tech air particulate samplers which
provide coverage in cities which represent approximately 24% of the population. By 2005, EPA will
upgrade the old system by purchasing 120 state-of-the-art units which wit be strategically located to
cover approximatley 60% of the population. The current system's air samplers will be retired from
service due to age, although some may be retained for emergency use.
1-105
-------
Homeland Security - Readiness & Response
In 2005 Verify that 50 percent of EPA's Radiological Emergency Response Team (RERT) members meet
scenario-based response criteria.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Percentage of EPA RERT members that meet
scenario-based criteria „ „
50 Percent
Baseline: Currently, EPA assesses RERT readiness based on the ability of the RERT to: (1) provide effective
field response, as defined today; (2) support coordination centers; and 3) provide analytical capabilities
throughout as needed to support a single small-to-medium scale incident. These evaluation criteria
will be reevaluated and revised in response to the Department of Homeland Security development of
critieria for the Nuclear Incident Response Team established under the Homeland Security Act of
2002, which includes EPA RERT assets.
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Purchase and Deploy State-of-Art Monitoring Units
Performance Data: Output Measure. Data from the near real-time gamma component of the
Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitoring System (ERAMS) will be stored hi an internal
EPA database at the National Ah" and Radiation Environmental Laboratory (NAREL) hi
Montgomery, Alabama. EPA monitors for radiation to provide data for nuclear and radiological
emergency response assessments; to provide data on ambient levels of radiation hi the
environment for baseline and trend analysis; and to inform the general public and public
officials.
Data Source: Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitoring System (ERAMS). A total of 60
near real-time monitoring units will provide data to the database at NAREL.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: Assuming that funding is secured during future years
and the project receives all necessary approvals, the existing air sampling equipment will be
replaced with state-of-the art air monitors that include near real-time gamma radiation detection
capability. Addition of detectors and communication systems will provide notification about
significant radioactive contamination events to decision- makers within hours
QA/QC Procedures: Quality Assurance and Quality Control Procedures will follow the
Agency guidelines and be consistent with a specific Quality Assurance Plan that is being
developed for the project. All monitoring equipment will be periodically calibrated with reliable
standards and routinely checked for accuracy with onsite testing devices. Laboratory analyses
of ak filters and other environmental media are closely controlled hi compliance with the
NAREL Quality Management Plan and applicable Standard Operating Procedures.
Data Quality Reviews: The database will screen all incoming data from the monitoring systems
for abnormalities as an indicator of either a contamination event or an instrument malfunction.
Data will be held hi a secure portion of the database until verified by trained personnel. Copies
1-106
-------
of quality assurance and quality control testing will also be maintained to assure the quality of
the data.
Data Limitations: Data are limited in near real-time to gamma emitting radionuclide
identification and quantification. Radiation levels from gamma-emitting nuclides that will be so
low as to be "undetectable" will be significantly below health concerns that require immediate
action. Lower levels of radioactive materials in the samples will be measured through laboratory
based analyses and data will be available within days after the sample is received. Data will not
be available to the general public or others, except relevant decision-makers, until verified by
trained personnel.
Error Estimate: The overall error in detection capability is estimated to be within 50% of the
actual concentration based on previous experience with similar measurement systems. An error
analysis will be performed on the prototype systems during the process of detector selection.
New/Improved Performance Data or Systems: New air samplers will maintain steady flow
rates that are measured during operation and corrected for varying environmental conditions.
Addition of gamma spectrometric detectors and computer-based multi-channel analyzers to the
air samplers provide near real-time analyses of radioactive content in particles captured by the
filter. In addition to data collection, the onboard computer systems can communicate results of
analyses back to a central database and even identify abnormal conditions that might require
action. These improvements not only include higher quality data, but also will provide
information regarding contamination events to decision-makers within hours instead of days.
The number and location of monitoring sites will be unproved to provide representative
sampling for much more of the nation's population.
References: For a additional information about the continuous monitoring system, ERAMS see:
http://v\rvv\\r.epa.gov/narel/erams/aboutus.html#mission
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Drums of Radioactive Waste Disposed of according to
EPA Standards.
Performance Data: The Department of Energy (DOE) Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP)
database contains the number of drums shipped by DOE waste generator facilities and placed in
the DOE WIPP. The WIPP is a DOE facility located in southeastern New Mexico, 26 miles from
Carlsbad. The WIPP Land Withdrawal Act was passed by Congress in October 1992 and
amended in September 1996. The act transferred the land occupied by the WIPP to DOE and
gave EPA regulatory responsibility for deterrnining whether the facility complies with
radioactive waste disposal standards.
Data Source: Department of Energy
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: N/A
QA/QC Procedures: The performance data used by EPA are collected and maintained by DOE.
Under EPA's WIPP regulations (available on the Internet:
http://www.epa.gov/radiation/wipp/background.htm, all DOE WIPP-related data must be
collected and maintained under a comprehensive quality assurance program meeting consensus
1-107
-------
standards developed by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) (available on
the Internet: http://www.asme.org/codes/ ). EPA conducts regular inspections to ensure that
these quality assurance systems are in place and functioning properly; no additional QA/QC of
the DOE data is conducted by EPA.
Data Quality Reviews: N/A
Data Limitations: The DOE WIPP database contains the number of drums shipped by DOE
waste generator facilities and placed in the DOE WIPP. Currently, there are five DOE waste
generator facilities that are approved to generate and ship waste: Los Alamos National
Laboratory, Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site, Hanford Site, Idaho National
Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, Savannah River Site.
Before DOE waste generator facilities can ship waste to the WIPP, EPA must approve the waste
characterization controls and quality assurance procedures for waste identification at these sites.
EPA conducts frequent independent inspections and audits at these sites to verify continued
compliance with radioactive waste disposal standards and to determine if DOE is properly
tracking the waste and adhering to specific waste component limits. Since 1998, EPA has
completed over 60 inspections prior to shipment of waste to the WIPP facility. Once EPA gives
its approval, the number of drums shipped to the WIPP facility on an annual basis is dependent
on DOE priorities and funding. EPA volume estimates are based on projecting the average
shipment volumes over 40 years with an initial start up.
New/Improved Data or Systems: None
References: The Department of Energy National TRU Waste Management Plan Quarterly
Supplement http://www.wipp.ws/library/caolib.htmtfControlled contains information on the
monthly volumes of waste that are received at the DOE WIPP.
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Percentage of EPA RERT members that meet scenario-
based criteria.
Performance Data: To determine the effectiveness of RERT performance, an output measure
has been developed that scores RERT members on a scale of one (1) to 100 against scenario-
based criteria. A baseline evaluation was performed in Fiscal Year (FY) 2003, based on the
effectiveness of the RERT in responses to actual incidents and a major national exercise
(TOPOFF2). RERT members were evaluated in their ability to: (1) provide effective field
response, (2) support coordination centers, and (3) provide analytical capabilities and throughput
as needed to support a single small-to-medium scale incident. Overall RERT effectiveness in
this baseline analysis was measured at approximately 13 percent. In FY 2005, however, the
evaluation criteria will need to be reevaluated and revised in response to the changes enacted by
the Homeland Security Act of 2002. Under this Act, the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) is required to develop evaluation criteria and test the effectiveness of the Nuclear Incident
Response Team (NIRT), which will include EPA RERT assets. Thus, the output measure
tentatively outlined above will be modified in cooperation with DHS to meet their needs.
Data Source: Beginning in FY 2005, EPA expects the Department of Homeland Security to
maintain the data. DHS is responsible for assuring that all Federal Emergency Response assets
1-108
-------
maintain an adequate level of readiness (Homeland Security Act of 2002). EPA assumes they
also will maintain a data system to evaluate and assess the readiness of assets across the federal
government. EPA will perform evaluations of its own assets and report results under this
measure, but must rely on the DHS data source for key information.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: N/A
QA/QC Procedures: N/A
Data Quality Reviews: N/A
Data Limitations: The expectations for performance of EPA's RERT are currently evolving.
Under Section 501 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, Department of State's (DOS) Under
Secretary for Emergency Preparedness and Response will establish standards for EPA RERT
assets as part of the new Nuclear Incident Response Team. DHS will also evaluate the NIRT's
performance against these new standards. These criteria have not yet been developed. In
addition, the requirements for the RERT (i.e., what is actually expected of RERT members
during a response) may also change. This uncertainty means that the current evaluation may not
effectively reflect future criteria.
New/Improved Data or Systems: None
References: The Homeland Security Act of 2002
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
In addition to the specific activities described above, EPA continues to work with Federal
agencies including NRC, DOE, and DHS to prevent metals and finished products suspected of
having radioactive contamination from entering the country. EPA also works with the
Department of Transportation on initiatives to promote use of non-nuclear density gauges for
highway paving.
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, 42 U.S.C 2011 et seq. (1970), and Reorganization Plan
#3 of 1970
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAA)
Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), as
amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA)
Energy Policy Act of 1992, P.L. 102-486
Executive Order 12241 of September 1980, National Contingency Plan, 3 CFR, 1980
Executive Order 12656 of November 1988, Assignment of Emergency Preparedness
Responsibilities, 3 CFR, 1988.
Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982
Public Health Service Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C 201 et seq.
1-109
-------
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C 5121 et
seq.
Safe Drinking Water Act
Title XIV of the National Defense Authorization Act of 1996 (Nunn-Lugar II)
Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Land Withdrawl Act of 1978
Waste Isolation Pilot Plan (WIPP) Land Withdrawal Act
1-110
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Plan and Congressional Justification
Clean Air and Global Climate Change
OBJECTIVE: Reduce Greenhouse Gas Intensity
Through EPA's voluntary climate protection programs, contribute 45 million metric tons
of carbon equivalent (MMTCE) annually to the President's 18 percent greenhouse gas intensity
improvement goal by 2012. (An additional 75 MMTCE to result from the sustained growth in
the climate programs are reflected in the Administration's business-as-usual projection for
greenhouse gas intensity improvement.)
Resource Summary
(Dollars in Thousands)
Reduce Greenhouse Gas Intensity
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Buildings & Facilities
Inspector General
Total Workyears
FY2003
Actuals
$99,836.4
$97,647.6
$750.0
$965.4
$473.5
251.3
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$106,936.5
$105,343.7
$0.0
$969.6
$623.2
244.1
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$108,389.3
$106,712.6
$0.0
$1,044.9
$631.8
244.6
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$1,452.9
$1,368.9
$0
$75.4
$8.6
0.5
Program Project
(Dollars in Thousands)
Climate Protection Program
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Administrative Projects
TOTAL
FY2003
Actuals
$82,169.5
$1,018.2
$16,648.7
$99,836.4
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
$91,289.6
• $0.0
$15,646.9
$106,936.5
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$91,961.3
$0.0
$16,428.0
$108,389.3
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$671.7
$0.0
$781.2
$1,452.9
FY 2005 REQUEST
Results to be Achieved under this Objective
In February 2002, the President announced a new approach to global climate change
designed to harness the power of the markets and technological innovation. The President
committed America to reduce the greenhouse gas intensity of the U.S. economy (how much we
emit per unit of economic activity) by 18 percent by 2012. Meeting this commitment will
prevent more than 500 million metric tons of carbon-equivalent emissions through 2012. This
approach focuses on reducing the growth of GHG emissions, while sustaining the economic
1-111
-------
growth needed to finance investment in new, clean energy technologies. Focusing on
greenhouse gas intensity sets America on a path to slow the growth of greenhouse gas emissions,
and—as the science justifies—to stop and then to reverse that growth.
Overall, EPA's climate protection programs may prevent as much as 185 MMTCE
annually by 2012, up from an estimated 65 MMTCE in 2002. Of the additional 120 MMTCE
that will be prevented annually by 2012, 75 MMTCE will result directly from the sustained
growth in many of the existing climate programs and are reflected in the Administration's
business-as-usual projection for greenhouse gas intensity improvement; another 45 MMTCE will
contribute towards President's 18 percent greenhouse gas intensity improvement goal.
EPA's voluntary climate programs work in partnership with businesses and other sectors
through programs that deliver multiple benefit from cleaner air to lower energy bills—while
improving overall scientific understanding of climate variability and change and its potential
consequences. In FY 2005, EPA expects to continue the significant accomplishments of its
Climate Protection Programs and contribute to reducing the Nation's greenhouse gas intensity.
EPA's international activities will lead to increases in the amount and quality of
information and technical capacity available for decisions-makers in key developing and
industrialized countries to implement emissions reductions policies and programs. Ultimately,
these activities will lead to the reduction of trans-boundary air pollution and greenhouse gas
emissions.
Climate Protection Program
The core of EPA's climate change efforts are voluntary government/industry partnership
programs designed to capitalize on the opportunities that consumers, businesses, and
organizations have for making sound investments in efficient equipment, policies and practices,
and transportation choices. In ten years, we expect that more than half the Nation's
anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions will come from equipment purchased between now and
then. Thousands of equipment purchases are made every day, and often people buy the
equipment that is the least costly, and often least energy efficient, thereby committing
themselves to higher energy bills in the future. At the same time, people often overlook the
investment opportunities represented by more energy efficient equipment—investment
opportunities with the potential of more than double the return on investment of other common
options (e.g., money markets, U.S. Treasury bonds).
EPA manages a number of efforts, such as its ENERGY STAR programs, voluntary
transportation efficiency programs, and the EPA Clean Automotive Technology (CAT) program
(included under the Science Objective), to remove market barriers to deployment of energy
efficient technology in the residential, commercial, transportation, and industrial sectors of the
economy. EPA programs do not provide financial subsidies. Instead, they work by overcoming
widely acknowledged market barriers to energy efficiency: lack of clear, reliable information on
technology opportunities; lack of awareness of energy efficient products and services; lack of
financing options to turn life cycle energy savings into initial cost savings for consumers; low
incentives to manufacturers for efficiency research and development; and lack of awareness
about energy efficient transportation choices.
1-112
-------
EPA's newest voluntary programs build on previous accomplishments. In 2001, EPA
launched partnership programs to promote cleaner, more efficient energy supply through
increased renewable energy and combined heat and power (CHP) applications. These
"distributed energy" technologies continue to break the link between our Nation's increased
energy demand and ah" pollution. CHP and renewable power also help meet the growing need
for decentralized, highly reliable power as our nation's electric grid ages. In FY 2003, EPA
expanded the national Combined Heat and Power Partnership and the Green Power Partnership.
EPA also expanded its Climate Leaders program, an effort launched in FY 2002 to encourage
individual companies to develop long-term, comprehensive climate change strategies and
emissions reduction goals. In 2003, Climate Leaders grew to 50 partners.
In addition, EPA began forming partnerships and initiated a number of transportation
efforts focusing both on the industry and on state and local sectors, including a program to
implement voluntary ground freight management practices as well as technologies that can
substantially improve load scheduling and load matching logistics, reduce truck engine idling,
and improve truck fuel-efficiency.
These partnerships can be extended globally to provide support for greenhouse gas
management activities in other countries of the world. In 2005, EPA will continue activities that
recognize and provide support for environmental issues in other countries, such as global air
quality, energy access and efficient, renewable energy, transportation alternatives, and solid
waste management (for methane reduction).
EPA has had substantial success across its Climate Protection Programs. Through FY
2003, EPA's Climate Protection Programs (see Table 1) reduced emissions of carbon dioxide
(COa) and other greenhouse gases such as methane and perfluorocarbons (PFCs). In addition,
EPA's Climate Protection Programs have locked hi substantial energy and environmental
benefits over the next decade. Since many of the investments promoted through EPA's climate
programs involve energy efficient equipment with lifetimes of decades or more, the investments
that have been spurred through 2003 will continue to deliver environmental and economic
benefits through 2012 and beyond. EPA currently estimates that, based on investments in
equipment already made due to EPA's programs through 2003, organizations and consumers
across the country may net savings of more than $85 billion through 2012, and could reduce
greenhouse emissions by more than 500 MMTCE through 2012 (cumulative reductions based
upon estimated 2003 achievements).92 These programs continue to be cost-effective approaches
for delivering environmental benefits across the country.
In FY 2003 alone, EPA's Climate Protection Programs are expected to produce the
following results, to be reported for. the Government Performance and Results Act (final results
will be available in late calendar year 2004):
• reduce greenhouse gas emissions by more than 80 MMTCE; and
• reduce energy consumption by an estimated 100 billion kilowatt hours.
92 Climate Protection Partnerships Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2003. Change for the Better, ENERGY
STAR and Other Voluntary Programs, 2002 Annual Report.
1-113
-------
In FY 2003, EPA's Climate Protection Programs also are on track to:
» conserve enough energy to light 100 million homes for the year;
• prevent almost 200,000 tons of emissions of nitrogen oxide (NOX); and
• avoid greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to the emissions of 45 million
automobiles for the year.
1-114
-------
Table 1: EPA's Climate Protection Programs
Sector
Buildings
Program
ENERGYSTAR
Activity/Initiative
Buildings
Labeled Products
Homes
Industry
Carbon Reduction Programs (CO2)
ENERGY STAR for Industry
Combined Heat and Power Partnership
Green Power Partnership
Climate Leaders
Waste Wise
Methane Programs (CH4)
Natural Gas STAR Program
Landfill Methane Outreach Program
Coalbed Methane Outreach Program
Agricultural Programs (Ruminant Livestock Outreach andAgSTAR)
Landfill Rule
Programs to Reduce High Global Warming
Potential Gases (HFCs, PFCs, SF6)
Voluntary Aluminum Industrial Program
PFC Reduction/Climate Partnership for the Semiconductor Industry
SF6 Emissions Reduction Partnership for the Electric Power System
SF6 Emissions Reduction Partnership for the Magnesium Industry
Partnership with HCFC-22 manufacturers to reduce HFC-23 emissions
Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) Programs
Voluntary Partnerships with SNAP Industry Sectors
Transportation *
(NOTE: fuel cell
vehicles and hydrogen
fuel technology as well
as the clean automotive
technology programs
are included in the
science objective).
Transportation Efficiency and Emission
Reduction Programs
Best Workplaces for Commuters program - promoting a national standard of
excellence for commuter benefits
SmartWay Transport Partnership — improve fuel efficiency and reduce
emissions through voluntary adoption of technologies, including anti-idling
and retrofit technologies
Carbon Removal
State and Local Climate Change Outi-each Program
International Capacity Building
EPA's climate change programs are on track to meet their greenhouse gas reduction goals
through FY 2003, as shown in Figure 1, and continue to meet the challenge of higher emissions
reduction goals. The programs are on target to meet or exceed their specific goals for reducing
greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption in 2003, as shown in Table 2 for key program
categories:
1-115
-------
Buildings (the ENERGY STAR program);
Industry programs working in partnership to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide
(including ENERGY STAR, WasteWise and Clean Energy programs);
Industry programs working in partnership to reduce emissions of methane;
Industry programs working in partnership to reduce emissions of the HFC/PFC
gases;
Transportation; and
State and local.
Figure 1. Overall Goals and Achievements for
the Climate Protection Programs
•Annual Achievements D Annual Goals
1-116
-------
Table 2. Goals and Accomplishments for Performance Measures: 1998 through 2005J
Program Area/Key
Gases
Buildings (ENERGY
STAR)4
Industry CO:
CH4
PFCs,
SF6.
HFCs
Transportation
State and Local
Total
1999
Accomplished
kWh
Saved
(billion)
61
Na
Na
Na
Na
Na
61
MMTCE
reduced
12.5
5.3
8.3
15
1.1
1.4
44
2000
Accomplished
kWh
Saved
(billion)
74
Na
Na '
Na
Na
Na
74
MMTCE
reduced
15.2
5.5
13.8
20.8
1.7
1.7
59
2001
Accomplished
kWh
Saved
(billion)
80
Na
Na
Na
Na
Na
80
MMTCE
reduced
16.6
5.8
16.0
22.86
1.9
1.9
65
2002
Accomplished
kWh
Saved
(billion)
100
na
na
na
na
na
100
MMTCE
reduced
21.5
6.7
16.8
24.S6
2.1
2.0
73.5
20032
Goal/Accomplished
kWh Saved
(billion)
95/105
Na
Na
Na
Na
Na
955/105
MMTCE
reduced
19.2s/23
6.75/6.7
17.05/18.0
24.95.6/29.2
2.45/2J
2.05/2.0
72.25/81
20043
Goal
kWh Saved
(billion)
110
Na
Na
Na
Na
Na
110s
MMTCE
reduced
21.4s
7.3s
18.1s
29.6"
2.6s
2.0s
81.0s
2005'
Goal
kWh
Saved
(billion)
120
na
na
na
na
na
120s
MMTCE
reduced
23.8s
8.0s
19.1s
34.4"
2.9s
2.0s
90.2s
'Metrics are not applicable to CAT, International Capacity Building or Global Change Research. The accomplishments of many of EPA's voluntary programs are documented in
the Climate Protection Partnerships Division Annual Report. The most recent version, Change for the Better: Energy Star and Other Voluntary Programs, Climate
Protection Partnerships Division 2002 Annual Report
2These results are estimates. Final results will be available in calendar 2004.
3The Third National Communication to the Secretariat of the Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) reporting on national progress was submitted in FY 2002. The
report provided updated information on U.S. climate protection programs including actual FY 2000 accomplishments and projected benefits in 2010. Goals for the
climate protection programs were reviewed and refined as part of this interagericy process.
4EPA's' ENERGY STAR program spans the Building sector and the Industrial sector.
5GPRA performance measure.
"These goals and accomplishments do not include EPA's efforts on self-chilling cans, which resulted in the avoidance of potentially significant emissions of HCFCs into the
atmosphere.
1-117
-------
Program Goals and Objectives for FY 2005
EPA's programs have made strides date, but opportunities remain to achieve further
greenhouse gas emissions reductions and energy bill savings from energy efficiency programs
and greater cost-effective use of renewable energy. American families and businesses spend
over $600 billion each year on energy bills. Technologies are available today that can cut this
energy use significantly.
Over the next several years, EPA will build upon its voluntary government/industry
partnership efforts to achieve even greater greenhouse gas reductions as part of the President's
plan to reduce greenhouse gas intensity by 18 percent in 2012. EPA will continue to break down
market barriers and foster energy efficiency programs, products and technologies, cost-effective
renewable energy, and greater transportation choices. EPA will continue to work closely with
state and local partners to assess the benefits of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and
developing practical risk reduction strategies. The Agency will develop international
partnerships that will link industrial efficiency, reduction of greenhouse gases, and sustainable
development. In FY 2005, EPA's climate change programs will work to:
• reduce greenhouse gas emissions from projected levels;
• reduce U.S. energy consumption from projected levels;
• reduce emissions of ah- pollutants such as NOX, particulate matter, and mercury
through activities that foster increased energy efficiency;
• continue to expand the ENERGY STAR program in the residential, commercial,
and industrial sectors;
• develop voluntary partnerships with the freight industry to substantially increase
the market penetration of diesel engine retrofits, anti-idling technologies, speed
management practices, improved aerodynamic truck designs and other practices
under the SmartWay Transport initiative that cost-effectively improve fuel
efficiency;
• expand energy efficient commute options like carpools, transit, and
telecommuting to reduce vehicle miles of travel by more than two billion miles
through the Best Workplaces for Commuters program;
• assist 10 key developing countries and countries with economies-in-transition in
building their capacity to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases through cost-
effective measures and participate actively in international discussions of climate
protection and assist in the fulfillment of the U.S. obligations under the U.N.
Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to facilitate technology
transfer to developing countries;
• produce measurable international greenhouse gas emission reductions through
clean industrialization partnerships with key developing countries;
• hi close cooperation with USDA, analyze, identify, and develop specific
opportunities to sequester carbon hi agricultural soils, forests, other vegetation
and commercial products, with benefits for agricultural productivity and the
environment; and
• assess the potential consequences of climate variability and change on human
health and ecosystems.
1-118
-------
EPA will be working towards the following goals in each of the following program areas:
• Buildings (ENERGY STAR):93 The Buildings Sector represents one of EPA's
largest areas of potential, and at the same time is one of its most successful. EPA
will continue the successful ENERGY STAR94 partnerships in the residential and
commercial buildings sector and prevent the emissions of 27 MMTCE in 2012 (hi
addition to the 20 MMTCE being prevented annually as of 2002). The efforts
necessary in FY 2005 to achieve the 2012 goals are detailed in Table 3.
• Industry:95 EPA will continue to build on the success of the voluntary programs
in the industrial sector, focusing on reducing CC«2 emissions and continuing the
highly successful initiatives to reduce methane emissions and emissions of the
high global-warming-potential gases. EPA's goals for these efforts are to: greatly
enhance the rate of energy and resource efficiency improvements hi industry
between now and 2012 through the ENERGY STAR and Waste Wise programs;
cost-effectively keep emissions of methane at 1990 levels or below through 2010;
cost-effectively limit emissions of the more potent greenhouse gases (MFCs,
PFCs, SFe); and facilitate the use of renewable energy. EPA's industrial sector
programs will prevent 80 MMTCE hi 2012 (hi addition to the 43 MMTCE being
prevented annually as of 2002). The efforts necessary in FY 2005 to continue to
achieve these 2012 goals are detailed hi Table 4.
• Transportation: EPA will continue to build and enhance efficient and effective
market-driven programs that address emissions of greenhouse gases from the
transportation sector. The transportation sector of the economy contributes about
one-third of all U.S. anthropogenic GHG emissions. The key elements of this
effort are the SmartWay Transport Partnership and the Best Workplaces for
Commuters program.
The SmartWay Transport partnership works with the trucking and railroad
industries to develop and deploy more fuel-efficient technologies and practices to
achieve cleaner and more efficient vehicles and locomotives by adopting pollution
control and energy saving technologies. At full implementation, this program has
the potential to reduce greenhouse gases by 9 to 18 MMTCE annually. As a
component of this program, EPA will continue to develop partnership agreements
with truck fleets, the truck stop industry, manufacturers of idle control
technologies, and local and state governments to create incentives for
implementation of idle control technologies, and remove barriers that truckers
have identified, and deploy idling reduction strategies along major transportation
corridors. Idling strategies alone have the potential to save 1 billion gallons of
93 Through the ENERGY STAR program, EPA promotes energy efficiency across the residential, pommercial and industrial
sectors. EPA expects to prevent 29 MMTCE through the ENERGY STAR program in 2012, in addition to the 23 MMTCE
prevented in 2002.
The ENERGY STAR program crosses two climate change program areas: Buildings and Industry. The total FY 2005 budget
request for the ENERGY STAR program is $50.3 million.
95 The Industrial Sector goals include the Agency's work with state and local governments, and state and local governments'
work with industry to prevent greenhouse gas emissions.
1-119
-------
diesel fuel per year, while reducing greenhouse gases by 2.5 MMTE, and NOX by
200,000 tons.
The goal of Best Workplaces for Commuters is to offer innovative
solutions to commuting challenges faced by U.S. employers and employees by
promoting outstanding commuter benefits that reduce vehicle trips and miles
traveled. By offering commuter benefits such as transit passes, telecommuting,
and vanpool vouchers, employers meet the National Standard of Excellence for
commuter benefits that improve air quality, traffic congestion, and energy security
while reducing emissions of greenhouse gases. During FY 2004 and FY 2005,
EPA will expand the Best Workplaces for Commuters program to the following
metropolitan areas: New York, Washington DC, Atlanta, San Antonio, Houston,
Phoenix, Tucson, Denver, San Francisco, and Sacramento. The Best Workplaces
for Commuters program may cover approximately 2 million employees by the
end of FY 2004, and 3.7 million employees in FY 2005.
EPA estimates that these voluntary programs have the potential to
contribute over 13 MMTCE annually iri GHG reductions by 2012, in addition to
the 2 MMTCE being prevented annually as of 2002. In addition, by 2012, EPA
estimates these programs could reduce over 200,000 tons of NOX each year, as
well as achieve significant reductions in PM emissions. The efforts necessary in
FY 2005 to achieve these goals are detailed in Table 5.
• Carbon Removal: Carbon can be sequestered through changes in both forestry
and agricultural practices, but these actions are not currently well understood or
accepted in many sectors of the international and environmental communities. In
addition, this potential is not always well-reflected in technical and economic
analyses. EPA is working collaboratively with USDA to address the
misconceptions regarding carbon sequestration and to ensure that this important
mitigation option is developed in an environmentally sound and economically
efficient way, and to facilitate the improved modeling of carbon sequestration
options. EPA is supporting USDA's programs under the Farm Bill and other
vehicles to promote carbon sequestration and enhanced methane recovery, which
could result in greenhouse gas reductions of up to 12 MMTCE by 2012. The
efforts necessary in FY 2005 to achieve these 2012 goals are detailed in Table 6.
• State and Local: States and localities have a significant and an important role in
voluntary efforts to reduce our country's GHG intensity, but need information,
analyses and tools they need to integrate energy, air quality, and GHG reduction
objectives and promote consistent, voluntary strategies.
The state and local program responds to this need by providing tools,
analyses and information about the benefits of voluntarily reducing emissions of
GHGs. EPA will continue its efforts to build capacity and to provide state and
local governments with technical, outreach, and/or education services about
integrated approaches, so that state and local governments may more effectively
address their environmental, human health, and economic goals in a
comprehensive manner. These efforts are detailed in Table 6.
1-120
-------
International Capacity Building: EPA is working with a number of key
developing countries to help them: 1) design and implement programs to increase
the use of low and zero greenhouse gas technologies; 2) identify, evaluate, and
implement strategies for achieving multiple social and health or economic
benefits while reducing greenhouse gas emissions; 3) facilitate more significant
actions to reduce GHG emissions by these countries under the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and help develop the
infrastructure necessary to implement these actions; and, 4) accurately assess
GHG emissions from the transportation sector in these countries and help to
implement less energy-intensive transportation strategies. Over the next ten
years, EPA's goals are to: 1) catalyze increases in voluntary, market-driven
programs for increasing the use of low and zero greenhouse gas technologies; 2)
encourage full consideration of climate variability and change into countries'
future development plans; and 3) establish the technical and institutional basis for
key developing countries to take significant actions to reduce GHG emissions
consistent with UNFCCC. The efforts necessary in FY 2004 to meet these goals
are detailed in Table 6.
1-121
-------
Table 3. EPA's ENERGY STAR Buildings Program: Description of Planned Activities
Within FY 2005 Budget Request
ENERGY
STAR
Buildings
Actively promote EPA's national energy performance rating system and work with building owners and managers to
benchmark an average of 19 percent of the market across office buildings, schools, Federal and state facilities, retail
spaces, hospitals, hotels, dormitories, and,restaurants.
Award 2,800 Energy Star labels to buildings that reach a benchmark score between 75 and 100.
Continue to work closely with the energy services industry to assist these companies in integrating EPA's national
energy performance rating system into their customer services, leading to 5,000 benchmarked buildings.
Have 10,000 small businesses and congregations look to ENERGY STAR to save energy and reduce operating costs.
Continue to promote the financial value of ENERGY STAR and energy efficiency with the Wall Street and financial
community.
Actively work to improve the efficiency of the Federal government - by working with other agencies to implement key
pieces of the Federal Executive Order on building energy efficiency, particularly focusing on assisting agencies to
benchmark their buildings and to procure energy efficient products.
Develop benchmark capabilities for two additional space types.
ENERGY
STAR
Products
Implement three seasonal, nationally coordinated, consumer outreach campaigns raising awareness of the
environmental benefits associated with using energy efficient air conditioning, lighting, and home electronics.
Coordinate with utility and state partners representing more than 65% of U.S. households in the design and operation of
effective state-level energy efficiency programs.
Enhance Energy Star labeled product quality through a review of performance specifications for 5 product categories.
Continue working with retailers and equipment contractors to ensure that consumers receive clear information when in
the market to purchase products.
Continue working in partnership with Canada, the European Community, Japan, Taiwan, Australia, and New Zealand
in implementing energy efficiency labeling programs modeled after Energy Star.
Promote the purchase of about 175 million Energy Star labeled products in 2005.
ENERGY
STAR
Homes
Over 150,000 new homes are expected to be constructed as Energy Star in 2005.
Promote Energy Star Labeled New Homes in 25 geographic areas.
Expand Energy Star to include 85% of the housing stock of the national builders, Pulte, Ryan and Centex.
Achieve 75% penetration of Energy Star in the manufactured housing industry.
Continue to promote Energy Star to HUD, and state and local housing authorities as the platform for their affordable
housing programs.
Work with major retailers, such as Home Depot, Lowes, and Sears, to promote ENERGY STAR Home Sealing to
consumers.
Promote proper installation, maintenance, and duct sealing of HVAC systems under the ENERGY STAR banner in 15
geographic regions.
Extend Energy Star to the remodeler market.
1-122
-------
ENERGYSTAR
for industry
Table 4. Industry Programs: Description of Planned Activities
Within FY 2005 Budget Request
Expand the Energy Star program to promote energy efficiency to nine industries.
Enhance technical assistance provided to the industrial sector by developing plant energy performance indicators
for three additional industries.
Maintain the energy peer exchange networking opportunities for the broader U.S. industry by conducting two
national meetings, along with a series of centralized peer exchanges accessible to all.
Combined Heat
and Power
Initiative
Expand efforts in the Northeast, Midwest, and Texas, working with state, local, and industry partners to facilitate
40 new CHP projects.
Begin working in the Southeast and in the Northwest with emerging regional outreach programs.
Maintain and publish a database of existing and planned projects in the U.S., to promote the greenhouse gas
reductions associated with these projects.
Continue to work with targeted state and local regulators to identify best practices for air regulations that
encourage energy-efficient generation.
Green Power
Partnership
Refine Green Power Partnership recruiting efforts to focus on large corporate and institutional electricity
purchasers, and recruit 100 new Partners from this category.
Continue developing a national market consensus on a benchmark for voluntary green power purchasing.
Work with targeted states to leverage their renewable energy programs through policies such as emissions
disclosure.
Target green power providers for expanded collaboration in marketing, recognition events, and recruiting.
Climate Leaders
Maintain and update Climate Leaders greenhouse gas inventory protocol to incorporate lessons learned and
Partner comments.
Expand Climate Leaders program to 100 partners.
Harmonize Climate Leaders inventory protocol with similar efforts at the national, state, and international level to
reduce reporting burdens on Partners that participate in multiple programs.
Announce 20 new voluntary corporate greenhouse gas reduction goals.
Waste Wise
Focus WasteWise efforts on new industry sector work, and on streamlined and improved data tracking on waste
reduction.
Expand efforts on coal ash cement via Coal Combustion Products Partnership (C2P2). Double the number of
C2P2 participants expected to join from 50 to 100, and obtain buy in for two new industry-wide goals: 1)
increasing the amount of coal ash used as a replacement for concrete from 14 million tons in 1992 to 20 million
tons by 2010 (reducing future GHG emissions by approximately 5.4 million tons), and 2) increasing the overall
use of C2P2s from 31% in 2002 to 45% in 2008.
Continue to pursue a Product Stewardship approach for electronics recycling with tangible industry commitments
and state support, leading to measurable increases in electronics recycling and associated climate benefits.
Begin to measure benefits of new national carpet product stewardship agreement with pursuing additional Product
Stewardship agreements in autos and beverage containers.
Continue Green Building efforts aimed at increasing recovery of construction and landscaping materials and use
of recovered materials in construction and landscaping. Continue to build partnerships and pilot innovative
approaches with sectors that can influence the marketplace, including the military (on base deconstruction),
WasteWise partners, and other large landowners. Work with key stakeholders to increase building deconstruction
infrastructure and expertise.
Provide research, outreach materials and technical assistance on the use of GHG emission factors for waste
reduction to encourage their adoption nationwide.
Methane
Programs
Continue Natural Gas STAR program in all sectors; increase industry-wide participation to 65%.
Work with key stakeholders through EPA's Coalbed Methane Outreach Program (CMOP) to increase the market
penetration of new greenhouse gas reduction technologies appropriate for combusting mine ventilation air. EPA
will continue to provide technical assistance to mining operations as well as monitor and analyze the results from
two demonstration projects and encourage demonstration of 3-4 new technical options.
Assist an additional 50 landfills through the Landfill Methane Outreach Program (LMOP) in implement landfill
gas-to-energy projects, and expand outreach and technical support for industrial and energy sector use of landfill
gas energy.
In the agriculture sector, continue expansion of methane-reducing technologies, such as anaerobic digesters, to
help ensure clean water and air for the livestock sector.
1-123
-------
Table 4, Industry Programs: Description of Planned Activities
Within FY 2005 Budget Request
(continued)
Programs to
Reduce High
Global Wanning
Potential Gases
The Voluntary Aluminum Industry Partnership (VAIP) will continue to deliver reductions, with VAIP participants
reducing the industry's emissions of PFCs by at least 70% percent from the 1990 baseline year, and begin
implementing energy efficiency improvements.
Work with the U.S. semiconductor partners to achieve their 10% PFC emissions reduction goal by 2010 from
their 1995 baseline.
Continue work with industry to increase participation in the SF6 Emissions Reduction Partnership for Electric
Power Systems to over 50% of the industry's net generating capacity and to achieve a sector-wide SF6 emission
reduction goal.
Support the US magnesium partners' research and alternative cover gas trials to expedite the phase-out of SFg,
which is due to be completed in 2010.
Maintain 100% participation with U.S. HCFC-22 chemical manufacturers to reduce emissions of HFC-23.
Expand the stewardship programs to reduce high global warming potential emissions from other key sources such
as the military and ODS replacement industries.
SNAP expects to review and list 10 alternatives to ozone-depleting substances, focusing on the identification of
safe and energy-efficient substitutes, including HFCs in various sectors.
1-124
-------
TableS. Transportation Programs: Description of Planned Activities
Within FY 2005 Budget Request
Transportation
Efficiency
The Best Workplaces for Commuters program reduces emissions of smog-forming and toxic air pollutants and
greenhouse gases by reducing the number of vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled. EPA partners with
employers who agree to adopt employee commuter benefit programs that meet a National Standard of Excellence
for commuter benefits. In FY 2005 EPA will promote Best Workplaces for Commuters in at least 10 major
metropolitan areas; expanding Best Workplaces for Commuters to include more than 4,000 employer partners;
actively promoting commuter benefits to industries representing finance, insurance, real estate, government, retail,
telecommunications, entertainment, health care, and universities; and expanding Best Workplaces for Commuters
to encompass 3.7 million employees (2.7% penetration of U.S. commuters).
The SmartWav Outreach Program promotes voluntary transportation programs, including a transportation
information disclosure program, that educate the public or benefit the environment both globally by reducing CO2
emissions and locally by reducing NOx and other smog forming emissions. The SmartWay Outreach Program
will achieve these emission reductions by implementing voluntary programs, including the SmartWay Transport
Program and the Vehicle Information Program, and will explore other potential applications of the SmartWay
concept.
In FY 2005 the SmartWav Transport Partnership will reduce greenhouse gases, as well as NOx and PM emissions,
by:
• Partnering with up to 200 trucking companies hi the U.S. and 3 of the 7 largest railroad companies.
Partners will agree to reduce fuel consumption and emissions through the implementation of negotiated
technologies and practices.
• Partnering with up to 100 manufacturing, retail, and supply companies that hire or contract trucking
and/or rail fleets. These companies will agree to hire rail and truck companies that are members of the
SmartWay Transport Partnership.
• Showcasing the emission control effectiveness, fuel efficiency, and commercial viability of innovative
diesel emission control technologies.
• Creating a rigorous technology evaluation program, to encourage the more rapid deployment of cleaner,
more efficient technologies and practices.
• Continuing the Agency's National Idle-Free Corridors project to develop a contiguous network of
electrified truck stop parking spaces across the most heavily-traveled interstate freight corridors.
Continue to provide technical assistance to state and local governments and to developing countries to develop and
pilot innovative climate change mitigation options for the transportation sector.
1-125
-------
Table 6, Other Programs: Description of Planned Activities
Within FY 2005 Budget Request
Carbon
Removal
Continue to collaborate with USDA on the project development issues and determine the viability of various
carbon sequestration activities as quantifiable means of limiting greenhouse gas emissions.
Continue work on enhancing the ability of major macroeconomic models to evaluate the economic value of carbon
sequestration and fully appreciate the role of carbon sequestration in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Bring together leading experts from government, industry, and the research community to address several difficult
issues related to sequestration projects, including permanence, leakage, monitoring, and verification.
Enhance efforts to better quantify the ancillary impacts of carbon sequestration.
Work with stakeholders in the forestry and agriculture sectors to promote the development of environmentally
sustainable and economically attractive carbon sequestration projects domestically and internationally.
Work with DOE and other stakeholders to understand emission reduction accounting and environmental impacts
from carbon storage in geological formations.
State
and
Local
Provide targeted support, via analytical tools, guidance, and tailored technical support, to states requesting
assistance with initiating and updating voluntary greenhouse gas inventories, developing and implementing
voluntary GHG reduction strategies, and integrating GHG reductions into their overall planning.
Support best practices by providing: training on new tools and models that build understanding of the broader
human health and clean air benefits of reducing criteria pollutants; opportunities for training; and information on
the environmental outcomes of voluntary programs.
Conduct analyses, develop analytical tools, and provide technical assistance to EPA regions, states, and local air
programs on integrating energy efficiency and renewable energy into SIPs through innovative measures.
Develop tools to facilitate voluntary adoption of heat island reduction activities and integrate them into SIPs.
Improve and enhance outreach products, including the EPA Global Warming and Heat Island websites, a
guidebook on heat island mitigation strategies, and maintenance of a best practices clearinghouse to promote
emission reduction strategies.
Translate key scientific findings into a format more readily understandable to the public.
Develop risk characterization methods to inform public response to climate change, and continue work on the
strategic coastal response program.
International
Capacity
Building
Continue and expand cooperation with China, Mexico, Brazil, and India.
Build the capacity in key developing countries (e.g., India and Russia) to develop reliable GHG emission
inventories.
Establish regional energy and GHG information networks in three major regions of the world.
Improve energy efficiency practices in buildings in Russia and Kazakhstan.
Continue to assist key developing countries in their efforts to identify and quantify mitigation measures that reduce
local air pollutants and GHG emissions and that result in multiple environmental, health, social, and economic
benefits.
Establish partnerships with key developing countries to share and transfer energy efficiency program models and
efficient energy technologies developed in the U.S.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for existing
FTE.
1-126
-------
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions
In 2005 Greenhouse gas emissions will be reduced from projected levels by approximately 90 MMTCE per
year through EPA partnerships with businesses, schools, state and local governments, and other
organizations.
In 2004 Greenhouse gas emissions will be reduced from projected levels by approximately 81 MMTCE per
year through EPA partnerships with businesses, schools, state and local governments, and other
organizations.
In 2003 End of year FY 2003 data will be available in mid-2004 to verify that Greenhouse gas emissions will
be reduced from projected levels by approximately 72.2 MMTCE per year through EPA partnerships
with businesses, schools, state and local governments, and other organizations.
Performance Measures:
Annual Greenhouse Gas Reductions - All
EPA Programs
Greenhouse Gas Reductions from EPA's
Buildings Sector Programs (ENERGY
STAR)
Greenhouse Gas Reductions from EPA's
Industrial Efficiency/Waste Management
Programs
Greenhouse Gas Reductions from EPA's
Industrial Methane Outreach Programs
Greenhouse Gas Reductions from EPA's
Industrial HFC/PFC Programs
Greenhouse Gas Reductions from EPA's
Transportation Programs
Greenhouse Gas Reductions from EPA's
State and Local Programs
FY2003
Actuals
Data Lag
Data Lag
Data Lag
Data Lag
Data Lag
Data Lag
Data Lag
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
81.0
21.4
7.3
18.1
29.6
2.6
2.0
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
90.2
23.8
19.1
34.4
2.9
2.0
MMTCE
MMTCE
MMTCE
MMTCE
MMTCE
MMTCE
MMTCE
Baseline: The baseline for evaluating program performance is a projection of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in
the absence of the U.S. climate change programs. The baseline was developed as part of an interagency
evaluation of the U.S. climate change programs in 2002, which built on similar baseline forecasts
developed hi 1997 and 1993. Baseline data for carbon emissions related to energy use is based on data
from the Energy Information Agency (EIA) and from EPA's Integrated Planning Model of the U.S.
electric power sector. Baseline data for non-carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, including nitrous oxide
and other high global warming potential gases are maintained by EPA. Baseline information is
discussed at length in the U.S. Climate Action Report 2002
(www.epa.gov/globalwarming/publications/car/index.html), which provides a discussion of differences
in assumptions between the 1997 baseline and the 2002 update, including which portion of energy
efficiency programs are included hi the estimates. EPA develops the non-CO2 emissions baselines and
projections using information from partners and other sources. EPA continues to develop annual
inventories as well as update methodologies as new information becomes available.
1-127
-------
Reduce Energy Consumption
In 2005 Reduce energy consumption from projected levels by more than 120 billion kilowatt hours,
contributing to over $8.5 billion in energy savings to consumers and businesses.
In 2004 Reduce energy consumption from projected levels by more than 110 billion kilowatt hours,
contributing to over $7.5 billion in energy savings to consumers and businesses.
In 2003 End of year FY 2003 data will be available in late 2004 to verify the reduction in energy consumption
from projected levels by more than 95 billion kilowatt hours, contributing to over $6.5 billion in
energy savings to consumers and businesses.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Annual Energy Savings - All EPA
Pr0gramS Data Lag 110 120 kWn"
Baseline: The baseline for evaluating program performance is a projection of U.S.
greenhouse gas emissions in the absence of the U.S. climate change programs. The baseline was
developed as part of an interagency evaluation of the U.S. climate change programs in 2002,
which built on similar baseline forecasts developed in 1997 and 1993. Baseline data for carbon
emissions related to energy use is based on data from the Energy Information Agency (EIA) and
from EPA's Integrated Planning Model of the U.S. electric power sector. Baseline data for non-
carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, including nitrous oxide and other high global warming
potential gases are maintained by EPA. Baseline information is discussed at length in the U.S.
Climate Action Report 2002 (www.epa.gov/globalwarming/publications/car/index.html), which
provides a discussion of differences in assumptions between the 1997 baseline and the 2002
update, including which portion of energy efficiency programs are included in the estimates.
EPA develops the non-CO2 emissions baselines and projections using information from partners
and other sources. EPA continues to develop annual inventories as well as update methodologies
as new information becomes available.
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
FY 2005 Performance Measure; Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions overall and
by Sector
Performance Database: Climate Protection Partnerships Division Tracking System.
Data Source: Baseline data for carbon emissions related to energy use comes from the Energy
Information Agency (EIA) and from EPA's Integrated Planning Model of the U.S. electric power
sector. Baseline data for non-carbon dioxide (COa) emissions, including nitrous oxide and other
high global warming potential gases, are maintained by EPA. Baseline information is discussed
at length in the U.S. Climate Action Report 2002. EPA develops the carbon and non-CO2
emissions baselines and projections using information from partners and other sources. Data
collected by EPA's voluntary programs include partner reports on facility- specific
improvements (e.g. space upgraded, kilowatt-hours (kWh) reduced), national market data on
shipments of efficient products, and engineering measurements of equipment power levels and
usage patterns.
1-128
-------
Methods, Assumptions, and Suitability: Most of the voluntary climate programs' focus is on
energy efficiency. For these programs, EPA estimates the expected reduction in electricity
consumption hi kilowatt-hours (kWh). Emissions prevented are calculated as the product of the
kWh of electricity saved and an annual emission factor (e.g., million metric tons carbon
equivalent (MMTCE) prevented per kWh). Other programs focus on directly lowering
greenhouse gas emissions (e.g., Natural Gas STAR, Landfill Methane Outreach, and Coalbed
Methane Outreach); for these, greenhouse gas emission reductions are estimated on a project-by-
project basis. EPA maintains a "tracking system" for emissions reductions.
QA/QC Procedures: EPA devotes considerable effort to obtaining the best possible
information on which to evaluate emissions reductions from voluntary programs. Peer-reviewed
carbon-conversion factors are used to ensure consistency with generally accepted measures of
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions, and peer-reviewed methodologies are used to calculate GHG
reductions from these programs.
Data Quality Review: The Administration evaluates its climate programs using an interagency
approach. The second such interagency evaluation included participants from EPA and the
Departments of State, Energy, Commerce, Transportation, and Agriculture. The previous
evaluation was published in the U.S. Climate Action Report-1997. A 1997 audit by EPA's Office
of the Inspector General concluded that the climate programs examined "used good management
practices" and "effectively estimated the impact their activities had on reducing risks to health
and the environment..."
Data Limitations: These are indirect measures of GHG emissions (carbon conversion factors
and methods to convert material-specific reductions to GHG emissions reductions). Also, the
voluntary nature of the programs may affect reporting. Further research will be necessary in
order to fully understand the links between GHG concentrations and specific environmental
impacts, such as impacts on health, ecosystems, crops, weather events, and so forth.
Error Estimate: These are indirect measures of GHG emissions. Although EPA devotes
considerable effort to obtaining the best possible information on which to evaluate emissions
reductions from voluntary programs, errors hi the performance data could be introduced through
uncertainties hi carbon conversion factors, engineering analyses, and econometric analyses.
New/Improved Data or Systems: The Administration regularly evaluates the effectiveness of
its climate programs through interagency evaluations. EPA continues to update inventories and
methodologies as new information becomes available.
References: The U.S. Climate Action Report 2002 is available at:
w\^rw.epa.gov/globalwarmmg/publications/car/index..html. The accomplishments of many of
EPA's voluntary programs are documented in the Climate Protection Partnerships Division
Annual Report. The most recent version is Change for the Better: Energy Star and Other
Voluntary Programs, Climate Protection Partnerships Division 2002 Annual Report.
1-129
-------
FY 2005 Performance Measure; Annual Energy Savings
Performance Database: Climate Protection Partnerships Division Tracking System
Data Source: Data collected by EPA's voluntary programs include partner reports on facility
specific improvements (e.g. space upgraded, kilowatt-hours (kWh) reduced), national market
data on shipments of efficient products, and engineering measurements of equipment power
levels and usage patterns.
Methods, Assumptions, and Suitability: Most of the voluntary climate programs' focus is on
energy efficiency. For these programs, EPA estimates the expected reduction in electricity
consumption in kilowatt-hours (kWh). Emissions prevented are calculated as the product of the
kWh of electricity saved and an annual emission factor (e.g., MMTCE prevented per kWh).
Other programs focus on directly lowering greenhouse gas emissions (e.g., Natural Gas STAR,
Landfill Methane Outreach, and Coalbed Methane Outreach); for these, greenhouse gas emission
reductions are estimated on a project-by-project basis. EPA maintains a tracking system for
energy reductions.
Energy bill savings are calculated as the product of the kWh of energy saved and the cost of
electricity for the affected market segment (residential, commercial, or industrial) taken from the
Energy Information Administration's (EIA) Annual Energy Outlook 2002 and Annual Energy
Review 2000 for each year in the analysis (1993-2012). Energy bill savings also include revenue
from the sale of methane and/or the sale of electricity made from captured methane. The net
present value (NPV) of these savings was calculated using a 4-percent discount rate and a 2001
perspective.
QA/QC Procedures: EPA devotes considerable effort to obtaining the best possible
information on which to evaluate energy savings from its voluntary programs.
Data Quality Review: The Administration regularly evaluates the effectiveness of its climate
programs through interagency evaluations. The second such interagency evaluation included
participants from EPA and the Departments of State, Energy, Commerce, Transportation, and
Agriculture. The results were published in the U.S. Climate Action Report-2002 as part of the
United States' submission to the Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC). The
previous evaluation was published in the U.S. Climate Action Report-1997. A 1997 audit by
EPA's Office of the Inspector General concluded that the climate programs examined "used
good management practices" and "effectively estimated the impact their activities had on
reducing risks to health and the environment."
Data Limitations: The voluntary nature of programs may affect reporting. In addition, errors in
the performance data could be introduced through uncertainties hi engineering analyses and
econometric analyses.
Error Estimate: Although EPA devotes considerable effort to obtaining the best possible
information on which to evaluate emissions reductions from voluntary programs, errors in the
performance data could be introduced through uncertainties in engineering analyses and
econometric analyses.
1-130
-------
New/Improved Data or Systems: The Administration regularly evaluates the effectiveness of
its climate programs through interagency evaluations. EPA continues to update inventories and
methodologies as new information becomes available.
References: The U.S. Climate Action Report 2002 is available at:
\vwu',epa.gov/globalwamiittg/pubiications/car/index.htDil. The accomplishments of many of
EPA voluntary programs are documented in the Climate Protection Partnerships Division
Annual Report. The most recent version is Change for the Better: Energy Star and Other
Voluntary Programs, Climate Protection Partnerships Division 2002 Annual Report.
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
Voluntary climate protection programs government-wide stimulate the development and
use of renewable energy technologies and energy efficient products that will help reduce
greenhouse gas emissions. The effort is led by EPA and DOE with significant involvement from
USD A, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the National Institute of
Standards and Technology.
Agencies throughout the government make significant contributions to the climate
protection programs. For example, DOE will pursue actions such as promoting the research,
development, and deployment of advanced technologies (for example, renewable energy
sources). The Treasury Department will administer proposed tax incentives for specific
investments that will reduce emissions. EPA is working with DOE to demonstrate technologies
that oxidize ventilation air methane from coal mines. EPA is broadening its public information
transportation choices campaign as a joint effort with DOT. EPA coordinates with each of the
above-mentioned agencies to ensure that our programs are complementary and in no way
duplicative.
This coordination is evident in work recently completed by an interagency task force,
including representatives from the Department of State, EPA, DOE, USDA, DOT, OMB,
Department of Commerce, USGCRP, NOAA, NASA, and the Department of Defense, to prepare
the Third National Communication to the Secretariat as required under the FCCC. The FCCC
was ratified by the United States Senate hi 1992. A portion of the Third National
Communication describes policies and measures (such as ENERGY STAR and EPA's Clean
Automotive Technology initiative) undertaken by the U.S. to reduce greenhouse gas emissions,
implementation status of the policies and measures, and their actual and projected benefits. One
result of this interagency review process has been a refinement of future goals for these policies
and measures which were communicated to the Secretariat of the FCCC in 2002. The "U.S.
Climate Action Report 2002: Third National Communication of the United States of America
under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change" is available at:
http://unfccc.rnt/resource/docs/natc/usnc3 .pdf.
EPA works primarily with the Department of State, the Agency for International
Development, and the Department of Energy as well as with regional organizations in
implementing climate-related programs and projects. In addition, EPA partners with others
worldwide, including international organizations such as the United Nations Environment
1-131
-------
Programme, the United Nations Development Programme, the International Energy Agency, the
OECD, the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, and our colleagues hi Canada, Mexico,
Europe and Japan.
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
Clean Ah- Act Amendments, 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. - Sections 102, 103, 104, and 108
Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq. - Section 104
Federal Technology Transfer Act, 15 U. S.C. - Section 3701 a
Global Climate Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. 2901 - Section 1103
National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. - Section 102
Pollution Prevention Act, 42 U.S.C. 13101 et seq. - Sections 6602, 6603, 6604, and 6605
Solid Waste Disposal Act, 42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq. - Section 8001
1-132
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Clean Air and Global Climate Change
OBJECTIVE; Enhance Science and Research
Through 2010, provide and apply sound science to support EPA's goal of clean air by
conducting leading-edge research and developing a better understanding and characterization of
environmental outcomes under Goal 1.
Resource Summary
(Dollars in Thousands)
Enhance Science and Research
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Buildings and Facilities
Inspector General
Total Workyears
FY2003
Actuals
$132377.0
$16,904.8
$113,313.3
$1715.0
$643.9
385.2
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
$128,016.6
$18,216.5
$107,353.4
$1,710.5
$736.2
371.2
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
$130,863.6
$18,723.8
$109,544.0
$1,840.5
$755.3
372.4
FY2005Req.v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$2,847.1
$507.4
$2,190.6
$130.0
$19.1
1.1
Program Project
(Dollars hi Thousands)
Climate Protection Program
Radiation: Protection
Research: Air Toxics
Research: Particulate Matter
Research: Troposphere Ozone
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Federal Support for Air Quality Management
Federal Support for Air Toxics Program
Administrative Projects
TOTAL
FY 2003
Actuals
$19,588.0
$1,367.0
$14,257.2
$64,437.9
$4,804.2
$4,042.7
$3,810.2
$408.0
$402.0
$19,459.8
$132,577.0
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$17,320.3
$1,472.1
$15,700.9
$63,620.6
$4,942.3
$3,991.2
$0.0
$380.7
$403.1
$20,185.4
$128,016.6
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$17,458.9
$1,361.5
$17,638.9
$63,690.8
$4,900.9
$3,991.2
$0.0
$482.4
$405.4
$20,933.6
$130,863.6
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$138.6
($110.6)
$1,938.0
$70.2
($41.4)
$0.0
$0.0
$101.7
$2.3
$748.3
$2,847.1
1-133
-------
FY 2005 REQUEST
Results to be Achieved Under this Objective
EPA undertakes and relies upon sound science in its clean air programs. The Agency
uses science to determine the risks that air pollution poses to human health and the environment,
and to identify the best means to detect, abate, and avoid environmental problems associated
with ah" pollutants. To support the achievement of its clean air objectives and the overall goal of
clean air for American communities and surrounding ecosystems, EPA will ensure that efforts to
reduce environmental and human health risks are based on the best available scientific
information. In addition, EPA will continue to integrate critical scientific assessment with
policy, regulatory, and non-regulatory activities.
The tropospheric ozone research program develops tools and generates methods and data
to support states, tribes, and the Agency as they identify and implement effective strategies to
attain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Research results will be used to
help determine which areas of the country attain the NAAQS for tropospheric ozone. Air quality
simulation models and associated inputs (atmospheric chemistry and emissions models)
produced from this research are used to support scientific analyses that serve as the basis for
identifying the most cost-effective mix of controls that could be deployed in a particular area to
meet the NAAQS.
Particulate matter (PM) exposure and health effects research will fill current gaps hi our
understanding of the observed excess mortality and disease associated with PM and will continue
work to strengthen the scientific basis for the next review of the PM NAAQS in 2010 by
conducting epidemiological, toxicological, clinical, and exposure studies of PM health effects.
This will include research describing the health effects of different PM sizes, and specific effects
(such as respiratory and cardiopulmonary) of ambient PM on select susceptible populations. In
addition, human exposure research will provide information on relationships between ambient
levels of PM and actual human exposure that lead to adverse health impacts. Results from the
research will also help elucidate the health implications of PM emitted from specific source
categories.
After the designation of non-attainment areas for the current PM NAAQS hi 2005, states
will have three years hi which to develop State Implementation Plans (SIPs) that, once
implemented, lead to cleaner air and PM NAAQS attainment. The PM research program will
provide the latest data on the chemical and physical characteristics of source emissions and
improve models to identify source contributions to locally observed PM concentrations. The
program will evaluate risk management options and provide the ah* quality models to predict
how various emission reduction strategies will impact future PM concentrations. These data and
information, which are essential for SIP development, will help states identify sources of concern
in thek area and develop effective SIPs that bring the states into compliance as quickly as
possible.
Air Toxics research contributes to the advancement of science in the areas of emissions,
air quality modeling, human exposure, and health effects, to improve EPA's ability to assess
public health risks associated with hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). The program scope includes
risk assessment techniques and risk reduction options for mobile, indoor, and stationary sources
1-134
-------
of air toxics including those where residual risks remain after existing technologies have been
installed. These efforts support development and implementation of national risk reduction
programs and community-level assessments.
Federal Support for Air Quality Management & Air Toxics Program/Radiation: Protection
EPA will continue to conduct risk assessments on both criteria and hazardous air
pollutants. These risk assessments will be used in support of our air toxics program and hi
estimating the risks associated with exposure to criteria pollutants, such as fine particles. EPA
also conducts radiation risk assessments and provides the technical tools and the scientific basis
for generating radionuclide-specific risk coefficients. Risk managers use this information to
assess health risks from radiation exposure and to determine appropriate levels for contaminated
site clean-up. This information is also utilized by EPA to develop radiation protection and risk
management policy, guidance, and rulemakings.
Clean Air Allowance Trading Systems
The Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNET) is a national long-term
atmospheric deposition monitoring network. Established in 1987, it is the Nation's primary
source for atmospheric data on the dry deposition component of total acid deposition, rural
ground-level ozone and other forms of atmospheric pollution that enter the environment as
particles and gases. Used in conjunction with the National Atmospheric Deposition Program
(NADP), CASTNET determines the effectiveness of national emission control programs through
monitoring geographic and long-term temporal trends hi atmospheric deposition. CASTNET
measures weekly average atmospheric concentrations of sulfate, nitrate, ammonium, sulfur
dioxide and nitric acid and hourly concentrations of ambient ozone levels in rural areas.
Currently, 79 monitoring stations operate across the United States. EPA operates most of the
monitoring stations; however, the National Park Service operates 26 stations hi cooperation with
EPA.
Climate Protection Program
EPA manages a number of efforts, such as the Energy Star programs, voluntary
transportation efficiency programs (all described under the Climate Change objective) as well as
the EPA Clean Automotive Technology (CAT) program, to remove barriers hi the marketplace
and to deploy technology faster hi the residential, commercial, transportation, and industrial
sectors of the economy.
The transportation component of EPA's Climate Protection Programs has produced
important advancements that will generate substantial energy and carbon benefits while
improving America's competitiveness. EPA manages a number of efforts, such as the EPA
Clean Automotive Technology program and the Fuel Cell and Hydrogen program, to develop
advanced technologies, to remove technology barriers hi the marketplace, and to deploy
technology faster in the residential, commercial, transportation, and industrial sectors of the
economy. (The Energy Star and voluntary transportation efficiency programs described under the
Climate Change objective also remove barriers in the marketplace.)
1-135
-------
The Agency's Clean Automotive Technology program will further develop advanced
clean and fuel-efficient automotive technology with the end result being to better protect the
environment and save energy. The Clean Automotive Technology program focuses efforts on
achieving significant fuel economy gams by beginning to transfer the highly efficient hybrid
powertrain components, originally developed for passenger car applications, to meet the more
demanding size, performance, durability, and towing requirements of vehicles such as Sport
Utility Vehicles (SUVs), pickup trucks, and urban delivery vehicles.
The emphasis of Clean Automotive Technology program work for the next 5-10 years
will be research and collaboration with the automotive, trucking, and fleet industries under
CRADAs, applying EPA's unique knowledge of hydraulic hybrid technology and advanced
clean-engine technologies to vehicles such as large SUVs, pickup trucks, urban delivery trucks,
school buses, shuttle buses, and refuse trucks. Through work within the CRADAs, significant
elements of EPA's technologies will be demonstrated in real-world applications and introduced
commercially by vehicle manufacturers between 2005 and 2010.
The Clean Automotive Technology program commits EPA to develop technology by the
end of the decade to satisfy stringent criteria emissions requirements and up to a doubling of fuel
efficiency in personal vehicles such as SUVs, pickups, and urban delivery vehicles — while
simultaneously meeting the more demanding size, performance, durability, and power
requirements of these vehicles. Expanding this advanced technology into 50 percent of new light
trucks by 2020 would generate annual fuel savings of 8 billion gallons, while tailpipe carbon
emissions would fall by 20 MMTCE.
Under the Fuel Cell and Hydrogen program, EPA upgraded the facilities at the National
Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory (NVFEL) to safely handle hydrogen, certified the first
fuel cell vehicle, and announced new partnerships with industry and the Department of Energy.
EPA will also play a leadership role in advancing fuel cell vehicle and hydrogen fuel
technologies and influencing the direction of technological and policy progress in support of
U.S. environmental, energy, and national security goals. EPA will achieve this by establishing
the capability to test a range of fuel cell vehicles and components; taking the national lead in
establishing emissions and fuel economy testing protocols and innovating safe laboratory
handling of hydrogen fuel; establishing a peer-reviewed life cycle model and promoting its use in
R&D and in policy decisions regarding fuel cell vehicle technology pathways; and working
closely with other key stakeholders through public/private partnerships like the California Fuel
Cell Partnership to facilitate the commercialization of innovative technologies.
In FY 2005, the Clean Automotive Technology Program will:
• demonstrate technology for a hydraulic-hybrid urban delivery vehicle or large
SUV that achieves 40-70 percent better fuel efficiency than the typical baseline
vehicle;
" provide CRADA partners the engineering expertise necessary to transfer EPA's
unique and innovative hydraulic hybrid and clean-and-efficient engine
technology;
» continue to participate in effective government/industry partnerships that advance
fuel cell vehicle technology.
1-136
-------
" certify fuel cell vehicles for several manufacturers;
• test and evaluate fuel cell vehicles as part of DOE's National Validation Program;
• establish national standards for life cycle modeling of fuel cells and fuels,
establish rigorous test procedures for fuel cell vehicles;
• expand hydrogen refueling capabilities at NVFEL to support broader fuel cell
demonstrations in Southeast Michigan, and to demonstrate the efficiency and
economics of innovative hydrogen production technologies.
Research: Tropospheric Ozone
While many of the adverse effects of. tropospheric ozone are well known,96 controlling
ozone is not an easy task because of the complex chemical reactions and atmospheric conditions
influencing ozone formation. EPA's Tropospheric Ozone Research program provides the data
and tools needed by Federal, state, tribal, and regional authorities to meet the NAAQS, and, in
turn, to effect improvements in human health and the environment.
Tropospheric ozone research is guided by a Multi-Year Plan (MYP),97 an important tool
the Agency uses to ensure that the planned research is relevant to EPA and states needs and
addresses the highest priority scientific questions. The MYP identifies research goals and
priorities, specific research needed to address the most compelling science needs, and
opportunities for collaboration and integration both within and outside of EPA. The MYP also
communicates important research results. In FY 2005, the tropospheric ozone MYP will be
combined with the PM MYP to form a comprehensive criteria pollutant MYP. This combined
plan will undergo peer review by the Clean Air Science Advisory Committee (CASAC), a
subcommittee of EPA's Science Advisory Board. (Criteria: Relevance)
As outlined in the MYP, in FY 2005 EPA's Tropospheric Ozone Research program will
focus on improving the predictive capability of, and speeding up the processing time for, air
quality models needed by the states to determine how best to meet the ozone NAAQS
(Criterion: Performance). This will include improvements to the models used to estimate
emissions of volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides that form ozone in the atmosphere,
and producing refined estimates of natural source emissions from forests and more spatially
resolved data on emissions from heavy-duty diesel trucks. The next release of the Community
Multi-Scale Air Quality (CMAQ) model, widely used by states and cities, will incorporate these
improved emission models and new atmospheric chemistry data. In addition, EPA will develop
advanced measurement methods and diagnostic information to evaluate the models. The model
improvements resulting from this research will provide Federal and state air quality managers
with the improved tools they need to more easily identify and implement cost effective control
strategies required to attain the ozone NAAQS.
96 U.S. EPA, Office of Air and Radiation. How Ground-level Ozone Affects the Way We Live and Breathe. Washington, DC: EPA. Accessed January 8,2004. Available only
I on the Internet: http://www.epa.gov/air/urbanair/ozone/index.html
97 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Tropospheric Ozone Multi-Year Plan. Washington, DC: EPA. Accessed October 22,2003. Available only on the Internet:
http://www.epa.gov/osp/myp.htnrfozone
1-137
-------
Research: Particulate Matter
EPA's PM research portfolio is aligned with the ten priority topics identified by the
National Research Council (NRC), 8 which has conducted periodic reviews of the PM research
program since 1998 to ensure the program's relevance to the highest priority research needs and
to monitor research performance. In addition to the NRC, the CASAC and EPA's Board of
Scientific Counselors (BOSC) periodically evaluate the PM research program's direction and
products (Criterion: Quality). The Agency plans to complete an updated draft PM Research
Strategy for CASAC review after completion of the final NRC report, which is expected in early
2004. The Strategy will outline research needs and priorities and the general approach the
program will take to meet them. A PM Research Multi-Year Plan (MYP)99 describes the
specific research EPA will conduct to implement the Strategy. (Criterion: Relevance)
The PM MYP addresses the topics raised by the NRC, and describes several critical
research issues included in multiple NRC topics. Among these critical research issues are: 1)
differentiating between the health effects of PM and the health effects of other air pollutants; 2)
identifying the health effects and biological mechanisms of PM constituents (e.g., sulfates versus
nitrates versus organic and elemental carbon, and metals); 3) understanding the quantitative
relationship between exposure to different particles and various health effects; and, 4)
understanding human exposures to PM constituents and sources of PM. The PM MYP also
addresses the need to improve information on the rate and characteristics of emitted particles and
to improve modeling capabilities for predicting and quantifying future PM concentrations and
their sources, and it describes the research needed to support the states as they implement plans
to meet the PM NAAQS. (Criterion: Relevance)
• Differentiating between the health effects of PM and other air pollutants
Research designed to understand and disentangle the effects of PM and co-pollutants will
include studies of how PM and other air pollutants interact as well as toxicology and human
clinical studies to understand the effects of co-pollutants on PM health effects. Epidemiology
studies and animal models will look at the health effects of PM and co-pollutants on specific
populations (e.g. the elderly, children, those with respiratory illness) believed to be most
vulnerable to PM. Some of the epidemiology studies will be conducted as part of EPA's large
multidisciplinary study in Detroit, Michigan.
Related research will focus on identifying risk factors for vulnerable populations. This
will include continuing research to identify these groups, and to develop animal models of
human susceptibility. Collaborative epidemiology/exposure studies will identify harmful effects
on vulnerable groups.
• Identifying the health effects and biological mechanisms of PM
98 For the latest report, see National Research Council. (2001) Research Priorities for Airborne Particulate Matter, m. Early Research Progress. Washington, DC: National
Academy Press. Available on the internet: htrp://www.nap.edu/books/0309073375/html/ (6/4/03).
99 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development Particulate Matter Multi-Year Plan. . Washington, DC: EPA. Accessed January 8,2004. Available only on the Internet:
http://www.epa.gov/osp/myp/pm.PDF (1/8/04)
1-138
-------
Research in FY 2005 will address the need for a better understanding of the physical,
chemical, and biological characteristics of particles responsible for adverse health effects, and
the relationships between PM constituents and adverse health effects.
The Agency will continue to conduct studies of disease processes in vulnerable
populations in order to shed light on existing evidence of long-term health effects of PM. These
studies will better characterize and quantify effects and the constituents most responsible for the
effects. Epidemiological, human clinical, and animal studies will evaluate and characterize the
differences between PM sources, components, and fine, ultrafine, and coarse particles hi healthy
and compromised individuals and extrapolate between animals and humans. This will improve
our ability to answer fundamental questions about the relative health risks attributed to PM
components and size fractions so that National Ambient Air Quality Standards can be set to
adequately protect public health.
As research results hi additional information and understanding of the characteristics of
PM components and mixtures most responsible for adverse health effects, EPA will engage in
toxicological research to determine the underlying mechanisms through which minute
concentrations of PM result hi adverse health impacts.
• Understanding the quantitative relationship between exposure to different particles and
various health effects
Health effects research to fill current gaps hi our understanding of the observed health
effects associated with PM will include determining dose-response relationships between PM
and adverse health effects. Related research on populations especially vulnerable to PM will
determine how the risk factors for these populations influence dose-response relationships.
• Understanding human exposures to PM constituents and sources of PM
Human exposure research will utilize both measurements and modeling to develop an
unproved understanding of the relationship of ambient levels of PM constituents to indoor and
personal levels and to identify relative source contributions to personal exposures. EPA will
accomplish much of this effort through a large multidisciplinary study in Detroit, Michigan.
This study will include efforts to characterize human exposures to PM and air toxics and to relate
those exposures to sources in the community. The field measurement portion of the Detroit
study, initiated hi FY 2004, will continue through FY 2006.
• Implementation research
Continuing research hi FY 2005 will support the efforts of EPA, states, tribes, and local
air quality officials to determine which areas attain the PM NAAQS, and provide them with tools
to identify the most cost-effective mix of controls that could be deployed to meet the standards.
This research will include monitoring and atmospheric measurements, development, and
evaluation of air quality and source-receptor models, emissions characterization methods and
measurements, and testing and evaluation of multi-pollutant control technologies.
Research to provide tools to quantify emissions, identify key sources of ambient PM, and
develop the science to support control strategies for attaining clean air standards, will continue hi
1-139
-------
FY 2005. Atmospheric chemistry and modeling research will continue to support improvements
in the predictive capabilities of the Community Multi-Scale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling
system for PM, and an updated version of CMAQ will be delivered to the states in FY 2005 for
them to use for developing state implementation plans (R&D Criterion: Performance).
Atmospheric measurement research will focus on developing and delivering to the states a
Federal Reference Method and/or a Federal Equivalent Method for measuring coarse particles.
Continuing implementation-related research also will generate improved data on
emissions for ai; quality models and help determine what sources are contributing to PM
measured in ambient air through use of unique chemical fingerprints. This will include
quantifying ammonia emissions (a precursor to PM formation in the atmosphere) from poultry
and cattle raising operations and producing data on the rate and chemical composition of
particles emitted from jet aircraft engines.
• PM Centers and Science to Achieve Results (STAR)100
Through a competitive process, EPA established five extramural PM Research Centers,
lasting from 1999 to 2004 through EPA's Science to Achieve Results (STAR) research program.
In FY 2005, EPA will issue new awards for Centers to conduct health effects, exposure, source
apportionment, and PM NAAQS implementation research. In addition, in FY 2005 a major
epidemiologic study on the health effects of long-term exposure to PM will be underway.
Other research supported by the STAR program will address aspects of PM health
effects, such as mechanisms and susceptibility, and issues related to NAAQS implementation.
The STAR research program uses a competitive peer review process to ensure that only high-
quality research proposals receive funding support (Criterion: Quality). STAR is an integrated
part of EPA's research program and provides the Agency access to a broad community of
researchers whose efforts have significantly improved the scientific foundation for EPA's
decision-making process in multiple areas, including the Particulate Matter Program.
EPA's PM program was evaluated for the FY 2005 President's Budget using the
Administration's Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART). The Agency is committed to
addressing the findings in the PART, such as developing long-term outcome-oriented and annual
performance measures, and annual efficiency measures.
Research: Air Toxics
The Agency has developed an Air Toxics Research Strategy101 that outlines research
needs and priorities consistent with programmatic regulatory directions. In addition, the Air
Toxics Research Multi-Year Plan (MYP),102 another tool the Agency uses to plan and implement
ah" toxics research, articulates the chief goals of EPA's air toxics research program as reducing
100 The STAR website can be accessed at: http://es.epa.gov/ncer/grants/ (Accessed January 14,2004.)
101 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Air Toxics Research Strategy. Washington, DC: EPA. Accessed October 12,2003. Available only on the Internet:
http://www.epa.gov/ord/htm/Air_Toxics.pdf
102 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Air Toxics Multi-Year Plan . Washington, DC: EPA. Accessed January 8,2004. Available only on the Internet:
http://www.epa.gov/osp/mvp/airtox.pdf
1-140
-------
uncertainty in air toxics assessments and providing tools to implement cost-effective approaches
to reduce the health risks of exposure to hazardous air pollutants or "HAPs." (Criterion:
Quality) Federal, state and local ah- quality officials will use the results from this research to
reduce exposures to HAPs and improve air quality across the country.
In FY 2005, EPA will conduct research to reduce uncertainty in air toxics assessments
under both Goals 1 and 4 (in the Human Health Risk Assessment program). Research under
Goal 1 to develop an acute risk assessment approach will include the use of animal studies to
predict acute neurotoxicity in humans and the identification of model forms common to animals
and humans that relate pulmonary and neurobehavioral effects from exposure to hazardous air
pollutants. EPA researchers will improve the chronic risk assessment approach by using
proteomics to determine common mechanisms of injury within the classes of halogenated
organics, metals, aldehydes and ketones, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.
The Agency will also continue to develop community assessment tools for air toxics.
This will include the investigation of acute neurotoxicity, homology between species, and
common mechanisms of injury. Research to better understand human exposure to air toxics will
be accomplished through the large multidisciplinary study in Detroit, Michigan mentioned above
in the description of particulate matter research. The study will develop an improved
understanding of the relationship of ambient levels of air toxics to indoor and personal levels and
will attempt to identify relative source contributions to personal exposures. (Criterion:
Performance)
Research to provide tools to implement cost-effective approaches that reduce the health
risks from stationary point, area, mobile, or indoor sources of air toxics will include
characterizing sources that contribute to indoor concentrations of air toxics, emissions from
small non-road engines, and determining temporal and spatial allocation of truck activity in the
Agency's modal-based Mobile Emissions Assessment System for Urban and Regional
Evaluation (MEASURE) model. Residual risk assessment and national scale assessment support
will include exposure research to prioritize health hazard information, air quality modeling tools
to predict ambient concentrations, and an evaluation of methods to measure trace organics
(Criterion: Performance).
The Agency will continue its joint effort with industry to support the Health Effects
Institute, which sponsors research on the health effects of pollutants from motor vehicles and
other sources. Current efforts to more accurately assess exposures to air toxics are developing
the foundation for health studies of air toxics using appropriate sites, populations, and endpoints.
As part of the efforts to monitor health and exposures related to the World Trade Center
(WTC) disaster, the Agency will support extended follow-up associated with the Agency for
Toxic Substances and Disease Registry's (ATSDR) registry of residents and workers affected by
the WTC disaster. Currently, a baseline health Registry has been set up. Resources hi FY05 will
continue to support a multi-agency effort on an additional round of registrant follow-up to get
updates on the health status of registrants, and a longitudinal analysis to assist hi identifying the
nature and extent of long-term health impacts from exposure to the WTC disaster.
1-141
-------
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
~"' ^^^^••IIMMIII I mi- j
S&T
• (-$200,600): These resources represent savings that will result from consolidation of
many information technology (IT) services, including call center and service desk, server
management, hardware and software acquisition, and IT equipment standardization. This will
result in enhanced security and uniform maintenance requirements. Since these resources
represent an efficiency savings, there is no negative programmatic impact.
• There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for new and
existing FTE.
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
Participate Matter Research
Long-term Outcome Measusre Measure under development.
Annual Measure Measure under development.
Efficiency Measure Measure under development.
Clean Automotive Technology
In 2005 Transfer hybrid powertrain components, originally developed for passenger car applications, to meet
size, performance, durability, and towing requirements of Sport Utility Vehicle and urban delivery
vehicle applications with an average fuel economy improvement of 30% over the baseline.
In 2004 Transfer hybrid powertrain components, originally developed for passenger car applications, to meet
size, performance, durability, and towing requirements of Sport Utility Vehicle and urban delivery
vehicle applications with an average fuel economy improvement of 25% over the baseline.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Fuel Economy of EPA-Developed SUV
Hybrid Vehicle over EPA Driving Cycles
Tested 25.2 26.3 MPG
Baseline: The average fuel economy of all SUVs sold in the US in 2001 is 20.2 mpg. Values for 2002, 2003,
and 2004 represent 15%, 20%, and 25% improvements over this baseline, respectively. The long-term
target is to demonstrate a practical and affordable powertrain that is 30% more efficient by 2005, and
100% more efficient by 2010.
1-142
-------
Research
PM Measurement Research
In 2005 Deliver and transfer improved receptor models and data on chemical compounds emitted from sources
so that, by 2006, EPA's Office of Air and Radiation and the states have the necessary new data and
tools to predict, measure, and reduce ambient PM and PM emissions to attain the existing PM National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for the protection of public health.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Improved receptor models and data on
chemical compounds emitted from sources ™ ,„ „ ,^ ,
09/30/05 data
Baseline: Following designation of non-attainment areas for the Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality
Standards in 2004 and 2005, states will need to immediately begin developing State Implementation
Plans (SIPs). SIPs incorporate source emission reduction rules that once implemented lead to cleaner
air and standards attainment. They are due to EPA three years after designation. SIP development is
predicated on the availability of recent and credible information on source emission characteristics and
receptor-oriented models that can identify sources contributing to locally observed PM concentrations
based on their chemical signatures. A next update (FY 2005) of these constantly improving models
and the latest hi source signatures will be produced to help states with their SIPs as part of a weight of
evidence approach that use these and chemical transport modeling to tag specific sources with
reduction targets.
Beginning in FY 2005, regular evaluations by independent and external panels will provide reviews of
EPA research programs' relevance, quality, and successful performance to date, in accordance with
OMB's Investment Criteria for Research and Development. These evaluations will include an
examination of a program's design to determine the appropriateness of a program's short-,
intermediate-, and long-term goals and its strategy for attaining these. Reviewers will also
qualitatively determine whether EPA has been successful hi meeting its annual and long-term
commitments for research. Recommendations and results from these reviews will improve the design
and management of EPA research programs and help to measure then" progress under the Government
Performance and Results Act (GPRA).
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
FY 2005 Performance Measure; Fuel Economy of EPA-Developed SUV Hybrid Vehicle
over EPA Driving Cycles Tested
Performance Database: Fuel economy test data for both urban and highway test cycles under
the EPA Federal Test Procedure for passenger cars.
Data Source: EPA fuel economy tests performed at the National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions
Laboratory (NVFEL), Ann Arbor, Michigan
QA/QC Procedures: EPA fuel economy tests are performed in accordance with the EPA
Federal Test Procedure and all applicable QA/QC procedures. Available on the Internet:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/sftp.htm.
1-143
-------
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: N/A
Data Quality Reviews: EPA's NVFEL laboratory is recognized as a national and international
facility for fuel economy and emissions testing. NVFEL is also the reference point for private
industry.
Data Limitations: Primarily due to EPA regulations, vehicle fuel economy testing is a well
established and precise exercise with extremely low test to test variability (well less than 5%).
Additional information is available on the Internet: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/testdata.html One
challenge relates to fuel economy testing of hybrid vehicles (i.e., more than one source of
onboard power), which is more complex than testing of conventional vehicles. EPA has not yet
published formal regulations to cover hybrid vehicles. However, relevant information is
available on the Internet: http://www.ctts.nrel.gov/analysis/hev_test/procedures.shtml
Error Estimate: N/A
New/Improved Data or Systems: EPA is using solid engineering judgment and consultations
with other expert organizations (including major auto companies) to develop internal procedures
for testing hybrid vehicles.
References: See http://www.epa.gov/otaq/testproc.htni for additional information about testing
and measuring emissions at the NVFEL.
EFFICIENCY MEASURES\MEASUREMENT DEVELOPMENT PLANS
As a measure of efficiency, the Agency will track the time it takes to process particulate
matter research grant proposals from RFA closure to submittal to EPA's Grants Administration
Division. The Agency will also track the number of peer-reviewed particulate matter research
journal articles produced per scientific/engineering FTE.
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
The Agency coordinates its tropospheric ozone research program with other agencies'
research efforts, including those of the Departments of Energy and Commerce, and the National
Science Foundation. All emissions, atmospheric chemistry, air quality modeling, and monitoring
research in this area is coordinated through the efforts of the North American Consortium for
Atmospheric Research hi Support of Air Quality Management (NARSTO), a public/private
partnership whose membership spans governments, utilities, industry, and academia throughout
Mexico, the United States, and Canada.
EPA and the National Institutes of Health coordinate research efforts on the health effects
of air pollution, recently co-sponsoring a workshop on air pollution and. cardiovascular disease.
Following this workshop, EPA and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
(NIEHS) issued a joint solicitation on the role of air pollutants hi cardiovascular disease with the
potential to fund approximately 10-15 grants ranging from two to four years in duration. EPA,
1-144
-------
NIEHS and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute are continuing these successful
coordination efforts and discussing possibilities for future collaboration.
The National Research Council's PM research plan serves as the principal guideline for
EPA's PM research program. EPA coordinates with other Federal agencies (e.g., the National
Institutes of Health and the Department of Energy) to review ongoing PM research activities and,
where appropriate, re-focus activities to be consistent with the NAS plan.
The PM science planning community has pointed to the need to conduct its health effects,
exposure, and monitoring research in close coordination so that PM toxicological,
epidemiological, and exposure research are done in combination. EPA will continue to focus on
such coordination through activities such as: (1) playing a lead role in coordinating all Federal
agency research on PM health, exposure, and atmospheric processes under the Air Quality
Research Subcommittee of the President's Committee on Environment and Natural Resources
(CENR/AQRS); (2) supporting an open inventory of public and private ongoing PM research;
and (3) completing a Research Strategy for PM that will benefit all organizations engaged in
PM-related research. Another key opportunity for coordinating research supporting state efforts
to implement the PM NAAQS is through the expansion of NARSTO, which has broadened its
mission to include PM-related efforts.
EPA's Air Toxics Research Program works with other Federal agencies, such as the
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) and the National Toxicology
Program (as a source of toxicity testing data), as needed. The Health Effects Institute conducts
complementary research related to air toxics that is coordinated with EPA activities. In
addition, EPA conducts research on advanced source measurement approaches jointly with the
Department of Defense through the Strategic Environmental Research and Development
Program (SERDP).
EPA works with the National Park Service hi running CASTNET. DOE will pursue
actions such as promoting the research, development, and deployment of advanced technologies
(for example, renewable energy sources). In the case of fuel cell vehicle technology, EPA is
working closely with DOE as the Administration's FreedomCAR initiative develops, taking the
lead on emissions-related issues.
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
Clean Air Act Amendments
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), as
amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA)
Energy Policy Act of 1992
Federal Technology Transfer Act, 15 U.S.C. - Section 370la
Global Climate Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. 2901 - Section 1103
National Climate Program Act (1997)
Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982
Pollution Prevention Act, 42 U.S.C. 13101 et seq. - Sections 6602, 6603, 6604, and 6605
Safe Drinking Water Act
U.S. Global Change Research Program Act of 1990
1-145
-------
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978
Waste Isolation Pilot Plan (WIPP) Land Withdrawal Act
1-146
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
CLEAN AIR AND GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE
Categorical Grant
Radon, 1-65
State and Local Air Quality Management, 1-14,1-15
Tribal Air Quality Management, 1-14
Children and other Sensitive Populations, 1-14
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs, 1-14,1-15,1-19,1-133
Clean School Bus Initiative, 1-15,1-39,1-42
Climate Protection Program, 1-111,1-112,1-113,1-114,1-115,1-133,1-135
Congressionally Mandated Projects, 1-14,1-111,1-133
Federal Stationary Source Regulations, 1-14,1-15,1-16,1-42
Federal Support for Air Quality Management, 1-14,1-15,1-31,1-42,1-133,1-135
Federal Support for Air Toxics Program, 1-14,1-15,1-36,1-42,1-133
Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certification, 1-14,1-15
Homeland Security
Critical Infrastructure Protection, 1-14
Preparedness, Response, and Recovery, I-100
Human Health Risk Assessment, 1-141
Indoor Air
Asthma Program, 1-65
Environment Tobacco Smoke Program, 1-65
Radon Program, 1-65
Schools and Workplace Program, 1-65
International Capacity Building, 1-14,1-40,1-115,1-117,1-121,1-126
Radiation
Protection, 1-100,1-101,1-133
Response Preparedness, I-100,1-102
Research
Air Toxics, 1-133
Particulate Matter, 1-133
Troposphere Ozone, 1-133
Science Advisory Board, 1-9,1-37,1-52,1-53,1-137
Stratospheric Ozone
Domestic Programs, 1-92,1-93
Multilateral Fund, 1-92
-------
Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents
Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water II-l
Protect Human Health 11-12
Protect Water Quality II-50
Enhance Science and Research 11-86
Subject Index II-98
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Clean and Safe Water
STRATEGIC GOAL: 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.
Resource Summary
(Dollars hi thousands)
Clean and Safe Water
Protect Human Health
Protect Water Quality
Enhance Science and Research
Total Workyears
FY2003
Actuals
$3,725,201.9
$1,259,787.6
$2,346,144.8
$119,269.5
2,941.4
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$2,959,731.8
$1,192,187.1
$1,647,043.1
$120,501.6
3,053.6
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$2,936,968.6
$1,170,339.6
$1,645,669.9
$120,959.1
3,041.4
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres
Bud
($22,763.3)
($21,847.5)
($1,373.3)
$457.5
-12.3
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT
Over the 30 years since enactment of the Clean Water and Safe Drinking Water Acts
(CWA and SOW A), government, citizens, and the private sector have worked together to make
dramatic progress hi improving the quality of surface waters and drinking water.
Thirty years ago, much of the nation's tap water had either very limited treatment
(usually disinfection) or no treatment at all. 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 waters were open sewers posing health risks and many water bodies were so polluted
that traditional uses, such as swimming, fishing, and recreation, were impossible.
Today, drinking water systems monitor and treat water to assure compliance with
drinking water standards covering a wide range of contaminants. In addition, we now protect
sources of drinking water through activities such as regulating injection of wastes to ground
waters. A massive investment of federal, state, and local funds resulted in a new generation of
wastewater treatment facilities able to provide "secondary" treatment or better. Over 50
categories of industry 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.
Cleaner, safer water has renewed recreational, ecological, and economic interests hi
communities across the nation. The recreation, tourism, and travel industry is one of the largest
1 United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water. 1998. Clean Water Action Plan: Restoring and Protecting
America's Water. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
II-1
-------
employers in the nation, and a significant portion of recreational spending comes from
swimming, boating, sport fishing, and hunting.2 Each year, more than 180 million people visit
the shore for recreation.3 In 2001, sportspersons spent a total of $70 billion- $35.6 billion on
fishing, $20.6 billion on hunting, and $13.8 million on items used for both hunting and fishing.
Wildlife watchers spent an additional $38.4 billion on their activities around the home and on
trips away from home.4 The commercial fishing industry, which also requires clean water and
healthy wetlands, contributed $28.6 billion to the economy in 2001.5 The Cuyahoga River,
which once caught fire, is now busy with boats and harbor businesses that generate substantial
revenue for the City of Cleveland. The Willamette River in Oregon has been restored to provide
swimming, fishing, and water sports. Even Lake Erie, once infamous for its dead fish, now
supports a $600 million per year fishing industry.6
Much of the dramatic progress hi improving the nation's water quality over the past 30
years is directly attributable to our improvements in water infrastructure. Entering the 21st
century, however, the job is far from over. Despite the gains made since the passage of the
CWA and the SDWA, approximately 40% of the nation's waters assessed by states still do not
meet basic water quality standards.7 Remaining water quality problems are not easily remedied:
they come not just from discharge from pipes, but from diffuse sources — farming and forestry,
construction sites, urban streets, automobiles, atmospheric deposition, even suburban homes and
yards. They are no longer just chemical hi nature. There are biological threats to our nation's
waters that we must address as well if we are to truly achieve the stated goal of the CWA to
"restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters."
States have identified more than 25,000 waterways as being impaired and have listed a
group of principal causes of impairment to the waterways.8 One of these impairments is
pesticides. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has synthesized contaminant and nutrient data
from its 1992-1998 National Water Quality Assessment (NAWQA) program. This assessment
found that detectable concentrations of pesticides are widespread in urban, agricultural and
mixed-use area streams. Interestingly, streams in urban areas generally have higher
concentrations of insecticides than streams in agricultural areas, however incidences are
generally lower. Recent trends toward low-density development (sprawl) will increase
waterways' overall exposure to pesticides because it leaves fewer pristine natural areas and
fewer trees and exposes more land to pesticides.
Reductions of pesticide concentrations in streams and groundwater require management
strategies that focus on reducing chemical use. This means local and regional management
strategies are needed to account for geographic patterns in chemical use and natural factors. One
of the primary concerns for water quality hi the U.S. is the role of small, dispersed sources of
2 Travel Industry Association of America. Tourism for America, II'1' 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 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. 2001 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife-Associated Recreation.
Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
5 National Marine Fisheries Service. 2002. Fisheries of the U.S. 2001. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
6 United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water. 1998. Clean Water Action Plan: Restoring and Protecting
America's Water. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
7 303(d) information comes from: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. States' Listing of Impaired Waters as Required by
Clean Water Act Section 303(d). Washington, DC. Available online at http://oaspub.epa.gov/waters/nationaLrept.control.
8 303(d) information comes from: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. States' Listing of Impaired Waters as Required by
Clean Water Act Section 303(d). Washington, DC. Available online at http://oaspub.epa.gov/waters/nationaLrept.control.
II-2
-------
non-point source pollution. The major factors that contribute to the increasing levels of
pesticides found in streams and groundwater include the application pattern of pesticides, the soil
condition and the amount of rainfall or irrigation, which can increase pesticide run-off into
streams and rivers.
Communities are challenged to find the fiscal resources to sustain the gains of the past 30
years, while providing clean and safe water for the future. They must find ways to replace aging
infrastructure, to meet growing infrastructure demands fueled by population growth, and to
secure their water and wastewater infrastructure against threats. To further our progress toward
clean waters and safer drinking water, we must both maintain our commitment to the core
measures we have already established and look for new ways to improve water quality and
protect human health.
MEANS AND STRATEGY
EPA will focus on four key strategies to accelerate progress toward achieving the
Nation's clean and safe water goals. To better address the complexity of the remaining water
quality challenges, EPA will promote local watershed approaches to achieving the best and most
cost effective solutions to local and regional water problems. To protect and build on the gains
of the past, EPA will focus on its core water programs. To maximize the impact of each dollar,
EPA will continue to strengthen our vital partnerships with States, Tribes, local governments,
and other parties that are also working toward the common goal of improving the Nation's
waters. To leverage progress through innovation, EPA will promote water quality trading, water
efficiency, and other market based approaches.
To achieve the Nation's clean and safe water goals, EPA will operate under an
overarching watershed approach in carrying out its statutory authorities under both the SDWA
Amendments of 1996 and the CWA. EPA is committed to helping local governments meet the
challenges of water management in the 21st century in fiscally responsible and sustainable ways.
We want to maintain the improvements in water quality, while enabling communities to grow
and prosper.
EPA's core water programs are the fundamental underpinning for protecting and building
on the gains of the past. This approach calls for setting watershed goals, assessing conditions,
determining sources of concern, addressing them using regulatory and voluntary tools, and then
re-evaluating and adapting plans as new information becomes available. By focusing and
integrating the work of EPA with sister agencies, States, Tribes, local governments, industry, and
nonprofit organizations hi watersheds, we are able to pool hiformation, resources, and authorities
and focus our collective energies on our common environmental objectives. In watersheds, we
can better understand the cumulative impact of activities, determine the most critical problems,
better allocate limited financial and human resources, engage stakeholders, win public support,
and make real improvements hi the environment.
Maintaining high environmental standards and sustaining a healthy economy requires that
we work with States, Tribes, local governments, and other partners to optimize costs and
conserve our natural resources. Innovative programs like water quality trading are based on a
broad environmental perspective, looking at entire watersheds. Trading can capitalize on
II-3
-------
economies of scale and control cost differentials among and between sources. Trading is a
valuable tool to more cost-effectively implement TMDLs, and to enable communities to grow
and prosper while maintaining their commitment to water quality. Trading can also be an
appropriate mechanism in a pre-TMDL context.
As a result of mounting evidence that pesticide use can lead to contamination of
groundwater, the Agency has developed a groundwater strategy. This strategy is designed to
protect our groundwater resources from pesticide contamination. The Agency is working with
the States and Tribes to implement local aspects of the strategy which includes providing
assistance in the development of Pesticide Management Plans for both generic aspects of
pesticide use, as well as more specific plans for a particular pesticide. The plans provide a
roadmap to managing pesticides through preventive and corrective measures. In addition, EPA
has an extensive scientific review process for data on new pesticides prior to granting
registration, and on older pesticides under the reregistration program. One of the assessment
areas for pesticides is the impact on ecosystems, including the likelihood of the chemical or
product to leach into groundwater, or to persist in surface water after it leaves the field as runoff.
Restrictions on use of the pesticide can be added to the registration (or reregistration), if
warranted.
Research
EPA's water research program supports the Agency's Clean and Safe Water Goal by
providing the scientific basis essential for protecting human health and the environment.
Implementation of the research provisions in the 1996 Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)
amendments and the Clean Water Act will provide improved tools (e.g., methods, models, risk
assessments, management strategies, and new data) to better evaluate the risks posed by
chemical and microbial contaminants that persist in the environment and threaten wildlife and,
potentially, human health.
The drinking water research program will focus on filling key data gaps and developing
analytical detection methods for measuring the occurrence of chemical and microbial
contaminants on the Contaminant Candidate List (CCL) and developing and evaluating cost-
effective treatment technologies for removing pathogens from water supplies while minimizing
disinfection by-product (DBP) formation. The water quality research program will provide
approaches and methods the Agency and its partners need to develop and apply criteria to
support designated uses, tools to diagnose and assess impairment in aquatic systems, and tools to
restore and protect aquatic systems. Water quality research will address a wide spectrum of
aquatic ecosystem stressors, with particular attention accorded to stressors that the Agency most
often cites as causing water body impairment, including pathogens/indicators of fecal
contamination, nutrients, and suspended and bedded sediments.
Several mechanisms are in place to ensure a high-quality water research program at EPA.
EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB), an independently chartered Federal Advisory Committee
Act (FACA) committee, meets annually to conduct an in-depth review and analysis of EPA's
Science and Technology account. The SAB provides its findings to the House Science
Committee and sends a written report on the findings to EPA's Administrator after every annual
review. EPA's Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) provides counsel to the Assistant
Administrator for the Office of Research and Development (ORD) on the operation of ORD's
II-4
-------
research program. Also, under the Science to Achieve Results (STAR) program all research
projects are selected for funding through a rigorous competitive external peer review process
designed to ensure that only the highest quality efforts receive funding support. EPA's scientific
and technical work products must also undergo either internal or external peer review, with
major or significant products requiring external peer review. The Agency's Peer Review
Handbook (2nd Edition) codifies procedures and guidance for conducting peer review.
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES AND FY 2005 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS
Protect Human Health
• In 2005 93% of the population served by community water systems will receive drinking
water that meets all applicable health-based drinking water standards through effective
treatment and source water protection.
• In 2005 94% of the population served by community water systems will receive drinking
water that meets health-based standards with which systems need to comply as of
December 2001.
• In 2005 75% of the population served by community water systems will receive drinking
water that meets health-based standards with a compliance date of January 2002 or later.
• In 2005 94% of community water systems will provide drinking water that meets health-
based standards with which systems need to comply as of December 2001.
• In 2005 75% of community water systems will provide drinking water that meets health-
based standards with a compliance date of January 2002 or later.
• In 2005 90% of the population served by community water systems in Indian country will
receive drinking water that meets all applicable health-based drinking water standards.
• In 2005 20% of source water areas for community water systems will achieve minimized
risk to public health.
• In 2005 80% of the shellfish growing acres monitored by states are approved or
conditionally approved for use.
• In 2005 At least 1% of the water miles/acres identified by states or tribes as having a fish
consumption advisory in 2002 will have improved water and sediment quality so that
increased consumption offish and shellfish is allowed.
• In 2005 Coastal and Great Lakes beaches monitored by State beach safety programs will
be open and safe for swimming in over 94% of the days of the beach season.
• In 2005 Restore water quality to allow swimming in not less than 2% of the stream miles
and lake acres identified by tales in 2000 as having water quality unsafe for swimming.
II-5
-------
Protect Water Quality
• In 2005 500 of the Nation's watersheds have water quality standards met in at least 80%
of the assessed water segments.
• In 2005 Water quality standards are fully attained in over 25% of miles/acres of waters
by 2012, with an interim milestone of restoring 2% of these waters - identified in 2000 as
not attaining standards - by 2005.
• In 2005 Improve ratings reported on the national "good/fair/poor" scale of the National
Coastal Condition Report for: coastal wetlands loss by at least 0.1 point; contamination of
sediments in coastal waters by at least 0.1 point; benthic quality by at least 0.1 point; &
eutrophic condition by at least 0.1 point
• In 2005 Scores for overall aquatic system health of coastal waters nationally, and in each
coastal region, is unproved on the "good/fair/poor" scale of the National Coastal
Condition Report by at least 0.1 point
• In 2005 In coordination with other federal partners reduce, by 11%, households on tribal
lands lacking access to basic sanitation.
• In 2005 Water quality in Indian country will be improved at not less than 35 monitoring
stations in tribal waters for which baseline data are available (i.e., show at least a 10%
improvement for each of four key parameters: total nitrogen, total phosphorus, dissolved
oxygen, and fecal coliforms.)
Enhance Science and Research
• In 2005 By 2005, provide methods for developing water quality criteria so that, by 2008,
approaches and methods are available to States and Tribes for their use hi developing and
applying criteria for habitat alteration, nutrients, suspended and bedded sediments,
pathogens and toxic chemicals that will support designated uses for aquatic ecosystems
and increase the scientific basis for listing and delisting unpaired water bodies under
Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act.
HIGHLIGHTS
Surface Water Protection
Water Quality Monitoring: EPA's fiscal year 2005 request will be the first step toward
solving the well-documented shortcomings of the Nation's water quality monitoring. The most
cost-efficient, practical means of making the most of scarce resources is information-based
management that uses tools such as prevention, source water protection, watershed trading, and
permitting on watershed basis. Monitoring is the foundation for information-based
environmental management. It is imperative that we close data and information gaps as quickly
as possible: they lead to market and regulatory failures, thwart our ability to document progress,
II-6
-------
and limit our ability to effectively target limited resources. Without adequate monitoring data,
the managers of water programs cannot inform the public about the condition of the Nation's
waters; make wise management decisions; demonstrate the success or failure of those programs;
and verify that resources are being used cost-effectively. Federal, State, and local monitoring
data are essential for States to carry out their responsibilities for Clean Water Act requirements.
Strengthening our monitoring program for both surface and ground water will allow for special
emphasis on drinking water sources to support expeditious actions to protect or clean up these
critical resources.
High quality, current monitoring data is critical for states and others to: make watershed-
based decisions, target water quality criteria development, develop necessary standards and total
maximum daily loads (TMDLs), and accurately and consistently portray conditions and trends.
To support these efforts, the President's Budget proposes $20 million to implement improved
state monitoring efforts that will:
• Describe the condition of aquatic resources at multiple scales using scientifically
defensible methods that are statistically valid and compatible;
• Apply predictive tools to target waters that need more intensive monitoring;
• Implement data management systems to facilitate exchange and use of data of
documented quality;
• Determine site-specific water quality impacts, appropriate protection levels and cost-
effective management actions;
• Monitor performance to determine effectiveness of management actions and support
adaptive management, if needed; and
• Utilize monitoring councils/partnerships to improve collaboration among entities
collection, analysis, and use of monitoring data and information.
This approach will result in social costs savings by maximizing the efficiency of
monitoring and assessment resources and, more importantly, by ensuring that resources invested
in environmental protection activities are directed most efficiently and are achieving
performance objectives.
Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations and Storm Water: As evidenced by recent
newspaper articles, withdrawal petitions, and the permit backlog, some States are struggling with
implementation of their NPDES permitting programs. In addition, the universe of facilities is
increasing due to new program requirements to permit concentrated animal feeding operations
(CAFOs) and additional sources of storm water. Without timely issuance of high quality
permits, necessary improvements in water quality will be delayed. To help States with this
workload, we are requesting an increase of $5 million for Section 106 Grants. This increase
would be used by States to support implementation of NPDES CAFO programs, which should
result hi pollutant reductions of over 2 billion pounds annually,9 and to support State issuance of
storm water permits, resulting in long term annual reductions of approximately 100 billion
pounds of sediment.10
9 United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, (January 2001). Development Document for the Proposed
Revisions to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Regulation and the Effluent Guidelines for Concentrated
Animal Feeding Operations. (EPA-821-R-01-003). Washington, D.C. [On-line] Available: http://epa.gov/waterscience/guide/
10 U.S. EPA, Office of Water. "Economic Analysis of the Final Phase II Storm Water Rule," EPA 833-R-99-002, October 1999.
II-7
-------
Water Quality Trading: Water quality trading is a watershed approach based on
voluntary partnerships at the local level. It capitalizes on economies of scale and control cost
differences among sources, by allowing one source to meet its regulatory obligation by using
pollutant reductions created by another source that has lower pollution control costs. Trading
provides incentives for voluntary pollutant reductions, especially from sources that are not
regulated. It encourages early reductions and more cost effective programs for restoring
impaired waters. Trading also provides incentives for innovative solutions to complex and
diverse water quality problems across the nation.
A current example of a successful trading effort between point sources can be found on
Long Island Sound, where nitrogen trading among publicly owned treatment works hi
Connecticut is expected to save over $200 million in control costs. A March 2003, report by the
World Resources Institute, states that market mechanisms such as nutrient trading provide the
greatest overall environmental benefits and a cost-effective strategy for reducing the Mississippi
River Basin's contribution to the Dead Zone in the Gulf of Mexico. The report highlights the
fact that trading provides a real opportunity for farmers to play a role in reducing nutrient
pollution.11
In FY 2005, we plan to redirect $4 million for this effort, to be set-aside within the
Targeted Watershed Grants.
Water Efficiency: At the end of 2002, nearly half the continental U.S. was in drought.12
In addition to reduced rainfall, most of our water systems also face a growing population and a
growing economy. In the future, our waters are going to be even more stretched across
competing demands. The Agency is committed to helping States and local governments address
a multi-billion dollar gap between water and wastewater infrastructure needs and available
capital financing over the next 20 years.
One way to reduce national water and wastewater infrastructure needs is by reducing
water demand and wastewater flows, allowing for deferral or downsizing of capital projects. In
addition to reduced infrastructure needs, less water demand may result hi many environmental
benefits including maintaining stream flows, protecting aquatic habitats, avoiding overdrawn
aquifers, conserving sources of supply, and mitigating drought effects. In anticipation of these
benefits, we are proposing to develop and implement a water efficiency market enhancement
program that would promote recognition of water-efficient products based on the highly
successful Energy Star Program. The Budget includes nearly $1 million for this new program.
Surface Water Protection & Drinking Water Programs
Sustainable Infrastructure: Closing the infrastructure gap requires actions and
innovations to reduce the demand for infrastructure, including better management, conservation
(or smart water use), and intergovernmental cooperation through the watershed approach.
U.S. EPA, Office of Water. "Construction and Development Effluent Guideline Proposed Rule," Federal Register Notice (June
24,2002). Accessed December 29, 2003. Available on the internet at:
http:/^•^vwsv.epa.govAvaterscience/g^ide/coHstructio^•''ru]e.htiTll
1' Greenhalgh, Suzie and Amanda Sauer. 2003. "Awakening the 'Dead Zone': An Investment for Agriculture, Water Quality, and
Climate Change." World Resources Institute.
12 The Drought Monitor; National Drought Mitigation Center; Website: www.drought.unl.edu/dm/about.html
II-8
-------
The touchstone of a long-term strategy to manage and maintain the Nation's
infrastructure is fiscal sustainabiliry. An important component of this strategy is promoting
sustainable water and wastewater treatment systems. This includes ensuring the technical,
financial, and managerial capacity of water and wastewater systems; helping service providers
avoid future gaps and expanding watershed approaches that engage stakeholders in broad-based
action-oriented partnerships to identify efficient and effective local infrastructure solutions by
adopting sustainable management systems to improve efficiency and economies of scale; and
reducing the average cost of service. Through a $2.5 million sustainable infrastructure initiative,
we will work in partnership with States, the utility industry, and other stakeholders to enhance
the operating efficiencies of water and wastewater systems. These efficiencies can help systems
make the infrastructure investments needed to meet growing consumer demand, and help to
sustain the human health and environmental gains we have achieved over the past three decades.
In FY 2005, the Agency will continue to coordinate with States and Tribes providing
guidance and assistance hi the development of generic and specific Pesticide Management Plans
hi order to protect our ground water resources. EPA will coordinate pesticide water issues and
assist our partners in identifying and implementing effective ground water protection programs
through these plans. The Agency will continue to support efforts on identifying the adverse
effects of pesticides hi ground and surface water at the State, Tribal and Regional levels.
Additionally, we will continue to assist States and Tribes hi identifying, developing and
implementing measures to prevent or reduce water contamination. Key to this effort will be
tailoring preventive and recovery measures to localities and specific pesticides.
Research
In FY 2005, EPA's drinking water research program will continue to conduct research to
reduce the uncertainties of risk associated with exposure to microbial contaminants hi drinking
water and improve analytical methods to control risks posed by drinking water contamination.
The drinking water research program will continue to focus on chemical and microbial
contaminants on current and future CCLs. Significant data gaps still exist on the occurrence of
harmful microbes hi source and distribution system water, linkages between water exposure and
infection, and the effectiveness of candidate treatment technologies to remove and inactivate
these contaminants. Efforts will also continue to support arsenic-specific research and
development of more cost-effective treatment technologies for the removal of arsenic from small
community drinking water systems.
EPA is working to develop biological and landscape indicators of ecosystem condition,
sources of impairment, stressor response/fate and transport models, and options for managing
stressors and their sources. Through the development of a framework for diagnosing adverse
effects of chemical pollutants hi surface waters, EPA will be able to evaluate the risks posed by
chemicals that persist in the environment and accumulate in the food chain, threatening wildlife
and potentially human health. The Agency will also develop and evaluate more cost-effective
technologies and approaches for managing sediments, and evaluate management options for
watershed restoration of TMDLs for other significant stressors (e.g., nutrients, pathogens and
toxic compounds). Finally, research to address uncertainties associated with determining and
reducing the risks to human health of the production and application of treated wastewater sludge
II-9
-------
(biosolids) to land for use as fertilizers and soil conditioners is emerging as an area of renewed
importance for the Agency.
Another area of research will focus on growing evidence of the risk of infectious diseases
resulting from exposure to microbes hi recreational waters. Exposure to these diseases is of
particular concern after major rainfall events that cause discharges from both point .and non-point
sources. These events may pose risks to human and ecological health through the uncontrolled
release of pathogenic bacteria, protozoans, and viruses, as well as a number of potentially toxic,
bioaccumulative contaminants. EPA will develop and validate effective watershed management
strategies and tools for controlling wet weather flows (WWFs), which will enable EPA to
provide states with consistent monitoring methods, standardized indicators of contamination, and
standardized definitions of what constitutes a risk to public health.
EXTERNAL FACTORS
EPA's strategies for achieving clean and safe water depend on substantial contributions
and investments by many public and private entities.
States are primary partners hi implementation of both clean water and safe drinking water
programs. Many states, however, are facing budget problems and even deficits. EPA recognizes
that state budget shortfalls are an external factor that may limit progress toward clean and safe
water goals.
Consistent with the federal government's unique trust responsibility to federally
recognized tribes, EPA implements programs in Indian country, helps build tribal capacity to
administer clean and safe water programs, and works with authorized tribes as co-regulators.
Unlike states, many tribes are still developing programs to administer clean and safe water
programs.
Local governments play a critical role in implementing clean and safe water programs,
and the continued participation of local government in these programs is critical to cleaner, safer
water. Municipalities and other local entities have proven to be strong partners with states and
the federal government in the financing of wastewater treatment and drinking water systems, and
continued partnership in financing these systems is essential to meeting water goals.
Municipalities are taking on additional responsibilities for addressing storm water and combined
sewer overflows and they are adopting sustainable management practices to extend the useful
lives of their wastewater infrastructure. Approximately 78 percent of wastewater treatment
plants are operated by small communities, thousands of which have had past operational
difficulties.13 Continued assistance to these small treatment plants, through the Wastewater
Operator Training Program, is important to keeping the nation's waters clean. 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 compliance with drinking
water standards. Ninety-five percent of the 160,000 or more public water systems responsible
for meeting drinking water safety standards are small systems that face challenges in sustaining
13 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assistance; Permit Compliance System; Web-
site: www.epa.gov/oeca/planning/data/water/pcssys.html
11-10
-------
their capacity to provide safe drinking water.14 Strong partnerships with local governments are
critical to achieving clean and safe water goals.
Several key components of the national water program, including nonpoint source
control, source water protection, and watershed management, as well as the core water quality
and drinking water standards, monitoring, TMDLs and NPDES permitting programs require
broad partnerships among many federal, state, and local agencies. Over the next several years,
building partnerships, particularly with the agricultural community (such as USDA, state
agricultural agencies, and local conservation districts) is a top priority for meeting clean water
goals. We must continue to provide EPA water quality data and work with USDA to help target
runoff control programs'resources.
States lead the effort in water quality monitoring. However, EPA relies on many other
agencies to provide monitoring data to measure progress toward its goal of clean and safe water,
such as the U.S Geological Survey, which maintains water monitoring stations throughout the
nation, and NOAA, which provides information on coastal waters. EPA relies on the continued
collection of data by these agencies.
Additionally, all of the EPA's coastal and oceans activities are carried out in partnership
with other federal agencies, and, in some cases, international, state, local and private entities as
well. EPA relies on its work with the Department of Defense, Coast Guard, Alaska and other
states, and a number of cruise ship and environmental and non-governmental organizations
regarding regulatory and non-regulatory approaches to managing wastewater discharges from
vessels. Meeting ocean and coastal goals will also depend on the extent to which the growth hi
coastal areas is directed hi ways that minimize effects on water quality.
West Nile Virus cases increased dramatically in 2002, spreading across 38 states and the
District of Columbia. In areas with new West Nile virus detections, EPA regional offices have
reported heightened concern about the pesticides used for mosquito control and the adverse
affect it might have in contaminating groundwater. Pesticides are applied to areas where
groundwater is prevalent due to the fact that mosquitoes need stagnant or standing water to lay
their eggs. The possibility of the West Nile Virus expanding into new areas of the United States
in the future will require the application of more pesticides onto the new breeding areas.
14 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS/FED),
11-11
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Clean and Safe Water
OBJECTIVE; 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.
Resource Summary
(Dollars in Thousands)
Protect Human Health
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Building & Facilities
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Inspector General
Total Workyears
FY2003
Actuals
$1,259,787.6
$159,996.8
$18,362.0
$1,361.4
$1,085,448.9
$6,871.9
859.7
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$1,192,187.1
$161,414.6
$27,926.9
$1,480.2
$1,008,640.4
$7,701.4
916.8
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$1,170,339.6
$164,157..!
$6,709.8
$1,595.3
$1,004,412.2
$7,594.4
910.9
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
($21,847.5)
$2,742.5
($21,217.1)
$115.1
($4,228.2)
($107.0)
-5.8
Program Project
(Dollars in Thousands)
Children and other Sensitive Populations
Categorical Grant: Public Water System
Supervision (PWSS)
Categorical Grant: Underground
Injection Control (UIC)
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Program
Implementation
Categorical Grant: Beaches Protection
Beach / Fish Programs
Drinking Water Programs
Infrastructure Assistance: Drinking
Water SRF
Infrastructui ; Assistance: Puerto Rico
Pesticides: Field Programs
Categorical Grant: Water Quality
Cooperative Agreements
Congressionally Mandated Projects
International Capacity Building
FY2003
Actuals
$246.6
$92,694.2
$10,465.7
$4,672.6
$7,473.3
$3,197.3
$86,119.7
$866,607.7
$0.0
$2,001.2
$0.0
$111,719.6
$3,419.4
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$135.0
$105,100.0
$11,000.0
$4,564.0
$10,000.0
$3,689.5
$99,085.5
$850,000.0
$8,000.0
$2,510.8
$0.0
$0.0
$1,611.2
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$77.2
$105,100.0
$11,000.0
$4,433.0
$10,000.0
$3,237.6
$100,947.6
$850,000.0
$4,000.0
$2,482.7
$750.0
$0.0
$2,181.0
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
($57.8)
$0.0
$0.0
($131.0)
$0.0
. ($451.9)
$1,862.1 i
$0.0
($4,000.0)
($28.1)
$750.0
$0.0
$569.8
11-12
-------
Children and other Sensitive Populations
Categorical Grant: Homeland Security
Homeland Security: Critical
Infrastructure Protection
Administrative Projects
TOTAL
FY2003
Actuals
$246.6
$4,508.5
$14,186.4
$52,475.4
$1,259,787.6
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$135.0
$5,000.0
$27,389.1
$64,102.0
$1,192,187.1
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$77.2
$5,000.0
$6,125.8
$65,004.7
$1,170,339.6
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
($57.8)
$0.0
($21,263.3)
$902.7
($21,847.5)
FY 2005 REQUEST
Results to be Achieved under this Objective
Protecting and Improving Drinking Water: Safe drinking water and clean surface waters
are critical to protecting human health. Over 260 million Americans rely on the safety of tap
water provided by water systems that are subject to national drinking water standards.15 EPA's
strategy for helping systems provide safe drinking water over the next several years focuses on
five major elements: (1) developing or revising drinking water standards; (2) supporting states,
tribes, and water systems in implementing standards; (3) promoting sustainable management of
drinking water infrastructure; (4) protecting sources of drinking water from contamination; and
(5) providing information, tools and assistance to drinking water and wastewater utilities to
protect critical water infrastructure from terrorist and other intentional acts. Collectively, these
and other interrelated elements of the national safe drinking water program form a balanced,
integrated framework that comprise a multiple barrier approach to protecting public health from
unsafe drinking water. Under this approach, by the end of FY 2005 the Agency and its partners
will have ensured that 94 percent of the population served by community water systems receives
drinking water that meets all health based standards with compliance dates of December 2001 or
earlier. Also as a result of these efforts, EPA expects that 75 percent of the population served by
community water systems will receive drinking water that meets the next generation of chemical
and microbial drinking water standards with compliance dates of January 2002 or later.
Protecting human health also entails the defense of the nation's water infrastructure in the
event of a terrorist attack. Water systems need to contend with three primary security concerns,
physical disruption, contamination with chemical, biological and radiological agents, and cyber
intrusion. In FY 2005, EPA will provide limited tools and assistance to the water sector that
address vulnerabilities identified in their completed assessments, including the identification of
the most up-to-date security enhancements, threat and contaminant information sharing, and
emergency response training.
Fish/Beach Programs: By 2008, the quality of water and sediments will be unproved to
allow increased consumption offish in not less than 3 percent of the water miles/acres identified
by states or tribes as having a fish consumption advisory hi 2002. In 2002, over 400,000 river
miles and over 11 million lake acres were identified by states or tribes as having fish with
15 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS/FED),
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/data/getdata.html
11-13
-------
chemical contamination levels resulting in an advisory of potential human health risk from
consumption.16
Pesticide Management: The Agency remains committed to working with the States and
Tribes to continue implementation of the Groundwater Strategy. This includes providing
assistance in the development of Pesticide Management Plans (PMP) for both generic aspects of
pesticide use as well as more specific plans for a particular pesticide. The plans provide a
roadmap to managing pesticides from contaminating ground water resources through preventive
and corrective measures. The Agency also reviews pesticides for potential adverse impacts to
both ground and surface water resources, and takes action to restrict use as warranted.
International Capacity: EPA's international capacity programs provide developing
countries with the tools and training necessary to achieve long-term environmental change.
These programs complement technical assistance EPA and other organizations provide by
ensuring that the recipient country or region is able to sustain and replicate environmental
improvements. They also help protect human health and the environment hi the U.S. by
introducing innovative practices for environmental management.
Drinking Water Programs, Drinking Water State Revolving Fund, Puerto Rico, and
Categorical Grants: Public Water System Supervision, Underground Injection Control
Develop Drinking Water Standards: The Safe Drinking Water Act directs EPA to set
legal limits on levels of contaminants hi our drinking water supplies. Over the past 30 years,
EPA has established national protective standards for 91 contaminants (see U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency List of Contaminants and their MCLs, http://www.epa.gov/safewater/mcl.htmlitoicls).
In FY 2005, the Agency will promulgate the Long-Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment
Rule (LT2) and Stage 2 Disinfectant and Disinfection Byproducts Rule (Stage 2). Until states
assume primacy (primary enforcement authority) for these two rules, EPA will, as required,
manage the collection and analysis for risk-based monitoring by large drinking water systems.
EPA also will continue to assess the need for new or revised drinking water standards based on
available data on health effects, occurrence, risks of exposure, analytical (detection) methods, as
well as information on technologies to prevent, detect, or remove specific contaminants.
Additionally, EPA's Drinking Water Laboratory Certification Program evaluates whether
Agency, state, and privately-owned laboratories are analyzing drinking water samples accurately
using approved laboratory methods and procedures, and whether they are properly implementing
quality assurance plans.
As required under the Safe Drinking Water Act, if there are adequate scientific data and
risk assessment information, EPA must determine whether to regulate an unregulated
contaminant on the Contaminant Candidate List (CCL), and must ascertain, through the Six-Year
Review of existing regulations, whether a revision to an existing standard is warranted. In 2003,
the Agency announced hi the Federal Register that it had completed its review of the 69 drinking
water regulations in place as of 1997 and had decided not to revise 68 of these regulations.17 In
16 US EPA. Office of Water. 2003. Factsheet, "Update: National Listing of Fish and Wildlife Advisories," EPA-823-F-03-003,
May 23, 2003.
17 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "National Primary Drinking Water Regulations; Announcement of Completion of
EPA's Review of Existing Drinking Water Standards," Federal Register v68, No 138. 18 July 2003.
http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-WATER/2003/July/Day-18/wl8152.pdf
11-14
-------
FY 2005, the Agency will continue its analysis of National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
for the second Six-Year Review, and develop proposed revisions to the Total Coliform Rule
(TCR), as well as consider additional protections for drinking water distribution systems. EPA
will continue to review and evaluate scientific and occurrence data on contaminants listed on the
second CCL, issued in 2004, to make regulatory determinations. If necessary, EPA is prepared
to act in advance of the next regulatory determination cycle to address an urgent threat to human
health. In addition to making regulatory decisions, the Agency will work to develop the third
CCL.
A key to the Agency's approach to assessing the need for new or revised standards is
ensuring EPA has the most recent scientific research, risk assessment information and
occurrence data for potentially high-risk contaminants. Some specific activities to accomplish
this are: 1) tracking research conducted on contaminants, 2) establishing a systematic approach
for the identification of those contaminants that pose the highest risk to human health, 3)
ensuring that monitoring data on such contaminants are reliable (QA/QC), 4) developing a full
range of analytical methods to determine the occurrence of these contaminants in source waters,
5) enhancing the tools to estimate the cost and benefits of drinking water regulations, and 6)
continuing to expand EPA's initiative to optimize treatment techniques and treatment
technologies as an effective alternative to regulations. To help maintain the strong scientific
underpinnings of its regulatory decisions, the Agency will implement an on-line system in 2005
that will include a wide range of information gathered from both U.S. and international drinking
water programs. This system will strengthen EPA's efforts to screen and evaluate over 100,000
chemical and microbial contaminants for possible listing on the third CCL, and directly reflects
recommendations to the Agency from the National Academy of Science's National Research
Council (NRC) and the National Drinking Water Advisory Council (NDWAC).
Finally, where the source of the contamination affects surface water, the Agency has
committed to identifying critical drinking water contaminants of concern in surface waters and
issuing new or revised criteria using the authorities of section 304(a) of the Clean Water Act to
protect public health. For example, EPA will use the section 304(a) authority to establish criteria
for Cryptosporidium, a widespread microbial contaminant that is resistant to chlorine
disinfection. These criteria, once adopted by states and authorized tribes, will form the basis for
regulatory limits on discharges of the contaminants to surface waters and guide programs
designed to reduce runoff of pollutants into our lakes, rivers and streams.
Implement Drinking Water Regulations: EPA works closely with states, tribes, and water
systems to implement multiple program barriers that protect public health from contaminants in
water supplies. Special emphasis will be focused on helping states identify and target their
efforts to those systems not providing their customers with safe drinking water. In FY 2005 and
future years, EPA's implementation support for primacy states and tribes will become
increasingly important given the growing number of systems that will need to comply with new,
more flexible drinking water regulations that can be tailored to the needs of individual utilities.
In FY 2005, EPA will continue to provide guidance, training and technical assistance on the
implementation of drinking water regulations to states, tribes and systems; ensure proper
certification of water system operators; develop new, easily accessible tools (e.g. Web-based) to
assist states and water systems; ensure on-site reviews of the operating condition and
management of public water systems as required by regulations; and promote consumer
awareness of the safety of drinking water supplies. The Agency estimates that as a result of its
11-15
-------
implementation support for state and tribal drinking water programs, 93 percent of the population
served by community water systems, and 90 percent of the population served by community
water systems in Indian Country, will receive drinking water that meets all applicable health-
based standards by the end of FY 2005.
•^ ; • ^Percentage of the Population served by , :
/ / .-Community Water Systems Providing Drinking Water
/ »; that Meets; :AH 'Applicable Health-Based Standards
FY 2003
?Y 2004
F.Y
Source: FY 2003 national data from U.S. EPA's Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS). FY2004and
FY2005 data are national goals.
Consistent with the Agency's longstanding implementation support for drinking water
systems, in FY 2005 EPA will continue to provide training and assistance to systems in many
areas. The Agency will focus its training and assistance on the use of cost-effective treatment
technologies, proper waste disposal, and compliance with high priority contaminant
requirements, including initial monitoring under the revised arsenic rule, and risk-based
monitoring under the LT2 and Stage 2. In FY 2005, the Agency will continue to support small
systems efforts to optimize their treatment technology under the Area-Wide Optimization
Program (AWOP). AWOP is a highly successful technical assistance and training program that
enhances the ability of small systems to meet existing and future microbial, disinfectant and
disinfection byproducts (M-DBP) standards. By the end of 2003, 20 states were implementing
AWOP and this initiative is continuing to expand throughout the country.18
High quality information is needed to support the effective implementation of drinking
water programs. The Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) serves as the primary
source of national information on compliance with all SDWA requirements, and is a critical
database for program management. In FY 2005, EPA will continue its work to update SDWIS to
ensure that new drinking water program requirements are incorporated into the data system to
help states and authorized Tribes monitor and report drinking water data..
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water. Implementing AWOPs through the Capacity Development and
DWSRFPrograms (EPA 816-F-03-019). July 2003. http://www.epa.gov/safewater/smallsys/pdfs/awop-capdev-dwsrf.pdf.
11-16
-------
EPA's efforts related to the President's Management Agenda, specifically the focus on
results oriented e-government, will build on pilot projects with states utilization of the central
data exchange (CDX). The CDX is a mechanism by which states electronically report end-to-
end drinking water data, and it has the consequent benefit of simplifying data exchange and
reducing transaction costs. EPA also will continue its work with States to improve data
completeness, accuracy, timeliness, and consistency through: 1) training on data entry, error
correction, and regulatory reporting; 2) conducting data verifications and analyses; and 3)
implementing quality assurance and quality control procedures to identify missing, incomplete or
conflicting data under the data reliability action plan.
Support Sustainable Drinking Water Infrastructure: Currently EPA utilizes a variety of
approaches to help drinking water systems sustain their technical, financial and managerial
capacity to provide safe drinking water, including tool development, technical assistance and
training. Providing drinking water that meets safe standards often requires an investment hi the
construction or maintenance of drinking water infrastructure. The Drinking Water State
Revolving Fund (DWSRF) program, described in a May 2003 Report to Congress, has made
available $6.4 billion to finance more than 3,000 infrastructure improvement projects
nationwide.19 In FY 2005, the DWSRF program will provide several hundred more loans to
public water systems for infrastructure improvement projects. In response to the Program
Assessment Rating Tool (PART) reevaluation. the Agency will continue to work on revising its
measures to better demonstrate the impact water treatment facility improvements have on public
health and will develop a long-term outcome efficiency measure.
Even with affordable, flexible financial assistance through the DWSRF, however, the
Agency's September 2002 Clean Water and Drinking Water Infrastructure "Gap" Analysis
projects a multi-billion dollar gap in capital infrastructure financing over the next 20 years.20 To
help sates and municipalities address this gap, the Agency will implement in FY 2005 a
Sustainable Infrastructure Leadership initiative in partnership with drinking water utilities.
Through this initiative, EPA and its partners will identify leaders hi the utility industry who have
established best practices hi drinking water asset management, innovations, and efficiency, and
who are interested in employing watershed-based approaches to managing water resources. EPA
also will work closely with states, utilities, and other stakeholders to develop a strategy to
facilitate the voluntary adoption of these best practices by 800 utilities, each serving 50,000 or
more consumers. The initiative will support sustainable drinking water utilities that are able to
maximize the value of safe drinking water by improving system performance at the lowest
possible cost.
Targeting a specific system, Puerto Rico's inadequate drinking water infrastructure has
created a significant daily health risk to consumers. Less than 30 percent of the population
receives drinking water that meets all health-based standards.21 Puerto Rico's compliance
problem is a major challenge in the national effort to ensure that 94 percent of the population
served by community water systems receives drinking water that meets all health-based
19 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water. The Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Program: Financing
America's Drinking Water from the Source to the Tap - A Report to Congress (EPA 918-R-03-009). May 2003.
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/dwsrr/pdfs/dwsrf_congressreport-main.pdf
20 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. The Clean Water and Drinking Water Infrastructure Gap Analysis. Washington,
DC: Government Printing Office.
21 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS/FED),
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/data/getdata.html
11-17
-------
standards by FY 2008. To improve the public health protection in Puerto Rico, the Agency will
support the first phase of the design of necessary infrastructure improvements. When all
upgrades are complete, EPA estimates that about 1.5 million people will benefit from safer,
cleaner drinking water22 and that risks of cancer, and gastroenteritis and other waterborne
diseases will be reduced.
EPA will work with other federal agencies to develop a coordinated approach to
improving Indian Tribes' access to safe drinking water. At the 2002 World Summit in
Johannesburg, the U.S. committed itself to the goal of reducing the number of people lacking
access to safe drinking water by 50 percent by 2015.23 In FY 2005, EPA will contribute to this
goal through its ongoing financial support for infrastructure improvement projects at drinking
water facilities in Indian country and Alaskan native villages. Other federal agencies, such as the
Department of Interior (DOI), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and the Department
of Health and Human Services (DHHS), also play key roles in addressing this problem. As a
result, by the end of FY 2005 EPA and other federal agencies will have developed an inter-
agency strategy that identifies how each agency will contribute to the Johannesburg commitment
to increase tribes' access to safe drinking water.
Protect Source Water Contamination: There is growing recognition that ensuring the
quality of surface and groundwater sources of drinking water is a critical element of public
health protection. In FY 2005, EPA will continue to support state and local efforts to protect
source water through the identification of actual and potential sources of contamination. By the
end of FY 2005, the Agency expects that all EPA-approved state source water assessment
programs will have completed high-quality baseline assessments for 52,000 community water
systems nationwide.
States already have completed thousands of assessments and are working with
community water systems to take voluntary measures to prevent, reduce or eliminate threats of
contamination to source water areas. EPA will continue to support these source water protection
efforts by providing training, technical assistance, and technology transfer capabilities to states
and localities; and by facilitating the adoption of geographic information system (GIS) databases
to support local decision-making. The Agency will work with national, state and local
stakeholder organizations to manage any significant sources of contamination identified in the
source water assessments through broad-based efforts. EPA will continue to work with other
Federal programs to help states and localities update source water assessments and manage
sources of contamination. By the end of FY 2005, the Agency anticipates that states and
communities will have minimized the risk of contamination in 20 percent of source water areas
for community water systems by substantially implementing voluntary source water protection
strategies.24
State water quality standards play an important role in protecting the Nation's drinking
water sources. The Agency's 2003 Strategic Plan emphasizes continued use of Clean Water Act
22 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS/FED),
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/data/getdata.html
23 United Nations. 2002. Report of the World Summit on Sustainable Development: Johannesburg, South Africa, 26 August — 4
September, 2002. New York, NY: United Nations.
24 Note: "Minimized risk" and "substantial implementation" of voluntary implementation of source water protection strategies,
will be determined at the state level by state source water protection programs.
11-18
-------
authorities to protect waters that serve as public water supplies. By the end of FY 2005, the
agency will complete, in coordination with states and tribes, a review of water quality standards
for surface waters that are source waters for public water supplies.
Ensuring safe underground injection of waste materials is also a fundamental component of a
comprehensive source water protection program. Management or closure of the approximately
700,000 shallow injection wells (Class V) nationwide remains a top priority for the Agency's
Underground Injection Control (UIC) program. Through the UIC categorical grant program, EPA
and the states will, by the end of 2005, have completed a survey of Class V wells for 20 percent of
source water areas for community water systems and have closed or permitted 20 percent of all
motor vehicle waste disposal wells, one of two types of high-risk shallow wells for which the
Agency has established additional protective measures. In addition, EPA will continue working
with states and tribes to educate and assist underground injection control well operators of all
classes of UIC wells; working with industry and stakeholders to collect and evaluate data on
endangering Class V wells; and exploring best management practices for protecting ground
sources of drinking water.
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection and Categorical Grant
Defending the nation's critical infrastructure is essential to protecting the public hi the
event of a terrorist attack on the United States. An attack on water infrastructure could
compromise the public health of a community. Under Homeland Security Presidential Directive
(HSPD) 7, EPA is assigned lead Federal responsibility to work with the water sector to ensure
that water utilities (drinking water and wastewater) are developing and implementing actions to
protect against physical, chemical/microbial, and cyber attacks. For the past three years, the
Agency has provided technical and financial assistance to water utilities, especially the
approximately 9,000 drinking water systems subject to the requirements of the Public Health
Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002 (Bioterrorism Act), to assess
the vulnerabilities of their infrastructure and to prepare or revise their emergency response plans.
In FY 2005, the Agency is focusing its resources on provisions of the Bioterrorism Act
that require EPA to: (1) identify the chemical, biological, and radiological contaminants that
could be intentionally introduced into drinking water systems, and (2) review the means by
which terrorists could disrupt the supply of safe drinking water. EPA will support, prototypes,
field-testing, training, and guidance. All of these activities will be targeted to high priority
contaminants and threats identified through basic research. Examples of specific projects include
support for the water sector's development of voluntary best practices for security. This will
include methods to select effective security enhancements, innovative financing mechanisms,
and design standards that incorporate security measures in new construction, reconstruction, and
retrofitting. In addition, the Agency will provide some funds to develop response protocols for
both water utilities and others that assist the water sector in an emergency, such as local law
enforcement officials, hazardous material teams, health care providers, environmental
laboratories, other infrastructure, and public health officials. This activity has the broader benefit
of improving the efficacy and timeliness of response to all emergencies (e.g., blackouts,
accidental contamination, hurricanes, and earthquakes) not just those related to homeland
security.
11-19
-------
EPA's efforts in water security will extend beyond drinking water systems to include
wastewater utilities. EPA will continue in FY 2005 to provide some training and other critical
assistance tools to wastewater utilities. FY 2005 funding will also support the implementation of
information sharing tools and mechanisms to provide timely information on contaminant
properties, water treatment effectiveness, detection technologies, analytical protocols, and
laboratory capabilities for use in responding to a water contamination event. This effort includes
the continued support for the secure Information Sharing and Analysis Center (WaterlSAC) to
disseminate threat and incident information and to serve as a clearinghouse for sensitive
information. Water security categorical grants will continue to maintain the states' efforts in
coordinating their critical water infrastructure protection activities with other homeland security
responsibilities.
Beach/Fish Programs and Beaches Grants
Safe Fish and Shellfish: Some toxic contaminants that enter waterbodies can move up the
food chain and build up to levels that make fish unsafe to eat. In 2002, states and tribes report
they issued fish consumption advisories for about 15 percent of river miles and 33 percent of
lake acres.25 Shellfish also can accumulate disease-causing microorganisms and toxic algae. In
1995, shellfishing was prohibited hi 11 percent of the approximately 25 million acres that
support shellfishing.26 EPA is working with states, tribes, and other federal agencies to improve
water and sediment quality so all fish and shellfish are safe to eat and to protect the public from
consuming fish and shellfish that pose unacceptable health risks. EPA is also working with these
groups and the shellfish industry to evaluate the use of more modern techniques to measure fecal
contamination in shellfish growing waters.
Fish Safe to Eat: Most fish consumption advisories today are issued because of unhealthy
levels of mercury in fish. Although small amounts of mercury are discharged to waters, most
mercury in fish originates from combustion sources, such as coal-fired power plants and
incinerators, which release it into the air. The mercury is then deposited by rainfall onto land
and water, where it is concentrated in waterbodies and moves up the food chain through fish to
people. EPA is working to reduce releases of mercury to the air through controls on combustion
sources. For example, EPA expects that by 2010, federal market-based and other air regulatory
programs will reduce electric generating unit emissions of mercury by 22 tons from their 2000
level of 48 tons (see Goal 1 of this Strategy).
25 U.S. EPA. Office of Water. "2002 National Listing of Fish & Wildlife Advisories." Fact Sheet. EPA-823-F-005. Washington,
DC: EPA, May 2003. Available at hnp://www.epa.govvwaterscience/fish/advisorie .
26 Alexander, C.E. "Classified Shellfish Growing Waters," in NOAA. "State of the Coast Report." Silver Spring, MD: NOAA,
1998.
11-20
-------
Improving water and sediment quality is another key element of the strategy for making
more fish safe to eat. Implementation of Clean Water Act programs will improve water quality
by: establishing water quality baselines, identifying emerging contaminant problems, impaired
waters and sources of contaminants; developing total maximum daily loads and source controls
for impaired waters; reducing discharges from storm water systems, combined sewer overflows,
and other permitted facilities, and reducing runoff from nonpoint sources.
These water quality programs rely on sound scientific information concerning individual
contaminants in fish. EPA recently issued a criteria document under the Clean Water Act
identifying the safe levels of mercury in fish tissue and will help states and tribes adopt the
criterion into water quality standards. EPA expects that states and authorized tribes will adopt
the new mercury fish tissue criterion by 2008. In 2000, EPA revised the methodology for
calculation of "human health criteria" for contaminants found in surface waters. This new
methodology reflects recent research on the health effects of contaminants and the potential for
contaminants in water to be concentrated in the food chain and pose a greater risk to people who
consume fish. EPA partially recalculated the criteria for 83 pollutants and will be revising these
criteria and additional criteria more completely over the next several years.
EPA is also working to restore the quality of aquatic sediment in critical waterbodies, with
special emphasis in the Great Lakes under the Great Lakes Legacy Act.27 Toxic contaminants hi
sediment accumulate hi fish and wildlife to levels that pose health risks. Through its National
Sediment Quality Survey28, EPA will continue to identify watersheds where sediment
contamination is severe and widespread. Further studies of these watersheds will help determine
source control and remediation measures that are needed to reduce human health and ecological
risks resulting from contaminated sediment.
27 Great Lakes Legacy Act of 2002, Public Law 107-303, November 27, 2002.
28 U.S. EPA. Office of Water. "The Incidence and Severity of Sediment Contamination In Surface Waters of the United States.
Volume 1: National Sediment Quality Survey." 2nd.ed. Draft. EPA-823-R-01-01. Washington, DC: EPA, December 2001.
Available at http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/cs.
11-21
-------
Another key element of EPA's strategy for increasing the number of waters where fish are
safe to eat is expanding the amount and type of information about fish safety and making this
information available to the public.
EPA provides guidance to states and tribes on monitoring and fish sampling.
EPA also provides funding and technical training to help states and tribes assess fish safety in
more of their waters every year. The Agency expects that by 2008, the percentage of rivers and
lakes monitored to determine the need for fish advisories will continue to increase.
Percentage of Lake Acres and River Miles
Under Advisory, 1993-2002
Source: US EPA, Office of Water. 2003. Update: National Listing of Fish and Wildlife Advisories: Fact Sheet.
EPA-823-F-03-003. May 2003. Available at: http://www.epa.qov/waterscience/fish/advisories/factsheet.pdf.
11-22
-------
EPA is also conducting an ongoing nationwide survey of contaminants in fish. In FY
2004, the analyses on mercury, PCBs, organochlorine pesticides, and dioxins/furans/co-planer
PCBs will be completed and the statistical analyses of the analyzed samples will be conducted.
During FY 2005, EPA will analyze the findings of the survey and will make them available in
FY 2006 on the Agency's waterscience website (http://www.epa.gov/waterscience). In addition,
the Agency will identify emerging contaminants of public health and ecological concern in fish
(e.g., flame retardants, fuel additives) and initiate analyses from archived fish tissues of a
narrower list of contaminants that pose particular concern.
A key public information tool is the internet-based National Listing of Fish and Wildlife
Consumption Advisories29. This website allows states and tribes to enter their advisories and
provides the public with information about the location of advisories, the fish that are affected,
and the number of meals or amount of fish that a person can safely eat. In addition, the listing
identifies the method that states use to issue their advisories. Over the years, EPA has urged
states to use a risk-based approach in issuing their advisories. As shown in the following figure,
states are increasing their use of EPA's risk-based guidance or a risk-based approach consistent
with EPA's guidance. The Agency continues to track state methods of issuing advisories as an
indicator in the 2003 Strategic Plan.
States Using EPA's Risk-based Guidance
TO
Number of States
DMay-99 •May-00 •May-01 ^May-02
Source: US EPA, Office of Water. 2003. Summary of Responses to the 2002 National Survey of Fish Advisory Programs. EPA-823-
R-03-007. August 2003.
Another tool is EPA's national advisory for mercury in fish. This advisory provides
information to the public about the number of meals or amount offish that a person can eat from
waters that states or tribes have yet to assess. EPA issued its first mercury advisory in January
29 U.S. EPA. Office of Water. "Fish Sampling and Analysis." Volume 1 of "Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data
for Use in Fish Advisories. 3rd ed. EPA-823-B-00-007. Washington, DC: EPA, 2000. Available at http:
www.epa.gov/vvaterscieRce/Rshadvice/vohimel.
11-23
-------
200130 and will revise it in FY 2004 by issuing a joint federal advisory with FDA. This joint
advisory will help clarify the fish consumption advice both agencies provide to the public. In FY
2005, EPA will work with public health agencies to develop and distribute outreach materials
and with the advertising industry to provide the fish consuming public with consistent, easily
understood information. EPA will strengthen its support to states in their monitoring of mercury
in fish. Also in FY 2005, EPA will work with USGS and states to integrate fish tissue mercury
data into STORET making it accessible to all. This will support studies to enhance the mercury
advice by aligning it with the advisories for PCBs and other contaminants to reflect the most
current science and to clarify for the public the differences in the fish covered and the
consumption advice based on where and how these contaminants concentrate hi fish.
Shellfish Safe to Eat: The safety of shellfish is managed through a partnership of the U.S.
Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference (ISSC), and
coastal states. States monitor shellfishing waters and restrict harvesting if shellfish taken from
the waters are considered unsafe.
EPA is working with states, FDA, ISSC, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) to increase the percentage of shellfishing acres where harvesting is
permitted from the estimated FY 1995 level of 77 percent to 85 percent in FY 2008. In FY 2005,
EPA will partner with federal, state, and other entities to improve water quality criteria for
shellfish growing waters using indicators that are better, more protective indicators of fecal
contamination and the sources of the contamination.
Over the past several years, the ISSC, working with states and federal agencies, has
developed a new information system that uses state monitoring data to pinpoint areas where
shellfishing has been restricted. Using this information system, EPA and states will more readily
be able to identify possible sources of pollutants restricting the use of shellfishing waters. This
information can be used to strengthen water pollution control activities, including development
of watershed plans, implementation of National Estuary Program plans, issuance or reissuance of
NPDES permits to point sources, enforcement of existing NPDES permits, and implementation
of controls over diffuse sources of polluted runoff. EPA also supports these actions by
identifying and evaluating technology-based controls that reduce the discharge of pollutants
close to shellfish beds and direct the discharged pollutants away from shellfish beds.
Safe Swimming Waters: Recreational waters, especially beaches in coastal areas and
the Great Lakes, provide outstanding recreational opportunities for many Americans. Swimming
in some recreational waters, however, can pose a serious risk of illness as a result of exposure to
microbial pathogens. In some cases, these pathogens can be traced to sources such as
wastewater treatment plants, malfunctioning septic systems, and discharges from storm water
systems. Swimming advisories and beach closures to protect the public from harmful levels of
pathogens can have significant economic impacts. Since 1997, EPA has sent out an annual
questionnaire to states, tribes, local governments and other agencies that maintain swimming
beaches. Over the years participation has steadily increased even though participation is entirely
voluntary. In 1997, 159 agencies reported on 1,021 beaches. In FY 2003 the number had grown
to 227 agencies reporting on 2,823 beaches. In addition, EPA has improved the questionnaire
30 U.S. EPA. Office of Water. Federal Advisories. Washington, DC: EPA. Accessed January 2001. Available only on the
internet at http://map i .epa.gov/htmi/federaladv
11-24
-------
enabling the Agency to track the percentage of days beaches are open during a particular beach's
recreational season and determine if the FY 2008 strategic target that monitored coastal and
Great Lakes beaches are open and safe for swimming 96 percent of the days during the beach
season is attained. In FY 2001, beaches reporting were open 94 percent of the days during the
beach season and in FY 2002, the percentage increased to 95 percent.
EPA is implementing a three-part strategy to protect the quality of the Nation's
recreational waters. The Agency will work to protect recreational water generally, control
combined sewer overflows, and protect the quality of waters adjacent to beaches used by the
public for recreation along the coasts and Great Lakes.
Protect Recreational Waters: The first element of the strategy is broadly focused on all
recreational waters. To protect and restore these waters, EPA works with state, tribal, and local
governments to implement the core programs of the Clean Water Act. For example,
development and implementation of total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) will generally benefit
recreational waters that are impaired. In FY 2005, EPA will expand the tools to estimate benefits
for recreation water protection and support states, tribes and local entities as they evaluate policy
options for reducing beach closures through cost-effectiveness analysis and better estimates of
economic impacts. The continuing implementation of the discharge permit program, urban
storm water controls, and nonpoint pollution control programs will also reduce pollution to
recreational waters, helping to ensure that the Agency meets its recreational water targets by
2008. EPA also supports pollution control programs by developing test protocols that can
distinguish human from other fecal contamination and by identifying and evaluating technology-
based controls that reduce the discharge of pathogens.
Control Combined Sewer Overflows: Full implementation of controls for overflows
from combined storm and sanitary sewers, or "CSOs," is another key step in protecting
recreational waters. During wet weather, these overflows may release untreated sewage
containing high levels of pathogens. CSOs, which occur in about 770 communities around the
country, can have a significant impact on the quality of recreational waters. EPA, states, and
local governments are making steady progress toward the reduction of overflows under the
"CSO Policy." Most communities with CSOs have now implemented basic control measures.
Approximately 275 communities have submitted long-term control plans to their NPDES
authority. Approximately 180 have received formal approval from the appropriate NPDES
authority. Approximately 85 communities have substantially completed implementation of their
long-term control plans or other CSO control programs.31
Protect Coastal and Great Lakes Beaches: The third element of the strategy to protect
and restore recreational waters is focused on beaches used by the public for swimming and other
recreational activities hi coastal areas and the Great Lakes. Under the recently enacted Beaches
Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health (BEACH) Act,32 EPA provides guidance, grants
and support to state, tribal, and local governments for programs to monitor beach water quality
31 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Report to Congress - Implementation and Enforcement of the
Combined Sewer Overflow Control Policy; December 2001; EPA833-R-01-003.
32 Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health Act of 2000. Public Law 106-284 (October 10, 2000), 114 U.S. Stat.
870.
11-25
-------
and notify the public when bacterial contamination poses a risk to swimmers.33 EPA expects that
100 percent of significant public beaches identified by States and Territories will be managed
under BEACH Act programs by 2008.
The BEACH Act requires that coastal and Great Lakes states adopt scientifically sound
water quality criteria for bacteria. EPA expects to meet its target of all 35 coastal and Great
Lakes states and territories adopting scientifically sound bacteria criteria for recreation waters by
2008. As a result of related efforts, Agency-approved rapid analytic methods (<2 hours) will be
available for pathogen indicators of concern in recreation waters.
Finally, EPA will continue to expand public access to internet-based beach information
on its website.34 Governments receiving BEACH Act grants and communities responding to
EPA's annual National Beach Health Protection Survey provide EPA information on water
quality, beach monitoring and advisory programs, and beach closures. In 2005, EPA will
continue to develop data management systems to facilitate the transmittal of information to the
Agency electronically through the Central Data Exchange (CDX) web portal, a cornerstone of
EPA's e-government initiative.35 eBeaches36 will provide rapid, easy and secure electronic
transmittal of beach water quality and swimming advisory information by state and local entities
through the CDX web portal. The system will reduce the reporting burden and cost of sending
beach water quality and swimming advisory information to EPA, a condition for continued
receipt of BEACH grants for monitoring and public notification programs.37 The eBeaches
system will also assist EPA meet its public reporting requirements under the BEACH Act. In
addition, the system will enable beach advisory information to be immediately available to the
public and displayed on maps for easy understanding. EPA's new program tracking database
(Program tracking, beach Advisories, Water quality standards and Nutrients or "PRAWN")38
will archive the beach program, advisory, and closure information enabling EPA to track
progress toward the target of coastal and Great Lakes beaches open and safe for swimming in
over 96 percent of the days during the beach season. The information is available to the public
on the internet at http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/beaches.
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Program Implementation
In FY 2005, the Agency will continue to coordinate with States and Tribes providing
guidance and assistance in the development of generic and specific Pesticide Management Plans
in order to protect our ground water resources. EPA will coordinate pesticide water issues and
assist our partners in identifying and implementing effective ground water protection programs
through these plans. The Agency will continue to support efforts for identifying the adverse
effects of pesticides in ground and surface water at the State, Tribal and Regional levels.
Additionally, we will continue to assist States and Tribes hi identifying, developing and
33 U.S. EPA. Office of Water. "National Beach Guidance and Required Performance Criteria for Grants." EPA-823-B-02-004.
Washington DC: EPA, June 2002. Available at http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/beaches/gtiidance/all.
34 U.S. EPA, Office of Water. Avaialable online at http://'www.epa.gov.waterscieKce/'beaches.
35 U.S. EPA, Office of Water. Avaialable online at http://www.epa.gov/cdx/
36 U.S. EPA. Office of Water. "eBeaches Enables Fast and Secure Transmission of Beach Water Quality and Swimming
Advisory Information." Fact Sheet. EPA-823-F-03-009. Washington, DC: EPA, July 2003. Available at
http:/vwwxv.epa.gov/waterscience/beaches.
37 U.S. EPA. Office of Water. "National Beach Guidance and Required Performance Criteria for Grants." EPA-823-B-02-004.
Washington, DC: EPA, June 2002. Available at http://w\\tw.epa.gov/waterscienc&'beaches/guidance/an .
38 U.S. EPA. Office of Water. "Beach Notification Data User Guide." EPA-823-R-03-005. Washington, DC: EPA, January 2003.
Available at http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/beaches/grants/2003/'
11-26
-------
implementing measures to prevent or reduce water contamination. Key to this effort will be
tailoring preventive and recovery measures to localities and specific pesticides. Pesticide
registration and reregistration reviews will continue to include consideration of the potential
impacts to ground or surface waters. Risk management actions could include changes to use
patterns, modifications in application techniques, buffer zones, and working with the
manufacturer to alter the product formulation. EPA provides funds to the states to implement
these programs, and offers national training courses as well. States and tribes also offer training,
and outreach, often in multiple languages to ensure understanding of non-native speakers, in
addition to operating state laboratories for testing to ensure compliance with use requirements.
International Capacity Building
There are 2.2 million deaths annually worldwide - mostly children - from waterborne
diseases, and billions of cases of severe illness. This lack of clean water contributes to inabilities
of developing countries in particular to pull themselves out of poverty. Poor economic growth
due to the disease burden can be tied to lost work days, the overburdening of already weak
healthcare systems, and poor children's health which leads to a diminished workforce for the
future. A World Health Organization (WHO) report39 on Macroeconomics and Health indicates
that adequate investment in water infrastructure and other health related services could make
immense contributions to long-term economic growth in developing countries.
In FY 2005, the international safe drinking water program will continue its focus on
applying cleaner and more cost-effective environmental practices and technologies in order to
improve drinking water quality in partner countries. On-going projects in Central America,
Africa and China will be used as models to promote urban drinking water quality improvement
throughout these regions, with expansion into Asia, including India. With the number of
medium-sized cities (100,000 to 1 million inhabitants) and large cities (greater than 1 million
inhabitants) expected to rise dramatically over the next 20 years, these projects will help alleviate
the enormous stress on an already compromised water and wastewater infrastructure in urban
and peri-urban areas.
In Latin America, EPA will work with partners such as the Pan American Health
Organization's technical center - CEPIS - to strengthen their abilities to improve wafer quality
hi the region. EPA implemented several drinking water projects in Africa during FY 2003, with
projects focused on nations hi the southern and eastern parts of the continent. In cooperation
with other Federal agencies and departments, EPA will expand these urban/peri-urban drinking
water programs during 2004. Raising awareness of the cost-effectiveness of protecting safe
water resources (versus treatment of contaminated sources) will be an important component of
each project. EPA will work with in-country partners to emphasize the health impacts and
societal costs, such as infant mortality or lost work force productivity, which can result from
unsafe drinking water. EPA will also consider environmental finance options for small-scale
infrastructure improvements in urban communities.
In China, a program to improve the quality of drinking water derived.from the Hai River
Basin, has an initial focus on watershed management and source water protection. In India, EPA
39 WHO: Macroeconomics and Health: Investing in Health for Economic Development. Report of the Commission on
Macroeconomics and Health. 2001. ISBN 92 4 154550.
11-27
-------
will build capacity within municipalities to improve laboratory capacity, optimize treatment
plants and address standard setting as part of an overall program to address water quality in an
urban setting.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
• +$500,000 redirected from effluent guidelines for a sustainable infrastructure initiative to
support partnerships with States, the utility industry, and other stakeholders to enhance
the operating efficiencies of drinking water and wastewater utilities.
• -$400,000 from the nationwide survey of containments in fish. In FY 2004, EPA will
complete the analyses for mercury, PCBs, dioxins/furans/co-planer PCBs and
organochlorine pesticides from the fish tissues collected and conduct statistical analyses
of these samples. During FY 2005, the Agency will document the findings of the survey
and make them available to the public. In addition, during FY 2005, the Agency will
identify emerging containments of public health and environmental concern in fish (e.g.,
flame retardants, fuel additives) and initiate analyses from archived fish tissues of the
narrower set of contaminants that pose particular concern. These FY 2005 activities will
not require the same level of resources as in previous years.
• (+$700,000, +0 FTE) This represents a redirection of resources from the U.S.-Mexico
Border Program to target water issues in Latin America.
• There are increases for payroll, cost of living and enrichment for existing FTE.
S&T
• -$21,300,000 from critical water infrastructure protection, reflecting a shift in priorities
from assistance and training on vulnerability assessments.
• There are increases for payroll, cost of living and enrichment for existing FTE.
STAG
• -$4,000,000 specifically targeted to begin designing the necessary drinking water
infrastructure improvements to Metropolitano, Puerto Rico's large community water
system. This makes the total request for FY2005 $4,000,000.
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES
GOAL: CLEAN AND SAFE WATER
OBJECTIVE: PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH
11-28
-------
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Safe Drinking Water
In 2005 93% of the population served by community water systems will receive drinking water that meets all
applicable health-based drinking water standards through effective treatment and source water
protection.
In 2005 94% of the population served by community water systems will receive drinking water that meets
health-based standards with which systems need to comply as of December 2001.
In 2005 75% of the population served by community water systems will receive drinking water that meets
health-based standards with a compliance date of January 2002 or later.
In 2005 94% of community water systems will provide drinking water that meets health-based standards with
which systems need to comply as of December 2001.
In 2005 75% of community water systems will provide drinking water that meets health-based standards with a
compliance date of January 2002 or later.
In 2005 90% of the population served by community water systems in Indian country will receive drinking
water that meets all applicable health-based drinking water standards.
In 2004 85 percent of the population served by community water systems will receive drinking water meeting
health-based standards promulgated in or after 1998.
In 2004 92% of the population served by community water systems will receive drinking water meeting all
health-based standards in effect as of 1994, up from 83% in 1994.
In 2003 End of year FY 2003 data will be available in 2004 to verify 85 percent of the population served by
community water systems received drinking water meeting health-based standards promulgated in or
after 1998.
In 2003 End of year FY 2003 data will be available in 2004 to verify 92% of the population served by
community water systems received drinking water meeting all health-based standards hi effect as of
1994, up from 83% in 1994.
Performance Measures:
Percent of population served by community
drinking water systems with no violations during
the year of any Federally enforceable health-
based standards that were in place by 1994.
Population served by community water systems
providing drinking water meeting health-based
standards promulgated in or after 1998.
Population served by community water systems
that receive drinking water that meets health-
based standards with which systems need to
comply as of December 2001
Population served by community water systems
that receive drinking water that meets health-
based standards with a compliance date of
January 2002 or later
Percentage of community water systems that
FY2003
Actuals
91
96
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
92
85
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
94
75
94
% Population
% Population
% Population
% Population
% CWSs
11-29
-------
Performance Measures:
provide drinking water that meets health-based
standards with which systems need to comply as
of December 2001
Percentage of community water systems that
provide drinking water that meets health-based
standards with a compliance date of January
2002 or later
Percent of the population served by community
water systems in Indian country that receive
drinking water that meets all applicable health-
based drinking water standards
% of population served by community water
systems that receive drinking water that meets all
applicable health-based drinking water standards
through effective treatment and source water
protection
FY2003
Actuals
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
75
90
93
% CWSs
% Population
% population
Baseline: In 1998, 85% of the population that was served by community water systems and 96% of the
population served by non-community, non-transient drinking water systems received drinking water
for which no violations of Federally enforceable health standards had occurred during the year. Year-
to-year performance is expected to change as new standards take effect. Covered standards include:
Stage 1 disinfection by-products/interim enhanced surface water treatment rule/long-term enhanced
surface water treatment rule/arsenic.
Source Water Protection
In 2005 20% of source water areas for community water systems will achieve minimized risk to public health.
In 2004 Advance States' efforts with community water systems to protect their surface and ground water
resources that are sources of drinking water supplies.
In 2003 End of year FY 2003 data will be available in 2004 to verify 39,000 community water systems (75% of
the nation's service population) will have completed source water assessments and 2,600 of these (10%
of the nation's service population) will be implementing source water protection programs.
Performance Measures:
Number of community water systems and
percent of population served by those CWSs that
are implementing source water protection
programs.
FY2003
Actuals
Data Lag
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
25% / 7,500
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
% pop/systems
Percent of source water areas for community
water systems that achieve minimized risk to
public health
20
% Areas
Baseline: EPA defines "achieve minimized risk" as substantial implementation of source water protection
actions, as determined by a State's source water protection strategy. Approximately 268 million
people are estimated to be served by Community Water Systems (CWSs) in 2002.
11-30
-------
River/Lake Assessments for Fish Consumption
In 2005 80% of the shellfish growing acres monitored by states are approved or conditionally approved for use.
In 2005 At least 1% of the water miles/acres identified by states or tribes as having a fish consumption
advisory in 2002 will have improved water and sediment quality so that increased consumption offish
and shellfish is allowed.
In 2004 Reduce consumption of contaminated fish by increasing the information available to States, Tribes,
local governments, citizens, and decision-makers.
In 2003 Reduced consumption of contaminated fish by increasing the information available to States, Tribes,
local governments, citizens, and decision-makers.
Performance Measures: FY 2003
Actuals
Lake acres assessed for the need for fish 33
advisories and compilation of state-issued fish
consumption advisory methodologies.
(cumulative)
River miles assessed for the need for fish
consumption advisories & compilation of state-
issued fish consumption advisory methodologies.
(cumulative)
Percent of water miles/acres, identified by states
or tribes as having fish consumption advisories
in 2002, where increased consumption of fish is
allowed.
Percent of the shellfish growing acres monitored
by states that are approved or conditionally
approved for use
15
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
35
16%
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
80
% Lake acres
% River miles
% Miles/Acres
% Areas
Baseline: In 1999, 7% of the Nation's rivers and 15% of the Nation's lakes were assessed to determine if they
contained fish that should not be eaten or should be eaten in only limited quantities. In September
1999, 25 states/tribes are monitoring and conducting assessments based on the national guidance to
establish nationally consistent fish advisories. In the 2000 Report to Congress on the National Water
Quality Inventory, 69% of assessed river and stream miles; 63% of assessed lake, reservoir, and pond
acres; and 53% of assessed estuarie square miles supported their designated use for fish consumption.
For shell fish consumption, 77% of assessed estuary square miles met this designated use.
Increase Information on Beaches
In 2005 Coastal and Great Lakes beaches monitored by State beach safety programs will be open and safe for
swimming in over 94% of the days of the beach season.
In 2005 Restore water quality to allow swimming in not less than 2% of the stream miles and lake acres
identified by states in 2000 as having water quality unsafe for swimming.
In 2004 Reduce human exposure to contaminated recreation waters by increasing the information available to
the public and decision-makers.
In 2003 Reduced human exposure to contaminated recreation waters by increasing the information available to
the public and decision-makers.
11-31
-------
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Beaches for which monitoring and closure data is 2,823 2,823 Beaches
available to the public at
http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/beaches/.
(cumulative)
Restore water quality to allow swimming hi 2 %
stream miles and lake acres identified by states Miles/Acres
Days (of beach season) that coastal and Great 94 %
Lakes beaches monitored by State beach safety Days/Season
programs are open and safe for swimming.
Baseline: By the end of FY 1999, 33 states had responded to EPA's first annual survey on state and local beach
monitoring and closure practices and EPA made available to the public via the internet. An average of
9 recreational contact waterborne disease outbreaks reported per year by the Centers for Disease
Control for the years 1994-1998, based on data housed in EPA/ORD internal database. In 2002,
monitored beaches were opened 94% of the days during the beach season.
VERFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFRQMANCE MEASURES
FY 2005 Performance Measures: The percentage of the population served by community water
systems that receive drinking water that meets health-based standards with which systems need to
comply as of December 2001.
The percentage of the population served by community water systems that receive drinking
water that meets health-based standards with a compliance date of January 2002 or later.
(Covered standards include: Stage I disinfection by-products/interim enhanced surface
water treatment rule/long-term enhanced surface water treatment rule/arsenic.)
The percentage of community water systems that provide drinking water that meets health-
based standards with which systems need to comply as of December 2001.
The percentage of community water systems that provide drinking water that meets health-
based standards with a compliance date of January 2002 or later.
The percentage of population served by community water systems hi Indian country that
receive drinking water that meets all applicable health-based drinking water standards.
Performance Database: Safe Drinking Water Information System- Federal Version (SDWIS or
SDWIS-FED). SDWIS contains basic inventory information, including an individual public water
system's activity status, type of water system (i.e., community, non-community, and non-transient
non-community), and the population served by that system. SDWIS also contains violations
11-32
-------
records that detail violations of the Safe Drinking Water Act and the statute's implementing
regulations. The performance measure is based on the population served by community water
systems that were active during any part of the performance year and did not have any violations
designated as "health based." Exceedances of a maximum contaminant level and violations of a
treatment technique are health-based violations; monitoring and reporting, record keeping, and
public notification violations are not "health based."
Data Source: Agencies with primacy (primary enforcement authority) for the Public Water
Supply Supervision (PWSS) program including states and EPA Regional Offices with direct
implementation (DI) responsibility for states and Indian tribes. The Navajo Nation Indian tribe, the
only tribe with primacy, is expected to begin reporting directly to EPA in FY 2004. Primacy
agencies collect the data from the regulated water systems, determine compliance, and report a
subset of the data to EPA (primarily inventory and violations).
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: The analytical methods that drinking water systems use
to collect violations data are specified in the technical guidance associated with each drinking
water regulation. Laboratories must be certified by the primacy agencies to analyze drinking
water samples and are subject to periodic performance audits by the states and EPA as the direct
implementers. Performance measures are based on data reported by individual systems to states,
which, in turn, supply the information to EPA through SDWIS. EPA then verifies and validates
the data for 10 to 12 states per year, according to a protocol, which is updated annually. To
measure program performance, EPA aggregates the SDWIS data into a national statistic on
overall compliance with health-based drinking water standards. This statistic compares the total
population served by community water systems meeting all health-based standards to the total
population served by all community water systems.
QA/QC Procedures: SDWIS-FED has numerous edit checks built into the software to reject
erroneous data. There are quality assurance manuals for states and Regions to follow to ensure
data quality. The manuals provide standard operating procedures for conducting routine
assessments of the quality of the data, communication and follow-up actions to be conducted
with the state to achieve timely corrective action(s). EPA offers training to states on reporting
requirements, data entry, data retrieval, and error correction. User and system documentation is
produced with each software release and is maintained on EPA's web site. SDWIS-FED
documentation includes data entry instructions, data element dictionary (on-line data dictionary -
electronic documentation), entity relationship diagrams, a user's manual, and regulation-specific
reporting requirements documents. System, user, and reporting requirements documents can be
found on the EPA web site, http://www.epa.gov/safewater/. System and user documents are
accessed via the database link http://w\wt'.epa.gov/safewater/databases.html. and specific rule
reporting requirements documents are accessed via the regulations, guidance, and policy
documents link http://www.epa.gov/safewater/regs.html. In addition, EPA provides specific
error correction and reconciliation support through a troubleshooter's guide, a system-generated
summary with detailed reports documenting the results of each data submission, and an error
code database for states to use when they have questions on how to enter or correct data. A user
support hotline is available 5 days a week to answer questions and provide technical assistance.
At least one EPA staff person in each EPA regional office serves as the SDWIS-FED Regional
data management coordinator to provide technical assistance and training to the states on all
aspects of information management and required reporting to EPA. Primacy agencies'
information systems are audited on an average schedule of once every 3 years.
11-33
-------
SDWIS-FED does not have a quality assurance project plan - it is a legacy system which has
"evolved" since the early 1980s prior to the requirement for a plan. The SDWIS-FED equivalent
is the data reliability action plan40 (DRAP). The DRAP contains the processes and procedures
and major activities to be employed and undertaken for assuring the data in SDWIS meet
required data quality standards. There are three major components of this plan: assurance,
assessment, and control. The assurance component includes management of the plan,
development and/or maintenance of tools used to support the implementation processes and
procedures, and standard operating procedures. It also includes provision of training, technical
assistance vehicles, coordination with other program areas that use the data or impact its quality.
The second major component of the plan is assessment. Quality assurance assessments include
all types of review, audit, and assessment of the DRAP, data, and information needs. The third
major component of the plan is control. Quality assurance controls include software edit checks,
processing controls, security controls, and other procedural controls that limit or prevent
incomplete, inaccurate, or unauthorized updates or modifications to the data. The data
verification protocol, and its use in on-site audits of states' files, is the final measure of data
quality control. Thirty-one state data verification audits were conducted over the period from
1999 to 2001.
Data Quality Review: SDWIS data quality was identified as an Agency weakness in 1999 and
has a corrective action completion target date in 2005. SDWIS' weaknesses center around five
major issues: 1) completeness of the data (e.g., the inventory of public water systems, violations of
maximum contaminant levels, enforcement actions) submitted by the states, 2) timeliness of the
data sent by the states, i.e., if states do not report at specified times, then enforcement and oversight
actions suffer, 3) difficulty receiving data from the states, 4) both cost and difficulty processing and
storing data in SDWIS after it has been received, and 5) difficulty getting SDWIS data for
reporting and analysis. The DRAP focuses on the first three issues, and an information strategic
plan41 (ISP) has been developed and is being implemented to address the last two issues, which
deal primarily with technology (hardware and software) concerns. For instance, the ISP is
examining ways to improve tools and processes for creating and transferring data to EPA, such as
incorporating newer technologies and adapting the Agency's Enterprise Architecture Plan to
integrate data and the flow of data from reporting entities to EPA via a secure central data
exchange (CDX) environment. Detailed activities and implementation schedules are included in
these two documents, and to date the Agency expects to correct these weaknesses by the end of
2005.
Routine data quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) analyses of the Safe Drinking Water
Information System (SDWIS) by the Office Water (OW) have revealed a degree of nonreporting
of violations of health-based drinking water standards, and of violations of regulatory monitoring
and reporting requirements. As a result of these data quality problems, the baseline statistic of
national compliance with health-based drinking water standards likely is lower than previously
reported. The Agency is currently engaged in a rigorous statistical analysis and in discussions
with states to more accurately quantify the impact of these data quality problems on the estimate
40 Data Reliability Action Plan. U.S. EPA, October 2002. Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water internal work plan
document.
41 U.S. EPA, Office of Water, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water Information Strategy (under revision). See Options
for OGWDWInformation Strategy (Working Draft), EPA 816-P-01-001. Washington, DC, February 2001. Available on the
Internet at http://www.epa.gov/safewater/data/infortnationstrategy.html
11-34
-------
of national compliance with health-based drinking water standards. This analysis could result in
statistically based adjustments to the baseline that will lower the 5-year (2008) performance
targets for our SDWIS-based subobjective and strategic measures. Ongoing EPA and state
efforts to improve data quality in SDWIS already have resulted in significant improvements in
data accuracy and completeness, however. Even as these improvements are made, SDWIS
serves as the best source of national information on compliance with Safe Drinking Water Act
requirements, and is a critical database for program management, the development of drinking
water regulations, trends analyses, and public information.
Management System Reviews (MSRs) of quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) systems for
SDWIS are carried out by the Quality Assurance Division of the Office of Environmental
Information. An MSR of SDWIS data quality was completed in 1999 and the final report
contained favorable comments on the level of detail in EPA's plans and actions to improve data
quality. EPA also completed a data reliability assessment (QA audit) of the 1996-1998 SDWIS-
FED data in FY 2000, which, hi turn, led to the development and issuance of the 2002 DRAP. A
second data reliability assessment is expected to be released in January 2004 and is based on
1998-2001 data in SDWIS/FED. Also, the 2002 DRAP will be revised and expanded in 2004
to include the findings of the second data reliability assessment.
• The basic findings from the second data reliability assessment were that the data hi
SDWIS are accurate but incomplete. Improvements were observed in all areas except
timeliness of violations reporting. Core inventory data are highly complete and accurate.
The quality of violations data is improving, with high accuracy but still low in
completeness. Monitoring and reporting violations continue to be the major problem
area. Health-based violation data quality is highly accurate with higher levels of
completeness than monitoring violations data.
Finally, EPA and its contracted auditors of primacy agencies' information systems conduct
individual data quality reviews. The frequency of these audits is every 2 to 4 years depending on
the resources available and programmatic need in the region. Continuous data quality reviews
include data quality estimates based on the results of data verifications, timeliness and
completeness of violation reporting, completeness of various required inventory data elements,
and completeness of reporting for specific rules.
Data Limitations: Currently SDWIS-FED is an "exceptions" database that focuses exclusively on
public water systems noncompliance with drinking water regulations (health-based and program).
Primacy states implement drinking water regulations with the support of the Public Water System
Supervision (PWSS) grant program and determine whether public water systems have violated:
maximum contaminant levels (MCL); treatment technique requirements; consumer notification
requirements; or monitoring-and-reporting requirements. These violations are reported through
SDWIS.
Recent state data verification and other quality assurance analyses indicate that the most
significant data quality problem is under-reporting to EPA of monitoring and health-based
standards violations and inventory characteristics, such as water sources and/or latitude/longitude
for all sources. The most significant under-reporting occurs in monitoring violations. Even
though those are not covered in the health based violation category, which is covered by the
performance measure, failures to monitor could mask treatment technique and MCL violations.
11-35
-------
Such under-reporting of violations limits EPA's ability to: 1) accurately quantify the number of
sources and treatments applied, 2) undertake gee-spatial analysis, and 3) integrate and share data
with other data systems. The under-reporting limits EPA's ability to precisely quantify the
population served by systems, which are meeting the health-based standards. As described in the
Data Quality Review section above, currently the program office is assessing the percentage of
unreported health-based violations and calculating possible adjustments to the performance data
that might be required for future reports. The SDWIS inventory of public water systems is
highly complete and the quality of population data has been determined to be of high quality.
In addition to the DRAP and the information strategy, other options under consideration to
improve data in SDWIS include:
1. Increase the focus on state compliance determinations and reporting of complete, accurate
and timely violations data. This is the single most significant factor for data quality
improvement.
2. Develop incentives to improve the accuracy, completeness, and timeliness of state
reporting.
3. Enhance and ease the flow of data from providers to EPA via a secure environment
(Central Data Exchange - CDX), utilizing modern technologies (e.g., extensible markup
language - XML) and standardized procedures and processes.
4. Continue to analyze the quality of the data.
5. Obtain parametric data (analytical results used to evaluate compliance with monitoring
regulations and compliance with treatment techniques and maximum contaminant levels)
from states through an agreement on voluntarily reporting these data to EPA, monitoring
schedules, and waiver information assigned to water systems by the state primacy agency.
This information would allow EPA to have more direct access to the data used for
compliance determinations for quality assurance and state oversight purposes. Potential
violation under reporting could be identified through the availability of this information
and appropriate corrective actions implemented.
Error Estimate: Analyses are under way to determine the impact of data quality on the
performance measures, and are scheduled for completion by early 2004. The analysis will include
data from an additional round of audits to provide a more accurate error estimate compared to the
results of earlier baseline audits.
New/Improved Data or Systems: Several approaches are underway.
First, EPA will continue to work with states to implement the DRAP and ISP, which have already
improved the completeness, accuracy, timeliness, and consistency of the data in SDWIS-FED
through: 1) training courses for SDWIS-FED data entry, error correction, and regulation specific
compliance determination and reporting requirements, 2) specific DRAP analyses, follow-up
activities and state-specific technical assistance, 3) increased number of data verifications
conducted each year, and 4) creation of various quality assurance reports to assist regions and
states in the identification and reconciliation of missing, incomplete, or conflicting data.
11-36
-------
Second, more states will use SDWIS-STATE,42 a software information system jointly designed
by states and EPA, to support states as they implement the drinking water program. SDWIS-
STATE is the counterpart to SDWIS-FED and uses many of the same edit criteria and enforces
many of the mandatory data elements. If the SDWIS-STATE system is fully utilized by a state,
the information it holds would meet EPA's minimum data requirements. SDWIS-STATE links
directly to SDWIS-FED, which aids in easing the states' reporting burden to EPA and hi the
process minimizes data conversion errors and improves data quality and accuracy. In addition, a
Web-enabled version of SDWIS-STATE and a data migration application that can be used by all
states to process data for upload to SDWIS-FED are being developed. EPA estimates that 40
states will be using SDWIS-STATE for data collections by the end of FY 2004.
Third, EPA is modifying SDWIS-FED to (1) streamline its table structure, which simplifies
updates and retrievals, (2) minimize data entry options that result in complex software and
prevent meaningful edit criteria, (3) enforce compliance with permitted values and Agency data
standards through software edits, and (4) ease the flow of data to EPA through a secure data
exchange environment incorporating modern technologies, all of which will improve the
accuracy of the data.
Fourth, EPA has developed a data warehouse system that is optimized for analysis, data retrieval,
and data integration from other data sources like information from data verifications, sample
(parametric) data, source water quality data (e.g., U.S. Geological Survey [USGS] data), and
indicators from inspections conducted at the water systems. It will improve the program's ability
to more efficiently use information to support decision-making and effectively manage the
program.
Finally, EPA, in partnership with the states, is developing information modules on other drinking
water programs: the Source Water Protection Program, the Underground Injection Control
Program (UIC), and the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund. These modules will be
integrated with SDWIS to provide a more comprehensive data set with which to assess the
nation's drinking water supplies, a key component of the goal. In 2003, agreement was reached
on the data elements for reporting source water and UIC data. In 2004, plans will be developed
for design of systems to address these data flows. Developing the systems to receive the data is
scheduled for 2005.
References:
Plans*
• SDWIS-FED does not have a Quality Assurance Project Plan - it is a legacy system which
has "evolved" since the early 80s prior to the requirement for a Plan. The SDWIS-FED
equivalent is the Data Reliability Action Plan.
• Information Strategy Plan - SDWIS-FED (see footnote 2 )
• Office of Water Quality Management Plan, available at
http://www.epa.gov/water/info.htnil
42 SDWIS/STATE (Version 8.1) is an optional Oracle data base application available for use by states and EPA regions to
support implementation of their drinking water programs.
U.S. EPA, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water. Data and Databases. Drinking Water Data & Databases -
SDWIS/STATE, July 2002. Information available on the Internet:
11-37
-------
• Enterprise Architecture Plan
Reports*
• 1999 SDWIS/FED Data Reliability
• 2003 SDWIS/FED Data Reliability Report - contains the Data Reliability Action Plan and
status report
• PWSS Management Report (quarterly)
• 1999 Management Plan Review Report
• 2003 Management Plan Review Report
Guidance Manuals, and Tools
• PWSS SDWIS/FED Quality Assurance Manual
• Various SDWTS-FED User and System Guidance Manuals (includes data entry
instructions, data On-line Data Element Dictionary-a database application, Error Code
Data Base (ECDB) - a database application, users guide, release notes, etc.) Available on
the Internet at
• Regulation-Specific Reporting Requirements Guidance. Available on the Internet at
Web site addresses
• OGWDW Internet Site and contains
access to the information systems and various guidance, manuals, tools, and reports.
• Sites of particular interest are:
contains information for users to
better analyze the data, and
contains reporting guidance,
system and user documentation and reporting tools for the SDWIS-FED system.
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Percentage of source water areas for community water
systems that achieve minimized risk to public health.
Performance Database: The source water assessment and protection programs are authorized
under Sections 1453, 1428, and relevant subsections of 1452 of the Safe Drinking Water Act
(SDWA). 3 EPA issued guidance to implement these programs in 1997, State Source Water
Assessment and Protection Programs Guidance?4 EPA will issue supplemental reporting
guidance - - Source Water Assessment and Protection Measures: Initial Guidance - - in 2004.
Starting in FY 2003, and updated annually thereafter, states will report to EPA on the results of
their source water assessment programs' (SWAPs) progress in implementing source water
* These are internal documents maintained by EPA's Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water. Please call 202-564-3751 for
further information.
43 Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996. P.L. 104-182. (Washington: 6 August 1996). Available on the Internet at
44 U.S. EPA, Office of Water. State Source Water Assessment and Protection Programs Guidance. EPA 816-R-97-009
(Washington: US EPA, August 1997). Available on the Internet at
11-38
-------
protection (SWP) strategies, and whether such strategy implementation is affecting public health
protection. To assess progress in completing the SWAPs, state reporting will include five
elements: (1) the delineated source water areas around each well and intake, (2) whether the
assessments are complete, (3) and (4) most prevalent and most threatening sources of
contamination, and (5) relative susceptibility ratings across source water areas, i.e., high,
medium, or low susceptibility. To assess progress in implementing the SWP strategies, state
reporting will include three elements: (1) whether a prevention strategy covering source water
areas has been adopted, (2) whether that strategy is being implemented, and (3) whether such
strategy implementation has reached a substantial level. To assess whether the program is
affecting public health protection, states will report change in the number of source water areas
with substantially implemented source water protection strategies. The Agency will develop a
national summary of data on the progress of states' source water protection programs using these
data elements.
In FY 2003, EPA maintained state-level summary data for each of these elements in an Excel
database. Beginning in FY 2004, states may, at their option, make available to EPA public water
system-level data for each of these elements to be maintained hi a set of data tables in the
drinking water warehouse (for tabular data) and in event tables in the Office of Water's Reach
Address Database (RAD)45 (GIS data). These data will be compatible with the inventory data
States are currently reporting to the Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS).46 [Not
publicly available. Contact the Drinking Water Protection Division at 202-564-3797.]
Data Source: See section "New/Improved Data or Systems."
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: For this measure, the states' reporting of progress in
implementing their source water assessment and protection programs will be based on EPA's
2004 guidance, Source Water Assessment and Protection Measures: Initial Guidance. States
will only report state-level summary information that may be: (1) directly related to specific
community water systems hi a database; (2) directly related to the community water systems
sampled in a statewide statistical sample; or (3) estimated using best professional judgment.
Because state reporting will be based on consistent definitions and procedures found in the
Source Water Assessment and Protection Measures: Initial Guidance, EPA assumes that these
data are reliable for use hi making management decisions.
QA/QC Procedures: QA/QC procedures will be included in the 2004 Source Water Assessment
and Protection Measures: Initial Guidance. Additionally, a series of data checks will be built
into the Excel-based data collection procedures given to each Region for their work with states.
States will be required to identify whether their reported summary-level data are based on a
system-level database or on aggregate-level estimates. EPA's Regions also will work with
individual states to obtain a description of their methods of collecting and verifying information.
Data Quality Reviews: EPA Regions will conduct data quality reviews of state data using the
QA/QC procedures included with the Excel-based data system, and work with states to resolve
45 Watershed Assessment, Tracking & Environmental Results (WATERS). Available only on the Internet at
46 Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS). Information available on the Internet at
11-39
-------
data exceptions. As a result, EPA expects the quality of data on assessments and source water
protection activities to improve over time.
Data Limitations: Because the initial reporting provides only state-level summary information,
there is no standard protocol for EPA to verify and validate the data to system-level information
contained in state databases. In addition, much of the data reported by states is voluntary and
based on working agreements with EPA because SDWA only requires states to complete source
water assessments. The only source water information that states are required to report to EPA
under SDWA is whether the assessments are completed. Although EPA's 2004 Source Water
Assessment and Protection Measures: Initial Guidance will set standard data definitions and
procedures, it also provides for considerable flexibility in states' data collection protocols and
analytical methods to evaluate their data. For example, some states may require each public
water system (PWS) to report data, while others may institute a voluntary process. Further, those
states that use statistical surveys may choose samples differently. Because much of the data
reporting is voluntary and the individual state protocols may vary, state data may be incomplete
and inconsistent across states.
Error Estimate: There is no basis for making an error estimate for this performance measure
given the data limitations of state-level summary reporting described above.
New/Improved Data or Systems: EPA is developing a new source water data module to
collect, store, and use public water system-level data received from states. The source water
module is being developed as a joint initiative between EPA, the Association of State Drinking
Water Administrators (ASDWA), and the Ground Water Protection Council (GWPC). It will
give EPA the ability to access the data directly from states through a data exchange agreement
using an electronic data transfer capability. A state may choose, at its option, to provide EPA
more detailed data in lieu of state-level summary reporting. The new source water data module
will be integrated into the drinking water data warehouse and be compatible with Safe Drinking
Water Information System (SDWIS) data already reported by states. Geospatial data (i.e., the
intake and well point locations and the source water area polygons) will be maintained in EPA's
Office of Water's Reach Access Database (RAD). The source water assessment and protection
indicator data and other attribute data will be maintained in data tables in the drinking water
warehouse. The source water data module should be operational in FY 2004. A number of
states are expected to report this detailed data in 2004 as part of the EPA/ASDWA/GWPC
initiative.
References:
Guidance Manuals
• U.S. EPA, Office of Water. State Source Water Assessment and Protection Programs
Guidance. EPA 816-R-97-009 (Washington: US EPA, August 1997). Available on the
Internet at
• Source Water Assessment and Protection Measures: Initial Guidance (to be released late
summer 2003)
11-40
-------
Web site addresses
• US EPA Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water,
• For more detailed information on Source Water topics, US EPA Office of Ground Water
and Drinking Water, Source Water site,
• US EPA Office of Water (OW) Reach Access Database (RAD). Watershed Assessment,
Tracking & Environmental Results (WATERS),
« Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS).
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/databases.htm}
FY 2005 Performance Measure; Percent of the population and the number of community
water systems - - serving more than 3,300 but less than 50,000 people - - that have certified
the completion of the development or revision of their emergency response plan.
Performance Database: No formal EPA database. Performance is tracked against a master list
of small systems (each of which serves between 3,301 and 49,999 people) that has been
compiled specifically for this performance measure.
Data Source: The Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) is the source of drinking
water system descriptive information, including system size. The master list of small drinking
water systems was compiled by determining which systems, based on size, are required to
develop/revise emergency response plans and submit a certification of completion of this activity
to EPA in accordance with the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and
Response Act of 2002 (Bioterrorism Act).
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: The method for determining the number of small
community water systems subject to the requirements of the Bioterrorism Act was to compile the
number of community water systems listed in SDWIS in July 2002. This listing was sent to
Regional drinking water program staff who, in turn, worked with each state in that Region to
review and categorize these systems by size as defined in the Bioterrorism Act. However,
because the number of community water systems changes often - - due to acquisitions, mergers,
closures, etc. - - all major stakeholders hi this effort, i.e., EPA, state, drinking water systems,
states-related organizations, and environmental groups agreed that these numbers should be
considered estimates and that EPA should count the number of certifications of completion of
emergency response plans submitted to the Agency. Each state serves as the final arbiter of
issues related to system size. As each system submits this document, its name is checked. Any
system on the list that has not submitted its certification of emergency response plan completion
by the statutory deadline set forth hi the Bioterrorism Act is contacted and a determination is
made at that time if the system is still in operation and when it will submit the required material.
QA/QC Procedures: Other than what is described above, there is no QA/QC procedure for this
activity and performance measure.
Data Quality Review: EPA works with the states on a regular basis to identify the drinking
water systems hi that state and to assure that these systems are reporting data to SDWIS.
Data Limitations: N/A
11-41
-------
Error Estimate: N/A
New/Improved Data or Systems: With a newly-developed information strategy developed by
EPA in partnership with the states and major stakeholders, several improvements to SDWIS are
underway.
References: N/A
FY 2005 Performance Measure: The quality of water and sediments will be improved to
allow increased consumption of fish in not less than 3% of the water miles/acres identified
by states or tribes as having a fish consumption advisory in 2002.
Performance Database: National Listing of Fish and Wildlife Advisories.1 The database
includes fields identifying the waters for which fish consumption advisories have been issued.
The fields also identify the date upon which the advisory was issued, thus allowing an
assessment of trends. The National Hydrographic Data (NHD) are used to calculate the spatial
extent of the fish advisory. This information is updated continually as states and tribes issue or
revise advisories. The National Listing of Fish and Wildlife Advisories database includes
records showing that 485,205 river miles and 11,277,276 lake acres were identified by states or
tribes in calendar year 2002 (calendar year 2003 data will be available in May 2004) as having
fish with chemical contamination levels resulting in an advisory of potential human health risk
from consumption. States and tribes report data on a calendar year basis. The calendar year data
are then used to support the fiscal year commitments (e.g. calendar year 2002 data support the
FY 2003 commitments). Metadata are also available describing methodologies used by states
and tribes for establishing advisories.
Data Source: State and Tribal Governments. These entities collect the information and enter it
directly Into the National Listing of Fish and Wildlife Advisories database. EPA reviews
advisory entries, including the states' or tribes' responses to an on-line survey, which support the
advisory decision. The Agency follows-up with the state or local government to obtain
additional information where it is incomplete.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: The database comprises advisories that reporting
states and tribes have in effect each year. The advisories are specific to a waterbody, and thus
are not aggregated. The percentage of lake acres and river miles assessed is the ratio of the
surface area of lakes and/or rivers for which states submit data to the National Listing of Fish &
Wildlife Advisories database and the total water surface area in the United States. It is a simple
mathematical calculation. The database reflects the actual number of advisories that states and
tribes issued, and are thus specific to the performance measure.
QA/QC Procedures: A standard survey, which has been approved by OMB, is available on the
Internet for electronic submission. A password is issued to ensure the appropriate party is
completing the survey. EPA has national guidance2'3 for states and tribes on developing and
implementing quality assurance practices for the collection of environmental information related
to fish advisories. This guidance helps assure data quality of the information that states and
tribes use to decide whether to issue an advisory. The Office of Water's "Quality
Management Plan, " approved in September 2001 and published in July 20024, is the guidance
that applies to this information collection.
11-42
-------
Data Quality Reviews: EPA reviews advisory entries and responses to the survey to ensure the
information is complete, then follows-up with the state or local government to obtain additional
information where needed. However, the Agency cannot verify the accuracy of the voluntary
information that state and local governments provide. There have been no external party reviews
of this information.
Data Limitations: Participation in this survey and collection of data is voluntary. While the
voluntary response rate has been high, it does not capture the complete universe of advisories.
Two states, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Guam do not report in the survey. In addition,
states have not assessed all waters for the need for advisories, so the information reported
reflects a subset of waterbodies in the state.
Error Estimate: Because submitting data to the National Listing of Fish & Wildlife Advisories
database is voluntary, the Agency cannot be certain that the database contains information on
100% of the assessed waters in the United States. Therefore, we may be understating the total
amount of waters assessed, the magnitude of which is not known. The error value cannot be
quantified.
New/Improved Data or Systems: EPA will use grants to encourage states to investigate more
waters for the need for advisories. This will increase the number of waterbodies assessed, and
lead to a more complete characterization of the nation's fish safety.
References:
1. U.S. EPA. Office of Water. " National Listing of Fish and Wildlife Advisories. "
Washington, DC: EPA Accessed May 1, 2003. Available only on the internet at
http://map 1 .epa.gov/
2. U.S. EPA. Office of Water. " Fish Sampling and Analysis." Volume 1 of AGuidance
for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use in Fish Advisories. 3rd ed. EPA-823-B-
00-007. Washington DC: EPA, 2000. Available at
http://w-w-w.epa.gov/waterscience/fishadvice/volume i/ .
3. U.S. EPA. Office of Water. " Risk Assessment and Fish Consumption Limits. "
Volume 2 of AGuidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use in Fish
Advisories. 3rd ed. EPA-823-B-00-008. Washington DC: EPA, 2000.
http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/fishadvice/volume2/.
4. U.S. EPA. Office of Water. " Quality Management Plan." EPA 821 -X-02-001.
Washington, DC: EPA, July 2002. Available at
http://www.epa.gov/ow/prograrns/qmp july2.
FY 2005 Performance Measure; Percentage of the shellfish-growing acres monitored by states
that will be approved for use.
Performance Database: The Shellfish Information Management System (SIMS). The database
is being developed and implemented by the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) on behalf of the Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference (ISSC), a
Cooperative Program chartered by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The database will
include relevant information that is collected by State Shellfish Control Authorities.
Historically, NOAA collected shellfish-growing area data hi 5-year intervals, 1985, 1990, and
11-43
-------
1995. These data were not stored in a database. Once operational, SIMS will be the first
national shellfish growing area database and will include NOAA's 1995 data and new data,
available in September, 2003. State summary information can then be used to track trends
relevant to the performance measure, with the 1995 data as baseline. The SIMS database is
designed as a real tune database. The ISSC plans to request data updates annually, but states
may update then: data any time. These data may be accessed at any time so timely status reports
can be generated.
Data Source: EPA is a member of the ISSC SIMS steering committee, along with FDA and
NOAA. The SIMS architecture is compatible with other databases using the National
Hydrographic Dataset (NHD). The steering committee is confident that the procedures used to
collect, analyze, and report the data will result hi accurate and reliable data.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: SIMS is a real time database and, therefore, will
provide up-to-date information.
QA/QC Procedures: States will be responsible for the internal QA/QC of their data. SIMS is
designed to use state data to produce nationwide reports.
Data Quality Reviews: The ISSC is developing its SIMS processes to review data submitted by
states.
Data Limitations: Based on NOAA's previous surveys and the voluntary nature of the effort,
potential data limitations may include incomplete coverage of shellfish growing areas.
Error Estimate: No estimates are available.
New/Improved Data or Systems: SIMS, initiated in September 2003, will be evaluated on a
periodic basis to identify and implement improvements.
References: None at this time.
FY 2005 Performance Measure; Restore water quality to allow swimming in stream miles
and lake acres identified by states in 2000 as having water quality unsafe for recreation.
[The data narrative for this measure is under Goal 2, Objective 2 — FY 2005 Performance
Measure: Water quality standards are fully attained in miles/acres of waters identified in
2000 as not attaining standards.]
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Percentage of days of the beach season that coastal and
Great Lakes beaches monitored by State beach safety programs will be open and safe for
swimming.
Performance Database: The data are stored in PRAWN (Program tracking, beach Advisories,
Water quality standards, and Nutrients)1, an new internal database that feeds into the National
Health Protection Survey of Beaches Information Management System.2 The database includes
fields identifying the beaches for which monitoring and notification information are available
and the date upon which the advisory or closure was issued, thus enabling trend assessments to
11-44
-------
be made. Beginning in FY 2003, the database will identify those states that have received a
BEACH (Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health) Act [P.L. 106-284] grant.
EPA reports the information annually, on a calendar year basis, each May.
Data Source: Since 1997, EPA has surveyed state and local governments for information on
their monitoring programs and on their advisories or closures. State and local governmental
response to the survey is voluntary. The number of records on beaches has grown from 1,021
beaches in calendar year 1997 to 2,823 beaches in calendar year 2002. States and local entities
collect and report data on a calendar year basis. The calendar year data are then used to support
fiscal year commitments (e.g. 2002 calendar year data are used to support the FY 2003
commitments). Starting in calendar year 2003, data for beaches along the coast and Great Lakes
must be reported to EPA as a condition of grants awarded under the BEACH Act3. EPA reviews
the advisory entries and responses to the survey to ensure the information is complete, then
follows-up with the state or local government to obtain additional information where needed.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: The data are a. census of beach-specific advisories or
closures issued by the reporting state or local governments during the year. Performance against
the target is tracked using a simple count of the number of beaches responding to the survey and
the advisory or closure actions taken. Thus the data are suitable for the performance measure.
QA/QC Procedures: Since 1997, EPA has distributed a standard survey form, approved by
OMB, to coastal and Great Lake state and county environmental and public health beach
program officials in hard copy by mail. The form is also available on the Internet for electronic
submission. In calendar year 2002, voluntary survey responses included 30 percent from
counties, 32 percent from cities, 20 percent from states, 10 percent from regional or districts, and
2 percent from federal entities. When a state or local official enters data over the Internet, a
password is issued to ensure the appropriate party is completing the survey. EPA reviews the
survey responses to ensure the information is complete, then follows up with the state or local
government to obtain additional information where needed. Currently the Agency has
procedures for information collection (see Office of Water's "Quality Management Plan,"
approved September 2001 and published July 20024). However, because state and local officials
submitted the data voluntarily, the Agency cannot verify the accuracy of the information
provided. Starting in 2003, coastal and Great Lakes states receiving a BEACH Act grant are
subject to the Agency's grant regulations under 40 CFR 31.45. These regulations require states
and tribes to develop and implement quality assurance practices for the collection of
environmental information.
Data Quality Review: EPA reviews the survey responses to ensure the information is complete,
following up with the state or local government to obtain additional information where needed.
The Agency cannot verify the accuracy of the voluntary information state and local governments
provide. There have been no external party reviews of this information.
Data Limitations: From calendar year 1997 to calendar year 2002, participation in the survey
and submission of data has been voluntary. While the voluntary response rate has been high, it
has not captured the complete universe of beaches. The voluntary response rate was 92% in
calendar year 2002 (240 out of 261 contacted agencies responded). The number of beaches for
which information was collected increased from 1,021 in calendar year 1997 to 2,823 in calendar
year 2002. Starting in calendar year 2003 participation in the survey will become a mandatory
11-45
-------
condition for grants awarded under the BEACH Act program to coastal and Great Lakes states.
However, coastal and Great Lakes states and local governments are not required to apply for a
grant. Those coastal and Great Lakes states receiving a BEACH Act grant and subject to the
Agency's grant regulations under 40 CFR 31.45 are required to develop and implement quality
assurance practices for the collection of environmental information, helping to assure data
quality.
Error Estimate: Because submitting data has been voluntary, the database does not contain
information on 100% of beaches in the United States. No error estimate is available for this data
because the total number of beaches in the U.S. is unknown.
New/Improved Data or Systems: With the passage of the BEACH Act of 2000, the Agency is
authorized to award grants to states to develop and implement monitoring and notification
programs consistent with federal requirements. As the Agency awards these implementation
grants, it will require standard program procedures, sampling and assessment methods, and data
elements for reporting. To the extent that state governments apply for and receive these grants,
the amount, quality, and consistency of available data will improve. In FY 2005, EPA expects
the 35 coastal and Great Lakes states to apply for grants to implement monitoring and
notification programs. The BEACH Act also requires the Agency to maintain a database of
national coastal recreation water pollution occurrences. The Agency has fulfilled this
requirement by creating a new PRAWN database that includes this information. EPA has also
developed eBeaches5, a new Internet-based system for secure transmittal of beach advisory and
water quality data into PRAWN. This system will make it easier for states to accurately transmit
this information to EPA using the Internet.
References
1. U.S. EPA. Office of Waters. "Beach Notification Data User Guide." EPA-823-R-03-005.
Washington, DC: EPA, January 2003. Available at
http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/beaches/grants/2003/
2. U.S. EPA. Office of Water. "National Health Protection Survey of Beaches".
Washington, DC: EPA. Accessed May 23, 2003. Available only on the internet at
http://uww.epa.gov/waterscience/beaches/
3. U.S. EPA. Office of Water. "National Beach Guidance and Required Performance
Criteria for Grants." EPA-823-B-02-004. Washington DC: EPA, June 2002. Available at
ht!p:/Vwww.epa.gov/waterscience/beaches/guidance/all.
4. U.S. EPA. Office of Water. "Quality Management Plan." EPA 821-X-02-001.
Washington, DC: EPA, July 2002. Available at
http://www.epa.gov/ow/programs/qmp.Julv2002.
5. U. S. EPA. Office of Water. "eBeaches." Fact Sheet. EPA-823-F-03-009.
Washington, DC, July 2003. Available at
http://wmv.epa.gov/waterscience/beaches/
11-46
-------
EFFICIENCY MEASURES\MEASUREMENT DEVELOPMENT PLANS
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund
As a measure of output efficiency, the Agency tracks each fund's utilization rate, which is
the ratio of the cumulative loan agreement dollars to cumulative funds available for projects.
EPA will develop an outcome efficiency measure for the DWSRF. Development of measures is
referenced in the program assessment Rating Tool (PART) summary in the Special Analysis
section.
Population in Indian Country Receiving Safe Drinking Water
EPA is working to develop a measure for drinking water on Tribal lands. The Agency is
committing, in the 2003 Strategic Plan, to being able to measure and achieve: "by 2015, in
coordination with other federal agency partners, reduce by 50% the number of households on
Tribal lands lacking access to safe drinking water." In order to measure progress toward that
target, in FY 2005 EPA will lead the development and issuance of an interagency strategy,
coordinating with other federal partners. The Agency will begin to collect data to establish an
accurate and complete baseline consistent with an interagency definition developed previously.
(EPA plans to begin reporting annual national progress in FY 2006.) Due to the large number of
other agencies that play key roles in directly or indirectly providing Tribal households with
access to safe drinking water, achieving measurable progress under this strategic measure will
depend heavily on long-term inter-agency coordination and support.
Public Water System Supervision Grants
EPA plans to develop an outcome efficiency measure for the Public Water System
Supervision Grants program as part of the FY 06 PART process.
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
The 1996 SDWA amendments include a provision that mandates a joint EPA/Centers for
Disease Control (CDC) study of waterborne diseases and occurrence studies in public water
supplies. CDC is involved in assisting EPA in training health care providers (doctors, nurses,
public health officials, etc.) on public health issues related to drinking water contamination and
there is close CDC/EPA coordination on research on microbial contaminants in drinking water.
EPA has in place a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and Interagency Agreement (IAG)
with the CDC in the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) to implement this
provision.
In implementing its source water assessment and protection efforts, the Agency coordinates
many of its activities with other Federal agencies. There are three major areas of relationships with
other agencies concerning source water assessments and protection.
Public Water Systems (PWSs). Some Federal agencies, i.e., USDA (Forest Service), DOD,
Department of Energy, DOI (National Park Service), and USPS, own and operate public water
systems. EPA's coordination with these agencies focuses primarily on ensuring that they cooperate
11-47
-------
with the states in which their systems are located, and that they are accounted for in the states'
source water assessment programs as mandated in the 1996 amendments to the SDWA.
Data Availability, Outreach and Technical Assistance. EPA coordinates with USGS (US
Geological Survey), USD A (Forest Service, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Cooperative
State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES), Rural Utilities Service); DOT, DOD,
DOE, DOI (National Park Service and Bureaus of Indian Affairs, Land Management, and
Reclamation); DHHS (Indian Health Service) and the Tennessee Valley Authority.
Collaboration with USGS. EPA and USGS have identified the need to engage in joint,
collaborative field activities, research and testing, data exchange, and analyses, in areas such as the
occurrence of unregulated contaminants, the environmental relationships affecting contaminant
occurrence, evaluation of currently regulated contaminants, improved protection area delineation
methods, laboratory methods, and test methods evaluation. EPA has an LAG with USGS to
accomplish such activities. This collaborative effort has improved the quality of information to
support risk management decision-making at all levels of government, generated valuable new data,
and eliminated potential redundancies.
Collaboration with Public and Private Partners on Critical Water mfrastructure Protection.
EPA coordinates with other federal agencies, especially the newly-established Department of
Homeland Security as well as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Food and
Drug Administration, and the Department of Defense on biological, chemical, and radiological
contaminants, and how to respond to their presence in drinking water and wastewater systems. A
close linkage with the FBI, particularly with respect to ensuring the effectiveness of the ISAC,
will be continued. The Agency is strengthening its working relationships with the American
Water Works Association Research Foundation, the Water Environment Research Federation
and other research institutions to increase our knowledge on technologies to detect contaminants,
monitoring protocols and techniques, and treatment effectiveness.
Collaboration with FDA. EPA and FDA have issued national fish consumption advisories
to protect the public from exposure to mercury in commercially and recreationally caught fish, as
well as fish caught for subsistence. EPA's advisory covers the recreational and subsistence fisheries
in fresh waters where states and tribes have not assessed the waters for the need for an advisory.47
FDA's advisory covers commercially caught fish, and fish caught in marine waters.48 EPA is
working closely with FDA to ensure that the national fish consumption advisories issued by both
agencies, for mercury or other contaminants, provide consistent and the most current scientifically
sound advice to the public, and to ensure that these advisories support and augment advisories
issued by states and tribes.
Collaboration with Other Federal Agencies on Beach Monitoring and Public
Notification
The BEACH Act requires that all federal agencies with jurisdiction over coastal and Great
Lakes recreation waters adjacent to beaches used by the public implement beach monitoring and
public notification programs. These programs must be consistent with guidance published by
47. ibid, http://mapi.epa.gov/litml/federaladv
48. Ibid. http://map} .epa.gov/html/Fedetaladv
11-48
-------
EPA49. EPA will continue to work with the U.S. Park Service and other federal agencies to ensure
that their beach water quality monitoring and notification programs are technically sound and
consistent with program performance criteria published by EPA.
Collaboration with States on Pesticides Management
States provide essential activities in developing and implementing the Groundwater
Strategy.
Collaboration with Other Federal Agencies on International Safe Drinking Water
EPA's environmental mandate and expertise make it uniquely qualified to represent the
nation's environmental interests aboard. While the Department of State (DOS) is responsible for
the conduct of overall U.S. foreign policy, implementation of particular programs, projects, and
agreements is often the responsibility of other agencies with specific technical expertise and
resources. Relations between EPA and DOS cut across several offices and/or bureaus in both
organizations.
EPA works closely with a number of other Federal agencies with environmental, health,
or safety mandates. These include the Department of State, Department of Labor, Department of
Transportation, Department of Agriculture, Department of the Interior, Department of Health and
Human Services, and the Food and Drug Administration
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health Act of 2000 (BEACH)
Clean Water Act (CWA)
Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act (EPCRA) section 313 (42 U.S.C.
1023)
EPCRA section 313 (42 U.S.C. 11023)
Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA)
Federal Fungicide, Insecticide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996
National Environmental Policy Act, Section 102
Pollution Prevention Act (42 U.S.C. 13101-13109)
PPA (42 U.S.C. 13101-13109)
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)
Water Resources Development Act (WRDA)
49. ibid. "National Beach Guidance and Required Performance Criteria for Grants.'
11-49
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Clean and Safe Water
OBJECTIVE: Protect Water Quality
Protect the quality of rivers, lakes, and streams on a watershed basis and protect coastal
and ocean waters.
Resource Summary
(Dollars in Thousands)
Protect Water Quality
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Building and Facilities
Inspector General
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Total Workyears
FY2003
Actuals
$2,346,144.8
$274,428.9
$3,541.2
$1,932.9
$12,836.2
$2,053,405.6
1,546.0
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$1,647,043.1
$286,677.0
$0.0'
$1,887.0
$10,579.2
$1,347,900.0
1,610.2
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
$1,645,669.9
$290,271.3
$0.0
$2,025.1
$10,623.5
$1,342,750.0
1,603.9
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
($1,373.2)
$3,594.3
$0.0
$138.2
$44.3
($5,150.0)
-6.3
Program Project
(Dollars in Thousands)
Categorical Grant: Wastewater Operator
Training
Categorical Grant: Nonpoint Source (Sec.
319)
Categorical Grant: Water Quality
Cooperative Agreements
Categorical Grant: Pollution Control (Sec.
106)
Infrastructure Assistance: Alaska Native
Villages
Infrastructure Assistance: Clean Water SRF
Marine Pollution
Surface Water Protection
Congressionally Mandated Projects
International Capacity Building
Administrative Projects
TOTAL
FY2003
Actuals
$0.0
$228,776.9
$18,155.7
$193,648.9
$41,810.6
$1,386,537.4
$7,070.0
$169,317.7
$208,639.3
$1,214.1
$90,974.2
$2,346,144.8
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$0.0
$238,500.0
$19,000.0
$200,400.0
$40,000.0
$850,000.0
$12,049.9
$189,230.1
$0.0
$431.7
$97,431.4
$1,647,043.1
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
$1,500.0
$209,100.0
$19,750.0
$222,400.0
$40,000.0
$850,000.0
$12,296.0
$190,785.3
$0.0
$372.0
$99,466.6
$1,645,669.9
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$1,500.0
($29,400.0)
$750.0
$22,000.0
$0.0
$0.0
$246.1
$1,555.2
$0.0
($59.7)
$2,035.1
($1,373.3)
11-50
-------
FY 2005 REQUEST
Results to be Achieved under this Objective
Improving Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Protecting Surface Water: In order to protect and improve water quality on a watershed
basis, EPA will focus its work with states, interstate agencies, tribes, and others in six key areas:
(1) strengthen the water quality standards program; (2) improve water quality monitoring; (3)
develop effective watershed plans and Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs); (4) implement
effective nonpoint source pollution control programs; (5) strengthen the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program; and (6) effectively manage
infrastructure assistance programs.
EPA expects to work with states, interstate agencies, and tribes in each of these areas, but
progress toward water quality improvements will largely depend on success in integrating
programs on a watershed basis, engaging diverse stakeholders in solving problems, and applying
innovative ideas, such as water quality trading, to deliver cost-effective water pollution control.
The Clean Watersheds Needs Survey will be a valuable tool to support integrated pollution
control problem-solving and cost-effective improvements.
Through an effective combination of these activities, the agency will progress toward our
2008 objectives of improving water quality such that standards are met in at least 600 of the
nation's watersheds, and the overall aquatic system health of coastal waters is improved.
International Capacity: Our objective to protect the environmental quality of U.S. waters
involves efforts to protect freshwater lakes, rivers, and estuarine environments as well as coastal
and ocean waters. U.S. waters are subject to international sources of pollution and EPA's
international efforts hi this area are focused on the development and implementation of
international standards necessary to address transboundary sources of pollution, pollution
affecting shared ecosystems, and the introduction of non-indigenous nuisance (invasive) species
introduced through maritime shipping. To reach these ends we are seeking to reduce the
successful introduction of invasive species to U.S. waters through the negotiation of effective
international standards addressing ballast water discharges, the use of harmful anti-foulants, and
ah" emissions from ships. In addition, we are isolating high-level radioactive wastes in
Northwest Russia that threaten the health of shared natural resources in the Arctic ecosystem.
Achievement of the objective and strategic targets will enhance U.S. water quality, human
health, and help stabilize aquatic ecosystems in North America.
Surface Water Programs and Clean Water State Revolving Fund
Strengthen the Water Quality Standards Program: State and authorized tribal water
quality standards provide the regulatory and scientific foundation for all water quality programs.
EPA derives the scientific baselines for contaminants in the form of "water quality criteria"
guidance and identifies recommended approaches to support state and tribal adoption and
implementation of water quality standards that protect water for uses such as swimming, public
water supply, and fish and wildlife. EPA also has a statutory obligation to review and approve
11-51
-------
state and tribal water quality standards, and to promulgate federal replacement standards, where
necessary.
The Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria50, developed in cooperation with
states and published in August 2003, reflects a wide-ranging review of the water quality
standards program with federal, state, tribal and other partners. The Strategy identifies the ten
highest priority actions EPA must take to strengthen the regulatory and scientific foundation of
state and tribal water quality standards to improve water quality and address the most significant
new and emerging environmental problems.
In FY 2005, EPA will focus the water quality standards and criteria program on directly
supporting Regional Offices, states and tribes to: (1) reduce the backlog of water quality
standards actions; (2) establish the highest attainable uses in water quality standards; and (3)
strengthen the scientific foundation on which to manage the water quality standards program.
EPA's first priority is to reduce the current backlog and avoid future backlogs of final
EPA action on water quality standards. Timely EPA action on water quality standards
submissions will assure the most current standards are available for development of TMDLs and
permit limits, and the evaluation of monitoring data to determine whether standards are being
attained consistent with the
Agency's strategic target. Water Quality Standards Submissions
As shown in the following without EPA action in 90 days
graph, improvement is
needed.
By providing direct
technical and administrative
assistance to regional
offices, states and tribes,
EPA will strive to take final
action on state and tribal
water quality standards
submissions within the 90-
day statutory deadline.
Completing EPA's national
consultation with the Fish
and Wildlife Service and the
National Marine Fishery
Service on existing aquatic
life criteria under the
Endangered Species Act51
should facilitate meeting this
target.
to
o
"v>
.52
.a
3
V)
.Q
Date of reports
Source: U.S. EPA, Office of Water, Office of Science and Technology "May 2003 Water
Quality Standards Backlog Report
50 U.S. EPA. Office of Water. "Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria." EPA-823-R-03-010. Washington, DC: EPA,
August 2003. Available at http://www.epa.goWwaterecience/standards/
51 Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544.
11-52
-------
Second, to address criticisms by the General Accounting Office52 and the National
Academy of Sciences53, EPA will provide clear, consistent technical outreach and support to
states and tribes in revising their standards, where necessary, to reflect the highest attainable
uses. These refined standards, based on sound science, technology and water quality-based
control evaluations, demonstrated benefits, and implementation strategies will enable states and
tribes to target the right waters for restoration.
Finally, EPA will strengthen scientific and policy tools that states, tribes and regional
offices require to better manage the water quality standards and criteria program. These tools
include new and revised water quality criteria for high priority chemicals identified by a
systematic process in FY 2004; a sedimentation criteria strategy to address sediment and siltation
problems that account for more water quality impairments than any other pollutant54;
implementation guidance and direct technical support to assist 25 states in adopting nutrient
criteria for fresh waters and to 45 states in adopting numeric biological criteria or
implementation methods for small rivers and streams by 2008. Excess nutrients are one of the
top four leading causes of water quality impairments 55 and biological criteria advance the
scientific basis of designating aquatic life uses and measuring the success of cleanup efforts.56
In a complementary effort, EPA will review risk assessment methodologies applied to
chemical pollutants and pathogens in biosolids generated by wastewater treatment plants and
assess the need for new or revised standards to protect public health and the environment. This
effort will respond to the highest priority recommendations in the National Research Council's
2002 report, "Biosolids Applied to Land: Advancing Standards and Practices."
Improve Water Quality Monitoring: Scientifically defensible data and information are
essential tools hi the Information Age. Water quality monitoring and assessment programs, the
essential underpinning of all aspects of the watershed approach, must be strengthened and
upgraded across the country.
In FY 2005, EPA requests funds for states to enhance existing monitoring programs so
that they can answer basic questions about the condition of all state waters, contribute to a valid
assessment of national water quality, and make good decisions about water quality management
at appropriate scales. Implementation of this proposal requires a flexible approach that
recognizes the different stages of development and the different monitoring frameworks of state
programs.
Increased performance is the most critical component of our FY 2005 request. EPA
expects to achieve the results detailed in the chart below. In addition, this monitoring initiative
52 General Accounting Office. "Water Quality: Improved EPA Guidance and Support Can Help States Develop
Standards That Better Target Cleanup Efforts." GAO-03-308. Washington, DC: GAO, February 2003.
53 National Research Council. "Assessing the TMDL Approach to Water Quality Management." Washington, DC:
National Academy Press, 2001.
54 U.S. EPA. Office of Water, http://oaspiib.epa.gov/waters/national reptcontrol
55 Ibid, http://oaspub.epa.gov/waters/nattonal...reptcontrol
56 U.S. EPA. Office of Water. "Biological Assessment and Criteria: Crucial Components of Water Quality
Programs." EPA-822-F-02-006. Washington, DC: EPA, Summer, 2002. Available at
h;tp://www.epa.gov/waterscience.^biocriteria/technical
11-53
-------
will enable EPA, by the time the Agency revises the Strategic Plan again in 2006, to write
Strategic Objectives that are scientifically defensible and measurable.
Current Status Goal
National picture of water quality condition: 2003 3aseiine
Estuaries
Streams and small rivers
Lakes
Large rivers
Near-shore coastline
Wetlands
Off-shore Marine
All states begin implementing a comprehensive monitoring strategy
o
S N.
All states submit comprehensive integrated reports including ( }
both probability-based results and site-specific information , ^—
X—->.
Full Integration of Federal Information Systems to maximize the { )
use of existing and new data in management decisions ^—'
USGS, NOAA, and EPA research produces tools to improve V^ J
prediction, targeting, restoration decisions at multiple scales
Red ( ) Yellow &M& Green
O
The proposal includes two components: A state grants component targeted specifically to
enhance state monitoring programs and support and enhance of state data management systems
to support cost-effective management decisions at the state level.
The largest component of the proposal is the state grants program. Grants under this
component of the proposal will be targeted specifically to support states' implementation of
monitoring strategies to most efficiently support the full range of decision needs. The state
monitoring strategies include the use of the following tools:
• Refinement of biological assessment methods and probability-based designs for different
water resource types. These activities are key to generating comparable assessments of
water resources at local, state and national scales.
• Landscape models and other predictive tools. These tools are used to indicate where
problems should be expected based on land use, discharges and non-point sources and
help to indicate the level of vulnerability, likelihood of impairment and target priority
actions.
• Remote sensing and innovative indicators of water quality to help to streamline where
additional monitoring is needed to identify site-specific water quality conditions.
• Targeted monitoring to provide data to implement local management actions like NPDES
permits and TMDLs. These existing targeted networks will be enhanced and refined by
the contributions of other monitoring and assessment tools.
11-54
-------
Effective data management is essential for successful state and national water monitoring
programs. The second component of the proposal includes funds to support improvement of
state data management systems to ensure that that water quality-monitoring data are
understandable and available to decision-makers, stakeholders, and public audiences. The
proposal will target funds to support development of efficient mechanisms for data sharing to
enhance collaboration and promote more informed decision making at the local, state and
national levels. Critical system management needs also include upgrades to Storage and
Retrieval System (STORET), the primary tool for storing and analyzing water quality data, to
improve system navigation and operation and to enhance analysis and presentation applications.
Other important activities include developing the capability to exchange data with states and
other partners, and providing essential training and implementation support for users.
Develop Effective Watershed Plans and TMDLs: EPA is working with states, interstate
agencies, and tribes to foster a "watershed approach" as the guiding principle of clean water
programs. At the watershed level, local managers can better understand the cumulative impact
of their activities, determine the most critical problems, better allocate limited financial and
human resources, engage stakeholders, win public support, and make real improvements in the
environment. EPA is encouraging states to develop watershed plans with a comprehensive
approach to assessing water quality, defining problems, integrating management of diverse
pollution control, and financing projects. States have successfully adopted watershed approaches
that use a "rotating basin" approach (e.g., a cycle in which watersheds of the state are assessed
every five years) as well as other methods. Where necessary, states will upgrade their continuing
planning process to assure development of a watershed approach. EPA is also working with
tribes to support development of watershed approaches to protecting tribal waters.
In watersheds where water quality standards are not attained, states will be developing
TMDLs. Some impaired waters are isolated segments that can be addressed individually. The
vast majority of impaired waters, however, are clustered on a watershed basis. EPA is
encouraging states to develop TMDLs for these waters on a watershed basis. Watershed-based
TMDLs are less expensive to develop and create the opportunity for innovations such as water
quality trading and watershed-based permitting. While supporting state watershed plans, EPA
will continue work with states to develop TMDLs consistent with state TMDL development
schedules and court-ordered deadlines. States and EPA have made significant progress in the
development and approval of TMDLs and expect to maintain the current pace of about 3,000
TMDLs per year.
EPA will continue to provide the modeling tools that states need to develop TMDLs by
incorporating technical improvements and new science into Better Assessment Science
Integrating Point and Nonpoint Source (BASINS), a multipurpose environmental analysis system
for performing watershed and water quality based studies. EPA will also provide technical
support and training to states for the use of BASINS to develop TMDLs.
Water Quality Trading: In FY 2005, EPA will support, through a $4 million set-aside
within the existing Targeted Watershed Grants program, pilot projects designed to demonstrate
the effectiveness of market-based approaches. Each pilot project will be required to establish
goals and document progress against a variety of criteria:
• What progress is made toward water quality standards?
11-55
-------
• How does this progress compare to estimated progress using traditional approaches?
• What cost savings were achieved, as compared to the estimated cost of traditional
approaches (e.g., for TMDL implementation)?
• What ancillary environmental benefits are realized beyond required reductions in speci c
pollutant loads, such as wetlands restoration?
Pilot projects will offer the opportunity to establish new criteria by which to judge the
effectiveness of various approaches. A key area for investigation will be that of cost savings.
Anecdotal information suggests that cost savings provided by trading programs can be
significant. Trading among point sources in Connecticut is expected to save over $200 million
dollars in reducing nitrogen loads to Long Island Sound over a 14-year period. After its first
year, the Connecticut program has achieved more nitrogen reductions than expected and cut
nearly six years off the projected timeline for meeting water quality standards.
Control Nonpoint Source Pollution: Watershed plans and TMDLs will focus pollution
control efforts for impaired waters on a range of pollution sources, including runoff from
nonpoint sources. EPA will also support efforts of states, interstate agencies, tribes, and other
federal agencies to implement management practices that will reduce levels of nonpoint source
pollution in both unpaired waters and in surface waters and ground waters nationwide.
A critical step in this effort is for EPA to forge strategic partnerships with a broad range
of agricultural interests at all levels. EPA will work with USD A to ensure that Federal resources,
including grants under section 319 of the Clean Water Act and Farm Bill funds, are managed hi a
coordinated way. As part of this effort, EPA will work with States to encourage the development
and implementation of watershed based plans, focusing on watersheds with water quality
impairments caused by nonpoint sources. These watershed plans are a mechanism to coordinate
monitoring and planning on a watershed basis and will build a foundation for effective
implementation actions using federal and other funding. EPA will also work cooperatively with
USDA to develop voluntary nutrient management plans for animal feeding operations (small
operations not covered by regulations) and to implement riparian and stream bank protection
measures over the next 5 years.
We will continue to track the steady increases in the cumulative dollar value and number
of projects financed with Clean Water SRF loans to prevent polluted runoff. Properly managed
onsite/decentralized systems are an important part of the Nation's wastewater infrastructure, and
EPA will encourage state, tribal, and local governments to adopt voluntary guidelines for the
effective management of these systems and use Clean Water Revolving Loan Funds to finance
systems where appropriate.
OMB conducted an assessment of the nonpoint source grants program using the
Administration's Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART). The program received adequate
scores for "purpose and design" and "program management," but was deemed deficient in
"strategic planning" and "program results/accountability," largely due to the unavailability of
adequate measures of program efficiency.
Strengthen NPDES Permit Program and Implement National Industrial Regulation
Strategy: The NPDES requires point source dischargers to be permitted and pretreatment
programs to control discharges from industrial facilities to the Nation's wastewater treatment
11-56
-------
plants. This program provides a management framework for protection of the Nation's waters
through the control of billions of pounds of pollutants. EPA has five key strategic objectives for
the program over the next five years: (1) assure effective management of the permit program and
focus on permits that have the greatest benefit for water quality; (2) implement wet weather point
source controls, including the storm water program; (3) implement the newly developed program
for permits at Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFO); (4) advance program
innovations, such as watershed permitting and trading; and (5) develop national industrial
regulations for industries where the risk to waterbodies supports a national regulation.
In 2003, EPA began developing the "Permitting for Environmental Results Strategy" to
address concern for the workload in permit issuance and the health of state NPDES programs.
The Strategy focuses limited resources on the most critical environmental problems by targeting
three key areas: developing and strengthening systems to ensure the integrity of the program;
focusing headquarters, Regions and States on environmental results in the permitting program;
and fostering efficiency in permitting program operations. Underpinning all three areas is the
need for increased quality and quantity of
data, including modernization of the Permits
Compliance System (PCS) and integration
of PCS with other environmental databases.
Program performance will be assessed by
this data, which will include permit issuance
information, compliance and enforcement
information, and other related water quality
program measures. Beginning in FY 2004,
EPA will make comprehensive assessments
of NPDES program integrity and track the
implementation of follow-up actions.
Percentage of Current NPDES Permits*
*Each year, 90% of all NPDES permits are considered current and,
beginning in 2005, 95% of high priority permits are also current,
achieving loading reductions of approximately 130 billion pounds.
Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Enforcement
and Compliance Assistance; Permit Compliance System; Web-site:
www.epa.gov/oeca/planning/data/water/pcssys.html
EPA is working with states, tribes,
and other interested parties to strengthen the
permit program in several other key areas
that will have significant water quality
benefits. EPA recently finalized new rules
for discharges from CAFOs and EPA will
work with states to assure that permits cover
most CAFOs by 2008. In addition, over the next five years, EPA expects that 100% of NPDES
programs will have issued general permits requiring storm water management programs for
Phase II municipalities (MS4s) and requiring storm water pollution prevention plans for
construction sites covered by Phase II of the storm water program. Finally, EPA and states will
monitor the percentage of control mechanisms that establish pretreatment requirements for
significant industrial users that discharge to publicly owned treatment works and for categorical
industrial users of non-pretreatment treatment works.
Recent articles in The Washington Post and The New York Times, withdrawal petitions,
and the permit backlogs indicate that States are struggling with NPDES program
implementation. In addition, the universe of facilities is increasing ten-fold due to new program
requirements to permit CAFOs and additional sources of storm water. To assist States with the
increasing workload, we are requesting a $5 million increase for Section 106 Grants.
11-57
-------
Most industrial facilities discharging directly to waterbodies or to wastewater treatment
plants have permit limits or pretreatment controls based on national regulations. In FY 2005,
EPA will implement the next round of setting priorities, consistent with the final plan published
by EPA, as required by section 304(m) of the CWA, for technology-based water quality
improvements.57 In consultation with the public, EPA will also establish program priorities
based on sound science and the potential for cost-effective risk reduction. In addition to
evaluation of regulatory options, EPA will consider other approaches (including clarifying
guidance, commitments to voluntary reductions, environmental management systems, promotion
of innovative technology, and permit writer support).
Support Sustainable Wastewater Infrastructure: Much of the dramatic progress in
improving water quality is directly attributable to investment in wastewater infrastructure—the
pipes and facilities that treat the Nation's wastewater. But the job is far from over.
Communities are challenged to find the fiscal resources to maintain and replace aging
infrastructure, to meet growing infrastructure demands fueled by population growth, and to
secure their infrastructure against threats. The Clean Watersheds Needs Survey 2000 documents
many of these needs and provides the foundation for much of the agency's wastewater
infrastructure work. Work is underway on the next survey, which is planned for release in late-
2005.
Clean Water State Revolving Funds (CWSRFs) provide low interest loans to help finance
wastewater treatment facilities and other water quality projects. These projects are critical to the
continuation of the public health and water quality gains of the past 30 years. As of early 2004,
the federal government had invested almost $21 billion in the CWSRFs. The revolving nature of
the funds and substantial additions from states have magnified that investment so that $47 billion
has been available for loans.58 The CWSRF program measures and tracks the average national
rate at which available funds are loaned, assuring that the fund is working hard to support water
quality infrastructure. Recognizing the substantial remaining need for wastewater infrastructure,
EPA expects to continue to provide significant annual capitalization to the CWSRFs through
2011. This continued federal investment in SRFs along with other traditional sources of
financing (including increased local revenues) will result in significant progress toward
addressing the Nation's wastewater treatment needs.
57 U.S. EPA. "Effluent Guidelines Planning Process Draft Strategy for National Industrial Regulation" 67 FR 71165 (Nov. 29,
2002)
58 Clean Water State Revolving fund National Information Management System. US EPA, Office of Water, National
Information Management System Reports: Clean Water Waters Revolving Fund (CWSRF). Washington; DC. Available at
http://www.epa.gov/r5water/cwsrf/pdf.
11-58
-------
Number of Clean Water State Revolving Fund Projects that
have Initiated Operations
12,000-1
10,000-
8,000-
6,000-
4,000-
2,000-
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
Source: U.S. EPA, Office of Water, Spreadsheet Maintained by the Office of Water,
January 2004.
Over the next five years, EPA will work with CWSRFs to meet several key objectives:
fund projects designed as part of an integrated watershed approach; link projects to
environmental results through the use of scientifically-sound water quality and public health
data; maintain the CWSRFs' excellent fiduciary condition; and continue to track the increasing
numbers of states that have developed integrated priority lists addressing nonpoint source
pollution and estuaries protection projects in addition to wastewater projects, to make CWSRF
funding decisions.
Another important approach to closing the gap between the need for clean water projects
and available funding is to use sustainable infrastructure management to assure that water and
wastewater infrastructure investments are tailored to the needs of the watershed, well capitalized,
and well maintained. Sustainable Management Systems, such as asset management and
environmental management systems, prolong the lives of existing treatment systems. EPA will
work to promote and institutionalize Sustainable Management Systems. EPA also intends to
work toward recognizing and promoting sustainable infrastructure management through our
awards and recognition programs and our outreach programs, including the clearinghouses and
industry information sources we help to support. Further, we will support efforts to explore new
sustainable techniques through Water Quality Cooperative Agreements-funded demonstration
projects.
To meet the challenges posed by the infrastructure gap, EPA proposes two initiatives to
help lower infrastructure costs — sustainable infrastructure initiative and water efficiency market
enhancement program.
11-59
-------
Even with affordable, flexible financial assistance through the CWSRF, the Agency's
September 2002 Clean Water and Drinking Water Infrastructure "Gap" Analysis projects a
multi-billion dollar gap in capital infrastructure financing over the next 20 years.59 Successfully
closing this gap will require more than federal financial assistance: it will require a broader,
sustained and more focused effort from the Agency to enhance the sustainability of wastewater
treatment systems. As a result, in FY 2005 the Agency will implement a Sustainable
Infrastructure Leadership initiative in partnership with wastewater utilities. Through this
initiative, EPA and its partners will identify leaders in the utility industry who have established
best practices in wastewater asset management, innovations, and efficiency, and who are
interested in employing watershed-based approaches to managing water resources. EPA also
will work closely with States, utilities and other stakeholders to develop a strategy to facilitate
the voluntary adoption of these best practices by approximately 1,000 utilities. The initiative
will be designed to support sustainable wastewater utilities that are able to maximize the value of
clean water by improving system performance at the lowest possible cost.
The proposed water labeling program, which will be based on the highly successful
Energy Star Products Program, will promote recognition of water-efficient products. This
program will give consumers a reference tool to identify and select water-efficient products, such
as faucets, showerheads, and landscape irrigation devices. The purpose of the program is to
reduce national water and wastewater infrastructure needs by reducing projected water demand
and wastewater flows allowing deferral or downsizing of capital projects. In addition to reduced
infrastructure needs, the Agency can anticipate many environmental benefits that assist in
meeting clean and safe water goals, such as maintaining stream flows, protecting aquatic
habitats, avoiding overdrawn aquifers, conserving sources of supply, and mitigating drought
impacts. This program could help to reduce energy usage associated with water savings.
The 2002 World Summit in Johannesburg adopted the goal of reducing the number of
people lacking access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation by 50 percent by 2015. EPA
will contribute to this work through its support for development of sanitation facilities in Indian
country and Alaskan native villages using funds set aside from the CWSRF. Other federal
agencies, such as DOI and USD A, also play key roles in addressing this problem. In addition,
Mexico Border infrastructure projects, described under Goal 4: Healthy Communities and
Ecosystems, will improve access to basic sanitation.
The Clean Water SRF PART review conducted in 2003 found that the program purpose
is clear and designed to have a significant impact on a well-identified need. It also found the
program to be a very competent national financial resource for State infrastructure projects
targeted at compliance with water quality standards and rated the Federal management of that
program as excellent. The review, however, did challenge the Agency to develop performance
measures that demonstrate more directly the impact of the program on water quality
improvement.
Provide Sustainable Communities Assistance: EPA works to provide rural and small
communities and special populations with the information and tools they need to sustain
themselves as healthy and successful communities.
59 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. The Clean Water and Drinking Water Infrastructure Gap Analysis. Washington,
DC: Government Printing Office.
11-60
-------
Onsite/Decentralized wastewater treatment systems, generally referred to as septic
systems, are widely used in rural and small communities, serving approximately 25% of the U.S.
population and used in about one-third of all new housing and commercial development.60 They
are important elements of the nation's sustainable water quality infrastructure. However,
onsite/decentralized systems that are improperly sited, designed, installed, operated and
maintained threaten human health and water quality. This problem affects, directly or indirectly,
the success of all major EPA water quality programs. EPA will provide national direction and
support to improve the performance of decentralized systems through upgrading professional
standards of practice and institutionalizing the concept of sustainable management. In March
2003 the agency published Voluntary National Guidelines for Management of
Onsite/Decentralized Wastewater Treatment Systems, and EPA will encourage states to adopt
and abide by these guidelines.
Of the more than 16,000 Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTWs) in the U.S., 12,500
discharge less than 1 million gallons per day of wastewater.61 The Wastewater Operator
Training Program has compiled an enviable record of success in assisting these small POTWs on
the verge of, or recently in, noncompliance with their wastewater discharge permits. The
program's only requirement is the facilities' willingness to work with a trainer to correct its
problems. To date the program has helped more than 7,000 POTWs, and 9 of 10 assisted have
achieved permit compliance, resulting hi unproved water quality and reduced need for
enforcement actions.62
The Agency works to manage grant assistance to 1,570 Congressional special
appropriations water and wastewater projects with total appropriations of more than $4.1 billion
through FY 2003.63
Infrastructure Assistance: Alaskan Native Villages
EPA also provides direct grants to help address the water and wastewater infrastructure
needs of Alaska Native Villages, and works closely with the Indian Health Service to identify
priority projects for funding in Indian Country. This work is authorized under the Indian set-
aside grant program under Title VI of the Clean Water Act.
Categorical Grants: Section 106 Grants and Water Quality Cooperative Agreements
Section 106 of the Clean Water Act authorizes the Agency to provide grants to states,
tribes and interstate agencies to help fund key programs for the prevention, reduction, and
elimination of surface and ground water pollution from point and nonpoint sources (NPS) and for
enhancing the ecological health of the Nation's water. These grants support State efforts to
restore impaired watersheds (TMDLs) including all facets of this program, i.e., pre-TMDL needs
such as monitoring and assessment and standards development, development of TMDLs and
60 U.S. Department of Commerce; U.S. Census Bureau; 1990 Census and U.S. Department of Commerce; U.S. Census Bureau;
American Housing Survey for the U.S.-1995; issued September 1997.
61 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assistance; Permit Compliance System; Web-
site: www.epa.gov/oeca/planning/data/water/pcssys.html.
62 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wastewater Management; National Operator Training and Technical
Assistance Program Tracking System.
63 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; Office of Wastewater Management, Special Appropriations Act Projects and Programs
Tracking System.
11-61
-------
post-TMDL implementation and restoration; implementing integrated wet weather strategies in
coordination with the NFS programs; and developing source water protection programs. Tribes
will continue to conduct watershed assessments and .will maintain and improve their capacity to
implement water quality programs through monitoring, assessments, planning, and standards
development.
Through the Water Quality Cooperative Agreement Program, the Agency continues to
support the creation of unique and innovative approaches to address requirements of the NPDES
program, with special emphasis on wet weather activities. In addition, this grant program has
long supported other programmatic activities such as sustainable management systems for water
pollution control and various other program innovations.
Marine Pollution
Improving Coastal and Ocean Waters: Coastal and ocean waters are environmentally and
economically valuable to the Nation. Key programs focused on coastal waters and critical to
improving these waters are: assessing coastal conditions; reducing vessel discharges; controlling
coastal nonpoint pollution; managing dredged material; managing non-indigenous invasive
species; and supporting international marine pollution control. By 2013, EPA, in cooperation
with other Nations, other Federal agencies, and state and local governments, will reduce the rate
of increase in the number of invasions by non-native invertebrate and algae species of marine
and estuarine waters.
In addition, coordinating our efforts with those of other federal agencies, states, tribes,
and public and private parties is essential. Improving coastal waters will depend on successful
implementation of pollution controls in inland watersheds. Progress in protecting and restoring
coastal waters is also directly tied to geographically focused projects, such as the Chesapeake
Bay Program, the Gulf of Mexico Program, and the National Estuary Program. These programs
are described under Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems.
Assessing Coastal Conditions: Progress in meeting these strategic targets will be tracked
through the National Coastal Condition Report, created in 2002 as a cooperative project of EPA,
NOAA, USD A, and DOI. The Report describes the ecological and environmental condition of
U.S. coastal waters according to a number of key parameters. EPA and other federal agencies
will review changing conditions and periodically issue updated assessments of the health of
coastal waters. In support of assessment of coastal waters, EPA is also working on indices for
measuring the health of coral reefs, providing information that would assist states, tribes and
local governments in anticipating and responding to harmful algal blooms, and improving the
monitoring network for air deposition. EPA also supports a national marine debris monitoring
program, which is developing statistically sound information on the sources of marine debris in
order to better address this environmental and human health hazard.
Reducing Vessel Discharges: A focus of EPA's efforts to improve the health of the
Nation's ocean and coastal waters will be to enhance regulation of discharges of pollution from
vessels. Key work includes development of discharge standards for cruise ships operating in
Alaskan waters; cooperation with the Department of Defense to develop discharge standards for
certain armed forces vessels; and assessing the effectiveness of current regulations for marine
11-62
-------
sanitation devices and promoting technological advancement in those devices to reduce sewage
discharges from vessels.
Implementing Coastal Nonpoint Source Pollution Programs: Rapid population growth in
coastal areas can result in significant increases in pollution from both point and nonpoint
sources. For the past 10 years, EPA and NOAA have been working with coastal and Great
Lakes states to improve and expand programs to reduce nonpoint source pollution hi the "coastal
zone" identified by states. Most states have used federal grant funds to develop coastal nonpoint
programs, and EPA and National Oceans and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) are working
with the remaining states to complete the program by providing continued support and
assistance. These nonpoint control programs, focused on the critical coastal zone areas, will play
an important role in accomplishing the environmental improvements sought for coastal waters by
2008.
Managing Dredged Material: Several hundred million cubic yards of sediment are
dredged from waterways, ports, and harbors each year to maintain the Nation's navigation
system for commercial, national defense, and recreational purposes. All of this sediment must be
disposed of safely. EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) share responsibility for
regulating how and where it is done. EPA and COE will focus additional resources on
improving the way disposal of dredged material is managed, including evaluating disposal sites,
designating and monitoring the sites, and reviewing and concurring on the disposal permits
issued by COE.
EPA is also working with its state partners and other federal agencies, including COE, the
Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Coast Guard, to ensure that comprehensive dredged material
management plans, which include provisions for the beneficial re-use of dredged material, are
developed and implemented in major ports and harbors.
Managing Invasive Species: One of the greatest threats to U.S. waters and ecosystems is
the uncontrolled spread of invasive species. Invasive species commonly enter U.S. waters
through the discharge of ballast water from ships. Although the majority of these organisms
never become established in a new ecosystem, an increasing number of invasive species are
adversely impacting the environment and local economies and posing risks to human health. In
response, EPA is assisting the U.S. Coast Guard in its efforts to develop ballast water exchange
requirements and ballast water discharge standards to control aquatic invasive species and is
addressing this issue at the international level. Negotiations are currently underway for a global
treaty designed to reduce or prevent further introductions of invasive aquatic species through
ballast water.
Supporting International Marine Pollution Control
EPA works closely with the Coast Guard, NOAA, and the Department of State to address
environmental threats to U.S. waters that require international cooperation. Recognizing the
effect of international shipping on the quality of the U.S. waters, EPA is heavily involved in the
negotiation of international standards at the International Maritime Organization. These
international standards are one of the principal mechanisms EPA is using to address invasive
aquatic species, tributyltin and other harmful antilfoulants, and marine debris. EPA is also
11-63
-------
engaged in cooperative efforts to reduce other sources of pollution affecting the Gulf of Mexico,
Great Lakes, Arctic Ocean, Straits of Florida, and the Wider Caribbean Basin.
International Capacity Building
To achieve our objective of preventing further degradation of the marine environment,
EPA leads and supports specific multilateral treaty negotiations through the International
Maritime Organization and other fora aimed at mitigating marine pollution at the global and
regional level. Regional and global efforts are specifically designed to enhance the effectiveness
of existing domestic environmental controls to reduce pollution of U.S. waters resulting from
international shipping and other transboundary vectors and thereby protect important natural
resources as well as the public health of the U.S. population.
Specific measures for FY 2005 will help advance our longer-term efforts to prevent or
reduce environmental damage associated with tributlytin, vessel emissions and discharges,
invasive species, and ocean dumping. Projects aimed at protection of the Arctic ecosystem are
focused on preventing and reducing environmental contamination from spent nuclear fuel in
Northwest Russia. In this context, we expect to achieve a 25 percent reduction of high-level
sources of radioactive waste by 2005.64 In addition, on-going efforts to address vessel and land-
based sources of marine pollution in the Wider Caribbean will result in Regional water quality
and marine habitat improvements that include economic benefits. Finally, our involvement in
global negotiations is critical to maintain needed flexibility in domestic rulemaking and other
environmental policy mechanisms.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
+$3,000,000 to support the monitoring initiative. Also funded through increases to the
STAG account, this initiative will support improvements to the nation's water quality
monitoring capability. These resources will provide technical support to states and tribes
as they adopt new comprehensive monitoring strategies, as well as improvements to
water quality data systems, including enhancements to data-sharing capabilities.
+$500,000 for a sustainable infrastructure initiative to support partnerships with States,
the utility industry, and other stakeholders to enhance the operating efficiencies of
drinking water and wastewater utilities.
+$800,000 for the Water Labeling Program. These resources will be used for the
development and implementation of a market enhancement program that will promote
recognition of water-efficient products.
-$3,500,000 from the development of effluent guidelines. By the end of FY 2004, the
Agency is scheduled to complete the last of nearly 20 effluent guidelines that had been
64 4000 high-level fuel assemblies to be removed from a total of 16,000 assemblies in Northwest Russia (2001 baseline): Bellona
Report (Volumes 1-3), The Bellona Foundation, 1994, 1996, and 2001.
11-64
-------
subject to court-ordered deadlines. In FY 2005, the Agency does not anticipate the same
number of rulemaking starts as previously experienced under the consent decree and will
therefore shift 9 FTE to support high priority work such as water quality monitoring,
permitting, and coastal activities.
• -$1,500,000 for wastewater operator training grants which reflects a change in the
appropriation for this program.
• There are increases for payroll, cost of living and enrichment for existing FTE.
STAG
• +$17,000,000 will fund grants to states and tribes under the water quality monitoring
initiative to support adoption of new comprehensive monitoring strategies and the
development of statistically valid monitoring networks to help target activities and
determine of water quality status and trends. These funds will be awarded under CWA
S.I06, and will be explicitly earmarked for monitoring work.
• +$5,000,000 for Section 106 Grants. These resources will assist States in implementing
the CAFO and Stormwater rules.
• +$1,500,000 for wastewater operator training grants which reflects a change in the
appropriation for this program.
• +$1,500,000 for the water infrastructure management initiative to support demonstration
grants to promote innovative ways for municipalities to manage water infrastructure.
• -$29,400,000 from Section 319 Nonpoint Source Grants hi recognition of increased
resources for USDA conservation programs. The Administration supports focusing the
Section 319 program to provide a basis for implementation of agricultural nonpoint
source controls using USDA program funding.
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
Watershed Protection
In 2005 500 of the Nation's watersheds have water quality standards met in at least 80% of the assessed water
segments.
In 2005 Water quality standards are folly attained in over 25% of miles/acres of waters by 2012, with an
interim milestone of restoring 2% of these waters - identified in 2000 as not attaining standards - by
2005.
In 2004 By FY 2005, Water quality will improve on a watershed basis such that 625 of the Nation's 2,262
watersheds will have greater than 80 percent of assessed waters meeting all water quality standards, up
from 500 watersheds in 1998.
11-65
-------
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Watersheds that have greater than 80% of 5000FY05) 500 8-digitHUCs
assessed waters meeting all water quality
standards.
Waterbodies (river miles and lake acres) 2 % Miles/Acres
identified in 2000 as not attaining Water quality
standards, are fully attained.
Baseline: As of 2002 state reports 453 watersheds had met the criteria that greater than 80% of assessed waters
met all water quality standards. For a watershed to be counted toward this goal, at least 25% of the
segments in the watershed must be assessed within the past 4 years consistent with assessment
guidelines developed pursuant to section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act. In 2002, 0% of the 255,408
miles/and 6,803,419 acres of waters identified on 1998/2000 lists of impaired waters developed by
States and approved by EPA under section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act.
Dredged Material/Ocean Disposal
In 2005 Improve ratings reported on the national "good/fair/poor" scale of the National Coastal Condition
Report for: coastal wetlands loss by at least 0.1 point; contamination of sediments in coastal waters by
at least 0.1 point; benthic quality by at least 0.1 point; & eutrophic condition by at least 0.1 point
In 2005 Scores for overall aquatic system health of coastal waters nationally, and in each coastal region, is
improved on the "good/fair/poor" scale of the National Coastal Condition Report by at least 0.1 point
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Score for overall aquatic system health of coastal 2.5 Scale score
waters nationally, and in each coastal region, is
improved (cumulative).
Maintain water clarity and dissolved oxygen in 4.3 / 4.5 Scale score
coastal waters at the national levels reported in
the 2002 National Coastal Condition Report
Improve ratings reported on the national 1.5 Scale score
"good/fair/poor" scale of the National Coastal
Condition Report for coastal wetlands loss
Improve ratings reported on the national 1.4 Scale score
"good/fair/poor" scale of the National Coastal
Condition Report for contamination of sediments
in coastal waters
Improve ratings reported on the national 1.5 Scale score
"good/fair/poor" scale of the National Coastal
Condition Report for benthic quality
Improve ratings reported on the national 1.8 Scale score
"good/fair/poor" scale of the National Coastal
Condition Report for eutrophic condition
Baseline: National rating of "fair/poor" or 2.4 where the rating is based on a 5-point system where 1 is poor and
5 is good and is expressed as an aerially weighted mean of regional scores using the National Coastal
Condition Report indicators [i.e., water clarity, dissolved oxygen, coastal wetlands loss, eutrophic
conditions, sediment contamination, benthic health, and fish tissue contamination]. The 2002 National
Coastal Condition Report indicated 4.3 for water clarity and 4.5 for dissolved oxygen, 1.4 for coastal
11-66
-------
wetlands loss; 1.3 for contamination of sediments in coastal waters; 1.4 for benthic quality; & 1.7 for
eutrophic condition.
State/Tribal Water Quality Standards
In 2005 In coordination with other federal partners reduce, by 11%, households on tribal lands lacking access
to basic sanitation.
In 2005 Water quality in Indian country will be improved at not less than 35 monitoring stations in tribal
waters for which baseline data are available (i.e., show at least a 10% improvement for each of four
key parameters: total nitrogen, total phosphorus, dissolved oxygen, and fecal coliforms.)
In 2004 Assure that States and Tribes have effective, up-to-date water quality standards programs adopted hi
accordance with the Water Quality Standards regulation and the Water Quality Standards program
priorities.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
States with new or revised water quality , 20 States
standards that EPA has reviewed and approved
or disapproved and promulgated federal
replacement standards.
Tribes with water quality standards adopted and 33 Tribes
approved (cumulative).
Number of monitoring stations (for which 35 Stations
baseline data on 4 key parameters are available)
where water quality is improved.
Number of households on tribal lands lacking 11 %
access to basic sanitation. Households
Baseline: The performance measure of state submissions (above) thus represents a "rolling annual total" of
updated standards acted upon by EPA, and so are neither cumulative nor strictly incremental. EPA
must review and approve or disapprove state revsisions to water quality standards withing 60-90 days
after receiving the state's package. In 2002, there will be four key parameters available at 900
sampling stations in Indian country. In 2002, Indian Health Service indicates that 71,000 households
on Tribal lands lack access to basic sanitation.
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
FY 2005 Performance Measure; Watersheds in which at least 80% of the assessed water
segments meet water quality standards.
Performance Database: The Watershed Assessment Tracking Environmental Results System
(WATERS) (1) is used to summarize water quality information at the watershed level. For
purposes of this national summary, Awatersheds " are equivalent to 8-digit hydrologic unit
codes (HUCs), of which there are 2,262 nationwide. WATERS is a geographic information
system that integrates many existing data management tools including the STOrage and
RETrieval (STORET) database (2), the Assessment Database (3) and the Water Quality
Standards database (4). Water quality information available through WATERS includes data
submitted by the states under Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 305(b). These data are submitted
11-67
-------
to EPA every two years, with annual electronic updates. The U.S.EPA summarizes these data in
the National Water Quality Inventory Report. (5)
Data Source: State CWA Section 305(b) reporting. The data used by the states to assess water
quality and prepare CWA Section 305(b) reports come from multiple sources (state monitoring
networks, United States Geological Survey (USGS), local governments, volunteer monitors,
academic institutions, etc.) as well as predictive tools such as water quality models. Raw data
may be entered by states and other sources into STORET. States compare available ambient
monitoring data to their water quality standards to arrive at assessment results. Assessment
results are then entered into the Assessment Database. EPA uses the assessment results to
present a snap-shot of water quality as reported by the states (the National Water Quality
Inventory Report), but because state methods and water quality standards vary widely, does not
use the assessment results to report trends in water quality.
Information on each state' s assessment methodology can be obtained from its 305(b) report, and
raw data entered into STORET must meet metadata standards.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: States employ various methods of ambient water data
collection, including: 1) Direct sampling of chemical, physical, and biological parameters using
targeted site selection (usually, where problems are most likely or where water is heavily used);
2) Predictive models of water quality standards attainment; 3) Direct sampling at statistically-
valid, probability-based sampling networks (in its early stages in a number of states); 4)
Compilation of data from outside sources such as volunteer monitors, academic institutions, and
others. EPA-supported models include BASINS, QUAL2E, AQUATOX, and CORMIX.
Descriptions of these models and instructions for their use can be found at
www.epa.gov/OST/wqm/.
The standard operating procedures and deviations from these methods for data sampling and
prediction processes are stored by states in the STORET database. EPA aggregates state
assessment information by watershed (as described above) to generate the national performance
measure. State assessment results describe attainment of designated uses in accordance with state
water quality standards and thus represent a direct measure of performance. State CWA Section
305(b) data are suitable for providing a snapshot of the ambient water quality conditions that
exist across the nation, in that subset of waters that are assessed. However, nationally aggregated
data are currently not suitable for year- to-year comparisons. As states update their monitoring
programs to include probabilistic monitoring, EPA will be able to conduct nationally aggregated,
year-to year comparisons.
QA/QC Procedures: QA/QC of data provided by states in their individual assessments (under
CWA Section 305(b)) and accessed through WATERS is dependent on individual state
procedures. Numerous system level checks are built into the data sources in WATERS, based
upon the business rules associated with the water quality assessment database. States are given
the opportunity to review the information to ensure it accurately reflects the data they submitted.
Detailed data exchange guidance and training are also provided to the states. Sufficiency
threshold for inclusion in this measure requires that 20% of stream miles in an 8-digit HUC be
assessed. The Office of Water Quality Management Plan (QMP), renewed every five years, was
approved in July 2002 (6). It describes the quality system used by the Office of Water and
11-68
-------
applies to all environmental programs within the Office of Water and to any activity within those
programs that involves the collection or use of environmental data.
Data Quality Review: Numerous independent reports have cited that weaknesses in water
quality monitoring and reporting undermine EPA's ability to depict the condition of the
Nation's waters, to make trend assessments, and to support scientifically-sound water program
decisions. The most recent reports include the 1998 Report of the Federal Advisory Committee
on the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Program (7), the March 15, 2000 General
Accounting Office report Water Quality: Key Decisions Limited by Inconsistent and Incomplete
Data (8), the 2001 National Academy of Sciences Report, Assessing the TMDL Approach to
Water Quality Management (9), a 2002 National Academy of Public Administration Report,
Understanding What States Need to Protect Water Quality (10), and EPA's Draft Report on the
Environment (11). Water quality reporting under Section 305(b) has been identified as an
Agency-Level weakness under the Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act.
In response to these evaluations, EPA has been working with states and other stakeholders to
improve: 1) data coverage, so that state reports reflect the condition of all waters of the state; 2)
data consistency, to facilitate comparison and aggregation of state data to the national level; and
3) documentation, so that data limitations and discrepancies are fully understood by data users.
The Office of Water has issued several recent guidance documents designed to increase
consistency and coverage in state monitoring, assessment and reporting. In November 2001,
EPA issued its Integrated Reporting guidance (12) which calls on states to integrate the
development and submission of 305(b) water quality reports and Section 303(d) lists of impaired
waters. The Integrated Report will enhance the ability of water quality managers to display,
access, and integrate environmental data and information from all components of the water
quality program. In July 2002, EPA released the Consolidated Assessment and Listing
Methodology - a Compendium of Best Practices (13), intended to facilitate increased consistency
hi monitoring program design and in the data and decision criteria used to support water quality
assessments. And hi March 2003, EPA issued Elements of a State Water Monitoring and
Assessment Program (14) which describes ten elements that each state water quality-monitoring
program should contain and a ten-year time frame for implementing all elements. As part of each
state' s monitoring strategy, state data will be accompanied by quality assurance plans.
EPA has enhanced two existing data management tools (STORET and the Assessment Database)
so that they include documentation of data quality information. EPA's WATERS tool integrates
many databases including STORET, the Assessment Database, and the Water Quality Standards
Database. These integrated databases facilitate comparison and understanding of differences
among state standards, monitoring activities, and assessment results.
Data Limitations: Data are not representative of comprehensive national water quality
assessments because most states do not yet employ a monitoring design that characterizes all
waters in each reporting cycle. States, territories, and tribes collect data and information on only
a portion of their water bodies because it is prohibitively expensive to monitor all water bodies.
Furthermore, states do not use a consistent suite of water quality indicators to assess attainment
with water quality standards. For example, indicators of aquatic life use support range from
biological community condition to levels of dissolved oxygen to concentrations of toxic
11-69
-------
pollutants. State water quality standards themselves vary from state to state. State assessments
of water quality may include uncertainties associated with derived or modeled data. These
variations in state practices and standards limit how the assessment reports they provide can be
used to describe water quality at the national level and prevent the agency from aggregating
water quality assessments at the national level with known statistical confidence.
Error Estimate: No error estimate is available for this data.
New/Improved Data or Systems: The Office of Water is currently working with states, tribes
and other Federal agencies to improve the database that supports this management measure by
addressing the underlying methods of monitoring water quality and assessing the data. Also, the
Office of Water is working with partners to enhance monitoring networks to achieve
comprehensive coverage of all waters, use a consistent suite of core water quality indicators
(supplemented with additional indicators for specific water quality questions), and document key
data elements, decision criteria and assessment methodologies in electronic data systems. The
Office of Water is using a variety of mechanisms to implement these improvements including
data management systems, guidance, stakeholder meetings, training and technical assistance,
program reviews and negotiations.
EPA is working with states to enhance their monitoring and assessment programs, with a
particular emphasis on the probabilistic approach. These enhancements, along with improving
the quality and timeliness of data for making watershed-based decisions, will greatly improve
EPA' s ability to use state assessments in consistently portraying national conditions and trends.
Specific state refinements include developing rigorous biological criteria to measure the health
of aquatic communities (and attainment with the aquatic life use) and designing probability-
based monitoring designs to support statistically-valid inferences about water quality. The EPA
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP) design team has been instrumental
in helping states design the monitoring networks and analyze the data. Initial efforts have
focused on streams, lakes and coastal waters. Wetlands and large rivers will be targeted next.
States are implementing these changes incrementally and in conjunction with traditional targeted
monitoring. At last count, 16 states have adopted probability-based monitoring designs, several
more are evaluating them, and all but 10 are collaborating in an EMAP study.
The Agency's FY2005 budget request includes a significant increase to support water quality
monitoring improvements. A state grants component will support states' implementation of
monitoring strategies, including refinement of biological assessment methods and probability-
based designs for different water resource types, landscape models and other predictive tools,
remote sensing and innovative indicators of water quality to help streamline where additional
monitoring is needed, and targeted monitoring to provide data to implement local management
actions such as National Pollution Discharge Elimination Program (NPDES) permits and Total
Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) The initiative will also support improvement of data
management systems to ensure that water quality monitoring data are understandable and
available to all who need it. Included here are upgrades to STORET, to improve system
navigation and operation and to enhance analysis and presentation applications. Funds will also
support enhancing the capability to exchange water quality data with states.
11-70
-------
References:
1. WATERS available on-line at www.epa.gov/waters. Aggregate national maps and state
and watershed specific data for this measurement are displayed numerically and
graphically in the WATERS database.
2. STORET available online at www.epa.gov/STORET. Links to user guide and descriptions
of the database can be found here.
3. Assessment Database information available at http://www.epa.gov/waters/305b/
4. Water Quality Standards Database information available at www.epa.gov/wqsdatabase/
5. U.S. EPA, Office of Water. National Water Quality Inventory, 2000 Report. Washington,
D.C: August 2002. EPA 841-R-02-001. Available at www.epa.gov/305b/2000Report
6. U.S. EPA. Office of Water Quality Management Plan. Washington, DC: July 2002. EPA
831 -X-02-001. Available at http://www.epa.gov/ow/programs/qmp_Jury2002.pdf
7. National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology. Report of the
Federal Advisory Committee on the Total Maximum Daily Load Program. 1998. EPA
100-R-98-006. Available at http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/faca/tofc.htra.
8. General Accounting Office. Water Quality: Key EPA and State Decisions Limited by
Inconsistent and Incomplete Data. Washington, DC: March 15, 2000. GAO/RCED-00- 54.
9. National Research Council, Committee to Assess the Scientific Basis of the Total
Maximum Daily Load Approach to Water Pollution Reduction. Assessing the TMDL
Approach to Water Quality Management. National Academy Press, Washington, DC:
2001.
10. National Academy of Public Administration. Understanding What States Need to Protect
Water Quality. Washington, D.C: December 2002. Academy Project No. 2001- 001.
Available at www.napawash.org
11. U.S. EPA. Draft Report on the Environment 2003. July 2003. EPA 260-R-02-006.
Available at http://www.epa.gov/indicators/roe/index.htm
12. U.S. EPA, Office of Water. " Integrated Water Quality Assessment and Report
Guidance." November 19, 2001. Available at
http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/2002wqraa.html
13. U.S. EPA, Office of Water. " Consolidated Assessment and Listing Methodology.
Toward a Compendium of Best Practices. " (First Edition). Washington, DC: July 31,
2002. Available at www.epa.gov/owow/monitoring/cahn.html
14. U.S. EPA, Office of Water. Elements of a State Water Monitoring and Assessment
Program. Washington, DC: March 2003. EPA 841-B-03-003. Available at:
www.epa. go v/o wow/monitoring
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Water quality standards are fully attained in miles/acres
of waters identified in 2000 as not attaining standards.
Performance Database: The Watershed Assessment Tracking Environmental Results System
(WATERS- found at http://www.epa.gov/waters/) is the overarching Agency tool that is used to
store water quality information related to this measure. Within WATERS, resides a section
entitled "303(d) Information," compiled from the comprehensive data set we refer to as States'
Listings of Impaired Waters as Required by Clean Water Act Section 303(d) (referred to here in
brief as "303(d) lists"). This tool (found at http://mvw.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/stams.htnil) is used
to generate reports that identify individual unpaired waters as well as an aggregation of impaired
waters that is the total impaired river-miles and lake-acres. This information, combined with
11-71
-------
information and comment from EPA Regions and states, yields the baseline data for this
measure— river-miles and lake-acres of unpaired waters in 2000. As Total Maximum Daily
Loads (TMDL) are developed, updated and entered into the National TMDL Tracking System
(NTTS), and water bodies are no longer counted as impaired, the associated restored river-miles
and lake-acres are removed from the year 2000 impaired totals. Changes will be recorded in
reports, scheduled every 6 years (e.g. future reporting years 2006 and 2012), as percentage
improvements to water body impairment.
Data Source: The underlying data source for this measure is State 303(d) lists of their unpaired
water bodies. Each state is required to submit this list to EPA every two years. States prepare
the lists using actual water quality monitoring data, probability-based monitoring information,
and other information and knowledge the state has, in order to make comprehensive
determinations addressing the total extent of the state's water body impairments. Once EPA
approves a state's 303(d) list, EPA enters the information into WATERS, as described above.
Methods, Assumptions, and Suitability: States employ various analytical methods of data
collection, compilation, and reporting including: 1) Direct water samples of chemical, physical,
and biological parameters; 2) Predictive models of water quality standards attainment; 3)
Probabilistic models of pollutant sources; and 4) Compilation of data from volunteer groups,
academic interests and others. EPA supported models include BASINS, QUAL2E, AQUATOX,
and CORMDC. Descriptions of these models and instructions for their use can be found at
wwu-.epa.gov/OST/wqm/. The standard operating procedures and deviations from these
methods for data sampling and prediction processes are stored by states in the STORET
database. EPA aggregates state data by watershed (as described above) to generate the national
performance measure. State provided data describe attainment of designated uses in accordance
with state water quality standards and thus represent a direct measure of performance. State
CWA Section 305(b) data are suitable for providing a snapshot of the ambient water quality
conditions that exist across the nation; however, nationally aggregated ambient water quality
data are currently not suitable for year-to-year comparisons. As states update their monitoring
programs to include probabilistic monitoring, we will be able to do nationally aggregated, year-
to year comparisons.
QA/QC Procedures: QA/QC of data provided by states pursuant to individual state 303(d) lists
(under CWA Section 303(d)) is dependent on individual state procedures. EPA Regional staff
interact with the states during the process of approval of the lists and before the information is
entered into the database to ensure the integrity of the data. The Office of Water Quality
Management Plan (QMP), renewed every five years, was approved in July 2001. EPA requires
that each organization prepare a document called a quality management plan (QMP) that:
documents the organization's quality policy; describes its quality system; and identifies the
environmental programs to which the quality system applies (e.g., those programs involved in'
the collection or use of environmental data).
Data Quality Review: Numerous independent reports have cited that weaknesses in monitoring
and reporting of monitoring data undermine EPA's ability to depict the condition of the Nation's
waters and to support scientifically-sound water program decisions. The most recent reports
include the 1998 Report of the Federal Advisory Committee on the Total Maximum Daily Load
11-72
-------
(TMDL) Program65, the March 15, 2000 General Accounting Office report Water Quality: Key
Decisions Limited by Inconsistent and Incomplete Data66, the 2001 National Academy of Sciences
Report Assessing the TMDL Approach to Water Quality Management67 and EPA's Draft Report on the
Environment.6S
In response to these evaluations, EPA has been working with states and other stakeholders to
improve: 1) data coverage, so that state reports reflect the condition of all waters of the state; 2)
data consistency to facilitate comparison and aggregation of state data to the national level; and
3) documentation so that data limitations and discrepancies are fully understood by data users.
First, EPA enhanced two existing data management tools (STORET and the Assessment
Database) so that they include documentation of data quality information.
Second, EPA has developed a GIS tool called WATERS that integrates many databases
including STORET, the Assessment database, and a new water quality standards database.
These integrated databases facilitate comparison and understanding of differences among state
standards, monitoring activities, and assessment results.
Third, EPA and states have developed a guidance document: Consolidated Assessment and
Listing Methodology - a Compendium of Best Practices69 (released on the Web July 31, 2002 at
www.epa.gov/owow/monitoring/calm.html) intended to facilitate increased consistency in
monitoring program design and the data and decision criteria used to support water quality
assessments.
Fourth, the Office of Water (OW) and EPA's regional offices have developed the Elements of a
State Water Monitoring and Assessment Program, (August 2002) which is currently under
review by our state partners. This guidance describes ten elements that each state water quality-
monitoring program should contain and proposes time-frames for implementing all ten elements.
Data Limitations: Data may not precisely represent the extent of unpaired waters because
states do not yet employ a monitoring design that monitors all waters in each 303(d) listing
cycle. States also do not use a consistent suite of water quality indicators to assess attainment
with water quality standards. For example, indicators of aquatic life use support range from
biological community assessments to levels of dissolved oxygen to concentrations of toxic
pollutants. These variations in state practices limit how the 303(d) lists provided by states can be
used to describe water quality at the national level. States, territories and tribes collect data and
information on only a portion of their water bodies. There are differences among their programs,
sampling techniques, and standards.
65 Report of the Federal Advisory Committee on the Total Maximum Daily Load Program. 1998. National Advisory Council
for Environmental Policy and Technology. EPA Number 100R98006. National Center for Environmental Publications]
66 Water Quality: Key EPA and State Decisions Limited by Inconsistent and Incomplete Data. March 15,2000. RCED-00-54 and
Water Quality: Inconsistent State Approaches Complicate Nation's Efforts to Identify Its Most Polluted Waters. January 11, 2002
67 Assessing the TMDL Approach to Water Quality Management. 2001. Committee to Assess the Scientific Basis of the Total
Maximum Daily Load Approach to Water Pollution Reduction, Water Science and Technology Board, National Research
Council
68 US. EPA. Draft Report on the Environment 2003. July 2003. EPA 260-R-02-006. Available at
http://Mww.epa.gov/rndicators/roe/mdex.htm
U.S. EPA. (July 31, 2002). Consolidated Assessment and Listing Methodology. Toward a Compendium of Best
Practices. (First Edition). Washington, DC: Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds. Available on the
Internet: Monitoring and Assessing Water Quality www.epa.gov/ovvow/nionitoring/cato.html
11-73
-------
State assessments of water quality may include uncertainties associated with derived or modeled
data. Differences in monitoring designs among and within states prevent the agency from
aggregating water quality assessments at the national level with known statistical confidence.
States, territories, and authorized tribes monitor to identify problems and typically lag times
between data collection and reporting can vary by state.
Error Estimate: No error estimate is available for this data.
New/Improved Data Systems: The Office of Water has been working with states to improve
the guidance under which 303(d) lists are prepared. EPA issued new listing Guidance on July
21, 2003 entitled Guidance for 2004 Assessment, Listing, and Reporting Requirements Pursuant
to Sections 303 (d) and 305 (b) of the Clean Water Act (Guidance). The Guidance may be found
at: http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/tmdlO 103/index.html. The Guidance addresses a number of
issues that states and EPA identified during the 2002 listing cycle. Among these issues are
minimum data requirements and sample size requirements in making listing determinations, use
of probability-based sampling in the state's monitoring program, improved year-to-year
consistency in a choice of a geo-referencing scheme, and use of a consistent method of
segmenting water bodies and denoting changes to the segmentation between listing cycles.
References: Cited in body of text above.
FY 2005 Performance Measure; Water quality in Indian country
Performance Database: National Water Information System (NWIS), the USGS water
monitoring database will be used to report on this measure (http://waterdata.us.gs,gov/nwis/usa).
Although NWIS has not yet adopted the EPA Tribal Identifier Data Standard (see
http://oaspiib.epa.gov/edr/epastd$.stattup), the AIEO Tribal Information Management System
(https://oasint.rtpnc.epa.:gov/TIMS/ ) (phone 202-564-0303 for password access) can extract
records from NWIS on the basis of reservation boundaries, enabling" both data systems to
provide tribal water quality data for this performance measure. NWIS records monitoring dates,
so time series analysis will be a key feature of the Indian country water quality performance
measure^
Data Sources: NWIS merges of all USGS district offices, and consists primarily of data
collected by USGS field staff, either on a regular basis or for special projects.
QA/QC Procedures: Quality assurance for the Indian country water quality performance
measure depends on the quality of the USGS NWIS data system. Documentation for NWIS
quality assurance may be found at: (http://water.usgs.gov/pubs/dds/ wqn96cd/html/
wqn/qasure/qasure.htm).
Data Quality Reviews: Two quality reviews are envisioned. The first will be a comparison of
the federal data, in aggregate, and the water quality data reported by the tribes in CWA §106
water quality assessment reports. The review will be conducted for five tribal reservations. The
second is a comparison of Storage and Retrieval System (STORET) data, EPA's repository of
water quality monitoring data reported by states, tribes, other grantees, and other federal
agencies, and NWIS water quality data for similar tribal geographic areas; this review is
11-74
-------
dependant upon future increased STORET use by tribes. The results of these two data quality
reviews will allow AIEO to estimate a range of variation for the data used in the water quality
assessments.
Data Limitations: The data collected for the tribal water quality performance measure are
limited by the accuracy of the reservation boundary files used by AIEO. The files, IND-3, are
distributed by the Bureau of Indian Affairs Geographic Data Service Center, (Internet site
disabled). There are minor variations between the files provided by BIA and other sources of
tribal boundary files. In an analysis of selected reservation boundaries, AIEO has determined
that there is an approximately a 5% variation between the files from the BIA IND-3 dataset, and
the Census Tiger files of reservation boundaries (http://www.census.gov/
geo/www/cob/bdyjHlesJhitml).
Error Estimate: AIEO estimates an approximately 5% error hi the identification of water
monitoring sites that fall inside reservation boundaries because of errors in tribal boundaries and
latitude and longitude of monitoring sites, resulting in errors in the extraction of geographic
records from NWIS. The overall error of the performance measure is expected to be the percent
variation hi the water quality data from different sources (STORET, water quality assessment
reports from tribes, NWIS) compounded by the error introduced by inaccuracies in boundary
files. AIEO expects a 5% or greater error in the analysis, depending on the magnitude of the
variation of the data from the different sources used.
New/Improved Data or Systems: As NWIS adopts a tribal identifier code, AIEO will no
longer have to rely on geographic extraction of data records and that source of error will be
eliminated. To date, USGS has not announced plans to tribally index their water quality data
systems.
A key improvement in EPA's ability to assess tribal water quality will be the enhancement of
tribes' usage of STORET. Plans are in place to improve outreach and technical assistance to
tribes and states to encourage greater use of the system, and to use STORET's capabilities to
upload local information to the national data warehouse. This will facilitate determinations of
water quality status and trends nationwide and in Indian country in particular. EPA will also
work to incorporate into STORET the agency's new Tribal Identifier Data Standard to further
facilitate assessing tribal water quality information.
References:
1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. STORET Database.
http://www.epa.gov/STORET/.
2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. American Indian Environmental Office. TIMS
Database https://oasint.rtpnc.epa.gov/TIMS/
3. U.S. Geological Survey. Water Resources Division. NWIS Database
http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/usa.
4. Bureau of Indian Affairs. (2000). IND-3 Indian Reservations. Geographic Data Service
Center. Lakewood. CO. (internet site disabled).
5. U.S. Census Bureau. Geographic Division. 2000 Census Tiger Files of American Indian
Areas http://www.census.gov/ geo/www/cob/bdv_files.html
11-75
-------
FY 2005 Performance Measure: In coordination with other federal partners, reduce the
number of households on tribal lands lacking access to basic sanitation.
Performance Database: The American Indian Environmental Office (AIEO) has been in the
forefront of working with multiple agencies on a federal interagency Tribal Enterprise
Architecture. Much of the work falls under the auspices of OMB Circular A-16 on coordination
of federal geographic data across federal agencies (OMB 2003). The Tribal Enterprise
Architecture includes access to a wide variety of data and information from several agencies and
numerous sources within those agencies. It also includes several AIEO and jointly- developed
applications to determine environmental performance in Indian country for a variety of specific
purposes, including strategic planning and annual reporting under the Government Performance
and Results Act. The components of the Tribal Enterprise Architecture create a broad, multi-
variant view of the environmental conditions and programs in Indian country. EPA will track the
status of federal and other basic sanitation infrastructure projects being undertaken in Indian
country.
Data Sources: AIEO Tribal Enterprise Architecture will be linked to the Indian Health Service
(IHS) Sanitation Tracking and Reporting System (STARS) database, which will be used to
measure tribal access to basic sanitation in real-time. IHS STARS database, Level 4 (unsafe
water or sanitation) and Level 5 (unsafe water and sanitation) information will be analyzed.
While the information from the STARS database is reported hi the aggregate to Congress on an
annual basis, the real-tune data allow EPA to link IHS codes with EPA tribal codes on a project-
by-prpject basis. It is anticipated that a significant percentage of other federal activity, besides
EPA and IHS,— which provides tribes access to basic sanitation is captured in the IHS STARS
system. AIEO will make the appropriate interagency inquiries to verify that all data are captured.
QA/QC Procedures: All the data used hi the Tribal Enterprise Architecture project have quality
assurance and metadata documentation prepared by the originating agency. AIEO works to
standardize data and use metadata standards as established by the Federal Geographic Data
Committee.
Data Quality Reviews: A unique feature of the Tribal Enterprise Architecture is the direct
incorporation of a data center for documentation of errors and correction of text hi the various
data systems. This system, called the TIMS Data Center, provides for the systematic review and
submission of corrections for 1) numeric and factual data from the national data systems used,
and 2) qualitative statements made hi a textual context. In the case of corrections to national
databases, AIEO monitors submissions, and forwards them to appropriate systems administrators
who make decisions on changes based on their criteria
Data Limitations: AIEO uses new geographic data mining technologies to extract records
based on the geographical coordinates of the data points. For example, if a regulated facility has
latitude and longitude coordinates that place it hi the boundaries of the Wind River Reservation,
then it is assigned to the Arapaho and Shoshone Tribes of the Wind River Reservation. This
technique is extremely powerful, because it "tribally enables" large numbers of information
systems which were previously incapable of identifying tribes. This will be applied to all the
EPA databases. There are limitations, however. When database records are not geographically
identified with latitude and longitude, the technique does not work and the record is lost to the
11-76
-------
system. Likewise, the accuracy of the method depends on the accuracy of the reservation
boundary files. EPA continues to request up-to-date and accurate coverage of reservation
boundaries and land status designations from other agencies
Error Estimate: In an analysis of selected reservation boundaries, AIEO has determined that
there is a 5% variation between the Bureau of Indian Affairs' IND-3 reservation boundaries and
those from the United States Census Bureau (e.g., U.S. Census Tiger file of reservation
boundaries). Another source of error comes from records that are not sufficiently described
geographically to be assigned to specific tribes. For some agencies, such as USGS, the
geographic record is complete, so there are no errors from these sources. It is estimated that 20%
of the regulated facilities in EPA regulatory databases are not geographically described, and thus
will not be recognized by the AIEO methodology.
New/Improved Data or Systems: The technologies used by the Tribal Enterprise Architecture
are all new and state-of-the art. Everything is delivered securely on the Internet with no need for
special software or desktop data disks. The geographic interface is an ESRI product called
ARC/IMS, which is a web-based application, with a fully functional GIS system that is fully
scalable. In FY 2003, the entire system will be rendered in 3D. The Tribal Enterprise
Architecture uses XML protocols to attach to and display uiformation seamlessly and in real-
time from cooperating agency data systems without ever having to download the data to an
intermediate server.
References:
1. Office of Management and Budget (2003). Circular A-16 Revised.
http://www.whitehQuse,gQv/omb/circulars/aQ 16/aO 16_rey.html
2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1998). Office of Water Indian Strategic Plan.
3. GAP Grant Tracking System, http://gap.tetratech-ffx.com (password available upon
request)
4. Tribal Enterprise Architecture http://everest.sdc-moses.com/TRIBAL/mdex3.html
(password available upon request)
5. Indian Health Service. Sanitation Tracking and Reporting System.
http://wstars.geonorth.com (password available upon request)
6. TIMS Data Center. http:.//it-tetratech-ffx.com/'tribal/ (password available upon request)
7. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2003. Implementing EPA's Information Quality
Guidelines: Guidance on Information Products Developed by the Office of the Chief
Financial Officer.
FY 2005 Performance Measures: Prevent water pollution and protect aquatic systems so
that overall aquatic system health of coastal waters nationally, and in each coastal region, is
improved on the "good/fair/poor" scale of the National Coastal Condition Report.
Maintain water clarity and dissolved oxygen in coastal waters at the national levels reported in
the 2002 National Coastal Condition Report.
Improve ratings reported on the national "good/fair/poor" scale of the National Coastal
Condition Report for: coastal wetlands loss by at least .1 points; contamination of sediments in
11-77
-------
coastal waters by at least .1 points; benthic quality by at least .1 points; & eutrophic condition by
at least .1 points
Performance Database: EMAP/NCA [Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
Program/National Coastal Assessment] database (housed EPA/ORD/NHEERL/AED,
Narragansett, RI)(Environmental Protection Agency/Office of Research and
Development/National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory/Gulf Ecology
Division); pre-database information housed hi ORD/NHEERL facility in Gulf Breeze, FL (Gulf
Ecology Division) (pre-database refers to a temporary storage site for data where it is examined
for QA purposes, has appropriate metadata attached to it and undergoes initial statistical
analyses); data upon QA acceptance and metadata completion is transferred to EMAP/NCA
database and is web available at www.epa. goy/emap/nca.
Data Source: Probabilistic surveys of ecological condition completed throughout the Mid-
Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico by EPA's Office of Research and Development (ORD) hi 1991-
1994, hi southern Florida hi 1995, in the Southeast hi 1995-1997, hi the Mid-Atlantic in 1997-
1998, hi each coastal state in 2000-2004 (except Alaska and Hawaii), hi Alaska hi 2002 and
2004, hi Hawaii hi 2002 and 2004, and in Puerto Rico hi 2000 and 2004, and hi other island
territories (Guam, American Samoa and U.S.> Virgin Islands hi 2004). Surveys collect
condition information regarding water quality, sediment quality and biotic condition at 70-100
sites/region (e.g., mid-Atlantic) each year of collection prior to 1999 and at 35-150 sites hi each
state or territory/year (site number dependent upon state) after 1999. Additional sampling was
completed hi the National Estuary Programs, including all individual national estuaries.
Additional NEP sampling included sufficient sites to increase total sites within NEP boundaries
to 30 for a two-year period between 2000-2003.
This "third party" data is collected through a joint EPA-State cooperative agreement and the
States follow a rigid sampling and collection protocol following intensive training by EPA
personnel. Laboratory processing is completed at either a state laboratory or through a national
EPA contract. Both entities are subject to the development of a QAPP (either the National
Coastal QAPP or one of then- developments based on this QAPP) and QA testing and auditing by
EPA.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: The surveys are conducted using a probabilistic
survey design comprised to permit extrapolation of results to the entire target population (in this
case - all estuarine resources of the specific state) The design maximizes the spatial spread of
the sites and locating each site based on a specific latitude-longitude combination. The survey
utilizes an index sampling period (generally late summer) to maximize encountering water
quality, sediment quality and biotic condition problems, if they exist. Based on the QAPP and
the field collection manual, a site in a specific state is located by sampling vessel via Global
Positioning System (GPS) and water quality is measured on board at multiple depths. Water
samples are taken for chemistry; sediment samples are taken for chemistry, toxicity testing and
benthic community assessment; and fish trawls are conducted to collect community fish data and
provide selected fish (target species) for analysis of whole body and/or fillet contaminant
concentrations. Samples are stored hi accordance with field manual and shipped to the
processing laboratory. Laboratories follow QA plans and complete analyses and provide
electronic information to state or EPA. For data not directly provided to EPA from laboratories,
state forward data to EPA. For data not provided directly to states, EPA forwards data to states.
11-78
-------
EPA analyzes data to assess regional condition and states analyze data to assess condition of
state-specific waters. Results of analyses on a national and regional basis are reported as
chapters in the National Coastal Condition Report series. The overall regional condition index is
the mean of the rating scores of the indicators used in successive versions of the Coastal
Condition Report (see last section). An improvement for one of the indicators by a full category
unit over the eight year period will be necessary for the regional estimate to meet the
performance measure goal (+0.2 over an eight year period).
Assumptions: (1) The underlying target population (estuarine resources of the United
States) has been correctly identified; (2) GPS operation is successfully located; (3) QAPP and
field collection manuals are followed; (4) all samples can be successfully collected; (5) all
analyses are completed in accordance with QAPP; and (6) all combinations of data into indices
are completed in a statistically rigorous manner.
Suitability: By design all data are suitable to be aggregated to the state and regional level
to characterize water quality, sediment quality, and biotic condition. Samples represent
"reasonable", site-specific point-in-time data (not primary intention of data use) and an excellent
population representation of the entire resource (extrapolation to entire resource supportable).
The intended use of the data is the characterization of populations and subpopulations of
estuarine resources through time. The data meets this expectation and the sampling design,
response design, analysis approach and reporting approach have been peer reviewed successfully
multiple tunes. The data are suitable for individual year characterization of condition,
comparison of condition across years, and assessment of long-term trends once sufficient data
are collected (7-10 years). Data are suitable for use hi National Coastal Condition calculations
for the United States and its regions as necessary to provide performance measurement
information.
QA/QC Procedures: The sampling collection and analysis of samples are controlled by a
Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) [EPA 2001] and the National Coastal Assessment
Information Management Plan (IMP)[EPA 2001]. These plans are followed by all twenty-three
coastal states and 5 island territories. Adherence to the plans are determined by field training
(conducted by EPA ORD), field audits (conducted by EPA/ORD), round robin testing of
chemistry laboratories (conducted by EPA/ORD), overall systems audits of state programs and
national laboratory practices (conducted by EPA), sample splits (sent to reference laboratories),
blind samples (using reference materials) and overall information systems audits (conducted by
EPA/ORD). All states are subject to audits at least once every two years these controls at least
once every two years for audits, training hi year 2000 and retraining sessions every two years,
and batch sample processing (including QA samples hi each batch) for laboratory analyses.
Data Quality Reviews: Data quality reviews have been completed in-house by EPA ORD at the
regional and national level in 2000-2003 (National Coastal Assessment 2000-2003) and by the
Office of Environmental Information (OEI) hi 2003 (assessment completed in June, 2003 and
written report not yet available; oral debriefing revealed no deficiencies). No deficiencies were
found hi the program. A national laboratory used hi the program (University of Connecticut) for
nutrient chemistry, sediment chemistry and fish tissue chemistry is being evaluated by the
Inspector General' s Office for inappropriate behavior and potential falsification of laboratory
results in connection with other programs not related to NCA. A full investigation has not been
completed by the IG and hi the interim has not determined any wrongdoing by the personnel
11-79
-------
associated with NCA. Our program has conducted an internal audit assessment and investigation
and could determine only one finding, which was an incorrect use of a chemical digestion
method for inorganic chemistry samples (metals). This finding has been corrected and all
samples "digested" incorrectly have been reanalyzed at no cost.
Data Limitations: Data limitations are few. Because the data are collected hi a manner to
permit calculation of uncertainty and designed to meet a specific Data Quality Objective (DQO)
(<10% error in spatial calculation for each state estimate annually), the results at the regional
level (appropriate for this performance measure) are within about 2- 4% of true values dependent
upon the specific sample type. Other limitations as follows: (a) even though methodology errors
are minimized by audits, hi the first year of the NCA program (2000) some errors occurred
resulting in loss of some data. These problems were corrected hi 2001 and no problems have
been observed since then, (b) In some instances, (<5%) of sample results, a QA finding is
determined regarding the precision of a measurement (control mortality toxicity testing exceeds
limit detection limit for a chemistry batch exceeds limit, etc.). In these cases, the data are
"flagged" in the database so that users are aware of the .potential limitations, (c) Because of the
sampling/ analysis design, the loss of data at a small scale (~ 10%) does not result in a significant
increase in uncertainty hi the estimate of condition. Wholesale data losses of multiple indicators
throughout the U.S. coastal states and territories would be necessary to invalidate the
performance measure, (d) The only source of external variability hi year-to-year climatic
variation (drought vs. wet, etc.) and the only source of internal variation is modification of
reporting indicators (e.g., new indices, not a change in sample indicators collected and analyzed).
This internal reporting modification required a re-analysis of earlier information to permit direct
comparison (e). There is generally a 2-3 year lag from the tune of collection until reporting.
Sample analysis generally takes 1 year and analysis takes 1 year. Report production and peer
review generally take an additional year. (F) Data collections are completed annually; however,
the EPA/ORD program for this collection will occur through 2004. After 2004, ORD will assist
OW as requested to provide expertise but the conduct of the surveys after 2004 will no longer be
supported (financially) by EPA ORD.
Error Estimate: The estimate of condition (upon which the performance measure is determined
has an annual uncertainty rate of about 2-3% for national condition, about 5-7% for individual
regional indicators (composite of all five states data into a regional estimate), and about 9-10%
for individual state indicators.
New/Improved Data or Systems:
(1) Changes have occurred hi the data underlying the performance measure based on
scientific review and development. A change hi some reporting indicators has occurred
hi order to more accurately represent the intended ecological process or function. For
example, a new eutrophication index was determined for the 2000 data. In order to
compare this new index to the 1991-1994 data, the earlier data results must be
recomputed using the new technique. This recalculation is possible because the
underlying data collection procedures have not changed.
(2) New national contract laboratories have been added every year based on competition.
QA requirements are met by new facilities and rigorous testing at these facilities is
completed before sample analysis is initiated. QA adherence and cross-laboratory sample
11-80
-------
analysis has minimized data variability resulting from new laboratories entering the
program.
(3) The only reason for the discontinuance of the National performance goal would be the
elimination of the surveys after 2004.
In order to continue to utilize the 2001 National Coastal Condition report as the baseline
for this performance measure, the original scores reported in 2001 have been re-calculated in the
pending 2004 report using the index modifications described above (#1). These "new" results
for the baseline (re-calculated scores) are reported in Appendix C of the pending report
scheduled for release hi fall 2004.
References:
1. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Database (1990-1998) and National Coastal
Assessment Database (2000- 2004) websites: www.epa.gov/emap and
www.epa.gov/emap/nca (NCA data for 2000 is only data available at present)
2. National Coastal Assessment. 2000-2003. Various internal memoranda regarding results of
QA audits. (Available through John Macauley, National QA Coordinator NCA, USEPA,
ORD/NHEERL/GED, 1 Sabine Island, Gulf Breeze, FL 32561)
3. National Coastal Assessment. 2001. Quality Assurance Project Plan. EPA/620/R-
01/002.(Available through John Macauley above)
4. National Coastal Assessment. 2001. Information Management Plan. EPA/620/R-01/003
(Available through Stephen Hale, NCA IM Coordinator, ORD/NHEERL/AED, 27
Tarzwell Drive, Narragansett, RI)
5. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2001. National Coastal Condition Report. EPA-
620/R- 01/005.
6. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2004. National Coastal Condition Report II. In
review Assigned Report Number EPA-620/R-04/001 (expected release date - fall 2004).
EFFICIENCY MEASURESVMEASUREMENT DEVELOPMENT PLANS
Clean Water State Revolving Fund
As a measure of efficiency, the Agency tracks each fund's utilization rate, which is the
ratio of the cumulative loan agreement dollars to cumulative funds available for projects.
Non-point Source
Efficiency measures are under development. Development of measures is referenced in
the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) summary in the Special Analysis section.
Nutrient Levels in Rivers and Streams
Measure development is underway for phosophorus concentration trends. EPA is
committed to reduce phosphorus levels hi major rivers, urban and farmland streams by 2008,
measuring progress via the percentage of USGS test sites for major rivers, urban streams, and
11-81
-------
farmland streams at which phosphorus levels are below levels of concern established by USGS.
USGS is conducting additional monitoring from 2002 - 2005 within study areas in order to
identify trends in phosphorus concentrations. However, the results of analysis of this second
round of data will not be available until approximately 2007, preventing its use as an annual
performance measure for FY2005.
Alaska Native Villages
EPA plans to develop an efficiency measure for the Alaska Native Villages program as
part of the FY 06 PART process.
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
Watersheds
Protecting and restoring watersheds will depend largely on the direct involvement of
many Federal agencies and state, Tribal and local governments who manage the multitude of
programs necessary to address water quality on a watershed basis. Federal agency involvement
will include USDA (Natural Resources Conservation Service, Forest Service, Agriculture
Research Service), Department of the Interior (Bureau of Land Management, Office of Surface
Mining, United States Geological Survey (USGS), Fish and Wildlife, and the Bureau of Indian
Affairs), National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of
Transportation, and the Department of Defense (Navy, Army Corps of Engineers). At the state
level, agencies involved in watershed management typically include departments of natural
resources or the environment, public health agencies, and forestry and recreation agencies.
Locally, numerous agencies are involved, including Regional planning entities such as councils
of governments, as well as local departments of environment, health and recreation who
frequently have strong interests in watershed projects.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Program (NPDES)
Since inception of the NPDES program under Section 402 of the CWA, EPA and the
authorized states have developed expanded relationships with various Federal agencies to
implement pollution controls for point sources. EPA works closely with the Fish and Wildlife
Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service on consultation for protection of endangered
species through a Memorandum of Agreement. EPA works with the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation on National Historic Preservation Act implementation. EPA and the states
rely on monitoring data from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to help confirm pollution
control decisions. The Agency also works closely with the Small Business Administration and
the Office of Management and Budget to ensure that regulatory programs are fair and
reasonable. The Agency coordinates with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) on efforts to ensure that NPDES programs support coastal and national estuary efforts;
and with the Department of Interior on mining issues.
11-82
-------
Joint Strategy for Animal Feeding Operations
The Agency is working closely with the USDA to implement the Unified National
Strategy for Animal Feeding Operations finalized on March 9, 1999. The Strategy sets forth a
framework of actions that USDA and EPA will take to minimize water quality and public health
impacts from improperly managed animal wastes in a manner designed to preserve and enhance
the long-term sustainability of livestock production. EPA's recent revisions to the CAFO
Regulations (effluent guidelines and NPDES permit regulations) will be a key element of EPA
and USDA's plan to address water pollution from CAFOs. EPA and USDA senior management
meet routinely to ensure effective coordination across the two agencies.
Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF)
Representatives from EPA's SRF program, Housing and Urban Development's (HUD's)
Community Development Block Grant program, and USDA's Rural Utility Service have signed
a Memorandum of Understanding committing to assisting state or Federal implementers in: (1)
coordination of the funding cycles of the three Federal agencies; (2) consolidation of plans of
action (operating plans, intended use plans, strategic plans, etc.); and (3) preparation of one
environmental review document, when possible, to satisfy the requirements of all participating
Federal agencies. A coordination group at the Federal level has been formed to further these
efforts and maintain lines of communication. In many states, coordination committees have been
established with representatives from the three programs.
In implementation of the Indian set-aside grant program under Title VI of the CWA, EPA
works closely with the Indian Health Service to administer grant funds to the various Indian
tribes, including determination of the priority ranking system for the various wastewater needs in
Indian Country.
In 1998, EPA and the Rural Utilities Service of the USDA formalized a partnership
between the two agencies to provide coordinated financial and technical assistance to Indian
tribes.
Construction Grants Program - US Army Corps of Engineers
Throughout the history of the construction grants program under Title II of the CWA,
EPA and the delegated states have made broad use of the construction expertise of the Corps of
Engineers to provide varied assistance in construction oversight and administrative matters.
EPA works with the Corps to provide oversight for construction of the special projects that
Congress has designated. The mechanism for this expertise has been and continues to be an
Interagency Agreement between the two agencies.
Nonpoint Sources
EPA will continue to work closely with its Federal partners to achieve the ambitious
strategic objective of reducing pollutant discharges, including at least 20 percent from 1992
erosion levels. Most significantly, EPA will continue to work with the USDA, which has a key
role in reducing sediment loadings through its continued implementation of the Environmental
11-83
-------
Quality Incentives Program, Conservation Reserve Program, and other conservation programs.
USD A also plays a major role in reducing nutrient discharges through these same programs and
through activities related to the AFO Strategy. EPA will also continue to work closely with the
Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management, whose programs can contribute significantly to
reduced pollutant loadings of sediment, especially on the vast public lands that comprise 29
percent of all land in the United States. EPA will work with these agencies, USGS, and the
states to document improvements in land management and water quality.
EPA will also work with other Federal agencies to advance a watershed approach to
Federal land and resource management to help ensure that Federal land management agencies
serve as a model for water quality stewardship in the prevention of water pollution and the
restoration of degraded water resources. Implementation of a watershed approach will require
coordination among Federal agencies at a watershed scale and collaboration with states, tribes
and other interested stakeholders.
Vessel Discharges
Regarding vessel discharges, EPA will continue working closely with the Coast Guard on
addressing ballast water discharges domestically, and with the interagency work group and U.S.
delegation to Marine Environmental Protection Committee (MEPC) on international controls.
EPA will continue to work closely with the Coast Guard, Alaska and other states, and the
International Council of Cruise Lines regarding regulatory and non-regulatory approaches to
managing wastewater discharges from cruise ships. EPA will also continue to work with the
Coast Guard on updating vessel sewage discharge standards, and with the Navy on developing
Uniform National Discharge Standards for Armed Forces vessels. Regarding dredged material
management, EPA will continue to work closely with the Corps of Engineers on standards for
permit review, as well as site selection/designation and monitoring.
International Capacity
EPA works with the Department of State, NOAA, Coast Guard, Navy, and other Federal
agencies in developing the technical basis and policy decisions necessary for negotiating global
treaties concerning marine antifouling systems, invasive species, and air pollution from ships.
EPA also works with the same Agencies in addressing land-based sources of marine pollution in
the Gulf of Mexico and Wider Caribbean Basin.
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
Annual Appropriations Acts
Certain Alaskan Cruise Ship Operations Act (PL 106-554)
Clean Vessel Act
Clean Water Act (CWA)
Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
Marine Plastic Pollution, Research and Control Act (MPPRCA) of 1987
Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA)
National Environmental Policy Act, Section 102
11-84
-------
National Invasive Species Act of 1996
North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)
Ocean Dumping Ban Act of 1988
Organotin Antifouling Paint Control Act (OAPCA)
Pollution Prevention Act (PPA)
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)
Shore Protection Act of 1988
Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA)
Water Resources Development Act (WRDA)
Wet Weather Water Quality Act of 2000
11-85
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Clean and Safe Water
OBJECTIVE: Enhance Science and Research
Provide and apply a sound scientific foundation to EPA's goal of clean and safe water by
conducting leading-edge research and developing a better understanding and characterization of
the environmental outcomes under Goal 2.
Resource Summary
(Dollars in Thousands)
Enhance Science and Research
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Building and Facilities
Inspector General
Total Workyears
FY 2003
Actuals
$119,269.5
$18,346.3
$97,900.4
$2,481.7
$540.9
535.7
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$120,501.6
$21,640.6
$95,708.8
$2,508.8
$643.3
526.7
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$120,959.1
$22,084.0
$95,527.1
$2,702.6
$645.4
526.5
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$457.5
$443.3
($181.7)
$193.8
$2.1
-0.1
Program Project
(Dollars in Thousands)
Surface Water Protection
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Research: Drinking Water
Research: Water Quality
Administrative Projects
TOTAL
FY2003
Actuals
$520.9
$4,328.9
$43,253.7
$46,934.1
$24,231.9
$119,269.5
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
$1,004.4
$0.0
$46,053.4
$47,178.5
$26,265.3
$120,501.6
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
$1,011.3
$0.0
$46,118.1
$46,809.8
$27,019.9
$120,959.1
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$6.9
$0.0
$64.7
($368.7)
$754.6
$457.5
FY 2005 REQUEST
Results To Be Achieved Under the Objective
Clean and Safe Water Science
Meeting the goal of clean and safe water requires that EPA effectively apply basic
research findings to the specific needs of water programs. The Agency will draw on the results
of basic research to prove and refine existing conclusions about the drinking water safety and
water quality. Critical, scientific aspects of water program research include development of
analytic test methods to support programs' scientific integrity; laboratory certification; and
11-86
-------
analysis of questions more commonly thought of as "social science,' such as the costs and
benefits of safe drinking water and healthy aquatic ecosystems.
Surface Water Protection
Develop Analytic Test Methods: EPA establishes analytic test methods that describe
laboratory procedures for measuring contaminant levels in drinking and surface waters. In some
cases, EPA itself develops methods; in other cases, the Agency approves alternative test
procedures. Approximately 550 EPA-approved analytical methods exist for nearly 300
contaminants. These test methods support the development of drinking water standards, surface
water quality criteria and standards, industrial discharge regulations, water monitoring, discharge
permitting, pretreatment, and compliance. 70
EPA has several goals for improving the analytic methods program over the next five
years. These include reducing the backlog of applications for approval of alternative test
procedures, many involving new technology; developing, new analytic methods that support the
more stringent levels of protection that have been established for some contaminants and are
more cost-effective to use; and making analytic methods readily available to the public through a
new web-based system.
Develop Methods for Valuing Ecological and Recreation Benefits: A related scientific
effort is developing unproved methods to assess and value ecological and recreational benefits
that result from improvements in water quality. EPA is supporting studies of the monetary value
of cleaner water for aquatic life and other ecological and recreational benefits, such as boating,
and will use this information to develop more precise estimates of the benefits of water pollution
control programs and requirements.
Research: Drinking Water
EPA's drinking water and water quality research programs conduct leading edge,
problem-driven research to provide a sound scientific foundation for Federal regulatory decision-
making. These efforts will result in strengthened public health and aquatic ecosystem protection
by providing methods, models, assessments, and risk management options for EPA program and
regional offices. Important research under this objective will: 1) provide stressor-response
relationship models linking loss and alteration of habitat to selected fish, shellfish, and wildlife
endpoints; 2) update models for stormwater management, suspended solids, sediments, and
nutrients; 3) provide data on contaminant occurrence, treatment and application process cost-
effectiveness, and contaminant transport and fate for selected biosolids contaminants; 4) report
on the treatability of selected endocrine disrupting chemicals; and 5) report on occurrence data
for newly identified disinfection by-products (DBPs) to help assess risk from alternative
disinfectants.
Although the U.S. has made considerable progress in supplying safe drinking water to its
citizens, and waterborne threats such as typhoid and cholera have been virtually eliminated,
70 See http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/methods
11-87
-------
some public health concerns remain.71 These concerns are supported by the continued
occurrence of waterbome disease outbreaks, the presence of chemical contaminants in drinking
water supplies, and the contamination of surface water and ground water sources. These events
may compromise the safety of drinking water if treatment is inadequate or if the quality of the
water hi distribution systems is compromised. Strengthening EPA's ability to characterize and
manage risks to human health posed by exposure to waterborne pathogens and chemicals in
drinking water yields public health benefits. Furthermore, it will improve our understanding of
potential health risks to vulnerable subpopulations, such as infants and children or those with
weakened immune systems.
The research provisions of the 1996 Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Amendments72
highlight the importance of EPA's drinking water research program for providing a strong
scientific foundation for regulatory decision-making (Criteria: Relevance). The Amendments
also contain specific requirements for research on waterborne pathogens (e.g., Cryptosporidium
and Norwalk virus), disinfection by-products, arsenic, and other harmful substances in drinking
water. The SDWA and amendments also mandate EPA to conduct studies to identify and
characterize groups that may be at greater risk than the general population following exposure to
contaminants in drinking water. EPA is directed to use a risk-based standard-setting process and
sound science in fulfilling the requirements of the Act. In response to these requirements, EPA
has established an integrated, multi-disciplinary research program that is closely linked to the
Agency's regulatory activities and timelines.
The FY 2005 drinking water research program, through its leading edge, problem-driven
research, directly supports the EPA's Strategic Plan73 through development or revision of
standards for contaminants of concern, effective implementation of these standards, and
protection of drinking water sources. To help guide the drinking water research program, EPA
developed research plans for Microbial Pathogens and DBPs in Drinking Water74 and Arsenic in
Drinking Water,75 and has developed a draft research plan for drinking water contaminants on
the Contaminant Candidate List (CCL). These plans were subject to rigorous peer review and
address those problems deemed most pressing in the area of drinking water quality (R&D
Criteria: Quality, Relevance).
In addition, the Drinking Water Research Multi-Year Plan (MYP) provides a framework
for integrating research throughout EPA's Office of Research and Development and ensures that
the research planned is relevant to EPA and state needs and addresses priority science needs for
drinking water research (Criteria: Relevance).76 The MYP articulates the long-term goals,
purpose, and priorities of the program, and includes a scheduled timeline of research activities
and expected products of the research program. To ensure quality, all scientific and technical
71 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. "1999-2001 Research Accomplishments: Drinking Water." Updated on: June
2, 2003. Date of Access: January 14,2004. Available only through the Internet: http://www.epa.gov/ord/archives/2002/august/
72 Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996, Public Law 104-182. Updated on: February 26,2003. Date of Access: January
14,2004. Available through the internet: http://www.epa.gov/safewater/sdwa/sdwa.html
73 U.S. EPA, Office of the Chief Financial Officer. "2003 - 2008 EPA Strategic Plan: Direction for the Future. " Date of Access:
January 14,2004. Available only through the internet: http://www.epa.gov/ocfo/plan/2003sp.pdf
74 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Research Plan for Microbial Pathogens and Disinfection By-Products in
Drinking Water. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. EPA 600-R-97-122. (1997).
75 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Research Plan for Arsenic in Drinking Water. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office. EPA 600-R-98-042. (1998).
76 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Drinking Water Research Program Multi Year Plan. Available only though
the internet at: http://www.epa.gov/osp/myp/dw.pdf
11-88
-------
work products undergo internal and/or external peer review, with major or significant products
requiring both internal and external peer review (Criteria: Quality).
The broad scope of EPA's research includes the development of new scientific data,
innovative methods, and cost-effective technologies for improving the scientific understanding
and control of drinking water risks. The research products and technical assistance provided by
EPA's drinking water research program support regulatory decision making and the
implementation of EPA rules and guidance by states, local authorities and water utilities.
In FY 2005, EPA's drinking water research program will continue to focus on laboratory,
clinical, and field studies of contaminants on the CCL, selected high priority DBFs, and arsenic.
Studies of chemical contaminants on the CCL will seek to provide either screening level or more
detailed information to support CCL regulatory determinations. Research support through
EPA's Science to Achieve Results (STAR) program will evaluate the infectivity, illness, and
immune response to Cryptosporidium that will enable development of improved risk assessment
models.77 The STAR program, which requires all research proposals to undergo rigorous
competitive peer review, is an integral part of EPA's drinking water research program. The
primary purpose of such peer review is to ensure that only high-quality research receives funding
support. EPA will conduct research to characterize health effects, especially adverse
reproductive outcomes, from the highest priority by-products and DBP mixtures. Studies will
also examine potential carcinogenicity of DBFs, as well as other toxic endpoints of possible
concern. Research will include studies to establish dose-response relationships for priority
contaminants, characterize pathogen virulence, evaluate the impact of host factors (e.g., immune
status) on infection and disease, and identify the causative agents responsible for waterborne
diseases.
In FY 2005, research will continue to focus on the development of improved analytical
detection methods for measuring the occurrence of chemicals and microbes on the CCL. Field-
testing of new methods will be conducted to gain performance information and preliminary
occurrence data. Pathogen classification schemes (i.e., virulence factor activity relationships),
suggested by the National Research Council, will be investigated and evaluated for potential
incorporation into future CCL listing and priority setting activities. Emphasis will be placed on
identifying new DBFs (e.g., iodinated DBFs) resulting from various disinfection processes,
deterrnining the factors affecting formation, fate and transport of priority halonitomethane DBFs,
and development of unproved analytical methods to detect and measure both DBFs and CCL-
listed chemicals. To help design and interpret animal toxicity and human epidemiology studies,
arsenic exposure research will improve methods for measuring different forms of arsenic in
foods and will establish a preliminary database of levels of arsenic species in target foods.
In FY 2005, drinking water risk management research will study the characterization and
fate of DBFs hi distribution systems. This work will address how to adapt conventional
treatment systems to new contaminants so that safe drinking water is cost effectively produced,
as well as development of treatment optimization strategies and innovative treatment
technologies. Desired outcomes of this research include improving EPA's ability to minimize
the risks from DBFs while controlling microbial pathogens. In addition to addressing regulated
contaminants, this research plays an important role in assessing the need and feasibility of
77 For more information about EPA's Science to Achieve Results Program, see http://es.epa.gov/ncer/
11-89
-------
controlling new contaminants under the CCL program. To support decisions on whether or not
new contaminants on the CCL should be regulated, research will continue to identify cost-
effective contaminant control techniques. Other efforts will also address the special needs of
small systems for arsenic removal and pathogen control in order to develop and demonstrate
small-scale, cost-effective treatment technologies that are easily installed and automated.
Research will continue epidemiological investigations to evaluate the risk attributable to
pathogens introduced in distribution systems, and will evaluate the effectiveness of bank
filtration for removing pathogens. Bank filtration is a water treatment process that uses surface
water that has naturally infiltrated ground water via the riverbed or banks and is recovered via a
pumping well.
Creating multiple barriers that prevent human exposure to contaminated waters is a major
element of EPA's drinking water research program. Source water protection research will
continue to focus on identifying and controlling significant sources of surface and ground water
contamination, as well as monitoring source water contaminants, wet weather flow and non-point
source impacts on water quality, and developing techniques for improved source water quality
and source load allocation. Research on distribution systems will address effective contaminant
detection techniques, processes in systems that result in changes in chemical and pathogen
contaminant concentrations, and options to prevent those of greatest concern.
Research: Water Quality
Although the quality of the Nation's waters has shown improvements, water pollution problems
remain. The adoption and implementation of statewide watershed approaches by states and
tribes require strong standards, monitoring, Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs)
determinations, and implementation programs (e.g., National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit) (Criteria: Relevance). In order to support these programs, water
quality research will improve risk management strategies to help EPA and other Federal, state,
and local agencies develop better baseline assessments of water quality, and implement strategies
for cost-effective improvements in water quality. Advances hi understanding the fate and
transport of water quality pollutants, aquatic ecosystem responses, and treatment technologies for
point sources have led to the dramatic restoration of some of the Nation's most polluted waters.
The Agency's water quality research program will provide approaches and methods the EPA and
its partners need to develop and apply criteria to support designated uses, tools to diagnose
impairment in aquatic systems, and tools to restore and protect aquatic systems. For example
EPA is developing CADDIS (Casual Analysis Diagnosis Decision Information System), a
database which provides guidance, data, and models for integrating information on stressor
response relationships for use by states, regions and tribes in environmental decisions-making.
Research to support the development of ecological criteria includes evaluating the
exposures and effects of nutrients, suspended and bedded sediments, pathogens, toxic chemicals,
and habitat alteration stressors on aquatic systems and understanding the structure and function
of aquatic systems. This research provides the scientific foundation to support TMDLs. EPA
developed the Ecological Research Strategy78 to provide focus to its research on the effects of
stressors on ecosystems, habitat alteration, diagnostic methods, landscape modeling, and best
\
78 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Ecological Research Strategy. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing
Office. EPA 600-R-98-086. (1998).
11-90
-------
management and restoration practices. This strategy was subjected to rigorous external peer
review and addresses those problems that pose the greatest risks to the environment. In addition,
the Water Quality Research Program Multi-Year Plan (MYP)79 provides a framework for
integrating water quality research across EPA. To ensure quality, all scientific and technical
work products resulting from the research must undergo either internal or external peer review,
with major or significant products requiring external peer review. Research outlined in the
Water Quality MYP will demonstrate integrated and stakeholder driven approaches to achieving
water quality goals, as well as focus on the development of watershed diagnostic methods,
understanding the importance of critical habitats, and the impacts of habitat alteration on aquatic
communities (Criteria: Quality).
EPA is developing stressor response models to understand and predict the relationship
between stressors such as nutrients, eutrophication, and hypoxia on aquatic ecosystems including
wetlands, riparian zones, sediments, and freshwater and marine ecosystems. EPA is also
developing an ecological risk assessment for nutrients, initially focusing on nitrogen, as part of
its program to develop common methodologies for integrating ecological and human health
assessments. Research on the ecology and oceanography of harmful algal blooms (HABs) is
funded as part of a joint effort with other Federal agencies including the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Science Foundation (NSF).
In FY 2005 the Agency will continue to address uncertainties associated with
characterizing, managing, and reducing the risks to human health and the environment from the
production and application of treated wastewater sludge (biosolids) to land for use as fertilizers
and soil conditioners, in response to the research recommendations of the National Academy of
Science report on this topic.80 The technical basis for current regulations was largely developed
in the mid-1970s to early 1980s. The composition of biosolids has changed markedly since then
and technical advances allow for better characterization, assessment, and management of sewage
sludge, and citizens in communities near biosolids application sites have expressed concerns
about their health risks. Research will focus on exposure and analytical methods development,
reviewing available data from past field studies, tracking ongoing studies, conducting field
studies, and improving existing treatment techniques for pathogen destruction through enhanced
support of the Pathogen Equivalency Committee (PEC).
Although suspended and bedded sediments are a natural part of aquatic ecosystems
critical to the energy cycle of the water body and the provision of microhabitats, they have
become stressors associated with human activity that adversely affect aquatic habitats. In the
2000 Water Quality Report, suspended solids and sediments were identified among the leading
causes of water quality impairment for streams and rivers.81 To maintain natural background
levels of suspended and bedded sediments, water resource managers need scientific tools to
determine their impacts on aquatic communities. In collaboration with EPA laboratories, risk
management strategies will be developed to help reduce the impact of human activities on
sedimentation and to maintain sediments at background levels.
79 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Water Quality Research Program Multi Year Plan. Available only though the
internet at: http://www.epa.gov/osp/myp/wq.pdf
80 NRC, 2002. Biosolids Applied to Land; Advancing Standards and Practices, National Research Council of the National
Academies. The National Academies Press. Available through the internet: http://www.epa.gov/ost/biosolids/nas/complete.pdf
81 U.S. EPA, Office of Water. 2000 National Water Quality Inventory. Available through the internet:
http://www.epa.gov/305b/2000report/
11-91
-------
Chemical stressors also impact aquatic life, the benthic community (e.g., clams, crabs,
lobsters, and other tiny organisms that live in or on the bottom of the ocean floor), wildlife, and
human health. Research in this area focuses on developing scientifically defensible methods to
better describe the risks of toxic chemicals to aquatic and aquatic-dependent populations and
communities. Specific goals are to: 1) demonstrate methods for water quality criteria for
bioaccumulative and non-bioaccumulative chemicals based on more complete and accurate risk
characterization of toxic chemicals to aquatic organisms; 2) provide methods for water quality
criteria based on population-level risk characterization of toxic chemicals to aquatic life and
aquatic-dependent wildlife; and 3) provide methods for extrapolating chemical toxicity data
across exposure conditions and across endpoints, life stages, and species that can support
assessment of risks to aquatic life and aquatic-dependent wildlife for chemicals with limited data.
The main focus of habitat alteration research is to provide the scientific basis for
assessing the role of essential habitat in maintaining healthy populations of fish, shellfish, and
wildlife, assisting the Agency and states in understanding interactions among pollutant effects
and other effects related to habitat changes. This research will identify the relationships between
habitat alteration and biological response and extrapolation schemes needed to develop broad-
scale habitat criteria for streams and coastal systems. The results of this research, combined with
biocriteria and monitoring research conducted in Goal 4 can be used to determine biocriteria,
evaluate combined effects of habitat alteration and other stressors (such as chemicals), and assist
ecosystem restoration decisions.
In FY 2005, EPA research on diagnostic methods will continue to focus on the causes
and sources of biological and aquatic ecosystem impairment. This work will be useful in
implementing criteria to protect and strengthen the biological basis for designated uses in state
and tribal water quality standards, improving the scientific foundation for addressing point and
non-point source water quality impairment, and determining appropriate and effective watershed
management alternatives. Specifically, this research will provide: 1) the scientific foundation
and information management scheme for the 303 (d) listing process, including a classification
framework for surface waters, watersheds, and regions to guide problem formulation; 2) first
generation diagnostic methods to distinguish among major classes of individual aquatic stressors
and/or suggest causal mechanisms that contribute to impairment of marine and freshwater
systems; and 3) refinements in diagnostic methods and technical support documents82 for
determining the relative significance of multiple stressors in 303(d) listed waters.
Modeling and landscape characterization research will provide the tools to inform and
support monitoring, assessment, diagnoses, restoration and protection of aquatic systems and to
forecast the ecological, economic, and human health outcomes of alternative management
solutions. The water quality research program will also address the uncertainties of effectiveness
of management options (e.g., best management practices) to control nutrients, suspended solids,
sediments, pathogens, toxic chemicals, and flow variations. The goals are to develop decision
support tools to assist watershed managers in analyzing problems associated with these stressors,
identify cost effective solutions, and conduct benefits analysis with a focus on mixed land-use
watersheds and watersheds in transition from development pressures. This program is designed
to promote community-based decisions by developing decision support tools and alternative
82 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development, Office of Water. Stressor Identification Guidance Document. Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. EPA 822-B-00-025. (2000).
11-92
-------
control technologies and strategies for use by local decision makers involved in watershed
management and pollution control. In FY 2005 studies will be conducted on the transport and
control of contaminants from agricultural operations that reach the environment through air
emissions, surface runoff, or leaching to ground water. In addition, research on wetlands will
compare natural and constructed wetlands to determine how seasonal changes in hydrologic
regime, stressor load, and upland land use affect the functioning of these systems. The results of
this research, along with the restoration technology and tool development activities described in
Goal 4, will equip Federal, state, and local managers with scientifically defensible methods for
protecting and restoring ecosystems.
Wet weather flow (WWF) drainage from urban and rural non-point sources during and
after rainfalls is one of the primary causes of water pollution. This degradation of water quality
poses significant risks to human and ecological health through the uncontrolled release of silts,
pathogenic bacteria, protozoans, and viruses, as well as a number of potentially toxic,
bioaccumulative contaminants. EPA has developed the Risk Management Research Plan for
Wet Weather Flows83 that provides a framework for integrating WWF research across EPA. To
minimize the public health risks from swimming and other recreational water activities, research
will specifically focus on both developing techniques to reduce WWF impacts and to provide
data to support the development of scientifically sound criteria for protecting recreational waters.
This program is designed to promote community-based decisions by developing decision support
tools and alternative WWF control technologies and strategies for use by local decision makers
involved in watershed management and pollution control. Effective watershed management
strategies and guidance for WWF discharges, unproved recreational water quality, and better risk
communication programs are all necessary to ensure clean and safe water for drinking,
recreation, and wildlife habitat.
EPA will also develop and provide effective evaluation tools necessary to make timely
and informed decisions on beach advisories and closures and strengthen beach programs and
water quality criteria for recreational water use. As part of this effort, EPA has developed the
EPA Action Plan for Beaches and Recreational Waters.84 Research guided by the "EPA Action
Plan for Beaches and Recreational Waters" and the Beaches Act of 2000 will in FY 2005
continue to focus on better understanding the effects of microbial pathogens on human health.
Significant uncertainty exists in deterrrnning the level of illness corresponding to the actual
exposure (ingestion, inhalation, and skin contact) to contaminated recreational waters. Research
is needed to provide decision makers with the necessary tools for making defensible science-
based decisions that ensure public health and safety, including evaluating and selecting
appropriate indicators of fecal contamination and determining relationships between indicators
and risk levels for disease. EPA is performing a suite of epidemiological studies needed to
establish a stronger, more defensible link between water quality indicators and disease which
will provide reliable information about the relationship between recreational water quality and
swimming-associated health effects. This will enable EPA to provide states with more consistent
monitoring methods, standardized indicators of contamination, and standardized definitions of
what constitutes a risk to public health. Local public health officials can use the results of this
83 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Risk Management Research Plan for Wet Weather Flows.
Available through the internet: http://www.epa.gov/ednnrrnrl/repository/wwfplan/wwf_plan.pdf
84 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development, Office of Water. EPA Action Plan for Beaches and Recreational
Waters. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. EPA 600-R-98-079. (1999). Available through the
internet: http://www.epa.gov/ordAVebPubs/beaches/600r98079.pdf
11-93
-------
research to provide the public with "real-time" information on potential exposure to pathogenic
microbes and make timely beach closure decisions.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
S&T
• (-$433,400) These resources represent savings that will result from consolidation of many
information technology (IT) services, including call center and service desk, server
management, hardware and software acquisition, and IT equipment standardization. This
will result in enhanced security and uniform maintenance requirements. Since these
resources represent an efficiency savings, there is no negative programmatic impact.
• (-$200,000) This represents a minor reduction to water quality research under the Science
to Achieve Results (STAR) grants program. There will not be any programmatic or
performance impacts.
• There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for new and
existing FTE.
EPM
There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for new and
existing FTE.
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
Research
Scientific Rationale for Surface Water Criteria
In 2005 Provide methods for developing water quality criteria so that, by 2008, approaches and methods are
available to States and Tribes for their use in developing and applying criteria for habitat alteration,
nutrients, suspended and bedded sediments, pathogens and toxic chemicals that will support designated
uses for aquatic ecosystems and increase the scientific basis for listing and delisting unpaired water
bodies under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Methods for developing water quality criteria 09/30/05 methods
based on population-level risks of multiple
stressors to aquatic life and aquatic-dependent
wildlife.
Baseline: State, Tribal, and EPA programs that assess, maintain, and restore water quality are all dependent upon
the ability to define water quality standards that, when met, are protective of the designated and desired
use of streams, lakes, and estuaries. The scientific bases for such standards are water quality criteria
11-94
-------
that relate biological outcomes (e.g., fish populations, aquatic wildlife communities, threatened and
endangered species) to measurable water quality parameters (e.g., nutrients, suspended and embedded
sediments, chemical concentrations). Relatively recent and Congressionally-mandated studies by the
National Research Council call for continued and more targeted scientific studies on water quality
criteria that reflect observed environmental variations and that reflect the multiple influence of habitat
alteration, regional and watershed conditions, and appropriate designated uses. Accordingly, EPA has
modified its longstanding research on water quality criteria to address these issues. Scientific outputs
from this research can be integrated into EPA technical guidance to the States and Tribes. Adoption
and deployment of new criteria developed with the assistance of the new methods and approaches will
improve the cost-effectiveness of TMDL's and related restoration efforts. Beginning in FY 2005,
regular evaluations by independent and external panels will provide reviews of EPA research
programs' relevance, quality, and successful performance to date, in accordance with OMB's
Investment Criteria for Research and Development. Reviewers will also qualitatively determine
whether EPA has been successful in meeting its annual and long-term commitments for research.
Recommendations and results from these reviews will improve the design and management of EPA
research programs and help to measure their progress under the Government Performance and Results
Act (GPRA).
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Methods for developing water quality criteria based on
population-level risks of multiple stressors to aquatic life and aquatic-dependent wildlife.
Performance Database: Program output; no internal tracking system
Data Source: N/A
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: N/A
QA/QC Procedures: N/A
Data Quality Reviews: N/A
Data Limitations: N/A
Error Estimate: N/A
New/Improved Data or Systems: N/A
References: N/A
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
While EPA is the Federal agency mandated to ensure safe drinking water, other Federal
and non-Federal entities are conducting research that complements EPA's research program on
priority contaminants in drinking water. For example, the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) conduct
health effects and exposure research. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) also performs
11-95
-------
research on children's risks. Many of these research activities are being conducted in
collaboration with EPA scientists. The private sector, particularly the water treatment industry,
is conducting research hi such areas as analytical methods, treatment technologies, and the
development and maintenance of water resources. Cooperative research efforts have been
ongoing with the American Water Works Association Research Foundation and other
stakeholders to coordinate drinking water research. EPA is also working with the U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS) to evaluate performance of newly developed methods for measuring
microbes in potential drinking water sources.
Interactions with external stakeholder groups have been initiated that will help determine
EPA's future regulatory priorities and research needs for drinking water. Interactions with re
Science Advisory Board's Drinking Water Committee and the National Drinking Water
Advisory Committee will also help EPA refine its drinking water research agenda.
EPA has developed joint research initiatives with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) and the United States Geological Survey (USGS) for linking
monitoring data and field studies information with available toxicity data and assessment models
for developing sediment criteria.
Under the Endangered Species Act, EPA is required to consult with the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) on actions that
may affect endangered species. EPA has developed a draft strategy for research and
development of criteria for endangered species that is now being reviewed. As part of
implementation of this strategy, EPA is coordinating its research with the Biological Research
Division of the USGS.
The issue of eutrophication, hypoxia, and harmful algal blooms (HABs) is a priority with
the Committee on Environment and Natural Resources (CENR). An interagency research
strategy for pfiesteria and other harmful algal species was developed in 1998, and EPA is
continuing to implement that strategy. EPA is working closely with NOAA on the issue of
nutrients and risks posed by HABs. This CENR is also coordinating the research efforts among
Federal agencies to assess the impacts of nutrients and hypoxia hi the Gulf of Mexico.
Implementation of EPA's Wet Weather Flows work is guided by the "Risk Management
Research Plan for Wet Weather Flows." This research plan was peer-reviewed by the Urban
Water Resources Research Council of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and the
Water Environment Research Foundation of the Water Environment Federation. Projects under
the WWF research plan are being coordinated with projects under Section 104(b)(3) of the Clean
Water Act (CWA). This plan is also being used to coordinate relevant work being conducted by
others such as the Water Environment Research Foundation's Wet Weather Advisory Panel, the
ASCE Urban Water Resources Research Council, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the U.S.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USAGE), the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the Sanitary Sewer Overflow (SSO) Advisory
Committee and Urban WWF Subcommittee, and other national and international organizations
that work to improve coordination and minimize duplication of WWF research.
11-96
-------
EPA is partnering with numerous other Federal and state agencies on WWF research
projects. For example, the Agency signed a three-year interagency .agreement (IAG) with
USAGE at the Waterways Experiment Station in Vicksburg, Mississippi, to develop a numerical
watershed model that will predict change in stream channels from land use change. Both
organizations have an inherent interest hi developing tools to predict such geomorphologic
changes. Land use changes alter storm water runoff patterns, which upset the established
equilibrium between the flow, shape, and course of the streambed (stream geomorphology).
Under this LAG the USAGE will modify an existing river model to account for erosion m small
streams.
Also, EPA is pursuing collaborative research projects with the USGS to utilize water
quality data from urban areas obtained through then- National Ambient Water Quality
Assessment (NAWQA) program. The USGS data for urban streams show levels of pesticides
that are even higher than hi many agricultural area streams. These data have potential uses for
identifying sources of urban pesticides, and EPA will evaluate how the USGS data could be
integrated into the GIS database system.
Finally, EPA is initiating collaboration with the USDA, CDC, and other Agencies to
develop a better understanding of the sources of pathogenic stressors and potential strategies for
then: control.
STATUTORY AUTHORITES
Clean Air Act (CAA)
Clean Vessel Act
Clean Water Act (CWA)
Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection, and Restoration Act of 1990
Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990
Endangered Species Act
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
Marine Plastic Pollution, Research and Control Act (MPPRCA) of 1987
Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA)
National Invasive Species Act of 1996
North American Wetlands Conservation Act
Ocean Dumping Ban Act of 1988
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)
Shore Protection Act of 1988
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
Water Resource Development Act (WRDA)
11-97
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
CLEAN AND SAFE WATER
Beach / Fish Programs, 11-12
Categorical Grant
Beaches Protection, 11-12
Homeland Security, 11-13
Nonpoint Source (Sec. 319), 11-50
Pesticides Program Implementation, 11-12,11-26
Pollution Control (Sec. 106), 11-50
Public Water System Supervision (PWSS), 11-12
Underground Injection Control (UIC), 11-12
Wastewater Operator Training, 11-50
Water Quality Cooperative Agreements, 11-12,11-50
Children and other Sensitive Populations, 11-12
Congressionally Mandated Projects, 11-12,11-50,11-86
Drinking Water Programs, II-8,11-12,11-14
Great Lakes Legacy Act, 11-21
Homeland Security
Critical Infrastructure Protection, 11-13
Infrastructure Assistance -
Alaska Native Villages, 11-50
Clean Water SRF, 11-50
Drinking Water SRF, 11-12
Puerto Rico, 11-12
International Capacity Building, 11-12,11-27,11-50,11-64
Marine Pollution, 11-50,11-62,11-63
Pesticides
Field Programs, 11-12
Research
Drinking Water, 11-86
Water Quality, 11-86
Science Advisory Board, II-4,11-96
Surface Water Protection, II-6, II-8,11-50,11-86,11-87
Wetlands, 11-70,11-73,11-97
-------
Goal 3: Land Preservation
And Restoration
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents
Goal 3: Land Preservation and Restoration III-l
Preserve Land 111-14
Restore Land 111-38
Enhance Science and Research 111-86
Subject Index 111-96
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Land Preservation and Restoration
STRATEGIC GOAL: 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.
Resource Summary
(Dollars in thousands)
Land Preservation and Restoration
Preserve Land
Restore Land
Enhance Science and Research
Total Workyears
FY2003
Actuals
$1,706,796.3
$205,443.3
$1,454,821.4
$46,531.6
4,675.2
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$1,779,473.5
$210,990.1
$1,508,646.8
$59,836.6
4,744.8
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
$1,798,171.0
$237,149.8
$1,503,465.6
$57,555.6
4,708.5
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres
Bud
$18,697.5
$26,159.7
($5,181.3)
($2,280.9)
-36.4
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT
Left uncontrolled, hazardous and nonhazardous wastes on the land can migrate to the air,
groundwater, and surface water, contaminating drinking water supplies, causing acute illnesses
or chronic diseases, and threatening healthy ecosystems in urban, rural, and suburban areas.
Hazardous substances can kill living organisms in lakes and rivers, destroy vegetation in
contaminated areas, cause major reproductive complications in wildlife, and otherwise limit the
ability of an ecosystem to survive.
MEANS AND STRATEGY
EPA will work to preserve and restore the land using the most effective waste
management and cleanup methods available. EPA will use a hierarchy of approaches to protect
the land: reducing waste at its source, recycling waste, and managing waste effectively by
preventing spills and releases of toxic materials and cleaning up contaminated properties. The
Agency is especially concerned about threats to our most sensitive populations, such as children,
the elderly, and individuals with chronic diseases.
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA, or Superfund)1 and the Resource Conservation and Recovery. Act (RCRA)2 provide
'42 U.S. Code 9601-9675
III-l
-------
the legal authority for most of EPA's work toward this goal. The Agency and its partners use
Superfund authority to clean up uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites; return the land
to productive use; and maximize the participation of potentially responsible parties in cleanup
efforts. Under RCRA, EPA works hi partnership with states and Tribes to address risks
associated with leaking underground storage tanks and with the generation and management of
hazardous and non-hazardous wastes.
EPA also uses authorities provided under the Clean Air Act,3Clean 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
significant challenge to protecting the land. EPA's approach integrates prevention, preparedness,
and response activities to minimize these risks. Spill prevention activities keep harmful
substances from being released to the environment. Improving its readiness to respond to
emergencies, through training, development of clear authorities, and provision of proper
equipment, will ensure that EPA is adequately prepared to minimize contamination and harm to
the environment when spills do occur.
In FY 2005, EPA will maintain its focus on three themes established in FY 2004, and one
additional theme on emergency preparedness, response and homeland security, in achieving its
objectives:
• Recycling, Waste Minimization and Energy Recovery: EPA's strategy for reducing waste
generation and increasing recycling is based on (1) establishing and expanding partnerships
with businesses, industries, states, communities, and consumers; (2) stimulating
infrastructure development, environmentally responsible behavior by product manufacturers,
users, and disposers ("product stewardship"), and new technologies; and (3) helping
businesses, government, institutions, and consumers by education, outreach, training, and
technical assistance.
• One Cleanup Program: Through the "One Cleanup Program" the Agency is looking across
its programs to bring consistency and enhanced effectiveness to site cleanups. The Agency
will work with its partners and stakeholders to enhance coordination, planning, and
communication across the full range of Federal, state, Tribal, and local cleanup programs.
This effort will improve the pace, efficiency, and effectiveness of site cleanups, as well as
more folly integrate land reuse and continued use into cleanup programs. The Agency will
promote information technologies that describe waste site cleanup and revitalization
information in ways that keep the public and stakeholders folly informed. Finally, the
Agency will develop environmental outcome performance measures that report progress
2 42 U.S. Code 6901-6992k
342U.S.Code7401-7671q
4 33 U.S. Code 1251-1387
5 33 U.S. Code 2701-2761
III-2
-------
among all cleanup programs, such as the number of acres able to be reused after site cleanup.
A crucial element to this effort is a national dialogue, currently underway, on the future of
Superfund and other EPA waste cleanup programs.
• Revitalization: The Agency's broad promotion of the successes of the Brownfields and other
waste programs focuses on restoring and revising contaminated lands. The Land
Revitalization Initiative complements the Agency's traditional cleanup programs by focusing
on solutions that improve the quality of life and economy of affected communities. Front
end planning for the final, productive use of contaminated lands enables the cleanup
programs, communities and interested stakeholders to more easily and quickly make cleanup
decisions. This integration of land reuse planning with the traditional cleanup processes will
lead to faster, more efficient cleanups.
• Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Homeland Security: EPA has a major role in
reducing the risk to human health and the environment posed by accidental or intentional
releases of harmful substances and oil. EPA will work to improve its ability to effectively
respond to these incidents, working closely with other federal agencies within the National
Response System.
Reducing and Recycling Waste
The Resource Conservation Challenge (RCC) represents a major national effort to find
flexible yet protective ways to conserve our valuable natural resources by reducing waste,
recycling, and recovering energy.6 Through the RCC, EPA challenges all Americans to make
purchasing and disposal decisions that conserve natural resources, save energy, reduce costs, and
preserve the environment for future generations.
Establishing and Expanding Partnerships: EPA will establish and expand its partnerships
with industry, states, and other entities to reduce waste and to develop and deliver tools that can
help businesses, manufacturers, and consumers. Nationally-recognized programs, such as
Waste Wise,7 which uses partnerships to encourage waste prevention and recycling, will serve as
models for new alliances among federal, state, and local governments and businesses that
capitalize on voluntary efforts to reduce waste and increase recycling.
EPA will also continue to help its Tribal partners improve practices for managing solid
waste on Indian lands. EPA has direct implementation responsibility for the RCRA hazardous
waste and Underground Storage Tank programs in Indian country. Recognizing the unique
challenges encountered in Indian country, EPA will work with Tribes on a government-to-
government basis that affirms the federal government's vital trust responsibility and the
6 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste. Resource Conservation Challenge Web Site:
http:/Av\\^v.epa.gov/epaoswer/osw/consenre/index.htm. Washington, D.C. Last updated August 21,2003.
7 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste. WasteWise Program Web Site, About Waste Wise
Page: http:.///www.epa.gov/wastewise/wrr/cbuild.htm. Washington, D.C. Last updated September 27,2002.
III-3
-------
importance of conserving natural resources for cultural uses. EPA will conduct joint projects to
upgrade Tribal solid waste management infrastructure, developing plans, codes and ordinances,
recycling programs, and other alternatives to open dumping. These efforts will help to prevent
open dumping in Indian country in the future and allow clean up of existing dumps, reducing the
risks that such dumps pose to human health and the environment.
Stimulating Infrastructure Development Product Stewardship, and New Technologies:
Another key strategy for reducing waste is fostering development of infrastructure that will make
it easier for businesses and consumers to reduce the waste they generate; acquire and use
recycled materials; and purchase products containing recovered materials. For example, EPA
has established voluntary product stewardship partnerships with manufacturers, retailers,
governmental, and nongovernmental organizations to reduce the impacts that electronics and
carpets can have on the environment throughout their lifecycles. EPA continues to promote the
development of new and better recycling technologies and explore ways to obtain energy or
products from waste.
Providing Education. Outreach, Training, and Technical Assistance: EPA works with
major retailers, electronics manufacturers, and the amusement and motion picture industries to
revitalize, create, and display conservation, waste prevention, and recycling messages. These
activities encourage smarter, more environmentally responsible behavior by consumers, young
people, and underserved communities. The Agency and its partners design activities that
encourage students and teachers to start innovative recycling programs and develop unique tools
and projects to promote waste reduction, recycling, and neighborhood revitalization in Hispanic
and African-American communities and on Indian lands.
Managing Hazardous Wastes and Petroleum Products Properly
Recognizing that some hazardous wastes cannot yet be completely eliminated or
recycled, the RCRA program works to reduce the risks of exposure to hazardous wastes by
maintaining a "cradle-to-grave" approach to waste management.
Preventing Hazardous Releases from RCRA Facilities: EPA's strategy for addressing
hazardous wastes that must be treated or stored is to achieve greater efficiencies at waste
management facilities through more focused permitting processes and tighter standards where
appropriate. EPA works with state, Tribal, and local government partners to ensure that
hazardous waste management facilities have approved controls hi place and continues to strive
for safe waste management.
EPA will work with the authorized states—specifically those with a large number of
facilities lacking approved controls in place— to resolve issues and transfer best practices from
other states. EPA also plans to study the universe of unpermitted facilities and work with states
to identify and resolve issues that may be preventing key categories of facilities from obtaining
permits or putting other approved controls in place. To achieve greater .efficiencies at facilities
III-4
-------
that treat or store hazardous waste, the Agency will promote innovative technologies that
streamline permitting processes and improve protection of human health and the environment.
Reducing Emissions from Hazardous Waste Combustion: EPA continues to develop and
issue regulations on emission standards for hazardous waste combustion facilities.
Implementation of these regulations is key to reducing the emission of dioxins, furans,
paniculate matter, and acid gases. Within 2 years from the date when EPA issues new limits,
facilities will conduct emission tests to demonstrate reductions. Additional periodic tests will
ensure continued compliance with the limits established for emissions.
Preventing Releases from Underground Storage Tank Systems: EPA recognizes that the
size and diversity of the regulated community put state authorities in the best position to regulate
Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) and to set priorities. RCRA Subtitle I allows state UST
programs approved by EPA to operate in lieu of the federal program.8 Except in Indian country,
even states that have not received formal state program approval from EPA are in most cases the
primary implementing agencies and receive annual grants from EPA.
While the frequency and severity of releases from UST systems have been greatly
reduced, EPA and its state partners have observed that releases are still occurring. EPA will
continue to work with its state and Tribal partners to prevent and detect petroleum releases from
USTs by ensuring that compliance with detection prevention requirements (spill, overfill, and
corrosion protection) are a national priority. While the vast majority of the approximately
683,000 active USTs have the regulatory equipment, significant work remains to ensure that
UST owners and operators maintain and operate their systems properly.9 In FY2005, the
Agency will continue its performance evaluation of new or upgraded UST systems to better and
more quickly identify releases and their causes. The Agency will also continue to identify
opportunities for improving UST system performance.
To protect our Nation's groundwater and drinking water from petroleum releases, EPA
will continue to support state programs; strengthen partnerships among stakeholders; and provide
technical and compliance assistance, and training to promote and enforce UST facilities'
compliance. In addition, EPA will continue its work to obtain states' commitments to increase
their inspection and enforcement presence if state-specific goals are not met. The Agency and
states will use innovative compliance approaches, along with outreach and education tools, to
bring more tanks into compliance.
The Agency will also provide guidance to foster the use of new technology to enhance
compliance. For example, the presence of methyl-tertiary-butyl-ether (MTBE) in gasoline
increases the importance of preventing and rapidly detecting releases, since MTBE cleanups can
8 42 U.S. Code 9601-6992k
9
Memorandum from Cliff Rothenstein, Director, EPA Office of Underground Storage Tanks to Underground
Storage Tank Division Directors in EPA Regions 1-10. June 19,2003. FA 2003 Semi Annual (Mid-Year) Activity
Report
III-5
-------
cost 100 percent more than cleanups involving other gasoline contaminants.10 The Agency will
focus its efforts on reducing UST releases and increasing early detection of petroleum products,
including MTBE, by further evaluating the performance of compliant UST systems.
Preparing for and Responding to Emergencies
EPA plays a major role in reducing the risks that accidental and intentional releases of
harmful substances and oil pose to human health and the environment. Under the National
Response System (NRS), EPA evaluates and responds to thousands of releases annually. The
NRS is a multi-agency preparedness and response mechanism that includes the following key
components: the National Response Center, the National Response Team (NRT) which is
composed of 16 Federal agencies, 13 Regional Response Teams, and Federal On-Scene
Coordinators (OSCs). These organizations work with state and local officials to develop and
maintain contingency plans that will enable the Nation to respond effectively to hazardous
substance and oil emergencies. When an incident occurs, these groups coordinate with the OSC
in charge to ensure that all necessary resources, such as personnel and equipment, are available
and that containment, cleanup, and disposal activities proceed quickly, efficiently, and
effectively. EPA's primary role in the NRS is to serve as the Federal OSC for spills and releases
in the inland zone. As a result of NRS efforts, the Nation has successfully contained many major
oil spills and releases of hazardous substances, minimizing the adverse impacts on human health
and the environment.
Preparing for Emergencies: Preparedness on a national level 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, or radiological incidents. Over the next
several years, EPA will enhance its core emergency response program to respond quickly and
effectively to chemical, oil, biological, and radiological releases. EPA also will improve
coordination mechanisms to respond to simultaneous, large-scale national emergencies,
including homeland security incidents. The Agency will focus its efforts on Regional Response
Teams and coordination among Regions; health and safety issues, including provision of
clothing that protects and identifies responders, training, and exercise; establishment of
delegation and warrant authorities; and response readiness, including equipment, transportation,
and outreach. The criteria for excellence in the core emergency response program will ensure a
high level of overall readiness throughout the Agency and improve its ability to support multi-
Regional responses.
In addition to enhancing its readiness capabilities, EPA will work to improve internal and
external coordination and communication mechanisms. For example, as part of the National
Incident Coordination Team, EPA will continue to improve its policies, plans, procedures, and
decision-making processes for coordinating responses to national emergencies. Under the
Continuity of Operations/Continuity of Government program, EPA will upgrade and test plans,
10 New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission. 2000. A Survey of Site Experiences with MTBE
Contamination at LUST Sites. Web Site: http:// epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/current.
m-6
-------
facilities, training, and equipment to ensure that essential government business can continue
during a catastrophic emergency. NRT capabilities are being expanded to coordinate
interagency activities during large-scale responses. EPA will coordinate its activities with the
Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA),
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), other Federal agencies, and state and local governments.
EPA will also continue to clarify its roles and responsibilities so that Agency security programs
are consistent with the national homeland security strategy.
Responding to Hazardous Substance Releases and Oil Spills: Each year, EPA personnel
assess, respond to, mitigate, and clean up thousands of releases, whether accidental, deliberate,
or naturally occurring. These incidents range from small spills at chemical or oil facilities to
national disasters, such as hurricanes and earthquakes, to terrorist events like the 2001 World
Trade Center and anthrax attacks, to the 2003 Columbia shuttle tragedy.
EPA will work to improve its capability to respond effectively to incidents that
may involve harmful chemical, oil, biological, and radiological substances. The Agency will
explore improvements in field and personal protection equipment and response training and
exercises; review response data provided in the "after-action" reports prepared by EPA
emergency responders following a release; and examine "lessons learned" reports to identify
which activities work and which need to be improved. Application of this information and other
data will advance the Agency's state-of-the-art emergency response operations.
Preventing Oil Spills: An important component of EPA's land strategy is to prevent oil
spills from reaching the Nation's waters. Under the Oil Pollution Act,11 the Agency requires
certain facilities (defined hi 40 CFR 112.2) to develop and implement spill prevention, control,
and countermeasure (SPCC) plans. SPCC plans ensure that facilities put in place containment
and other countermeasures to prevent oil spills from reaching navigable waters. Facilities that
are unable to provide secondary containment, such as berms around an oil storage tank, must
provide a spill contingency plan that details cleanup measures to be taken if a spill occurs.
Compliance with these requirements reduces the number of oil spills that reach navigable waters
and prevents detrimental effects on human health and the environment should a spill occur.
Controlling Risks to Human Health and the Environment at Contaminated Sites
Leaching contaminants can foul drinking water in underground aquifers used for wells or
surface waters used by public water intakes. Contaminated soil can result in human ingestion or
dermal absorption of harmful substances. Contamination can also affect subsistence resources,
including resources subject to special protections through treaties between Federal and Tribal
governments. Furthermore, because of the risks it poses, contaminated land may not be available
for use.
EPA and its partners work to clean up contaminated land to levels sufficient to control
risks to human health and the environment and to return the land to productive use. The
11 33 U.S. Code,6901 -6992k
III-7
-------
Agency's cleanup activities, some new and some well-established, include removing
contaminated soil, capping or containing contamination in place, pumping and treating
groundwater, and bioremediation.
EPA uses a variety of tools to accomplish cleanups: permits, enforcement actions,
consent agreements, Federal Facility Agreements, and many other mechanisms. As part of
EPA's One Cleanup Program Initiative, all levels of government will work together to ensure
that appropriate cleanup tools are used; that resources, activities, and results are coordinated with
partners and stakeholders and communicated to the public effectively; and that cleanups are
protective and contribute to community revitalization. This approach reflects EPA's efforts to
coordinate across all of its cleanup programs, while maintaining the flexibility needed to
accommodate differences in program authorities and approaches.
EPA fulfills its cleanup and waste management responsibilities on Tribal lands by
acknowledging Tribal sovereignty and recognizing Tribal governments as being the most
appropriate authorities for setting standards, making policy decisions, and managing programs
consistent with Agency standards and regulations.
Through strong policy, leadership, program administration, and a dedicated workforce,
EPA's cleanup programs will merge sound science, cutting-edge technology, quality
environmental information, and stakeholder involvement to protect the Nation from the harmful
effects of contaminated property. To accomplish its cleanup goals, the Agency continues to
forge partnerships and develop outreach and education strategies.
EPA and its partners follow four key steps to accomplish cleanups and control risks to
human health and the environment: assessment, stabilization, selection of appropriate remedies,
and implementation of remedies. The Agency will continue to work with Federal, state, Tribal,
and local government partners at each step of the process to identify facilities and sites requiring
attention and to monitor changes in priorities. For example, EPA is collecting Tribal program
baseline data for the Superfund program and will modify the Superfund data system to more
accurately track sites of concern to Tribes, along with those situated on Indian lands. As systems
and approaches change, cleanup programs will revise guidance appropriately.
Usable land is a valuable resource. However, where contamination presents a real or
perceived threat to human health and the environment, options for future land use at that site may
be limited. EPA's cleanup programs have set a national goal of returning formerly contaminated
sites to long-term, sustainable, and productive use. This goal creates greater impetus for
selecting and implementing remedies that, in addition to providing clear environmental benefits,
will support future land use providing greater economic and social benefits.
Maximizing Potentially Responsible Party Participation at Superfund Sites:
Enforcement authorities play a critical role in all Agency cleanup programs. However,
they have an additional and unique role under the Superfund program: they are used to leverage
III-8
-------
private-party resources to conduct a majority of the cleanup actions and to reimburse the federal
government for cleanups financed by the Trust Fund. EPA will continue to pursue the following
two strategies for limiting the use of trust funds.
Applying Superfund "Enforcement First": Historically, EPA has achieved at least $6 in
private-party cleanup commitments for every $1 spent on enforcement. The Agency will
continue to use its enforcement authorities to achieve this end. The Superfund program's
"Enforcement First" strategy will allow EPA to focus limited Trust Fund resources on sites
where viable, potentially responsible parties either do not exist or lack the funds or capabilities to
conduct the cleanup. By taking enforcement actions at sites where viable, liable parties do exist,
EPA will continue to leverage private-party dollars so that Trust Fund money is used only when
absolutely necessary to clean up hazardous waste sites.
Recovering Costs: Cost recovery is another way to leverage private-party resources
through enforcement. Under Superfund, EPA has the authority to compel private parties to pay
back Trust Fund money spent to conduct cleanup activities. EPA will continue its efforts to
address 100 percent of the Statute of Limitations cases for Superfund sites with unaddressed total
past costs equal to or greater than $200,000 and to report the value of costs recovered.
Research
The FY 2005 land research program supports the Agency's objective of reducing or
controlling potential risks to human health and the environment at contaminated waste sites by
accelerating scientifically-defensible and cost-effective decisions for cleanup at complex sites,
mining sites, marine spills, and Brownfields in accordance with the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liabilities Act (CERCLA).
The Agency will conduct research to: 1) improve the range and scientific foundation for
contaminated sediment remedy selection options through improved site characterization, and
increased understanding of different remedial options; 2) determine the performance and cost
benefit of alternative groundwater remediation technologies and provide tools for characterizing
and assessing groundwater contamination to program offices for use hi state and local remedial
decisions; 3) provide tools and methods that will allow the Agency to accurately and efficiently
assess, remediate, and manage soil and land contamination; and 4) provide tools, methods, and
models, and technical support to characterize the extent of multimedia site contamination.
Multimedia decision-making, waste management, and combustion constitute the three
major areas of research under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) in FY
2005, as the Agency works toward preventing releases through proper facility management.
Multimedia research will focus on resource conservation (e.g., electronic waste recycling and
waste-derived products), corrective action, and multimedia modeling. Waste management
research will develop more cost-effective ways to manage/recycle non-hazardous wastes and will
examine other remediation technologies, while combustion research will continue to focus on
characterizing and controlling emissions from bioreactors and industrial combustion systems.
III-9
-------
Several mechanisms are in place to ensure a high-quality waste research program at EPA.
The Research Strategies Advisory Committee (RSAC) of EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB),
an independent chartered Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) committee, meets annually
to conduct an in-depth review and analysis of EPA's Science and Technology account. The
RSAC provides its findings to the House Science Committee and sends a written report on the
findings to EPA's Administrator after every annual review. Moreover, EPA's Board of
Scientific Counselors (BOSC) provides counsel to the Assistant Administrator for the Office of
Research and Development (ORD) on the operation of ORD's research program. Also, under
the Science to Achieve Results (STAR) program, all research projects are selected for funding
through a rigorous competitive external peer review process designed to ensure that only the
highest quality efforts receive funding support. Our scientific and technical work products must
also undergo either internal or external peer review, with major or significant products requiring
external peer review. The Agency's Peer Review Handbook (2nd Edition) codifies procedures
and guidance for conducting peer review.
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES AND FY 2005 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS
Preserve Land. By 2008, 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.
Restore Land. By 2008, 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.
Enhance Science and Research. Through 2008, provide and apply sound science for protecting
and restoring land by conducting leading-edge research and developing a better understanding
and characterization of environmental outcomes under Goal 3.
HIGHLIGHTS
In FY 2005, EPA and its partners will preserve and restore the land by reducing,
recycling, and managing wastes, preventing and responding to releases of harmful substances,
and cleaning up contaminated land. The following accomplishments are examples of what has
been done by the Agency to achieve these purposes:
• completed 303,120 cleanups of confirmed releases from Federally-regulated LUSTs
since 1987;
• conducted over 7,900 removal response actions from 1982 through January 6, 2004;
• completed clean up construction at 890 Superfund National Priorities List Sites
through January 6, 2004;
111-10
-------
• assessed over 45,300 potential Superftmd sites through January 6, 2004;
• removed more than 33,400 sites from the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) waste site list;
• responded to or monitored 300 oil spills in a typical year;
• 699 construction projects are ongoing at over 430 sites;
• expanded the Waste Wise Partnership to more than 1,300 partners who recycled over
9 million tons of waste, and prevented over 400,000 tons of waste;
• enrolled 50 Coal Combustion Products Partners, who are investigating ways to
increase the use of coal combustion products (CCPs) in construction and to promote other
beneficial uses of CCPs;
• determined that an investment of $ 1 million in Jobs Through Recycling grants helped
businesses create more than 1,700 jobs and $290 million in capital investment;
• provided over $6.0 million to thirty-one Tribes to clean up open dumps and $3.1
million to 47 Tribes to develop hazardous waste management programs through the
Tribal Solid Waste Interagency Workgroup;
» developed e-permitting tools to expedite and simplify the permitting process and
provide better public access to permitting information;
• financial assurance regulations reduced the number of sites that must be cleaned up
under either state or Federal authorities (such as Superfund removals) by requiring
facilities to have financial assurance for third party liability, closure, and completion of
corrective action;
• 83 percent of hazardous waste facilities have approved controls (permits) hi place,
exceeding the 2005 goal of 80 percent;
• the "worst facilities first" strategy resulted in over 1,200 facilities achieving the
Current Human Exposures Under Control environmental indicator goal and over 1,000
facilities achieving the Migration of Contaminated Groundwater Under Control
environmental indicator goal;
• secured greater than $20 billion in PRP commitments, through response and cost
recovery settlements, over the life of the Superfund program; and
III-11
-------
• resolved potential liability of 24,700 small volume waste contributing parties through
more than 475 de rninimis settlements.
In FY 2005, contaminated sites research will: 1) reduce uncertainties associated with
soil/groundwater sampling and analysis; 2) reduce the time and cost associated with site
characterization and site remediation activities; and 3) develop and demonstrate more effective
and less costly remediation technologies involving complex sites and hard-to-treat wastes. Other
proposed work will enhance and accelerate current contaminated sediments research efforts,
providing the data needed to make and support crucial decisions on high impact and high
visibility sites. The Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) program fosters the
development and use of lower cost and more effective characterization and monitoring
technologies, as well as risk management remediation technologies for sediments, soils, and
groundwater. In FY 2005, EPA will complete at least four SITE demonstrations, with emphasis
on non-aqueous phase liquids (NAPLs) and sediments.
Waste management research hi FY 2005 will work to advance the multimedia modeling
and uncertainty/sensitivity analyses methodologies that support core RCRA program needs as
well as emerging RCRA resource conservation needs. Waste management research will also be
conducted to improve the management of both solid and hazardous wastes.
EXTERNAL FACTORS
EPA's ability to respond as the Federal On-Scene Coordinator for releases of harmful
substances hi the inland zone will be affected 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 security incidents may be affected by
circumstances surrounding each event. For instance, if travel or communication is severely
impeded, EPA's response may be delayed and its efficiency compromised. Also, hi the case of a
single large-scale incident, removal program resources will most likely be concentrated on that
response, thus reducing EPA's ability to address other emergency releases. In severe cases,
EPA's current emergency response workforce and resources may not be sufficient to address a
large number of simultaneous large-scale incidents.
A number of external factors could also affect the Agency's ability to achieve its
objectives for cleanup and prevention. These factors include Agency reliance on private-party
response and state and Tribal partnerships, development of new environmental technologies,
work by other Federal agencies, and statutory barriers. Achieving the release prevention
objectives and attaining FY 2005 targets will depend heavily on the participation of states that
have been authorized or approved to be the primary implementors of these programs.
111-12
-------
Attaining EPA's waste reduction and recycling objectives will depend on the
participation of Federal agencies, states, Tribes, local governments, industries, and the general
public in partnerships aimed at reducing waste generation and increasing recycling rates. EPA
provides national leadership hi the areas of waste reduction and recycling to facilitate public and
private partnerships that can provide the impetus for government, businesses, and citizens to join
in the campaign to significantly reduce the amount of waste generated and ultimately sent for
disposal. Further, both domestic and foreign economic stresses can adversely affect markets for
recovered materials.
State programs are primarily responsible for implementing the RCRA Hazardous Waste
and UST programs. EPA's ability to achieve its goals for these programs depends on the
strength of state programs, including the level of funding contributed by states to these programs.
The Agency's ability to achieve its goals for Superfund construction completion is
partially dependent upon the performance of cleanup activities by the Department of Defense
(DOD) and the Department of Energy (DOE). In addition to construction completion, the
Agency must rely on the efforts of DOD and DOE to establish and maintain Restoration
Advisory Boards (RABs) and Site Specific Advisory Boards (SSABs). RABs and SSABs
provide a forum for stakeholders to offer advice and recommendations on the restoration of
Federal Facilities. Program success also partly depends on private party response and State
partnerships, development of new environmental technology, work by other federal agencies,
and statutory barriers. Further, EPA also coordinates its activities with other entities, such as
PRP negotiations and agreements with states and Tribes.
Ill-13
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Land Preservation and Restoration
OBJECTIVE: Preserve Land
By 2008, 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.
Resource Summary
(Dollars in Thousands)
Preserve Land
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Building and Facilities
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Inspector General
Total Workyears
FY2003
Actuals
$205,443.3
$115,732.5
$950.0
$1,398.3
$85,944.2
$466.5
$951.6
717.7
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$210,990.1
$121,103.9
$0.0
$1,478.0
$86,436.9
$809.4
$1,161.9
740.9
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$237,149.8
$121,177.4
$0.0
$1,571.1
$112,236.9
$807.8
$1,356.6
725.4
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$26,159.7
$73.5
$0.0
$93.1
$25,800.0
($1.6)
$194.7
-15.5
Program Project
(Dollars in Thousands)
Categorical Grant: Tribal General
Assistance Program
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Categorical Grant: Hazardous Waste
Financial Assistance
Categorical Grant: Underground Storage
Tanks
Compliance Assistance and Centers
LUST/UST
RCRA: Waste Management
RCRA: Waste Minimization & Recycling
Administrative Projects
FY2003
Actuals
$364.9
$2,252.2
$73,923.5
$11,655.8
$401.9
$6,765.8
$59,706.6
$12,107.4
$38,265.2
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$0.0
$0.0
$74,486.9
$11,950.0
$586.5
$7,144.2
$67,381.6
$8,637.4
$40,803.5
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$0.0
$0.0
$74,286.9
$37,950.0
$585.3
$7,094.5
$67,422.3
$10,107.9
$39,702.9
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$0.0
$0.0
($200.0)
$26,000.0
($1.2)
($49.7)
$40.7
$1,470.5
($1,100.6)
III-14
-------
Categorical Grant: Tribal General
Assistance Program
TOTAL
FY2003
Actuals
$364.9
$205,443.3
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$0.0
$210,990.1
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$0.0
$237,149.8
FY2005Req.v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$0.0
$26,159.7
FY 2005 REQUEST
Results to be Achieved under this Objective
Preventing pollution before it is generated and poses harm is often less costly than
cleanup and remediation. Source reduction and recycling programs can often increase resource
and energy efficiencies and thereby reduce pressures on the environment. To meet its objective
for reducing materials use through product and process redesign, and increasing materials and
energy recovery from wastes otherwise requiring disposal, EPA intends to achieve the following
results in FY 2005:
• Maintain the national average municipal solid waste generation rate at no more than
4.5 pounds per person per day.
• Increase recycling of the total annual municipal solid waste produced from 34 to 35
percent.
To meet its objective for reducing releases to the environment by managing hazardous
wastes and petroleum products properly, EPA intends to achieve the following results in FY
2005:
• Prevent releases from RCRA hazardous waste management facilities by increasing
the number of facilities with permits or other approved controls by 2.8 percent over the FY
2004 level. At the end of FY 2002, 83 percent of the facilities 12 had permits or other
approved controls.
• Increase the percentage of UST facilities that are in significant operational
compliance with both release detection and release prevention (spill, overfill, and corrosion
protection) requirements by 1 percent from the baseline established in FY 2004, out of a total
estimated universe of approximately 258,000 facilities.
• Limit the number of confirmed releases at UST facilities to 10,000 or fewer.
(Between FY 1999 and FY 2003, confirmed releases averaged 13,600.)
12 Approximately 2,750 hazardous waste management facilities are currently regulated under RCRSA. EPA plans to
reassess this universe in 2006. Facilities that started activities subject to hazardous waste permitting after October 1,
1997 will be included in the count; facilities that should not have counted will be removed.
Ill-15
-------
The Agency is also committing, in the 2003 Strategic Plan, to two strategic targets for
which there are not yet annual performance measures for FY 2005. These 2008 targets are to
update controls for preventing releases at 150 facilities that are due for permit renewal by the end
of 2006, and to reduce hazardous waste combustion facility emissions of dioxins and furans by
90 percent and particulate matter by 50 percent from 1994 levels of 880 grams/year and 9,500
tons/year, respectively. Regarding the target for permit renewals, EPA will develop a
methodology to track renewals and perform outreach with the states to encourage them to enter
these data into their systems. The Agency anticipates setting an annual performance goal for FY
2006. For the hazardous waste facility emissions, EPA plans to have the Maximum Air Control
Technology (MACT) revised standards promulgated in 2005 pursuant to a settlement agreement
among the parties to that litigation.
RCRA Waste Minimization and Recycling
RCRA directs EPA to promote a reduction in the amount of waste generated and to
improve recovery and conservation of materials through recycling. The RCRA program
emphasizes a national policy focusing on a hierarchy of waste management options that
advocates source reduction, reuse and recycling over treatment and disposal.
The RCRA Program - Waste Universe Diagram
Total Quantity of Wastes - 2.6 billion tons (excluding wastewater)
Industrial D Waste -
(214)
Construction &
Demolition (350)
Municipal Solid
Waste (232)
Other (6)
Hazardous
Waste (34)
Special Waste -
Bevill: (1782)
As depicted in the waste universe diagram, 2.6 billion tons of solid waste is generated
annually by America's industries, businesses, institutions, and individuals. If disposed, these
wastes represent a huge potential liability to health, the environment, and the economy. When
mismanaged, the more hazardous substances hi these wastes, such as persistent,
III-16
-------
bioaccumulative, and toxic organics, can cause severe damage to biota, air, and water resources.
Even more benign waste materials such as scrap tires pose danger when stockpiled, serving as
habitat for disease-transmitting rodents and mosquitoes, and igniting into dangerous and
unhealthy fires which can burn for months, polluting the air, land, and surface and ground water.
Disposal of waste materials squanders valuable resources which could otherwise be reused,
recycled, or converted to useful energy. Reuse and recycling avoid the financial and
environmental costs of extracting, harvesting, and processing virgin materials as well as the
costly burden of waste disposal. Proper handling and disposal of these burgeoning wastes are a
burden to society through their potential liability as well as through the direct costs of waste
management. Industries, businesses, institutions, and individuals spend millions of dollars each
year on waste management. Emissions from waste disposal can contribute to global warming
and contaminate surface and ground water supplies. Potential emissions from waste disposal
must be controlled or mitigated, adding to the costly burden of waste management. As disposal
facilities become depleted, new land must be taken from productive use and converted, at
substantial cost, to an acceptable disposal facility.
Reducing waste generation has clear benefits in combating the ever-growing stream of
Municipal Solid Waste (MSW). MSW includes waste generated from residences, commercial
establishments, institutions, and industrial non-process operations. Annual generation of MSW
grew steadily from 88 million to 232 million tons between 1960 and 2000. 13 In FY 2005, EPA's
municipal solid waste program will implement coordinated strategies to achieve its strategic
target of maintaining the national average municipal solid waste generation rate to no more than
4.5 pounds per person per day. These strategies will include source reduction (also called waste
prevention), recycling (including composting), combustion with energy recovery, and land
filling. Preference will be given to strategies that maximize the diversion of waste from disposal
facilities, with source reduction (including reuse) as the highest priority. Implementation of
these strategies will result in an ambitious increase in the total annual portion of MSW recycled
nationally from 31 percent in 2002 to 35 percent by FY 2005.
Influencing the nation's waste generation is a daunting task. In the calendar year 2000,
the growth of recycling slowed from the pace in the early 1990s.14 Several factors, such as
reaching audiences where recycling is more difficult (e.g., high rise apartments, office and
business settings, and public facilities) and changes in the waste stream (e.g., rapid turnover of
new electronics products, increased packaging from e-commerce and new beverage containers)
have contributed to a slower growth than expected in the recycling rate. EPA intends to
overcome these barriers by implementing a diversified strategy through the Resource
Conservation Challenge (RCC).
13 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: October 2003. Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 2001 Facts
and Figures, Executive Summary. Washington, D.C. U.S. Government Printing Office. Available online at
http://epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/muncpl/msw99.htm. Last updated November 5,2003.
14 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: October 2003. Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 2001 Facts
and Figures, Executive Summary. Washington, D.C. U.S. Government Printing Office. Available online at
http://epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/muncpl/msw99.htm. Last updated November 5,2003.
Ill-17
-------
In the hazardous waste arena, along with the waste rninimization partnerships discussed
in Goal 5, the Agency will be reviewing where regulatory innovations can increase the rate of
recycling. EPA will issue a rule encouraging the recycling of lead-containing cathode ray tubes
(CRTs), and investigate whether other electronic devices are being recycled safely and how
electronics recycling can be increased. In addition, the Agency will work with specific industry
sectors (e.g., printing and metal finishing) on innovative approaches to promote safe recycling.
EPA launched the RCC as a major national effort to find
flexible, yet more protective ways to conserve our valuable natural
resources through waste reduction, energy recovery and recycling.
Through the RCC, EPA challenges every American to prevent
pollution and promote recycling and reuse; and conserve energy and
materials.
In FY 2005, EPA's strategy for reducing waste generation and increasing recycling will
focus on three key principles:
• Establishing and expanding partnerships by promoting the RCC
• Stimulating infrastructure development, product stewardship and new
technologies
• Providing education, outreach, training and technical assistance
Establishing and expanding partnerships by promoting the RCC: One strategy for
accomplishing these objectives is to build and foster voluntary partnerships with industries,
states, Tribes, and other entities. These partnerships provide smarter, faster, voluntary solutions
that reduce adverse effects to land.
One example of a RCC voluntary partnership is the Coal Combustion Products
Partnership (C2P2). The purpose of C2P2 is to increase the use of coal combustion products
(CCPs) in construction and to promote other beneficial uses of CCPs. Use of CCPs: reduces
future greenhouse gas emissions (when it displaces the need for Portland cement in concrete);
reduces the need for additional landfill capacity; and reduces the need for mining virgin
resources. This partnership was launched hi January 2003 and already has 50 partners. In 2005,
EPA will continue to work with the Utility Solid Waste Activity Group (USWAG), the
American Coal Ash Association (ACAA), and other stakeholders that manufacture, purchase, or
use coal combustion products to provide EPA with a more effective solution to enhance CCP
diversion from disposal and explore the beneficial use of these valuable products.
EPA's nationally recognized programs, such as Waste Wise, serve as models for the RCC
by establishing and expanding partnerships among Federal, state, and local governments and
businesses. These partnerships capitalize on voluntary efforts to reduce waste and increase
recycling. In FY 2003, Waste Wise grew to more than 1,300 partners. Partners recycled over 9
III-18
-------
million tons of waste, and prevented over 400,000 tons of waste. EPA estimates that these
Waste Wise partners' efforts have prevented the emission of nearly 3.5 million metric tons of
carbon equivalent, similar to removing more than 2 million cars from the road for one year.15
In FY 2005, EPA's Waste Wise program will pursue new collaborations with states to
enhance partner services, reduce duplication of effort between the Federal and state governments
and encourage prospective organizations to join the program. In addition to these expanded state
collaborations, the WasteWise program will facilitate progress within its 81 member Federal
partner organizations and 40 Tribal organizations. EPA also plans to continue its WasteWise
annual awards program to recognize partners who report significant achievements hi waste
prevention, recycling, and buying or manufacturing recycled-content products.
Jobs Through Recycling (JTR) is another RCC program that has an active network of
state and Regional contacts who develop innovative programs and provide useful information to
recyclers and related businesses. 16 Since launching JTR hi 1994, EPA has awarded more than
$7.2 million in grants to 36 states, five Tribes, and three multi-state organizations. Also, a
review of four well-established programs shows that an investment of $1 million hi JTR grants
has helped businesses create more than 1,700 jobs and $290 million hi capital investment. In FY
2005, JTR will continue to promote their core programs.
EPA also plans to expand its efforts to encourage resource conservation and safe
management of construction and demolition (C&D) debris. EPA will work to establish a formal
partnership with the military services to make deconstruction a standard operating procedure,
and meet specific, quantitative building deconstruction goals. Unlike demolition, which
completely destroys a structure, deconstruction takes a structure apart and preserves valuable
components for reuse. EPA will also expand coordination with state, local, and Tribal
governments to address C&D debris issues, including the management of lead-based paint and
other problematic components of the C&D waste stream. Finally, in FY 2005 EPA plans to
increase the number of partners participating in the Building Challenge, begun hi FY 2002 under
WasteWise. The Building Challenge is a voluntary partnership that provides its partners with
technical assistance and recognition for reducing C&D waste and for purchasing recycled-
content building products. Currently, twenty-two partners have made the Building Challenge
pledge.
Stimulating infrastructure development, product stewardship, and new technologies: In
FY 2005, EPA will promote strategies that make it easier for businesses and consumers to design
and purchase more environmentally sensitive products, extend the life and usefulness of these
products, and ensure the safe recycling or reuse of these products when one consumer no longer
Carbon equivalence was calculated using waste reduction quantities reported by the WasteWise partners and
EPA's waste reduction model, as described in U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: May 2002. Solid Waste.
^Management and Greenhouse Gases: A Life-Cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks. Available online at
httpi/^pa.gov/'mswclimate/greengas.iJdf U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Jobs Through Recycling Web
Site: http://www.epa.gov/jtr. Washington, D.C. Last updated December 18,2003.
Ill-19
-------
needs them. The Agency has implemented several initiatives to establish voluntary product
stewardship partnerships with manufacturers, retailers, recyclers, governmental and
nongovernmental organizations to develop and implement sector-specific strategies.
For example, to address one of the RCC challenge areas - electronic waste — EPA is
working with those in the information technology industry to develop projects that will
significantly cut back on the amount of electronic waste produced each year. With today's
increasing demand for faster computers, small cellular phones, and personal digital assistants
(PDAs), electronic waste is the fastest-growing waste stream. Electronic products and
components are made of valuable materials that should be reused or recycled and can contain
hazardous materials, such as lead and mercury, thus posing environmental problems when
disposed of improperly. In FY 2005, EPA will continue to support the Electronics Product
Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEAT). EPEAT is a purchasing tool used to drive design
innovations by manufacturers. In FY 2005, EPEAT will be finalized, incorporating feedback
from its use during a pilot phase, and an independent organization will launch EPEAT. Also on
the design front, EPA will extend the Federal Electronics Challenge in FY 2005 to additional
Federal agencies. The Challenge will use the EPEAT tool and guidelines for environmentally
safe recycling.
Another important Agency-lead design effort targeted to the electronics sector is EPA's
"Plug-In To eCycling" program. Through partnerships with private and public entities, Plug-In
is making available to Americans more opportunities to recycle their old electronics and
communicating why it is important to do so. EPA is focusing attention on reducing the waste
stream as well as recycling waste that can not be eliminated, and will work with project partners
in a summit to develop an action plan for identifying and carrying out voluntary, shared
responsibility roles at a national level.
As part of the National Electronics Product Stewardship Initiative (NEPSI), EPA will
continue to work with electronics manufacturers, recyclers, retailers, state and local
governments, and non-governmental to collect and finance the recycling of old consumer
electronics. In FY 2005, EPA plans to use the finalized environmentally safe management
guidelines for end-of-life electronics as part of the national voluntary recycling program and the
Federal Electronics Challenge. These guidelines are intended to optimize resource recovery and
minimize risks during recycling.
Carpet America Recover Effort (CARE) is an industry-led, multi-stakeholder effort to
build and strengthen the carpet reclamation and recycling infrastructure. This voluntary
partnership seeks to divert 40 percent of carpet from landfills by calendar year 2012 through
recycling, reuse, and other waste recovery and waste minimization activities. In FY 2005, EPA
will promote efforts to increase state support for CARE's mission, provide technical and
financial assistance for market development, and develop and promote procurement
specifications for recycled content carpet.
111-20
-------
An increasing number of EPA partners are saving money and reducing waste by using
resource management (RM) contracting. This contracting system, pioneered by General Motors
Corp., increases resource efficiency by aligning waste contractor incentives with the goals of
waste reduction. For example, an RM contract might cap disposal costs based on current costs
and then include a gain-sharing arrangement for waste reduction projects initiated by the
contractor. EPA has developed the Resource Management Contracting Manual and will
promote its use through the Waste Wise network, provide technical assistance to organizations
interested in using this type of contracting approach, and document resource efficiency gains
made by organizations using RM. In addition, EPA is tracking activities being undertaken by
developing countries to further increase reuse, recycling, and energy recovery from materials
typically considered wastes. The Agency will continue this effort in FY 2005.
In the area of new technologies, EPA is promoting flexible innovative ways to convert
waste to energy. The Agency considers gasification to be desirable technology for this
conversion and will work in FY 2005 to promote a positive regulatory program that encourages
the use of waste materials as a feedstock to gasifiers. To do this, the Agency will assess those
components of the regulatory structure in all media that can affect the use of waste in gasification
and consider any changes to the regulations that could promote the efficient and safe use of
wastes as gasification feedstock.
In FY 2005, EPA will also revisit the impact of revising the RCRA hazardous waste
program to allow a conditional exclusion from the definition of solid waste for hazardous oil-
bearing secondary materials, generated by the petroleum refinery industry, when these materials
are processed in a gasification system that produces synthesis fuel and other non-fuel chemical
by-products. The response to the initial proposal to do this suggested EPA broaden its scope of
activity past the hazardous waste program into the use of other waste streams, such as municipal
and agricultural waste, as possible feedstock to gasifiers. The Agency will look into developing
a "how to" manual for municipalities who might need technical and programmatic support to use
gasification as a technology to solve solid waste disposal problems and generate a source of
power.
EPA will work with several Federal agencies including the Department of Energy (DOE)
and the Department of Agriculture (USDA) as well as industry, states, and municipalities to
facilitate using gasification technology, encouraging recycling through new technology by
removing regulatory barriers to safe hazardous waste and materials recycling.
EPA will also investigate regulatory innovations, including appropriate rules, guidance,
and other outreach materials, to increase the safe recycling of hazardous wastes and enhance the
recovery of hazardous materials. The Agency will emphasize efforts that minimize use of
hazardous constituents and maximize recovery of hazardous materials. EPA plans to complete a
regulation that revises the Definition of Solid Waste to be consistent with the guidance provided
by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in Association of Battery Recyclers v. EPA. The Agency
will also continue to further define "discard" of materials destined for reuse and recycling.
111-21
-------
In FY 2005, EPA will address new issues raised in regard to the Definition of Solid
Waste. Some concerns that are voiced by environmentalists involve limiting recycling with
respect to a "continuous process within the same industry" to on-site recycling, and not allowing
recycling to occur off-site without the material being regulated as a hazardous waste. Industry
groups raise different issues and challenge EPA's definition of the term "continuous process
within the same industry." Depending on the number of issues, their complexity, and the need
for additional study, the Agency anticipates making significant progress developing regulations.
In addition, EPA will continue to collaborate with Regions and states to clarify or revise existing
policy guidance to address these new issues. The Agency will also track developments hi the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and other developing countries aimed
at increasing the reuse or recovery of hazardous residuals.
At the same time, EPA will focus on specific industry sectors, such as metal finishing.
EPA plans to establish regulations tailored to the risk posed by metal finishing waste when
recycled. Compliance with these regulations is expected to be less costly than for the existing
hazardous waste regulations. EPA will also work with academic laboratories to tailor RCRA
regulations to achieve maximum efficiency while continuing the high level of human health and
environmental protection. This effort is designed to reduce the use of constituents and chemicals
of concern and educate high school and university students on safe handling methods. The goal
is to promote environmental stewardship within academia so that, once students graduate, they
can integrate environmental values into their workplace and lives.
Lastly, the RCC explores ways to obtain energy or products from waste through
alternative energy sources. EPA currently allows certain industrial byproducts that are
comparable to fossil fuels to be used for energy production, which saves energy by reducing the
amount of hazardous waste that would otherwise be treated and disposed, promotes energy
production from a domestic, renewable source, and reduces use of fossil fuels. Further, EPA is
examining the effectiveness of the current comparable fuel program and considering whether
other byproducts could be safely used as fuel as well.
Providing education, outreach, training and technical assistance: By spreading the
conservation and recycling message to consumers, youth, senior citizens, and under-served
communities, EPA encourages the personal commitment of Americans to reduce their waste
generation and increase their recycling efforts. In FY 2005, EPA will build on the success of
existing outreach products and educational tools to promote waste reduction, recycling, and
neighborhood revitalization hi Hispanic and African-American communities and on Native
American lands. Two major media campaigns have been launched to encourage urban African
Americans to reduce and recycle waste. These public service announcements aired on 50 radio
stations hi major African-American media markets nationwide.
EPA also launched a campaign to encourage Hispanic-Americans to recycle used oil,
with such major oil recyclers as the Automotive Oil Change Association (AOCA) and the
National Oil Recycling Association (NORA). EPA will expand its outreach to the Hispanic
community in FY 2005 through a campaign aimed at identifying household hazardous wastes
111-22
-------
and providing information on proper waste management and disposal. Materials will be written
and printed in Spanish as well as in English, in a format and language appropriate to the Hispanic
culture.
In October 2003, the Agency launched its "Make a Difference" campaign at a Youth
Environmental Symposium, co-sponsored with the City of San Diego Environmental Services
Division. Over 400 junior and high school students attended a morning of workshops and
presentations to help them make environmentally-conscious decisions about their day-to-day
activities.
In FY 2005, EPA will continue its youth campaign by developing outreach materials on
green purchasing, recycling used motor oil, and life cycle posters that target products used
everyday, such as cell phones. These materials are intended to encourage students and teachers
to make a difference in the environment and to start innovative recycling programs in their
schools and communities.
Also in FY 2005, the Agency will initiate a campaign on the environmental issues and
needs surrounding the elderly. Outreach materials and activities will focus on such topics as
green purchasing, moving (downsizing homes, lifestyles), home offices, e-cycling and
travel/leisure.
RCRA Waste Management
The Agency's RCRA program accounts for over 6,500 of the facilities addressed by this
objective. The RCRA program, working in partnership with states, industry, and Tribes, reduces
the risk of human exposures to hazardous, industrial non-hazardous, and municipal solid wastes.
Recognizing that some hazardous wastes cannot be completely eliminated or recycled,
the RCRA program works to reduce exposure to hazardous wastes by maintaining a cradle-to-
grave approach to waste management. The program's primary focus is to prevent hazardous
releases from RCRA facilities and reduce emissions from hazardous waste combustion. In FY
2005, this will be accomplished by providing greater regulatory flexibility where appropriate and
promoting opportunities for converting waste to energy.
A combination of regulations, permits, voluntary standards, and programs help to ensure
safer management of these various wastes. If these wastes are not properly managed, new
contaminated waste sites that threaten nearby communities could result. This approach regulates
the generation, handling, transport, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste. The
main vehicle for hazardous waste program implementation is the issuance of RCRA hazardous
waste permits, which mandate appropriate controls for each site. To date, 48 states, Guam, and
the District of Columbia are authorized to issue permits.
Strong state partnerships and the authorization of states for all portions of the RCRA
hazardous waste program, including regulations that address waste management issues contained
111-23
-------
in permits, are important goals. State program authorization provides the states with primary
RCRA implementation and enforcement authority; reduces overlapping and dual implementation
by the states and EPA; provides the regulated community with one set of regulations; reduces
overall Federal enforcement presence hi the states; and can provide the opportunity for some of
the newer, less-stringent RCRA regulations to be implemented by the states. In FY 2005, by
using Express Authorization, states will save the tune and paper work currently required to
receive authorization. The RCRA program will continue its strong partnerships with states to
eliminate the greatest impediments to state program authorization.
In a rulemaking designed to simplify the permitting process for lower-risk treatment and
storage facilities, 17 the Agency proposed standardized permit procedures. EPA anticipates
promulgating the final rule hi 2004. In 2005, the RCRA program plans to give guidance and
training necessary for the Agency and states to implement this rule. In addition, in FY 2005 the
program will continue to work hi partnership with the states to incorporate e-permitting
approaches into the RCRA permitting program. Dissemination of the e-perrnitting tools
developed hi prior years and development of additional components will encourage and facilitate
states to expedite and simplify the permitting process and provide better public access to
permitting information.
To tap into the power of voluntary programs to achieve broad, yet practical
environmental progress, the Agency will promote and facilitate the adoption of Environmental
Management Systems (EMS) at RCRA facilities. EPA intends to partner with the states on pilot
implementations and work through the permit modification and renewal processes. The goal is
to make permits more "EMS-friendly."
In FY 2005, EPA will promulgate the final dyes and pigments listing determination
completing all of the court ordered listing determinations. The promulgation of this listing
determination will culminate more than a decade long effort. The Agency will also assess
additional hazardous waste identification work, identify priorities, and initiate necessary changes
through non-regulatory or regulatory approaches to ensure protection of human health and the
environment.
To better calibrate risk and regulatory standards, in 2005, the Agency will consider the
need to develop additional targeted exemptions from the hazardous waste mixture and derived-
from rules. The Agency will identify priorities for additional targeted exemptions as well as
review changes to existing exemptions hi relation to other programmatic changes.
In FY 2005, the Agency will finalize a rule establishing a consistent national approach
for managing used industrial wipes, shop towels and rags containing hazardous solvents. As part
of this effort, EPA will initiate development of implementation guidance to assist the thousands
of small businesses, which routinely use these particular materials.
17 Federal Register Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: 66 FR 52191
111-24
-------
In FY 2005, the Agency will also experiment with projects that test alternative regulatory
requirements. For example, EPA will review and identify alternative approaches to the current
waste generator regulations, identifying opportunities to streamline the regulations and reduce
the burden on generators. To encourage energy conservation, EPA will continue to partner with
the automotive and fuel industries to address any RCRA barriers to emerging technologies, such
as fuel cells.
Another area where the Agency will seek to improve waste management practices
involves the hazardous waste manifest system, used for tracking cradle to grave waste
transportation of waste from a generator to a treatment, storage, or disposal facility. A rule
proposed in May 2001 for major manifest system changes is intended to greatly reduce the
paperwork burdens on waste handlers and authorized states, while improving the effectiveness of
tracking waste shipments.18 In FY 2004, the Agency expects to finalize the manifest form
changes supported by both industry and states. In FY 2005, EPA will develop standards and
systems for preparing, signing, and transmitting manifests electronically.
In FY 2005, EPA will focus on ways to eliminate mercury releases, reduce mercury use
in products and processes, and ensure safe storage and disposal of mercury. In early 2004 EPA
will begin to negotiate an agreement with Electric Arc Furnace mini-mills that they only accept
automobile scrap that is free of mercury switches. In addition to this voluntary effort, the Agency
is accelerating its MACT rulemaking that would cover these mini-mills. Also, EPA plans to
work with the American Dental Association to foster proper management of dental amalgam;
consider partnerships with industry to promote the use of mercury-free alternatives; address the
beneficial reuse of mercury from coal combustion units; and expand an existing regional
program to reduce mercury air emissions from operating gold mines.
Treatment and disposal of hazardous waste is the primary area for many changes the
Agency is making to the RCRA program. Combustion is one typical method of treatment of
hazardous waste. MACT standards for hazardous waste burning incinerators, cement kilns, and
light-weight aggregate kilns were vacated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit. 19 The Agency must respond to the court's decision with revised standards to
those proposed in FY 2004 and promulgated in FY 2005 pursuant to a settlement agreement
among the parties to that litigation. Technical assistance will be critical during the next few
years to appropriately control these major sources of hazardous air pollutants as interim
standards become effective. The interim standards became effective in September 2003. Under
a second settlement agreement, the Agency must also develop MACT standards for hazardous
waste burning boilers and hydrochloric acid production furnaces in order to meet statutory
obligations under the Clean Air Act (CAA).
18 Federal Register Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: 66 FR 28239
19 This rule, published in 64 FR 52828, September 30, 1999 was challenged in Cement Kiln Recycling Coalition v.
EPA, 255 F. 3d 855 (D.C. Cir.2001)
111-25
-------
In 2003, the Agency began working with the Association of State and Territorial Solid
Waste Management Officials to improve the financial assurance regulations for the RCRA
program. The financial assurance regulations reduce the number of sites that must be cleaned up
under either state or Federal authorities (such as Superfund removals), by requiring facilities to
have financial assurance for third party liability, closure, and completion of corrective action. In
FY 2005 the Agency and states will be determining which areas of the program need further
attention and how to improve the program.
The Agency will continue to implement its strategy for revising its municipal solid waste
landfill criteria in FY 2005. Revisions will provide additional flexibility for states and the
regulated community. Revisions will also provide for bioreactor technology as a future energy
source. Studies have indicated that bioreactor landfill technology results in a significant increase
in landfill gas emissions over a short period of time. 20 These landfill gases consist primarily of
methane and carbon dioxide. Landfill gas may represent an opportunity for gas collection and
beneficial reuse for projects such as energy recovery. Currently, the use of landfill gas for
energy applications is about 10% of its potential. Application of the controlled bioreactor
technology to 50% of the waste currently being landfilled could provide over 270 billion cubic
feet of methane yearly, sufficient to supply 1% of the U.S. electrical needs based on DOE
estimates.
The use of biomass as a renewable resource for bio-based products and bio-energy can
result in additional farm income, as well as less reliance on foreign energy sources, such as oil.
Currently, bio-based products and the bio-energy industry remain small and fragmented. In FY
2005, EPA will continue to work with USD A, DOE, and states to coordinate and promote a
unified national bio-energy strategy.
The Agency will also work to reduce risks from industrial non-hazardous waste, also
known as Industrial D waste. Manufacturing facilities generate and dispose of 7.6 billion tons of
industrial non-hazardous waste each year. 21 In FY 2005, EPA will assist facility managers, state
and Tribal regulators, and the interested public use the voluntary "Guide for Industrial Waste
Management," developed by EPA and its partners in FY 2003, and will modify the Guide as
needed to improve its usefulness to all environmental partners.
Waste management in Indian Country is one of the highest environmental and public
health priorities for Federally-recognized Indian tribes. Under RCRA, the responsibility for solid
20 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste Web Site: http://www.epa.gov/epaoswei-/non-
hw/mimcpl'landfill/bioreactors.htm. Specific studies can be found at
http://epa.gov/ord/NRMRL/Pnbs/625ROiOi2/625R01012.pdf.: htlp-.//www.epa.gov/proiectxl/Voio/index.htm.:
http:/V\vu^v\epa.gov/epaoswer/'non-hw/muncpl/landfill.'bio-vvorlo/index\.htm.
21 Data for 1982 from "Screening Survey of Subtitle D Establishments. Draft final report. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, December 1987. "Nonhazardous Waste: Environmental Safeguards for
Industrial Facilities Need to Be Developed." Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on .Transportation and
Hazardous Materials, Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives. April 1990
111-26
-------
and hazardous waste program management in Indian country rests with EPA. Even though EPA
has been implementing programs in Indian country for many years, major gaps still exist.
Improper solid and hazardous waste management practices are widespread, posing significant
environmental and public health threats. For example:
* Over 44% of the 572 recognized Tribes have no waste management program at all.
• 24% of Tribes state that open dumps are then- primary method of solid waste
disposal.
• 16% indicate that burn barrels are their primary method of disposal.
• 35% state that recycling is their last or next to last management option.
• Over 100 high threat open dumps exist on Tribal lands.
In concurrence with statutory and trust responsibilities, in FY 2005 EPA will focus
resources on waste program development and implementation in Indian country. Environmental
results will be achieved primarily by building sustainable Tribal solid and hazardous waste
management programs. These programs will include items such as integrated waste
management plans/development of Tribal capacity to implement them; increase recycling/reuse
programs; new mechanisms to combat illegal dumping; and increased attention to EPA's direct
implementation responsibilities. Initial performance measures will focus on the number of tribes
with waste management programs.
EPA will continue its leadership of the Tribal Solid Waste Interagency Workgroup. EPA
will strengthen its partnerships and continue to work closely with agencies such as the Bureau of
Indian Affairs, the Indian Health Service, and USDA's Rural Utilities Service to build programs,
improve waste management, and work towards the most efficient and effective solutions to
provide the greatest positive impact on human health and the environment. Open dumps are of
particular concern for Tribes. A 1998 report to Congress by the Indian Health Service identified
142 high-threat open dumps on Tribal lands. 22 Since 1999, the Interagency Workgroup has
provided over $6.0 million to thirty-one Tribes to clean up open dumps and $3.1 million to 47
Tribes to develop hazardous waste management programs. EPA will also strengthen its
partnerships with Tribal governments and form partnerships with others to deal more effectively
with waste management issues. In addition, EPA will develop specific educational programs and
outreach tools on solid and hazardous waste issues, such as the recently completed Tribal
Decision Makers' Guide.
Categorical Grant: Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance
The RCRA statute authorizes EPA to assist state governments in the development and
implementation of an authorized hazardous waste management program for the purpose of
controlling the generation, transportation, treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous wastes.
These grants to states strengthen their ability to implement all aspects of the hazardous waste
22 Indian Health Service Web Site: http://www.ihs.gov/NonMedical
Programs/DFEE/Solid_W/l 998_ODReport/l 998OpenDumpsReport.pdf.
111-27
-------
program (hazardous waste recycling and waste minimization, permitting, authorization,
combustion, enforcement and tribal assistance). The states propose legislation and upgrade
regulations to achieve equivalence with the federal hazardous waste management program, and
apply to EPA for authorization to administer the program. This program provides Performance
Partnership Grants to states.
This account also provides funding for the direct implementation of the RCRA program
by Region 7 and 10 for the States of Iowa and Alaska, respectively, which are not authorized to
administer the program.
In FY 2005, the following activities will be accomplished using categorical grants:
• Issue post-closure permits or use appropriate enforcement mechanisms to address
environmental risk at inactive land disposal facilities and put "approved controls"
in place.
• Approve closures plans for interim status treatment and storage facilities that are
not seeking permits to operate.
• Review and decide on permit renewals and modifications for hazardous waste
management facilities.
• Provide input to the RCRA Info National Reporting System to support higher
quality, more useable, and more accessible information.
• Operate comprehensive compliance monitoring and enforcement actions related
to the RCRA hazardous waste program.
• Provide funding for the Direct Implementation of the RCRA program by Region 7
for the State of Iowa and Region 10 for the State of Alaska.
LUST/UST (USTportion only)
In managing petroleum products properly, the Agency will work with states, Tribes and
Intertribal Consortia to prevent, detect, and correct leaks into the environment from federally-
regulated underground storage tanks containing petroleum and hazardous substances. Achieving
significant improvements in release prevention and detection will require a sustained emphasis
by both EPA and its partners. Concerns about the use of fuel oxygenates (e.g., methyl-tertiary-
butyl-ether, or MTBE) in gasoline further underscores EPA's and the states' emphasis on
promoting compliance with all UST requirements.
To this end, by FY 2008, EPA intends to increase the percentage of UST facilities in
significant operational compliance with both release detection and prevention requirements by 4
percent compared to 2004, out of a total estimated universe of approximately 258,000 facilities.
(The baseline compliance rate will be determined in FY 2004, but is estimated to be
approximately 60%.) EPA previously reported progress in meeting each of these requirements,
but combined them per the recommendations of an EPA/state workgroup to improve consistency
in reporting the national data. Most states are applying more stringent criteria to determine the
progress in attaining operational compliance with the two requirements. In FY 2003, the
111-28
-------
universe of UST facilities was approximately 258,000. Additionally, each year through FY
2008, EPA and its partners will seek to limit the number of confirmed releases at UST facilities
to no more than 10,000. Between FY 1999 and FY 2003, confirmed releases averaged 13,600.
EPA recognizes that the size and diversity of the regulated community puts state
authorities in the best position to regulate USTs and to set priorities. RCRA Subtitle I allows
state UST programs approved by EPA to operate in lieu of the Federal program. While the
frequency and severity of releases from UST systems have been greatly reduced, EPA and its
state partners note that releases are still occurring. EPA continues to work with its state and
Tribal partners to prevent and detect petroleum releases from USTs by ensuring that compliance
with both release detection and prevention requirements (spill, overfill, and corrosion protection)
is a national priority. While most of the approximately 683,000 active underground storage
tanks (located at UST facilities) have the required equipment, significant work remains to ensure
that UST owners and operators maintain and operate their systems properly. Therefore, in FY
2005, the Agency will continue to work with states and industry to improve UST system
performance based on the results of the UST system evaluation work. The Agency will also
continue to monitor UST system performance and evaluate certain aspects of performance in
more detail.
To protect groundwater and drinking water from petroleum releases, EPA will continue
to support core development and implementation of state and tribal UST programs; strengthen
partnerships among stakeholders; and provide technical assistance, compliance assistance, and
training to promote and enforce UST facilities' compliance. For example, as part of a national
UST training effort, initiated in FY 2003 by an EPA/state and industry workgroup, EPA will
continue to provide web-based training modules that address topics such as cathodic protection,
leak detection, spill containment, and overfill protection components of the UST system. The
training modules will provide UST inspectors with core and advanced knowledge on how to
inspect an UST system. In addition, EPA will continue its work to obtain states' commitments to
increase their inspection and enforcement presence if state-specific goals are not met. The
Agency and states will continue to use innovative compliance approaches, along with outreach
and education tools, to bring more tanks into compliance. For example, programs that allow tank
owners to self-certify by conducting rigorous self-audits through EPA's environmental results
program, third-party inspections, and multi-site agreements can be effective in bringing a single
tank owner with multiple sites into compliance.
The Agency will also provide guidance to foster the use of new technology to enhance
compliance. For example, the presence of MTBE in gasoline increases the importance of
preventing and rapidly detecting releases, since MTBE cleanups can cost 100 percent more than
cleanups involving other gasoline contaminants. The Agency will focus its efforts on reducing
UST releases and increasing early detection of petroleum products, including MTBE, by further
evaluating the performance of compliant UST systems.
111-29
-------
Categorical Grant: Underground Storage Tanks
This program provides RCRA 2007(f) (2) grants to states and Public Law 105-276 grants
to tribes to build core state and tribal UST programs. The objective of this grant funding is to
assist state governments and Indian nations in the development and implementation of UST
programs. EPA recognizes that the size and diversity of the regulated community puts state
authorities in the best position to regulate USTs and to set priorities. RCRA Subtitle I allows
state UST programs approved by EPA to operate in lieu of the Federal program. Except in
Indian country, even states that have not received formal state program approval from EPA are in
most cases the primary implementing agencies and receive annual grants from EPA.
For example, UST categorical grant funding is used to assist states and tribes to conduct
inspections of underground storage tanks; in encouraging owners and operators to properly
operate and maintain their USTs; ensure owners and operators routinely and correctly monitor all
regulated tanks and piping in accordance with the regulations; and develop state programs with
sufficient authority and enforcement capabilities to operate in lieu of the federal program.
EPA has the primary responsibility for implementation of the UST program in Indian
Country. Grants under Public Law 105-276 will continue to help Tribes develop the capacity to
administer UST programs. For example, funding is used to support training for tribal staff,
educate owners and operators in Indian Country about the UST requirements; and maintain
information on USTs located in Indian Country.
This grant funding may be used in Performance Partnership Agreements with states and
tribes. A state or tribe could elect to consolidate this and other categorical media grants into one
or more multi-media or single media grant. The state or Tribe could then target its most pressing
environmental problems and use the performance partnership grant for a number of activities
including pollution control, abatement and enforcement. This program will not compromise
basic national objectives and legislative requirements.
In FY 2005, EPA is requesting an additional $26 million in STAG funding over the FY
2004 President's budget request. The additional funds will allow EPA to fund additional state
inspections of underground storage tanks.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
% (+1,470,500) Internal decisions to centralize LAN funding and provide support to the
Land Revitalization initiative have resulted in an increase to the RCRA: Waste
Minimization and Recycling program.
111-30
-------
STAG
(+ $26,000,000) In FY 2005, EPA is requesting an additional $26 million in STAG funding
over the FY 2004 President's budget request. The additional funds will allow EPA to fund
additional state inspections of underground storage tanks.
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
GOAL: LAND PRESERVATION AND RESTORATION
OBJECTIVE: PRESERVE LAND
Municipal Solid Waste Source Reduction
In 2005 Divert an additional 1% (for a cumulative total of 35% or 81 million tons) of municipal solid waste
from land filling and combustion, and maintain per capita generation of RCRA municipal solid waste
at 4.5 pounds per day.
In 2004 Divert an additional 1% (for a cumulative total of 34% or 79 million tons) of municipal solid waste
from land filling and combustion, and maintain per Capita generation of RCRA municipal solid waste
at 4.5 pounds per day.
In 2003 End of year FY 2003 data will be available in December 2005 to verify that an additional 1% (for a
cumulative total of 32% or 74 million tons) of municipal solid waste from land filling and combustion,
and maintain per capita generation of RCRA municipal solid waste at 4.5 pounds per day was diverted.
Performance Measures:
Millions
diverted.
of tons of municipal solid waste
Daily per capita generation of municipal solid
waste.
FY2003
Actuals
Data available in
December 2005
Data available in
December 2005
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
79
4.5
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
81 million tons
4.5
Ibs. MSW
Baseline: An analysis conducted in FY 2001 shows approximately 68 million tons (29.2%) of municipal solid
waste diverted and 4.4 Ibs of MSW per person daily generation. While data indicate that the growth in
recycling rates has slowed, the target of a 35% recycling rate is being maintained.
Waste and Petroleum Management Controls
In 2005 Reduce releases to the environment by managing hazardous wastes and petroleum products properly.
In 2004 Reduce releases to the environment by managing hazardous wastes and petroleum products properly.
In 2003 For UST facilities, 72% are in operational compliance with leak detection, and 79% are in operational
compliance with spill prevention requirements. An additional 4.1% of the RCRA facilities have
permits or approved controls.
m-31
-------
Performance Measures:
Percent increase of RCRA hazardous waste
management facilities with permits or other
approved controls.
Number of confirmed UST releases nationally.
Increase in UST facilities in significant
operational compliance with leak detection
requirements.
Increase in UST facilities in significant
operational compliance with spill, overfill and
corrosion protection regulations.
Percent increase of UST facilities in significant
operational compliance with both detection and
release prevention (spill overflow, corrosion
protection) requirements.
FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
4.1% 2.4% 2.8% percentage
pts.
<10,000 <10,000 UST
releases
-8% 4% Not percentage
applicable pts.
-6% 4% Not percentage
applicable pts.
1%
percent
Baseline: EPA did not increase by 3% to 80% for the leak detection requirements or with spill, overfill and
corrosion protection requirements by 3% to 85% in FY 2003. The FY 2003 actuals were 72% for UST
facilities in significant operational compliance with leak detection requirements; 79% for UST
facilities in significant operational compliance with spill, overfill and corrosion protection. Although
the Agency has been working with the states to improve their reporting of both measures, the
compliance rates for both have been steady or declining. There is some variability in reporting by
states because some states have more stringent requirements, while other states have targeted non-
compliant UST facilities so the facilities that are inspected are not representative of all facilities in the
state. A baseline for the new combined measure will be determined in FY 2004, and is currently
estimated to be approximately 60%. Between FY 1999 and FY 2003, confirmed UST releases
averaged 13,600. By the end of FY 2003, 83.1% of approximately 2,750 RCRA facilities had permits
or other approved controls in place.
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE
FY 2005 Performance Measure:
• Daily per capita generation
• Millions of tons municipal solid waste diverted
Performance Database: Data are provided by the Department of Commerce. EPA does not
maintain a database for this information.
Data Source: The baseline numbers for municipal solid waste source reduction and recycling
are developed using a materials flow methodology employing data largely from the Department
of Commerce and described hi the EPA report titled "Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste
hi the United States." The Department of Commerce collects solid waste generation and
recycling rate data from various industries.
111-32
-------
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: Data on domestic production of materials and products
are compiled using published data series. U.S. Department of Commerce sources are used,
where available; but in several instances more detailed information on production of goods by
end-use is available from trade associations. The goal is to obtain a consistent historical data
series for each product and/or material. Data on average product lifetimes are used to adjust the
data series. These estimates and calculations result in material-by-material and product-by-
product estimates of MSW generation, recovery, and discards.
There are various assumptions factored into the analysis to develop estimates of MSW
generation, recovery and discards. Example assumptions (from pages 141-142 of year 2000
"Characterization Report" include: Textiles used as rags are assumed to enter the waste stream
the same year the textiles are discarded. Some products (e.g., newspapers and packaging)
normally have short lifetime; products are assumed to be discarded in the year they are produced.
QA/QC Procedures: Quality assurance and quality control are provided by the Department of
Commerce's internal procedures and systems. The report prepared by the Agency,
"Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste hi the United States," is then reviewed by a number
of experts for accuracy and soundness.
Data Quality Review: The report, including the baseline numbers and annual rates of recycling
and per capita municipal solid waste generation, is widely accepted among experts.
Data Limitations: Data limitations stem from the fact that the baseline statistics and annual
rates of recycling and per capita municipal solid waste generation are based on a series of
models, assumptions, and extrapolations and, as such, are not an empirical accounting of
municipal solid waste generated or recycled.
Error Estimate: N/A. Currently, the Office of Solid Waste (OSW) does not collect data on
estimated error rates.
New/Improved Data or Systems: Because the statistics on MSW generation and recycling are
widely reported and accepted by experts, no new efforts to improve the data or the methodology
have been identified or are necessary. EPA plans to develop regulations for improving reporting
of source reduction activities by TRI reporting facilities.
References: Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 1999 Facts and Figures, EPA, July
2001 (EPA 530-R-01-014), http://www.epa.gov/osw/uidex.htm
FY 2005 Performance Measure
• Percent of RCRA hazardous waste management facilities with permits or other
approved controls in place.
m-33
-------
Performance Database: The Resource Conservation Recovery Act Information System
(RCRAInfo) is the national database which supports EPA's RCRA program.
Data Source: Data are entered by the States. Supporting documentation and reference materials
are maintained in regional and state files. EPA's Regional offices and authorized states enter
data on a rolling basis.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: The Resource Conservation Recovery Act
Information System (RCRAInfo) is the national database which supports EPA's RCRA program.
RCRAInfo contains information on entities (genetically referred to as "handlers") engaged in
hazardous waste (HW) generation and management activities regulated under the portion of
RCRA that provides for regulation of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo has several different
modules, including status of RCRA facilities in the RCRA permitting universe.
QA/QC Procedures: States and EPA's Regional offices generate the data and manage data
quality related to timeliness and accuracy. Within RCRAInfo, the application software enforces
structural controls that ensure that high-priority national components of the data are properly
entered. RCRAInfo documentation, which is available to all users on-line (at
http://www..epa,gQy/rcrainfQ/) provides guidance to facilitate the generation and interpretation of
data. Training on use of RCRAInfo is provided on a regular basis, usually annually, depending
on the nature of system changes and user needs. The data that support the performance for the
GPRA goals is of far better quality than the handler data in general (including generators).
Determination of whether or not the GPRA annual goals are met is based on the legal and
operating status codes for each unit (e.g., a facility can have more than one unit). In 1999 and
2000 there was a focused effort to update this information for the baseline facilities in
RCRAInfo. RCRAInfo is the sole repository for this information and is a focal point hi planning
from the local to national level.
Note: Access to RCRAInfo is open only to EPA Headquarters, Regional, and authorized State
personnel. It is not available to the general public because the system contains enforcement
sensitive data. The general public is referred to EPA's Envirofacts Data Warehouse to obtain
filtered information on RCRA-regulated hazardous waste sites.
Data Quality Review: The Government Accounting Office's (GAO's) 1995 Report on EPA's
Hazardous Waste Information System http://frebgate access gpo gov/cgibin/ (This historical
document is available on the Government Printing Office Website) reviewed whether national
RCRA information systems support EPA and states in managing their hazardous waste program.
Recommendations coincide with ongoing internal efforts (WIN/Informed) to improve the
definitions of data collected, ensure that data collected provide critical information and rninimize
the burden on states.
Data Limitations: No data limitations have been identified. The states have ownership of their
data and EPA has to rely on them to make changes. The data that determine if a facility has met
its permit requirements are prioritized in update efforts. Basic site identification data may
111-34
-------
become out-of-date because RCRA does not mandate annual or other periodic notification by the
regulated entity when site name, ownership and contact information changes. Nevertheless, EPA
tracks the facilities by their IDs and those should not change even during ownership changes.
Error Estimate: N/A. Currently OSW does not collect data on estimated error rates.
New/Improved Data or Systems: EPA has successfully implemented new tools for managing
environmental information to support federal and state programs, replacing the old data systems
(the Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System and the Biennial Reporting
System) with RCRAInfo. RCRAInfo allows for tracking of information on the regulated
universe of RCRA hazardous waste handlers, such as facility status, regulated activities, and
compliance history. The system also captures detailed data on the generation of hazardous waste
by large quantity generators and on waste management practices from treatment, storage, and
disposal facilities. RCRAInfo is web accessible, providing a convenient user interface for
Federal, state and local managers, encouraging development of in-house expertise for controlled
cost, and using commercial off-the-shelf software to develop reports from database tables.
References: http://www.epa.gov/osw/index.htm
FY2005 Performance Measure:
« Percentage of UST facilities that are in significant operational compliance with both
release detection and release prevention (spill, overfill, and corrosion protection)
requirements.
• Number of confirmed releases at UST facilities nationally
Performance Database: The Office of Underground Storage Tanks (OUST) does not maintain a
national database; the states maintain their respective databases and/or spreadsheets.
FY 2004 will be the first year of establishing the baseline for the new combined measure, the
percentage of UST facilities that are in significant operational compliance with both release
detection and release prevention (spill, overfill, and corrosion protection), which will be reported
hi the FY2005 Annual Report. EPA has previously reported progress hi meeting each of these
requirements separately. The new combined measure cannot be recalculated using the previous
separate measures because there hasn't been a baseline prior to FY 2004. As there is no database
for this information, a requirement to recalculate the baseline would be overly burdensome to the
states.
Data Source: Designated state agencies submit semi-annual progress reports to the EPA's
Regional offices.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: N/A
m-35
-------
QA/QC Procedures: States submit their performance on an EPA-supplied form for review
against national trends and historical data. Previously reported percentages and/or totals are
compared to current values and states are notified of any discrepancies and/or anomalies.
Data Quality Review: EPA resolves any discrepancies and/or anomalies in the reported
information through written explanations and/or justifications from the states and discussions.
Data Limitations: Percentages reported are sometimes based on estimates and extrapolations
from sample data. The quality of the states' data depends on the completeness and accuracy of
states' internal recordkeeping.
Error Estimate: Not calculated.
New/Improved Data or Systems: None.
References: FY 2003 Mid-Year Activity Report, June 19, 2003 (updated semi-annually)
EFFICIENCY MEASURES\MEASUREMENT DEVELOPMENT PLANS;
EPA continues to emphasize a strong multi-year focus on performance measure
development. Measurement Development Plans (MDPs) describe efforts to fill identified
measurement gaps so that progress toward developing fully-functioning measures, whether long-
term or short-term, can be tracked. MDPs are useful tools that can be used to measure long-term
strategic outcomes to be highlighted in the next strategic plan, to track current strategic targets
that cannot be measured annually, or to highlight progress in addressing measurement gaps.
In this objective, the Agency is committing, hi the 2003 Strategic Plan, to two strategic
targets for which there are not yet annual performance measures for 2005. These 2008 targets
are to update controls for preventing releases at 150 facilities that are due for permit renewal by
the end of 2006, and to reduce hazardous waste combustion facility emissions of dioxins and
furans by 90 percent and particulate matter by 50 percent from 1994 levels of 880 grams/year
and 9,500 tons/year, respectively. Regarding the target for permit renewals, EPA will develop a
methodology to track renewals and perform outreach with the states to encourage them to enter
these data into their systems. The Agency anticipates setting an annual performance goal for
2006. For the hazardous waste facility emissions, EPA plans to have the MACT revised
standards promulgated hi 2005 pursuant to a settlement agreement among the parties to that
litigation.
111-36
-------
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Pollution prevention activities entail coordination with other Federal
departments/agencies, such as the General Services Administration (use of safer products for
indoor painting and cleaning), DOD (use of safer paving materials for parking lots), and Defense
Logistics Agency (safer solvents). The program also works with the National Institute of
Standards and Technology, the International Standards Organization, and other groups to
develop standards for Environmental Management Systems.
In addition to business, industry and other non-governmental organizations, EPA will
work with Federal, state, Tribal, and local governments to encourage reduced generation as well
as the safe recycling of wastes. Frequently, successful programs require multiple partners to
address the multi-media nature of effective source reduction and recycling. The Agency has
brought together a range of stakeholders to examine alternatives in specific industrial sectors,
and several regulatory changes have followed which encourage hazardous waste recycling.
Partners in this effort include the Environmental Council of States, the Tribal Association on
Solid Waste and Emergency Response, and the Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste
Management Officials.
As Federal partners, EPA and the United States Postal Service (USPS) work together on
several municipal solid waste projects. For instance, rather than dispose of returned or unwanted
mail, EPA and the USPS developed and implemented successful recycling procedures and
markets. For example, unwanted mail (advertisements, catalogues, etc.) is being returned to the
Post Office for recycling rather than disposal by the recipient. In addition, Integrated Solid Waste
Management Plans are being implemented at parks in western states because of Regional offices'
assistance to the National Park Service. EPA also works with the Small Business Administration
to provide support to recycling businesses.
The Federal government is the single largest potential source for "green" procurement in
the country for office products as well as products for industrial use. EPA works with other
Federal agencies and departments in advancing the purchase and use of recycled-content and
other "green" products. In particular, the Agency is currently engaged with other organizations
within the Executive Branch to foster compliance with Executive Order 13101 and in tracking
and reporting purchases of products made with recycled contents.
In addition, the Agency is currently engaged with the DOD, Education and DOE, USPS,
and other agencies to foster proper management of surplus electronics equipment, with a
preference for reuse and recycling. With these agencies, and in cooperation with the electronics
industry, EPA participated in developing a draft interagency memorandum of understanding
(MOU) which will lead to increased reuse and recycling of an array of computers and other
electronics hardware used by civilian and military agencies. Implementation of this MOU will
divert substantial quantities of plastic, glass, lead, mercury, silver, and other materials from
111-37
-------
disposal. Currently, EPA works with USDA and FDA on a variety of issues related to the
disposal of agricultural products (food and/or animals), contaminated with chemical or biological
pathogens.
State LUST programs are critical to achieving the objectives and long-term strategic
goals. Except in Indian Country, EPA relies on state agencies to implement the LUST program,
including overseeing cleanups by responsible parties and responding to emergency LUST
releases. LUST cooperative agreements awarded by EPA are directly given to the states to assist
them in implementing their oversight and programmatic role.
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
Department of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development and Independent Agencies
Appropriation Act, Public Law 105-275; 112 Stat. 2461, 2499 (1998)
Pollution Prevention Act (PPA) (42 U.S.C. 13101-13109)
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976, as amended; (42 U.S.C. 6901-
6992k) Public Law 94-580,42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.
Solid Waste Disposal Act (SWDA) of 1976, as amended by the Hazardous Waste Amendments
of 1984, (Subtitle I); Section 8001(a); Tribal Grants: PL 105-276
111-38
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Budget Request
Land Preservation and Restoration
OBJECTIVE: Restore Land
By 2008, 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.
Resource Summary
(Dollars in Thousands)
Restore Land
Environmental Program & Management
Building and Facilities
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Oil Spill Response
Inspector General
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Total Workyears
FY2003
Actuals
$1,454,821.4
$77,013.7
$2,308.5
$33,997.8
$70,263.9
$14,701.7
$879.3
$1,255,656.6
3,772.7
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$1,508,646.8
$78,811.3
$4,179.5
$31,913.1
$71,005.4
$15,289.4
$1,069.1
$1,306,379.0
3,822.6
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$1,503,465.
6
$77,204.5
$2,594.2
$32,113.1
$71,000.5
$15,500.6
$1,082.2
$1,303,970.
4
3,796.7
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
($5,181.3)
($1,606.8)
($1,585.3)
$200.00
($4.9)
$211.2
$13.1
($2,408.6)
-25.9
Program Project
(Dollars in Thousands)
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Categorical Grant: Hazardous Waste
Financial Assistance
Compliance Assistance and Centers
LUST/UST
Civil Enforcement
Homeland Security: Preparedness,
Response, and Recovery
LUST Cooperative Agreements
FY 2003
Actuals
$3,509.4
$31,017.3
$198.6
$12,650.6
$1,969.7
$37,556.3
$55,798.7
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$0.0
$31,913.1
$279.9
$10,581.0
$2,163.6
$27,339.3
$58,399.1
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$0.0
$32,113.1
$276.6
$10,499.6
$2,135.6
$27,163.2
$58,450.0
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$0.0
$200.0
($3.3)
($81.4)
($28.0)
($176.1)
$50.9
111-39
-------
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Oil Spill: Prevention, Preparedness and
Response
RCRA: Corrective Action
Superfund: Emergency Response and
Removal
Superfund: Enforcement
Superfund: EPA Emergency
Preparedness
Superfund: Federal Facilities
Superfund: Federal Facilities lAGs
Superfund: Remedial
Superfund: Support to Other Federal
Agencies
Administrative Projects
TOTAL
FY2003
Actuals
$3,509.4
$12,543.8
$36,816.6
$217,880.1
$158,487.3
$17,926.8
$28,838.1
$6,749.0
$656,387.4
$10,178.8
$166,319.4
$1,454,827.9
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$0.0
$12,897.5
$40,363.8
$199,803.9
$155,307.5
$10,130.1
$32,744.2
$10,022.6
$725,751.1
$10,676.0
$180,274.1
$1,508,646.8
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$0.0
$13,064.7
$40,975.6
$201,088.0
$155,537.2
$10,091.4
$32,182.0
$10,044.4
$719,249.8
$10,676.0
$179,918.4
$1,503,465.6
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$0.0
$167.2
$611.8
$1,284.1
$229.7
($38.7)
($562.2)
$21.8
($6,501.3)
$0.0
($355.8)
($5,181.3)
FY 2005 REQUEST
Results to be Achieved under this Objective
EPA leads the country's activities to reduce the risks posed by releases of harmful
substances and by contaminated land. The most effective approach to controlling these risks
incorporates developing and implementing prevention measures, improving response
capabilities, and maximizing the effectiveness of response and cleanup actions. This approach
will help to ensure that human health and the environment are protected and that land is returned
to beneficial use. To meet its objective to reduce and control the risks posed by accidental or
intentional releases of harmful substances by improving our Nation's capability to prepare for
and respond more effectively to these emergencies, EPA intends to achieve the following results
in FY 2005:
• Improve the Agency's emergency preparedness by achieving and maintaining the
capability to respond to simultaneous large-scale emergencies and by increasing response
readiness by 10 percent from a baseline established by the end of 2003 using the core
emergency response criteria.
• Respond to 350 hazardous substance releases and 300 oil spills.
• Minimize impacts of potential oil spills by inspecting or conducting exercises or drills at
6 percent of approximately 6,000 oil storage facilities required to have Facility Response
Plans. (Between FY 1997 and FY 2002, 30 percent of these facilities were inspected).
111-40
-------
To meet its objective to control the risks to human health and the environment at
contaminated properties or sites through cleanup, stabilization, or other action, and to
make land available for reuse, EPA intends to achieve the following results in FY 2005:
• Make 500 final site-assessment decisions under Superfund;
• Control all identified unacceptable human exposures from site contamination to at or
below health-based levels for current land and/or groundwater use conditions at 10 of the
Superfund human exposure sites and 225 of the high priority RCRA facilities;
• Control the migration of contaminated groundwater through engineered remedies or
natural processes at 10 of the Superfund groundwater exposure sites and 203 high priority
RCRA facilities;
• Select final remedies (cleanup targets) at 20 Superfund sites;
• By 2008, clean up and reduce the backlog of 136,000 leaking Underground Storage Tank
(UST) sites by 50 percent;
• Complete construction of remedies at 40 Superfund sites; and
• Complete 21,000 cleanups of leaking underground storage tanks, and 45 cleanups of
underground storage tanks in Indian country.
To track progress in meeting the strategic targets included hi the FY 2003 EPA Strategic
Plan, efforts are underway as appropriate to develop new measures, collect data and establish
baselines necessary to set annual targets.
In the Superfund Remedial program, efficiency measures will be developed that move the
program's performance management tools away from primarily addressing historical program
performance outputs and toward addressing the program's efficiency hi achieving its goals and
objectives. The Superfund program's measure development efforts seek to identify and
implement at least one (output or outcome) efficiency measure for the FY 2005 budget. The
longer-term goal is to identify and implement by FY 2006 additional efficiency measures (both
output and outcome) that can be used by both EPA management and the public to assess the
Superfund Remedial Program's performance.
In addition to developing FY 2005 Corrective Action environmental indicator goals, the
RCRA program has prepared a measurement development plan to re-assess baselines and
strategic targets hi support of EPA efforts to cleanup and reuse contaminated land that integrates
aspects of the One Cleanup Program. Strategic targets under development include:
• Performing health- and environmentally- based site assessments at 100 percent of RCRA
baseline facilities;
• Controlling all identified unacceptable human exposures from site contamination to at or
below health-based levels for current land and/or groundwater use conditions at 95
percent of RCRA facilities;
• Controlling the migration of contaminated groundwater through engineered remedies or
natural processes at 80 percent of RCRA facilities;
• Selecting final remedies (cleanup targets) at 30 percent of RCRA facilities;
* Completing construction of remedies at 20 percent of RCRA baseline facilities.
111-41
-------
The Superfund enforcement program is critical to the Agency's ability to cleanup the vast
majority of the nation's worst hazardous waste sites. In FY 2005, EPA will continue to
emphasize "enforcement first" by obtaining PRP commitments to conduct new remedial actions
as its primary strategy for completing construction at non-Federal facility Superfund sites. EPA
has successfully encouraged or compelled PRPs to undertake or fund approximately 70% of new
remedial construction work at non-Federal facility Superfund sites in recent years. The
environmental benefits cannot be overstated as most contaminated waste sites would not
otherwise be cleaned up due to limited Federal resources. The program will focus on
maximizing PRP participation in conducting or funding response actions while promoting
fairness in the enforcement process; recovering costs from PRPs when EPA expends funds from
the Superfund Trust Fund; and, negotiating agreements with Federal facilities for NPL site
cleanup.
Superfund Remedial
The Superfund Remedial program addresses contamination from uncontrolled releases at
Superfund hazardous waste sites that may threaten human health, the environment, and the
economic vitality of local communities. Superfund sites with contaminated soils, sediment, and
groundwater exist nationally in a large number of communities. Many of these sites are located
in urban areas, are accessible by children, and expose the population to contamination. Once
contaminated, groundwater, sediments, and soils may be extremely difficult and costly to clean
up. Some sites will require decades to clean up because of their complexity and for some sites,
removing or destroying all of the contamination is not possible. Residual contamination at these
sites will need to be managed on site, creating a need for long-term stewardship.
To protect human health and the environment and address potential barriers to
redevelopment, the Superfund Remedial Program works with states, Indian tribes, and other
Federal agencies to: 1) assess sites and determine whether they meet the criteria for Federal
Superfund response actions; 2) prevent, minimize or mitigate significant threats at Superfund
sites through removal actions; 3) generate accurate risk assessment and cost-performance data
critical to providing the technical foundation for decisions made in environmental cleanup
programs; 4) complete remedial cleanup construction at sites listed on the National Priority List
(NPL); 5) control human exposures and the migration of contaminated groundwater at NPL sites;
6) develop technologies for cost-effective characterization and remediation; 7) ensure long-term
protectiveness of remedies by overseeing operations and maintenance and conducting five-year
reviews; 8) enhance the role of states and Indian tribes in the implementation of the Superfund
program; 9) work with the surrounding communities to improve their direct involvement in
every phase of the cleanup process and their understanding of potential site risk; 10) continue
progress of cleanups while increasing consistency with other EPA cleanup programs; and 11)
promote reuse and redevelopment of Superfund sites.
EPA's efforts to address uncontrolled releases at Superfund sites begin when states,
Indian tribes, citizens, other Federal agencies, or other sources notify EPA of a hazardous waste
111-42
-------
site or incident. EPA confirms this information and places sites requiring Federal attention in the
Agency's Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information
System (CERCLIS) database, or in the case of Federal facilities, sites are placed on the Federal
Agency Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket. EPA assesses these sites to determine whether
Federal action is needed. In most cases, EPA makes a determination that no further Federal
action is required. These sites are removed from the inventory. If warranted, EPA may refer
sites removed from its inventory to state or Tribal environmental authorities for further attention.
For those sites requiring additional action to protect public health and the environment,
EPA seeks the course of action best suited to the individual site. Sites posing immediate risks
may be addressed under removal authority. EPA may defer response at sites with ongoing state
action. In some instances, potentially responsible parties enter into agreements with EPA to
evaluate or clean up sites prior to listing on the NPL. In such cases, where cleanup is
progressing in a timely and protective manner or is completed prior to final listing, listing on the
NPL may be unnecessary. Some sites may be addressed under both removal and remedial
authorities when, for example, early removal action is taken to address immediate risks at sites
on the NPL. As a matter of policy, EPA seeks a concurrence from a state's governor before
listing a site on the NPL.
For sites listed on the NPL, remedial work begins with site characterization and a
feasibility study to review site conditions and evaluate strategies for cleanup, taking into
consideration reasonably anticipated future land use. These actions form the foundation for
remedy selection, which is documented in the record of decision. Community involvement is a
key component in selecting the proper remedy at a site. A remedial action is performed upon
approval of the remedial design and represents the actual cleanup or other work necessary to
implement the remedy selected. Potentially responsible parties or other Federal agencies
perform remedial action work. EPA, states or Tribes may also perform remedial cleanup as
fund-financed actions with either EPA, the state or Tribe leading the cleanup action.
As of January 6, 2004, EPA assessed over 45,300 sites, completed final cleanup plans at
over 1,100 Superfund NPL sites, conducted over 7,900 removal cleanup actions at hazardous
waste sites to reduce immediate threats to human health and the environment, and removed more
than 33,400 sites from the CERCLIS waste site list to help promote the economic redevelopment
of these properties. The Agency also cleaned up or had construction underway at 93 percent of
the 1,518 sites on the final NPL (final and deleted sites as of January 6, 2004). Of these 1,518
sites, 59 percent have cleanup construction completed (890 sites as of January 6, 2004). A total
of 700 projects are ongoing at over 430 sites as of January 6,2004.
Human Health and Environmental Risks: The Superfund program fulfills an important
environmental mission of reducing risks to human health and the environment posed by
dangerous chemicals, pollutants and contaminants in the air, soil and water. The Superfund
program and its partners, including other Federal agencies, states, local and Tribal governments
and others, work collaboratively to reduce these risks.
111-43
-------
The Superfund program continues to address sites that pose an immediate or direct risk to
human health and the environment. Response actions are underway at numerous Superfund sites
where residential areas are impacted by hazardous wastes. The Tar Creek, OK site is a
residential area contaminated with lead and other metals from lead and zinc mining. In calendar
year 1997, approximately 25 percent of the children had elevated blood lead levels compared to a
statewide average of 3 percent. Elevated blood lead levels of health concern in children refer to
levels greater than or equal to 10 ug/dL. By calendar year 2000, children with elevated blood
lead levels had been reduced by 50 percent, largely due to residential soil cleanup and the
extensive health education activities.23 Residential cleanup activities are continuing on this site.
The Oronogo/Duenwig Mining Belt, MO site (Jasper County site) is a former lead and
zinc mining site. A 1991 childhood lead study performed by the Missouri State Health
Department and ATSDR indicated that more than 14 percent of the children in the area had
blood lead levels of health concern (greater than or equal to 10ug/dL).24 A childhood lead study
was performed again in 2001, which indicated that the number of children in the area with blood
lead levels of health concern had dropped to 2 percent. 25 This 86 percent reduction in children
with elevated levels of blood lead, as well as a 40 percent reduction in average blood levels of all
children tested, is attributed to the environmental and educational intervention activities
undertaken at the site and surrounding communities.
Response actions are underway or completed at other sites with lead contamination
similar to Tar Creek and Oronogo/Duenwig including: Omaha Lead, NE, Herculaneum Lead
Smelter, MO (where 28 percent of the children in the area have elevated blood lead levels of
health concern) and Bunker Hill, ID.
The Superfund program has been instrumental in responding to reduce or eliminate
human exposures to contaminants in residential areas. An example is the Grand Street Mercury,
NJ site which was a former industrial building, contaminated with mercury, that was converted
into apartments. Twenty of the 29 residents tested, five of whom were children, possessed levels
of mercur in their urine that might cause subtle neurological changes and renal tubule (kidney)
effects. Response activities included permanently relocating the residents and demolishing the
building. Dissociating the residents from the site and implementing measures to prevent further
off-site mercury migration have mitigated the risks to residents and minimized the risks to
neighbors of the site. Eighty years of vermiculite ore mining has caused asbestos to spread
throughout the town of Libby, MT, where 18 percent of the tested population have abnormalities
of the lungs from the contamination (compared to 0.2-2.3 percent hi the general population),
asbestos-related deaths appear to be 40-80 tunes the state and national averages, and lung
23 U.S. EPA, Region 6. "Tar Creek Site Summary." Washington, DC: EPA. Accessed: January 8, 2004. Available only on the
Internet at: http:/A\'Av\v.epa.gov/earthlr6/6sf>''pdfIiles/'tarcreek.pdf
24 Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). Jasper County, Missouri Superfund Site Lead and Cadmium
Exposure Study (Final Report). Missouri Department of Health, Division of Environmental Health and Epidemiology, Bureau of
Environmental Epidemiology, 1995.
25 Missouri Department of Health and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. "Jasper County, Missouri Superfund
Site Childhood Follow-up Lead Exposure Study." Available only on the Internet at
http://www.dliss.state.Trio.us.-'Pre%;entionATidWe11ness/Jasper_report.hrm
111-44
-------
cancers are 20-30 percent higher than expected. Response actions are ongoing to reduce
asbestos exposure and ATSDR has determined that areas already remediated by EPA no longer
pose apparent public hazards.26 At the Vasquez Boulevard/Interstate 70 site in the northeast
section of Denver, CO, test results show that some residential properties have high levels of
arsenic and lead hi soil. Approximately 650 properties sampled to date have arsenic levels hi
soil that might pose a public health hazard for preschool children who may be exposed through
incidental intake of soil. EPA has also identified approximately 260 properties where the
increased risk for cancer is unacceptable in adults who also lived there as children. EPA is
continuing to clean up these properties and to identify other areas of concern.
At the Wellsbach, NJ site, exposure to radioactive materials is being, eliminated through
Superfund activities. Work is underway to reduce PCB exposure hi Anniston, AL, where some
residents have elevated PCB levels hi their blood. These are just a few examples that
demonstrate how the Superfund program has and continues to improve public health through
response activities that reduce the public's exposure to hazardous pollutants.
Environmental Results: Environmental data gathered by EPA through September 30,
2003, shows that since the inception of the Superfund program, EPA has: 1) provided alternative
drinking water supplies to nearly 613,000 people at NPL and non-NPL sites to protect them from
contaminated ground and surface water; 2) relocated over 32,000 people at NPL and non-NPL
sites in instances where contamination posed the most severe immediate threats; 3) treated or
removed 967 million cubic yards of hazardous solid waste; and 4) addressed 375 billion gallons
of hazardous liquid waste (including contaminated groundwater).
The Superfund program seeks to improve its ability to measure true environmental
progress hi achieving its mission. In FY 2005, EPA will measure Superfund's progress
(including that associated with the Superfund Federal Facilities Response program) hi achieving
environmental results through six key performance measures. These six measures include: (1)
assessing the extent of contamination at sites, (2) controlling identified unacceptable human
exposures from site contamination to levels that are at or below health-based levels for current
land and/or groundwater use conditions, (3) controlling the migration of contaminated
groundwater through engineered remedies or natural processes, (4) selecting final remedies
(cleanup targets), (5) completing construction of the selected remedies, and, (6) making land
ready for reuse. These measures highlight important milestones hi achieving risk reduction; no
single measure can itself adequately capture the environmental benefits derived from the entire
Superfund program.
Two of Superfund's performance measures have been hi place for some time. The
Superfund Program has collected data on site assessment (measure 1) and construction
completions (measure 5) for several years and will continue to do so hi FY 2005. In 2002, the
26 Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Public Health Assessment Libby Asbestos Site Libby, Lincoln County,
Montana EPA Facility ID: MT0009083840. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services. May 15, 2003.
111-45
-------
Superftmd program began reporting on two additional measures: Human Exposure Under
Control and Contaminated Groudwater Migration Under Control.
Beginning in FY 2004, the Superfund Remedial program will target and track Remedy
Selections (measure 4) for the first time. In selecting final remedies, the Agency seeks to address
all current and potential sources of contamination that threaten human health and the
environment. Remedies are selected based on many criteria, including the protectiveness they
offer, environmental media cleanup objectives, their short and long term effectiveness,
implementation issues, and their acceptability to state and Tribal governments and the affected
community. In selecting remedies, EPA and its partners also consider reasonably anticipated
future land use. At the end of FY 2002, there was a universe of 1103 sites with final remedies
selected. The Agency is currently evaluating this baseline and may adjust it downward hi the
future. The Superfund program expects to select final remedies at an additional 20 sites per year
during FY 2004 and FY 2005.
The human exposure under control measure, (2) above, is meant to describe whether
adequately protective controls are in place to prevent any unacceptable human exposure under
current land and groundwater use conditions only. This measure does not consider potential
future land or groundwater use conditions or ecological receptors. As of September 30, 2003,
1,227 NPL sites (over 80 percent) had human exposures under control. The Superfund program
expects to control human exposures at an additional 10 sites in FY 2005.
The groundwater migration under control measure, (3) above, is meant to describe
whether the migration of contaminated groundwater from a Superfund site is being controlled
through engineered remedies or natural processes. As of September 30, 2003, the migration of
contaminated groundwater was under control at 826 NPL sites (over 60 percent) with
contaminated groundwater. The Superfund program expects to control the migration of
contaminated groundwater at an additional 10 sites in FY 2005.
Environmental Indicators
Human Exposure Under Control Contaminated Groundwater Migration
60.5%
803%
11.7%
16.6%
22.8%
Under Control
Not Under Control
Insufficient Data-
111-46
-------
The Superfund Remedial program is committed to returning underutilized land to
productive reuse through its cleanup and other actions. In FY 2003, the Superfund program
tasked a workgroup to develop performance measures to help quantify Agency accomplishment
for this activity. The result is that in FY 2004, two new measures will be introduced: (1) sites
with land ready for reuse, and (2) acres of land ready for reuse. Both measures will include
acreage for the Superfund Federal Facilities Response program, which has been reporting on
these same measures (under the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) program) since FY
1997. EPA will report accomplishments for these two measures for FY 2004 and FY 2005.
EPA may set targets for these accomplishments hi future years if analysis reveals that such
targets would be meaningful.
As the Superfund program seeks to improve and refine its existing program measures, it
is actively working on several new measures for use in the years beyond FY 2005:
• Ecological Risk Reduction measure - The Superfund and RCRA programs are
working together to develop an Ecological Risk Reduction measure. This measure is intended to
quantify the benefits resulting from cleanup actions by estimating the degree to which the
selected remedy protects ecological receptors from contaminants at the site. Within the next
several years, EPA intends to develop and pilot a draft methodology to ascertain the feasibility of
implementing this type of measure. Based on the pilot results, EPA and its partners seek to
develop a measure that demonstrates ecological risk reduction by FY 2008.
• Exposure Control measure - The Superfund program is in the process of
developing an exposure control measure to better quantify the human health benefits resulting
from cleanup actions. Within the next several years, EPA intends to develop and pilot a draft
methodology to ascertain the feasibility of implementing this type of measure. Based on the
pilot results, EPA and its partners seek to develop a measure that demonstrates increased
exposure control of potentially exposed populations by FY 2008.
EPA is actively seeking input from stakeholders on these two approaches. Most notably,
EPA has shared the draft methodology for the Ecological Risk Reduction measure with the
National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology (NACEPT) Superfund
Subcommittee and has received initial feedback. EPA also intends to seek stakeholder input on
the draft methodology for the Exposure Control measure.
Other performance measure-related activities include the One Cleanup Program
Initiative, in which Superfund is an active participant. The Measuring for Results component of
the One Cleanup Program Initiative involves developing a unified, cohesive set of performance
measures for all cleanup programs. In addition, the Superfund program is in the process of
developing one or more efficiency measures by FY 2006.
Superfund Pipeline Management Review: The Agency initiated the Superfund Pipeline
Management Review (PMR) during FY 2002 to ensure that Agency resources are properly
111-47
-------
focused to achieve maximum results, including protection of human health and the environment
as well as progress towards completion of response actions at sites.
As of January 6, 2004, Superfund has 1,518 sites on the NPL, of which over 620 require
additional response actions (also called construction) to achieve protection of human health and
the environment. As the program has matured, more sites have advanced to the construction
phase. Superfund construction projects are technically complex and costly, and growth in the
number, size, duration and cost of these projects over time has resulted hi a backlog of
construction projects awaiting funding. Superfund cleanups directly support the Agency goal to
preserve and restore the Nation's land.
Through the PMR, EPA is increasing the precision with which the Agency tracks
construction completion candidates and projects future construction completion achievements,
extending the planning horizon for making funding decisions for Superfund construction
projects, and implementing new policies and actions to maximize the use of resources available
for construction.
Construction Completions: The Agency remains committed to completing construction
at Superfund sites. The Program expects to achieve construction completion at an additional 40
sites during FY 2004, for a total of 926 since program inception. EPA expects construction
completion accomplishments to remain at approximately 40 during FY 2005. Since the
beginning of the program, the Agency has averaged 42 construction completions per year.27
EPA monitors site progress and identifies potential critical points as sites move towards
construction completion. The Agency will continue to regularly conduct detailed and
comprehensive reviews of construction completion candidates funded by EPA to better follow
site progress, identify potential problems, and sharpen projections of future construction
completions.
Remedial Action Project Planning and Resource Allocation: Funding for EPA Superfund
construction projects is critical to achieving risk reduction and construction completion and
restoration of contaminated sites to productive reuse. The cost of EPA Superfund construction
projects underway and those awaiting funding is rising due to the greater complexity of sites
remaining to be cleaned up on the NPL. The program faces a large and growing backlog of
projects that are ready to begin construction, while at the same time, is experiencing a growing
challenge to fully fund several large and complex ongoing projects at their optimal pace.
Additionally, as the EPA Superfund program has matured, the Agency is devoting more
resources toward post construction activities, including long-term remedial actions and 5-year
reviews.
27 The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability System
(CERCLIS) is the database used by the Agency to track, store, and report JSuperfund site
information.
111-48
-------
The Agency is taking the following steps to improve program effectiveness and
efficiency:
• Carefully review the scope, budget and schedule of ongoing construction projects to
ensure available resources are directed where they are needed;
• Review construction start candidates to ensure that sites that present the greatest risk
to human health and the environment are addressed, while balancing the programmatic
need to complete construction at other sites;
• Maximize the involvement of responsible parties to conduct cleanups by finding them
earlier and having them pay earlier;
• Maximize the use of resources already available to the Agency, including
deobligations of prior year funds and reimbursements;
• Continue to implement administrative reforms which have already yielded $1.7
billion in cost savings; and
• Continue to work with developers and partner with other Federal agencies (such as
the US Army Corps of Engineers) to leverage the Program's resources.
EPA places a high priority on construction funding. Priorities for funding Superfund
construction projects are established as follows: (1) the highest priority is given to funding
emergencies which pose imminent threats to human health and the environment, (2) the next
priority is ongoing construction projects that have already begun and which require additional
resources, and (3) new construction projects. During FY 2003, funding was provided for more
than 100 ongoing construction projects and long-term response actions, as well as 11 new start
construction projects. However, funding was not available for 14 new construction projects that
were reviewed for funding by the National Risk-based Priority Panel in FY 2003. In addition, 11
new start projects considered for funding by the panel encountered schedule delays, but will be
ready to proceed during FY 2004. These 25 projects have a cumulative estimated cost exceeding
$225 million and will be reconsidered for funding in FY 2004.
In addition to the FY 2003 unfunded projects mentioned above, the Regions have
identified a large number of new construction projects that will be reviewed for funding by the
National Risk-based Priority Panel during FY 2004. In addition, the Program's construction
funding needs are projected to continue to grow hi FY 2005 as well. To address the Agency's
growing construction project needs, the President has requested an increase of $150 million for
construction in FY 2004. This increase is also included hi the base request for FY 2005. With
the additional resources requested, EPA will initiate 10 to 15 new construction projects both hi
FY 2004 and hi FY 2005. The exact number will depend on the selection of projects and their
estimated cost.
111-49
-------
Superfund Program Initiatives: National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and
Technology (NACEPT) A key component of the One Cleanup Program initiative is undertaking
a stakeholder dialogue on the future direction of the Superfund program in the context of other
waste cleanup programs. The Agency initiated this dialogue in June 2002 with the creation of
the Superfund Subcommittee under the NACEPT. The Subcommittee is working to render
consensus-based recommendations on three key issues: (1) the role of the NPL, (2) complex and
expensive sites, called megasites, and (3) measurement of program progress. The
Subcommittee's final report is due by April 2004.
NPL Listing Policy. EPA is working to thoroughly examine its policies with regard to
decisions to place new sites on the NPL. As noted above, a new NACEPT Subcommittee has
been convened to provide broad Superfund program stakeholder advice on NPL listing. The
NACEPT Subcommittee's final report is due by April 2004, and it will address a longer term
future of Superfund.
Superfund Pre-SARA/First Generation Site Initiative. Closely tied to the PMR is the
Superfund pre-SARA site initiative. As of the end of FY 2003, 185 non-Federal and Federal
facility sites that were placed on the NPL prior to October 16, 1986 (date of enactment of the
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act, SARA) were not construction complete. This
initiative encourages Regions, working with states, other Federal agencies and local jurisdictions,
to resolve issues necessary to move these pre-SARA sites into the construction completion
category. Specifically, the initiative will:
• Focus on developing stakeholder-based schedules for resolving remaining issues
delaying the completion of longer duration sites (i.e., Federal and non-Federal, pre-
SARA, final NPL sites);
• Facilitate the resolution of issues necessary to completing construction at these sites
by identifying the scientific, technical and legal issues to be resolved, sequencing the
resolution of issues to maximize completions over the next 5 to 10 years, and establishing
accountability for issue resolution (e.g., Research and Development, Enforcement,
Federal Facilities, Superfund);
• Allocate program resources to better leverage cleanups at these sites (e.g., factoring in
the cost of 'warehousing sites,' as well as funds needed for completion);
• Provide more aggressive management oversight, tracking of site progress, reporting
of accomplishments, and publicizing results; and,
• Use lessons learned from analysis of past sites to minimize the number of future sites
lingering on the NPL in the future.
Post Construction Completion. Although construction completion is a major milestone in
the Superfund program, many activities occur at a site after construction is complete. These post
111-50
-------
construction activities are essential to assure that Superfund sites remain protective and are
suitable for reuse following cleanup. The activities include:
• Oversight of operation and maintenance activities performed by the states, private
PRPs, and other Federal agencies to ensure that the remedies work properly;
• Operation of fund-financed groundwater restoration systems for up to 10 years (long-
term response), and oversight of states and PRPs operating these systems until
cleanup goals are achieved;
• Implementation and oversight of institutional controls;
• Five-year reviews to ensure remedies remain protective of human health and the
environment;
• Optimization of groundwater restoration systems to improve performance and/or
reduce costs; and,
• NPL site deletion and partial deletion.
As more NPL sites reach the milestone of construction completion, the focus of
Superfund cleanups turns to ensuring that response actions provide for long-term protection of
human health and the environment. In FY 2005, EPA will continue to implement a
comprehensive Post Construction Completion Strategy for managing current and former NPL
sites. EPA will work closely with states, Tribes, other Federal agencies, local partners and other
stakeholders to implement the strategy.
One area requiring increased emphasis is institutional controls (ICs). EPA defines ICs as
non-engineered instruments, such as administrative and/or legal controls, that help to minimize
the potential for human exposure to contamination and to protect the integrity of a remedy by
limiting land or resource use. The challenge of ICs is that although they play a critical role in
remedies, they are often implemented, monitored and enforced by different agencies and/or
entities at different levels of government. To ensure the long-term reliability of ICs, structured,
coordinated and routine 1C tracking must occur. For this reason, EPA is continuing to work with
other Federal agencies, states, Tribes, local governments and industry in the development of a
tracking approach to better manage 1C information. This concept promotes the identification of
core data categories, the use of common 1C definitions, and the virtual sharing of 1C information
among various 1C co-regulators and other stakeholders.
The main goal of the Coordinated 1C Tracking Concept is to promote pro-active
stewardship throughout the entire 1C life-cycle by facilitating the collection, tracking, and
sharing of accurate information about ICs. The concept is to coordinate different Federal, state,
Tribal, local government and industry systems through a virtual network. An EPA system will
be one part of the network, and will provide links to other tracking systems and mechanisms to
111-51
-------
share information. To create this network, EPA has begun a collaborative development process
among co-regulators, industry and other stakeholders that seeks to: 1) leverage information from
existing systems; 2) provide an opportunity for data to be collected by organizations not
currently tracking ICs; 3) identify and exchange methods for effective data sharing; 4) pilot the
sharing of information on a minimum set of data elements; and, 5) identify data stewards to
support the formation of a network for data sharing. Progress has been made on the development
of a national registry and development of a prototype Superfund 1C Tracking System, but a
significant amount of work remains to place the system into production, populate and support
implementation of the National 1C Tracking Network.
Reuse. EPA is increasingly aware of the importance of fully exploring with its partners
future land use opportunities at Superfund sites and BRAC facilities before selecting and
implementing a cleanup remedy. In FY 2005, the Superfund reuse initiative will continue to
facilitate the return of Superfund sites to productive use. As a result of these efforts, Superfund
sites that were once thought to have no future use potential are now being "recycled" back into
productive use. EPA has compiled a list of nearly 300 Superfund sites that are in reuse or where
reuse is planned. More than 60,000 acres are now in ecological or recreational use at these sites.
Additionally, more than 30,000 jobs, representing approximately $1.3 billion in annual income,
are located at sites that have been recycled for commercial use. Under this initiative, EPA will
continue to focus its efforts on helping communities plan for reuse of Superfund sites. EPA can
then select, design, and implement cleanups that are protective of human health and the
environment and that are also consistent with anticipated future uses. EPA has given
communities at 71 pilot sites up to $100,000 each in direct financial assistance and/or services.
EPA will assess the impacts from these projects on the Superfund program and their potential to
facilitate site reuse following cleanup.28
Community. State, and Tribal. EPA is committed to involving the community in the site
cleanup process. Superfund bases its community involvement on two-way communication
designed to keep citizens informed about site progress and give them the opportunity to provide
input on site decisions. The Agency conducts outreach efforts, such as holding public meetings
and public availability sessions and by distributing site-specific fact sheets. Superfund also has a
variety of community involvement programs, such as the Technical Assistance Grant (TAG)
program, the Community Advisory Group (CAG) program, the Technical Outreach Services for
Communities (TOSC) and Technical Outreach Services for Native American Communities
(TOSNAC) programs, and the Superfund Job Training Initiative (SuperJTI). The TAG program
provides communities with financial assistance to hire technical advisers to assist them in
understanding the problems and potential solutions to address hazardous waste cleanups. A
CAG is a group of community stakeholders, which reviews plans and activities and provides
input on local needs and concerns to those responsible for cleaning up a Superfund site. TOSC
and TOSNAC are university-based outreach programs that provide technical assistance to
28 EPA, Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation, Superfund
Redevelopment Successes. Accessed January 8, 2004. Available through the internet at:
http.'/'/mvw.epa.gov/siiperfund/programs/'recycle
111-52
-------
communities that are affected by hazardous substances. SuperJTI supports job training programs
in communities affected by nearby Superfund sites and encourages the employment of trainees at
local site cleanups. The Agency strives to create a decision-making process to clean up sites that
communities feel is open and legitimate, and improves the community's understanding of
potential risk at hazardous waste sites.
States and Indian Tribes are key partners at Superfund sites. EPA can authorize the states
or Tribes to carry out or share responsibility for fund-financed remedial actions. However, states
and Tribes more often operate in the role of a support agency to remain actively involved in site
response activities while EPA plays the lead role. To support their involvement as a lead or
support agency, EPA provides financial support through cooperative agreements to conduct
removal, site assessment, remedial, and enforcement projects and for core infrastructure
development activities.
Under Core Program Cooperative Agreements, EPA provides non-site- specific funds to
develop, maintain and enhance state and Tribal capacity to manage and implement Superfund
cleanups. EPA currently has Core Program Cooperative Agreements with 46 states and 55
Tribes or Tribal consortia. Activities funded under the Core Program Cooperative Agreements
include: 1) developing procedures for emergency response and long-term remediation (e.g.,
health and safety plans, quality assurance project plans, and community relations plans); 2)
satisfying all Federal requirements and assurances (e.g., fiscal and contract management
activities for CERCLA); 3) providing legal assistance (e.g., coordinating applicable or relevant
and appropriate requirements (ARAR) identification); and, 4) training staff to manage publicly-
funded cleanups.
Meaningful stakeholder involvement is also central to EPA's Superfund Federal Facilities
Response program. EPA's Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Office (FFRRO)
collaborates with a unique set of state and Tribal associations, environmental groups, community
advisory boards, labor organizations, and universities to ensure that social, cultural, and
economic factors are considered when making cleanup and reuse decisions at Federal facilities.
In FY 2005, FFRRO will continue to cultivate new relationships with other Federal facility
stakeholders who have yet to be brought into the fold — particularly those located in
environmental justice communities.
Quality Assurance. In an effort to better implement the Agency's Quality Assurance
Order (EPA Order 5360.1 A2 May, 2000), EPA is enhancing the quality management activities
of its Superfund program office. This work entails the implementation of a quality management
plan based on the EPA Order. Specific enhancement of standard operating procedures, guidance
for the development and application of models, training for quality related activities, and other
activities will aid in promoting quality. The quality management plan will initiate a continuing
process to improve environmental cleanup decisions. These activities will continue to promote
cross program coordination so that Superfund cleanup efforts will reflect increasing progress
toward consistency and transparency across programs that is needed to support the goal of one
cleanup program. The maintenance of up-to-date standard operating procedures allows EPA to
continue to take immediate actions to address homeland security threats and other responses that
111-53
-------
require quality assurance procedures for the collection and assessment of data to support
decisions on hazards and cleanup. Finally, these quality assurance activities support
revitalization efforts through the establishment of transparent and consistent standards for
environmental cleanups.
Activities to establish consistent quality assurance processes among EPA, DOD, and
DOE will continue in FY 2005. An Intergovernmental Data Quality Task Force (IDQTF) has
completed development of a Uniform Federal Policy for Implementing Quality Systems which
has been approved by EPA, DOD and DOE. The Task Force is chaired by the Director of
FFRRO. This policy will form the basis of a DOD-wide quality system and is under
consideration as the basis of a DOE-wide system.
The IDQTF will issue a Uniform Federal Policy for Quality Assurance Project Plans
following comment by DOD, DOE, the Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste
Management Officials, and EPA headquarters and regional offices. The Task Force feels the use
of this policy will promote consistency and uniformity in planning data collection. Anticipated
results include unproved data quality and cost and time savings in the future. While these
policies are based on a national consensus standard (Specifications and Guidelines for Quality
Systems for Environmental Data Collection and Environmental Technology Programs
(ANSI/ASQC E-4)), agreement between Federal agencies on adopting specific procedures in the
quality arena is a new and innovative approach. These initiatives will also support compliance
with the guidance issued by the Office of Management and Budget on February 22, 2002,
entitled "Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility and Integrity
of Information Disseminated by Federal Agencies," which were required by Public Law 106-
554.
Superfund: Support to Other Federal Agencies
Other Federal agencies contribute to the Superfund program by providing essential
services in areas where EPA does not possess the necessary specialized expertise. Contributors
include the Department of Interior (DOI), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA), and the United States Coast Guard. For example, DOI provides
response preparedness and management activities that support the National Response System
(NRS); provides Federal, state and Indian Tribe trustees to assess damage to natural resources as
a result of hazardous substances releases; and provides scientific support to develop ways to
include natural resource restoration in removal actions. FEMA provides technical and financial
assistance to support the National Contingency Plan and the NRS through development of
preparedness exercises and hazardous materials training.
111-54
-------
Other Federal Agency Funding
Agency
DOI
FEMA
NOAA
OSHA
USCG
Total
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$997,700
$1,097,400
$2,444,500
$648,500
$5,487,900
$10,676,000
FY 2005 Request
$997,700
$1,097,400
$2,444,500
$648,500
$5,487,900
$10,676,000
Superfund: Federal Facilities
Thousands of Federal facilities nationwide are contaminated with hazardous waste,
military munitions, radioactive waste, fuels, and a variety of other toxic contaminants. These
facilities include many different types of sites, such as formerly used defense sites (FUDS),
active, closing and closed installations, abandoned mines, nuclear weapons production facilities,
fuel distribution areas, and landfills. There are 177 Federal sites listed on the NPL (158 final, 13
deleted, 6 proposed), over 9,300 FUDS, and approximately 50 DOE Formerly Utilized Site
Remedial Action Plan (FUSRAP) sites. There are currently 484 remedial
investigations/feasibility studies, 72 remedial designs, and 218 remedial actions being addressed
at NPL sites in the Superfund Federal Facilities Response program. Forty Federal sites have
reached the construction completion stage, with one installation scheduled for completion in FY
2004 and seven more targeted for FY 2005. In many cases, Federal facilities cleanups face
unique challenges due to the types of contamination present (e.g., radiation, military munitions),
the size of the facility (e.g., DOE's Hanford site is over 500 square miles - the size of the State
of Rhode Island), or the complexities of reuse related to environmental issues, as in the case of
base closures.
FFRRO works with DOD, DOE, other Federal agencies, states, Tribes, and the public to
find protective, creative, and cost-effective cleanup solutions, while encouraging restoration and
property reuse. The Superfund Federal Facilities Response program provides technical and
regulatory oversight at Federal facility sites to ensure protection of human health, effective
program implementation, and meaningful public involvement. The Agency encourages citizen
involvement by working with DOD and DOE to establish Restoration Advisory Boards (RABs)
and Site-Specific Advisory Boards (SSABs), respectively.
Performance goals and measures for the Superfund Federal Facilities Response program
are a component of the overall response cleanup measures. EPA's ability to meet its annual
Superfund Remedial program targets (site assessment, remedy selection, construction
completion, environmental indicators such as groundwater migration and human exposure under
control, and property reuse) is partially dependent on work performed at NPL Federal facility
sites. Such issues as military munitions, post-record of decision (ROD) authority disputes, and
reduced environmental cleanup resources play a major role in construction completion targets
111-55
-------
being accomplished on schedule at Federal sites. For example, due to post-ROD dispute issues
at DOD installations, over 70 remedy decision documents have been delayed of late. However,
since December 2003, EPA has helped to rapidly reduce the backlog by 22 documents. In FY
2001, DOE began a top-to-bottom review of its environmental management mission.
Developing a new plan with innovative approaches to expedite the cleanup of DOE sites and
reduce risk to human health, safety and the environment is the objective of the review.
Following the review, DOE, EPA and states negotiated expedited cleanup plans and high level
documents establishing accelerated cleanup principles. DOE field offices then prepared
Performance Management Plans based on strategies outlined in the Letters of Intent. Increasing
the pace and approach to DOE cleanup will require a corresponding increase in the level of EPA
effort necessary to negotiate RODs and compliance agreements, and to oversee cleanups to
ensure that human health and the environment are protected. DOE has begun to implement the
recommendations of the DOE top-to-bottom review by requiring each site must prepare a risk-
based end-state vision that will be concurred upon by the regulators. The deadline for
preparation of the risk-based end states vision reports is January 2004. In addition, DOE has
requested EPA's continued involvement in reviewing relevant policy and guidance documents.
In FY 2005, EPA will continue working with DOD, DOE, and other Federal agencies to
maximize construction completions and promote property reuse.
There continues to be increasing demand for EPA's involvement in DOD's Military
Munitions Response and FUDS programs. The General Accounting Office (GAO) has estimated
that millions of acres of training ranges in the United States and its territories are contaminated
with military munitions.29 By their nature, military munitions (unexploded ordnance (UXO),
buried munitions, and reactive or ignitable soil) present explosive, human health, and
environmental risks. The different types of military munitions vary in their likelihood of
detonation and sometimes these anomalies are just laying around waiting to be picked up by
innocent victims hiking or playing nearby. When disturbed, munitions may explode causing
immediate death or injury. EPA is working on several initiatives with DOD, the states, and
Federal Land Managers to help build DOD's Military Munitions Response program. These
initiatives include: participation in the Munitions Response Committee to coordinate, identify,
and synchronize munitions response efforts with DOD; review and comment on the Munitions
Inventory and Munitions Response Prioritization Protocol; development of EPA guidelines to
provide direction to those overseeing response actions involving UXO/ordnance and explosives
(OE); publishing and updating a handbook on the management of OE that will offer information
on the technical issues associated with the cleanup of military munitions; and, conducting
UXO/OE training for all EPA regions and state, Tribal, and DOD staff involved in UXO/OE
responses at Federal facilities.
EPA is finding itself more involved in the environmental investigations and cleanups of
privately-owned FUDS. FUDS are sites formerly owned, leased, possessed, or operated by DOD
that are, in some cases, now owned by the states, Tribes, cities, and other government entities, as
29 "DoD Training Range Cleanup Cost Estimates Are Likely Understated," GAO-01-479, April
2001, p. 1
111-56
-------
well as individuals or corporations, etc. The Defense Environmental Restoration Program
(DERP) assigns DOD the "responsibility" to conduct response actions consistent with CERCLA
and the National Contingency Plan at such properties. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USAGE) implements the FUDS program for DOD.
The Agency is working on several initiatives with the USAGE, states, and Tribes hi the
identification and cleanup of over 9,300 FUDS nationwide. EPA has finalized a policy which
articulates how the Agency plans to undertake its obligations and responsibilities at non-
Federally owned, non-NPL FUDS. Over the past several years, EPA, the states and public have
expressed concerns with USAGE response actions, environmental investigations, and cleanups at
privately-owned FUDS that are not on the NPL. Some FUDS have been redeveloped for uses
inconsistent with then- environmental condition (e.g., housing, schools). Spring Valley, located
hi northwest Washington, D. C. is the nation's first FUDS involving the cleanup of chemical
munitions hi a residential area. This site work, which is being managed by the USAGE, includes
a university and an adjacent neighborhood where World War I chemical warfare agents were
tested and disposed of in 1918.
Federal Facility Interagency Agreements
CERCLA § 120 requires that all Federal facility sites on the NPL sign an LAG which
provide enforceable schedules for the progression of the entire cleanup. The signing and
implementation of an LAG ensures a protective cleanup at a timely pace. EPA will also monitor
milestones in existing LAGs, resolve disputes, and oversee all remedial work being conducted by
Federal facilities. EPA will work with affected agencies to resolve outstanding policy issues
relating to the cleanup of Federal facilities.
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC)
Since FY 1993, EPA's
Superfund BRAC program has
worked with DOD and the states'
environmental programs to achieve
the Agency's goal of "making
property environmentally
acceptable for transfer, while
protecting human health and the
environment" at realigning, closing
or closed military installations.
These activities complement
Agency themes of one cleanup
program and revitalization.
Between FY 1988 and FY 1995,
497 major Army, Navy, Air Force,
and Defense Logistics Agency
Time and Cost Avoidance Attributed to
EPA Participation in the Fast Track Cleanup Program
FY02
FY01
FYOO
FY99
FY98
FY97J
FY96J
FY95
^^^^^^^^^^^^T^^^^^^^^^^^1 " 1 -*>6 tHi>^a YedP>
ifMM^!^!^^^^^s^-!'^!^^ 3 -*/*/ » '.'•••''
^^^^^^^^^^^^^T^ ^ jWV.f
-------
military installations were slated either for realignment or closure. Of these 497 BRAC
installations, 107 have been designated accelerated cleanup installations. The four rounds of
BRAC are generally referred to as BRAC 1988, BRAC 1991, BRAC 1993, and BRAC 1995,
indicating the year in which each cluster of military installations was selected for realignment or
closure. Accelerating the cleanup of 107 BRAC installations is intended to make parcels
available for reuse as quickly as possible via the transfer of uncontaminated or remediated
parcels, lease of contaminated parcels where cleanup is underway, or "early transfer" of
contaminated property.
Since FY 1993, EPA and DOD have addressed lease-related concerns at BRAC sites by
preparing findings of suitability to lease or transfer. These findings summarize any and all
environmental information upon which DOD relies while establishing environmental restrictions
in leases on property conveyances necessary to protect human health and the environment. The
majority of BRAC acres planned for transfer from DOD are intended for non-Federal entities. A
major success for the accelerated cleanup program is, the formation of base cleanup teams
(BCTs) at those installations designated as such. The teams, which include environmental
experts from EPA, DOD, and the states, engineer common sense approaches to cleanups by
developing common goals and priorities. The Agency empowers the team to integrate base reuse
priorities while making decisions to expedite the process of accelerating cleanup. To further
assist with accelerated cleanups, EPA engages in public participation by working with DOD to
establish RABs at military installations. RABs foster teamwork by bringing members of the
community together with military officials and government regulators to discuss cleanup issues.
EPA and DOD have entered into a new interagency funding agreement which will extend
EPA's involvement in the existing BRAC program through September 30, 2005. The National
Defense Authorization Act of FY 2002 authorizes another BRAC round for FY 2005. In FY
2005, the Agency will continue to focus on meeting the requirements of the existing BRAC
bases and putting those facilities back into productive reuse. To date, EPA's participation hi the
BRAC program has afforded DOD a savings of $372 million and 468 project years. This time
and cost savings for the BRAC program translates into communities being satisfied since
properties are being put back into productive reuse much quicker.
Superfund Enforcement
The Superfund enforcement program is critical to the Agency's ability to clean up the
vast majority of the nation's worst hazardous waste sites. The program pursues a policy of
"enforcement first" to ensure that sites for which there are viable responsible parties are cleaned
up by those parties. In FY 2005, EPA will continue to secure Potentially Responsible Parties
(PRP) commitments to conduct new remedial actions, as its primary strategy for completing
construction at non-Federal facility Superfund sites. In tandem with this approach, various
Superfund reforms are being implemented to increase fairness, reduce transaction costs and
promote economic redevelopment. The Agency provides funding to the Department of Justice
(DOJ) through an interagency agreement (LAG) to assist EPA Superfund in enforcement efforts.
111-58
-------
EPA has successfully encouraged or compelled PRPs to undertake or fund approximately
70% of new remedial construction work at non-Federal facility Superfund sites in recent years.
The environmental benefits cannot be overstated, as most contaminated waste sites would not
otherwise be cleaned up due to limited federal resources. The program focuses on the following
efforts: 1) maximizing PRP participation in conducting or funding response actions while
promoting fairness hi the enforcement process; 2) recovering costs from PRPs when EPA
expends funds from the Superfund Trust Fund; and 3) negotiating agreements with Federal
facilities for NPL site cleanup.
In FY 2005, the Agency will negotiate remedial design/ remedial action cleanup
agreements at sites and will also achieve removal agreements at hazardous waste sites. Where
negotiations fail, the Agency will either take unilateral enforcement actions to require PRP
cleanup or use Trust Fund dollars to remediate sites. When Trust Fund dollars are used to
cleanup sites, the program will take cost recovery actions against PRPs to recover expenditures.
The Superfund program and its stakeholders have benefited from enforcement reforms
implemented in recent years. These reforms include undertaking early, expanded PRP searches
and investigations to enable "enforcement first" to occur and develop sufficient information to
make orphan share determinations; making orphan share offers at all eligible sites; expediting
negotiations to facilitate early de minimis settlements; settling with parties with limited ability to
pay; making more effective and widespread use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR);
issuing administrative orders to the maximum practicable number of PRPs at a given site; and
creating site-specific special accounts.
In FY 2005, the Superfund cost recovery program will recover monies expended from the
Trust Fund from viable responsible parties. Where settlement negotiations and previous
enforcement actions have failed to achieve PRP response, and Trust Fund dollars are used to
cleanup sites, the program will take cost recovery actions against PRPs to recover expenditures.
By pursuing cost recovery settlements, the program promotes the principle that polluters should
pay cleanup costs at sites where they caused or contributed to the contamination and maximizes
the leverage of the Trust Fund to address future threats posed by contaminated sites. Trust Fund
expenditures will be recouped through administrative actions, CERCLA § 107 case referrals, and
through settlements reached with the use of alternative dispute resolution.
The enforcement program's involvement in case referrals and support include case
development and preparation, referral and post-filing actions. The program will also provide
case and cost documentation support for the docket of cases currently being worked on by DOT.
The enforcement program will meet cost recovery statute of limitation deadlines, resolve cases,
and issue bills for oversight and make collections in a timely manner.
EPA's financial management community maintains a strong partnership with the
Superfund program. The Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) recognizes and supports
this continuing partnership by providing the full array of financial management support services
necessary to pay Superfund bills and recoup cleanup and oversight costs for the trust fund.
111-59
-------
OCFO manages Superfund budget formulation, justification, and execution as well as financial
cost recovery. OCFO manages oversight billing for Superfund site cleanups (cost of overseeing
the responsible party's cleanup activities) and refers oversight debts to the Department of Justice
(DOJ) when they are not paid.
Superfund: Emergency Response and Removal
EPA plays a major role in reducing the risks that accidental and intentional releases of
harmful substances and oil pose to human health and the environment. As the Federal on-scene
coordinator (OSC) in the inland zone, EPA evaluates and responds to thousands of releases
annually as part of the National Response System (NRS). The NRS is a multi-agency
preparedness and response mechanism that includes the following key components: the National
Response Center (NRC); the National Response Team (NRT), composed of 16 Federal agencies;
13 Regional Response Teams (RRTs); and Federal OSCs. These organizations work with state
and local officials to develop and maintain contingency plans that will enable the Nation to
respond effectively to hazardous substance and oil emergencies. When an incident occurs, these
groups coordinate with the OSC in charge to ensure that all necessary resources, such as
personnel and equipment, are available and that containment, cleanup, and disposal activities
proceed quickly, efficiently, and effectively. As a result of NRS efforts, the Nation has
successfully contained many major oil spills and releases of hazardous substances, minimizing
the adverse impacts on human health and the environment.
Each year, EPA personnel assess, respond to, mitigate, and clean up thousands of
releases, whether accidental, deliberate, or naturally occurring. These incidents range from small
spills at chemical or oil facilities to national disasters, such as hurricanes and earthquakes, to
terrorist events like the 2001 World Trade Center and anthrax attacks, to the 2003 Columbia
shuttle tragedy. EPA undertakes removals to prevent, reduce or mitigate threats posed by
releases or potential releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, and contaminants in emergency
and non-emergency situations at NPL and non-NPL sites. EPA undertakes removal response
actions at: 1) emergency incidents where response is necessary within a matter of hours (e.g.,
threats of fire or explosion); 2) tune-critical incidents posing public health and environmental
threats; and, 3) non-time critical situations at both NPL and non-NPL sites to promote quicker
and less costly cleanup. Decisions to conduct removals are made based on protecting human
health and the environment and minimizrng risk from uncontrolled releases. The National
Response System (NRS) is designed to have responsible parties respond to incidents when
possible, and to have local and state response agencies respond when within their capabilities.
However, for those incidents that are not properly addressed by the responsible party and are
beyond the scope of responses typically managed by the local or state agencies, EPA will assist
or lead the response. EPA traditionally responds to 350 incidents each year.
EPA will work to improve its ability to respond effectively to incidents that may involve
harmful chemical, oil, biological, and radiological substances. As part of its strategy for
improving effectiveness, the Agency will explore improvements in response readiness levels,
including field and personal protection equipment and response training, and exercises; review
response data provided in the "after-action" reports prepared by EPA emergency responders
following a release; and examine "lessons learned" reports to identify which activities work and
111-60
-------
which need to be improved. Application of this information and other data will advance the
Agency's state-of-the-art emergency response operations.
EPA's emergency preparedness, prevention, and response staff are vital to this work. We
will continue to develop technical personnel hi the field, ensuring their readiness and protecting
their health and safety when responding to releases of dangerous materials. In addition, EPA will
strengthen its information infrastructure by making information management decisions Agency-
wide and by improving operations and the security, collection, and exchange of information.
Superfund: EPA Emergency Preparedness
Preparedness on a national level is essential to ensure that emergency responders are able
to deal with multiple, large-scale emergencies, including those that may involve chemicals, oil,
biological, or radiological substances. Over the next several years, EPA will enhance its core
emergency response program to respond quickly and effectively to chemical, oil, biological, and
radiological releases and will improve coordination mechanisms to enable response to
simultaneous, large-scale national emergencies, including homeland security incidents. The
agency will focus its efforts on Regional Response Teams (RRTs) and coordination among
regions; health and safety issues, including provision of clothing that protects and identifies
responders, training, and exercise; establishment of delegation and warrant authorities; and,
response readiness, including equipment, transportation, and outreach. The criteria for
excellence in the core emergency response program will ensure a high level of overall readiness
throughout the Agency and improve its ability to support multi-regional responses after a
baseline is established hi FY 2003. EPA anticipates it will improve its readiness level by 10
percent annually.
In addition to enhancing our readiness capabilities, EPA will work to improve internal
and external coordination and communication mechanisms. For example, as part of the National
Incident Coordination Team, EPA will continue to improve its policies, plans, procedures, and
decision-making processes for coordinating responses to national emergencies. Under the
Continuity of Operations/Continuity of Government program, EPA will upgrade and test plans,
facilities, training, and equipment to ensure that essential government business can continue
during a catastrophic emergency. NRT capabilities are being expanded to coordinate interagency
activities during large-scale responses. EPA will coordinate its activities with the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS), Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA), Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI), other Federal agencies, and state and local governments. EPA
will also continue to clarify its roles and responsibilities to ensure that Agency security programs
are consistent with the national homeland security strategy.
Under multiple authorities, including CERCLA, FWPCA, the Oil Pollution Act, and the
National Contingency Plan (NCP), EPA supports a highly effective national emergency
preparedness and response capability.
Through the National Response Team (NRT)TRRTs and the Federal Response Plan
(FRP), the Federal government helps states and cities address major incidents that are beyond
their capabilities. EPA chairs the 16 NRT agencies and co-chairs the 13 RRTs throughout the
111-61
-------
U.S. which coordinates actions of all Federal partners to prevent, prepare for and respond to
hazardous substance and petroleum emergencies, whether accidental or terrorist in origin.
Building on current efforts to enhance national emergency response management, NRT
agencies will continue the development of the new National Incident Management System
(NIMS) and National Response Plan (NRP). NRT agencies will improve notification and
response procedures, develop anthrax response technical assistance documents, continue to
implement and test incident command/unified command system (IC/UCS) across all levels of
government and the private sector, and assist in the development of Regional Contingency Plans
and Local Area Plans. Technical assistance, training and exercises will be provided to identify
and correct barriers to implementing the system (e.g., size of command structure, cultural
differences between state/local and Federal responders). In the science and technology area the
NRT will continue to assist web-based responder training and innovative use of incident
notification technologies.
Another important NRT priority is the U.S.-Panama Canal agreement which calls for the
U.S. to provide assistance to the Panama Canal Authority when emergencies that exceed their
capabilities. In FY 2005, EPA will work with the Canal Authority's response officials to
improve their incident management skills, through training assistance and table top exercises
involving incident notification and response management.
The FRP, under the direction of the DHS, provides for the delivery of Federal assistance
to states to help them deal with the consequences of terrorist events as well as natural and other
significant disasters. EPA has the lead responsibility for the plan's Emergency Support Function
covering hazardous materials and inland petroleum releases. As such it participates in the
Federal Emergency Support Function Leaders Group which addresses FRP planning and
implementation at the operational level. Through this interagency organization, Federal agencies
handle issue formulation and resolution, review after-action reports, and evaluate the need for
changes to FRP planning and implementation strategies. They also participate in FRP exercises,
training and post event evaluation actions, coordinating these activities closely with the NRT.
Under the NRP, EPA will participate, on the successor organization to the Catastrophic
Disaster Response Group (CDRG) which will provide national level guidance and policy
direction on response coordination and issues that arise from emergency support function
activities.
In FY 2005, EPA will provide staff support to the DHS's emergency operations center
during national disasters and emergencies. EPA will also continue to develop and participate in
training courses on emergency support function responsibilities, deliver presentations on the
NRP to national forums and participate in nation-wide exercises to test and improve the Federal
government's preparedness and response system and its capabilities.
Compliance Assistance and Centers and Civil Enforcment
The EPA will continue to provide effective compliance and enforcement support Clean
Water Act Section 311 (oil spill and hazardous substances) policy development, case
111-62
-------
development and review. It will also provide support for field investigations and inspections for
the Spills and Spill Control Countermeasure (SPCC) compliance program.
LUST/UST (LUSTportion only)
In controlling 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, the Agency will work with states, Tribes and Intertribal
Consortia to leave the land better protected through a one cleanup program approach. The
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) program promotes rapid and effective responses to
releases from Federally-regulated underground storage tanks (USTs) containing petroleum by
enhancing state, local, and Tribal enforcement and response capability. To this end, by FY 2008,
EPA intends to clean up and reduce the backlog of approximately 136,000 confirmed releases for
which cleanups have not been completed by 50 percent. EPA will continue to work with the
states to strive for approximately 18,000 — 23,000 cleanups completed each year, thus reducing
the backlog.
The Agency's LUST program provides support for the oversight and cleanup of
petroleum releases from USTs, using LUST funds where owners and operators are unknown,
unwilling, or unable to take corrective actions themselves. States may also oversee and enforce
responsible party cleanups and cost recover from responsible parties who are unwilling to pay for
cleanups.
In FY 2005, EPA's LUST Program priorities continue to focus on accelerating cleanups;
addressing contamination from oxygenates; and promoting the continued use, reuse (i.e.,
revitalization), and long-term management of LUST sites. EPA will continue working with state
UST programs to accelerate the pace of cleanups by measuring and evaluating performance and
with other cleanup programs to streamline the remediation process, and promoting innovative
approaches to corrective action. EPA is helping to address groundwater and drinking water
contamination from oxygenates by supporting information exchange, research, and field pilots
that provide a better understanding of the nature, scope, and best remedial approaches to
contamination from oxygenates. EPA will continue promoting the use and reuse of LUST sites
by developing partnerships and incentives, sharing experiences and lessons learned, fostering the
use of Brownfields grants for petroleum-contaminated sites, devising ways to prioritize sites for
reuse, identifying how to improve the long-term management of LUST sites, and continuing to
measure program performance. In FY 2005, EPA will continue to improve methods of tracking
and analyzing LUST program performance, e.g., projecting cleanup goals, analyzing trends,
looking at new and existing performance measures and their definitions, and developing
diagnostic tools to help EPA and state managers improve strategies for expediting cleanups. EPA
will continue working with states to improve performance reporting and tracking.
As part of the Agency's One Cleanup Program Initiative, EPA will continue to coordinate
cleanup efforts among the Agency's solid waste remediation programs to ensure more consistent
and effective cleanups, provide clear and more useful information about cleanups, and apply
better performance measures to cleanup programs. In FY 2005, EPA will continue coordinating
with Agency task forces on groundwater cleanup, site assessment decision-making, and long-
111-63
-------
term site stewardship to support this Initiative. LUST program-specific projects include
developing information about long-term site management and a strategy for evaluating the
impact of vapor intrusion at LUST sites. Concerns about the use of fuel oxygenates (e.g., methyl-
tertiary-butyl-ether, or MTBE) in gasoline further underscores EPA's and the states'
programmatic emphasis for better oversight and quicker action to reduce the costs of cleaning up
MTBE contamination, which can cost up to 100 percent more than a cleanup involving the
typical gasoline contaminants. In turn fewer communities and individuals, including those in
Indian Country, will lose their drinking water supplies.
EPA will continue to perform its oversight responsibilities, strengthen partnerships
among stakeholders, and provide technical assistance and training to improve and expedite
corrective action at LUST sites. To help state and EPA regulators respond to releases and sites
in a proactive manner, EPA will continue to provide a LUST web-based training module that
addresses topics such as basic hydrogeology, source control, sampling techniques, remediation
technologies, and performance monitoring. The LUST module is one element of a national UST
training effort initiated in FY 2003 by a state, and EPA work group. In FY 2005, EPA will also
identify and foster the implementation of innovative approaches, such as multi-site cleanup
agreements with states and states' use of performance-based contracting to achieve LUST
program objectives, and evaluations to optimize remediation at difficult LUST sites. UST owners
and operators undertake nearly all cleanups under the supervision of state or local agencies.
The Agency has the primary responsibility for implementing the LUST program in Indian
country. A portion of the LUST resources is used to implement the LUST program in Indian
country, including but not limited to cleanup activities and enforcement. In FY 2005, EPA will
continue to provide support in Indian Country to educate owners and operators about the
requirements for addressing leaking USTs; oversee and conduct site assessments, site
investigations, and remediation, in part, through a national LUST contract designed specifically
for Indian Country; enforce against responsible parties; perform cleanup of soil and/or
groundwater; provide alternate water supplies and cost recovery against UST owners and
operators in Indian Country; provide technical expertise and assistance by utilizing in-house
personnel, contractors and grants/cooperative agreements to Tribal entities using Public Law
105-276 and to non-state entities using RCRA 8001; conduct response activities in very limited
circumstances; oversee responsible party lead cleanups in Indian Country; and, provide
direction, support and assistance to Tribal governments as well as negotiate and monitor then-
cooperative agreements. The Agency estimates that cleaning up all known and yet-to-be-
discovered releases in Indian Country will take several years.
LUST Cooperative Agreements
The LUST program promotes rapid and effective responses to releases from USTs
containing petroleum by enhancing state, local and Tribal enforcement and response capability.
Most of EPA's LUST appropriation is provided to 56 states and territories through cooperative
agreements. These states have the authority to respond to respond to petroleum releases from
USTs using LUST funds where owners and operators are unknown, unwilling, or unable to take
corrective actions themselves. States may also oversee and enforce responsible party cleanups
and cost recover from responsible parties who are unwilling to pay for cleanups. To this end, by
111-64
-------
FY 2008, EPA intends to clean up and reduce the backlog of approximately 136,000 confirmed
releases for which cleanups have not been completed by 50 percent. EPA will continue to work
with the states to strive for approximately 18,000 - 23,000 cleanups completed each year, thus
reducing the backlog,
As part of the FY 2005 budget cycle, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
evaluated the updated LUST program analysis, originally conducted in FY 2004 using the
Performance Assessment Rating Tool (PART). OMB gave the program a rating of "Results Not
Demonstrated," and indicated that the LUST program has a clear purpose but lacks adequate
strategic planning and needs to set goals that are adequately ambitious and show clear human
health or environmental outcomes. In response to these findings, EPA has undertaken new
analyses to refine its targets and to test the link between the activities of the program, notably
cleanups, and the impact on human health and environmental outcomes achieved.
RCRA: Corrective Action
For decades, many industrial facilities in this country mismanaged their hazardous
wastes. The Superfund program addresses some of these facilities, particularly those that have
been abandoned or closed. A significantly larger number, however, fall under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Corrective Action program that EPA and the
authorized states administer. Currently, thirty-nine states and territories are authorized to
implement the corrective action program. The program covers some of the most intractable and
controversial cleanup projects in the country. Over 3,500 industrial facilities must undergo a
cleanup under the RCRA program. Out of these facilities, the Agency has targeted over 1,700
facilities as high priority - where people or the environment is likely to be at significant current
or future risk. The Agency is pursuing a strategy for addressing the worst facilities first, as
reflected in the Agency's annual performance goal. This focus on near-term actions has resulted
in over 1,200 facilities achieving the Current Human Exposures Under Control environmental
indicator goal and over 1,000 facilities achieving the Migration of Contaminated Groundwater
Under Control environmental indicator goal.
Over the past several years, the Agency has been successful hi implementing
administrative reforms that streamlined the corrective action program and improved overall
implementation. The reforms have been effective in changing the way program implementors
and stakeholders interact, which has had a positive impact on moving facilities toward cleanup
goals. Given the many challenges of meeting the environmental indicator targets for controlling
human exposures and toxic releases to groundwater, looking toward final cleanup, taking
advantage of redevelopment opportunities, and cleaning up Federal facilities, mahitahiing strong
partnerships with all relevant stakeholders will continue to be a priority for the program hi FY
2005.
Despite the progress made, challenges still face the program, including the extent and
severity of the groundwater contamination, complex technical and associated policy issues, and
the expense of groundwater cleanups. Also, many of the high priority facilities that have not yet
met the environmental indicator goals are extremely large and complicated sites that may not
make progress in cleanups at the same pace as those facilities that have already met the goals.
111-65
-------
Furthermore, ongoing work which began in FY 2002 has continued to demonstrate that
contamination hi groundwater can be a threat to people in ways beyond impacts to their drinking
water supplies. These issues, as well as others related to defining "completion" of cleanup and
implementing institutional controls, continue to surface during stakeholder meetings EPA hosted
across the country. EPA will continue working in partnership with the stakeholders to further
address these issues.
In FY 2005, the Agency will place added emphasis and resources on providing technical
assistance to facilities still working toward FY 2005 indicator goals and on moving facilities
toward final cleanup. To do so, the Agency will work in partnership with the authorized states
and the regulated community to resolve policy and technical issues, such as those associated with
setting subsequent and final cleanup goals for groundwater, indoor air exposures, and
groundwater-to-surface water pathways. Since there is not a one-size-fits-all approach to
cleanups, working partnerships will allow all parties to fully explore flexible, common sense
approaches.
In support of the revitalization theme, the Agency will work in partnership with states to
finalize development of a Revitalization Work Plan. There are many important revitalization
activities the Agency will undertake including: piloting an approach of clustering sites and
issues; supporting RCRA facilities in the next round of Brownfields grants; participation hi the
development of institutional control tracking and a "sites in my community" data system;
analysis of liability issues for municipalities and lenders; and, development of reports on acres
made available for reuse as a result of cleanup.
In FY 2005, the Agency will devote special attention to Federal facilities being cleaned
up under RCRA authorities. The Agency and the authorized states have worked with EPA's
Federal partners to more effectively communicate cleanup goals and facilitate Federal facilities'
cleanups. For example, the Agency will foster dialogue with the authorized states and the
Federal facility community to explore such topics as innovative approaches to cleanups and
regulatory flexibility. Lessons learned through programs hi other industries will be applied to
Federal facilities, leading to greater efficiencies hi cleanups.
Training and outreach are integral parts of the corrective action program's activities. The
way program implementors and the regulated community do business, and the way hi which the
public participates hi the cleanup decisions made in their communities has been positively
influenced through the reforms. The Agency will build on its successes, further promote
flexibility hi program implementation and continue to encourage more frequent communications
among all parties.
Categorical Grant: Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance
The RCRA statute authorizes EPA to assist state governments hi the development and
implementation of an authorized hazardous waste management program for the purpose of
controlling the generation, transportation, treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous wastes.
The states (both those authorized for corrective action and those not authorized for corrective
action through work sharing agreements with their regions) are the primary implementers of
111-66
-------
corrective action, although regional staff are also the lead on a significant number of facilities
undergoing corrective action. This account also provides funding for the direct implementation
of the RCRA program by Region 7 and 10 for the states of Iowa and Alaska, respectively.
In FY 2005, the following are activities which will be accomplished using categorical
grants:
• Assessments of RCRA facilities statutorily required to conduct CA and those
subject to CA
• Investigations of RCRA facilities where CA has been imposed
• Implementation of stabilization measures
• Determination if Human Exposures and Groundwater Releases are
"controlled"
• Selection of Final Remedy, Implementation of Final Remedy and if the
objectives of Final Remedies have been met
OMB evaluated the RCRA Corrective Action Program using their Program Assessment
Rating Tool (PART) during the FY 2005 budget cycle. OMB gave the program a rating of
adequate, and indicated that the program is well designed in that it puts decision-making
authority close to the actual cleanup activity while still ensuring a certain amount of oversight
and consistency in protecting human health and the environment. In addition, the program has
established acceptable long-term and annual outcome performance measures that tie directly to
program activities and focus on protecting human health. However, OMB noted that the goals
are no longer as ambitious as they were when first established and that new baselines and targets
are needed for the measures to continue to be useful in tracking and guiding program
performance.
In response to OMB's comments, EPA is working with the states to establish a new
baseline for performance measures and set appropriate new annual targets reflecting more
ambitious long-term goals, hi addition to efforts to develop land revitalization measures and
efficiency measures.
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and Recovery
Responding to small and large-scale disasters is one of EPA's traditional responsibilities.
The Agency's crucial role hi responding to the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks, the
decontamination of anthrax in a U.S. Senate office building, and the response to the Columbia
shuttle disaster have further defined the nation's expectations of EPA's emergency response
capabilities. The Agency will continue to play a unique role hi responding to and preparing for
future terrorist incidents. In FY 2005, EPA will continue to improve the capabilities of the
regional response programs, On-Scene Coordinators (OSCs), and the Environmental Response
Team (ERT) through unproved state-of-the-art equipment and expertise, increased training and
exercises, and additional field experience.
The Agency will continue efforts begun in FY 2004 to set up a National Decontamination
Team with plans to become fully operational in FY 2005. Efforts will focus on improving the
111-67
-------
Agency's specialized capabilities to address chemical and biological agents of concern, in both
environmental and building contamination situations.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is leading the development of a National
Response Plan (NRP) in accordance with the Homeland Security Presidential Document - 5
(HSPD-5), "Management of Domestic Incidents," issued in February 2003. The NRP is
structured based on the awareness, prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery aspects to
these incidents. EPA and other member agencies of the NRT are participating in this NRP
development, as well as the development of guidance for the new National Incident Management
System (NIMS) that will implement the NRP. The NIMS workgroups are addressing: command
and incident management; resource management; science and technology; system preparedness;
and, communication and information management. This effort is attempting to meet the
requirements of HSPD-5, especially in the context of September 11 and other terrorist threats,
while ensuring that existing authorities and response support systems (such as the National
Response System, the National Contingency Plan, and the Federal Response Plan) are currently
available and incorporated as appropriate.
Oil Spill: Prevention and Preparedness
The goal of the oil spill program is to protect public health and the environment from
hazards associated with a discharge or substantial threat of a discharge of oil into navigable
waters, adjoining shorelines, and exclusive economic zones of the United States. Based on data
obtained from the National Response Center, each year more than 24,000 oil spills occur in the
United States, over half of them within the inland zone over which EPA has jurisdiction. On
average, one spill of greater than 100,000 gallons occurs every month from EPA-regulated oil
storage facilities and the oil transportation network. Oil spills contaminate drinking water
supplies; cause fires and explosions; kill fish, birds, and other wildlife; destroy habitats and
ecosystems; and impact the food chain. There are also serious economic consequences of oil
spills because of their impact on commercial and recreational uses of water resources and
cleanup costs.
The oil spill program prevents, prepares for, responds to, and monitors oil spills. EPA
protects U.S. waters through oil spill prevention, preparedness, and enforcement activities
associated with the 415,000 non-transportation-related oil storage facilities EPA regulates
through its spill prevention program. In addition to its prevention responsibilities, EPA serves as
the lead responder for the inland zone for all spills, including non-transportation-related spills
from pipelines, trucks, and other transportation systems (regulated by the Department of
Transportation). EPA accesses the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, administered by the United
States Coast Guard, to obtain reimbursement for site-specific spill response activities.
The oil spill program establishes requirements to prevent and prepare for spills at oil
storage facilities subject to its regulations. The Oil and Hazardous Substances National
Contingency Plan (NCP) is the nation's blueprint for the Federal response to discharges of oil
and hazardous substances. The Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures (SPCC)
regulation and the Facility Response Plan (FRP) regulation chiefly compose EPA's oil program
regulatory framework. The oil spill program is also responsible for publishing the National
111-68
-------
Product Schedule and subpart J of the NCP, which is a listing of dispersants, other chemicals,
and other spill mitigating agents that may be used during response to oil discharges.
All regulated oil storage facilities must prepare SPCC plans. These facilities range from
commercial, manufacturing, or other enterprises using or storing oil to large tank farms; any
facility with an aggregate aboveground storage capacity greater than 1,320 gallons, or
completely buried storage greater than 42,000 gallons (not otherwise subject to the UST program
requirements) is regulated under the SPCC rule. EPA's field inspections and SPCC plan reviews
have as their goal unproved compliance with spill prevention requirements by the regulated
community.
In addition, large oil storage facilities and refineries must prepare FRPs to identify and
ensure the availability of resources to be prepared and ready to respond to a worst case
discharge, establish communication, address security, identify an individual with authority to
implement removal actions, and describe training and testing drills at the facility. In FY 2005,
EPA will conduct inspections, and review/approve plans at any of the approximately 6,000 FRP
facilities with a continued emphasis on emergency preparedness unannounced drills and
exercises to ensure facilities and responders can effectively implement response plans, including
responses to terrorist incidents.
EPA will continue the enhancement of the existing National Preparedness for Response
Exercise Program (PREP), with emphasis on area and regional planning. EPA will continue to
develop and modify area and regional contingency plans (ACPs, RCPs), in conjunction with area
committees (state, local and Federal officials in a given geographic location). The ACPs detail
the responsibilities of various parties in the event of a spill/release; describe unique geographical
features, sensitive ecological resources, and drinking water intakes for the area covered, and
identify available response equipment and its location. EPA conducts a small number of ACP
exercises each year to evaluate and strengthen the plans.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004 REQUEST
EPM
• (+611,800) Internal decisions to centralize LAN funding and provide support to the Land
Revitalization have resulted in an increase to the RCRA: Corrective Action program.
Superfund
• (- $6,501,300) The decrease to the Superfund: Remedial program primarily reflects
recent organizational changes. OSWER has consolidated response and removal
responsibilities within the new Office of Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and
Response (OEPPR). The decrease in funds for the Superfund Remedial program reflects
the new focus and responsibilities of OSRTI.
111-69
-------
• (+$1,284,100) Adjustments in resources available to the Superfund: Emergency
Response and Removal program reflect recent organizational changes within EPA in
response to its new responsibilities in the area of homeland security.
• (-$562,200) Adjustments in resources available to the Superfund: Federal Facilities
program reflect recent organizational changes within EPA in response to its new
responsibilities in the area of homeland security.
• (+6.0 FTE) FTE, previously allocated to the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC)
program, have been primarily redirected to meet additional EPA responsibilities under
the Superfund EPA Emergency Preparedness program. Five of the redirected FTE will
support efforts to ensure the readiness of EPA personnel, coordinate the National
Response Team and Regional Response Team efforts, and work with other Federal
agencies to respond effectively and consistently to nationally significant events. The
other FTE will be devoted to Superfund Remedial program efforts.
• (-$1,000,000), Reduces funds provided to the Department of Justice for CERCLA
litigation support.
• (+$340,200), Technical adjustment made from forensics support under goal 5, objective 4
to support the various programs under goals 3 and 5.
• (+$1,700,000 SF) These Regional resources support the full array of financial
management support services necessary to pay Superfund bills and recoup cleanup and
oversight costs for the trust fund.
• (+$ 1,791,000) The increase in non-payroll resources will be used to further efforts hi FY
2005 to modernize major Agency financial systems. The modernization will provide
decision-makers throughout the Agency with integrated budget cost and performance
information and timely and reliable financial information and reports to improve
accountability, decision-making and program management. FY 2005 efforts will focus
on significant upgrades to the Agency's budget and planning systems, new system
integration capabilities and continued progress in replacing EPA's integrated
financial management system scheduled for implementation in FY 2007, and further
developing desk-top access to key cost accounting and performance information.
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
Prepare for and Respond to Accidental and Intentional Releases
In 2005 Reduce and control the risks posed by accidental and intentional releases of harmful substances by
improving our Nation's capability to prepare for and respond more effectively to these emergencies.
In 2004 Reduce and control the risks posed by accidental and intentional releases of harmful substances by
improving our Nation's capability to prepare for and respond more effectively to these emergencies.
111-70
-------
In 2003 EPA responded to or monitored 322 significant oil spills in the inland zone and Superfund
accomplished 380 removal response actions.
Performance Measures:
Number of Superfund removal response actions
initiated.
Oil spills responded to or monitored by EPA.
Number of inspections and exercises conducted
at oil storage facilities that are required to have
Facility Response Plans.
Percentage of emergency response and homeland
security readiness improvement.
FY2003
Actuals
380
322
82.3%
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
350
300
10%
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
350
300
360
10%
removals
spills
inspections/
exercises
percent
Baseline: Through FY2003, Superfund had initiated approximately 7,900 removal response actions. EPA
typically responds to or monitors 300 oil spill cleanups per year. In FY2003, EPA completed
evaluations of core emergency response capabilities in each region, and the average score from these
was 823 out of a possible 1,000 points so 82.3 percent is used as the baseline for improvements.
Between FY 1997 and FY 2003, approximately 31 percent (or 1,862) of the nearly 6,000 oil storage
facilities required to have Facility Response Plans were inspected.
Assess and Cleanup Contaminated Land
In 2005 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.
In 2004 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.
In 2003 Superfund made 917 final site assessment decisions, controlled human exposures at 28 sites and
groundwater migration at 54 sites, and achieved 40 construction completions. The RCRA program
controlled human exposures at 230 sites and groundwater migration at 175 sites. There were 18,518
LUST cleanups.
Performance Measures:
Number of Superfund final site assessment
decisions.
Number of Superfund construction completions.
Number of Superfund hazardous waste sites with
human exposures controlled.
Number of Superfund hazardous waste sites
with groundwater migration controlled.
Number of final remedies (cleanup targets)
selected at Superfund sites.
Number of leaking underground storage tank
cleanups completed.
Number of high priority RCRA facilities with
human exposures to toxins controlled.
FY2003
Actuals
917
40
28
54
18,518
230
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
475
40
10
10
20
21,000
166
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
500
40
10
assessments
completions
sites
10
20
21,000
225
sites
remedies
cleanups
facilities
111-71
-------
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Number of high priority RCRA facilities with 175 129 203 facilities
toxic releases to groundwater controlled.
Baseline: By the end of FY 2003, Superfund had initiated approximately 7,900 removal response actions,
controlled human exposures at 82% (1,227 of 1,494) of eligible NPL sites and controlled groundwater
migration at 65% (826 of 1,275) of eligible NPL sites, and completed construction at 58% (886) of the
NPL sites. Of the 1,714 RCRA Corrective Action high priority facilities, 73% (1,246) have human
exposures controlled, an increase from 1,018 facilities with human exposures controlled at the end of
FY 2002; and 61% (1,049) have groundwater migration controlled, an increase from 877 facilities with
groundwater migration controlled at the end of FY 2002. Furthermore, at the end of FY 2001 there
were 814 facilities with human exposures controlled and 737 facilities groundwater migration
controlled reflecting the strong EPA/state partnership in this program. At the end of FY 2003, 303,120
cleanups of confirmed releases from Federally-regulated leaking underground storage tanks were
completed since 1987. At the end of FY 2002, there was a universe of 1,103 Superfund sites with final
remedies selected. The Agency is currently evaluating this baseline and may adjust it downward in the
future.
Superfund Cost Recovery
In 2005 Ensure trust fund stewardship by getting PRPs to initiate or fund the work and recover costs from
PRPs when EPA expends trust fund monies. Address cost recovery at all NPL and non-NPL sites with
a statute of limitations (SOL) on total past costs equal to or greater than $200,000.
In 2004 Ensure trust fund stewardship by getting PRPs to initiate or fund the work and recover costs from
PRPs when EPA expends trust fund monies. Address cost recovery at all NPL and non-NPL sites with
a statute of limitations (SOL) on total past costs equal to or greater than $200,000.
In 2003 Ensured trust fund stewardship by getting PRPs to initiate or fund the work and recover costs from
PRPs when EPA expends trust fund monies. Addressed cost recovery at all NPL and non-NPL sites
with a statute of limitations (SOL) on total past costs equal to or greater than $200,000.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Refer to DO J, settle, or write off 100% of Statute 100 100 100 Percent
of Limitations (SOLs) cases for SF sites with
total unaddressed past costs equal to or greater
than $200,000 and report value of costs
recovered.
Baseline: In FY 98 the Agency addressed 100 percent of cost recovery at all NPL & non-NPL sites with total
past costs equal or greater than $200,000.
Superfund Potentially Responsible Party Participation
In 2005 Reach a settlement or take an enforcement action before the start of a remedial action at 90 percent of
Superfund sites having a viable, liable responsible party other than the federal government.
In 2004 Reach a settlement or take an enforcement action before the start of a remedial action at 90 percent of
Superfund sites having a viable, liable responsible party other than the federal government.
111-72
-------
In 2003 Maximized all aspects of PRP participation which included maintaining PRP work at 87% of the new
remedial construction starts at non-Federal Facility Superfund, and emphasized fairness in the
settlement process.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY
Actuals Pres. 2005
Bud. Pres.
Bud.
PRPs conduct 70% of the work at new 87 Percent
construction starts
Percentage of Superfund sites at which 90 90 Percent
settlement or enforcement action taken before
the start of RA.
Baseline: In FY 98 approximately 70% of new remedial work at NPL sites (excluding Federal facilities) was
initiated by private parties. In FY2003, a settlement was reached or an enforcement action was taken
with non-Federal PRPs before the start of the remedial action at approximately 90 percent of
Superfund sites.
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
FY 2005 Performance Measures;
• Number of final Superfund site assessment decisions.
• Number of Superfund hazardous waste sites with human exposures controlled.
• Number of Superfund hazardous waste sites with groundwater migration controlled.
• Number of final remedies (cleanup targets) selected at Superfund sites.
• Number of Superfund construction completions.
• Number of Superfund removal response actions initiated.
Performance Database: The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability System (CERCLIS) is the database used by the Agency to track, store, and report
Superfund site information.
Data Source: CERCLIS is an automated EPA system; headquarters and EPA's Regional offices
enter data into CERCLIS on a rolling basis.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: Each performance measure is a specific variable
within CERCLIS.
QA/QC Procedures: To ensure data accuracy and control, the following administrative controls
are in place: 1) Superfund Implementation Manual (SPIM), the program management manual
that details what data must be reported; 2) Report Specifications, which are published for each
report detailing how reported data are calculated; 3) Coding Guide, which contains technical
instructions to such data users as Regional Information Management Coordinators (IMCs),
program personnel, report owners, and data input personnel; 4) Quality Assurance (QA) Unit
111-73
-------
Testing, an extensive QA check against report specifications; 5) Regional CERCLIS Data Entry
Internal Control Plan, which includes: (a) regional policies and procedures for entering data into
CERCLIS; (b) a review process to ensure that all Superfund accomplishments are supported by
source documentation; (c) delegation of authorities for approval of data input into CERCLIS;
and (d) procedures to ensure that reported accomplishments meet accomplishment definitions;
and (6) a historical lockout feature has been added to CERCLIS so that changes in past fiscal
year data can be changed only by approved and designated personnel and are logged to a change-
log report.
CERCLIS 3/WasteLAN operation and further development is taking place under the following
administrative control quality assurance procedures: 1) OIRM Life Cycle Guidance; 2) OSRTI
Quality Management Plan; 3) Agency platform, software and hardware standards (NTSD); 4)
Quality Assurance Requirements in all contract vehicles under which CERCLIS 3/WasteLAN is
being developed and maintained; and 5) Agency security procedures. In addition, specific
controls are in place for system design, data conversion and data capture, and CERCLIS
3/WasteLAN outputs.
Data Quality Reviews: Two audits, one by the Office Inspector General (OIG) and the other by
General Accounting Office (GAO), were done to assess the validity of the data in CERCLIS.
The OIG audit report, Superfund Construction Completion Reporting (No. E1SGF7_05_0102_
8100030), dated December 30, 1997, was prepared to verify the accuracy of the information that
the Agency was providing to Congress and the public. The OIG report concluded that the
Agency "has good management controls to ensure accuracy of the information that is reported,"
and "Congress and the public can rely upon the information EPA provides regarding
construction completions." Further information on this report are available at
http://www.epa.gQV/Qigearth/eroQm.htm. The GAO's report, Superfund Information on the
Status of Sites (GAO/RECD-98-241), dated August 28, 1998, was prepared to verify the
accuracy of the information in CERCLIS on sites' cleanup progress. The report estimates that
the cleanup status of National Priority List sites reported by CERCLIS as of September 30, 1997,
is accurate for 95 percent of the sites. Additional information on the Status of Sites may be
obtained by visiting http://www.gao. gov. Another OIG audit, Information Technology -
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System
(CERCLIS) Data Quality (Report No. 2002-P-00016), dated September 30, 2002, evaluated the
accuracy, completeness, timeliness, and consistency of the data entered into CERCLIS. The
weaknesses identified were caused by the lack of an effective quality assurance process and
adequate internal controls for CERCLIS data quality. The report provided 11 recommendations
to improve controls for CERCLIS data quality. OSWER concurs with the recommendations
contained in the audit, and many of the identified problems have been corrected or actions that
would address these recommendations are underway. Additional information about this report is
available at http://www.epa.gov/oigearth/eroom.htm.
The IG reviews annually the end-of-year Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) data, in an informal process, to verify the data
supporting the performance measures. Typically, there are no published results.
111-74
-------
The Quality Management Plan (QMP) for the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
(OSWER) is currently under review by the Office of Environmental Information.
Data Limitations: Weaknesses were identified hi the OIG audit, Information Technology -
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System
(CERCLIS) Data Quality (Report No. 2002-P-00016), dated September 30, 2002. The
weaknesses identified were caused by the lack of an effective quality assurance process and
adequate internal controls over CERCLIS data quality. The report provided 11
recommendations with which OSWER concurs. Many of the identified problems have been
corrected or actions that would address these recommendations are underway, e.g., 1) FY 02/03
SPIM Chapter 2 update was made to better define the Headquarters and Regional roles and
responsibilities for maintaining planning and accomplishment data in CERCLIS; 2) draft
guidance from OCA (Other Cleanup Activity) subgroup, which outlines the conditions under
which sites are taken back from states when states have the lead but are not performing and 3)
Pre-CERCLIS Screening: A Data Entry Guide, which provides guidance to the regions for
preventing entry of duplicate sites in CERCLIS. The development and implementation of a
quality assurance process for CERCLIS data has begun. This process includes delineating
quality assurance responsibilities in the program office and periodically selecting random
samples of CERCLIS data points to check against source documents in site files.
Error Estimate: The GAO's report, "Superfund Information on the Status of Sites"
(GAO/RECD-98-241), dated August 28, 1998, estimates that the cleanup status of National
Priority List sites reported by CERCLIS is accurate for 95 percent of the sites.
New/Improved Data or Systems: A CERCLIS modernization effort is currently underway to
enhance CERCLIS, with a focus on data collection and data analysis and how to best satisfy the
current needs of the Superfund program. Among other initiatives, this effort includes reviewing
current and anticipated data needs. Items in CERCLIS that are no longer needed will be deleted,
and new items identified will be added. Strict standards for quality will be enforced. During FY
2004, the CERCLIS database will be made Intranet accessible, and perhaps, Internet accessible,
using CITRIX. This will make it easier to access the database and will simplify the SNAPSHOT
process. This change will improve database reliability since there will no longer be 10 separate
CERCLIS installations on servers maintained by regional IRM shops. The Superfund eFacts
system is a vital part of the CERCLIS modernization efforts. The Superfund eFacts system is an
e-Government solution design to give EPA management and staff quick and easy access to
important milestones relating to various aspects of the Superfund program. In 2005, the Agency
will continue its efforts begun in 1999 to improve the Superfund program's technical information
by increasing reliance upon CERCLIS support data systems, which incorporate more site remedy
selection, risk, removal response, and community involvement information. Efforts to share
information among the Federal, state, and Tribal programs to further enhance the Agency's
efforts to efficiently identify, evaluate, and remediate Superfund hazardous waste sites will
continue. In 2005, the Agency will also establish data quality objectives for program planning
purposes and to formulate the organization's information needs for the next 5 years.
Adjustments will be made to EPA's current architecture and business processes to better meet
those needs.
111-75
-------
References: References include OIG audit reports, Superfund Construction Completion
Reporting, (No. E1SGF7_05_0102_ 8100030) and Information Technology - Comprehensive FY
2005 Performance Measures Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information
System (CERCLIS) Data Quality, (No. 2002-P-00016), http://www.epa.gov/oigearth/eroom.htm:
and the GAO report, Superfund Information on the Status of Sites (GAO/RECD-98-241),
http.://www.ga,Q,gQy. Other references include the Superfund/Oil Implementation Manuals for
the fiscal years 1987 to the current manual, the Annual Performance Report to Congress, and the
Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation's Information Management
Center" Quality Assurance Procedures for the Official Superfund Data Base, CERCLIS
3/WasteLAN.
FY 2005 Performance Measures
* Number of leaking underground storage tank cleanups completed.
Performance Database: The Office of Underground Storage Tanks (OUST) does not maintain a
national database; the states maintain their respective databases and/or spreadsheets.
Data Source: Designated state agencies submit semi-annual progress reports to the EPA's
Regional offices.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: N/A
QA/QC Procedures: States submit their performance on an EPA-supplied form for review
against national trends and historical data. Previously reported percentages and/or totals are
compared to current values and states are notified of any discrepancies and/or anomalies.
Data Quality Review: EPA resolves any discrepancies and/or anomalies in the reported
information through written explanations and/or justifications from the states arid discussions.
Data Limitations: Percentages reported are sometimes based on estimates and extrapolations
from sample data. The quality of the states' data depends on the completeness and accuracy of
states' internal recordkeeping.
Error Estimate: Not calculated. •
New/Improved Data or Systems: None.
References: FY 2003 Mid-Year Activity Report, June 19, 2003 (updated semi-annually)
FY 2005 Performance Measures:
• High priority RCRA facilities with human exposures to toxins controlled
• High priority RCRA facilities with toxic releases to groundwater controlled
Performance Database: The Resource Conservation Recovery Act Information System
(RCRAInfo) is the national database which supports EPA's RCRA program.
111-76
-------
Data Source: Data are entered by the States. A "yes" or "no" entry is made in the database
with respect to meeting corrective action indicators. Supporting documentation and reference
materials are maintained in Regional and state files. EPA's Regional offices and authorized
states enter data on a rolling basis.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: RCRAInfo has several different modules, including a
Corrective Action Module that tracks the status of facilities that require, or may require,
corrective actions. RCRAInfo contains information on entities (genetically referred to as
"handlers") engaged hi hazardous waste (HW) generation and management activities regulated
under the portion of RCRA that provides for regulation of hazardous waste. Human exposures
controlled and toxic releases to groundwater controlled are used to summarize and report on the
facility-wide environmental conditions at the RCRA Corrective Action Program's highest
priority facilities. The environmental indicators are used to track the RCRA program's progress
in getting highest priority contaminated sites under control. Known and suspected sitewide
conditions are evaluated using a series of simple questions and flow-chart logic to arrive at a
reasonable, defensible determination. These questions were issued as a memorandum titled:
Interim Final Guidance for RCRA Corrective Action Environmental Indicators, Office of Solid
Waste, February 5, 1999). Lead regulators for the site (authorized state or EPA) make the
environmental indicator determination; however, facilities or their consultants may assist EPA in
the evaluation by providing information on the current environmental conditions.
QA/QC Procedures: States and Regions generate the data and manage data quality related to
timeliness and accuracy (i.e., the environmental conditions and determinations are correctly
reflected by the data). Within RCRAInfo, the application software enforces structural controls
that ensure that high-priority national components of the data are properly entered. RCRAInfo
documentation, which is available to all users on-line, provides guidance to facilitate the
generation and interpretation of data. Training on use of RCRAInfo is provided on a regular
basis, usually annually, depending on the nature of systems changes and user needs.
Note: Access to RCRAInfo is open only to EPA Headquarters, Regional, and authorized State
personnel. It is not available to the general public because the system contains enforcement
sensitive data. The general public is referred to EPA's Envirofacts Data Warehouse to obtain
filtered information on RCRA-regulated hazardous waste sites.
Data Quality Review: GAO's 1995 Report on EPAs Hazardous Waste Information System
(http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/) reviewed whether national RCRA information systems support
EPA and the states in managing their hazardous waste programs.
Data Limitations: No data limitations have been identified. As discussed above, environmental
indicator determinations are made by the authorized states and EPA Regions based on a series of
standard questions and entered directly into RCRAInfo. EPA has provided guidance and training
to states and Regions to help ensure consistency in those determinations. High priority facilities
are monitored on a facility-by-facility basis and the QA/QC procedures identified above are in
place to help ensure data validity.
111-77
-------
Error Estimate: N/A. Currently, the Office of Solid Waste does not collect data on estimated
error rates.
New/Improved Data or Systems: EPA has successfully implemented new tools for managing
environmental information to support federal and state programs, replacing the old data systems
(the Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System and the Biennial Reporting
System) with RCRAInfo. RCRAInfo allows for tracking of information on the regulated
universe of RCRA hazardous waste handlers, such as facility status, regulated activities, and
compliance history. The system also captures detailed data on the generation of hazardous waste
from large quantity generators and on waste management practices by treatment, storage, and
disposal facilities. RCRAInfo is web-accessible, providing a convenient user interface for
federal, state and local managers, encouraging development of in-house expertise for controlled
cost, and using commercial off-the-shelf software to develop reports from database tables.
References: GAO's 1995 Report on EPA's Hazardous Waste Information System reviewed
whether national RCRA information systems support EPA and the states in managing their
hazardous waste programs. Recommendations coincide with ongoing internal efforts
(WIN/Informed) to improve the definitions of data collected, ensure that data collected provide
critical information and minimize the burden on states. This historical document is available on
the Government Printing Office Website (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/)
FY 2005 Performance Measure:
• Percentage of emergency response and homeland security readiness improvement.
Performance Database: No specific database has been developed. Data from evaluations are
tabulated and stored using standard software (WordPerfect, spreadsheets, etc.)
Data Source: Data are collected through detailed surveys and interviews of personnel and
managers in each program office. The survey instrument was developed based upon Core
Emergency Response (ER) elements, and has been approved by EPA Headquarters and Regional
managers.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: The Core ER elements were developed over the last
several years by the EPA Removal Program to identify and clarify what is needed to ensure an
excellent emergency response program. The elements, definitions, and rationales were
developed by staff and managers and have been presented to the Administrator and other high
level Agency managers. Based on the Core ER standards, evaluation forms and criteria were
established for EPA's Regional programs, the Environmental Response Team (ERT), and
Headquarters. These evaluation criteria identify what data need to be collected, and how that
data translate into an appropriate score for each Core ER element. The elements and evaluation
criteria will be reviewed each year for relevance to ensure that the programs have the highest
standards of excellence and that the measurement clearly reflects the level of readiness. The data
are collected from each Regional office, ERT, and Headquarters using a systematic, objective
process. Each evaluation team consists of managers and staff, from Headquarters and from
another EPA Regional office, with some portion of the team involved hi all reviews for
111-78
-------
consistency and some portion varying to ensure independence and objectivity. For instance, a
team evaluating Region A might include some or all of the following: a staff person from
Headquarters who is participating hi all reviews, a staff person from Headquarters who is very
familiar with Region A activities, a manager from Headquarters, and a staff person and/or
manager from Region B. One staff or group will be responsible for gathering and analyzing all
the data to determine the overall score for each Regional office, ERT, and Headquarters, and for
determining an overall National score.
QA/QC Procedures: See "Methods, Assumptions and Suitability"
Data Quality Review: The evaluation team will review the data (see Methods, Assumptions
and Suitability) during the data collection and analysis process. Additional data review will be
conducted after the data has been analyzed to ensure that the scores are consistent with the data
and program information. There currently is no specific database that has been developed to
collect, store, and manage the data.
Data Limitations: One key limitation of the data is the lack of a dedicated database system to
collect and manage the data. Standard software packages (word processing, spreadsheets) are
used to develop the evaluation criteria, collect the data, and develop the accompanying readiness
scores.
Error Estimate: It is likely that the error estimate for this measure will be small for the
following reasons: the standards and evaluation criteria have been developed and reviewed
extensively by Headquarters and EPA's Regional managers and staff; the data will be collected
by a combination of managers and staff to provide consistency across all reviews plus an
important element of objectivity in each review; the scores will be developed by a team looking
across all ten Regions, ERT, and Headquarters; and only twelve sets of data will be collected,
allowing for easier cross-checking and ensuring better consistency of data analysis and
identification of data quality gaps.
New/Improved Data or Systems: There are no current plans to develop a dedicated system to
manage the data.
References: FY 2003 Core Emergency Response Report, based on Regional and Headquarters
evaluations (for internal EPA use only).
FY 2005 Performance Measures;
• Number of inspections and exercises conducted at oil storage facilities required to have
Facility Response Plans
• Oil spills responded to or monitored by EPA
Performance Database: The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability System (CERCLIS) is the database used by the Agency to track, store, and report
Superfund site information. Historically, oil program performance has been reported in
CERCLIS; a new, more streamlined reporting system is being developed hi 2004 to store oil spill
111-79
-------
prevention, emergency preparedness and response information. Information included in the new
database will be similar to CERCLIS, but definitions and activities pertaining to oil will be
included to support oil spill program needs for FY 2004 and beyond.
Data Source: Automated EPA system; Headquarters and Regional offices enter data (Currently
CERCLIS, has a new system pending).
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: Each performance measure is a specific variable
within CERCLIS.
QA/QC Procedures: N/A
Data Quality Reviews: N/A
Data Limitations: N/A
Error Estimate: N/A
New/Improved Data or Systems: N/A
References: The Superfund/Oil Implementation Manual, 1987. This is being revised as part of
the development of the new database.
FY 2005 Performance Measures;
• Refer to DOJ, settle, or writeoff 100% of Statute of Limitations (SOLs) cases for
Superfund sites with total unaddressed past costs equal to or greater than $200,000
and report value of costs recovered.
Performance Database: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Information System (CERCLIS)
Data Source: Automated EPA system; Headquarters and EPA's Regional offices enter data into
CERCLIS
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: The data used to support this measure are collected
on a fiscal year basis only. Enforcement reports are run at the end of the fiscal year, and the data
that support this measure are extracted from the report.
QA/QC Procedures: Office of Site Remediation Enforcement (OSRE) Quality Management
Plan, approved April 11, 2001. To ensure data accuracy and control, the following
administrative controls are in place: 1) Superfund/Oil Implementation Manual (SPIM), a
program management manual that details what data must be reported; 2) Report specifications,
which are published for each report detailing how reported data are calculated; 3) Coding Guide,
which contains technical instructions to such data users as Regional Information Management
Coordinators (IMCs), program personnel, report owners, and data input personnel; 4) Quality
Assurance (QA) Unit Testing, an extensive QA check against report specifications; 5) QA Third
111-80
-------
Party Testing, an extensive test made by an independent QA tester to ensure that the report
produces data in conformance with the report specifications; 6) Regional CERCLIS Data Entry
Internal Control Plan, which includes: a) regional policies and procedures for entering data into
CERCLIS, b) a review process to ensure that all Superfund accomplishments are supported by
source documentation, c) delegation of authorities for approval of data input into CERCLIS, and,
d) procedures to ensure that reported accomplishments meet accomplishment definitions; and 7)
a historical lockout feature that has been added to CERCLIS so that changes in past fiscal year
data can be changed only by approved and designated personnel and are logged to a change-log
report.
Data Quality Review: The IG annually reviews the end-of-year CERCLA data, in an informal
process, to verify the data supporting the performance measure. Typically, there are no
published results.
Data Limitations: None
Error Estimate: NA
New/Improved Data or Systems: None
References: Office of Site Remediation Enforcement (OSRE) Quality Management Plan,
approved April 11, 2001
FY 2005 Performance Measures:
• Reach a settlement or take an enforcement action before the start of a remedial
action at 90 percent of Superfund sites having viable, liable responsible parties other
than the Federal government.
Performance Database: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Information System (CERCLIS).
Data Source: Automated EPA system; headquarters and regional offices enter data into
CERCLIS
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: There are no analytical or statistical methods used to
collect the information. The data used to support this measure are collected on a fiscal year basis
only. Enforcement reports are run at the end of the fiscal year, and the data that support this
measure is extracted from the report.
QA/QC Procedures: Office of Site Remediation Enforcement (OSRE) Quality Management
Plan, approved April 11, 2001. To ensure data accuracy and control, the following
administrative controls are in place: 1) Superfund/Oil Implementation Manual (SPIM), a
program management manual that details what data must be reported; 2) Report Specifications,
which are published for each report detailing how reported data are calculated; 3) Coding Guide,
which contains technical instructions to such data users as Regional Information Management
m-81
-------
Coordinators (IMCs), program personnel, report owners, and data input personnel; 4) Quality
Assurance (QA) Unit Testing, an extensive QA check against report specifications; 5) QA Third
Party Testing, an extensive test made by an independent QA tester to ensure that the report
produces data in conformance with the report specifications; 6) Regional CERCLIS Data Entry
Internal Control Plan, which includes: a) regional policies and procedures for entering data into
CERCLIS, b) a review process to ensure that all Superfund accomplishments are supported by
source documentation, c) delegation of authorities for approval of data input into CERCLIS, and,
d) procedures to ensure that reported accomplishments meet accomplishment definitions; and 7)
a historical lockout feature that has been added to CERCLIS so that changes in past fiscal year
data can be changed only by approved and designated personnel and are logged to a change-log
report.
Data Quality Review: The IG annually reviews the end-of-year CERCLA data, in an informal
process, to verify the data supporting the performance measure. Typically, there are no
published results.
Data Limitations: None
Error Estimate: NA
New/Improved Data or Systems: None
References: Office of Site Remediation Enforcement (OSRE) Quality Management Plan,
approved April 11, 2001.
EFFICIENCY MEASURES\MEASUREMENT DEVELOPMENT PLANS
Site-Specific Efficiency Measure Development Plan for Superfund
The Superfund program is following a written efficiency measure development plan. The
proposed measures are percentage of total Superfund appropriated resources which are obligated
site-specifically and other efficiency measures. The milestone for FY 2005 is to complete
methodology and data collection procedures. It should be noted that the site-specific obligation
measure is currently one of many being considered by a Superfund workgroup designated to
develop Superfund efficiency measures. The proposed measure has not been rigorously
analyzed nor reviewed by the group to determine whether it is appropriate or feasible for the
program to implement. Development of this measure is referenced in the Program Assessment
Rating Tool (PART) summary in the Special Analysis section.
Other Measure Development Plans
The Superfund program is pursuing a measure development plan for (1) sites with land ready for
reuse, and (2) acres of land ready for reuse. In FY 2005, the program plans to report a second
year of annual accomplishments for reuse performance measures. In addition, the program plans
to initiate a draft feasibility analysis of reuse performance data collected over two years to
determine if setting a target is feasible, and to make recommendations for further action. Fully
implementing reuse measures is contingent on the feasibility analysis, which may reveal that
111-82
-------
setting targets for reuse performance measures could be counterproductive to other Superfund
program objectives. Development of this measure is referenced in the Program Assessment
Rating Tool (PART) summary in the Special Analysis section.
Another measure development plan is hi place for an expansion of the current Human Exposure
Control measure, covering National Priority List sites in six exposure categories. In FY 2005,
the Superfund program plans to report the first year of accomplishments for an expanded Human
Exposure Control measure. Fully implementing this measure is contingent on a feasibility
analysis, which may reveal that setting targets for this performance measure could be
counterproductive to other Superfund program objectives. Development of this measure is
referenced in the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) summary hi the Special Analysis
section.
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
Superfund Remedial Program
The Superfund Remedial program coordinates with many other Federal and state
agencies in accomplishing its mission. Executive Order 12580 delegates certain authorities for
implementing Superfund to other Federal agencies. Many of these agencies perform, in close
consultation and coordination with EPA, the actual cleanup and essential services in areas where
the Agency does not possess the specialized expertise. Currently, EPA has active interagency
agreements with the Department of Interior (DOI), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and the United States Coast Guard
(USCG).
These agencies provide numerous Superfund related services such as supporting the
national response system by providing emergency preparedness expertise and administrative
support to the national response team and the regional response teams; conducting compliance
assistance visits to review site safety and health plans and developing guidelines for assessing
safety and health at hazardous waste sites; conducting outreach to states, Indian Tribes and
Federal natural resource trustee officials regarding natural resource damage assessments;
providing scientific support for response operations in EPA's regional offices; assisting in the
coordination among Federal and state natural resource trustee agencies; supporting the
Superfund program in the management and coordination of training programs for local officials
through the Emergency Management Institute and the National Fire Academy; responding to
actual or potential releases of hazardous substances involving the coastal zones, including the
Great Lakes and designated inland river ports; and, litigating and settling cleanup agreements
and cost recovery cases. In addition, the Agency coordinates with the U. S. Army Corp of
Engineers (USAGE), states, and Tribes in the identification and cleanup of approximately 9,300
FUDS nationwide. Expectations are that the Agency will play an even greater role at these sites
hi the future.
111-83
-------
USAGE and the Bureau of Reclamation contribute to the cleanup of Superfund sites by
providing technical support for the design and construction of many remediation projects through
site-specific interagency agreements. These Federal partners have the technical design and
construction expertise and contracting capability needed to assist EPA regions in implementing
most of Superfund's high-cost Fund-financed remedial action projects. These two agencies also
provide technical on-site support to regions in the enforcement oversight of numerous
construction projects performed by PRPs.
The Superfund response and Federal Facilities enforcement programs work closely with
other Federal agencies (e.g., DOD, DOE, DOI, etc.) to clean up their facilities under the
Superfund program. EPA also works with states and Indian tribes as key partners in the cleanup
decision-making process at Superfund Federal sites.
The Agency also works hi partnership with state and Tribal governments to strengthen
their hazardous waste programs and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the nation's
overall hazardous waste response capability. EPA assists the states in developing their CERCLA
implementation programs through infrastructure support, financial and technical assistance, and
training. Partnerships with states increase the number of site cleanups, improve the timeliness of
responses, and make land available for economic redevelopment sooner, while allowing for more
direct local involvement hi the cleanup process.
EPA partners with other Federal agencies, state and local governments, and private
industry to fulfill Superfund program priorities when a site is radioactively contaminated. Under
CERCLA, radioactively contaminated sites are addressed in a manner consistent with how
chemically contaminated sites are addressed, accounting for the technical differences. The
radiation program provides radiological scientific and technical expertise and leadership in
evaluating projects and providing field and laboratory support.
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
The Agency maintains a close relationship with the state agencies that are authorized to
implement the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Corrective Action program.
EPA expects states to achieve the same level of Federal standards as the Agency, including
annual performance goals of human exposures and groundwater releases controlled. As part of
the state grant process, Regional offices negotiate with the states their progress set in meeting the
corrective action environmental indicator goals.
Encouraging states to become authorized for the RCRA Corrective Action program
remains a priority. Currently, thirty-nine states and territories have the authority to implement
the program. EPA expects two additional states to gain authorization in the next year. EPA also
encourages states to use alternate (non-RCRA) authorities to accomplish the goals of the
Corrective Action program. These include state Superfund and voluntary programs.
The RCRA Corrective Action program also coordinates closely with other Federal
agencies, primarily the Department of Defense and Energy, which have many sites hi the
111-84
-------
corrective action universe. Encouraging Federal facilities to meet environmental indicators
remains a top priority.
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
EPA, with very few exceptions, does not perform the cleanup of leaking underground
storage tanks (LUST). States and territories use the LUST Trust Fund to administer their
corrective action programs, oversee cleanups by responsible parties, undertake necessary
enforcement actions, and pay for cleanups in cases where a responsible party cannot be found or
is unwilling or unable to pay for a cleanup. Most states have cleanup funds that cover the
majority of owners and operators' cleanup costs. These state funds are separate from the LUST
Trust Fund.
State LUST programs are key to achieving the objectives and long-term strategic goals.
Except in Indian Country, EPA relies on state agencies to implement the LUST program,
including overseeing cleanups by responsible parties, and responding to emergency LUST
releases. LUST cooperative agreements awarded by EPA are directly given to the states to assist
them in implementing their oversight and programmatic role.
Emergency Preparedness and Response:
The focal point for our Federal preparedness efforts is EPA's role in the National
Response System (NRS), which coordinates chemical emergency preparedness and response at
the Federal, state and local levels. Within this structure, EPA chairs the multi-agency National
Response Team, and co-chairs Regional Response Teams that oversees national, regional, and
area spill emergency planning. In addition, the Agency plays a leadership role in crisis
management, which requires participation on a number of interagency committees and
workgroups. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) provides technical and financial
assistance to support the National Contingency Plan and the NRS through development of
preparedness exercises and hazardous materials training.
Under the Oil Spill program, EPA works with other Federal agencies such as the United
States Fish & Wildlife Service, National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration,
United States Coast Guard (USCG), FEMA, Department of the Interior, Department of
Transportation, Department of Energy, and other Federal agencies and states, as well as with
local government authorities to develop Area Contingency Plans. The Department of Justice
also provides assistance to agencies with judicial referrals when enforcement of violations
becomes necessary. EPA and the USCG work in coordination with other Federal authorities to
implement the National Preparedness for Response program.
111-85
-------
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq. (1970), and Reorganization
Plan #3 of 1970
Clean Water Act
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) as
amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C. 9.601-
9657
Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act (CERFA)
Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, and the Defense Authorization
Amendments and Base Realignment and Closure Act (BRAC) of 1990, Section 2905(a)(l)(E)
(10 U.S.C. 2687 Note)
Departments of Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies
Appropriations Act of 1999, Public Law 105-276, (112 Stat. 2461, 2499; 42 U.S.C. 6908a).
Executive Order 12241 of September 1980, National Contingency Plan, 3 CFR, 1980
National Environmental Policy Act (NEP A)
Oil Pollution Act 33 U.S.C.A.
Pollution Prevention Act (PPA) (42 U.S.C. 13101-13109)
Public Health Service Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 201 et seq.
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 5121
et seq.
Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. 300F et seq. (1974)
Solid Waste Disposal Act as amended by Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 to
the Resource Conversation and Recovery Act of 1976
Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Land Withdrawal Act of 1978
Executive Order 12656 of November 1988, Assignment of Emergency Preparedness
Responsibilities, 3 CFR, 1988
Executive Order 12580 of January 1987, Superfund I
111-86
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Land Preservation and Restoration
OBJECTIVE; Enhance Science and Research
Through 2008, provide and apply sound science for protecting and restoring land by
conducting leading-edge research and developing a better understanding and characterization of
environmental outcomes under Goal 3.
Resource Summary
(Dollars in Thousands)
Enhance Science and Research
Environmental Program & Management
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Oil Spill Response
Science & Technology
Buildings and Facilities
Inspector General
Total Workyears
FY2003
Actuals
$46,531.6
$3,117.4
$25,144.1
$682.4
$881.0
$15,798.6
$812.0
$96.1
184.8
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
$59,836.6
$3,026.1
$43,883.3
$730.6
$919.4
$10,374.9
$823.0
$79.1
181.4
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$57,555.6
$2,983.2
$42,840.8
$736.7
$924.4
$9,112.3
$886.9
$71.3
186.4
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
($2,280.9)
($42.9)
($1,042.5)
$6.1
$5.0
($1,262.6)
$63.9
($7.7)
5.0
Program Project
(Dollars in Thousands)
Congresskmally Mandated Projects
Superfund: Remedial
Research: Land Protection and Restoration
Research: SITE Program
Administrative Projects
TOTAL
FY2003
Actuals
$5,963.3
$0.0
$25,122.8
$4,781.1
$10,664.4
$46,531.6
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
$0.0
$6,291.5
$36,568.5
$6,941.1
$10,035.5
$59,836.6
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$0.0
$6,234.0
$33,059.3
$6,927.7
$11,334.6
$57,555.6
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$0.0
($57.5)
($3,509.2)
($13.4)
$1,299.2
($2,280.9)
FY 2005 REQUEST
Results to be Achieved under this Objective
EPA's Land Protection and Restoration research and science programs are committed to
conducting leading-edge research to provide a foundation for preserving land quality and
111-87
-------
remediating contaminated land. These efforts will result in documented methods, models,
assessments, and risk management options for program and regional offices, facilitating then-
accurate evaluation of effects on human health and the environment, understanding of potential
exposure, and implementation of effective remediation options.
As of 2001, there were approximately 1200 Superfund sites on the National Priorities List
(NPL). In addition, it is estimated that there are more than 5,000 RCRA corrective action sites,
and 422,573 leaking underground storage tanks30. The vast majority of these sites are
contaminating groundwater and the public runs the risk of being exposed to hazardous materials
that are associated with these sites. The number, diversity, and complexity of contaminated sites
warrant an ongoing research program aimed at improving EPA's ability to characterize, assess
and remediate contamination efficiently so that land may be returned to productive use without
unacceptable risk to communities (Criterion: Relevance). Cost estimates for cleaning up all of
these sites are over $100 billion31; scientific and technological advances offer the best
opportunity of containing these costs.
To support the Agency's objective of managing active waste management facilities to
prevent contaminant releases into the environment, the Agency will conduct research hi
multimedia science, waste management, and RCRA corrective action as well as perform
technical support activities. This supports the Agency's need for research to build a strong
scientific foundation for regulatory reforms and, thereby, supports the Agency's mission to
protect human health and the environment (Criterion: Relevance).
EPA's responsibility is to preserve and restore the Nation's land resources using the most
effective waste management and remediation methods available. The Agency's research
program is helping to achieve this goal by accelerating scientifically defensible and cost-
effective characterization and clean-up of contaminated sites. The Agency has developed Multi-
^"y "%"%
Year Plans for both Contaminated Sites and Hazardous Waste research, with input from
across the Agency, to ensure that the research conducted is relevant and addresses Agency-wide
goals and priorities. The externally peer reviewed Waste Research Strategy34 was released in
1999 to provide a clear rationale for selection and prioritization of waste research activities
(Criterion: Relevance). The vast majority of this work is funded through competitively awarded
support contracts, containing the requisite quality assurance plans and standard operating
procedures (Criterion: Quality).
30 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Superfund Accomplishment Figures, Summary Fiscal Year (FT) 2003.
Accessed January 14,2004. Available only on the internet at:
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/action/process/numbers.htm
31 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Cleaning up the Nation's Waste Sites: Markets and Technology Trends.
(EPA/542/R-96/005). Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office. (1997).
32 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Contaminated Sites Multi-Year Plan. Washington D.C.: EPA.
Accessed January 14,2004. Available only on the internet at: www.epa.gov/osp/myp
33 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Hazardous Waste Multi-Year Plan. Washington D.C.: EPA.
Accessed January 14, 2004. Available only on the internet at: www.epa.gov/osp/myp
34 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Waste Research Strategy. (EPA/600/R-98/154). Washington
DC: Government Printing Office. (1999)
111-88
-------
Research: Land Protection and Restoration
Contaminated Sediments
Contaminated sediments are soils, sands, and organic matter that accumulate on the
bottom of a water body and contain toxic or hazardous materials. Research in the area of
contaminated sediments is working toward improving the range and scientific foundation for
remedy selection options by enhancing risk characterization, site characterization and
understanding of different remedial options (Criterion: Relevance).
Contaminated sediments are present at many large and controversial sites where risks are
often disputed and costly remedies can take years to demonstrate meaningful results, making the
issue a high research priority for the Agency as well as the public (Criterion: Relevance). In
order to advance clean-up of these sites and thereby reduce risk of exposure, research focuses on
three main themes: addressing questions in characterizing sites and deriving more certain human
and ecological risk assessments; addressing specific gaps in our understanding of human
exposure; and expanding the number of remedial alternatives with documented performance.
In FY 2005, research will continue to focus on improving our ability to characterize
accurately the risks posed by contaminated sediments. EPA will also continue to develop
remediation alternatives and evaluate their short- and long-term performance, as well as test
several remedies to identify approaches that have potential cost or performance advantages.
Groundwater (including LUST)
Dense non-aqueous phase liquids (DNAPLs) are chlorinated solvents that were used in a
wide range of manufacturing industries. Poor storage, disposal, and transport of these toxic
chemicals have lead to widespread contamination. In FY 2005, research will continue on the
high priority, complex problem of determining DNAPL location and concentration in
groundwater. EPA is developing and evaluating several non- or minimally-intrusive geophysical
techniques, yielding a greater ability to make sound waste management decisions. Groundwater
remediation research is focusing on an approach for DNAPL site clean-up, including combining
multiple treatment technologies to move toward successful remediation. Research on the use of
thermal treatment and flushing processes to address DNAPL source zones will also continue.
EPA will conduct field studies on monitored natural attenuation (MNA) of mobile
metals. Monitored natural attenuation offers an alternative to more conventional clean-up
methods at lower cost and with less intrusion to the surrounding environment. Studies on the
application of permeable reactive barriers (PRBs) to inorganic contaminants such as arsenic and
mercury will also continue. PRBs are an alternative approach for remediating groundwater
contamination that combines subsurface fluid flow management with a passive chemical
treatment zone. Although this research area is relatively young, PRB's are beginning to be
selected for Superfund sites based on documented performance of the systems35
35 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Capstone Report on the Application, Monitoring, and
Performance of Permeable Reactive Barriers for Ground-Water Remediation. (EPA/600/R-03/045) Washington
D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. (2003).
111-89
-------
Leaking underground storage tanks (LUST) corrective action research will continue to
address assessment and clean-up processes for fuels and fuel oxygenates, such as methyl tertiary
butyl ether (MTBE). Assessment work will focus on the development of transport models that
can be used by state project managers. The first generation of these web-based models are
already receiving over 10,000 hits per month (Criteria: Relevance and Performance).
Remediation research will address multiple approaches applicable to spilled fuels, with and
without oxygenates like MTBE and ethanol. These approaches include treatment and
containment methods that could be applied to existing spills or engineered as a safety feature of
new storage tank placements. One remediation device is a bioreactor, which uses
microbiological processes to transform and stabilize organic wastes. This technology has been
developed for use in MTBE removal in water sources. When proven in field tests, this low cost,
effective unit has the potential to provide an extra measure of safety to public and private water
supplies.
Soils/Land Research
EPA is developing analytical methods that lower detection limits, improve accuracy, and
decrease screening costs in soils/land research. In FY 2005, research will focus on persistent
organic toxins, and efforts will be completed on sampling methods for volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) in soils.
EPA is also evaluating the effectiveness of current containment systems and developing
new systems using innovative materials and methods. Research areas include caps, covers, and
vertical barriers for the transition zone between the land surface and the water table; fixed
barriers; remediation methods for contaminated plumes and infiltration control using plants; and
soil contaminant immobilization. In FY 2005 research will focus on the stability of newer cap
materials and on alternative cover system assessment.
Multimedia Research (Including Risk Assessment Research and Oil SpiUs Research)
Multimedia research focuses on: 1) assessing, predicting, and communicating risks to the
environment; and 2) developing testing protocols, risk management strategies, and identifying
fate and effects of oil spills.
In FY 2005, risk assessment research will continue to focus on developing methodologies
and factors that enable ecological risk assessors to estimate the amount of soil-borne
contamination that will be biologically "available" to wildlife.
Oil spills research has three areas of emphasis: test protocol development, fate and
transport modeling, and remediation. In FY 2005, EPA will complete a set of protocols needed
to test spill response products, and work will continue on models that help describe and track the
spreading of oil spills. Remediation research will continue on physical, chemical, and biological
risk management methods for petroleum and non-petroleum oils spilled in freshwater and marine
environments.
111-90
-------
Waste Management
A number of significant technical problems remain related to waste management,
including arsenic treatment, treatment of residual disposal, use of landfill bioreactors to manage
municipal solid waste, and combustion. Certain hazardous waste disposal techniques must be
reevaluated and improved to ensure releases are minimized. The ability to predict waste releases
depends on the ability of leaching protocols to reflect accurately the waste environment and
matrix effects. Research will continue to define the role of leaching tests and protocols, and to
document their limitations.
In the area of municipal solid waste management, EPA is collaborating with the private
sector to conduct field evaluations of the performance of landfill bioreactors and with states to
develop a monitoring program to optimize operations and minimize potentially dangerous
emissions. Landfill bioreactors have potential to provide alternative energy in the form of
landfill gas while increasing the nation's landfill capacity. In FY 2005, EPA will conduct field
sampling and monitoring of several landfill bioreactors, continue the characterization of the
microbiology of bioreactor cells, and initiate a bioreactor design manual. Results of these efforts
will include an interim field assessment of a landfill bioreactor system. In conjunction with
drinking water research in Goal 2, efforts will continue on hard-to-treat wastes and focus on the
characterization and treatment of arsenic-bearing residuals. Leaching studies will continue on
arsenic-bearing wastes, mine process wastes, and municipal solid wastes, including those in
bioreactors.
Emissions from combustion facilities remain a public concern and a number of
uncertainties exist, including the cumulative impact of continuous emissions from multiple
combustion facilities. In FY 2005, EPA will conduct further research on continuous emissions
monitors will continue with a focus on dioxins and other products of incomplete combustion
(PICs), supporting the Agency's goal of reducing dioxin and furan emissions from waste
combustors.
Multimedia Decision-Making
In FY 2005, the Agency will work to advance the multimedia modeling methodologies
that support core and emerging RCRA program needs. In support of EPA's Resource
Conservation Challenge, a major national effort to reduce waste by promoting the use of
recycled products to conserve natural resources, EPA will develop multimedia science
approaches and risk assessment procedures for evaluating potential contaminant releases
resulting from the beneficial reuse of waste-derived products, as well as methods for electronic
waste recycling. This research effort will have broad applicability and benefit to other programs'
multimedia risk assessments. EPA works with other Federal entities through a multi-agency
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), the goal of which is to enhance coordination hi the
development of reliable risk assessment methods and technologies.
EPA has set goals of meeting environmental indicators at high priority sites and moving
sites through the RCRA corrective action process. New concerns have arisen regarding ways
contaminants may migrate from groundwater to surface water and from groundwater to indoor
111-91
-------
air. In FY 2005, the Agency will continue providing support for evaluation of these pathways as
well as on the fate and transport of contaminants through the groundwater/surface water
interface. In addition, work on vapor intrusion modeling will continue.
Technical Support
Technical support activities associated with contaminated sites and RCRA Corrective
Action, conducted through support centers, include site-specific technical support, responses to
scientific questions (e.g., human health and environmental toxicity), and technology trar rar
documents to EPA program offices and other stakeholders.
The Hazardous Substance Technical Liaison (HSTL) Program provides and facilitates
technical support to EPA Regions in waste-related areas, including the transfer of scientific and
engineering products- between research laboratories and the Regions. The program also provides
direct assistance in a variety of technical areas.
Research: SITE (Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation) Program
The goal of the SITE36 program is to identify, demonstrate, assess, and distribute
information about innovative and alternative environmental technologies to developers,
remediation site managers, and regulators, yielding more efficient characterization and
remediation processes. In FY 2005, this program will continue to conduct demonstrations of
innovative remediation, monitoring, and measurement approaches, with the goal of increasing
the application of more effective and less costly options that already exist. Through a
competitive solicitation process, EPA selects technologies that address high priority remediation
problems identified by the Agency and regions (Criterion: Quality). Since the inception of the
SITE program in 1986, clean-up of contaminated sites through the use of innovative technologies
has resulted in an estimated net cost savings of $2.4 billion. This averages to a savings of 72
percent per site37 (Criteria: Relevance and Performance).
Superfund: Remedial
EPA's Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation (OSRTI) is
committed to using sound science and technological advances in its programs to preserve land
and remediate contaminated land. Modernization of analytical tools, remediation technologies
and strategies to address contaminated sites can lead to more effective efforts to preserve and
remediate land. This goal, to integrate science advances into OSRTI's programs, recognizes that
many of these advances may come from research and technology applications from EPA and
elsewhere.
EPA will track the state of the practice for analytical methods and remediation
technologies. The Agency will work in partnership with academics, other Federal agencies and
36 For more information about EPA's SITE program, see http://www.epa.gov/ORD/SITE/
37 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. The Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation Program:
Annual Report to Congress FY 2001. (EPA/540/R-03/502). Washington DC: Government Printing Office. (2003).
111-92
-------
industry to identify and deploy promising technologies and strategies. The program will
document successful technology applications, encourage field trials of emerging technologies
and strategies, provide field technical assistance for new approaches and deliver training to EPA
and state personnel to keep them abreast of emerging innovations. EPA will also explore
promising optimization techniques to improve EPA's remedies and their associated monitoring
systems.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
S&T
• (-$1,000,000) This decrease represents a shift from research to enhance the Agency's
knowledge of interactions that occur at the groundwater/surface water (gw/sw) interface,
to the Science to Achieve Results (STAR) Fellowships program in Goal 4.
• (-$226,100) These resources represent savings that will result from consolidation of
many information technology (IT) services, including call center and service desk, server
management, and hardware and software acquisition, and IT equipment standardization.
This will result in enhanced security and uniform maintenance requirements. Since these
resources represent an efficiency savings, there is no negative programmatic impact.
There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for new and existing
FTE.
Superfund
« (-$2,250,000) This reduction represents a significant decrease in funding for the
Hazardous Substance Research Centers (HSRCs). These centers conducted research that
focused on different aspects of hazardous substance management.
There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for new and existing
FTE.
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
Research
Scientifically Defensible Decisions for Site Clean
In 2005 Complete at least four SITE demonstrations, with emphasis on NAPLs and sediments, in order to, by
2010, develop or evaluate 40 scientific tools, technologies, methods, and models, and provide technical
support that enable practitioners to 1) characterize the nature and extent of multimedia contamination;
2) assess, predict, and communicate risks to human health and the environment; 3) employ improved
remediation options; and 4) respond to oil spills effectively.
111-93
-------
In 2004 Provide risk assessors and managers with site-specific data sets on three applications detailing the
performance of conventional remedies for contaminated sediments to help determine the most effective
techniques for remediating contaminated sites and protecting human health and the environment.
In 2003 Delivered state-of-the-science report and methods to EPA and other stakeholders for risk management
of fuel oxygenates; organic and inorganic contamination of sediments, ground water and/or soils; and
oil spills to ensure cost-effective and technically sound site clean-up.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2003 FY2003
Actuals Actuals Actuals
Complete draft of the FY 2002 Annual SITE 1 draft report
Report to Congress.
Reports on performance data for conventional 3 reports
sediment remedies for three sites.
SITE demonstrations completed 4 demonstrations
Baseline: This APG will contribute to an array of assessment and remediation options targeted to addressing
situations where uncertainty remains high, technology performance is lacking, or where existing
options are cost- or time intensive. Through FY 2005, non-aqueous phase liquids (NAPLs) and
contaminated sediments will be of special interest because of the cost and complexity of assessing and
remediating these sites, as well as the risks they pose to public health. EPA estimates that
approximately 20% of National Priorities List (NPL) sites have contaminated sediments with risk from
a number of toxic substances (http:www.epa.gov/superfund/resources/sediment/index.htm). Available
remedies are unproven, expensive to implement, or both. The SITE program evaluates tools,
technologies, and approaches for remediation, measurement, and monitoring. The innovative
approaches that are evaluated are largely developed in the private sector. The purpose of the program
is to provide an independent assessment of performance, so that site decision-makers can gain
confidence hi selecting an innovative approach. Since the inception of the SITE program in 1986,
clean-up of contaminated sites through the use of innovative technologies has resulted in an estimated
net cost savings of $2.4 billion
(http://www.epa.gov/ORD/SITE/congress/540R03502/540R03502.htm). Beginning in FY 2005,
regular evaluations by independent and external panels will provide reviews of EPA research
programs' relevance, quality, and successful performance to date, in accordance with OMB's
Investment Criteria for Research and Development. Reviewers will also qualitatively determine
whether EPA has been successful in meeting its annual and long-term commitments for research.
Recommendations and results from these reviews will improve the design and management of EPA
research programs and help to measure their progress under the Government Performance and Results
Act(GPRA).
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
FY 2005 Performance Measure:
SITE demonstrations completed
Performance Database: Program output; no internal tracking system
Data Source: N/A
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: N/A
111-94
-------
QA/QC Procedures: N/A
Data Quality Reviews: N/A
Data Limitations: N/A
Error Estimate: N/A
New/Improved Data or Systems: N/A
References: N/A
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
EPA coordinates with other agencies to conduct risk management and assessment
research. These activities include work with the Department of Defense (DOD) in its Strategic
Environmental Research and Development Program and the Environmental Security Technology
Certification Program, the Department of Energy (DOE), and the Office of Health and
Environmental Research. EPA also conducts collaborative field demonstrations (e.g., through the
SITE program) and laboratory research with DOD, DOE, the Department of Interior (particularly
the U.S. Geological Survey - USGS), and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(NASA) to improve characterization and risk management options for dealing with subsurface
contamination. Collaborations with external organizations provide the Agency with more
opportunity to understand and address a variety of complex waste/site characterization and
remediation problems and, consequently, improve the Agency's ability to meet its objective of
quicker and more cost-effective site cleanups. A collaborative DNAPL remediation alternatives
demonstration among EPA, DOE, and NASA, begun in 1995, led to formation of the Federal
DNAPL Technology Initiative.
Other coordinated research efforts include the unique controlled-spill field research
facility designed hi cooperation with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. Geophysical research
experiments and development of software for subsurface characterization and detection of
contaminants are being conducted with the USGS and DOE's Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory. These experiments include the use of a controlled spill unit in which the movement
of spilled solvents is monitored using experimental ground penetrating radar, borehole dielectric
techniques, complex resistivity, seismic techniques, and electromagnetic techniques.
The USGS also has a number of programs, such as the Toxic Substances Hydrology
Program, that support studies related to contamination of surface water and groundwater by
hazardous materials. Groundwater modeling and remediation of MTBE is being conducted in
collaboration with a number of states, including New York, Oklahoma, and California. Also,
Remediation Technology Development Forum (RTDF) teams on such topics as bioremediation,
metal treatment, and contaminated sediments have been formed to conduct collaborative research
programs addressing priority technical issues.
111-95
-------
The Agency is also working with the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
(NIEHS), which manages a large basic research program focusing on Superfund issues, to
advance fundamental Superfund research. Also, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry (ATSDR) was established to provide critical health-based information to assist EPA in
making effective cleanup decisions. EPA will continue to work with these agencies on
collaborative projects, information exchange, and identification of research issues.
The Interstate Regulatory Cooperative (ITRC) has proven a good forum for coordinating
federal and state activities and for defining continuing research needs through its teams on topics
including contaminated sediments, permeable reactive barriers, radionuclides, and brownfields.
EPA developed an MOU with several other agencies (DOE, DoD, Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Department of the Interior - USGS, NOAA, and the Department of Agriculture) for
multimedia modeling research and development.
With respect to waste management issues, research is being coordinated with the public
and private sectors. Currently, EPA has the lead in providing regulatory guidance for solid waste
disposal issues. The Agency has also worked extensively with bioreactor technology, in
cooperation with states and private industry, and will continue to do so in FY 2005. In
conjunction with the Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials
(ASTSWMO) and the National Council of Governors, EPA state programs have been actively
analyzing new operating configurations for landfills to help states and municipalities develop
options for managing municipal solid waste.
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
Brownfields Revitalization and Environmental Restoration Act
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liabilities Act (CERCLA)
Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA)
Oil Pollution Act (OPA)
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
Solid Waste Disposal Act (SWDA)
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
111-96
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
LAND PRESERVATION AND RESTORATION
Alternative Dispute Resolution, ni-59
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC), 111-47,111-57,111-70
Brownfields, III-3, III-9,111-63,111-66,111-96
Categorical Grant
Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance, IH-14,111-39,111-66
Tribal General Assistance Program, 111-14
Underground Storage Tanks, III-14,111-30
Civil Enforcement, 111-39
Compliance Assistance and Centers, 111-14,111-39,111-62
Congressionally Mandated Projects, 111-14,111-39,111-87
Homeland Security
Preparedness, Response, and Recovery, 111-39,111-67
LUST/UST,III-14,III-39
LUST Cooperative Agreements, 111-39,111-64
Oil Spill
Prevention, Preparedness and Response, 111-40
RCRA
Corrective Action, 111-40,111-65
Waste Management, III-14
Waste Minimization & Recycling, III-14
Research
Land Protection and Restoration, 111-87,111-89
SITE Program, 111-87
Science Advisory Board, III-10
Superfund
Emergency Response and Removal, 111-40,111-60
Enforcement, 111-40
EPA Emergency Preparedness, 111-40,111-61
Federal Facilities, 111-40,111-55
Federal Facilities lAGs, 111-40
Remedial, HI-40,111-87
Support to Other Federal Agencies, 111-40,111-54
-------
Goal 4: Healthy Communities
and Ecosystems
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems IV-1
Chemical, Organism, and Pesticide Risks IV-22
Communities IV-80
Ecosystems IV-103
Enhance Science and Research TV-134
Subject Index TV-176
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems
STRATEGIC GOAL: Protect, sustain, or restore the health of people, communities, and
ecosystems using integrated and comprehensive approaches and partnerships.
Resource Summary
(Dollars in thousands)
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems
Chemical, Organism, and Pesticide Risks
Communities
Ecosystems
Enhance Science and Research
Total Workyears
FY2003
Actuals
$1,211,267.2
$345,298.1
$313,167.7
$171,169.4
$380,878.7
3,923.7
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$1,262,438.1
$364,126.3
$317,572.9
$160,698.1
$420,040.9
3,824.4
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$1,298,932.0
$383,305.4
$319,958.4
$200,844.5
$394,823.7
3,850.1
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres
Bud
$36,493.9
$19,179.2
$2,385.4
$40,146.5
($25,217.2)
25.8
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT
To promote healthy communities and ecosystems, EPA must bring together a variety of
programs, tools, approaches and resources. The support of a multitude of stakeholders, along
with strong partnerships with Federal, State, Tribal and local governments, are necessary to
achieve the Agency's goal of protecting, sustaining or restoring healthy communities and
ecosystems. The Agency's goal of achieving healthy communities and ecosystems will be
accomplished by focusing both on stressors to human health and the environment and the
locations at most risk from environmental problems.
A key component of this goal is protecting human health and the environment by
identifying, assessing, and reducing the potential risks presented by the thousands of chemicals
on which our society and economy have come to depend. These include the pesticides we use to
meet national and global demands for food, and the industrial and commercial chemicals found
throughout our homes, our workplaces, and the products we use.
Some pest-control methods that are used to ensure an abundant and affordable food
supply can cause unwanted environmental or health effects if not used and managed properly.
Apart from its role in agriculture, effective pest control is also essential in homes, gardens,
rights-of-ways, hospitals, and drinking water treatment facilities. Pesticides are an important
part of pest management in each of these settings. EPA licenses pesticides to help ensure they
can be used safely and beneficially while avoiding unintended harm to our health or
environment. EPA must also address the emerging challenges posed by a growing array of
biological organisms—naturally occurring and, increasingly, genetically engineered—that are
being used in industrial and agricultural processes.
IV-1
-------
Agriculture accounts for about 80 percent of all conventional pesticide applications.
Herbicides are the most widely used pesticides and account for the greatest expenditure and
volume, approximately $6.4 billion and 534 million pounds in 1999. Biopesticides and reduced
risk pesticides are assuming an increasingly important role. For example, safer pesticides, which
include biopesticides and reduced risk pesticides, increased in use from 3.6 percent in 1998 to
7.5 percent of total pounds reported for 2002.
Biological agents are potential weapons that could be exploited by terrorists against the
United States. EPA's pesticides antimicrobial program has been very responsive to addressing
this threat. Antimicrobials play an important role in public health and safety. EPA is conducting
comprehensive scientific assessments and developing test protocols to determine product safety
and efficacy of products used against chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction, and
registering products as necessary. EPA is also developing a timeline for prioritizing and
implementing the tests.
EPA programs under this Goal have many indirect effects that significantly augment the
stream of benefits they provide. For example, each year the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA) New Chemicals program reviews and manages the potential risks from approximately
1,800 new chemicals and 40 products of biotechnology that enter the marketplace. Since its
inception, approximately 17,000 new chemicals reviewed by the program have entered United
States commerce. This new chemical review process not only protects the public from the
possible immediate threats of harmful chemicals like polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) from
entering the marketplace, but it has also contributed to changing the behavior of the chemical
industry, making industry more aware and responsible for the impact these chemicals have on
human health and the environment.
Americans come into daily contact with any number of chemicals that entered the market
before the New Chemicals Program was established in 1978, yet relatively little is known about
many of their potential impacts. Getting basic hazard testing information on large volume
chemicals is one focus of EPA's work in the Existing Chemicals program. The voluntary High
Production Volume program challenges industry to develop chemical hazard data critical to
enabling EPA, State, Tribes, and the public to screen chemicals already in commerce for any
risks they may be posing. Risks of other chemicals, such as lead or PCBs are well known, and
EPA's responsibility centers on reducing exposure through proper handling or disposal.
The Acute Exposure Guideline Levels (AEGLs) Program was designed by EPA to
provide scientifically credible data to directly support chemical emergency planning, response,
and prevention programs mandated by Congress. Emergency workers and first responders need
to know how dangerous a chemical contaminant may be to breathe or touch, and how long it may
remain dangerous. The program develops short-term exposure limits applicable to the general
population for a wide range of extremely hazardous substances (approximately 400) for purposes
related to chemical terrorism and chemical accidents.
In addition to addressing human health and ecosystems and stressors such as chemicals
and pesticides, this goal also focuses on those geographic areas with human and ecological
communities at most risk. For example the Mexican Border is an area facing unique
environmental challenges. At the Mexican Border, EPA addresses local pollution and
rv-2
-------
infrastructure needs that are priorities for the Mexican and the U.S. governments under the
Border 2012 agreement.
As the population in coastal regions grows the challenges to preserve and protect these
important ecosystems increase. Through the National Estuary Program, coastal areas have
proved valuable grounds for combining innovative and community-based approaches with
national guidelines and inter-agency coordination to achieve results.
Wetlands are among the most productive ecosystems in the world, comparable to rain
forests and coral reefs. Yet the nation loses an estimated 58,000 acres per year, and existing
wetlands may be degraded by excessive sedimentation, nutrient enrichment, and other factors.1
In 2001 the Supreme Court determined that some isolated waters and wetlands are not
regulated under the Clean Water Act. Many waters with important aquatic values may no longer
be covered by CWA Section 404 protections.
Large water bodies like the Gulf of Mexico, the Great Lakes, and the Chesapeake Bay are
surrounded by industrial and other development and have been exposed to substantial pollution
over many years at levels higher than current environmental standards permit. As a result, the
volume of pollutants in these water bodies has exceeded their natural ability to restore balance.
Working with stakeholders, EPA has established special programs to protect and restore these
unique resources by addressing the vulnerabilities for each.
EPA's continued enforcement efforts will be strengthened through the development of
measures to assess the impact of enforcement activities and assist in targeting areas that pose the
greatest risks to human health and the environment, display patterns of noncompliance, and
include disproportionately exposed populations. In addition, the EPA's enforcement program
supports Environmental Justice effort by focusing enforcement actions and criminal
investigations on industries that have repeatedly violated environmental laws in minority and/or
low-income areas.
Further, EPA's Brownfields Initiative funds pilot programs and other research efforts;
clarifies liability issues; enters into Federal, state and local partnerships; conducts outreach
activities; and creates job training and workforce development programs.
EPA's environmental justice program will continue education, outreach, and data
availability initiatives. The Program provides a central point for the Agency to address
environmental and human health concerns in minority and/or low-income communities—a
segment of the population that has been disproportionately exposed to environmental harms and
risks. The program will continue to manage the Agency's Environmental Justice Community
Small Grants Program that assists community-based organizations working to develop solutions
to local environmental issues.
' Dahl, I.E. 1990. Status and Trends of Wetlands in the Conterminous United States, 1986 to 1997. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Available online at:
http://wetIands.fws.gov/bha/SandT/SandTReport.htinl: Report to Congress on the Status and Trends of Wetlands in the
Conterminous United States, 1986 to 1997.
rv-3
-------
The Agency will continue to support the National Environmental Justice Advisory
Council (NETAC) which provides the Agency significant input from interested stakeholders such
as community-based organizations, business and industry, academic institutions, state, Tribal and
local governments, non-governmental organizations and environmental groups. The Agency will
also continue to chair an Interagency Working Group (IWG) consisting of eleven departments
and agencies, as well as representatives of various White House offices, to ensure that
environmental justice concerns are incorporated into all Federal programs.
Research
EPA has a responsibility to ensure that efforts to reduce potential environmental risks are
based on the best available scientific information. Strong science allows identification of the
most important sources of risk to human health and the environment as well as the best means to
detect, abate, and avoid possible environmental problems, and thereby guides our priorities,
policies, and deployment of resources. It is critical that research and scientific assessment be
integrated with EPA's policy and regulatory activities. In order to address complex issues in the
future, the Agency will design and test fundamentally new tools and management approaches
that have potential for achieving environmental results. Under Goal 4, EPA will conduct
research in many areas, including emerging areas such as biotechnology and computational
toxicology, to help develop better understandings and characterizations of positive
environmental outcomes related to healthy communities and ecosystems.
EPA uses several noteworthy mechanisms to ensure scientific relevance, quality, and
integration as it seeks to produce sound environmental results. For example, EPA's Science
Advisor is responsible for advising the EPA Administrator on science and technology issues to
support Agency programs, policies, procedures, and decisions. Also, EPA uses its Science
Advisory Board (SAB), an independently chartered Federal Advisory Committee Act committee,
to conduct annual, in-depth reviews and analyses of EPA's Science and Technology account.
The SAB provides its findings to the House Science Committee and reports findings to EPA's
Administrator after every annual review. Under the Science to Achieve Results (STAR)
program, all research projects are selected for funding through a rigorous, competitive, and
external peer review process designed to ensure that only the highest quality efforts receive
funding support. All EPA scientific and technical work products must undergo either internal or
external peer review, with major or significant products requiring external peer review. The
Agency also uses a Peer Review Handbook (2nd Edition) which codifies procedures and guidance
for conducting quality EPA peer reviews. Taken together, these mechanisms serve to ensure
EPA's research and science remains relevant and committed to achieving superior environmental
results.
MEANS AND STRATEGY
In coordination with our State and Tribal co-regulators and co-implementers and with the
support of industry, environmental groups, and other stakeholders, EPA will use multiple
approaches to address risks associated with chemicals and pesticides. Improving communities'
ability to address local problems is a critical part of our efforts to reduce risk.
IV-4
-------
The Agency's strategy for reducing the risks of exposures to pesticides and industrial
chemicals is based on:
• Identifying and assessing potential risks from? chemicals, pesticides, and
microorganisms;
• Setting priorities for addressing these risks;
• Developing and implementing strategies aimed at preventing risks and managing those
risks that cannot be prevented;
• Implementing regulatory measures, such as systematic review of pesticides and new
chemicals, and developing and implementing procedures for safe production, use,
storage, and handling of chemicals, pesticides, and microorganisms;
• Employing innovative voluntary measures, such as promoting the use of reduced-risk
pesticides and challenging companies to assess and reduce chemical risks and develop
safer and less polluting new chemicals, processes, and technologies; and
• Conducting outreach and training, and establishing partnerships.
Pesticides Management
EPA has the responsibility under Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA) and the Federal Food and Drug Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) to set terms and conditions of
pesticide registration, marketing and use. EPA will use these authorities to reduce risk from
residues of pesticides, particularly those pesticides with the highest potential to cause harm to
human health and the environment, including those which pose particular risks to children and
other susceptible populations. All new pesticides are reviewed for registration through an
extensive review and evaluation of human health and ecosystem studies and data, applying the
most recent scientific advances in risk assessment. The Registration program includes
registration activities, such as setting tolerances, registering new active ingredients and new uses,
and handling experimental use permits and emergency exemptions.
New registration actions result in more pesticides on the market that meet the strict Food
Quality Protection Act (FQPA) pesticide risk-based standards, which brings the Agency closer to
the objective of reducing adverse risks from pesticide use. In 2005, the Agency will continue to
promote accelerated registrations for pesticides that provide unproved risk reduction or risk
prevention compared to those currently on the market. Progressively replacing older, higher-risk
pesticides is one of the most effective methods for curtailing adverse impact on health and the
ecosystem while preserving food quality and production rates. EPA measures adoption of the
reduced-risk pesticides by tracking the amount of acres treated — or "acre treatments" — using
reduced risk pesticides. By 2005, an estimated 8.7 percent of total acre-treatments are expected
to use reduced-risk pesticides.
Another priority is to review older pesticides in applying the FQPA safety standards. We
will complete pesticide reregistration eligibility decisions by 2008 (food use by 2006) and, hi
tandem with that work, meet our FQPA statutory goal of reassessing 9,721 existing tolerances by
August 2006. The Strategic Agricultural Partnership Initiative and the Pesticide Environmental
Stewardship Program collaborate with USDA, States, and non-governmental organizations to
demonstrate integrated pest management strategies that reduce pesticide residues in the
environment.
IV-5
-------
Pesticide and pest control issues extend beyond the farm. Public health officials and
homeowners use pesticides to control a variety of pests, protect human health, and benefit
consumers. Through our regulatory programs, EPA reviews all pesticides with the goal of
minimizing pesticide exposure and risk. For example, as of 2002, children's exposure to
organophosphates — an older, riskier class of pesticide — was reduced by 60 percent through the
elimination of many uses in and around the house. EPA registers antimicrobials used by public
drinking water treatment facilities and by food processing plants and hospitals to disinfect
surfaces. Effective antimicrobials are of growing importance as many serious disease-causing
organisms become resistant to our antibiotic procedures. To provide environmental, public
health, and economic benefits, we will continue addressing risk from older pesticides, making
new pesticides available and addressing emergency health or pest damage issues flexibly and
efficiently.
Biotechnology has presented the Agency with a range of new issues and scientific
challenges as well. Outreach activities on the subject of biotechnology such as public meetings
and scientific peer reviews of our policies and assessments are likely to be expanded to keep
pace with changing science and the public's demand for information in this area. EPA is
working closely with other Federal agencies involved in biotechnology. Adoption of
biotechnology has great potential to reduce reliance on some older, more risky chemical
pesticides, and to lower worker risks. For example, the use of Bt cotton has reduced the use of
other insecticides that present higher risk to wildlife.
Toxic Chemicals
Three primary approaches comprise EPA's strategy to prevent and reduce risks that may
be posed by chemicals and microrganisms:
• Preventing the introduction into U.S. commerce of chemicals and organisms that pose
unreasonable risks;
• Effectively screening the stock of chemicals already in use for potential risk; and
• Developing and implementing action plans to reduce use of and exposure to chemicals
that have been demonstrated to harm humans and the environment.
EPA intends to work with States and Tribes, other Federal agencies, the private sector,
and international entities to implement this strategy and, in particular, to make protecting
children and the aging population a fundamental goal of public health and environmental
protection.
TSCA requires that EPA review all new chemicals and organisms prior to their
production or import and be notified of significant new uses for certain chemicals that have
already been reviewed.2 While TSCA gives EPA a 90-day review period, new criteria, such as
preventing the introduction of persistent bioaccumulative toxics (PBTs) or considering the use of
new chemicals as potential weapons of terror, continue to emerge. An expanded set of screening
tools will increase EPA's and industry's efficiency by using the limited data that companies
1 Toxic Substances Control Act Section 5: Manufacturing and Processing Notices, Public Law 94-469, October 11,1976
IV-6
-------
provide in their Pre-manufacturing Notice (PMN) submissions to predict potential hazards,
exposures, and risks quickly and effectively.
In 2005, EPA will continue to make progress in screening, assessing, and reducing risks
posed by the 66,600 chemicals that were in use prior to the enactment of TSCA. Thousands of
these chemicals are still used today, and nearly 3,000 of them are "high production volume"
(HPV) chemicals, produced or imported hi quantities exceeding one million pounds per year.
Approximately 300 companies and 100 consortia are voluntarily providing data covering over
2,200 of the more than 2,800 chemicals included in the HPV Challenge Program.3 EPA will
make the data publicly available and screen for potential hazards and risks. We will then
identify and set priorities for further assessment, and determine the need to take action to
eliminate or effectively manage the risks identified. To support these efforts, we will draw on
data already obtained through the TSCA Inventory Update Rule4, particularly on new exposure-
related data to be provided beginning in 2005.
In certain instances, risk-reduction efforts are targeted at specific chemicals. Foremost
among these is the Federal government's commitment to eliminate the incidence of childhood
lead poisoning. Since 1973, we have reduced environmental lead levels by phasing out leaded
gasoline and addressing other sources of lead exposure. Since the 1990's, EPA has focused on
reducing children's exposure to lead hi paint and dust through a regulatory framework and by
educating parents and the medical community about prevention.5 EPA's efforts, combined with
those of other Federal agencies, has led to a 50 percent drop hi the number of children in the U.S.
that have elevated blood levels, to approximately 400,000 children.
EPA is employing a multimedia, cross-Agency strategy to focus on other high-risk
chemicals and classes of chemicals. For example, we are working to prevent new PBTs from
entering commerce and to reduce risks associated with PBTs, including mercury, that are
currently in use or that have been used hi the past. In addition, recommendations will be
provided to EPA hi 2004 from a panel of national experts on asbestos that will assist the Agency
hi designing strategies to address remaining asbestos risks. We will expand successful pilots to
encourage companies to retire from service large capacitors and transformers containing PCBs to
meet ambitious new targets for safe disposal by 2008.
U.S./Mexican Border
To reduce environmental and human health risks along the U.S./Mexico Border, EPA
employs both voluntary and regulatory measures. Efforts include a series of workgroups that
focus on priority issues ranging from water infrastructure and hazardous waste to outreach
efforts focusing on communities and businesses hi the border area. The programs were initially
conceived hi a Federal-to-Federal context. Today, it is clear that hi both countries, non-Federal
governments are the appropriate entities for developing and carrying out much of the work of
protecting the border environment. The experience of the last six years has shown U.S. border
states as key participants hi workgroup activities with similar experience on the Mexico side.
3 U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, High Production Volume Challenge Program, HPV Commitment
Tracking System. Available at hrtp://wmfw.epa.gov/chemrtk.''viewsfch.htiri.
4 U.S. EPA website, www.epa.gov/opptitttr/iur, Title 40 CFR Part 710, Subpart A
5 See www.epa.gov/lead
rv-7
-------
In the past year, all border states have stressed the need for greater decentralization of
environmental authority, and in FY 1999, states and the Federal governments agreed to a set of
principles that clarify the roles of the governments and advance State and Tribal participation.
Under a new environmental plan developed with SEMARNAP (EPA's Mexican counterpart),
completed in April 2003, the States and Tribes will play a more substantial and meaningful role
in:
• determining how Federal border programs are developed and funded;
• developing regional workgroups that empower border citizens; and
• ensuring that programs devolve from Mexico's Federal government to the Mexican
states, with corresponding funding.
Ecosystems
EPA will work with Federal, state, Tribal, local, and private sector partners to achieve
our ecosystem objectives. Through continuing emphasis on partnerships and innovation, we will
protect and restore coastal water quality through the National Estuary Program and related
coastal watershed support. In coordination with the Corps of Engineers, EPA will improve the
CWA Section 404 program to achieve no net loss of wetlands by avoiding, minimizing and
compensating for losses. With an emphasis on community-based restoration, EPA will
contribute to the goal of no net loss of wetlands.
Great Lakes Strategy 2002, developed by EPA and Federal, state, and Tribal agencies in
consultation with the public, advances U.S. Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement
implementation. Its long-range vision for a healthy natural environment where all beaches are
open for swimming, all fish are safe to eat, and the Lakes are protected as a safe source of
drinking water, is supported by Lakewide Management Plans (LaMPs) and Remedial Action
Plans (RAPs) for Areas of Concern (AOCs).
Work in the Chesapeake Bay is based on a unique regional partnership formed to direct
and conduct restoration of the Chesapeake Bay. Partners include Maryland, Virginia and
Pennsylvania; the District of Columbia; the Chesapeake Bay Commission; EPA; and
participating citizen advisory groups. A comprehensive and far-reaching agreement, Chesapeake
2000, will guide restoration and protection efforts through 2010. The agreement focuses on
improving water quality as the most critical element in the overall protection and restoration of
the Bay and its tributaries.
EPA's efforts hi the Gulf of Mexico represent a broad, multi-organizational partnership
based on the participation of business and industry, agriculture, local government, citizens,
environmental and fishery interests, Federal agencies, and five Gulf States. The partners
voluntarily identify key environmental problems and work at the regional, state, and local level
to define and recommend solutions.
Brownfields
Brownfields are defined as real properties, where expansion, redevelopment, or reuse
may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or
IV-8
-------
contaminant. Brownfields include abandoned industrial and commercial properties, drug labs,
mine-scarred land, and sites contaminated with petroleum or petroleum products. The Small
Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act (SBLRBRA), signed into law in
2002, expands Federal grants for assessment, cleanup, and job training. To encourage
revitalization and reuse of brownfield sites, the law limits the legal liability of prospective
purchasers, innocent land holders, and contiguous property owners related to brownfield
properties. In addition, the law provides for establishing and enhancing state and Tribal response
programs, which play a critical role in successfully cleaning up and revitalizing brownfields.
Brownfields grants will continue to provide communities with vital assessment, cleanup,
revolving-loan fund, and job-training support. Brownfields assessment grants provide funding to
inventory, characterize, assess, and conduct planning and community involvement activities
related to brownfields. Brownfields revolving-loan fund grants provide funding for a grantee to
capitalize a revolving loan and make subgrants to carry out cleanup activities. Cleanup grants,
newly authorized by the Brownfields Law, will fund cleanup activities by grant recipients.
Expanded authorities within the new law also address the potential for limited funding for
institutional controls, insurance, and health monitoring. EPA will provide limited funding for
grants that provide technical assistance, training, and research to Brownfields communities.
EPA will also provide funding to create local environmental job framing programs, ensuring that
the economic benefits derived from Brownfields revitalization efforts remain in the community.
EPA will continue to work in partnership with state cleanup programs to address
brownfield properties. The Agency will provide states and Tribes with tools, information, and
funding they can use to develop response programs that will address environmental assessment
cleanup, characterization, and redevelopment needs at sites contaminated with hazardous wastes
and petroleum. The Agency will continue to encourage the empowerment of state, Tribal, and
local environmental and economic development officials to oversee brownfield activities and the
implementation of local solutions to local problems.
Research
EPA is continuing to ensure that it is a source of strong scientific and technical
information, and that it is on the leading edge of environmental protection innovations that will
allow achievement of its strategic objectives. The Agency consults a number of expert sources,
both internally and externally, and uses several deliberative steps in planning its research
programs. As a starting point, the Agency draws input from multi-year plans, EPA's Strategic
Plan, available research plans, EPA program offices and Regions, Federal research partners, and
peer advisory bodies such as the Science Advisory Board (SAB) and others. Agency teams
prioritize research areas by examining risk and other factors such as National Science and
Technology Council (NSTC) research, client office priorities, court orders, and legislative
mandates. EPA's research program will increase understanding of environmental processes and
capabilities to assess environmental risks to both human health and ecosystems.
To enable the Agency to enhance science and research for healthy people, communities,
and ecosystems through 2008, EPA will engage in high priority, multidisciplinary research
efforts to improve understanding of the risks associated with: 1) human health and ecosystems;
2) climate change; 3) pesticides and toxics; 4) computational toxicology; 5) endocrine disrupters;
IV-9
-------
6) mercury, and 7) homeland security. Following is a summary of the means and strategies to
meet the Agency's long-term objectives hi these areas.
EPA's human health research represents the Agency's only comprehensive program to
address the limitations in human health risk assessment. Scientists across the Agency will use
the measurement-derived databases, models, and protocols developed through this research
program to strengthen the scientific foundation for human health risk assessment. In addition,
global change, loss and destruction of habitat due to sprawl and exploitation of natural resources,
invasive species, non-point source pollution, and the accumulation and interaction of these
effects present emerging ecological challenges. EPA will conduct research to strengthen its
ability to assess and compare risks to ecosystems, protect and restore them, and track progress
toward optimal ecological outcomes.
EPA designs its Climate Change research program hi collaboration with the other
agencies participating in the Climate Change Science Program (CCSP). This research focuses on
assessing potential direct and indirect effects of climate change on human health, air quality,
water quality, and aquatic ecosystems; identifying and quantifying the uncertainties associated
with those effects; and comparing potential climate change effects with effects caused by other
stressors.
Research under the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) builds on earlier research to
reduce scientific uncertainty hi risk assessment. This research will provide data needed to
develop refined aggregate and cumulative risk assessments, develop the appropriate safety
factors to protect children and other sensitive populations, refine risk assessments, and provide
risk mitigation technologies. By 2008, EPA will provide scientific tools that can be used to
characterize, assess, and manage risks associated with the implementation of FQPA.
The Agency will conduct additional research on pesticides and toxics that support the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Toxic Substances Control
Act (TSCA), designed to enhance the Agency's human health and ecological risk assessment and
risk management capabilities. Efforts will include the development of predictive tools used hi
testing requirements, research on probabilistic risk assessment methods, biotechnology, and
other areas of high interest and utility to the Agency.
To enhance the scientific basis and diagnostic/predictive capabilities of existing and
proposed chemical testing programs, EPA's Computational Toxicology (CT) Research Program
will use in vitro or other approaches such as molecular profiling, biomformatics, and quantitative
structure-activity relationships. These alternative approaches, hi conjunction with highly
sophisticated computer-based models and research results, will greatly reduce the use of animal
testing to obtain chemical toxicity information. To support our regulatory mandates, endocrine
disrupters research will focus on improving EPA's scientific understanding of exposures to,
effects of, and management of endocrine-disrupter chemicals. Research hi direct support of
EPA's screening and testing programs will evaluate current testing protocols and develop new
protocols to evaluate potential endocrine effects of environmental agents. The Agency will also
conduct research to determine impacts that endocrine-disrupting chemicals may have on humans,
wildlife, and the environment.
rv-io
-------
A 1997 EPA Mercury Study Report to Congress discussed the magnitude of mercury
emissions in the United States and concluded that a plausible link exists between human
activities that release mercury from industrial and combustion sources in the United States and
methylmercury concentrations in humans and wildlife. The Agency will conduct risk
management research for managing emissions from coal-fired utilities (critical information for
rule-making) and non-combustion sources of mercury; on the fate and transport of mercury in the
atmosphere; for assessing methyhnercury in human populations; and for developing risk
communication methods and tools.
EPA's Homeland Security research program will expand knowledge of potential threats,
as well as its response capabilities, by assembling and evaluating private sector tools and
capabilities. Preferred response approaches will be identified, promoted, and evaluated for
potential future use by first responders, decision makers, and the public. The Agency will be
working closely with other federal and outside organizations to fill gaps in this critical research
area. EPA's research will focus on preparedness, risk assessment, detection, containment,
decontamination and disposal of chemical and biological attacks water systems.
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES AND FY 2005 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS
Chemical, Organism, and Pesticide Risks
• Ensure new pesticide registration actions (including new active ingredients and new uses)
meet new health standards and are environmentally safe.
• Increase percentage of acre treatments that will use reduced-risk pesticides.
• Decrease occurrence of residues of carcinogenic and cholinesterase-inhibiting neuortic
pesticides on foods eaten by children from their 1994 to 1996 average.
• Ensure that through ongoing data reviews, pesticide active ingredients, and products that
contain them, are reviewed to assure adequate protection for human health and the
environment, taking into consideration exposure such as subsistence lifestyles of the
Native Americans.
• Standardize and validate screening assays.
• Reduce from 1995 levels the number of incidents involving mortalities to nontargeted
terrestrial and aquatic wildlife caused by pesticides.
• Reduce exposure to and health effects from priority industrial and commercial chemicals.
• Identify, restrict, and reduce risks associated with industrial and commercial chemicals.
Ecosystems
• Support wetlands and stream corridor restoration and management and
assessment/monitoring of overall wetland health.
* Support projects with the goal of creating, restoring or protecting 2400 acres of important
coastal and marine habitats per year in the Gulf of Mexico.
• Assist the Gulf States in implementing watershed restoration actions in priority impaired
coastal river and estuary segments.
rv-n
-------
• Improve Great Lakes ecosystem components, including progress on fish contaminants,
beach closures, air toxics and trophic status.
• Improve the aquatic health of the Chesapeake Bay.
• By 2005, working with partners, achieve no net loss of wetlands.
Community Health
• Empower states, Tribes, local communities and other stakeholders hi economic
redevelopment to work together to prevent, assess, safely cleanup, and reuse
Brownfields.
• Through December 2003, the Brownfields program has awarded 552 Brownfields
assessment grants, over 171 Brownfields revolving loan funds and 50 cleanup grants, and
66 job training grants.
• Assess 1,000 Brownfields properties,
• Clean up 60 properties using Brownfields funding,
• Leverage $1.0 billion in cleanup/redevelopment funding,
• Leverage 5,000 j obs.
• Train 200 participants, placing 65 percent in jobs.
Science and Research
• Establish and maintain Centers of Applied Science to provide technical assistance and
coordination of applied research activities addressing the latest needs of stakeholders.
• Provide high quality exposure, effects and assessment research results that support the
August 2006 reassessment of current-use pesticide tolerances, so that, by 2008, EPA will
be able to characterize key factors influencing children's and other subpopulations' risks
from pesticide exposure.
• By 2005, provide risk assessors and managers with methods and tools for measuring
exposure and effects in children.
• By 2005, provide technical guidance for implementing and evaluating projects to restore
riparian zones, so that, by 2010, watershed manages have state-of-the-science field
evaluation tools, technical guidance and decision-support systems.
• Through 2005, initiate or submit to external review 28 human health assessments and
complete 12 human health assessments through the Integrated Risk Information System
(IRIS).
HIGHLIGHTS
Chemical, Organism and Pesticide Risks
Pesticide Registration
In 2005, the Agency will continue its efforts to decrease the risk to the public from
pesticide use through the regulatory review of new pesticides. EPA expedites the registration of
reduced risk pesticides, which are generally presumed to pose lower risks to consumers, workers,
IV-12
-------
the ozone layer, groundwater, and wildlife. These accelerated pesticide reviews provide an
incentive for industry to develop, register, and use lower risk pesticides. Additionally, the
availability of these reduced risk pesticides provides alternatives to older, potentially more
harmful products currently on the market.
Biological agents are potential weapons that could be exploited by terrorists against the
United States. EPA's pesticides antimicrobial program is working to help address this threat.
Antimicrobials play an important role in public health and safety. EPA is conducting
comprehensive scientific assessments and developing test protocols to determine the safety and
efficacy of products used against chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction, and
registering products as necessary. EPA is also developing a timeline for prioritizing and
implementing the tests.
Tolerance Reassessment and Reregistration
The 1996 Food Quality Protection Act requires the reassessment of existing pesticide
tolerances by 2006. A tolerance is the amount of pesticide residue that may legally remain on a
food. Pesticide reregistration is a statutory requirement under the 1988 amendments to FIFRA.
Under the law, all pesticides registered prior to November 1984 must be reviewed to ensure that
they meet current health and safety standards. Many pesticides must be reviewed under both
statutes. Additional program requirements and priorities within FQPA include:
• Review of inert ingredients;
• Reform of the antimicrobial review process;
• Transparency of our regulatory decisions;
• Incorporation of aggregate and cumulative risk into our reviews;
• Special protection for infants and children;
• Screening of pesticides for endocrine disrupting effects;
* Enhancements to minor use program; and
• Emphasis on registration of reduced risk pesticides
In the Pesticides program, the main focus, our primary goal, and our largest public
commitment is to meet the final statutory goal for completing tolerance reassessment by August
3, 2006. Additional resources of $4,400,000 are requested in this program to complete food use
reregistration work necessary for the Agency
to complete tolerance reassessments by 2006 as required by FQPA. These resources will support
completion of conventional pesticides, inerts, biopesticides and antimicrobial reviews. The
reviews can take several years to complete, therefore FY 2005 is the last opportunity to ensure
the Agency has the resources to meet the 2006 FQPA deadline.
In FY 2005, the Agency will continue its review of older pesticides and move forward
toward its ten-year statutory deadline of reassessing all 9,721 tolerances. EPA met its first two
statutory deadlines under FQPA for tolerance reassessment. The tolerance reassessment process
addresses the highest-risk pesticides first. Using data surveys conducted by USDA, FDA and
other sources, EPA has identified a group of "top 20" foods consumed by children and matched
those with the tolerance reassessments required for pesticides used on those foods. The Agency
is tracking its progress hi determining appropriate tolerances for these pesticides under the FQPA
IV-13
-------
standards. In 2005, EPA will continue its effort to reduce dietary risks to children by completing
approximately 93 percent (cumulative) of these children's tolerances of special concern.
Through the Reregistration program, EPA reviews pesticides currently on the market to
ensure they meet the latest health standards. Pesticides not in compliance with the standards will
be eliminated or restricted in order to minimize potentially harmful exposure. FQPA added
considerably more complexity to the pesticide reregistration process, lengthening the "front end"
of reregistration. These requirements include considering aggregate and cumulative risk in our
risk assessments, implementing new processes to increase involvement of pesticide users and
other stakeholders, and ensuring a reasonable opportunity for agriculture to make the transition
to new, safer pest control tools and practices.
In 2005, EPA will work toward completing 40 Reregistration Decisions6, 400 product
reregistrations and 1000 tolerance reassessments. The Agency will also continue to develop tools
to screen pesticides for their potential to disrupt the endocrine system. Over the longer run,
these changes will enhance protection of human health and the environment.
Appropriate transition strategies to reduced risk pesticides are important to the nation to
avoid disruption of the food supply or sudden changes in the market that could result from
abruptly terminating the use of a pesticide before well-targeted reduced risk equivalents can be
identified and made available. In FY 2005, the Agency will continue efforts to reach more
farmers and grower groups, encourage them to adopt safer pesticides, and use environmental
stewardship and integrated pest management practices. These outreach efforts play pivotal roles
in moving the nation to the use of safe pest control methods, including reduced risk pesticides.
These programs promote risk reduction through collaborative efforts with stakeholders to use
safer alternatives to traditional chemical methods of pest control.
Endangered Species
Also in FY 2005, the Agency is requesting additional resources of $1,000,000 for the
Endangered Species program. The Agency has been working with the Fish and Wildlife Service
and the National Marine Fisheries Service to improve the review process on the potential impact
of pesticides on endangered species. Efforts include elevating the level of detail of specificity
in risk assessments to more realistically predict risks to endangered species populations;
developing a compendium of species biology, food and habitat requirements, listing specification
and recovery efforts; ensuring implementation of applicable label provisions; and supporting
State and Tribal entities in protecting endangered species. This funding will be used mainly by
the states for assisting in the implementation of these improvements.
Endocrine Disruptors
EPA's Endocrine Disruptors Screening Program (EDSP) was established hi response to
an FQPA requirement, and to growing concerns in the scientific community about observed
adverse effects in wildlife and their potential relationship to human effects. The program's
primary objectives are to establish validated assays and scientifically-supported tools for testing
6 Reregistration Decisions include Reregistration Eligibility Decisions [REDs], Tolerance Reregistration Eligibility Decisions
[TREDs] and Interim Reregistration Eligibility Decisions [IREDs]).
rv-14
-------
chemicals for possible adverse effects to the endocrine system. FQPA requires that "validated"
assays be used in the Screening Program, but at passage in 1996, available endocrine effects test
methods were principally experimental and none had been validated. EPA has spent the past
several years standardizing a defined set of assays and establishing their relevance and reliability.
The long-term outcomes of the EDSP will be a baseline estimate of the degree of endocrine
disruption occurring from environmental chemicals, and a way to measure the risk.
High Production Volume Challenge Program
EPA's High Production Volume (HPV) Challenge Program, established in cooperation
with industry, environmental groups, and other interested parties, works to ensure that critical
human health and environmental effects data on approximately 2,800 HPV chemicals are
screened and made publicly available. HPV chemicals are defined as industrial chemicals that
are manufactured or imported into the United States in volumes of one million pounds or more
each year. Through this program, EPA asks industry to voluntarily sponsor HPV chemicals for
screening-level testing. Hazard test information on large volume chemicals is now more visible
through the HPV website7, giving states, regions, and Tribes accessibility and the ability to share
critical data and information. EPA's screening efforts should be well under way by FY 2005 and
are expected to result in follow up actions on five to ten percent of the chemicals screened.
Lead Poisoning Prevention Activities
EPA is part of the Federal effort to address lead poisoning and elevated blood levels in
children by assisting in, and in some cases guiding, Federal activities aimed at reducing the
exposure of children in homes with lead-based paint. In 2005, EPA plans to proceed with a
proposed rule on the de-leading of bridges and structures. Also, because much of the remaining
incidence of lead poisoning occurs in low-income, urban areas, new public education initiatives
will focus on these populations. EPA also plans to step up efforts with the private sector to
increase knowledge and ability to work in a lead-safe manner as a normal part of doing business,
and plans to ensure that special attention is paid to private sector (non-profit and for-profit)
organizations working in high-impact areas.
Risk Management Plans
Reducing chemical accidents is vital to ensure that communities are not exposed to
hazardous materials. The Agency continues its efforts to help states and Local Emergency
Planning Committees (LEPCs) implement the risk management plan (RMP) program. In FY
2002, 398 RMP audits were conducted and the Agency continues to make steady progress in this
area. In FY 2005, EPA will provide technical assistance grants, technical support, outreach, and
training to state and LEPCs. Through these activities, states, local communities and individuals
will be better prepared to prevent and prepare for chemical accidents.
7 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. "High Production Volume (HPV) Challenge
Program." Available online at: http://www.epa.gov/chernrtkAxJchall.htm. Washington, DC. Accessed September 9, 2003.
IV-15
-------
Community Health
Brownfields
The Brownfields program is designed to empower states, Tribes, local communities and
other stakeholders in economic redevelopment to work together to prevent, assess, safely
cleanup, and reuse Brownfields. Through December 2003, the Brownfields program has
awarded 552 Brownfields assessment grants, over 171 Brownfields revolving loan funds and 50
cleanup grants, and 66 job training grants. In FY 2005, working with its state, Tribal, and local
partners to meet its objective to sustain, cleanup, and restore communities and the ecological
systems that support them, EPA intends to assess 1,000 Brownfields properties, clean up 60
properties using Brownfields funding, leverage $1.0 billion in cleanup/redevelopment funding,
leverage 5,000 jobs, and train 200 participants, placing 65 percent in jobs.
Ecosystems
National Estuary Program
EPA will continue to support protection and restoration efforts in high-priority
ecosystems, including those covered by the National Estuary Program (NEP). Key NEP
activities will include continued support for assessing status and trends, and implementation
activities to restore and protect critical habitat.
State and Tribal Grants
EPA will continue its grants to states and Tribes to help them protect wetlands made
vulnerable by the SWANCC ruling as part of comprehensive programs that will achieve no net
loss of wetlands, while also providing grant funding for states and Tribes to assume more
decision-making authority in waters that remain subject to the CWA.
Watersheds
Targeted geographic watershed initiatives are an important component of community-
based environmental protection and restoration. In the Great Lakes, EPA will target additional
resources to clean up contaminated sediments and strive to reduce PCB concentrations in lake
trout and walleye. The emphasis in the Chesapeake Bay will be the restoration of submerged
aquatic vegetation (SAV). To achieve unproved water quality and restore submerged aquatic
vegetation, Chesapeake Bay partners have committed to reducing nutrient and sediment pollution
loads sufficiently to remove the Bay and the tidal portions of its tributaries from the list of
impaired waters. Continued implementation of core water programs and efforts to address the
hypoxic zone will help to restore the waters of the Gulf of Mexico and its tributaries.
Research
Research for Human Health and Ecosystems
In order to improve the scientific basis for identifying, characterizing, assessing, and
IV-16
-------
managing environmental exposures that can pose the greatest health risks to the American
public, EPA is committed to developing and verifying innovative methods and models for
assessing the susceptibilities of sub-populations, such as children and the elderly, to
environmental toxins. Since many of the current human health risk assessment methods, models,
and databases are based on environmental risks for adults, this research is primarily aimed at
enhancing current risk assessment and management strategies and guidance to better consider
risk determination needs for children.
In FY 2005, research will identify modes of action by which specific groups of
chemicals/pesticides increase cancer or non-cancer health risks as a function of life stage,
develop the necessary tools and models to characterize and conduct field studies on exposures to
high-priority environmental chemicals in the elderly, and examine effects of pre-existing
respiratory disease (e.g., asthma, bronchitis) on response to air pollutants.
EPA will continue to generate exposure measurement and exposure factor data and
establish methods to support the development, evaluation, and enhancement of models of
aggregate exposures, dose, and effects. This research seeks to understand the key determinants
of exposure and risk, improve exposure measurement techniques, and develop critical data on
exposure and exposure factors. The results will be used to fill data gaps and reduce reliance on
numerous default assumptions that are currently used in the risk assessment process, which will
strengthen the scientific foundation for human health risk assessment.
Additional research will provide regulatory decision-makers with models and guidance
that will be used for conducting assessments for cumulative exposure and risks to pollutants that
pose the greatest health risks to the American public. Activities for FY 2005 and beyond
include: 1) developing and refining physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models for
using exposure, biomarker, and PK data hi risk assessments; 2) examining promising new
biomarkers of exposure and effects that can be used hi future exposure and epidemiological
studies, such as the National Children's Study (NCS); and 3) sponsoring research that will
provide a framework for structuring evaluations of the toxicity of complex chemical mixtures for
use in human and environmental health assessments.
In order to balance the growth of human activity with the need to protect the
environment, it is important to understand the current condition of ecosystems, what stressors are
changing that condition, what the effects may be from those changes, and what can be done to
prevent, mitigate, or adapt to those changes. In FY 2005, the Environmental Monitoring and
Assessment Program (EMAP) will continue to be a major contributor to EPA's environmental
indicators report and will be instrumental hi improving state contributions to the Agency's bi-
annual report to Congress on the condition of the Nation's waters. Baseline ecological condition
of Western streams will be determined so that, by 2008, a monitoring framework is available for
streams and small rivers in the Western U.S. that can be used from the local to the national level
for statistical assessments of condition and change to ecological resources.
Research will also provide technical guidance for implementing and evaluating projects
to restore riparian zones, which are critical landscape components for the restoration of aquatic
ecosystems and water quality. Research will include: (1) development, demonstration and
technical support for monitoring designs, indicators, and interpretive analysis tools to allow
IV-17
-------
States and Tribes to monitor and report the condition of water resources; (2) development of
approaches to identify and test the linkages between probability-based and targeted water quality
monitoring programs, landscape characteristics and the probability of water body impairment;
(3) development of monitoring methods and decision support systems to improve our ability to
identify probable causes of ecological impairment in streams; and (4) development of monitoring
approaches to evaluate the effectiveness of programs to manage and restore aquatic resources in
reaching performance objectives at site, regional, state and national scales.
The Agency will continue research to assess the impacts of invasive species on U.S.
ecosystems, including monitoring for invasive species as part of the Western EMAP program
and the National Coastal Assessment, modeling zebra mussel influence on nutrients hi Great
Lakes Ecosystems, and developing a model for predicting where certain species will invade next.
Research efforts in FY 2005 will continue to build on the Agency's FY 2004 Clear Skies
Research Initiative to identify where emerging control technologies and continuous measurement
of mercury combustion sources can facilitate or optimize mercury emissions reduction. This
research will also give support to the recent Utility Mercury Reductions proposal signed by
Administrator Leavitt on December 15, 2003.
EPA will increase efforts to implement information quality guidelines. While the
Agency has extensive procedures in place to ensure that the information it disseminates meets
high standards, further actions will be taken to ensure that such information is current and fully
complies with the guidelines. In FY 2005, the Agency will establish an extramural mechanism
to assist Regions in identifying external peer reviewers and securing their advice and assistance.
Climate Change Research
EPA's Climate Change Research Program supports one of six Administration FY 2005
Interagency Research and Development Priorities - Climate Change Science and Technology.
All activities to assess potential impacts of global climate change will be developed and
coordinated with the Climate Change Science Program (CCSP). Attention is expected to be
given to assessing the potential consequences of global change - including climate variability
and change, land use changes, and UV radiation — on air quality, water quality, ecosystem health,
and human health. The Agency will also assess potential adaptation strategies for building
resilience to global change, while responding to both potential risks and opportunities.
Research for Pesticides and Toxics •
EPA is continuing to build on research launched under the FY 2003 Biotechnology
Initiative focusing on plant-incorporated protectants (PIP) crops. In FY 2005, the Agency will
deliver a final report outlining the state-of-the-art hi tools for monitoring resistance development
in the field and the use of target pest ecology to refine Insect Resistance Management strategies,
as they are determined in risk assessment practice. This report will focus on data gaps in pest
biology, ecology, and population dynamics related to insect resistance development. The report
will also lend insight into the development of appropriate tools to identify and measure resistance
hi field populations of target pests.
IV-18
-------
Research for Computational Toxicology
EPA's Computational Toxicology research program supports the Molecular-level
Understanding of Life Processes activity, one of the Administration's six FY 2005 Interagency
Research and Development Priorities, by employing the use of genomic information and modern
computational techniques to enable better management of chemicals that may be present in the
environment. In FY 2005, EPA will invest additional resources hi computational toxicology
(CT) research - 4.0 FTE and $4,080,093. The FY 2005 CT investment will build upon the
current program by accelerating the use of bioinformatics and other computational approaches
and apply the program to address other high priority regulatory issues, including the assessment
of important classes of environmental agents. In FY 2005, the Agency will begin to develop
computational models that could be used to help prioritize anti-microbial agents and inerts for
screening and testing requirements.
Fellowships
The STAR fellowship program is the only Federal fellowship program designed
exclusively for students pursuing advanced degrees in the environmental sciences and
engineering. In FY 2005, the Agency will invest additional resources to support STAR graduate
fellowships. This additional investment will extend the purpose of developing high quality
scientists across multiple disciplines, including the biological and physical sciences,
mathematics, computer sciences, and engineering that will benefit EPA, the private sector, and
the entire Nation.
In FY 2005, EPA will also invest additional resources to support Association of Schools
of Public Health (ASPH) fellowships. This investment will further extend the important
contribution to public health issues that ASPH fellows provide within EPA, thereby helping EPA
to better design its programs for human health outcomes. Under a cooperative agreement with
the ASPH, eligible fellows are placed in EPA labs, centers, and offices to conduct projects that
contribute to EPA's public health mission.
Research for Homeland Security
EPA's Homeland Security research program will continue to conduct critical cross-
cutting research to provide near-term, appropriate, affordable, reliable, tested, and effective
technologies and guidance. Work will focus on preparedness, risk assessment, detection,
containment, decontamination, and disposal of chemical and biological agents used in attacks on
water systems. New work will be initiated hi the decontamination and clean up of biological
agents.
EXTERNAL FACTORS
The ability of the Agency to achieve its strategic goals and objectives depends on several
factors over which the Agency has only partial control or influence. Partnerships, voluntary
cooperation, international collaboration, industry, economic influences^ industrial accidents,
natural disasters, litigation, and legislation play critical roles, affecting the Agency's results.
Changes in the focus, level of effort, or status of any of these components could affect the
success of the Agency's programs under Goal 4. Consequently, EPA must consider these factors
as it establishes annual performance measures and targets.
IV-19
-------
EPA assures the safe use of pesticides in coordination with the USDA and FDA, who
have responsibility to monitor and control residues and other environmental exposures. EPA
also works with these agencies to coordinate with other countries and international organizations
with which the United States shares environmental goals. The Agency employs a number of
mechanisms and programs to assure that our partners in environmental protection will have the
capacity to conduct the activities needed to achieve the objectives. However, as noted, EPA
often has limited control over these entities. Much of the success of EPA programs depends on
the voluntary cooperation of the private sector and the public.
Other factors that may delay or prevent the Agency's achievement of the objectives
include lawsuits that delay or stop the planned activities of EPA and/or State partners, new or
amended legislation, and new commitments within the Administration. Economic growth and
changes in producer and consumer behavior could also have an influence on the Agency's ability
to achieve the objectives within the tune frame specified.
Large-scale accidental releases, such as pesticide spills, or rare catastrophic natural
events (such as hurricanes or large-scale flooding) could impact EPA's ability to achieve
objectives in the short term. In the longer term, new technology, newly identified environmental
problems and priorities, or unanticipated complexity or magnitude of pesticide-related problems
may affect the time frame for achieving the objectives or long-term goals. For example,
pesticide use is affected by unanticipated outbreaks of pest infestations and/or disease factors,
which require EPA to review emergency uses in order to preclude unreasonable risks to the
environment. While the Agency can provide incentives for the submission of registration actions
such as reduced risk and minor uses, EPA does not control incoming requests for registration
actions. As a result, the Agency's projection of regulatory workload is subject to change.
Progress in reducing risks is often highly dependent on industry's response to EPA
assistance and initiatives. EPA has little direct control over the pace and volume at which
industry develops new chemicals or pesticides; we primarily concentrate on providing industry
with tools, such as the PBT Profiler and Pollution Prevention Framework, or incentives, such as
the priority review of reduced-risk pesticides, to help screen out high-risk chemicals before they
are submitted for EPA review. These tools and incentives have been shown to be effective in
gaming cooperation from industry and meeting our long-term and annual goals. In addition,
voluntary programs, such as the HPV Challenge Program, operate exclusively on the basis of
industry commitments for participation. Industry's response to such initiatives affects the
Agency's ability to achieve effective new chemical screening efficiently.
Research
Strong science is predicated on the desire of the Agency to make human health and
environmental decisions based on high-quality scientific data and information. This challenges
the Agency to perform and apply the best available science and technical analyses when
addressing health and environmental problems. Such a challenge moves the Agency to a more
integrated, efficient, and effective approach of reducing potential risks. As long as high quality
science is a central tenant for actions taken by the Agency, then external factors will have a
minimal impact on the goal.
IV-20
-------
EFFICIENCY MEASURES/MEASUREMENT DEVELOPMENT PLANS
In addition to the newly established efficiency measures, the Office of Pesticide
Programs is creating a measures workplan to identify and plan for the development of risk-based
outcome measures and indicators for both human health and the environment. The data and
information for meaningful pesticides measures require coordination and cooperation with other
organizations. The workplan will identify these partnerships and lay out the necessary steps for
developing outcome measures and indicators for program goals.
IV-21
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems
OBJECTIVE: Chemical, Organism, and Pesticide Risks
Prevent and reduce pesticide, chemical, and genetically engineered biological organism
risks to humans, communities, and ecosystems.
Resource Summary
(Dollars in Thousands)
Chemical, Organism, and Pesticide Risks
Credit Subsidy Re-estimate
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Building and Facilities
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Inspector General
Total Workyears
FY2003
Actuals
$345,298.1
$905.5
$307,746.6
$4,939.6
$23,630.5
$1,334.9
1,819.1
FY2004
Pres-. Bud.
$364,126.3
$0.0
$327,982.7
$5,379.6
$6,827.6
$22,236.0
$1,700.4
1,837.0
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$383,305.4
$0.0
$346,346.5
$5,469.4
$7,375.2
$22,367.0
$1,747.3
1,859.8
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$19,179.1
$0.0
$18,363.8
$89.8
$547.6
$131.0
$46.9
22.7
Program Project
(Dollars in Thousands)
Children and other Sensitive Populations
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Program
Implementation
Pesticides: Field Programs
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response,
and Recovery
Categorical Grant: Lead
Commission for Environmental Cooperation
Pesticides: Registration of New Pesticides
Pesticides: Review / Reregistration of Existing
Pesticides
POPs Implementation
State and Local Prevention and Preparedness
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk
Management
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Review and
Reduction
Toxic Substances: Lead Risk Reduction Prgm
FY 2003
Actuals
$365.2
$8,492.9
$19,119.3
$3,929.8
$686.3
$15,137.6
$304.4
$42,458.9
$50,922.0
$2,090.9
$10,273.0
$10,464.4
$42,212.4
$11,263.0
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
$0.0
$8,536.0
$23,246.9
$0.0
$2,327.4
$13,700.0
$393.8
$35,981.6
$64,314.4
$2,224.4
$12,508.1
$9,243.1
$45,536.2
$14,832.9
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$116.0
$8,667.0
$24,703.2
$0.0
$2,339.8
$13,700.0
$417.1
$45,310.2
$60,471.0
$2,235.4
$12,134.8
$9,514.2
$45,878.8
$11,082.6
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$116.0
$131.0
$1,456.3
$0.0
$12.4
$0.0
$23.3
$9,328.6
($3,843.4)
$11.0
($373.3)
$271.1
$342.6
($3,750.3)
IV-22
-------
Children and other Sensitive Populations
TRI / Right to Know
International Capacity Building
Administrative Projects
TOTAL
FY2003
Actuals
$365.2
$14,687.6
$2,109.8
$110,780.6
$345,298.1
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
$0.0
$14,690.6
$1,541.2
$115,049.7
$364,126.3
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$116.0
$15,940.9
$1,804.7
$128,989.7
$383,305.4
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$116.0
$1,250.3
$263.5
$13,940.0
$19,179.1
FY 2005 REQUEST
Results to be Achieved under this Objective
A key component of this objective is protecting human health and the environment by
identifying, assessing, and reducing the risks presented by the thousands of chemicals on which
our society and economy have come to depend. These,include the pesticides we use to meet
national and global demands for food and the industrial and commercial chemicals ubiquitous in
our homes, our workplaces, and the products we use. EPA also addresses the risks associated
with potential chemical releases, working in collaboration with local community planners as well
as States. Accessible information is critical to good planning and the Agency will focus efforts
on improved tools for understanding chemical reporting from facilities. On the international
front, reducing transboundary movement of chemicals of concern remains a top priority.
This request highlights EPA's efforts to improve the prevention and reduction of
pesticide risks to humans, communities and ecosystems, including protecting the safety of our
food supply with special emphasis on the protection of infants and children through regulatory
and voluntary means. The Agency will continue partnerships with the United States Department
of Agriculture (USD A), the Food and Drag Administration (FDA), the Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS), the international Organization for Economic and Cooperation
Development (OECD) and others to conduct a smooth transition to safer pest management for
food crops. This effort will include engaging and sharing information with stakeholders, to
develop and implement transition strategies. EPA will continue to ensure that the best available
science is incorporated into the implementation of the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA).
Some pesticides currently on the market are suspected human carcinogens, neurotoxins or
endocrine disrupters and thus may pose significant health concerns, especially to children and
other susceptible populations. FQPA set strong safety requirements to protect human health and
the environment and provides opportunities to positively impact agricultural production
techniques and pesticide user behavior, lessening the overall risk of pesticide use. FQPA further
requires that the Agency review pesticides on a periodic basis to ensure that those registered for
use meet the most current health standards. Through this process, EPA will ensure that when
properly used, pesticides maintain the "reasonable certainty of no harm" standard.8 The review
of existing pesticides through reregistration and tolerance reassessment combined with the
availability of safer pesticides through registration continues to improve the risk picture for
agricultural and other pesticide uses.
! FFDCA, Sec. 408 (b)(2)(A)
IV-23
-------
Attainment of this objective will yield human health and environmental benefits by
providing for appropriate screening, testing and risk management responses to chemicals of
potential concern, including those specially targeted for risk reduction actions. Expected results
include preventing the entry into commerce of chemicals posing unreasonable risk to human
health or the environment, and either reducing or effectively managing risks associated with
certain existing high production volume chemicals. Particular emphasis will be placed on
reducing risks to sensitive populations such as children. EPA expects to leverage public and
private resources by working with external partners to achieve efficiencies in program
administration and execution.
To reduce or eliminate the potential risks associated with chemical releases, EPA must
first identify and understand potential chemical risks and releases. EPA will use information
generated by the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act and the Spill
Prevention Control and Countermeasure program to supplement data on potential chemical risks
and to develop voluntary initiatives and activities aimed at high-risk facilities and/or geographic
areas. To meet its objective of protecting human health, communities, and ecosystems from
chemical risks and releases through facility risk reduction efforts and building community
infrastructures, EPA intends to complete 400 risk management plan (RMP) audits in 2005.
The majority of this work will be accomplished through our partnerships. EPA will work
with communities to provide chemical risk information on local facilities. The Agency will also
assist states and communities in understanding how these chemical risks could affect them and
how to reduce those risks and prepare to address and mitigate risks should a chemical release
occur.
EPA has set as a strategic target that by 2008, 50 percent of local communities or LEPCs
will have incorporated facility risk information into their emergency preparedness and
community right-to-know programs. EPA will collect information from LEPCs during 2004 to
determine the extent to which they have incorporated such facility risk information into their
emergency preparedness and community right-to-know programs. This information will serve
as a baseline from which EPA will track progress toward this strategic goal. EPA will work with
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) to provide LEPCs as Citizen Corps Council. EPA will also continue an initiative
to improve and enhance emergency preparedness and prevention in Tribal communities.
EPA will continue to reduce Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) reporting burdens on
industry and improve TRI data quality by distributing its new software tool, "TRI Made-Easy
(TRI-ME).9" The Agency expects to further increase the percentage of TRI reporting forms that
are submitted in electronic format. EPA will continue to refine and expand the public's
understanding of TRI data by improving data access tools such as the "TRI Explorer." Through
these electronic tools, EPA is better positioned to allow more timely access to important facility
information which helps environmental decision making and supports first responders hi the
critical first moments after an accident or security event occurs.
Many human health and environmental pollutants to the American public originate
outside the U.S. and can travel easily across borders via rivers, air and ocean currents, and
9 U.S. EPA, Office of Environmental Information, Toxic Release Inventory Website, http://www.epa.gov/tii, Date of Access:
January 2, 2004.
IV-24
-------
migrating wildlife. Even in the remote Arctic, industrial chemicals such as polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs) have been found in significant levels in the tissues of local wildlife. Further,
differences in public health standards can contribute to global pollution. A chemical of
particular concern to one country may not be controlled or regulated in the same way by another.
Harmonization of national standards can assist hi reducing global pollution by increasing the
number of health and ecological effects any single country may be examining. It may also lower
barriers to trade and commerce as countries accept the validity of another's screening methods or
other standards.
EPA's international activities under this objective give priority to selected chemicals and
certain heavy metals which can persist, bioaccumulate and are toxic (PBTs). PBT chemicals
break down slowly in the environment, and elemental metals never degrade. For this reason,
PBTs, including persistent organic pollutants (POPs), are very mobile, moving great distances
along wind and ocean currents, thereby posing serious risks to human health and the ecosystem
in the U.S. and world-wide. PBTs also enter the food chain accumulating in shellfish, fish, birds
and animals that are exposed directly or indirectly through their diets. Certain populations are
especially vulnerable. Examples include (1) coastal and indigenous populations with subsistence
diets heavy in fish or marine mammals, which may contain toxins and mercury, and (2)
endangered wildlife which consume and biomagnify PCBs, DDT and other harmful PBTs.10
EPA is working to reduce potential risk from PBTs on several international fronts
including the following:
• reducing the release and transboundary movement of PBTs;
• reducing the levels of exposure to humans and adverse effects to wildlife that may result
from these PBTs;
• assisting additional countries around the world to monitor releases and also manage then-
use of PBTs.
For each of these efforts, the Agency targets the highest risk or greatest concerns first.
For example, PCBs, dioxins/furans, DDT, other POPs pesticides, and mercury pose the greatest
concern. Thus, in each negotiated agreement or offer of technical assistance, these substances
take priority. In addition, releases from certain countries of these pollutants are more likely to
impact vulnerable U.S. populations, such as in the Arctic, and thus receive priority consideration.
Examples of such countries include those hi the Caribbean and Central America, Russia, China,
India and Mexico.
This objective will be accomplished through the following program/projects:
Pesticides: Registration of New Pesticides
Pesticide licensing involves both registration of new chemicals and the review of older
chemicals.11 Under the Registration program, EPA makes registration decisions about new
pesticides after extensive review and evaluation of studies and data xm human health and
ecological effects. As part of the process, the Agency analyzes data and sets a tolerance level for
10 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "PBT Chemical Program: Frequently Asked Questions." Available only through the
Internet: http://www.epa.gov/pbt/faq.htm.
IV-25
11 FIFRA Sec 3; FIFRA Sec 4 (i) (5)
-------
each crop or crop grouping (use) the registrant requests for the pesticide. The pesticide
registration program provides numerous benefits, including worker protection, public health
assurance, safe food, and protection of the environment from pesticide risk. Additionally, the
need for keeping a growing population adequately and safely fed, while at the same time
protecting this population from pesticide risk, results hi more investment in new science and
alternative pest control techniques and technologies. The Registration program gives priority to
accelerated processing of reduced risk pesticides which may substitute for products already on
the market, thus giving farmers and other users new tools that are better for human health and the
environment.
There are many types of registration requests submitted by industry for EPA approval.
These include requests for registration of new active ingredients, new pesticides that may simply
be new formulations of ingredients already registered ("me-toos"), new uses that add a crop type
to the approved uses of the registered pesticide and minor uses for low volume crops.12
During the last several years, the Agency has, engaged the public and the scientific
community in developing and reviewing nine science policies that shape EPA's approach to
screening pesticides. While all of the policies are significant, the requirements in FQPA to
consider cumulative and aggregate risk and the ten-fold safety factor for children's health have
important ramifications for risk assessments of many chemicals.
Cumulative risk requires that EPA
consider the combined effects of exposures to
multiple chemicals sharing a common mechanism
of toxicity. Aggregate risk brings issues of
residential exposures and drinking water residues
into the equation. The extra ten-fold safety factor
impacts risk assessments affecting children's
health. A lower factor can be used, ". . . only if,
on the basis of reliable data, such margin will be
safe for infants and children."14
In FY 2005, the Agency will continue
applying its cumulative risk policy to pesticide
registration and reregistration decisions. EPA will
continue to actively encourage and engage the
pesticide industry, farmers and the public to
participate in the implementation of FQPA. EPA
uses common-sense strategies for reducing risk to
acceptable levels while retaining pesticides of the
greatest public value, including those employed in
minor uses and integrated pest management
needs. In FY 2005, EPA will continue to work with the pesticide industry and farmers to explore
new pest management approaches and to provide a reasonable phase-put period for canceled
pesticides. EPA will also continue its stakeholder consultation process through regular meetings
Active and Inert Ingredients
13
Pesticide products contain both "active" and "inert"
ingredients. The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) has defined the terms
"active ingredient" and "inert ingredient," since
1947. An active ingredient is one that prevents,
destroys, repels or mitigates a pest, or is a plant
regulator, defoliant, desiccant or nitrogen stabilizer.
By law, the active ingredient must be identified by
name on the label together with its percentage by
weight.
An inert ingredient is simply any ingredient in the
product that is not intended to affect a target pest.
For example, isopropyl alcohol may be an active
ingredient and antimicrobial pesticide in some
products; however, in other products, it is used as a
solvent and may be considered an inert ingredient.
The law does not require inert ingredients to be
identified by name and percentage on the label, but
the total percentage of such ingredients must be
declared.
12 FIFRA Sec 3
13 FIFRA Sec 2(a); FIFRA Sec 2(m)
14 FFDCA Sec 408(b)(2)(C)
IV-26
-------
with the Committee to Advise on Reassessment and Transition (CARAT). The CARAT is an
advisory body composed of environmental/public interest groups; pesticide industry and trade
associations; pesticide user, grower, processor and commodity organizations; public health
organizations, including children's health representatives; Federal agencies; State, local and
Tribal governments; academia; consumers and the public established to ensure stakeholder
participation in FQPA issues.
States and industry submit requests to EPA for registration actions to meet rapidly
changing or emerging needs, including petitions for temporary uses of pesticides to meet
emergency conditions, and for research purposes. The Agency allows for the unpredictability of
agricultural conditions and pest outbreaks and takes action to meet emerging needs. These
actions include issuance of emergency exemptions under FIFRA sec. 18, which allows the use,
for a limited time, of a pesticide not registered for that specific purpose. Emergency conditions
could include controlling a new pest or the spread of a pest to new areas, or controlling an
outbreak of a pest that poses a public health risk, such as the West Nile virus spread by the
migration of mosquitoes. FIFRA addresses other special needs, including provisions to register
products by States for specific local uses not Federally registered and provisions for
experimental use permits (under FIFRA sec.5), which allow pesticide producers to test new
pesticide uses outside the laboratory to generate information to apply for amendments to
previously approved pesticides (e.g., to reflect label revisions or changed formulations for
products already registered).
The Agency and USDA work collaboratively to ensure that minor use registrations
receive appropriate support. EPA policy has defined minor uses as pesticide usage on crops
grown on less than 300,000 acres. Minor crops account for about 40 percent of the total
agricultural sales for the United States. Although minor use pesticides are of major significance
in agricultural production and to growers and consumers, they produce relatively little revenue
for thek manufacturers, considering the cost of maintaining these registrations. Without these
small-scale but vital pesticide uses, many of the fruits, vegetables, and ornamentals grown in the
United States, worth billions of dollars, could not be produced successfully. In FY 2005, EPA
and USDA will continue to work closely to meet the need for newer, reduced risk pesticides
registered for minor uses. As needed, the Agency uses the data collected under USDA's
Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR-4) program to establish tolerances for minor uses and
provides priority status for registrations for vulnerable crops and minor agricultural uses. IR-4
helps minor crop producers obtain tolerances and registrations for pest control products.
In FY 2005, EPA will continue to provide incentives to the pesticide industry to decrease
risk levels from pesticides through the expedited regulatory review of reduced risk pesticides,
including biopesticides. Reduced risk criteria include pesticides with reduced toxicity, potential
to displace other chemicals posing potential human health concerns, reduced exposure to
workers, low toxicity to non-target organisms, low potential for groundwater contamination,
lower use rates than alternatives, low pest resistance potential, or high compatibility with
integrated pest management and efficacy.15 The Agency is committed to expediting the
registration of additional alternative products and in FY 2005, and expects to register four new
conventional reduced risk pesticides.
15 Pesticide Regulation (PR) Notice 97-3, September 4,1997
IV-27
-------
Kids need Protection
Children are at a greater risk for some pesticides for a
number of reasons. Children's internal organs are still
developing and maturing and their enzymatic,
metabolic, and immune systems may provide less
natural protection than those of an adult. There are
"critical periods" in human development when
exposure to a toxin can permanently alter the way an
individual's biological system operates. Children may
be exposed more to certain pesticides because often
they eat different foods than adults.
For instance, children typically consume larger
quantities of milk, applesauce, and orange juice per
pound of body weight than do adults. Children's
behaviors, such as playing on the floor or on the lawn
where pesticides are commonly applied, or putting
objects in their mouths, increase their chances of
exposure to pesticides.
Adverse effects of pesticide exposure range from
mild symptoms of dizziness and nausea to serious,
long-term neurological, developmental and
reproductive disorders.
EPA is moving deliberately to minimize
exposure from currently marketed pesticides with the
highest potential to cause adverse effects on human
health and the environment. In FY 2005, using the
best available science and incorporating stakeholder
concerns, EPA will continue to reduce risk from these
pesticides through implementation of our decisions in
the field, encouraging development, and expediting
registration of alternatives. The Agency is especially
conscious of the potential impacts on minor crop
growers and integrated pest management programs
and will continue to work with growers and
registrants to focus attention on those situations where
limited crop protection alternatives exist. Because
FQPA emphasizes the need to protect children from
adverse effects of pesticide exposure, EPA is putting
emphasis on pesticides used on the foods children
commonly eat and, through regulatory means, will
continue to seek reduction of pesticide residues on
these foods.
Homeland Security continues to be a concern
for the public and the Agency. Using CDC's category A list of possible bio-agents as a starting
point, the Agency proposes reviewing at least three additional threats hi the short-term. Based
on experience with anthrax, reviews for other bio-agents would require developing new models
and protocols for defining a reasonable standard of efficacy and determining whether
substantially different multiple pathways should be addressed.
For the first time as part of the FY 2004 budget process, the Registration Program was
rated under OMB's PART process. In the FY 2005 re-evaluation, the program's score was rated
at 60 percent. As a result of the evaluation, OMB has recommended that the program develop
long term risk-based outcome goals, develop more challenging targets, and assure more
independent evaluations are conducted. The program is currently working to address the
recommendations.
Pesticides: Review/Reregistration of Existing Pesticides
The FY 2005 request addresses the review of older pesticides as well as some of the
scientific effort involved in identifying potential endocrine disrupting chemicals. The
reregistration and the tolerance reassessment programs look at older pesticides and review their
safety hi light of the latest science and the safety standards mandated by FQPA. In FY 2005, the
Agency is requesting additional funding of $4,400,000 to support meeting the 2006 FQPA
statutory deadline. Tolerance reassessment and reregistration reviews involve considerable
resources and can take several years to review, making 2005 the last opportunity to ensure EPA
has the resources to meet this key deadline.
16 http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/kidpesticide.htm
IV-28
-------
Pesticides, by their very nature, are designed to kill pests, so the pesticide regulatory
programs must provide a balance on the potential risks resulting from the use of pesticides and
the benefits that they provide to determine their acceptability given current scientific knowledge.
This acceptability must result in a reasonable certainty of no harm to human health and the
environment. This is accomplished through various means, including risk mitigation measures
such as label changes and modification in the ways pesticides are applied (use of protective
equipment, farmworker re-entry level changes, application rates and frequency, etc.). The
regulatory decisions, along with voluntary actions encouraged through education and outreach,
provide benefits such as public health safety, safe and abundant food supply, worker safety, and
protection of our land and groundwater from pesticide contamination.
During the Reregistration and the Tolerance Reassessment processes, EPA reviews data
and studies submitted by registrants in support of the reregistration or the approved use of a
pesticide. During this review, the Agency conducts a risk assessment that forms the basis for the
Agency's decisions and determines the safe residue (tolerance) that may remain on the food
product for a food use pesticide. Risk assessments involve a series of sophisticated analyses of
the potential health and environmental effects resulting from exposure to a chemical through
various means. As discussed previously, FQPA brought a number of analytic refinements and
considerations into these risk assessments.
EPA will continue to review pesticides currently on the market to assure the public of
their continued safety. Pesticides found not in compliance will be eliminated or otherwise
restricted to reduce harmful exposure. The issuance of a Reregistration Eligibility Decision
(RED) summarizes the health and environmental effects findings during the reregistration review
of the chemical. These findings determine whether the products registered under this chemical
are eligible for reregistration. In 2005, the Agency will complete 32 REDs and an additional
eight Interim REDS/Tolerance REDs. EPA plans to complete issuing REDs for food use active
ingredients by FY 2006 and for non-food use active ingredients by FY 2008. The review of
existing inert ingredients will also be completed by FY 2008.
There are 9,721 tolerances to be reassessed. The final tolerance reassessment deadline
requires reassessment of 100 percent of these tolerances by August 2006. In FY 2005, the
Agency will continue its reassessment of these tolerances, completing approximately a
cumulative 88 percent.
EPA obtains data from a wide variety of sources including USDA surveys on types and
quantities of foods people eat, FDA residue monitoring, and United States Geological Survey
information on pesticide levels in ground, surface and drinking water. The risk assessment and
adjunct analyses determine the outcomes for the tolerances on food. FQPA requires assessment
analyses, looking at both aggregate risk and cumulative risk for pesticides with a common
mechanism of toxicity. Draft risk assessments go through both scientific peer review and a
public review process. The science and policies behind these assessments is complex and the
standards developed will impact many pesticides on the market. In particular, the cumulative
risk policy will impact chemical groups of pesticides such as organophosphates and carbamates.
In FY 2005, as EPA obtains information and obtains new research results, EPA will update and
enhance the existing cumulative risk policy as appropriate to make sure risk assessments
maintain pace with advancing science.
IV-29
-------
The cumulative risk policy is affecting the decisions on many older, less expensive
pesticides, and resulting changes may have an impact on farmers' available choices in the use of
pesticides. As an example, the Agency reviewed a group of higher risk pesticides, the
organophosphates, which, because of their wide use, heavily affected the farming community. In
2005, the Agency will review another group of high-risk pesticides, the carbamates. Carbamates
are a broad-spectrum, older, less expensive, class of pesticides, and include insecticides used for
mosquito control. To address the issues around replacement and review of these widely used
pesticides, the Agency and USDA collaborated in development and implementation of a review
process which greatly expanded public participation. In 2005, this process will continue to be
reviewed, improved and expanded as necessary as we continue our review of other groups of
high risk, older pesticides.
Once the reregistration or tolerance reassessment analysis is performed, findings may call
for modifications in ways the pesticides are used, in order to reduce risks. Options for risk
reduction range from revocation of the tolerance to modifications hi use such as farmworker re-
entry intervals or application rates. For example, the pesticide could be applied in lower
quantities, or less frequently, or at a greater distance from water bodies.
Protecting children's health is of central concern for EPA, and FQPA further emphasized
this concern, requiring an additional safety factor to be applied to certain pesticides to adjust for
children's higher sensitivity to chemical exposure unless reliable data indicate that a different
margin of safety for the pesticide residue is safe for infants and children. As such, EPA has
identified and given priority to the tolerance reassessments that affect the top 20 foods eaten by
children. The Agency projects completion of 93 percent of this set of tolerance reassessments in
FY 2005. Another, more general FQPA approach to reducing risks more quickly is to give
priority to the review of tolerances or tolerance exemptions that appear to pose the greatest risk
to public health. As a result, EPA divided all pesticide chemicals into three priority groups,
published in the Federal Register in 1997.
The highest risk pesticides are in Priority Group 1, which includes organophosphates,
carbamates, and probable carcinogens, among other high-risk chemicals, and totals 5,543
tolerances. Group 2 includes some carcinogens and other tolerances, and Group 3 includes the
remaining pre-FQPA and post-1984 pesticides. Some tolerances in all groups have been
reassessed as part of the work already underway in the reregistration program.17 Status of
reassessments is as follows:
17 EPA FRN "Raw and Processed Food Schedule for Pesticide Tolerance Reassessment; Notices" Aug 4,1997
rv-30
-------
Status of Tolerance
Reassessments by Priority Group,
9/30/03
6000-1
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
3947
1075
1604
Group 1
Group 2
Group 3
I Remaining D Completed
Status of Tolerance Reassessment by Priority Group (as of 9/30/03)
• Group 1: 3,947 reassessments completed out of 5,543 (71 percent reassessed and 29
percent remaining)
• Group 2: 1,075 reassessments completed out of 1,928 ( 56 percent reassessed and 44
percent remaining)
• Group 3: 1,604 reassessments completed out of 2,250 (71 percent reassessed and 29
percent remaining)
Overall pesticide use appears to be declining as well, based on estimates derived from
sales figures, which show about a 15 percent decline between 1985 and 1999. Insecticides as a
class tend to be acutely toxic pesticides, and their use is also declining. The total for acre-
treatments using pesticides labeled "danger for humans" has gone down by 43 percent between
1997 and 2001."
18
EPA has made great strides hi addressing FQPA requirements and incorporating them
into its core programs, including the reregistration of antimicrobials. The Agency has met much
shorter review periods for antimicrobials and virtually eliminated the backlog in this area.
Antimicrobials are different from other pesticides in that science issues, uses, constituencies and
stakeholders differ from agricultural pesticides. Use patterns such as wood preservatives and
antifouling paints have raised public health and environmental concerns. Also, for many
antimicrobial products, (e.g., hospital disinfectants, swimming pool disinfectants, medical waste
treatment products), product performance, i.e., efficacy, is an area where the Agency plays a
major regulatory role. These differences mean it is difficult to leverage work on other pesticides
18 EPA Pesticides Industry Sales and Usage 1998 and 1999 Market Estimates, August 2002,
http://www.epa.gov/oppbeadl/pestsales
IV-31
-------
to help make progress with antimicrobials. The new resources requested will help support the
antimicrobial tolerance reassessments required to meet the FQPA deadline for completing
tolerance reassessments by August 2006 and for maintaining the established goal for
reregistration.19
The Agency will continue to address concerns regarding the efficacy of public health
products used to kill microorganisms in hospitals, schools, restaurants, and homes. Sterilizers
and disinfectants are increasingly vital to containing infections that are resistant to antibiotics in
clinical settings. EPA has developed a comprehensive strategy to improve the regulation of
antimicrobial pesticides. Manufacturers are required to submit to EPA detailed and specific
information concerning the chemical composition of their product, effectiveness data to
document their claims against specific microorganisms and to support the directions for use
provided in labeling; labeling that reflects the required elements for safe and effective use; and
toxicology data to document any hazards associated with use of the product. EPA has committed
resources to ensure that efficacy tests for antimicrobial products are reliable and reproducible
and that internal controls are unproved to ensure the integrity of data submitted by registrants. In
keeping with a major component of the strategy, EPA has greatly improved communications
with the public, all levels of government, academia, user communities, industry, health
professionals, trade organizations, and independent testing groups. Additionally, the Agency has
enhanced and expanded its use of the Internet to educate the general public about the status and
direction of the regulation for antimicrobial products.
Another area of FQPA concern is the review of inert ingredients. Of the original 870
tolerance exemptions for pesticide inert ingredients requiring reassessment, more than half still
need to be reassessed as part of meeting the FQPA deadline. Review of inert ingredients is
crucial because these ingredients could potentially be more toxic than the active ingredients. A
portion of the requested additional resources will be targeted to assist in completing these
reviews. There are approximately 50 inerts hi a backlog that dates back as far as seven years.
The Agency has developed a streamlined methodology for evaluating inert ingredients and is
implementing the process, but even with these process improvements, increased funding is
needed to ensure the Agency can meet the 2006 deadline.
FQPA requires that EPA establish a process for periodic review of pesticide registrations
with a goal of completing this process every 15 years. The registrations of pesticides will be
updated with respect to current scientific data, risk assessment methodologies, program policies,
and effective risk reduction measures. In 2004, EPA will be addressing comments on a proposed
rule that outlines this review program, developing final procedural regulations during 2005, and
continuing preparations to implement the new program. Implementation tasks include
establishing and prioritizing registration review cases and developing internal procedures and
information management processes. As the reregistration program draws to a close, the new
registration review program will continue to protect human health and the environment using the
most current scientific standards.
The Agency continues to ensure that sound science is applied consistently in our
pesticide reviews and also that this process includes stakeholder and scientific community input
to discuss the policies and their impacts. The Agency has worked extensively with stakeholders
19 FIFRA Sec 4 (i) (5)
IV-32
-------
through the Pesticide Program Dialogue Committee (PPDC) and the Committee to Advise on
Reassessment and Transition (CARAT) to ensure transparency in decision-making and a fuller
understanding of the implications for growers, producers and the public. EPA will continue to
encourage transition to safer pesticides, and to coordinate closely with USD A, industry and
commodity groups in finding alternative pest management practices and sharing information.
The FY 2005 President's Budget Request reflects passage of the Pesticides Registration
Improvement Act, included in the FY 2004 Consolidated Appropriations Act. The Registration
Improvement Act includes an extension of the Maintenance Fees, originally authorized by the
1988 FIFRA amendments, providing funding for the reregistration program, tolerance
reassessments, expedited registration and inerts. The Act also authorizes a new voluntary service
fee for the expedited processing of pesticide registrations.
Overall, the baseline funding for the Pesticides programs will remain stable, with the
exception of two requested increments: $4.4 million for the completion of tolerance
reassessments and reregistration programs, and $1 million to implement the new Endangered
Species requirements. However, due to the new fee structure, there are shifts within
appropriated funding requests for specific program areas.
Pesticides: Field Programs
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Program Implementation
In 2005, EPA will continue its
partnership with States and Tribes in
educating workers, farmers and
employers on the safe use of
pesticides and worker safety. The
Certification and Training (C&T) and
the Worker Protection (WP) programs
protect agricultural workers, pesticide
applicators/ handlers, employers, and
the public from the potential risks
posed by pesticides.
I—Certification &
Training of
Applicators
Worker Protection Standard
Pesticides S-
Mational Strategies far
Health tare Providers
The Worker Protection
regulations offer protection to over three and a half million people who work with or around
pesticides at more than 560,000 workplaces.20 The regulations include provisions for routine
safety training for all agricultural workers and pesticide handlers, and other provisions designed
to reduce or prevent pesticide exposure to pesticide workers. The C&T program assures the
competence of private and commercial applicators in handling and applying pesticides through
certification and education/training programs. All applicators of restricted use pesticides must be
certified as competent and be recertified every three to five years through continuing education
or other means.21
20 40 CFR Part 170
21 FIFRA Sec 3(d), 11,22, 23
IV-33
-------
EPA will continue efforts to educate the public in the proper use of pesticides to prevent
household and other pesticide misuse. EPA will focus its efforts in rural and urban areas with
poor communities where there are disproportionate public health risks to residents, especially
children. EPA will employ product stewardship with manufacturers and distributors, and work
with States to improve their
certification and training programs.
EPA continues to improve consumer
product labels, communicate proper
Promoting Use of Integrated Pest Management in Schools
One of EPA's highest priorities is protecting children's
health from unnecessary exposure to pesticides that are used in their
schools to control pests. EPA is encouraging school officials to
adopt Integrated Pest Management (IPM) practices to reduce
children's exposure to pesticides while maintaining effective control
of pests.
A goal of the IPM in Schools Initiative is to efficiently
integrate an IPM program with the school's existing pest
management plan and other school management activities. School
management activities such as preventive maintenance, janitorial
practices, landscaping, occupant education, and staff training are all
part of an IPM program. The following steps are required to
develop an IPM decision network:
• Developing an official policy statement for school pest
management
• Designating pest management roles
• Setting pest management objective for sites
• Inspecting, identifying and monitoring for incipient pest
populations
• Setting action thresholds
• Applying IPM strategies
• Evaluating results and record keeping
EPA is helping schools understand and implement IPM
through the distribution of printed publications, awarding grants to
start IPM programs, offering workshops and courses and providing
guidance and assistance through partnerships with universities and
national associations.
handling of pesticide containers and
their distribution, and direct
enforcement activities to prevent
improper sales and use of agricultural
pesticides.
Regional offices will continue
to support the development and
implementation of FQPA transition
projects with commodity groups and
provide strategic and technical
assistance on project design,
implementation, and evaluation. Due
to variations in crops, pests and
weather patterns in different locales, a
regional approach will be employed to
address local needs. This approach
will rely on partnerships between
EPA, state agencies (Departments of
Agriculture, Departments of
Environment and Land Grant
Universities) and agricultural groups
(farm bureaus and major commodity
groups). The first stage of this
Strategic Agricultural Initiative
evaluates current farm operations
including pesticide risk reduction
technologies, Integrated Pest
Management (IPM) techniques and Best Management Practices (BMPs), soil and water
conservation, handling and storage of hazardous materials, and solid waste management. Model
or demonstration sites are used for purposes of outreach, education and compliance assistance for
other agricultural operations throughout the State.
In FY 2005, EPA, in cooperation with USD A, will continue to provide information about
pest control options, organize and deliver pest management educational programs for agricultural
producers, consumers, and other stakeholders on reduced risk pesticides and alternative pest
control methods. EPA will also continue to support the development and evaluation of new pest
management technologies through IPM and Pesticide Environmental Stewardship Program
(PESP).
FV-34
-------
The PESP furthers risk reduction by promoting the use of safer alternatives to traditional
chemical methods of pest control. PESP, through voluntary partnerships with pesticide users,
also seeks to reduce both health and environmental risks while incorporating pollution
prevention strategies. Partners and supporters of PESP play vital roles in developing common
sense approaches to pesticide risk reduction, including use of IPM, biological and cultural
controls, and weather and pest data decision models. PESP supporters have an interest in risk
reduction because they use agricultural products or represent groups affected by pesticides.
Although this program began in 1994 prior to FQPA, its focus is consistent with the
statute's goals and EPA's strategic plan in reducing risk in agricultural and nonagricultural
settings. PESP grants provide assistance to partners, and supporters, hi developing and
implementing risk reduction strategies. EPA will continue to coordinate with USDA and other
Federal Agencies in encouraging and supporting IPM practices, fostering the managed use of an
array of biological, cultural, mechanical, and chemical pest control methods that achieve the best
results with the least adverse impact to the environment.
The Endangered Species Protection Program (ESPP) is built on consultation and
cooperation between the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), EPA Regions, States,
and pesticide users. The Endangered Species Act is intended to protect and promote the
recovery of animals and plants that are in danger of becoming extinct. Under the Act, EPA must
ensure that use of pesticides will not result in harm to species listed as endangered and
threatened, or harm habitat critical to those species' survival. Additional resources are requested
to support efforts in FY 2005 to improve and formalize the consultation process and make the
program more efficient and effective. Some of this additional funding will be used by the states
for assisting in the implementation of these improvements.
In order to protect listed species from harm resulting from pesticide use, the Agency will
continue to do the following:
• Use sound science to assess the risk of pesticide exposure to listed species. In 2005, EPA
will continue to work with industry to improve databases of endangered species
information. The database will help ensure consistent consideration of endangered
species as pesticides are reviewed.
• Implement use limitations through appropriate label statements; develop county bulletins
containing maps of species' locations and pesticide use limitations; and provide a toll-
free telephone number to assist users hi determining whether they need a bulletin and
where to obtain one.
• Encourage individual States and Tribes to develop then: own endangered species
protection plans where needed, to meet the program's goals.
Reducing the risks of pesticide exposure is a particular challenge hi Indian Country.
Native Americans may consume different foods than the average American, eating more or
different types of wild game and fish. They may also engage in unique, culturally linked
activities, live in different types of housing, have different mobility patterns, and otherwise
encounter unusual chemical exposure opportunities. Their patterns of exposure may not be
adequately represented hi the general public dietary or other exposure information gathered by
USDA, FDA or the registrant. In FY 2002, EPA launched a pilot project to modify Lifeline
software (a risk assessment tool) to enable it to capture these unique exposure risks for Tribes hi
IV-35
-------
two biogeographical areas of the country. The Agency is now beginning its evaluation of the
results of the pilot and determining whether work should proceed to expand the range of the
model. Additionally, the Agency will foster greater Tribal awareness of pesticide health hazards,
and provide training to Tribal members on managing pesticides and pesticide risks. Outreach
and education tools must be matched to Tribal needs.
EPA will continue to assist farmers in transitioning to reduced risk pesticides and pest
management practices as the Agency continues to comply with FQPA and restricts or removes
older, riskier pesticides from the market. Agriculture's effects on surface water quality,
groundwater quality, air quality, food quality, habitat, and other areas of concern can be
significant, thus a series of complex regulatory and non-regulatory control measures addressing
media-specific environmental issues is needed. The Agency must simultaneously consider
numerous risks associated with the agricultural use of pesticides, including pesticides application
spray drift, chemical runoff, pesticide disposal, groundwater protection, worker protection, and
pesticide application techniques, in order to promote an integrated approach to pollution
prevention.
EPA has several objectives and programs to help protect human health and the
environment. These efforts include:
• Protection of agricultural workers;
• Certification and training of pesticide applicators;
• Protection of endangered species and non-target species such as benign insects, fish and
wildlife, and ecosystems from the harmful effects of pesticides;
• Development and implementation of environmental stewardship and integrated pest
management pollution prevention strategies; and
• Protection of our nation's groundwater from pesticide contamination.
The Agency will establish a more consistent EPA presence as a partner with USDA and
other organizations in addressing environmental issues associated with agriculture, and a more
consistent Agency voice hi the national dialogue on agriculture.
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Review and Reduction
New Chemicals Program: The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) of 197622 is the
Agency's basic chemical risk assessment and risk management statute, covering production,
importation, processing, distribution, and use of commercial/industrial chemicals in the United
States. TSCA requires EPA to review a chemical or microorganism before it is manufactured
commercially or imported (i.e., a "new" chemical) to determine whether it can be handled and
used safely. If the Agency determines that an unreasonable risk may be posed to people or the
environment, EPA can block the chemical's entry into commerce or establish control measures
to ensure the chemical's safety in the marketplace.
At the core of TSCA is the Premanufacture Notice (PMN) Review. TSCA requires
companies planning to manufacture or import a new chemical substance into the U.S. to submit a
premanufacture notice to EPA for review and action. During PMN review, the Agency assesses
~ Toxic Substances Control Act, Public Law 94-469, October 11, 1976.
IV-36
-------
within 90 days whether the new chemical poses unreasonable risk to workers and/or the general
population and whether action is needed to prevent or reduce that risk. The PMN program is the
Agency's first and foremost line of defense against potential hazards from chemicals newly
introduced or imported.
Chemicals on TSCA inventory in 2003
New Chemicals
screened and
added to
Inventory
22.5%
Original TSCA
Inventory in
1978
77.5%
Source: U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Annual Performance Measures Tracking
Since 1979, EPA has reviewed more than 40,000 PMNs, approved approximately 36,000,
and taken actions to control risks for an estimated ten percent of these chemicals and
microorganisms.23 A majority of the chemicals currently in commerce, however, predate the
PMN review requirements, a considerable number of commercial chemicals entered U.S.
commerce subsequent to the enactment of the PMN requirements, and thus have undergone
PMN review. The PMN-reviewed chemicals are depicted as new chemicals added to the TSCA
inventory on the chart provided above.
As the preceding chart suggests, there has been substantial progress in the New
Chemicals Program (NCP) since its inception in 1978. In 2003, there were potentially 81,248
chemicals hi commerce; 18,248 of these chemicals, or 22.5 percent, had gone through the TSCA
Premanufacture Notice review process and entered into commerce following submittal of a
Notice of Commencement of Manufacturing.24 These chemicals have been assessed for risks,
and controls are in place as necessary.
As part of its continued interest in increasing efficiency through innovative processes and
voluntary partnerships, the Agency has launched "Sustainable Futures," a program designed to
help industry develop new chemical substances that are sustainable both economically and
environmentally.25 Regulatory relief is offered to participating companies submitting qualifying
new chemical substances. Sustainable Futures advances pollution prevention by encouraging
risk screening of new chemicals at the earliest stages of R&D. Sustainable Futures offers
23 U.S EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, TSCA New Chemicals Program Annual Report and the TSCA New
Chemicals Program Website http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/newchems/accomplishments.htm
24 U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Annual Performance Measure Tracking Files
25 67 Federal Register 76282. December 11,2002. "Sustainable Futures" U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics. Pollution Prevention (P2) Framework Web Site, http://'www.epa.gQv/oppt/p2rfamework/.
Washington, DC. Accessed September 9, 2003.
IV-37
-------
companies' computerized chemical risk screening tools that can be used to identify and
commercialize environmentally preferable new chemicals. A combination of training and
technical assistance in the use of EPA risk screening tools and regulatory incentives (i.e.,
decreased time to market) will be used to promote the development of safer chemicals. The
Sustainable Futures program makes use of the Persistent, Bioaccumulative, Toxic (PBT) Profiler,
which is a screening-level tool that estimates persistence, bioaccumulation, and chronic fish
toxicity.26 Highly praised by industry and environmentalists, over 24,000 chemical-specific PBT
analyses were performed between September 2002 and August 2003. Use of the profiler informs
decision-making at early stages of new chemical development and promotes the selection and
application of safer chemicals and processes, thus reducing product development costs and
improving environmental performance.
EPA has concluded a successful pilot project with the Kodak Corporation using methods
advanced through Sustainable Futures. Kodak's Final Project Agreement (FPA) report indicated
that "...Kodak has reviewed materials that were possible candidates for commercialization using
the P2 Framework. Of the materials that could have been commercialized, 24 percent were
dropped early in the product development process. All PMNs submitted to EPA were cleared by
the Agency through their standard review process." On the heels of this success, a Federal
Register notice was issued in December 2002 to expand training efforts to a nationwide pilot
program.27 Training has been initiated and informal discussions with trade associations indicate
the potential to leverage external resources to increase the pace of training potential PMN
submitters. Sustainable Futures PMNs are beginning to be submitted.
Another effort to create efficiencies in the marketplace while maintaining environmental
protection involves our international partners, particularly Europe and Canada. EPA has been
engaged in discussions with industry representatives and our international governmental partners
to institutionalize some form of New Chemicals Review "harmonization" program that, if
successful, will allow for one government's new chemical hazard reviews to be routinely shared
and accepted by other governments. If this program is successful, it will lead to seamless
information exchanges, and accelerate innovation by allowing faster introduction of newer, safer
chemicals into international commerce. To this end, in a cooperative program with industry, EPA
has been sharing selected new chemical reviews of substances with Canada as well as the
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) for several years now. The
Agency has also been providing information on our review process for new chemicals to the
European Community as they consider proposed new legislation on new and existing chemicals,
known as Registration Evaluation and Authorization of Chemicals (REACH).
The Agency will prepare a plan for the development of annual performance goals and
measures for the New Chemicals Program (NCP) so that progress towards the relevant strategic
targets can be measured and monitored. Historically, the NCP has relied primarily on output-
based measures to monitor and assess results obtained through the NCP (for example, tracking
the number of chemicals that go through the NCP process). In 2005, we will apply new annual
goals and measures (currently under development) that will be based on the
prevention/avoidance of unreasonable risk so as to allow better evaluation of the program's
effectiveness hi meeting its strategic targets. In addition, we will apply one or more efficiency
26 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. PBT Profiler Web Site,
http://www.PBTProfiler.net. Washington, DC. Accessed September 3,2003.
27 67 FR 76282, December 11, 2002
IV-38
-------
measures for determining whether the desired NCP results are being achieved at reduced cost
relative to the benefits of protecting the American people from risk to human health and the
environment.
For the first time as part of the FY 2004 budget process, the New Chemicals Program
(together with the Green Chemistry Program) was evaluated under the Program Assessment
Rating Tool (PART) budget process. The program demonstrated results, receiving an
"adequate" rating. During the FY 2005 re-evaluation, the New Chemicals Program scored
higher in the Program Planning and Results/Accountability sections of the PART, resulting in a
"moderately effective" rating because of increased results demonstrated.
These advancements were achieved through work initiated by the New Chemicals
program to develop a long-term outcome measure on risks to the public avoided and an
efficiency measure to track costs per new chemical review. This was done in response to the FY
2004 PART experience but also in conjunction with the EPA Strategic Plan revision effort. The
New Chemicals program is continuing its efforts to improve performance measurement in
response to FY 2005 PART findings by developing long-term and associated annual efficiency
measures. The program is also establishing targets and timeframes for measures, considering an
independent evaluation of the program, and proposing appropriations language to remove the cap
on fees in TSCA for PMN reviews.
Existing Chemicals Program: Before enactment of TSCA in 1976, there was no
comprehensive Federal statute requiring the review of new chemicals but there were already a
large number of chemicals in use. Therefore, relatively little information exists on the potential
hazards of many chemicals that are hi commerce and found hi everyday household products and
industrial processes. A major priority for the Agency is improving the amount of human health
and environmental effects data on industrial chemicals in commerce that were not screened
under the PMN program and ensuring public access to the information. Fostering the public
availability of risk screening information will allow States, communities, industry, and the public
to act on then- own and in concert with EPA to reduce potential risks posed by these chemicals.
To help carry out this strategy, EPA developed the Risk Screening Environmental
Indicators model (RSEI), which is used to assess the relative impacts of releases of toxic
chemicals by combining estimates of toxicity, exposure level, and the exposed population to
provide risk-related comparisons (i.e., indexes of relative risk).28 RSEI performs such
calculations in a matter of minutes or hours, including various screening-level analyses, saving
stakeholders tune and resources. Nonetheless, identifying and prioritizing risks is an ongoing
challenge. The High Production Volume Chemical program, described in more detail below, is
one effective way to review a greater number of chemicals than ever before, but many other
chemicals will remain unexamined.
To assist hi finding feasible strategic approaches to this issue, the National Pollution
Prevention and Toxics Advisory Committee (NPPTAC) was established in September 2002 hi
accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA29). The
NPPTAC will support EPA in performing its duties and responsibilities under the Toxic
28 U.S. EPA, RSEI website location, http://www.epa.gov/oppt/rsei/whats_rsei.html
29 5 U.S.C. App.2 § 9 (c)
IV-39
-------
Substances Control Act, the Pollution Prevention Act, and other applicable statutes. The
objectives of the NPPTAC are to provide advice and recommendations in areas such as:
• Risk assessment/management;
• Risk communication;
• Pollution prevention in chemical management and prevention programs; and
• Coordination with other Federal, State and Tribal government agencies, as well as non-
governmental organizations.
In this increasingly global economy, chemical risk identification and risk management is
a responsibility of all. EPA has been deeply involved hi international efforts to manage Persistent
Organic Pollutants (POPs) and select heavy metals (e.g., mercury).30 The POPs protocol in turn
helped to establish the foundation for the negotiation (under the auspices of the United Nations
Environment Program, or UNEP) of a legally binding global convention on POPs. Another
important international agreement, the Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent
(PIC) Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides hi International Trade was
signed hi 1998. Now that 50 countries have ratified it, the PIC Convention will come into force
on February 24, 2004. The PIC Convention establishes a network for information exchange and
provides opportunities for importing countries to make informed decisions when importing
certain chemicals that have been subject to control actions hi other parts of the world.
Establishing compatible information collections, databases and dissemination vehicles
are indispensable to effective international chemical management, and can provide a streamlined
cost-savings for industry, reducing barriers to trade. Through HPV data collection efforts, the
EPA has made hazard data available via both domestic and international program efforts, namely
the U.S. Chemical Right-to-know (ChemRTK) and OECD Screening Information Data Sets
(SIDS), respectively.
It is also under the OECD SIDS Program in which the EPA is able to review and
comment on EU risk assessments prior to publication. In order to promote data collection, data
sharing and standardization, EPA is endeavoring to ensure that the results of these efforts and
their associated products (dossiers, robust study summaries, screening level assessments and
hazard profiles) are compatible with the remaining OECD member countries' equivalents to
include Europe hi these and similar programs. Testing protocols for chemicals are another
opportunity for enhancing trade while ensuring environmental protection. To this end, EPA has
published about 100 test guidelines, a third of which have been harmonized with OECD
requirements.31 The U.S. is one of the 30 OECD member countries that participate hi the
development of OECD Test Guidelines. On average (over the last decade or so), approximately
five new and/or revised OECD test methods may be finalized and released hi any given year.
For the first tune as part of the FY 2004 budget process, the Existing Chemicals Program
was evaluated under OMB's Program Assessment Rating Tool process. In the FY 2005 re-
evaluation, the program increased its score by over 50 percent and advanced to a rating of results
30 Under the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe's Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution
(LRTAP).
31http://www.oecd.org/document/22/0,2340,en_2649_34377_1916054_l_l_l_l,OO.html
rv-40
-------
demonstrated of "adequate." The program's scores increased dramatically in the Purpose and
Design, Strategic Planning, and Results sections of the tool.
In response to the FY 2004 PART experience as well as the Agency's Strategic Plan
revision efforts during FY 2003, the program worked to establish better long-term and annual
performance measures. The success of these preliminary efforts in setting ambitious targets and
demonstrating results has been illustrated in the increased PART score for FY 2005. Most
notable was the creation of a long-term outcome-focused measure examining the percent
reduction of chronic human health risk from environmental releases of industrial chemicals in
commerce. The Existing Chemicals program is continuing its efforts to improve performance
measurement in response to FY 2005 PART findings by developing long-term and associated
annual efficiency measures.
High Production Volume (HPV) Challenge Program Ensuring Public Access to Chemical
Hazard Information; Of the 80,000 chemicals on the TSCA inventory, only 22 percent went
through Pre-Manufacturing screening. As discussed, little is known of the vast majority of
chemicals present in our daily lives. The HPV Challenge Program focuses on the chemicals
produced in high volumes.32 Established in cooperation with industry, environmental groups,
and other interested parties, the HPV Program is working to ensure that critical human health and
environmental effects data on approximately 2,800 HPV chemicals are made publicly available.
HPV chemicals are defined as industrial chemicals that are manufactured or imported into the
United States in volumes of one million pounds or more each year. Through this program,
companies and consortia voluntarily sponsor HPV chemicals for screening-level testing. Hazard
test information on large volume chemicals is posted on the HPV website, giving States, regions,
and Tribes accessibility and the ability to share critical data and information.
EPA recognizes the importance of investigating HPV chemicals on a worldwide basis by
working closely with the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).
The Agency continues to develop risk analysis tools that improve information sharing and data
collection regarding high production volume chemicals. The Screening Information Data Sets
(SIDS) contains information on physical characteristics, and environmental fate and pathways, as
well as ecotoxicological and toxicological data.
EPA continues to undertake activities targeted at receiving and reviewing the quality of
HPV chemical hazard data, and reviewing the plans of sponsor companies for developing new
test data. As of December 12, 2003, a total of 2,231 HPV chemicals had been sponsored under
the program, and 331 companies and 97 consortia were sponsoring chemicals. Two hundred
sixty-seven test plans covering 1,064 chemicals have been received.33 The Agency has worked
with industry and environmental groups to minimize the need for animal testing. During FY
2004, EPA plans to examine the status of "orphan" chemicals (those not voluntarily sponsored
by industry) in the HPV program and will develop actions to secure needed data.
32 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. "High Production Volume (HPV)
Challenge Program." Available online at: http://www.epa.gov/chemrtk/voichall.htm. Washington, DC. Accessed September 9,
2003.
33 U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, High Production Volume Challenge Program, HPV Commitment
Tracking System. Available at http'.//w\vw.epa.gov/chemrtk;'vievvsrch.htm.
IV-41
-------
EPA is committed to making information obtained through the HPV program broadly
accessible to the public, both domestically and internationally. As one step in meeting that
commitment, the Agency has posted HPV data on the EPA website.34 In FY 2002, the HPV
program made screening level health and environmental effects data on 843 chemicals available
to the public and for FY 2003 the total was 1,080.35 EPA expects that test plans for 1,129
chemicals will be received and reviewed by EPA by year-end 2004.
In 2004 and 2005, EPA efforts will focus on making the HPV data more accessible to the
public through more efficient data systems that meet stakeholder needs for analysis or
compilation. Extensive website enhancements will allow users to search for comprehensive data
related to sponsored chemicals. Technical guidance will enhance data use by States, local
governments, the chemical industry and others. EPA will also begin to screen submitted data
and identify chemicals of potential concern that may require additional work, currently
anticipated to involve five to ten percent of screened chemicals.
Voluntary Children's Chemical Evaluation Program (VCCEP) Ensuring Public Access to
Chemical Risk Information; Children, with then" developing brains and bodies, can be more
vulnerable to potential adverse effects of chemical exposures. EPA's Voluntary Children's
Chemical Evaluation Program (VCCEP) focuses on assessing the potential health risks
associated with chemicals to which children are exposed.36 Through VCCEP, companies that
manufacture and/or import chemicals to which children have a high likelihood of exposure
voluntarily sponsor data on the chemicals. Initially, thirty-five companies and ten consortia
volunteered to sponsor 20 chemicals. As part of their sponsorship, companies collect and/or
develop health effects and exposure information on their chemical(s) and integrate that
information into a risk assessment. A "Data Needs Assessment" is conducted, which determines
whether it is necessary to expand the information we have on the risks these chemicals may pose
to children.
Assessments addressing the risks to children of four separate chemicals (acetone,
decabromodiphenyl ether, vinylidene chloride, pentabromodiphenyl ether) were developed in FY
2003. An independent outside party held peer consultation meetings for all four assessments.
The independent outside party will post the final summary of the peer consultation meetings on
its website so they will be available to the public. In 2005, follow-up actions for the chemicals
assessed in 2003 will be undertaken if warranted.
Assessments addressing the risks to children of five additional chemicals will be
reviewed by peer consultations hi FY 2005. EPA has developed a process for providing the
Agency's response to the data needs section of the sponsor's assessments. This includes an
Agency review by other interested program and regional offices.
TSCA Inventory Update Rule Amendment (IUTLA): The TSCA Inventory Update rule
requires the submission of basic. data - companies, production sites and volumes - on
approximately 9,000 organic substances every four years, taken from a list of more than 76,000
34 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. "High Production Volume (HPV)
Challenge Program." Available online at: http://www.epa.gov/chemrtk/vo1chaU.htm. Washington, DC. Accessed September 9,
2003.
35 U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, High Production Volume Challenge Program, HPV Commitment
Tracking System. Available at htip://www.epa.gov/chemrtk/yiewsrch.htin.
36 U.S. EPA website, http://www.epa.gov/chemrtk/vccep/index.htm
IV-42
-------
chemicals on the TSCA Inventory of Chemical Substances.37 A recent amendment will also
facilitate the collection of data on inorganic chemicals, beginning in 2006.38 There have been
five IUR collections of basic chemical manufacturing information since its beginning in 1986.
This information has proved invaluable to EPA programs, and the IUR databases are often the
first data sources searched when investigating a chemical. Recent amendments expand the
information collected to include manufacturing exposure-related information on about 9,000
organic and inorganic chemicals and processing and use information on about 3,000 organic
chemicals.39
The TSCA Inventory Update Rule Amendments (IURA) address deficiencies in the
availability of exposure-related information on a set of relatively higher production volume
chemicals from among the chemicals listed on the TSCA Inventory. Basic exposure information
is critical if the Agency is to identify potential risk reduction opportunities and target resources
more efficiently. The amended rale provides the EPA with a vehicle to obtain updated
information related to the potential human and environmental exposures of chemical substances
listed on the TSCA inventory.
A series of stakeholder training sessions will be conducted in 2004 and 2005 to
familiarize the regulated community with the amended rule and to instruct persons reporting
information to the Agency on the requirements and interpretation of the new rule. In addition to
an instruction manual, a question and answer document and an interactive online instruction
manual will be developed to assist persons who will report information under the rule. By 2005,
additional amendments to the Inventory Update Rule will clarify the rule and respond to
commitments included in the 2003 amendment. EPA will complete a petition review pilot
project and will begin to review petitions for inclusion hi the IUR partial exemption.
By requiring persons reporting under the rule to collect and report information on the use
of chemical products they manufacture and import, the rule will alert the regulated community to
possibilities to reduce exposure to chemical substances. Additional information collected by the
Agency will facilitate selection of chemical substances for more in-depth evaluation and efforts
to regulate chemicals of concern, reduce the consumption of chemical substances, and encourage
the use of safer chemical substitutes. EPA will also continue its effort hi the IURA data base
development and plans to complete the design in FY 2005.
Moreover, EPA plans separate actions dealing with brominated flame retardants (BFRs)
and perfluorooctanoic acid and its salts (PFOA), respectively. These chemicals are singled out
for separate discussion below because they have recently been identified as requiring priority
attention within the larger universe of existing chemicals.
Brominated Flame Retardants (BFRs - PBDEs); The potential risks to children
associated with exposures to three brominated flame retardants — penta-, octa-, and deca-
bromodiphenylether (PBDEs) — were assessed under the Voluntary Children's Chemical
Evaluation Program (VCCEP). Recent studies have shown widespread presence of these
chemicals, particularly lower brominated (terra to hexa) congeners, hi the environment and hi
37 U.S. EPA website, www.epa.gov/opptintr/iur; Title 40 CFR Part 710, Subpart A
38 U.S. EPA website, www.epa.gov/opptintr/iur/amendment.htm; Title 40 CFR Part 710, Subpart C
39 U.S. EPA website, www.epa.gov/opptintr/iur/amendment.htm; Title 40 CFR Part 710, Subpart C
IV-43
-------
humans - including in human breast milk and serum.40 Health concerns associated with human
exposure to these chemicals include developmental neurotoxicity and thyroid effects.
Biomonitoring data indicated that this chemical exists in food, drinking water and indoor air.41 It
is also widely distributed in aquatic and terrestrial fauna including species used by humans as
food. PBDEs are typically used in such products as polyurethane foams, television and radio
cabinets, printed circuit boards, and textiles including fabrics for upholstered furniture,
automotive and airline seating, draperies, and carpets.
It is evident that there may be widespread exposure to PBDEs. What is not known are the
potential risks of exposure to these chemicals. By 2005, the Agency will have a better
understanding of the following:
• the chemicals' environmental properties, environmental fate, and exposure pathways,
• health and environmental effects, and
• potential substitutes.
EPA is working to determine whether the potential risks of PDBEs to children have been
adequately characterized, and if not, to identify the data needs remaining. EPA is continuing to
evaluate potentially safer substitutes for these chemicals in the TSCA New Chemicals Program.
In addition, EPA continues to develop a significant new use rule (SNUR) which would require
manufacturers and processors to notify the Agency before they produce certain chemicals as
flame retardants for residential upholstered furniture. EPA will work with the Consumer Product
Safety Commission (CPSC), which is in the process of developing a residential upholstered
furniture flammability unit. Product stewardship and other voluntary efforts are other avenues to
address this issue.
In 2005, EPA will continue its VCCEP efforts to assess and, if indicated, manage risks
associated with brominated flame retardants. EPA will also continue its ongoing efforts to assess
the potential risks of commercially developing BFR substitute chemicals in its New Chemicals
program. EPA will track the adoption of State and Federal laws and regulations and consumer
preferences that influence the use of brominated flame retardants hi commercial and consumer
products. EPA will monitor and encourage the adoption of chemical substitutes for brominated
flame retardants hi commercial and consumer products as appropriate.
PFOA (Perfluorooctanoic acid and its salts) and Fluorinated Telomers: In the late
1990's, EPA received information that PFOA and related chemicals were present hi low amounts
hi the blood of the general population. Since then, EPA has examined this family of chemicals
and worked with industry to collect more data under the Existing Chemicals program.
PFOA is a synthetic chemical used as an essential processing aid in the manufacture of
fiuoropolymers. Currently, fluoropolymers are employed in hundreds of industry segments,
including aerospace, automotive, building/construction, and electrical. PFOA may also be
produced by the degradation of other synthetic chemicals, called fluorinated telomers. Telomers
are used as protective surface treatments on many industrial and consumer products, including
40 "Environmental Health Perspectives," Volume 112(1), January 2004, "Brominated Flame Retardants: Cause for Concern?,"
review by Linda S. Birnbaum and Danielle S. Staskale; http://ehpnetl.niehs.nih.gov/members/2003/6559/6559.html
41 Ibid.
IV-44
-------
carpet, paper, leather, and textiles, and as surfactants in cleaning products. Toxicity studies in
laboratory animals reveal that PFOA causes developmental and systemic toxicity,
immunotoxicity, and carcinogenicity.42 PFOA is also persistent hi the environment.
Furthermore, EPA's preliminary assessment indicates potential exposure of the U.S. general
population to PFOA at very low levels. However, we don't know the potential risks of PFOA at
current levels or the sources of the chemical found in people and the environment.
In 2005, EPA will pursue PFOA risk management actions as indicated by the results of
ongoing risk assessment and testing actions. EPA has developed a draft risk assessment for
PFOA and plans to seek peer review of the assessment by EPA's Science Advisory Board in
spring 2004. Manufacturers have voluntarily committed to developing hazard and exposure-
related data that will be of assistance in the assessment of PFOA risks. Manufacturers, Federal
and State agencies, and other interested parties are also participating in the development of
enforceable consent agreements (EGAs) under Section 4 of TSCA that will direct the generation
of additional information necessary to understand the sources of PFOA in the environment and
the pathways leading to human and environmental exposures. EPA is also drafting a proposed
rale that would amend the TSCA Polymer Exemption Rule43 to exclude from eligibility certain
perfluorinated polymers.
Acute Exposure Guideline Levels (AEGLs): Through the AEGL Program, EPA provides
scientific and technical support in the development of emergency exposure limits and works with
over nine Federal agencies, numerous State agencies, private industry, academia, emergency
medical associations, unions, and other organizations in the private sector.44 Recently, the
program was extended to the international community, with the endorsement of the OECD and
active participation by The Netherlands and Germany. In addition, the U.S. State Department is
expected to provide a grant to Russia to support the AEGL Program. EPA has attended meetings
hi Russia to discuss that country's interaction with the AEGL program. The objective is to
develop one standardized set of scientifically sound short-term exposure values that will be used
worldwide for all chemical emergencies.
The AEGL program has been a key contributor to EPA's Homeland Security efforts for
the nation. Acute inhalation values for chemicals of concern to homeland security have been
developed with support from EPA's Office of Research and Development as well as direct
support from Congress.
Through FY 2003, the AEGL Program has developed proposed values for 100 chemicals,
of which 18 have been published as final by the National Academy of Science (NAS).45 This
includes 13 chemicals hi FY 2003. The final AEGL values include nerve agents and mustard
gas. These values are being used for emergency planning by the military and State agencies as
the military begins to destroy stockpiled chemical warfare agents.
42 U.S. EPA, "Revised Draft Hazard Assessment of Perfluorooctanoic Acid and its Salts," USEPA 11/4/2002, OPPT-2003-0012-
0011
43 40 CFR Part 723.250
44 National Research Council. 2001. Standing Operation Procedures for Developing Acute Exposure Guideline Levels for
Hazardous Chemicals. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
45 National Research Council 2000. Acute Exposure Guidelines Levels for Selected Airborne Chemicals, Volume 1.201pp,
Volume 2.276pp, Volume 3.497pp
IV-45
-------
In FY 2004, the President provided additional funding for AEGL development as a result
of PART findings. In FY 2005, the President's Budget maintains this increase. EPA has
initiated a broad based, collaborative effort to develop necessary AEGLs. To date, during the
start-up phase, the program has developed approximately 1,500 AEGLs for approximately 100
chemicals with proposed, interim, or final status.
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Management: Most chemicals currently in commerce
were introduced into the marketplace and the environment before their risks were known, and a
number of these chemicals have turned out to be both prevalent and high-risk. EPA has
established national programs which manage reductions in use, safe removal, disposal and
containment of these chemicals, as appropriate. For example, significant risks are well
established for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), asbestos, mercury and dioxin. Reductions in
uses and releases as well as dissemination of risk awareness and prevention information are
important to reducing exposure of the general population and sensitive sub-populations to these
chemicals. Many of these chemicals have impacts on all work that is ongoing in air, water, and
waste, and the Agency coordinates approaches to maximize effectiveness, notably through the
persistent bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) program.
Persistent, Bioaccumulative. Toxics (PBTsV. EPA remains concerned about persistent
bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) substances, a category of chemicals that includes mercury,
dioxins/furans, and PCBs, because these pollutants persist in the environment and can build up to
high concentrations in human and animal tissue.4 Some PBTs can cause developmental and
neurological defects in fetuses and young children and some are also suspected endocrine
disrupters.
EPA is pursuing the development of National Action Plans for certain PBTs. Since FY
1999, the Agency has completed a National Action Plan for Alkyl-lead47 and is tracking its
implementation. The Agency has also fostered the development of effective cross-agency
communication and collaboration through a cross-agency PBT Monitoring Strategy. Finally,
EPA has focused on the development of National Action Plans for Mercury, Dioxins/Furans and
PCBs.
New activities for FY 2004 and 2005 will include:
• Continuing efforts for dioxins and furans, Mercury and PCBs;
• Implementing a cross-agency routine PBT monitoring strategy;
• Seeking continued improvement in PBT risk communication through Agency- wide PBT-
specific webpages (created in 2003) plus development of a cross-cutting PBT risk
communication and outreach strategy; and
• Reviewing the results from major measurement, monitoring and data collection efforts.
r< ^
Hospitals for a Healthy Environment: Though it !^«*!«'>-_£*l \ <• *
renders uniquely valuable services, the healthcare sector uses a ' ^ '1 * i"\ t'l n -»
variety of toxic products and generates large volumes of waste. /I \ \ t k o N M i N T*
In an effort to expand voluntary pollution prevention strategies
46 U.S. EPA website, www.epa.gov/pbt
47 Federal Register, July 23, 2002, Vol. 67, Number 141, Page 48177-48178 - Final National Action Plan for Alkyl-lead; Notice
of Availability. EPA web site: http://www.epa.gov.pbt/alkyl.htrn
FV-46
-------
to the healthcare sector, the Agency has collaborated with the American Hospital Association,
Health Care Without Harm, and the American Nurses Association to create the voluntary
program called Hospitals for a Healthy Environment (H2E) (discussed in greater detail under
PBT section above). H2E works with hospitals and health care facilities to eliminate non-
essential mercury use, reduce hospital wastes, and identify and eliminate the use of non-essential
persistent, bio-accumulative, and toxic chemicals (PBTs).
As H2E participants, hospitals and health care facilities pledge to eliminate mercury by
2005 and reduce overall hospital waste by 50 percent by 2010. EPA is maintaining its support
for the Hospitals for a Healthy Environment program, which continues to recruit new partners
and make progress towards its mercury and waste reduction goals. For mercury use reduction,
EPA plans to create additional partnerships with industry to reduce existing mercury uses. To
improve the quality of data used for assessing trends, the Agency will develop a database on
national industry use of mercury.
The H2E program continues to actively recruit hospital and health care facilities.
Currently, over 2,100 facilities are participating in the program and it is expected that as many as
one-third of the nation's 6,000 hospitals will pledge to the program.48 Recently, the Veterans
Health Administration, Kaiser Permanente, and Catholic Health Association all pledged
commitment to the program.
Currently, the United States is experiencing a significant demographic transformation,
with the number of persons of age 65 and older expected to double by the year 2030.49 As a
result, EPA has announced a comprehensive and coordinated new aging initiative to address the
environmental health needs of older populations. As part of the new Aging Initiative, H2E has
signed on 84 nursing homes as H2E partners50 and will continue to bring more nursing homes
into the program and extend its outreach to assisted living and long-term healthcare facilities.
FY 2005 Activities will include the following:
• Developing a "green chemical inventory" program to help facilities identify and
eliminate use of harmful chemicals on-site;
• Promoting the use of greener cleaning chemicals;
• Training in integrated pest management and safer pesticide use;
• Providing building specifications for green construction of assisted living and long-term
care facilities;
• Providing purchasing specifications for environmentally preferable products; and
• Providing older persons and their caregivers with a "Guide to Choosing an
Environmentally Friendly Care Facility"
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs): Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) have been shown
to cause a wide variety of health effects, often at very low levels. The average American carries
enough PCB in his or her body to meet or exceed the minimum threshold for beginning health
problems due to PCBs. Because of their insulating and nonflammable properties, PCBs had been
48 www.h2e-online.org
49 U.S. Census Bureau, "The 65 Years and Over Population: 2000," October 2001
50 www.h2e-ordine.org
FV-47
-------
widely used as coolants and lubricants in transformers, capacitors, and other electrical equipment
before manufacture was stopped in 1977.51 This equipment is now reaching the end of its useful
life.. Reducing exposure through safely disposing of existing equipment or materials containing
PCBs is the main focus of EPA's program. PCBs are an issue with implications for domestic
industry, international commerce and defense.
In FY 2005, EPA will continue to encourage the voluntary phase-out of PCB Large
Capacitors and PCB Transformers. Activities to facilitate this voluntary phase-out include
discussions with major Federal and private owners and operators of electrical equipment;
identification of opportunities for replacement of older, less efficient equipment with new more
efficient equipment; and the accelerated phase-out of PCB containing electrical equipment as
supplemental environmental projects. These activities are reflected in our annual performance
goals, which measure the number of PCB Large Capacitors and PCB Transformers disposed of
since 1991 as reported by the disposal facilities. In addition, assuming ratification of the
Stockholm Agreement (POPs), EPA will be actively involved in implementing the Agreement
including the development of a PCB implementation plan and strategy.
EPA will continue to work toward achieving the U.S. commitments to the North
American Regional Action Plan (NARAP) for PCBs. The U.S. obligation hi the NARAP for
PCBs establishes a goal for the virtual elimination of PCBs in items such as PCB Large
Capacitors and PCB Transformers by 2008. In the most recent data, between 1999 and 2001,
PCB waste management companies reported the disposal of 36,258 PCB Large Capacitors and
24,792 PCB Transformers.52
EPA will continue to work with the Maritime Administration (MARAD) in order to
dispose of its fleet of obsolete ships which contain equipment using PCBs, in FY 2005.
MARAD has a fleet of approximately 130 obsolete ships that are ready for disposal. Proposed
methods of disposal include domestic and foreign scrapping. Pursuant to legislation enacted in
FY 200353, EPA and MARAD were directed to implement one or more pilot programs for
foreign scrapping by September 30, 2003; each pilot is limited to no more than four ships. EPA
granted MARAD enforcement discretion to export 13 ships for scrapping to the United Kingdom
(UK). MARAD has exported four ships. MARAD and EPA are considering rulemaking to
allow the export of the remainder of the ships. MARAD is also considering scrapping proposals
from shipyards in China and the Northern Marianas. The deadline for disposing of the remaining
ships is 2006.
Two Department of Defense incinerators have begun trial burns of PCB-containing nerve
agent rockets in FY 2004, which are expected to lead to final disposal approvals. Two existing
DoD incinerators will continue PCB disposal activities and their PCB disposal approvals will be
modified as needed. By 2005, EPA expects to issue final approvals needed to ensure
environmentally safe disposal of nerve agent rockets with PCB contamination.
Dioxin: "Dioxins" refers to a group of chemical compounds that share certain chemical
structures and biological characteristics. Studies have shown that exposure to dioxins at high
51 National Safety Council webpage; Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB) Chemical Backgrounder at
www.Esc.org/library/checmial/polychlo
5240CFR761.180(b)
53 Title XXXV, Maritime Administration Sec. 3504 (Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003)
IV-48
-------
enough doses may cause a number of adverse health effects.54 Federal, State and private sector
efforts to reduce releases of dioxins and dioxin-like compounds have had significant results. As
the regulations now in place are fully implemented over the next few years, dioxin emissions
from well characterized sources will be reduced by more than 90 percent, using 1987 as a
baseline. Human exposure to dioxin-like compounds has also declined. Current tissue levels in
humans are about half of those estimated for the early 1980s. Further reductions in exposure
become increasingly difficult because of dioxin's environmental persistence.
EPA will continue to be part of an interagency effort to assess potential dioxin risks to the
public, focusing on identifying and better quantifying the link between sources of dioxin-like
compounds and potential human exposures. Results from the Agency's Dioxin Exposure
Initiative (DEI) have already resulted in the identification of additional sources, and the
establishment of baseline measurements of dioxins in food and air.
Studies on dioxin sources included testing of certain coal-fired utilities, uncontrolled
combustion of household waste, and releases from utility poles treated with pentachlorophenol.
EPA also conducted sediment analysis of selected lakes across the U.S. to establish long-term
historic trends in dioxin environmental levels. EPA helped organize and has actively
participated in the Interagency Dioxin Research Coordination workgroup with FDA, CDC,
USD A, and others.
In addition, the Agency designed and deployed the National Dioxin Air Monitoring
Network (NDAMN) and modified EPA's air transport model55 so that it could predict long-range
transport of dioxin. NDAMN data will help the Agency track the effectiveness of EPA's recent
combustion regulations in achieving the anticipated reductions in dioxin levels in ambient air.
On the international level, EPA has provided the lead for U.S. participation and
development of a draft Phase I North American Regional Action Plan for Dioxins and Furans,
and Hexachlorobenzene56. After this draft Action Plan undergoes public review, it will be
finalized and submitted for approval to the environmental ministers of the U.S., Canada and
Mexico. In addition, assuming ratification of the Stockholm Agreement (POP's), EPA will be
actively involved hi implementing the Agreement including the development of a Dioxin
implementation plan and strategy that reaches beyond North America.
Mercury: Mercury can be a potent neurotoxin and is known to bioaccumulate, notably in
fish. Approximately 8 percent of women of childbearing age, representative of the United States
population, had blood mercury concentrations higher than the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency's recommended reference dose, according to 1999/2000 data from the National Health
and Nutrition Examination Survey published in April 2003 hi the Journal of the American
Medical Association57. EPA has taken numerous actions to reduce sources of mercury pollution
to air, water and waste through regulatory and permit programs. EPA is developing a new draft
54 Dioxin Qs & As, www.epa.gov/ncea/dioxinqa
55 Regional Lagrangian Model of Air Pollution (RELMAP).
56 www.ceo.org/pubs_docs/documents/index.cfin?varlan=english&ID= 1220
57 Schober SE, Sinks TH, Jones RL, Bolger PM, McDowell M, Osterloh J, Garrett ES, Canady RA, Dillon CF, Sun Y, Joseph
CB, and Mahaffey KR. Blood mercury levels in US children and women of childbearing age, 1999-2000. JAMA 289:1667-
1674,2003
IV-49
-------
of the Agency's Mercury Action Plan (MAP), which will outline EPA's multimedia, multi-
office goals and priority actions for addressing mercury pollution and exposure over the coming
years.
To meet the Agency's objectives of reducing chemical risks to humans, communities, and
ecosystems, EPA has provided support to a number of regional and State programs designed to
reduce mercury use and releases, and is working with our Federal and international partners on
relevant aspects of the issue.
The Agency has also worked with the Quicksilver Caucus, a coalition of State
government organizations formed to highlight their concerns about mercury pollution. The
Quicksilver Caucus issued draft reports in 2003 regarding how to meet mercury reduction goals
for specific water bodies where mercury pollution is caused primarily by air deposition, and safe
stewardship of mercury stocks and mercury-containing wastes58.
EPA and DOE collaborated on research on mercury treatment and alternatives for
managing mercury wastes and bulk elemental mercury. A report summarizing the work was
published in January 200359. To support policy decisions on long-term disposition of mercury
supplies that may no longer be needed or in demand, EPA will examine numerical data on
secondary-market recycling (retorting) and disposal, and renew research efforts to develop and
demonstrate a viable stabilization technology for mercury.
EPA has worked with schools as well, to communicate to teachers, school administrators,
students, and parents the importance of reducing mercury in schools and the community.
Regional workshops and on-line training courses for teachers, as well as an expanded curriculum
package and a web site help to address health issues, cultural uses, mercury in schools, mercury
in the community, environmental effects, and history of mercury use. In FY 2004 and 2005,
EPA will continue looking at new ways to promote additional reductions in mercury use, such as
through the voluntary Green Suppliers Network, and through continued support for regional and
State programs and partnerships.
For enhancing mercury risk communication, the Agency will develop tools for educating
different audiences, including the general population, cultural fish eaters, and Tribes in the lower
48 States about the risks of eating mercury-contaminated fish and bioaccumulation in various
organs in fish-eating wildlife species. We will measure the effectiveness of these risk
communication efforts by moving beyond anecdotal feedback to survey-based feedback.
Asbestos/Fibers: Asbestos is not a PBT, but use and management of asbestos and
asbestos-containing products remains a matter of concern for EPA and other Federal agencies.
Asbestos is known to cause a variety of health problems when inhaled into the lungs.
In 2002, EPA commissioned an Asbestos Strategies project to take stock of the recent
experience and potential solutions and options regarding the use and management of asbestos. In
consideration of the recommendations of this document and the recent experience and public
concerns over mining and processing of vermiculite containing asbestos, EPA is in the process of
developing an Asbestos Action Plan. This new EPA Asbestos Action Plan, including a Research
www.sso.org/ecos
y 29, 2003
rv-so
59 68 FR 4481, January 29, 2003
-------
Agenda, will guide the future direction of its asbestos program. EPA will focus its efforts to
reduce exposure to this fiber, which is known to cause various forms of cancer as well as certain
other diseases in humans. In 2005, the Agency will also address the development of fiber
science and fiber toxicity issues, and address the need to develop a definitive and accurate bulk
testing method for asbestos contamination in vermiculite attic insulation and other potentially
contaminated materials.
In 2003, the Agency launched a public awareness campaign aimed at asbestos-
contaminated vermiculite attic insulation. In FY 2004 and 2005, outreach and technical
assistance will be expanded for the asbestos program for schools, in coordination with the
Occupational Safety and Health Admuiistration (OSHA), the Department of Education, the
States, the National Parent-Teachers Association, and the National Education Association. A
new project to determine and ultimately convey the risks to homeowners and remodelers from
asbestos-contaminated vermiculite home insulation is underway. EPA also plans to conduct a
market analysis of the asbestos products and asbestos contaminated products currently in
commerce. To inform the public of the potential risks ,and sources of asbestos exposure, the
Agency will also continue developing outreach materials such as the recently completed
Vermiculite Attic Insulation: Current Best Practices consumer guidance brochure.60
EPA will also continue to coordinate with other Federal agencies — including OSHA,
MSHA, NIOSH, CPSC, ATSDR, and USGS - on asbestos issues. In FY 2005, EPA will
continue to examine results from its studies into the potential for exposure to asbestos fibers
from vermiculite in building insulation materials.
Toxic Substances: Lead Risk Reduction Program
Categorical Grant: Lead
Exposure to lead from deteriorated lead-based paint and other sources is the primary
cause of lead poisoning in children in the U.S. today. Children may ingest lead-based paint dust
or chips from flaking walls, windows and doors or when lead-based paint is disturbed hi the
course of renovation, repair or abatement activity. EPA has been implementing a program to
establish a national infrastructure of trained and certified lead remediation professionals;
establish hazard control methods and standards to ensure that homeowners and others have
access to safe, reliable and effective methods to reduce children's exposure to lead-based paint;
and provide information to homeowners and occupants so that they can make informed decisions
regarding lead-based paint hazards in their homes. This activity area also includes EPA's work
on addressing sources of lead exposure other than from lead-based paint.
The lead categorical grant program provides assistance to States, territories, the District
of Columbia and Indian Tribes to develop and carry out authorized programs for the training of
individuals engaged in lead-based paint activities, the accreditation of training programs for
those individuals, and the certification of contractors engaged in lead-based paint activities.
Similar activities are implemented directly by EPA hi States that have not been granted
authorization for these functions.
60 U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics and U.S. Health and Human Services Agency for Toxic Substances and
Disease Registry. Current Best Practice for Vermiculite Attic Insulation. EPA 747-F-03-001. May 2003. Washington B.C.
rv-51
-------
In recent years, EPA has focused on reducing children's exposure to lead in paint and
dust by crafting a regulatory framework to improve work practices associated with lead-based
paint and by educating parents and the medical community about the effects of lead poisoning
and steps that can be taken to prevent it. For example, EPA has promulgated rules to establish
training and certification programs for lead professionals, and to establish right-to-know
programs mandating disclosure of specific lead issues prior to real estate transactions and
renovations. EPA has also managed the National Lead Information Clearinghouse and has
produced many brochures and educational programs.
The Agency has made great strides in reducing the incidence of childhood lead poisoning
through this combination of rulemakhig and education, coupled with research and partnerships
mainly with the Department of Housing and Urban Development (e.g., with States). According
to data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, for children one to five
years of age, the incidence of children with elevated blood lead levels dropped from about
900,000 cases hi the early 1990s to approximately 434,000 cases hi 2000-2001. In addition, the
geometric mean blood level for children ages one to five years decreased from 15 micrograms
per deciliter to two micrograms per deciliter from 1980 to 1999.61
States contributed significantly to achieving EPA's goal of lowering children's blood
lead levels and reducing childhood lead poisoning. Partnering with 37 authorized States, three
Tribes, and two territories, EPA has made substantial progress toward its goal of establishing a
national cadre of trained and certified lead-based paint abatement professionals. By the end of
FY 2002, more than 4,000 workers were certified to employ EPA-required and recommended
work practices to reduce the primary remaining source of children's exposure to lead62.
EPA is working with other Federal agencies, mainly HUD, HHS, and DOJ through the
President's Task Force on Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks to Children on
implementing a Federal strategy to virtually eliminate lead poisoning. In 2005, EPA will
continue the lead-based paint training and certification program through EPA-authorized State,
territorial and Tribal programs and, in States and territories without EPA authorization, through
direct implementation by the Agency. EPA is also continuing to work on the lead regulatory
framework. In FY 2004, EPA plans to work on rules covering management of lead-
contaminated debris and notification prior to abatement work. EPA is continuing to implement
the lead hazard standards rule, the lead renovation information rule and the real estate
notification and disclosure rule63.
In FY 2005, EPA plans to proceed with a proposed rule on the de-leading of bridges and
structures. EPA will devote resources to this rule and other regulatory reviews to ensure that the
Agency has a seamless and synchronized program with a high likelihood of being effective hi the
highest risk areas. Because much of the remaining incidence of lead poisoning occurs in low-
income, urban areas, new "Hotspots" initiatives that consider multiple sources of lead exposure
will focus on these populations. EPA will initiate a voluntary program for remodelers and
renovators in order to increase the use of lead safe work practices by this large industry. In
partnership with other Federal agencies and State and local governments, we anticipate that these
61 Centers for Disease Control, National Center for Health Statistics. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey: 1999-
2002. Available online at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/iAanes.htm.
62 Certification status tracked via FLPP (Federal Lead-based Paint Program), an EPA automated system
63 40 CFR Part 745
IV-52
-------
targeted measures will allow us to achieve our 2008 goal for reducing lead poisoning to 90,000
children with elevated blood lead levels, consistent with the Federal government's goal of
virtually eliminating childhood lead poisoning by 2010.
Toxics Release Inventory/Right to Know
By using TRI information, citizens, businesses, community groups, researchers, and
governments can work together to make informed decisions that will better protect human health
and the environment, in real-time and for the long term. TRI provides the public with
information on releases and other waste management activities of toxic chemicals. Two laws,
Section 313 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act and Section 6607
of the Pollution Prevention Act, mandate that EPA annually collect information on listed toxic
chemicals from certain industries and make the information available to the public through
various means, including a publicly accessible national database.
The annual use of TRI-ME reporting software will continue to reduce the reporting burden on
the regulated community, increase data quality, and allow EPA to make important facility
information available in a timely and effective way.
POPs Implementation
EPA is developing an international POPs Implementation Plan focusing on the priority
pollutants under the Stockholm Convention. Goals of this plan include: 1) reduction in the
releases of POPs reaching the U.S. by long range transport; 2) reduction of sources of POPs hi
countries of origin, focusing on PCB-containing equipment, obsolete pesticides stockpiles, and
dioxins and furans emissions from combustion sources; and 3) better niter- and intra-country
coordination on POPs implementation activities by improving access to POPs technical,
regulatory and program information on the Internet. In FY 2005, efforts to reduce releases and
transboundary transport of PBTs, initiated in FY 2004, will continue.
In FY 2005, EPA will continue
to monitor and develop strategies to
address atmospheric and other long-
range transport of contaminants. For
example, current levels of
contaminants transported to and
deposited hi the Arctic region are a
concern. Unless preventative
measures are taken, levels will
increase due to continued economic
growth and transboundary transport
from the surrounding regions. Long-
range transport of contaminants to and
from the U.S. is one of many concerns
within a larger context of global
atmospheric exchange of contaminants
hi which all countries participate as
both sources and receptors.
••&«•£ °^ 4PCTI&
>!:?f:V$LOCei4tf\£>£
- *,
y • " ' **S(Nt' $
fc-t /'«,^a-V
-*- -&"&£-*
Mercury, POPs, and other pollutants are carried into the Arctic, and
trapped by circulation patterns Crane K., Galasso JL., 1999. Arctic
Environmental Atlas. Washington, DC. Office of Naval Research,
Naval Research Laboratory
IV-53
-------
The Agency is increasingly concerned that progress made domestically to reduce our
mercury emissions will be overwhelmed by atmospheric transport of mercury from abroad.
International uses and emissions of mercury contribute an estimated 40 percent of U.S.
atmospheric mercury deposition, with .an estimated one-third of all releases coming from fossil-
fuel burning in Asia.64 Once deposited in U.S. Territories, mercury quickly enters the food chain
with consequent risks to human health. In FY 2005, EPA will continue to expand the
geographic reach of its mercury monitoring, modeling and pollution prevention efforts. Mercury
is one of the three pollutants to be addressed by the Clear Skies Initiative.
Since 1993, EPA has been actively promoting the phase-out of lead additives hi gasoline
on the international level. EPA is a founding partner in the Partnership for Clean Fuels and
Vehicles. Through the Partnership, the Agency works with international organizations, the
private sector, and donor countries to encourage the phase out of lead hi gasoline, the reduction
of sulfur levels in fuels, and the use of vehicle technologies to improve ah" quality. In FY 2005,
EPA will focus its efforts on Sub-Saharan Africa, as it is more severely affected by lead
poisoning and pollution than any other region of the world. The vast majority of countries on the
African continent still use leaded gasoline, and the lead content of that gasoline is the highest hi
the world. EPA will also implement Partnership activities in other regions of the world,
including the U.S.-Mexico Border region and China.
Progress of leaded petrol
phase out in Sub-Saharan Africa
Fmtamaxy 2OO4 *
United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP), Partnership for Clean Fuels and Vehicles, UNEP. Accessible only
through the Internet http://www.vmep.org/pcrV/Documents/M3pProgressSSA4-smJPG
In this increasingly global economy, chemical risk identification and risk management is
a responsibility of all. EPA has been deeply involved hi international efforts to manage POPs and
select heavy metals (e.g., mercury), including hi the negotiation to establish the Stockholm
Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, a legally binding global convention on POPs.
64 U.S Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards and Office of Research and
Development. Mercury Study Report to Congress (Volumes I- Vffl). EPA-452/R-97-003 through EPA-452/R-97-010. December
1997.
IV-54
-------
Another important international agreement, the Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed
Consent (PIC) Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade
was signed in 1998, and will come into force once 50 countries have ratified it.
State and Local Prevention and Preparedness: The Agency's chemical emergency
preparedness and prevention program seeks to decrease the risks associated with the
manufacture, transportation, storage and use of hazardous chemicals. The program is primarily
responsible for implementing the accidental release prevention provisions of the Clean Air Act,
and the emergency preparedness authorities of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-
to-Know Act (EPCRA). The program also implements right-to-know initiatives stemming from
EPCRA, to inform the public about chemical hazards and supports actions at the local level to
reduce risk. The cornerstone of the program is a belief that the operators of facilities who have
hazardous chemicals are primarily responsible for the safe handling of those chemicals. In
addition, since the risks posed by these facilities are local issues, state and local governments (as
well as the community) play a critical role in risk reduction. EPA estimates that nationwide over
500,000 facilities have significant quantities of hazardous chemicals that are subject to EPCRA
requirements.
All Americans benefit from an effective chemical safety program because hazardous
chemical substances are virtually everywhere and chemical accidents are an ever-present danger.
The facilities required to develop comprehensive Risk Management Plans (RMPs) reported over
1,900 accidents over the past five-year period involving deaths, injuries, significant
property/environmental damage and/or evacuations/shelter-in-place.
Section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act requires facilities that handle quantities of regulated
substances to develop RMPs and submit them to EPA, state agencies, and local emergency
planning committees (LEPCs). Approximately 15,000 facilities have reported under the RMP
requirement to date. Through this program, Federal, state, and local agencies and the general
public have access to large amounts of information on the presence of chemicals in every
community and the potential hazards those chemicals present.
The Risk Management Program regulations were built on practices currently used hi
many industries for process safety management. Each RMP describes the process safety
management systems used by a facility for preventing accidents and documents the facilities'
compliance with the regulation.
Each RMP identifies and assesses the hazards posed by on-site chemicals. It also
provides a five-year facility accident history and outlines an accident prevention program and an
emergency response plan. The statutory deadline for filing RMPs was June 1999. While the
numbers are still being tallied, EPA estimates that it will reach its goal of 90 percent compliance
by the end of 2003. Since the statute requires RMPs to be updated every five years, facilities
will submit the next round of RMPs by June 21, 2004. EPA will need to manage and screen the
reports hi a volume similar to the initial reports submitted in calendar year 1999. Consistent with
its renewed focus on finding ways to improve facility safety, EPA will begin to analyze the data
from this second generation of RMPs, looking for accident trends and patterns in areas such as
industry sector, facility size, geographic region and chemicals.
IV-55
-------
The Clean Air Act requires EPA to establish a system to audit RMPs. The audit system
is used to continuously improve the quality of risk management programs as well as check
compliance with the requirements. In FY 2005, the EPA and other implementing agencies will
perform their audit obligations through a combination of desk audits of RMP plans and on-site
facility inspections. A total of 400 audits will be conducted during this period. Audit selection
will be based upon several criteria, including accident history, patterns of noncompliance, types
and quantities of chemicals, and geographic location. In an effort to help implementing
agencies, states, and prospective third party auditors acquire or improve skills required to
conduct audits, EPA has identified an RMP audit curriculum. The training will be offered
extensively throughout the country in FY 2005. In addition to auditing the quality of the RMPs
submitted, EPA will continue to look for facilities that have not yet submitted their RMPs as
required.
In FY 2005, in the regulatory area, the program will complete Regulatory Actions on
changes to RMP submission and reporting requirements, as well as program adjustments to RMP
Info/Submit to accommodate regulatory changes.
One of EPA's vital roles is to help communities implement accident prevention and
emergency preparedness programs. LEPCs (3,400 established under EPCRA) serve as the focal
point for discussions on reducing chemical risks at the local level. Under the EPCRA and RMP
programs, LEPCs take chemical inventory information and information on how facilities are
reducing the risk of accidents, and integrate it into their emergency plans and community right-
to-know programs and community-wide accident prevention programs. In FY 2005, EPA will
support LEPC efforts by providing tools, technical assistance and guidance to better enable them
to use the information to reduce risks.
EPA, in partnership with states, will continue the implementation of the RMP program
during FY 2005. Since nearly all facilities will be submitting updated RMPs in May 2004, EPA
will publicize the RMP program and undertake renewed efforts to promote state implementation.
The Agency believes individual states are best suited to implement the program because they
benefit directly from its success and have established relationships with the communities that
may be at risk. EPA also believes that as state officials see their facilities achieve compliance,
they will become motivated to seek delegation. The Agency will continue to emphasize
flexibility hi how states will be authorized to receive delegation and eventually implement the
RMP program themselves. EPA will host an RMP implementing agency conference and will
work with states to secure agreements to partially implement the RMP program and help them to
develop and manage individual program components. In addition to this effort, EPA will provide
states a combination of grant assistance, technical support, training, and other outreach services
to help them fully develop and receive delegation of the program. EPA Regional offices will
continue to manage RMP programs hi those states that have not accepted delegation.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
(+$4,400,000): This increase is requested in the base Reregistration program to complete
food use Registration Eligibility Decisions (REDs). Reregistration of food use inert
IV-56
-------
ingredients and certain anti-microbials must be started in FY 2005 if the Agency is to
meet our final statutory deadlines for tolerance reassessment in 2006.
(+$1,000,000): This increase for the Endangered Species Program will fund activities to
implement enhanced reviews developed in consultation with the Fish and Wildlife
Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service. This will ensure that the licensed use
of pesticides is not the cause of any species decline or extinction.
(-$4,000,000): This decrease to EPA's lead program reflects the successful reduction hi
the number of children with elevated blood levels, which has halved to approximately
400,000 since the early 1990's and the decrease in geometric mean blood lead levels for
children age one to five to two ug/dl. EPA will continue to develop the lead-based paint
regulatory infrastructure mandated by Title X. In addition, EPA will continue to .work as
an active member of the President's Task Force on Environmental Health Risks and
Safety Risks to Children to virtually eliminate lead poisoning in children by 2010.
(+$1,331,700, +3.5 FTE): This increase allows the TRI data flows to move through the
Enterprise Portal.
There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for new and
existing FTE.
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
GOAL: HEALTHY COMMUNITIES AND ECOSYSTEMS
OBJECTIVE: CHEMICAL, ORGANISM, AND PESTICIDE RISKS
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Decrease Risk from Agricultural Pesticides
In 2005 Ensure new pesticide registration actions (including new active ingredients, new uses) meet new health
standards and are environmentally safe.
In 2005 Percentage of acre treatments that will use applications of reduced-risk pesticides
In 2004 Decrease adverse risk from agricultural uses from 1995 levels.
In 2003 124 safer chemicals and biopesticides were registered, 72 new chemicals were registered, and 425 new
uses were registered. Date for acre-treatments is expected in 2004.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Register safer chemicals and biopesticides 124 131 135 Regist.
(Cum)
New Chemicals (Active Ingredients) 72 74 84 . Regist.
(Cum)
New Uses 425 3,079 3,479 Actions
(Cum)
Percentage of acre-treatments with reduced risk Data lag 8.5% 8.7% Acre-
Treatments
IV-57
-------
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
pesticides
Maintain timeliness of S18 decisions 45 Days
Reduce registration decision times for new 7% Reduction
conventional chemicals
Reduce registration decision times for reduced 3% Reduction
risk chemicals
Baseline: The baseline for registration of reduced risk pesticides, new chemicals, and new uses, is zero in the
year 1996 (the year FQPA was enacted). Progress is measured cumulatively since 1996. The baseline
for acres-treated is 3.6% of total acreage in 1998, when the reduced-risk pesticide acres-treatments was
30,332,499 and total (all pesticides) was 843,063,644 acre-treatments. Each year's total acre-
treatments, as reported by Doane Marketing Research, Inc. serves as the basis for computing the
percentage of acre-treatments using reduced risk pesticides. Acre-treatments count the total number of
pesticide treatments each acre receives each year. As of 2003, there are no products registered for use
against other potential bio-agents (non-anthrax). Conventional pesticides FY 2002 baseline for
reducing decision time is 44 months; reduced risk pesticides FY 2002 baseline for reducing time is
32.5 months. The 2005 baseline for expedited new active ingredient pesticides is 4. The SI8 2005
baseline is 45 days.
Reduce use of highly toxic pesticides
In 2005 Decrease occurrence of residues of carcinogenic and cholinesterase-inhibiting neuortic pesticides on
foods eaten by children from their average 1994-1996 levels
In 2004 Decrease occurrence of residues of carcinogenic and cholinesterase-inhibiting pesticides on foods
eaten by children from their average 1994-1996 levels.
In 2003 Data available in 2004.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Reduction of detections on a core set of 19 foods
eaten by children relative to detection levels for Data lag 25% 27% Reduced
those foods reported in 1994-1996. Detections
Baseline: Percent occurrence of residues of FQPA priority pesticides (organophosphates and carbamates) on
samples of children's foods in baseline years 94-96. Baseline percent is 33.5% of composite sample of
children's foods: apples, apple juice, bananas, broccoli, carrots, celery, grapes, green beans (fresh,
canned, frozen), lettuce, milk, oranges, peaches, potatoes, spinach, sweet corn (canned and frozen),
sweet peas (canned and frozen), sweet potatoes, tomatoes, and wheat.
Reassess Pesticide Tolerances
In 2005 Ensure that through ongoing data reviews, pesticide active ingredients, and products that contain them
are reviewed to assure adequate protection for human health and the environment, taking into
consideration exposure scenarios such as subsistence lifestyles of the Native Americans
In 2004 Ensure that through on-going data reviews, pesticide active ingredients and the products that contain
them are reviewed to assure adequate protection for human health and the environment, taking into
consideration exposure scenarios such as subsistence lifestyles of Native Americans.
IV-58
-------
Performance Measures: FY 2003
Actuals
Tolerance Reassessment 68%
Reregistration Eligibility Decisions (REDs) 75%
Product Reregistration 306
Tolerance reassessments for top 20 foods eaten 65.6%
by children
Number of inert ingredients tolerances
reassessed
Reduce decision time for REDs
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
78%
81.7%
750
83%
100
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
87.7%
88.2%
400
93%
100
7%
Tolerances
(Cum)
Decisions
(Cum)
Actions
Tolerances
(Cum)
tolerances
Reduction
Baseline: The baseline value for tolerance reassessments is the 9,721 tolerances that must be reassessed by 2006
using FQPA health and safety standards. The baseline for REDS is the 612 REDs that must be
completed by 2008. The baseline for inerts tolerances is 870 that must be reassessed by 2006. The
baseline for the top 20 foods eaten by children is 893 tolerances that must be reassessed by 2006.
Tribal Pilot of 2 models in FY 2003; total number of models to be determined (current estimate is 16-
18). Reregistration decision time baseline 38-40 months.
Testing of Chemicals in Commerce for Endocrine Disruption
In 2005 Standardization and validation of screening assays
In 2004 Standardization and validation of screening assays
Performance Measures:
Screening Assays Completed
FY2003
Actuals
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
11
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
11
Screening
assay
Baseline: The non-prioritized universe of chemicals that needs to be considered for prioritization includes:
pesticide active ingredients, pesticide inert ingredients, chemicals on the TSCA Inventory,
environmental contaminants, food additives, pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, nutritional supplements, and
representative mixtures. "Priority-setting" refers to the determination of priorities for entry into Tier 1
Screening. The baseline for the Tier 1 screening measure is zero in 1996 - no valid methods for
endocrine disruptor screening and testing existed when FQPA was enacted in FY1996.
Process and Disseminate TRI Information - OEI
In 2005 The increased use of the Toxic Release Inventory Made Easy (TRI-ME) will result in a total burden
reduction of 5% for Reporting Year 2004 from Reporting Year 2003 levels.
In 2004 The increased use of the Toxic Release Inventory Made Easy (TRI-ME) will result in a total burden
reduction of 5% for Reporting Year 2003 from Reporting Year 2002 levels.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Percentage of TRI chemical forms submitted 25 50 55
over the Internet using TRI-ME and the Central
Data Exchange.
Percent
Baseline: 4.2 million hours for FY 2002.
IV-59
-------
Reduce Wildlife Incidents and Mortalities
In 2005 Reduce from 1995 levels the number of incidents involving mortalities to nontargeted terrestrial and
aquatic wildlife caused by pesticides
In 2004 Reduce Wildlife Incidents and Mortalities
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Number of incidents and mortalities to terrestrial 5 11 reduction
and aquatic wildlife caused by the 15 pesticides
responsible for the greatest mortality to such
wildlife
Baseline: 80 reported bird incidents (involving 1150 estimated bird casualties); 65 reported fish incidents
(involving 632,000 estimated fish casualties) as reported in 1995.
Exposure to Industrial / Commercial Chemicals
In 2005 Reduce exposure to and health effects from priority industrial / commercial chemicals
In 2004 Reduce exposure to and health effects from priority industrial / commercial chemicals
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Safe Disposal of Transformers 5,000 5,000 Transformers
Safe Disposal of Capacitors 9,000 9,000 Capacitors
number of children aged 1-5 years with elevated 270,000 225,000 children
blood lead levels (>10 ug / dl)
Baseline: 1999/2000 baseline released in January 2003: Approximately 400,000 cases of childhood lead
poisoning cases according to NHANES data. In 2004 a larger data set will be included as we will be
expanding to include more EPA Regional efforts that will include all federally administered and State
administered programs. Introduced the "number of children aged 1-5 years" measure hi FY2004.
Since the baseline is 1999/2000 data we are unable to project targets for 2004 and 2005 due to the
data-lag. The FY2003 data for a new baseline may not be available until 2005. The baseline for PCB
transformers is estimated at 2.2 million units and for capacitors is estimated at 1.85 million units as of
1988 as noted in the 1989 PCB Notification and Manifesting Rule. From 1991-2001 there was a
declining trend in PCB disposal due to failing equipment and environmental liability: the total number
of PCB large capacitors safely disposed of 436,485 and the total number of PCB transformers safely
disposed of 172,672 as of 2002.
Risks from Industrial / Commercial Chemicals
In 2005 Identify, restrict, and reduce risks associated with industrial/commercial chemicals.
In 2004 Identify and reduce risks associated with international industrial/commercial chemicals.
In 2004 Identify, restrict, and reduce risks associated with industrial/commercial chemicals.
In 2003 Of the approximately 1,633 applications for new chemicals and microorganisms submitted by industry,
ensure those marketed are safe for humans and the environment. Increased proportion of commercial
chemicals that have undergone PMN review to signify they are properly managed and may be potential
"green" alternatives to existing chemicals in commerce.
IV-60
-------
Performance Measures:
Number
Reviews
of TSCA Pre-Manufacture Notice
Make screening level health and environmental
effects data publicly available for sponsored
HPV chemicals
Reduction in the current year production-
adjusted Risk Screening Environmental
Indicators risk-based score of releases and
transfers of toxic chemicals.
High Production Volume chemicals with
complete Screening Information Data Sets
(SIDS) submitted to OECD SIDS Initial
Assessment Meeting
Percentage of chemicals identified as highest
priority by the Acute Exposure Guideline Levels
(AEGLs) Program with short-term exposure
limits established.
FY 2003
Actuals
1,633
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
1,700
1,300
9%
75
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
12%
52%
Notices
cum.
chemicals
Index
chemicals
Total
Chemicals
Baseline: The baseline for TSCA PMNs in FY2004 is zero. (EPA receives about 1,700 PMNs per year for
chemicals about to enter commerce. From 1979-2002, EPA reviewed about 40,000 PMNs. Of the
78,000 chemicals potentially in commerce, 16,618 have gone through the risk-screening process of
Notice of Commencement.) The baseline for HPV measure is zero chemicals in 1998. The baseline
for the RSEI measure is the index calculated for 2001. Baseline is 2002; calculation methodology by
addition of AEGL values (10 minute, 1 hour, 4 hour and 24 hour exposure periods) and numbers of
chemicals addressed. There is a list maintained by the AEGL FACA committee of highest priority
chemicals: 99 chemicals are on List 1 which was generated at the program's inception in 1996 and 137
chemicals are highest priority on List 2 which was generated in 2001. Therefore the total of highest
priority chemical stands today at 236 chemicals, however chemicals can be added or deleted from the
list to fit stakeholder needs which is why we have decided to provide percentage targets. 2001 levels
will serve as the baseline reference point for the percent reduction in relative risk index for chronic
human health associated with environmental releases of industrial chemicals in commerce as measured
by Risk Screening Environmental Indicators Model analyzing results to date. Measurement
Development Plans exist for HPV, VCCEP, and New Chemicals.
Chemical Facility Risk Reduction
In 2005
In 2004
In 2003
Protect human health, communities, and ecosystems from chemical risks and releases through facility
risk reduction efforts and building community infrastructures.
Protect human health, communities, and ecosystems from chemical risks and releases through facility
risk reduction efforts and building community infrastructures.
Data available in March 2004.
Performance Measures:
Number of
completed.
risk management plan audits
FY 2003
Actuals
Data lag
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
400
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
400 .
audits
Baseline: By the end of FY 2001,438 risk management plan audits were completed.
rv-6i
-------
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Percentage of TRI chemical forms submitted over the
Internet using the Toxic Release Inventory Made Easy (TRI-ME) and the Central Data
Exchange (CDX).
Performance Database: TRI System (TRIS).
Data Source: Facility submissions of TRI data to EPA.
Methods, Assumptions, and Suitability: As part of the regular process of opening the mail at
the TRI Reporting Center, submissions are immediately classified as paper or floppy disk. This
information is then entered into TRIS. The identification of an electronic submission via CDX is
done automatically by the software.
QA/QC Procedures: Currently, the mail room determines whether a submission is on paper or a
floppy disk during the normal process of entering and tracking submissions. Electronic
submissions via CDX are automatically tracked by the software. With an increase in electronic
reporting via CDX, the manual mail room processing will be significantly reduced. Information
received via hard copy is double-key entered. During the facility reconciliation process, the data
entered are checked to ensure submission identification is accomplished at no less than 99 %
accuracy. Accuracy is defined as accurate identification of document type.
Data Quality Reviews: Each month the Data Processing Center conducts data quality checks to
ensure 99 % accuracy of submission information captured in TRIS.
Data Limitations: Occasionally, some facilities send in their forms hi duplicative formats (e.g.,
paper, floppy, and/or through CDX). All submissions are entered into TRIS. The Data
Processing Center follows the procedures outlined in the document "Dupe Check Procedures" to
identify potential duplicate submissions. Submissions through CDX override duplicate
submissions through disk and/or hard copy. Floppy disk submissions override duplicate paper
copy submissions.
Error Estimate: The error rate for "submission-type" data capture has been assessed to be less
than 1%. The quality of the data is high.
New/Improved Performance Data or Systems: EPA continues to identify enhancements hi E-
reporting capabilities via CDX.
References: www.epa.gov/TRI
FY 2005 Performance Measure; Percentage of acre treatments with reduced risk
pesticides.
Performance Database: EPA uses an external database, Doane Marketing Research data, for
this measure.
Data Source: Primary source is Doane Marketing Research, Inc. (a private sector research
database).
IV-62
-------
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: A reduced-risk pesticide must meet the criteria set
forth in Pesticide Registration Notice 97-3, September 4, 1997. Reduced-risk pesticides include
those which reduce the risks to human health; reduce the risks to non-target organisms; reduce
the potential for contamination of groundwater, surface water, or other valued environmental
resources; and/or broaden the adoption of integrated pest management strategies or make such
strategies more available or more effective. In addition, biopesticides are generally considered
safer (and thus reduced-risk). EPA's statistical and economics staff review data from Doane.
Information is also compared to prior years for variations and trends as well as to determine the
reasons for the variability.
Doane sampling plans and QA/QC procedures are available to the public at their website. More
specific information about the data is proprietary and a subscription fee is. required. Data are
weighted and multiple regression procedure is used to adjust for known disproportionalities
(known disproportionality refers to a non proportional sample, which means individual
respondents have different weights) and ensure consistency with USDA and state acreage
estimates.
QA/QC Procedures: All registration actions must employ sound science and meet the Food
Quality Protection Act (FQPA) new safety standard. All risk assessments are subject to public
and scientific peer review. Doane data are subject to extensive QA/QC procedures, documented
at their websites.
Data Quality Review: Doane data are subject to extensive internal quality review, documented
at the website. EPA's statistical and economics staff review data from Doane. Information is
also compared to prior years for variations and trends as well as to determine the reasons for the
variability.
Data Limitations: Doane data are proprietary; thus in order to release any detailed information,
the Agency must obtain approval.
Error Estimate: Error estimates differ according to the data/database and year of sampling.
Doane sampling plans and QA/QC procedures are available to the public at their website. More
specific information about the data is proprietary and a subscription fee is required. Data are
weighted and multiple regression procedure is used to adjust for known disproportionalities and
ensure consistency with USDA and state acreage estimates.
New/Improved Data or Systems: These are not EPA databases; thus improvements are not
known in any detail at this time.
References: EPA Website; EPA Annual Report; Annual Performance Plan and Annual
Performance Report, http://www.ams.usda.gov/science/pdp/download.htm; Doane Marketing
Research, Inc.: http://www.doanemr.com: http://www.usda.gov/nass/pubs and
http://www.usda.nass/nass/nassinfo; FFDCA Sec 408(a)(2); EPA Pesticide Registration Notice
97-3, September 4, 1997.
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Reduction in occurrences of carcinogenic and
cholinesterase-inhibiting neurotoxic pesticide residues on a core set of 19 children's foods
reported in 1994-1996
IV-63
-------
Performance Database: United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Pesticide Data
Program (PDF).
Data Source: Data collection is conducted by the states. Information is coordinated by USDA
agencies and cooperating state agencies.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: The information is collected by the states and inch e as
statistical information on pesticide use, food consumption, and residue detections, which pro ^de
the basis for realistic dietary risk assessments and evaluation of pesticide tolerance. Pesticide
residue sampling and testing procedures are managed by USDA's Agricultural Marketing
Service (AMS). AMS also maintains an automated information system for pesticide residue data
and publishes annual summaries of residue detections.
This measure helps provide information on the effect of EPA's regulatory actions on children's
health via reduction of pesticide residues on children's foods. The assumption is that through
reduction of pesticide residues on these foods, children's exposure to pesticides will be reduced;
thus, the risk to their health diminished. This measure contributes to the Agency's goal of
protecting human health and is aligned with the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) mandate of
protecting children's health.
QA/QC Procedures: The core of USDA's PDP's QA/QC program is Standard Operating
Procedures (SOPs) based on EPA's Good Laboratory Practices. At each participating laboratory,
there is a quality assurance (QA) unit which operates independently from the rest of the
laboratory staff. QA Plans are followed as the standard procedure, with any deviations
documented extensively. Final QA review is conducted by PDP staff responsible for collating
and reviewing data for conformance with SOPs. PDP staff also monitors the performance of
participating laboratories through proficiency evaluation samples, quality assurance internal
reviews, and on-site visits. Additionally, analytical methods have been standardized in various
areas including analytical standards, laboratory operations, data handling, instrumentation and
QA/QC. With the exception of California, all samples of a commodity collected for PDP are
forwarded to a single laboratory, allowing greater consistency, improved QA/QC and reduced
sample loss. Program plans may be accessed at http://www.ams.usda.gov/science/pdp/SOPs.htm.
Data Quality Review: In addition to having extensive QA plans to ensure reliability of the
data, the PDP follows EPA's Good Laboratory Practices in standard operating procedures. A
QA committee composed of quality assurance officers is responsible for annual review of
program SOPs and for addressing QA/QC issues. Quality assurance units at each participating
laboratory operate Independently from the laboratory staff and are responsible for day-to-day
quality assurance oversight. Preliminary QA/QC review is done at each participating laboratory
with final review performed by PDP staff for conformance with SOPs.
Data Limitations: Participation hi the PDP is voluntary. Sampling is limited to ten states but
designed in a manner to represent the food supply nationwide. The number of sampling sites and
volume vary by state. Sampling procedures are described at the website, see reference below.
Error Estimate: Uncertainties and other sources of error are minor and not expected to have any
significant effect on performance assessment. More information is available on the website (See
References).
IV-64
-------
New/Improved Data or Systems: These are not EPA data; thus improvements are not known
in any detail at this time.
References: PDF Annual Reports, http://www.ams.usda.gov/science/pdp/download.htm;
http://www.ams.usda.gov/process/; CFR 40 Part 160; Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) 1996;
http://www.epahome/Standards.htmlj_http://www.ams.usda.gov/science/pdp/SOPs.htm.
FY 2005 Performance Measures:
• Number of Tolerance Reassessments issued.
• Number of Reregistration Eligibility Decisions (REDs) issued.
• Number of Product Reregistration decisions issued.
• Tolerance Reassessments for top 20 foods eaten by children
• Number of inert ingredients tolerance/tolerance exemptions reassessed.
• Reduce decision times for REDs
Performance Database: The OPPIN (Office of Pesticide Programs Information Network)
consolidates various EPA program databases. It is maintained by the EPA and tracks regulatory
data submissions and studies, organized by scientific discipline, which are submitted by the
registrant in support of a pesticide's reregistration. Additionally, manual counts of the
registrations of reduced risk pesticides are kept as backup and quality control.
Data Source: EPA's Pesticides Program.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: The measures are program outputs which represent
the program's statutory requirements to ensure that pesticides entering the marketplace are safe
for human health and the environment and when used in accordance with the packaging label
present a reasonable certainty of no harm. While program outputs are not the best measures of
risk reduction, they do provide a means for reducing risk in that the program's safety review
prevents dangerous pesticides from entering the marketplace.
QA/QC Procedures: All registration actions must employ sound science and meet the Food
Quality Protection Act (FQPA) new safety standard. All risk assessments are subject to public
and scientific peer review.
Data Quality Review: Management reviews the program counts and signs off on the decision
document.
Data Limitations: None known.
Error Estimate: N/A. There are no errors associated with count data.
New/Improved Data or Systems: The OPPIN, which consolidates various pesticides program
databases, will contribute to reducing the processing time for reregistration actions.
References: EPA Website http://www.epa.gov/pesticides EPA Annual Report 2002 EPA
Number 735-R-03-001; 2003 Annual Performance Plan
IV-65
-------
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Number of incidents and mortalities to terrestrial and
aquatic wildlife caused by the 15 pesticides responsible for the greatest mortality to such
wildlife.
Performance Database: The Ecological Incident Information System (EIIS) is a national
database of information on poisoning incidents of non-target plants and animals caused by
pesticide use. The Environmental Fate and Effects staff for Pesticide Programs maintain this
database.
Data Source: Data are extracted from written reports of fish and wildlife incidents submitted to
the Agency by pesticide registrants under the Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act
(FEFRA), Section 6(a)(2), as well as incident reports voluntarily submitted by state and Federal
agencies involved in investigating such incidents.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: This measure helps to provide information on the
effect of EPA's regulatory actions on the well being of fish and wildlife. The assumption is that
the number of incidents and mortalities to fish and wildlife caused by pesticides will decrease
when use of those pesticides are curtailed or eliminated.
QA/QC Procedures: EPA employs a process to ensure data quality for this measure which
begins before entering an incident into the database. A database program is used to screen for
records already in the database with similar locations and dates. Similar records are then
individually reviewed to prevent duplicate reporting. After each record is entered into the EIIS
database, an incident report is printed that contains all the data entered into the database. A staff
member, other than the one who entered the data, then reviews the information in the report and
compares it to the original source report to verify data quality. Scientists using the incident
database are also encouraged to report any inaccuracies they find in the database for correction.
Data Quality Review: Internally and externally conducted data quality reviews related to data
entry are ongoing. EPA follows a quality assurance plan for accurately extracting data from
reports and entering it into the EIIS database. This quality assurance plan is described in
Appendix D of the Quality Management Plan for pesticides programs. When resources allow
incorporation of wildlife data from private organizations, such as the American Bird
Conservancy, the new data and EIIS data are reviewed for quality during data entry using the
same standards.
Data Limitations: This measure is designed to monitor trends in the numbers of acute
poisoning events reported to the Agency. Because the data are obtained, in part, through
voluntary reporting, the numbers of reported incidents may not accurately reflect the numbers of
actual incidents. Therefore, it is important to consider the possible factors influencing changes hi
incident reporting rates over time when evaluating this measure.
Error Estimate: Moving average counts of number of incidents per year may be interpreted as
a relative index of the frequency of adverse effects that pesticides are causing to fish and wildlife
from acute toxicity effects. The indicator numbers are subject to under-reporting, but trends in
the numbers over time may indicate if the overall level of adverse acute effects is improving or
getting worse. Even so, if there is an increase in bird kills since the baseline year, it may be due
to better tracking/reporting of kills rather than an increase or change in use of a pesticide.
IV-66
-------
New/Improved Data or Systems: The EPA is currently conducting a project with the American
Bird Conservancy, reviewing the data in its Avian Incident Monitoring System on bird kill
incidents caused by pesticides. These data will be incorporated into the EIIS. The project is
expected to improve the quantity and quality of data in the EIIS database on avian incidents.
References: The Ecological Incident Information System (EIIS) is an internal EPA database.
Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), Section 6(a)(2).
QMP: Quality Management Plan for the Office of Pesticides Program, May 20, 2000
FY 2005 Performance Measures;
• Number of registrations of reduced risk pesticides registered (Register safer
chemicals and biopesticides).
• Number of new (active ingredients) conventional pesticides registered (New
Chemicals)(Cumulative).
• Number of conventional new uses registered (New Uses)(Cumulative).
• Number of new uses for previously registered antimicrobial products.
• Maintain timeliness of Section 18 Emergency Exemption Decisions.
• Reduce registration decision times for reduced risk chemicals
Performance Database: The OPPIN (Office of Pesticide Programs Information Network)
consolidates various pesticides program databases. It is maintained by the EPA and tracks
regulatory data submissions and studies, organized by scientific discipline, which are submitted
by the registrant in support of a pesticide's registration. Additionally, manual counts of the
registrations of reduced risk pesticides are maintained for quality control
Data Source: Pesticide program reviewers update the status of the submissions and studies as
they are received and as work is completed by the reviewers. The status indicates whether the
application is ready for review, the application is in the process of review, or the review has been
completed.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: The measures are program outputs which when
finalized, represent the program's statutory requirements to ensure: 1) that pesticides entering
the marketplace are safe for human health and the environment, and 2) when used in accordance
with the packaging label present a reasonable certainty of no harm. While program outputs are
not the best measures of risk reduction, they do provide a means for reducing risk, such that the
program's safety review prevents dangerous pesticides from entering the marketplace.
QA/QC Procedures: A reduced risk pesticide must meet the criteria set forth in Pesticide
Registration Notice 97-3, September 4, 1997. Reduced risk pesticides include those which
reduce the risks to human health; reduce the risks to non-target organisms; reduce the potential
for contamination of groundwater, surface water or other valued environmental resources; and/or
broaden the adoption of integrated pest management strategies, or make such strategies more
available or more effective. In addition, biopesticides are generally considered safer (and thus
reduced risk). All registration actions must employ sound science and meet the Food Quality
Protection Act (FQPA) new safety standard. All risk assessments are subject to public and
scientific peer review.
IV-67
-------
Data Quality Review: These are program outputs. EPA staff and management review the
program outputs in accordance with established policy for the registration of reduced-risk
pesticides as set forth in Pesticide Regulation Notice 97-3, September 4, 1997.
Data Limitations: None. All required data must be submitted for the risk assessments before
the pesticide, including a reduced risk pesticide, is registered. If data are not submitted, the
pesticide is not registered. As stated above, a reduced risk pesticide must meet the criteria set
forth in PRN 97-3 and all registrations must meet FQPA safety requirements. If a pesticide does
not meet these criteria, it is not registered. If an application for a reduced risk pesticide does not
meet the reduced risk criteria, it is reviewed as a conventional active ingredient.
Error Estimate: N/A
New/Improved Data or Systems: The OPPIN (Office of Pesticide Programs Information
Network), which consolidates various pesticides program databases, will reduce the processing
tune for registration actions.
References: FIFRA Sec 3(c)(5); FFDCA Sec 408(a)(2); EPA Pesticide Registration Notice 97-3,
September 4, 1997; Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) 1996;
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Number of children aged 1-5 years with elevated blood
lead levels (>10 ug/dL). This is the level that CDC defines as 'elevated' and indicative of the
need for intervention.
Performance Database: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) National Health
and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES).
Data Source: The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey is a coordinated program
of studies designed to assess the health and nutritional status of adults and children in the U.S.
The program began in the early 1960s and continues. The survey examines a nationally
representative sample of approximately 5,000 people each year located across the U.S.
Methods, Assumptions, and Suitability: Detailed interview questions cover areas related to
demographic, socio-economic, dietary, and health-related questions. The survey also includes an
extensive medical and dental examination of participants, physiological measurements, and
laboratory tests. Specific laboratory measurements of environmental interest include: heavy
metals (lead, cadmium, and mercury), VOC exposures, phthalates, organophosphates (OPs),
pesticides and their metabolites, non-persistent pesticides, dioxins/furans and polyaromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs). NHANES is unique in that it links laboratory-derived measurements of
exposure (urine, blood etc.) to questionnaire responses and results of physical exams.
CDC has published both the "National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental
Chemicals," (March 2001) and the "Second National Report on Human Exposure to
Environmental Chemicals" (January 2003), which reflect findings from NHANES, including the
body burden of lead and other pollutants measured in the blood stream or urine. These reports
provide ongoing surveillance of the U.S. population's exposure to environmental chemicals. The
2001 report provides measurements of exposure to 27 chemicals based on blood and urine
samples from people participating in NHANES 1999. The 2003 Report expands the number of
FV-68
-------
chemicals to 100 (in order to include carcinogenic volatile organic compounds, carcinogenic
PAHs, dioxins and furans, PCBs, trihalomethanes, haloacetic acids, and carbamate and
organochlorine pesticides). Future reports will provide additional details on exposure among
different populations ~ stratifying results by gender, race/ethnicity, age, urban/rural residence,
education level, income, and other characteristics. CDC will track these indicators over time.
Data will assist both public health officials and regulators in analyzing: 1) trends over time; 2)
the effectiveness of public health efforts; and 3) exposure variations among sub-populations.
QA/QC Procedures: Quality assurance plans are available from both CDC and the contractor,
WESTAT, as outlined on the web site under the
NH-ANES section.
Data Quality Reviews: CDC follows standardized survey instrument procedures to collect data
to promote data quality, and data are subjected to rigorous QA/QC review. CDC/NCHS has an
elaborate data quality checking procedure outlined on the web site
under the NHANES section.
Data Limitations: The NHANES survey uses two steps, a questionnaire and a physical exam.
For this reason, there are sometimes different numbers of subjects in the interview and
examinations and special weighting techniques are needed. Additionally, the number of records
in each date file varies depending on gender and age profiles for the specific components.
Demographic uiformation is collected but not available at the highest level of detail in order to
protect privacy. Body burden data are evidence of human exposure to toxic substances;
however, linkages between evidence of exposure and source of exposure have yet to be made for
many substances. In the case of lead, the correlation is strongly documented.
Error Estimate: Because NHANES is based on a complex multi-stage sample design,
appropriate sampling weights should be used in analyses to produce national estimates. Several
statistical methodologies can be used to account for unequal probability of the selection of
sample persons. The methodologies and appropriate weights are provided at
www.cdc.gov/nchs/about/maior/nhanes/nhanes3/cdrom/nchs/MANUALS/NH3GUIDE to help
generate appropriate error estimates.
New/Improved Data or Systems: NHANES has moved to an annual schedule. The sample
design allows for limited estimates to be produced on an annual basis and more detailed
estimates to be produced on 3-year samples.
References: "National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals," (NCEH
Publication Number 01-0164, Atlanta, GA: March 2001), [On the web at
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes.htm or http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/dls/report/]; more extensive
findings from NHANES are in the "Second National Report on Human Exposure to
Environmental Chemicals" (NCEH Publication Number 03-0022: Atlanta, GA January 2003)
[On the web at [http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes.htm, or http://www.cdc.gov/exposurereport/].
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Reduce the potential for risks from leaks and spills by
ensuring the safe disposal of large capacitors and transformers containing polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs).
IV-69
-------
Performance Database: PCB Annual Report Database.
Data Source: Annual Reports from commercial storers and disposers of PCB Waste.
Methods, Assumptions, and Suitability: Data provide a baseline for the amount of safe
disposal of PCB waste annually. By ensuring safe disposal of PCBs in equipment such as
transformers and capacitors coming out of service, and contaminated media such as soil, and
structures from remediation activities, the Agency is reducing the exposure risk of PCBs that are
either already in the environment or may be released to the environment through spills or leaks.
QA/QC Procedures: The Agency reviews, transcribes, and assembles data into the Annual
Report Database.
Data Quality Reviews: The Agency contacts data reporters, when needed, for clarification of
data submitted.
Data Limitations: Data limitations include missing submissions from commercial storers and
disposers, and inaccurate submissions. PCB-Contaminated Transformers, of PCB concentrations
50 to 499 parts per million (ppm), and those that are 500 ppm PCBs or greater are not
distinguished in the data. Similarly, large and small capacitors of PCB waste may not be
differentiated. Data are collected for the previous calendar year on July 1 of the next year
creating a lag of approximately one year. Despite these limitations, the data do provide the only
estimate of the amount of PCB waste disposed annually.
Error Estimate: N/A
New/Improved Data or Systems: None
References: U.S EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, National Program Chemicals
Program, PCB Annual Report for Storage and Disposal of PCB Waste.
FY 2005 Performance Measure; Percent reduction in relative risk index for chronic human
health associated with environmental releases of industrial chemicals in commerce as
measured by Risk Screening Environmental Indicators (RSEI) Model.
Performance Database: The RSEI Model uses annual reporting from individual industrial
facilities along with a variety of other information to evaluate chemical emissions and other
waste management activities. RSEI incorporates detailed data from EPA's Toxics Release
Inventory (TRI) and Integrated Risk Information System, the U.S. Census, and many other
sources. Due to a TRI data lag, performance data will be unavailable for this measure when the
FY 2005 Annual Performance Report is prepared. The data will be available for the FY 2007
report.
Data Source: The wide variety of data used within RSEI were collected by Federal Agencies
(U.S. Census Bureau, EPA, U.S. Geological Survey, Commerce Dept. - National Oceanographic
Atmospheric Administration, Dept. of Interior - U.S. Fish and Wildlife), state agencies (air
emissions and stack data, fishing license data), and research organizations (Electric Power
Research Institute (EPRI), etc.) for a variety of national/state programmatic and regulatory
FV-70
-------
purposes, and for industry-specific measurements.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: The RSEI Model generates unique numerical values
known as "Indicator Elements" using the factors pertaining to surrogate dose, toxicity and
exposed population. Indicator Elements are unitless (like an index number, they can be compared
to one-another but do not reflect actual risk), but proportional to the modeled relative risk of
each release (incrementally higher numbers reflect greater estimated risk). Indicator Elements are
risk-related measures generated for every possible combination of reporting facility, chemical,
release medium, and exposure pathway (inhalation or ingestion). Each Indicator Element
represents a unique release-exposure event and together these form the building blocks to
describe exposure scenarios of interest. These Indicator Elements are summed in various ways to
represent the risk-related results for releases users are interested in assessing. RSEI results are
for comparative purposes and only meaningful when compared to other scores produced by
RSEI. The measure is appropriate for year-to-year comparisons of performance. Depending on
how the user wishes to aggregate, RSEI can address trends nationally, regionally, by state or
smaller geographic areas.
QA/QC Procedures: EPA annually updates the data sources used within the RSEI model to
take advantage of the most recent and reliable data. For example, TRI facilities self-report
release data and occasionally make errors. TRI has QC functions and an error-correction
mechanism for reporting such mistakes. Because of the unique screening-level abilities of the
RSEI model, it is possible to identify other likely reporting errors and these are forwarded to the
TRI Program for resolution. In developing the RSEI model, OPPT has performed numerous Q/C
checks on various types of data. For instance, locational data for on-site and off-site facilities
have been checked and corrected, and this information is being supplied to the Office of
Environmental Information (OEI) and the Envirofacts database.
Data Quality Reviews: RSEI depends upon a broad array of data resources, each of which has
gone through a quality review process tailored to the specific data and managed by the providers
of the data sources. RSEI includes data from the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), Integrated
Risk Information System (IRIS), Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables (HEAST), U.S.
Census, etc. All were collected for regulatory or programmatic purposes and are of sufficient
quality to be used by EPA, other Federal agencies,' and state regulatory agencies. Over the
course of its development, RSEI has been the subject of three reviews by EPA's Science
Advisory Board (U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Risk Screening
Environmental Indicators Model, Peer Reviews. Available at
http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/rsei/faqs.html).
The RSEI model has undergone continuous upgrading since the 1997 SAB Review. Toxicity
weighting methodology was completely revised and subject to a second positive review by SAB
(in collaboration with EPA's Civil Rights program); air methodology was revised and ground-
truthed using New York data to demonstrate high confidence; water methodology has been
revised in collaboration with EPA's Water program. When the land methodology has been
reviewed and revised, EPA will have completed its formal, written response to the 1997 SAB
Review.
Data Limitations: RSEI relies on data from a variety of EPA and other sources. TRI data may
have errors that are not corrected in the standard TRI QC process. In the past, RSEI has
IV-71
-------
identified some of these errors and corrections have been made by reporting companies.
Drinking water intake locations are not available for all intakes nationwide. Where intake
locations are known only at the comity-level, RSEI distributes the drinking water population
between all stream reaches in that county. This could increase or decrease the RSEI risk-related
results depending on the pattern of TRI releases on the stream reaches in that county. If the
actual uptake location is on a highly polluted stream reach, this approach would underestimate
risk by distributing the drinking water population to less-polluted reaches. In coastal areas,
Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW) water releases may go directly to the ocean, rather
than nearby streams. EPA is in the process of systematically correcting potential errors
regarding POTW water releases. These examples are illustrative of the data quality checks and
methodological improvements that are part of the RSEI development effort. Data sources are
updated annually and all RSEI values are recalculated on an annual basis.
Error Estimate: In developing the RSEI methodology, both sensitivity analyses and
groundtruthing studies have been used to address model accuracy (documentation is provided on
the RSEI Home Page - www.epa.gov/oppt/env_ind/). For example, groundtruthing of the air
modeling performed by RSEI compared to site-specific regulatory modeling done by the state of
New York showed virtually identical results in both rank order and magnitude. However, the
complexity of modeling performed hi RSEI, coupled with un-quantified data limitations, limits a
precise estimation of errors that may either over- or under-estimate risk-related results.
New/Improved Data or Systems: The program regularly tracks improvements hi other Agency
databases (e.g., SDWIS and Reach File databases) and incorporates newer data into the RSEI
databases. Such improvements can also lead to methodological modifications in the model.
Corrections hi TRI reporting data for all previous years are captured by the annual updates of the
RSEI model.
References: The methodologies used in RSEI were documented for the 1997 review by the
EPA Science Advisory Board. The Agency has provided this and other technical documentation
on the RSEI Home Page. The Agency is revising the existing methodology documents
concurrent with the second beta release of RSEI Version 2.0. [RSEI Home Page -
www.epa.gov/oppt/env_ind/]
U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Risk Screening Environmental Indicators
Model, Peer Reviews. Available at http://www.epa.gov/opptrntr/rsei/faqs.html
RSEI Methodology Document (describes data and methods used hi RSEI Modeling)
RSEI User's Manual (PDF, 1.5 MB) explains all of the functions of the model, the data used, and
contains tutorials to walk the new user through common RSEI tasks
(http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/rsei/docs/users_manual.pdf).
A more general overview of the model can be found in the RSEI Fact Sheet (PDF, 23 KB)
(http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/rsei/docs/factsheet_v2-1 .pdf).
There are also seven Technical Appendices that accompany these two documents and provide
additional information on the data used hi the model. The Appendices are as follows:
IV-72
-------
Technical Appendix A (PDF, 121 KB) - Listing of All Toxicity Weights for TRI Chemicals and
Chemical Categories
Technical Appendix B (PDF, 290 KB) - Physicochemical Properties for TRI Chemicals and
Chemical Categories
Technical Appendix C (PDF, 40 KB) - Derivation of Model Exposure Parameters
Technical Appendix D (PDF, 71 KB) - Locational Data for TRI Reporting Facilities and Off-site
Facilities
Technical Appendix E (PDF, 44 KB) - Derivation of Stack Parameter Data
Technical Appendix F (PDF, 84KB) - Summary of Differences Between RSEI Data and TRI
Public Data Release
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Establish short-term exposure limits for 52 percent of
chemicals identified as highest priority by the Acute Exposure Guideline Levels (AEGL)
Program.
Performance Database: Performance is measured by the cumulative number of chemicals with
"Proposed", "Interim", and/or "Final" AEGL values.
Data Source: EPA manages a Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) committee that reviews
short term exposure values for extremely hazardous chemicals. The supporting data, from both
published and unpublished sources and from which the AEGL values are derived, are collected,
evaluated, and summarized by FACA Chemical Managers and Oak Ridge National Laboratory's
scientists. Proposed AEGL values are published for public comment in the Federal Register.
After reviewing public comment, interim values are presented to the AEGL Subcommittee of the
National Academies of Sciences (NAS) for review and comment. After review and comment
resolution, the National Research Council under the auspices of the National Academies of
Sciences (NAS) publishes the values as final.
Methods, Assumptions, and Suitability: The work of the National Advisory Committee's
Acute Exposure Guideline Levels (NAC/AEGL) adheres to the 1993 U.S. National Research
Council/National Academies of Sciences (NRC/NAS) publication Guidelines for Developing
Community Emergency Exposure Levels for Hazardous Substances. NAC/AEGL, in cooperation
with the National Academy of Sciences' Subcommittee on AEGLs, have developed standard
operating procedures (SOPs), which are followed by the program. These have been published by
the National Academies Press and are referenced below.
AEGL values approved as "proposed" and "interim" by the NAC/AEGL FACA Committee and
"final" by the National Academies of Sciences represent the measure of the performance. The
work is assumed to be completed at the time of final approval of the AEGL values by the NAS.
QA/QC Procedures: QA/QC procedures include public comment via the Federal Register
process, review and approval by the FACA committee, and review and approval by the
NAS/AEGL committee and their external reviewers.
Data Quality Review: N/A
Data Limitations: N/A
IV-73
-------
Error Estimate: N/A
New/Improved Data or Systems: This is the first time acute exposure values for extremely
hazardous chemicals have been established according to a standardized process and put through
such a rigorous review.
References: Standing Operating Procedures for Developing Acute Exposure Guideline Levels
for Hazardous Chemicals, National Academy Press, Washington, DC 2001
(http://www.nap.edu/books/030907553X/html/).
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Number of risk management plan audits completed
Performance Database: There is no database for this measure.
Data Source: EPA's Regional offices and the states provide the data to EPA headquarters.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: Data are collected and analyzed by surveying EPA's
Regional offices to determine how many audits of facilities' risk management plans (RMPs)
have been completed.
QA/QC Procedures: Data are collected from states by EPA's Regional offices, with review at
the Regional and Headquarters' levels.
Data Quality Review: Data quality is evaluated by both Regional and Headquarters' personnel.
Data Limitations: Data quality is dependent on completeness and accuracy of the data provided
by state programs.
Error Estimate: Not calculated.
New/Improved Data or Systems: N/A
Reference: N/A
EFFICIENCY MEASURES/MEASUREMENT DEVELOPMENT PLANS
Pesticides Program
In addition to the newly established efficiency measures, the Office of Pesticide
Programs is creating a measures workplan to identify and plan for the development of outcome
measures and indicators for both human health and the environment. Meaningful measures for
pesticides require coordination and cooperation with other organizations for data and
information. The workplan will identify these partnerships and lay out the steps needed to
develop outcome measures and indicators for program goals.
The efficiency measures presented for this goal set targets for improving the decision-
making tunes. For example, by 2006, the Agency will reduce reregistration time (issuance of
FV-74
-------
Re-registration Eligibility Decision, or RED) by ten percent from the FY 2002 baseline, from the
initiation of public participation to the signed RED. Each year through 2008, EPA will make
safer pest management tools available sooner, and during 2005 will reduce the registration tune
for new active ingredients which meet the criteria for reduced risk pesticides by three percent.
By 2008, EPA will reduce registration decision times by ten percent for conventional new active
ingredients and five percent for reduced-risk new active ingredients (including biopesticides)
from the FY 2002 baseline.
The processing times for reviews and decisions are tracked through the new Office of
Pesticides Programs Information Network (OPPIN) computer system, which came on-line hi FY
2003. Where process re-designs have already brought about significant savings (the section 18
process and the reduced risk registration process), the target will be to maintain the shorter times
through 2008.
Toxics Program
Through 2008, the Agency plans to reduce its per-chemical review costs from 2002
levels. This will be accomplished by training chemical developers to use EPA's risk screening
tools early in research and development so that the Agency receives at least 40 pre-screened
PMNs per year. For the New Chemicals Program, the next step will be to track trends associated
with the review of chemicals undergoing expedited review under the Sustainable Futures
Initiative. The Initiative is intended to create cost savings for industry; however the "pre-
screening" model should also provide efficiencies for EPA processes. Development of measures
is referenced in the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) summary hi the Special Analysis
section.
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
Coordination with State lead agencies and with the U. S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA) provides added impetus to the implementation of the Certification and Training
program. States also provide essential activities in developing and implementing the Endangered
Species and Worker Protection programs. States are involved in numerous special projects and
investigations, including emergency response efforts. The Regions provide technical guidance
and assistance to the States and Tribes in the implementation of all pesticide program activities.
EPA uses a range of outreach and coordination approaches for pesticide users, agencies
implementing various pesticide programs and projects, and the general public. Outreach and
coordination activities are essential to protect workers and endangered species; to provide
training of pesticide applicators; to promote integrated pest management and environmental
stewardship; and to support compliance through EPA's regional programs and those of the States
and Tribes.
In addition to the training that EPA provides to farm workers and restricted use pesticide
applicators, EPA works with the State Cooperative Extension Services designing and providing
specialized training for various groups. Such training includes instructing private applicators on
the proper use of personal protective equipment and application equipment calibration, handling
spill and injury situations, farm family safety, preventing pesticide spray drift, and pesticide and
IV-75
-------
container disposal. Other specialized training is provided to public works employees on grounds
maintenance, to pesticide control operators on proper insect identification, and on weed control
for agribusiness.
EPA coordinates with and uses information from a variety of Federal, State and
international organizations and agencies in our efforts to protect the safety of America's health
and environment from hazardous or higher risk pesticides.
In May 1991, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) implemented the
Pesticide Data Program (PDP) to collect objective and statistically reliable data on pesticide
residues on food commodities. This action was in response to public concern about the effects of
pesticides on human health and environmental quality. EPA uses PDP data to improve dietary
risk assessment to support the registration of pesticides for minor crop uses.
PDP is critical to implementing the Food Quality Protection Act. The system provides
improved data collection of pesticide residues, standardized analytical and reporting methods,
and sampling of foods most likely consumed by infants and children. PDP sampling, residue,
testing and data reporting are coordinated by the Agricultural Marketing Service using
cooperative agreements with ten participating States representing all regions of the country. PDP
serves as a showcase for Federal-State cooperation on pesticide and food safety issues.
FQPA requires EPA to consult with other government agencies on major decisions.
EPA, USDA and FDA work closely together using both a Memoranda of Understanding and
working committees to deal with a variety of issues that affect the involved agencies' missions.
For example, these agencies work together on residue testing programs and on enforcement
actions that involve pesticide residues on food, and we coordinate our review of antimicrobial
pesticides.
While EPA is responsible for making registration and tolerance decisions, the Agency
relies on others to carry out some of the enforcement activities. Registration-related
requirements under FIFRA are enforced by the States. The Department of Health and Human
Services/Food and Drug Administration enforces tolerances for most foods and the United States
Department of Agriculture/Food Safety and Inspection Service enforces tolerances for meat,
poultry and some egg products.
Internationally, the Agency collaborates with the Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical
Safety (IFCS), the CODEX Alimentarius Commission, the North American Commission on
Environmental Cooperation (NACEC), the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD) and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Commission.
These activities serve to coordinate policies, harmonize guidelines, share information, correct
deficiencies, build other nations' capacity to reduce risk, develop strategies to deal with
potentially harmful pesticides and develop greater confidence in the safety of the food supply.
One of the Agency's most valuable partners on pesticide issues is the Pesticide Program
Dialogue Committee (PPDC), which brings together a broad cross-section of knowledgeable
individuals from organizations representing divergent views to discuss pesticide regulatory,
policy and implementation issues. The PPDC consists of members from industry/trade
IV-76
-------
associations, pesticide user and commodity groups, consumer and environmental/public interest
groups and others.
The PPDC provides a structured environment for meaningful information exchanges and
consensus building discussions, keeping the public involved in decisions that affect them.
Dialogue with outside groups is essential if the Agency is to remain responsive to the needs of
the affected public, growers and industry organizations.
EPA relies on data from HHS to help assess the risk of pesticides to children. Other
collaborative efforts that go beyond our reliance on the data they collect include developing and
validating methods to analyze domestic and imported food samples for organophosphates,
carcinogens, neurotoxins and other chemicals of concern. These joint efforts protect Americans
from unhealthful pesticide residue levels.
EPA's chemical testing data provides information for the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration's (OSHA) worker protection programs, the National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health (NIOSH) for research, and the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC)
for informing consumers about products through labeling. EPA frequently consults with these
Agencies on project design, progress and the results of chemical testing projects. The National
Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), the Mine Safety and Health Association
(MSHA) and EPA meet monthly to coordinate on issues such as mercury recycling, a proposed
rule on worker protection for acrylamide, and issues relating to vermiculite/asbestos at a
Superfund site in Montana. The Agency of Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) has
asked EPA to develop TSCA Section 4 testing actions for certain chemicals that are found
frequently at Superfund sites.
The Agency will work with a full range of stakeholders on homeland security issues:
USD A, CDC, other federal agencies, industry and the scientific community. Review of the
agents that may be effective against anthrax has involved GSA, State Department, UAMRIID,
FDA, EOSA, USPS, and others, and this effort will build on this network.
The Acute Exposure Guidelines (AEGL) program is a collaborative effort that includes.
ten Federal agencies (EPA, DHS, DOE, DOD, DOT, NIOSH, OSHA, CDC, ATSDR, and FDA),
numerous State agencies, private industry, academia, emergency medical associations, unions,
and other organizations in the private sector. The program also has been supported
internationally by the OECD and includes active participation by the Netherlands, Germany and
France.
The success of EPA's lead program is due in part to effective coordination with other
Federal agencies, States and Indian Tribes through the President's Task Force on Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks to Children. EPA will coordinate with HUD to clarify how new
rules may affect existing EPA and HUD regulatory programs, and with the Federal Highway
Administration of the Department of Transportation and the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) of the Department of Labor on worker protection issues. EPA will
continue to work closely with State and Federally recognized Tribes to ensure that authorized
State and Tribal programs continue to comply with requirements established under TSCA, that
the ongoing Federal accreditation certification and training program for lead professionals is
IV-77
-------
administered effectively, and that the States and Tribes adopt the Renovation and Remodeling
and the Buildings and Structures Rules when these rules become effective.
EPA has a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with HUD on coordination of efforts
on lead-based paint issues. As a result of the MOU, EPA and HUD have co-chaired the
President's Task Force since 1997. There are 14 other Federal agencies including CDC and the
Department of Defense (DOD) on the Task Force. In another joint effort, EPA, HUD, and the
National Institutes of Standards and Technology (NIST) have been working to identify reliable
at-home test kits for lead-based paint to recommend to do-it-yourself renovators. HUD and
EPA also have a joint Lead Hotline and share enforcement of the Disclosure Rule.
Mitigation of existing risk is a common interest for other Federal agencies addressing
issues of asbestos and PCBs. EPA will continue to coordinate interagency strategies for
assessing and managing potential risks from asbestos and other fibers. Coordination on safe
PCB disposal is an area of ongoing emphasis with the Department of Defense (DOD), and
particularly with the U.S. Navy, which has special concerns regarding PCBs encountered during
ship scrapping. PCBs and mercury storage and safe disposal are also important issues requiring
coordination with the Department of Energy and DOD as they develop alternatives and explore
better technologies for storing and disposing high risk chemicals.
Since many agencies at all levels of government have authority to regulate and
implement aspects of hazardous materials safety programs, coordination is essential for the
success of EPA initiatives. On the chemical accident preparedness and prevention side,
interagency coordination remains a critical factor hi accomplishing the goals of the Risk
Management and EPCRA programs. The Agency's role in carrying out these initiatives is to
provide leadership and support. EPA works hi partnership with States and local governments
and other organizations to promote actions to reduce risk. EPA provides technical assistance and
tools to States and LEPCs so they can better utilize the information on chemical hazards and
risks available to them. In addition, through the rulemaking process, EPA works closely with
our Federal partners (DOJ, OSHA, and DOT) and with States to ensure compatibility with new
and existing accident preparedness and prevention initiatives. Close coordination and a
cooperative working relationship is also required to effectively meet our responsibilities in the
Chemical Safety program, most importantly where they involve the Chemical Safety Board
(CSB). EPA has completed a memorandum of understanding with the CSB, which further
delineates this working relationship.
The independent CSB places responsibilities on the Agency with regard to chemical
safety and accident prevention. The same Clean Air Act provisions that established the CSB
require EPA to respond to the Board's recommendations and to provide support for its activities.
In 2005, EPA expects to continue to respond to CSB recommendations that result from
investigations. For example, EPA has worked with the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration and the CSB on two recommendations associated with reactive chemical process
safety arising from the Morton International chemical accident in New Jersey.
To conclude the international agreements on POPs, heavy metals and PIC substances,
EPA must continue to coordinate with other Federal agencies and external stakeholders, such as
Congressional staff, industry, and environmental groups, to convey the U.S. approach and solicit
constructive criticism. EPA needs to ensure that the list of chemicals and the criteria and process
IV-78
-------
for evaluating future chemicals for possible international controls are based on sound science.
To illustrate, the Agency may typically coordinate with the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA), FDA's National Toxicology Program, the Centers for Disease Control/Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry (CDC/ATSDR), the National Institute of Environmental Health
Sciences (NIEHS) and/or the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) on matters relating
to OECD test guideline harmonization.
EPA's objective is to promote unproved health and environmental protection, both
domestically and worldwide. The success of this objective is dependent on successful
coordination not only with other countries, but with various international organizations such as
the Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety (IFCS), the North American Commission on
Environmental Cooperation (NACEC), the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD), and the CODEX Alimentarius Commission. The North American Free
Trade Agreement and cooperation with Canada and Mexico play an integral part in the
harmonization of data requirements.
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
1909 Boundary Waters Agreement
1978 U.S./Canada Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement
1989 US/USSR Agreement on Pollution
1991 U.S./Canada Air Quality Agreement
1996 Habitat Agenda, paragraph 43bb
Chemical Safety Information, Site Security and Fuels Regulatory Relief Act
Clean Air Act (CAA)
Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. 1251_1387)]
Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act
Endangered Species Act
Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA)
Federal Fungicide, Insecticide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996
North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC)
North American Free Trade Agreement
Pollution Prevention Act
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
Section 112r, Accidental Release Provisions of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
U.S./Canada Agreements on Arctic Cooperation
World Trade Organization Agreements
IV-79
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems
OBJECTIVE: Communities
Sustain, clean up, and restore communities and the ecological systems that support them.
Resource Summary
(Dollars in Thousands)
Communities
Environmental Program & Management
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Science & Technology
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Building and Facilities
Inspector General
Total Workyears
FY 2003
Actuals
$313,167.7
$64,392.8
$2,324.5
$75.1
$243,985.7
$744.1
$1,645.5
327.5
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$317,572.9
$83,379.9
$1,031.4
$0.0
$230,500.0
$666.8
$1,994.9
372.0
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$319,958.4
$85,676.7
$1,039.9
$0.0
$230,500.0
$721.7
$2,020.1
369.6
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$2,385.4
$2,296.80
$8.50
$0.00
$0.00
$54.9
$25.2
(2.4)
Program Project
(Dollars in Thousands)
Children and other Sensitive Populations
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Commission for Environmental Cooperation
Categorical Grant: Brownfields
Brownfields
Environment and Trade
Environmental Justice
Geographic Program: Other
Infrastructure Assistance: Brownfields
Projects
Infrastructure Assistance: Mexico Border
Regulatory Innovation
US Mexico Border
Regional Geographic Initiatives
Administrative Projects
TOTAL
FY 2003
Actuals
$3,074.7
$140.8
$4,069.6
$48,605.7
$22,613.4
$1,769.6
$3,813.9
$0.0
$81,953.4
$113,426.6
$6,724.4
$4,967.7
$0.0
$22,007.9
$313,167.7
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$6,710.4
$0.0
$3,544.0
$60,000.0
$27,820.6
$1,702.6
$5,044.3
$0.0
$120,500.0
$50,000.0
$2,541.2
$6,484.4
$8,755.7
$24,469.7
$317,572.9
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$6,801.1
$0.0
$3,531.7
$60,000.0
$28,002.3
$1,723.1
$5,130.5
$2,000.0
$120,500.0
$50,000.0
$2,642.7
$5,784.8
$8,799.5
$25,042.7
$319,958.4
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$90.7
$0.0
($12.3)
$0.0
$181.7
$20.5
$86.2
$2,000.0
$0.0
$0.0
$101.5
($699.6)
$43.8
$572.9
$2,385.4
IV-80
-------
FY 2005 REQUEST
Results to be Achieved under this Objective
Brownfields are real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be
complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or
contaminant and they are not traditional Superfund sites. Generally, Brownfields are not highly
contaminated properties and, therefore, present lesser health risks. Economic changes over
several decades have left thousands of communities with these contaminated properties and
abandoned sites. Working with its state, Tribal, and local partners to meet its objective to
sustain, cleanup, and restore communities and the ecological systems that support them, EPA
intends to achieve the following results in FY 2005:
• assess 1,000 Brownfields properties
• clean up 60 properties using Brownfields funding
• leverage $1.0 billion in cleanup/redevelopment funding
• leverage 5,000 jobs
• train 200 participants, placing 65 percent in jobs.
EPA's international work programs under this objective are a critical component in
creating sustainable and healthy communities because pollution knows no boundaries. Many
environmental threats can be linked to activities that take place along U.S. borders or through
transport along air and water currents. Advancing free trade that includes environmental
provisions can sustain our communities and lower potential environmental risks from air or
water borne contaminants. Activities focus on the U.S.-Mexico Border region; public health
problems, North American environmental issues as addressed by the Commission for
Environmental Cooperation (pesticide exposure, sound management of chemicals, biodiversity,
and children's health), and the negotiation and implementation free trade agreements (FTAs) that
support trade without lessening environmental standards.
The FY 2005 Request includes funding for the Community Actions for a Renewed
Environment (CARE) initiative, which is expected to result in measurable reduced exposures to
toxic pollutants including toxic chemicals, lead, pesticides, particulates as well as asthma
triggers. Expected results also include increased acres of wetlands and miles of riparian forest
buffer restored and preserved. Reductions in exposures resulting from diet and subsistence
living practices will also be measured. This initiative will help EPA achieve its Strategic Goals
of Clean Air, Clean and Safe Water, Protecting and Restoring the Land, and Healthy
Communities and Ecosystems.
In January 2001, EPA estimated water and wastewater infrastructure needs along the
U.S.-Mexico border through 2020 at $4.5 billion.65 EPA will work with two key partners, the
Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC) and the North American Development
Bank, which manages the Border Environmental Infrastructure Fund (BEIF), to support the
financing and construction of water and wastewater treatment facilities. For FY 2005, the
65 U.S. EPA Office of Water. "Status Report on the Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Program for the U.S.-Mexico
Borderlands." January 2001. Available online at http://www.epa.gov/OW-OWM.html/mab/mexican/usmexrpt/finallb2.pdf
IV-81
-------
Agency has established a goal that cumulatively 1.5 million people will be protected from health
risks because of the construction of adequate water and wastewater sanitation systems.
Categorical Grant: Brownfields
EPA provides both monetary and technical/legal assistance to states and Tribes
developing and enhancing response programs. The response programs address contaminated
sites through assessment, oversight, and other mechanisms which do not require Federal action,
but need cleanup before the sites are considered for reuse. Legislation also permits the recipients
to capitalize revolving loan funds, purchase insurance or develop risk sharing pools, or
indemnity pools, under the states' response programs. EPA believes that building strong and
effective state and Tribal programs, such as Voluntary Response Programs, will also complement
efforts to address the cleanup of Brownfields properties. Since the program's inception in 1995,
states, territories, and Tribes have received over $156,000,000 for state and Tribal Response
Program grants.
Brownflelds (EPM)
The Brownfields program is designed to empower states, Tribes, local communities and
other stakeholders in economic redevelopment to work together to prevent, assess, safely
cleanup, and reuse Brownfields. Legal, administrative and resource management offices provide
support to the Agency's Brownfields programs administering rent, utilities, security costs, and
legal advice. EPA's Brownfields Initiative funds pilot programs and other research efforts,
clarifies liability issues, enters into Federal, state, and local partnerships, conducts outreach
activities, and creates job training and workforce development programs.
In addition to supporting the operations and management of the Brownfields program,
funds requested will also provide financial assistance for training on hazardous waste to
organizations representing the interests of state and Tribal co-implementers of the Brownfields
law (SBLRBRA), and outreach support for environmental issues involving Tribal and native
Alaskan villages or communities that have been disadvantaged due to perceived or real
hazardous waste contamination. EPA will also provide technical assistance to communities
which were awarded funding to combine smart growth policies with Brownfields redevelopment
or national groups which use the funding to address general issues of vacant properties and
infrastructure decisions.
PART update: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) evaluated the Brownfields
program using the Performance Assessment Rating Tool (PART) during the FY 2005 budget
cycle. The program received a score of 51, which is an "adequate" rating.
OMB found that the Brownfields program is clearly articulated hi its authorizing
legislation, and is well managed, but that it would benefit from regular independent evaluations
and a systematic strategic planning process. In addition, while the program has reached many of
its performance goals, new goals, commensurate with funding, have not yet been put into place.
In response to these findings, the Administration will assess and cleanup Brownfields
sites at an accelerated rate. It will also work to develop more ambitious long term assessment
targets.
FV-82
-------
Commission for Environmental Cooperation
The Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) was established hi 1993 under
the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC), a supplemental
agreement to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The CEC consists of a
Council, a Secretariat, and a Joint Public Advisory Committee. Executive Order 12915
designates the EPA Administrator as the United States representative on the Council and gives
EPA lead responsibility for the U.S. Government regarding the CEC.
In FY 2005, EPA will continue to coordinate U.S. involvement in programs related to the
NAAEC, including oversight of programs related to connections between trade and the
environment, environmental enforcement, children's environmental health, chemicals
management, and biodiversity. In addition to these specific activities, EPA will attend meetings
and coordinate U.S. Government positions hi response to advice of the Joint Public Advisory
Committee, and coordinate meetings and respond to advice for the U.S. domestic National and
Governmental Advisory Committees for the CEC. Transparency and public participation are
central elements hi all of CEC's work.
In FY 2005, EPA will also provide oversight, guidance, and technical support for a
number of substantive CEC projects in FY 2004. For example, EPA will implement a tri-national
strategic plan for biodiversity conservation, including the strategic development of a network of
protected marine areas hi North America. In the area of children's health and the environment,
building on the 2004 review of the Cooperative Agenda for Children's Health and the
Environment in North America66, EPA will organize programs to address children's health risks
by developing educational workshops and reports on topics such as lead poisoning, asthma and
respiratory diseases, and economic valuation of children's environmental health threats. EPA will
continue to provide information and technical support for the annual Taking Stock publication,
which CEC publishes to measure pollutant releases across North America. In the area of
chemicals management, EPA will support implementing North American Regional Action Plans
on Mercury; Dioxins, Furans, and Hexachlorobenzene; and Lindane.
Environment and Trade
Trade liberalization will lead to increased economic activity - with the potential for
increased pollution. Environmental degradation can reach across borders, affecting the quality of
the regional and global commons. For example, mercury, persistent bioaccumulative toxics,
greenhouse gasses, and particulates are being carried hi the atmosphere around the globe and
may be contributing to the non-attainment of air quality standards. Increasing fossil fuel
combustion hi eastern Asia is affecting surface ozone hi the U.S., and arsenic, copper, and zinc
from smelting hi China have appeared hi Hawaii. In addition, increased shipments to the U.S. as
the result of trade liberalization carry the increased potential for inadvertently contaminated
products entering the U.S.
Congress, hi recognition of the growing awareness of the link between trade and the
environment, enacted hi the Trade Promotion Authority Act of 2002 (TPA) explicit priorities and
objectives for environmental issues, such as environmental reviews and capacity building. TPA
66 Commission for Environmental Cooperation, Council Resolution 02-06: Cooperative Agenda for Children's Health and the
Environment in North America, Available only on the Internet: http://www.cec.org/pubs_docs.
rv-83
-------
also has provisions against lowering environmental standards to attract investment. As a result,
EPA has become increasingly involved with USTR and the Department of State in developing
US trade policy, as exemplified by the environmental provisions included in the NAFTA and
U.S.-Jordan trade agreements.
In addition to specific obligations to enforce laws and not lower environmental standards
to attract investment, TPA objectives include promoting sustainable development and
consultative mechanisms to strengthen the capacity of United States' trading partners to develop
and implement standards for the protection of the environment and human health. TPA also
requires the US to conduct environmental reviews to predict the effects of the agreements.
Although TPA includes environmental objectives for trade negotiations such as commitments to
high levels of environmental protection and effective enforcement of environmental laws, many
negotiating partners lack the capacity to achieve those objectives.
During FY 2002, EPA worked in an interagency process to harmonize environment and
trade policy, and on that basis, negotiate new FTAs. As a result, two agreements that reached
conclusion in early FY 2003 (Singapore and Chile) contain environmental text and include
processes for establishing and conducting cooperative projects that harmonize environmental
protection and trade. These cooperative projects are aimed at improving the environment
worldwide through communicating environmental best practices and reducing the potential for
global and trans-boundary pollution.
In FY 2003, the United States initiated four new free trade agreement negotiations. The
countries involved, together with the countries Included in the Free Trade Area of the Americas
(FTAA) negotiations, comprise 10 percent of the world's population. In each case, EPA will
promote the harmonization of environmental protection and trade, through negotiating the
agreements and by working with partner countries to develop cooperative projects that will assist
them in maintaining or improving their environmental conditions. This work will continue into
FY 2005, when much of the work on cooperative projects will take place, and negotiations for
additional free trade agreements are expected to begin. An additional goal in FY 2004 is to
ensure that the Environment and Trade program will address an important data gap by
quantifying environmental impacts of potential trade agreements, allowing us to better measure
the results of our work.
Throughout FY 2004 and beyond, EPA will be heavily involved in developing and
conducting environmental capacity building projects. Project discussions are being linked to
upcoming trade agreements that will enhance and protect the environment. In FY 2005, EPA
will continue to implement projects initiated in FY2004 and assist trade partner countries with
existing capacity building resources.
Environmental Justice
EPA's environmental justice program will continue its efforts to provide education,
outreach, and data availability initiatives. The Program provides a central point for the Agency
to address environmental and human health concerns in minority and/or low-income
communities-- segments of the population that have been disproportionately exposed to
environmental harms and risks. The program will continue to manage the Agency's
Environmental Justice Community Small Grants program, assisting community-based
IV-84
-------
organizations to develop solutions to local environmental issues. The Community Small Grants
Program was established in 1994, and has awarded more than 973 grants of up to $20,000 each
to community-based organizations and others such as universities, Tribes, and schools. As a
result, community-based organizations (i.e., grassroots groups, churches, and other nonprofit
organizations) are expanding citizen involvement and awareness about exposure to
environmental harms and risks, and supporting local efforts to protect families and their
communities. These small grants have served as "seed-money" to empower the residents of
these communities, which has allowing them to more fully participate in Government
environmental decision making processes.
In support of the Agency's environmental justice efforts, criminal investigations and civil
enforcement actions will focus on industries that have repeatedly violated environmental laws in
minority and/or low-income areas. During the past several years, efforts have also been made to
encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR). In FY 2005, the Agency will increase
its capacity to resolve disputes, through training and multi-stakeholder partnering. Through the
use of ADR, the Agency expects to reduce time and resources accompanying litigation; and
anticipates that decisions reached through the program will be more efficient and favorable for
all parties involved.
In FY 2005, the Agency will continue to support the National Environmental Justice
Advisory Council (NEJAC). The Council provides the Agency with significant input from
interested stakeholders such as community-based organizations, business and industry, academic
institutions, state, Tribal and local governments, non-governmental organizations, and
environmental groups. Six standing subcommittees have been created around EPA's broad
statutory mandates and are sponsored by the appropriate EPA office: Air/Water; Enforcement;
Health/Research; Indigenous People; International; and Waste/Facility Siting.
The Agency will also continue to chair an Interagency Working Group (IWG) composed
of 11 Federal agencies to ensure that environmental justice concerns are incorporated into all
Federal programs. In 2005, the IWG will continue its efforts to work collaboratively and
constructively with all levels of government, and throughout the public and private sectors. The
IWG will effectively address the environmental, health, economic and social challenges facing
our communities through the selection of fifteen new demonstration and revitalization projects.
These new projects will continue to implement the 2000 Action Agenda, which in the beginning
centered on fifteen demonstration projects hi diverse urban and rural communities, in virtually all
regions of the nation. By FY 2003, fifteen more demonstration projects were added. At present,
there are 30 existing demonstration projects throughout the country and fifteen more are
expected to be created hi FY 2005. Plans for FY 2005 include selecting projects to achieve a
variety of goals, ranging from environmental cleanup, Brownfields and economic development,
and children's health, to community education and capacity building. To date, these
demonstration projects have leveraged more than $12 million hi public/private resources.
The Agency supports state and Tribal environmental justice programs and provides
outreach and technical assistance to states, local governments, and stakeholders on
environmental justice issues. In order to be able to respond to an allegation of environmental
injustice, it is essential to identify the "affected geographic areas." In 2001, the Environmental
Justice Geographical Information System Assessment Tool was developed for the Internet to
provide all stakeholders with information about all geographic areas in the 48 contiguous states.
IV-85
-------
The Environmental Justice Tool reflects environmental data available from the agency's data
warehouse and demographic data provided by the U.S. Census Bureau. Links are provided to the
Department of Health and Human Services' health-related database.
The Agency will also expand and refine its environmental justice training program. In
FY 2002, a Fundamentals Workshop on Environmental Justice was developed. In FY 2003, a
module on the issuance of permits under RCRA, CWA, and CAA was added to the course. EPA
will provide 25 training sessions to over 750 individuals hi FY 2005.
Geographic Program: Other
Many cities, towns and neighborhoods continue to express concerns about their exposure
to toxic pollutants from multiple sources. While the media-specific authority and the national
scope of our programs have significantly reduced the overall exposure to toxic pollutants across
the country, there is still more to be done to reduce potential risks at the local level in
communities. Community Action for a Renewed Environment (CARE) is a multi-media effort
designed to reduce the burden of toxic pollutants in communities. The initiative will support the
development and implementation of community-based toxics reduction projects, similar to those
underway in Cleveland, St. Louis, Ponca City and South Phoenix. These projects are intended to
demonstrate that community-based approaches can be an effective way of addressing diffuse
sources of toxic pollutants and cumulative risk by addressing issues comprehensively and by
targeting solutions to the specific characteristics and needs of the community. This initiative will
encourage and support communities' efforts to focus resources on the greatest risks and build the
consensus needed to mobilize local resources to reduce exposures to toxic pollutants. This
initiative will build on the wide range of current Agency efforts designed to address community
concerns such as Diesel Retrofits, Brownfields, National Estuary Program, Design for
Environment, Environmental Justice Revitalization Projects, Tools for Schools, and RGI,
improving their effectiveness by working to integrate them to better meet the needs of
communities.
Performance will be measured and reported by communities and regions. EPA will
collect actions (such as diesel engines retrofitted) and convert them to environmental outcome
measures (tons NOx, PM, etc.) wherever possible. Since the community will select the risk-
reduction projects, results will vary from community to community. The central team will work
with programs to develop new conversion metrics or improve existing ones, as necessary. This
program is expected to result in measurable results in the reduction of exposures to toxic
pollutants including toxic chemicals, lead, pesticides, particulates as well as reduced exposure to
asthma triggers. Expected results also include increased acres of wetlands restored and miles of
riparian forest buffer restored and preserved, reductions in exposures resulting from diet and
subsistence living practices will also be measured. This initiative will help EPA achieve its
Strategic Goals of Clean Air, Clean and Safe Water, Protecting and Restoring the Land, and
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems
Infrastructure Assistance: Brownfields Projects
The Brownfields program coordinates a Federal, state, Tribal, and local government
approach to assist in addressing environmental site assessment and cleanup. In FY 2005, the
Agency will provide a total of $120,500,000 for assessment, Revolving Loan Fund (RLF),
IV-86
-------
cleanup, job training, and petroleum grants as well as financial assistance to localities, states,
Tribes, and non-profit organizations for research, training, and technical assistance.
In FY 2005 the Brownfields program will provide $29,000,000 in funding and technical
support for 126 assessments. These assessments provide states (including U.S. territories),
political subdivisions (including cities, towns, and counties), and federally- recognized Tribes
with necessary tools, information, and strategies for promoting a unified approach to
environmental site assessment, characterization, and redevelopment.
The Agency provides funding for site assessment grants of up to $200,000 each. By the
end of FY 2004, EPA will cumulatively award over 640 two year assessment grants to
communities to assist them in assessing contamination at Brownfields sites. These grants
include existing assessment, greenspace assessment, and showcase assessment-related activities.
More than 4,300 properties have had environmental assessments completed under the assessment
program since program inception. EPA designed this assistance to enhance state, local and
Tribal governments' capacity to assess and clean up properties under state and Federal
environmental authorities, and facilitate the redevelopment and reuse of the properties. To date,
grants have leveraged over 25,000 cleanup, construction and redevelopment jobs.
In addition, the Agency and its Federal partners will continue to support the existing 28
showcase communities which serve as models to demonstrate the benefits of interagency
cooperative efforts in addressing environmental and economic issues related to Brownfields.
The showcase communities capitalize on a multi-agency partnership designed to provide a wide
range of support depending on the particular needs of each community. The Agency will
continue to provide technology support to localities, states and Tribes to ensure that the most
efficient and effective technologies are used for Brownfields site assessment, cleanup, and
monitoring.
Where appropriate, the Agency provides funding for targeted assessments hi
communities that are not successful in competing for an assessment grant. Site assessments at
non-grant Brownfields sites are performed under existing EPA contracts. This activity enjoys
wide support from cities and other local communities. This funding provides preliminary
assessments and site investigations using standard methodologies established by, for example,
the American Society for Testing and Materials.
To further enhance a community's capacity to respond to Brownfields redevelopment, the
Agency will also provide $41,500,000 in funding to capitalize RLF and cleanup grants for 70
communities. All communities with Brownfields properties are eligible to apply. The Agency
will award cooperative agreements to capitalize RLF grants of up to $1,000,000 each. EPA
offers grants to governmental entities which may provide subgrants to nonprofit or other
governmental entities. This funding enables eligible entities to develop cleanup strategies, make
loans to prospective purchasers to clean up properties, and encourages communities to leverage
other funds into their RLF pools and cleanup grants. The Agency also provides direct cleanup
grants of up to $200,000 per site to communities and non-profits.
The Brownfields law (SBLRBRA) authorized the cleanup of petroleum sites. EPA will
use approximately $30,300,000 for the assessment and cleanup of abandoned underground
storage tanks (USTs) and other petroleum contamination found on Brownfields properties. This
IV-87
-------
funding will clean up a portion of the estimated 200,000 abandoned petroleum tanks found at
sites. With these funds, EPA will support assessment and cleanup of petroleum contamination in
approximately 60 Erownfields communities. In FY 2003, EPA funded 50 grants which targeted
clean up of petroleum contamination.
In addition, in FY 2005, the Agency will award Brownfields job training and
development grants at up to $200,000 over two years to help residents of Brownfields
communities take advantage of new jobs leveraged by the assessment and cleanup of
Brownfields. To augment the communities' capacities to clean up Brownfields sites, EPA will
provide $2,500,000 to fund 10 new job training grants for community residents, and will provide
$3,000,000 to the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) to supplement
its minority worker training programs that focus on Brownfields workforce development
activities. This will result in a cumulative total of 86 job-training grants, resulting in the training
of almost 2,000 participants since 1998 and an annual average of 65 percent job placement.
By the end of FY 2005, the Brownfields assessment, RLF, and cleanup grants should
leverage over $7,500,000,000 in public and private investment, and leverage 33,000 jobs in
cleanup, construction, and redevelopment, with 6,800 properties assessed.
The Agency will also continue to provide funding for training, research and technical
assistance to localities, states, Tribes and nonprofit organizations to ensure that the most efficient
and effective technologies are used for Brownfields site assessment, cleanup, and monitoring. In
addition, EPA will continue to explore connections between RCRA low-priority corrective
action efforts and cleanup of Brownfields properties.
Infrastructure Assistance: Mexico Border
EPA is working along the Mexican Border to reduce transboundary threats to human and
ecosystem health in North America. Border communities face unique environmental and
coordination challenges. The U.S.-Mexico Border 2012 Program, a joint effort between the U.S.
and Mexican governments, will work with the 10 border-states and local communities to
improve the region's environmental health. To help bridge the coordination issues, four regional
workgroups and Policy Forums will collaborate with local communities to set priorities and plan
and implement projects. These groups will also assist in establishing objectives, defining
indicators, and measuring progress.
The US and Mexico Governments will work to improve water quality along the border
through a range of pollution control sanitation projects, with the goal of restoring the quality of
at least half of the currently impaired significant shared and transboundary surface waters by the
year 2012. For example, EPA is working with Mexican officials to develop baseline information
concerning the number of homes lacking access to basic sanitation and wastewater treatment
systems, in support of the Border 2012 goal of increasing by 25 percent the number of homes
with access to drinking water and sewage treatment systems (baseline of 1999).
One focus of Border 2012 will be improved water quality hi the region. Because of
inadequate drinking water and sewage treatment, border residents suffer disproportionately from
hepatitis A and other water-borne diseases. By increasing the number of connections to potable
water systems, EPA and its partners will reduce health risks to residents who may currently sack
IV-88
-------
access to safe drinking water. Similarly, by increasing the number of homes with access to basic
sanitation, EPA and its partners will reduce the discharge of untreated domestic wastewater into
surface and ground water. Our planned assessment of shared and transboundary surface waters
will facilitate the collection, management, and exchange of environmental data essential for
effective water management.
U.S./Mexico Border:
Cumulative Number of People Connected
to Water and Wastewater Systems
Source: Border Environment Cooperation
Commission: Certification Documents
Regulatory Innovation
EPA's community-based approach provides integrated assessment tools and information
for environmental protection in partnership with local, state, and Tribal governments. EPA's
Regions also provide direct assistance to communities to assist them hi implementing local
environmental management efforts and in building capacity for local problem solving. In FY
2005, EPA will continue to support over 150 demonstration projects assisting local community
environmental planning and management. These
projects strengthen local and intergovernmental
partnerships to address risks to human health and
ecosystems that provide goods and services to our
communities.67 Specifically, EPA will provide
assistance to communities and states to help them
identify the integrated set of local environmental issues
and develop strategies to address interconnected issues
with appropriate regulatory and non-regulatory tools.
EPA will also provide tools and information to build
better stakeholder involvement and assist communities
in conducting assessments of environmental issues.
EPA will assist local communities in identifying
Smart growth is development that serves
the economy, community, and the
environment. It provides a framework for
communities to make informed decisions
about how and where they grow. Smart
growth makes it possible for communities
to grow in ways that support economic
development and jobs; create strong
neighborhoods with a range of housing,
commercial, and transportation options;
and achieve healthy communities that
provide families with a clean
environment.
67 www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/
IV-89
-------
measures of performance to enlighten local decisions and assess the value of various models of
community-based efforts. EPA will also conduct evaluations of existing projects to assess and
fine-tune its own approaches and to derive direction for future demonstrations.
The Agency will more effectively integrate and manage EPA's resources and efforts that
are currently available for promoting environmental quality at the community and state level.
The Agency will focus on improving environmental quality by: (1) removing barriers and
creating incentives for environmentally beneficial development; (2) developing tools and
technical assistance (e.g., the Smart Growth Index); (3) leveraging EPA's resources to provide
and disseminate information (e.g., through web sites and publications); (4) forming multi-
disciplinary, multi-lateral partnerships among public and private sector stakeholders; and (5)
identifying and conducting research related to environmental quality impacts associated with
development patterns and practices.
U.S.-Mexico Border
Communities along the 2,000 mile U.S.-Mexico border are experiencing rapid economic
and population growth, much of it driven by increased trade between the countries, as well as
environmental problems. The border population is now at 11.8 million and is expected to
increase by 7.6 million by 202068. The development of new environmental infrastructure has not
kept pace with this growth and as a
result the area is experiencing
water scarcity, serious
gastrointestinal and respiratory
illness, and hazardous and non-
hazardous
problems69.
waste disposal
,t"
The U.S.-Mexico Border
Program will protect public health
and the environment in the border
region by increasing the number of
people with adequate water and
wastewater sanitation systems by
financing water infrastructure
improvements and educating the
communities along the Rio Grande
about drinking water and public health issues. The Program will minimize risks from pesticides
by training farmers on pesticide risks and safe handling. It will increase the number of Mexican
corporations with implemented pollution prevention controls by expanding hazardous waste
management and pollution prevention practices. The Program will increase the number of sister-
cities with joint contingency plans by improving chemical safety and emergency preparedness hi
the border region.
U.S. EPA and Mexico Secretariat for the Environment and Natural Resources. "Border 2012: U.S.-Mexico Environmental
Program." EPA 160-R-03-001 Available on the Internet: http://www.epa.gov/usmexicoborder/pdf/2012_english.pdf. April,
2003.
69 U.S. EPA and Mexico Secretariat for the Environment and Natural Resources. "Border 2012: U.S.-Mexico Environmental
Program." EPA 160-R-03-001 Available on the Internet: http://www.epa.gov/usmexicoborder/pdf/2012_english.pdf. April,
2003.
rv-90
-------
The U.S.-Mexico Border 2012 Program, a joint effort between the U.S. and Mexican
governments, will work with the 10 border states and with local communities to improve the
regions environmental health. In FY 2003, EPA, in close cooperation with the SEMARNAT
(EPA's Mexican counterpart), other Mexican agencies, the U.S. border states, U.S. Indian Tribal
Nations and U.S. and Mexican NGOs and academic institutions, developed a new program for
the border, Border 2012: U.S.-Mexican Environment Program70, that will focus limited resources
in areas which can most directly lead to improvements in public health and environmental
conditions in this area. The Border 2012 Program transfers to the states and local communities
the responsibility to set priorities and manage program implementation based on explicit
environment and public health goals and objectives with measurable outcomes.
In addressing overall transboundary threats to human and ecosystem health along the
U.S.-Mexico border region, the Border 2012 Program
will focus on: 1) protecting human health; 2)
improving air quality through monitoring and control
strategies; 3) funding wastewater and drinking water
infrastructure investments hi under-served
communities; 4) managing chemical accidents
through completing joint chemical accident
contingency plans; 5) supporting pollution prevention
programs that will, over the long term, reduce the
adverse health and environmental effects of
pollutants; 6) reducing and effectively managing
hazardous and solid wastes through using tracking
mechanisms; 7) strengthening bi-national cooperation
between institutions responsible for enforcing their
respective country's environmental laws; and 8) strengthening coordination of pesticide activities
linking the work on regulatory harmonization with field implementation projects to protect field
workers and assure safe food supplies.71
One focus of Border 2012 will be
improved water quality in the region.
Because of inadequate water and sewage
treatment, border residents suffer
disproportionately from hepatitis A and
other water-borne diseases. By
increasing the number of connections to
potable water systems, EPA and its
partners will reduce health risks to
residents who may currently lack access
to safe drinking water. Similarly, by
increasing the number of homes with access to basic sanitation, EPA and its partners will reduce
the discharge of untreated domestic wastewater into surface and ground water. Our planned
US EPA. Picture of open sewage canal and flooded
roadway in a US/Mexico border community
US EPA. Picture of the effluent disposal channel from Zaragosa
wastewater treatment olant in Mexicali. Mexico.
70 U.S. EPA and Mexico Secretariat for the Environment and Natural Resources. "Border 2012: U.S.-Mexico Environmental
Program." EPA 160-R-03-001 Available on the Internet: http://www.epa.gov/usmexicoborder/pdf/2012_english.pdf. April,
2003.
71 U.S. EPA and Mexico Secretariat for the Environment and Natural Resources. "Border 2012: U.S.-Mexico Environmental
Program." EPA 160-R-03-001 Available on the Internet: http://www.epa.gov/usmexicoborder/pdf/2012_english.pdf. April,
2003.
IV-91
-------
assessment of shared and transboundary surface waters will facilitate the collection,
management, and exchange of environmental data essential for effective water management. By
2005, the Border 2012 Program will promote the assessment of 10 percent of the existing water
systems in the border cities to identify opportunities for improvement in overall water system
efficiencies.
In the effort to help safeguard the health of border residents by protecting and improving
border air quality, the Border 2012 will continue the effort hi FY 2005 to define baseline and
alternative scenarios for emissions reductions along the border and their impacts on air quality
and human exposure. Based on results obtained from defining baselines and scenarios, the
program can define specific emission reductions strategies and air quality and exposure
objectives to be achieved by 2012.
As part of the goal to reduce land contamination, the Border 2012 will continue the effort
in FY 2005 to identify needs and develop an action plan to improve institutional and
infrastructure capacity for waste management and pollution prevention as they pertain to
hazardous and solid waste and toxic substances along the U.S.-Mexico border. The plan will be
implemented in FY 2005 and concluded by 2012. Waste "management capacity" (both
institutional and in terms of infrastructure) means having the techniques, organizations,
expertise, and technology to effectively handle and dispose of waste. Where a lack of capacity is
identified, the Border 2012 program will work to develop the needed capacity to ensure the
appropriate management of waste. In 2005, EPA will fund removal of surface drums, sacks, and
some soil for proper disposal to a hazardous waste facility in the U.S. This site has abandoned
leaking drums and sacks with toxic concentrations of lead, as well as some surface level soil hot
spots with extremely high lead concentrations. This action would be much like a small targeted
Superfund removal that stabilizes a site before a more permanent remedy. The project will
demonstrate swift, significant results to the Mexican community downhill from the site.
Also in FY 2005, the Border 2012 will continue the effort to evaluate the hazardous
waste tracking systems in the United States and Mexico. Currently, both the United States and
Mexico have their own, separate computer systems for tracking the movement of hazardous
waste across the border.
An EPA funded project will develop Fire Prevention Plans in conjunction with tire pile
operators and pre-incident plans in conjunction with emergency responders in an effort to
prevent waste tire pile fires on the border through an assessment of Mexican tire pile sites. EPA
will also continue the effort to extend current efforts in bi-national environmental health training
for 100 health care providers each for pesticides and water.
The Border 2012 will continue the effort to develop a bi-national policy of clean up and
restoration resulting in the productive use of abandoned sites contaminated with hazardous waste
or materials, along the length of the border, in accordance with the laws of each country. By
2007, this policy is targeted to apply at least once in each of the four geographic regions. There
are a number of contaminated sites in the border region that are of concern to both countries.
Mexico and the United States will develop a policy on having sites cleaned up and restored to
productive use. The policy also will identify priority sites in the border area.
IV-92
-------
Finally, as part of an effort to reduce exposure to chemicals as a result of accidental
chemical releases and/or acts of terrorism, the Border 2012 will continue the effort in FY 2005 to
establish joint contingency plans for all 14 parrs of sister cities. By 2008, these plans will be in
place and operating (including exercises), with the establishment of bi-national committees for
chemical emergency prevention (or similar border forums).
Children and Other Sensitive Populations
EPA will also continue its commitment to protect children's health as a member of the
President's Task Force on Environmental Health and Safety Risks to Children. 72 The Agency
will direct resources toward the programs that reduce risks to children from a range of
environmental hazards. In 2005, the Agency will focus on research and analyses to provide
scientific and economic information needed to address the heightened risks faced by children
from environmental contaminants. The Agency will continue to work with HHS to decrease the
frequency and severity of asthma attacks in children through reduction and avoidance of key
asthma triggers, including environmental tobacco smoke, prevalent indoor allergens and ambient
air pollution. The Agency will continue efforts with HUD to reduce children's exposure to lead,
particularly in low income minority neighborhoods where children living in older housing are
much more likely to be exposed to lead. The Agency will also continue to work with the states
and other partners to identify and address environment issues in schools that may affect
children's health. EPA will continue to build partnerships and work with other Federal agencies,
states, health care providers, and international organizations to incorporate children's
environmental health into their programs and activities.
Additionally, the Office of Children's Health Protection and the Office of Research and
Development will lead an Agency effort to reduce exposure of older Americans to environmental
hazards. Working with stakeholders, the Agency will begin to implement activities identified in
a national agenda on the environmental health of older adults, being developed in 2004. The
national agenda is expected to: 1) prioritize and study environmental health threats to older
persons; 2) examine the effect that a rapidly growing aging population might have on our
environment; and 3) encourage older persons to engage in civic activities in their communities to
reduce hazards and protect the environment.
Regional Geographic Initiative
The Regional Geographic Initiative (RGI) is one of the most effective tools that the
Regions have available to address complex and cross-jurisdictional problems using geographic-
based, multi-media, holistic approaches. The Regions use RGI to achieve the balance between
flexibility hi responding to state and local needs and national priorities. The problems addressed
by RGI often showcase innovative solutions to risks to human health and ecosystems. As a
result, RGI enables EPA Regional offices to partner with states, local governments, communities
and the private sector on problems identified via strategic planning processes as high priority in
the Regions, based on national and regional criteria. Many RGI projects are critical components
of larger Agency programs and the Regions use RGI to further such Presidential, Administrator,
and Agency initiatives as children's health, watersheds, clean air, pollution prevention, and
environmental stewardship.
7- U.S. EPA, Office of the Administrator. "Environmental Health Threats to Children", EPA 175-F-96-001, September 1996.
IV-93
-------
Each year, RGI funds a myriad of projects that solve environmental and public health
problems that:
• address disproportionate levels of environmental and public health risks (i.e. asthma, lead
levels, threats to air and water quality);
• support collaboration with communities and many different partners (watershed planning,
demonstration projects, and air monitoring);
• focus on environmental outcomes, rather than activity measures; and,
• leverage additional funds from states, localities, non-profit, private, and other sources that
contribute to environmental improvement.
Working with communities to find cost effective solutions that work for them, ensuring
involvement of all stakeholders in the process, and leveraging resources from federal, state and
private sectors are all critical components of RGI. The RGI approach has been very successful
in resolving multi-media environmental and health issues.73.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
(+$2,000,000): Community Action for a Renewed Environment (CARE) will support the
development and implementation of multi-media community-based toxics reduction
projects, similar to those underway in Cleveland, St. Louis and South Phoenix. It will fill
the current gap in our national programs, which provide a broad level of basic health and
environmental protection but are not always sufficient to meet the needs of all
communities, especially those which are over-burdened by toxic pollutants. This
initiative will reduce those risks through cost-effective, tailored and immediate actions.
In this initiative grants will be awarded to provide funding for communities to organize
and assess the risks in their community and to take action to reduce those risks. The
initiative will support regions by providing multi-media risk reduction and risk
assessment tools, models to assist communities in identifying, prioritizing and reducing
risks. It will also conduct training and hold conferences, as needed, to educate community
members and share lessons learned. Finally, the team will collect and aggregate results
provided by the specific projects and conduct program evaluations to assess the resulting
benefits and lessons learned. The regions will work directly with the communities to
provide needed support and information. This initiative will work in tandem with the
Clean School Bus Diesel Retrofit Grant Program in Goal 1. Retrofitting school buses
will allow areas to achieve reductions hi toxics emissions that affect children.
(+$64,800, +0.5 FTE): Increased resources will be used to help manage the Agency's
Environmental Justice Small Grants program.
(-$700,000, -0 FTE): Resources redirected to the International Capacity Building
Program/Project to emphasize significant capacity issues along the U.S.-Mexico border.
73 U.S. EPA, Office of Regional Operations, (202) 564-3100
IV-94
-------
There are additional increases for payroll, cost-of-living, and enrichment for existing
FTE.
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
GOAL: HEALTHY COMMUNITIES AND ECOSYSTEMS
OBJECTIVE: COMMUNITY HEALTH
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
U.S. - Mexico Border Water/Wastewater Infrastructure
In 2005 In the US-Mexico Border Region, sustain and restore community health, and preserve the ecological systems that support them
In 2004 Increase the number of residents in the Mexico border area who are protected from health risks, beach pollution and damaged
ecosystems from nonexistent and failing water and wastewater treatment infrastructure by providing improved water and
wastewater service.
In 2003 Increase the number of residents in the Mexico border area who are protected from health risks, beach poEution and damaged
ecosystems from nonexistent and failing water and wastewater treatment infrastructure by providing improved water and
wastewater service.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Enacted Pres. Bud. Request
People in the Mexico border area protected from health risks 1.5 Million People
because of adequate water and wastewater sanitation systems
funded through the Border Environmental Infrastructure
Fund.
Number of additional people in Mexico border area protected 900,000 990,000 People
from health risks, because of adequate water & wastewater
sanitation systems funded through border environmental
infrastructure funding.
Baseline: The US-Mexico border region extends more than 3,100 kilometers (2,000 miles) from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific Ocean,
and 62.5 miles on each side of the international border. More than 11.8 million people reside along the border and this figure is
expected to increase to 19.4 million by 2020. Ninety percent of the population reside in the 14 impaired, interdependent sister
cities. Rapid population growth in urban areas has resulted in unplanned development, greater demand for land and energy,
increased traffic congestion, increased waste generation, overburdened or unavailable waste treatment and disposal facilities, and
more frequent chemical emergencies. Rural areas suffer from exposure to airborne dust, pesticide use, and inadequate water
supply and treatment facilities. EPA, other US Federal agencies, and the Government of Mexico have partnered to address these
environmental problems.
World Trade Organization - Regulatory System
In 2005 Assist trade partner countries in completing environmental reviews
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Enacted Pres. Bud. Request
Number of environmental reviews initiated by FTAA 3 Countries
countries following the enactment of the 2002 Trade
Promotion Act (TPA).
Baseline: As of the end of FY 2003, two environmental reviews (Chile and Singapore) have been initiated since the enactment of the 2002
Trade Promotion Act.
Revitalize Properties
In 2005 Leverage jobs by assessing, promoting the cleanup and reuse of brownfields properties.
hi 2004 Leverage jobs through revitalization efforts.
In 2004 Leverage or generate funds through revitalization efforts.
La 2004 Make Brownfields property acres available for reuse or continued use.
IV-95
-------
In 2003 Leverage jobs through revitalization efforts.
In 2003 Leverage or generate $0.9 B through revitalization efforts.
Performance Measures:
Number of Brownfields properties assessed.
Number of Brownfields cleanup grants awarded.
Number of properties cleaned up using Brownfields funding.
Estimated number of Brownfield property acres available for
reuse or continued use.
Number of jobs leveraged from Brownfields activities.
Number of Brownfields job training participants trained.
Percentage of Brownfields job training trainees placed.
Amount of cleanup and redevelopment funds leveraged at
Brownfields sites.
Number of Tribes supported by Brownfields cooperative
agreements.
FY 2003
Enacted
472(qtr3)
1,202 (qtr 3)
62%(qtr3)
$0.3B(qtr3)
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
1,000
25
no target
no target
2,000
200
65%
S0.9B
FY2005
Request
1,000
25
60
no target
5,000
200
65%
SLOB
assessments
grants
properties
acres
jobs
participants
trainees placed
funds
no target
Tribes
Baseline: By the end of FY 2002, the Brownfields program had leveraged 19,646 jobs, provided job training to 913 individuals, placed an
average of 65% of job training participants, and leveraged a total of $6.7 billion. Data reported for FY 2002 reflect
accomplishments up to the 3rd quarter of FY 2002.
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
FY 2005 Performance Measure:
• Number of Brownfields properties assessed.
• Number of jobs leveraged from Brownfields activities.
• Number of properties cleaned up using Brownfields funding.
• Percentage of Brownfields job training trainees placed.
• Amount of cleanup and redevelopment funds leveraged at Brownfields sites.
Performance Database: The Brownfields Management System (BMS) contains the
performance information identified in the above measures.
Key fields related to performance measures include:
AP 5 - Number of Properties with Assessment Completed with Pilot Funding
AP 11 - Number of Cleanup/Construction Jobs Leveraged
AP 12 - Number of Cleanup Dollars Leveraged
AP 13 - Number of Redevelopment Jobs Leveraged
AP 14 - Number of Redevelopment/Construction Dollars Leveraged
JT 2 - Number of Participants Completing Training
JT 3 - Number of Participants Obtaining Employment
RLF - Number of Properties with cleanup activities completed using Brownfields Cleanup
Revolving Loan Fund funds.
Data Source: Data are extracted from quarterly reports prepared by Cooperative Agreement
Award Recipients
IV-96
-------
Methods, Assumptions and Sustainability: Cooperative Agreement Award Recipients submit
reports quarterly on project progress. Data on performance measures are extracted from
quarterly reports by an EPA contractor. Afterwards, data are forwarded to Regional Pilot
managers for review and finalization.
"Number of jobs leveraged from Brownfields activities" is the aggregate of the "Number of
redevelopment jobs leveraged" and the "Number of cleanup/construction jobs leveraged."
"Amount of cleanup and redevelopment funds leveraged at Brownfields sites" is the aggregate of
"Number of Cleanup Dollars Leveraged" and the "Number of Redevelopment/Construction
Dollars Leveraged." "Percentage of Brownfields job training trainees placed" based on the
"Number of Participants Completing Training" and the "Number of Participants Obtaining
Employment." "Number of properties cleaned up using Brownfields funding" is the aggregate of
"Number of Properties with cleanup activities completed using BCRLF funds" and the number
of properties cleaned up using cleanup grant funding (to be included in amended database. See
"New and Improved Data or Systems").
QA/QC Procedures: Data reported by cooperative award agreement recipients are reviewed by
EPA Regional pilot managers for accuracy and to ensure appropriate interpretation of key
measure definitions. Reports are produced monthly with detailed data trends analysis.
Data Quality Reviews: No external reviews.
Data Limitations: All data provided voluntarily.
Error Estimate: NA
New/Improved Data or Systems: The Brownfields Management System (BMS) has been
migrated to an oracle platform and is currently being modified to include all reporting elements
required in grantee terms and conditions. Key field definitions will be updated.
References: NA
FY 2005 Performance Measure: People in the Mexico border area connected to potable
water and wastewater collection and treatment systems (cumulative).
Performance Database: No formal EPA database. Performance is tracked and reported
quarterly by Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC) and North American
Development Bank (NADBank). Data field is A population -served by potable water and
wastewater collection and treatment systems.
Data Source: 1) U.S. population figures from the 2000 U.S. Census [Reference A, below]; 2)
Data on U.S. and Mexican populations served by "certified" water/wastewater treatment
improvements from the BECC; 3) Data on projects funded from the NADBank.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: Summation of population from BECC and NADBank.
U.S. Census data are assumed to be correct and suitable.
IV-97
-------
QA/QC Procedures: EPA Headquarters is responsible for evaluation of reports from BECC and
NADBank on drinking water and wastewater sanitation projects. Regional representatives attend
meetings of the certifying and financing entities for border projects (BECC and NADBank) and
conduct site visits of projects underway to ensure the accuracy of information reported.
[Reference B]
Data Quality Review: Regional representatives attend meetings of the certifying and financing
entities for border projects (BECC and NADBank) and conduct site visits of projects underway
to ensure the accuracy of information reported.
Data Limitations: None
Error Estimate: Same as census data.
New/Improved Data or Systems: None.
References:
A. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1990). Institute National de Estadistica, Geografia y Informatica, Aguascalientes,
Total Population by State (1990).
B. Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC), Cd Juarez, Chih, and North
American Development Bank (NADBank), (San Antonio, TX, 2002).
FY 2005 External Performance Measure: Assist trade partner countries in completing
environmental reviews.
Performance Database: None- Manual Collection
Data Source: Project / Trade Agreement Specific
QA/QC Procedures: Verification does not involve any pollutant database analysis, but will
require objective assessment of: (1) tasks completed, (2) compliance with new regulation, and
(3) progress toward project goals and objectives.
Validating measurements under international programs presents several challenges. Technical
assistance projects, for instance, typically target developing countries, which often do not have
sound data collection and analysis systems in place. Non-technical projects, such as assistance in
regulatory reform, frequently must rely on more subjective measures of change, such as the
opinions of project staff or reviews by third-party organizations, including other U.S.
government organizations, hi judging the long-term efficacy of the assistance provided.
EPA works with its trading partners on capacity building projects, which establish the framework
and tools to ensure increased trade does not degrade the environment and harm human health.
Projects will help prevent pollution at the source, and will be tailored to partner-country needs
and be built on past US assistance. Tracking development and implementation of these projects
presents few challenges because EPA project staff maintains close contact with their counterparts
and any changes become part of a public record. Assessing the effectiveness of these projects or
FV-98
-------
the inclusion of environmental provisions in trade agreements is more subjective. Aside from
feedback from Agency project staff, EPA relies, in part, on feedback from its trading partners in
the target countries and regions and from non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and other
third parties. Because EPA works to establish long-term relationships with its trading partners,
the Agency is often able to assess environmental improvements in these countries and regions for
a number of years following implementation of the trade agreement.
EFFICIENCY MEASURES/MEAUSREMENT DEVELOPMENT PLANS
The Agency will work to develop and support the measurement of surface water quality
along the Mexican Border. In the 2003 Strategic Plan, EPA commits by 2012 to assessing
significant shared and transboundary surface waters and to achieving a majority of water quality
standards currently being exceeded in those waters. In FY 2005, a work group will be established
with Mexico and a work plan developed to measure annual progress toward this target. The
workplan will cover both the achievement of the target and its measurement. As a binational
plan, success will depend equally on U.S. and Mexican government resources and actions. In
addition, the Mexican Border program will be proposing an efficiency measure as part of the FY
06 PART process.
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
In November 2002, the EPA Administrator announced the Brownfields Federal
Partnership Action Agenda. This involves 23 Federal agencies contributing resources and
technical assistance to Brownfields redevelopment. Federal resources include: redevelopment
funds from the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Economic Development
Agency; planning funds from the Economic Development Agency and job training efforts from
the Department of Labor and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.
EPA and these other Federal agencies will continue to provide active support for
Brownfields activities across the country in FY 2005. To augment the success of the
Brownfields Federal Partnership and its efforts to clean up and redevelop Brownfields properties,
the Agency and its Federal partners continue to revise and enter into new Memoranda-of-
Understanding.
The Brownfields program also relies on partnership building with local government,
state, and non-government groups to leverage Federal funding with private sector funding. As
part of the Brownfields initiative, EPA will continue to provide outreach, curriculum
development, job training, and technical assistance to community residents through cooperative
agreements to community-based organizations, community colleges, universities, and private
sector non-profit groups. The Agency also works with cities, states, federally recognized Indian
Tribes, community representatives, and other stakeholders to implement the many commitments.
Successful Brownfields redevelopment is proof that economic .development and environmental
protection go hand hi hand.
IV-99
-------
EPA's environmental mandate and expertise make it uniquely qualified to represent the
nation's environmental interests abroad. While the Department of State (DOS) is responsible for
the conduct of overall U.S. foreign policy, implementation of particular programs, projects, and
agreements is often the responsibility of other agencies with specific technical expertise and
resources. Relations between EPA and DOS cut across several offices and/or bureaus in both
organizations.
EPA works extensively with the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR),
particularly its Office of Environmental and Natural Resources, to ensure that U.S. trade and
environmental polices are mutually supportive. For example, through the Agency's participation
in the negotiation of both the North American Free Trade Agreement and the World Trade
Organization Agreements, EPA has worked with USTR to ensure that U.S. obligations under
international trade agreements do not hamper the ability of Federal and state governments to
maintain high levels of domestic environmental protection. The two agencies also work together
to ensure that new obligations are consistent with U.S. law and EPA's rules, regulations, and
programs. In addition to the work with USTR, EPA also cooperates with many other Federal
agencies in the development and execution of US trade policy, and in performing environmental
reviews of proposed trade agreements. Moreover, EPA works closely with the Department of
State and USAID in developing and implementing environmental cooperation agreements
associated with each new FT A, and the associated environmental capacity building projects.
EPA and the Department of Commerce work together closely on a range of different
issues, including many science and technology issues. For example, EPA is responsible for
implementing activities under the Export
Enhancement Act of 1992. The Act
mandated EPA participation on the
Environmental Trade Working Group of
the Trade Promotion Coordinating
Committee, an interagency working group
chaired by the Secretary of Commerce to
coordinate the government's overall
environmental trade promotion activities.
Cumulative Population Benefited by
BEIF Funding
5.6
1999 2000 2001
Population in Millions
The Governments of Mexico and
the United States agreed, in November 1993, to assist communities on both sides of the border in
coordinating and carrying out environmental infrastructure projects. The agreement between
Mexico and the United States furthers the goals of the North American Free Trade Agreement
and the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation. To this purpose, the
governments established two international institutions, the Border Environmental Cooperation
Commission (BECC) and the North American Development Bank (NADBank), which manages
the Border Environmental Infrastructure Fund (BEIF), to support the financing and construction
of much need environmental infrastructure.
The BECC, with headquarters in Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua,. Mexico, assists local
communities and other sponsors in developing and implementing environmental infrastructure
projects. As of August 31, 2003, EPA has provided $38.7 million to the BECC project
development fund. The BECC also certifies projects as eligible for NADBank financing. The
NADBank, with headquarters in San Antonio, Texas, is capitalized in equal shares by the United
FV-100
-------
States and Mexico. NADBank provides new financing to supplement existing sources of funds
and foster the expanded participation of private capital. As of August 31, 2003, EPA has
provided $437.6 million to NADBank through the BEIF which then issues border grants for
individual projects on the agency's behalf.
A significant number of residents along the U.S.-Mexico border area are without basic
services such as potable water and wastewater treatment and the problem has become
progressively worse in the last few decades. Over the last several years, EPA has continued to
work with the U.S. and Mexican Sections of the International Boundary and Water Commission
to further efforts to improve water and wastewater services to communities within 100 km of the
U.S.-Mexico border. Recently, EPA has been involved hi efforts to plan, design and construct
more than 10 water and wastewater facilities in the border region.
The Administrator co-chairs, along with the Secretary of the Department of Health and
Human Services, the President's Task Force on Environmental Health and Safety Risks to
Children. About 15 Federal cabinet departments, agencies and White House offices are
members of the Task Force.
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
Annual Appropriations Act
Clean Air Act
Clean Water Act
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA)
as amended by the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act
(SBLRBRA) (Public Law 107-118).
Computer Security Act
Congressional Review Act
Congressional Review Act
Contract law
CPRKAofl986
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) section 313 (42 U.S.C.
110001-11050)
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) section 313 (42 U.S.C.
110001-11050)
Enterprise for the Americas Initiative Act (7 U.S.C. 5404)
Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration Act (ERDDA) of 1981
EPA's Assistance Regulations
EPA's Environmental Statues
Executive Order 12866
Executive Order 12915 - Federal Implementation of the North American Agreement on
Environmental Cooperation
Executive Order 12916 - Implementation of the Border Environment Cooperation Commission
and the North American Development Bank Plain Language Executive Order
Executive Order 13148, "Greening the Government through Leadership in Environmental
Management"
Federal Acquisition Regulations
FV-101
-------
Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (5 U.S.C. App.)
Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA)
Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA)
Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA)
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552)
Government Management Reform Act (1990)
Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA)
National Environmental Education Act
National Environmental Policy Act
North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation
North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation
North American Free Trade Agreement
Paperwork Reduction Act Amendment of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520)
Pollution Prevention Act (PPA) (42 U.S.C. 13101-13109)
PPA (42 U.S.C. 13101-13109)
Privacy Act
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 8001.
Safe Drinking Water Act
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
Toxic Substance Control Act section 14 (TSCA) (15 U.S.C. 2601-2692)
Toxic Substances Control Act
Trade Act of 2002 (TPA)
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
World Trade Organization Agreements
IV-102
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems
OBJECTIVE: Ecosystems
Protect, sustain, and restore the health of natural habitats and ecosystems.
Resource Summary
(Dollars in Thousands)
Ecosystems
Environmental Program & Management
Buildings & Facilities
State & Tribal Assistance Grants
Inspector General
Total Workyears
FY2003
Actuals
$171,169.4
$142,880.5
$325.5
$27,146.2
$817.2
546.0
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$160,698.1
$119,336.0
$386.5
$40,000.0
$975.6
384.8
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
$200,844.5
$154,173.6
$422.6
$45,000.0
$1248.4
390.8
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$40,146.5
$34,837.6
$36.1
$5,000.0
$272.8
5.9
Program Project
(Dollars in Thousands)
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Geographic Program: Other
Regional Geographic Initiatives
Categorical Grant: Wetlands Program
Development
Categorical Grant: Targeted Watersheds
Geographic Program: Chesapeake Bay
Geographic Program: Great Lakes
Geographic Program: Gulf of Mexico
Geographic Program: Lake Champlain
Geographic Program: Long Island Sound
Great Lakes Legacy Act
National Estuary Program / Coastal Waterways
Wetlands
Administrative Projects
TOTAL
FY 2003
Actuals
$16,157.3
$5,731.7
$6,855.9
$14,206.2
$12,940.0
$21,755.2
$16,810.7
$4,383.0
$2,666.6
$2,225.5
$0.0
$22,712.0
$17,129.2
$27,596.1
$171,169.4
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$0.0
$4,762.5
$0.0
$20,000.0
$20,000.0
$20,777.7
$18,104.2
$4,431.7
$954.8
$477.4
$15,000.0
$19,094.2
$19,299.9
$17,795.7
$160,698.1
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$0.0
$4,789.7
$0.0
$20,000.0
$25,000.0
$20,816.6
$21,194.8
$4,477.8
$954.8
$477.4
$45,000.0
$19,229.3
$19,752.8
$19,151.3
$200,844.5
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$0.0
$27.2
$0.0
$0.0
$5,000.0
$38.9
$3,090.6
$46.1
$0.0
$0.0
$30,000.0
$135.1
$452.9
$1,355.7
$40,146.5
rv-103
-------
FY 2005 REQUEST
Results to be Achieved under this Objective
EPA is working to protect, sustain, and restore the health of natural habitats and
ecosystems by identifying and evaluating problem areas, developing tools, and improving
community capacity to address problems. Special emphasis on these varied placed-based
ecosystem protection efforts provides the opportunity not only to have necessary heightened
Federal involvement in critical watersheds, but also to develop and implement water quality
control practices and other ecosystem management tools whose successes can be transferred to
other place-based efforts nationwide. Actions in these targeted areas will support the
achievement of goals to improve water quality, including improvements to overall aquatic
system health in coastal waters.
National Estuary Program
During the past decade, the U.S. has preserved, restored and/or created hundreds of
thousands of acres of habitat nationwide as part of the National Estuary Program (NEP). The
program focuses not just on improving water quality hi an estuary, but on maintaining the
integrity of the whole system -- its chemical, physical, and biological properties, as well as its
economic, recreational, and aesthetic values. Some of the mechanisms used to protect habitats
include land acquisition, conservation easements, and deed restrictions.
Estuaries are among the most 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 rapidly increasing growth and development
along the Nation's coastlines. About half the U.S. population now lives in coastal areas, and
coastal counties are growing three times faster than counties elsewhere in the nation. Overuse of
resources and poor land use practices have resulted in beach and shellfish bed closings, harmful
algal blooms, unproductive fisheries, loss of habitat and wildlife, fish kills, and a host of other
human health and natural resource problems.
EPA plans to implement key activities74 under its flagship coastal watershed protection
effort, the NEP, to help address these growing threats to the Nation's estuarine resources. The
NEP, which provides inclusive, community-based planning and action at the watershed level, is
an important initiative in conserving our estuarine resources.
EPA will facilitate the ecosystem-scale protection and restoration of natural areas by
supporting continuing efforts of all 28 NEP estuaries to implement then1 Comprehensive
Conservation and Management Plans (CCMPs) to protect and restore estuarine resources. In
addition, the Agency will provide more focused support for several priority needs identified by
EPA and the NEP, including problems of invasive species, air deposition of pollutants such as
74 The means and strategies outlined here for achieving Sub-objective 4.3.1 must be viewed in tandem with the means and
strategies outlined under Goal 2, Objective 2, Sub-objective 2.2.2, Improve Ocean and Coastal Waters.® Sub-objective 2.2
contains strategic targets for EPA's vessel discharge, dredged material management, ocean disposal programs, and other ocean
and coastal programs, which are integral to the Agency's efforts to facilitating the ecosystem scale protection and restoration of
natural areas.
rv-104
-------
mercury and nitrogen, and nutrient over-enrichment. EPA will support estuaries in developing
aquatic nuisance species monitoring protocols and rapid response plans, improving mercury
deposition monitoring, and developing and implementing nutrient management strategies.
The health of the Nation's estuarine ecosystems also depends on the maintenance of
high-quality habitat. Diminished and degraded habitats are less able to support healthy
populations of wildlife and marine organisms and perform the economic, environmental, and
aesthetic functions on which coastal populations depend for their livelihood. EPA will facilitate
ecosystem-scale protection and restoration by supporting estuary efforts to achieve its habitat
restoration and protection goal of 250,000 additional acres by 2008. In FY 2005, EPA and its
partners will protect or restore an additional 25,000 acres of habitat.
Wetlands and Wetland Program Development Grants
Over the years, the United States has lost more than 115 million acres of wetlands to
development, agriculture, and other purposes.75 Today, the Nation still loses an estimated 58,000
acres of wetlands every year, while other wetlands are being degraded by excessive
sedimentation, nutrient over-enrichment, pesticides, invasive species, habitat loss and
fragmentation.76
The Administration has set the stage for a growing commitment to a regulatory program
aimed at no net loss of wetlands and to public and private, regulatory and non-regulatory
initiatives and partnerships to improve the overall condition of the Nation's wetlands. In
December 2003, the Administrator of EPA and the Assistant Secretary of the Army reiterated the
Administration's commitment to the goal of "no net loss" of wetlands, reaffirming and bolstering
protections for wetlands.
Because the Clean Water Act does not protect all wetlands, achieving the
Administration's commitment necessitates stronger state, Tribal and local programs to protect
the most vulnerable wetlands. In FY04 states are applying to be certified as eligible for grants
based upon comprehensive programs that meet environmental standards. Grant funds will help
states and tribes to protect wetlands that were once protected by federal agencies but are no
longer because of the Supreme Court's 2001 Decision hi Solid Waste Association of Northern
Cook County.
EPA will work with its state and Tribal partners to develop and implement broad-based
and integrated monitoring and assessment programs that improve data for decision-making
within the watersheds, address significant stressors, and report on condition. EPA will work to
achieve national gains hi wetlands acreage by implementing an innovative partner-based
wetlands and stream corridor restoration program. The Agency, working with the Corps of
Engineers, and other partners, will continue to implement the Administration's Mitigation Action
Plan and to build our capacity to measure wetland function and condition, in addition to
measuring wetland acreage. EPA's support will help avoid or minimize wetland losses, and
75 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:http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/othrdata/wetloss/wetloss.htm.
76 Dahl, T.E. 1990. Status and Trends of Wetlands in the Conterminous United States, 1986 to 1997. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Available online at:
http://wetlands.fws.gov/bha/SandT/SandTReport.html: Report to Congress on the Status and Trends of Wetlands in the
Conterminous United States, 1986 to 1997.
rv-105
-------
provide for full compensation for unavoidable losses of wetland functions. Wetlands and stream
corridor restoration will remain a focus for regaining lost aquatic resources.
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 more than 90 percent of the surface
freshwater in the United States. The watershed includes two nations, eight American states, a
Canadian province, more than 40 Tribes and is home to more than one-tenth of the U.S.
population. To further restore the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Great Lakes
ecosystem, EPA is implementing Clean Water Act core water protection programs and has
launched the Great Lakes Strategy 2002: A Plan for the New Millennium on behalf of the U.S.
Policy Committee.77 The Strategy presents a basin-wide vision for Great Lakes protection and
restoration, identifying the major environmental issues in the Great Lakes; establishing common
goals for Federal, state, and Tribal agencies; and helping to fulfill U.S. responsibilities under the
U.S.-Canada Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. Objectives include the clean up and de-
listing of at least 10 Areas of Concern by 2010, a 25 percent reduction in PCB concentrations in
lake trout and walleye (see graph below), and the restoration or enhancement of 100,000 acres of
wetlands within the Great Lakes basin. The Strategy also sets goals for the clean up of all Areas
of Concern by 2025, and for 90 percent of monitored Great Lakes beaches to be open 95 percent
of the season.
Poly-chlorinated biphenyis (PCBs)
Trends in Great Lakes fish tissue*
c
©
a
w
t
a
3
m
m
o
a.
Source: Great Lakes National Program Office annual monitoring program, Great Lakes Environmental Database
The Great Lakes Strategy incorporates the Great Lakes Binational. Toxics Strategy, a
groundbreaking international toxics reduction effort that targets a common set of persistent, toxic
77 U.S. Policy Committee for the Great Lakes. April 2002. A Strategic Plan for the Great Lakes Ecosystem. Washington, DC.
Available online at http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/gls/glsvideotest.html.
rv-106
-------
substances for reduction and elimination (http://www.epa.gov/gmpo^s/documents.html).78 The
Toxics Strategy applies voluntary and regulatory tools focused on pollution prevention to a
targeted set of substances including mercury, PCBs, dioxins/furans, and certain canceled
pesticides. The Strategy outlines activities for states, industry, Tribes, non-governmental
organizations, and other stakeholders.
GLNPO will lead development of management recommendations to address the
inexplicably low dissolved-oxygen levels in Lake Erie, which have resulted in an increasing
"dead zone." Despite U.S. and Canadian success in achieving total phosphorus load reductions,
phosphorus in the central basin of Lake Erie has increased since the early 1990's to levels
substantially in excess of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement Objective of lOug-P/1 (see
Figure 1). During 2004, GLNPO will cooperate with Environment Canada on several targeted
projects in Lake Erie. For 2005, research will center on data necessary to update mathematical
models of Lake Erie's response to nutrients, and the updating of the models for management use.
20
Figure 1: Central Lake Erie Total Phosphorus
Spring 1983-2003
0)
10
a.
0
o
JC
Q.
"WQ Objective
y = -0.733x +14.19
-p-
-------
partners will have remediated a cumulative total of 2.9 million cubic yards of contaminated
sediments since tracking began in 1997. In the second year of this program, EPA will support
six projects for remediation which would result in cleanup of a quarter million cubic yards of
contaminated sediments.
Chesapeake Bay
EPA's work in the Chesapeake Bay is based on a unique regional partnership formed to
direct and conduct restoration of the Chesapeake Bay. Partners include Maryland, Virginia and
Pennsylvania; the District of Columbia; the Chesapeake Bay Commission, a tri-state legislative
body; EPA, which represents the Federal government; and participating citizen advisory groups.
A comprehensive and far-reaching agreement will guide their restoration and protection efforts
through 2010. That agreement, Chesapeake 2000, focuses on improving water quality as the
most critical element in the overall protection and restoration of the Bay and its tributaries.
One of the key measures of success in achieving improved Bay water quality will be the
restoration of submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV). SAV is one of the most important biological
communities in the Bay, producing oxygen, nourishing a variety of animals, providing shelter
and nursery areas for fish and shellfish, reducing wave action and shoreline erosion, absorbing
nutrients such as phosphorus and nitrogen, and trapping sediments. While recent improvements
in water quality have contributed to a resurgence in SAV (from a low of 38,000 acres in 1984 to
more than 89,000 acres today), more improvements are needed. As a measure of unproved water
quality in the Bay, in FY 2005, there will be 91,000 acres of SAV.
Acres of Bay Grasses
180 -
"£• 160 -
CD 140 -
o
g 120 -
^x 100 -
CD
80 -
w
1 60 H
o
3- 4M
CO
20 -
0
Restoration Goal (185,000 acres by 2010)
*Note - Hatched area of bar includes estimated additional acreage. No sinvey in 1988.
Source: Chesapeake Bay Program.
GOAL: 185,000 acres by
2010.
STATUS: Total acreage in
2002 is estimated to be
89,658. The increases
seen in 2001 and 2002
reflect a strong recovery
of grasses in portions of
the middle Bay.
rv-108
-------
To achieve improved water quality and restore submerged aquatic vegetation, Bay
partners have committed to reducing nutrient and sediment pollution loads sufficiently to remove
the Bay and the tidal portions of its tributaries from the list of unpaired waters. Key elements of
state strategies to achieve these reductions include implementing advanced treatment of
wastewater to reduce nutrient discharges, a range of management practices to reduce nutrients
and sediments from farms, and the restoration and protection of riparian forests that serve as a
buffer against sediment and nutrient pollution that enters waterways from the land.
EPA has identified a number of actions that will contribute to achievement of the
program goals. For example, EPA will work with the Bay Program partners to implement a
SAV strategy and water quality criteria for protecting SAV; collaborate with the U.S. Forest
Service to ensure effective strategies to conserve forest buffers; and ensure that states are
implementing existing tributary strategies and are on schedule to implement new water quality
standards/allocations through e.g., installation of biological nutrient removal at wastewater
treatment facilities and effective storm water and CAFO permits.
Gulf of Mexico
EPA's efforts in the Gulf of Mexico directly support a broad multi-organizational Gulf
states-led partnership comprised of regional; business and industry; agriculture; State and local
government; citizens; environmental and fishery interests; and, numerous Federal departments
and agencies. EPA provides the underlying facilitation and technical support necessary to
empower and exploit the partnership's capacity to protect and restore the health and productivity
of this complex ecosystem in ways consistent with the economic well-being of the region.
Through this collaborative framework, the Gulf States strategically identify the key
environmental issues and work at the regional, state, and local level to define, recommend, and
voluntarily implement the supporting solutions.
25000
Gulf of Mexico issues can be broadly
categorized as affecting water quality,
public health, and habitat loss. Actions
identified by the Gulf of Mexico Program
and its partners support efforts to restore
unpaired waterbodies to achieve levels
that meet state water quality standards
and strengthen Clean Water
implementation; to increase acres of coastal
wetland habitats; to reduce contamination of
reduce nutrient loadings to watersheds; and, to
Area! Extent of Hypoxic Zone 1985 - 2003
Act
local {sourco.w.Ra&a/a/s.tuMcow; beaches; to
initiate and lead efforts to address multi-
jurisdictional problems such as the hypoxic zone in the Gulf of Mexico. A continued focus on
protecting and restoring aquatic life and recreational uses ensures that local communities directly
benefit from an improved quality of life and that the Gulf as a whole ultimately benefits from the
culmination of community watershed restoration efforts. These local efforts substantially
increase regional understanding of the Gulf as an ecological system and lead to improved
capabilities to assess, evaluate, manage, and communicate progress.
IV-109
-------
Other Geographic Areas/Targeted Watershed Grants
EPA will continue efforts to provide targeted support to special ecosystems, including
those with statutorily authorized protection programs. Efforts in Lake Champlain will continue
to support the successful interstate, interagency, and international partnership undertaking the
implementation of "Opportunities for Action," a plan designed to address various threats to the
Lake's water quality, including phosphorus loadings, invasive species and toxic substances.
EPA will also provide targeted support to the Long Island Sound, continuing implementation of
the Sound's Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP), approved in 1994.
Activities will focus on six areas identified in the plan as requiring special attention: hypoxia,
toxic contamination, pathogens, floatable debris, the impact of habitat degradation on the health
of living resources, and land use and development.
Our Targeted Watershed Grants program will enter its third year, supporting competitive
grants to watershed stakeholders ready to undertake immediate action to improve water quality
and to improve watershed protection measures with tools, training and technical assistance. Of
these funds, $10 million will be set-aside for a new regional pilot program. For 2005, the pilot
will take place in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, and will focus on helping publicly-owned
treatment works (POTWs) reduce nutrient discharges to the Bay through nonpoint source
projects. In addition, the Targeted Watersheds program will give special emphasis to projects
that promote water quality trading opportunities to more efficiently achieve water quality
benefits through market-based approaches. Projects will demonstrate the effectiveness of these
approaches, with a particular emphasis on trades involving both point and nonpoint sources of
pollution.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
• +$30,000,000: Will support contaminated sediment remediation pursuant to the Great
Lakes Legacy Act, including additional contaminated sediment cleanups, site
assessments, alternatives analyses, and remedial design at Great Lakes Areas of Concern.
• +$3,000,000: Will support Lakewide Management Plan and Remedial Action Plan
implementation by re-building State and local capacity for Great Lakes restoration and
initiation of projects to restore impaired beneficial uses (e.g., addressing beach closings,
tainted fish and improving habitat) at Great Lakes Areas of Concern.
• There are increases for payroll, cost of living and enrichment for existing FTE.
STAG
• +$5,000,000: For Targeted Watershed Grants (supplemented by a redirection within the
base of an additional $5,000,000) to help municipalities meet requirements for nutrient
loading reductions.
FV-110
-------
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
GOAL: HEALTHY COMMUNITIES AND ECOSYSTEMS
OBJECTIVE: ECOSYSTEMS
Protecting and Enhancing Estuaries
In 2005 Working with NEP partners, protect or restore an additional 25,000 acres of habitat within the study areas for the 28 estuaries
that are part of the National Estuary Program (NEP).
In 2004 Restore and protect estuaries through the implementation of Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plans (CCMPs).
In 2003 Restored and protected estuaries through the implementation of Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plans (CCMPs).
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Acres of habitat restored and protected nationwide as part of 118,171 25,000 25,000 Acres
the National Estuary Program, (incremental)
Baseline: As of January 2000, there were over 600,000 acres of habitat preserved, restored, and/or created.
Gulf of Mexico
In 2005 Prevent water pollution and protect aquatic species in order to improve the health of the Gulf of Mexico.
In 2004 Assist the Gulf States in implementing watershed restoration actions in 14 priority impaired coastal river and estuary segments.
In 2003 Assisted the Gulf States in implementing watershed restoration actions in 14 priority unpaired coastal river and estuary
segments.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Impaired Gulf coastal river and estuary segments 95 71/5yrrollavg Segments
implementing watershed restoration actions (incremental).
Reduce releases of nutrients throughout the Mississippi River Less than KM2
Basin that affect the size of the hypoxic zone in the Gulf of 14,128
Mexico, as measured by the five year running average
Baseline: There are 95 coastal watersheds at the 8-digit hydrologic unit code (HUC) scale on the Gulf coast. The Gulf of Mexico Program
has identified 12 priority coastal areas for assistance. These 12 areas include 30 of the 95 coastal watersheds. Within the 30
priority watersheds, the Gulf States have identified 354 segments that are impaired and not meeting full designated uses under
the States' water quality standards. The 1996-2000 running average size = 14,128 km2.
Wetland and River Corridor Projects
In 2005 Working with partners, achieve a no net loss of wetlands.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Annually, in partnership with the Corps of Engineers and No Net Loss Acres
States, achieve no net loss of wetlands in the Clean Water
Act section 404 regulatory program
Working with partners, achieve no net loss of wetland acres No Net Loss Acres
Baseline: Annual net loss of an estimated 58,500 acres. In partnership with the Corps of Engineers, a baseline and initial reporting will
begin in FY 2004 on net loss of wetlands in the CWA Section 404 regulatory programs.
Great Lakes Assessment and Implementation Actions
In 2005 Prevent water pollution and protect aquatic systems so that overall ecosystem health of the Great Lakes is improved by at least 1
point.
In 2004 Great Lakes ecosystem components will improve, including progress on fish contaminants, beach closures, air toxics, and
trophic status.
rv-iii
-------
In 2003 End of year data will be available in 2004 to verify that Great Lakes ecosystem components have improved, including progress
on fish contaminants, beach closures, air toxics, and trophic status.
Performance Measures:
Long-term concentration trends of toxics (PCBs) in Great
Lakes top predator fish.
Long-term concentration trends of toxic chemicals in the air.
Total phosphorus concentrations (long-term) in the Lake Erie
Central Basin.
Average concentrations of PCBs in whole lake trout and
walleye samples will decline.
Average concentrations of toxic chemicals in the air in the
Great Lakes basin will decline
Restore and delist Areas of Concern (AOCs) within the Great
Lakes basin
Cubic yards (in millions) of contaminated sediment
remediated in the Great Lakes (cumulative from 1997).
FY2003
Actuals
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
Data Lag
Data Lag
18.4
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
5%
7%
10
5%
5%
3
2.9
Annual decrease
Annual decrease
Ug/1
Annual Decrease
Annual Decrease
AOC
Cubic Yards/M
Baseline: In 2003, Great Lakes rating of 20 on a 40 point scale where the rating uses select 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. The trend (starting with 1972 data)
for toxics in Great Lakes top predator fish is expected to be less than 2 parts per million (the FDA action level) but far above the
Great Lakes Initiative target or levels at which fish advisories can be removed. The trend (starting with 1992 data) for PCB
concentrations in the air is expected to range from 50 to 250 picograms per cubic meter. In 2002, no Areas of Concern had been
delisted. 2.1 million yards of remediated sediments are the cumulative number of yards from 1997 - 2001.
Chesapeake Bay Habitat
In 2005 Prevent water pollution and protect aquatic systems so that overall aquatic system health of the Chesapeake Bay is improved
enough so that there are 91,000 acres of submerged aquatic vegetation, (cumulative)
In 2005 Reduce nitrogen loads by 74 million pounds per year; phosphorus loads by 8.7 million pounds per year, and sediment loads by
1.06 million tons per year from entering the Chesapeake Bay, from 1985 levels
In 2004 Improve habitat hi the Chesapeake Bay.
In 2003 Improved habitat in the Chesapeake Bay.
Performance Measures:
Reduction, from 1985 levels, of nitrogen (M/lbs), phosphorus
(M/lbs), and sediment loads (tons) entering Chesapeake Bay.
(cumulative)
Acres of submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) present in the
Chesapeake Bay. (cumulative)
FY 2003
Actuals
89,659
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
90,000
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
74/8.7/1.06
91,000
Lbs/Lbs/Tons
Acres
Baseline: In 1984, there were 37,000 acres of submerged aquatic vegetation in the Chesapeake Bay. hi 2002, baseline for nitrogen loads
was 51 million pounds per year; phosphorus loads was 8.0 million pounds per year; and sediment loads was 0.8 million tons per
year.
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Acres of habitat restored and protected nationwide as
part of the National Estuary Program (NEP).
Performance Database: The Office of Wetlands Oceans and Watersheds has developed a
standardized format for data reporting and compilation, defining habitat protection and
restoration activities and specifying habitat categories. We have also designed a web page that,
hi an educational fashion with graphics and images, highlights habitat loss/alteration, as well as,
IV-112
-------
the number of habitat acres protected and restored by habitat type, based on specific NEP
reports. This enables EPA to provide a visual means of communicating NEP performance and
habitat protection and restoration progress to a wide range of stakeholders and decision-makers.
Data Source: NEP documents such as annual work plans (which contain achievements made hi
the previous year) and annual progress reports are used, along with other implementation
tracking materials, to document the number of acres of habitat restored and protected. EPA then
aggregates the data provided by each NEP to arrive at a national total for the entire Program.
EPA is confident that the data presented are as accurate as possible, based on review and
inspection by each NEP prior to reporting to EPA. In addition, EPA conducts regular reviews of
NEP implementation to help ensure that information provided in these documents is generally
accurate, and progress reported is in fact being achieved.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: Measuring the number of acres of habitat restored and
protected may not directly correlate to improvements in the health of the habitat reported, or of
the estuary overall, but it is a suitable measure of on-the-ground progress. We recognize that
habitat acreage does not necessarily correspond one-to-one with habitat quality, nor does habitat
(quantity or quality) represent the only indicator of ecosystem health. Nevertheless, habitat
acreage serves as an adequate surrogate, and is a suitable measure of on-the-ground progress
made toward EPA's annual performance goal of habitat protection and restoration in the NEP.
QA/QC Procedures: Primary data are prepared by the staff of the NEP based on their own
reports and from data supplied by other partnering agencies/organizations (that are responsible
for implementing the action resulting in habitat protection and restoration). The NEP staff is
requested to follow guidance provided by EPA to prepare their reports, and to verify the
numbers. EPA then confirms that the national total accurately reflects the information submitted
by each program. The Office of Water Quality Management Plan (QMP), renewed every five
years, was approved in July 2001. EPA requires that each organization prepare a document
called a quality management plan (QMP) that: documents the organization's quality policy;
describes its quality system; and identifies the environmental programs to which the quality
system applies (e.g., those programs that involves the collection or use of environmental data.)
Data Quality Review: No audits or quality reviews conducted yet.
Data Limitations: It is still early to determine the full extent of data limitations. Current data
limitations include: information that may be reported inconsistently (based on different
interpretations of the protection and restoration definitions), acreage that may be miscalculated
or misreported, and acreage that may be double counted (same parcel may also be counted by
parmering/implementing agency or need to be replanted multiple years). In addition, measuring
the number of acres of habitat restored and protected may not directly correlate to improvements
hi the health of the habitat reported (particularly hi the year of reporting), but is rather a measure
of on-the-ground progress made by the NEPs.
Error Estimate: No error estimate is available for this data.
New/Improved Data or Systems: We are examining the possibility of geo-referencing the data
hi a geographic information system (GIS).
IV-113
-------
References: Aggregate national and regional data for this measurement, as well as data
submitted by the individual National Estuary Programs, is displayed numerically, graphically,
and by habitat type in the Performance Indicators .Visualization and Outreach Tool (PIVOT).
PIVOT data is publicly available at
http://www.epa.gov/owow/estuaries/pivot/overview/intro.htm. The Office of Water Quality
Management Plan (July 2001) is available on the Intranet at
http://intranet.epa.gov/ow/infopolicy.html.
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Annually, beginning in FY04 and in partnership with the
Corps of Engineers and states, achieve no net loss of wetlands in the Clean Water Act
Section 404 regulatory program.
Performance Database: Since 1989, the goal of the Clean Water Act Section 404 program has
been no net loss of wetlands.
Historically, the Corps has collected limited data on wetlands losses and gains in its RAMS
permit tracking database. The Corps has compiled national Section 404 wetland permitting data
for the last 10 years reflecting wetland acres avoided (through the permit process), permitted for
impacts, and mitigated.
Corps national data for the last 10 years (1993-2002):
• 44,000 acres mitigated/year
• 6,000 acres avoided/year
= Total of 50,000 acres/year of wetlands offset or preserved while allowing for development
activities (approximately 24,000 acres of impacts authorized per year).
Data Source: Data included in RAMS is generally collected by private consultants hired by
permit applicants or Corps Regulatory Staff. Data input is generally done by Corps staff.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: RAMS was designed to be an administrative aid hi
tracking permits, thus it lacks many of the fields necessary to adequately track important
information regarding wetland losses and gains. Also, the database was modified differently for
each of the 38 Corps Districts making national summaries difficult. Furthermore, the database is
also proprietary making it difficult to retrofit without utilizing its original developers.
QA/QC Procedures! Historically, there has not been a high level of QA/QC with regard to data
input into RAMS. Its antiquated format and numerous administrative fields discourage use.
Lack of standard terms and classification also make all aspects of data entry problematic.
Data Quality Reviews: Independent evaluations published hi 2001 by the National Academy of
Sciences (NAS) and the General Accounting Office (GAO) provided a critical evaluation of the
effectiveness of wetlands compensatory mitigation (the restoration, creation, or enhancement of
wetlands to compensate for permitted wetland losses) for authorized losses of wetlands and other
waters under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The NAS determined that available data was
insufficient to determine whether or not the Section 404 program was meeting its goal of no net
loss of either wetland area or function. The NAS added that available data suggested that the
IV-114
-------
program was not meeting its no net loss goal. Among its suite of recommendations, the NAS
noted that wetland area and function lost and regained over time should be tracked in a national
database and that the Corps should expand and improve quality assurance measures for data
entry.
In response to the NAS, GAO, and other recent critiques of the effectiveness of wetlands
compensatory mitigation, EPA and the Corps hi conjunction with the Departments of
Agriculture, Commerce, Interior, and Transportation released the National Wetlands Mitigation
Action Plan on December 26, 2002. The Plan includes 17 tasks that the agencies will complete
over the next three years to improve the ecological performance and results of compensatory
mitigation.
One of the major goals articulated in the 2002 interagency National Wetlands Mitigation Action
Plan (MAP) is improving data collection and availability (including tracking and reporting on
acreage and function gains and losses). MAP includes three action items the agencies will
complete over the next two years that will improve their ability to track and report on wetlands
gains and losses. Additional details of the milestones shown below are contained in the MAP:
http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/guidance/index.htmlifenitigation.
• The Corps, EPA, USDA, DOI, and NOAA, in conjunction with states and Tribes,
compiling and disseminating information regarding existing mitigation-tracking database
systems in FY04.
• Building upon the analysis of existing mitigation data base systems, the Corps, EPA,
USDA, DOI, and NOAA will establish a shared mitigation database by FY05.
• Utilizing the shared database, the Corps, in conjunction with EPA, USDA, DOI, and
NOAA, will provide an annual public report card on compensatory mitigation to
complement reporting of other wetlands programs by FY05.
Data Limitations: As previously noted, RAMS currently provides the only national data on
wetlands losses and gains hi the Section 404 Program. Also, as previously noted, there are a
number of concerns regarding the conclusions that can be drawn from these numbers. Data
quality issues include:
1. Inability to separate restoration, creation, enhancement and preservation acreage from the
aggregate "mitigation" acreage reported
2. Lack of data regarding how much designated mitigation acreage was actually undertaken,
and how much of that total was successful
3. Lack of data regarding how much of the permitted impacts actually occurred, and
4. Limitations on identifying acres "avoided," as the figure is only based on the difference
between original proposed impacts and impacts authorized. Often, permit applicants who are
aware of the 404 program's requirements to avoid and minimize impacts to wetlands, make
initial site selection and site design decisions that minimize wetland impacts prior to
submitting a permit application. Such avoidance decisions benefit applicants, as then-
applications are more likely to be accepted and processed with minor changes. This
behavioral influence that the program engenders is difficult to capture and quantify, but
contributes considerable undocumented "avoided" impacts.
Error Estimate: Not applicable
IV-115
-------
New/Improved Data or Systems: The EPA and the Corps have acknowledged the need for
improved 404 tracking. Corps is currently piloting a new national permit tracking database
called ORM to replace its existing database (RAMS). As part of the MAP, the Corps is working
with EPA and the other Federal agencies and states to ensure that the version of ORM that is
ultimately deployed will adequately track wetlands gains and losses. ORM is being designed to
provide unproved tracking regarding:
• Type of impacts
• Type of habitat impacted (Using Hydrogeomorphic and Cowardin classification systems)
• Type of habitat mitigated (Using Hydrogeomorphic and Cowardin classification systems)
• Type of mitigation (restoration, creation, enhancement, or preservation)
• Amount of mitigation by type
• Differentiate stream mitigation (in linear feet) from wetlands mitigation (in acres)
• Spacial tracking via GIS for both impact and mitigation sites (planned)
References:
http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/guidance/index.htmltfmitigation
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Prevent water pollution and protect aquatic ecosystems so
that overall ecosystem health of the Great Lakes is improved.
Performance Database: US EPA's Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO) will collect
and track the components of the index and publish the performance results as part of annual
reporting under the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) and as online reporting of
GLNPO's monitoring program, . Extensive
databases for the indicator components are maintained by GLNPO (phosphorus concentrations,
contaminated sediments, benthic health, fish tissue contamination), by binational agreement with
Environment Canada (air toxics deposition) or other entities (coastal wetlands), and by local
authorities who provide data to EPA (drinking water quality, beach closures).
Data Source: Data for the index components are tracked internally and reported at the State of
the Lakes Ecosystem Conferences (SOLEC). The document, "Implementing Indicators 2003-A
Technical Report," presents detailed indicator reports as prepared by primary authors (attending
the conference), including references to data sources found in the summary document.
Methods, Assumptions, and Suitability: The Index is based on a 40 point scale where the
rating uses select Great Lakes State of the Lakes Ecosystem indicators (i.e., coastal wetlands,
phosphorus concentrations, Areas of Concern (AOC), sediment contamination, benthic health,
fish tissue contamination, beach closures, drinking water quality, and air toxics deposition).
Each component of the Index is based on a 1 to 5 rating system, where 1 is poor and 5 is good.
Authors of SOLEC indicator reports use best professional judgment to assess the overall status of
the ecosystem component in relation to established endpoints or ecosystem objectives, when
available. Each of the index components is included in the broader suite of Great Lakes
indicators, which was developed through an extensive multi-agency process to satisfy the overall
criteria of necessary, sufficient and feasible. Information on the selection process is hi the
document, "Selection of Indicators for Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem Health, Version 4."
IV-116
-------
QA/QC Procedures: GLNPO has an approved Quality Management system in place1 that
conforms to the EPA quality management order and is audited every 3 years in accordance with
Federal policy for Quality Management.
Data Quality Review: GLNPO's quality management system has been given "outstanding"
evaluations in previous peer and management reviews2. GLNPO has implemented all
recommendations from these external audits and complies with Agency Quality standards.
Data Limitations: Data limitations vary among the indicator components of the Index. The data
are especially good for phosphorus concentrations, fish tissue contamination, benthic health, and
air toxics deposition. The data associated with other components of the index (coastal wetlands,
AOC sediment contamination, beach closures, and drinking water quality) are more qualitative.
Some are distributed among several sources, and without an extensive trend line. Limitations for
each of the index components are included in the formal indicator descriptions in the document,
"Selection of Indicators for Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem Health, Version 4."
Error Estimate:
Error statistics for the Great Lakes Index have not been quantified. Each unit of the 40 point
scale represents 2.5% of the total, so any unit change in the assessment of one of the component
indicators would result in a change of the index of that magnitude. The degree of environmental
change required to affect an indicator assessment, however, may be significantly large.
New/Improved Data or Systems: The data system specifically for this index is being
developed. Data continue to be collected through the SOLEC process by various agencies,
including GLNPO. Efforts are currently hi progress to integrate various Great Lakes monitoring
programs to better meet SOLEC objectives and to increase efficiencies hi data collection and
reporting.
References:
1. "Quality Management Plan for the Great Lakes National Program Office." EPA905-R-02-
009. October 2002, Approved April 2003.
2. "GLNPO Management Systems Review of 1999. " Unpublished - hi USEPA Great Lakes
National Program Office files.
3. Canada and the United States. "State of the Great Lakes 2003." ISBN 0-662-34798-6,
Environment Canada, Burlington, Ontario, Cat. No. En40-l 1/35-2003E, and U.S.
4. Environmental Protection Agency, Chicago, EPA 905-R-03-004. 2003. Available on CD
and online at .
5. Canada and the United States. "Implementing Indicators 2003 - A Technical Report." ISBN
0-662-34797-8 (CD-Rom), Environment Canada, Burlington, Ontario, Cat. No. Enl64-
1/2003E-MRC (CD-Rom), and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Chicago, EPA 905-
R-03-003. 2003. Available on CD from U.S. EPA/Great Lakes National Program Office,
Chicago.
6. Bertram, Paul and Nancy Stadler-Salt. "Selection of Indicators for Great Lakes Basin
FV-117
-------
Ecosystem Health, Version 4." Environment Canada, Burlington, Ontario, and U.S. EPA,
Chicago. 2000. Available online at .
FY 2005 Performance Measure: The average concentrations of PCBs in whole lake trout
and walleye.
Performance Database: Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO) base monitoring
program1. The key fields for this measure are Lake Trout and Walleye (Lake Erie). Reporting
starts with 1972 data for Lake Michigan and 1977 or 1978 data for the other Lakes. In FY05, the
database will contain QA/QC data from fish collected in 2003.
Data Source: GLNPO's ongoing base monitoring program, which has included work with
cooperating organizations such as the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Survey (USFWS).
Methods, Assumptions, and Suitability: This indicator provides concentrations of selected
organic contaminants in sport fish from the Great Lakes to: (1) determine time trends hi
contaminant concentrations, (2) assess impacts of contaminants on the fishery, and (3) to assess
potential human and wildlife exposures from consuming contaminated sport fish. The data
provide two elements of contaminant concentrations: The first element includes data from 600-
700 mm lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush) whole fish composites (5 fish) from each of the lakes
(walleye, Stizostedion vitreum vitreum, hi Lake Erie). These data are used to assess time trends in
organic contaminants in the open waters of the Great Lakes, using fish as biomonitors. These
data can also be used to assess the risks of such contaminants on the health of this important
fishery, and on wildlife that consume them.
The second element of the indicator focuses on assessing human exposures via consumption of
popular sport fish. Coho (Oncorhynchus kisutch) and chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus
tshawytscha) from each lake (rainbow trout, Salmo gairdneri, hi Lake Erie) are collected during
the fall spawning run, and composite fillets (5 fish) are analyzed for organic contaminants to
assess human exposure. The coho salmon spawn at 3 years of age, and so their body burdens
reflect a more focused and consistent exposure time compared to the lake trout which may
integrate exposures over 4 to 10 yrs depending on the lake. Chinook salmon spawn after 4-5
years, and have higher (and thus more detectable) concentrations than the coho salmon and also
represent a consistent exposure time. Thus tune trends for consistent age fish as well as
consistent size fish can be assessed from these data.
QA/QC Procedures: GLNPO has an approved Quality Management system hi place2 that
conforms to the EPA quality management order and is audited every 3 years hi accordance with
Federal policy for Quality Management. The Quality Assurance (QA) plan that supports the fish
contaminant program is approved and available on request3. The draft field sampling Quality
Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) is being revised and will be submitted to the GLNPO QA officer
for review by September 30, 20034.
Data Quality Review: GLNPO's quality management system has been evaluated as
"outstanding" in previous peer and management reviews5. GLNPO has implemented all
recommendations from these external audits and complies with Agency Quality standards.
IV-118
-------
Data Limitations: The top predator fish (lake trout) program was designed specifically for
lakewide trends. It is not well suited to portray localized changes.
Error Estimate: The goal of the fish contaminant program is to detect a 20% change in each
measured contaminant concentration between two consecutively sampled periods at each site.
The program was designed to reach that goal with 95% confidence.
New/Improved Data or Systems: The GLENDA database is a significant new system with
enhanced capabilities. Existing and future fish data will be added to GLENDA.
"The Great Lakes Fish Monitoring Program - A technical and Scientific Model For Interstate
Environmental Monitoring" September, 1990. EPA503/4-90-004.
"Great Lakes National Program Office Indicators. Fish Indicators."
http://www.epa.gov/gmpo/glmdicators/fishcontarninants.html
"Trends in Great Lakes Fish Contaminants ", Dr. Deborah Swackhammer, Univ of Minnesota
Environ. Occ. Health, School of Public Health, EPA Grant #GL97524201-2, 7/1/02.D& Vault, D.
S. 1984. Contaminant analysis of fish from Great Lakes harbors and tributary mouths. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Great Lakes National Program Office. EPA 905/3-84-003.
De Vault, D. S. 1985. Contaminants in fish from Great Lakes harbors and tributary mouths.
Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 14: 587-594.
De Vault, D. S., P. Bertram, D. M. Whittle and S. Rang. 1995. Toxic contaminants in the Great
Lakes. State of the Great Lakes Ecosystem Conference (SOLEC). Chicago and Toronto, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Great Lakes National Program Office and Environment
Canada.
De Vault, D. S., R. Hesselberg, P. W. Rodgers and T. J. Feist. 1996. Contaminant trends in lake
trout and walleye from the Laurentian Great Lakes. Journal of Great Lakes Research 22: 884-
895.
De Vault, D. S. and J. A. Weishaar. 1983. Contaminant analysis of 1981 fall run coho salmon.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Great Lakes National Program Office. EPA 905/3-83-
001.
De Vault, D. S. and J. A. Weishaar. 1984. Contaminant analysis of 1982 fall run coho salmon.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Great Lakes National Program Office. EPA 905/3-85-
004.
De Vault, D. S., J. A. Weishaar, J. M. Clark and G. Lavhis. 1988. Contaminants and trends in fall
run coho salmon. Journal of Great Lakes Research 14: 23-33.
De Vault, D. S., W. A. Willford, R. Hesselberg, E. Nortrapt and E. Rundberg. 1985.
Contaminant trends in lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush) from the upper Great Lakes. Archives
of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 15: 349-356.
IV-119
-------
De Vault, D. S., W. A. Willford, R. J. Hesselberg and D. A. Nortrupt. 1986. Contaminant trends
in lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush) from the upper Great Lakes. Archives of Environmental
Contamination and Toxicology 15: 349-356.
Eby, L. A., C. A. Stow, R. J. Hesselberg and J. F. Kitchell. 1997. Modeling changes in growth
and diet on polychlorinated biphenyl bioaccumulation hi "Coregonus hoyi". Ecological
Applications 7(3): 981-990.
Giesy, J. P., et al. 1995. Contaminants hi fishes from Great Lakes influenced sections and above
dams of three Michigan rivers: III. Implications for health of bald eagles. Archives of
Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 29: 309-321.
Giesy, J. P., J. P. Ludwig and D. E. Tillett. 1994. Deformities hi birds of the Great Lakes region:
assigning causality. Environmental Science and Technology 28(3): 128A-135A.
Giesy, J. P., et al. 1994. Contaminants in fishes from Great Lakes-influenced sections and above
dams of three Michigan rivers. II: Implications for health of mink. Archives of Environmental
Contamination and Toxicology 27: 213-223.
Glassmeyer, S. T., D. S. De Vault, T. R. Myers and R. A. Hites. 1997. Toxaphene in Great Lakes
fish: a temporal, spatial, and trophic study. Environmental Science and Technology 31: 84-88.
Glassmeyer, S. T., K. E. Shanks and R. A. Hites. 1999. Automated toxaphene quantitation by
GC/MS. Analytical Chemistry hi press.
GLNPO. 1981. A Strategy for Fish Contaminant Monitoring in the Great Lakes. USEPA Great
Lakes National Program Office..
Jeremiason, J. D., K. C. Hornbuckle and S. J. Eisenreich. 1994. PCBs in Lake Superior, 1978-
1992: decreases hi water concentrations reflect loss by volatilization. Environmental Science and
Technology 28(5): 903-914.
Kubiak, T. J., Harris, H. J., Smith, L. M., Schwartz, T. R., Stalling, D. L., Trick, J. A., Sileo, L.,
Docherty, D. E., and Erdman, T. C. 1989. Microcontaminants and reproductive impairment of
the Forster's Tern on Green Bay, Lake Michigan - 1983. Archives of Environmental
Contamination and Toxicology 18: 706-727.
Mac, M. J. and C. C. Edsal. 1991. Environmental contaminants and the reproductive success of
lake trout in the Great Lakes. J. Tox. Environ. Health. 33: 375-394.
Mac, M. J., T. R. Schwartz, C. C. Edsall and A. M. Frank. 1993. Polychlorinated biphenyls in
Great Lakes lake trout and their eggs: relations to survival and congener composition 1979-1988.
Journal of Great Lakes Research 19(4): 752-765.
Madenjian, C. P., T. J. DeSorcie, R. M. Stedman, E. H. J. Brown, G. W. Eck, L. J. Schmidt, R. J.
Hesselberg, S. M. Chernyak and D. R. Passino-Reader. 1999. Spatial patterns in PCB
concentrations of Lake Michigan lake trout. Journal of Great Lakes Research 25(1): 149-159.
IV-120
-------
Madenjian, C. P., R. J. Hesselberg, T. J. Desorcie, L. J. Schmidt, R. M. Stedman, L. J. Begnoche
and D. R. Passino-Reader. 1998. Estimate of net trophic transfer efficiency of PCBs to Lake
Michigan lake trout from their prey. Environmental Science and Technology 32(7): 886-891.
Pearson, R. F., K. C. Hornbuckle, S. J. Eisenreich and D. L. Swackhammer. 1996. PCBs in Lake
Michigan water revisited. Environ. Sci. & Technol. 30(5): 1429-1436.
Rodgers, P. W. and W. R. Swain. 1983. Analysis of polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) loading
trends in Lake Michigan. Journal of Great Lakes Research 9: 548-558.
Safe, S. H. 1994. Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs): environmental impact, biochemical and
toxic responses, and implications for risk. CRC Critical Reviews in Toxicology 24(2): 87-149.
Schmidt, L. J., and Hesselberg, R. J. 1992. A mass spectroscopic method for analysis of AHH-
inducing and other polychlorinated biphenyl congeners and selected pesticides in fish. Archives
of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 23: 37-44.
Stow, C. A. 1995. Factors associated with PCB concentrations in Lake Michigan salmonids.
Environmental Science and Technology 29(2): 522-527.
Stow, C. A., S. R. Carp and J. F. Amrheim. 1994. PCB concentration trends in Lake Michigan
coho (Oncorhynchus kisutch) and chinook salmon (O. tshawytscha). Canadian Journal of
Fisheries and Aquatic Science 51: 1384-1390.
Stow, C. A. and S. R. Carpenter. 1994. PCB accumulation in Lake Michigan coho and chinook
salmon: individual-based models using allometric relationships. Environmental Science and
Technology 28: 1543-1549.
Stow, C. A., S. R. Carpenter, L. A. Eby, J. F. Amrhein and R. J. Hesselberg. 1995. Evidence that
PCBs are approaching stable concentrations in Lake Michigan fishes. Ecological Applications 5:
248-260.
Stow, C. A. and S. S. Qian. 1998. A size-based probabilistic assessment of PCB exposure from
Lake Michigan fish consumption. Environmental Science and Technology 32: 2325-2330.
Swackhammer, D., J. Charles and R. Hites. 1987. Quantitation of toxaphene in environmental
samples using negative ion chemical ionization mass spectrometry. Analytical Chemistry 59:
913-917.
Swackhammer, D. L. 1996. Studies of polychlorinated biphenyls in the. Great Lakes. Issues in
Environmental Science and Technology 6: 137-153.
Swackhammer, D. L. and R. A. Hites. 1988. Occurrence and bioaccumulation of organochlorine
compounds in fishes from Siskiwit Lake. Environmental Science and Technology 22: 543-548.
Swackhammer, D. L. and A. Trowbridge. 1997. LMMBS Methods Compendium: Vol. 2
Organics and Mercury Sample Analysis Techniques, Chapter 1, Section 042. USEPA. 905-R-97-
012b.
IV-121
-------
Trowbridge, A. G. and D. L. Swackhammer. 1999. Biomagnification of Toxic PCB Congeners in
the Lake Michigan Foodweb. Bioaccumulative Toxic Compounds in the Environment. R.
Lipnick, D. Muir, J. Hermens and K. C. Jones. Washington, DC, ACS Symposium Series
Monograph: in review.
"Quality Management Plan for the Great Lakes National Program Office." EPA905-R-02-009.
October 2002, Approved April 2003.
Swackhammer, D. L. 2001. "Trends in Great Lakes Fish Contaminants." Unpublished - in
USEPA Great Lakes National Program Office files.
Swackhammer, D.L. February 2002. "Trends in Great Lakes Fish Contaminants." Unpublished
- in USEPA Great Lakes National Program Office files.
"GLNPO Management Systems Review of 1999. " Unpublished - in USEPA Great Lakes
National Program Office files.
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Concentration trends of toxic chemicals in the air in the
Great Lakes basin will decline.
Performance Database: Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO) integrated atmospheric
deposition network l (IADN) operated jointly with Canada. Reporting starts with 1992 data,
collected through the joint US/Canadian Integrated Atmospheric Deposition Program and
includes, PCBs, PAHs, and pesticides. Monitoring results from 2003 will be reported in 2005.
Data Source: GLNPO and Environment Canada are the principal sources of the data. Data also
come through in-kind support and information sharing with other Federal agencies, with Great
Lakes' States, and with Canada.
Methods, Assumptions, and Suitability: There are five master IADN stations, one for each
lake, which are supplemented by satellite stations in other locations. The master stations are
located in remote areas and are meant to represent regional background levels. Concentrations
from the master stations are used for the performance measure. Concentrations from the satellite
stations in Chicago and Cleveland are also sometimes used to demonstrate the importance of
urban areas to atmospheric deposition to the Lakes.
Air samples are collected for 24 hours using hi-volume samplers containing an adsorbent.
Precipitation samples are collected as 28-day composites. Laboratory analysis protocols
generally call for solvent extraction of the organic sampling media with addition of surrogate
recovery standards. Extracts are then concentrated followed by column chromatographic
cleanup, fractionation, nitrogen blow-down to small volume (about 1 mL) and injection
(typically 1 uL) into GC-ECD or GC-MS instruments.
All IADN data are loaded and quality controlled using the Research Database Management
System (RDMQ), a Statistical Analysis System (SAS) program. RDMQ provides a unified set of
quality assured data, including flags for each data point that can be used to evaluate the usability
of the data. Statistical summaries of annual concentrations are generated by the program and
used as input into an atmospheric loading calculation. The loadings calculation is described in
detail in the Technical Summary referenced below. However, the averaged annual
concentrations rather than the loadings are used in the performance measure.
IV-122
-------
QA/QC Procedures: GLNPO has a Quality Management system in place, which conforms to
the EPA quality management order and is audited every 3 years in accordance with Federal
policy for Quality Management2. Quality Assurance Project Plans are in place for the laboratory
grantee, as well as for the network as a whole. A jointly-funded QA contractor conducts
laboratory audits and tracks QA statistics. Data from all contributing agencies are quality-
controlled using the SAS-based system.
Data Quality Review: GLNPO's quality management system has been evaluated as
"outstanding" in previous peer and management reviews3. This program has a joint Canadian
US quality system and workgroup that meets twice a year. GLNPO has implemented all
recommendations from these external audits and complies with Agency Quality standards4.
A regular set of laboratory and field blanks is taken and recorded for comparison to the IADN
field samples. In addition, a suite of chemical surrogates and internal standards is used
extensively in the analyses. A jointly-funded QA contractor conducts laboratory audits and
intercomparisons and tracks QA statistics. As previously mentioned, data from all contributing
agencies are quality-controlled using a SAS-based system.
Data Limitations: The sampling design is dominated by rural sites that under emphasize urban
contributions to deposition; thus although the data is very useful for trends information, there is
less assurance of the representativeness of deposition to the whole lake. There are gaps in open
lake water column organics data, thus limiting our ability to calculate atmospheric loadings.
Error estimate: Concentrations have an error of +/- 40%, usually less. Differences between
laboratories have been found to be 40% or less. This is outstanding given the very low levels of
these pollutants in the air and the difficulty in analysis. The performance measure examines the
long-term trend.
New/Improved Data or Systems: GLNPO expects to post joint data that has passed quality
review to < http://binational.net/ >, a joint international web site, and to the IADN website at <
www.msc.ec.gc.ca/iadn/ >.
References:
1. "Great Lakes National Program Office Indicators. Air Indicators. "
http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/glindicators/ataiospheric.html
Details of these analyses can be found in the Laboratory Protocol Manuals or the agency project
plans, which can be found on the IADN resource page
at:http://www.msc.ec.gc.ca/iadn/resources/resources e.html
Overall results of the project can be found in "Technical Summary of Progress under the
Integrated Atmospheric Deposition Program 1990-1996" and the Draft "Technical Summary of
Progress under the Integrated Atmospheric Deposition 1997-2002". The former can also be
found on the IADN resource page.
2. "Quality Management Plan for the Great Lakes National Program Office." EPA905-R-02-
009. October 2002, Approved April 2003.
IV-123
-------
3. "GLNPO Management Systems Review of 1999. " Unpublished - in USEPA Great Lakes
National Program Office files.
4. "Integrated Atmospheric Deposition Network Quality Assurance Program Plan - Revision 1.1.
Environment Canada and USEPA. June 29, 2001. Unpublished - in USEPA Great Lakes
National Program Office files.
FY 2005 Performance Measure; Cumulative total of Areas of Concern within the Great
Lakes Basin that have been restored and delisted.
Performance Database: US EPA's Great Lakes National Program Office will track the
cumulative total Areas of Concern (AOC) and post that information
http://www.epa.gov/ghipo/aoc/index.html> Forty-three AOCs have been identified: 26 located
entirely within the United States; 12 located wholly within Canada; and five that are shared by
both countries. GLNPO is tracking the 31 which are within the US or shared; however, none of
these are currently restored and delisted.
Data Source: Internal tracking and communications with Great Lakes States, the US
Department of State and the International Joint Commission (IJC).
Methods, Assumptions, and Suitability: US EPA's Great Lakes National Program Office is in
regular communication with the Great Lakes States, the US Department of State and the IJC, and
is responsible for coordinating and overseeing the de-listing of Areas of Concern.
QA/QC Procedures: GLNPO has an approved Quality Management system in place1 that
conforms to the EPA quality management order and is audited every 3 years in accordance with
Federal policy for Quality Management
Data Quality Review: GLNPO's quality management system has been given "outstanding"
evaluations in previous peer and management reviews2. GLNPO has implemented all
recommendations from these external audits and complies with Agency Quality standards.
Data Limitations: None known.
Error Estimate: None.
New/Improved Data or Systems: NA
References:
GLNPO will develop and maintain the appropriate tracking system once there are any de-listed
US or Binational Areas of Concern. Information regarding Areas of Concern is currently
available online at: http://www.epa.gov/ghipo/aoc/index.html
1. "Quality Management Plan for the Great Lakes National Program Office." EPA905-R-02-
009. October 2002, Approved April 2003.
2. "GLNPO Management Systems Review of 1999. " Unpublished - in USEPA Great Lakes
National Program Office files.
IV-124
-------
FY 2005 Performance Measure; Cubic yards of contaminated sediment in the Great Lakes
remediated, (cumulative from 1997)
Performance Database: Data tracking sediment remediation are compiled in two different
formats. The first is a matrix that shows the cumulative total of contaminated sediment that was
remediated in the Great Lakes basin from 1997 to 2002 for each Area of Concern or other non-
Areas of Concern with sediment remediation. The second format depicts the yearly totals for
sediment remediation projects graphically. These databases are reported approximately one year
after the completion of work.
Data Source: GLNPO collects sediment remediation data from various state and Federal project
managers across the Great Lakes region. These data are obtained directly from the project
manager via an information fact sheet the project manager completes for any site in the Great
Lakes basin that has performed any remedial work on contaminated sediment. The project
manager also indicates whether an approved Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) was used in
the collection of data at the site. This is used to decide if the data provided by the project
manager are reliable for GLNPO reporting purposes. If an approved QAPP was not used,
sediment data would likely not be reported by GLNPO
Methods, Assumptions, and Suitability: The data collected to track sediment remediation hi
the Great Lakes show the amount of sediment remediated for that year, the amount of sediment
remediated in prior years, and the amount of sediment remaining to be addressed for a particular
site. This format is suitable for year-to-year comparisons for individual sites.
QA/QC Procedures: GLNPO relies on the individual government/agency project managers to
provide information on whether an approved QAPP was hi place during remediation of
contaminated sediment. This tracking database houses information on the calculated amount of
sediment remediated at individual sites as provided by the project managers. It is then GLNPO's
responsibility to determine if the data are usable based upon the information sheet provided by
the project managers.
Data Quality Review: The data, hi both the graphic and matrix formats, are reviewed by
management, individual project managers, and GLNPO's Sediment Team Leader prior to being
released. GLNPO's quality management system has been given "outstanding" evaluations hi
previous peer and management reviews. GLNPO has implemented all recommendations from
these external audits and complies with Agency Quality standards.
Data Limitations: The data provided hi the sediment tracking database should be used as a tool
to track sediment remediation progress at sites across the Great Lakes. Many of the totals for
sediment remediation are estimates provided by project managers. For specific data uses,
individual project managers should be contacted to provide additional information.
Error Estimate: The amount of sediment remediated or yet to be addressed should be viewed as
estimated data. A specific error estimate is not available.
New/Improved Data or Systems: Existing tracking systems are anticipated to remain in place.
IV-125
-------
References:
1. Collier, D.C. 2002. "Sediment Remediation Matrix ". Unpublished - in USEPA Great Lakes
National Program Office files.
2. Collier, D.C. 2002. "Sediment Remediation Pie Charts ". Unpublished - hi USEPA Great
Lakes National Program Office files.
3. Collier, D.C. 2002. "Compilation of Project Managers Informational Sheets". Unpublished
- hi USEPA Great Lakes National Program Office files.
FY 2005 Performance Measure; Acres of submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) present in
the Chesapeake Bay.
Performance Database: SAV acres hi Chesapeake Bay. Total acres surveyed and estimated
additional acres from 1978 through 2002, excluding the years 1979-1983 and 1988 when no
surveys were conducted. FY 2005 Annual Performance Report for this measure will be based on
the results of the survey conducted the previous calendar year (2004). We expect to receive the
preliminary survey results for calendar year 2004 in April 2005.
Data Source: Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences provides the data (via an EPA Chesapeake
Bay Program grant to Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences). EPA has confidence hi the third
party data and believes the data are accurate and reliable based on QA/QC procedures described
below.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: The SAV survey is a general monitoring program,
conducted to optimize precision and accuracy hi characterizing annually the status and trends of
SAV hi tidal portions of the Chesapeake Bay. The general plan is to follow fixed flight routes
over shallow water areas of the Bay, to comprehensively survey all tidal shallow water areas of
the Bay and its tidal tributaries. Non-tidal areas are omitted from the survey. SAV beds less
than 1 square meter are not included due to the limits of the photography and interpretation.
Annual monitoring began in 1978 and is ongoing. Methods are described hi the Quality
Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) on file for the EPA grant and at the VIMS web site
(http://www.vhns.eduhttp://www.vims.edu/bio/sav/X
QA/QC Procedures: Quality assurance project plan for the EPA grant to the Virginia Institute
of Marine Sciences describes data collection, analysis, and management methods. This is on file
at the EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office. The VIMS web site at
http://www.vhns.edu/bio/sav/ provides this information as well. Metadata are included with the
data set posted at the VIMS web site (http://www.vhns.edu/bio/sav/metadata/recent.html).
Data Quality Reviews: This indicator has undergone extensive technical and peer review by
state, Federal and non-government organization partner members of the SAV workgroup and the
Living Resources subcommittee. Data collection, data analysis and QA/QC are conducted by the
principal investigators/scientists. The data are peer reviewed by scientists on the workgroup.
Data selection and interpretation, the presentation of the indicator, along with all supporting
information and conclusions, are arrived at via consensus by the scientists and resource manager
IV-126
-------
members of the workgroup. The workgroup presents the indicator to the subcommittee where
extensive peer review by Bay Program managers occurs.
No audits have been conducted by the Inspector General (IG) or evaluations by the General
Accounting Office (GAO), OMB and National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA). No
deficiencies identified hi external reviews. Data are not identified as an "Agency-Level or
Material Weakness" as a result of EPA decisions under the Federal Managers Financial Integrity
Act.
Data Limitations: Due to funding constraints, there were no surveys in the years 1979-1983
and 1988. Spatial gaps in 1999 occurred due to hurricane disturbance and subsequent inability to
reliably photograph SAV. Spatial gaps in 2001 occurred due to post-nine-eleven flight
restrictions near Washington D.C.
Error Estimate: No error estimate is available for this data.
New/Improved Data or Systems: Some technical improvements (e.g., photomterpretation
tools) were made over the 22 years of the annual SAV survey in Chesapeake Bay.
References:
See Chesapeake Bay SAV special reports at http://www.vims.edu/bio/sav/savreports.html and
bibliography at http://www.vims.edu/bio/sav/savchespub.html. The SAV distribution data files
are located at http://www.vims.edu/bio/sav/savdata.html and also at
http://www.chesapeakebav.net/pubs/statustrends/88-data-2002.xls. The SAV indicator is
published at http://www.chesapeakebay.net/status.cfm?sid=88.
FY 2005 Performance Measures:
• Reduce nitrogen loads entering Chesapeake Bay, from 1985 levels (2002 Baseline:
51 million pounds/year reduced.)
• Reduce phosphorus loads entering Chesapeake Bay, from 1985 levels. (2002
Baseline: 8 million pounds/year reduced.)
• Reduce sediment loads entering Chesapeake Bay, from 1985 levels. (2002 Baseline:
0.8 million tons/year reduced.)
Performance Database: Nutrient and Sediment Loads Delivered to the Chesapeake Bay. The
Bay data files used in the indicator are located at
http://www.chesapeakebay.net/pubs/statustrends/186-data-2003.xls. Data have been collected in
1985, 2000, 2001, and are expected on an annual basis after 2001. There is a two year data lag.
Load data are from Chesapeake Bay watershed portions of NY, MD, PA, VA, WV, DE, and DC.
FY 2005 Annual Performance Report for these measures will be based on the results of the 2003
data collection. We expect to receive the preliminary results for calendar year 2003 in April
2005.
Data Source: State/district data are provided to the Chesapeake Bay Program Office for input
into the Chesapeake Bay Program Watershed Model.
IV-127
-------
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: The data are of high quality. Data are consolidated by
watershed boundaries at the state level and provided to the Chesapeake Bay Program Office for
input into the watershed model. Data are collected from states and local governments programs.
Methods are described at http://www.chesapeakebay.net/data/nidex.htm. (refer to CBP
Watershed Model Scenario Output Database, Phase 4.3). For more information contact Kate
Hopkins at hopkins.kate@epa.gov or Jeff Sweeney isweeney@chesapeakebay.net
QA/QC Procedures: State offices have documentation of the databases used indicating the
design, construction and maintenance conforming to existing U.S. Department of Agriculture
Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA/NRCS) technical standards and specifications
for nonpoint source data and PCS standards for point source data. State offices also have
documentation of implemented Best Management Practices (BMPs) based on USDA NRCS
standards and specification and the Chesapeake Bay Program's protocols and guidance. BMPs
are traditionally used to reduce pollutant loads coming from nonpoint sources such as
urban/suburban runoff, agriculture, and forestry activities. Some people also think of nutrient
reduction technology used at wastewater treatment plants as a point source BMP, however, in the
traditional sense, BMPs have been used to describe the suite of practices used to reduce pollutant
loads coming from agricultural, forest, and urban/suburban lands. References include: the USDA
NRCS Technical Guide and Appendix H from the Chesapeake Bay Program (contact Russ
Mader at mader.russ@epa.gov or Kate Hopkins at hopkins.kate@epa.gov). Quality assurance
program plans are available in each state office.
Data Quality Reviews: All data are reviewed and approved by the individual jurisdictions
before input to the watershed model. Model results are also reviewed and approved before
release to the web site. Processes are reviewed by the Tributary Strategy Workgroup of the
Nutrient Subcommittee. The model itself is given a quarterly peer review by an outside
independent group of experts.
No audits have been conducted by the Inspector General (IG) or evaluations by the General
Accounting Office (GAO), OMB and National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA). No
deficiencies identified in external reviews. Data are not identified as an "Agency-Level or
Material Weakness" as a result of EPA decisions under the Federal Managers Financial Integrity
Act.
Data Limitations: Data collected from voluntary collection programs are not included in the
database, even though they may be valid and reliable. The only data submitted by state and local
governments to our office are data that are required for reporting under the cost share and
regulatory programs. State and local governments are aware that additional data collection
efforts are being conducted by non-governmental organizations and that several entities are
involved in using BMPs, however, they are done independently of the cost share programs and
are therefore not reported.
Error Estimate: There may be errors of omission, mis-classification, incorrect georeferencing,
mis-documentation or mistakes in the processing of data.
New/Improved Data or Systems: The next version of the watershed model is currently under
development and will be completed in 2005. The new version(phase 5) will have increased
spatial resolution and ability to model the effect of management practices. The phase 5
IV-128
-------
watershed model is a joint project with cooperating state and Federal agencies. Contact Gary
Shenk gshenk@chesapeakebay.net or see the web site at
http ://www.chesapeakebay .net/phaseS .htm
References:
See http://www.chesapeakebay.net/data/index.htm, refer to CBP Watershed Model Scenario
Output Database, Phase 4.3. Contact Kate Hopkins at hopkins.kate@epa.gov or Jeff Sweeney
j sweeney@chesapeakebav.net
The nutrient and sediment loads delivered to the Bay indicator are published at
http://www.chesapeakebav.net/status.cfm?sid== 186. The nutrient and sediment loads delivered to
the Bay data files used in the indicator are located at
http://www.chesapeakebay.net/pubs/statustrends/186-data-2003 .xls.
See "Chesapeake Bay Watershed Model Application and Calculation of Nutrient and Sediment
Loadings, Appendix H: Tracking Best Management Practice Nutrient Reductions in the
Chesapeake Bay Program, A Report of the Chesapeake Bay Program Modeling Subcommittee",
USEPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office, Annapolis, MD, August 1998, available at
http://www.chesapeakebay.net/pubs/777.pdf
See USDA NRCS Field Office Technical Guide available at
http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/efotg/
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Prevent water pollution and protect aquatic ecosystems so
that overall aquatic system health of coastal waters of the Gulf of Mexico is improved on
the "good/fair/poor" scale of the National Coastal Condition Report.
FY 2005 Performance Measure; Reduce releases of nutrients throughout the Mississippi
River Basin to reduce the size of the hypoxic zone in the Gulf of Mexico.
Performance Database: (1) Louisiana Coastal Hypoxia Shelfwide Survey metadata (data
housed at National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/National Ocean Data Center, Silver
Spring, Maryland). Funds for this research are provided by the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, Coastal Ocean Program (NOAA/COP)
(2) Southeast Area Monitoring and Assessment Program (SEAMAP) - Gulf surveys.
Data Source: (1) Hydrographic data are collected during annual surveys of the Louisiana
continental shelf. Nutrient, pigment and station information data are also acquired. The
physical, biological and chemical data collected are part of a long-term coastal Louisiana dataset.
The goal is to understand physical and biological processes that contribute to the causes of
hypoxia and use the data to support environmental models for use by resource managers.
(2) The Southeast Area Monitoring and Assessment Program (SEAMAP) is a
state/Federal/university program for collection, management and dissemination of fishery-
independent data and information in the southeastern United States
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: (1) During the shelfwide cruise-, data is collected along
transects from the mouth of the Mississippi River to the Texas border. Information is collected
on a wide range of parameters, including conductivity/temperature/depth (CTD), light
penetration, dissolved oxygen, suspended solids, nutrients, phytoplankton, and chlorophyll.
Hydrographic, chemical, and biological data from two transects of Terrebonne Bay on a monthly
IV-129
-------
basis, and bimonthly, off Atchafalaya Bay. There is a single moored instrument array in 20-m
water depth in the core of the hypoxic zone that collects vertical conductivity/temperature data,
as well as near-surface, mid, and near-bottom oxygen data; an upward directed Acoustic Doppler
Current Profiler (ADCP) on the seabed measures direction and speed of currents from the seabed
to the surface. There is also an assortment of nutrient and light meters.
Station depths range from 3.25 to 52.4 meters. The objective is to delimit and describe the
area of midsummer bottom dissolved oxygen less than 2 (mg. L). Northern end stations of
transects are chosen based on the survey vessel's minimum depth limits for each longitude.
Standard data collections include hydrographic profiles for temperature, salinity, dissolved
oxygen, and optical properties. Water samples for chlorophyll a and phaeopigments, nutrients,
salinity, suspended sediment, and phytoplankton community composition are collected from the
surface, near-bottom, and variable middle depths.
Details of data collection and methodology are provided in referenced reports.
QA/QC Procedures: NOAA does not require written QA/QC procedures or Quality
Management Plan; however, the procedures related to data collection are covered in the metadata
files.
SEAMAP Data Management System (DMS) is based on information contained in the SEAMAP
Gulf and South Atlantic DMS Requirements Document developed through a cooperative effort
between National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and other SEAMAP participants.
Data Quality Reviews: (1) Essential components of an environmental monitoring program in
the Gulf of Mexico include efforts to document the temporal and spatial extent of shelf hypoxia,
and to collect basic hydrographic, chemical and biological data related to the development of
hypoxia over seasonal cycles. All data collection protocols and data are presented to and
reviewed by the Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force (the Task
Force) in support of the adaptive management approach as outlined in the Action Plan for
Reducing, Mitigating, and Controlling Hypoxia in the Northern Gulf of Mexico (the Action
Plan).
(2) Biological and environmental data from all SEAMAP-Gulf surveys are included in the
SEAMAP Information System, managed in conjunction with National Marine Fisheries Service
- Southeast Fisheries Science Center (NMFS-SEFSC). Raw data are edited by the collecting
agency and verified by the SEAMAP Data Manager prior to entry into the system. Data from all
SEAMAP-Gulf surveys during 1982-2002 have been entered into the system, and data from
2003 surveys are in the process of being verified, edited, and entered for storage and retrieval.
Data Limitations: Some existing monitoring for shelf-wide conditions are currently only
performed each year primarily, but not exclusively, during July. Resources to conduct them
limit the spatial boundaries of some of these existing monitoring efforts. Experience with the
datasets has shown that when data are plotted or used in further analysis, outlying values may
occasionally be discovered.
FV-130
-------
Error Estimate: (1) The manufacturers state +/- 0.2mg/L as the error allowance for both
SeaBird and Hydrolab oxygen sensors.
References:
Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task force.2001. Action Plan for
Reducing, Mitigating, and Controlling Hypoxia in the Northern Gulf of Mexico. Washington,
DC.
Rabalais N.N., R.E. Turner, Dubravko Justic, Quay Dortch, and WJ. Wiseman. 1999.
Characterization of Hypoxia. Topic 1 Report for the Integrated assessment on Hypoxia in the
Gulf of Mexico. NOAA Coastal Ocean Program Decision Analysis Series No. 15. Silver Spring
Maryland: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Hendee, J.C. 1994. Data management for the nutrient enhanced coastal ocean productivity
program. Estuaries 17:900-3
Rabalais, Nancy N., WJ. Wiseman Jr., R.E. Turner ; Comparison of continuous records of near-
bottom dissolved oxygen from the hypoxia zone of Louisiana. Estuaries 19:386-407
SEAMAP Information System http://www.gsmfc.org/sis.html
EFFICIENCY MEASURES/MEASUREMENT DEVELOPMENT PLANS
Wetlands
The Agency is developing measures of wetland function. By 2006 and each year
thereafter, EPA is committed to partnering with the Corps of Engineers (COE), states, and Tribes
to obtain no net loss hi wetland function based on quantifying functions gamed and lost through
mitigation for authorized wetlands impacts. Although there is not yet an annual measure for this
target, by FY 2005 EPA will develop performance standards guidance on monitoring and
adaptive management of mitigation sites, in conjunction with COE, U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA), Department of Interior (DOI), and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), and working with states and Tribes. In addition, by FY 2005, COE,
EPA, USDA, DOI, and NOAA will establish a shared mitigation database. (A baseline is to be
determined in FY 2006.) Since the effort is a joint undertaking of EPA and several other
partners, progress could be affected by partner actions outside the control of EPA.
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
National Estuary Program
Effectively implementing successful comprehensive management plans for the estuaries
in the NEP depends on the cooperation, involvement, and commitment of Federal and state
agency partners that have some role in protecting and/or managing those estuaries. Common
Federal partners include NOAA, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Corps of Engineers, and
IV-131
-------
USDA. Other partners include State and local government agencies, universities, industry,
NGOs, and members of the public.
Wetlands
Federal agencies share the goal of increasing wetlands functions and values, and
implementing a fair and flexible approach to wetlands regulations.
Great Lakes
Pursuant to the mandate in Section 118 of the Clean Water Act to "coordinate action of
the Agency with the actions of other Federal agencies and state and local authorities..." Great
Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO) is engaged in extensive coordination efforts with state,
Tribal, and other Federal agencies, as well as with our counterparts in Canada. EPA has joined
with states, Tribes, and Federal agencies that have stewardship responsibilities for the Lakes in
developing a new Great Lakes Strategy. In addition to the eight Great Lakes States and
interested Tribes, partners include the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), the Coast Guard, the
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the U.S. Office of Geological Survey, the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the Natural Resources Conservation Service
(NRCS). The Strategy joins environmental protection agencies with natural resource agencies hi
pursuit of common goals. These organizations meet semi-annually as the Great Lakes U.S.
Policy Committee to strategically plan and prioritize environmental actions. GLNPO monitoring
involves extensive coordination among these partners, both in terms of implementing the
monitoring program, and in utilizing results from the monitoring to manage environmental
programs. GLNPO's sediments program works closely with the states and the Corps regarding
dredging issues. Implementation of the Binational Toxics Strategy involves extensive
coordination with Great Lakes States. GLNPO works closely with states, Tribes, FWS, and
NRCS in addressing habitat issues in the Great Lakes. EPA also coordinates with these partners
regarding development and implementation of Lakewide Management Plans for each of the
Great Lakes and for Remedial Action Plans for the 31 U.S./binational Areas of Concern.
Chesapeake Bay
The Chesapeake Bay Program has a Federal Agencies Committee, chaired by EPA,
which was formed hi 1984 and has met regularly ever since. There are currently over 20
different Federal agencies actively involved with the Bay Program through the Federal Agencies
Committee. The Federal agencies have worked together over the past decade to implement the
commitments laid out in the 1994 Agreement of Federal Agencies on Ecosystem Management in
the Chesapeake Bay and the 1998 Federal Agencies Chesapeake Ecosystem Unified Plan
(FACEUP). In the past two years, the Federal Agencies Committee has been focusing on how its
members can help to achieve the 104 commitments contained in the Chesapeake 2000 agreement
adopted by the Chesapeake Bay Program hi June 2000. Through this interagency partnership
Federal agencies have contributed to some major successes, such as the U.S. Forest Service
helping to meet the year 2010 goal to restore 2,010 miles of riparian forest buffers eight years
early; the National Park Service leading the effort to restore over 500 miles of water trails three
years early; and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service working to try to meet our fish passage goal
of reopening 1,357 miles of currently blocked river habitat by 2003. Also hi 2003, through the
Federal Agencies Committee, the members will be looking at their agency budgets and other
FV-132
-------
programs to try to leverage maximum benefit to the state, private and Federal efforts protect and
restore the Bay.
Gulf of Mexico
Key to the continued progress of the Gulf of Mexico Program is a broad multi-
organizational Gulf states-led partnership comprised of regional; business and industry;
agriculture; State and local government; citizens; environmental and fishery interests; and,
numerous Federal departments and agencies. This Gulf partnership is comprised of members of
the Gulf Program's Policy Review Board, subcommittees, and workgroups. Established in 1988,
the Gulf of Mexico Program is designed to assist the Gulf states and stakeholders in developing a
regional, ecosystem-based framework for restoring and protecting the Gulf of Mexico through
coordinated Gulf-wide as well as priority area-specific efforts. The Gulf states strategically
identify the key environmental issues and work at the regional, state, and local level to define,
recommend, and voluntarily implement the supporting solutions. To achieve the Program's
environmental objectives, the partnership must target specific Federal, state, local, and private
programs, processes, and financial authorities in order to leverage the resources needed to
support state and community actions.
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
1909 The Boundary Waters Treaty
1978 Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA)
1987 Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement
1987 Montreal Protocol on Ozone Depleting Substances
1990 Great Lakes Critical Programs Act
1996 Habitat Agenda
1997 Canada-U.S. Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy
2002 Great Lakes and Lake Champlain Act
Clean Water Act
Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection, and Restoration Act of 1990
Estuaries and Clean Waters Act of 2000
North American Wetlands Conservation Act
US-Canada Agreements
Water Resources Development Act (WRDA)
IV-133
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems
OBJECTIVE; Enhance Science and Research
Through 2008, provide a sound scientific foundation for EPA's goal of protecting,
sustaining, and restoring the health of people, communities, and ecosystems by conducting
leading-edge research and developing a better understanding and characterization of
environmental outcomes under Goal 4.
Resource Summary
(Dollars in Thousands)
Enhance Science and Research
Environmental Program & Management
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Science & Technology
Buildings and Facilities
Inspector General
Total Workyears
FY2003
Actuals
$380,878.7
$52,443.0
$34,740.6
$286,526.2
$5,525.0
$1,643.9
1,230.8
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$420,040.9
$61,444.1
$14,267.8
$336,318.6
$5,680.5
$2,329.9
1,230.4
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$394,823.7
$62,016.9
$8,361.6
$316,109.2
$6,131.7
$2,204.3
1,230.0
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
($25,217.2)
$572.8
($5,906.2)
($20,209.4)
$451.2
($125.6)
-0.4
Program Project
(Dollars in Thousands)
Research: Computational Toxicology
Research: Endocrine Disrupter
Research: Global Change
Research: Human Health and Ecosystems
Research: Pesticides and Toxics
Research: Fellowships
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response,
and Recovery
Endocrine Disrupters
Science Policy and Biotechnology
Human Health Risk Assessment
Administrative Projects
TOTAL
FY2003
Actuals
$5,436.9
$13,161.9
$22,354.9
$163,550.7
$32,664.7
$2,040.8
$13,669.8
$30,959.2
$7,075.1
$850.2
$27,536.0
$61,578.5
$380,878.7
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
$8,948.6
$12,984.7
$21,528.6
$190,730.8
$36,784.8
$6,402.8
$0.0
$28,999.9
$9,002.7
$1,603.8
$36,495.0
$66,559.2
$420,040.9
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$13,028.7
$8,044.0
$20,689.6
$177,407.5
$29,017.7
$8,261.6
$0.0
$22,751.7
$9,037.3
$1,707.2
$36,832.2
$68,046.2
$394,823.7
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$4,080.1
($4,940.7)
($839.0)
($13,323.3)
($7,767.1)
$1,858.8
$0.0
($6,248.2)
$34.6
$103.4
$337.2
$1,487.0
($25,217.2)
IV-134
-------
FY 2005 Request
Results to be Achieved under the Objective
Endocrine Disruptors
There is increasing evidence that fish and wildlife can be affected by chemicals that
interfere with the endocrine system resulting in abnormal development, low fertility and greater
susceptibility to disease. The link to human disease is less clear at ambient environmental levels.
The Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 mandated that EPA test pesticides for estrogen-like
effects on human health. The Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996 authorize EPA to
similarly test contaminants found in drinking water sources to which a substantial population
may be exposed. Given the scientific controversy over the testing of chemicals for then-
endocrine disrupting effects, the Agency established the Endocrine Disrupter Screening and
Testing Advisory Committee (EDSTAC) under the Federal Advisory Committee Act. EDSTAC
included representatives from industry, environmental and public health groups, academia, and
Federal and state government bodies.
On the basis of science, EDSTAC recommended that the screening program include
commercial chemicals and contaminants; estrogen, androgen and thyroid endpoints; and wildlife
as well as human health effects.
Schedule for the Development and Implementation of the Endocrine
Disrupter Screening Program (EDSP)
Screening
Sorting and Priority Setting selects chemicals for screening using existing chemical data
and screening tools. This will result in publication of an initial list of chemicals to be screened in
Tierl.
IV-135
-------
Regulatory Implementation involves the proposal and final adoption of regulations to
implement EPA's statutory authority to require manufacturers of chemicals and registrants of
pesticides to test chemicals.
Tier 1 Screens is a battery of in vitro and in vivo short-term screening assays that identify
chemicals having the potential to interact with the estrogen, androgen and thyroid systems.
Chemicals that screen positive in Tier 1 screening battery will be tested in Tier 2.
Tier 2 Tests consists of multi-generation tests in mammals, birds, fish, amphibians and
invertebrates and will provide information on the adverse effects of the chemical as well as other
information needed to assess the hazard to these organisms.
Screening of initial list chemicals starts testing chemicals from the sorting and priority
setting stage using the validated Tier 1 assays.
EPA based its EDSP on the EDSTAC recommendations. The EDSP is a two-tiered
program. Tier 1 is a battery of in vitro and in vivo short-term screening assays to identify
chemicals that have the potential to interact with the estrogen, androgen, and thyroid systems.
Chemicals demonstrating endocrine effects in the Tier 1 screening battery will be tested hi Tier
2. Tier 2 consists of multi-generation tests in mammals, birds, fish, amphibians and invertebrates
and will provide information on the adverse effects of the chemical as well as other information
needed to assess the hazard to these organisms. FQPA mandated that all assays used hi the
EDSP be validated. Validation is a science-based process and has required application of cutting
edge science, domestic, interagency and international cooperation, and ongoing stakeholder
involvement.
The FQPA also mandated deadlines for the development and implementation of the
EDSP. In 2001 the Natural Resources Defense Council and the EPA entered in to a Settlement
Agreement in response to a suit brought by NRDC hi which they alleged that EPA failed to meet
the 1999 statutory deadline for program implementation. EPA agreed to make best efforts to
validate the Tier 1 assays, publish the priority list and implement Tier 1 screening by December
2003. Under the terms of the Settlement Agreement, EPA must report to NRDC every six
months when the agency anticipates missing the targets in the Settlement Agreement.
Currently, EPA expects to complete the validation of most of the Tier 1 screens and put
into place the procedures needed to initiate endocrine screening of specific chemicals hi 2005.
Science Policy and Biotechnology
Crops may be bioengineered to produce a class of pesticides, called plant-incorporated
protectants (PIPs). These bioengineered crops are capable of producing PIPs for protection
against pests, reducing or eliminating the use of chemical pesticide application on the plant. Such
bioengineered crops are playing an ever-increasing role hi the agricultural marketplace. The
Federal government is committed to ensuring that bioengineered products, including those
bioengineered to express PIPs, are safe for the public and environment alike. As with any new
technology, there is lively public and scientific debate of the best ways to incorporate the
products into the market and the possible long-term implications for agriculture. EPA, as part of
the U.S. Federal government system of oversight, must keep abreast of new science and perform
IV-136
-------
its traditional role of evaluating potential risks to humans and the environment for products
within its statutory purview.
The Plant-Incorporated Protectant (PIP) Rule, published in 2001, clarifies which
genetically modified products are subject to review under FIFRA and FFDCA. The rule also
reaffirmed the partnership between the USDA and EPA on regulation of bioengineered crop
plants: the PIP (the pesticidal substances) are subject to EPA authorities, while the modified
plant is regulated by USDA. Publication of the rule ensured that genetically engineered PIPs
meet FIFRA and FFDCA safety standards. EPA evaluates PIPs in a scientifically rigorous
manner taking into consideration any unique issues they present. Because pests can become
resistant to pesticides, EPA also evaluates and addresses the potential for pests to become
resistant to PIPs. EPA believes it is appropriate to evaluate and address this concern as PIPs
generally are "reduced risk" pesticides. In general they affect only a very narrow range of
targeted organisms, sparing other species that may be incidentally exposed to the PIP. Thus,
PIPs are generally considered safer for humans and the environment than many of the toxic
chemicals they replace. Should resistance to PIPs develop in pest populations, farmers may have
to again rely on more toxic chemical insecticides. There are several new PIP products coming to
the EPA for review for which decisions will likely be made hi FY 2004 and 2005. EPA will also
continue during this time frame to develop procedures and regulations specifically tailored to the
characteristics of PIPs, improving EPA's ability to reduce pesticide risks while at the same time
streamlining procedures for developers/manufacturers.
The bioengineering of plants so that they resist harmful insects or pathogens is likely to
attract continued public scrutiny, particularly on issues such as allergenicity and gene transfer.
EPA will continue to seek technical information from scientific experts, and input from various
stakeholders, on such issues.
EPA is committed to enhancing the quality of the science and research used to reach its
environmental goals. The Agency will provide a sound scientific foundation for protecting,
sustaining, and restoring the health of people, communities, and ecosystems by conducting
leading-edge research and developing a better understanding and characterization of
environmental outcomes. To meet its objective, EPA will conduct research hi several important
areas: 1) human health and ecosystems; 2) human health risks assessments; 3) climate change; 4)
computational toxicology; 5) endocrine disrupters; and 6) pesticides and toxics.
The measurement-derived databases, models, and protocols developed through the
integrated human health research program will strengthen the scientific foundation for human
health risk assessment and provide the data, tools, and protocols needed for more reliable risk
assessments, thereby improving the Agency's ability to better understand and characterize
environmental outcomes. Ecosystems protection research, which provides the scientific
understanding to measure, model, maintain, and/or restore the integrity and sustainability of
highly valued ecosystems, will focus on strengthening the scientific basis to adequately assess
and compare risks to ecosystems, to protect and restore them, and to track progress hi terms of
ecological outcomes. In FY 2005, the Agency will enhance efforts to integrate different scales
and types of monitoring to target effective water quality management actions and document the
effectiveness of water quality management programs.
IV-137
-------
In coordination with the U.S. Climate Change Science Program (CCSP), EPA's Climate
Change Research Program79 provides the knowledge to allow policy makers to identify the most
appropriate science-based solutions reducing potential risks to human health and ecosystems
posed by climate change. The program focuses on assessing the potential consequences of
climate change, including climate variability and land use changes, on air quality, water quality,
ecosystem health, and human health. The Agency will also assess potential adaptation strategies
for building resilience to climate change, while responding to both potential risks and
opportunities.
Computational toxicology research will demonstrate how new scientific advances can be
integrated in a way that allows for more efficient and more precise risk assessments, thereby
optimizing the cost of EPA regulations, while protecting human and ecological health. In FY
2005, EPA will build on current efforts by accelerating the use of biornformatics and other
computational approaches and applying the program to address other high-priority regulatory
issues.
EPA will continue to develop and evaluate innovative state-of-the-art testing methods for
assessing potential human health risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs). These
methods will involve molecular and computational tools that can be used to prioritize chemicals
for screening and testing.
The Agency's fellowship programs will continue to attract the brightest and most
dedicated students in the Nation for training in scientific and engineering disciplines critical to
the protection of public health and the environment.
EPA's multidisciplinary research program to examine risks resulting from exposure to
pesticides and toxics focuses on meeting the requirements of the Food Quality Protection Act
(FQPA). By 2008, EPA will provide scientific tools that can be used to characterize, assess, and
manage risks associated with the implementation of FQPA. Additional research on pesticides
and toxics will support the implementation of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act and the Toxic Substances Control Act by developing methods and models to
obtain toxicity data and assess and manage risks to toxic agents.
EPA's Homeland Security research program is committed to providing sound science and
conducting leading edge research to help reduce the impacts of terror attacks. This includes
developing enhanced methods for detecting, containing, and decontaminating biological and
chemical agents intentionally introduced drinking water and wastewater systems. EPA will also
develop methods for safe disposal of waste materials resulting from cleanups, and methods for
conducting rapid assessments of risks to emergency response personnel and the public from
potential homeland security threats. These efforts will provide elected officials, decision makers,
the public, and first responders with rapid risk assessment protocols to quickly assess the risk to
human health and the environment from chemical and biological threats. They will also result in
more efficient and effective cleanup of water systems, and disposal of contaminants resulting
from terror attacks.
79 For more information about EPA's Climate Change Research, see http://cfJ3ub.epa.gov/gcrp/
IV-138
-------
Research: Human Health and Ecosystems Protection
EPA's mission is to protect public health and the natural environment. To fulfill this dual
charge and balance environmental sustainability with the growth of human activity, the Agency
conducts core human health and ecosystems research to 1) identify and characterize, through the
process of human health risk assessment, environmentally-related human health problems, and 2)
understand the condition of ecosystems, the stressors changing that condition, the consequences
of those changes, and the consequences of preventing, mitigating, or adapting to those changes.
As a result, this research has become integral to environmental decision-making within the
Agency. Emanating from these two broad areas of research are more targeted efforts, including,
but not limited to, mercury research and research for the Report on the Environment that are
critical to the fulfillment of the EPA's mission.
The Agency's human health research program has five primary areas of focus: 1)
harmonization of cancer and non-cancer risk assessment; 2) aggregate risk assessment; 3)
cumulative risk assessment; 4) susceptible and highly exposed life stages and subpopulations;
and 5) Evaluating the Effectiveness of Public Health Outcomes. EPA's ecological research
program also has four primary areas of emphasis: 1) ecological condition; 2) ecological
diagnosis; 3) ecological forecasting; and 4) ecological restoration. Following are more in-depth
discussions of EPA's human health and ecosystems research efforts for FY 2005.
Human Health Research: There are many uncertainties associated with the risk
assessment process because of severe limitations in available data on the complex interactions
between the sources and environmental concentrations of contaminants, human exposures to
these contaminants, and relationships between human exposure, dose, and response. These
uncertainties frequently result in the use of default assumptions and uncertainty factors in human
health risk assessments. EPA's human health research, guided by the Human Health Research
Strategy,™ represents the Agency's only comprehensive program to address these data limitations
and reduce reliance on default assumptions.
Human health research is one of the highest priorities for many Agency program offices,
the Regions, and the states. For example, in order to more effectively implement the
requirements of FIFRA, TSCA, and FQPA, EPA's Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic
Substances (OPPTS) needs research to provide a scientific basis for the use of mechanistic data
in harmonized risk assessment, methods and tools for aggregate and cumulative risk, and
research on children and the elderly as susceptible subpopulations. EPA's Office of Air and
Radiation (OAR) utilizes research on methods and models for aggregate and cumulative risk to
more effectively evaluate risk associated with exposures to particulate matter and various air
toxics, and asthma in children, to carry out its mandates under the Clean Air Act (CAA).
The Office of Water (OW), in addressing the requirements of the CWA and SDWA,
requires a sound scientific basis for the use of mechanistic data in harmonized risk assessment
and methods to assess cumulative risks from exposure to multiple chemicals in drinking water.
Regions and other regulatory program offices have comparable needs for- sound science to carry
out then- legislative mandates. This research also supports the Human Health Risk Assessments
Program/Project described later in this chapter.
80 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Human Health Research Strategy. (EPA/600/R-02/050) Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Government Printing Office. (2003)
IV-139
-------
Human health research is conducted by EPA researchers, and through contracts and
assistance agreements (i.e., grants and cooperative agreements). Products resulting from this
research are subjected to quality assurance (QA) procedures. Research supported under the
Science to Achieve Results (STAR)81 program is selected for funding through a rigorous
competitive external peer review process designed to ensure that only the highest quality efforts
receive funding support. (Criteria: Quality)
This research program is supported by multiple long-range research planning documents,
including: 1) the Human Health Research Strategy; 2) the Research Strategy on Environmental
Risks to Children;82 3) the Asthma Research Strategy; 83 and 4) the Multi-Year Plan for Human
84
Health Research. These long-term strategies and planning documents guide research to
improve the scientific basis to identify, characterize, assess, and manage environmental
exposures that pose the greatest health risks to the American public, and identify clear goals and
priorities for the program. These documents also support performance planning and evaluation
as required by the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA).
Human health research addresses critical issues along five major themes: 1)
harmonization of cancer and non-cancer risk assessment; 2) aggregate risk assessment; 3)
cumulative risk assessment; 4) susceptible and highly-exposed life stages and subpopulations;
and 5) evaluating the effectiveness of public health outcomes.
Harmonization of cancer and non-cancer risk assessment: EPA's research on
harmonization of risk assessment approaches is designed to develop a consistent, flexible set of
principles for using and drawing inferences from available information on mode or mechanism
of action to support risk assessment. Such a framework should be responsive to differences that
exist among various modes or mechanisms of toxicity and the amount of relevant toxicity data
available. In FY 2005, research activities will develop 1) genomic/proteomic approaches that
could be combined with emerging computer approaches for EPA's Computational Toxicology
program; 2) DNA microarray techniques to provide mechanistic data on high priority
environmental chemicals; 3) a scientific database that will serve as a framework for the
consistent use of mechanistic data in cancer and non-cancer risk assessments; and 4) workshops
to integrate information from grants-supported research and mechanistic work performed by
EPA. Research will also support development of biologically-based markers of toxicity for high
priority chemicals. Research results will be provided to the EPA scientific community so they
will have mechanistically-based markers that can be used in a consistent manner for cancer and
non-cancer risks assessment.
Aggregate Risk Assessment: EPA's research program on aggregate risk (i.e., sum of
exposures to a single chemical or toxicant from multiple sources, and multiple routes and
pathways of exposure) is designed to provide improved tools (methods, models, data, and
guidance) for assessing human health risk so that the Agency can protect the health of the public
and environment more effectively.
81 For more information about EPA's Science To Achieve Results Program, see http://es.epa.gov/ncer •
82 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Strategy for Research on Environmental Risks to Children. (EPA/600/R-
00/068) Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. (2000)
83 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Asthma Research Strategy. (EPA/600/R-01/061) Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office. (2002)
84 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Human Health Research Multi Year Plan. Washington, D.C.: EPA. Accessed
January 14, 2003. Available only on the internet at: www.epa.gov/osp
IV-140
-------
In FY 2005, EPA will continue to generate exposure measurement and exposure factor
data and innovative methods to support the development, evaluation, and enhancement of models
of aggregate exposures, dose, and effects. This research seeks to understand the key
determinants of exposure and risk, improving exposure measurement techniques, and develop
critical data on exposure and exposure factors. The results of this research will be used to fill
data gaps and reduce reliance on numerous default assumptions that are currently used hi the risk
assessment process, which will strengthen the scientific foundation for human health risk
assessment.
Cumulative Risk Assessment: Through its base program and the FY 2003 Cumulative
Risk Research Initiative, EPA will provide regulatory decision-makers with models, risk
assessment approaches, and guidance that will be used for conducting assessments for
cumulative exposure and risks to pollutants that pose the greatest health risks to the American
public. This research is intended to describe how multiple chemicals or other stressors may work
together to produce an adverse effect when accumulated over multiple pathways and routes of
exposure, and over time. Cumulative risk research will support the Risk Assessment Forum's
effort to develop Agency guidelines for cumulative risk assessment.
Activities for FY 2005 and beyond include: 1) developing and refining physiologically-
based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models for using exposure, biomarker and PK data in risk
assessments; 2) examining promising new biomarkers of exposure and effects that can be used
in future exposure and epidemiological studies, such as the National Children's Study (NCS);
and 3) sponsoring research that will provide a framework for structuring evaluations of the
toxicity of complex chemical mixtures for use in human and environmental health assessments.
Susceptible and Highly-Exposed Life Stages and Subpopulations: EPA is committed to
obtaining data and developing and verifying innovative methods and models to support
assessment of the susceptibilities of sub-populations to environmental agents.
The Agency's long-term goal hi this area is to demonstrate why some groups of people,
defined by life stage, genetic factors, and health status, are more vulnerable than others to
adverse effects from exposure to environmental agents. The Agency's core research program on
the vulnerabilities associated with children's age and developmental life stages was expanded
through initiatives in 1998 and 2000 on children's environmental health. In the FY 2004
President's Budget, EPA launched its National Aging Initiative with the purpose of examining
and prioritizing environmental health threats to older persons. This research produces the
fundamental tools that are then used to support the FQPA and the Safe Drinking Water Act
(SDWA), which require that the Agency consider children and other potentially susceptible
groups when setting health-based standards.
In FY 2005, research on susceptible subpopulations will continue to provide the scientific
support for conducting risk assessments that consider the vulnerabilities of susceptible and
highly exposed life stages and subpopulations. This research will focus on developing a
scientific understanding of the reasons for differences in exposure and response of selected
groups, by age and developmental stage, within the general population. The research is
organized into three broad science themes: life stage, genetic background, and health status.
IV-141
-------
Important research efforts for FY 2005 include:
• evaluate community-based approaches to risk reduction that are being tested in the
Children's Centers of Excellence in Environmental Health and Disease Prevention;
• provide validated tools for characterizing real world risks to young children and
adolescents participating in the National Children's Study;
• identify modes of action by which specific groups of chemicals/pesticides increase cancer
or non-cancer health risks as a function of life stage;
• develop the necessary tools and models to characterize and conduct field studies on
exposures to high-priority environmental chemicals in the elderly;
• examine effect of pre-existing respiratory disease (e.g., asthma, bronchitis) on response to
air pollutants;
• develop the necessary tools and models to characterize and conduct field studies on
exposures to high-priority environmental chemicals in adolescents.
EPA will also continue targeted studies focusing on children's health. Research will
examine children's aggregate and cumulative exposure research results from the past five years
(FY 2000-05) and will statistically analyze this data hi support of the above referenced FY 2006
FQPA mandate. Remaining critical children's aggregate exposure issues will also be identified,
and targeted research studies will be conducted through FY 2007 to address these issues and
generate the critical exposure and exposure factor data needed to reduce risk assessors' reliance
on default assumptions. Finally, EPA is working with OPPTS and OAR under the "Buy Clean"
program to provide guidance to school systems and other interested stakeholders on emissions
from products used in schools.
Evaluating the Effectiveness of Public Health Outcomes: In FY 2005, EPA will
continue its efforts to evaluate the effectiveness of risk management options hi producing
positive public health outcomes. This research will provide the scientific understanding and
tools to develop a framework to assist the Agency and partners in evaluating the effectiveness of
risk management options in terms of public health outcomes. Much of the work will consist of
an integrated effort to build collaborations with and linkages to other Federal agencies, such as
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the National Institute of
Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), to identify data bases and indicators that can be used
to assess environmental decisions hi public health terms. This research will provide crucial
information for the Agency's Report on the Environment.
Ecosystem Research: The nation's ecosystems provide valuable services to the public,
such as air and water purification, flood control, food, and raw materials for industrial processes,
as well as multiple recreational benefits. Many human activities alter or damage ecosystems and
their ability to provide these goods and services. To balance environmental sustainability with
the growth of human activity, it is important to understand the condition of ecosystems, the
stressors changing that condition, the consequences of those changes, and the consequences of
preventing, mitigating, or adapting to those changes. EPA's ecological research program
addresses these concerns, and has four primary areas of emphasis: 1) ecological condition; 2)
ecological diagnosis; 3) ecological forecasting and 4) ecological restoration.
EPA's Ecological Research program was evaluated for the FY 2005 President's Budget
using the Administration's Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART). The Agency is committed
IV-142
-------
to addressing the findings in the PART, such as developing long-term outcome-oriented and
annual performance measures, and annual efficiency measures.
Ecological Condition Research: EPA's ecological condition research efforts consist, in
large part, of the various components of the Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program
(EMAP), which focuses on monitoring science required to develop EPA's capability to measure
trends hi freshwater and marine ecosystem health. The EMAP research efforts are guided by the
EMAP Research Strategy, published in 2002.85 Major efforts under EMAP include the National
Coastal Assessment (NCA), Western EMAP, the Central Basin Integrated Assessment, work hi
landscape ecology, and programs to develop and refine environmental indicators.
Under the National Coastal Assessment program, EPA is partnering with 24 marine
coastal states and Puerto Rico, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to conduct sampling of estuaries using probabilistic
methods. As a result of this effort, the condition of near-shore coastal environments in the
Western continental U.S. is being assessed. This effort will continue in FY 2005 to complement
EPA's ongoing work to improve beach monitoring in support of the Clean Water Act (sections
403(c), 301(h), and 316 (a) and (b)). As EPA completes the initial phase of the NCA, the
Agency will have sufficient information on selected estuaries to begin examining changes and,
subsequently, trends in condition. In 2008, there will be sufficient data on estuaries sampled in
the earlier years of EMAP to evaluate the power of the survey design for these systems to detect
changes hi condition and trends. Preliminary data will be reported in the FY 2005 National
Estuarine Program report.
The Western EMAP (a.k.a. Western Pilot) study will continue as a primary activity of
EPA's monitoring research. This study has four areas of emphasis: 1) the landscape atlas for
western states; 2) intensive study of three watersheds (Columbia River basin, Missouri River
basin, and San Francisco Bay region); 3) Pacific coast monitoring; and 4) a western-wide stream
survey. The results from the Western Pilot, National Coastal Assessment and FY 2005 wetlands
reporting efforts will be used to guide the development of monitoring frameworks for other
aquatic ecosystems.86 These programs will provide water resources managers with the tools
necessary to identify status and trends hi the condition of the nation's streams and estuaries and
to assess the impacts of management decisions. These projects will also support development of
a framework of science and technology for sustainability, addressing issues of geographic and
temporal scale, stocks and flows of materials, system vulnerability and resilience, and the role of
information.
EPA is also refining and extending the EMAP approach of working in partnership with
states and tribes to determine the condition of their surface waters, including large rivers hi the
Mississippi River Basin (the Central Basin). Rivers of the Central Basin are challenged by long-
term loadings of nutrients, sediments, and toxic chemicals as well as extensive habitat
alterations. The resulting inputs to the Gulf of Mexico are a significant contributor to causes of
hypoxia, loss of wildlife habitat, and water quality concerns. In addition, there are important
85 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Environmental Monitoring Assessment Program: Research Strategy.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. EPA 620-R-02-002. (2002). Available through the internet:
http://www.epa.gov/emap/html/pubs/docs/resdocs/resstrat02.html
86 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development, Office of Water. National Coastal Condition Report. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office. EPA 620-R-01-005. (2001). Available through the internet:
http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/nccr/chapters/cwapcover.pdf
IV-143
-------
scientific linkages between the Central Basin research and proposed watershed mitigation and
management efforts. The health of these large rivers is linked to the conditions of small streams,
and ultimately their watersheds. Determining the condition of large rivers and understanding the
processes occurring in the watersheds will be important for diagnosing the causes of impaired
conditions in these river systems. In FY 2005, research will continue to develop a sampling and
analysis design to monitor ecological condition of the Missouri, upper Mississippi, and Ohio
Rivers.
Research in FY 2005 will also provide technical guidance for implementing and
evaluating projects to restore riparian zones, which are critical, landscape components for the
restoration of aquatic ecosystems and water quality. Landscape ecology research in FY 2005
will continue to focus on improving estimates on the effects of land-based stressors on aquatic,
estuarine, wetland, terrestrial, and landscape conditions. This work extends the EMAP
probability sampling design to estimate conditions of ecological resources across the West
through the application of spatially-distributed models. Landscape characterization research
includes: 1) planning and generating land characteristic databases for determining current
conditions and (change land cover and other spatial databases); 2) continuing remote sensing
research and developing high resolution imagery applications to document changes in land cover
over time; and 3) quantifying relationships between landscape metrics and specific parameters.
This research will significantly improve EPA's ecological monitoring and assessments, as well
as risk management decisions, and will reduce uncertainty in other high priority research
programs. The Landscape Sciences Program is contributing a national assessment of riparian
habitat conditions to the Committee on Environment and Natural Resources' (CENR) National
Environmental Report. This report will fit into the framework for conducting a national
landscape assessment by the year 2008.
Environmental indicators research in FY 2005 will continue to focus on: 1) the
development of the next generation of biological indicators to characterize ecosystem condition
and diagnose exposure to specific stressors; 2) the application of these indicators to the
monitoring of aquatic ecosystems; and 3) the interpretation of the indicators hi ecological risk
assessments. Ecological indicators, including genetic and landscape, will be developed and
evaluated using EPA's Indicator Guidelines.87 Also, prototype indicators of condition for deep
river fish and population genetics data will be developed, which are unique to ecological
integrity studies. This will provide inherent measures of population fitness and sustainability,
which can be associated with historic or anthropogenic stresses.
Products of EMAP research conducted by EPA researchers, and through contracts and
cooperative agreements are subjected to quality assurance (QA) procedures. EMAP has had
more than 25 separate peer reviews of individual program components (over the last 10 years).
The EPA Science Advisory Board has also reviewed several aspects of EMAP, paying particular
attention to the development of indicators and the integration and assessment activities within the
program. (Criteria: Quality)
By integrating EMAP activities described herein with the monitoring and research
activities of other agencies, specifically through the efforts of the twelve federal partners that
comprise the National Environmental Monitoring Initiative, EPA can begin to assess the status of
87 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Evaluation Guidelines For Ecological Indicators. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office. EPA 620-R-99-005. (2000)
FV-144
-------
resources and their multiple uses in the context of entire ecosystems. A fully integrated and
coordinated network can provide a better understanding of our environmental resources and
produce greater cost-effectiveness, while continuing to meet individual agency missions.
(Criteria: Relevance)
A major component of this research is the development of techniques for the assessment
of condition at regional scales. Progress is evident in the successful application of these
techniques in the Mid-Atlantic and adoption by states, and in current work on the National
Coastal Assessment (NCA) and the Western Pilot. In the Mid-Atlantic, for example, a decade of
work has produced such landmark reports as an Ecological Assessment of the United States Mid-
Atlantic Region: A Landscape Atlas,88 The Condition of the Mid-Atlantic Estuaries,89 From the
on
Mountains to the Sea; the State of Maryland's Freshwater Streams, and Mid-Atlantic
Highlands Stream Assessment.91 Research in this area will focus on a region-wide ecological
assessment of the Mid-Atlantic hi cooperation with Region 3. The National Coastal Condition
Report provides an assessment of historical conditions of many of the nation's estuaries and is an
important baseline for the NCA Program. (Criteria: Performance)
Ecological Diagnosis Research: Diagnosis research (i.e., process and modeling)
addresses biological, chemical, and physical processes affecting the condition of ecosystems and
their responses to stressors. This research allows for predictions of future landscapes, stressor
patterns, ambient conditions, and receptor responses. Predicting the impact of changes in
conditions enables resource managers to address problems in ways that will more effectively
achieve their environmental protection goals. By providing a better understanding of risks to
ecosystem resources, processes, and services supporting human health and welfare, this research
will help provide better and more ecologically sustainable choices by environmental decision
makers.
Since measurements are not feasible in every watershed because of cost and other
practical constraints, landscape indicators offer an efficient means to detect change, measure
watershed level stressors, and quantify relationships between landscape metrics and specific
parameters. A new generation of wall-to-wall spatial data (e.g., Multi-Resolution Landscape
Characterization land cover data and North American Landscape Characterization historical
landscape data), and advances in geographic information systems (GIS) make it possible for
local, state, and Federal mangers to diagnose causes and forecast future conditions to protect and
restore valued ecosystems more effectively. Diagnosis and forecasting models developed in this
objective are being successfully applied to provide a better scientific basis for ecosystem
protection and restoration, and provide important support for a number of programs (e.g.,
nitrogen and mercury control, Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL), pesticide registration, and
Hazardous Waste Identification Rule (HWIR)).
U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. An Ecological Assessment of the United States Mid-Atlantic Region: A
Landscape Atlas. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. EPA/600/R-97/130. (1997):
6 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. The Condition of the Mid-Atlantic Estuaries. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office. EPA/600/R-98/147. (1998).
90 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. From the Mountains to the Sea, The State of Maryland's
Freshwater Streams. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. EPA/903/R-99/023. (1999).
91 U.S. EPA, Region 3. Mid-Atlantic Highlands Stream Assessment. EPA/903/R/00/015. (2000). Available through the internet:
http://www.epa.gov/maia/pdfiMAHAStreams.pdf
IV-145
-------
EPA will also continue to conduct research to address the effects of excess nitrogen from
atmospheric or other sources and aquatic ecosystems in FY 2005, including the development of
models that predict the loading-response relationships for nitrogen in aquatic habitats and
improved knowledge of the biogeochemical processes controlling nutrient processes in
watersheds. Such models can be used for stressor source apportionment and for the assessment
of management and mitigation strategies. In addition, deposition of nitrogen, along with other
atmospheric stressors such as sulfur, will be monitored throughout the northeastern U.S. to
continue to evaluate the effectiveness of existing regulations on control of the major constituents
of acid rain and the recovery of impacted streams, rivers, and lakes. Additional research in FY
2005 will include investigation into the fate, behavior, and effects of natural organic nitrogen and
controls on the mobility and availability of phosphorous.
Other ecological process and modeling research will continue to develop approaches for
evaluating relative risks from chemical and non-chemical stressors on fish and wildlife
populations across large areas or regions. Research in this area will improve the ability to
perform retrospective (diagnostic) and prospective (forecasting) assessments of risks to animal
and plant life as determined by the spatial distribution of habitat quality and stressors (e.g., toxic
chemicals, nutrients, disease, and invasive species) in the landscape. Research results will be
used to describe habitat requirements for wildlife and to manage watersheds to achieve and
maintain desired ecological conditions, using biological indicators and metrics to determine the
condition of aquatic ecosystems. Research in FY 2005 involves improving the environmental
manager's ability to implement new, more efficient methods for stressor identification and
characterization. A report will be produced on the development of molecular indicators of
exposure to detect biologically relevant exposures to invertebrate organisms. Also, the level 1
Causal Analysis and Diagnosis Decision Information System (CADDIS) will continue to be
utilized in these efforts.92 This research supports the Administration's priority for Networking
and Information Technology Research and Development.
Ecological Forecasting Research: EPA's ecological forecasting research (i.e., risk
assessment) addresses the risk posed to ecosystems by stressors, alone and in combination, now
and in the future. Ecological assessments will link stressors with consequences and evaluate the
potential for damage to particular ecosystems, and will be used to compare the relative risks
associated with different stressors, regional areas, and ecosystems. This research develops tools
to enable environmental risk managers at local, state, and Federal levels to identify priority
sensitive ecosystems.
The Regional Vulnerability Assessment (ReVA) project, begun in FY 2000, will continue
to combine modeled projections of changes in stressors (e.g., pollution deposition, land use
change) with information on sensitive ecosystems in order to identify: 1) the greatest
environmental risks likely to arise in the next 5-25 years, and 2) where those risks are likely to
occur. The ReVA project continues to show that invasive species are major stressors on
ecological resources and will pose significant threats in the future. Successful rapid response
requires both early detection of new invaders and a prediction of their spread based on patterns
of invasion (e.g., shipping) and the inherent vulnerability of different ecosystems to invasion. To
date, monitoring for water quality (e.g., 305b Clean Water Act), early detection of invasive
species, predicting the spread of invasive species, and predicting the vulnerability of ecosystems
92 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Summary Report for the Workshop on the Causal Analysis and Diagnosis
Decision Information System (CADDIS). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. EPA/600/R/02/078. (2002).
IV-146
-------
to invasions have largely been independent activities. The overall goal of this research is to
develop integrated methods of detecting and predicting the spread of new invasive species
introduced into the Great Lakes. Achieving this goal will require coordination among
researchers in several different fields, as well as Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies, and
NGOs.
Ecological Restoration Research: In FY 2005, EPA will continue to focus on the options
available to manage the risks to, and restoration of, degraded ecosystems. The growth rate of the
man-made environment necessitates development of cost-effective prevention, control, and
remediation approaches for sources of stressors and adaptation approaches for ecosystems.
These technologies will diagnose ecosystem restoration needs, evaluate progress toward
restoration, and establish ecologically relevant goals and decision support systems for state and
community planners. EPA is developing integrated restoration technologies which focus on: 1)
rehabilitating, to the extent possible, the structure of watershed ecosystems (e.g., restoring
riparian zones); 2) reducing perceived stressors (e.g., cleaning up contaminated sediments); and
3) enhancing the natural resilience of the system. EPA is also developing tools to assess the
progress, effectiveness, and cost of candidate restoration technologies, including the
development of methods for evaluating negative or unexpected impacts of the restoration
technology. Utilizing this research, local, state and Federal mangers will protect and restore
aquatic ecosystems using scientifically defensible methods. This research will be incorporated
into restoration protocols to allow more uniform approaches to determining effectiveness and
cost, which will relate to potential results hi public benefits. (Criteria: Relevance)
Mercury Research: Mercury is released from a variety of sources, exhibits a complicated
chemistry, and proceeds via several different pathways to humans and wildlife. After release,
mercury undergoes complicated transformations that can result in highly toxic methylmercury,
an organic form of mercury that bioaccumulates in fish and animal tissue. Methylmercury is a
persistent compound posing risks of neurological and reproductive problems for human and
wildlife, and therefore is a pollutant of considerable concern.
93
The 1997 Mercury Study Report to Congress described the magnitude of mercury
emissions hi the United States, identified mercury emission sources, and assessed the health and
environmental implications of those emissions. In the report, EPA concluded that a plausible
link exists between human activities that release mercury from industrial and combustion sources
hi the United States and methylmercury concentrations hi humans and wildlife. While power
generation facilities collectively are the largest remaining source of mercury emissions to the
atmosphere, there are great uncertainties associated with understanding the fate and transport of
atmospheric mercury and how to most efficiently manage this pollutant while simultaneously
meeting significant reduction targets for other pollutants.
EPA has developed a Mercury Research Multi Year Plan (MYP)94, which identifies
research efforts to be conducted over an eight-year time frame and addresses the elements of
93 U.S. EPA, Mercury Study Report to Congress Volume I- VIII. (EPA-45/R-97-003 through EPA-452/R-97-010). Washington
D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. (1997) Available: http://www.epa.gov/oar/mercuiy.html
94 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Mercury Research Multi-Year Plan. Washington DC:EPA. Accessed January
14,2004. Available only on the internet at: www.epa.gov/osp/myp.
IV-147
-------
95
the Agency's externally peer-reviewed Mercury Research Strategy . The MYP reflects the
Agency's research needs concerning mercury sources, control and treatment, environmental fate
and behavior, impacts on ecological resources, and potential effects on human health. The
research strategy and MYP for mercury reflect EPA's ongoing commitment to design and
conduct relevant research that includes providing results reflective of clear goals and priorities
developed with input from customers. (Criteria: Relevance)
The Mercury MYP has two long-term goals: 1) reduce and prevent release of mercury
into the environment and 2) understand the transport and fate of mercury from release to the
receptor and its effects on the receptor. The major emphasis of the mercury research program is
the control of utility emissions, because utilities represent the most significant source (in regards
to magnitude) of mercury release to the atmosphere in the United States. Controlling and
reducing these emissions requires risk management tools, including the development of technical
information and data on the cost and performance of control options (e.g., flue gas treatment).
Research efforts in FY 2005 will continue the Agency's FY 2004 Clear Skies Research
Initiative to identify where emerging control technologies and continuous measurement of
mercury combustion sources can facilitate or optimize mercury emissions reduction. In addition,
work will continue as part of this initiative to develop a method to measure dry deposition of
mercury to support future deployment in routine networks to assess the impact of emissions
reductions over time. This research will also support the recent Utility Mercury Reductions
proposal signed by Administrator Leavitt on December 15, 2003. This proposal will control
emissions of mercury and other hazardous air pollutants from power plants through emissions
trading and would cap power plant mercury emissions at 15 tons in 2018, down from 48 tons in
1999.
Other important research efforts include characterizing mercury effects on ecological
receptors. The presence of mercury hi freshwater fish, particularly predator fish higher hi the
food chain, is the most frequent basis for state fish advisories. Human health assessments are
planned that will provide answers to some of the questions that were raised while setting and
evaluating the current reference dose (RfD) for methylmercury . These assessments will
address the relationship between maternal and cord blood levels of mercury and explore the
potential adverse effects of methylmercury on cardiovascular function. This work will serve as
background and prepare the Agency for a reevaluation of the RfD for methylmercury hi FY
2009. Other Agency priorities and regulatory issues that will directly benefit from mercury
research over the next five to ten years include: MACT rules for chlorine production, municipal
solid waste landfills, and commercial boilers; the Urban Air Toxics strategy; wildlife water
quality criterion; Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) development; and revised Land Disposal
Restrictions (LDRs) for mercury-bearing hazardous wastes.
Report on the Environment (ROE): This work strategically moves EPA beyond its
historic reliance on indicators of reduction hi exposures (e.g., decreased ah", water, or blood and
urine concentrations; decreased emissions/discharges; increased facilities in compliance) to more
direct outcome measures (e.g., unproved ecological conditions, reduced illness and disease).
95 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Mercury Research Strategy' (EPA/600/R-0/073) Washington D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office. (2000)
96 National Research Council (NRC). Toxicological Effects of Methyl mercury. Washington D.C: National Academy Press.
(2000)
FV-148
-------
The Agency is committed to the identification, development, and application of a new generation
of indicators that will extend EPA's ability to assess environmental progress. Indicator research
played a pivotal role hi the formulation and preparation of the first EPA ROE. In FY 2005, EPA
will continue to revise and update the technical report on the state of environmental indicators,
which will provide the scientific basis for the FY 2005 report. The Ecological Research MYP
includes information on goals, priorities, and schedules related to the ROE Report. (Criteria:
Relevance & Performance)
Exploratory Grants Research: In FY 2005, the Exploratory Grants research program will
announce an annual solicitation for research proposals hi areas where significant gaps hi
scientific knowledge and understanding exist. This program provides opportunities for
individual investigators from the academic research community to conceive, define, and propose
research projects. This program supports open, investigator-initiated projects that apply novel
and highly innovative approaches to address environmental issues. It is EPA's longest
established program devoted to addressing emerging environmental issues hi a substantive way.
Panels of external researchers competitively review the proposals, with only the most
scientifically sound proposals ultimately receiving support. (Criteria: Quality & Relevance)
In April of 2003, the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences
(NAS) issued a report on EPA's Science To Achieve Results (STAR) program, which indicated,
"The committee encourages the STAR program to continue funding research that explores future
environmental problems within its overall research portfolio. Research devoted to potential
environmental threats may help to avoid or reduce the impact of such threats or at the very least
97
put into place the scientific capacity to address them." Exploratory grants research will
include the area of nanotechnology, which is one of the Administration's six science and
technology priorities for Federal investment.
EPA Science Advisor: In FY 2005, EPA will continue to support the EPA Science
Advisor. The Science Advisor will be responsible for ensuring the availability and use of the
best science to support Agency policies and decisions, as well as advising the EPA Administrator
on science and technology issues and their relationship to Agency policies, procedures, and
decisions. The Science Advisor's office will continue to promote effective partnerships with
EPA programs and regions, assist them hi their efforts to strengthen environmental science, and
provide for timely and open communication on critical science matters.
Implementing Information Quality Guidelines: In October 2002, EPA released its
Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility and Integrity of
Information Disseminated by the Environmental Protection Agency?* These guidelines were
developed hi response to guidelines issued by the Office of Management and Budget pursuant to
the Data Quality Act. EPA's guidelines present the Agency's procedures for ensuring that the
information we disseminate is of high quality. The guidelines also provide the public an
opportunity to request correction of information. EPA's Guidelines are based on the Agency's
existing Quality System, as well as its Peer Review and Risk Characterization policies.
97 National Research Council of the National Academies. The Measure of STAR: Review of the U.S. EPA's Science to Achieve
Results (STAR) Research Grants Progi-am. Washington D.C.: National Academies Press. (2003)
98 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility,
and Integrity of Information Disseminated by the Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, D.C.: EPA. Accessed January
14, 2003. Available only on the internet at: http://www.epa.gov/oei/qualityguidelines/
FV-149
-------
While the Agency has extensive procedures in place to ensure that the information it
disseminates meets high standards for quality, objectivity, and integrity, further actions will be
taken to ensure that such information is current and fully complies with the guidelines. For
example, the Agency will update some of its scientific and technical products, such as Integrated
Research Information System (IRIS) assessments, to respond to requests for correction. In its
first year of implementing the Guidelines, the Agency has received requests to correct
assessments of two chemicals (Barium and Bromate) contained in the IRIS database. In both
cases, the petitioner calls attention to new or additional information. The Agency expects that
more correction requests are forthcoming.
As noted hi a recent study on EPA regional use of science hi decision-making, there is a
need to enhance the capability of regional offices to conduct peer review. The study
acknowledged that funding is needed to support greater peer review of the regions' major science
products and that a mechanism is needed to identify independent, expert reviewers hi a timely
fashion to enhance the use of science in regional decisions. In FY 2005, the Agency will
establish an extramural mechanism to assist Regions in identifying external peer reviewers and
securing their advice and assistance.
Research: Climate Change: In 2002, President Bush established the U.S. Climate Change
Science Program (CCSP) as part of a new cabinet-level management structure to oversee public
investments in climate change science. The CCSP, which incorporates the U.S. Global Change
Research Program (USGCRP) and the Climate Change Research Initiative established by the
President in 2001, coordinates and integrates scientific research on global change and climate
change sponsored by 13 participating departments and agencies of the U.S. Government,
including the EPA99. All planning and activities in EPA's Climate Change Research program
are coordinated with the CCSP and NOAA.
In 2003, the Climate Change Science Program prepared and released a Strategic Plan for
the Climate Change Science Program in response to the President's direction to accelerate
climate change research activities in order to provide the best possible scientific information to
support public discussion and decision-making on climate-related issues100. In FY 2005, in
coordination with the CCSP Strategic Plan (Criteria: Relevance), the Agency will continue
research and assessment activities of the potential effects of global change on air quality, water
quality, human health, and ecosystems, focusing on those issues for which the Agency has
specific expertise and the necessary statutory authority.
EPA's Climate Change Research Program's draft Research Strategy1®1 and the Multi-
Year Plan (MYP)102 guide the Agency's climate change research and assessment efforts. The
Research Strategy has been externally peer reviewed, and final editorial changes are being made
99 Climate Change Science Program and the Subcommittee on Global Change Research. Our Changing Planet. Fiscal Year
2003. Accessed December 14, 2003. Available on the Internet: http://www.usgcrp.gov/usgcrp/Library/ocp2003.pdf
100 Climate Change Science Program and the Subcommittee on Global Change Research. Strategic-Plan for the U.S. Climate
Change Science Program. Accessed December 12, 2003. Available on the Internet:
-------
to ensure its complete consistency with the CCSP Strategic Plan. The MYP, which provides
more detailed information about the implementation of the program described in the Research
Strategy, is a more dynamic document, adapting to evolving research results to ensure that the
research conducted is relevant to EPA's mission and the greatest research needs of the scientific
and stakeholder communities. (Criteria: Relevance). The Agency will coordinate all research
and assessment activities in FY 2005 with the CCSP Strategic Plan and through interagency
working groups convened by the CCSP. (Criteria: Relevance).
Ecosystems-related work will evaluate the potential effects of global change on aquatic
ecosystems including coral reefs. Assessing aquatic ecosystems capitalizes on the extensive
EPA experience in this area and acknowledges the important influences of terrestrial ecosystems
and land use change alongside the impacts of climate change. The Agency will complete an
assessment of the potential impacts of climate change on goods and services provided by aquatic
ecosystems in the San Francisco Bay Basin and Watershed in FY 2005, as well as an initial
synthesis of the scientific literature on the effects of climate variability and change on the
potential future distribution of nonindigenous invasive species, arid consequent impacts on
aquatic ecosystem health. (Criteria: Performance).
Other efforts will develop models and methodologies for analyzing the potential
consequences of global change on regional air quality, including tropospheric ozone and
particulate matter concentrations, to inform air quality managers and other decision makers about
how global climate change and future technology changes could influence ambient air quality.
The aim is to better characterize the changes in regional emissions and atmospheric composition.
This work will be done hi collaboration with NASA, with the NSF-sponsored National Center
for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), and with NOAA.
Research on the potential effects of global change on water quality will continue to
support understanding the impacts on pollutants and pathogens in surface and ground waters.
These changes could have ramifications for aquatic ecosystems, human recreational uses, and
drinking water. EPA will explore the implications of global change for public drinking water
systems and wastewater treatment facilities.
Research: Pesticides and Toxics
EPA conducts a multidisciplinary research program to examine risks resulting from
exposure to pesticides and toxics. The program is designed to meet the requirements of the Food
Quality Protection Act (FQPA)103 and support the Agency's efforts to reduce current and future
risk to the environment by preventing or controlling the production of new chemicals that pose
unreasonable risk, as well as assessing the risks of chemicals already in commerce (under Toxic
Substances Control Act - TSCA104 - and Federal Fungicide, Insecticide and Rodenticide Act -
FIFRA).105
The research conducted under this objective provides direct support to EPA in
implementing the requirements of these statutes. The program is guided by multiple EPA long-
103 Food Quality Protection Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-70, Section 405.
104 Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976, Title 15, Chapter 53, Section 2609
105 Federal Fungicide, Insecticide and Rodenticide Act of 1972, Title 7, Chapter 6, Section 136r
IV-151
-------
range strategies and plans, including the Safe Food Multi-Year Plan (MYP), 106 the Safe
Pesticides/Safe Products MYP, 107 the Human Health Research Strategy, the Strategy for
Research on Environmental Risks to Children, and the Ecological Research Strategy. (Criteria:
Relevance) EPA's research and regulatory programs collaborate on a regular basis to identify
future research topics of highest priority.
Safe Food: EPA's Safe Food Research program supports efforts to conduct aggregate
(sum of exposures to the same chemical from multiple sources and multiple routes of exposure)
and cumukuive (sum of exposures from chemicals with a common mode of action) risk exposure
assessments and tolerance (allowable levels) assessments on pesticides. Improved assessments
will result in better decisions to protect the public from the consumption of unacceptable levels
of pesticides on processed and unprocessed foods.
In FY 2005, the Agency will continue to conduct research under four broad themes to
meet the requirements of FQPA: 1) evaluate aggregate risks; 2) evaluate cumulative risks; 3)
apply 10X safety factors to protect children and other sensitive populations; and 4) use
physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) data and models to refine risk assessments and
decisions regarding pesticide safety. However, to better coordinate research activities, EPA will
realign major components of food safety research under the human health research program.
More specifically, health effects and exposure research will be consolidated under the human
health program, as well as extramural research under the STAR program.
Risk management research, which will remain in the Safe Food program in FY 2005, will
continue to develop standard protocols for assessing treatment effects on pesticide residues in
drinking water, and testing the efficiency of drinking water treatment systems and the formation
of by-products for pesticide classes of high priority (non-Candidate Contaminant List).
Information collected from these protocols will be used hi aggregate and cumulative exposure
assessments. The first phase of a drinking water protocol to be used by pesticide manufactures
will be completed in FY 2005.
Safe Pesticides/Safe Products Research: Protecting human health and the environment
from harmful agents carries the challenge of developing the capability to assess hundreds of
possible hazardous effects for tens-of-thousands of important commercial chemicals.
Establishing strategic priorities to focus available resources on chemicals that pose the greatest
potential risks is essentialto EPA in minimizing risks from harmful agents. Over the past three
decades, EPA has developed an extensive arsenal of test methods for regulatory risk assessment.
In FY 2005, the Safe Pesticides/Safe Products research program will continue to refine many of
these methods to reduce uncertainty with respect to interpreting the results of tests in EPA
decisions. The program will also address the greater challenge of developing the science
necessary for EPA to know when and how to apply those test methods to gain maximum insight
into the potential risks of a specific chemical.
EPA's Safe Pesticides/Safe Products research program improves the efficiency of testing
by developing spatially explicit, geographically based probabilistic risk assessment methods for
106 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Safe Food Multi Year Plan. Washington, D.C.: EPA. Accessed January 14,
2003. Available only on the internet at: www.epa.gov/osp
107 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Safe Pesticides/Safe Products Multi Year Plan. Washington, D.C.: EPA.
Accessed January 14, 2003. Available only on the internet at: www.epa.gov/osp.
IV-152
-------
ecological risks, by developing the basis to assess the risks of plant-incorporated protectants
(PIPs), and by developing ways to evaluate the safety of newly discovered or novel hazards.
To further the development of a scientific foundation for probabilistic risk assessment
methods for wildlife populations, in FY 2005 the research program will include surrogate test
species in the Interspecies Correlation Estimations (ICE) model, which will be used to estimate
toxic effects on endangered species, and provide an upgraded Pesticide Root Zone (PRZM)
model for use in characterizing ecological risks.
EPA is continuing to build on research launched under the FY 2003 Biotechnology
Initiative focusing on plant-incorporated protectant crops. In FY 2005, the Agency will deliver a
final report outlining the state-of-the-art in tools for monitoring resistance development in the
field and the use of target pest ecology to refine Insect Resistance Management strategies, as
they are determined in risk assessment practice. This report will focus on data gaps in pest
biology, ecology, and population dynamics related to insect resistance development. The report
will also provide insight on the development of appropriate tools to identify and measure
resistance in field populations of target pests.
In FY 2005, EPA will sponsor a workshop on the analysis of population genetics of
invertebrates in agro-ecosystems. Agency risk assessors will use workshop results to better
understand and assess pest genetic architecture and the changes that occur due to pest exposure
.to genetically modified crops, in order to inform future resistance management plans.
Risk management research will deliver verified/validated resistance management models
for delaying resistance to PIP crops in target insects. Models can describe the development of
resistance to PIPs by targeted insects and various approaches to mitigating the development of
resistant insect populations. The Agency currently employs nascent models to develop
resistance management strategies.
EPA will continue to upgrade the pesticide spray drift model and integrate the Agency's
research with the Spray Drift Task Force's research. An upgraded spray drift exposure model
will be produced with added modules for orchard and ground application of pesticides for
assessing risks associated with re-volatilization and secondary drift from the near field to the
meso field.
Little is known about the environmental distribution and adverse environmental effects of
perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), a persistent organic pollutant, and the alternative chemicals
being developed to replace it. In FY 2005, EPA will deliver "A Report on Approaches to Assess
Ecological Risk of Fluorinated Chemicals in Small Fish and Amphibian Models". (R&D
Criteria: Performance) This report will characterize PFOS reproductive and developmental
toxicity in small fish and amphibians and compare the toxicity of PFOS and substitutes, as well
as determine the role of life stage in susceptibility to toxicity. The utility of genomic and
proteomic techniques for PFOS toxicity will be assessed and the factors impacting ecological
risk will be made clear. Research will yield an integrated model to assess the risk of fluorinated
chemicals.
Persistent Bioaccumulative Toxics: The Agency will continue to support prevention,
minimization, and, when possible, elimination of Persistent Bioaccumulative Toxics (PBTs) by
IV-153
-------
improving methods for their identification and testing. These pollutants pose risks because they
are toxic, persist in ecosystems, and accumulate in humans, fish, and wildlife as a result of direct
exposure and through the food chain. EPA has committed, as outlined hi the Agency's draft
Multimedia Strategy for Persistent Bioaccumulative and Toxic Chemicals, to create a
coordinated, Agency-wide system that will address the multimedia issues associated with priority
PBT pollutants. (Criteria: Relevance) This research is necessary, because conventional pollution
control techniques will not provide a long-term, sustainable solution. PBTs must eventually be
eliminated at their source through process changes or chemical substitution in products. EPA
will advance the understanding of exposure, assessment, and management of PBTs while
simultaneously working toward PBT prevention.
EPA measures progress on actions under the Agency's multimedia strategy through
environmental and human health indicators (e.g., reduced levels of PBTs hi human blood or fish
tissue), chemical release, waste generation, use indicators and other measures. (Criteria:
Relevance)
Human Health Risk Assessment
Human health risk assessment program priorities are set based on input from various
parts of EPA, other governmental organizations, and the public. Highly trained scientists and
administrative personnel act on these priorities to produce documents and information responsive
to the needs of EPA's program offices, regional offices, and regulatory partners in other Federal
agencies; Tribal, state, and local organizations; and the public.
EPA establishes priorities for human health assessments through internal consultations
and advice from other Federal agencies and regulatory partners, and the regulated community,
both private and public sectors. The Agency publishes draft health assessments relevant to all
media programs, addresses comments from expert external peer reviewers, and publishes final
assessments on the Agency's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) for use by all EPA
programs and on the Internet for use by risk assessors in States and by organizations around the
world.
In FY 2005, work will continue on major human health assessments of national
significance, including trichloroethylene (TCE), ammonium perchlorate, dioxin, methyl-tertiary-
butyl ether (MTBE), tetrachloroethylene, and asbestos. These major assessments are of such
consequence that other Federal agencies and often the National Academy of Sciences become
involved in an expert review capacity. When completed, these assessments are also made
available through IRIS. Other lower profile assessments that are still of high priority to Agency
programs and the public will be peer reviewed and completed in FY 2005 and made available on
IRIS.
Research efforts will also support EPA's National Air Toxics Assessment (NATA)
Program by deriving peer reviewed cancer unit risk and chronic (RfC and RfD) and acute (ARE)
non-cancer reference values. Additional research includes supporting EPA's Drinking Water
Program by characterizing — in peer reviewed documents — the magnitude and severity of risks
associated with exposure to drinking water contaminants and by developing methods for
quantitative microbial risk assessment. Other efforts will assist EPA in assessing chemical risks
and supporting EPA's Superfund Program by providing 1) site-specific technical support for
FV-154
-------
Superfund risk and exposure assessments and 1) peer-reviewed provisional toxicity values to
support regional office decision-making.
Another component of the program focuses on health assessment methods development
and technical support and assistance. EPA's Risk Assessment Forum coordinates the
development and external expert peer review of various risk assessment guidelines and other
guidance documents for use by all Agency programs. Methods development research will
continue on microbial risk assessment techniques, assessment approaches for addressing
complex mixtures, cumulative/aggregate risks, susceptible sub-populations, and development of
tools for quantifying dose-response, such as Benchmark Dose software and nasal dosimetry
methodologies. Expert internal and external peer reviewers help assure the relevance and quality
of EPA health assessment research.
Finally, Agency scientists and other personnel produce Air Quality Criteria Documents
(AQCDs) after consultation on priorities with EPA staff. The Clean Air Science Advisory
Committee (CASAC) reviews the draft AQCDs and makes recommendations, which the Agency
addresses in producing the final document. Expert staff provides technical support to assist in
interpreting the AQCDs for EPA program office use in decision-making. In FY 2005, EPA will
deliver a final Ozone Air Quality Criteria Document, which will provide technical support on the
Ozone and Particulate Matter AQCDs, and will continue work on the Oxides of Nitrogen AQCD.
These AQCD efforts to summarize the state-of-the-science on criteria air pollutants in peer-
reviewed documents assist the Office of Air and Radiation hi fulfilling its statutory
responsibilities.
Research: Computational Toxicology
The emerging sciences of genomics, computational methods, systems biology, and
bioinformatics have created an opportunity to revolutionize the science used in risk assessments
of environmental agents. While EPA has long worked toward obtaining the studies needed to
reduce, refine, and replace test methods, computational toxicology (CT) research under this
objective has the potential to lead to more sensitive and specific testing protocols and risk
assessment methods and to a reduction hi animal testing to a far greater extent by developing
alternative techniques for prioritizing chemicals for further testing. A framework for a
Computational Toxicology Research Program in EPA, which has undergone peer review, has
been developed and will be released hi FY 2004. This research supports the Molecular-level
Understanding of Life Processes activity, one of the Adrninistration's six interagency priority
areas for research and development, by employing, among other things, the use of genomic
information and modern computational techniques to enable better environmental management.
(Criteria: Relevance)
EPA's Computational Toxicology Research Program has three objectives: 1) use
computational tools to improve empirical linkages between exposure to an environmental agent,
presence of the agent in the body, effects on a target organ site, and expression of toxicity; 2)
develop strategies for prioritizing chemicals for subsequent screening and .testing; and 3) develop
better methods and predictive models to improve quantitative risk assessment. The Agency
initiated this research program hi FY 2003 with the broader objectives of expanding its ability to
assess and predict the human health and ecological risks from environmental exposures and
reducing its reliance on animal testing protocols. In FY 2005, the Agency will continue to make
IV-155
-------
progress in these areas. Specifically, EPA will conduct research that demonstrates how CT can
integrate new scientific advances that will allow more accurate risk assessments, thereby
optimizing the cost of EPA regulations, while protecting human and ecological health.
The FY 2005 CT initiative will build upon the current core program by accelerating the
use of bioinformatics and other computational approaches and apply the program to address
other high priority regulatory issues, including the assessment of important classes of
environmental agents. In FY 2005, the Agency will begin to develop computational models that
could be used to help prioritize anti-microbial agents and inerts for screening and testing
requirements by the Agency. This initiative specifically addresses needs identified in the
Agency's 2003-2008 Strategic Plan (Criteria: Relevance), including:
• Increasing the efficiency of registration and re-registration of pesticides and other agents
to ensure that they meet current safety requirements;
• Protecting human health and the environment by identifying, assessing and reducing risks
presented by chemicals, including antimicrobial agents;
• Identifying and assessing chemical, pesticide and microorganism potential risks; and
• Setting priorities for potential risks
EPA program offices will continue to work collaboratively to identify the most important
classes of chemicals and risk assessment needs for prioritization and strategic testing.
Products of computational toxicology research conducted by EPA researchers, and
through contracts and cooperative agreements are subjected to quality assurance (QA)
procedures. The Science to Achieve Results program (STAR) also provides research results
complementing EPA in-house research. In 2005, the STAR program will continue to support
research leading to the development of High Throughput Screens and studies that use a systems
biology approach for hazard identification and risk assessment. Under STAR, all research
projects are selected through a rigorous competitive external peer review process and designed
to ensure that only the highest quality efforts receive funding support. (Criteria: Quality)
Research: Endocrine Disrupter
The EDC research program includes a diverse, multi-disciplinary set of research
involving human health and wildlife. Research to provide a better understanding of the science
underlying effects, exposure, assessment, and management of endocrine disrupters will direct
and refine future research and will develop tools that can help determine the impact of EDCs on
human health and the environment. Research hi direct support of EPA's screening and testing
programs will evaluate current testing protocols and develop new protocols to evaluate potential
endocrine effects of environmental agents. EDC research will assist decision makers in working
toward reducing and eliminating exposure of humans and ecosystems to EDCs.
Evidence suggests that humans and animals, both domestic and wildlife species, have
suffered adverse health effects resulting from exposure to environmental chemicals that interact
1 f\Q
with the endocrine system. Collectively, these substances are referred to as endocrine
108 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Environmental Endocrine Disruption: Effects Assessment and Analysis
Document. Risk Assessment Forum. Washington DC (1996)
IV-156
-------
disrupting chemicals (EDCs). EDCs interfere with the production, release, transport,
metabolism, binding, or elimination of natural hormones hi the body responsible for the
maintenance of equilibrium and the regulation of developmental processes. Reports of
reproductive effects hi humans over the last four decades, and increases hi certain cancers that
may have an endocrine-related basis (breast, prostate, testicular), have led to speculation about
environmental causes.
Recognizing the potential scope of the problem, the possibility of serious health effects
on populations, and the persistence of some EDCs in the environment, EPA developed a
Research Plan109 for Endocrine Disrupters hi 1998. The EDC Research Plan was externally
peer-reviewed by a panel convened by the Agency's Risk Assessment Forum. (Criteria:
Relevance) The Research Plan is consistent with the overall Committee on Environment and
Natural Resources (CENR) Federal research framework, the recommendations made hi the 1999
report on "Hormonally Active Agents hi the Environment"110 published by the NAS, and
recommendations made hi the World Health Organization (WHO)'s "Global Assessment of the
State of the Science of Endocrine Disrupters".l'1
The objective of the EDC research program is to improve the knowledge and
understanding of the exposures and interactions of endocrine disruptors hi the environment hi
order to improve risk assessment and risk management methods. EPA has also developed an
EDC Multi-Year Plan112 (MYP) that identifies the elements of the EDC research program the
Agency will pursue in an integrated fashion. (Criteria: Relevance) The MYP and research
strategy documents represent an ongoing effort to design and conduct relevant EDC research
within well-defined priorities and goals.
As hi the past, EDC-related work will be organized along an integrated pathway of
effects, exposure, risk assessment, and risk management research. EPA's program includes areas
that are of unique importance to EPA hi helping the Agency meet its legislative mandates as well
as research that serves to improve the basic understanding of EDCs, complementing research
conducted at other Federal agencies, hi other countries, and by industry.
Endocrine disrupters research hi FY 2005 will address the priorities established in the
1998 plan by developing tools to identify hazards, characterize the extent of human and wildlife
exposures to known and suspected EDCs, and manage risks from exposure to EDCs. This
research focuses on three long term goals: 1) provide a better understanding of the science
underlying the effects, exposure, assessment, and management of endocrine disruptors; 2)
determine the extent of the impact of endocrine disruptors on humans, wildlife, and the
environment; and 3) support EPA's screening and testing program mandated under the Food
Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996 and the Safe Drinking Water Act
109 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Research Plan for Endocrine Disruptors (EPA/600/R-98/087). Washington
DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. (1998)
110 National Research Council. Hormonally Active Agents in the Environment. Washington D.C.: National Academy Press.
(1999)
111 International Programme of Chemical Safety. Global Assessment of the State-of-the-Science of Endocrine Disruptos. World
Health Organization (WHO). (2002)
112 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development Multi-Year Plan for Endocrine Disruptors. Washington D.C.: EPA Accessed
January 14, 2004. Available through the internet: www.epa.gov/osp/myp
IV-157
-------
Amendments113SDWAA) of 1996. Both FQPA and SDWAA authorize EPA to institute a
screening program for estrogenic and other endocrine effects.
While there is a wealth of data available on some endocrine disrupters, much more
research is needed for the Agency to carry out its large number of mandates. In FY 2005, EPA
will continue to develop and evaluate an innovative DNA microarray and other state-of-the-art
analytical methods for EDCs. Using genomics in the continued development of improved
molecular and computational tools that can be used to prioritize chemicals for screening and
testing is within the "Molecular-level Understanding of Life Process" priority, which is one of
the Administration's six science and technology priorities for federal investment. (Criteria:
Relevance)
Other important areas of research to be conducted in FY 2005 include: determining
whether exposures to endocrine disrupting pesticides during development and maturation of the
immune system alter immunocompetence later in life; investigating potential sources of EDCs
including wastewater treatment plants and concentrated animal feeding operations and the ability
of conventional and advanced drinking water treatment processes to remove EDCs; and
continuing a longitudinal study started in FY 2004 designed to examine very young children's
aggregate exposures to selected pesticides, EDCs, and persistent pollutants. The EDC research
program has identified and described appropriate, strategic performance measures and schedules
within the EDCs MYP. (Criteria: Performance)
Research: Fellowships
EPA fellowships are administered through a variety of programs including: the Science
To Achieve Results (STAR) graduate fellowship program, the Greater Research Opportunities
(GROs) program, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), and more
recently the Association of Schools of Public Health (ASPH). The STAR graduate and GRO
fellowship programs are educational assistance whereas the AAAS and the ASPH fellowships
are professional development opportunities in direct support of EPA.
A blue ribbon panel of the EPA Science Advisory Board recommended hi 1994 that
EPA enhance its environmental education programs for training the next generation of scientists
and engineers. To meet that challenge in 1995, EPA initiated the Science To Achieve Results
(STAR) graduate fellowship program. This program is designed to attract the brightest and most
dedicated students in the Nation for training in scientific and engineering disciplines pertaining
to the protection of public health and the environment. Fellowships are awarded through an
external competitive review process. (Criteria: Quality) The STAR fellowship program is the
only Federal fellowship program designed exclusively for students pursuing advanced degrees in
the environmental sciences and engineering. This program is open to doctoral and entering
Masters' degree students who plan to attend accredited US universities. EPA receives roughly
1,300 applications per year to the program. In FY 2005, the Agency will invest additional
resources to support STAR graduate fellowships. This additional investment will extend the
purpose of developing high quality scientists across multiple disciplines, including the biological
and physical sciences, mathematics, computer sciences, and engineering that will benefit EPA,
the private sector, and the entire Nation.
113 Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments (1996)
FV-158
-------
Through the GRO program, EPA offers undergraduate and graduate fellowships to
students attending minority academic institutions. This undergraduate student program was
initiated in 1982 as a means to bolster the ability of these institutions to offer excellent training
for minority students hi environmental disciplines. To quality, students must attend a fully
accredited four-year U.S. minority academic institution, which include: Historically Black
Colleges or Universities (HBCU), Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs), and Tribal Colleges
(TCs). The graduate GRO stipend is equivalent to that of STAR fellowship including an annual
stipend, fixed amount for authorized expenses, and tuition and fees. Undergraduate fellowships
recipients receive lesser amounts of the same categories and must participate in a summer intern
program after their first year of the fellowship, during which the fellow completes a summer
project meant to complement the work they are doing while supported by the fellowship program
at their home institution.
Since 1981, EPA hi a joint effort with the AAAS has operated the Science and
Engineering Fellowship Program, which places highly qualified and motivated tecfinical
professionals hi EPA headquarters offices for one year, to work on projects at the science-policy
interface. The program operates through a cooperative agreement and its purpose is to enhance
the careers of highly trained technical professionals by providing first-hand knowledge of how
EPA uses technical information in its decision making process. Through 2003, the Agency has
hosted roughly 190 fellows. To be eligible, a candidate must have a PhD degree or equivalent hi
a technical discipline with an environmental focus. Candidates must pass several layers of peer
review and secure an appropriate placement hi EPA headquarters before being offered a
fellowship.
In 2003, EPA debuted a new professional development program called the Environmental
Public Health Fellowship Program. Under a cooperative agreement with the Association of
Schools of Public Health (ASPH), eligible fellows are placed hi EPA labs, centers, and offices to
conduct projects that contribute to EPA's public health mission. In FY 2005, EPA will invest
additional resources to support ASPH fellowships. This investment will further extend the
important contribution to public health issues that ASPH fellows provide within EPA. To be
eligible for this program, a candidate must have graduated from a US university with an
accredited school of public health that is a member hi good standing of ASPH. Candidates must
possess a Masters of Public Health degree or equivalent, pass a peer review process, and secure
an appropriate placement hi EPA before being offered a fellowship. Fellows work
independently, with the guidance of an EPA mentor. The fellowship provides a stipend, plus
funds for health insurance, relocation, orientation, and program-related travel.
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and Recovery
EPA's Homeland Security research program supports one of six Administration FY 2005
Interagency Research and Development Priorities - Homeland Security (Criterion: Relevance).
The Agency intends to increase the state of the knowledge of potential threats, as well as its
response capabilities, by assembling and evaluating private sector tools and capabilities so that
preferred response approaches can be identified, promoted, and evaluated, for future use by first
responders, decision makers, and the public. EPA will work with Federal institutions and other
organizations through collaborative research efforts to help provide strong homeland defense and
response programs.
IV-159
-------
In order to facilitate this research, EPA established the National Homeland Security
Research Center to conduct critical cross-cutting research to provide near-term, appropriate,
affordable, reliable, tested, and effective technologies and guidance. Research focuses on
preparedness, risk assessment, detection, containment, decontamination and disposal in response
to chemical and biological attacks. The Center has put into place standard operating procedures
and quality assurance plans to ensure quality hi funding its research (Criterion: Quality). In
addition, the Center and its programs are undergoing a number of reviews including those of the
National Academy of Sciences, EPA Science Advisory Board, and Board of Scientific
Counselors (Criteria: Relevance and Quality).
This research contributes to the Preparedness, Response, and Recovery goal of EPA's
Homeland Security Strategic Plan114, which describes the goals and priorities for the Agency's
Homeland Security program (Criterion: Relevance). Under this goal, EPA will focus on
strengthening and broadening its response capabilities, clarifying its roles and responsibilities to
ensure an effective response, and promoting unproved response capabilities across government
and industry for areas in which EPA has unique knowledge and expertise.
Water Security Research: Water security research will focus on developing, testing,
demonstrating, communicating, and implementing enhanced methods for detection, treatment,
and containment of biological and chemical warfare agents and bulk industrial chemicals
intentionally introduced into drinking water systems.
In FY 2005, detection work will focus on testing and verifying innovative detection
devices, developing new devices or methods for rapid response, and pilot-scale testing of
detection networks and early alert and warning systems. Containment research will seek to
develop, evaluate, and test methods and procedures for preventing the spread of contaminants in
drinking water sources and distribution systems, with particular emphasis on the use of models to
predict contaminant flow and isolation. Research will also focus on development, evaluation,
and testing of methods, technologies, and procedures for decontaminating drinking water, with
consideration of efficacy, utility, safety, and cost.
Scientific and technical support activities will continue to provide assistance for
managing threats to, or actual attacks on, water infrastructure. Emphasis will be placed on:
refining a protocol for first responders; improving detection, containment, and decontamination
techniques and technologies based on vulnerability assessments; improving approaches for
coordination of water managers and public health officials hi responding to terror events; and
enhancing physical security of water systems through new design and security techniques that
may result hi inherently safer water infrastructure. In FY 2005 guidance and support will be
provided on unproved detection, containment, and decontamination methods. Research will
target utility managers and emergency responders to help institute monitoring approaches, and
EPA will seek the help of public health officials hi identifying and controlling disease outbreaks.
Other efforts will improve techniques and technologies for sharing critical information to assist
utility managers and first responders through a structured information sharing strategy, and
relaying information to stakeholders. Emphasis in FY 2005 will be on implementation of tools
previously developed and outreach to stakeholders. Efforts will also begin to address research
related to protecting wastewater infrastructure from physical or contaminant threats or attacks.
114 U.S. EPA. Strategic Plan for Homeland Security. Washington D.C.: EPA. Accessed on January 14, 2004. Available only
online at: http:;Vwwv,'.epa.gov/epahoMie/dowiiloads/epa_liomeIamLsecurity_siTategic_plan.pdf
rv-160
-------
Rapid Risk Assessment Research: Rapid risk assessment research will focus on: 1)
implementation of the products developed to date through outreach activities and 2) initiation of
the second generation of risk assessment building on knowledge gained hi all areas of the risk
assessment paradigm.
In FY 2005, research will include: risk assessment of by-products of contamination;
refining toxicity databases; developing transport, fate, dispersion, and exposure parameters; and
developing computer-based tools to aid decision makers in assessing the risks associated with
biological and chemical attacks. In addition, work will begin on establishing protocols for
communicating risks, developing exposure assessments, and improving biological risk
assessment approaches, including sampling procedures to ensure effective decontamination.
Risk assessment work will also focus on providing scientific data and methodologies to support
determination/revision of cleanup guidance goals as new toxicity information becomes available
and as new potential agents are identified. This will involve screening the literature for major
health information and coordinating with other entities. Risk assessments may also be used in
the development of an approach for integrating chemical and radiological risk paradigms to
address a potential "duty bomb" threat.
Risk communication will be an ongoing function requiring revised training materials
tailored to thousands of local communities, first responders, building owners/operators, water
supply systems, and other stakeholders. These activities will incorporate initial tools and other
products developed through research in this area.
Biologicals Research: New research will be initiated that will include development and
validation of environmental sampling and analysis methods for known and emerging biological
threat agents. Such methods are critical to ensuring appropriate response and recovery actions
and developing necessary laboratory support capacity. This research will also produce data,
information, and technologies to assist EPA hi developing standards, protocols, and capabilities
to recover from and mitigate the risks associated with biological attacks.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
S&T
• (+$7,854,700, +25.2 FTE): This technical adjustment realigns cumulative risk resources
from the Safe Food/FQPA research program to the human health research program. This
move consolidates EPA's cumulative risk research under the human health and
ecosystems program/project and aids in the planning and coordination of this effort.
There will not be any programmatic or performance impacts, since the actual work will
not change hi nature or scope.
• (+$4,080,093, +4.0 FTE): In FY 2005, EPA will devote additional resources to
computational toxicology (CT) research. This investment will build upon the current
core program by accelerating the use of bioinformatics and other computational
approaches and apply the program to address high priority regulatory issues, including
the assessment of important classes of environmental agents. In FY 2005, the Agency
IV-161
-------
will begin to develop computational models that could be used to help prioritize anti-
microbial agents and inerts for screening and testing requirements.
(+$2,000,000): This increase supports EPA's efforts to implement information quality
guidelines. While the Agency has extensive procedures in place to ensure that the
information it disseminates meets high standards, further actions will be taken to ensure
that such information is current and fully complies with the guidelines. In FY 2005, the
Agency will establish an extramural mechanism to assist Regions hi identifying external
peer reviewers and securing their advice and assistance.
(+$1,256,500, +2.5 FTE): This increase reflects redirected resources to further support
EPA's Science to Achieve Results (STAR) graduate fellowships program. The majority
of funds will be redirected from ground water and surface water interaction research
within Goal 3. This investment will further support development of high quality
scientists across multiple disciplines, including the biological and physical sciences,
mathematics, computer sciences, and engineering that will benefit EPA, the private
sector, and the entire Nation.
(+$600,000): This increase reflects new resources to support the Environmental Public
Health Fellowship Program through the Association of Schools of Public Health (ASPH).
This investment will further the important contribution to public health issues that ASPH
fellows provide. Under a cooperative agreement with ASPH, eligible fellows are placed
hi EPA to conduct projects that contribute to the Agency's public health mission.
Candidates must possess a Masters of Public Health degree or equivalent, pass a peer
review process, and secure an appropriate placement in EPA before being offered a
fellowship.
(+$300,000): This reflects an increase to EPA's Integrated Risk Information System
(IRIS) program to improve the overall quality and accessibility of the IRIS database.
(-$22,170,900): This reduction eliminates extramural ecosystems research under the
Science to Achieve Results (STAR) program. STAR grants (approximately 50) will be
eliminated under the following areas: 1) estuarine and Great Lakes Programs (EaGles),
including the development and evaluation of new and existing indicators for the West
U.S. Coast, East U.S. Coast, Gulf of Mexico, and the Great Lakes, as well as cross-
regional indicators; 2) genomic indicators of water, including the development of new
indicators based on genomic-enabled research methods and approaches; 3) invasive
species research to predict a species' potential to invade vulnerable ecosystems,
particularly aquatic ecosystems, as well as early detection and rapid response, especially
for inland aquatic and coastal estuarine systems; 4) the statistics center that conducts
advanced statistical science crucial to environmental research at many stages, including
design, development, and analysis; and 5) new watershed classification schemes
supporting the design of efficient monitoring strategies, diagnosis of biological
impairment, and prioritization of watersheds. As a result of this reduction, STAR efforts
designed to establish or improve the connection between ecosystems stressors and
effects, serving as input to decisions at the regional, state, and local levels, will be
discontinued. The Agency will continue to support ecosystem protection research
through its in-house research program.
FV-162
-------
(-$7,854,700, -25.2 FTE): This technical adjustment reflects the realignment of resources
supporting Safe Food/FQPA cumulative risk research. Resources are being realigned to
the human health research program. Given the core scientific nature of this research and
the focus on mode-of-action, the work more logically fits under the human health
research program as opposed to the problem-driven, FQPA research program. The
movement of resources will not diminish support for the implementation of FQPA, nor
will there be any programmatic or performance impacts, since the actual work will not
change in nature or scope.
(-$4,860,000): This decrease reflects the elimination of Science to Achieve Results
(STAR) grants to fund research on endocrine disrupting chemical (EDCs). EPA will
maintain in-house research in this area.
(-$2,016,400): This decrease represents the elimination of Science to Achieve Results
(STAR) grants in mercury research. EPA will maintain in-house research in this area.
(-$1,264,700): The Agency will no longer maintain the ultraviolet (UV) monitoring
network. The network was originally designed to evaluate human exposure to UV. In
1996, the Agency refocused the network on ecological impacts. The UV network has
achieved the ecological goals set out when it was redesigned in 1996.
(-$1,127,100): These resources represent savings that will result from consolidation of
many information technology (IT) services, including call center and service desk, server
management, and hardware and software acquisition, and IT equipment standardization.
This will result in enhanced security and uniform maintenance requirements. Since these
resources represent an efficiency savings, there is no negative programmatic impact.
There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for new and
existing FTE.
Superfund
(+$2,000,000): This increase will support new Homeland Security work in the area of
biological threat agents, including the development and validation of environmental
sampling and analysis methods for known and emerging biological agents. This research
is critical to ensuring appropriate response and recovery actions related to biological
agents.
(-$8,193,900): This represents complete elimination of Homeland Security building
decontamination research. EPA will not complete its core responsibilities to provide
scientifically defensible and cost-effective decontamination methods and force it to
disband the technical and engineering expertise that will be needed to address known and
emerging biological and chemical threats in the future.
IV-163
-------
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
Research
Research to Support FQPA
In 2005 Provide high quality exposure, effects and assessment research results that support the August 2006 reassessment of current-use
pesticide tolerances to EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs so that, by 2008, EPA will be able to characterize key factors
influencing children's and other subpopulations' risks from pesticide exposure.
Performance Measures:
Children's exposure data and tools for assessing aggregate
exposure to residential-use pesticides
FY2003
Actuals
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
09/30/05
data/tools
Baseline: The Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) requires EPA to review, by August 2006, the pesticide tolerances for pesticides in use
as of August 1996. EPA's Office of Research Development (ORD) has been conducting research to generate new and improved
exposure and effects tools (data, methods, aad models) to assist the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) in meeting this 2006
requirement. In FY05, ORD will provide OPP with a summary document highlighting the key results from ORD's exposure
research program over the period 2000-2005. ORD will also provide OPP with validated children's pesticide exposure data and
exposure factor data from multiple exposure field and laboratory studies. This high quality data will fill critical data gaps and
eliminate the need for using many default assumptions currently used in the risk assessment process. An analysis of these results
will also be performed to help identify remaining critical children's exposure data needs. ORD will also provide OPP with a
suite of exposure-to-dose models that can be used to estimate aggregate pesticide exposures for children (by age and
developmental life stage) and other susceptible subpopulations. These state-of-the-art models will be used by OPP to develop
pesticide exposure distributions and address key issues associated with variability and uncertainty in exposure. With improved
information, EPA can better protect public health from risks posed by pesticide use. Beginning in FY 2005, regular evaluations
by independent and external panels will provide reviews of EPA research programs' relevance, quality, and successful
performance to date, in accordance with OMB's Investment Criteria for Research and Development. Reviewers will also
qualitatively determine whether EPA has been successful in meeting its annual and long-term commitments for research.
Risk Assessment
In 2005 Through FY2005 initiate or submit to external review 28 human health assessments and complete 12 human health assessments
through the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). This information will improve EPA's and other decisionmakers' ability
to protect the public from harmful chemical exposure
Performance Measures:
Complete 4 human health assessments and publish their
results on the IRIS website
Initiate or submit to external peer review human health
assessments of at least 20 high priority chemicals.
Complete 8 human health assessments and publish their
results on the KRIS website
Initiate or submit to external peer review human health
assessments of 8 high priority chemicals
FY2003
Actuals
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
4
20
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
assessments
assessments
assessments
assessments
Baseline: IRIS is an EPA data base containing Agency consensus scientific positions on potential adverse human health effects that may
result from exposure to chemical substances found in the environment. IRIS currently provides information on health effects
associated with chronic exposure to over 500 specific chemical substances. IRIS contains chemical-specific summaries of
qualitative and quantitative health information in support of the first two steps of the risk assessment process, i.e., hazard
identification and dose-response evaluation. Combined with specific situational exposure assessment information, the
information in IRIS may be used as a source in evaluating potential public health risks from environmental contaminants. IRIS
is widely used in risk assessments for EPA regulatory programs and site-specific decision making. Updating IRIS with new
scientific information is critical to maintaining information quality and providing decision makers with a credible source of
health effects information. Achieving this APG will provide EPA and other decision makers with needed updates to IRIS so
they can make informed decisions on how to best protect the public from harmful chemical exposure. In FY 2004, the Agency
will complete 4 human health assessments and initiate or submit for external peer review human health assessments of at least 20
high priority chemicals. In FY 2005, EPA will complete 8 more assessments and initiate or submit for review an additional 8
assessments, for a two-year total of 12 completed assessments and 28 initiated or submitted for review.mmBeginning in FY
2005, regular evaluations by independent and external panels will provide reviews of EPA research programs' relevance, quality,
and successful performance to date, in accordance with OMB's Investment Criteria for Research and Development. Reviewers
will also qualitatively determine whether EPA has been successful in meeting its annual and long-term commitments for
research.
IV-164
-------
Regional Scale Ecosystem Assessment Methods
In 2005 The baseline ecological condition of Western streams will be determined so that, by 2008, a monitoring framework is available
for streams and small rivers in the Western U.S. that can be used from the local to the national level for statistical assessments of
condition and change to determine the status and trends of ecological resources.
In 2004 Provide Federal, state and local resource managers with a means to more effectively determine long-term trends in the condition
and vitality of Eastern U.S. stream ecosystems through measurements of changes in the genetic diversity of stream fish
populations.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FT 2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
A study of fish genetic diversity that demonstrates the power 1 report
of this modern approach for evaluating condition and vitality
of biotic communities to Federal, state and local resource
managers.
Baseline ecological condition of Western streams determined 1 report
Baseline: This FY 2005 APG represents the first statistically-valid baseline for Western stream condition from state-based data. Although
States and Tribes are required by the Clean Water Act (CWA) to monitor the condition of all their waters, they typically are only
able to monitor at, and make scientifically defensible statements about, targeted sites that account for only a small percentage of
their total waters. The monitoring framework used in the achievement of this APG removes scientific uncertainty by using a
probability design approach (random sampling) to provide a more cost-effective, scientifically-defensible alternative for
determining the condition of all the streams of a State or Tribe. EPA is transferring this approach to our State, Tribal, and EPA
Regional partners in the Western U.S. so that they can determine the status and trends of their ecological resources. This
monitoring framework also provides the scientific basis for identifying problems and needs for action, causes of harm, and
successful mitigation and restoration efforts. This information will ultimately allow EPA to determine its success in achieving
specific environmental outcomes.
Beginning in FY 2005, regular evaluations by independent and external panels will provide reviews of EPA research programs'
relevance, quality, and successful performance to date, in accordance with OMB's Investment Criteria for Research and
Development. These evaluations will include an examination of a program's design to determine the appropriateness of a
program's short-, intermediate-, and long-term goals and its strategy for attaining these. Reviewers will also qualitatively
determine whether EPA has been successful in meeting its annual and long-term commitments for research. Recommendations
and results from these reviews will improve the design and management of EPA research programs and help to measure their
progress under the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA).
Research on Riparian Zone Restoration
In 2005 Provide technical guidance for implementing and evaluating projects to restore riparian zones, which are critical landscape
components for the restoration of aquatic ecosystems and water quality, so that, by 2010, watershed managers have state-of-the-
science field-evaluated tools, technical guidance, and decision-support systems for selecting, implementing, and evaluating cost-
effective and environmentally-sound approaches to restore ecosystem services as part of watershed management
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Technical guidance for implementing and evaluating projects 1 tech. guide
to restore riparian zones
Baseline: This FY 2005 APG will provide State, Tribal, Regional, and local watershed managers and restoration practitioners with
technical guidance for selecting, implementing, and evaluating cost-effective and environmentally-sound approaches to restore
ecosystem services. Essential ecosystem services are a result of naturally occurring processes and include such necessities for
human health as a reliable supply of clean water, oxygen, nutrient cycling, and soil regeneration, as well as wildlife habitat and
greenspace. Habitat destruction, invasive species, and non-point source pollutants such as excess nitrogen and eroded sediments
adversely impact ecosystem services by contributing to the loss of ecosystems and/or their functions. Finding effective and
efficient ways to protect and restore ecosystem services is necessary for human, as well as ecological, health. Riparian zones,
i.e. those areas immediately adjacent to river and stream banks, are critical components of any watershed. Without a healthy
riparian zone, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to achieve water quality goals. EPA is evaluating the effectiveness of
riparian restoration techniques as tools to achieve goals such as water quality criteria or the restoration of specific ecosystem
functions, such as denitrification. The guidance represented by this APG will help watershed managers and restoration
practitioners in decision-making and on-the-ground implementation of scientifically- and technically-defensible restoration and
management techniques.
Beginning in FY 2005, regular evaluations by independent and external panels will provide reviews of EPA research programs'
relevance, quality, and successful performance to date, in accordance with OMB's Investment Criteria for Research and
Development. Reviewers will also qualitatively determine whether EPA has been successful in meeting its annual and long-term
commitments for research.
IV-165
-------
Exposures and Effect of Environmental Research
In 2005 Provide risk assessors and managers with methods and tools for measuring exposure and effects in children, and characterizing
and reducing risks to children from environmental agents in schools so that, by 2014, EPA will be able to demonstrate why some
groups of people, defined by life stage, genetic factors, and health status, are more vulnerable than others to adverse effects from
exposure to environmental agents.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Methods and tools for measuring exposure and effects in 09/30/05 methods/tools
children, and characterizing and reducing risks to children
from environmental agents in schools
Baseline: Current risk assessments for children are hampered by the lack of exposure and risk data and by a lack of methods that are
appropriate for children. By FY 2004, EPA expects to have better data on children's exposures and on children's exposure
factors. In FY 2005, research will build upon the improved data on children's exposures by compiling and analyzing the data,
and translating the enhanced knowledge into better methods and approaches for measuring and estimating children's exposure
and risk. The research in FY 2005 will culminate in initial approaches, ready for external peer review, on: how to conduct
children's exposure and risk assessments; how to replace default uncertainty factors with data and distributions; and how to use
biomarkers more appropriately in characterizing children's exposures. In addition, the increased understanding of children's
exposures will provide evaluated methods for reducing their exposures and risks in schools and other indoor environments.
These data, methods, and approaches will significantly improve the reliability, credibility, and transparency of children's risk
assessments used by regulatory decision-makers throughout EPA and will provide to the public and to school and daycare
officials tested methods to reduce children's exposures to chemical pollutants.
Beginning in FY 2005, regular evaluations by independent and external panels will provide reviews of EPA research programs'
relevance, quality, and successful performance to date, in accordance with OMB's Investment Criteria for Research and
Development. Reviewers will also qualitatively determine whether EPA has been successful in meeting its annual and long-term
commitments for research. Recommendations and results from these reviews will improve the design and management of EPA
research programs and help to measure then: progress under the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA).
Mercury Research
hi 2005 Provide information on managing mercury and other co-pollutants from utility boilers so that, by 2010, there is an extensive set
of data and tools available to help industry and federal, state, and local environmental management officials make decisions on
the most cost-effective ways to reduce or prevent mercury releases into the environment.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Information on managing mercury and other co-pollutants 1 report
from utility boilers
Baseline: EPA's Mercury Study Report to Congress identified emissions from coal-fired utilities as one of the most significant contributors
of mercury to the air (http://www.epa.gov/oar/mercury.html). On December 14, 2000, EPA determined that mercury emissions
from coal-fired utilities needed to be regulated. Unless some form of multi-pollutant legislation for utility boilers is passed by
Congress, a Maximum Achievable Control Technology standard (MACT) will be promulgated in December 2004 to control
mercury emissions with full compliance of utilities expected by December 2007. There are a variety of technological options
under development that could be used to more cost-effectively achieve any required mercury reduction. These control
technologies need to be evaluated before utilities make decisions on how to comply. The state-of-the-science on emission
controls for mercury will be advanced by investigating the factors that impact the species of mercury in coal-fired utilities flue
gas and the performance of promising mercury control technologies. Results available by the end of FY 2005 will be
documented and made available for use by utilities and other interested stakeholders.
Beginning in FY 2005, regular evaluations by independent and external panels will provide reviews of EPA research programs'
relevance, quality, and successful performance to date, in accordance with OMB's Investment Criteria for Research and
Development. These evaluations will include an examination of a program's design to determine the appropriateness of a
program's short-, intermediate-, and long-term goals and its strategy for attaining these. Reviewers will also qualitatively
determine whether EPA has been successful in meeting its annual and long-term commitments for research. Recommendations
and results from these reviews will improve the design and management of EPA research programs and help to measure then-
progress under the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA).
Homeland Security Research
In 2005 Provide tools, case studies, and technical guidance so that, by FY 2006, first responders and decision-makers will have the
methods, guidance documents, and technologies to enhance safety and to mitigate adverse effects of the purposeful introduction
of hazardous chemical or biological materials into the environment.
In 2004 Provide a database of EPA experts on topics of importance to assessing the health and ecological impacts of actions taken
against homeland security that is available to key EPA staff and managers who might be called upon to rapidly assess the
impacts of a significant terrorist event.
IV-166
-------
In 2004 Provide to building owners, facility managers, and others, methods, guidance documents, and technologies to enhance safety in
large buildings and to mitigate adverse effects of the purposeful introduction of hazardous chemical or biological materials into
indoor air.
In 2004 Verify two point-of-use drinking water technologies that treat intentionally introduced contaminants in drinking water supplies
for application by commercial and residential users, water supply utilities, and public officials.
Performance Measures:
Verify two treatment technologies for application in
buildings by commercial and residential users, utilities, and
public officials to treat contaminants in drinking water
supplies.
Prepare ETV evaluations on at least 5 new technologies for
detection, containment, or decontamination of
chemical/biological contaminants in buildings to help
workers select safe alternatives.
Through SBIR awards, support as least three new
technologies/methods to decontaminate HVAC systems in
smaller commercial buildings or decontaminate valuable or
irreplaceable materials.
Prepare technical guidance for building owners and facility
managers on methods/strategies to minimize damage to
buildings from intentional introduction of
biological/chemical contaminants.
A restricted access database of EPA experts with knowledge,
expertise, and experience for use by EPA to rapidly assess
health and ecological impacts focused on safe buildings and
water security.
Risk assessment toolbox to predict and reduce the
consequences of chemical/biological attacks in U.S. cities.
Technical guidance for water system owners and operators
on methods/strategies for rninimizing damage from
intentional introduction of biological/chemical contaminants
Water system-related case studies that provide a spectrum of
contingency planning situations and responses, including one
specifically focused on the National Capital area
FY2003
Actuals
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
2
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
9/30/04
09/30/05
09/30/05
verifications
verifications
techs/methods
guidance
database
toolbox
tech. guidance
case studies
Baseline: EPA's homeland security research provides appropriate, effective, and rapid risk assessment guidelines and technologies to help
decision-makers prepare for, detect, contain, and decontaminate building and water treatment systems against which chemical
and/or biological attacks have been directed. The Agency intends to expand the state of the knowledge of potential threats, as
well as its response capabilities, by assembling and evaluating private sector tools and capabilities so that preferred response
approaches can be identified, promoted, and evaluated for future use by first responders, decision-makers, and the public.
Examples of the types of products that will be available in FY 2005 include: sampling protocols, efficacy protocols, risk
assessment tools, and threat scenario simulations. These products will enable first responders to better deal with threats to the
public and the environment posed by the intentional release of toxic or infectious materials.
Beginning in FY 2005, regular evaluations by independent and external panels will provide reviews of EPA research programs'
relevance, quality, and successful performance to date, in accordance with OMB's Investment Criteria for Research and
Development. These evaluations will include an examination of a program's design to determine the appropriateness of a
program's short-, intermediate-, and long-term goals and its strategy for attaining these. Reviewers will also qualitatively
determine whether EPA has been successful in meeting its annual and long-term commitments for research. Recommendations
and results from these reviews will improve the design and management of EPA research programs and help to measure their
progress under the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA).
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
FY 2005 Performance Measure; Children's exposure data and tools for assessing
aggregate exposure to residential-use pesticides
Performance Database: Program output; no internal tracking system
IV-167
-------
Data Source: N/A
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: N/A
QA/QC Procedures: N/A
Data Quality Reviews: N/A
Data Limitations: N/A
Error Estimate: N/A
New/Improved Data or Systems: N/A
References: N/A
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Information on managing mercury and other co-
pollutants from utility boilers
Performance Database: Program output; no internal tracking system
Data Source: N/A
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: N/A
QA/QC Procedures: N/A
Data Quality Reviews: N/A
Data Limitations: N/A
Error Estimate: N/A
New/Improved Data or Systems: N/A
References: N/A
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Methods and tools for measuring exposure and effects in
children, and characterizing and reducing risks to children from environmental agents in
schools.
Performance Database: Program output; no internal tracking system
Data Source: N/A
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: N/A
QA/QC Procedures: N/A
IV-168
-------
Data Quality Reviews: N/A
Data Limitations: N/A
Error Estimate. N/A
New/Improved Data or Systems: N/A
References: N/A
FY 2005 Performance Measure; Technical guidance for implementing and evaluating
projects to restore riparian zones.
Performance Database: Program output; no internal tracking system
Data Source: N/A
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: N/A
QA/QC Procedures: N/A
Data Quality Reviews: N/A
Data Limitations: N/A
Error Estimate: N/A
New/Improved Data or Systems: N/A
References: N/A
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Baseline ecological condition of Western streams
determined.
Performance Database: Program-output; no internal tracking system
Data Source: N/A
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: N/A
QA/QC Procedures: N/A
Data Quality Reviews: N/A
Data Limitations: N/A
Error Estimate: N/A
IV-169
-------
New/Improved Data or Systems: N/A
References: N/A
FY 2005 Performance Measure; Complete 8 human health assessments and publish their
results on the IRIS website
Performance Database: Program output; no internal tracking system
Data Source: N/A
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: N/A
QA/QC Procedures: N/A
Data Quality Reviews: N/A
Data Limitations: N/A
Error Estimate: N/A
New/Improved Data or Systems: N/A
References: N/A
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Initiate or submit to external peer review human health
assessments of 8 high priority chemicals
Performance Database: Program output; no internal tracking system
Data Source: N/A
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: N/A
QA/QC Procedures: N/A
Data Quality Reviews: N/A
Data Limitations: N/A
Error Estimate: N/A
New/Improved Data or Systems: N/A
References: N/A
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Risk assessment toolbox to predict and reduce the
consequences of chemical/biological attacks in U.S. cities.
IV-170
-------
Performance Database: Program output; no internal tracking system
Data Source: N/A
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: N/A
QA/QC Procedures: N/A
Data Quality Reviews: N/A
Data Limitations: N/A
Error Estimate: N/A
New/Improved Data or Systems: N/A
References: N/A
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Technical guidance for water system owners and
operators on methods/strategies for minimizing damage from intentional introduction of
biological/chemical contaminants.
Performance Database: Program output; no internal tracking system
Data Source: N/A
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: N/A
QA/QC Procedures: N/A
Data Quality Reviews: N/A
Data Limitations: N/A
Error Estimate: N/A
New/Improved Data or Systems: N/A
References: N/A
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Water system-related case studies that provide a
spectrum of contingency planning situations and responses, including one specifically
focused on the National Capital area.
Performance Database: Program output; no internal tracking system
Data Source: N/A
rv-171
-------
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: N/A
QA/QC Procedures: N/A
Data Quality Reviews: N/A
Data Limitations: N/A
Error Estimate: N/A
New/Improved Data or Systems: N/A
References: N/A
EFFICIENCY/MEASURES/MEASUREMENT DEVELOPMENT
As a measure of efficiency, the Agency will track the time it takes to process ecosystems
protection research grant proposals, global change research grant proposals and endocrine
disruptors research grant proposals from RFA closure to submittal to EPA's Grants
Administration Division. The Agency will also track the number of peer-reviewed journal
articles produced per scientific/engineering FTE.
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
EPA participates in the White House Agricultural Biotechnology Working Group and
works closely with FDA and the USDA's Animal Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS).
FDA and USDA APHIS each have statutory authorities that the Federal government uses in
concert with EPA authorities to ensure the safety of biotechnology products. The three agencies
(EPA, USDA, and FDA) discuss all major actions on genetically modified products. EPA, FDA
and USDA APHIS have been working together .to better disseminate information on
biotechnology products and regulations. It is anticipated that a database of such information will
be made available to the public hi FY 2004. The Agency will continue to work with industry and
USDA and FDA, as well as other relevant Federal agencies, on issues that arise from
biotechnology innovation in agriculture.
Several Federal agencies sponsor research on variability and susceptibility in risks from
exposure to environmental contaminants. EPA collaborates with a number of the Institutes
within the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC).
For example, the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) conducts
multi-disciplinary biomedical research programs, prevention and intervention efforts, and
communication strategies. The NIEHS program includes an effort to study the effects of
chemicals, including pesticides and other toxics, on children. EPA collaborates with NIEHS in
supporting the Centers for Children's Environmental Health and Disease Prevention, which
study whether and how environmental factors play a role hi children's health.
IV-172
-------
The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) supports
research on the reproductive, neurobiological, developmental, and behavioral processes that
determine and maintain the health of children and adults. The NICHD program includes
research on the effects of exposure to environmental agents on human development. NICHD,
EPA, CDC, and other Federal agencies are designing the National Children's Study (NCS), a
large longitudinal epidemiology study of children's exposure to environmental agents. The NCS
will enroll 100,000 children during the mother's pregnancy and follow them throughout
childhood and adolescence. This study on environmental influences on children's health and
development was mandated in the Children's Health Act of 2000.
The National Center for Toxicological Research (NCTR) supports fundamental research
on the effects of chemicals regulated by the Food and Drug Administration. Although some of
the models used by NCTR may be similar to those used by EPA, the chemicals and regulatory
context vary significantly. Historically, NCTR has been a leader in developing models and
principles for risk assessment, which has led to collaborations between EPA and NCTR
scientists.
EPA's Global Change Research Program is coordinated with the Committee on Climate
Change Science and Technology Integration (CCCSTI). Through its participation in the Climate
Change Science Program (CCSP), the Agency collaborates closely with other CCSP member
agencies (e.g., the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA's) Regional
Integrated Science and Assessment Program), to ensure appropriate prioritization and efficiency,
to avoid duplication, and to ensure consistently high standards of scientific review for all aspects
of supported studies and analyses.
EPA and NICHD jointly sponsor research on genetic susceptibility and variability of
human malformations. EPA's efforts in this area focus on identifying environmental agents that
cause birth defects and other developmental disorders, the molecular mechanisms of birth
defects, and how to use mechanistic and other data in the risk assessment process.
The National Cancer Institute's (NCI) Agricultural Health Study (AHS) is a large
epidemiology study of cancer hi farm workers and then* families. EPA is participating in the
AHS through an exposure study of a participant subgroup.
EPA coordinates with the other Federal agencies having health risk assessment expertise,
including the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), the National
Science Foundation, and the National Institutes of Health. In the context of human health risk
assessment, the purposes of these Interactions are to enhance the quality of methods and
approaches through exchange of perspectives and to coordinate and collaborate in future research
efforts in support of human health risk assessment. The Agency also participates on several
government-wide working groups on chemicals of mutual concern, including dioxin, ammonium
perchlorate, trichloroethylene, and formaldehyde.
Research in ecosystems protection is coordinated government-wide through the
Committee on Environment and Natural Resources (CENR). EPA is an active participant in the
IV-173
-------
ENR, and all work in this objective is fully consistent and complementary with other Committee
member activities.
EPA researchers work within the CENR on EMAP and other ecosystems protection
research. The Mid-Atlantic Landscape Atlas was developed in cooperation with NOAA, USFW,
the University of Tennessee, and the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) Oak Ridge National
Laboratory. Development of the Networking and Information Technology Research &
Development (NITR) Modeling System is coordinated with the Army Corps of Engineers
(USAGE), USDA, and DOE. EPA cooperates with the CENR's Subcommittee on Ecological
Systems, hi the restoration of habitats and species, impacts of landscape change, invasive species
and inventory and monitoring programs. A draft Ecological Research Strategy underwent
interagency peer review by the Committee on Environment and Natural Resources (CENR) in
June 1997 and external peer review by the Science Advisory Board's Ecological Processes and
Effects Committee (SAB-EPEC) in July 1997. The strategy was revised in response to SAB-
EPEC suggestions and CENR comments, and the final document was published in June 1998.
EPA is working through interagency agreements with the USAGE on the development of
tools for the management of stressors in reservoir and lake watersheds and the establishment of
an approach for the development of decision support systems to manage these types of
ecosystems. Through interagency agreements with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), EPA
has worked to investigate and develop tools for assessing the impact of hydrogeology on riparian
restoration efforts. This work also focuses on development of tools for the dispersal modeling of
invasive species, the evaluation of the effectiveness of restoration efforts to reconnect
groundwater and surface water hydrology, and the establishment of zones of denitrification
within impaired streams. The collaborative work with the USGS continues to play a vital role in
investigating the impact and fate of atmospheric loadings of nitrogen and nitrogen applications
as part of restoration technologies on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. All of these efforts have
significant implications for risk management in watersheds, total maximum daily load (TMDL)
implementation, and management of non-point source pollutants.
Additional interagency grants programs in Ecology include: the Ecology and
Oceanography of Harmful Algal Blooms (EcoHAB) program with NOAA, NSF, DOD, and
NASA, and nutrient science for watershed management with USDA.
The broad nature of the EDCs issue necessitates a coordinated effort on both the national
and international levels. EPA has shown extensive leadership at both levels - chairing the
Committee on Environment and Natural Resources (CENR) interagency working group and
chairing a Steering Group on Endocrine Disrupters under the auspices of the International
Programme on Chemical Safety/World Health Organization/Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (IPCS/WHO/OECD). Due to the complex nature of the
uncertainties posed by endocrine disrupting chemicals, the overlapping concerns of Federal
agencies, and the resource constraints on the Federal budget, close coordination and cooperation
among Federal agencies are essential to the resolution of critical research questions. While the
CENR provides the umbrella for this coordination, individual agencies are responsible for the
development of their own independent research plans.
Under EPA's leadership, an inventory of Federal research on endocrine disruption has
been developed and is used to evaluate Federal efforts, identify research gaps and establish
IV-174
-------
priorities, and clarify governmental roles and responsibilities. Working with other nations, EPA
has expanded the U.S. Federal inventory to include projects from Canada, Japan, and Europe and
has turned it into a Global Endocrine Disrupters Research Inventory with close to 800 projects.
The IPCS/WHO/OECD Steering Group on Endocrine Disrupters has developed a "Global State-
of-the-Science Review" which was made available August 12, 2002. Both the inventory and the
international assessment result from recommendations made at the 1997 G-8 Environmental
Ministers' Meeting. In FY 2005, EPA will continue to collaborate with European countries
under the U.S.-EU Science and Technology Agreement and with Japanese scientists under the
U.S.-Japan Science and Technology Agreement.
Homeland Security research is conducted in collaboration with numerous agencies,
enabling funding to be leveraged across multiple programs and producing synergistic results.
EPA's National Homeland Security Research Center (NHSRC) works closely with the
Department of Homeland Security to assure that EPA's efforts are directly supportive of DHS
priorities. Utilizing experience gained from the management of ORD's Star Grant Program, EPA
is also working with DHS to provide support and guidance to DHS in the startup of their
Universitity Centers of Excellence program. The Department of Defense organizations are
primarily responsible for the production and control of military chemical agents, and EPA's
National Homeland Security Research Center (NHSRC) works closely with the Edgewood
Chemical and Biological Center (ECBC), the Army Research Laboratory, the Technical Support
Working Group, the Army Corps of Engineers, and other Department of Defense organizations.
In conducting biological agent research the NHSRC works closely with the Centers for Disease
Control (CDC) as well as their military counterparts. The NHSRC works with the Department of
Energy to access research conducted by DOE's National Laboratories as well as to obtain data
related to radioactive materials. In addition to these major collaborations, the NHSRC has
relationships with numerous other Federal Agencies including the Department of Homeland
Security, the U.S. Air Force, Food and Drug Administration, and the National Institute of
Standards and Technology. Also, the NHSRC is working with state and local emergency
response personnel to better understand their needs and build relationships, which will enable the
quick deployment of NHSRC products.
IV-175
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
HEALTHY COMMUNITIES AND ECOSYSTEMS
Brownfields, IV-3, IV-8, IV-9, IV-12, IV-16,
IV-80, IV-81, IV-82, IV-85, IV-86, IV-87,
IV-88, IV-95, IV-96, IV-97, IV-99, IV-101
Brownfields Projects, IV-80, IV-86
Categorical Grant
Brownfields, IV-80, IV-82
Lead, IV-22
Pesticides Program Implementation, IV-22
Targeted Watersheds, IV-103
Wetlands Program Development, IV-103
Children and other Sensitive Populations,
IV-22, IV-80
Commission for Environmental Cooperation,
IV-22, IV-80, IV-81, IV-83
Congressionally Mandated Projects, IV-22,
IV-80, IV-103, IV-134
Endocrine Disrupters, IV-14, IV-134, IV-135,
IV-157,IV-174,rV-175
Environment and Trade, IV-80, IV-83, IV-84
Environmental Education, IV-102
Environmental Justice, IV-3, IV-4, IV-80,
IV-84, IV-85, IV-86, IV-94
Geographic Program
Chesapeake Bay, IV-103
Great Lakes, IV-103
Gulf of Mexico, IV-103
Lake Champlain, IV-103
Long Island Sound, IV-103
Other, IV-80, IV-103
Great Lakes Legacy Act, IV-103, IV-107,
IV-110
Homeland Security
Preparedness, Response, and Recovery,
IV-22, IV-134, IV-159
Human Health Risk Assessment, IV-134,
rV-139,IV-154
Infrastructure Assistance
Mexico Border, IV-80
International Capacity Building, IV-23, IV-94
Mexican Border, IV-2, IV-7, IV-88, IV-99
National Estuary Program / Coastal
Waterways, IV-103
Pesticides
Field Programs, IV-22
Registration of New Pesticides, IV-22
Review / Reregistration of Existing
Pesticides, IV-22
POPs Implementation, IV-22, FV-53
Regional Geographic Initiatives, FV-80,
IV-103
Regulatory Innovation, IV-80, FV-89
Research
Computational Toxicology, IV-134
Endocrine Disrupter, IV-134, FV-156
Fellowships, IV-134, IV-158
Global Change, IV-134
Human Health and Ecosystems, IV-134,
IV-139
Pesticides and Toxics, IV-134
Science Advisory Board, IV-4, IV-9, IV-45,
rv-7i, rv-72, rv-i44, rv-iss, rv-ieo,
IV-174
Science Policy and Biotechnology, IV-134,
IV-136
State and Local Prevention and Preparedness,
IV-22, IV-55
Toxic Substances
Chemical Risk Management, IV-22
Chemical Risk Review and Reduction,
IV-22, IV-36
TRI / Right to Know, IV-23
US Mexico Border, IV-80
Wetlands, IV-3, IV-103, IV-105, IV-106,
rv-112, rv-ii5, iv-i3i, rv-132, rv-i33
-------
Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental
Stewardship
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents
Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship V-l
Improve Compliance V-17
Improve Environmental Performance through Pollution Prevention and Innovation.. V-40
Build Tribal Capacity V-69
Enhance Science and Research .' V-78
Subject Index V-89
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Compliance and Environmental Stewardship
STRATEGIC GOAL: Improve environmental performance through compliance with
environmental requirements, preventing pollution, and promoting environmental stewardship.
Protect human health and the environment by encouraging innovation and providing incentives
for governments, businesses, and the public that promote environmental stewardship.
Resource Summary
(Dollars in thousands)
Compliance and Environmental
Stewardship
Improve Compliance
Improve Environmental Performance
through Pollution Prevention and
Innovation
Build Tribal Capacity
Enhance Science and Research
Total Workyears
FY2003
Actuals
$662,042.0
$395,964.4
$123,311-5
$70,556.6
$72,209.6
3,492.9
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$712,907.9
$418,998.2
$137,968.5
$78,759.3
$77,181.8
3,489.3
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$750,556.9
$431,695.1
$169,802.0
$78,931.1
$70,128.7
3,547.4
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres
Bud
$37,649.0
$12,696.9
$31,833.5
$171.7
($7,053.1)
58.1
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT
The underlying principles of the activities within Goal 5 are to improve environmental
performance through compliance with environmental requirements, preventing pollution, and
promoting environmental stewardship. Working in partnership with State and Tribal
governments, local communities and other Federal agencies, EPA identifies and addresses
significant environmental and public health problems, strategically deploys its resources, and
makes use of integrated approaches to achieve strong environmental outcomes.
Enforcement and Compliance
The Agency is committed to implementing a "smart enforcement" approach to EPA's
mission of identifying, preventing, and reducing potential environmental risks and
noncompliance and promoting greater voluntary environmental stewardship. This approach uses
the most appropriate enforcement or compliance tool to address the most significant problems to
achieve the best outcomes.
Smart enforcement embodies an integrated, common-sense approach to problem-solving
and decision-making. Simply put, smart enforcement is the use of an appropriate mix of data
collection and analysis; compliance monitoring, assistance and incentives; civil and criminal
enforcement resources; and innovative problem-solving approaches; to address significant
environmental issues and achieve environmentally beneficial outcomes. This approach requires
V-l
-------
that the Agency develop and maintain strong and flexible partnerships with regulated entities and
a well-informed public, in order to foster a climate of empowerment, and a shared responsibility
for the quality of our nation's land, resources and communities.
Pollution Prevention and Innovation
While enforcement presents one tool for achieving the Agency's mission, the diversity of
America's environments (communities, homes, workplaces and ecosystems) requires EPA to
adopt a multi-faceted approach to protecting the public from threats that may be posed by
pesticides, toxic chemicals and other pollutants. Throughout its history, EPA has taken the lead
in developing and evaluating tools and technologies to monitor, prevent, control, and cleanup
pollution. The emphasis of the Agency's programs hi the 1970's and 1980's was to identify
viable options for controlling or remediating environmental problems. Over the last decade, the
Agency has turned its attention more and more to pollution prevention (P2) when addressing
many important human health and environmental problems. A preventive approach requires that
the Agency develop: (1) innovative design and production techniques that minimize or eliminate
environmental liabilities; (2) holistic approaches to utilizing air, water, and land resources; and
(3) fundamental changes in the creation of goods and services and their delivery to consumers.
EPA remains committed to helping industry further prevent pollution by adopting more efficient,
sustainable, and protective business practices, materials, and technologies.
The Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 establishes pollution prevention as a "national
objective" and the pollution prevention hierarchy as national policy. The Act requires that
pollution should be prevented or reduced at the source wherever feasible; that pollution that
cannot be prevented should be recycled in an environmentally safe manner; and that, in the
absence of feasible prevention or recycling opportunities, pollution should be treated. Disposal or
other release into the environment should be used as a last resort. Pollution Prevention is
generally more effective than end-of-pipe approaches in reducing potential health and
environmental risks hi that it helps identify voluntary programs which:
• Reduce releases to the environment;
• Reduce the need to manage pollutants;
• Avoid shifting pollutants from one medium (air, water, land) to another; and
• Protect and conserve energy sources and natural resources for future generations by
cutting waste and conserving materials.
Increasingly complex environmental problems, such as the continuing accumulation of
greenhouse gases; poor water quality; increasing urban smog; and inequities in building and
maintaining water infrastructure; give rise to the need for EPA to develop and use a broader set
of cross media tools. Shrinking state and Federal budgets also require the development of new
ways to leverage partnerships with states, local communities and businesses to produce better
environmental results at lower costs. EPA will work to ensure that governments, businesses and
the public meet Federal legal environmental requirements, and will encourage and assist them to
adopt environmental stewardship and to voluntarily exceed current requirements. Through public
recognition, incentives, and sometimes relief from regulatory mandates, EPA will encourage
environmental stewardship, behavior that goes beyond compliance with the laws.
V-2
-------
Strengthening environmental
partnerships, targeting priorities,
expanding the current collection of
tools, and creating a more
innovative culture to effectively
address challenging problems is
what EPA's innovation strategy is
all about
EPA is committed to promoting innovation in
strategies to protect the environment, including new less-
polluting technologies. In FY 2002, EPA launched a
comprehensive Innovations Strategy to drive innovation in all
aspects of the Agency's work. Crafted with input from states
and other stakeholders, the Strategy focuses on transforming
EPA into a more innovative, results-oriented organization by:
• strengthening partnerships with states and Tribes;
• focusing on a set of priority problems that are in need of innovative solutions;
• developing tools and approaches that expand problem-solving capabilities; and,
• fostering an innovation-friendly culture and set of organizational systems.
The effectiveness of EPA's regulatory decisions depends on the analysis underlying these
regulations, and the clarity with which they are presented. Their quality determines how well
environmental programs actually work, and the extent to which they achieve health and
environmental goals. Sound economic and policy analysis builds the foundation for EPA to meet
its overarching goals, as well as to wisely use societal resources.
EPA's emphasis on economic and policy analysis supports the Agency's continuing
effort to quantify the benefits of its air, land and water regulations, policies and programs. For
example, determining the value of ecological systems and the benefits associated with preserving
these systems will be critical over the coming years as the Agency strives to focus on healthy
communities and ecosystems. Sound economic and policy analysis also supports EPA's
stewardship and improved compliance goals by fostering consideration of alternative
approaches, such as voluntary programs, innovative compliance tools, and flexible, market-based
solutions. Sound economic and policy analysis helps EPA achieve results by documenting and
communicating its decisions, thereby avoiding challenges to our analyses that might otherwise
impede our ability to implement regulations, policies or programs.
Tribal Capacity
Since adoption of the EPA Indian Policy in 1984, EPA has worked with Tribes on a
government-to-government basis that affirms the federal trust responsibility that EPA maintains
with federally recognized Tribe and Tribal government. In terms of strengthening partnerships
with Tribes, under Federal environmental statutes, the Agency has responsibility for assuring
human health and environmental protection in Indian Country. EPA has worked to establish the
internal infrastructure and organize its activities in order to meet this responsibility. The creation
of EPA's American Indian Environmental Office (AIEO) in 1994 took responsibility for such
efforts and was a further step in ensuring environmental protection hi Indian Country.
Research
Today's environmental innovations extend beyond scientific and technological advances
to include new policies and management tools that respond to changing conditions and needs.
Examples include market-based incentives that provide an economic benefit for environmental
improvement; regulatory flexibility that gives companies more discretion related to how specific
goals are met; and disclosure of information about environmental performance. As a result of
V-3
-------
these and other innovations, the nation's environmental protection system continues to evolve,
with a focus on increased efficiency and effectiveness, and greater inclusiveness of all elements
of society.
MEANS AND STRATEGY
Improving Compliance: A strong enforcement and compliance program identifies and
reduces noncompliance problems; assists the regulated community in understanding
environmental laws and regulations; responds to complaints from the public; strives to secure a
level economic playing field for law-abiding companies; and deters future violations. The
Agency carefully targets its enforcement and compliance assurance resources, personnel and
activities to address the most significant risks to human health and the environment, and to
ensure that certain populations do not bear a disproportionate environmental burden.
In FY 2005 the Agency will identify national priorities, in consultation with states and
other regulatory partners, to most effectively and efficiently address significant environmental,
public health, or noncompliance problems, and will use the most appropriate tool(s) to achieve
the best outcomes culminating with the development and implementation of performance-based
strategies for FY2005 - FY 2007 national priorities that take into account environmental justice
considerations and a workforce deployment analysis.
The EPA will also promote compliance hi core program areas by working within the
agency and with our partners to address major problems in media-specific programs with the
most appropriate tool(s) to achieve the best outcomes. These efforts will be aided by use of a
facility "Watch List" that identifies facilities with chronic noncompliance problems. EPA will
use compliance data to identify problems in need of EPA or state attention, to monitor
performance of Regional and media-specific program elements, and to improve the effectiveness
of the program by incorporating lessons learned into program operations.
The Agency's "smart enforcement" approach uses the most appropriate enforcement or
compliance tools to address the most significant problems to achieve the best outcomes. This
approach includes:
• Compliance Assistance and Incentives: The Agency's Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance Program uses compliance assistance tools to encourage compliance with
regulatory requirements and reduce adverse public health and environmental problems.
To achieve compliance, the regulated community must first understand its regulatory
obligations, and then learn how to best comply with those obligations. EPA supports the
regulated universe by assuring that requirements are clearly understood, and by helping
industry identify cost-effective options to comply through the use of pollution prevention
and innovative technologies. EPA also enables other assistance providers (e.g., states,
universities) to provide compliance information to the regulated community.
• Compliance Monitoring: The Agency reviews and evaluates the activities of the regulated
community to determine compliance with applicable laws, regulations, permit conditions
and settlement agreements and to determine whether conditions presenting imminent and
substantial endangerment exist. The majority of work- years devoted to compliance
monitoring are provided by the regions to conduct investigations, on-site inspections and
V-4
-------
evaluations, and perform monitoring, sampling and emissions testing. Compliance
monitoring activities are both environmental media- and sector-based. The traditional
media-based inspections and evaluations complement those performed by states and
tribes, and are a key part of our strategy for meeting the long-term and annual goals
established for the air, water, pesticides, toxic substances, and hazardous waste
environmental goals included in the EPA Strategic Plan.
• Enforcement: The Enforcement Program addresses violations of environmental laws, to
ensure that violators come into compliance with these laws and regulations. The program
achieves the Agency's environmental goals through consistent, fair and focused
enforcement of all environmental statutes. The overarching goal of the enforcement
program is to protect human health and the environment, targeting its actions according
to degree of health and environmental risk. Further, it aims to level the economic playing
field by ensuring that violators do not realize an economic benefit from non-compliance,
and seeks to deter future violations.
• Auditing and Evaluation Tools: Maximum compliance requires the active efforts of the
regulated community to police itself. EPA will continue to investigate options for
encouraging self-directed audits and disclosures. It will also continue to measure and
evaluate the effectiveness of Agency programs in improving compliance rates and
provide information and compliance assistance to the regulated community. Further, the
Agency will maintain its focus on developing innovative approaches, through better
communication, fostering partnerships and cooperation, and the application of new
technologies.
• Partnering: State, Tribal and local governments bear much of the responsibility for
ensuring compliance, and EPA works in partnership with them and other Federal
agencies to promote environmental protection. EPA also develops and maintains
productive partnerships with other nations, to ensure and enforce compliance with US
environmental standards and regulations.
• NEPA Federal Review: EPA fulfills its uniquely federal responsibilities under the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). NEPA requires that federal agencies prepare
and submit Environmental Impact Statements (EIS), to identify potential environmental
consequences of major proposed activities, and develop plans to mitigate or eliminate
negative impacts. The Agency maximizes its use of NEPA review resources by targeting
its efforts toward potentially high-impact projects, and by promoting cooperation,
innovation, and working towards a more streamlined review process.
• International: EPA will continue to cooperate with states and the international
community to enforce and ensure compliance with cross-border environmental
regulations, and to help build their capacity to design and implement effective
environmental regulatory, enforcement and environmental impact assessment programs.
Improving Environmental Performance through Pollution Prevention and
Innovation: Preventing pollution through regulatory, voluntary, and partnership actions, that is,
educating and changing the behavior of the public, is a sensible and effective approach to
V-5
-------
sustainable development while protecting our nation's health. Two groups with significant
potential to effect environmental change are industry and academia. The Agency has
successfully implemented a number of pollution prevention (P2) programs with both of these
groups. These programs address the market for products through the purchasing and supply
chain, emphasize certain sectors for additional targeted technical assistance, provide support for
State and Tribal infrastructure, and work to reduce the number and amount of toxic chemicals in
use by finding alternative chemicals and alternative industry processes.
• Environmentally Preferable Purchasing: Because of the enormous span of private and
public sector activities which would benefit from a prevention-based approach, EPA's P2
programs necessarily cover a wide variety of informational and capacity building
activities. For example, the Agency works to improve the market for environmentally
"greener" products though voluntary programs, the Environmentally Preferable
Purchasing (EPP) Program, and the Green Suppliers Network. EPP provides guidance
and carries out a variety of initiatives and outreach activities for a wide constituency,
including federal agencies. Under the EPP Program, EPA will help purchasers identify
those products that generate the least pollution, consume fewest non-renewable natural
resources, and constitute the least threat to human health and to wildlife. The Green
Suppliers Network enables large manufacturers to actively engage all levels of their
supply chain in the development of good business approaches to prevent pollution.
• Pollution Prevention State Grants: The development and support of State infrastructure is
essential for providing small and medium size businesses, government and schools with
the opportunities to change and to test new technologies, processes and alternatives. A
vital component of our strategy is the continuation of the Pollution Prevention State
Grant Program. In FY 2005, EPA will provide $7 million to States and Tribes to support
their efforts to provide industry with technical assistance, information sharing, and
outreach. The grants also support promising, innovative ideas for preventing pollution.
• Technical Assistance: Sector-based technical assistance is another method to accomplish
our mission. The Resource Conservation Challenge is a major national effort to find
flexible, yet more protective ways to conserve our valuable resources through pollution
prevention, waste reduction and energy recovery activities that will improve public health
and the environment. EPA is working to address environmental problems in the
electronics, buildings, hospitals, paper production, and priority chemicals areas under this
comprehensive approach. Similarly, in an effort to expand voluntary pollution prevention
strategies to the healthcare sector, the Hospitals for a Healthy Environment (H2E)
Program works with hospitals and health care facilities to eliminate mercury use and
reduce hospital wastes.
• Green Chemistry: EPA works to help industry further prevent pollution by adopting
more efficient, sustainable and protective business practices, materials, and technologies.
EPA's Green Chemistry Program supports research and fosters development and
implementation of innovative chemical technologies to prevent pollution in a
scientifically sound, cost-effective manner. The Green Engineering Program works to
incorporate "green" or environmentally conscious thinking and approaches in the daily
work of engineers, especially of chemical and environmental engineers. Similarly, EPA's
Design for the Environment (DfE) Industry Partnership Program promotes integration of
V-6
-------
cleaner, cheaper, and smarter pollution prevention solutions into everyday business
practices.
NEPA Federal Review: EPA fulfills its uniquely federal responsibilities under the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). NEPA requires that federal agencies prepare
and submit Environmental Impact Statements (EIS), to identify potential environmental
consequences of major proposed activities, and develop plans to mitigate or eliminate
negative impacts. The Enforcement and Compliance Assistance Program maximizes its
use of NEPA review resources by targeting its efforts toward potentially high-impact
projects, and by promoting cooperation, innovation, and working towards a more
streamlined review process.
Resource Conservation Challenge (RCC): This program focuses on recovering materials
and energy, either by converting wastes into products and energy directly or as a result of
process and product redesigns that produce these benefits. We will closely coordinate our
RCC efforts with the Agency's other pollution prevention activities, potentially revising
our strategies or targets to focus on materials and energy recovery through recycling
when source reduction is not a feasible solution. The Agency is also working with its
partners to identify additional goals that will reflect our expanded effort, beginning in
2003, to increase recovery of materials and energy and reduce releases of priority
chemicals in waste. We expect these new goals to be in place by 2004, as the program
becomes fully operational.
State Innovation Grant Program: EPA will develop and promote innovative
environmental protection strategies that achieve better environmental results at a lower
cost and also reward environmental stewardship. In collaboration with its state and Tribal
partners, the Agency will continue to focus its efforts on innovations that will help small
businesses and communities improve both their environmental performance and their
bottom lines. A cornerstone of the Agency's Innovation Strategy is reaching out to states
and tribes through the State Innovation Grant Program to promote, support and facilitate
innovation hi state and Tribal environmental programs. The Grant Program allows states
and tribes to test innovative ideas, such as using Environmental Management Systems in
the permitting system .to improve environmental results while achieving resource
efficiencies.
Regulatory and Economic Management and Analysis: EPA is exploring the potential for
more integrated, holistic, regulatory and non-regulatory approaches at a facility level,
building on experience with federal and State pilot programs for permitting and pollution
prevention. EPA sees facility-wide approaches as holding the possibility of obtaining
better environmental results, while eliminating unnecessary regulatory burdens. These
approaches should help stimulate pollution prevention, and help facilities obtain the
maximum benefit from use of environmental management systems. The Agency will
augment programs such as EPA's National Environment Performance Track Program,
which recognize and reward superior environmental performance and motivate
improvements. Under its Sector Strategies Program, EPA will also tailor environmental
performance improvement efforts to particular industry sectors.
V-7
-------
• Small Business: EPA has undertaken an effort to review the current Agency Small
Business Strategy. The new Strategy will guide the Agency in future efforts to understand
the operations and needs of small businesses, consider those needs when developing and
implementing programs and policies that affect them, and work effectively with the small
business community to improve environmental performance.
Building Tribal Capacity: EPA's strategy for Tribes has three major components. First,
work with Tribes to create an environmental presence for each federally recognized Tribe. An
environmental presence allows most Tribes to support at least one or two persons working in
their community to build a strong, sustainable environment for the future. These people perform
vital work by assessing the status of a Tribe's environmental condition and building an
environmental program tailored to that Tribe's needs.
Another key role of this workforce is to alert EPA of serious conditions requiring
attention in the near term so that, in addition to assisting in the building of Tribal environmental
capacity, EPA can work with the Tribe to respond to immediate public health and ecological
threats. Second, provide the information needed by the Tribe to meet EPA and Tribal
environmental priorities. At the same time, ensure EPA has the ability to view and analyze the
conditions on Indian lands and the effects of EPA and Tribal actions and programs on the
environmental conditions. Third, provide the opportunity for implementation of Tribal
environmental programs by Tribes, or directly by EPA, as necessary.
Managing and Improving Environmental Data: Through the Environmental
Information Exchange Network (http://www.exchange network.net), EPA will continue to
provide funding to states, tribes, and territories to encourage and promote their data integration
efforts and participation in the Network.1 These grants will allow states and tribes to create "next
generation" environmental data systems that integrate air, water, and waste data and provide the
regulated community with efficient and reliable electronic means for reporting compliance
information consistent with the President's Management Agenda and the goals of e-Government.
The National Environmental Information Exchange Network grant program encourages
state and other partners' data integration efforts and their participation in the Network. State,
Tribal, and EPA data on the Network will both facilitate understanding of various environmental
issues and serve as a precursor to understanding the data needed to fully comprehend
environmental conditions and trends and, thus, make better-informed environmental and human
health decisions.
This program has four main parts: Network Readiness; Implementation; Collaboration;
and Support Grants. These grants will increase state and Tribal capacity to integrate their
environmental data, reduce reporting burden, enhance electronic reporting, provide public access
to data, and participate in the Exchange Network.
Enhancing Science and Research: EPA's Compliance and Environmental Stewardship
strategic goal is designed to protect human health and the environment by improving
environmental behavior through regulatory and non-regulatory means. Under this goal, EPA
strives to use science and research more strategically and effectively to inform Agency policy
decisions and guide compliance, pollution prevention, and environmental stewardship efforts. In
order to strengthen the scientific evidence and research supporting environmental policies and
V-8
-------
decisions, EPA works with its partners and stakeholders to identify research needs and set
priorities. The Agency continues to conduct research on pollution prevention and new and
developing technologies, with an overall aim of promoting conservation of energy and natural
resources, pollution prevention, recycling, and other aspects of environmental stewardship.
EPA also conducts research to enhance its capacity to evaluate the economic costs and
benefits and other social impacts of environmental policies. These efforts, undertaken in concert
with other agencies, will result hi unproved methods to assess economic costs and benefits, such
as improved economic assessments of land use policies and improved assessments for the
valuation of children's health, as well as other social impacts of environmental decision-making.
The Agency will also continue to characterize, prevent, and clean up contaminants
associated with high priority human health and environmental problems through the
development and verification of improved environmental tools and technologies. EPA will
incorporate a holistic approach to pollution prevention by assessing the interaction of multiple
stressors threatening both human and environmental health, and by developing cost-effective
responses to those stressors. Research will also explore the principles governing sustainable
systems and the integration of social, economic, and environmental objectives in environmental
assessment and management. Emphasis will be on developing and assessing preventive
approaches for industries and communities having difficulty meeting pollution standards. In a
broader context, the pollution prevention research program will continue expanding beyond its
traditional focus on the industrial sectors to other sectors (e.g., municipal) and ecosystems. The
P2 research program will also focus on developing outcome goals to measure its performance.
Several mechanisms are in place to ensure a high-quality research program at EPA. The
EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB), an independent chartered Federal Advisory Committee
Act (FACA) committee, meets annually to conduct an in-depth review and analysis of EPA's
Science and Technology account. The SAB provides its findings to the House Science
Committee and sends a written report on the finding to EPA's Administrator after every annual
review. In addition, EPA's scientific and technical work products undergo either internal or
external peer review, with major or significant products requiring external peer review. The
Agency's Peer Review Handbook (2nd Edition) codifies procedures and guidance for conducting
peer review.
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES AND FY 2005 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS
Improve Compliance
By 2008, maximize compliance to protect human health and the environment through
compliance assistance, compliance incentives, and enforcement by achieving a 5 percent
increase in the pounds of pollution reduced, treated, or eliminated,1 and achieving a 5 percent
'"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 non-complying 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.) On-line compliance information is available to the public via ECHO,
V-9
-------
increase in the number of regulated entities making improvements in environmental management
practices/ (Baseline to be determined for 2005.)
Improve Environmental Performance through Pollution Prevention and Innovation.
By 2008, improve environmental protection and enhance natural resource conservation
on the part of government, business, and the public through the adoption of pollution prevention
and sustainable practices that include the design of products and manufacturing processes that
generate less pollution, the reduction of regulatory barriers, and the adoption of results-based,
innovative, and multimedia approaches.
Build Tribal Capacity
Through 2008, assist all federally recognized Tribes in assessing the condition of their
environment, help in building their capacity to implement environmental programs where needed
to improve Tribal health and environments, and implement programs in Indian Country where
needed to address environmental issues.
Enhance Science and Research
Through 2008, strengthen the scientific evidence and research supporting environmental
policies and decisions on compliance, pollution prevention, and environmental stewardship.
HIGHLIGHTS
Improving Compliance
The Compliance Assistance Program strategically targets areas where regulated entities
demonstrate an incomplete understanding of how they can best comply with regulatory
requirements. The Agency's support of industry and government sector internet-based
Compliance Assistance Centers greatly expands the reach of EPA's compliance assistance
efforts. It provides educational tools and other assistance, such as workshops and on-site visits,
to help increase understanding of regulatory obligations, improve environmental management
practices and reduce pollution.
Other tools that are used include compliance incentives, voluntary programs, and
innovative approaches designed to motivate better environmental compliance and performance
by individuals, communities, businesses and industry sectors. The Agency promotes self-
policing and improvement through incentives, such as EPA's Audit, Small Business and Small
Local Governments policies and the inclusion of environmental management systems in
enforcement actions.
^'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 requirements. Further information on environmental management
practices is available at w\\^-.epa.gov/compliance/resources/pubiications/piaMiirig/'caseconc.pdf.
V-10
-------
The Agency will continue to work with states and tribes to target areas that pose risks to
human health or the environment, display patterns of noncompliance, or include
disproportionately exposed populations. Media-specific, industry sector and problem-based
priorities will be established for the national program, and will be developed in conjunction with
the Regional offices, with input from states, tribes, environmental justice representatives, and
other stakeholders.
The Agency's Forensics Support Program provides technical support, including field
sampling and measurement; forensic analytical chemistry; and computer forensic imaging,
restoration and analysis. The forensics team consistently provides high-quality data and analyses,
allowing the Agency to successfully investigate and prosecute the nation's most complex
criminal and civil enforcement cases.
Improving Environmental Performance through Pollution Prevention and Innovation
In the 1990's, through the Pollution Prevention Act, Congress formally established a
national policy to prevent or reduce pollution at its source whenever feasible. The Act defines
P2 as ".. .the use of materials, processes, or practices that reduce the use of hazardous materials,
energy, water, or other resources and practices that protect natural resources through
conservation or more efficient use."3
Major provisions of the Act include:
• Providing matching funds for State and local P2 programs through the PPIS grant
program to promote P2 techniques by businesses
• Establishing a P2 strategy outlining the Agency's intent to promote source reduction and
collect data on source reduction
• Operating a source reduction clearinghouse
• Mandating P2 reporting as part of TRI
There are also several Executive Orders that address Pollution Prevention. For example,
Executive Order 13101, titled Greening the Government through Waste Prevention, Recycling,
and Federal Acquisition, strengthens federal mandates to protect the environment and promote
economic growth through the purchase of environmentally preferable products.4 Using the
purchasing power of the federal government is one way to help improve the market for
environmentally preferable, recycled content, and bio-based products while protecting our
natural resources and providing an example for private industry.
The Executive Order (EO) defines "environmentally preferable" as "products or services
that have a lesser or reduced effect on human health and the environment when compared with
competing products and services that serve the same purpose." The EO also states that products
or services should be compared across the entire life cycle - from raw material acquisition to its
final disposal at its end of life. EPA has several responsibilities under the EO, including
3 Pollution Prevention Act. U.S. Code Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, Chapter 133, sec. 13101 b. Policy.
4 Greening the Government Through Waste Prevention, Recycling, and Federal Acquisition - 63 Federal Register 49643.
September 16,1998.
V-ll
-------
developing guidance on environmentally preferable purchasing for federal agencies, and
assisting federal agencies with conducting and documenting pilot projects. EPA has also
developed tools to assist federal purchasers, including a database of environmental standards,
case study of federal pilot projects, model contract language and other resources.
Reducing pollution at its source involves two types of changes in behavior: making the
greener products available, and increasing the demand for them. The Environmentally Preferable
Purchasing (EPP) Program works to harness the purchasing power of government to stimulate
demand for "greener" products and services, thereby fostering manufacturing changes. In FY
2005, the P2 program will shift resources to state grants and other P2 programs, which have
shown significant results. The P2 research program will be evaluated to improve its performance
and contribution to the Agency's P2 efforts.
In FY 2005, the Agency also will continue to identify environmental performance
standards by which products can be evaluated, and invest in the development of tools, such as
life-cycle analysis tools that businesses and purchasers can use to evaluate the environmental
performance of products. In FY 2005, the Agency will continue to focus on providing tools,
resources and models to federal agencies on a number of product categories, including
electronics, janitorial services, and meetings/conferences. EPA will also continue its efforts to
meet its own goals to green its own facilities and operations, including purchasing.
The voluntary Green Suppliers Network (GSN) builds on the premise that cost effective
manufacturing, pollution prevention and environmental protection can be the result of good
business planning and practice. The GSN uses the purchasing power of the private sector to
achieve pollution prevention and manufacturing efficiencies throughout the supply chain. In FY
2005 the GSN will continue to develop and enhance partnerships with the aerospace,
healthcare/pharmaceutical, office/home furniture, farm and construction, and automotive sectors.
The Agency expects to explore GSN with other federal agencies, replication of the program
internationally, and working with new sectors, such as the truck/bus and appliance
manufacturing sectors.
Through voluntary partnerships with academia, industry, and other government agencies,
Green Chemistry supports fundamental research in environmentally benign chemistry and
provides a variety of educational and international activities, including sponsoring conferences
and meetings and developing tools. The Presidential Green Chemistry Challenge Award
Program recognizes superior achievement in the design of chemical products, and continues to
quantitatively demonstrate the scientific, economic, and environmental benefits that green
chemistry technologies offer.5 In FY 2005, the program will explore ways to increase the number
and effectiveness of incentives, and to reduce the barriers to mainstreaming green chemistry
practices.
Traditionally, engineering approaches to pollution prevention have been focused on
waste minimization and have not addressed such risk factors as exposure, fate, and toxicity.
EPA's Green Engineering Program promotes consideration of these, factors in the design,
commercialization, and use of chemical products and the development of feasible, economical
5 U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Green Chemistry Challenge. Accessed October 1, 2003. Available at
http^Vwwy.epa.gov/greenchemistry/index.html.
V-12
-------
processes that minimize generation of pollution at the source. In FY 2005, the program will
focus on the implementation of specific activities that provide quantifiable environmental
benefits, particularly in industrial applications. The program will continue to partner with
research institutions on their green engineering/sustainable research projects and collect data on
the application of Green Engineering approaches and tools, with an emphasis on gathering
information from people and organizations that have already received green engineering training
and have adopted green engineering approaches.
The Design for the Environment Program will continue to work with industry sectors to
reduce risks to human health and the environment, improve performance, and save costs
associated with existing and alternative pollution prevention technologies or processes. In FY
2005, the program expects to initiate one to three new projects. The program will also
implement, as part of any new partnership building activities, evaluation guidelines for
developing and collecting measures, building on program-wide analysis and evaluation that will
be completed in FY 2004.
Pollution Prevention State Grants provide funds to build pollution prevention strategies
into State government environmental protection programs, encourage innovative and non-
regulatory pollution prevention solutions and encourage government/industry partnerships.
Pollution Prevention State Grants are unique within EPA because they address cross-media and
multi-media environmental impacts at the source, rather than end-of-pipe.
The Agency's innovation programs are demonstrating significant results. For example,
in FY 2003, The Performance Track Program added 61 new members, bringing the total
number of members to 320. The Program's first progress report showed that hi FY 2001
Performance Track facilities reduced energy use by 1.1 million MMBTUs, reduced hazardous
materials use by 908 tons, and increased their use of recycled and reused materials by 10,823
tons, (www.epa.gov/sectors/)
EPA expanded its partnerships with industry sectors in FY 2003. Eight new sectors
(agribusiness, cement manufacturing, colleges and universities, construction, forest products,
iron and steel manufacturing, paint and coatings, and ports) committed to work collaboratively
to improve environmental management while also addressing regulatory and other barriers to
improve performance and increase efficiencies, (www.epa.gov/sectors/)
Past performance demonstrates remarkable progress in delivering results. For example,
in FY 2003, EPA assisted more than ten states in continuing support of twenty-one innovative
projects approved in previous years and in approving eight new innovative projects. These
projects achieved a broad range of efficiency gains by: enhancing the infrastructure to recycle
electronic waste, strearnliriing permitting, better coordinating non-point and point sources to
meet Total Maximum Daily Loads, supporting streamlined state authorization procedures, and
improving compliance monitoring for small drinking water systems. These projects' also
invested in less energy demanding alternative technology at pulp and paper facilities, alternative
landfill technology to increase landfill capacity, and increased recycling of hazardous wastes.
During the same year, EPA also awarded grants to three states to test innovative concepts
in permitting. First, the funding provided under the State Innovation Grant Program allowed the
State of Arizona to develop a web-based, "intelligent" screening and permit application
V-13
-------
program for storm water permits that will increase the efficiency of the permitting process.
Second, Delaware will develop an auto body sector Environmental Results Program (ERP)
modeled after other state ERP projects, such as Rhode Island and Florida. The Delaware ERP
project expects to significantly improve environmental compliance in hundreds of small
businesses state-wide. Third, Massachusetts will develop a watershed-based permitting program
to improve water quality on a National Heritage Waterway.
The Environmental Results Program model that originated in Massachusetts has
expanded to seven other states and the District of Columbia with projects being implemented
across seven business sectors: dry cleaners, printers, photoprocessors, auto repair facilities, auto
salvage yards, auto body shops, gasoline stations (underground storage tanks and Stage II vapor
recovery systems).
Research
In FY 2005, the Agency will continue its systems-based approach to pollution
prevention, which will lead to a more thorough assessment of human health and environmental
risks and a more comprehensive management of those risks. EPA will improve FY 2005
performance measures to prevent pollution at its source and continue to evaluate a small set of
environmental technologies through the Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) program.
ETV is a voluntary, market-based verification program for commercial-ready technologies. In
FY 2005, the ETV program will complete 15 additional verifications and two testing protocols.
In addition, the program will evaluate whether verifications and testing protocols have led to
increased use of environmental technologies.
Additionally, through the National Environmental Technology Competition (NETC),
based on results from field demonstrations of one-year in duration, EPA will recognize
innovative technologies that cost-effectively remove arsenic from drinking water to help small
communities meet the new arsenic drinking water standard. Other work includes research on
market mechanisms and incentives that will support investigations that explore the conditions
under which financial and other performance incentives will achieve environmental objectives at
a lower cost or more effectively than traditional regulatory approaches.
EXTERNAL FACTORS
The Agency's Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program's ability to meet its
annual performance goals may be affected by a number of factors. Projected performance could
be impacted by natural catastrophes, such as major floods or significant chemical spills,
requiring a redirection of resources to address immediate environmental threats. Many of the
targets are coordinated with and predicated on the assumption that state and Tribal partners will
continue or increase their levels of enforcement and compliance work. In addition, successful
conclusion of EPA's enforcement relies on the Department of Justice to accept and prosecute
cases. The success of EPA's activities hinges on the availability and applicability of technology
and adequate resources to modernize and maintain our information systems. Finally, the
regulated community's willingness to comply with the law will greatly influence EPA's ability to
meet its performance goals.
V-14
-------
Other factors, such as the number of projects subject to scoping requirements initiated by
other federal agencies, the number of draft/final documents (Environmental Assessments and
Environmental Impact Statements) submitted to EPA for review, streamlining requirements of
the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), and the responsiveness of other
federal agencies to environmental concerns raised by EPA, may also impact the Agency's ability
to meet its performance goals. The NEPA Compliance workload is driven by the number of
project proposals submitted to EPA for funding or NPDES permits that require NEPA
compliance, including the Congressional projects for wastewater, water supply and solid waste
collection facility grants which have increased in recent years.
In the area of pollution prevention, the Agency's work is almost entirely dependent on
voluntary partnerships, collaboration, and persuasion, since there are few environmental
regulations that set specific source-reduction requirements. The Design for the Environment
Program seeks partnerships with industry trade associations to engage jointly in the development
and marketing of products that generate less pollution. The Green Chemistry Program
challenges industry and the academic community to step forward with new chemical
formulations that pose fewer risks to human health and the environment. EPA's strategy of
"greening the supply chain" depends on the willingness of large manufacturers to voluntarily
require their suppliers to provide environmentally preferable products. These efforts all depend
on our partners' continued willingness to cooperate in joint endeavors that may not realize an
immediate payoff. EPA's ability to carry out its voluntary pollution prevention initiatives could
be reduced if partners begin to believe that the initiatives are not worthwhile, are too risky, or are
otherwise contrary to their best interests. Historically however, this has not been the case, and the
Agency and industry have worked well together to reduce pollution.
Finally, our evolving user community will also affect the success of our information
efforts. As more states and Tribes develop the ability to integrate their environmental
information, we must adjust EPA's systems to ensure that we are able to receive and process
reports from states and industry under Agency statutory requirements. Local citizens'
organizations and the public at large are also increasingly involved in environmental decision-
making, and their need for information and more sophisticated analytical tools is growing.
Further, shrinking state budgets have underscored the critical need for the State Innovations
Grants Program.
EPA's policy has been, and continues to be, that Tribes develop the capability to
implement federal programs themselves. However, in working with Tribes, EPA has realized
that "Treatment as a State" (TAS) may not suit the needs of all Tribes. Some Tribes with acute
pollution sources and other environmental problems may be too small to support fully delegated
or approved environmental programs. Other Tribes are wary of seeking TAS status because it
may lead to costly litigation that may in turn lead to a diminishment of Tribal sovereignty. In the
absence of EPA-approved Tribal programs, EPA generally faces practical challenges in
implementing the federal programs in Indian Country. EPA will continue to encourage and work
with. Tribes to develop their capability to implement Federal environmental programs.
Achieving our objectives for Indian Country is based upon a partnership with Indian
Tribal governments, many of which face severe poverty, employment, housing and education
issues. Because Tribal Leader and Environmental Director support will be critical in achieving
this objective, the Agency is working with Tribes to ensure that they understand the importance
V-15
-------
of having good information on environmental conditions in Indian Country and sound
environmental capabilities. In addition, EPA also works with other Federal Agencies, the
Department of Interior (US Geological Survey, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and Bureau of
Reclamation), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Indian Health Service
and the Corps of Engineers to help build programs on Tribal lands. Changing priorities in these
agencies could impact their ability to work with EPA in establishing and implementing
strategies, regulations, guidance, programs and projects that affect Tribes.
Strong science is predicated on the desire of the Agency to make human health and
environmental decisions based on high-quality scientific data and information. This challenges
the Agency to perform and apply the best available science and technical analyses when
addressing health and environmental problems that adversely impact the United States. Such a
challenge moves the Agency to a more integrated, efficient, and effective approach of reducing
risks. As long as high quality science is a central tenant for actions taken by the Agency, then
external factors will have a minimal impact on the goal.
V-16
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Compliance and Environmental Stewardship
OBJECTIVE: Improve Compliance
By 2008, maximize compliance to protect human health and the environment through
compliance assistance, compliance incentives, and enforcement by achieving a 5 percent
increase hi the pounds of pollution reduced, treated, or eliminated, and achieving a 5 percent
increase in the number of regulated entities making improvements in environmental management
practices. (Baseline to be determined for 2005.)
Resource Summary
(Dollars hi Thousands)
Improve Compliance
Building & Facilities
Environmental Program & Management
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Inspector General
Science & Technology
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Total Workyears
FY2003
Actuals
$395,964.4
$3,312.5
$346291.1
$16,436.1
$1,475.2
$268.0
$28,181.5
2,555.4
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$418,998.2
$5,158.7
$371,655.6
$13,056.6
$1,827.3
$0.0
$27,300.0
2,529.4
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$431,695.1
$4,149.5
$383,218.7
$15,116.8
$1,910.1
$0.0
$27,300.0
2,587.4
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$12,696.9
($1,009.2)
$11,563.1
$2,060.2
$82.8
$0.0
$0.0
58.0
Program Project
(Dollars in Thousands)
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Enforcement
Categorical Grant: Toxics Substances
Compliance
Categorical Grant: Sector Program
Compliance Monitoring
Criminal Enforcement
Enforcement Training
Compliance Incentives
Compliance Assistance and Centers
Civil Enforcement
International Capacity Building
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure
Protection
Administrative Projects
TOTAL
FY 2003
Actuals
$20,341.8
$5,229.8
$2,609.9
$56,567.5
$40,448.5
$4,661.5
$9,589.0
$25,054.3
$100,366.7
$1,460.7
$4,181.1
$125,453.6
$395,964.4
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
$19,900.0
$5,150.0
$2,250.0
$58,155.0
$38,076.8
$4,038.6
$9,257.2
$27,205.8
$108,318.4
$1,051.5
$3,901.9
$141,693.0
$418,998.2
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
$19,900.0
$5,150.0
$2,250.0
$62,216.7
$39,990.7
$4,058.1
$9,370.7
$27,759.1
$113,030.5
$862.4
$3,972.4
$143,219.5
$431,695.1
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$4,061.7
$1,828.9
$19.5
$113.5
$553.3
$4,712.1
($189.1)
$70.5
$1,526.5
$12,696.9
V-17
-------
FY 2005 REQUEST
Results to be Achieved under this Objective
The Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program has been the centerpiece of the
Agency's efforts to provide a deterrent to pollution by ensuring compliance with environmental
laws and regulations, and has achieved significant improvements in public health and the
environment. The Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program works together with states
and tribes to identify and address violations of environmental statutes and regulations. By
improving compliance with standards, permits and other established requirements,
environmental problems and their associated risks are either mitigated or avoided altogether.
The universe of private, public, and federal facilities regulated by the Agency under the
various statutes is extremely large and diverse. The EPA will maximize its effectiveness by
strategically targeting its compliance and enforcement activities to address significant risks to
human health and the environment, and those that impose a disproportionate burden on certain
populations. A strong compliance and enforcement program achieves environmental protection
by identifying noncompliance problems, holding violators accountable, and deterring future
violations, while ensuring a level economic playing field for all regulated entities.
State, Tribal, and local governments bear much of the responsibility for ensuring
compliance. EPA will continue its efforts to cooperate with these entities, as well as other federal
agencies, to promote environmental protection. Further, EPA will cooperate with other nations to
enforce and ensure compliance with international agreements affecting the environment. These
activities will also ensure a level economic playing field in an increasingly global trading system.
The Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program employs a "smart enforcement"
approach to achieve its goals of cleaner air, purer water, and better protected land. Smart
Enforcement is the use of the appropriate enforcement and compliance tools to address
significant problems to achieve strong environmental outcomes. The Agency employs integrated
strategies that use data analysis, compliance assistance and incentives, monitoring, and civil and
criminal enforcement to achieve environmental results.
In FY 2005, the Agency's Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program will
measure its performance not only in terms of outputs such as number of inspections, enforcement
actions and compliance assistance activities, but also hi terms of outcomes such as pollutants
reduced, increased understanding of regulatory requirements, and unproved facility practices.
The FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan contains annual goals and measures to show improved
compliance and positive behavioral changes resulting from compliance assistance and
enforcement efforts. These measures complement traditional enforcement and portray a more
complete picture of the results of the Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program.
The President's Management Agenda has put increasing emphasis on programs' use of
performance measures, particularly outcome measures, and the use of efficiency measures.
OMB's Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) program reviews, started hi FY 2002, are now
the primary mechanism for measuring the performance of federal programs. The PART guidance
for FY 2002 and FY 2003 identifies the need for programs to have long-term and annual
efficiency measures. OMB is also using the PART assessment to determine the success of an
V-18
-------
Agency in integrating budget and performance; one of the five areas in the President's
Management Agenda. PART assessments of the Civil Enforcement Program were completed in
FY 2002 and FY 2003. These assessments are to be reflected hi the FY 2004 and FY 2005,
process. A PART assessment of the Criminal Enforcement Program was completed in FY 2003.
For FY 2005, the civil and criminal enforcement programs will use pounds of pollutants
reduced per FTE for both program's efficiency measures. Since achievement of the civil and
criminal enforcement program's annual and long-term goals are highly dependent on the
enforcement cases concluded in a given year, there can be significant variability in a measure
from one year to the next. To partially address this variability, this efficiency measure is based
on three-year rolling averages.
In FY 2005, the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance will increase its
enforcement staffing level by 54 FTE. This increase will ensure that the enforcement and
compliance assurance program continues to address significant environmental problems, to
obtain the best environmental outcomes (e.g., reducing pollutant loadings from the environment)
for the public. These resources will also increase the velocity of compliance through the use of
integrated strategies—compliance assistance, compliance incentives, and enforcement— to
achieve compliance.
Compliance Assistance
The Compliance Assistance Program provides information, training and technical
assistance to the regulated community to increase its understanding of all statutory and
regulatory environmental requirements, thereby gaining measurable improvements in
compliance and reducing risk to human health and the environment. The program also provides
tools, training and assistance to other compliance assistance providers, enabling them to more
effectively help the regulated community comply with environmental requirements. The program
will continue to develop and implement integrated compliance assurance strategies to support
improving compliance within specific industrial, commercial and government sectors, or with
certain regulatory requirements.
EPA will continue to develop compliance assistance tools and provide these to the
regulated community, utilizing stakeholder workgroups comprised of regulators and trade
associations to develop and distribute these tools. Compliance tools cover a wide variety of
assistance vehicles. Assistance is provided in the forms of plain-language guides, comprehensive
sector-based documents (e.g. Sector Notebooks on industry-specific manufacturing processes
and pollution issues), environmental audit protocol manuals, fact sheets, checklists, newsletters,
our web-based clearinghouse, and interactive, virtual, sector-based compliance assistance
centers.
In FY 2005, EPA will tailor the Agency's role in direct delivery of compliance assistance
to focus on targeted initiatives for particular sectors, or environmental problems of national
significance. As part of a strategic compliance assistance program, the Agency will conduct the
following activities to improve results: build a network of compliance assistance providers;
distribute tools to providers that work more directly with the regulated community; provide
training to address sector-specific and regulatory compliance issues; convene a compliance
assistance forum to share best practices; engage in priority setting; provide leadership on
V-19
-------
compliance assistance outcome measurement; develop guidance to encourage use of consistent
compliance assistance measures and a new integrated compliance assurance database; develop
new compliance assistance materials; coordinate a federal roundtable for compliance assistance
programs; and maintain a clearinghouse of compliance assistance materials available from
federal, state and local governments and trade associations. EPA will continue to work with
stakeholders to identify compliance assistance needs and improve planning with states. EPA will
compile Agency and state activities in the Compliance Assistance Activity Plan. Through public
outreach press releases and newsletters, EPA will publicize its compliance assistance efforts and
help the regulated community anticipate and prevent violations of federal environmental laws.
Compliance Assistance Centers are a key component of EPA's efforts to help small and
medium-sized businesses and governments to understand, and comply with, federal
environmental requirements. The centers provide one-stop shopping for regulatory and technical
assistance, pollution prevention activities, and other information particularly suited to the
individual sectors. Operated in partnership with industry associations, environmental groups,
universities, and other governmental agencies, the Centers are accessible through Internet web
sites as well as toll-free telephone assistance lines.
EPA has ten mature Compliance Assistance Centers, and three recently established
centers for the auto salvage, construction, and US-Mexican Border sectors. In FY 2005, EPA
will continue to develop three new centers. Possible new centers include plastics, fuels
management, or marina/boat repair. The Agency will also continue to measure the centers'
success hi improving users' understanding of environmental requirements; changes in facility
management practices; and pollution reduction behaviors.
The Agency will also continue to support, implement, and improve the Compliance
Assistance Center Platform (Platform). The Platform is a suite of comprehensive web-based
tools necessary to create new, full-featured centers; it is a base for launching new sector-specific,
topical, and geographic Internet-based compliance assistance centers. The Platform ensures
efficient integration of technology and content and reduces the financial barriers to creating new
centers.
In FY 2005, the Agency will continue to improve and expand local -and state-specific
information (e.g., state regulatory requirements) in the new and existing Centers. EPA will also
continue to integrate the centers and clearinghouse with the "Business Gateway" Initiative,
formerly the "Business Compliance Assistance One-Stop" (One-Stop) Initiative, one of the
President's 24 e-government initiatives. Visitors to the One-Stop website will be directed to
applicable compliance information through a customized "user profiler."
EPA will measure changes hi understanding, facility management practices, and levels of
pollution reduction resulting from targeted compliance assistance. This ongoing measurement
and analysis will improve the effectiveness of the Compliance Assistance Program. For example,
EPA will use surveys to measure the outcomes of the use of compliance assistance centers and
the clearinghouse, on-site assistance visits, workshops, training and the Environmental
Assistance Summit (formerly the Compliance Assistance Providers Forum). EPA continues to
refine data elements, to ensure a smooth transition from the Reporting Compliance Assistance
Database (RCATS) to the Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS). During FY 2005,
compliance assistance data elements will be refined and reported into ICIS.
V-20
-------
The Federal Facility Enforcement Program will continue to provide technical guidance to
other federal agencies on compliance with executive orders, pollution prevention requirements,
and applicable environmental laws. EPA will also continue working with other federal agencies
to establish and support a new Federal Facilities Stewardship and Compliance Assistance Center
hi FY 2004. EPA will work in partnership with other federal agencies, to implement
environmental management systems, and will conduct environmental management review at
specific federal facilities.
Compliance Incentives
EPA will continue to implement EPA's Audit/Self-Policing Policy, Small Business
Compliance Policy, and Small Local Governments Policy as core elements of the Enforcement
and Compliance Assurance Program. EPA's Audit/Self-Policing Policy encourages corporate
audits and subsequent correction of self-discovered violations, providing a uniform enforcement
response toward disclosures of violations. Under the Audit Policy, when companies voluntarily
discover and promptly correct environmental violations, EPA will waive or substantially reduce
gravity-based civil penalties.
EPA is currently working on many efforts to encourage corporate self-disclosures, with a
special emphasis on the telecommunications, petroleum, iron and steel industries. Through FY
2003, approximately 2,500 entities have disclosed violations at 7,848 facilities. The Agency will
continue to expand use of the Audit Policy through aggressive outreach to particular industries.
EPA actively encourages disclosures at multiple facilities owned by the same regulated entity,
because such disclosures allow an entity to review their operations holistically, which more
effectively benefits the environment.
The EPA Small Business Compliance Policy is intended to promote environmental
compliance among small businesses by providing them with special incentives, such as penalty
reductions to use compliance assistance and other voluntary means to identify, disclose, and
correct violations. This policy meets EPA's obligations, under the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act, to provide a penalty reduction program for small entities. EPA has
worked with stakeholders to modify the policy to encourage greater participation. As part of its
FY 2005 outreach activities, EPA is working with small business compliance assistance
providers to develop tools to assist small businesses in better understanding applicable
environmental requirements and to take advantage of the flexibility the policy offers. EPA will
provide incentives for states and communities to utilize the policy, with the option to establish an
environmental management system to resolve violations.
In FY 2005, the Compliance Incentives Program continues to promote the use of
environmental management systems (EMS), including ISO 14001. The EMS offer companies
and other regulated entities an innovative approach to minimizing environmental impacts by
integrating environmental concerns into business decisions and practices. EPA works with a
variety of stakeholders to promote the use of EMS, and to explore ways in which regulators can
encourage the use of the EMS to enhance environmental performance. Domestic and
international partners include federal agencies, state and local governments, industry, non-
governmental organizations, and the North American Commission for Environmental
Cooperation. Executive Order 13148 requires Federal agencies to establish an EMS by 12/31/05.
V-21
-------
EPA work in partnership with other Federal agencies to implement EMSs at these Federal
facilities. In addition, EPA will conduct Environmental Management Reviews (EMR) at specific
facilities.
The Agency also works to enhance market incentives for responsible environmental
performance. Disclosure of environmental information promotes responsible behavior and
ensures that markets value environmental performance. The United States securities regulatory
system relies on registrants' full disclosure of information, including the registrant's
environmental liabilities, to current and potential shareholders as a primary means of ensuring
informed investments and the proper functioning of the market. EPA's Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance Program notifies parties to EPA-initiated administrative enforcement
actions of their potential duty to disclose the proceeding to the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC). In FY 2005, EPA continues to promote the full and fair disclosure of
environmental information to the public in accordance with the SEC's requirements, and
facilitates the public's use of this information to positively influence environmental performance.
Compliance Monitoring
The Agency reviews and evaluates the activities of the regulated community to determine
compliance with applicable laws, regulations, permit conditions, and settlement agreements, and
to determine whether conditions presenting imminent and substantial endangerment to human
health or the environment exist. The majority of work years devoted to the compliance
monitoring program are provided to the Regions to conduct investigations, on-site compliance
inspections and evaluations. Evaluations include monitoring, sampling, and emissions testing.
The program staff also reviews performance reports submitted by sources.
Compliance monitoring activities are environmental media- and sector-based. The
traditional media-based inspections and evaluations are conducted to supplement those
performed by States and Tribes and to implement programs that are not delegated to States and
Tribes. These compliance inspections and evaluations are key to meeting annual and long-term
goals established for air, water, pesticides, toxic substances, and hazardous waste in the EPA
Strategic Plan. Multi-media approaches such as cross-media inspections and evaluations, sector
initiatives, and risk-based targeting, allow the Agency to take a more holistic approach to
protecting ecosystems and to solving the more intractable environmental problems. EPA also
monitors compliance by Federal facilities with environmental regulatory requirements and
executive orders, as well as conducting single- and multi-media inspections and evaluations.
In FY 2005, EPA plans to conduct approximately 18,500 inspections, evaluations, and
civil and criminal investigations. These activities will be targeted to areas that pose risks to
human health or the environment, display patterns of noncompliance, or involve
disproportionately-exposed populations. EPA is working with States and Tribes to identify where
these inspections and evaluations will have the greatest impact on achieving environmental
results.
In FY 2005, the Agency will begin measuring the percentage of regulated entities
working towards compliance, as a result of our monitoring activities. This measure will
demonstrate that EPA's compliance monitoring identifies potential violations and promotes
facilities to take immediate action to address the violations early to achieve compliance. As
reported in the FY 2002 Annual Performance Report, analysis of compliance inspections and
V-22
-------
evaluations showed that (in the limited inspection programs studied) 50% resulted in the
identification of potential environmental violations, and 10% showed that immediate action was
taken to address environmental and human health risks.
Maintaining an effective inspection and evaluation program depends on a well-trained
workforce. In order to maintain EPA's expertise in field monitoring and to ensure compliance
with EPA Order 3500.1, the Agency supports development of inspector manuals, training
modules, and delivery systems for training Regional, State, and Tribal inspectors and program
managers. The EPA Order 3500.1 establishes consistent Agency-wide training and development
standards for EPA employees leading environmental compliance inspections/field investigations
to ensure that they have working knowledge of regulatory requirements, inspection and
evaluation methodologies, and health and safety procedures. The Order consists of a three-level
training program for EPA compliance inspectors/field investigators: Occupational Health and
Safety Curriculum, Basic Inspector Curriculum, and Program-Specific Curriculum. EPA
compliance inspectors/field investigators must complete the required training before leading a
compliance inspection/field investigation.
Training materials developed may include sampling tools, use of EPA's information
systems and other new technologies, and guidance for conducting inspections. This is especially
critical as EPA moves to formal electronic signature processes (forms and reports that can be
filled out electronically and certified as legal documents). The Order also serves as a potential
model to states, tribes and local environmental agencies that may want to develop their own
inspector training program. In addition, under EPA's Guidelines for Issuing Federal Credentials
to States and Tribes, they will need to complete minimum training which will parallel the
requirements for Federal EPA inspectors. To ensure that training is available, EPA will need to
develop and make available training materials and course modules in the media programs.
In FY 2005, EPA will continue to review and respond to 100 percent of the notices for
trans-boundary movement of hazardous waste, ensuring that these wastes are properly handled in
accordance with international agreements and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
regulations. Through analysis of notices, manifests, tracking documents, and annual reports, EPA
monitors compliance with relevant regulations and takes enforcement actions as necessary.
While the vast majority of the hazardous waste trade occurs with Canada, the U.S. also has
international trade agreements with Mexico, Malaysia, Costa Rica and member countries of the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). In calendar year 2003, EPA
responded to 1,170 notices (representing 446 import notices and 724 export notices) regarding
8,247 distinct waste streams.
In FY 2005, the compliance monitoring program will focus on the national program
priorities established through the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance's FY
2004/2005 Memorandum of Agreement. New priorities will be developed for FY 2005, based on
recommendations from the EPA's Planning Council, regions, states, and tribes responsible for
operating compliance monitoring programs. These priorities may be geographic, sector-based,
media-based or focused on specific regulatory programs
V-23
-------
Civil Enforcement
The Agency's Civil Enforcement Program addresses violations of environmental laws, to
ensure that violators come into compliance with these laws and regulations. The program
achieves the Agency's environmental goals through consistent, fair and focused enforcement of
all environmental statutes. The overarching goal of the civil enforcement program is to protect
human health and the environment, targeting its actions according to degree of health and
environmental risk. Further, it aims to level the economic playing field by ensuring that violators
do not realize an economic benefit from noncompliance, and seeks to deter future violations.
To accomplish these goals, the Civil Enforcement Program is responsible for the
development, litigation, and settlement of administrative and civil judicial cases against serious
violators of priority environmental laws. The federal program will focus its resources on national
program priorities, including environmental and human health problems, trans-boundary
pollutants, and multi-state industrial violators. The Federal facilities enforcement program will
continue to expeditiously pursue enforcement actions at Federal facilities where significant
violations are discovered.
In FY 2005, program management will provide direction, set goals and priorities, and
evaluate and review the national enforcement program. Enforcement and compliance staff will
develop guidance and policy for technical evaluations, investigations, and case development
strategies that may include the use of injunctive relief, supplemental environmental projects, and
other civil penalties as appropriate. Further, enforcement staff will participate in the development
or revision of regulations and interpretive guidance.
Criminal Enforcement
The criminal enforcement program brings to bear the Agency's most powerful
enforcement tool against the most significant environmental violations. By demonstrating that
the regulated community will be held accountable for serious, willful statutory violations in
terms of jail sentences and criminal fines, the program acts to forcefully deter violations of
environmental laws and regulations hi a way that civil judicial and administrative enforcement
might not achieve. EPA's special agents, located nationwide, will conduct criminal
investigations, develop information to support grand jury inquiries and decisions, and work with
other law enforcement agencies to present a highly visible and effective force in the Agency's
enforcement strategy. Cases are referred to the Department of Justice for prosecution, with
special agents serving as key witnesses in these judicial proceedings. The criminal enforcement
program places particular emphasis on cooperation with state and local law enforcement through
participation hi task forces and enhancing capacity through specialized training and community
policing efforts.
EPA's efforts to work more closely and cooperatively with industry are complemented by
the criminal enforcement program. The Agency is sending a clear message to the regulated
community that those who choose to cooperate hi good faith will reap the benefits of that
partnership. Those whose noncompliance is distinguished by culpable conduct can expect
criminal investigation and prosecution. In FY 2005, EPA estimates that it will conduct 400
criminal investigations of traditional environmental crimes targeted to areas that pose risks to
human health or the environment, display patterns of noncompliance, or include
V-24
-------
disproportionately exposed populations. EPA will also continue to develop and deploy a secure
network for proper handling of confidential law enforcement information used in the criminal
program.
Homeland Security
The enforcement program provides investigative and training support to EPA's efforts,
and activities with other Federal law enforcement partners in support of homeland security. The
program maintains a National Counter Terrorism Evidence Response Team to coordinate with
FBI Headquarters and field offices in response to Homeland Security incidents; and a Homeland
Security/Counter Terrorism team, which responds directly to both the National Contingency Plan
and the enforcement program's technical needs. These teams may also respond to requests from
the U. S. Secret Service to provide on-site criminal investigative and technical support at
designated National Special Security Events (i.e. national political conventions, international
events, etc.) In FY 2005, the program will scale down its previous counter-terrorism efforts to
focus on regular criminal enforcement issues.
Enforcement Training
The Agency's enforcement training program is mandated by the Pollution Prosecution
Act to provide environmental enforcement training nationally through the National Enforcement
Training Institute (NETI). The program oversees the design of core and specialized enforcement
courses and their delivery to lawyers, inspectors, civil and criminal investigators, and technical
experts. In FY 2005, the program will develop and deliver training to support national teams
formed to address national enforcement priority areas, and continue to develop and enhance a
training center on the Internet. "NETI Online" offers timely, targeted technical training courses
to a nation-wide and international audience. The site also provides for tracking individual
training plans as well as developing and managing the program's training delivery processes.
The Agency also provides specialized classroom training in criminal environmental law
enforcement at the Department of Treasury's Federal Law Enforcement Training Center
(FLETC) in Glynco, GA. FLETC develops and delivers basic and advanced training to EPA
Special Agents and their state, local, and Tribal partners across the United States and in selected
counties worldwide. FLETC provides one of the few opportunities for state, local, and Tribal
enforcement professionals to obtain criminal investigation training. In FY 2005, the enforcement
training program will enhance opportunities for experiential training with the continued
development of a practical exercise site at its NETI-West facility in Denver, Colorado.
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
A strong state and Tribal enforcement and compliance assurance presence is essential to
EPA's long-term strategic plan objective to identify and reduce significant noncompliance in
high priority areas while maintaining a strong enforcement presence in all regulatory program
areas. Most of the Nation's environmental laws envision a strong role for state governments in
implementing and managing environmental programs. In FY 2005, the Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance Program will continue to support state agencies implementing
authorized, delegated, or approved environmental programs. Consistent with regulations and
V-25
-------
Agency policy, EPA will provide an appropriate level of oversight and guidance to states to
ensure that environmental regulations are fairly and consistently enforced across the Nation.
EPA works with Indian tribes on a government-to-government basis to identify
enforcement, compliance assistance, and capacity building issues affecting Tribal lands. The
Agency's goal is to help tribes develop their own enforcement and compliance assistance
programs so that they can assume greater management of environmental programs in Indian
Country. In FY 2005, the Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program will continue
implementation of the Tribal Strategy hi order to direct compliance monitoring and compliance
assistance capacity-building efforts. By monitoring and evaluating progress made, EPA will
ensure that the plan's commitments are met hi a timely fashion. These efforts will help
implement EPA's 1984 Indian Policy in which EPA works with Tribal governments as full
partners to enhance protection of public health and the environment on Tribal lands.
The state and Tribal grant programs are designed to build environmental partnerships
with states and tribes to strengthen their ability to address environmental and public health
threats. These threats include contaminated drinking water, pesticides in food, hazardous waste,
toxic substances, and air pollution. In FY 2005, the Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Program will continue to award state and Tribal enforcement grants to assist in the
implementation of the compliance and enforcement provisions of the Toxic Substances Control
Act (TSCA) and the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). These grants
support state and Tribal compliance and enforcement activities to protect the environment from
harmful chemicals and pesticides. The enforcement component of RCRA state grants is also
included in this objective.
Under the Pesticides Enforcement Grant Program, EPA provides resources to states and
Indian tribes to conduct FIFRA compliance inspections and take appropriate enforcement
actions, and implement programs for farm worker protection.
States receive toxic substances grant funding for compliance inspections of asbestos and
PCBs and for implementation of the state lead abatement enforcement program. The funds will
complement other Federal program grants for building state capacity for lead abatement, and
enhancing compliance with disclosure, certification and training requirements.
EPA has maintained a multi-media grants program for states and tribes over the last
several years to build or improve compliance capacity within the Agency's regulatory partners
and to foster innovation. The Agency establishes annual funding priorities for the multi-media
grants program, including improving compliance data quality; modernizing data systems;
improving public access to enforcement and compliance data; improving outcome measurement;
supporting state and Tribal inspector training and field testing innovative approaches to
compliance monitoring. The grants and/or cooperative agreements are competed nationally and
each funding priority is targeted at enhancing state and Tribal capacity and capability or needs
identified by states, tribes or state and Tribal associations.
The Agency will also continue providing single media enforcement grants to states that
are funded under other environmental goals supporting air and water programs as well as RCRA
and multi-media funds to the Regions specifically for Tribal enforcement and compliance
activities.
V-26
-------
International Capacity Building
The strategic mission and objectives of the international enforcement program promote
international and border environmental security through enforcement and compliance. The
international program fosters cooperation with foreign countries of strategic interest to the
United States, as prescribed in treaties and trade agreements, through capacity building activities.
Data about trans-boundary movements of regulated substances and wastes are integrated,
analyzed and used to promote international environmental enforcement. Achieving these
strategic objectives and environmental benefits requires an EPA enforcement presence to
effectively implement international commitments for cooperation in enforcement and
compliance activities with other countries, especially those along the U.S. border. Through such
arrangements, EPA works to reduce environmental risks to U.S. citizens from external sources of
pollution, as well as to prevent or reduce the impact of pollution originating in the United States.
In FY 2005, EPA will continue cooperating with other nations to enforce compliance
with international agreements affecting the environment to promote global environmental
protection. These activities also serve to level the economic playing field in an increasingly
global trading system.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
• +$5,400,000, 54.0 FTE: Increases FTE to maximize compliance and achieve
environmental results through targeted inspections and enforcement. The increase will
bring the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance's FTE to actual FY 2003 and
expected FY 2004 levels.
• -$233,500, -0.9 FTE: Technical adjustment made transferring resources to the enabling
support program area of IT/Data Management to supporting data quality efforts.
• -$64,800, -0.5 FTE: Resources are being moved to support management of the
environmental justice small grants program supporting Goal 4.
• There are increases for payroll, cost of living and enrichment for existing FTE.
Superfund
• +383,100, +3.0 FTE: Technical adjustment from Forensics support under Goal 5,
Objective 4. The adjustment reflects work being performed at the National Enforcement
Investigations Center that supports the homeland security efforts.
• +$433,700: Technical adjustment made from forensics support under goal 5, objective 4
to support the OECA's programs under goal 5, objective 1.
V-27
-------
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
Non-compliance Reduction
In 2005 Through monitoring and enforcement actions, EPA will increase complying actions, pollutant reduction or treatment, and
improve EMP.
In 2004 EPA will direct enforcement actions to maximize compliance and address environmental and human health problems.
In 2003 EPA will directed enforcement actions to maximize compliance and address environmental and human health problems.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Millions of pounds of pollutants required to be reduced 600 350 M pounds
through enforcement actions settled this fiscal year.(core
optional)
Number of EPA inspections conducted (core required) 18,880 15,500 inspections
Pounds of pollution estimated to be reduced, treated, and 300 million pounds
eliminated as a result of concluded enforcement actions.
Percentage of concluded enforcement cases (including SEPs) 30 Percentage
requiring that pollutants be reduced, treated, or eliminated
and protection of populations or ecosystems.
Percentage of concluded enforcement cases (including SEPs) 60 percentage
requiring implementation of improved env. management
practices.
Number of inspections, civil investigations and criminal 18,500 insp&inv.
investigations conducted.
Dollars invested in improved env. performance or improved 4 billion Dollars
EMP as a result of concluded enforcement actions (i.e.,
injunctive relief and SEPs)
Percentage of regulated entities taking complying actions, as 10 percentage
a result of compliance monitoring.
Percent of concluded enforcement actions that require an 63 75 Percent
action that results in environmental benefits and/or changes
in facility management or information practices.
Number of Criminal Investigations 471 400 Investigations
Number of Civil Investigations 344 225 Investigations
Baseline: Protecting the public and the environment from risks posed by violations of environmental requirements is basic to EPA's
mission. To develop a more complete picture of the results of the enforcement and compliance program, EPA has initiated a
number of performance measures designed to capture the results of reducing the amount of time for significant noncompliers to
return to compliance, reducing noncompliance recidivism rates, and improvements in facility process and/or management
practices through behavioral changes. The baseline rates for many of these measures were established in FYOO. These measures
will complement the traditional enforcement measures of inspections and enforcement actions to provide a more complete
picture of environmental results from the enforcement and compliance program.
Compliance Incentives
In 2005 Through self-disclosure policies, EPA will increase the percentage of facilities reducing pollutants or improving EMP.
In 2004 Increase opportunities through new targeted sector initiatives for industries to voluntarily self-disclose and correct violations on
a corporate-wide basis.
In 2003 Increased opportunities through new targeted sector initiatives for industries to voluntarily self-disclose and correct violations on
a corporate-wide basis.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. .Bud.
Percentage of audits or other actions that result in the 5 percentage
reduction, treatment, or elimination of pollutants; and the
protection of populations or ecosystems.
Percentage of audits or other actions that result in 10 Percentage
improvements in env. management practices.
V-28
-------
FY 2003
Actuals
Performance Measures:
Pounds of pollutants reduced, treated, or eliminated, as a
result of audit agreements or other actions.
Dollars invested in improving environmental management
practices as a result of audit agreements or other actions.
Facilities voluntarily self-disclose and correct violations with 848
reduced or no penalty as a result of EPA self-disclosure
policies.
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
500
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
.25 million
2 million
Pounds
dollars
Facilities
Baseline: EPA developed its Audit/Self-Policing Policy in 1995 to encourage corporate audits and subsequent correction of self-
discovered violations. That Policy as well as the Small Business Compliance Policy were modified in FYOO. The Agency is
working to expand the use of the Audit Policy through aggressive outreach to specific sectors. In FY01 the performance
measure was modified to reach settlements with 500 facilities to voluntarily self-disclose and correct violations. This same
measure has been carried continued.
Regulated Communities
In 2005 Through compliance assistance, EPA will increase the understanding of regulated entities, improve Environmental Management
Practices, and reduce pollutants.
In 2004 Increase the regulated community's compliance with environmental requirements through their expanded use of compliance
assistance. The Agency will continue to support small business compliance assistance centers and develop compliance
assistance tools such as sector notebooks and compliance guides.
In 2003 Increased the regulated community's compliance with environmental requirements through their expanded use of compliance
assistance. The Agency continued to support small business compliance assistance centers and developed compliance assistance
tools such as sector notebooks and compliance guides.
Performance Measures: FY 2003
Actuals
Number of facilities, states, technical assistance providers or 721,000
other entities reached through targeted compliance assistance
(core optional)
Percentage of regulated entities seeking assistance from
EPA-sponsored CA centers and clearinghouse reporting that
they improved EMP as a result of their use of the centers or
the clearinghouse.
Percentage of regulated entities receiving direct compliance
assistance from EPA (e.g., training, on-site visits) reporting
that they improved EMP as a result of EPA assistance.
% of regulated entities seeking assistance from EPA-
sponsored CA centers and clearinghouse reporting that they
reduced, treated, or eliminated pollution as a result of that
resource.
% of regulated entities seeking assistance from EPA-
sponsored CA centers and clearinghouse reporting that they
increased their understanding of env. rqmts. as a result of
their use of the resources.
% of regulated entities receiving direct CA from EPA (e.g.,
training, on-site visits) reporting that they increased their
understanding of env. rqmts. as a result of EPA assistance.
% of regulated entities receiving direct assistance from EPA
(e.g., training, on-site visits) reporting that they reduced,
treated, or eliminated pollution, as a result of EPA assistance.
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
500,000
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
60
50
25
75
65
25
Entities
percentage
Percentage
Percentage
Percentage
percentage
percentage
Baseline: EPA provides clear and consistent descriptions of regulatory requirements to assure that the community can understand its
obligations. EPA supports initiatives targeted toward compliance in specific industrial and commercial sectors or with certain
regulatory requirements. Compliance assistance tools range from plain-language guides, factjsheets, checklists and newsletters.
New distribution methods include the on-line Clearinghouse. In FY03, EPA is planning to reach 475,000 facilities, states, or
technical assistance providers through targeted compliance assistance efforts.
V-29
-------
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
FY 2005 PERFORMANCE MEASURE;
Percentage of concluded enforcement cases (including SEPs) requiring that pollutants be
reduced, treated, or eliminated and protection of populations or ecosystems.
Pounds of pollution estimated to be reduced, treated, or eliminated as a result of concluded
enforcement actions.
Percentage of concluded enforcement cases (including SEPs) requiring implementation of
improved environmental management practices.
Dollars invested in improved environmental performance or improved environmental
management practices as a result of concluded enforcement actions (i.e., injunctive relief
and SEPs).
Percentage of audits or other actions that result in the reduction, treatment, or elimination
of pollutants and protection of populations or ecosystems.
Percentage of audits or other actions that result in improvements in environmental
management practices.
Pounds of pollutants reduced, treated, or eliminated as a result of audit agreements or
other actions.
Dollars invested in improved environmental management practices as a result of audit
agreements or other actions.
Performance Database: The Integrated Compliance Information System, (ICIS), which tracks
EPA civil enforcement (e.g., judicial and administrative) actions.
Data Source: Most of the essential data on environmental results in ICIS are collected through
the use of the Case Conclusion Data Sheet (CCDS), which Agency staff begins preparing after
the conclusion of each civil (judicial and administrative) enforcement action. EPA implemented
the CCDS in 1996 to capture relevant information on the results and environmental benefits of
concluded enforcement cases. The information generated through the CCDS is used to track
progress for several of the performance measures. The CCDS form consists of 27 specific
questions which, when completed, describe specifics of the case; the facility involved;
information on how the case was concluded; the compliance actions required to be taken by the
defendant(s); the costs involved; information on any Supplemental Environmental Project to be
undertaken as part of the settlement; the amounts and types of any penalties assessed; and any
costs recovered through the action, if applicable. The CCDS documents whether the
facility/defendant, through injunctive relief, must: (1) reduce pollutants; and (2) improve
management practices to curtail, eliminate or better monitor and handle pollutants in the future.
The Criminal Enforcement Program also maintains a separate case conclusion data form and
system for compiling and analyzing the results of criminal enforcement prosecution.
V-30
-------
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: For enforcement actions which result in pollution
reductions, the staff estimate the amounts of pollution reduced for an immediately implemented
improvement, or an average year once a long-term solution is in place. There are established
procedures for the staff to calculate, by statute, (e.g., Clean Water Act), the pollutant reductions
or eliminations. The procedure first entails the determination of the difference between the
current "out of compliance" concentration of the pollutant(s) and the post enforcement action
"in compliance" concentration. This difference is then converted to mass per time using the flow
or quantity information derived during the case.
QA/QC Procedures: Quality Assurance/Quality Control procedures [See references] are in
place for both the CCDS and ICIS entry. There are a Case Conclusion Data Sheet Training
Booklet [See references] and a Case Conclusion Data Sheet Quick Guide [See references], both
of which have been distributed throughout Regional and Headquarters' (HQ) offices. Separate
CCDS Calculation and Completion Checklists [See references] are required to be filled out at the
time the CCDS is completed.
Quality Management Plans (QMPs) are prepared for each Office within The Office of
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA). The Office of Compliance (OC) has
established extensive processes for ensuring timely input, review and certification of ICIS
information in FY'03. OC's QMP, effective for 5 years, was approved July 29, 2003. OECA
instituted a requirement for semiannual executive certification of the overall accuracy of
information to satisfy the GPRA, the Agency's information quality guidelines, and other
significant enforcement and compliance policies on performance measurement.
Data Quality Review: Information contained hi the CCDS and ICIS are required by policy to
be reviewed by regional and headquarters' staff for completeness and accuracy.
Data Limitations: The pollutant reductions or eliminations reported on the CCDS are estimates
of what will be achieved if the defendant carries out the requirements of the settlement.
Information on expected outcomes of state enforcement is not available. The estimates are based
on information available at the time a case is settled or an order is issued. In some instances, this
information will be developed and entered after the settlement, during continued discussions
over specific plans for compliance. Because of the time it takes to agree on the compliance
actions, there may be delay in completing the CCDS. Additionally, because of unknowns at the
tune of settlement, different levels of technical proficiency, or the nature of a case, OECA's
expectation is that based on information on the CCDS, the overall amounts of pollutant
reductions/eliminations will be prudently underestimated.
Error Estimate: Not available
New & Improved Data or Systems: In November 2000, EPA completed a comprehensive
guidance package on the preparation of the Case Conclusion Data Sheet. This guidance, issued
to headquarters' and regional managers and staff, was made available in print and CD-ROM, and
was supplemented hi FY 2002 [See references]. The guidance contains work examples to ensure
better calculation of the amounts of pollutants reduced or eliminated through concluded
enforcement actions. EPA trained each of its ten regional offices during FY 2002. OC's Quality
Management Plan was approved by OEI July 29, 2003, and is effective for five years. [See
references]
V-31
-------
References: Quality Assurance and Quality Control procedures: Data Quality: Life Cycle
Management Guidance, (IRM Policy Manual 2100, dated September 28, 1994, reference Chapter
17 for Life Cycle Management). Case Conclusion Data Sheets: Case Conclusion Data Sheet,
Training Booklet, issued November 2000 available:
w\\^%epa.gov/compliance/resources/publications/planning/caseconc.pdf: Quick Guide for Case
Conclusion Data Sheet, issued November 2000. Information Quality Strategy and OC's Quality
Management Plans: Final Enforcement and Compliance Data Quality Strategy, and Description
of FY 2002 Data Quality Strategy Implementation Plan Projects, signed March 25, 2002. ICIS:
U.S. EPA, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, ICIS Phase I, implemented June
2002. Internal EPA database; non-enforcement sensitive data available to the public through the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
FY 2005 Performance Measure; Number of inspections, civil investigations, and criminal
investigations conducted
Performance Databases: Output measure. Integrated Data for Enforcement Analysis (IDEA)
integrates data from major enforcement and compliance systems, such as the Permit Compliance
System (PCS), Air Facilities Subsystem (AFS), Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Information System (RCRAInfo), and Emergency Response Notification system (ERNS). The
Criminal Docket System (CRIMDOC) is a criminal case management, tracking and reporting
system. Information about criminal cases investigated by the U.S. EPA-Criminal Investigation
Division (CID) is entered into CRIMDOC at case initiation, and investigation and prosecution
information is tracked until case conclusion.
Data Source: EPA's regional and Headquarters' offices. U.S. EPA-CID offices.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: N/A
QA/QC Procedures: All the systems have been developed in accordance with the Office of
Information Management's Lifecycle Management Guidance, which includes data validation
processes, internal screen audit checks and verification, system and user documents, data quality
audit reports, third-party testing reports, and detailed report specifications for showing how data
are calculated. For CRIMDOC, the system administrator performs regularly scheduled quality
assurance/quality control checks of the CRIMDOC database to validate data and to evaluate and
recommend enhancements to the system.
Data Quality Review: EPA is now using updated monitoring strategies [See references] which
clarify reporting definitions and enhances oversight of state and local compliance monitoring
programs. In FY2003, OECA instituted a requirement for semiannual executive certification of
the overall accuracy of information to satisfy the GPRA, the Agency's information quality
guidelines, and other significant enforcement and compliance policies on performance
measurement.
Data Limitations: For all systems, there are concerns about quality and completeness of data
and the ability of existing systems to meet data needs. Incompatible database structures/designs
and differences in data definitions impede integrated analyses. Additionally, there are incomplete
data available on the universe of regulated facilities because not all are inspected/permitted. In
V-32
-------
addition, the targets for numbers of inspections, and civil and criminal investigations are based
on the resources redirected to the state and Tribal enforcement grant program,
Error Estimate: N/A
New & Improved Data or Systems: PCS modernization is underway and the first version is
scheduled to be released in December 2005. An Interim Data Exchange Format (IDEF) has been
established and will support the transfer of data from modernized state systems into the current
PCS data system while PCS is being modernized. EPA is addressing the quality of the data hi
the major systems and each Office within OECA has developed a Quality Management Plan
(data quality objectives, quality assurance project plans, baseline assessments). A new
Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) supports core program needs and consolidates
and streamlines existing systems. Additionally, OECA began implementing its Data Quality
Strategy in FY 2002. A new case management, tracking and reporting system (Case Reporting
System) is currently being developed that will replace CRIMDOC. This new system will be a
more user-friendly database with greater tracking, management and reporting capabilities.
References: Clean Air Act Compliance Monitoring Strategy, April 25, 2001,
www.epa.gQy/compliance/fre.sQU^^
AFS: http://^^ww,epa.gQv/compllanceyplamiing/data/air/afssystemAtml.
PCS: http://www.epa.gov/cQmpliance^
RCRA info: http://w\yw.epa,gQyte^
For CRIMDOC: CRIM-DOC U.S. EPA, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance.
Internal enforcement confidential database; non-enforcement sensitive data available to the
public through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
Information Quality Strategy and OC's Quality Management Plans: Final Enforcement and
Compliance Data Quality Strategy, and Description of FY 2002 Data Quality Strategy
Implementation Plan Projects, signed March 25, 2002
FY 2005 Performance Measure; Percentage of regulated entities taking complying actions
as a result of compliance inspections and evaluations.
Performance Databases: ICIS and manual reporting by regions
Data Sources: EPA regional offices and Office of Regulatory Enforcement (specifically, the
Clean Air Act (CAA)- Mobile Source program).
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: A new measurement tool, the Inspection Conclusion
Data Sheet, (ICDS) will be used to analyze results from inspections conducted under some of
EPA's major statutes. EPA will analyze data on communication of problems to industry,
compliance assistance delivered by inspectors, and immediate corrections made by industry
according to region, nationally and by industry sector. The inspectors fill out the Inspection
Conclusion Data Sheet (ICDS) for each inspection and that information is reported to ICIS by
the Regions.
QA/QC Procedures: ICIS has been developed per Office of Information Management
Lifecycle Management Guidance, which includes data validation processes, internal screen audit
V-33
-------
checks and verification, system and user documents, data quality audit reports, third party testing
reports, and detailed report specifications for showing how data are calculated.
Data Quality Review: Regional manual reports are reviewed and checked against the
inspection data entered into other Agency databases (Air Facilities Subsystem (AFS), Permit
Compliance System (PCS), Online Tracking Information System (OTIS), Integrated Data for
Enforcement Analysis (IDEA)). Information contained in the CCDS and ICIS are required by
policy to be reviewed by regional and headquarters' staff for completeness and accuracy. In
FY2003, OECA instituted a requirement for semiannual executive certification of the overall
accuracy of information to satisfy the GPRA, the Agency's information quality guidelines, and
other significant enforcement and compliance policies on performance measurement.
Data Limitations: ICIS is not currently the primary database for inspections and as a result the
regions have to enter inspection data into both ICIS and other Agency databases. This can result
in redundant, incomplete, or contradictory data.
Error Estimate: N/A
New & Improved Data or Systems: The new Integrated Compliance Information System
(ICIS) will support core program needs and consolidate and streamline existing systems. As ICIS
becomes more widely used by the regions and HQ programs some of the problems with data
entry and reporting should be resolved. As various older systems become modernized (e.g.,
PCS), they will incorporate the ICDS data set as part of the system. This should minimize data
entry and reporting problems.
References: ICIS: U.S. EPA, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, ICIS Phase I,
implemented June 2002. Internal EPA database; non-enforcement sensitive data available to the
public through the Freedom of Information Act (FOLA).
FY 2005 Performance Measure;
Percentage of regulated survey respondents seeking assistance from EPA-sponsored
compliance assistance centers and clearinghouse reporting that they improved
environmental management practices as a result of their use of the centers or the
clearinghouse.
Percentage of regulated survey respondents seeking assistance from EPA-sponsored
compliance assistance centers and clearinghouse reporting that they reduced, treated, or
eliminated pollution as a result of their use of the centers or the clearinghouse.
Percentage of regulated survey respondents seeking assistance from EPA-sponsored
compliance assistance centers and clearinghouse reporting that they increased their
understanding of environmental requirements as a result of their use of the centers or the
clearinghouse.
Performance Database: In FY2005, EPA Headquarters will manage data on the performance
of the Centers and Clearinghouse respondents using ICIS (Integrated Compliance Information
V-34
-------
System) and will no longer operate and maintain the Reporting Compliance Assistance Tracking
System (RCATS).
Data source: Headquarters and EPA's Regional offices will enter information in ICIS upon
completion and delivery of media and sector-specific compliance assistance including
workshops, training, on-site visits and distribution of compliance assistance tools. ICIS is
designed to capture outcome measurement information such as increased
awareness/understanding of environmental laws, changes in behavior and environmental
improvements as a result of the compliance assistance provided.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: N/A
QA/QC Procedures: Automated data checks and data entry guidelines are in place for ICIS.
Data Quality Reviews: Information contained in the ICIS is reviewed by Regional and
Headquarters staff for completeness and accuracy. In FY2003, OECA instituted a requirement
for semiannual executive certification of the overall accuracy of information to satisfy the
GPRA, the Agency's information quality guidelines, and other significant enforcement and
compliance policies on performance measurement.
Data Limitations: None
Error Estimate: None
New/Improved Data or Systems: EPA plans to incorporate RCATS into ICIS in FY2004.
References: Reporting Compliance Assistance Data in the Integrated Compliance Information
System (ICIS), January 9, 2004. RCATS: U.S. EPA Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance. Internal EPA database. Guidance: RCATs User Guide of March 19, 2001.
FY 2005 Performance Measure;
Percentage of regulated entities receiving direct compliance assistance from EPA (e.g.,
training, on-site visits) reporting that they improved environmental management practices
as a result of EPA assistance.
Percentage of regulated entities receiving direct compliance assistance from EPA (e.g.,
training, on-site visits) reporting that they increased their understanding of environmental
requirements as a result of EPA assistance.
Percentage of regulated entities receiving direct assistance from EPA (e.g., training, on-site
visits) reporting that they reduced, treated, or eliminated pollution, as a result of EPA
assistance.
Performance Database: EPA Headquarters will manage data on the performance of the
Centers and clearinghouse respondents using ICIS (Integrated Compliance Information System)
in FY05 and will no longer operate and maintain the Reporting Compliance Assistance Tracking
System (RCATS). •
V-35
-------
Data source: Headquarters and EPA's Regional offices will enter information in ICIS upon
completion and delivery of media and sector-specific compliance assistance including
workshops, training, on-site visits and distribution of compliance assistance tools. ICIS is
designed to capture outcome measurement information such as increased
awareness/understanding of environmental laws, changes in behavior and environmental
improvements as a result of the compliance assistance provided.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: N/A
QA/QC: Automated data checks and data entry guidelines are in place for ICIS.
Data Quality Review: Information contained in the ICIS is reviewed by Regional and
Headquarters staff for completeness and accuracy. In FY2003, OECA instituted a requirement
for semiannual executive certification of the overall accuracy of information to satisfy the
GPRA, the Agency's information quality guidelines, and other significant enforcement and
compliance policies on performance measurement.
Data Limitations: None
Error Estimate: None
New & Improved Data or Systems: EPA plans to incorporate RCATS into ICIS in FY2004.
References: Reporting Compliance Assistance Data in the Integrated Compliance Information
System (ICIS), January 9, 2004. RCATS: U.S. EPA Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance. Internal EPA database. Guidance: RCATs User Guide of March 19, 2001.
EFFICIENCY MEASURES/MEASUREMENT DEVELOPMENT PLANS
OECA is currently developing an outcome measure to capture the impact of the criminal
enforcement program's specific deterrence, which EPA considers to be a "level two" or "level
three" outcome on its hierarchy. Specific deterrence is based on the assumption that once
prosecuted and punished, a defendant will not deliberately break the law again. OECA's measure
of specific deterrence will be based on recidivism, i.e., the degree to which a former defendant in
an EPA criminal enforcement prosecution has been indicted subsequently for another
environmental crime. OECA's Office of Criminal Enforcement, Forensics and Training is
currently developing this measure. It plans to track the measure and develop a baseline in FY
2005, and expects to propose it as a formal GPRA measure in FY 2006
For FY 2005, the civil and criminal enforcement programs will use pounds of pollutants
reduced per FTE for both program's efficiency measures. Since achievement of the civil and
criminal enforcement program's annual and long-term goals are highly dependent on the
enforcement cases concluded in a given year, there can be significant variability in a measure
from one year to the next. To partially address this variability, this efficiency measure is based
on three-year rolling averages.
V-36
-------
For FY 2005, the civil and criminal enforcement programs will use pounds of pollutants
reduced per FTE for both program's efficiency measures. Since achievement of the civil and
criminal enforcement program's annual and long-term goals are highly dependent on the
enforcement cases concluded in a given year, there can be significant variability in a measure
from one year to the next. To partially address this variability, this efficiency measure is based
on three-year rolling averages.
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
The Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program coordinates closely with the
Department of Justice (DOJ) on all enforcement matters. In addition, the program coordinates
with other agencies on specific environmental issues as described herein.
The Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance coordinates with the Chemical
Safety and Accident Investigation Board, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration,
and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry in preventing and responding to
accidental releases and endangerment situations, with the Bureau of Indian Affairs on Tribal
issues relative to compliance with environmental laws on Tribal Lands, and with the Small
Business Administration on the implementation of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act (SBREFA). In addition, it coordinates with the Small Business Administration and
a number of other federal agencies in implementing the Business Compliance One-Stop Project,
an "E-Government" project that is part of the President's Regulatory Management Agenda. The
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance also works with a variety of federal agencies
including the Department of Labor and the Internal Revenue Service to organize a Federal
Compliance Assistance Roundtable to address cross cutting compliance assistance issues.
Coordination also occurs with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on wetlands.
Due to changes in the Food Security Act, the U.S. Department of Agriculture/Natural
Resources Conservation Service (USDA/NRCS) has a major role in determining whether areas
on agricultural lands meet the definition of wetlands and are therefore regulated under the Clean
Water Act. Civil Enforcement coordinates with USDA/NRCS on these issues also. Finally, the
program coordinates closely with the Department of Agriculture on the implementation of the
Unified National Strategy for Animal Feedlot Operations. EPA's Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance program also coordinates with USDA on food safety issues arising from the misuse of
pesticides, and shares joint jurisdiction with Federal Trade Commission (FTC) on pesticide
labeling and advertising. Coordination also occurs with Customs on pesticide imports. EPA and
the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) share jurisdiction over general-purpose disinfectants
used on non-critical surfaces and some dental and medical equipment surfaces (e.g.,
wheelchairs). Finally, the Agency has entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the
Department of Housing and Urban Development concerning lead poisoning.
The Criminal Enforcement program coordinates with other federal law enforcement
agencies (i.e. FBI, Customs, Treasury, U.S. Coast Guard, DOJ) and with state and local law
enforcement organizations in the investigation and prosecution of environmental crimes. EPA
also actively works with DOJ to establish task forces that bring together federal, state and local
law enforcement organizations to address environmental crimes. In addition, the National
Enforcement Training Institute has an Interagency Agreement with the Department of Treasury
to provide specialized criminal environmental training to federal, state, local, and Tribal law
V-37
-------
enforcement personnel at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) in Glynco,
GA. NETI also coordinates with four state associations who provide training for state and local
officials.
Under Executive Order 12088, EPA is directed to provide technical assistance to other
Federal agencies to help ensure their compliance with all environmental laws. The Federal
Facility Enforcement Program coordinates with other Federal agencies, states, local, and Tribal
governments to ensure compliance by federal agencies with all environmental laws.
The Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance works closely with the states and
tribes. States perform the vast majority of inspections, direct compliance assistance, and
enforcement actions. Most EPA statutes envision a partnership between EPA and the states
under which EPA develops national standards and policies and the states implement the program
under authority delegated by EPA. If a state does not seek approval of a program, EPA must
implement that program in the state. Historically, the level of state approvals has increased as
programs mature and state capacity expands, with many of the key environmental programs
approaching approval in nearly all states. EPA will increase its effort to coordinate with states
on training, compliance assistance, capacity building and enforcement. EPA will continue to
enhance the network of state and Tribal compliance assistance providers.
EPA works directly with Canada and Mexico bilaterally and in the trilateral Commission
for Environmental Cooperation (CEC). EPA's border activities require close coordination with
the U.S. Customs Service, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Department of Justice, and the
States of Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas.
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act sections 3007, 3008, 3013, and 7003 (42 U.S.C. 6927,
6928, 6934, 6973)
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act sections 106, 107,
109, and 122 (42 U.S.C. 9606, 9607, 9609, 9622)
Clean Water Act (CWA) sections 308, 309, and 311 (33 U.S.C. 1318, 1319, 1321)
Safe Drinking Water Act sections 1413, 1414, 1417, 1422, 1423, 1425, 1431, 1432, 1445 (42
U.S.C. 300g-2, 300g-3, 300g-6, 300h-l, 300h-2, 300h-4, 300i, 300i-l, 300J-4)
Clean Air Act sections 113,114, and 303 (42 U.S.C. 7413, 7414, 7603)
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) sections 11, 16, and 17 and TSCA Titles II and IV (15
U.S.C. 2610, 2615, 2616, 2641-2656, 2681-2692)
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act sections 325 and 326 (42 U.S.C.
11045,11046)
Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992, section 1018 under TSCA section
11 (42 U.S.C. 4852d, 2610)
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act sections 8, 9, 12, 13, and 14 (7 U.S.C. 136f,
I36g, 136j, 136k, 1361)
Ocean Dumping Act sections 101, 104B, 105, and 107 (33 U.S.C. 1411, 1414B, 1415, 1417)
North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation
1983 La Paz Agreement on US/Mexico Border Region
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) section 102(f)
V-38
-------
Pollution Prosecution Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. section 4321 note)
Environmental Information Authorities
Clean Air Act (CAA) (42 U.S.C. 7601-7671q)
Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. 1251 - 1387)
Clinger-Cohen Act
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (42
U.S.C. 9601-9675)
Computer Security Act
Congressional Review Act
Congressional Review Act
CPRKAof 1986
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) section 313 (42 U.S.C.
110001-11050)
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) section 313 (42 U.S.C.
110001-11050
Enterprise for the Americas Initiative Act (7 U.S.C. 5404)
Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration Act (ERDDA) of 1981
Executive Order 12866
Executive Order 12915 - Federal Implementation of the North American Agreement on
Environmental Cooperation
Executive Order 12916 - Implementation of the Border Environment Cooperation Commission
and the North American Development Bank
Executive Order 13148, "Greening the Government through Leadership in Environmental
Management"
Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (5 U.S.C. App.)
Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA)
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 U.S. C. 136-136y)
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 U.S. C. 136-136y)
Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA)
Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA)
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552)
Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA)
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA)
National Environmental Education Act
North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation
Paperwork Reduction Act Amendment of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520)
Plain Language Executive Order
Pollution Prevention Act (PPA) (42 U.S.C. 13101-13109)
Privacy Act
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) (42 U.S.C. 6901-6992k)
Safe Drinking Water Act section 1445 (SDWA) (42 U.S.C. 300f-300j-26)
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
Toxic Substance Control Act section 14 (TSCA) (15 U.S.C. 2601-2692)
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
V-39
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Compliance and Environmental Stewardship
OBJECTIVE: Improve Environmental Performance through Pollution Prevention and
Innovation
By 2008, improve environmental protection and enhance natural resource conservation
on the part of government, business, and the public through the adoption of pollution prevention
and sustainable practices that include the design of products and manufacturing processes that
generate less pollution, the reduction of regulatory barriers, and the adoption of results-based,
innovative, and multimedia approaches.
Resource Summary
(Dollars in Thousands)
Improve Environmental Performance
through Pollution Prevention and
Innovation
Environmental Program & Management
Building and Facilities
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Inspector General
Total Workyears
FY2003
Actuals
$123^11.5
$97,351.3
$1,557.8
$23,874.4
$528.0
544.2
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$137,968.5
$104,608.4
$1,635.3
$31,000.0
$724.8
556.1
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$169,802.0
$113,104.3
$1,769.6
$54000.0
$928.1
562.6
FY2005Req.v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$31,833.5
$8,495.9
$134.3
$23,000.0
$203.3
6.5
Program Project
(Dollars in Thousands)
Categorical Grant: State and Tribal
Performance Fund
Small Business Ombudsman
Categorical Grant: Environmental Information
Categorical Grant: Pollution Prevention
NEPA Implementation
Pollution Prevention Program
Regulatory/Economic-Management and
Analysis
Environmental Education
Congressionally Mandated Projects
RCRA: Waste Minimization & Recycling
Regulatory Innovation
Administrative Projects
TOTAL
FY 2003
Actuals
$0.0
$3,048.6
$18,514.0
$5,360.4
$11,204.2
$15,450.3
$21,261.8
$5,281.0
$1,950.5
$3,325.9
$7,357.9
$30,556.9
$123,311.5
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$0.0
$3,764.9
$25,000.0
$6,000.0
$12,315.4
$17,098.7
$18,468.6
$0.0
$0.0
$4,134.2
$19,390.5
$31,796.2
$137,968.5
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$23,000.0
$3,838.7
$25,000.0
$6,000.0
$12,654.2
$22,496.2
$18,551.8
$0.0
- $0.0
$4,193.8
$19,349.5
$34,717.8
$169,802.0
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$23,000.0
$73.8
$0.0
$0.0
$338.8
$5,397.5
$83.2
$0.0
$0.0
$59.6
($41.0)
$2,921.6
$31,833.5
V-40
-------
FY 2005 REQUEST
Results to be Achieved under this Objective
EPA uses multiple approaches to prevent pollution at its source. To achieve the full
measure of opportunities available, EPA has focused on several key means of delivering program
benefits. For example, EPA supports development of tools and information to assist producers
and consumers in evaluating the cost and environmental/energy savings available through
pollution prevention measures, as well as the identification and promotion of partnerships by
which new approaches can be identified and tested. From these projects, lessons can be applied
to new opportunity areas. Grants through the States build further capacity and demonstrate the
broad-based viability of prevention and conservation-based approaches to environmental
management.
Attainment of this objective will capture significant human health and environmental
benefits by reducing the amount of pollution generated and released into the environment. The
objective covers a variety of programs and initiatives that have as a common purpose the
prevention of pollution and the implementation of sustainable practices. For example, EPA is
carrying out a program that is designed to promote federal government acquisition of "greener,"
less polluting products. These efforts, taken together, directly support the strategic targets that
EPA has adopted for this objective, which express the Agency's pollution prevention
commitments in quantitative, measurable terms. The efforts will also help to conserve public
and private resources to the extent that pollution prevention makes environmental goals
attainable at lower cost.
In FY 2005, the Agency will continue to carry out its responsibilities under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which requires that Federal agencies consider the
environmental consequences of their activities. EPA prepares NEPA environmental reviews for
its proposed actions, and under §309 of the Clean Air Act and NEPA, EPA reviews major
actions taken by other federal agencies to ensure that adverse environmental effects are identified
and either eliminated or mitigated.
Through the Environmental Information Exchange Network (http://www.exchange
network.net), EPA will continue to provide funding to states, tribes, and territories to encourage
and promote their data integration efforts and participation in the Network. These grants will
allow states and tribes to create "next generation" environmental data systems that integrate air,
water, and waste data and provide the regulated community with efficient and reliable electronic
means for reporting compliance information consistent with the President's Management Agenda
and the goals of e-Government.
In FY 2005, EPA will continue to promote innovative environmental approaches for
businesses, states, tribes and communities to help them achieve unproved environmental
performance. Incentives for beyond-compliance performance developed and implemented in the
Agency's Performance Track program will continue to reward businesses that demonstrate
environmental responsibility and stewardship that translate into specific reductions hi air
emissions, water use, and the amount of waste generated. The Agency's established programs
with major industrial sectors and small businesses will continue to achieve widespread
V-41
-------
improvements in environmental performance through collaborative planning, targeted assistance,
and innovative regulatory reform.
Similarly, through innovative environmental pilot projects, EPA will continue to test,
evaluate, and invest in new ways of achieving unproved environmental performance. EPA will
continue to work with states to test new approaches in permitting, including alternatives to
permitting. Testing innovations will verify their ability to achieve higher levels of environmental
performance. Evaluating innovations will quantify their results. Building the capacity to conduct
program evaluations of innovations will help sharpen the effectiveness of innovation activities
and stimulate the transfer and replication of successful results-based approaches.
Pollution Prevention Program
Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Program: Through the Environmentally
Preferable Purchasing Program (EPP), EPA helps other federal agencies identify and acquire
products that generate less pollution, consume fewer non-renewable natural resources, and pose
less of a threat to human health and to wildlife. Federal agencies spend nearly $250 billion
annually on goods and services.6 EPP harnesses this
purchasing power to stimulate demand for "greener"
products and services, thereby fostering environmentally
improved manufacturing processes and increased
availability of environmentally preferable products and
services.7 The Agency's investment in such tools as life
cycle analysis enables purchasers to evaluate the
environmental performance of products and promotes
"green" products that generate less pollution throughout
their entire life cycle - from manufacturing to disposal.
In recent vears, EPP has focused on the Thc basis ofthis "bine«y >s a bio-based material
J t created from an abundant agricultural fiber,
Of tOOlS and information tO help purchasers sunflower hulls bound together with soybean-
based resin and sealed with citrus oil.
make environmentally conscious purchasing decisions and
to move the Agency towards meeting its annual program goals. As a result of these efforts, EPP
participants have at their disposal a wide array of tools and information resources. For instance,
BEES (Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability), a tool developed by the
National Institute of Standards and Technology and supported by EPA's EPP program, provides
life cycle environmental impact information for building products. The EPP Database provides
the underlying environmental criteria, standards and specifications for numerous products.8
These efforts are supported by an outreach program that includes a comprehensive website,
regular publication of the EPP Update, and frequent presentations and exhibits at conferences.
In FY 2005, EPA will continue to implement major efforts in partnership with other
federal agencies, such as a coordinated interagency effort to "green" janitorial services at Federal
facilities by providing federal building managers with model contract language and guidance of
GAO Report No. 03-443, April 2003. "A Report to the Committee on Government Reform, House of Representatives, and the
Committee on Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate.
7 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Web
Site: http://\vww.epa.gov/opptintr/epp. Accessed September 9, 2003.
8 www.epa.gov/opptintr/epp/database.htm
V-42
-------
how to green janitorial services contracts, implementing EPA's new on-line ordering system for
"green" office supplies, development of a database with model green specifications for
construction products aimed at helping federal agencies, and development of an assessment tool
for electronic products. New initiatives will focus on launching a tool to help purchasers assess
the environmental impacts of electronic assets and the provision of technical assistance in
interpreting life cycle environmental impact information for the USDA Bio-Based Products
program. These efforts will make environmentally preferable purchasing easier for federal
agencies, by giving agencies the easy-to-use tools and technical assistance needed to make
decisions about green purchasing choices. By increasing federal purchases of green products,
agencies will be able to go beyond compliance with "Greening" Executive Orders.
Green Suppliers Network: The voluntary Green Suppliers Network (GSN) builds on the
premise that cost effective lean manufacturing, pollution prevention and environmental
protection can be the result of good business planning and practice. Through an innovative
partnership with EPA, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, Manufacturing
Extension Partnership (NIST, MEP), and state technical assistance providers, the Green
Suppliers Network enables large manufacturers to actively engage all levels of their supply chain
in the development of good business approaches to prevent pollution. The Manufacturing
Extension Partnerships, using facility workshops, assess manufacturing processes, raw materials,
technology and design with the aim of saving money, and protecting the environment at the same
time. The GSN effort was launched by EPA in FY 2003 and has recorded significant progress
since then.
Through the Green Suppliers Network, suppliers are able to continuously improve products
and processes, increase energy efficiency, identify cost-saving opportunities, and optimize
resources and technologies with the aim of eliminating waste. The program model was first
tested in a successful pilot program with the Saturn Corporation, a subsidiary of the General
Motors Corporation. Under the Saturn pilot, four manufacturing workshops identified sixteen
potentially valuable environmental improvement opportunities and corresponding solutions.
Eleven were opportunities for product or process design improvements and increased financial
value. The environmental benefits of the workshops were a reduction in electricity consumption
of about 1.9Million kWh, CO2 emission reduction of about 80,000 pounds, transportation fuel
use reduction of about 3,600 gallons and solid waste disposal reductions of about 300,000
pounds. The economic value of the workshops was a total potential direct operating cost savings
(annually) of approximately $360,000 in addition to reductions in such indirect costs as
regulatory reporting and other compliance requirements9.
Following the Saturn project, General Motors engaged EPA in a more formal partnership
involving its suppliers. This partnership, launched in October 2002, is an official trade
association called the Suppliers' Partnership for the Environment (SP). SP is the automotive arm
of GSN. The purpose of the SP effort is to develop a system to minimize the environmental
impact of the GM manufacturing process up and down the supply chain through active
engagement with suppliers. To achieve this, large companies need then: suppliers to be better
business performers by employing P2 practices which result in materials efficiency and cost
savings.
9 "Greening the Supply Chain Pilot, Phase 1 - Mapping the Saturn Supply Chain," August 12, 2002
V-43
-------
Today the Suppliers' Partnership for the Environment, an independent network, is open to
all auto manufacturers and suppliers. While currently it consists of General Motors working
with its suppliers through the NIST/MEP technical assistance, the SP is continuing to expand to
include more of the GM and Daimler-Chrysler supply chain and it may soon include the supply
chains of other Original Equipment Manufacturers.
In FY 2005, the Green Suppliers Network will continue to expand partnerships with the
aerospace, automotive, office/home furniture, healthcare/pharmaceutical, farm/construction and
appliances sectors; pursue four additional industry sectors; furnish training needed by MEP
centers; form collaborations with other federal agencies (such as DOE's Office of Industrial
Technologies) and with States; measure and evaluate program results; and coordinate with other
EPA voluntary programs, including Waste Wise, Performance Track and Energy Star.
Through these partnerships, the Green Suppliers Network will continue to focus on
establishing lean manufacturing practices that incorporate energy and material efficiency as well
as process optimization within the supply chain. GSN is uniquely designed to capture the
environmental impacts of product specification throughout the supply chain. By encouraging
suppliers to identify obstacles such as outdated specifications or regulations, the GSN provides a
forum for identifying options for change. This third-party forum for information transfer helps
to minimize the liabilities associated with direct communications between the customer and the
supplier. Therefore, under the GSN, manufacturers are able to address product and process
design for the environment issues.
EPA's GSN efforts have already produced quantifiable environmental results through its
initial pilot efforts hi FY 2002 and in its initial year since being formally launched in FY 2003.
In FY 2005, this successful program will increase these results by working with the National
Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) to
strongly encourage State P2 technical assistance providers and local MEP centers to form
collaborative relationships under GSN; developing a GSN communication strategy and
infrastructure such as a website to increase information flow with all participants; developing
pollution prevention tools for chemical management services, green purchasing specifications
and energy efficiency innovations; assisting US sectors in extending GSN to foreign suppliers,
particularly those in the NAFTA region; and preparing GSN for international replication by
working with international partners through the Commission for Environmental Cooperation
(CEC) and the OECD. EPA increased its outcome-based FY 2005 P2 Annual Performance
Measures to reflect the increased results anticipated from these expanded activities, though the
full impact of outreach and technical assistance will take a full year or longer to develop.
Green Chemistry: The Green Chemistry program supports research, development and
use of innovative chemical technologies that can replace more toxic chemicals. Through
voluntary partnerships with universities and colleges, industry and trade organizations, and State
and federal government agencies, the Green Chemistry program helps provide the technical tools
needed to develop and implement scientifically sound and cost-effective alternatives and to
reduce our nation's chemical vulnerabilities. The Green Chemistry Challenge Awards program
offers high-level recognition for the best examples and stimulates additional efforts and
measurement of results.
V-44
-------
In FY 2003, the Green Chemistry program undertook an effort to more narrowly focus on
identifying targeted audiences not currently involved hi green chemistry product and process
design and specific high priority chemicals, products, and/or processes for which safer
alternatives are not available. As part of this effort, the program began working with its partners
to investigate incentives as well as barriers
to adoption of green chemistry practices,
particularly by industry. Initial findings are
varied. Barriers identified, for example,
include technical and economic issues, data
ownership and proprietary issues, and
customer needs and perceptions. These
efforts will be expanded in FY 2004 and are
of particular interest to the program's
research and international partners.
Eliminating 270 Million Pounds of Pollutants
By the end of FY 2005, EPA expects that over 575
million pounds of hazardous chemicals and solvents will
have been eliminated through the Green Chemistry
Challenge Award Program. Initiated hi 1996, the
Presidential Green Chemistry Challenge Award program has
achieved significant pollution prevention by reducing the
quantity of hazardous chemicals and solvents in the
environment through the adoption of safer technologies and
chemicals. Thus far (through FY 2003), cumulative pounds
of solid hazardous chemicals and solvents eliminated are
270 million pounds; cumulative gallons of hazardous
chemicals and solvents eliminated are seven million gallons.
Substances eliminated include chlorofluorocarbons
(CFCs), volatile organic solvents (VOCs), persistent, toxic,
and bio-accumulative chemicals and solvents, as well as
very corrosive and toxic chemical substances. The program
is also positively impacting water and energy uses.
The Green Chemistry Program's
current shift hi focus to more targeted
audiences and topics is expected to continue
into FY 2005. Efforts aimed at gaining an
understanding of incentives and barriers to
mainstreaming green chemistry practices as
well as increased State involvement will
shape the program's research, recognition,
and outreach efforts in 2005. In the area of education, the program's original goals of initially
providing general materials to a target scientific audience have been met. In addition, these
initial education efforts have been sufficiently leveraged with key partners. As such, EPA's
involvement hi green chemistry education in 2005 and beyond is expected to be advisory hi
nature rather than leadership-oriented.
EPA's Green Chemistry Challenge Program has proven its ability to deliver quantifiable
environmental results, contributing directly to EPA's long-term strategic and annual outcome-
based pollution prevention performance measures. Additional resources hi FY 2005 will enable
this successful program to increase these results by expanding and targeting its focus on existing
and emerging chemicals of concern. Initial targets for development of substitutes will include
supply side reductions (via process and product improvements) for chemicals already listed on
EPA's Waste Minimization Priority Chemicals List, which are also a target of the Resource
Conservation Challenge, and emerging chemicals of concern such as brominated flame
retardants used hi flexible foam, perfluorinated acids and PBT chemicals. EPA will specify the
parameters that will make substitutes environmentally preferable, such as chemically
incorporating flame retardants into the foam matrix to control unintended migration during use.
As hi the current Green Chemistry Challenge program, chemical manufacturers as well as
academics and others will be encouraged to participate. New emphasis will be placed on ability
to bring substitutes to market, ensuring that the results promised by these new innovations are
actually realized.
U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. Green Chemistiy Tracking System... Internal Database. Continually
updated.
V-45
-------
The Green Chemistry program was reviewed for the 2004 and 2005 President's Budgets
with the Administration's Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) for the New Chemicals
Program, discussed in Goal 4. The program has shown very strong purpose, management, and
outcome performance, which contributed to an increased rating for the New Chemicals PART
from "Adequate" to "Moderately Effective".
Green Engineering: The Green Engineering program seeks to incorporate "green" or
environmentally conscious thinking and approaches into the daily work of chemical and
environmental engineers. While traditional engineering approaches to pollution prevention often
focus on waste minimization - placing less emphasis on risk factors such as exposure, fate, and
toxicity - EPA's Green Engineering program encourages consideration of these factors in the
design, commercialization, and use of chemical products and the development of feasible,
economical processes that minimize generation of pollution at the source.
The focus of the Green Engineering Program in the past few years has been on the
academic community. To accomplish its goals, the Green Engineering Program first developed
modules and a standardized textbook, published in 2001 and titled Green Engineering:
Environmentally Conscious Design of Chemical Processes and Products,11 which can be used by
universities for Green Engineering courses to provide starting references for practicing
engineers. Over the past few years, the Green Engineering Program has also worked with the
universities and the American Society of Engineering Education's Chemical Engineering
Division (ASEE/ChE) to develop "Green Engineering champions" and to incorporate Green
Engineering into Chemical Engineering curricula. The ami is to develop future chemical
engineers with Green Engineering training.
To date, over 200 professors from 90 schools have attended Green Engineering Educators
workshops. The Green Engineering textbook is used and/or incorporated in about 40 to 50
chemical/environmental engineering schools in the U.S. as well as hi several other countries. As
part of the Green Engineering Educators workshops, attendees also receive hands-on training and
education on a number of selected EPA risk-based tools and other risk-based/green engineering
design tools that can be used to develop greener process syntheses and designs of new or existing
chemical processes and operations.
The focus of the program to date has been on chemical engineers. There has been
substantial interest from other engineering disciplines, as well as States, to incorporate Green
Engineering approaches and tools into their own curricula. The Green Engineering Program
started to engage other engineering disciplines via the first multi-disciplinary conference on
"Green Engineering: Defining the Principles," held hi May 2003. An outcome of the
conference was a set of principles that can be incorporated into the education and practice of all
engineering disciplines. To achieve more tangible and quantifiable results, the program will
start developing plans for a number of projects involving engineers and scientists from academia,
industry, and government.
The focus in FY 2005 will be on implementation of specific projects and activities which
will result hi quantifiable environmental benefits, including the folio whig activities:
11 U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Green Engineering, www.epa.gov/oppt/'greenengiiteering 2001
V-46
-------
• Partnerships with research institutions on their green engineering/ sustainable research
projects;
• Collaboration with professional engineering societies such as the American Institute of
Chemical Engineers (AIChE) and the American Society of Mechanical Engineers
(ASME) on their annual award programs to recognize green enguieering/environmental
beneficial projects (criteria will be judged based on application of green engineering
principles and approaches developed);
• Work with industry on specific Green Engineering initiatives/projects of high potential
environmental benefits;
• Collection of data on application of Green Engineering approaches and tools from people
who have received green engineering training (either through ASEE or AIChE);
• Work with ASEE to apply Green Engineering approaches and tools in industry-sponsored
Green Engineering projects;
• Work with technical journals to produce special issues recognizing innovative and
environmentally beneficial projects and products which apply Green Engineering
approaches and tools.
Design for the Environment: EPA's Design for the Environment (DfE) Program partners
with industry sectors to facilitate the innovation, identification, and adoption of cleaner products,
processes, and technologies. DfE partnerships use a variety of approaches including cleaner
technology assessments, life cycle assessments, formulation improvement, best practices, and
integrated environmental management systems.12
Paint Cost Savings with HVLP
Conventional HVLP Spray Guns
HVLP Spray Guns with
Proper Technique
13
Over the past decade, DfE has partnered with more than 15 industry sectors, including
automotive manufacturing and refinishing, dry cleaning, electronics, foam furniture, industrial
and institutional laundries, and printing. DfE partnerships have consistently resulted in
12 U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Design for the Environment, www.epa.gov/dfe
13 The chart depicts cost savings associated with DfE's auto refinishing project. * Estimated annual savings, based on 420 gal/yr
Courtesy of the STAR Program, IWRC
V-47
-------
environmental and health improvements. For example, half of screen printers switched to a
cleaner screen reclamation product (1994-1997), 15 percent of printed wiring board
manufacturers switched to a cleaner "making holes conductive" technology (1995-1997), dry
cleaners decreased their use of perchloroethylene by 37 percent (1997-2001), and foam furniture
manufacturers dropped their use of methylene-chloride-based adhesives by 83 percent (1997-
2001)14.
DfE is also driving the innovation of cleaner technologies and reducing worker and
public health risks. For example, through DfE's formulator partnership with industrial laundries,
14 new eco-friendly detergents have entered the marketplace. Annual benefits from just one of
these detergents include eliminating use of over 340,000 gallons of toxic chemicals and over 100
million gallons of water saved along with the energy to heat it through improvements in product
design that increase water and energy efficiency15. DfE's auto-refinishing partnership has
conducted best practice site visits at over 50 auto body shops. Partner shops have reduced
worker exposure to and emissions of diisocyanates (the leading cause of occupational asthma),
organic solvents and other toxic components of paints by as much as 30 percent. They
accomplished this while saving roughly $4,000 per year per shop16.
Current and recently completed DfE partnerships - including auto-refinishing best
practices, computer displays, industrial and institutional laundry detergents, and flexographic
printing - are continuing to see reductions in the use of and exposure to toxic chemicals. DfE is
transferring its "lessons-learned" to additional industries that use similar chemicals and practices
such as the collision repair, paint, insurance, and vocational technical educator sectors. DfE
conducted train-the-trainer workshops with these groups to promote best practices. Best
practices often save money at the same time they protect workers and the environment; such as
the paint spray-gun use illustrated hi the chart above. A key focus of the training is to promote
awareness of health effects and safe handling techniques, improve paint transfer efficiency, and
reduce inhalation and dermal exposure of diisocyanates and other toxic chemicals during spray
application and related activities.
Recently, DfE has also been collaborating with EPA Regions on certain industry sector
projects. For example, DfE and Region 9 are looking at alternatives to the use of brominated
flame retardants hi the furniture industry. EPA and the furniture manufacturing industry are
initiating a partnership to explore alternatives to both the materials and chemicals used in
furniture including foam, fabric, plastics, and batting and their respective flame retardant
chemicals. The partnership aims to look holistically at health and environmental issues in the
manufacturing process.
In addition, DfE has initiated a partnership with the Industrial Designers Society of
America (IDSA). The industrial design sector leads the design of consumer products that sell in
high volumes and thereby drive the production and use of many chemicals of concern to EPA.
DfE's industrial design sector partnership will bridge the gap between green chemistry and
engineering and their application to green the high production volume consumer products sold,
used and disposed of in the U.S. The partnership will focus on developing educational materials
for the designer, making information available to facilitate rapid decision making by industrial
14 http://www.epa.gov/dfe/projects/index.htm
15 Information provided by Noramtech Corporation, correspondence of 11/20/02
16 http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/dfe/pubs/auto/trainers/sprayandsave.htm
V-48
-------
designers, recognizing ecological design excellence in high-volume products, and developing
product-specific partnerships to achieve measurable results.
In FY 2005, DfE expects to broaden its industrial design partnership to design and bring
to production three major consumer items. We will expand the diisocyanate work to additional
sectors such as consumer products and casting binders in foundries. DfE will focus on priority
chemicals where we can achieve a significant return on our investment. We will ensure that our
partnerships obtain measurable reductions of priority pollutants and align with the American
Chemistry Council's Responsible Care Program. DfE will finalize the Environmental Security
Supplement to the Integrated Environmental Management System Guidance. Other likely
partnership candidates include reduction of lead and brominated flame retardants in PVC wiring.
EPA's Design for the Environment (DfE) Program has proven its ability to deliver
quantifiable environmental results, contributing directly to EPA's long-term strategic and annual
outcome-based pollution prevention performance measures. Additional resources in FY 2005
will enable this successful program to increase these results by expanding its collaborative
partnerships to several additional small business sectors. New partnership targets will be
determined based on a combination of factors including the level and potential significance of
pollution prevention results anticipated and the interest and need of companies in such sectors for
EPA technical assistance. Initial sectors under consideration for attention in FY 2005 include
optimizing formulations for automotive paint and floor care and finishing products. These
sectors offer great opportunity for reduction of Hazardous Air Pollutants and toxic chemicals
such as diisocyanates. This high-production volume chemical is the leading cause of
occupational asthma. Consideration will also be given to expanding our industry partnership on
flame retardants beyond flexible foam. Industry is working to comply with enhanced fire safety
standards and would like to partner with EPA to look holistically at furniture to ensure that they
do not use flame retardants that could endanger human health or the environment. Some flame
retardants have been shown to occur widely in human tissue. Some of the increased results
anticipated from these expanded activities will occur in FY 2005, and additional environmental
benefits will be measurable in 2006 and beyond as new techniques and technologies are
developed.
RCRA Waste Minimization and Recycling
The Resource Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA) Waste Minimization Program works
with industries, government agencies, and communities to find ways to help organizations reduce
the amount of waste they generate. EPA's newest waste minimization effort is the National
Waste Minimization Partnership Program, which is a voluntary program that encourages results
by publicly recognizing and showcasing the source reduction, recycling and advanced
manufacturing accomplishments of member partners who commit to reducing wastes containing
Waste Minimization Priority Chemicals (WMPCs). These chemicals are found in hazardous
waste and are documented contaminants of air, land, water, plants and animals.
EPA set goals of reducing 30 priority list chemicals from hazardous waste by 50 percent
between 1991 and 2005. In FY 2003, EPA analyzed TRI 2001 data and concluded that a 53
percent reduction (from the 1999 baseline) has been achieved. The Agency anticipates achieving
additional reductions of 2 percent per year in 2004 and 2005 (to 55% in 2004; to 57% in 2005)
based on the original 1991 baseline, using voluntary programs almost exclusively. In 2004 EPA
V-49
-------
and its state partners will develop a new baseline, using 2001 TRI data. By 2008, EPA will
reduce the amount of priority chemicals in hazardous waste streams by 10 percent based on 2001
baseline data.
In FY 2005, EPA will implement aspects of the Resource Conservation Challenge
through the National Waste Minimization Partnership program to reduce hazardous wastes
containing priority chemicals. EPA will sponsor industry workshops, encourage increased
technical assistance and information sharing, and publicly recognize industry leaders. Regional
and state staffs will encourage partners and aid in identifying waste minimization goals and
avenues for achieving them cost-effectively. EPA expects to expand its work from five industrial
pilot facilities to other key industrial sectors such as facilities generating lead and cadmium
containing hazardous wastes. EPA will also encourage the piloting of chemical management
systems which create a positive economic incentive for chemical suppliers to partner in finding
ways to reduce chemical use.
Resource Conservation Challenge
The multi-office Resource Conservation Challenge (RCC) challenges all Americans -
makers of goods, sellers of goods, and buyers of goods to prevent pollution and promote
recycling and reuse; reduce priority chemicals at all life cycle stages; and conserve energy and
materials. The RCC is a major national effort to find flexible,
yet more protective ways to conserve our valuable resources
through pollution prevention, waste reduction and energy
recovery activities that will improve public health and the
environment. The RCC identifies areas of program focus, or
"challenges" that.are ready for voluntary partnerships. Each of
these challenges works to resolve national environmental
problems by finding environmentally acceptable solutions.
The program currently is coordinating across EPA offices to
address environmental problems in the electronics, buildings,
hospitals, paper production, and priority chemicals areas.
RESOURCE GQMSEH¥ffl10N
Categorical Grant: Pollution Prevention
Pollution Prevention Grants to States and Tribes help support a technical assistance,
education and outreach infrastructure at the local level to assist businesses and industries in
identifying better strategies and solutions to reducing waste and pollution at the source. 17 The
grants also stimulate new non-regulatory strategies to preventing pollution. State and Tribal
pollution prevention programs address the transfer of potentially harmful pollutants across all
environmental media: air, water, and land.
P2 grant projects have demonstrated that facilities have many opportunities to protect the
environment by implementing pollution prevention, and that source reduction can be a cost-
effective way of meeting or exceeding Federal and State regulatory requirements. Successful P2
17 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. Pollution Prevention Grants Web Site,
http://www.epa.gov/p2/grants/index.htm. Accessed September 9,2003.
V-50
-------
grant projects have yielded decreases in facility emissions and discharges which lead to less
stringent regulatory and permitting requirements, increases in production rates that correlate to
decreasing environmental costs, elevated investments in new and better technologies, and
savings that directly impact the overall profitability of a business. EPA recently completed a
summary of the P2 grant program from 1988 that includes an analysis of funding by organization
type, sectors targeted, and activities conducted, (http://www.epa.gov/p2/grants/state/index.htm)
EPA is working to strengthen the nation's network of regional State and Tribal Pollution
Prevention Roundtables. The Regional Pollution Prevention Roundtables support pollution
prevention and "beyond regulatory compliance" activities through information sharing, issue
discussion and program development among member organizations. The Roundtables are
collections of regional pollution prevention professionals that share a common mission to
prevent pollution before it becomes a problem. They serve as forums to share ideas and discuss
successful efforts at preventing pollution and to discuss issues and share technical information
and thereby save time, money and resources.
In FY 2003, the National Pollution Prevention Roundtable conducted a state survey and
produced a report entitled "An Ounce of Pollution Prevention," which summarized pollution
prevention results from the states
over the last ten years. The
report revealed that more than
167 billion pounds of pollution
were prevented, not just treated
and controlled. In addition, more
than 4 billion gallons of water
were conserved.
O
"An Ounce of Pollution Prevention is
Worth Over 167 Billion Pounds of Cure"
A Decade of Pollution Prevention Results, 1990 - 2000
Resources Conserved
• 215 million kWh of
energy
• 4.1 billion gallons of
water
• $666 million in cost
savings
167 Billion Pounds of
Pollution Prevented by
Media
Source: National Pollution Prevention Roundtable, January 2003 report on achievement of
state and local P2 programs
Effective management of
government operations requires
measuring the results of our
work. EPA will work with the
National Pollution Prevention
Roundtable to develop a national
pollution prevention results
reporting system that will
provide annual information on a core set of pollution prevention result measures. These P2
performance measures will also be incorporated into the P2 State Grants so that states will focus
some of their efforts on the measurement of the results of their program activity.
EPA will also work to build pollution prevention activities and infrastructure on Tribal
lands and better coordinate Tribal and State pollution prevention activities through Tribal
participation in the nationwide pollution prevention roundtables.
P2 State and Tribal Assistance Grants have proven their ability-to deliver quantifiable
environmental results, contributing directly to EPA's long-term strategic and annual outcome-
based pollution prevention performance measures. Additional resources in FY 2005 will enable
this successful program to increase these results by allowing EPA to use internal EPM funds to
support the P2Rx network, allowing at least $1 million of P2 STAG funds currently supporting
V-51
-------
this work to be redirected to State and Tribal grantees. EPA increased its outcome-based FY
2005 P2 Annual Performance Measures to reflect the increased results anticipated from these
expanded activities.
Categorical Grant: Environmental Information
This program encourages state and other partners' data integration efforts and their
participation in the Network. State, Tribal, and EPA data on the Network will both facilitate
understanding of various environmental issues and serve as a precursor to understanding the data
needed to fully comprehend environmental conditions and trends and, thus, make better-
informed environmental and human health decisions.
The program has four main parts: Network Readiness; Implementation; Collaboration;
and Support Grants. These grants will increase state and Tribal capacity to integrate their
environmental data, reduce reporting burden, enhance electronic reporting, provide public access
to data, and participate in the Exchange Network.
Regulatory Innovation
In FY 2005, the Agency will continue to test innovative ideas through demonstration
projects, such as those related to integrating Environmental Management Systems into permits,
and removing regulatory impediments to "lean manufacturing" techniques.
The Agency will expand its efforts to promote innovative environmental management
strategies to states and Tribes through a proposed increase in resources available under the State
Innovation Grant Program. By expanding this program with an additional $750,000, EPA will
build on EPA-state collaborations that began in FY 2002. The grant program allows states to test
innovative ideas, such as using Environmental Management Systems in the permitting system to
improve environmental results while
achieving resource efficiencies. Because
current technology-based standards don't
address upstream pollution reduction and can
lock in outdated technologies, EPA wants to
support the states hi their efforts to promote
performance-based alternatives that provide
incentives for the development and
implementation of new management systems
and technologies. The grant program assists
states, which are at the front line of permitting
Five Key Traits of Enhanced Environmental
Protection
1. Focus on environmental performance and results
2. Emphasize greater environmental responsibility,
not just pollution control
3. Integrate environmental management more folly
across facilities, problems, and media
4. Use market-based incentives to achieve
environmental goals
5. Emphasize partnership and stakeholder
and regulatory activities, hi improving the collaboration.
efficiency of their environmental programs ~
a high priority given shrinking state resources.
In FY 2005, EPA will broaden its capacity to conduct program evaluations of innovative
projects and investments, including supporting third-party evaluations. This work responds
directly to criticism from Congress, OMB, and GAO about the Agency's capacity for evaluating
innovation and for explaining the environmental outcomes of its regulations, policies and
activities. It also responds to the "Budget and Performance Integration" component of the
V-52
-------
President's Management Agenda and subsequent calls for Agency evaluation results by the
Office of Management and Budget.
Successful environmental pilot project tools and techniques will be evaluated and
replicated to drive these innovative approaches deeper into EPA and State core programs For
example, in 2005, EPA will continue to facilitate the transfer to states and priority environmental
problem areas the Environmental Results Program (ERP) model. This innovation originated in
Massachusetts in the late 1990s. The ERP model interactively links compliance assistance, self-
certification and performance measurement. This approach gives small business
owners/operators better knowledge and understanding of their regulatory requirements, provides
detailed measurement data on the performance of individual facilities as well as whole business
sectors, and assists state regulatory agencies in targeting their technical assistance and
enforcement efforts. Nine states are implementing ERP projects across seven small-business
dominated sectors.
Strong partnerships with businesses, states and Tribes are an important element of EPA's
Innovations Strategy. In FY 2005, the Agency will implement a Performance Track Corporate
Recognition Program, an extension of the current facility-based recognition program. Through
program feedback and evaluation, EPA continues to improve the Performance Track program
and in FY 05, will reduce administrative burdens and increase flexibility in ways that allow
greater efficiency and enable members to
achieve and measure beyond-compliance
performance.
EPA seeks to establish Performance Track as a "gold
standard" for environmental performance — a standard
that facilities will strive to attain. To encourage
facilities to aim for this standard, EPA adds value to
Performance Track membership through recognition,
networking, and regulatory and administrative
incentives.
In FY 2005, EPA will make greater
use of the Sector Strategies Program to
achieve better environmental results with
greater efficiency. The program will begin
to implement sector strategies with 12 major industrial and service sectors through regulatory
changes designed to reduce productivity barriers, and through targeted approaches such as
environmental management systems to prompt sector-wide stewardship. The Agency will
extend participation in the program through more multi-sector initiatives and greater state
involvement, following the model of the successful public dialogue convened in FY 2004 on
barriers to beneficial reuse of industrial materials. EPA also will expand the use of these
collaborative sector partnerships to explore new ways of doing business, drawing upon the
expertise and impact of sector partners to craft strategies for market-based approaches, targeted
technology development, greater voluntary stewardship, and collective problem solving in
support of the Agency's mission and goals.
The Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation continues to work on implementing the
National Environmental Performance Track Program (NEPT). NEPT is a program designed to
motivate and reward companies and other regulated entities that are top environmental
performers to recognize facilities that consistently meet their legal requirements, implemented
EMS, and made tangible improvements to their environmental performance. Entry criteria
include showing implementation of an EMS, presenting a record of continued compliance,
certifying current compliance, demonstrating specific environmental achievements, and
committing to future improvements, including public outreach and annual performance reporting
(including summaries of audit findings). Incentives for participation include Agency recognition,
V-53
-------
lowered priority for routine inspections, access to Audit Policy penalty mitigation and
recognition of good faith participation in the program hi case of a discretionary penalty
assessment.
In addition, the Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation participates hi projects under
the 1998 Joint EPA/State Agreement on Innovation and other innovative partnerships. The
enforcement program will focus on ensuring these projects are legally enforceable where
necessary, and will provide accountability and transparency for federal and non-federal facilities
participants. The program also assists hi verifying and evaluating project results.
In FY 2005, OPEI is funding the enhancement and transfer of the innovative
Massachusetts Environmental Results Program (ERP). ERP consists of a set of three linked
tools— compliance assistance, inspections, and performance measurement, including an annual
certification of compliance signed by a senior company official. ERP has unproved performance
for small businesses, and resulted in savings for these businesses, allowing the State and EPA to
focus resources on higher priority environmental problems. The Agency will continue to provide
technical and legal assistance to states developing an ERP, as well as foster the sharing of
information and materials between states.
Last but not least, in FY 2005, OPEI will continue to assure that EPA responsively
addresses small business environmental issues, and assists small business to improve their
environmental performance through innovative and cost-effective mechanisms. These efforts
will be guided by the newly revised Small Business Strategy through a process that involves: 1)
developing new and innovative outreach vehicles; 2) building a better knowledge base; 3) setting
priorities for developing regulations, policies and other initiatives; 4) unifying and coordinating
programs within EPA; and, 5) measuring and evaluating the results of these efforts.
Regulatory/Economic Management and Analysis
EPA will promote the use of economics hi the
design and assessment of management solutions to
environmental issues facing Agency decision makers. The
Agency will support the development of economic tools to
apply hi analyses of the economic benefits, costs and
impacts of regulatory programs. Using economic tools in
the design and assessment of management solutions to
The causes and consequences of
environmental problems have
important economic dimensions. This
is why environmental economic
analysis is critical to the development
and implementation of effective and
progressive environmental policy.
environmental issues will aid in the cost-effective use of
Agency and societal resources, hi addition, EPA will conduct and supervise research and
development on economic analytic methods; lead production of cross-Agency economic reports;
provide guidance for performing economic analyses; and promote consistency hi the preparation
and presentation of economic information hi the Agency.
EPA will continue to improve the Agency's regulatory and policy development process
hi FY 2005. The Agency will strengthen the policy analysis of key regulatory and non-
regulatory actions, improve the regulatory and policy action information management system,
and improve the economic analysis underlying Agency actions. Multimedia analysis will
include policy option analysis, regulatory analysis, and analysis of innovative policy approaches.
V-54
-------
The regulatory development process ensures the Agency's compliance with various
statutes and Executive Orders. Through improved and streamlined regulatory processes that
include increased public access, EPA is working to provide quality information to stakeholders.
In FY 2005, the Agency will continue to advance these objectives by ensuring that EPA
rulemakings adhere to all applicable statutory and executive requirements, and achieve
environmental results with a rninimum burden on the public. The Agency will continue its
outreach to small businesses, small governments, and small non-profits, establishing formal
mechanisms to build small entity partnership involvement in Agency rulemakings. EPA will
complete Regulatory Flexibility analyses for all rulemakings that may have a significant impact
on a substantial number of small entities, and will continue a small community's outreach
program to gather information on the potential impact of EPA's rules on small communities.
State and Tribal Performance Grant Fund
EPA will make available in the FY 05, through a competitive process, $23M to states and
tribes for all activities normally eligible for categorical grant assistance. The award process will
be performance focused, with winners selected on the basis of the proposed environmental
and/or health outcomes. The program will require that grantees show how their proposal directly
supports the Agency's mission and strategic plan; consider the availability of matching funds;
allow for multimedia approaches; and show tangible performance-based environmental or health
outcomes. These grants will require that the grantees design up-front and build into the program
performance measurement, the ability to evaluate the effectiveness of the program so that we can
learn and make good management decisions about investing additional resources. The
Performance Grants differ from other grants that may use formula driven resource distribution
methods or consider performance measurement after the initial program design. The performance
grants will help EPA clearly articulate expectations of states and tribes hi terms of environmental
results, rather than only of process. These grants will encourage states to experiment with bold
forms of regulatory and non-regulatory management, such as facility-wide permits,
performance-based management contracts, cap-and-trade systems, pollution taxes or fees,
information requirements, collaborative approaches to setting goals and designing strategies for
protecting watersheds, and compliance-assistance tools of various kinds. These grants will
develop and deploy approaches to environmental protection that can deliver measurable results
more effectively or efficiently, and be models for implementation across the nation. The lessons
we learn from these performance based competitive grants can help EPA focus limited resources
on the most effective strategies and-influence the distribution of future grant awards. The grants
will generally encourage states to invest their energies in measuring environmental conditions,
and in organizing their planning around priorities and strategic goals. The award of grants will
be influenced by state planning capability. Within EPA, these grants will help build the
infrastructure for multimedia, performance-based management and help cut across the
fragmented media based EPA organizational structure.
NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) Implementation
EPA's Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program reviews environmental impacts
of proposed major federal actions as required by NEPA, §309 of the Clean Air Act, the Antarctic
Science, Tourism, and Conservation Act (ASTCA), and the Executive Order on environmental
justice; and develops policy and technical guidance on issues related to NEPA, the Endangered
Species Act, the National Historic Preservation Act and relevant Executive Orders. The program
V-55
-------
emphasizes cooperation with other Federal agencies to ensure compliance with applicable
environmental laws and better integration of pollution prevention and ecological risk assessment
into their programs, while targeting high impact federal program areas, such as water resources
and transportation/energy related projects. The program also manages the Agency's official
filing activity for all federal Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) in accordance with a
Memorandum of Understanding with the Council on Environmental Quality.
In FY 2005, the Agency will continue to work with other federal agencies to streamline
and improve then- NEPA process hi such key areas as approvals of highways and airport
expansions; hydro-power/nuclear power plant re-licensing, coal bed methane development and
other energy-related projects; military base closures; flood control and port development
projects; and management of national forests and public lands. In FY 2005, 70 percent of the
significant impacts identified by EPA during the NEPA review of all major proposed federal
actions will be mitigated hi order to preserve air and water quality, wetlands, aquatic and
terrestrial habitats, and endangered species; to protect Environmental Justice communities; and
to prevent degradation of valued environmental resources.
The NEPA Implementation program also guides EPA's own compliance with NEPA and
other applicable statutes, and with related environmental justice requirements. These efforts
include EPA-issued new source National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
permits in regions where a state/tribe has not assumed the NPDES program; for off-shore oil and
gas sources; for Clean Water Act (CWA) wastewater treatment plant grants; and for special
appropriation grants for wastewater, water supply and solid waste collection facilities. In FY
2005, 90 percent of EPA projects subject to NEPA Environmental Assessment or Environmental
Impact Statement requirements (water treatment facility project and other grants, new source
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits and EPA facilities) are expected to
result in a finding of no significant environmental impact.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
• (+$5,000,000): This increase is a redirection from the Agency's P2 Research program to
other Agency P2 efforts that have shown results in reducing pollution. The following P2
programs will be funded: The Green Suppliers Network will allow the program to
increase results by working to encourage both State P2 technical assistance providers and
local Manufacturing Extension Partner centers to form collaborative relationships under
GSN. The Green Chemistry Challenge Program will focus on existing and emerging
chemicals of concern, and the DFE Program will expand its collaborative partnerships to
several additional small business sectors. The increase will also support the P2Rx
network.
• (+$750,000): Expand the Innovations Grants Program, a program that provides
assistance to States and Tribes through a competitive process to support innovative
approaches to help meet and exceed regulatory environmental requirements and improve
participants' stewardship of and impact on the environment.
V-56
-------
STAG
(+$23,000,000) Create a new State and Tribal Performance Grant Fund that will be
multimedia in scope and competitively awarded based on anticipated performance and
results.
There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for new and
existing FTE.
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
GOAL: COMPLIANCE AND ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP
OBJECTIVE: IMPROVE ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE THROUGH POLLUTION
PREVENTION AND INNOVATION
Reduction of Industrial / Commercial Chemicals
In 2005 Prevent, reduce and recycle hazardous industrial/commercial chemicals and improve environmental
stewardship practices.
In 2004 Prevent, reduce and recycle hazardous industrial/commercial chemicals and municipal solid wastes.
In 2003 FY 2003 data will be available in 2005 to verify the quantity of toxic release inventory (TRI)
pollutants released, disposed of, treated or combusted for energy recovery in 2003, (normalized for
changes in industrial production) will be reduced by 200 million pounds, or two percent, from 2002.
Performance Measures:
TRI non-recycled
Reduction of
(normalized)
Alternative feed stocks, processes, or safer
products identified through Green Chemistry
Challenge Award
Number of participants in Hospitals for a
Healthy Environment
Quantity of hazardous chemicals/solvents
eliminated through the Green Chemistry
Challenge Awards Program
For eco-friendly detergents, track the number of
laundry detergent formulations developed.
Percent reduction in Toxics Release Inventory
(TRI) reported toxic chemical releases at Federal
Facilities.
Percent reduction in both Toxics Release
Inventory (TRI) chemical releases to the
environment from the business sector per unit of
production ("Clean Index")
Percent reduction in TRI chemicals in
production-related wastes generated by the
FY 2003
Actuals
waste Data lag
FY 2004 FY 2005
Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
200 Million
210
2000
150 million
36
32%
20%
10%
Ibs
Prod/proc
(Cum)
Participants
Ibs
formulations
Releases
(Cum)
Releases
(Cum)
Waste (Cum)
V-57
-------
Performance Measures: ' FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
business sector per unit of production ("Green
Index").
Reduction in overall pounds of pollution. 34 Billion Pounds
(Cum)
Millions of dollars saved through reductions in 134 Million Dollars
pollution. (Cum)
Annual cumulative quantity of water conserved 1.5 billion Gallons
(Cum)
Billions of BTUs of energy conserved. 143 Billion BTU (Cum)
Baseline: The baseline for the TRI non-recycled wastes measure is the amount of non-recycled wastes in 2001
reported FY2003. The baseline for eco-friendly detergents is 0 formulations in 1997. The baseline for
the alternative feed stocks / processes measure is zero in 2000. The baseline for the quantity of
hazardous chemicals / solvents measures is zero pounds in the year 2000. The baseline for the
hospitals measure is zero in FY2001. The baseline reference point for reductions of pollution and
conservation of BTUs and water will be zero for 2003. The baseline for money saved will be 2003.
The baseline for reduction in CO2 will be zero for 1996. The baseline for the Clean and Green Index
would be 2001 levels. The baseline for chemical releases is 2001 level. The baseline for chemical
production related wastes is 2001 level. Note: Several output measures were changed to internal-only
reporting status in 2005. Annual Performance measures under development for EPA's
Environmentally Preferable Purchasing program for the FY2006 Annual Performance Plan.
Innovation Activities
In 2005 Performance Track members collectively will achieve an annual reduction of 600 million gallons in water
use; 2.5 million MMBTUs in energy use; 15,000 tons of solid waste; 6,000 tons of air releases; and 10,000
tons in water discharges, compared with 2001 results.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Specific annual reductions in five media/resource 5 media
areas: water use, energy use, solid waste, air reductions
releases, and water discharges.
Baseline: The baseline year is 2001. The FY 2005 specific reductions planned are that Performance Track
members collectively will achieve annual reductions, compared with 2001, of 600M gallons of
water used; 2.5M MMBTUs of energy used; 15,000 tons of solid waste; 6,000 tons of air releases;
and 10,000 tons of water discharges.
EFFICIENCY MEASURES/MEASUREMENT DEVELOPMENT PLAN
An efficiency measure for the Green Chemistry Program is being developed.
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
FY 2005 Performance Measure:
V-58
-------
Percent reduction in both Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) chemical releases to the
environment from the business sector per unit of production ("Clean Index").
Percent reduction in TRI chemicals in production-related wastes generated by the business
sector per unit of production ("Green Index").
Percent reduction in Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) reported toxic chemical releases at
Federal Facilities.
Performance Database: TRIM: Toxics Release Inventory Modernization, formerly TRIS
(Toxics Release Inventory System) provides facility/chemical-specific data quantifying the
amount of TRI-listed chemicals entering wastes associated with production process in each year.
The total amount of each chemical in production-related wastes can be broken out by the
methods employed in managing such wastes, including recycling, energy recovery, treatment,
and disposal/release. Amounts of these wastes that are not recycled are tracked for this
performance measure.
Data Source: Regulated facilities report facility-specific, chemical-specific release, waste and
recycling data to EPA. For example, in calendar year 1999, 22,639 facilities filed 84,068 TRI
reports.
Methods, Assumptions, and Suitability: TRI data are collected as required by sections 313 of
EPCRA and 6607 of Pollution Prevention Act (PPA) (40 CFR ' 372; www.epa.gov/tri''). Only
certain facilities in specific Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes are required to report
annually the quantities of over 650 listed toxic chemicals and chemical categories released to
each environmental medium and otherwise managed as waste (40 CFR '372; www.epa.gov/tri/').
Regulation requires covered facilities to use monitoring, mass balance, emission factors and/or
engineering calculations approaches to estimate releases and recycling volumes. For purposes of
the Clean and Green Index performance measures, data controls are employed to facilitate cross-
year comparisons: a subset of chemicals and sectors are assessed that are consistently reported in
all years; data are normalized to control for changes in production using published U.S. Bureau
of Economic Analysis (BEA) gross product indices (chain-type quantity index for the
manufacturing sector). [Please note, the federal facility measure data are not normalized to
control for changes in production].
QA/QC Procedures: Most facilities use EPA-certified automated Toxics Release Inventory
(TRI) FORM R reporting tools, which contain automated error checking mechanisms. Upon
receipt of the facilities' reports, EPA conducts automated edits, error checks, data scrubs,
corrections and normalization during data entry and subsequent processing to verify that the
information provided by the facilities is correctly entered in TRIM. The Agency does not control
the quality of the data submitted by the regulated community. EPA does, however, work with
the regulated community to improve the quality of then- estimates.
Data Quality Review: The quality of the data contained in the TRI chemical reports is
dependent upon the quality of the data that the reporting facility uses to estimate its releases and
other waste management quantities. Use of TRI Form R by submitters and EPA's performance
data reviews combine to help assure data quality. The GAO Report, Environmental Protection:
V-59
-------
EPA Should Strengthen Its Efforts to Measure and Encourage Pollution Prevention (GAO - 01 -
283), recommends that EPA strengthen the rule on reporting of source reduction activities.
Although EPA agrees that source reduction data are valuable, the Agency has not finalized
regulations to improve reporting of source reduction activities by TRI-regulated facilities.
Data Limitations: Use of the data should be based on the user's understanding that the Agency
does not have direct assurance of the accuracy of the facilities' measurement and reporting
processes. TRI release data are reported by facilities on a good faith, best-estimate basis. EPA
does not have the resources to conduct on-site validation of each facility's reporting data, though
on-site investigations do occur each year at a subset of reporting facilities.
Error Estimate: From the various data quality efforts, EPA has learned of several reporting
issues such as incorrect assignment of threshold activities and incorrect assignment of release
and other waste management quantities (EPA-745-F-93-001; EPA-745-R-98-012;
wwrw.epa..gov/tri/tridata/data__quality reports/index.htm; www.epa.gov/tri/report/index.htm.)
For example, certain facilities incorrectly assigned a 'processing' (25,000 Ib) threshold instead of
an 'otherwise use' (10,000 Ib) threshold for certain non-persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic
(PBT) chemicals, so they did not have to report if their releases were below 25,000 Ibs. Also, for
example, some facilities incorrectly reported fugitive releases instead of stack releases of certain
toxic chemicals.
New/Improved Data or Systems: EPA plans to develop regulations for improving reporting of
source reduction activities by TRI reporting facilities.
References: www.epa.goy/triy and additional citations provided above. (EPA-745-F-93-
001 ;EP A-745-R-98-012:http://www.epa.gov/tri/report/index.htm:
www.epa.gov/tri/tridata/data_qualitv reports/index.htm: wwvt?.epa.gov/tri/report/index.htm
Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) indices are available at
http://www.bea.gov/bea/regional/gsp/
FY 2005 Performance Measure:
• Reduction in overall pounds of pollution
• Billions of BTUs of energy conserved
• Billions of gallons of water saved
• Millions of dollars saved through reductions in pollution
• Reduction in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from a baseline year of 1996. (Green
Chemistry only)
The Agency's Pollution Prevention programs include Green Chemistry, Design for the
Environment, Green Engineering, and other Pollution Prevention (P2) Programs. Each of these
programs operate under the principles of the Pollution Prevention Act and work with others to
reduce waste at the source, before it is generated. These programs are designed to facilitate the
incorporation of pollution prevention concepts and principles into the daily operations of
government agencies, businesses, manufacturers, nonprofit organizations, and individuals.
V-60
-------
Performance Database:
Green Chemistry (GC): EPA is developing an electronic database ("metrics" database) which
will allow organized storage and retrieval of green chemistry data submitted to EPA on
alternative feedstocks, processes, and safer chemicals. The database is being designed to store
and retrieve, hi a systematic fashion, information on the environmental benefits and, where
available, economic benefits that these alternative green chemistry technologies offer. The
database is also being designed to track the quantity of hazardous chemicals and solvents
eliminated through implementation of these alternative technologies.
Design for the Environment (DfE): DfE does not have a performance database. Instead, DfE is
planning to develop an evaluation spreadsheet for its main project approaches (i.e., Life Cycle
Assessment, Formulator, Best Practices, Cleaner Technology Substitutes Assessment, and
Supply Chain). Spreadsheet content will vary by approach, and generally will include measures
comparing baseline technologies or products to "cleaner" ones, as well as information on partner
adoption and/or market share of cleaner alternatives; for example, the DfE formulator approach
.tracks chemical improvements (such as pounds of chemicals of concern no longer used by
partners, and conversely pounds of safer ingredients) and resource savings. This information
will allow benefit calculations.
Green Engineering (GE): Similar to the Green Chemistry Program, EPA will be developing an
electronic database to keep track of environmental benefits of GE projects including, gallons of
water, British Thermal Units (BTUs) and dollars saved and pounds of carbon dioxide (CO2)
emissions eliminated.
Pollution Prevention (P2) Programs: EPA is working with state and local P2 programs to
develop a national database that will provide data on environmental outcomes (the core P2
metrics included in the above performance measure). Many EPA Regional offices', state and
local P2 programs are currently collecting data on P2 program activities, outputs, and outcomes.
EPA will be working with these programs to reach consensus on standardized metrics, including
definitions, and to establish an ongoing system to gather data on these metrics. The system will
include new reporting requirements in EPA P2 grants and the cooperation of key stakeholder
groups, such as the National Pollution Prevention Roundtable (which produced a January 2003
report providing baseline data on the above metrics for the period 1990-2000). Data collected
from the program will be placed in a new national database, facilitating convenient data storage
and retrieval.
Data Source:
Green Chemistry (GC): Industry and academia submit nominations annually to OPPT hi
response to the Presidential Green Chemistry Challenge Awards. Environmental and economic
benefit information is included hi the nomination packages. The metrics database pulls this
benefit information from the nominations.
Design for the Environment (DfE): The source of DfE's evaluation information varies by the
approach and the partner industry. For example, in DfE's formulation improvement
partnerships, partners provide proprietary information on both their original formulation and
their environmentally improved one. Partners sign a memorandum of understanding with
EPA/DfE which includes information on how the company uses cleaner chemistry to formulate a
product, the environmental and health benefits of the product, and customer and sales
V-61
-------
information. For other partnerships, data sources typically include technical studies (e.g., cleaner
technology substitutes assessments, life-cycle assessments) and market/sales/adoption
information from associations.
Green Engineering (GE): Data will come from profiles of recognized projects by technical
journals or organizations, such as the American Institute of Chemical Engineers, or directly
reported by project leaders on industry projects or joint academia-industry projects.
Pollution Prevention (P2) Programs: State and local P2 programs will submit data as described
above.
Methods, Assumptions, and Suitability:
Green Chemistry (GC): This is an output measure tracked directly through OPPT record-keeping
systems. No models or assumptions or statistical methods are employed.
Design for the Environment (DfE): Methods and assumptions vary by approach and partner
industry. Each DfE partnership identifies and focuses on a unique set of chemicals and industrial
processes. For most DfE approaches, the general method is to 1) develop a model for a "typical"
or "average" facility, 2) assess the differences between traditional and alternative technologies
on metrics such as toxics use, resource consumption, cost, and performance, 3) track market
share of alternative technologies over time, and 4) multiply the increase in use of alternative,
cleaner technologies by the environmental, cost, and performance differences identified in Step
2. Through this quantitative process, the Agency is able to calculate the benefits generated by the
cleaner technology: e.g. how much toxics use reduction is occurring, how much less resources
are consumed? Similarly, for DfE's formulation improvement approach, the method is to
analyze environmental (e.g., toxics use, resource consumption) and cost differences between the
old and improved formulations. This proprietary information is provided by our partners and
sales information. For each approach, we will develop a spreadsheet that includes the methods
and assumptions.
Green Engineering (GE): The information will be tracked directly through EPA record keeping
systems. No models or statistical extrapolations are expected to be used.
Pollution Prevention (P2) Programs: The data will come from state and local P2 programs as
described above. No models or assumptions or statistical methods are employed.
QA/QC Procedures: All Pollution Prevention and Toxics programs operate under the
Information Quality Guidelines as found at http://www.epa.gov/oei/qualityguidennes/index.html
and under the OPPT Quality Management Plan (QMP). OPPT Quality Management Plan is for
internal use only.
Green Chemistry: Data undergo a technical screening review by OPPT before being uploaded to
the database to determine if they adequately support the environmental benefits described in the
application. Subsequent to OPPT screening, data are reviewed by an external independent panel
of technical experts from academia, industry, government, and NGOs. Their comments on
potential benefits are incorporated into the database. The panel is convened by the Green
Chemistry Institute of the American Chemical Society, primarily for judging nominations
V-62
-------
submitted to the Presidential Green Chemistry Challenge Awards Program and selecting winning
technologies
Design for the Environment (DfE): Data undergo a technical screening review by DfE before
being uploaded to the spreadsheet. DfE determines whether data submitted adequately support
the environmental benefits described.
Green Engineering (GE): Data collected will be reviewed to ensure it meets the EPA Quality
Guidelines in terms of transparency, reasonableness and accuracy.
Pollution Prevention (P2) Programs: Data will undergo technical screening review by EPA and
other program participants (e.g., National Pollution Prevention Roundtable) before being placed
in the database. Additional QA/QC steps to be developed, as appropriate.
Data Quality Review: All Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) programs operate
under the Information Quality Guidelines as found at
http://www.epa.gov/oei/qualityguidelnies/index.html and under the OPPT Quality Management
Plan (QMP).
Green Chemistry (GC): Review of industry and academic data as documented hi U.S. EPA,
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Green Chemistry Program Files available at
http://www,ejpa.gov/QpptintT/greenchemistry/
Design for the Environment (DfE): Not applicable.
Green Engineering (GE): Data collected will be reviewed to meet data quality requirements.
Pollution Prevention (P2) Programs: The new metrics and data system were based, in part, on
recommendations in the February 2001 GAO report, "EPA Should Strengthen Its Efforts to
Measure and Encourage Pollution Prevention" (GAO-01-283). They also incorporate work by
such organizations as the Northeast Waste Management Officials Association, Pacific Northwest
Pollution Prevention Resource Center, and National Pollution Prevention Roundtable.
Data Limitations:
Green Chemistry (GC): Occasionally data are limited for a given technology due to confidential
business information (the Presidential Green Chemistry Challenge Awards Program does not
process CBI). It also is occasionally unclear what the percentage market penetration of
implemented alternative green chemistry technology (potential benefits vs. realized benefits) is.
In these cases, the database is so noted.
Design for the Environment (DfE): Occasionally data are limited for a given technology due to
confidential business information.
Green Engineering (GE): There may be instances in which environment benefits are not clearly
quantified. In those instances, the data will be excluded.
Pollution Prevention (P2) Programs: Limitations arise from the reliance on individual state and
local P2 programs to gather data. These programs vary in attention to data collection from
sources within their jurisdictions, data verification and other QA/QC procedures. Also, despite
V-63
-------
plans described above to move toward consistent metrics and definitions, some differences exist
Error Estimate:
Green Engineering (GE): There may be instances in which environment benefits are not clearly
quantified. In those instances, the data will be excluded.
Not applicable for other programs contributing data to this measure.
New/Improved Data or Systems:
Green Chemistry (GC), Design for the Environment (DfE), Green Engineering (GE): The
American Chemistry Council (ACC) has initiated an industry self-monitoring program called
Responsible Care. Beginning in 2003, member companies will collect and report on a variety of
information. Measures tentatively include Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) releases; tons of CO2
equivalent per pound of production; total BTUs consumed per pound of production; systems for
assessing or, reassessing potential environmental, health, and safety risks; percentage of products
re-evaluated; percentage of commitments for chemical evaluation programs; documentation of
process for characterizing and managing product risks; and documentation of communication of
risk characterization results. Many of these measures are similar to the EPA program targets
identified under Goal 5, Objective 2. These reports may be an invaluable source of industry
baseline information. It is important that the EPA programs identified under Goal 5 evaluate the
utility of the reports generated under the ACC's Responsible Care Program in support of the
EPA's programs as well as the goals of Responsible Care. (CAPRM II, Chemical and Pesticide
Results Measures, March 2003 pp. 313)
Pollution Prevention (P2) Programs and Hospitals for a Healthy Environment (H2E): See
discussion in first item.
References:
Chemical and Pesticide Results Measures II: http://www.pepps.fsu.edu./CAPRM/index.html
Green Chemistry (GC): http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/greenchemistrv/
Design for the Environment (DfE): http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/dfe/
Green Engineering (GE): http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/greenengineering/
Pollution Prevention (P2) Programs: http://www.epa.gov/oppt/p2home/index.htm
FY 2005 Performance Measure; Specific annual reductions in five media/resource areas:
water use, energy use, solid waste, air releases, and water discharges.
Performance Databases: Both the Performance Track On-Line (a Domino database) and the
Performance Track Members Database (a Microsoft Access database) store information provided
to EPA from members' applications and annual performance reports. Both databases contain the
same information; in fact, data from PTrack On-Line is transferred electronically to the PTrack
Members Database, which is more useful for analysis. Performance Track members select a set
of environmental indicators on which to report performance over a three-year period of
participation. The externally reported indicators (listed above) may or may not be included in
any particular facility's set of indicators. Performance Track aggregates and reports only that
information that a facility voluntarily reports to the Agency. A facility may make progress
towards one of the above indicators, but if it is not among its set of "commitments", then
Performance Track's data will not reflect the changes occurring at the facility. Similarly, if a
V-64
-------
facility's performance declines in any of the above areas and the indicator is not included among
its set of commitments, that decline will not be reflected in the above results.
Members report on results in a calendar year. Fiscal year 2005 corresponds most closely with
members' calendar year of 2005. That data will be reported to the Performance Track program
by April 1, 2006. The data will then be reviewed, aggregated, and available for external
reporting in August 2006. (Calendar year 2004 data will become available in August of 2005.)
Data Source: All data are self-reported and self-certified by member facilities.
Methods, Assumptions, and Suitability: Data collected from members' applications and
annual performance reports are compiled and aggregated across those members that choose to
report on the given indicator. The data reflect the performance results at the facility; any
improvements or declines hi performance are due to activities and conditions at the specific
facility. The data should not be interpreted to represent the direct results of participating in the
Performance Track program. Additionally, while Performance Track asks that facilities report
results of an indicator for the facility as a whole, in some cases facilities report results for
specific sections of a facility. This is not always clear in the reports submitted to the program.
For example, Member A commits to reducing its VOC emissions from 1000 tons to 500 tons
over a 3-year period. In Year 1, it reports a reduction of VOCs from 1000 tons to 800 tons.
Performance Track aggregates this reduction of 200 tons with results from other facilities. But
unbeknownst to Performance Track, the facility made a commitment to reduce its VOCs from
Production Line A and is only reporting on its results from that production line. The facility is
not intentionally hiding information from EPA, but it mistakenly thought that its commitment
could focus on environmental management activities at Production Line A rather than across the
entire facility. Unfortunately, due to increased production and a couple of mishaps by a sloppy
technician, VOC emissions at Production Line B increased by 500 tons in Year 1. Thus, the
facility's VOC emissions actually INCREASED by 300 tons hi Year 1. Performance Track's
statement to the public that the facility reduced its emissions by 200 tons is therefore misleading.
The data can be used to make year-to-year comparisons, but reviewers and analysts should bear
in mind that Performance Track membership is constantly hi flux. Although members should
retain the same set of indicators for their three-year participation period, as new members join
the program and others leave, the baseline constantly changes.
Due to unavoidable issues regarding the tuning of the application period, a small subset of
reported data will represent two years of performance at certain facilities, i.e., the baseline will
be two years prior rather than one year.
QA/QC Procedures: Data submitted with applications and annual performance reports to the
program are reviewed for completeness and adherence to program formatting requirements. In
cases where it appears possible that data is miscalculated or misreported, EPA or contractor staff
follows up with the facility. If the accuracy of data remains under question or if a facility has
provided incomplete or non-standard data, the database is coded to ensure that the data is
excluded from aggregated and externally reported results.
Additionally, Performance Track staff visit up to 20% of Performance Track member facilities
each year. During those visits, facilities are asked about their data collection systems and about
the sources of the data reported to the program.
V-65
-------
Performance Track contractors conduct a quality review of data entered manually into the
database. Performance Track staff conduct periodic checks of the entered data.
As described, Performance Track is quality controlled to the extent possible, but is not audited in
a formal way. However, a prerequisite of Performance Track membership is an environmental
management system (EMS) at the facility, a key element of which is a system of measurement
and monitoring. Most Performance Track facilities have had independent third-party audits of
their EMSs, which create a basis for confidence hi the facilities' data.
A Quality Management Plan is under development.
Data Quality Reviews: N/A.
Data Limitations: Potential sources of error include miscalculations, faulty data collection,
misreporting, inconsistent reporting, and nonstandard reporting on the part of the facility. Where
facilities submit data outside of the Performance Track On-Line system, Performance Track staff
or contractors must enter data manually into the database. Manually entered data is sometimes
typed incorrectly.
It is clear from submitted reports that some facilities have a tendency to estimate or round data.
Errors are also made in converting units and in calculations. In general, however, EPA is
confident that the externally reported results are a fair representation of members' performance.
Error Estimate: Not calculated.
New/Improved Performance Data or Systems: As of spring 2004, all Performance Track
applications and annual performance reports will be submitted electronically (i.e., through the
Performance Track On-Line system), thus avoiding the new for manual data entry. Additionally,
the program is implementing a new requirement that all members gain third-party assessments of
theur EMS.
References: Members' applications and annual performance reports can be found on the
Performance Track website at http://www.epa.gov/performancetrack/particip/alphabet.htm.
Performance Track On-Line and the Performance Track Members Database are not generally
accessible. Performance Track staff can grant access to and review of the databases by request.
EFFICIENCY MEASURES/MEASUREMENT DEVELOPMENT PLANS
Environmental Education: Increase by five percent the non-federal matching dollars spent on
educational projects by state and local organizations relative to the dollars invested by the EPA
Environmental Education Grants.
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
This objective spans a broad range of pollution prevention activities which can yield
reductions in waste generation and energy consumption in both the public and private sectors.
V-66
-------
For example, the Environmentally Preferable Purchasing initiative, which implements Executive
Orders 12873 and 13101, promotes the use of cleaner products by Federal agencies. This is
aimed at stimulating demand for the development of such products by industry.
This effort includes a number of demonstration projects with other Federal Departments
and Agencies, such as the General Services Administration (in particular, working to more
broadly implement green janitorial services in Federal Agencies), the National Park Service (to
use Green Purchasing as a tool to achieve the sustainability goals of the parks), Department of
Defense (use of environmentally preferable construction materials), and Defense Logistics
Agency (identification of environmental attributes for products in its purchasing system). The
program is also working within EPA to "green" its own operations. The program also works with
the National Institute for Standards and Technology to develop a life-cycle based decision
support tool for purchasers.
Under the Suppliers' Partnership for the Environment program and its umbrella program,
the Green Suppliers' Network, EPA's Pollution Prevention Program is working closely with the
National Institute of Standards and Technology and its Manufacturing Extension Partnership
Program to provide technical assistance to the process of "greening" industry supply chains. The
EPA is also working with the Department of Energy's Industrial Technologies Program to
provide energy audits and technical assistance to these supply chains.
The Agency is required to review environmental impact statements (EIS) and other major
actions impacting the environment and public health proposed by all federal agencies, and make
recommendations to the proposing federal agency on how to remedy/mitigate those impacts.
Although EPA is required under § 309 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) to review and comment on
proposed federal actions, neither the National Environmental Policy Act nor § 309 CAA require
a federal agency to modify its proposal to accommodate EPA's concerns. EPA does have
authority under these statutes to refer major disagreements with other federal agencies to the
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). Accordingly, many of the beneficial environmental
changes or mitigation that EPA recommends must be negotiated with the other federal agency.
The majority of the actions EPA reviews are proposed by the Forest Service, Department of
Transportation (including Federal Highway Administration and Federal Aviation
Administration), Army Corps of Engineers, Department of the Interior (including Bureau of
Land Management, Minerals Management Service and National Park Service), Department of
Energy (including Federal Regulatory Commission), and Department of Defense.
EPA will continue to work with the Small Business Administration, as appropriate, on
implementation of SBREFA and other small business issues. The Agency will work with other
federal agencies on a broad range of innovation and environmental improvement opportunities
using the Sector Strategies and Performance Track programs, coordinating our environmental
management programs, and ensuring opportunities to conduct environmental pilot projects with
host States.
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
Antarctic Science, Tourism, and Conservation Act (ASTCA)
Clean Air Act (CAA) section 309 (42 U.S.C. 7609)
Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251-1387)
V-67
-------
Economy Act of 1932
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) (42 U.S.C. 11001-11050)
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 11, 18, 24, and
25 (7 U.S.C. 136a, 136a-l, 136c, 136d, 1361, 136p, 136v, and 136w)
National Environmental Policy Act
Pollution Prevention Act (PPA) (42 U.S.C. 13101-13109)
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) (42 U.S.C. 6901-6992k)
Safe Drinking Water Act
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
Solid Waste Disposal Act as amended by the Hazardous Waste Amendments of 1984
Toxic Substances Control Act
V-68
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Compliance and Environmental Stewardship
OBJECTIVE; Build Tribal Capacity
Through 2008, assist all federally recognized tribes in assessing the condition of their
environment, help in building their capacity to implement environmental programs where needed
to improve tribal health and environments, and implement programs in Indian country where
needed to address environmental issues.
Resource Summary
(Dollars in Thousands)
Build Tribal Capacity
Environmental Program & Management
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Building and Facilities
Inspector General
Total Workyears
FY2003
Actuals
$70,556.6
$13,882.1
$56,212.5
$87.7
$374.3
99.8
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$78,759.3
$15,687.4
$62,500.0
$73.6
$498.3
99.5
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$78,931.1
$15,849.2
$62,500.0
$79.3
$502.6
98.4
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$171.8
$161.8
$0.0
$5.7
$4.3
-1.1
Program Project
(Dollars hi Thousands)
Categorical Grant: Tribal General Assistance
Program
Tribal - Capacity Building
Administrative Projects
TOTAL
FY2003
Actuals
$56,212.5
$9,555.8
$4,788.3
$70,556.6
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
$62,500.0
$10,494.1
$5,765.2
$78,759.3
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
$62,500.0
$10,641.7
$5,789.4
$78,931.1
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
$0.0
$147.6
$24.1
$171.7
FY 2005 REQUEST
Results to be Achieved under this Objective
Under Federal environmental statutes, the Agency has responsibility for assuring human
health and environmental protection in Indian Country. EPA has worked to establish the internal
infrastructure and organize its activities in order to meet this responsibility. Since adoption of the
EPA Indian Policy in 1984, EPA has worked with tribes on a government-to-government basis
that affirms the federal trust responsibility that EPA has with each federally recognized tribal
government. The creation of EPA's American Indian Environmental Office (AIEO) in 1994 took
V-69
-------
responsibility for such efforts and was a further step in ensuring environmental protection in
Indian Country.
EPA's strategy for achieving this Objective has three major components. First, work
with tribes to create an environmental presence for each federally recognized tribe. Second,
provide the information needed by the tribe to meet EPA and tribal environmental priorities. At
the same tune, ensure EPA has the ability to view and analyze the conditions on Indian lands and
the effects of EPA and tribal actions and programs on the environmental conditions. Third,
provide the opportunity for implementation of tribal environmental programs by tribes, or
directly by EPA, as necessary.
Categorical Grant: Tribal General Assistance Program
Placing an Environmental Presence in Indian Country: Under the authority of the Indian
Environmental General Assistance Program (GAP) Act of 1992, EPA provides grants to tribal
governments and intertribal consortia for developing the capacity to administer multi-media
environmental protection programs. In FY 2005, EPA is requesting $62.5 million which will
provide approximately 500 or 90 % of federally recognized tribes and intertribal consortia with
at least one person working in their community to build a strong, sustainable environment for the
future. The vital work performed includes locally assessing the status of a tribe's environmental
condition, utilizing available federal information, building an environmental program tailored to
the tribe's needs, developing environmental education programs, developing solid waste
management plans, assisting in the building of tribal environmental capacity, and alerting EPA to
serious conditions involving immediate public health and ecological threats. (Note: $500,000
previously requested for solid waste implementation under Tribal GAP Grants are requested
under Goal 3.)
Tribal Capacity Building
Assessing Conditions and Measuring Results: In the past, a lack of comprehensive
environmental data has severely impacted EPA's ability to properly identify risk to human health
and the environment in Indian Country. Similarly, the tribal environmental presence is unable to
identify risk without access to the proper information. AIEO has been in the forefront of working
with multiple agencies on a federal interagency Tribal Enterprise Architecture. The Tribal
Enterprise Architecture includes access to a wide variety of data and information from several
agencies and numerous sources within those agencies. The components of the Tribal Enterprise
Architecture create a broad, multiple variant views of the environmental conditions and
programs in Indian Country. It also includes several AIEO and jointly developed applications
that perform analysis of information on environmental performance in Indian Country for a wide
variety of specific purposes.
In FY 2005, resources will be used to continue to develop and maintain the Tribal
Enterprise Architecture. EPA will continue to construct an information technology infrastructure
that organizes environmental data on a tribal basis, enabling a clear, up-to-date picture of
environmental activities in Indian Country. We will continue to take advantage of new
technology to establish direct links with other federal agency data systems (including the U.S.
Geological Service, Bureau of Reclamation, and Indian Health Service) to further develop this
integrated, comprehensive, multi-agency Tribal Enterprise Architecture as well as using
V-70
-------
information from numerous other agencies to conduct analysis. This interactive system will
allow tribes and EPA headquarters and regional offices to supply management information that
supplements data collected by the national and regional federal systems resulting in the
availability of more comprehensive data and information. Together, integrating additional data
systems and creating the ability to supply data will result in the closing of many data gaps.
Significant for data quality aspects of the Tribal Enterprise Architecture, the Agency continues to
formalize interagency data standards and protocols to ensure, information is collected and
reported consistently among the federal agencies by working as the co-lead (EPA with the
Department of Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs) on the Federal Geographic Data Committee
(FGDC) Tribal Data Workgroup. The interagency efforts of the Tribal Enterprise Architecture
will promote consistency throughout the federal government in assessing environmental
conditions hi Indian Country and are conducted under OMB Circular A-16.
Implementation of Programs: The ability to comprehensively and accurately examine
conditions and make assessments will provide a blueprint for planning future activities through
the development of tribal/EPA Environmental Agreements (TEAs) or similar tribal
environmental plans to address and support priority environmental multi-media concerns in
Indian Country. Vital to the EPA Indian Policy are the principles that the Agency has a
government-to-government relationship with tribes and that "EPA recognizes tribes as the
primary parties for setting standards, making environmental policy decisions and managing
programs for reservations, consistent with agency standards and regulations." To that end, EPA
"encourage[s] and assist[s] tribes in assuming regulatory and program management
responsibilities," primarily through the Treatment in the Same Manner as a State (TAS)
processes available under several environmental statutes.
Also, in accordance with EPA's longstanding policy, the Agency is considering
innovative, additional approaches for how EPA and tribes might work together to protect public
health and the environment in Indian Country. As part of that effort, EPA is again proposing
language for inclusion hi the President's budget that would allow EPA to award cooperative
agreements to federally recognized Indian tribes or qualified intertribal consortia to assist the
Administrator in implementing federal environmental programs for Indian Country. These
cooperative agreements would be made notwithstanding the Federal Grant and Cooperative
Agreement Act requirements that Federal agencies use a contract when the principal purpose of a
transaction is to acquire services for the direct benefit or use of the United States. Cooperative
agreements, rather than a contract under the Federal acquisition regulation, are the preferred
funding mechanism, since they better reflect the government-to-government relationship. These
cooperative agreements would not be awarded using funds designated for State financial
assistance agreements.
The proposed cooperative agreement language would promote tribal participation when
EPA is directly implementing Federal environmental programs hi Indian Country or for tribes.
It would also help tribes build the capacity to achieve TAS status if they wish to do so. While
EPA would retain final decision-making authority and ultimate responsibility for all regulatory
activities where EPA directly implements federal programs, the proposed language would allow
for varying degrees of tribal involvement hi assisting EPA hi carrying out the federal program
depending upon a tribe's interest and ability hi carrying out specific work. Some tribes might
perform much of the work for EPA necessary to develop and carry out federal environmental
programs. Other tribes might gradually increase their involvement as then- capacity to assist
V-71
-------
EPA increases over time. In this way, the proposed language would improve environmental
protection while also building the capacity and expertise of the tribes to run their own
environmental programs.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
There are increases for payroll, cost of living and enrichment for existing FTE.
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
Tribal Environmental Baseline/Environmental Priori
In 2005 Assist federally recognized tribes in assessing the condition of their environment, help in building their capacity to implement
environmental programs where needed to improve tribal health and environments, and implement programs 'in Indian country
where needed to address environmental issues.
In 2004 Percent of Tribes will have an environmental presence (e.g., one or more persons to assist in building Tribal capacity to develop
and implement environmental programs.
Performance Measures:
Percent of Tribes with delegated and non-delegated programs
(cumulative).
Percent of Tribes with EPA-reviewed monitoring and
assessment occurring (cumulative).
Percent of Tribes with EPA-approved multimedia workplans
(cumulative).
Increase tribes' ability to develop environmental program
capacity of federally recognized tribes that have access to an
environmental presence.
Develop or integrate EPA and interagency data systems to
facilitate the use of EPA Tribal Enterprise Architecture
information in setting environmental priorities and informing
policy decisions.
Eliminate data gaps for environmental conditions for major
water, land, and air programs as determined through the
availability of information in the EPA Tribal Enterprise
Architecture.
Increase implementation of environmental programs in
Indian country by program delegations, approvals, or
primacies issued to tribes and direct implementation activities
by EPA.
Increase the percent of tribes with environmental monitoring
and assessment activities under EPA-approved quality
assurance procedures.
Increase the percent of tribes w/ multimedia programs
reflecting traditional use of natural resources.
FY 2003
Actuals
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
25%
20%
18%
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
90
159
Tribes
Tribes
Tribes
% Tribes
Systems
% Data Gap
Programs
% Tribes
% Tribes
Baseline: There are 572 tribal entities that are eligible for GAP program funding. These entities are the ones for which environmental
assessments of their lands will be conducted.
V-72
-------
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
FY 2005 Performance Measure;
Increase tribes' ability to develop environmental program capacity by ensuring that 90
percent of federally recognized tribes have access to an environmental presence.
Develop or integrate 15 (cumulative) EPA and interagency software applications to
facilitate the use of EPA Tribal Enterprise Architecture information in setting
environmental priorities and informing policy decisions.
Eliminate data gaps for environmental conditions for major water, land, and air programs
as determined through the availability of information in the EPA Tribal Enterprise
Architecture.
Increase implementation of environmental programs in Indian Country as determined by
program delegations, or primacies issued to tribes and direct implementation activities by
EPA.
Increase the percent of tribes with environmental monitoring and assessment activities
under EPA-approved quality assurance procedures.
Increase the percent of tribes with multimedia programs reflecting traditional use of
natural resources as determined by use of Performance Partnership Grants, EPA/Tribal
Environmental Agreements, and other innovative EPA agreements that reflect holistic
program integration.
Performance Database: EPA's American Indian Environmental Office (AIEO) has been in the
forefront of working with multiple agencies on a federal interagency Tribal Enterprise
Architecture under the auspices of OMB Circular A-16 on federal data coordination. The Tribal
Enterprise Architecture includes access to a wide variety of data from several agencies and
numerous sources within the agencies. It also includes several AIEO-developed applications to
analyze environmental performance in Indian Country.
Environmental presence on tribal land is the creation of tribal government infrastructure (FTE
and support) to develop program capacity, assess environmental conditions, establish
environmental priorities, implement and manage programs that result in environmental
improvements. The GAP Grant Tracking System, which is a component of the Tribal Enterprise
Architecture, can measure environmental presence, based on tribally reported information.
Environmental presence is measured by staffing levels reported; also information is collected on
general capacity building, media program, and cross-media activities.
The Tribal Information Management System (TIMS), which is also part of the Tribal
Enterprise Architecture, is a web-based application (httpr/oasintrtpnc.epa.gov) used to access
baseline environmental information on federally recognized Indian Tribes. Public access to this
information via the web cannot be provided until EPA completes its consultation with the tribes.
TIMS contains information about the environmental condition of tribal lands, the nature and
V-73
-------
status of regulated facilities there, as well as the nature and extent of tribal environmental
management program activities. TIMS is not a static system. It is a real-time system that extracts
information from EPA and external data systems as they are maintained and updated by various
federal, non-federal, and tribal partners. TIMS is also a vehicle for tribes, federal agencies and
non-federal agencies, to develop partnerships, improve communication, and to establish tribal
environmental priorities in a coordinated, multimedia, and interagency way.
TIMS generates tribal profiles, which are standardized overviews of environmental
conditions and include tribally supplied background (non-environmental) information. The
overviews are multi-media and allow further access to specific, detailed, publicly available
information. These profiles, in conjunction with other Tribal Enterprise Architecture
information: (1) allow EPA to accurately assess the establishment of an environmental presence
in Indian Country, and to report results annually as progress toward performance goals; (2) allow
EPA to measure trends and changes hi environmental conditions and program results over time;
and, (3) provide information for tribes and agencies to establish environmental priorities in a
coordinated fashion.
Data Sources: Current TIMS data sources are existing federal databases, both from EPA and
other agencies, supplemented by data sources collected from the EPA regions as appropriate. All
data sources are identified and referenced hi the TIMS application. In FY 2004 we expect to
formalize interagency data standards and protocols, working with the Federal Geographic Data
Committee (FGDC) formed as a result of OMB Circular A-16, to ensure information is collected
and reported consistently among the federal agencies. In 2005, AIEO will be working as the co-
lead of the Federal Geographic Data Committee (with DOI's Bureau of Indian Affairs) on the
FGDC tribal data workgroup.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: The methodology for assessments of environmental
conditions in Indian Country will be standard statistical methods of analysis of variance. Chi
Square and Fisher linear model techniques will be used to evaluate the statistical significance of
comparisons of tribal conditions, with regard to specific environmental parameters, compared to
the nation as a whole. The data used to develop these statistical inferences are in general non-
aggregated point measurements that have been geographically indexed. Sample sizes are
generally large enough (often in the hundreds of thousands when evaluating parameters such as
regulated facilities) to provide the necessary degrees of freedom to make statistical inferences in
spite of the large variance in sizes of reservations in Indian Country. The data are suitable for
year-to-year performance comparisons, and also for trend analysis. Forecasting technologies
have not yet been tested on the data.
QA/QC Procedures: All the data used in the baseline project have quality assurance and
metadata documentation prepared by the originating agency. These will all be described in a
Quality Management document: "Manual to TIMS: Tribal Information Management System."
AIEO will develop data and metadata standards through its work on the Federal Geographic Data
Committee.
Data Quality Reviews: Quality of the external databases will be described but not ranked. Data
correction and improvement is an ongoing part of the baseline assessment project. Tribes will
have the opportunity to review their Tribal Profiles. Mechanisms for adjusting data will be
supplied. Errors in the tribal profile are subject to errors in the underlying data. A special site
V-74
-------
http://db-sen^er.tetratech-ffx.com/'baseline/datacenter which will be used to: 1) allow direct
editing and correction of text of the profiles, 2) submit geographic corrections to maps and
boundary files, or submit files of different kinds of political units for analysis, and 3) submit
corrections to quantitative data points, and 4) display the bibliography used to compile the TIMS
information system.
Data Limitations: The largest part of the data used by the Tribal Enterprise Architecture has
not been coded to particular tribes by the recording agency. AIEO uses new geographic data
mining technologies to extract records based on the geographical coordinates of the data points.
For example, if a regulated facility has latitude and longitude coordinates that place it in the
boundaries of the Wind River Reservation, then it is assigned to the Arapaho and Shoshone
Tribes of the Wind River Reservation. This technique is extremely powerful, because it "tribally
enables" large numbers of information systems which were previously incapable of identifying
tribes. This will be applied to all the EPA databases. There are limitations, however. When
database records are not geographically identified with latitude and longitude, the technique does
not work and the record is lost to the system. Likewise, the accuracy of the method depends on
the accuracy of the reservation boundary files. EPA continues to request up-to-date and accurate
coverage of reservation boundaries and land status designations from other agencies.
Error Estimate: Analysis of variation of the various coverage of reservation boundaries that are
available to EPA indicates deviations of up to 5%. The other source of error comes from records
that are not sufficiently described geographically, to be assigned to specific tribes. For some
agencies, such as USGS, the geographic record is complete, so there is no error from these
sources. It is estimated that 20% of the regulated facilities in EPA regulatory databases are not
geographically described, and thus will not be recognized by the AIEO methodology.
New/Improved Data or Systems: The technologies used by the Tribal Enterprise Architecture
are all new and state-of-the-art. Everything is delivered on the Internet, with security, and no
need for any special software or data disk on the desktop. The geographic interface is an ESRI
product called ARC/IMS, which is a web-based application, with a fully functional GIS system
that is fully scalable. In FY 2003, the entire system will be rendered in 3D. The Tribal
Enterprise Architecture uses XML protocols to attach to and display information seamlessly and
in real-time from cooperating agency data systems without ever having to download the data to
an intermediate server.
References:
Manual to TIMS: Tribal Information Management System (draft).
http:/A\rww.epa.gov/enviro//html/'bia'tribal em.html
https://oasint.rtpnc.epa.gov/TIMS
http://db-ser\'er.tetratech-ffx.coma/baseline/datacenter
https://oasint.rtpnc.epa.gov/TATS
http ://gap-demo .tetratech-ffx .com
V-75
-------
EFFICIENCY MEASURES/MEASUREMENT DEVELOPMENT PLANS
Tribal General Assistance Program
To measure aspects of efficiency, the Agency will be tracking the number of
environmental programs implemented in Indian Country per million dollars (of Gap Funding).
The aim is to increase flexibility of Tribal Governments to use GAP funding to address
multimedia environmental management issues in Indian Country by leveraging other
environmental funding sources. The specific metrics for this measure will track the number of
EPA grants per Tribe received for Tribes in the lower 48 states. Development of measures is
referenced in the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) summary in the Special Analysis
section.
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
Solid Waste Interagency Workgroup
EPA and several federal agencies including the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Indian
Health Service, the Federal Aviation Administration, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, and the Departments of Housing and Urban Development, Department of
Agriculture (Forest Service and Rural Utilities Service), and Department of Defense are working
collaboratively to identify, prioritize and close solid waste dumps in Indian Country. The Group
is focusing on 146 of the highest priority sites from the Indian Health Service's 1997 Report to
Congress, entitled "Open Dumps on Indian Lands," which contains an inventory of 1,162 open
dumps in Indian Country. Additional agencies are likely to participate as the workgroup further
defines its goals and strategy.
Other Examples of Interagency Coordination
EPA and the Department of Interior are coordinating an Interagency Tribal Information
Steering Committee that includes the Bureau of Reclamation, Department of Energy,
Department of Housing and Urban Development, U.S. Geological Survey, Federal Geographic
Data Committee, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Indian Health Service, Department of the Treasury,
and Department of Justice. This Interagency effort is aimed to coordinate the exchange of
selected sets of environmental, resource, and programmatic information pertaining to Indian
Country among federal agencies in a "dynamic" information management system that is
continuously and automatically updated and refreshed, to be shared equally among partners and
other constituents.
Under a two-party interagency agreement, EPA works extensively with the Indian Health
Service to cooperatively address the drinking water and wastewater infrastructure needs of
Indian tribes. EPA is developing protocols with the Indian Health Service Sanitation Facilities
Construction Program for integration of databases of the two agencies, within the framework of
the Tribal Enterprise Architecture.
EPA has organized a Tribal Data Working Group under the Federal Geographic Data
Committee, and, along with BIA, is the co-chair of this group. EPA will play a lead role in
V-76
-------
establishing common geographic data and metadata standards for tribal data, and in establishing
protocols for exchange of information among federal, non-federal and tribal cooperating
partners.
EPA is developing protocols with the Bureau of Reclamation, Native American Program,
for integration of databases of the two agencies, within the framework of the Tribal Enterprise
Architecture. EPA is also developing agreements to share information with the Alaska District,
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
Act of 1992 as amended (42 U.S.C. 4368b)
Indian Environmental General Assistance Program (GAP)
V-77
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Compliance and Environmental Stewardship
OBJECTIVE: Enhance Science and Research
Through 2008, strengthen the scientific evidence and research supporting environmental
policies and decisions on compliance, pollution prevention, and environmental stewardship.
Resource Summary
(Dollars in Thousands)
Enhance Science and Research
Environmental Program & Management
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Science & Technology
Buildings and Facilities
Inspector General
Total Workyears
FY2003
Actuals
$72,209.6
$12,336.5
$5,160.1
$53,066.4
$1,337.1
$309.3
293.5
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$77,181.8
$11,039.9
$8,070.5
$56,273.7
$1,422.4
$375.3
304.4
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$70,128.7
$10,936.2
$6,879.5
$50,468.8
$1,506.3
$337.9
299.0
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
($7,053.1)
($103.7)
($1,191.0)
($5,804.9)
$83.9
($37.4)
-5.3
Program Project
(Dollars in Thousands)
Research: Pollution Prevention
Forensics Support
Research: Environmental Technology
Verification (ETV)
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Administrative Projects
TOTAL
FY 2003
Actuals
$31,504.1
$14,845.9
$2,619.0
$9,040.0
$14,200.6
$72,209.6
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$38,998.6
$18,258.4
$4,011.8
$0.0
$15,913.0
$77,181.8
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$34,060.5
$16,910.8
$2,996.8
$0.0
$16,160.6
$70,128.7
FY 2005 Req. v.
FY 2004 Pres Bud
($4,938.1)
($1,347.6)
($1,015.0)
$0.0
$247.6
($7,053.1)
FY 2005 REQUEST
Results to be Achieved under this Objective
EPA has developed and evaluated tools and technologies to monitor, prevent, control,
and cleanup pollution throughout its history. Over the last decade, the Agency has turned its
attention more and more to pollution prevention (P2) when addressing many important human
health and environmental problems. A preventive approach requires: (1) innovative design and
production techniques that mmimize or eliminate environmental liabilities; (2) holistic
V-78
-------
approaches to utilizing air, water, and land resources; and (3) fundamental changes in the
creation of goods and services and their delivery to consumers.
Research will develop and provide tools and technologies to improve individual and
organizational decision making and the capability to reduce or eliminate emissions, effluents,
and wastes from products and processes, as well as assist small businesses in the development
and commercialization of innovative environmental technologies needed by EPA Regions,
program offices, and state regulatory and compliance programs. In addition, research will
address the findings in the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART), including focusing more
on outcomes from these tools and methodologies. Research to develop and construct the
knowledge base necessary to engineer stable environmental management practices at the scale of
watersheds will also be conducted. Results will include: providing key information on market
mechanisms and incentives to support investigations that explore conditions under which
financial and other performance incentives will achieve environmental objectives at a lower cost
or more effectively than traditional regulatory approaches; and verifying the performance of
environmental technologies developed in the private sector so that technology purchasers and
permit writers have the objective information necessary for decision making.
Forensics Support
The Agency's forensic support program provides specialized support for the nation's
most complex civil and criminal enforcement cases, and provides technical expertise for non-
routine Agency compliance efforts. EPA's National Enforcement Investigations Center (NEIC)
is the only accredited forensics environmental center in the nation. NEIC's Accreditation
Standard has been customized to cover the civil, criminal, and special program work conducted
by the program.
Efforts to stay at the forefront of environmental enforcement will include the refinement
of successful multi-media inspection approaches; use of customized laboratory methods to solve
unusual enforcement case problems; and further development of a computer forensic expertise
for use in seizure and recovery of data and in investigative support related to computers and data
fraud. In response to civil and criminal case needs, the NEIC conducts applied research and
implementation science, to identify and deploy new capabilities, or to enhance existing methods
and techniques involving environmental measurement and forensic situations. As part of this
activity, NEIC also evaluates the scientific basis and/or technical enforceability of select EPA
regulations. The program also provides technical support for national, regional, state, and tribal
initiatives and priorities as well as the Agency's integrated compliance assurance program using
a unique process-based approach.
To effectively support the Agency's enforcement and compliance activities, NEIC staff
must maintain state-of-the-art research and analytical skills. They also must have access to the
tools and technologies needed to perform high-quality work within an increasingly sophisticated
regulated community. In FY 2005, the forensic program will continue to function under more
stringent International Standards of Operation for environmental data measurements to maintain
its accreditation. The program also will continue development of emerging technologies in field
) and laboratory analytical techniques.
V-79
-------
Research: Pollution Prevention
The purpose, goals, and associated research directions for EPA's research program on
pollution prevention and new technologies (P2NT) are found in EPA's externally peer-reviewed
Pollution Prevention Research Strategy18. The P2NT Multi-Year Plan19 (MYP) sets research
directions within timeframes that translate the strategic directions of the Pollution Prevention
Research Strategy into specific goals and measures with schedules that enhance accountability.
(R&D Criteria: Relevance & Performance) The P2NT MYP was last peer-reviewed hi December
2001. Revised versions of both the research strategy and multi-year plan documents are
currently under development. In FY 2000, in cooperation with EPA's Office of Research and
Development, the EPA's Office of Inspector General (OIG) conducted a pilot-scale program
evaluation of research within this objective20. The OIG evaluation noted that EPA had made
significant progress in its Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) efforts. The
evaluation has been used to further improve EPA's P2NT research program. (Criteria: Quality)
Pollution Prevention Tools: The authorizing legislation for this research comes from the
Pollution Prevention Act21 of 1990 that reads hi part "The EPA should coordinate with
appropriate offices to promote source reduction practices hi other Federal agencies, and generic
research and development on techniques and processes which have broad applicability." One of
the long-term goals of the pollution prevention research program is to develop new advanced
theories and methods of system analysis, along with decision support tools based on those
methods that can be applied both within and beyond the industrial sector. These tools intended
to support several EPA program offices and regions, focus on areas such as: (1) chemical process
simulation for waste reduction; (2) alternative solvent chemistry and processes; and (3) multi-
media life cycle assessments for identifying and evaluating environmental burdens associated
with the life cycles of material and services, from cradle to grave.
Several of these tools have been developed and moved toward commercial availability
through EPA's Cooperative Research and Development Agreements (CRADAs) with the public
and private sectors. Examples of technology transfer of P2NT tools include agreements with:
Horizon Technologies to develop, market, and distribute the waste reduction (WAR) algorithm;
Chemstations, Inc. to integrate the WAR algorithm into software for modeling different chemical
and petrochemical processes; and Exxon Chemical Company to evaluate lubricants with specific
new refrigerants for replacement of ozone-depleting substances. In FY 2005, P2NT tools work
will include: complete extension of PARIS II (Program for Assisting the Replacement of
Industrial Solvents) solvent replacement software to include optional user defined chemical
properties; guidance software for the replacement of EDCs hi industrial settings; and low cost
technology that offers economic benefits for controlling chromium emissions.
18 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Pollution Prevention Research Strategy. (EPA/600/R-98/123). Washington
DC: U.S. Government Printi
ng Office. (1998)
19 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. DRAFT Multi-Year Plan: Pollution Prevention and New Technologies for
Environmental Protection. Washington DC: EPA. Accessed January 14, 2004. Available only on the internet at:
www.epa.gov/osp
20 Office of Inspector General. Program Evaluation Report: Goal 8 Objective 8. (OIG Publication No. 2002-P-000002)
Washington D.C.: Office of Inspector General.
(2001).
-' Pollution Prevention Act of 1990, Title 42, Chapter 133, Section 13
V-80
-------
EPA's P2 program was evaluated for the FY 2005 President's Budget using the
Administration's Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART). The Agency is committed to
addressing the findings in the PART, such as developing long-term outcome-oriented and annual
performance measures, and annual efficiency measures.
Clean Chemistry and Engineering: Related work in clean chemistry involves the design
of chemicals and alternative chemical syntheses that do not use toxic feedstock, reagents, or
solvents, and do not produce toxic by-products or co-products. Clean chemistry research will
contribute to the development of safer commercial substances and environmentally friendly
chemical syntheses. Research hi FY 2005 will continue to explore benign chemical synthesis,
reformulation of products, substitution of alternative chemicals, bioengineering, and in-process
changes in order to reduce harmful emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), global
warming compounds, and persistent bioaccumulative toxics (PBTs).
Sustainable Environmental Systems (SES) research (formerly Environmental Systems
Management (ESM)) endeavors to answer the key scientific question: can stable, sustainable,
long-term management solutions to complex, watershed-scale environmental problems be
devised? The SES program plan was the subject of a consultation by the Environmental
Engineering Committee of the EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) in March 2001. While a
formal report was not required or issued for such a consultation, the Committee unanimously
supported the overall direction and goal of the research program. The central mission of the SES
research program is to construct a six to nine year strategy for managing environmental systems
using economics, water resource and land use planning, physical and ecological theory, law, and
technological methods to reduce risks to human health and the environment. Collaborative
research efforts that will continue during FY 2005 include: cost-effective restoration of select
ecosystems throughout the Mid-Atlantic Highlands with the Canaan Valley Institute and Region
3; development of a resistance management framework for preventing the emergence of
resistance in target insect pests with EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs; and development of
sustainable management strategies for National Parks with the U.S. National Park Service and
Region 8.
EPA will also continue to facilitate the adoption of innovative environmental
technologies by the public and private sectors through the National Environmental Technology
Competition (NETC). EPA will build upon the work started in 2003 and develop competitive
solicitations for additional cost effective technologies. With a focus on sustainability and results,
this program is expected to show tangible, measurable results for developing cost-effective,
innovative solutions to specific environmental problems identified by local decision makers,
industry, and interest groups. Working with partners, the NETC will support a "sustainable
design challenge" competition that will incorporate sustainability criteria into existing student
design competitions.
Small Business Innovation Research Program (SBIR): EPA's Small Business Innovation
Research (SBIR) program, created by the Small Business Innovation Development Act of 1982
and funded through a 2.5% set-aside of the Agency's extramural research and development
budget, makes awards to small, high-tech firms to help develop and move new environmental
tools and technologies from "proof of concept" to commercialization. Proposals are evaluated
and judged on a competitive basis by external peer reviewers. Priorities are established by
V-81
-------
Agency-wide work groups and undergo independent peer review to ensure SBIR topics
complement EPA's overall research program. (Criteria: Quality & Relevance) The SBIR
program targets research to prevent pollution, reduce water and air pollution, manage solid and
hazardous wastes, and improve environmental monitoring. The program also addresses special
topics such as environmental bioterrorism. Recognizing that the expense of carrying out
research and development programs is often beyond the means of small businesses, SBIR
participants receive both financial and technical assistance in developing and commercializing
technologies according to the anticipated market. The technologies developed under SBIR help
the regulated community meet environmental requirements in a more cost-effective manner;
enable industry to reduce the use of toxic and hazardous materials in production processes,
recovering and recycling materials for reuse; and provide new approaches to designing more
environmentally-friendly products. Examples of commercialized technologies developed under
EPA's SBIR program can be found in the document Environmental Solutions: Commercializing
SBIR Technologies.22
In October of 2003, EPA submitted a Report to Congress entitled "One Stop Shop:
Coordination of Programs which Foster Development of Environmental Technologies", which
described EPA efforts to consolidate and assist outside organizations seeking to develop new
technologies. In an effort to improve the Agency's efforts in this regard, EPA launched the
Environmental Technology Opportunities Portal (ETOP) web site on December 31, 2003 to
assist external customers seeking funding opportunities, information, and links to programs that
assist in environmental technology development and commercialization. The web site can be
found at: www.epa.gov/etop.
Economics and Decision Sciences: Effective accomplishment of EPA's mission depends
on understanding not only the physical and biological effects of environmental changes, but also
the behavioral causes and consequences of those changes. The focus of Economics and Decision
Sciences (EDS) research at EPA is to develop a better basis for making decisions, by improving
the understanding of incentives and motivations that determine individual and corporate
environmental behavior. Priority EDS research identified by EPA economists and outside
experts includes: ecosystem and human health benefits valuation; market-based incentives for
environmental management; corporate environmental behavior, including compliance behavior
and the effectiveness of government interventions; decision-making processes that incorporate
non-monetized benefits; the benefits of environmental information disclosure; and effective
group or community decision-making. (Criteria: Relevance) Valuation of ecosystems and
reductions of human health morbidity risk are research priorities for agency rule development
because there are extensive gaps in the information we have about biodiversity, habitat, wildlife,
and different ecosystems as well as disease endpoints associated with environmental causes.
Other high-priority research focuses of the EDS program include better understanding of
corporate compliance behavior, which will improve both evaluation of regulation and the
allocation of implementation resources for enforcement, compliance, technical assistance, and
financial incentives. The Environmental Economics Research Strategy is being peer-reviewed
by EPA's Science Advisory Board. A revised and updated version of the EDS multi-year plan is
currently under development.
22 U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Environmental Solutions: Commercializing SBIR Technologies,
(EPA/600/FOO/002), Washington DC: EPA. (2000).
V-82
-------
EPA's Science To Achieve Results (STAR) program has independently and in
partnership with the National Science Foundation (NSF) issued grant solicitations in EDS
research. Research proposals received in response to the solicitations are competitively peer-
reviewed to ensure selection and funding of only the highest quality research. (Criteria: Quality)
Research conducted in FY 2005 will: enhance environmental decision-making by improving the
understanding of how people value the environment, focusing on difficult morbidity and
ecological valuation issues. Results of this research will enable development of more efficient
and equitable regulations and policies. Research on market mechanisms and incentives will
support investigations that explore the conditions under which financial and other performance
incentives will achieve environmental objectives (e.g., pollution reduction, habitat preservation)
at a lower cost or more effectively than traditional regulatory approaches, and will lead to the
design and development of efficient market-based incentives to achieve environmental quality.
Corporate behavior research will also help Federal and state agencies understand how regulated
entities respond to incentives for environmental compliance offered through enforcement,
compliance assistance, and information and voluntary mechanisms.
This research focus is particularly important to regulatory programs that must conduct
cost-benefit analyses. EPA's peer-reviewed guidelines23 for preparing economic analyses, which
is EPA's internal guidance for cost-benefit and other economic analyses supporting rulemaking
and policies, include citations from ten STAR-supported socio-economic research publications
from peer-reviewed journals. The results of this work will help guide policy development at
EPA for the foreseeable future. This and other examples of EDS research results used by state,
local, and Federal government and private enterprises show the success and relevancy of this
work.
Research: Environmental Technology Verification (ETV)
Technology purchasers and venture capitalists have historically viewed technology
vendor-supplied performance data with skepticism. This has limited the commercial
development and use of more innovative environmental technologies. The Environmental
Technology Verification (ETV) program aims to ensure scientific relevance, fairness, and
consistency in evaluating environmental technologies. ETV is a voluntary, market-based
verification program for commercial-ready technologies, with over 800 stakeholders representing
diverse interests within the environmental arena. (Criteria: Relevance) The goal of ETV is to
verify the performance characteristics of private-sector-developed technologies so that
purchasers, users, and permit writers have the information they need to make environmentally
sound decisions. Working together, stakeholders, ETV partners, and technology developers
develop testing protocols and project-specific test plans. Verification tests are conducted by
independent third parties, and appropriate quality assurance procedures are incorporated into all
aspects of the process and all reports are subjected to peer review. (Criteria: Quality)
Verification statements of three to five pages, based on performance data in the reports, are
signed by EPA and the ETV partner, and are posted on the ETV Web Site. EPA and ETV
partners announce verification activities in relevant publications, and on the ETV web site at
www.epa.gov/etv.
23 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Guidelines for Preparing Economic Analyses (EPA/240/ROO/003) Washington DC:
National Center for Environmental Economics. (2000)
V-83
-------
The program is designed so that, as the value of ETV verification becomes more broadly
appreciated, technology developers will be required to cover an increasing share of the verification
costs. The program cost share for vendors in the program is projected to increase from
approximately 17 percent in FY 2001 to approximately 25 percent of program costs by FY 2005.24
EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB) has twice reviewed the ETV program since its inception in
1995, and during the second'review the SAB concluded that: "The scarcity of independent and
credible technology verification information is one critical barrier to the use of innovative
environmental technologies. Therefore, the verification testing information that is provided by the
ETV program fulfills an essential need of the environmental technology marketplace." 25 (Criteria:
Relevance) While information on technology commercialization or purchasing data are not
available at this time, anecdotal evidence (e.g., growing vendor interest and participation since 1995,
and vendors' willingness to pay an increasing share of verification costs) indicates the significant
value vendors place in the ETV verification program. Both data and other anecdotal evidence are
reported in the ETV report to Congress.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
S&T
• (-$5,000,000): This reduction results in the elimination of EPA's extramural Pollution
Prevention (P2) research supported through the Science to Achieve Results (STAR)
Program. Resources will be shifted from the Office of Research and Development to the
Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxics Substances (OPPTS).
• (-$1,000,000): This reduction in funding for the Environmental Technology Verification
(ETV) program in FY 2005 will result in the closing of one or more of the five verification
centers. The ETV centers currently focus on drinking water, water security, air pollution
control, advanced monitoring, and greenhouse gas technologies. Technology verifications
during FY 2005 will continue, however the scope of technology categories will be narrowed.
EPA will continue its program outreach efforts through the ETV website, national
conferences, and state permit writer training.
• (-$143,600, -1.4 F.TE): This represents a redirection of work years from clean chemistry and
engineering research to Computational Toxicology research. There will be no significant
impact to any performance commitments.
• (+$159,000): Supports higher costs associated with increased mandatory costs such as
payroll.
• There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for new and
existing FTE.
24 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2002). DRAFT Report to Congress: The Environmental Technology
Verification Program. Washington DC: EPA
25 USEPA Science Advisory Board. Review of EPA's Environmental Technology Verification Program (EPA Review Draft
report) Washington DC: Science Advisory Board, Environmental Engineering Committee, Technology Evaluation
Subcommittee. (2000)
V-84
-------
Superfund
(-$383,100, -3.0 FTE): Technical adjustment from forensics support to reflect actual
work supporting homeland security under Goal 5, Objective 1. The adjustment moves
resources already supporting homeland security efforts at National Enforcement
Investigations Center (NEIC).
(-$1,123,500): Technical adjustment from forensics support to support various programs
under goals 3 and 5 of the Agency's Strategic Plan.
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
Research
Pollution Prevention Research
Long-term Outcome Measure Measure under development.
Annual Measure Measure under development.
Efficiency Measure Measure under development.
New Technologies
In 2005 Complete thirty verifications and four testing protocols for a program cumulative total of 280 verifications and 88 testing
protocols for new environmental technologies so that, by 2009, appropriate and credible performance information about new,
commercial-ready environmental technology is available that influences users to purchase effective environmental technology in
the US and abroad.
In 2004 Verify 35 air, water, greenhouse gas, and monitoring technologies so that States, technology purchasers, and the public will have
highly credible data and performance analyses on which to make technology selection decisions.
In 2003 Developed 10 testing protocols and completed 40 technology verifications for a cumulative Environmental Technology
Verification (ETV) program total of 230 to. aid industry, states, and consumers in choosing effective technologies to protect the
public and environment from high risk pollutants.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Verify and provide information to States, technology 40 verifications
purchasers, and the public on 40 air, water, pollution
prevention and monitoring technologies for an ETV
programmatic total of 230 verifications.
Complete an additional 10 stakeholder approved and peer- 10 protocols
reviewed test protocols in all environmental technology
categories under ETV, and provide them to international
testing organizations.
Through the ETV program, verify the performance of 35 35 verifications
commercial-ready environmental technologies.
Verifications completed 15 verifications
Testing protocols completed 2 protocols
Baseline: Actual environmental risk reduction is directly related to performance and effectiveness of environmental technologies
purchased and used. Private sector technology developers produce almost all the new technologies purchased in the U.S. and
around the world. Purchasers and permitters of environmental technologies need an independent, objective, high quality source
of performance information in order to make more informed decisions; and vendors with innovative, improved, faster and
cheaper environmental technologies need a reliable source of independent evaluation to be able to penetrate the environmental
technology market. Through FY 2004, EPA's Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) Program will have verified
approximately a programmatic total of 265 technologies, as well as making data on their performance available for public use,
and will have developed 86 protocols. In FY 2005, the ETV Program will complete 15 additional verifications and two testing
protocols for a cumulative total of 280 verifications and 88 testing protocols since ETV begin in 1995. Beginning in FY 2005,
regular evaluations by independent and external panels will provide reviews of EPA research programs' relevance, quality, and
successful performance to date, in accordance with OMB's Investment Criteria for Research and Development. These
V-85
-------
evaluations will include an examination of a program's design to determine the appropriateness of a program's short-,
intermediate-, and long-term goals and its strategy for attaining these. Reviewers will also qualitatively determine whether EPA
has been successful in meeting its annual and long-term commitments for research. Recommendations and results from these
reviews will improve the design and management of EPA research programs and help to measure their progress under the
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA).
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Verifications completed
Performance Database: Program output; no internal tracking system
Data Source: N/A
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: N/A
QA/QC Procedures: N/A
Data Quality Reviews: N/A
Data Limitations: N/A
Error Estimate: N/A
New/Improved Data or Systems: N/A
References: N/A
FY 2005 Performance Measure; Testing protocols completed
Performance Database: Program output; no internal tracking system
Data Source: N/A
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: N/A
QA/QC Procedures: N/A
Data Quality Reviews: N/A
Data Limitations: N/A
Error Estimate: N/A
New/Improved Data or Systems: N/A
References: N/A
V-86
-------
EFFICIENCY/MEASURES/MEASUREMENT DEVELOPMENT PLANS
As a measure of efficiency, the Agency will track the time it takes to process pollution
prevention research grant proposals from RFA closure to submittal to EPA's Grants
Administration Division. The Agency will also track the number of peer-reviewed pollution
prevention research journal articles produced per scientific/engineering FTE.
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
The forensic program works with the state, local and tribal agencies, providing technical
assistance, and on-site investigation and inspection activities for the civil program. The program
also coordinates with the Department of Justice and other federal, state and local law enforcement
organizations in support of criminal investigations.
Under the Persistent Bioaccumulative Toxics (PBT) program, EPA has been working with
the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA), and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to develop a national routine
PBT monitoring strategy. Through the integration of existing monitoring programs, this new
strategy will ultimately meet the mutual objectives of EPA and other Federal agencies.
EPA also partners under a joint solicitation with the Department of Agriculture, Department
of Commerce, Department of Defense, Department of Energy, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, National Institute of General Medical Sciences (National Institutes of Health), and
the National Science Foundation, on metabolic engineering that supports a portion of the Agency's
pollution prevention research program.
EPA has contributed projects to the Department of Defense's (DOD's) Strategic
Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP), with particular emphasis on the
pollution prevention pillar and the use of lifecycle thinking in addressing production and
manufacture of weapons and military hardware. Preliminary contacts have been made with the
Department of Agriculture (USDA) regarding lifecycle analysis and a preventive approach for the
development and advancement of biologically- and genetically-altered products. Additionally, EPA
and DOD's U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will continue addressing the costs and benefits associated
with the implementation of new engineering projects and technologies in order to understand and
respond to the economic impacts of environmental innovation.
EPA co-funds efforts to verify the performance of technologies under a memorandum of
agreement with US Coast Guard (ballast water treatment technology) and the State of Massachusetts
(mercury continuous emission monitors). EPA also coordinates with other agencies to fund
verifications. These include the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (multiparameter
water probes); US Department of Energy (mercury continuous emission monitors); US Department
of Defense (explosives monitors, PCB detection, dust suppressants); US Department of Agriculture
(ambient ammonia monitors); States of Alaska and Pennsylvania (arsenic removal from drinking
water); States/counties in Georgia, Kentucky, Michigan (storm water treatment technology); and
States of New York and Colorado (waste to energy technology).
V-87
-------
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
Clean Air Act
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
Clean Water Act
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act sections 106, 107,
109, and 122 (42 U.S.C. 9606, 9607, 9609, 9622)
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act sections 325 and 326 (42 U.S.C.
11045,11046)
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
Federal Technology Transfer Act
Ocean Dumping Act sections 101, 104B, 105, and 107 (33 U.S.C. 1411, 1414B, 1415, 1417)
Pollution Prevention Act
Pollution Prosecution Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. section 4321 note)
Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992, section 1018 under TSCA section
11 (42 U.S.C. 4852d, 2610)
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976, as amended; 42 U.S.C. 6901-6992K)
Safe Drinking Water Act
Small Business Innovation and Development Act
Superfund Amendments Reauthorization Act
Toxic Substances Control Act
V-88
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
COMPLIANCE AND ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP
Categorical Grant
Environmental Information, V-43
Pesticides Enforcement, V-17
Pollution Prevention, V-43
Sector Program, V-17
State and Tribal Performance Fund, V-43
Toxics Substances Compliance, V-17
Tribal General Assistance Program, V-73, V-74
Civil Enforcement, V-18, V-19, V-25, V-39
Commission for Environmental Cooperation, V-22, V-40, V-48
Compliance Assistance and Centers, V-18
Compliance Incentives, V-17, V-21, V-22, V-30
Compliance Monitoring, V-4, V-17, V-22, V-35
Congressionally Mandated Projects, V-44, V-82
Criminal Enforcement, V-17, V-19, V-25, V-32, V-38, V-39
Enforcement Training, V-17, V-26, V-39
Environmental Education, V-41, V-44, V-70
Environmental Justice, V-59
Exchange Network, V-8, V-45, V-55
Forensics Support, V-l 1, V-82, V-83
Homeland Security
Critical Infrastructure Protection, V-18
International Capacity Building, V-18, V-28
Mexican Border, V-20
NEPA Implementation, V-43, V-59
Pollution Prevention Program, V-43, V-45, V-71
RCRA
Waste Minimization & Recycling, V-44
Regulatory Innovation, V-44, V-55.
Regulatory/Economic-Management and Analysis, V-44
Research
Environmental Technology Verification (ETV), V-82
Pollution Prevention, V-82
Science Advisory Board, V-9, V-86, V-87, V-89
Small Business Ombudsman, V-43
Tribal - Capacity Building, V-73
-------
Enabling/Support Programs
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents
Enabling/Support Programs
Office of Air and Radiation ESP-1
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response ESP-3
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance ESP-5
Office of Administration and Resources Management ESP-8
Office of Environmental Information ESP-15
Office of the Chief Financial Officer ESP-29
Office of International Activities ESP-34
Office of the Administrator ESP-36
Office of the General Counsel ESP-45
Inspector General ESP-49
Subject Index ESP-56
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
ENABLING/SUPPORT PROGRAMS
(Dollars in Thousands)
Office of Air and Radiation
Program Project
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and
Infrastructure
FY 2003
Actuals
$0.0
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
$600.0
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$600.0
FY 2005 REQUEST
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure
The Agency's security and protection of personnel and infrastructure are critical to EPA's
ability to respond to terrorist incidents. In FY 2005 the Agency will continue to take steps to
safeguard staff members, ensure the continuity of operations, and protect the operational
capability of vital infrastructure assets.
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
N/A
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
Appropriations Law
Clean Air Act
Computer Security Act
Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction Act (Title XTV of Public Law 104-201)
Executive Order 10831 (1970)
Electronic Freedom of Information Act
EPA's Environmental Statutes, and the Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act
Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), contract law, and EPA's Assistance Regulations
(40CFR Parts 30, 31,35, 40,45,46,47)Federal Manager's Financial Integrity Act (1982)
Freedom of Information Act
The Government Performance and Results Act (1993)
Government Management Reform Act (1994)
Homeland Security Act of 2002
ESP-1
-------
National Response Plan
Paperwork Reduction Act
Privacy Act Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Emergency and Response Act of 2002
Public Health Service Act, as amended 42 U.S.C 201 et seq.
Public Law 86-37
Reorganization Plan No. 3 (1970)
Title 5 United States Code
Various Presidential Decision Directives
ESP-2
-------
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and
Infrastructure
FY 2003
Actuals
$0.0
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
$600.0
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$600.0
FY 2005 REQUEST
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure
Presidential Decision Directive 67 directs all Executive branch departments and agencies
to have in place a viable Continuity of Operation (COOP) and Continuity of Government
program. In FY 2005 EPA will concentrate on developing agency-wide minimum requirements
to achieve such a capability. Once established, efforts will focus on helping regions to enhance
their COOP facilities and procure equipment to conduct activities involving national security
materials. Training and guidance will be provided to all COOP essential personnel in
headquarters and the regions.
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
N/A
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
Appropriations Law
Clinger-Cohen Act
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA)
Computer Security Act
Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction Act (Title XIV of Public Law 104-201)
Electronic Freedom of Information Act
Emergency Planning and Right to Know Act
EPA's Environmental Statutes, and the Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act
Executive Order 10831 (1970)
Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), contract law, and EPA's Assistance Regulations
(40CFR Parts 30, 31, 35,40,45,46,47)
Federal Manager's Financial Integrity Act (1982)
Freedom of Information Act
Government Management Reform Act (1994)
Homeland Security Act of 2002
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP)
ESP-3
-------
National Response Plan
Ocean Dumping Act
Oil Pollution Act
Paperwork Reduction Act
Pollution Prevention Act
Privacy Act
Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Emergency and Response Act of 2002
Public Health Service Act, as amended 42 U.S.C 201 et seq.
Public Law 86-37
Reorganization Plan No. 3 (1970)
Resource Conversation and Recovery Act (EPCRA)
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
The Government Performance and Results Act (1993)
Title 5 United States Code
Toxic Substances Control Act
Various Presidential Decision Directives
ESP-4
-------
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Program Project
Congressional, Intergovernmental, External Relations
IT / Data Management
FY 2003
Actuals
$1,807.3
$22,244.7
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$2,253.3
$25,641.1
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$2,467.2
$26,261.9
FY 2005 REQUEST
EPA will continue to ensure the security and integrity of its compliance information
systems. Efforts will be made to upgrade computer systems, databases, and tracking systems to
enable the Agency to respond to increasing demands for compliance and environmental
information. Further, the Agency will significantly improve the exchange of compliance and
permitting information with states and tribes, through modernization of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) database.
In FY 2005, the enforcement and compliance assurance programs will support state
agencies' implementation of their own Environmental Management Systems. Members of the
environmental justice community, and the general public, will have improved access to the data
they need to hold facilities and local government managers accountable for meeting
environmental goals.
IT/Data Management
Reliable, comprehensive and up-to-date data systems are key to EPA's ability to identify
non-complying facilities, target compliance monitoring and assistance to environmental
problems posing the highest risk, and measure the effectiveness of its enforcement activities. In
FY 2005, the enforcement and compliance assurance program will continue developing a
consolidated enforcement and compliance information management system, making enforcement
and compliance information available to the public through the Enforcement and Compliance
History On-line Internet website, and implementing a data quality strategy.
Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS). The Agency will continue to develop
the Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) which will consolidate enforcement and
compliance information currently contained in the thirteen legacy media-based systems. ICIS
will reduce burden and duplication by providing a single source for data entry; improving public
access to data; supporting the development of risk reduction strategies; and providing states and
Regions with a modernized system to meet their program management and accountability
responsibilities.
In FY 2005, the Agency will continue modernization of the Permit Compliance System
(PCS) to address serious data gaps, provide easy access to data through the Internet, and support
Agency efforts to implement an EPA/state network for exchange of environmental data. PCS
serves as the national database of record for the permitting, enforcement, and compliance
program needs of the Clean Water Act (CWA) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
ESP-5
-------
(NPDES). Also, in FY 2005 the Agency will complete the system software development for the
fully modernized PCS system. The software testing, data migration, and system implementation
will be completed for the first release of the Modernized PCS (Version 1) hi December 2005.
Version 1 of the modernized system will be available for direct users of the system to include;
EPA Headquarters, all Regional offices, and nine of the approximately 18 direct user states.
The remaining direct user states will be implemented by the end of May 2006. Full
implementation (final system release with all states implemented) of the Modernized PCS is
scheduled to take place by June 2007.
Enforcement and Compliance History On-line (ECHO). The Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance Program will continue to make enforcement and compliance information
available to the public through the Enforcement and Compliance History On-line (ECHO)
Internet website during FY 2005. The existing website has been unproved in response to the
comments of the public and industry. The Sector Facility Indexing Project (SFIP) is being
discontinued in FY 2004 and will be subsumed by ECHO. The compliance and enforcement
program will also continue to make all significant enforcement and compliance guidance, policy
statements, planning documents, and accomplishments electronically accessible to the Regions,
states, industry, and the public through the Internet.
Data Quality Strategy. The Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program is
implementing a Data Quality Strategy focusing on objective verification of core data fields
across systems and programs, through random sampling technology and resolution of data
quality problems, as they relate to interpretation of data definitions. Each office within the
Office of Enforcement Compliance Assurance has an approved Quality Management Plan
(QMP). In FY 2003 OECA also instituted a requirement for semiannual executive certification of
the overall accuracy of information provided to support the reporting of Federal enforcement and
compliance activities for GPRA and other significant program measures.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
• (+$233,500, +0.9 FTE) Technical adjustment made from Goal 5, Objective 1 to reflect
data quality efforts under the Agency's IT/Data Management program.
• There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for new and
existing FTE
• Congressional, Intergovernmental, External Relations
EPA will respond to Congressional requests for information, written and oral testimony,
briefings, and briefing materials. The Agency will also develop legislative strategies to support
the enforcement and compliance assurance program; inform the public about environmental
problems and goals; strengthen communications with the public and news media; and, increase
ESP-6
-------
public awareness and enhance public perceptions of environmental issues. The Agency will also
continue to work with states and state associations to ensure that state concerns are considered in
Agency enforcement and compliance policies, guidance, regulations, and issues relating to the
National Environmental Performance Partnerships System (NEPPS).
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
• There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for new and
existing FTE.
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
Clinger-Cohen Act
Computer Security Act
Congressional Review Act
Congressional Review Act
CPRKAofl986
Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA)
Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA)
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA)
Paperwork Reduction Act Amendment of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520)
Plain Language Executive Order
Privacy Act
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
ESP-7
-------
Office of Administration and Resources Management
Program Project
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and
Infrastructure
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Acquisition Management
Human Resources Management
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management
FY2003
Actuals
$39,968.1
$385,000.8
$40,740.9
$46,491.7
$17,792.2
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$19,288.0
$418,840.5
$41,846.3
$49,191.0
$20,313.4
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$19,309.3
$439,297.8
$43,659.5
$48,553.1
$23,262.1
FY 2005 REQUEST
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure
The Agency's security and protection of personnel and infrastructure are critical to EPA's
ability to respond to terrorist incidents. In FY 2005 the Agency will continue to take steps to
safeguard staff members, ensure the continuity of operations, and protect the operational
capability of vital infrastructure assets.
In FY 2005, the Agency will update its physical security vulnerability assessments at 146
facilities; begin mitigating medium vulnerabilities at our most sensitive facilities; improve the
Agency's personnel security program by expanding background checks and investigations to
include contractors, grantees, and other personnel with access to EPA space; and enhance
security operations to include increased guard services and improvements to the Agency's
Occupant Emergency Planning.
In FY 2005, the Agency plans to redirect resources within its Homeland Security base to
provide funding for two E-Gov initiatives. The first is the procurement of universal, technology-
enhanced smart cards and equipment for identifying and credentialing appropriate personnel that
will grant access to EPA facilities and sensitive information. This will increase facility and data
security through automated features that provide positive identification as well as automatic or
directed expiration. The second initiative is the development and implementation of an interface
with the Office of Personnel Management's E-Clearance initiative to allow timely and efficient
background checks and investigations.
In addition, this will enhance the Agency's National Security Information and Segmented
Compartment Information (NSI/SCI) program. EPA will develop and disseminate updated
policies and procedures detailing roles and responsibilities for safeguarding NSI/SCI documents
and develop and implement a computer based training course to increase employee and
clearance-holder awareness of NSI/SCI policies and procedures.
ESP-8
-------
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
The Agency manages activities and support services in many centralized administrative
areas such as health and safety, environmental compliance, occupational health, medical
monitoring, fitness/wellness and safety, and environmental management functions at EPA. This
program also provides a full range of ongoing facilities management services including: facilities
maintenance and operations; security; space planning; shipping and receiving; property
management; printing and reproduction; mail management; and transportation services. Also
provided is management of repairs and improvements and new construction programs at EPA
facilities.
Within this program/project the Agency's goal is supported through the construction of
new facilities, and the design and establishment of state-of-the-art laboratories. These facilities
provide the tools essential to research innovative solutions to current and future environmental
problems and enhancing our understanding of environmental risks. In addition, EPA is highly
engaged in reducing energy use needed to operate these facilities. In FY 2005, the Agency will
continue to improve operating efficiency and encourage the use of new and advanced
technologies and energy savings performance contracts.
Resources in this objective will also be used to comply with Executive Orders (EO)
131491, Greening the Government through Federal Fleet and Transportation Efficiency and EO
13123 , Greening the Government through Efficient Energy Management.
EO 13149 requires that by FY 2005, petroleum use be twenty percent lower than that in
1999. EPA will direct resources towards acquiring alternative fuel vehicles and more fuel-
efficient passenger cars and light trucks to meet this goal. EO 13123 requires a twenty percent
reduction of energy consumption (per square foot or per unit production) in laboratory facilities
by FY 2005. The Agency will attain this goal through several initiatives including
comprehensive facility energy audits, sustainable building design in Agency construction and
alteration projects, energy savings performance contracts to achieve energy efficiencies, the use
of off-grid energy equipment, energy load reduction strategies, and the use of Energy Star
products and buildings.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
MULTIPLE APPROPRIATIONS
» (+$10,889,400 EPM, +$2,204,400 SF) Provides additional resources for increases in rent
costs.
• (+$1,490,500 EPM, +$1,481,400 SF) Provides additional resources for increases in
utilities costs.
1 Information available at http://www.epa.gov/fedsite/eol3149.htm
2 Information available at http://www.epa.gov/fedsite/eo 13123.htm
ESP-9
-------
• (+$5,014,600 EPM, +$2,636,900 SF) Provides additional resources for increases in
security costs.
Acquisition Management
Resources in this program/project support activities related to the management of
contract/acquisition management at headquarters, Regions, Research Triangle Park and
Cincinnati. This program/project focuses on maintaining a high level of integrity in the
management of EPA's procurement activities, and fostering relationships with state and local
governments to support the implementation of environmental programs.
In FY 2005, the Agency will improve electronic government capabilities and enhance the
education of its contract workforce. The Agency will meet the President's Management Agenda
initiative3 on electronic government by:
• Web-enabling the Program Office Interface (POI) and Small Purchase/Electronic Data
Interface (SPEDI), which will allow access to these systems through EPA's Intranet;
• Utilizing the central contractor registry, which is the single government-wide database for
vendor data and part of the Integrated Acquisition Environment (IAE)4;
• Submitting contract actions directly, at the time the action is issued, into the Federal
Procurement Data Base-Next Generation (FPDS-NG), which is another IAE initiative;
• Extending the use of electronic signatures;
• Developing interfaces with current Agency-wide financial systems involved in the
purchasing and paying process; and,
• Working to eliminate paper-processing hi the acquisition process, and to manage
acquisition records electronically.
To meet the President's goal that 90 percent of all acquisition employees meet mandatory
training requirements by FY 2005, the Agency will improve the qualifications and education of
its contract workforce by providing appropriate training opportunities and establishing and
enforcing mandatory training requirements.
3 The President's Management Agenda: FY 2002. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Available at
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fV2002/mgmt.pdf
4 Integrated Acquisition Environment available at http:.//www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/internal/
acquisition.htm
ESP-10
-------
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
MULTIPLE APPROPRIATIONS
• There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for new and
existing FTE.
Human Resources Management
Resources in this program/project support activities related to the provision of human
resources management services to the entire Agency. Specifically, EPA supports functions in
all aspects of human resources programs, organizational development, and management
activities including support to Agency-wide and interagency councils and committees and
serving as EPA's liaison on interagency management improvement initiatives. The Agency
provides assessment/evaluation/review of effectiveness of human resource and workforce
functions, programs and activities; employee development; leadership development; workforce
planning; and succession management.
EPA has accomplished many important milestones in implementing its original Strategy
for Human Capital5 and is committed to fully implementing the revised version of the Strategy
that was issued in December 2003. This Strategy sets EPA on a course so that by July 1, FY
2004, the Agency can achieve a "Yellow" status in Human Capital in the President's
Management Agenda. EPA will continue its improvement efforts to attain and maintain a
"Green" status.
Specifically, the Agency will continue to take advantage of the Workforce Planning
System throughout the entire organization to identify competency gaps. A focused effort will
also target the delivery of training in the Workforce Development Strategy6 to help organizations
eliminate their competency gaps. Further, as a result of the OMB Circular A-76
"Implementation of the Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act of 19987 (Public Law 105-270)
("FAIR Act")" Study, competitive sourcing will also be given consideration.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
MULTIPLE APPROPRIATIONS
• There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for new and
existing FTE
5 US EPA Investing in OUR People II, EPA's Strategy for Human Capital. Available at
http://www.epa.gov/ocfo/finstatement/2000ar/arOO sec3.pdf
6 Workforce Assessment Project: Executive Summary and Tasks 1 - 4 Final Reports. Available at
http://www.epa.gov/epahrist/workforce/wap.pdf
7 Available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg/fair2002notice4.html
ESP-11
-------
Financial Assistance Grants /IAG Management
Resources in this program/project support activities related to the management of
Financial Assistance Grants/IAG and suspension and debarment at headquarters, Regions,
Research Triangle Park and Cincinnati. This program/project focuses on maintaining a high
level of integrity in the management of EPA's assistance agreements, and fostering relationships
with State and Local governments to support the implementation of environmental programs.
A key component of this program/project is EPA's management of grants, which
comprise over half of the Agency's budget, to meet the highest fiduciary standards and produce
measurable environmental results. In FY 2005, additional resources are needed to strengthen
EPA's ability to carry out its new long-term Grants Management Plan8. The Plan will promote a
consistent, Agency-wide approach to pre-award and post-award grants management. EPA will
report on the performance measures in the Plan in the Agency's FY 2005 Annual Report. In
furtherance of the Plan, this investment will assist the Regional Grants Management Offices by
providing: six-fold increase in the required number of Regional on-site reviews; an on-line
training program for at-risk recipients; and funding for critical indirect cost rate negotiations for
non-profit recipients. This investment will also address congressional concerns over EPA's
accountability for effective grants management by supporting Agency-wide training for
Headquarters and Regional managers and supervisors on their grants management
responsibilities.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
• (+$1,000,000) This increase will provide funding to increase support for grants
management in the regional grants management offices and to provide mandatory, on-
line grants management training for managers.
STATUTORY AUTHORITY
Annual Appropriations Act
Clinger-Cohen Act
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
Computer Security Act
Electronic Freedom of Information Act
EPA's Environmental Statutes, and the Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act
Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), contract law, and EPA's Assistance Regulations
(40CFR Parts 30, 31, 35,40,45, 46,47)
Federal Manager's Financial Integrity Act (1982)
8 US EPA, EPA Grants Management Plan. EPA-216-R-03-001, April 2003. Available at
http ://www.epa. gov/ogd/EO/finalreport.pdf
ESP-12
-------
Freedom of Information Act
Government Management Reform Act (1994)
Paperwork Reduction Act
Privacy Act
The Government Performance and Results Act (1993)
Title 5 United States Code
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
Energy Consumption Reduction
In 2005 By 2005, EPA will achieve a 20% energy consumption reduction from 1990 in its 21 laboratories which is in line to meet the
2005 requirement of a 20% reduction from the 1990 base. This includes Green Power purchases.
In 2004 By 2004, EPA will achieve a 16% energy consumption reduction from 1990 in its 21 laboratories which is in line to meet the
2005 requirement of a 20% reduction from the 1990 base. This includes Green Power purchases.
In 2003 The Agency achieved 15.3% energy consumption reduction from 1990 in its 21 laboratories.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY200S
Actuals Pres. Pres. Bud.
Bud.
Cumulative percentage reduction in energy consumption 15.3 16 20 Percent
(from 1990).
Baseline: In FY 2000, energy consumption of British Thermal Units (BTUs) per square foot is 320,000 BTUs per square foot.
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Performance Measure: Cumulative percentage reduction in energy consumption in EPA's
21 laboratories from the 1990 base.
Performance Database: The Agency's contractor receives energy bills regularly — either
monthly or quarterly - from the utility companies. This information is compiled in the
contractor's database and provided to the Agency quarterly and annually. The contractor is
responsible for validating the data.
Data Source: Energy bills from the utility companies, as compiled by the Agency's contractor.
QA/QC Procedures: Agency staff/contractor review utility bills from laboratories.
Data Quality Review: EPA's Sustainable Facilities Practices Branch.
Data Limitations: N/A
New/Improved Data or Systems: N/A
References: N/A
ESP-13
-------
Data Source: The Office of Human Resources and Organizational Services (OHROS) will assist
Program Offices in determining their demand for future mission-critical skills and competencies,
identifying their gaps, and developing a methodology for filling the gaps. This information will
be entered by the Program Offices into the Agency's Workforce Planning module in PeoplePlus,
the Agency's integrated human resources/time&labor/payroll system.
QA/QC Procedures: The information will be verified through collaboration with Program
Managers, e.g., through focus groups.
Data Quality Review: N/A
Data Limitations: Some of the data, like a determination of current competencies and skills,
will be generated by employees themselves.
New/Improved Data or Systems: PeoplePlus is the Agency's new integrated system set to go
live in early October 2003.
References: http://intranet.epa.gov/institute/wdsM.anning,htm
ESP-14
-------
Office of Environmental Information
Program Project
Homeland Security: Communication and Information
Exchange Network
Information Security
IT / Data Management
FY2003
Actuals
$0.0
$21,282.4
$21,516.2
$86,198.4
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
$3,820.3
$33,295.3
$13,337.4
$112,124.9
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$3,820.3
$27,762.2
$4,697.2
$130,019.6
In FY 2005, EPA proposes increased focus on the following five critical areas:
• Address critical technology gaps affecting EPA's ability to deliver information access
consistently where interfacing with external partners is an essential dimension of
operations.
• Deliver a high speed network and information technology (IT) infrastructure that has the
capacity to handle the massive amounts of data needed to perform environmental
analyses, support environmental decision making, and share environmental data with
partners inside and outside EPA.
• Improve management and reduce the cost of IT investments to modernize Agency
technology and information infrastructure through adoption of sound investment
strategies and architecture planning, consistent with the President's Management Agenda
(PMA) and e-Gov concepts9.
• Implement cyber-security for environmental information to assess and mitigate highest
priority risks, address critical homeland security requirements, and ensure reliable, secure
information access for all EPA personnel, emergency responders (EPA and local), and all
external partners.
• Enhance EPA's Web site management procedures and processes to keep pace with
technological advances as well as homeland defense concerns on the disclosure of certain
information, and the public's demand for access to environmental information.
EPA's Chief Information Officer (CIO) will continue to pursue a strategy which supports
a strong Agency architecture program and investment management process as outlined by the
Federal CIO Council and required by the Clinger-Cohen Act. Our approach to information will
allow EPA to collect and share data while making key information, technology, and funding
decisions at an enterprise-wide level and strengthening the efficiency and effectiveness of the
governance structure and operations.
9 Office of Management and Budget. "The President's Management Agenda." Available (or accessible) only though
the Internet: httt>://www.whitehouse.gov/'omb/budget''fv20Q2/mgnit.pdf
ESP-15
-------
The vast majority of environmental data are collected by states and tribes, not directly by
EPA. Through a five-year partnership effort, EPA is working with states and tribes to develop
an internet-based Environmental Information Exchange Network (Exchange Network). The
Exchange Network is the means by which EPA and our partners are migrating from antiquated,
inaccessible, "stove pipe" data systems (or sometimes even paper systems) to digital, high
quality, integrated environmental information systems. These new systems, with their "network
portals" allow multiple types of data to be exchanged over the internet between EPA, states,
tribes, the regulated community, and the public. The Exchange Network was conceived and
designed by EPA and the states to enhance environmental decision making at the Federal, state,
and local level. It increases the availability of data, ensures better data quality and accuracy,
maintains security of sensitive data, prevents avoidance of redundant data, and reduces the
burden on those who provide and those who access data. It is an effort which supports both
public servants and private citizens' environmental choices.
In addition to the value inter-governmental partnerships and environmental .information
exchange provide to environmental policy making, EPA and others also benefit from the
economies of scale and efficiencies which improve the quality of services and drive down the
cost of basic government functions. The Agency's enterprise-wide investment and planning will
result hi unproved services beyond the institutional boundaries of EPA. The PMA's e-Gov
efforts seek to simplify processes and unify operations to better serve citizens' needs. EPA will
continue its efforts to implement this vision, and eliminate redundancies and overlap. Specific
activities include small business compliance, payroll, geospatial information, online rulemaking,
and other enterprise-wide resource functions.
FY 2005 REQUEST
Homeland Security
Sound decision making is based upon accurate and timely information. EPA possesses
unique capabilities to collect, synthesize, interpret, manage, and disseminate complex
information about environmental and human-made contaminants and the condition of the
environment. Effectively managing and sharing this information within the Agency with its
partners at all levels of government and industry will help the Nation to detect, prepare for, and
respond to terrorist incidents.
It is the responsibility of OEI to provide timely and accurate environmental information.
Integrated and accurate information about EPA-regulated facilities and areas of environmental
interest is critical to support the Department of Homeland Security and to conduct EPA's
homeland security responsibilities. In the event of an emergency, the Agency's success will
depend on its ability to identify and report on regulated facilities, their location and spatial
coordinates, their inventory of materials, and their corporate ownership to provide relevant risk
information to the national security community. Through its FY 2005 investments, EPA will
deliver secure, reliable, and timely data access and communication to first responders, on-scene
coordinators, emergency response teams, and investigators wherever they are located and
regardless of what jurisdiction they operate under.
ESP-16
-------
EPA's primary effort to enhance collection and sharing of environmental data and
information is the development of the Exchange Network. The Exchange Network is a
collaborative effort by EPA, states, and tribes to exchange data among all partnering entities via
the Internet. The Central Data Exchange (CDX) has been established to handle electronic data
transfers as well as non-electronic submissions such as paper forms and diskettes. Working in
partnership with states and tribes, EPA has identified and set priorities for the information
systems that will be supported by these electronic exchanges; as of early 2003, five such systems
are being supported by the CDX facility and the technical design work is underway for seven
additional systems.
Exchange Network
The Exchange Network is a comprehensive and integrated approach that will facilitate
information sharing among EPA and its partners using standardized data formats and definitions,
a web-enabled approach to receiving and distributing information, and improved access to timely
and reliable environmental information10. Through the Exchange Network, environmental
partners quickly and easily share information and EPA will be better able to take advantage of
the wealth of environmental and health data collected by other Federal agencies, states, and local
governments.
EPA, the states, and tribes will migrate from the old, inaccessible, "stove pipe" data
systems of the past hi favor of new, secure, high quality, integrated air, water, and waste
information systems. These new systems are being designed to include "network portals"
through which data can be exchanged over the internet between EPA, states, tribes, the regulated
community and the public. The Exchange Network will fundamentally change the way the
Agency, states, and tribes do business because it will result hi the increase of the quality and
quantity of available environmental information, streamlined data transactions between partners,
and unproved environmental information for decision making at all levels.
The result of a five-year partnership between states and EPA is the creation of the
Exchange Network. EPA will continue work with its state partners under the State/EPA
Information Management Workgroup (IMWG) and the Network Steering Board. The IMWG
has created action teams to jointly develop key information projects that will benefit both states
and EPA. The action teams consist of EPA, state, and Tribal members. They are structured to
result in consensus solutions to information management issues which affect states, tribes, and
EPA, such as the development and use of environmental data standards, and implementation of
new technologies for collecting and reporting information.
EPA is measuring the results of the CDX initiative against its long-term focus on
improving analytical capacity, adopting a uniform approach to information governance, and
providing excellence in information service delivery. Currently, much of EPA's environmental
reporting consists of non-electronic reporting instruments, multiple reporting points, less-than-
10 Network Steering Board. "Exchange Network Net" Web site. Washington DC: NSB. Date of Access: December
22,2003. Available only on the Internet at: http://www.exchangenetwork.net
ESP-17
-------
optimal data timeliness, and data quality issues. At the end of FY 2005, the Exchange Network,
by way of the CDX, will enable:
• fully supported electronic data exchange for major EPA environmental systems, allowing
for faster receipt, processing, and quality checking of data;
• states to exchange data with CDX through state nodes in real time, using new web-based
data standards that allow for automated data-quality checking; and,
• private sector, local, and Tribal governments, and other regulated entities, including
laboratories, to choose to use CDX to report environmental data to EPA electronically,
taking advantage of automated data quality checks and online customer support11.
All these FY 2005 performance measures will result in the increase of high quality health
and environmental information, the first of the three objectives based upon EPA's information
management strategy.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
MULTIPLE APPROPRIATIONS
• (-$4,950,500, +10.0 FTE EPM, -$582,600 SF) This change reflects the establishment of
an Enterprise Portal which will service the data collection and data integration needs of
the CDX partners from the Exchange Network.
Information Security
EPA's Information Security program protects the confidentiality, availability, and
integrity of the Agency's information assets. It establishes a risk-based cyber security program
that creates defenses against cyber attacks on multiple levels throughout EPA's information
systems and IT infrastructure. This "defense-in-depth" approach includes partnering with other
Federal agencies, states, and tribes to ensure that security components are coordinated and
comprehensive and take advantage of potential economies of scale.
EPA maintains a robust information security program to protect the Agency's IT
infrastructure and data. The program is based on a framework of policies, procedures, and
standards that are applicable across the Agency and are consistent with Federal requirements.
Key elements of the program include implementing technical controls to protect the network,
infrastructure, and systems; conducting independent testing to evaluate the effectiveness of the
security program; conducting risk assessments of systems and infrastructure to maintain
awareness of evolving threats and vulnerabilities; establishing an incident response capability;
maintaining up-to-date security and contingency plans for all Agency major IT applications and
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Central Data Exchange" Web site. Washington DC: EPA. Date of
Access: December 22,2003. Available only on the Internet at: http://www.epa.gov/cdx.
ESP-18
-------
general support systems performing annual security awareness training for all employees; and
conducting technical training for employees with significant security responsibility.
EPA's information security program continuously strengthens the Agency's capacity to
protect the availability, integrity, and confidentiality of information resources against known
threats. The Agency's continued vigilance against expanding and evolving threats supports its
long-term focus on increasing analytical capacity, improving uniform information governance,
and providing excellent information service delivery. The Agency's FY 2005 plans for
performance are integrated into a long-term program that identifies priority incremental
improvements that must be demonstrated throughout all EPA's information assets and services.
Performance measures include assuring that progress is maintained and improved through
implementation and validation of annual enhancements as reported to OMB.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
MULTIPLE APPROPRIATIONS
• (-$9,149,100 and -0.5 FTE EPM, +$508,900 and +0.5 FTE SF) This change reflects the
establishment of an Enterprise Portal which will service the data collection and data
integration needs of the CDX partners from the Exchange Network.
IT/Data Management
EPA is critically dependent on information services to fulfill its mission and provide
environmental and human health protection in partnership with states, tribes, and other Federal
agencies. EPA's ability to conduct program operations and make management decisions requires
stable, secure information services with adequate capacity. Emergency responders in the field
need secure remote access to EPA information resources. Federal, state, and private sector
scientists need adequate network capacity to exchange data and collaborate on high priority
projects (e.g. modeling of environmental effects in a crisis situation).
EPA has moved to performance-based, outsourced services to obtain the best solutions
(value for cost) for the range of program needs. This includes innovative multi-year leasing that
sustains and renews technical services in a least-cost, stable manner as technology changes over
time. EPA manages these services and ensures best value for the entire Agency portfolio of
information investments through management planning and control processes that translate
business needs into technology action. These governance processes align IT decisions with
mission priorities and resource commitments, allowing EPA to fulfill multi-year outsourcing and
leasing commitments, while successfully supporting statutorily mandated inherently
governmental priority functions.
Through IT/Data Management, EPA promotes analytical approaches that integrate data
from different sources to provide a more holistic view and understanding of the environment,
thus encouraging informed environmental and human health decision-making. Insights gained
through environmental analysis tools will support a fuller understanding of environmental
outcomes and remaining problems and challenges. EPA is advancing the use of indicators as a
ESP-19
-------
means of more effective reporting on environment conditions. Building on the work leading to
EPA's "Draft Report on the Environment," EPA continues to identify data gaps and advance the
use of indicators as a means of measuring12.
IT/Data Management will continue to provide support to local program offices in the
Regions' areas of hardware requirements determination, software programming and applications,
records management systems, data base services, local area network activities, intranet web
design, and desktop support. EPA's environmental information efforts require the Agency to
ensure that it is keeping pace with the states in the areas of data collection, management and
utilization. Additionally, this program will continue to focus on information security and the
need for each Region to have an internal IT security capacity. The Regions will implement
Agency information resource management policies hi areas such as data and technology
standards, central data base services, and telecommunications. The Regions will also continue to
work on the implementation of cost accounting procedures to capture hi detail all IT
expenditures for EPA offices. This will enable the Agency to better address OMB's IT reporting
requirements.
IT/Data Management is designed to provide EPA with methods to manage the quality of
its environmental data collection, generation, and use. The primary goal of the EPA Quality
System is to ensure that its environmental data are of sufficient quantity and quality to support
the data's intended use. As part of the Agency's Quality System, policies and procedures have
been developed to assist individual data collectors, data users, and decision makers in defining
their needs for data and assessing data against these needs, and to provide EPA management with
methods for overseeing the quality-related activities of their programs.
In FY 2005, EPA will measure its efforts to increase the use of environmental indicators
to inform the public and manage for results against its strategic focus on analytic capacity and
excellent information service delivery. EPA's FY 2005 planned progress includes establishing
an unproved suite of indicators for use by EPA for more effective strategic planning and
measurement by building on work completed to produce the "Draft Report on the Environment."
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
MULTIPLE APPROPRIATIONS
• (+$2,484,800 EPM, +$464,200 SF, +$632,100 S&T) Resources transferred from the
other EPA program offices to OEI hi to centralize the management EPA's website.
• (+$14,194,200 and -13.0 FTE EPM, -$55,000 and -0.5 FTE SF) This change reflects the
establishment of an Enterprise Portal which will service the data collection and data
integration needs of the CDX partners from the Exchange Network.
12 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Environmental Information, Draft Report on the Environment -
2003 (EPA 260-R-02-006), htip:/7www.epa.gQv/mdicators/roe/. Date of Access: January 2, 2004
ESP-20
-------
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
Information Exchange Network
In 2005 Improve the quality, comparability, and availability of environmental data for sound environmental decision-making through the
Central Data Exchange (CDX).
In 2004 Improve the quality, comparability, and availability of environmental data for sound environmental decision-making through the
Central Data Exchange (CDX).
In 2003 Continued to improve data access to ensure that decision makers have access to the environmental data that EPA collects and
manages to make sound environmental decisions while minimizing the reporting burden on data providers.
Performance Measures:
States using the Central Data Exchange (CDX) to send data
to EPA.
CDX will fully support electronic data exchange
requirements for major EPA environmental systems, enabling
faster receipt, processing, and quality checking of data.
States will be able to exchange data with CDX through state
nodes in real time, using new web-based data standards that
allow for automated data-quality checking.
States, tribes, laboratories, and others will choose to use
CDX to report environmental data electronically to EPA,
taking advantage of automated data quality checks and on-
line customer support.
Customer help desk calls are resolved in a timely manner.
In preparation for increasing the exchange of information
through CDX, implement four data standards in 13 major
systems and develop four additional standards in 2003.
Number of private sector and local government entities, such
as water authorities, will use CDX to exchange
environmental data with EPA.
CDX offers online data exchange for all major national
systems by the end of FY 2004.
Number of states using CDX as the means by which they
routinely exchange environmental data with two or more
EPA media programs or Regions.
FY2003
Actuals
49
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
12
40
20,000
96
2000
13
46
States
Systems
States
Users
Percent
Data
Standards
Entities
Systems
States
Baseline:
The Central Data Exchange program began in FY 2001.
Data Quality
In 2005
In 2005
In 2004
In 2003
EPA increasingly uses environmental indicators to inform the public and manage for results.
EPA will improve the quality and scope of information available to the public for environmental decision-making.
EPA increasingly uses environmental indicators to inform the public and manage for results.
The public had access to a wide range of Federal, state, and local information about local enviromental conditions and features in
an area of their choice.
Performance Measures:
Establish an improved suite of environmental indicators for
use by EPA's programs and partners in the Agency's strategic
planning and performance measurement process.
Responders to the baseline questionnaire on customer
satisfaction on the EPA Website report overall satisfaction
FY2003
Actuals
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
1
60
Report
Percent
ESP-21
-------
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
with their visit to EPA.GOV.
Window-to-My Environment is nationally deployed and Nationally Deployed
provides citizens across the country with Federal, state, and
local environmental information specific to an area of their
choice.
Establish the baseline for the suite of indicators that are used 1 Report
by EPA's programs and partners in the Agency's strategic
planning and performance measurement process.
Baseline: An effort to develop a State of the Environment report based on environmental indicators was initiated in FY 2002.
Information Security
In 2005 OMB reports that all EPA information systems meet/exceed established standards for security.
In 2004 OMB reports that all EPA information systems meet/exceed established standards for security.
In 2003 OMB reported that all EPA information systems meet/exceed established standards for security.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Percent compliance with criteria used by OMB to assess 75 75 75 Percent
Agency security programs reported annually to OMB under
Federal Information Security Management Act/Govt.
Information Security Reform Act.
Percent of intrusion detection monitoring sensors installed 100 Percent
and operational.
Baseline: hi FY 2002, the Agency started planning an effort to expand and its strengthen information security infrastructure.
Agency-Wide IT Infrastructure
In 2004 Manage Agency-wide information technology assests consistent with the Agency's multi-year strategic information resource
management plan (Enterprise Architecture) reflecting current Agency mission priorities and resources.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Designated upgrades to technology infrastructure and 1 Report
enterprise information tools occur on schedule per plan.
Baseline: The baseline for this program is zero, as it will just begin in FY 2004.
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
FY 2005 Performance Measures:
• The Central Data Exchange (CDX) will fully support electronic data exchange
requirements for major EPA environmental systems, enabling faster receipt,
processing, and quality checking of data.
• States will be able to exchange data with CDX through state nodes in real time,
using new web-based data standards that allow for automated data-quality
checking.
• Private sector, local and tribal governments, and other regulated entities, including
laboratories, will choose to use CDX to report environmental data electronically to
EPA, taking advantage of automated data quality checks and on-line customer
ESP-22
-------
support.
• Customer-help desk calls resolved in a timely fashion.
Performance Database: CDX Customer Registration Subsystem.
Data Source: Data are provided by state, private sector, local, and tribal government CDX users.
Methods, Assumptions, and Suitability: All CDX users must register before they can begin
reporting to the system. The records of registration provide an up-to-date, accurate count of
users. Users identify themselves with several descriptors.
QA/QC Procedures: QA/QC have been performed in accordance with a CDX Quality
Assurance Plan [Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Interim Central Data Exchange System.
Document number: EP005T7. Sept. 17, 2001] and the CDX Design Document v.3. Appendix K
registration procedures [Central Data Exchange Electronic Reporting Prototype System
Requirements: Version 3; Document number: EP005S3. December 2000]. Specifically, data are
reviewed for authenticity and integrity. There are plans to update these procedures during FY
2004 to incorporate new technology and policy requirements. Automated edit checking routines
are performed in accordance with program specifications and CDX quality assurance guidance
[Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Interim Central Data Exchange System. Document
number: EP005T7. Sept. 17, 2001].
Data Quality Reviews: CDX successfully completed independent security risk assessment in the
summer 2001. In addition, routine audits of CDX data collection procedures and customer
service operations are provided weekly to CDX management and staff for review. Included in
these reports are performance measures such as the number of CDX new users, number of
submissions to CDX, number of help desk calls, number of calls resolved, ranking of
errors/problems, and actions taken. These reports are reviewed and actions discussed at weekly
project meetings.
Data Limitations: The CDX system collects, reports, and tracks performance measures on data
quality and customer service. While its automated routines are sufficient to screen systemic
problems/issues, a more detailed assessment of data errors/problems generally requires a
secondary level of analysis that takes time and human resources.
Error Estimate: CDX incorporates a number of features to reduce errors, such as pre-
populating data whenever possible, edit checks, etc. The possibility of an error in the number of
states registered for CDX, e.g., double-counting of some sort, is extremely remote (far less than 1
New/Improved Performance Data or Systems: CDX coalesces the registration/submission
requirements of many different state-to-EPA, private sector-to-EPA, and local and tribal
governments-to-EPA data exchanges into a single web-based system. The system allows for a
more consistent and comprehensive management and performance tracking of many different
external customers. The creation of a centralized registration system, coupled with the use of
ESP-23
-------
web forms and web-based approaches to submitting the data, invite opportunities to introduce
automated quality assurance procedures for the system and reduce human error.
References: CDX website (www.epa.gov/cdx).
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Establish an improved suite of environmental indicators
for use by EPA's programs and partners in the Agency's strategic planning and
performance measurement process.
Performance Database: Initial collection of indicators compiled during the drafting of EPA's
"Report on the Environment," supplemented by indicators currently used in the Agency's
strategic planning and performance measurement process (e.g., EPA's Strategic Plan, Annual
Performance Plan, Annual Performance Report, Annual Operating Plan, and National
Environmental Performance Partnership Agreements), will comprise an Agency baseline of
indicators.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: The Office of Environmental Information (OEI), the
Office of Research and Development (ORD), and the Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO) will review the planning documents and establish a baseline of indicators in
consultation with key Agency steering committees.
QA/QC Procedures: As the baseline is established, protocols also will be developed to ensure
that the data supporting the indicators are accurate and complete.
Data Quality Reviews: To be determined and conducted once a baseline has been established.
Data Limitations: The challenge is to develop suitable indicators with sufficient data of known
quality.
Error Estimate: To be determined.
New/Improved Performance Data or Systems: The baseline indicators and supporting data are
in development.
References: EPA's "Draft Report on the Environment" and "Technical Support Document"
(EPA pub. no. 260-R-02-006). Draft Report on the Environment Technical Document
(Publication # EPA 600-R-03-050). Both Dated June 2003
Web site: http://www.epa.gov/indicators/roe/htrnl/roePDF.htm
FY 2005 Performance Measure: Percent compliance with criteria used by OMB to assess
Agency security programs reported annually to OMB under the Federal Information
Security Management Act (FISMA).
Performance Database: Automated Security Self-Evaluation and Remediation Tracking
(ASSERT) database.
ESP-24
-------
Data Source: Information technology (IT) system owners in Agency Program and Regional
offices.
Methods, Assumptions, and Suitability: Annual IT security assessments are conducted using
the methodology mandated by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the National
Institute of Standards, and Technology (NIST) Security Self_Assessment Guide for Information
Technology Systems. ASSERT has automated and web-enabled this methodology.
QA/QC Procedures: Automated edit checking routines are performed in accordance with
ASSERT design specifications to ensure answers to questions in ASSERT are consistent.
Independent evaluations are conducted on the assessments by both the Office of Inspector
General consistent with §3545 FISMA and the Chief Information Officer's information security
staff. The Agency certifies results to OMB in the annual FISMA report.
Data Quality Reviews: Program offices are required to develop security action plans composed
of tasks and milestones to address security weakness. Program offices self-report progress
toward these milestones. EPA's information security staff review these self-reported data,
conduct independent validation of a sample, and discuss anomalies with the submitting office.
Data Limitations: Resources constrain the security staffs ability to validate all of the self-
reported compliance data submitted by program systems' managers.
Error Estimate. N/A
New/Improved Data or Systems: N/A
References: Annual Information Security Reports to OMB:
http://intranet.epa.gov/ttsecurity/pro.greviews/; OMB guidance memorandum:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/2003.httnl: ASSERT web site:
https://cfint.rtpnc.epa.gov/assert/; NIST Special Publication 800-26, Security Self_Assessment
Guide for Information Technology Systems, November 2001:
http:/ycsrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/index.html; and, Federal Information Security
Management Act, PL 107-347: hrtp://csrc.nist.gov/policies/FISMA. final.pdf.
FY 2005 Performance Measures: Responders to the baseline questionnaire on customer
satisfaction on the EPA Website report overall satisfaction with their visit to EPA.GOV.
baseh'ne levels.
Performance Database: Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire
Data Source: Data are provided by customers completing the questionnaire.
Methods, Assumptions, and Suitability: Customers visiting the EPA's Website are given an
opportunity to provide feedback by completing a short customer satisfaction questionnaire. In an
ESP-25
-------
effort to maintain the objectivity of the questionnaire results, EPA has contracted with an
independent group, which specializes in hosting online surveys, to gather and analyze data. No
personal information is collected as a result of completing the survey.
QA/QC Procedures: The EPA Website provides access to information produced by the EPA's
program and Regional offices. Information published on the Website must go through a product
review conducted by the program/Region producing the information. Additionally, all
information must adhere to Agency Website policies and guidance. The customer satisfaction
questionnaire database has controls in place to prevent repeated entries.
Data Quality Reviews: An annual EPA Website accounts audit is conducted by The Office of
Environmental Information's (OEI's) Office of Information Analysis and Access and requires
EPA's program offices to review the content and quality of their material and to re-authorize
who can post to their Web area. The customer satisfaction database is reviewed quarterly.
Data Limitations: The customer satisfaction questionnaire is voluntary.
Error Estimate: N/A
New/Improved Data or Systems: The EPA Website was converted to a single look and feel that
provides a more consistent approach to presenting information on the Web. In FY 2004, to help
users access the information more easily, and to provide information in an integrated manner, the
website's search engine will be replaced.
References: EPA Web site (www.epa.gov)
EFFICIENCY MEASURES/MEASURE DEVELOPMENT PLANS
• EPA plans to track the costs incurred for the Central Data Exchange (CDX) relative to
production system, state node, and CDX user.
• Regarding information security, the Agency will measure the number of incidents that
occurred from known threats that should have been anticipated relative to the number of
Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT) advisories implemented within EPA's
infrastructure.
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
EPA works with its state partners under the State/EPA Information Management
Workgroup and the Network Steering Board. This workgroup has created action teams to jointly
develop key information projects. Action teams consist of EPA, state, and Tribal members. They
are structured to result hi consensus solutions to information management issues which affect
states, tribes, and EPA, such as the development and use of environmental data standards, and
implementation of new technologies for collecting and reporting information.
ESP-26
-------
EPA also participates in multiple workgroups with other Federal agencies including the
United States Geological Survey (USGS), Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC), and
CIO Council. The Agency is actively involved with several agencies in developing government-
wide e-government reforms, and continues to participate with the Office of Homeland Security
and national security agencies on homeland security. These multi-agency workgroups are
designed to ensure consistent implementation of standards and technologies across Federal
agencies in order to support efficient data sharing.
EPA will continue to coordinate with key Federal data sharing partners including the
USGS, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and the Fish and Wildlife Service as well as state and local data
sharing partners in public access information initiatives. With respect to community-based
environmental programs, EPA coordinates with state, Tribal, and local agencies, and with
non-governmental organizations, to design and implement specific projects.
The nature and degree of EPA's interaction with other entities varies widely, depending
on the nature of the project and the location(s) in which it is implemented. EPA is working
closely with the FGDC and the USGS to develop and implement the infrastructure for national
spatial data. EPA is coordinating its program with other state and Federal organizations,
including the Council for Environmental Quality and the Environmental Council of States, to
insure that the appropriate context is represented for observed environmental and human health
conditions.
EPA will continue to coordinate with other Federal agencies on IT infrastructure and
security issues by participating on the Federal CIO Council. For example, EPA (along with the
Department of Labor) recently co-chaired a Federal government committee on security. EPA
will continue to participate on the CIO Council committees on security, capital planning,
workforce development, interoperability, and e-Gov, and will engage with other Federal agencies
in ensuring the infrastructure for homeland security.
EPA is a leader in many areas, such as E-dockets. EPA has a modern well-supported
system that can host other Agencies' docket systems, thereby reducing their costs to develop or
deploy such a system. EPA will also continue to coordinate with state agencies on IT
infrastructure and security issues through state organizations such as the National Association of
State Information Resources Executives. In addition, EPA, along with other Federal agencies, is
involved in the OMB led e-Gov initiatives. As part of this effort, EPA, OMB, the Department of
Transportation, and ten other Federal agencies are examining the expansion of EPA's Regulatory
Public Access System, a consolidated on-line rule-making docket system providing a single
point of access for all Federal rules. EPA is also coordinating efforts with the National Archives
and Records Administration on an e-records initiative. This effort is aimed at establishing
uniform procedures, requirements, and standards for electronic record keeping of Federal e-Gov
records.
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
Clean Air Act and amendments
ESP-27
-------
Clean Water Act and amendments
Clinger-Cohen Act
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
Computer Security Act
Electronic Freedom of Information Act
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know
Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration Act
Federal Advisory Committee Act
Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
Food Quality Protection Act
Freedom of Information Act
Government Information Security Reform Action
Government Management Reform Act
Government Performance and Results Act
Paperwork Reduction Act
Privacy Act
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Safe Drinking Water Act and amendments
Superfund Amendments and Re-authorization Act
Toxic Substance Control Act
ESP-28
-------
Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Program Project
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
FY 2003
Actuals
$74,889.4
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$86,143.4
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
$86,655.3
Resources will support activities related to maintaining the highest-quality standards for
environmental leadership and for effective internal management and fiscal responsibility of
Agency resources. Activities under this program/project will support the management of
integrated planning, budgeting, financial management, performance and accountability processes
and systems to ensure effective stewardship of resources. In addition, this program/project
supports a full range of national, local and specialized accounting, financial and customer
services through the Agency's four Finance Centers.
FY 2005 REQUEST
Central Planning, Budgeting and Finance
In FY 2005 Agency activities under the Central Planning, Budgeting and Finance
Program/Project will support performance and results-based decision making and sound
financial stewardship including the following activities: Strategic Planning, Annual Planning and
Budgeting, Financial Services, Financial Management, Performance Measurement Improvement
and Accountability. Through this program/project the Agency provides executive direction for
the Agency's budget, financial, and resource management functions; develops and manages a
performance and results-based management system; manages the Agency's strategic planning
process; manages the annual planning and budgeting process; provides financial accounting and
fiscal services to the Agency; operates and maintains the Agency's integrated financial
management system; provides support to the Agency's Superfund cost recovery efforts; prepares
the annual financial statements and performance reports; and coordinates the planning and
budgeting process for the Agency's working capital fund.
In addition, EPA's Environmental Finance Program assists states and localities to meet
then: critical environmental infrastructure needs in a sustainable manner. The program provides
grants to a network of university-based Environmental Finance Centers which in turn, provide
training, expert advice, education, and analysis to states, local communities and small businesses.
As part of Agency efforts to provide the American public with innovative, market-based
programs and services, EPA actively reviews programs as part of its Federal Activities Inventory
Reform (FAIR) Act process.
In FY 2005, EPA will build on the accomplishment of "getting to green" in financial
performance on the President's Management Agenda scorecard. Specific Agency activities that
led to this achievement included receiving unqualified audit opinions, meeting Federal systems
requirements, validating EPA's payment practices, strengthening the effectiveness of EPA's
grants competition policy, demonstrating how Agency offices use financial and performance
ESP-29
-------
information to support day-to-day decision making, and correcting all material weaknesses for
the first time in 20 years.
The Agency will also continue development of innovative approaches to meet Federal
financial management challenges and continue to improve the delivery of core financial
management customer services. EPA's financial management innovations are focused on
providing Agency decision makers with useful, reliable, and timely cost information associated
with key results-based environmental information. This is to be accomplished, in part, by
upgrading the Agency's electronic information systems to make crucial data more easily
available and provide accurate, timely information to managers across the Agency for use in
making financial and programmatic decisions.
To continue the Agency's compliance with government-wide accelerated reporting
requirements for financial statements, EPA has identified opportunities to further automate
financial statement preparation capabilities. In FY 2005, EPA plans to adopt several best
practices, including the capability to perform more robust analyses, enhance data compilation,
simplify footnote disclosure, reduce control risks, and support year-end closing within a 3-day
period.
In FY 2005, EPA's priority is to continue efforts to modernize the Agency's financial
systems and business processes that are rapidly becoming obsolete by today's standards. The
modernization effort will reduce cost, comply with Congressional direction and new Federal
financial system requirements, and improve EPA's management analysis and decision-making
capability. The financial systems modernization initiative is fully aligned with the strategies
under the President's Management Agenda, especially those related to Budget and Performance
Integration, Improved Financial Performance, and Expanded Electronic Government (e-Gov). In
addition, this work is framed by the Agency's Enterprise Architecture development efforts, and
is being designed to make maximum use of enabling technologies for e-Gov initiatives, including
e-Grants, e-Procurement, e-Payroll and e-Travel. The Agency's financial systems architecture
will provide the supporting infrastructure for EPA and enable the organization to achieve its
environmental goals and mission.
The Agency will launch a substantial upgrade to our budgeting and planning system and
continue improvements in Agency financial data warehousing and reporting capabilities, while
continuing preparations to implement the new financial management system in FY 2007, and
improving Agency access to key cost accounting and performance information. EPA will
support the administration's e-Payroll initiative by partnering to become a payroll customer of
USDA's National Finance Center. In FY 2005, EPA will also support a government-wide e-
Travel initiative by preparing to join the government-wide travel management system. In
addition, EPA will continue collaborating with other Chief Financial Officer Act agencies to
improve the quality and timeliness of information for the government as a whole and to explore
opportunities to standardize financial business processes across government.
In FY 2005, EPA plans to continue to support program efforts to develop more outcome-
based annual performance goals and measures, develop new sources of performance data,
improve the quality and usability of existing data sources of performance data, improve the
quality and usability of existing data sources, and develop tools to set strategic priorities and
ESP-30
-------
track performance. EPA programs will work with state partners in targeted efforts to improve
performance goals and measures that strengthen results-based management. Potential approaches
include: addressing data gaps to develop more outcome oriented measures and goals, increasing
state use of environmental data and performance information in environmental policy and
management decisions, promoting integration of information on environmental conditions with
other management systems used to make environmental policies and management decisions,
supporting development of statistical models for linking program outputs and environmental
improvements, and developing best practices and case studies based on current successful EPA
or state environmental management efforts.
As part of these efforts, EPA will continue to consult with its partners and stakeholders
(states, tribes, local government, other Federal agencies, environmental associations, industry
groups, the EPA Science Advisory Board) and the Congress and OMB. EPA will work to link
annual plans to long-term goals and objectives of the Agency. Our continued work with state
governments through the Environmental Council of the States (ECOS) and Tribal governments
will ensure collaboration and cooperation in achieving the Agency's short - and long-term goals
and objectives. In the development of the Agency's Annual Plan and Budget, EPA will continue
to significantly involve its regulatory partners (principally states and tribes) in identifying short-
and long-term program priorities.
EPA will report on the results of its Annual Plan and Budget implementation in the
Agency's Annual Report, which includes audited annual financial statements and information on
results in achieving annual performance goals and measures and progress toward strategic
objectives. The Annual Report provides Congress and the public a comprehensive picture of
EPA's programs, financial, and management performance, including the results of annual
performance goals and measures described hi the Agency's revised final FY 2004 Annual Plan.
In addition to assessing the Agency's performance results and progress toward its longer-
term strategic objectives, the Annual Report also summarizes the results of EPA's work to
comply with the Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act and the Inspector General Act
Amendments. The Agency continuously assesses the effectiveness of EPA management
controls, vulnerabilities and challenges, and monitors progress on audit closeout.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004 REQUEST
EPM
» (+$1,500,QOO) The increase of $1,500,000 in non-payroll resources will be used to
further efforts hi FY 2005 to modernize major Agency financial systems. The
modernization will provide decision-makers throughout the Agency with integrated
budget cost and performance information and timely and reliable financial information
and reports to improve accountability, decision-making and program management. FY
2005 efforts will focus on significant upgrades to the Agency's budget and planning
systems, new system integration capabilities and continued progress in replacing EPA's
ESP-31
-------
integrated financial management system scheduled for implementation in FY 2007, and
further developing desk-top access to key cost accounting and performance information.
SF
• (-$1,700,000 SF) These Regional non-payroll resources were redirected to the superfund
enforcement goal. These resources will support the full array of financial management
support services necessary to pay Superfund bills and recoup cleanup and oversight costs
for the trust fund.
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
Strengthen EPA's Management
In 2005 Strengthen EPA's financial management services in support of the Agency's mission while addressing the challenges included in the
President's Management Agenda
In 2004 Strengthen EPA's financial management services in support of the Agency's mission while addressing the challenges included in the
President's Management Agenda
In 2003 Strengthen EPA's financial management services in support of the Agency's mission while addressing the challenges included in the
President's Management Agenda
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Enacted Pres. Bud. Request
Agency audited Financial 111 Financial statement
Statements are timely, and
receive an unqualified opinion.
Baseline: The Agency's audited FY 2004 Financial Statements will be submitted on time, in accordance with the new accelerated schedule,
to OMB and receive an unqualified opinion.
VALIDATION AND VERIFICATION OF PERFORMANCE GOALS
Performance Measure: Agency's audited Financial Statements meet the new accelerated
schedule and receive an unqualified opinion.
Performance Database: .N/A
Data Source: OMB acknowledgement of receipt of financial statements, OIG audit report.
QA/QC Procedures: OCFO management review, OIG audit
Data Quality Review: OIG audit. The annual financial audit opinion, rendered by the OIG, is a
gauge of the accuracy and fair presentation of the financial activity and financial balances of the
Agency. The unqualified opinion is rendered by the OIG.
Data Limitations: N/A
New/Improved Data or Systems: N/A
ESP-32
-------
References: Fiscal Year 2003 EPA Annual Report
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
EPA will develop and issue guidance for executive agencies to use when purchasing
goods and services in response to Executive Order 13101 to show a preference for
"environmentally preferable" products and services.
To achieve its mission, OCFO has undertaken specific coordination efforts with Federal
and state agencies and departments through two separate vehicles: 1) the National Academy of
Public Administration's Consortium on Improving Government Performance; 2) active
contributions to standing interagency management committees, including the Chief Financial
Officers Council and the Federal Financial Managers' Council. These groups are focused on
improving resources management and accountability throughout the Federal government. OCFO
also coordinates appropriately with Congress and other Federal agencies, such as Department of
Treasury, Office of Management of Budget, and the General Accounting Office.
STATUTORY AUTHORITY
Annual Appropriations Act
Clinger-Cohen Act
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
Computer Security Act
E — Government Act of 2002
Electronic Freedom of Information Act
EPA's Environmental Statutes, and the Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act
Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act (FAIR)
Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), contract law, and EPA's Assistance Regulations
(40CFR Parts 30, 31, 35,40,45, 46,47)
Federal Manager's Financial Integrity Act (1982)
Freedom of Information Act
Government Management Reform Act (1994)
Improper Payments Information Act
Inspector General Act of 1978 and Amendments of 1988
Paperwork Reduction Act
Privacy Act
The Chief Financial Officers Act (1990)
The Government Performance and Results Act (1993)
The Prompt Payment Act (1982)
Title 5 United States Code
ESP-33
-------
Office of International Activities
Program Project
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and
Infrastructure
FY2003
Actuals
$0.0
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$0.0
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
$35.0
FY 2005 REQUEST
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure
To address the critical need of providing secure and safe overseas facilities, the
Department of State and OMB has developed a cost sharing initiative to meet this objective. The
construction program will be funded in part through a Capitol Security Cost Sharing program
managed by the Department of State. Under this program, all agencies with an overseas presence
in U.S. diplomatic facilities will pay a proportionate share for accelerated construction of new
embassies and consulate facilities. EPA provides personnel overseas to support the work of our
Mexico program and the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development. In addition,
EPA provides key technical assistance to developing countries and works hi partnerships with
developed countries on global environmental issues of mutual concern in furtherance of EPA's
mission.
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
EPA's environmental mandate and expertise make it uniquely qualified to represent the
nation's environmental interests abroad. While the Department of State (DOS) is responsible for
the conduct of overall U.S. foreign policy, implementation of particular programs, projects, and
agreements is often the responsibility of other agencies with specific technical expertise and
resources.
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
Appropriations Law
Clean Air Act
Clean Water Act
Clinger-Cohen Act
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA)
Computer Security Act
Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction Act (Title XIV of Public Law 104-201)
Electronic Freedom of Information Act
Emergency Planning and Right to Know Act
EPA's Environmental Statutes, and the Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act
ESP-34
-------
Executive Order 10831 (1970)
Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), contract law, and EPA's Assistance Regulations
(40CFR Parts 30, 31, 35,40, 45, 46,47)
Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act
Federal Manager's Financial Integrity Act (1982)
Food Quality Protection Act
Freedom of Information Act
Government Management Reform Act (1994)
Homeland Security Act of 2002
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP)
National Response Plan
Ocean Dumping Act
Oil Pollution Act
Paperwork Reduction Act
Pollution Prevention Act
Privacy Act
Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Emergency and Response Act of 2002
Public Health Service Act, as amended 42 U.S.C 201 et seq.
Public Law 86-37
Reorganization Plan No. 3 (1970)
Resource Conversation and Recovery Act (EPCRA)
Safe Drinking Water Act
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
The Government Performance and Results Act (1993)
Title 5 United States Code
Toxic Substances Control Act
Various Presidential Decision Directives
ESP-35
-------
Office of the Administrator
Program Project
Homeland Security: Communication and Information
Congressional, Intergovernmental, External Relations
Administrative Law
Civil Rights / Title VI Compliance
Regional Science and Technology
Science Advisory Board
Small Minority Business Assistance
FY2003
Actuals
$874.0
$52,341.0
$4,464.4
$11,770.7
$2,840.1
$3,748.7
$2,105.8
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
$0.0
$45,198.9
$4,705.1
$12,113.8
$3,609.2
$4,409.0
$2,214.5
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$500.0
$46,082.8
$4,929.3
$12,414.2
$3,626.2
$4,757.1
$2,282.0
FY 2005 REQUEST
The Office of the Administrator (AO) consists of the Immediate Office, which provides
overall supervision to the Agency, three Associate Administrators and their offices, as well as ten
staff offices. In addition to these 14 individual offices at Headquarters, this request includes
resources for the ten Regional Administrators and their staffs, as well as Regional functions that
are counterparts to certain functions found within the Office of the Administrator (for example,
congressional liaison and public affairs).
Administrative Law
The Environmental Appeals Board (EAB) will issue final Agency decisions in
environmental adjudications on appeal to the Board13. These decisions are the end point in the
Agency's administrative enforcement and permitting programs. The right of affected persons to
appeal these decisions within the Agency is conferred by various statutes14, regulations and
constitutional due process rights. The Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) will preside in
hearings and issue decisions in cases initiated by EPA's enforcement program against those
accused of environmental violations under various environmental statutes. The ALJs have
increased their use of alternative dispute resolution techniques to facilitate the settlement of cases
13 The full text of all formal EAB opinions may be accessed electronically at the EAB's website
(http://www.epa.gov/eab) and by subscribers to the Lexis and Westlaw computerized legal research firms. The
opinions are also published in a series of bound volumes titled Environmental Administrative Decisions (E.A.D.),
which may be purchased from the U.S. Government Printing Office, and which may be read at several hundred
public and law libraries that are designated as Federal Depository Libraries. The opinions are also commercially
available in the EPA Administrative Law Reporter, EPA Shadow Law ™ and ELI Environmental Law Reporter.
14 OALJ does not publish its decisions in bound printed book form. Copies of these decisions are maintained in
printed form in the Office of the Administrative Law Judges in Washington, D.C., and in the case file for the case
they pertain to in the Regional Docket Clerk's Office and Headquarters Docket Clerk's Offices, until archived. The
best and simplest way for the public to search and access these decisions is via EPA's free website
(http://www.epa.gov/oalj) or through computerized legal research firms like Lexis and Westlaw, for which you must
pay for access.
ESP-36
-------
and, thereby, avoided more costly litigation. The EAB and ALJs recently acquired access to
videoconferencing technology, which is being used to reduce expenses for parties involved hi the
administrative litigation process.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
• There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for new and
existing FTE.
Civil Rights/Title VI Compliance
In 2005, policy direction and guidance will be provided within the Agency on equal
employment opportunity, civil rights and diversity issues. The Agency will continue to work
diligently to process all Title VII internal employment discrimination complaints. Appropriate
training will be provided to Office of Civil Rights (OCR) staff to conduct Title VII counseling
and investigations. OCR will continue to administer and monitor the implementation of
affirmative employment programs. OCR will manage special emphasis programs designed to
improve the representation, utilization, and retention of minorities, women, older workers,
persons with disabilities and persons with differing sexual orientations in the Agency's
workforce.
In addition, external compliance, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, will
prohibit discrimination in programs and activities that receive financial assistance from EPA.
OCR will also issue Title VI guidance on limited English proficiency and develop a Title VI
compliance review program. Finally, OCR provides expert advice and consultation to
supervisors and managers of EPA, and technical assistance to EPA employees and applicants for
employment on matters related to the Americans with Disabilities Act; the Rehabilitation Act of
1973, as amended; the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended; section 188 of the Workforce
Investment Act of 1998; and other applicable civil rights laws, with particular attention to
providing assistance to managers, employees, and applicants in obtaining reasonable
accommodations for persons with disabilities.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
• There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for new and
existing FTE.
ESP-37
-------
Congressional, Intergovernmental and External Relations
The Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations (OCIR) responds to
congressional requests for information, writes and/or reviews written and oral testimony,
briefings, and briefing materials. It ensures that Congress and EPA's managers receive the
information they need to make policy and program decisions on environmental and public health
issues. In addition to working with Congress, OCIR works closely with the Agency's program
offices to keep them informed of current activities that affect their particular subject areas.
OCIR develops legislative strategies to support the Agency's mission and policy positions and
coordinates Agency appearances before congressional committees, as well as responses to
congressional transcripts and written correspondence. In addition to these activities, OCIR also
manages EPA's OMB/interagency clearance of Administration positions, congressional
testimony and other legislative materials.
OCIR is the Agency's lead on issues relating to the National Environmental Performance
Partnerships System. "Performance Partnerships" is a joint effort with the states to advance joint
planning and priority setting hi the oversight of state programs, and is a long-term effort focused
on improving the relationship between EPA and the states. OCIR also serves as the Agency's
primary liaison with state and local government environmental agencies. In that capacity, the
office provides regular and timely communications for both the Agency's leadership and
members of Congress, ensuring their ability to address priority issues and respond to questions
arising from elected officials in state and local governments. OCIR also works with states and
state associations to ensure that state concerns are considered in the development of EPA's rules,
policies, guidance and annual budget. OCIR supports the Local Government Advisory
Committee and its Small Community Advisory Subcommittee. These committees, formed under
the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, provide both the Agency and local
governments with a direct forum for addressing issues and exchanging information regarding
local governments' role in managing environmental programs15.
Americans request environmental protections that preserve and protect America's
environment, in an environmental protection framework that is based on partnerships with state
and Tribal governments. They are challenging their leaders to adopt tough but achievable goals
for the environment (cleaner air, purer water, and healthy communities) and to offer people and
institutions the flexibility to find cost-effective ways to achieve those goals. The Immediate
Office of the Administrator will provide the vision and leadership needed to enable EPA to meet
its commitments to protect public health and the environment in 2005 and beyond. The Regional
Administrators and their staffs will provide leadership in their respective Regions and the states
they service. They will work with the states and negotiate performance partnerships with the
states to agree on environmental outcomes the states will achieve with resources received from
EPA.
The Office of Executive Services will provide the Office of the Administrator with
management infrastructure services, including personnel, administrative, budget, planning,
15 Available only on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/ocir/nepps/index.htm
ESP-38
-------
integrity, ethics, computer support, information management security, and financial management
services. The office will assist AO's managers and supervisors in hiring a qualified and diverse
staff in accordance with the Agency's affirmative action and human resource management
programs and principles. This office will also provide the expertise, reports, financial and
program analyses, and related information that managers need to make decisions and understand
the resource implications of their management decisions, and to ensure that the Office of the
Administrator operates within its authorized funding levels. Automated data processing and
information resource management support will also be provided to meet the increasing
information resource needs of the Office of the Administrator, as well as development and
implementation of information management security policies needed to protect electronic data.
The Office of the Executive Secretariat logs, assigns, and tracks correspondence received
by the Administrator and Deputy Administrator to help ensure that citizens' comments,
questions, ideas, and concerns are directed to the appropriate program and/or Regional offices
for informed response, for inclusion in official public comment files, and/or for other necessary
action. This office also ensures the quality of executive responses.
The integrity of one of the Agency's primary stakeholder engagement and public
participation processes—formally chartered Federal Advisory Committees—will be assured
through the oversight, training, and policy functions of the Office of Cooperative Environmental
Management (OCEM). OCEM has Agency-wide responsibility for Federal Advisory
Committees16 and thus, will ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations; provide
uniform guidance; collect and share best practices; re-engineer processes; and train the Agency's
designated federal officials to increase the efficiency and minimize the vulnerability of Federal
Advisory Committees.
OCEM will also provide direct support to four Federal Advisory Committees that advise
the Administrator, the President, and Congress. The National Advisory Council for
Environmental Policy and Technology provides the Administrator and the Agency with
stakeholder advice on a broad range of environmental policy and technology issues that will
improve the quality of EPA's environmental decision making. The statutorily mandated Good
Neighbor Environmental Board17 will provide the President and Congress with advice and
recommendations on environmental and infrastructure issues along the U.S. border with Mexico.
The National and Governmental Advisory Committees, mandated by the North American
Agreement on Environmental Cooperation18 and by Executive Order19, provide advice to the
Administrator and the U.S. Government that will help the U.S. achieve its objectives hi
16 On February 18, 1998, the EPA Deputy Administrator designated OCEM as the national program manager for
EPA's committee management program
17 The Good Neighbor Environmental Board is authorized under Section 6 of the Enterprise for the Americas Act of
1992, 7 U.S.C. section 5404.
18 Articles 17 and 18 of the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation
19 Executive Order No. 12915
ESP-39
-------
implementing the environmental side accords to the North American Free Trade Agreement with
Canada and Mexico.
The Office of Public Affairs (OPA) uses diverse media resources to aid the public's
understanding of science to increase awareness and perception of environmental issues and their
technological and scientific solutions. The office informs the public about environmental
problems and goals, and strengthens the integration of policy/regulatory decisions in its
communications messages. OP A, and its Regional and program office counterparts, manages
development and approval of communications products and publishes them in print and on
EPA's web site in coordination with the Office of Environmental Information. OPA manages
the Agency website's homepage, press release database, the Administrator's speeches database;
and the newsroom Web page. The office conducts oversight of web and printed publications and
directs audit reports to appropriate offices. OPA works with the Administrator to keep Agency
staff and the public informed about major policy decisions, initiatives, events, and key personnel
appointments. The office is also responsible for the electronic distribution of mass mail
information for the Administrator and his or her designees.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for new and
existing FTE.
(-$500,000) These resources will be redirected within the Office of the Administrator to
support EPA's new Office of Homeland Security.
Regional Science and Technology
In addition to its liaison responsibilities, the Office Congressional and Intergovernmental
Relations (OCIR) also manages the Regional Science and Technology (RS&T) account on behalf
of the Regional laboratories. OCIR is responsible for replacing or supplying the sophisticated
equipment the laboratories need to effectively undertake their responsibilities. The Regional
laboratories are critical in supporting all of the Agency's programs and goals by supplying
specialized expertise and high quality results hi sampling procedures, data documentation,
analytical methodology, protocol and/or statutory guidelines20. In FY 2005, the laboratory
equipment will support Regional implementation of the Agency's statutory mandates through:
field operations for environmental sampling and monitoring; Regional laboratories for
environmental analytical testing; quality assurance oversight and data management support; and,
laboratory accreditation.
20. U.S. EPA, Office of Regional Operations, Science to the Power of 10; Regional Laboratory System Annual
Report FY 2002
ESP-40
-------
The RS&T program provides in-house scientific expertise and technical capabilities in
the generation of data for Agency decisions, not only hi the normal course of activities, but also
hi response to emergency and catastrophic events of concern to homeland security, such as those
that occurred on September 11, 2001. Following the September 11 attacks, RS&T divisions
supported the development of critical and timely environmental data and data review activities.
This expertise is also utilized m oversight of state and private laboratory certification for the
National Drinking Water Program. The scientific expertise required to design and execute these
analyses is used to provide advice, expert testimony, and critical environmental analyses hi
Regional and national program decisions, and civil and criminal litigation and enforcement
cases.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
• There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for new and
existing FTE.
Science Advisory Board
For many years, the goal of EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB) has been to make a
positive difference in the development and use of science at EPA. Established by Congress hi
1978, the SAB utilizes non-government technical experts who serve as its 87 members and more
than 400 consultants. They come from a broad range of disciplines — physics, chemistry,
biology, mathematics, engineering, ecology, economics, medicine, and other fields. Operating
under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), the SAB empanels technically strong and
diverse groups to ensure a balanced range of technical views from academia, communities,
states, independent research institutions, and industry.
EPA's SAB plans to enhance its mission by advising the Agency to focus on priority
environmental issues that greatly impact overall environmental protection, address novel
problems or principles, influence long-term technological development, deal with problems that
transcend Agency boundaries, strengthen the Agency's basic capabilities, and/or serve
Congressional and other leadership interests. The Board also recognizes that economic and other
social science issues are particularly important, given that EPA has generated new information-
based, voluntary approaches to environmental protection — such as working with stakeholders hi
communities and sectors to achieve environmental goals that voluntarily go beyond regulatory
activities.
Additionally, the SAB supports the President's Management Agenda on Competitive
Sourcing and has evaluated staff operations and identified several functions which were
previously performed by its administrative and technical staff that are now being performed by
the private sector. The direct conversion of four work years to contractor support was effective
hi FY 2003, and continues. The EPA SAB's attention to competitive sourcing has lead to a
ESP-41
-------
management review of overall staff operations. The Board is in the process of developing an
effective human capital strategy, a government-wide initiative that will better identify its human
capital needs and how it will acquire, develop, and deploy its human capital to better align its
organizational objectives with EPA's mission and goals.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
• There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for new and
existing FTE.
Small Minority Business Assistance
EPA's Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization (OSDBU) and its
Regional counterparts provide technical assistance to headquarters and Regional program office
personnel to ensure that small, minority and women-owned businesses receive a fair share of
EPA's procurement dollars. This fair share may be received either directly or indirectly through
EPA contracts, grants, cooperative agreements, or interagency agreements. Pursuant to P.L.102-
389, the Agency has a national goal of 8% utilization of minority and women-owned businesses.
In addition, pursuant to P.L. 101-549, the Agency has a national goal of 10% utilization of these
firms for research conducted under the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990.
OSDBU and its Regional counterparts also assist the Agency in meeting its direct
procurement goals for small, small disadvantaged, Historically Underutilized Business Zones,
Women-Owned, and Service Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Businesses. These efforts enhance
the ability of small, minority and women-owned businesses to participate in the Agency's
objective to protect human health and the environment. As a result of the Supreme Court's
decision hi Adarand v. Pena, 115 S. Ct. 2097 (1995), EPA is in the process of proposing a rule
for the participation of Disadvantaged Business Enterprises in procurements funded through
assistance agreements. In 2005, the Agency plans to draft the final rule and begin implementing
the certification requirements of the final rule.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
• There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for new and
existing FTE.
Homeland Security
EPA's Office of Homeland Security (OHS) is responsible for ensuring implementation of
the Agency's homeland security responsibilities; coordinating homeland security policy
development across the Agency; serving as primary liaison with senior officials in the
ESP-42
-------
Department of Homeland Security and other Federal agencies with responsibilities for homeland
security; providing a more centralized and efficient system for receiving and evaluating
important classified communications from multiple sources; and serving as primary liaison on
matters relating to homeland security within EPA.
OHS will collaborate with EPA headquarters program and regional offices to develop and
maintain a system to monitor progress on homeland security activities. This system will help
EPA program and regional offices document then- range of homeland security responsibilities
and will facilitate the sharing of information across the Agency.
FY 2005 Change from FY 2004 Request
EPM
.• (+$500,000) These resources will be redirected from within the Office of the
Administrator to support EPA's new Office of Homeland Security.
COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
EPA will continue to work with the Small Business Administration, as appropriate, on
regulations that affect small businesses.
The EPA SAB interacts with comparable advisory bodies within and outside the Agency;
in some cases seeking and maintaining liaison and integrated membership with some of these
bodies. For example, the chairs of the Office of Research and Development's Board of
Scientific Counselors, the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act's Scientific
Advisory Panel, and the Children's Health Protection Advisory Committee participate in the
quarterly meetings of the SAB Executive Committee meetings. There are also membership
contacts and exchanges with technical advisory bodies in the Department of Defense,
Department of Energy, and the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences.
In addition, the SAB has sought interactions with advisory groups at different levels (e.g., the
advisory committee to the Mayor of Columbus, Ohio; the environmental advisory board to the
Governor of the State of Michigan; the Health Council of the Netherlands; and the Academy of
Sciences of Australia). The success of the SAB is measured, in part, by the extent to which the
board is used as a model for advisory boards at various levels of government — from the local to
the international level.
EPA's Office of Homeland Security will work with senior officials hi the Department of
Homeland Security and other Federal agencies with responsibilities for homeland security.
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
Administrative Procedure Act
ESP-43
-------
Americans with Disabilities Act
Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VI
Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 and 1990
Clinger-Cohen Act
Commission and the North American Development Bank
Computer Security Act
Congressional Review Act
Enterprise for the Americas Initiative Act (7 U.S.C. 5404)
Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration Authorization Act of 1978
Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (5 U.S.C. App.)
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA)
Executive Order 12915 - Federal Implementation of the North American Agreement on
Environmental Cooperation
Executive Order 12916 - Implementation of the Border Environment Cooperation
Commission and the North American Development Bank
North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation
Rehabilitation Act of 1973
The National Strategy for Homeland Security, White House Office of Homeland Security, July
2002
Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to
Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act (USA Patriot Act)
ESP-44
-------
Office of the General Counsel
Program Project
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Legal Advice: Environmental Program
Legal Advice: Support Program
FY 2003
Actuals
$877.9
$33,913.7
$8,871.3
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$1,153.4
$34,722.9
$12,240.9
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$1,889.6
$35,522.8
$12,521.7
The Office of General Counsel (OGC) and the Offices of Regional Counsel (ORCs) will
provide legal representational services, legal counseling, and legal support for all Agency
environmental activities and for all activities necessary for the operation of the Agency.
Additionally, these resources are used by the OGC to provide environmental Alternative Dispute
Resolution services.
FY 2005 REQUEST
Alternative Dispute Resolution
In FY 2005, this OGC program will provide conflict prevention and alternative dispute
resolution (ADR) services to EPA Headquarters and Regional Offices, and external stakeholders
on environmental matters. The national ADR program assists hi developing effective ways to
anticipate, prevent, and resolve disputes, and makes neutral third parties - such as facilitators and
mediators — more readily available for those purposes. Under EPA's ADR Policy, the Agency
encourages the use of ADR techniques to prevent and resolve disputes with external parties in
many contexts, including adjudications, rulemaking, policy development, administrative and
civil judicial enforcement actions, permit issuance, protests of contract awards, administration of
contracts and grants, stakeholder involvement, negotiations, and litigation.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
(+$125,000) Provides funding for contractor support to use ADR in environmental
matters, including those involving EPA's core regulatory programs, to resolve disputes
more efficiently. $75,000 of this increase represents a transfer of funds from OECA to
support ADR enforcement and compliance activities under the Agency's reorganization
that consolidated resources for EPA's environmental ADR program. The remaining
$50,000 is an increase hi extramural funding for contractor support to use ADR in
Regional environmental matters.
ESP-45
-------
(-$266,226, -2 FTE) Represents a transfer of workyears and related support costs to
OARM in accordance with the Agency's reorganization of the ADR function to support
EPA's Workplace Solutions Staff.
There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for new and
existing FTE.
Superfund
(+$874,700, +2 FTE) Represents a transfer of resources from OECA to support ADR
enforcement and compliance activities under the Agency's reorganization of the
environmental ADR program.
Legal Advice: Environmental Program
Legal advice to environmental programs includes, but is not limited to: representing EPA
and providing litigation support in cases where EPA is a defendant as well as those cases where
EPA is not a defendant but may have an interest in the case; providing legal advice, counsel and
support to Agency management and program offices on matters involving environmental issues
including, for example, providing interpretations of relevant and applicable laws, regulations,
directives, policy and guidance documents, and other materials.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
• There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for new and
existing FTE.
SF
• There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for new and
existing FTE.
Legal Advice: Support Program
In FY 2005, legal advice to support programs, provided by the Office of General Counsel
(OGC) and the Offices of Regional Counsel (ORCs), will provide legal representational services,
legal counseling and legal support for all Agency activities necessary for the operation of the
Agency (i.e., contracts, personnel, information law, ethics, and financial/monetary issues). Legal
services includes, but are not limited to: representing EPA and providing litigation support hi
cases where EPA is a defendant as well as those cases where EPA is not a defendant, but may
have an interest in the case; providing legal advice, counsel and support to the Agency
management and administrative offices on matters involving actions affecting the operation of
ESP-46
-------
the Agency, including, for example, providing interpretations of relevant and applicable laws,
regulations, directives, policy and guidance documents, and other materials.
FY 2005 CHANGE FROM FY 2004
EPM
• There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for new and
existing FTE.
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
This program/project provides legal advice and services related to all statutes that affect EPA's
implementation of environmental programs. These statutes include but are not limited to the:
Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1996
Age Discrimination in Employment Act
Americans with Disabilities Act
Anti-deficiency Act
Anti-Lobbying Act
Civil Rights Act of 1964
Civil Service Reform Act
Clinger Cohen Act
Clean Air Act
Clean Water Act
Competition in Contracting Act
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
Computer Security Act
Congressional Review Act
Contract Disputes Act
Copyright Act
Endangered Species Act
Emergency Planning and Community Right_to_Know Act
EPA's various appropriations acts Act of 1990
Equal Pay Act
Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act
Federal Advisory Committee Act
Federal Claims Collection Act
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act
Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act
Federal Records Act
Federal Technology Transfer Act
Federal Tort Claims Act
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
Freedom of Information Act
Government Paperwork Elimination Act
ESP-47
-------
Government Performance and Results Act
Military and Civilian Employees' Claims Act
Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1996
National Environmental Policy Act
North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation
Oil Pollution Act
Paperwork Reduction Act
Pollution Prevention Act
Privacy Act
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Rehabilitation Act
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Safe Drinking Water Act
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
Toxic Substances Control Act
Trademark (Lanham) Act
U.S. Patent Statute
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act
Whistleblower Protection Act
ESP-48
-------
Office of the Inspector General
Program Project
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
FY 2003
Actuals
$46,612.9
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$50,021.3
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$51,135.6
All Office of the Inspector General (OIG) work is planned based on the anticipated value
toward influencing resolution of the Agency's major management challenges, reducing risk,
improving practices and program operations, and saving taxpayer dollars while leading to the
attainment of EPA's Strategic Goals. Our strategic plan aligns OIG products and services with
current Agency goals and priorities based upon emerging issues, legislative initiatives, needs of
various customers, clients and stakeholders, and multiple dynamic external factors.
FY 2005 REQUEST
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
The OIG provides audit, evaluation, investigative, and advisory services that fulfill the
requirements of the IG Act, as amended, and contribute to improved Agency management,
environmental quality, and human health. The work of the OIG supports the attainment of
Agency Strategic Goals and assists the Agency hi resolving its top management challenges.
Audits and program evaluations, selected based on relative risk, materiality, and results of past
reviews, identify best practices, areas for improvement, and cooperative solutions to problems.
Investigations focus on alleged fraud, waste, abuse, and other illegal activities by EPA
employees, contractors, and grantees. Advisory and assistance services, which include a wide
range of products and services, are designed to give Agency managers and congressional
requesters information they need more expediently than audits or evaluations, and to assist EPA
management in assessing and/or implementing control systems and processes.
During FY 2005, the OIG will: 1) perform program evaluations and audits to provide
Congress and the Agency with best practices, analyses, and recommendations to address the
most serious management challenges, accomplish environmental objectives, achieve
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) goals, and safeguard resources; 2) conduct
investigations which focus on detection and prosecution of financial fraud, laboratory fraud, and
cyber crime; 3) partner with others, including other Federal and State auditors, evaluators, law
enforcement officials, and associations who also have environmental missions, to leverage our
resources to attain maximum environmental benefits with available resources; and, 4)
implement human capital strategies that will ensure that the OIG has a diverse, highly
motivated, and accountable staff with the skill sets and tools needed to perform increasingly
complex work.
The IG will also hold the position of Inspector General for the Chemical Safety and
Hazard Investigation Board (Board) as stipulated in Conference Report 108-401 on the
"Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2004." The Board is an independent Federal Agency,
authorized by the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, whose mission is to prevent industrial
ESP-49
-------
chemical accidents and save lives. The duties of the IG regarding the Board are those outlined in
the IG Act, as amended.
Audits and Evaluations use sophisticated analytical tools, methodologies, and specialized
skills to determine the extent to which the desired results and benefits envisioned by the
Administration and Congress are being efficiently and effectively achieved. Investigations focus
on the detection and prosecution of financial fraud, cyber crime, and laboratory fraud.
OIG audit work determines whether EPA's programs, systems, and processes are
operating effectively and efficiently. Contract audits determine whether or not a cost claimed by
contractors is permissible, can be allocated and is reasonable. Contract audits also assess the
effectiveness of EPA's contract management. Assistance agreement audits consist of financial
and performance audits of EPA's State Revolving Fund programs, EPA grants, interagency
agreements, and cooperative agreements. Financial statement audits include audits of the
Agency's financial systems and statements to ensure that adequate controls are in place and the
Agency's financial information is timely, accurate, reliable, and useful, and complies with
applicable laws and regulations. System audits review the economy, efficiency, and effectiveness
of operations by examining the Agency's support systems for achieving environmental goals,
including its information systems and systems for setting priorities, developing and
implementing strategies to accomplish them, and measuring performance. Our work will focus
on key processes including those related to financial systems, information systems, human
capital, and project management.
OIG program evaluation work will determine whether EPA's programs, projects, and
tasks are achieving the desired results and impacts in the most efficient and cost-effective
manner. Staffed with a mix of program analysts, scientists, auditors, economists, and others,
program evaluations will assist the Agency in identifying what works and at what cost. Process
evaluations assess the extent to which a program is operating as it was intended; outcome
evaluations assess the extent to which a program achieves its outcome-oriented objectives;
impact evaluations assess net effect of a program by comparing outcomes with the absence of the
program; and cost benefit evaluations compare a program's outputs or outcomes with the costs to
produce them.
OIG investigative work will contribute to improving the environment and EPA programs
and operations; identify and close high risk vulnerabilities and systemic weaknesses; and obtain
prosecutions, recoveries, indictments, and convictions for criminal activity, and appropriate civil
and administrative remedies. Financial fraud investigations include several types of
investigations. Contract fraud investigations focus on financial crimes, criminal activity, or
serious misconduct in the performance of EPA contracts, or are related to contract procurement
practices. Assistance agreement investigations focus on financial crimes, criminal activity, or
serious misconduct in the performance of EPA grants to individuals, businesses, or
organizations, or are related to the application and awarding of EPA grant monies. These
investigations address similar activity in the use of EPA money involved in State Revolving
Funds, interagency agreements, and cooperative agreements awarded to state, local, and Tribal
governments, universities, and nonprofit recipients.
ESP-50
-------
Employee integrity investigations focus on allegations of criminal activity or serious
misconduct by EPA employees that could threaten the credibility of the Agency, validity of
executive decisions, security of personnel or business information entrusted to the Agency, or
financial loss to the Agency. Program integrity investigations focus on serious misconduct or
criminal activity that could undermine or erode the public trust and confidence in EPA, its
programs, or its employees.
The OIG Computer Crimes Directorate (CCD) focuses on cyber crime and interacts with
the law enforcement community, such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation, sharing expertise
and working collaboratively. The CCD develops investigative responses to suspect computer
intrusions, supports the OIG and Agency personnel with a Penetration Laboratory, and assists the
Office of Investigations with its Forensic Laboratory. The CCD's Intrusion Unit monitors all
computer incidents reported to or by the Agency and performs intrusion assessments to
determine whether investigative activity is warranted. The Penetration Laboratory supports
Agency information security personnel as they examine the Agency network for weaknesses and
vulnerabilities. The Forensics Unit conducts forensic examinations to locate and preserve
evidence in electronic media.
The OIG initiative to uncover criminal activity in laboratories focuses on investigating
indicators of laboratory fraud within the environmental community to include commercial and
EPA laboratories. The Agency relies upon laboratory test results to assess environmental threats
and determine what actions are necessary to control hazardous wastes, toxins, and other
contaminated substances that pollute our air, water, and land. These investigations generally are
part of contract investigations or program integrity investigations.
The OIG will concentrate work in the following areas during FY 2005:
Air
Particulate Matter: How can EPA maximize the effectiveness of its fine particulate matter (PM
2.5) ambient monitoring and emissions control strategies? Ozone Attainment: How can EPA
better execute ozone reduction strategies?
Air Toxics: How can EPA improve the effectiveness of its efforts to assess, monitor, control, and
reduce the risks of toxic air pollutants to human health and the environment?
Challenges to Further Progress: How can EPA maximize the contributions of State, local, and
Tribal agencies in continuing progress toward meeting clean air goals?
Water
Drinking Water: How can EPA effectively implement the Safe Drinking Water Amendments of
1996?
Watershed Protection: How can EPA effectively control, protect, and monitor watersheds and
water quality?
ESP-51
-------
Reducing Pollutant Loadings: How can EPA effectively use and improve policy tools to reduce
water pollutant loadings?
Land
Superfund: Is EPA making progress toward effective risk reduction and waste cleanup?
Brownfields: Is EPA making progress toward effective risk reduction, cleanup, and restoring
previously polluted sites to appropriate uses?
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA): Is EPA making progress toward effective
waste management, hazardous material management, and risk reduction?
Cross-Media
Homeland Security: How can EPA better execute its homeland security responsibilities to
prevent, prepare for, and respond to a terrorist attack to minimize adverse impacts on human
health and the environment?
Environmental Stewardship: Do the States and tribes use high performance concepts to deliver
environmental and human health protection?
Environmental Justice: How well are environmental justice concerns incorporated into EPA
decision making? Do EPA policies and practices disproportionately contribute to adverse
impacts on human health and the environment in communities of concern?
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement: Is the employment of traditional and nontraditional
enforcement approaches optimized to ensure compliance with environmental rules and
regulations that are designed to protect human health and the environment?
Good Government
Financial Management: Does EPA have the people, processes, and systems needed to efficiently
provide timely, accurate, complete, and useful financial information for decision making and
accountability?
Information Resources Management: Does EPA have systems, processes, and controls in place
to ensure that timely, reliable, and complete information is available to manage EPA's programs
and report on environmental results?
Program Management: Does EPA have the systems and processes in place to plan, budget for,
and manage programs, including the human capital needed to carry out its mission?
Assistance Agreements: Is EPA using assistance agreements to efficiently and effectively
accomplish its mission?
ESP-52
-------
Contracts: Is EPA using contracts to efficiently and effectively accomplish its mission?
Public Liaison
The OIG Hotline will receive and review complaints and allegations of inappropriate
decisions, actions, or activities involving Agency programs, employees, contractors, or grantees.
The Hotline recommends work assignments for staffing within OIG offices, monitors those work
assignments, and reviews reports of findings and recommendations. The Ombudsman also
informs external stakeholders of the results of reviews and reports on fiscal year activity.
FY 2005 Change from FY 2004
IG
• There are additional increases for payroll, cost of living, and enrichment for new and
existing FTE.
• (+$500,000) Increase for EPA's Office of Inspector General to carry out its new
responsibilities as the Inspector General for the Chemical Safety and Hazardous
Investigation Board.
SF
(-$75,000) Decrease to fund a portion of the fixed costs increase in Superfund.
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND MEASURES
Fraud Detection and Deterrence
In 2005 In 2005, the OIG will improve Agency business and operations by identifying 240 recommendations,
potential savings and recoveries equal to 200 percent of the annual investment in the OIG, 102 actions
for better business operations, and 80 criminal, civil, or administrative actions reducing risk or loss of
integrity.
In 2004 In 2004, the OIG will improve Agency business and operations by identifying 240 recommendations,
contributing to potential savings and recoveries equal to 150 percent of the annual investment in the
OIG, 100 actions for greater efficiency and effectiveness, and 80 criminal, civil, or administrative
actions reducing the risk of loss or integrity.
In 2003 In the Annual Performance Report, our results for APG 2 were combined with the results for APG 1.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Number of improved business practices and 138 100 102 Improvements
systems.
Number of criminal, civil, and administrative 83 80 80 Actions
actions.
Number of business recommendations, risks, and 264
best practices identified.
240
240
Recommendations
ESP-53
-------
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Return on the annual dollar investment in the 856 150 200 Percent
OIG.
Baseline: In FY 2002, the OIG established a baseline of 150 business recommendations, 70 improved business
practices, and 50 criminal, civil, and administrative actions for improving Agency management; and a
100% potential dollar return on the investment in the OIG from savings and recoveries.
Audit and Advisory Services
In 2005 In 2005, the OIG will contribute to improved environmental quality and human health by identifying
95 environmental recommendations, best practices, risks, or opportunities for improvement;
contributing to the reduction or elimination of 23 environmental or infrastructure security risks; and 45
actions influencing environmental improvements or program changes.
In 2004 In 2004, the OIG will improve environmental quality and human health by identifying 80
recommendations, risks, or best practices; contributing to the reduction or elimination of 18
environmental risks; and 42 actions influencing positive environmental or health impacts.
In 2003 Improve environmental quality and human health by identifying 48 environmental recommendations,
risks, and best practices; contributing to the reduction of 9 environmental risks, and 47 actions
influencing positive environmental or health impacts.
Performance Measures: FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Pres. Pres. Bud.
Bud.
Number of environmental risks reduced. 9 18 23 Risks
Number of environmental actions. 47 42 45 Improvements
Number of environmental recommendations, 48 80 95 Recommendations
risks, and best practices identified.
Baseline: In FY 2002, the OIG established a baseline of: 75 recommendations, best practices and risks identified
contributing to unproved Agency environmental goals; 15 environmental actions; and the reduction of 15
environmental risks. The FY 2004 performance measure targets for environmental measures were revised
downward due to actual experience gained within the past year.
VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES
FY 2005 Performance Measures: Number of actions taken for environmental
improvement, reductions in environmental risks, and recommendations made for
environmental improvement. Number of actions taken for improvement in business
practices, criminal/civil/administrative actions, potential dollar return, and
recommendations made for improved business practices.
Performance Database: The OIG Performance Measurement and Results System is used to
capture and aggregate information on an array of measures in a logic model format, linking
ESP-54
-------
immediate outputs with longer term intermediate outcomes and results. Because intermediate
and long-term results may not be realized for several years, only verifiable results are reported in
the year completed, while others remain prospective until completed and verified. Database
measures include numbers of:l) recommendations for environmental and management
improvement; 2) legislative, regulatory policy, directive, or process changes; 3) environmental
and integrity risks identified, reduced or eliminated; 4) best practices identified and transferred;
5) examples of environmental and management improvements; and 6) monetary value of funds
questioned, saved, fined or recovered.
Data Source: Designated OIG staff enter data into the system. Data are from OIG performance
evaluations, audits, research, court records and from EPA documents, data systems and reports
that track environmental and management actions or improvements made, risks reduced or
avoided. OIG also collects independent data from EPA's partners and stakeholders.
Methods, Assumptions and Suitability: OIG performance results are a chain of linked events,
starting with OIG outputs (e.g., recommendations, reports of best practices and identification of
risks). The subsequent actions taken by EPA or its stakeholders/partners, as a result of OIG's
outputs, to improve operational efficiency and environmental program delivery are reported as
intermediate outcomes. The resulting improvements in operational efficiency, risks
reduced/eliminated, and conditions of environmental and human health are reported as outcomes.
By using common categories of performance measures, quantitative results can be summed and
reported. Each outcome is also qualitatively described, supported and linked to an OIG product
or output. The OIG can only control its outputs, and has no authority, beyond its influence, to
implement its recommendations.
QA/QC Procedures: All performance data submitted to the database require at least one
verifiable source assuring data accuracy and reliability. Data quality assurance and control are
performed as an extension of OIG products and services, subject to rigorous compliance with the
Government Auditing Standards of the Comptroller General, and regularly reviewed by OIG
management, an independent OIG Management Assessment Review Team, and external
independent peer reviews. The statutory mission of the OIG is to independently evaluate the
integrity of Agency operations and reporting systems. The OIG has also issued its own data
quality policy and procedures.
Data Quality Reviews: There have not been any previous audit findings or reports by external
groups on data or database weaknesses in the OIG Performance Measurement and Results
System.
Data Limitations: All OIG staff are responsible for data accuracy in then* products and
services. However, there is a possibility of incomplete, miscoded, or missing data in the system
due to human error or time lags. Data supporting achievement of results are often from indirect
or external sources, with their own methods or standards for data verification/validation.
Error Estimate: The error rate for outputs is estimated at +1-5%, while the error rate for
reported outcomes is estimated to be at least +/-10%.
ESP-55
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
ENABLING/SUPPORT PROGRAMS
Acquisition Management, ESP-8, ESP-10
Administrative Law, ESP-36
Alternative Dispute Resolution, ESP-45
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations, ESP-49
Brownfields, ESP-52
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance, ESP-29
Civil Rights / Title VI Compliance, ESP-36
Congressional, Intergovernmental, External Relations, ESP-5, ESP-6, ESP-36
Environmental Justice, ESP-52
Exchange Network, ESP-15, ESP-16, ESP-17, ESP-18, ESP-19, ESP-20, ESP-21
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations, ESP-8, ESP-9
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management, ESP-8, ESP-12
Homeland Security
Communication and Information, ESP-15, ESP-36
Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure, ESP-1, ESP-3, ESP-8, ESP-34
Human Resources Management, ESP-8, ESP-11
Information Security, ESP-15, ESP-18, ESP-22, ESP-24, ESP-25, ESP-28, ESP-56
IT / Data Management, ESP-5, ESP-15
Legal Advice
Environmental Program, ESP-45, ESP-46
Support Program, ESP-45, ESP-46
Regional Science and Technology, ESP-36, ESP-40
Science Advisory Board, ESP-31, ESP-36, ESP-41
Small Minority Business Assistance, ESP-36, ESP-42
-------
Performance Goals and Measures
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
GOAL: 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.
OBJECTIVE: HEALTHIER OUTDOOR AIR
Through 2010, 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.
Reduce Air Toxic Emissions
In 2005 Air toxics emissions nationwide from stationary and mobile sources combined will be reduced by an additional 1% of the updated
1993 baseline of 6.0 million tons for a cumulative reduction of 38%.
In 2004 Air toxics emissions nationwide from stationary and mobile sources combined will be reduced by an additional 2% of the updated
1993 baseline of 6.0 million tons for a cumulative reduction of 37%.
In 2003 End-of-year- FY 2003 data will be available in late 2009 to verify that air toxics emissions nationwide from stationary and mobile
sources combined will be reduced by an additional 1% of the updated 1993 baseline of 6.0 million tons for a cumulative reduction
35%.
In 2002 End-of-year FY 2002 data will be available in late 2006 to verify that air toxics emissions nationwide from stationary and mobile
sources combined will be reduced by 1.5% from 2001 for a cumulative reduction of 33.5% from the 1993 baseline of 6.0 million tons
per year.
In 2001 End-of-year FY 2001 data will be available in late 2006 to verify that air toxics emissions nationwide from stationary and mobile
sources combined will be reduced by 5% from 2000 (for a cumulative reduction of 35% from the 1993 level of 4.3 million tons.)
In 2000 End-of-year FY 2000 data will be available in late 2006 to verify that air toxics emissions nationwide from stationary and mobile
sources combined will be reduced by 3% from 1999 (for a cumulative reduction of 30% from the 1993 level of 4.3 million tons.)
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Combined Stationary and Mobile Source Reductions in Data Lag Data Lag Data Lag Data Lag 2 1 Percent
Air Toxics Emissions
Mobile Source Air Toxics Emissions Reduced .71 .80 Million Tons
Stationary Source Air Toxics Emissions Reduced 1.59 1.59 Million Tons
Major Sources, Area and All Other Air Toxics Emissions +.13 +.14 Million Tons
Reduced
Baseline: In 1993, the last year before the MACT standards and mobile source regulations developed under the Clean Air Act began to be
implemented, stationary and mobile sources are now estimated to have emitted 6.0 million tons of air toxics. (EPA's prior estimate
was 4.3 million tons and was updated with improved inventory data.) Air toxics emission data are revised every three years to
generate inventories for the National Toxics Inventory (NTI). In the intervening years between the update of the NTI, the model EMS-
HAP (Emissions Modeling System for Hazardous Air Pollutants) is used to estimate and project annual emissions of air toxics. EMS-
HAP projects emissions, by adjusting point, area and mobile emission data to account for growth and emission reductions resulting
from emission reduction scenarios such as the implementation of the Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards.
Reduce SO2 Emissions
In 2005 Keep annual emissions below level authorized by allowance holdings and make progress towards achieving the year 2010 SO2
emissions cap for utilities. Annual emissions reduction target is 6.9 million tons from the 1980 baseline.
In 2004 Maintain or increase annual SO2 emission reduction of approximately 5 million tons from the 1980 baseline. Keep annual emissions
below level authorized by allowance holdings and make progress towards achievement of Year 2010 SO2 emissions cap for utilities.
In 2003 End of year 2003 data will be available in the last quarter of 2004 to verify that annual emissions reduction of approximately 5 million
tons from utility sources were maintained or increased during 2003.
In 2002 SO2 emissions were reduced by 35% from the 1990 level of 15.9 million tons and approximately 40% from the 1980 level of 17.5
million tons.
In 2001 Approximately 5 million tons of SO2 emissions from utility sources were reduced from the 1980 baseline.
2
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
In 2000 6.3 million tons of SO2 emissions from utility sources were reduced from 1980 baseline.
Performance Measures
S02 Emissions
FY 2000
Actuals
6,300,000
FY 2001
Actuals
6,670,000
FY2002 FY2003
Actuals Actuals
7,000,000 Data Lag
FY2004 FY200S
Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
5,000,000 6,900,000 Tons Reduced
Baseline: The base of comparison for assessing progress on the annual performance goal is the 1980 emissions baseline. The 1980 SO2
emissions inventory totals 17.4 million tons for electric utility sources, this inventory was developed by National Acid Precipitation
Assessment Program (NAPAP) and used as the basis for reductions in Title IV of the Clean Air Act Amendments. This data is also
contained in EPA's National Air Pollutant Emissions Trends Report. Statutory SO2 emissions cap for year 2010 and later is at 8.95
million tons which is approximately 8.5 million tons below 1980 emissions level. "Allowable SO2 emission level" consists of
allowance allocations granted to sources each year under several provisions of the Act and additional allowances carried over, or
banked, from previous years.
Reduce NOx Emissions
In 2003 End of year 2003 data will be available in Summer 2004 to verify that the Agency has achieved the annual emission reduction goal.
In 2002 EPA reduced annual NOx emissions from coal-fired utility sources by 3.5 million tons from the modeled projections of NOx
emissions that would have been emitted in 2000 without implementation of Title IV of the Clean Air Act Amendments.
In 2001 2 million tons of NOx from coal-fired utility sources were reduced from levels that would have been emitted without implementation
of Title IV of the Clean Air Act Amendments.
In 2000 2 million tons of NOx from coal-fired utility sources were reduced from levels before implementation of Title IV of the Clean Air Act
Amendments.
Performance Measures
NOx Reductions .
FY 2000
Actuals
2,000,000
FY 2001
Actuals
2,000,000
FY 2002
Actuals
3,500,000
FY 2003
Actuals
Data Lag
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
Tons Reduced
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Baseline: Performance Baseline: The base of comparison for assessing progress on this annual performance goal is emissions that would have
occurred in the absence of Title IV of the Clean Air Act Amendments.
Reduce Exposure to Unhealthy Ozone Levels -1 Hour
In 2005
In 2004
In 2003
In 2002
In 2001
In 2000
The number of people living in areas with monitored ambient ozone concentrations below the NAAQS for the 1-hour ozone standard
will increase by 4% (relative to 2004) for a cumulative total of 53% (relative to 1992).
The number of people living in areas with monitored ambient ozone concentrations below the NAAQS for the 1-hour ozone standard
will increase by 4% (relative to 2003) for a cumulative total of 47% (relative to 1992).
Maintained healthy air quality for approx. 161.5 million people living in monitored areas attaining the ozone std; certified that 5 areas
of the remaining 54 nonattainment areas have attained the 1-hour NAAQS for ozone thus increasing the no. of people living in areas
with healthy air by 5.8 million.
Maintained healthy air quality for 155 million people living in monitored areas attaining the ozone standard; and certified 2 areas of
the remaining 55 nonattainment areas attained the 1-hour NAAQS for ozone, thus increasing the number of people living in areas with
healthy air by 3.6 million.
EPA maintained healthy air quality for 152 million people living in 43 areas attaining the ozone standard, increased by 170,000 the
number of people living in areas with healthy air quality that have newly attained the standard by certifying that 3 new areas have
attained the 1-hour standard.
Maintained healthy air quality for 152 million people living in 42 areas attaining the ozone standard.
FY2000
Actuals
FY2001
Actuals
FY 2002
Actuals
FY2003
Actuals
Data Lag
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
47
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
53 Percent
Performance Measures
Cumulative Percent Increase in the Number of People
who Live in Areas with Ambient 1-hour Ozone
Concentrations Below the Level of the NAAQS as
Compared to 1992
Cumulative Percent Increase in the Number of Areas with Data Lag 55 40 Percent
Ambient 1-hour Ozone Concentrations Below the Level
of the NAAQS as Compared to 1992
Total Number of People who Live in Areas Designated to 151,868,200 152,038,400 155,678,900 161,485,905 167,300,000 174,562,000 People
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
FY 2000
Actuals
Performance Measures
Attainment of the Clean Air Standards for Ozone
Areas Designated to Attainment for the Ozone Standard 0
Additional People Living in Newly Designated Areas 1,017,545
with Demonstrated Attainment of the Ozone Standard
FY 2001
Actuals
1
170,200
FY 2002
Actuals
2
3,640,507
FY 2003
Actuals
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
5,800,000 5,800,000 7,276,790
Areas
People
VOCs Reduced from Mobile Sources
NOx Reduced from Mobile Sources
1,562,000
1,059,000
1,659,000
1,189,000
1,755,000
1,319,000
1,900,000
1,400,000
2,040,000
1,653,000
855,624
1,693,259
Tons
Tons
Baseline: The 1992 baseline for population is the population in areas not classified or designated as attainment for the clean air national ambient
air quality standards. The 1992 baseline for areas is those areas that are designated as non-attainment of the NAAQs. Through FY
2003, 161,485,905 people are living in areas designated to attainment; 51 areas are designated to attainment for this/these pollutants.
The 2000 MOBILE 6 inventory is used as the baseline year for mobile source emissions as of FY 2005. The 2000 baseline for VOC
emissions is 7.7 million tons; the baseline is 11.8 million tons. The 2000 MOBILE 6 inventory is used as the baseline year for mobile
source emissions as of FY 2005. The 2000 baseline for VOC emissions is 7.7 million tons; the baseline is 11.8 million tons. Beginning in FY
2004, EPA changed the basis for evaluating progress for this measure to reflect actual measured levels of air quality. Previously, EPA
had not defined an area as having clean air until the area was formally classified as having met health-based standards. The
procedural requirements for classification may require a year or more to complete. The previous total population numbers were for
2000-33.4 million(m) 2001 -38.2m; 2002-41.7m; 2003 -47.8m.
Reduce Exposure to Unhealthy PM Levels - PM-10
In 2005 The number of people living in areas with monitored ambient PM concentrations below the NAAQS for the PM-10 standard will
increase by 1% (relative to 2004) for a cumulative total of 7% (relative to 1992).
In 2004 The number of people living in areas with monitored ambient PM concentrations below the NAAQS for the PM-10 standard will
increase by 1% (relative to 2003) for a cumulative total of 6% (relative to 1992).
In 2003 Maintained healthy air quality for 120 million people living in monitored areas attaining the PM standards; increased by 252 thousand
the number of people living in areas with healthy air quality that have newly attained the standard.
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
In 2002 Maintained healthy air quality for 120 million people living in monitored areas attaining the PM standards; and increased by 2.7
million the number of people living in areas with healthy air quality that have newly attained the standard.
In 2001 EPA maintained healthy air quality for 117 million people living in 9 areas attaining the PM standards and increased by 2.2 million
the number of people living in areas with healthy air quality that have newly attained the standard.
In 2000 Maintained healthy air quality for 115 million people living in 7 areas attaining the PM standards, and increased by 18 thousand the
number of people living in areas with healthy air quality that have attained the standard.
Performance Measures
Cumulative Percent Increase in the Number of People
who Live in Areas with Ambient PM-10 Concentrations-
Below the Level of the NAAQSas Compared to 1992
Cumulative Percent Increase in the Number of Areas with
Ambient PM-10 Concentrations Below the Level of the
NAAQSas Compared to 1992
Total Number of People who Live in Areas Designated in
Attainment with Clean Air Standards for PM
Areas Designated to Attainment for the PM-10 Standard
Additional People Living in Newly Designated Areas
with Demonstrated Attainment of the PM Standard
PM-10 Reduced from Mobile Sources
PM-2.5 Reduced from Mobile Sources
FY2000
Actuals
FY 2001
Actuals
FY2002
Actuals
FY 2003
Actuals
Data Lag
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
6
Data Lag 40
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
7
50
Percent
Percent
115,107,800 117,437,659 120,126,600 120,379,036 120,700,000 122,308,000 People
1
18,587
20,000
15,000
8
2,239,859
22,000
16,500
4
2,688,990
23,000
17,250
5
252,387
25,000
18,000
9
380,000
18,000
13,500
4
1,549,648
62,161
61,217
Areas
People
Tons
Tons
Baseline: The 1992 baseline for population is the population in areas not classified or designated as attainment for the clean air national ambient
air quality standards. The 1992 baseline for areas is those areas that are designated as non-attainment of the NAAQs. Through FY
2003, 120,379,036 people are living in areas designated to attainment; 5 areas are designated to attainment for this/these pollutants.
The 1995 baseline for PM-10 reduced from mobile sources is 880,000 tons. The 2000 MOBILE 6 inventory is used as the baseline
for mobile source emissions as of FY 2005. The 2000 baseline for PM 2.5 from mobile sources is 500,000 tons; the 2000 baseline for
PM 2.5 from mobile sources is 613,000 tons. Beginning in FY 2004, EPA changed the basis for evaluating progress for this measure
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
to reflect actual measured levels of air quality. Previously, EPA had not defined an area as having clean air until the area was formally
classified as having met health-based standards. The procedural requirements for classification may require a year or more to
complete. The previous total population numbers were for 2000 -1.2 million (m) 2001 - 1.2m; 2002- 3.4m; 2003 - 6.2m.
Reduce Exposure to Unhealthy CO, SO2, NO2, Lead
In 2005 The number of people living in areas with monitored ambient CO, NO2, SO2, or Pb concentrations below the NAAQS will increase
by less than 1% (relative to 2004) for a cumulative total of 53% (relative to 1992).
In 2004 The number of people living in areas with monitored ambient CO, NO2, SO2, or Pb concentrations below the NAAQS will increase
by 4% (relative to 2003) for a cumulative total of 53% (relative to 1992).
In 2003 Maintained healthy air quality for 167 million people living in monitored areas attaining the CO, SO2, N02, and Lead standards;
increased by .435 million the number of people living in areas with healthy air quality that have newly attained the standard.
In 2002 Maintained healthy air quality for 167 million people living in monitored areas attaining the CO, SO2, NO2, and Lead standards; and
increased by 16.5 million, the number of people living in areas with healthy air quality that have newly attained the standard.
In 2001 EPA maintained healthy air quality for 150 million people living in 91 areas attaining the CO, SO2, N02, and Lead standards and
increased by 418,000 the number of people living in areas with healthy air quality that have newly attained the standard.
In 2000 Maintained healthy air quality for 150 million people living in 82 areas attaining the CO, SO2, NO2, and Lead standards, and
increased by 4.5 million the number of people living in areas with healthy air quality that have attained the standard.
FY 2000
Actuals
FY 2001
Actuals
Performance Measures
Cumulative Percent Increase in the Number of People
who Live in Areas with Ambient CO, SO2, NO2, or Pb
Concentrations Below the Level of the NAAQS as
Compared to 1992
Cumulative Percent Increase in the Number of Areas with
Ambient CO, SO2, NO2, or Pb Concentrations Below the
Level of the NAAQS as Compared to 1992
Total Number of People Living in Areas Designated in 150,523,186 150,914,043
Attainment with Clean Air Standards for CO, SO2, NO2,
FY2002
Actuals
FY 2003
Actuals
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
53
87
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
53
77
Percent
Percent
167,425,596 167,860,905 174,000,000 174,222,000 People
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Performance Measures
andPb
FY 2000
Actuals
Areas Designated to Attainment for the CO, SO2, NO2, 10
and Pb Standards
Additional People Living in Newly Designated Areas 4,503,306
with Demonstrated Attainment of the CO, SO2, NO2, and
Pb Standards
FY 2001
Actuals
9
418,000
FY2002
Actuals
12
FY 2003
Actuals
16,483,800 435,309
FY 2004
Fres. Bud.
19
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
6,150,000 209,991
Areas
People
CO Reduced from Mobile Sources
10,341,000
Total Number of People Living in Areas with 13,000,000
Demonstrated Attainment of the NO2 Standard
10,672,000
14,944,000
11,002,000
14,944,000
12,636,000 -841,971 Tons
n/a n/a People
Baseline: The 1992 baseline for population is the population in areas not classified or designated as attainment for the clean air national ambient
air quality standards. The 1992 baseline for areas is those areas that are designated as non-attainment of the NAAQs. Through FY
2003,167,860,905 people are living in areas designated to attainment; 108 areas are designated to attainment for this/these pollutants.
The 1995 baseline for mobile source emissions for CO was 70,947,000 tons. For mobile sources, the 2000 MOBILE 6 inventory is
used as the baseline for FY 2005; the 2000 baseline for CO emissions is 79 million tons. While on-road CO emissions continue to
decrease, there is an overall increase in mobile source CO emissions due to a growth in nonroad CO. Beginning in FY 2004, EPA
changed the basis for evaluating progress for this measure to reflect actual measured levels of air quality. Previously, EPA had not
defined an area as having clean air until the area was formally classified as having met health-based standards. The procedural
requirements for classification may require a year or more to complete. The previous total population numbers were for 2000 -
27.7million (m) 2001 - 36.3m; 2002 - 36.7m; 2003 - 53.7m.
Reduce Exposure to Unhealthy Ozone Levels - 8 Hour
In 2005 The number of people living in areas with monitored ambient ozone concentrations below the NAAQS for the 8-hour ozone standard
will increase by 4% (relative to 2004) for a cumulative total of 7% (relative to 2001).
In 2004 The number of people living in areas with monitored ambient ozone concentrations below the NAAQS for the 8-hour standard will
increase by 3% (relative to 2003) for a cumulative total of 3% (relative to 2001).
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Performance Measures
Cumulative Percent Increase in the Number of People
who Live in Areas with Ambient 8-hour Concentrations
Below the Level of the NAAQS as Compared to 2001
Cumulative Percent Increase in the Number of Areas with
Ambient 8-hour Ozone Concentrations Below the Level
of the NAAQS as Compared to 2001
FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
<1
<1
Percent
Percent
Baseline: EPA will designate the attainment status for areas in April 2004. With that data, we will have the population baseline as well as the
number of areas that are not in attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard.
Reduce Exposure to Unhealthy PM Levels - PM- 2.5
In 2005
In 2004
The number of people living in areas with monitored ambient PM concentrations below the NAAQS for the PM-2.5 standard will
increase by 1% (relative to 2003) for a cumulative total of less than 1% (relative to 2001).
The number of people living in areas with monitored ambient ozone concentrations below the NAAQS for the PM-2.5 standard will
increase by 1% (relative to 2003) for a cumulative total of less man 1% (relative to 2001).
Performance Measures
Cumulative Percent Increase in the Number of People
who Live in Areas with Ambient PM-2.5 Concentrations
Below the Level of the NAAQS as Compared to 2001
Percent Increase in the Number of Areas with Ambient
PM-2.5 Concentrations Below the Level of the NAAQS
as Compared to 2001
FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
1 1 Percent
Percent
Baseline: EPA will designate the attainment status for areas in FY 2005. With that data, we will have the population baseline as well as the
number of areas that are not in attainment for the PM-2.5 standard.
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Increase Tribal Air Capacity
In 2004
In 2003
Increase the number of tribes monitoring air quality for ozone and/or particulate matter from 42 to 45 and increase the percentage of
tribes monitoring clean air for ozone from 64% to 67% and particulate matter from 71% to 72%,
39 tribes monitored air quality for ozone and/or particulate matter; 66% of tribes monitored clean air for ozone and 68% monitored for
particulate matter.
Performance Measures
Percent of Tribes with Tribal Lands Monitoring for Ozone
and/or Particulate Matter
Percent of Monitoring Tribes Monitoring Clean Air for
Ozone
Percent of Monitoring Tribes Monitoring Clean Air for
Particulate Matter
Number of Tribes Implementing Air Programs
FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002
Actuals Actuals Actuals
FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
13 Percent
66
68
39 tribes
67
72
30
Percent
Percent
Tribes
Baseline:
Acid Rain
In 2005
In 2005
In 2004
There are 570 Federally-recognized Tribes with 341 Tribes having Tribal lands (Alaska Native Villages (Tribes) number 229 entities
but only one 'reservation')- During 2003, 39 Tribes conducted monitoring for ozone and/or particulate matter; fifteen Tribes
monitored their air sheds for ozone (10 of which recorded clean air) and thirty seven Tribes monitored for particulate matter (25 of
which recorded clean air). EPA will continue to work with the Tribes to increase the number and/or percentage of Tribes that monitor
for clean air.
Reduce total annual average nitrogen deposition and ambient nitrate concentrations 5% from baseline.
Reduce total annual average sulfur deposition and ambient sulfate concentrations 27% from baseline
Reduce total annual average nitrogen deposition and mean ambient nitrate concentrations 5% from baseline
10
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
In 2004 Reduce total annual average suliur deposition and mean ambient sulfate concentrations 25% from baseline.
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Total Annual Average Sulfur Deposition and Ambient 25 27
Sulfate concentrations reduced (per cent from baseline)
Total Annual Average Nitrogen Deposition and Ambient 5 5
Nitrate concentrations reduced (per cent from baseline)
Baseline; Sulfur and nitrogen deposition contribute to acidification of lakes and streams, making them unable to support fish and other aquatic
life. Reductions in both total sulfur and nitrogen deposition is critical to reducing the number of chronically acidic water bodies.
Ambient sulfate and ambient nitrate ("acid rain particulate") contributes to unhealthy air and respiratory problems in humans,
especially children and other sensitive populations. The baseline is established from monitored site levels based on consolidated map
of 1989-1991 showing three years of deposition levels produced from the CASTNet site
(http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/castnet/sites.html').
OBJECTIVE: HEALTHIER INDOOR AIR
By 2008,22.6 million more Americans than in 1994 will be experiencing healthier indoor air in homes, schools, and office
buildings.
Healthier Residential Indoor Air
In 2005 843,300 additional people will be living in homes with healthier indoor air.
In 2004 4 834,400 additional people will be living in healthier residential indoor environments.
In 2003 End-of-year FY 2003 data will be available in late 2004 to verify that 834,400 additional people were living in healthier residential
indoor environments.
In 2002 834,400 additional people lived in healthier residential indoor environments.
In 2001 An additional 890,000 additional people lived in healthier residential indoor environments.
11
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
In 2000 1,032,000 additional people lived in healthier residential indoor environments.
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
People Living in Healthier Indoor Air 1,032,000 890,000 834,400 Data Lag 834,400 843300 People
Baseline: 1. By 2005, increase the number of people living in homes built with radon reducing features to 4,539,000 from 1,862,280 in 1994
(cumulative).* 2. By 2005, decrease the number of children exposed to ETS from 27,502,000 in 1994 to 24,119,404 (cumulative).**
3. By 2005, increase by 500,000 the number of people with asthma and their caregivers who are educated about indoor air asthma
triggers.
* The 1994 baseline for the number of new homes built with radon-resistant design features has changed from 684,000 tO 384,000.
This is due to a recent review of historical NAHB Research Center reports which determined that a significant number of "rough-in"
installations were reported as radon-resistant new construction. "Rough-in" installations are not complete radon-reduction systems
and do not provide any risk reduction, and they should not be considered when estimating the number of homes built with radon-
resistant new construction. In order to improve the integrity of the results that are being reported, EPA is dropping homes with rough-
in installations when estimating the amount of homes built with radon-resistant construction. The baseline of existing homes
mitigated remains the same at 300,000 in 1994.
** The 1995 Census Report that EPA was using for a baseline population (19,500,000) for children 0 to 6 years of age represented
only children 0 to 4 years of age. This recently came to our attention after an internal review of the baselines. The actual baseline
population of children from the ages of 0 to 6 should be 27,502,168. In order to improve the integrity of the results that are being
reported, EPA is correcting the baseline population to the comprehensive number which includes the ages 0 to 6 years old. Our 2005
goal of decreasing the percentage of children exposed, remains at 15% and the starting point remains at 27.3%.
Healthier Indoor Air in Schools
In 2005 1,312,500 students, faculty and staff will experience improved indoor air quality in their schools.
In 2004 1,575,000 students, faculty and staff will experience improved indoor air quality in their schools.
In 2003 End-of-year FY 2003 data will be available in late 2004 to verify that 1,050,000 students, faculty and staff experienced improved
indoor air quality in their schools.
12
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
In 2002 1,228,500 students, faculty and staff experienced improved indoor air quality in their schools.
In 2001 An additional 1,930,000 students, faculty and staff experienced improved indoor air quality in their schools.
In 2000 2,580,000 students, faculty and staff experienced improved indoor air quality in their schools.
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals. Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Students/Staff Experiencing Improved IAQ in Schools 2,580,000 1,930,000 1,228,500 Data Lag 1,575,000 1,312,500 Students/Staff
Baseline: The nation has approximately 117,000* schools with an average of 525 students, faculty and staff occupying them for a total baseline
population of 61,425,000. The IAQ "Tools for Schools" Guidance implementation began in 1997. For FY 2004, the program projects
an additional 3,000 schools will implement the guidance and seeks to obtain implementation commitments from 15 of the 100 largest
school districts in the U.S. with an average of 140,000 per district. (Additional, not cumulative since there is not an established
baseline for good IAQ practices in schools.)
* According to the U.S. Department of Education National Center for Education Statistics, between 1994 and 2002, 7,000 new schools
were built. For the revised strategic plan we increased our baseline to incorporate the increase. Our FY 2008 strategic goal
incorporates the additional school.
Healthier Indoor Air in Workplaces
In 2005 150,000 additional office workers will experience improved air quality in their workplaces.
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
150,000 additional office workers will experience 150,000 People
improved air quality in their workplaces.
Baseline: There are approximately 750,000 office buildings with 12 billion square feet. The mean worker density is 1 office worker per 500
square feet. Therefore, a total of 24 million office workers work in office buildings. Our 2005 goal is to get 5% of all office buildings
to adopt good IAQ measures which translates into 1.2 million office workers (cumulative from 1994). Our 2008 goal is to get an
13
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
additional 3% of all office buildings to adopt good LAQ measures which translates to 720,000 office workers (cumulative at 240,000
per year).
OBJECTIVE: REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS INTENSITY
Through EPA's voluntary climate protection programs, contribute 45 million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTCE)
annually to the President's 18 percent greenhouse gas intensity improvement goal by 2012. (An additional 75 MMTCE to
result from the sustained growth in the climate programs are reflected in the Administration's business-as-usual projection for
greenhouse gas intensity improvement.)
Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions
In 2005 Greenhouse gas emissions will be reduced from projected levels by approximately 90 MMTCE per year through EPA partnerships
with businesses, schools, state and local governments, and other organizations.
In 2004 Greenhouse gas emissions will be reduced from projected levels by approximately 81 MMTCE per year through EPA partnerships
with businesses, schools, state and local governments, and other organizations.
In 2003 End of year FY 2003 data will be available hi mid-2004 to verify that Greenhouse gas emissions will be reduced from projected levels
by approximately 72.2 MMTCE per year through EPA partnerships with businesses, schools, state and local governments, and other
organizations.
In 2002 Greenhouse gas emissions were reduced from projected levels by 71.0 MMTCE per year through EPA partnerships with businesses,
schools, state and local governments, and other organizations.
In 2001 EPA's Climate Protection Programs reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 65 million metric tons of carbon equivalent in 2001. EPA
estimates that due to investments already made through EPA's technology deployment programs, greenhouse gas emissions will be
reduced by more than 500 MMTCE through 2012.
In 2000 Greenhouse gas emissions were reduced from projected levels by more than 59\3 MMTCE per year through EPA partnerships with
businesses, schools, State and local governments, and other organizations thereby offsetting growth in GHG emissions above 1990
level by about 20%.
14
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002
Actuals Actuals Actuals
Annual Greenhouse Gas Reductions - All EPA Programs 59,3 65 71
Greenhouse Gas Reductions from EPA's Buildings Sector 15.2 16.6 18
Programs (ENERGY STAR)
Greenhouse Gas Reductions from EPA's Industrial 5.5 5.8 6.7
Efficiency/Waste Management Programs
Greenhouse Gas Reductions from EPA's Industrial 13.8 16 17.0
Methane Outreach Programs
Greenhouse Gas Reductions from EPA's Industrial 21.4 22.8 24.9
HFC/PFC Programs
Greenhouse Gas Reductions from EPA's Transportation 1.7 1.9 2.4
Programs
FY 2003
Actuals
Data Lag
Data Lag
FY 2004 FY 2005
Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
81.0 90.2
21.4
Data Lag
Data Lag
Data Lag
Data Lag
7.3
18.1
29.6
2.6
23.8
8
19.1
34.4
2.9
MMTCE
MMTCE
MMTCE
MMTCE
MMTCE
MMTCE
Greenhouse Gas Reductions from EPA's State and Local 1.7
Programs
1.9
2.0
Data Lag 2.0
2.0
MMTCE
Baseline: The baseline for evaluating program performance is a projection of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in the absence of the U.S. climate
change programs. The baseline was developed as part of an interagency evaluation of the U.S. climate change programs in 2002,
which built on similar baseline forecasts developed in 1997 and 1993. Baseline data for carbon emissions related to energy use is
based on data from the Energy Information Agency (EIA) and from EPA's Integrated Planning Model of the U.S. electric power
sector. Baseline data for non-carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, including nitrous oxide and other high global warming potential gases
are maintained by EPA. Baseline information is discussed at length in the U.S. Climate Action Report 2002
(www.epa,gov/globalwarming/publications/car/index.html), which provides a discussion of differences in assumptions between the
1997 baseline and the 2002 update, including which portion of energy efficiency programs are included in the estimates. EPA
develops the non-CO2 emissions baselines and projections using information from partners and other sources. EPA continues to
develop annual inventories as well as update methodologies as new information becomes available.
15
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Reduce Energy Consumption
In 2005 Reduce energy consumption from projected levels by more than 120 billion kilowatt hours, contributing to over $8,5 billion in energy
savings to consumers and businesses.
In 2004 Reduce energy consumption from projected levels by more than 110 billion kilowatt hours, contributing to over $7.5 billion in energy
savings to consumers and businesses.
In 2003 End of year FY 2003 data will be available in late 2004 to verify the reduction in energy consumption from projected levels by more
than 95 billion kilowatt hours, contributing to over $6.5 billion in energy savings to consumers and businesses.
In 2002 Reduced energy consumption by 100 billion kilowatt hours, contributing to over $10 billion in energy savings to consumers and
businesses.
In 2001 EPA's Climate Protection Programs reduced energy use by 84 billion kilowatt hours in 2001.
In 2000 Reduced energy consumption from projected levels by about 74 billion kilowatt hours, resulting in over $8 billion in energy savings to
consumers and businesses that participate in EPA's climate change programs.
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Annual Energy Savings - All EPA Programs 74 84 100 Data Lag 110 120 Billion kWh
Baseline: The baseline for evaluating program performance is a projection of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in the absence of the U.S. climate
change programs. The baseline was developed as part of an interagency evaluation of the U.S. climate change programs in 2002,
which built on similar baseline forecasts developed in 1997 and 1993. Baseline data for carbon emissions related to energy use is
based on data from the Energy Information Agency (EIA) and from EPA's Integrated Planning Model of the U.S. electric power
sector. Baseline data for non-carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, including nitrous oxide and other high global warming potential gases
are maintained by EPA. Baseline information is discussed at length in the U.S. Climate Action Report 2002
(www.epa.gov/globalwarming/publications/car/index.html), which provides a discussion of differences in assumptions between the
1997 baseline and the 2002 update, including which portion of energy efficiency programs are included in the estimates. EPA
develops the non-C02 emissions baselines and projections using information from partners and other sources. EPA continues to
develop annual inventories as well as update methodologies as new information becomes available.
16
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
OBJECTIVE: PROTECT THE OZONE LAYER
By 2010, through worldwide action, ozone concentrations in the stratosphere will have stopped declining and slowly begun the
process of recovery, and the risk to human health from overexposure to ultraviolet (UV) radiation, particularly among
susceptible subpopulations, such as children, will be reduced.
Restrict Domestic Consumption of Class II HCFCs
In 2005 Restrict domestic annual consumption of class II HCFCs below 9,906 ODP-weighted metric tonnes (ODP MTs) and restrict domestic
exempted production and import of newly produced class I CFCs and halons below 10,000 ODP MTs.
In 2004 Restrict domestic annual consumption of class II HCFCs below 9,906 ODP-weighted metric tonnes (ODP MTs) and restrict domestic
exempted production and import of newly produced class I CFCs and halons below 10,000 ODP MTs.
In 2003 End of year FY 2003 data will be available in late 2004 to verify restriction of domestic consumption of class II HCFCs below 9,906
ODP-weighted metric tonnes (ODP MTs) and restriction of domestic exempted production and import of newly produced class I
CFCs and halons below 10,000 ODP MTs.
In 2002 End of year FY 2002 data will be available in late 2004 to verify restriction of domestic consumption of class II HCFCs below 15,240
ODP-weighted metric tonnes (ODP MTs) and restrict domestic exempted production and import of newly produced class I CFCs and
halons below 60,000 ODP MTs.
In 2001 Restricted domestic consumption of class II HCFCs below 15,240 ODP-weighted metric tonnes (ODP MTs) and restricted domestic
exempted production and import of newly produced class I CFCs and halons below 60,000 ODP MTs.
In 2000 Domestic consumption of class II HCFCs was restricted below 15,240 ODP-weighted metric tonnes (ODP MTs) and domestic
exempted production and import of newly produced class I CFCs and halons was restricted below 60,000 ODP MTs.
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Domestic Consumption of Class II HCFCs 13,180 12,087 Data Lag Data Lag <9,906 <9,906 ODP MTs
Domestic Exempted Production and Import of Newly 462 3,062 Data Lag Data Lag <10,000 <10,000 ODP MTs
Produced Class ICFC s and Halons
17
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Baseline: The base of comparison for assessing progress on the 2005 annual performance goal is the domestic consumption cap of class II
HCFCs as set by the Parties to the Montreal Protocol. Each Ozone Depleting Substance (ODS) is weighted based on the damage it
does to the stratospheric ozone - this is its ozone-depletion potential (ODP). Beginning on January 1,1996, the cap was set at the sum
of 2.8 percent of the domestic OOP-weighted consumption of CFCs in 1989 plus the ODP-weighted level of HCFCs in 1989.
Consumption equals production plus import minus export.
OBJECTIVE: RADIATION
Through 2008, working with partners, minimize unnecessary releases of radiation and be prepared to minimize impacts to
human health and the environment should unwanted releases occur.
Ensure WIPP Safety
In 2005 Certify that 40,000 55-gallon drums of radioactive waste (containing approximately 120,000 curies) shipped by DOE to the Waste
Isolation Pilot Plant are permanently disposed of safely and according to EPA standards.
In 2004 Certify that 36,000 55-gallon drums of radioactive waste (containing approximately 108,000 curies) shipped by DOE to the Waste
Isolation Pilot Plant are permanently disposed of safely and according to EPA standards.
In 2003 36,041 drums (55 gallon) of radioactive waste shipped by DOE to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant were permanently disposed of safely
and according to EPA standards.
In 2002 EPA certified that 22,800 55 gallon drums of radioactive waste (containing approximately 68,400 curies) shipped by DOE to the
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant were permanently disposed of safely and according to EPA standards.
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Number of 55-Gallon Drums of Radioactive Waste 22,800 36,041 36,000 40,000 Drums
Disposed of According to EPA Standards
Baseline: The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) near Carlsbad, NM was opened in May 1999 to accept radioactive transuranic waste. By the
end of FY 2003, approximately 73,000 (cumulative) 55 gallon drums will be safely disposed. In FY 2005, EPA expects that DOE will
ship an additional 40,000 55- gallon drums of waste. Through FY 2004, EPA expects that DOE will have shipped safely and
18
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
according to EPA standards, approximately 13% of the planned waste volume, based on disposal of 860,000 drums over the next 40
years. Number of drums shipped to the WIPP facility on an annual basis is dependent on DOE priorities and funding. EPA volume
estimates are based on projecting the average shipment volumes over 40 years with an initial start up.
Build National Radiation Monitoring System
In 2005 EPA will purchase 60 additional state of the art monitoring units and im'tiatie deployment to sites selected based on population and
geographical coverage. All old sampling will be replaced and population coverage will be expanded to 60%.
In 2004 EPA will purchase 60 state of the art radiation monitoring units thereby increasing EPA radiation monitoring capacity and population
coverage from 37% of the contiguous U.S. population in FY 2002 to 50% in FY 2004.
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY200S
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Purchase and Deploy State-of-the Art Monitoring Units 60 60 Units
Purchased
Baseline: The current fixed monitoring system, part of the Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitoring System, was developed in the 1960s
for the purpose of monitoring radioactive fallout from nuclear weapons testing. The system currently consists of 52 old, low-tech air
particulate samplers which provide coverage in cities which represent approximately 24% of the population. By 2005, EPA will
upgrade the old system by purchasing 120 state-of-the-art units which wil be strategically located to cover approximatley 60% of the
population. The current system's air samplers will be retired from service due to age, although some may be retained for emergency
use.
Homeland Security - Readiness & Response
In 2005 Verify that 50 percent of EPA's Radiological Emergency Response Team (RERT) members meet scenario-based response criteria.
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals. Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Percentage of EPA RERT members that meet scenario- 50 Percent
based criteria
19
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Baseline: Currently, EPA assesses RERT readiness based on the ability of the RERT to: (1) provide effective field response, as defined today;
(2) support coordination centers; and 3) provide analytical capabilities throughout as needed to support a single small-to-medium
scale incident. These evaluation criteria will be reevaluated and revised in response to the Department of Homeland Security
development of criteria for the Nuclear Incident Response Team established under the Homeland Security Act of 2002, which
includes EPA RERT assets.
OBJECTIVE: ENHANCE SCIENCE AND RESEARCH
Through 2010, provide and apply sound science to support EPA's goal of clean air by conducting leading-edge research and
developing a better understanding and characterization of environmental outcomes under Goal 1.
Clean Automotive Technology
In 2005 Transfer hybrid powertrain components, originally developed for passenger car applications, to meet size, performance, durability, and
towing requirements of Sport Utility Vehicle and urban delivery vehicle applications with an average fuel economy improvement of
30% over the baseline.
In 2004 Transfer hybrid powertrain components, originally developed for passenger car applications, to meet size, performance, durability, and
towing requirements of Sport Utility Vehicle and urban delivery vehicle applications with an average fuel economy improvement of
25% over the baseline.
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Fuel Economy of EPA-Developed SUV Hybrid Vehicle 25.2 26.3 MPG
over EPA Driving Cycles Tested
Baseline: The average fuel economy of all SUVs sold in the US hi 2001 is 20.2 mpg. Values for 2002,2003, and 2004 represent 15%, 20%, and
25% improvements over this baseline, respectively. The long-term target is to demonstrate a practical and affordable powertrain that
is 30% more efficient by 2005, and 100% more efficient by 2010.
20
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Research
PM Measurement Research
In 2005 By FY 2005, deliver and transfer improved receptor models and data on chemical compounds emitted from sources so that, by 2006,
EP A's Office of Air and Radiation and the states have the necessary new data and tools to predict, measure, and reduce ambient PM
and PM emissions to attain the existing PM National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for the protection of public health.
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY200S
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Improved receptor models and data on chemical 09/30/05 models/data
compounds emitted from sources
Baseline: Following designation of non-attainment areas for the Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards in 2004 and 2005,
states will need to immediately begin developing State Implementation Plans (SIPs). SIPs incorporate source emission reduction rules
that once implemented lead to cleaner air and standards attainment. They are due to EPA three years after designation. SIP
development is predicated on the availability of recent and credible information on source emission characteristics and receptor-
oriented models that can identify sources contributing to locally observed PM concentrations based on their chemical signatures. A
next update (FY 2005) of these constantly improving models and the latest in source signatures will be produced to help states with
their SIPs as part of a weight of evidence approach that use these and chemical transport modeling to tag specific sources with
reduction targets.
Beginning in FY 2005, regular evaluations by independent and external panels will provide reviews of EPA research programs'
relevance, quality, and successful performance to date, in accordance with OMB's Investment Criteria for Research and Development.
These evaluations will include an examination of a program's design to determine the appropriateness of a program's short-,
intermediate-, and long-term goals and its strategy for attaining these. Reviewers will also qualitatively determine whether EPA has
been successful in meeting its annual and long-term commitments for research. Recommendations and results from these reviews will
improve the design and management of EPA research programs and help to measure their progress under the Government
Performance and Results Act (GPRA).
21
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
GOAL: 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,
OBJECTIVE: 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.
Safe Drinking Water
In 2005 75% of community water systems will provide drinking water that meets health-based standards with a compliance date of January
2002 or later.
In 2005 75% of the population served by community water systems will receive drinking water that meets health-based standards with a
compliance date of January 2002 or later.
In 2005 90% of the population served by community water systems in Indian country will receive drinking water that meets all applicable
health-based drinking water standards.
In 2005 93% of the population served by community water systems will receive drinking water that meets all applicable health-based drinking
water standards through effective treatment and source water protection.
In 2005 94% of the population served by community water systems will receive drinking water that meets health-based standards with which
systems need to comply as of December 2001.
In 2005 94% of community water systems will provide drinking water that meets health-based standards with which systems need to comply
as of December 2001.
In 2004 85 percent of the population served by community water systems will receive drinking water meeting health-based standards
promulgated in or after 1998.
22
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
In 2004 92% of the population served by community water systems will receive drinking water meeting all health-based standards in effect as
of 1994, up from 83% in 1994.
In 2003 End of year FY 2003 data will be available in 2004 to verify 85 percent of the population served by community water systems
received drinking water meeting health-based standards promulgated in or after 1998.
In 2003 End of year FY 2003 data will be available in 2004 to verify 92% of the population served by community water systems received
drinking water meeting all health-based standards in effect as of 1994, up from 83% in 1994.
In 2002 91% of the population served by community water systems received drinking water meeting all health-based standards in effect as of
1994.
In 2002 Final FY 02 numbers were not available until June 2003.
In 2001 91 percent of the population served by water systems received drinking water meeting all health-based standards that were in effect as
of 1994.
In 2000 91% of the population served by community drinking water systems received drinking water meeting all health-based standards that
were in effect as of 1994, up from 83% in 1994.
Performance Measures FY 2000
Actuals
Percent of population served by community drinking 91
water systems with no violations during the year of any
Federally enforceable health-based standards that were in
place by 1994.
Population served by community water systems providing
drinking water meeting health-based standards
promulgated in or after 1998.
Population served by community water systems that
receive drinking water that meets health-based standards
with which systems need to comply as of December 2001
Population served by community water systems that
receive drinking water that meets health-based standards
FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
91 91 91 92
N/A 96% 85
94
75
% Population
% Population
% Population
% Population
23
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres, Bud.
with a compliance date of January 2002 or later
Percentage of community water systems that provide 94 %CWSs
drinking water that meets health-based standards with
which systems need to comply as of December 2001
Percentage of community water systems that provide 75 % CWSs
drinking water that meets health-based standards with a
compliance date of January 2002 or later
Percent of the population served by community water 90 % Population
systems in Indian country that receive drinking water that
meets all applicable health-based drinking water standards
% of population served by community water systems that 93 % population
receive drinking water that meets all applicable health-
based drinking water standards through effective
treatment and source water protection
Baseline: In 1998, 85% of the population that was served by community water systems and 96% of the population served by non-community,
non-transient drinking water systems received drinking water for which no violations of Federally enforceable health standards had
occurred during the year. Year-to-year performance is expected to change as new standards take effectCovered standards include:
Stage 1 disinfection by-products/interim enhanced surface water treatment rule/long-term enhanced surface water treatment
rule/arsenic.
Source Water Protection
In 2005 20% of source water areas for community water systems will achieve minimized risk to public health.
In 2004 Advance States' efforts with community water systems to protect their surface and ground water resources that are sources of drinking
water supplies.
In 2003 ' End of year FY 2003 data will be available in 2004 to verify 39,000 community water systems (75% of the nation's service
population) will have completed source water assessments and 2,600 of these (10% of the nation's service population) will be
implementing source water protection programs.
24
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Performance Measures
Number of community water systems and percent of
population served by those CWSs that are implementing
source water protection programs.
Percent of source water areas for community water
systems that achieve minimized risk to public health
FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
6,570/25% 25%/7,500 % pop/systems
20
% Areas
Baseline: EPA defines "achieve minimized risk" as substantial implementation of source water protection actions, as determined by a State's
source water protection strategy. Approximately 268 million people are estimated to be served by Community Water Systems
(CWSs) in 2002.
River/Lake Assessments for Fish Consumption
In 2005 80% of the shellfish growing acres monitored by states are approved or conditionally approved for use.
In 2005 At least 1% of the water miles/acres identified by states or tribes as having a fish consumption advisory in 2002 will have improved
water and sediment quality so that increased consumption offish and shellfish is allowed.
In 2004 Reduce consumption of contaminated fish by increasing the information available to States, Tribes, local governments, citizens, and
decision-makers.
In 2003 Reduced consumption of contaminated fish by increasing the information available to States, Tribes, local governments, citizens, and
decision-makers.
In 2002 14% of the nation's river miles and 28% of nation's lake acres have been assessed to determine if they contain fish and shellfish that
should not be eaten or should be eaten in only limited quantities.
In 2001 9% of the nation's river miles and 23% of nation's lake acres have been assessed to determine if they contain fish and shellfish that
should not be eaten or should be eaten in only limited quantities.
In 2000 7% of the nation's river miles and 16% of the nation's lake acres have been assessed to determine if they contain fish and shellfish that
should not be eaten or should be eaten in only limited quantities.
25
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Performance Measures
Lake acres assessed for the need for fish advisories and
compilation of state-issued fish consumption advisory
methodologies, (cumulative)
River miles assessed for the need for fish consumption 7
advisories & compilation of state-issued fish consumption
advisory methodologies, (cumulative)
Percent of water miles/acres, identified by states or tribes
as having fish consumption advisories in 2002, where
increased consumption offish is allowed.
Percent of the shellfish growing acres monitored by states
that are approved or conditionally approved for use
FY 2000
Actuals
16
FY2001
Actuals
23
FY 2002
Actuals
28
14%
FY2003
Actuals
33
15
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
35
16%
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
80
% Lake acres
% River miles
% Miles/Acres
% Areas
Baseline: In 1999, 7% of the Nation's rivers and 15% of the Nation's lakes were assessed to determine if they contained fish that should not be
eaten or should be eaten in only limited quantities. In September 1999, 25 states/tribes are monitoring and conducting assessments
based on the national guidance to establish nationally consistent fish advisories. In the 2000 Report to Congress on the National Water
Quality Inventory, 69% of assessed river and stream miles; 63% of assessed lake, reservoir, and pond acres; and 53% of assessed
estuarie square miles supported their designated use for fish consumption. For shell fish consumption, 77% of assessed estuary square
miles met this designated use.
Increase Information on Beaches
In 2005 Coastal and Great Lakes beaches monitored by State beach safety programs will be open and safe for swimming in over 94% of the
days of the beach season.
In 2005 Restore water quality to allow swimming in not less than 2% of the stream miles and lake acres identified by states in 2000 as having
water quality unsafe for swimming.
In 2004 Reduce human exposure to contaminated recreation waters by increasing the information available to the public and decision-makers.
26
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
In 2003 Reduced human exposure to contaminated recreation waters by increasing the information available to the public and decision-
makers.
In 2002 Reduced exposure to contaminated recreation waters by providing monitoring and closure data on 2,455 beaches to the public and
decision-makers.
In 2001 Reduce exposure to contaminated recreation waters by providing information on 2,354 beaches for which monitoring and closure data
is available to the public and decision-makers.
In 2000 1,981 beaches had monitoring and closure data including 150 digitized maps, available to the public through EPA's website.
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Beaches for which monitoring and closure data is 1,981 2,354 2,445 2,823 2,823 Beaches
available to the public at
http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/beaches/. (cumulative)
Restore water quality to allow swimming in stream miles 2 % Miles/Acres
and lake acres identified by states
Days (of beach season) that coastal and Great Lakes 94 %
beaches monitored by State beach safety programs are Days/Season
open and safe for swimming.
Baseline: By the end of FY 1999,33 states had responded to EPA's first annual survey on state and local beach monitoring and closure practices
and EPA made available to the public via the internet. An average of 9 recreational contact waterborne disease outbreaks reported per
year by the Centers for Disease Control for the years 1994-1998, based on data housed in EPA/ORD internal database. In 2002,
monitored beaches were opened 94% of the days during the beach season.
OBJECTIVE: PROTECT WATER QUALITY
Protect the quality of rivers, lakes, and streams on a watershed basis and protect coastal and ocean waters.
Watershed Protection
In 2005 500 of the Nation's watersheds have water quality standards met hi at least 80% of the assessed water segments.
27
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
In 2005 Water quality standards are fully attained in over 25% of miles/acres of waters by 2012, with an interim milestone of restoring 2% of
these waters - identified in 2000 as not attaining standards - by 2005.
In 2004 By FY 2005, Water quality will improve on a watershed basis such that 625 of the Nation's 2,262 watersheds will have greater than 80
percent of assessed waters meeting all water quality standards, up from 500 watersheds in 1998.
In 2003 End of year FY 2003 data will be available in 2005 to verify if FY 2003, Water quality has improved on a watershed basis such that
600 of the Nation's 2,262 watersheds will have greater than 80 percent of assessed waters meeting all water quality standards, up from
500 watersheds in 1998.
In 2002 This measure reflects states' biennial reporting under CWA 305(b), and is not intended to be reported against again until the FY2003
reporting cycle.
In 2001 Water quality improved on a watershed basis such that 510 of the Nation's 2,262 watersheds will have greater than 80 percent of
assessed waters meeting all water quality standards, up from 500 watersheds in 1998.
Performance Measures
Watersheds that have greater than 80% of assessed waters
meeting all water quality standards.
Waterbodies (river miles and lake acres) identified in
2000 as not attaining Water quality standards, are fully
attained.
FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
510 510 453 500 (FY 500
(FYOO) 05)
8-digitHUCs
% Miles/Acres
Baseline: As of 2002 state reports 453 watersheds had met the criteria that greater than 80% of assessed waters met all water quality standards.
For a watershed to be counted toward this goal, at least 25% of the segments in the watershed must be assessed within the past 4 years
consistent with assessment guidelines developed pursuant to section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act. In 2002, 0% of the 255,408
miles/and 6,803,419 acres of waters identified on 1998/2000 lists of impaired waters developed by States and approved by EPA under
section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act
28
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Coastal Aquatic Conditions
In 2005
In 2005
Improve ratings reported on the national "good/fair/poor" scale of the National Coastal Condition Report for: coastal wetlands loss by
at least 0.1 point; contamination of sediments in coastal waters by at least 0.1 point; benthic quality by at least 0.1 point; & eutrophic
condition by at least 0.1 point
Scores for overall aquatic system health of coastal waters nationally, and in each coastal region, is improved on the "good/fair/poor"
scale of the National Coastal Condition Report by at least 0.1 point
Performance Measures
Score for overall aquatic system health of coastal waters
nationally, and in each coastal region, is improved
(cumulative).
Maintain water clarity and dissolved oxygen in coastal
waters at the national levels reported in the 2002 National
Coastal Condition Report
Improve ratings reported on the national "good/fair/poor"
scale of the National Coastal Condition Report for coastal
wetlands loss
Improve ratings reported on the national "good/fair/poor"
scale of the National Coastal Condition Report for
contamination of sediments in coastal waters
Improve ratings reported on the national "good/fair/poor"
scale of the National Coastal Condition Report for benthic
quality
Improve ratings reported on the national "good/fair/poor"
scale of the National Coastal Condition Report for
eutrophic condition
FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
2.5 Scale score
4.3/4.5
1.5
1.4
1.5
1.8
Scale score
Scale score
Scale score
Scale score
Scale score
Baseline: National rating of "fair/poor" or 2.4 where the rating is based on a 5-point system where 1 is poor and 5 is good and is expressed as an
aerially weighted mean of regional scores using the National Coastal Condition Report indicators [i.e., water clarity, dissolved oxygen,
29
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
coastal wetlands loss, eutrophic conditions, sediment contamination, benthic health, and fish tissue contamination]. The 2002
National Coastal Condition Report indicated 4.3 for water clarity and 4.5 for dissolved oxygen, 1.4 for coastal wetlands loss; 1.3 for
contamination of sediments in coastal waters; 1.4 for benthic quality; & 1.7 for eutrophic condition.
State/Tribal Water Quality Standards
In 2005 In coordination with other federal.partners reduce, by 11%, households on tribal lands lacking access to basic sanitation.
In 2005 Water quality in Indian country will be improved at not less man 35 monitoring stations in tribal waters for which baseline data are
available (i.e., show at least a 10% improvement for each of four key parameters: total nitrogen, total phosphorus, dissolved oxygen,
and fecal coliforms.)
In 2004 Assure that States and Tribes have effective, up-to-date water quality standards programs adopted in accordance with the Water
Quality Standards regulation and the Water Quality Standards program priorities.
In 2003 Assured that States and Tribes had effective, up-to-date water quality standards programs adopted in accordance with the Water
Quality Standards regulation and the Water Quality Standards program priorities.
In 2002 Assure that 25 States and 22 Tribes have effective, up-to-date water quality standards programs adopted in accordance with the Water
Quality Standards regulation and the Water Quality Standards program priorities.
In 2001 21 States and 19 Tribes have effective, up-to-date water quality standards programs adopted in accordance with the Water Quality
Standards regulation and the Water Quality Standards program priorities.
In 2000 35 States and 16 Tribes have effective, up-to-date water quality standards programs adopted in accordance with the Water Quality
Standards regulation and the Water Quality Standards program priorities.
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
States with new or revised water quality standards that 21 25 28 20 States
EPA has reviewed and approved or disapproved and
promulgated federal replacement standards.
Tribes with water quality standards adopted and approved 16 19 22 23 33 Tribes
(cumulative).
Number of monitoring stations (for which baseline data 35 Stations
30
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
on 4 key parameters are available) where water quality is
improved.
Number of households on tribal lands lacking access to 11 % Households
basic sanitation.
Baseline: The performance measure of state submissions (above) thus represents a "rolling annual total" of updated standards acted upon by
EPA, and so are neither cumulative nor strictly incremental. EPA must review and approve or disapprove state revsisions to water
quality standards withing 60-90 days after receiving the state's package. In 2002, there will be four key parameters available at 900
sampling stations in Indian country. In 2002, Indian Health Service indicates that 71,000 households on Tribal lands lack access to
basic sanitation.
OBJECTIVE: ENHANCE SCIENCE AND RESEARCH
Provide and apply a sound scientific foundation to EPA's goal of clean and safe water by conducting leading-edge research and
developing a better understanding and characterization of the environmental outcomes under Goal 2.
Research
Scientific Rationale for Surface Water Criteria
In 2005 Provide methods for developing water quality criteria so that, by 2008, approaches and methods are available to States and Tribes for
their use in developing and applying criteria for habitat alteration, nutrients, suspended and bedded sediments, pathogens and toxic
chemicals that will support designated uses for aquatic ecosystems and increase the scientific basis for listing and delisting impaired
water bodies under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act.
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Methods for developing water quality criteria based on 09/30/05 methods
population-level risks of multiple stressors to aquatic life
and aquatic-dependent wildlife.
31
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Baseline: State, Tribal, and EPA programs that assess, maintain, and restore water quality are all dependent upon the ability to define water
quality standards that, when met, are protective of the designated and desired use of streams, lakes, and estuaries. The scientific bases
for such standards are water quality criteria that relate biological outcomes (e.g., fish populations, aquatic wildlife communities,
threatened and endangered species) to measurable water quality parameters (e.g., nutrients, suspended and embedded sediments,
chemical concentrations). Relatively recent and Congressionally-mandated studies by the National Research Council call for
continued and more targeted scientific studies on water quality criteria that reflect observed environmental variations and that reflect
the multiple influence of habitat alteration, regional and watershed conditions, and appropriate designated uses. Accordingly, EPA
has modified its longstanding research on water quality criteria to address these issues. Scientific outputs from this research can be
integrated into EPA technical guidance to the States and Tribes. Adoption and deployment of new criteria developed with the
assistance of the new methods and approaches will improve the cost-effectiveness of TMDL's and related restoration efforts.
Beginning in FY 2005, regular evaluations by independent and external panels will provide reviews of EPA research programs'
relevance, quality, and successful performance to date, in accordance with OMB's Investment Criteria for Research and Development.
Reviewers will also qualitatively determine whether EPA has been successful in meeting its annual and long-term commitments for
research. Recommendations and results from these reviews will improve the design and management of EPA research programs and
help to measure their progress under the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA).
32
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
GOAL: LAND PRESERVATION AND 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.
OBJECTIVE: PRESERVE LAND
By 2008, 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.
Municipal Solid Waste Source Reduction
In 2005 Divert an additional 1% (for a cumulative total of 35% or 81 million tons) of municipal solid waste from land filling and combustion,
and maintain per capita generation of RCRA municipal solid waste at 4.5 pounds per day.
In 2004 Divert an additional 1% (for a cumulative total of 34% or 79 million tons) of municipal solid waste from land filling and combustion,
and maintain per capita generation of RCRA municipal solid waste at 4.5 pounds per day.
In 2003 End of year FY 2003 data will be available in December 2005 to verify that an additional 1% (for a cumulative total of 32% or 74
million tons) of municipal solid waste from land filling and combustion, and maintain per capita generation of RCRA municipal solid
waste at 4.5 pounds per day was diverted.
In 2002 FY 2002 data is currently not available for the diversion of municipal solid waste from land filling and combustion or maintaining per
capita generation of RCRA municipal solid waste. Analysis of FY 2002 data is anticipated by December 2004.
, In 2001 29.2% or 68 million tons of municipal sold waste was diverted from land filling and combustion, and the per capita generation
decreased to 4.4 pounds per day.
In 2000 29.2% or 68 million tons of municipal solid waste was diverted from land filling and combustion, and the per capita generation
decreased to 4.4 pounds per day.
33
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Performance Measures
Millions of tons of municipal solid waste diverted.
Daily per capita generation of municipal solid waste.
FY2000
Actuals
68
4.5
FY 2001
Actuals
68
4.4
FY 2002
Actuals
not
available
not
available
FY 2003
Actuals
Data
available
12/05
Data
available
12/05
FY 2004 FY 2005
Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
79 81
4.5
4.5
million tons
Ibs. MSW
Baseline: An analysis conducted in FY 2001 shows approximately 68 million tons (29.2%) of municipal solid waste diverted and 4.4 Ibs of
MSW per person daily generation. While data indicate that the growth in recycling rates has slowed, the target of a 35% recycling
rate is being maintained.
Waste and Petroleum Management Controls
In 2005 Reduce releases to the environment by managing hazardous wastes and petroleum products properly.
In 2004 Reduce releases to the environment by managing hazardous wastes and petroleum products properly.
In 2003 For UST facilities, 72% are in operational compliance with leak detection, and 79% are in operational compliance with spill
prevention requirements. An additional 4.1% of the RCRA facilities have permits or approved controls.
In 2002 4.5% of RCRA hazardous waste management facilities received permits or other approved controls.
In 2001 9.0% of RCRA hazardous waste management facilities received permits or other approved controls.
In 2000 12.6% of RCRA hazardous waste management facilities received permits or other approved controls.
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals
Percent increase of RCRA hazardous waste management 12.6% 9.0% 4.5% 4.1%
facilities with permits or other approved controls.
Number of confirmed UST releases nationally.
FY 2004 FY 2005
Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
2.4% 2.8%
<10,000 <10,000
percentage pts.
UST releases
34
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Performance Measures
Increase in UST facilities in significant operational
compliance with leak detection requirements.
Increase in UST facilities in significant operational
compliance with spill, overfill and corrosion protection
regulations.
Percent increase of UST facilities in significant
operational compliance with both detection and release
prevention (spill overflow, corrosion protection)
requirements.
FY 2000
Actuals
FY 2001
Actuals
FY 2002
Actuals
FY 2003
Actuals
-8%
-6%
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
4%
4%
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
not
applicable
not
applicable
1%
percentage pts.
percentage pts.
percent
Baseline: EPA did not increase by 3% to 80% for the leak detection requirements or with spill, overfill and corrosion protection requirements by
3% to 85% in FY 2003. The FY 2003 actuals were 72% for UST facilities in significant operational compliance with leak detection
requirements; 79% for UST facilities in significant operational compliance with spill, overfill and corrosion protection. Although the
Agency has been working with the states to improve their reporting of both measures, the compliance rates for both have been steady
or declining. There is some variability in reporting by states because some states have more stringent requirements, while other states
have targeted non-compliant UST facilities so the facilities that are inspected are not representative of all facilities in the state. A
baseline for the new combined measure will be determined in FY 2004, and is currently estimated to be approximately 60%. Between
FY 1999 and FY 2003, confirmed UST releases averaged 13,600. By the end of FY 2003, 83.1% of approximately 2,750 RCRA
facilities had permits or other approved controls in place.
OBJECTIVE: RESTORE LAND
By 2008, 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.
Prepare for and Respond to Accidental and Intentional Releases
In 2005 Reduce and control the risks posed by accidental and intentional releases of harmful substances by improving our Nation's capability
to prepare for and respond more effectively to these emergencies.
35
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
In 2004 Reduce and control the risks posed by accidental and intentional releases of harmful substances by improving our Nation's capability
to prepare for and respond more effectively to these emergencies.
In 2003 EPA responded to or monitored 322 significant oil spills in the inland zone and Superfund accomplished 380 removal response
actions.
In 2002 EPA responded to or monitored 203 oil spills and Superfund initiated 426 removal response actions
In 2001 EPA responded to or monitored 527 oil spills and Superfund initiated 302 removal response actions.
In 2000 EPA responded to or monitored 368 oil spills and Superfund initiated 375 removal response actions.
Performance Measures FY 2000
Actuals
Number of Superfund removal response actions initiated. 375
Oil spills responded to or monitored by EPA. 368
Percentage of emergency response and homeland security
readiness improvement.
Number of inspections and exercises conducted at oil
storage facilities that are required to have Facility
Response Plans.
FY 2001
Actuals
302
527
FY 2002
Actuals
426
203
FY2003
Actuals
380
322
82.3%
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
350
300
10%
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
350
300
10%
360
removals
spills
percent
inspections/
exercises
Baseline: Through FY 2003, Superfund had initiated approximately 7,900 removal response actions. EPA typically responds to or monitors 300
oil spill cleanups per year. In FY2003, EPA completed evaluations of core emergency response capabilities in each region, and the
average score from these was 823 out of a possible 1,000 points so 82.3 percent is used as the baseline for improvements. Between
FY 1997 and FY 2003, approximately 31 percent (or 1,862) of the nearly 6,000 oil storage facilities required to have Facility
Response Plans were inspected.
Assess and Cleanup Contaminated Land
In 2005 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.
36
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
In 2004 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.
In 2003 Superfund made 917 final site assessment decisions, controlled human exposures at 28 sites and groundwater migration at 54 sites,
and achieved 40 construction completions. The RCRA program controlled human exposures at 230 sites and groundwater migration
at 175 sites. There were 18,518 LUST cleanups.
In 2002 Human exposures to toxins were controlled at 172 RCRA facilities and toxic releases to groundwater were controlled at 171 RCRA
facilities. Also, 15,769 leaking underground storage tank cleanups were completed, and 42 Superfund construction completions were
achieved.
In 2002 Superfund recorded 587 site assessment decisions.
In 2001 Human exposures to toxins were controlled at 179 RCRA facilities and toxic releases to groundwater were controlled at 154 RCRA
facilities, 19,074 leaking underground storage tank cleanups were completed, and 47 Superfund construction completions were
completed.
In 2001 Superfund recorded 931 site assessment decisions.
In 2000 Human exposures to toxins were controlled at 191 RCRA facilities and toxic releases to groundwater were controlled at 168 RCRA
facilities, 20,834 leaking underground storage tank cleanups were completed, and 87 Superfund construction completions were
completed.
In 2000 Superfund completed 468 site assessment decisions.
Performance Measures
Number of Superfund final site assessment decisions.
Number of Superfund construction completions.
Number of Superfund hazardous waste sites with human
exposures controlled.
Number of Superfund hazardous waste sites with
groundwater migration controlled.
Number of final remedies (cleanup targets) selected at
FY 2000
Actuals
468
87
FY 2001
Actuals
629
47
FY2002
Actuals
587
42
FY2003
Actuals
917
40
28
54
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
475
40
10
10
20
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
500
40
10
10
20
assessments
completions
sites
sites
remedies
37
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Performance Measures
FY2000
Actuals
Superfund sites.
Number of leaking underground storage tank cleanups 20,834
completed.
Number of high priority RCRA facilities with human 191
exposures to toxins controlled.
Number of high priority RCRA facilities with toxic 168
releases to groundwater controlled.
FY2001
Actuals
19,074
179
154
FY 2002
Actuals
15,769
207
174
FY2003
Actuals
18,518
230
175
FY2004 FY2005
Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
21,000
166
129
21,000
225
203
cleanups
facilities
facilities
Baseline; By the end of FY 2003, Superfund controlled human exposures at 82% (1,227 of 1,494) of eligible NPL sites and controlled
groundwater migration at 65% (826 of 1,275) of eligible NPL sites, and completed construction at 58% (886) of the NPL sites. Of the
1,714 RCRA Corrective Action high priority facilities, 73% (1,246) have human exposures controlled, an increase from 1,018
facilities with human exposures controlled at the end of FY 2002; and 61% (1,049) have groundwater migration controlled, an
increase from 877 facilities with groundwater migration controlled by the end of FY 2002. Furthermore, at the end of FY 2001there
were 814 facilities with human exposures controlled and 737 facilities groundwater migration controlled reflecting the strong
EPA/state partnership in this program. At the end of FY 2003, 303,120 cleanups of confirmed releases from Federally-regulated
leaking underground storage tanks were completed since 1987. At the end of FY 2002, mere was a universe of 1103 Superfund sites
with final remedies selected. The Agency is currently evaluating this baseline and may adjust it downward in the future.
Superfund Cost Recovery
In 2005
In 2004
In 2003
Ensure trust fund stewardship by getting PRPs to initiate or fund the work and recover costs from PRPs when EPA expends trust fund
monies. Address cost recovery at all NPL and non-NPL sites with a statute of limitations (SOL) on total past costs equal to or greater
than $200,000.
Ensure trust fund stewardship by getting PRPs to initiate or fund the work and recover costs from PRPs when EPA expends trust fund
monies. Address cost recovery at all NPL and non-NPL sites with a statute of limitations (SOL) on total past costs equal to or greater
than $200,000.
Ensured trust fund stewardship by getting PRPs to initiate or fund the work and recover costs from PRPs when EPA expends trust
fund monies. Addressed cost recovery at all NPL and non-NPL sites with a statute of limitations (SOL) on total past costs equal to or
greater than $200,000.
38
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
In 2002 The goal was met. Cost recovery was addressed at 204 NPL and non-NPL sites of which 101 had total past costs greater than or equal
to $200,000 and potential statute of limitations (SOL) concerns. EPA secured cleanup and cost recovery commitments from private
parties in excess of $645 million.
In 2001 Although the goal was not met, there was no loss in dollars recovered. Cost recovery was addressed at 208 NPL and non-NPL sites,
of which 89 had total past costs greater than or equal to $200,000 and potential SOL concerns. EPA addressed cost recovery for 87 of
89 sites and planned to write off costs associated with the other two SOL cases, but decision documents were not completed before the
expiration of the SOL.
In 2000 Addressed cost recovery at 98.5% of NPL and non-NPL sites with a statute of limitations on total past costs equal to or greater than
$200,000.
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Refer to DOJ, settle, or write off 100% of Statute of 98.5 97.8 100 100 100 100 Percent
Limitations (SOLs) cases for SF sites with total
unaddressed past costs equal to or greater than $200,000
and report value of costs recovered.
Baseline: In FY 98 the Agency addressed 100 percent of cost recovery at all NPL and non-NPL sites with total past costs equal or greater than
$200,000.
Superfund Potentially Responsible Party Participation
In 2005 Reach a settlement or take an enforcement action before the start of a remedial action at 90 percent of Superfund sites having a viable,
liable responsible party other than the federal government.
In 2004 Reach a settlement or take an enforcement action before the start of a remedial action at 90 percent of Superfund sites having a viable,
liable responsible party other than the federal government.
In 2003 Maximized all aspects of PRP participation which included maintaining PRP work at 87% of the new remedial construction starts at
non-Federal Facility Superfund, and emphasized fairness in the settlement process.
In 2002 In FY 2002 the percentage of remedial construction starts initiated by responsible parties exceeded the target by one percent.
39
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
In 2001 Maximized all aspects of PRP participation by maintaining PRP work at 67.3% of the new remedial construction starts at non-Federal
Facility Superfund sites, while emphasizing fairness in the settlement process.
In 2000 Maximized all aspects of PRP participation by maintaining PRP work at 68% of the new remedial construction starts at non-Federal
Facility Superfund sites, while emphasizing fairness in the settlement process.
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Ensure fairness by making Orphan Share Offers at 100% 100 Percent
of all eligible settlement negotiations for response work.
PRPs conduct 70% of the work at new construction starts 68 67.3 71 87 Percent
Percentage of Superfund sites at which settlement or 90 90 Percent
enforcement action taken before the start of RA.
Baseline: In FY 98 approximately 70% of new remedial work at NPL sites (excluding Federal facilities) was initiated by private parties. In
FY2003, a settlement was reached or an enforcement action was taken with non-Federal PRPs before the start of die remedial action at
approximately 90 percent of Superfund sites.
OBJECTIVE: ENHANCE SCIENCE AND RESEARCH
Through 2008, provide and apply sound science for protecting and restoring land by conducting leading-edge research and
developing a better understanding and characterization of environmental outcomes under Goal 3.
Research
Scientifically Defensible Decisions for Site Clean
In 2005 Complete at least four SITE demonstrations, with emphasis on NAPLs and sediments, in order to, by 2010, develop of evaluate 40
scientific tools, technologies, methods, and models, and provide technical support that enable practitioners to 1) characterize the
nature and extent of multimedia contamination; 2) assess, predict, and communicate risks to human health and the environment; 3)
employ improved remediation options; and 4) respond to oil spills effectively.
40
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
In 2004 Provide risk assessors and managers with site-specific data sets on three applications detailing the performance of conventional
remedies for contaminated sediments to help determine the most effective techniques for remediating contaminated sites and
protecting human health and the environment.
In 2003 Delivered state-of-the-science report and methods to EPA and other stakeholders for risk management of fuel oxygenates; organic and
inorganic contamination of sediments, ground water and/or soils; and oil spills to ensure cost-effective and technically sound site
clean-up.
In 2002 EPA provided evaluation information on six innovative approaches that reduce human health and ecosystem exposure from dense
nonaqueous phase liquids (DNAPLs) and methly tertiary butyl-ether (MTBE) in soils and groundwater, and from oil and persistent
organics in aquatic systems.
In 2001 EPA provided technical information to support scientifically defensible and cost-effective decisions for clean-up of complex sites,
hard-to-treat wastes, mining, oil spills near shorelines, and Brownfields to reduce risk to human health and the environment.
In 2000 The MTBE case studies summary report was delayed to include more than the original four sites. The SITE report was sent to OMB in
FY 2000, but the time required for approval delayed its arrival in Congress. The dermal exposure route report was delayed until 12/00
to allow for completing peer review.
Performance Measures FY 2000
Actuals
Summary Report of Case Studies of Natural Attenuation 0
of MTBE, a fuel additive, at Geographically Diverse
Locations
Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) 18-Jan-
Program Report to Congress. 2001
A report summarizing the key research findings methods, 31-Dec-
models, and factors relating to evaluating the risks from 2000
the dermal route of exposure.
Review the 20 most common Superfund soil 30-Sep-
contaminants and develop eco-toxicity soil screening 2000
levels for wildlife and soil biota for chemicals where there
is sufficient data.
Deliver the Annual SITE Program Report to Congress.
FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
report
report
report
values
report
41
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Complete draft of the FY 2002 Annual SITE Report to 1 1 draft report
Congress.
Reports on performance data for conventional sediment 3 reports
remedies for three sites.
SITE demonstrations completed 4 demonstrations
Baseline: This APG will contribute to an array of assessment and remediation options targeted to addressing situations where uncertainty
remains high, technology performance is lacking, or where existing options are cost- or time-intensive. Through FY 2005, non-
aqueous phase liquids (NAPLs) and contaminated sediments will be of special interest because of the cost and complexity of assessing
and remediating these sites, as well as the risks they pose to public health. EPA estimates that approximately 20% of National
Priorities List (NPL) sites have contaminated sediments with risk from a number of toxic substances
(http:www.epa.gov/superrund/resources/sediment/index.htm). Available remedies are unproven, expensive to implement, or both.
The SITE program evaluates tools, technologies, and approaches for remediation, measurement, and monitoring. The innovative
approaches that are evaluated are largely developed hi the private sector. The purpose of the program is to provide an independent
assessment of performance, so that site decision-makers can gain confidence in selecting an innovative approach. Since the inception
of the SITE program hi 1986, clean-up of contaminated sites through the use of innovative technologies has resulted in an estimated
net cost savings of $2.4 billion (http://www.epa.gov/ORD/SITE/congress/540R03502/540R03502.htm). Beginning in FY 2005,
regular evaluations by independent and external panels will provide reviews of EPA research programs' relevance, quality, and
successful performance to date, in accordance with OMB's Investment Criteria for Research and Development. Reviewers will also
qualitatively determine whether EPA has been successful in meeting its annual and long-term commitments for research.
Recommendations and results from these reviews will improve the design and management of EPA research programs and help to
measure progress under the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA).
42
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
GOAL: HEALTHY COMMUNITIES AND ECOSYSTEMS
Protect, sustain, or restore the health of people, communities, and ecosystems using integrated and comprehensive approaches and
partnerships.
OBJECTIVE: CHEMICAL, ORGANISM, AND PESTICIDE RISKS
Prevent and reduce pesticide, chemical, and genetically engineered biological organism risks to humans, communities, and
ecosystems.
Decrease Risk from Agricultural Pesticides
In 2005 Ensure new pesticide registration actions (including new active ingredients, new uses) meet new health standards and are
environmentally safe.
In 2005 Percentage of acre treatments that will use applications of reduced-risk pesticides
In 2004 Decrease adverse risk from agricultural uses from 1995 levels.
In 2003 FY 2003 data will be avail, in 2004 to verify decreased adverse risk from agricultural uses from 1995 levels and assure, that new
pesticides that enter the market are safe for humans and the environ., through ensuring that all registration action are timely and
comply with standards mandated by law.
In 2002 In FY 2002, EPA continued to register pest control products, including "safer" pesticides, thus ensuring that growers have an adequate
number of pest control options available to them.
In 2001 The Agency registered 9 new chemicals, exceeding its target by 2, and 267 new chemicals, underperforming its target by 83.
In 2000 The Registration Program completed registrations for 9 new chemicals, 3069 amendments, 1106 me-toos, 427 new uses, 95 inerts, 458
special registrations, 452 tolerances, and 13 reduced risk chemicals/biopesticides.
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Register safer chemicals and biopesticides 13 107 124 131 135 Regist. (Cum)
43
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Performance Measures
New Chemicals (Active Ingredients)
New Uses
FY 2000
Actuals
9
427
FY 2001
Actuals
53
1896
FY 2002
Actuals
60
2329
FY 2003
Actuals
72
425
FY 2004 FY 2005
Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
74 84 Regist. (Cum)
3,079 3479 Actions (Cum)
Percentage of acre-treatments with reduced risk pesticides
Maintain timeliness of S18 decisions
Reduce registration decision times for new conventional
chemicals
Reduce registration decision times for reduced risk
chemicals
7.5%
Data Lag 8.5%
8.7%
45.
7%
3%
Acre-
Treatments
Days
Reduction
Reduction
Baseline: The baseline for registration of reduced risk pesticides, new chemicals, and new uses, is zero in the year 1996 (the year FQPA was
enacted). Progress is measured cumulatively since 1996. The baseline for acres-treated is 3.6% of total acreage in 1998, when the
reduced-risk pesticide acres-treatments was 30,332,499 and total (all pesticides) was 843,063,644 acre-treatments. Each year's total
acre-treatments, as reported by Doane Marketing Research, Inc .serves as the basis for computing the percentage of acre-treatments
using reduced risk pesticides. Acre-treatments count the total number of pesticide treatments each acre receives each year. As of
2003, there are no products registered for use against other potential bio-agents (non-anthrax). Conventional pesticides FY 2002
baseline for reducing decision time is 44 months; reduced risk pesticides FY 2002 baseline for reducing time is 32.5 months. The
2005 baseline for expedited new active ingredient pesticides is 4. The S18 2005 baseline is 45 days.
Reduce use of highly toxic pesticides
In 2005 Decrease occurrence of residues of carcinogenic and cholinesterase-inhibiting neuortic pesticides on foods eaten by children from
their average 1994-1996 levels
In 2004 Decrease occurrence of residues of carcinogenic and cholinestherase-inhibiting pesticides on foods eaten by children from their
average 1994-1996 levels.
In 2003 Data available hi 2004.
44
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Reduction of detections on a core set of 19 foods eaten by Data lag 25% 27% Reduced
children relative to detection levels for those foods Detect.
reported hi 1994-1996.
Baseline: Percent occurrence of residues of FQPA priority pesticides (organophosphates and carbamates) on samples of children's foods in
baseline years 94-96. Baseline percent is 33.5% of composite sample of children's foods: apples, apple juice, bananas, broccoli,
carrots, celery, grapes, green beans (fresh, canned, frozen), lettuce, milk, oranges, peaches, potatoes, spinach, sweet corn (canned and
frozen), sweet peas (canned and frozen), sweet potatoes, tomatoes, and wheat.
Reassess Pesticide Tolerances
In 2005 Ensure that through ongoing data reviews, pesticide active ingredients, and products that contain them are reviewed to assure adequate
protection for human health and the environment, taking into consideration exposure scenarios such as subsistence lifestyles of the
Native Americans
In 2004 Ensure that through on-going data reviews, pesticide active ingredients and the products that contain them are reviewed to assure
adequate protection for human health and the environment, taking into consideration exposure scenarios such as subsistence lifestyles
of Native Americans.
In 2003 Assured that pesticides active ingredients registered prior to 1984 and the products that contain them were reviewed to assure adequate
protection for human health & the envir. Also considered the unique exposure scenarios such as subsistence lifestyles of Native
Americans in regulatory decisions.
In 2002 Reregistration efforts delayed to focus on reviewing and testing pesticides against anthrax.
In 2001 EPA reassessed 40% of tolerances requiring reassessment under FQPA and issued a cumulative 72% of total REDs required,
achieving both targets.
In 2000 We did not achieve our FY2000 target for tolerance reassessments due to the ongoing work to establish a science policy on cumulative
risk. Although we missed our annual target, we are still on track to meet our statutory deadlines to reassess all tolerances.
45
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Performance Measures
Tolerance Reassessment
Reregistration Eligibility Decisions (REDs)
Product Reregistration
Tolerance reassessments for top 20 foods eaten by
children
Number of inert ingredients tolerances reassessed
Reduce decision time for REDs
FY2000
Actuals
121
6
552
FY2001
Actuals
40%
43.5%
FY2002
Actuals
66.9
72.7%
307
65.6
FY 2003
Actuals
68
75
306
65.6
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
78%
81.7%
750
83%
100
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
87.7%
88.2%
400
93%
100
7%
Tolerances(Cum)
Decisions (Cum)
Actions
Tolerances(Cum)
tolerances
Reduction
Baseline: The baseline value for tolerance reassessments is the 9,721 tolerances that must be reassessed by 2006 using FQPA health and safety
standards. The baseline for REDS is the 612 REDs that must be completed by 2008. The baseline for inerts tolerances is 870 that
must be reassessed by 2006. The baseline for the top 20 foods eaten by children is 893 tolerances that must be reassessed by 2006.
Tribal Pilot of 2 models in FY 2003; total number of models to be determined (current estimate is!6-18). Reregistration decision time
baseline 38-40 months.
Testing of Chemicals in Commerce for Endocrine Disrupters
In 2005 Standardization and validation of screening assays
In 2004 Standardization and validation of screening assays
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Screening Assays Completed 11 11 Screening assay
Baseline: The non-prioritized universe of chemicals that needs to be considered for prioritization includes: pesticide active ingredients,
pesticide inert ingredients, chemicals on the TSCA Inventory, environmental contaminants, food additives, Pharmaceuticals,
cosmetics, nutritional supplements, and representative mixtures. "Priority-setting" refers to the determination of priorities for entry
into Tier 1 Screening. The baseline for the Tier 1 screening measure is zero in 1996 - no valid methods for endocrine disrupter
screening and testing existed when FQPA was enacted in FY1996.
46
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Process and Disseminate TRI Information - OEI
In 2005 The increased use of the Toxic Release Inventory Made Easy (TRI-ME) will result in a total burden reduction of 5% for Reporting '
Year 2004 from Reporting Year 2003 levels.
In 2004 The increased use of the Toxic Release Inventory Made Easy (TRI-ME) will result in a total burden reduction of 5% for Reporting
Year 2003 from Reporting Year 2002 levels.
In 2003 8,000 facilities reported expanded information on releases and waste management of lead and lead compounds in TRI in Reporting
Year 2001 and increased usage of TRI-ME which resulted in total burden reduction of 5% for Reporting Year 2002.
In 2002 EPA reduced reporting burden, improved data quality, lowered program costs, and speeded data publication by increasing the amount
of TRI electronic reporting from 70% to 92%.
In 2001 120,000 chemical submissions and revisions processed; published annual summary of TRIS database in April 2001; and TRI Public
Data Release published in April 2001.
In 2000 Processed all submitted facility chemical release reports, published annual summary of TRI data, provided improved information to
the public about TRI chemicals, and maximized public access to TRI information.
Performance Measures
Total electronic reporting of all chemical submissions
processed. (Includes diskette submissions created by
ATRS, TRI-ME, and other reporting software programs,
as well as web-based submissions.)
TRI Public Data Release
Chemical submissions and revisions processed.
TRIS database complete and report issued
Facilities reporting releases and waste management of
lead and lead compounds.
Percentage of TRI chemical forms submitted over the
FY 2000
Actuals
FY 2001
Actuals
FY2002
Actuals
92
FY 2003
Actuals
FY 2004 FY 2005
Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Published
119,000
Published
120,000
On Target Published
8561
25
50
55
Percent
Published
Forms
Published
Facilities
Percent
47
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Internet using TRI-ME and the Central Data Exchange.
Baseline: In FY 2001,TRI electronic reporting was 70%.
Reduce Wildlife Incidents and Mortalities
In 2005 Reduce from 1995 levels the number of incidents involving mortalities to nontargeted terrestial and aquatic wildlife caused by
pesticides
In 2004 Reduce Wildlife Incidents and Mortalities
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Number of incidents and mortalities to terrestrial and 5 11 reduction
aquatic wildlife caused by the 15 pesticides responsible
for the greatest mortality to such wildlife
Baseline: 80 reported bird incidents (involving 1150 estimated bird casualties); 65 reported fish incidents (involving 632,000 estimated fish
casualties) as reported in 1995.
Exposure to Industrial / Commercial Chemicals
In 2005 Reduce exposure to and health effects from priority industrial / commercial chemicals
In 2004 Reduce exposure to and health effects from priority industrial / commercial chemicals
In 2001 Capacitor, Transformer and Bulk Waste data reported by industry on a calendar year basis and not available until September 2002.
The Transfomer Rsclassification Rule was published on April 2,2001.
48
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres, Bud. Pres. Bud.
Safe Disposal of Transformers 4,885 5,000 5000 Transformers
Safe Disposal of Capacitors 9,494 9,000 9000 Capacitors
number of children aged 1-5 years with elevated blood 270,000 225,000 children
lead levels (>10 ug / dl)
Baseline; 1999/2000 baseline released in January 2003: Approximately 400,000 cases of childhood lead poisoning cases according to NHANES
data. In 2004 a larger data set will be included as we will be expanding to include more EPA Regional efforts that will include all
Federally administered and State administered programs. Introduced the "number of children aged 1-5 years" measure in FY2004.
Since the baseline is 1999/2000 data we are unable to project targets for 2004 and 2005 due to the data-lag. The FY2003 data for a
new baseline may not be available until 2005. The baseline for PCB transformers is estimated at 2.2 million units and for capacitors is
estimated at 1.85 million units as of 1988 as noted in the 1989 PCB Notification and Manifesting Rule. From 1991-2001 there was a
declining trend in PCB disposal due to failing equipment and environmental liability: the total number of PCB large capacitors safely
disposed of 436,485 and the total number of PCB transformers safely disposed of 172,672 as of 2002.
Risks from Industrial / Commercial Chemicals
In 2005 Identify, restrict, and reduce risks associated with industrial/commercial chemicals.
In 2004 Identify and reduce risks associated with international industrial/commercial chemicals.
In 2004 Identify, restrict, and reduce risks associated with industrial/commercial chemicals.
In 2003 Of the approx. 1,633 applic. for new chem. and microorganisms submitted by industry, ensured those marketed are safe for humans
and the envir. Increased proportion of commer. chem. that have undergone PMN review to signify they are properly managed and may
be potential green altern. to exist, chem.
In 2002 EPA reviewed all 1,943 Pre-manufacturing Notices received during FY 2002. At the end of 2002, 21.5 percent of all chemicals in
commerce had been assessed for risks. A large fraction of these chemicals also may be "green" alternatives to existing chemicals in
commerce.
In 2001 Data was obtained from test plans submitted by industry for 724 chemicals already in commerce.
49
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
In 2001 EPA reviewed 1,770 Premanufacturing Notices. By the end of 2001, 21 percent of all chemicals in commerce had been assessed for
risks.
In 2000 All new chemical pre-manufacturing notification submissions were reviewed within the required timeframe.
Performance Measures
Number of TSCA Pre-Manufacture Notice Reviews
Through chemical testing program, obtain test data for
high production volume chemicals on master testing list.
Notice of Commencements
Make screening level health and environmental effects
data publicly available for sponsored HPV chemicals
Reduction in the current year production-adjusted Risk
Screening Environmental Indicators risk-based score of
releases and transfers of toxic chemicals.
High Production Volume chemicals with complete
Screening Information Data Sets (SIDS) submitted to
OECD SIDS Initial Assessment Meeting
Percentage of chemicals identified as highest priority by
the Acute Exposure Guideline Levels (AEGLs) Program
with short-term exposure limits established.
FY2000
Actuals
1838
FY2001
Actuals
1770
724
21.0
FY 2002
Actuals
1943
FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005
Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
1,633 1700 Notices
Chemicals
843
1300
9%
75
12%
52%
NOCs (Cum)
cum. chemicals
Index
chemicals
Total Chemicals
Baseline: The baseline for TSCA PMNs in FY2004 is zero. (EPA receives about 1,700 PMNs per year for chemicals about to enter commerce.
From 1979-2002, EPA reviewed about 40,000 PMNs. Of the 78,000 chemicals potentially in commerce, 16,618 have gone through
the risk-screening process of Notice of Commencement.) The baseline for HPV measure is zero chemicals in 1998. The baseline for
the RSEI measure is the index calculated for 2001. Baseline is 2002; calculation methodology by addition of AEGL values (10
minute, 1 hour, 4 hour and 24 hour exposure periods) and numbers of chemicals addressed. There is a list maintained by the AEGL
FACA committee of highest priority chemicals: 99 chemicals are on List 1 which was generated at the program's inception in 1996
and 137 chemicals are highest priority on List 2 which was generated in 2001. Therefore the total of highest priority chemical stands
today at 236 chemicals, however chemicals can be added or deleted from the list to fit stakeholder needs which is why we have
50
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
decided to provide percentage targets. 2001 levels will serve as the baseline reference point for the percent reduction in relative risk
index for chronic human health associated with environmental releases of industrial chemicals in commerce as measured by Risk
Screening Environmental Indicators Model analyzing results to date. Measurement Development Plans exist for HPV, VCCEP, and
New Chemicals.
Chemical Facility Risk Reduction
In 2005 Protect human health, communities, and ecosystems from chemical risks and releases through facility risk reduction efforts and
building community infrastructures.
In 2004 • Protect human health, communities, and ecosystems from chemical risks and releases through facility risk reduction efforts and
building community infrastructures.
In 2003 Data available in March 2004.
In 2002 EPA audited 350 risk management plans.
In 2001 5 states implemented accident prevention programs and 43 8 risk management plan audits were completed.
In 2000 Three states implemented accident prevention programs and 266 risk management plan audits were completed.
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Number of risk management plan audits completed. 266 438 350 Data lag 400 400 audits
Number of states implementing chemical accident 351 states
prevention programs.
Baseline: By the end of FY 2001,438 risk management plan audits were completed, and 15 states had implemented accident prevention
programs.
51
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
OBJECTIVE: COMMUNITIES
Sustain, clean up, and restore communities and the ecological systems that support them.
U.S. - Mexico Border Water/Wastewater Infrastructure
In 2005 In the US-Mexico Border Region, sustain and restore community health, and preserve the ecological systems that support them.
In 2004 Increase the number of residents in the Mexico border area who are protected from health risks, beach pollution and damaged
ecosystems from nonexistent and failing water and wastewater treatment infrastructure by providing improved water and wastewater
service.
In 2003 Increased the number of residents in the Mexico border area who are protected from health risks, beach pollution and damaged
ecosystems from nonexistent and failing water and wastewater treatment infrastructure by providing improved water and wastewater
service.
In 2002 Increase the number of residents to 720,000 in the Mexico border area who are protected from health risks, beach pollution and
damaged ecosystems from nonexistent and failing water and wastewater treatment infrastructure by providing improved water and
wastewater service.
In 2001 Provided protection to over 576,405 residents in the Mexico border area from health risks, beach pollution and damaged ecosystems
from nonexistent and failing water and wastewater treatment infrastructure by providing improved water and wastewater service.
In 2000 10 Additional water/wastewater projects (cumulative total of 36) along the Mexican border have been certified for design-
construction.
Performance Measures
Number of people in Mexico border area protected from
health risks, because of adequate water & wastewater
sanitation systems funded through border environmental
infrastructure funding, (cumulative)
Projects certified for design-construction along the 10
Mexican Border
FY2000
Actuals
FY2001 FY2002 FY2003
Actuals Actuals Actuals
576,405 720,000 872,000
FY 2004 FY 2005
Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
990,000 1.5 Million People
Projects
52
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Baseline: The US-Mexico border region extends more than 3,100 kilometers (2,000 miles) from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific Ocean, and
62,5 miles on each side of the international border. More than 11.8 million people reside along the border and this figure is expected
to increase to 19.4 million by 2020. Ninety percent of the population reside in the 14 impaired, interdependent sister cities. Rapid
population growth in urban areas has resulted in unplanned development, greater demand for land and energy, increased traffic
congestion, increased waste generation, overburdened or unavailable waste treatment and disposal facilities, and more frequent
chemical emergencies. Rural areas suffer from exposure to airborne dust, pesticide use, and inadequate water supply and treatment
facilities. EPA, other US Federal agencies, and the Government of Mexico have partnered to address these environmental problems.
World Trade Organization - Regulatory System
In 2005 Assist trade partner countries in completing environmental reviews
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Number of environmental reviews initiated by FTAA 3 countries
countries following the enactment of the 2002 Trade
Promotion Act (TPA).
Baseline: As of the end of FY 2003, two environmental reviews (Chile and Singapore) have been initiated since the enactment of the 2002
Trade Promotion Act.
Revitalize Properties
In 2005 Leverage jobs by assessing, promoting the cleanup and reuse of brownfields properties.
In 2004 Leverage jobs by assessing, promoting the cleanup and reuse of brownfields properties.
In 2003 Available data shows that the Brownfields program has generated 1,202 jobs and placed 62% of the job training program participants
as of the third quarter.
In 2003 EPA is on track to leverage or generate $0.9 B through revitalization efforts.
In 2002 $0.75 billion of cleanup and redevelopment was leveraged.
53
-------
In 2002
In 2001
In 2001
In 2000
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
4,418 jobs were leveraged from Brownfields activities.
$1.2 billion of cleanup and redevelopment was leveraged.
8,232 jobs were leveraged from Brownfields activities.
3,030 jobs were leveraged from Brownfields activities.
Performance Measures
Number of Brownfields properties assessed.
Number of Brownfields cleanup grants awarded.
Number of properties cleaned up using Brownfields
funding.
Estimated number of Brownfield property acres available
for reuse or continued use.
Number of jobs leveraged from Brownfields activities.
Percentage of Brownfields job training trainees placed.
Amount of cleanup and redevelopment funds leveraged at
Brownfields sites.
FY 2000
Actuals
337
FY 2001
Actuals
676
FY 2002
Actuals
1,158
FY 2003
Actuals
472 (qtr 3)
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
1,000
25
no target
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
1,000
25
60 -
assessments
grants
properties
no target no target acres
3,030 8,232 4,418 1,202 (qtr 3) 2,000 5,000 jobs
62% (qtr 3) 65% 65% trainees placed
$1.2B $0.756 $0.3B(qtr3) S0.9B $1.0B funds
Baseline: By the end of FY 2002, the Brownfields program had leveraged 19,646 jobs, provided job training to 913 individuals, placed an
average of 65% of job training participants, and leveraged a total of $6.7 billion. Data reported for FY 2002 reflect accomplishments
up to the 3rd quarter of FY 2002.
54
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
OBJECTIVE: ECOSYSTEMS
Protect, sustain, and restore the health of natural habitats and ecosystems.
Protecting and Enhancing Estuaries
In 2005 Working with NEP partners, protect or restore an additional 25,000 acres of habitat within the study areas for the 28 estuaries that are
part of the National Estuary Program (NEP).
In 2004 Restore and protect estuaries through the implementation of Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plans (CCMPs).
In 2003 Restored and protected estuaries through the implementation of Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plans (CCMPs).
In 2002 Restored and protected over 137,000 acres of estuary habitat through the implementation of Comprehensive Conservation and
Management Plans (CCMPs).
In 2001 Restored and protected 70,000 acres of estuaries through the implementation of Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plans
(CCMPs).
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Acres of habitat restored and protected nationwide as part 70,000 137,710 118,171 35,000 25,000 Acres
of the National Estuary Program, (incremental)
Baseline: As of January 2000, there were over 600,000 acres of habitat preserved, restored, and/or created.
Gulf of Mexico
In 2005 Prevent water pollution and protect aquatic species in order to improve the health of the Gulf of Mexico.
In 2004 Assist the Gulf States in implementing watershed restoration actions in 71 (5-year rolling average) priority impaired coastal river and
estuary segments.
In 2003 Assisted the Gulf States in implementing watershed restoration actions in 14 priority unpaired coastal river and estuary segments.
55
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
In 2002 Assisted the Gulf States in implementing restoration actions by supporting the identification of place-based projects in 137 State
priority coastal river and estuary segments.
In 2001 Assisted the Gulf States in implementing watershed restoration action strategies (WRAS) or their equivalent in 37 priority coastal
river and estuary segments.
In 2000 Assisted the Gulf states in implementing watershed restoration action strategies (WRAS) or similar plans to restore waterbodies in 14
priority impaired coastal river and estuary segments.
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Impaired Gulf coastal river and estuary segments 31 37 137 95 71 (5 yr Segments
implementing watershed restoration actions (incremental). rolling
average)
Reduce releases of nutrients throughout the Mississippi < 14,128 KM2
River Basin that affect the size of the hypoxic zone in the
Gulf of Mexico, as measured by the five year running
average
Baseline: There are 95 coastal watersheds at the 8-digit hydrologic unit code (HUC) scale on the Gulf coast. The Gulf of Mexico Program has
identified 12 priority coastal areas for assistance. These 12 areas include 30 of the 95 coastal watersheds. Within the 30 priority
watersheds, the Gulf States have identified 354 segments that are impaired and not meeting full designated uses under the States' water
quality standards. The 1996-2000 running average size = 14,128 km2.
Great Lakes Assessment and Implementation Actions
In 2005 Prevent water pollution and protect aquatic systems so that overall ecosystem health of the Great Lakes is improved by at least 1 point
In 2004 Great Lakes ecosystem components will improve, including progress on fish contaminants, beach closures, air toxics, and trophic
status.
In 2003 End of year data will be available in 2004 to verify that Great Lakes ecosystem components have improved, including progress on fish
contaminants, beach closures, air toxics, and trophic status.
56
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
In 2002 By removing or containing contaminated sediments, 100,000-200,000 pounds of persistent toxics which could adversely affect human
health will no longer be biologically available through the food chain. This contributes to decreasing fish contaminants and advances
the goal of removing fish advisories
In 2001 Great Lakes ecosystem components improved, including progress on fish contaminants, beach toxics, air toxics, and trophic status.
In 2000 6,000 of acres of aquatic, wetland, riverine, and terrestrial Great Lakes habitats were positively impacted.
Performance Measures
FY2000
Actuals
Long-term concentration trends of toxics (PCBs) in Great
Lakes top predator fish.
Long-term concentration trends of toxic chemicals in the
air.
Total phosphorus concentrations (long-term) in the Lake
Erie Central Basin.
Average concentrations of PCBs in whole lake trout and
walleye samples will decline.
Average concentrations of toxic chemicals in the air in the
Great Lakes basin will decline
Restore and delist Areas of Concern (AOCs) within the
Great Lakes basin
Cubic yards (in millions) of contaminated sediment
remediated in the Great Lakes (cumulative from 1997).
Great Lakes Ecosystem Indicator Indices with reports, 10
addressing select fish contaminants, atmospheric
deposition, limnology, biology, and sediments.
Model predictions for Lake Michigan for toxics reduction 5
scenarios.
FY 2001
Actuals
Uncertain
FY 2002
Actuals
Declining
Declining Declining
Improving Mixed
FY 2003
Actuals
Data Lag
Data Lag
18.4
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
5%
7%
10
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
10
5%
5%
3
2.9
Annual
decrease
Annual
decrease
Ug/1
Annual
Decrease
Annual
Decrease
AOC
Cubic yards
(millions)
57
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Baseline: Great Lakes rating of 20 on a 40 point scale where the rating uses select Great Lakes State of the Lakes Ecosystem indicators based on
alto 5 rating system for each indicator, where 1 is poor and 5 is good. The trend (starting with 1972 data) for toxics in Great Lakes
top predator fish is expected to be less than 2 parts per million (the FDA action level) but far above the Great Lakes Initiative target or
levels at which fish advisories can be removed. The trend (starting with 1992 data) for PCB concentrations in the air is expected to
range from 50 to 250 picograms per cubic meter. In 2002, no Areas of Concern had been delisted. 2.1 million yards of remediated
sediments are the cumulative number of yards from 1997 - 2001.
Wetland and River Corridor Projects
In 2005 Working with partners, achieve no net loss of wetlands
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY200S
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Annually, in partnership with the Corps of Engineers and No Net Acres
States, achieve no net loss of wetlands in the Clean Water Loss
Act Section 404 regulatory program
Working with partners, achieve no net loss of acres No Net Acres
Loss
Baseline: Annual net loss of an estimated 58,500 acres. In partnership with the Corps of Engineers, a baseline and initial reporting will begin in
FY 2004 on net loss of wetlands in the CWA Section 404 regulatory programs.
Chesapeake Bay Habitat
In 2005 Prevent water pollution and protect aquatic systems so that overall aquatic system health of the Chesapeake Bay is improved enough
so that there are 91,000 acres of submerged aquatic vegetation, (cumulative)
In 2005 Reduce nitrogen loads by 74 million pounds per year; phosphorus loads by 8.7 million pounds per year, and sediment loads by 1.06
million tons per year from entering the Chesapeake Bay, from 1985 levels
In 2004 Improve habitat in the Chesapeake Bay.
In 2003 Improved habitat in the Chesapeake Bay.
58
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
In 2002 Meeting the annual performance goal to improve habitat in the Bay requires adherence to commitments made by the Chesapeake 2000
agreement partners and monumental effort/resources from all levels of government (local, state, and a range of Federal agencies) and
from private organizations/citizens.
In 2001 Improved habitat in the Chesapeake Bay by reducing 48,1 million pounds of nitrogen, 6.84 million pounds of phosphorous and
restored over 69,000 acres of submerged aquatic vegetation.
In 2000 In the Chesapeake Bay watershed, 1,032 stream miles of migratory fish habitat was reopened through the provision of fish passages,
construction and restoration of 11,000 acres of oyster habitat, and 41% of wastewater flow to the Bay was treated by Biological
Nutrient Removal.
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Reduction, from 1985 levels, of nitrogen (M/lbs), 74/8.7/1.06 Lbs/Lbs/Tons
phosphorus (M/lbs), and sediment loads (tons) entering
Chesapeake Bay. (cumulative)
Acres of submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) present in 68,125 69,126 85,252 89,659 90,000 91,000 Acres
the Chesapeake Bay. (cumulative)
Baseline: In 1984, there were 37,000 acres of submerged aquatic vegetation in the Chesapeake Bay. In 2002, baseline for nitrogen loads was 51
million pounds per year; phosphorus loads was 8.0 million pounds per year, and sediment loads was 0.8 million tons per year.
OBJECTIVE: ENHANCE SCIENCE AND RESEARCH
- Through 2008, provide a sound scientific foundation for EPA's goal of protecting, sustaining, and restoring the health of
people, communities, and ecosystems by conducting leading-edge research and developing a better understanding and
characterization of environmental outcomes under Goal 4.
59
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Research
Research to Support FQPA
In 2005 Provide high quality exposure, effects and assessment research results that support the August 2006 reassessment of current-use
pesticide tolerances to EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs so that, by 2008, EPA will be able to characterize key factors influencing
children's and other subpopulations' risks from pesticide exposure,
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Children's exposure data and tools for assessing aggregate 09/30/05 data/tools
exposure to residential-use pesticides
Baseline: The Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) requires EPA to review, by August 2006, the pesticide tolerances for pesticides in use as of
August 1996. EPA's Office of Research Development (ORD) has been conducting research to generate new and improved exposure
and effects tools (data, methods, and models) to assist the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) in meeting this 2006 requirement. In
FY05, ORD will provide OPP with a summary document highlighting the key results from ORD's exposure research program over the
period 2000-2005. ORD will also provide OPP with validated children's pesticide exposure data and exposure factor data from
multiple exposure field and laboratory studies. This high quality data will fill critical data gaps and eliminate the need for using many
default assumptions currently used in the risk assessment process. An analysis of these results will also be performed to help identify
remaining critical children's exposure data needs. ORD will also provide OPP with a suite of exposure-to-dose models that can be
used to estimate aggregate pesticide exposures for children (by age and developmental life stage) and other susceptible
subpopulations. These state-of-the-art models will be used by OPP to develop pesticide exposure distributions and address key issues
associated with variability and uncertainty in exposure. With improved information, EPA can better protect public health from risks
posed by pesticide use.
Beginning in FY 2005, regular evaluations by independent and external panels will provide reviews of EPA research programs'
relevance, quality, and successful performance to date, in accordance with OMB's Investment Criteria for Research and Development.
Reviewers will also qualitatively determine whether EPA has been successful in meeting its annual and long-term commitments for
research.
Risk Assessment
In 2005 Through FY2005 initiate or submit to external review 28 human health assessments and complete 12 human health assessments
through the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). This information will improve EPA's and other decisionmakers' ability to
protect the public from harmful chemical exposure
60
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Performance Measures
Complete 4 human health assessments and publish their
results on the IRIS website
Initiate or submit to external peer review human health
assessments of at least 20 high priority chemicals.
Complete 8 human health assessments and publish their
results on the IRIS website
Initiate or submit to external peer review human health
assessments of 8 high priority chemicals
FY 2000
Actuals
FY 2001
Actuals
FY 2002
Actuals
FY 2003
Actuals
FY 2004
Fres. Bud.
4
20
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
assessments
assessments
assessments
assessments
Baseline: IRIS is an EPA data base containing Agency consensus scientific positions on potential adverse human health effects that may result
from exposure to chemical substances found in the environment. IRIS currently provides information on health effects associated
with chronic exposure to over 500 specific chemical substances. IRIS contains chemical-specific summaries of qualitative and
quantitative health information in support of the first two steps of the risk assessment process, i.e., hazard identification and dose-
response evaluation. Combined with specific situational exposure assessment information, the information in IRIS may be used as a
source in evaluating potential public health risks from environmental contaminants. IRIS is widely used hi risk assessments for EPA
regulatory programs and site-specific decision making. Updating IRIS with new scientific information is critical to maintaining
information quality and providing decision makers with a credible source of health effects information. Achieving this APG will
provide EPA and other decision makers with needed updates to IRIS so they can make informed decisions on how to best protect the
public from harmful chemical exposure. In FY 2004, the Agency will complete 4 human health assessments and initiate or submit for
external peer review human health assessments of at least 20 high priority chemicals. In FY 2005, EPA will complete 8 more
assessments and initiate or submit for review an additional 8 assessments, for a two-year total of 12 completed assessments and 28
initiated or submitted for review.
Beginning in FY 2005, regular evaluations by independent and external panels will provide reviews of EPA research programs'
relevance, quality, and successful performance to date, in accordance with OMB's Investment Criteria for Research and Development.
Reviewers will also qualitatively determine whether EPA has been successful in meeting its annual and long-term commitments for
research.
61
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Regional Scale Ecosystem Assessment Methods
In 2005 The baseline ecological condition of Western streams will be determined so that, by 2008, a monitoring framework is available for
streams and small rivers in the Western U.S. that can be used from the local to the national level for statistical assessments of
condition and change to determine the status and trends of ecological resources.
In 2004 Provide Federal, state and local resource managers with a means to more effectively determine long-term trends in the condition and
vitality of Eastern U.S. stream ecosystems through measurements of changes in the genetic diversity of stream fish populations.
Performance Measures
A study of fish genetic diversity that demonstrates the
power of this modern approach for evaluating condition
and vitality of biotic communities to Federal, state and
local resource managers.
FY2000
Actuals
FY2001
Actuals
FY 2002
Actuals
FY2003
Actuals
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
1
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
report
Baseline ecological condition of Western streams
determined
report
Baseline: This FY 2005 APG represents the first statistically-valid baseline for Western stream condition from state-based data. Although
States and Tribes are required by the Clean Water Act (CWA) to monitor the condition of all their waters, they typically are only able
to monitor at, and make scientifically defensible statements about, targeted sites that account for only a small percentage of their total
waters. The monitoring framework used in the achievement of this APG removes scientific uncertainty by using a probability design
approach (random sampling) to provide a more cost-effective, scientifically-defensible alternative for determining the condition of all
the streams of a State or Tribe. EPA is transferring this approach to our State, Tribal, and EPA Regional partners in the Western U.S.
so that they can determine the status and trends of their ecological resources. This monitoring framework also provides the scientific
basis for identifying problems and needs for action, causes of harm, and successful mitigation and restoration efforts. This
information will ultimately allow EPA to determine its success in achieving specific environmental outcomes.
Beginning in FY 2005, regular evaluations by independent and external panels will provide reviews of EPA research programs'
relevance, quality, and successful performance to date, in accordance with OMB's Investment Criteria for Research and Development.
These evaluations will include an examination of a program's design to determine the appropriateness of a program's short-,
intermediate-, and long-term goals and its strategy for attaining these. Reviewers will also qualitatively determine whether EPA has
been successful in meeting its annual and long-term commitments for research. Recommendations and results from these reviews will
62
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
improve the design and management of EPA research programs and help to measure their progress under the Government
Performance and Results Act (GPRA).
Research on Riparian Zone Restoration
In 2005 Provide technical guidance for implementing and evaluating projects to restore riparian zones, which are critical landscape
components for the restoration of aquatic ecosystems and water quality, so that, by 2010, watershed managers have state-of-the-
science field-evaluated tools, technical guidance, and decision-support systems for selecting, implementing, and evaluating cost-
effective and environmentally-sound approaches to restore ecosystem services as part of watershed management
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY200S
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Technical guidance for implementing and evaluating 1 tech. guide
projects to restore riparian zones
Baseline: This FY 2005 APG will provide State, Tribal, Regional, and local watershed managers and restoration practitioners with technical
guidance for selecting, implementing, and evaluating cost-effective and environmentally-sound approaches to restore ecosystem
services. Essential ecosystem services are a result of naturally occurring processes and include such necessities for human health as a
reliable supply of clean water, oxygen, nutrient cycling, and soil regeneration, as well as wildlife habitat and greenspace. Habitat
destruction, invasive species, and non-point source pollutants such as excess nitrogen and eroded sediments adversely impact
ecosystem services by contributing to the loss of ecosystems and/or their functions. Finding effective and efficient ways to protect
and restore ecosystem services is necessary for human, as well as ecological, health. Riparian zones, i.e. those areas immediately
adjacent to river and stream banks, are critical components of any watershed. Without a healthy riparian zone, it would be difficult, if
not impossible, to achieve water quality goals. EPA is evaluating the effectiveness of riparian restoration techniques as tools to
achieve goals such as water quality criteria or the restoration of specific ecosystem functions, such as denitrification. The guidance
represented by this APG will help watershed managers and restoration practitioners in decision-making and on-the-ground
implementation of scientifically- and technically-defensible restoration and management techniques.
Beginning in FY 2005, regular evaluations by independent and external panels will provide reviews of EPA research programs'
relevance, quality, and successful performance to date, in accordance with OMB's Investment Criteria for Research and Development.
Reviewers will also qualitatively determine whether EPA has been successful in meeting its annual and long-term commitments for
research.
63
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Exposures and Effect of Environmental Research
In 2005 Provide risk assessors and managers with methods and tools for measuring exposure and effects in children, and characterizing and
reducing risks to children from environmental agents in schools so that, by 2014, EPA will be able to demonstrate why some groups of
people, defined by life stage, genetic factors, and health status, are more vulnerable than others to adverse effects from exposure to
environmental agents.
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Methods and tools for measuring exposure and effects hi 09/30/05 methods/tools
children, and characterizing and reducing risks to children
from environmental agents in schools
Baseline: Current risk assessments for children are hampered by the lack of exposure and risk data and by a lack of methods that are appropriate
for children. By FY 2004, EPA expects to have better data on children's exposures and on children's exposure factors. In FY 2005,
research will build upon the improved data on children's exposures by compiling and analyzing the data, and translating the enhanced
knowledge into better methods and approaches for measuring and estimating children's exposure and risk. The research in FY 2005
will culminate in initial approaches, ready for external peer review, on: how to conduct children's exposure and risk assessments; how
to replace default uncertainty factors with data and distributions; and how to use biomarkers more appropriately in characterizing
children's exposures. In addition, the increased understanding of children's exposures will provide evaluated methods for reducing
their exposures and risks in schools and other indoor environments. These data, methods, and approaches will significantly improve
the reliability, credibility, and transparency of children's risk assessments used by regulatory decision-makers throughout EPA and
will provide to the public and to school and daycare officials tested methods to reduce children's exposures to chemical pollutants.
Beginning in FY 2005, regular evaluations by independent and external panels will provide reviews of EPA research programs'
relevance, quality, and successful performance to date, in accordance with OMB's Investment Criteria for Research and Development.
Reviewers will also qualitatively determine whether EPA has been successful in meeting its annual and long-term commitments for
research. Recommendations and results from these reviews will improve the design and management of EPA research programs and
help to measure their progress under the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA).
Mercury Research
In 2005 Provide information on managing mercury and other co-pollutants from utility boilers so that, by 2010, there is an extensive set of
data and tools available to help industry and federal, state, and local environmental management officials make decisions on the most
cost-effective ways to reduce or prevent mercury releases into the environment.
64
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud, Pres. Bud.
Information on managing mercury and other co-pollutants 1 report
from utility boilers
Baseline: EPA's Mercury Study Report to Congress identified emissions from coal-fired utilities as one of the most significant contributors of
mercury to the air (http://www.epa.gov/oar/mercury.html). On December 14, 2000, EPA determined that mercury emissions from
coal-fired utilities needed to be regulated. Unless some form of multi-pollutant legislation for utility boilers is passed by Congress, a
Maximum Achievable Control Technology standard (MACT) will be promulgated in December 2004 to control mercury emissions
with full compliance of utilities expected by December 2007. There are a variety of technological options under development that
could be used to more cost-effectively achieve any required mercury reduction. These control technologies need to be evaluated
before utilities make decisions on how to comply. The state-of-the-science on emission controls for mercury will be advanced by
investigating the factors that impact the species of mercury in coal-fired utilities flue gas and the performance of promising mercury
control technologies. Results available by the end of FY 2005 will be documented and made available for use by utilities and other
interested stakeholders.
Beginning in FY 2005, regular evaluations by independent and external panels will provide reviews of EPA research programs'
relevance, quality, and successful performance to date, in accordance with OMB's Investment Criteria for Research and Development.
These evaluations will include an examination of a program's design to determine the appropriateness of a program's short-,
intermediate-, and long-term goals and its strategy for attaining these. Reviewers will also qualitatively determine whether EPA has
been successful in meeting its annual and long-term commitments for research. Recommendations and results from these reviews will
improve the design and management of EPA research programs and help to measure their progress under the Government
Performance and Results Act (GPRA).
Homeland Security Research
In 2005 Provide tools, case studies, and technical guidance so that, by FY 2006, first responders and decision-makers will have the methods,
guidance documents, and technologies to enhance safety and to mitigate adverse effects of the purposeful introduction of hazardous
chemical or biological materials into the environment.
Provide a database of EPA experts on topics of importance to assessing the health and ecological impacts of actions taken against
homeland security that is available to key EPA staff and managers who might be called upon to rapidly assess the impacts of a
significant terrorist event.
In 2004
significant terrorist event
65
-------
In 2004
In 2004
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Provide to building owners, facility managers, and others, methods, guidance documents, and technologies to enhance safety in large
buildings and to mitigate adverse effects of the purposeful introduction of hazardous chemical or biological materials into indoor air.
Verify two point-of-use drinking water technologies that treat intentionally introduced contaminants in drinking water supplies for
application by commercial and residential users, water supply utilities, and public officials.
Performance Measures
Verify two treatment technologies for application in
buildings by commercial and residential users, utilities,
and public officials to treat contaminants in drinking
water supplies.
Prepare ETV evaluations on at least 5 new technologies
for detection, containment, or decontamination of
chemical/biological contaminants in buildings to help
workers select safe alternatives.
Through SBIR awards, support as least three new
technologies/methods to decontaminate HVAC systems in
smaller commercial buildings or decontaminate valuable
or irreplacable materials.
Prepare technical guidance for building owners and
facility managers on methods/strategies to minimize
damage to buildings from intentional introduction of
biological/chemical contaminants.
A restricted access database of EPA experts with
knowledge, expertise, and experience for use by EPA to
rapidly assess health and ecological impacts focused on
safe buildings and water security.
Risk assessment toolbox to predict and reduce the
consequences of chemical/biological attacks in U.S.
cities.
Technical guidance for water system owners and
operators on methods/strategies for minimizing damage
FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud, Pres. Bud.
2 verifications
verifications
techs/methods
9/30/04 guidance
database
toolbox
09/30/05 tech. guidance
66
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
from intentional introduction of biological/chemical
contaminants
Water system-related case studies that provide a spectrum 09/30/05 case studies
of contingency planning situations and responses,
including one specifically focused on the National Capital
area
Baseline: EPA's homeland security research provides appropriate, effective, and rapid risk assessment guidelines and technologies to help
decision-makers prepare for, detect, contain, and decontaminate building and water treatment systems against which chemical and/or
biological attacks have been directed. The Agency intends to expand the state of the knowledge of potential threats, as well as its
response capabilities, by assembling and evaluating private sector tools and capabilities so that preferred response approaches can be
identified, promoted, and evaluated for future use by first responders, decision-makers, and the public. Examples of the types of
products that will be available in FY 2005 include: sampling protocols, efficacy protocols, risk assessment tools, and threat scenario
simulations. These products will enable first responders to better deal with threats to the public and the environment posed by the
intentional release of toxic or infectious materials.
Beginning in FY 2005, regular evaluations by independent and external panels will provide reviews of EPA research programs'
relevance, quality, and successful performance to date, in-accordance with OMB's Investment Criteria for Research and Development.
These evaluations will include an examination of a program's design to determine the appropriateness of a program's short-,
intermediate-, and long-term goals and its strategy for attaining these. Reviewers will also qualitatively determine whether EPA has
been successful in meeting its annual and long-term commitments for research. Recommendations and results from these reviews will
improve the design and management of EPA research programs and help to measure their progress under the Government
Performance and Results Act (GPRA).
67
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
GOAL: COMPLIANCE AND ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP
Improve environmental performance through compliance with environmental requirements, preventing pollution, and promoting
environmental stewardship. Protect human health and the environment by encouraging innovation and providing incentives for
governments, businesses, and the public that promote environmental stewardship.
OBJECTIVE: IMPROVE COMPLIANCE
By 2008, maximize compliance to protect human health and the environment through compliance assistance, compliance
incentives, and enforcement by achieving a 5 percent increase in the pounds of pollution reduced, treated, or eliminated, and
achieving a 5 percent increase in the number of regulated entities making improvements in environmental management
practices. (Baseline to be determined for 2005.)
Non-Compliance Redaction
In 2005 Through monitoring and enforcement actions, EPA will increase complying actions, pollutant reduction or treatment, and improve
BMP.
In 2004 EPA will direct enforcement actions to maximize compliance and address environmental and human health problems.
In 2003 EPA directed enforcement actions to maximize compliance and address environmental and human health problems.
In 2002 Based upon one measure, this APG was not met.
In 2001 EPA directed enforcement actions to maximize compliance and address environmental and human health problems.
In 2000 Deterred and reduced noncompliance and achieved environmental and human health improvement. 74.9% of concluded enforcement
actions required environmental or human health improvement, such as pollution reduction.
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Millions of pounds of pollutants required to be reduced 714 660 261 600 350 M pounds
through enforcement actions settled this fiscal year.(core
68
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Performance Measures
optional)
Number of EPA inspections conducted (core required)
Pounds of pollution estimated to be reduced, treated,
eliminated as a result of concluded enforcement actions. ,
Percentage of concluded enforcement cases (including
SEPs) requiring that pollutants be reduced, treated, or
eliminated and protection of populations or ecosystems.
Percentage of concluded enforcement cases (including
SEPs) requiring implementation of improved env.
management practices.
Number of inspections, civil investigations and criminal
investigations conducted.
Dollars invested in improved env. performance or
improved BMP as a result of concluded enforcement
actions (i.e., injunctive relief and SEPs)
Percentage of regulated entities taking complying actions,
as a result of compliance monitoring.
Percent of concluded enforcement actions that require an
action that result in environmental benefits and/or
changes in facility management or information practices.
Number of Criminal Investigations
Number of Civil Investigations
FY2000
Actuals
20123
FY 2001
Actuals
17812
FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
17668 18,880 15,500
300
30
60
18,500
10
477
660
79
482
368
77
484
541
63
471
344
75
400
225
Inspections
Million
Pounds
Percentage
Percentage
insp&inv.
4 billion Dollars
Percentage
Percent
Investigations
Investigations
Baseline: Protecting the public and the environment from risks posed by violations of environmental requirements is basic to EPA's mission. To
develop a more complete picture of the results of the enforcement and compliance program, EPA has initiated a number of
performance measures designed to capture the results of reducing the amount of time for significant noncompliers to return to
compliance, reducing noncompliance recidivism rates, and improvements in facility process and/or management practices through
behavioral changes. The baseline rates for many of these measures were established in FYOO. These measures will complement the
69
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
traditional enforcement measures of inspections and enforcement actions to provide a more complete picture of environmental results
from the enforcement and compliance program.
Compliance Incentives
In 2005 Through self-disclosure policies, EPA will increase the percentage of facilities reducing pollutants or improving EMP.
In 2004 Increase opportunities through new targeted sector initiatives for industries to voluntarily self-disclose and correct violations on a
corporate-wide basis.
In 2003 Increased opportunities through new targeted sector initiatives for industries to voluntarily self-disclose and correct violations on a
corporate-wide basis.
In 2002 The number of facilities that participated in voluntary self-audit programs, disclosed and corrected violations greatly exceeded the
target.
In 2001 EPA increased opportunities through targeted sector initiatives for industries to use one of the self-disclosure policies.
In 2000 Increased entities self-policing and self-correction of environmental problems through use of small business and small community
policies.
Performance Measures FY 2000 FY 2001
Actuals Actuals
Number of facilities that self-disclosed potential 2,200
violations.
Percentage of audits or other actions that result in the
reduction, treatment, or elimination of pollutants and the
protection of populations or ecosystems.
Percentage of audits or other actions that result in
improvements in env. management practices.
Pounds of pollutants reduced, treated, or eliminated, as a
result of audit agreements or other actions.
Dollars invested in improving environmental management
practices as a result of audit agreements or other actions.
FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Facilities
5 Percentage
10 Percentage
.25 million Pounds
2 million Dollars
70
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Facilities voluntarily self-disclose and correct violations 1754 1467 848 500 Facilities
with reduced or no penalty as a result of EPA self-
disclosure policies.
Baseline: EPA developed its Audit/Self-Policing Policy in 1995 to encourage corporate audits and subsequent correction of self-discovered
violations. That Policy as well as the Small Business Compliance Policy were modified in FYOO. The Agency is working to expand
the use of the Audit Policy through aggressive outreach to specific sectors. In FY01 the performance measure was modified to reach
settlements with 500 facilities to voluntarily self-disclose and correct violations. This same measure has been carried continued.
Regulated Communities
In 2005 Through compliance assistance, EPA will increase the understanding of regulated entities, improve Environmental Management
Practices, and reduce pollutants.
In 2004 Increase the regulated community's compliance with environmental requirements through their expanded use of compliance
assistance. The Agency will continue to support small business compliance assistance centers and develop compliance assistance
tools such as sector notebooks and compliance guides.
In 2003 Increased the regulated community's compliance with environmental requirements through their expanded use of compliance
assistance. The Agency continued to support small business compliance assistance centers and developed compliance assistance tools
such as sector notebooks and compliance guides.
Performance Measures FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Number of facilities, states, technical assistance providers 721,000 500,000 Entities
or other entities reached through targeted compliance
assistance (core optional)
Percentage of regulated entities seeking assistance from 60 Percentage
EPA-sponsored CA centers and clearinghouse reporting
that they improved BMP as a result of their use of the
centers or the clearinghouse.
Percentage of regulated entities receiving direct 50 Percentage
71
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures .
Performance Measures
compliance assistance from EPA (e.g, training, on-site
visits) reporting that they improved BMP as a result of
EPA assistance.
% of regulated entities seeking assistance from EPA-
sponsored CA centers and clearinghouse reporting that
they reduced, treated, or eliminated pollution as a result of
that resource,
% of regulated entities seeking assistance from EPA-
sponsored CA centers and clearinghouse reporting that
they increased their understanding of env. rqmts. as a
result of their use of the resources.
% of regulated entities receiving direct CA from EPA
(e.g., training, on-site visits) reporting that they increased
their understanding of env. rqmts. as a result of EPA
assistance.
% of regulated entities receiving direct assistance from
EPA (e.g., training, on-site visits) reporting that they
reduced, treated, or eliminated pollution, as a result of
EPA assistance.
FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
25 Percentage
75 Percentage
65 percentage
25 percentage
Baseline: EPA provides clear and consistent descriptions of regulatory requirements to assure that the community can understand its obligations.
EPA supports initiatives targeted toward compliance in specific industrial and commercial sectors or with certain regulatory
requirements. Compliance assistance tools range from plain-language guides, fact sheets, checklists and newsletters. New distribution
methods include the on-line Clearinghouse. In FY03, EPA is planning to reach 475,000 facilities, states, or technical assistance
providers through targeted compliance assistance efforts.
72
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
OBJECTIVE: IMPROVE ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE THROUGH POLLUTION PREVENTION AND
INNOVATION
By 2008, improve environmental protection and enhance natural resource conservation on the part of government, business,
and the public through the adoption of pollution prevention and sustainable practices that include the design of products and
manufacturing processes that generate less pollution, the reduction of regulatory barriers, and the adoption of results-based,
innovative, and multimedia approaches.
Reduction of Industrial / Commercial Chemicals
In 2005 Prevent, reduce and recycle hazardous industrial/commercial chemicals and improve environmental stewardship practices.
In 2004 Prevent, reduce and recycle hazardous industrial/commercial chemicals and municipal solid wastes
In 2003 FY 2003 data will be avail, in 2005 to verify the quantity of Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) pollutants released, disposed of, treated or
combusted for energy recovery in 2003, (normalized for changes in industrial production) will be reduced by 200 million pounds, or
2%, from 2002.
In 2002 Data Lag
In 2001 No conclusions can be drawn regarding changes in TRI Non-recycled wastes from calendar year 2000 to calendar year 2001 without
data.
In 2000 - EPA exceeded its target of a reduction of 200 million pounds of TRI pollutants released.
Performance Measures
Reduction of TRI non-recycled waste (normalized)
Alternative feed stocks, processes, or safer products
identified through Green Chemistry Challenge Award
Number of participants in Hospitals for a Healthy
Environment
Quantity of hazardous chemicals/solvents eliminated
73
FY2000
Actuals
405
Million
FY 2001
Actuals
464
Million
FY 2002
Actuals
Not
Available
FY 2003
Actuals
Data Lag
FY 2004 FY 2005
Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
200
Million
210
2000
150 million
Lbs
Prod/proc (cum)
Participants
Lbs
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Performance Measures
FY 2000
Actuals
FY 2001
Actuals
FY2002
Actuals
FY2003
Actuals
FY2004 FY2005
Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
through the Green.Chemistry Challenge Awards Program
For eco-friendly detergents, track the number of laundry
detergent formulations developed.
Percent reduction in Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
reported toxic chemical releases at Federal Facilities,
Percent reduction in both Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
chemical releases to the environment from the business
sector per unit of production ("Clean Index")
Percent reduction in TRI chemicals in production-related
wastes generated by the business sector per unit of
production ("Green.Index").
Reduction in overall pounds of pollution.
Annual cumulative quantity of water conserved
Billions of gallons of water saved.
Billions of BTUs of energy conserved.
36
32%
20%
10%
Formulations
Releases (Cum)
Releases (Cum)
Waste (Cum)
34 Billion Pounds (Cum)
134 Million Dollars (Cum)
1.5 Billion Gallons (Cum)
143 Billion BTU (Cum)
Baseline: The baseline for the TRI non-recycled wastes measure is the amount of non-recycled wastes in 2001 reported FY2003. The baseline
for eco-friendly detergents is 0 formulations in 1997. The baseline for the alternative feed stocks / processes measure is zero in 2000.
The baseline for the quantity of hazardous chemicals / solvents measures is zero pounds in the year 2000. The baseline for the
hospitals measure is zero in FY2001. The baseline reference point for reductions of pollution and conservation of BTUs and water will
be zero for 2003. The baseline for money saved will be 2003. The baseline for reduction in CO2 will be zero for 1996. The baseline
for the Clean and Green Index would be 2001 levels. The baseline for chemical releases is 2001 level. The baseline for chemical
production related wastes is 2001 level. Note: Several output measures were changed to internal-only reporting status in 2005.
Annual Performance measures under development for EPA's Environmentally Preferable Purchasing program for the FY2006 Annual
Performance Plan.
74
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Innovation Activities
In 2005 Performance Track members collectively will achieve an annual reduction of 600 million gallons in water use; 2.5 million in
MMBTUs in energy use; 15,000 tons of solid waste; 6,000 tons of air releases; and 10,000 tons in water discharges, compared with
2001 results.
Performance Measures FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
Specific annual reductions in five media/resource areas: 5 media
water use, energy use, solid waste, air releases, and water reductions
discharges.
Baseline: The baseline year is 2001. The FY 2005 specific reductions planned are that Performance Track members collectively will achieve
annual reductions, compared with 2001, of 600M gallons of water used; 2.5M MMBTUs of energy used; 15,000 tons of solid waste;
6,000 tons of air releases; and 10,000 tons of water discharges.
OBJECTIVE: BUILD TRIBAL CAPACITY
Through 2008, assist all federally recognized tribes in assessing the condition of their environment, help in building their
capacity to implement environmental programs where needed to improve tribal health and environments, and implement
programs in Indian country where needed to address environmental issues.
Tribal Environmental Baseline/Environmental Priority
In 2005 Assist federally recognized tribes in assessing the condition of their environment, help in building their capacity to implement
environmental programs where needed to improve tribal health and environments, and implement programs in Indian country where
needed to address environmental issues.
In 2004 Percent of Tribes will have an environmental presence (e.g., one or more persons to assist in building Tribal capacity to develop and
implement environmental programs.
In 2003 In 2003, AIEO evaluated non-Federal sources of environmental data pertaining to conditions in Indian Country to enrich the Tribal
Baseline Assessment Project.
75
-------
In 2002
In 2001
In 2000
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
A cumulative total of 331 environmental assessments have been completed.
Baseline environmental assessments were collected for 207 Tribes.
16% of tribal baseline information was collected by enabling a pilot demonstration model to access and display tribal information
from EPA databases and data collection surveys containing environmental information. However, only four EPA/Tribal
Environmental Agreements (TEAs) were signed.
Performance Measures
Percent of Tribes with delegated and non-delegated
programs (cumulative).
Percent of Tribes with EPA-reviewed monitoring and
assessment occurring (cumulative).
Percent of Tribes with EPA-approved multimedia
workplans (cumulative).
Increase tribes' ability to develop environmental program
capacity of federally recognized tribes that have access to
an environmental presence.
Develop or integrate EPA and interagency data systems to
facilitate the use of EPA Tribal Enterprise Architecture
information in setting environmental priorities and
informing policy decisions.
•Eliminate data gaps for environmental conditions for
major water, land, and air programs as determined
through the availability of information in the EPA Tribal
Enterprise Architecture.
Increase implementation of environmental programs in
Indian country by program delegations, approvals, or
primacies -issued to tribes and direct implementation
activities by EPA.
Increase the percent of tribes with environmental
monitoring and assessment activities under EPA-
FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY200S
Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Pres. Bud. Pres, Bud.
25% Tribes
20%
18%
90
159
Tribes
Tribes
% Tribes
Systems
% Data Gap
Programs
% Tribes
76
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Performance Measures
approved quality assurance procedures.
Increase the percent of tribes w/ multimedia programs
reflecting traditional use of natural resources.
Tribal environmental baseline information collected
Tribes with Tribal/EPA environmental agreements or
identified environmental priorities
Environmental assessments for Tribes, (cumulative)
Non-federal sources of environmental data pertaining to
conditions in Indian Country.
FY2000
Actuals
16
FY 2001
Actuals
207
FY 2002
Actuals
331
FY2003
Actuals
FY 2004 FY 2005
Pres. Bud. Pres. Bud.
20
% Tribes
% Baseline
Tribes
Tribes, etc.
Data sources
Baseline: There are 572 tribal entities that are eligible for GAP program funding. These entities are the ones for which environmental
assessments of their lands will be conducted.
OBJECTIVE: ENHANCE SCIENCE AND RESEARCH
Through 2008, strengthen the scientific evidence and research supporting environmental policies and decisions on compliance,
pollution prevention, and environmental stewardship.
Research
New Technologies
In 2005 Complete thirty verifications and four testing protocols for a program cumulative total of 280 verifications and 88 testing protocols for
new environmental technologies so that, by 2009, appropriate and credible performance information about new, commercial-ready
environmental technology is available that influences users to purchase effective environmental technology in the US and abroad.
In 2004 Verify 35 air, water, greenhouse gas, and monitoring technologies so that States, technology purchasers, and the public will have
highly credible data and performance analyses on which to make technology selection decisions.
77
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
In 2003
In 2002
In 2001
Developed 10 testing protocols and completed 40 technology verifications for a cumulative Environmental Technology Verification
(ETV) program total of 230 to aid industry, states, and consumers hi choosing effective technologies to protect the public and
environment from high risk pollutants.
EPA formalized generic testing protocols for technology performance verification, and provided additional performance verifications
of pollution prevention, control and monitoring technologies in all environmental media.
EPA developed, evaluated, and delivered technologies and approaches that eliminate, minimize, or control high risk pollutants from
multiple sectors. Delivery of the evaluative report on the Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) pilot program is delayed
until FY 2002.
Performance Measures
Deliver a Report to Congress on the status and
effectiveness of the Environmental Technology
Verification (ETV) Program during its first five years.
Complete 20 stakeholder approved and peer-reviewed test
protocols in all environmental technology categories
under ETV, and provide them to testing organizations
world-wide.
Verify and provide information to States, technology
purchasers, and the public on 40 air, water, pollution
prevention and monitoring technologies for an ETV
programmatic total of 230 verifications.
Complete an additional 10 stakeholder approved and
peer-reviewed test protocols in all environmental
technology categories under ETV, and provide them to
international testing organizations.
Through the ETV program, verify the performance of 35
commercial-ready environmental technologies.
Verifications completed
Testing protocols completed
FY2000
Actuals
FY 2001
Actuals
0
FY 2002
Actuals
20
FY 2003
Actuals
FY 2004
Pres. Bud.
FY 2005
Pres. Bud.
40
10
35
15
2
Report
Protocols
Verifications
Protocols
Verifications
Verifications
Protocols
78
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
6-Year Performance Data
Annual Performance Goals and Measures
Baseline: Actual environmental risk reduction is directly related to performance and effectiveness of.environmental technologies purchased and
used. Private sector technology developers produce almost all the new technologies purchased in the U.S. and around the world.
Purchasers and permitters of environmental technologies need an independent, objective, high quality source of performance
information in order to make more informed decisions; and vendors with innovative, improved, faster and cheaper environmental
technologies need a reliable source of independent evaluation to be able to penetrate the environmental technology market. Through
FY 2004, EPA's Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) Program will have verified approximately a programmatic total of
265 technologies, as well as making data on their performance available for public use, and will have developed 86 protocols. In FY
2005, the ETV Program will complete 30 additional verifications and four testing protocols for a cumulative total of 280 verifications
and 88 testing protocols since ETV begin in 1995.
Beginning in FY 2005, regular evaluations by independent and external panels will provide reviews of EPA research programs'
relevance, quality, and successful performance to date, in accordance with OMB's Investment Criteria for Research and Development.
These evaluations will include an examination of a program's design to determine the appropriateness of a program's short-,
intermediate-, and long-term goals and its strategy for attaining these. Reviewers will also qualitatively determine whether EPA has
been successful in meeting its annual and long-term commitments for research. Recommendations and results from these reviews will
improve the design and management of EPA research programs and help to measure their progress under the Government
Performance and Results Act (GPRA).
79
-------
Special Analysis
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents
Special Analysis
Annual Performance Plan Components , SA-1
Major Management Challenges SA-3
EPA User Fee Program SA-15
Working Capital Fund SA-17
STAG—Appropriation Account SA-18
STAG—Categorical Grants Program SA-19
STAG—Statutory Authority and Eligible Uses SA-25
STAG—Infrastructure Financing SA-37
Program Projects SA-41
Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) SA-50
Subject Index SA-64
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE PLAN COMPONENTS
Introduction
EPA's Annual Performance Plan, as for the past 6 years, is integrated into the annual
Budget request. To fully explain the Agency's resource needs, the Budget contains annual
performance goals and performance measures that the Agency uses to achieve its results. EPA
submits a stand-alone Annual Plan to Congress to meet the concern expressed in GPRA that
"annual plans not be voluminous presentations describing performance for every activity. The
Annual Plan and reports are to inform, not overwhelm the reader." (See the Special Analysis
section of this document for the Annual Performance Plan components.)
Annual Performance Plan Organization
The Annual Performance Plan submission to Congress contains the following elements of
the Agency's Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification:
I. GOALS
Goal Statement
Goal Resource s Summary
Background and Context
Means and Strategy
Highlights
Strategic Objectives and Annual Performance Goals
External Factors
II. OBJECTIVES
Objective Statement
Program Project Resources Summary
Results to be Achieved Under the Objective
Program/Projects
FY 2005 Request
FY 2005 Change from FY 2004
Annual Performance Goals and Performance Measures:
Verification and Validation of Performance Measures
Efficiency Measures/Measurement Development Plans
Coordination with Other Agencies
Statutory Authority
HI. ENABLING SUPPORT PROGRAMS
Resource Summary
Explanation of Changes
Annual Performance Goals and Performance Measures
SA-1
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
IV. SPECIAL ANALYSIS
Annual Performance Plan Components
Major Management Issues
User Fees
Working Capital Fund
STAG — Appropriations
STAG ~ Categorical Grants
STAG - Statutory Authority and Eligible Uses
Program Projects
PART Summary
SA-2
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
MAJOR MANAGEMENT CHALLENGES
In FY 2003 EPA strengthened its ability to achieve environmental and human health
results by addressing its major management challenges. For the second year, the Agency
reported no material weaknesses under the Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act (Integrity
Act).1 EPA also resolved in FY 2003 almost one third of its less severe, internal Agency
weaknesses tracked by the Administrator. To identify management issues and monitor progress
in addressing them, Agency senior leaders use a system of activities that includes: internal and
independent reviews, program evaluation and measurement; audits by the General Accounting
Office (GAO) and EPA's Office of Inspector General (OIG); and input from the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). These efforts ensure that program activities are effectively
carried out in accordance with applicable laws and sound management policy, and provide
reasonable assurance that Agency resources are protected against fraud, waste, abuse and
mismanagement.
In FY 2003 OMB recognized EPA's success hi correcting material weaknesses, which
contributed to the Agency achievement of a "green" status score in Improved Financial
Performance, a key initiative of the President's Management Agenda.2 Following are brief
descriptions and summaries on efforts underway to address the management challenges facing
the Agency.
Challenges in Addressing the Air Toxics Regulatory/Residual Risk Program
While EPA has made substantial progress hi issuing Phase 1 air toxics standards, it was
over two years behind in fulfilling statutory responsibilities. From FY 2001 to FY 2003, this
issue has been an Integrity Act weakness, and from FY 2002 to FY 2003 an OIG management
challenge.
EPA has made significant progress in correcting the Agency level weakness on Meeting
Statutory Deadlines for the Air Toxics Regulatory/Residual Risk Program. Based on this
progress, the Agency is on target to complete all of its 10-year Maximum Achievable Control
Technology (MACT) standards by February 27, 2004.3 In addition to strengthening the air
toxics program to prevent further delays in issuing the MACT, EPA has developed a
comprehensive, integrated air toxics program that better meets long term goals by addressing
risks from all sources of toxics—major, area, mobile and indoor sources. The Agency continues
to shift the emphasis of its air toxics program to a risk-based approach that addresses specific
needs of the various categories of residual risk and their special handling in the Clean Air Act.
EPA is developing site-specific risk assessment guidance4 that will allow a facility to
demonstrate whether the health risks it poses to the surrounding community are low enough to
1 Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act of 1982, Public Law 97-255 (September 8, 1982).
2 Office of Management and Budget, The Executive Office of the President, Federal Management, The President's Management
Agenda. Available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budintegration/pma index.html.
3 U.S. EPA, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. Available at http://wv>'\v.epa.gov/ttn./at\v/eparuies.html.
4 Air Toxics Website - hto://www.epa.go^ttm'atw/.
SA-3
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
comply with the residual risk standards. The Agency is also continuing to analyze the risk of the
remaining 2-, 4-, and 7-year MACT source categories. As part of the effort to address concerns
about data gaps for toxicity and different data collection and analysis methods, EPA is also
developing an efficiency measure on the cause-and-effect relationships between the air toxics
program and changes in environmental conditions or cancer incidence. In addition, the Agency
is strengthening its sound scientific foundation for an effective risk-based program. This year,
the Science Advisory Board (SAB) completed an external review of the Agency's air toxics
research strategy.5 EPA is also working with state and local agencies hi a joint Air Toxics
Monitoring Steering Committee to design a national toxics monitoring network. The SAB has
expressed clear support to the Agency's approach for developing this capacity through
monitoring pilots carried out under the sponsorship of the joint committee. The data analysis
phase of the initial assessment work, reflected hi a 10-city air toxics monitoring pilot project,
was completed in mid-2003.6 Data from this effort is helping to complete the design of a
network for a national air toxics characterization in FY 2004. While EPA works to develop
better indicators of air toxic risk reduction, it continues to effectively reduce air toxics, which
since 1990 have been reduced by 1.5 million tons per year, a 34% reduction.7 When all the
MACT rules are fully implemented, in addition to efforts by states and industry, toxic emissions
from large industrial facilities will decrease by 1.7 million tons per year or 63% from 1990-1993
baseline levels.8
Reduce the Backlog of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permits9
Expired NPDES permits might not reflect the most recent applicable effluent guidelines,
water quality standards, or Total Maximum Daily Loads posing a threat to the environment.
Necessary improvements hi water quality could be delayed if high-quality permits are not issued
timely. From FY 2001 to FY 2003 this issue has been an Integrity Act weakness and an OIG
management challenge.
EPA's strategy for improving the program has significantly reduced the backlog. 84
percent of major facilities have current permits (63 percent of the targeted reduction). 82 percent
of individual minor facilities have current permits (79 percent of the targeted reduction). When
facilities covered by non-storm water general permits are included hi the count of minors, 85
percent have current permits (87 percent of the targeted reduction).
5 Science Advisory Board Website - http:/7-ftlww.epa.gov/sciencel/03project/proi0328.htni.
6 Technology Transfer Website - http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/
7 U.S. EPA, Office of Air and Radiation. Analysis based on emission projections using the EMS-HAP version 2 model and the
2000 version of the 1990/1993 baseline inventory. EMS-HAP available at http://www.epa.gov/scramOOi/tt22.htmtfaspen .
Projection-related inputs available at http://w\vw.epa.gov/ttii/chie£/emch/projection/Jemshap.hmii.
8 U.S. EPA, Office of Air and Radiation. Analysis based on emission projections using the EMS-HAP version 2 model and the
2000 version of the 1990/1993 baseline inventory. EMS-HAP available at hitp ://www.epa. go v/scratnOO 1 /tt22. htm#aspen .
Projection-related inputs available at http:/7viAvw.epa.gov./ttn./chie£/emch,/prqiectioa/eiiisnap.html.
9 U.S. EPA, Office of Water, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), Backlog Reduction. Available at
http;//cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/pei'mitissuance/backlog.cf!Ti.
SA-4
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
In addition to significantly reducing the backlog, EPA is continuing to improve permit
efficiency and quality. EPA's recently revised strategy includes increased focus on: effective
prioritization of permits for environmental results, stronger NPDES program integrity, and
increased efficiency through permit streamlining. To prioritize permits, in FY 2003, EPA pilot
tested the use of a permit prioritizatidn checklist and is working with regions and states to
finalize it. EPA is also reviewing permit data quality, increasing the percentage of permit
records with locational data to better characterize the environmental impact, and modernizing
PCS for anticipated implementation in FY 2006. To strengthen NPDES program integrity, EPA
is holding regular training courses for permit writers, and working with regions and states to
develop and pilot quality management tools, including regional and state self assessments,
quarterly trend reports, and state NPDES program profiles. As part of the effort to increase
efficiency, the Agency is bundling lower priority permits in a streamlined process, facilitating
watershed-based permitting approaches, encouraging use of general permits, and developing and
distributing electronic permit application and permit writing tools. In 2003, EPA also made
available, through the internet, scanned copies of major permits and fact sheets. The web-
accessible permits improve access to information, provide models and improve data sharing.
Management of Biosolids
OIG raised concerns regarding the scientific studies regarding risk and the resources
devoted to implementing the biosolids program. From FY 2002 to FY 2003 this issue has been
an OIG management challenge.
EPA continues to meet its statutory obligations under the Clean Water Act (CWA)
pertaining to sewage sludge while it addresses concerns about the adequacy of the sewage sludge
rule, significantly expands biosolids-related research, and continues to actively address biosolids
violations and enforce safe land-application of biosolids to prevent risk to human health or the
environment. EPA set into motion an inclusive process to address concerns by establishing an
intra-Agency committee to develop a draft Agency response to National Research Council
(NRC) 2002 recommendations for additional research.10 In April 2003 EPA published its draft
response in the Federal Register for public comment.11 and announced its final response and
strategy in the Federal Register on December 31, 2003.n The December 31, Federal Register
notice also included the final decision on identifying additional pollutants in biosolids that may
warrant further regulation §405(d)(2)(C) of the CWA. It describes a multi-pathway screening
risk analysis from which EPA identified 15 pollutants for further evaluation and data gathering to
determine whether they may warrant regulation under the CWA.
On October 17, 2003, EPA announced its final decision not to regulate dioxins in land
applied sewage sludge.13 This decision was based on the results of a peer reviewed multi-
pathway risk assessment that took five years to develop and finalize. The results of this risk
10 National Research Council, Division on Earth and Life Studies, Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology, Biosolids
Applied to Land: Advancing Standards and Practices (2002). Available at http://www.nap.edu/catttlog/10426.html.
" Federal Register, April 9, 2003 at 68 Federal Register 17379-17395.
12 Federal Register, December 31,2003 at 68 Federal Register 75531-75552
13 Federal Register, October 24, 2003 at 68 Federal Register 61084-61096.
SA-5
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
assessment demonstrated that the risk is small of new cancers from exposure to dioxins for a
highly exposed population of farm families that use sewage sludge on their farms as a fertilizer
and soil amendment. EPA also evaluated the potential risks to wildlife from exposure to dioxins
from land applied sewage sludge. The results of this evaluation indicated that there are no
significant ecological impacts.
EPA is undertaking research and analyses initiatives to improve and expand its scientific
understanding and management of the biosolids program. In addition, EPA has taken actions to
address biosolids violations and will continue to take actions to address instances where
biosolids pose an endangerment to human health or the environment. From FY 1995 to FY2002
EPA undertook over 500 enforcement actions, and from FY 2000 to FY 2002 conducted
approximately 380 inspections.14 To assist the states and regions in their oversight of the
biosolids program, EPA has, either in place or in development, tools to assist and promote
compliance with biosolids regulatory requirements. For example, the Agency recently
developed revised guidance and training on NPDES inspections, including biosolids.15 EPA is
also continuing to work with states as it modernizes the Permit Compliance System (PCS) to
allow for more effective program oversight. As part of the PCS modernization, a separate
workgroup (including states and EPA) was devoted to the data needed to manage the biosolids
program.16 The anticipated implementation date for the modernized PCS is December 2005. In
addition to this national system, states and facilities may choose to use the Biosolids Data
Management System (BDMS) as an additional management tool.
EPA also has been working closely with the National Biosolids Partnership to develop
and pilot test a voluntary system for biosolids which seeks to enhance biosolids management
from pretreatment through processing and ultimate disposition. Currently there are 62
wastewater treatment authorities hi the EMS and EMS development program. At the end of
Calendar 2003, the first two authorities, Orange County, California and the City of Los Angeles
California attained EMS status with the awarding of EMS certificates by the National Biosolids
Partnership. The Agency has also been actively coordinating with states and regions through a
cross-office Biosolids Program Implementation Team. EPA also continues to conduct state of
the biosolids workshops. The Agency held the most recent conference on the "State of Science
for the Land Application of Biosolids" hi January, 2004. In cooperation with the U.S.
Department of Agriculture and many other stakeholders, EPA plans to conduct field studies at
selected locations to assess potential emissions of certain chemical and microbial agents from
biosolids land-application sites.
14 U.S. EPA, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, Permit Compliance System (PCS) database.
15 U.S. EPA, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, Clean Water Act/NPDES Computer Based Inspector Training
CD ROM, August, 2003.
16 U.S. EPA, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, ICIS Phase II, Permit Compliance System Modernization,
Final Design Document, September, 2003.
SA-6
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
EPA's Working Relationships with States
The National Environmental Performance Partnership System (NEPPS)17 established
working EPA-state partnerships designed to focus scarce resources on priority environmental
problems. Under NEPPS, jointly-developed priorities, strategies, and measures for assessing
progress are articulated in performance partnership agreements (PPAs). Performance partnership
grants (PPGs),18 a primary tool for implementing NEPPS, allow states and Tribes to combine
multiple EPA grants into one grant directed to their needs and priorities. From FY 2001 to FY
2003, NEPPS implementation has been a GAO or OIG major management challenge.
The Agency continues its long-term commitment to working with state agencies to
improve management of national environmental programs and promote implementation of
NEPPS. A joint EPA-Environmental Council of States (ECOS) workgroup was established in
the spring of 2003 to further advance joint planning and performance partnerships. After a series
of working sessions, EPA and state leaders agreed to better align EPA national, regional, and
state planning processes and facilitate more meaningful joint priority setting. To strengthen the
role of PPAs as the defining document for the state-EPA partnership, they also agreed upon the
essential elements of PPAs. Implementation will begin hi 2004, with particular focus on piloting
the unproved processes with a subset of states that have expressed an interest and commitment to
participate during the FY 2005 planning cycle. The EPA-ECOS workgroup will monitor the
initial effort to ensure continuous improvement.
The Performance Partnership Steering Committee comprised of senior leaders from
across EPA, meets periodically to provide overall direction and resolve policy issues related to
improving performance partnerships. Responding to a major need identified during a joint EPA-
state meeting on PPGs in January 2003, EPA developed a PPG training course that was delivered
to EPA and state officials hi a series of workshops across the country during the year. In FY
2004, EPA will focus on addressing issues raised during the training sessions. These issues
include timing of grants, use of carryover funds, joint evaluation, and mitigating conflicts
between performance partnership principles and categorical grants guidance. Regional and
program office NEPPS coordinators hold regular conference calls to share experiences and
discuss issues, and the Agency continues periodic reporting on the status of PPAs and PPGs to
keep the states, Congress, and other stakeholders and partners informed. With these activities
serving as the foundation for further progress, EPA is committed to continuing training, working
group sessions, joint reviews, and developing and implementing a strategy to market the
successes and benefits of performance partnerships.
17 U.S. EPA, Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations, Performance Partnership. Available at
http://www.epa.gov/ocirpage/nepps/index.htni.
18 U.S. EPA, Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations, Performance Partnership. Available at
http://www.epa.gov/ocirpage/nepp&''iudex.htm.
SA-7
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Information System Security
EPA continues to improve the management and oversight of the Agency information
security program with the development and implementation of effective information security
tools and processes that mitigate risks to the Agency's data and systems. From FY 2001 to FY
2003 this topic has been an Integrity Act weakness, and GAO or OIG management challenge.
EPA has successfully demonstrated and maintained a high level of security for its
information resources and environmental data. In FY 2002, the Agency developed and began
implementing a comprehensive strategy to systematically address security-related deficiencies in
accordance with the Government Information Security Reform Act,19 and in FY 2003, the
Agency validated the effectiveness of these corrective actions. The corrective actions include
ensuring annual security self-assessments of Agency general support systems and major
applications in accordance with Federal Information Security Management Act20 and relevant
OMB directives; conducting in-depth analyses of Capital Planning and Investment Control
system security plans to determine that the controls provide the anticipated protections; ensuring
regular risk assessments and follow-up on major applications and general support systems;
monitoring Agency networked computer servers for compliance with security standards and
sending quarterly reports to senior officials summarizing their compliance status; conducting
internal and external network penetration testing; and monitoring EPA's firewall and intrusion
detection system to ensure security of the Agency's cyber perimeter.
EPA plans to sustain information security improvements through consistent security
control implementation, ongoing evaluation, and regular testing to ensure that the policies and
procedures are effective. In FY 2004, the Agency will focus on establishing a robust quality
assurance program, improving the security training program for staff with significant security
responsibilities, ensuring contingency plans are updated, and establishing a process to ensure that
the Agency's information security practices are implemented throughout the life cycle of
information technology systems.
Information Resources Management (IRM) and Data Quality/Environmental and
Performance Information Management
To acquire, manage, and deliver the data the Agency needs to make decisions and
monitor progress against environmental goals, EPA continues to improve data management and
use by providing tools and planning processes for effective data sharing, data integration, and
identification of key data gaps. From FY 2001 to FY 2003 this issue has been an Integrity Act
weakness and a GAO and OIG management challenge.
19 FY 2001 Defense Authorization Act, Public Law 106-398, Title X, Subtitle G.
20 FY 2003 Electronic Government Act, Public Law 107-347, Title III.
SA-8
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
EPA's progress includes completion of the EPA Strategic Information Plan, A
Framework for the Future?1 promulgation of six Reinventing Environmental Information data
standards;22 development of the Data Architecture, a component of the Agency Enterprise
Architecture (EA);23 development of the draft Data and Information Quality Strategic Plan;24
completion of a second set of six new data standards;22 and improvement of data collection
processes through the Central Data Exchange.25 EPA is working with the states and tribes,
through the Environmental Data Standards Council, to develop data standards for the exchange
of environmental data. To facilitate data standard implementation, EPA has established technical
and business guidelines for the use of standard data elements, and is providing technical
assistance. Building on the FY 2003 Draft Report on the Environment,26 EPA is continuing the
Environmental Indicators Initiative, a long-term effort to work with stakeholders, partners and
the public to identify and fill key data gaps.
All EPA organizations have approved Quality Management Plans, and are focusing on
implementing and integrating quality procedures into business practices. During 2004, EPA will
continue its efforts with states and tribes to develop the National Environmental Information
Exchange Network, a web-based system that enables electronic data exchanges that improve data
quality and timeliness, reduce burden and costs, and improve public access. The Agency plans
for at least 25 states to have Exchange servers by the end of FY 2004.
EPA efforts to improve oversight and management of Agency laboratory quality systems
include developing a web site of best practices of laboratory policies, procedures, tools and
training to improve capacity to produce quality environmental data. The Agency's Forum on
Environmental Measurements (FEM) developed a draft policy to ensure and demonstrate the
competency of Agency laboratories. The draft policy, currently undergoing Science Policy
Council review, requires Agency laboratories to become accredited and participate in inter-
laboratory comparison studies to demonstrate continuing competency. The draft policy also
mandates assessments by external organizations or assessors in cases where appropriate
accreditation programs do not exist.
Making Regulatory Innovations Successful27
EPA has invested considerable time and resources to "reinvent" environmental
regulations within the existing statutory framework, but GAO is concerned that EPA must
21 EPA Strategic Information Plan: A Framework for the Future. Available at
wjvw.epa.gov/bei/pdffStrategic.Information Plan 7 29 02.pdf
22 U.S. EPA, Environmental Data Registry. Available at http://www.epa.gov/edr/
23 U.S. EPA, DRAFT Data and Information Quality Strategic Plan (January 2002). Available from the Office of Environmental
Information's Office of Planning, Resources, and Outreach.
24 U.S. EPA, EPA Enterprise Architecture, Version 1.0 (January 2003). Available from the Office of Environmental
Information's Office of Technology and Operations Planning.
2S U.S. EPA, Central Data Exchange. Available at www.epa.gov/cdx/'
26 U.S. EPA Draft Report on the Environment 2003 (EPA-260-R-02-006, June 2003), available at
http://www.epa.gov/mdicators/roe/mdex.htni.
27 U.S. EPA National Center for Environmental Innovation. Available at http://www.epa.gov/innovation.
SA-9
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
address statutory obstacles in order for innovative regulatory programs to succeed. In FY 2002
and FY 2003, regulatory reinvention has been a GAO major management challenge.
EPA is committed to continue testing and implementing innovative approaches to
achieve environmental results. This continued commitment allows progress to occur in the near
term, while gaining experience in how new legislative authority could address impediments
without undermining the benefits of today's environmental statutes or sacrificing important
safeguards in the Nation's environmental protection system. In 2003, EPA continued and
enhanced its robust approach to regulatory innovation. For example, EPA has been instrumental
in its facilitation of the transfer of the Environmental Results Program (ERP), an innovation
model originated in Massachusetts self-certification innovation launched in the late 1990's, to
other states and environmental problem areas. ERP interlinks the three components of
compliance assistance, self-certification and performance measurement. ERP compliance
assistance brings together all regulatory requirements and pollution prevention best management
practices in a "plain English" workbook. Facility self-certification can be single or multimedia
based and is prepared in a user friendly format. ERP performance measurement is based on
statistically valid inspection protocols and allows tracking whole business sectors as well
individual facilities. The three components are interlinked so workbook sections relate directly
to self-certification questions and inspection protocols for performance measurement and
tracking. The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MA DEP) has found that
ERP reduces cost and burden for regulators and regulated entities. MA DEP estimates that ERP
has resulted in dry cleaners reducing their perchloroethyane emissions by 22 tons, and printers
their volatile organic compound emissions by 4 tons. Also, underground storage tanks ERP
projects are being implemented in several states as well as other small-business dominated
sectors.
EPA continues to work with the Environmental Council of the States (ECOS) to improve
the EPA processes needed to create regulatory flexibility for state innovation projects. For
example, EPA and ECOS are developing a Joint Workplan designed to align EPA and state
innovation efforts so they address the same priority environmental problems, leveraging the
combined efforts of EPA and the states, and driving innovation into core state environmental
programs. EPA also successfully piloted a state innovation grant competition and awarded
several state grants to provide seed money to the state-initiated projects. Based on an
independent evaluation of the first-year innovation competition, the Agency is expanding this
state innovation funding idea. The second solicitation was issued in October 2003 and is
targeted at priorities identified in consultation with states and other stakeholders. This kind of
program, and the discussion between state environmental commissioners and EPA senior
leadership, can inform the legislative process, and potentially support a clearer understanding of
how specific legislative provisions could be designed to overcome perceived barriers in existing
statutes. The greatest potential and anticipated benefit of this innovation work is effectively
taking lessons learned during experimental pilots and applying them to our national and state
programs, and potentially making regulatory change. EPA is working with the states in the grant
program to measure and evaluate the results of the state pilots. EPA describes a specific
strategic target for the State Innovation Grant Program in the Agency's Strategic Plan for 2003-
SA-10
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
2008 to measure improvement in environmental protection resulting from alternative approaches
to environmental protection.
Human Capital Strategy Implementation/Employee Competencies
EPA recognizes the importance of placing the right people, with the appropriate skills,
where they are needed. The Agency needs a systematic approach to workforce planning,
supported by reliable and valid workforce data, and should focus on sustaining adequate
scientific expertise. From FY 2001 to FY 2003 this issue has been an Integrity Act weakness,
and a GAO and OIG management challenge.
EPA made significant progress toward addressing this weakness and achieving the
President's Management Agenda (PMA) Human Capital initiative. EPA received green progress
scores for five of six quarters.28 The Agency aligned its human capital planning activities with
strategic planning and budgeting processes. EPA has issued a new Strategy for Human Capital,
Investing in Our People II, 2004 and Beyond 29 to build on a history of solid accomplishments
and chart the course for the future. The Strategy identifies 80 specific action items for FY 2004
that set the stage for achieving Human Capital excellence and for attaining a green status score in
the Human Capital portion of the PMA. Some of those action items include:
I. Implementing the National Strategic Workforce Planning System,30 which links
competencies to mission needs along major occupations, and will provide managers with
a tool to inventory workforce competencies and project future needs to identify skill gaps.
II. Continuing to offer successful developmental programs that address the needs of
all employees from administrative personnel to executive leadership.
III. Assessing the effectiveness of the Workforce Development Strategy31 programs,
by conducting several program evaluations and making enhancements as indicated by
these evaluations. These evaluations will serve as a "test bed" for an evaluation
methodology that will be applied to other human capital initiatives.
IV. Providing greater support for national recruitment initiatives and developing a
coordinated approach to Agency-wide recruitment and outreach initiatives.
To ensure that the Agency's Human Capital activities support the agency mission and are
being effectively conducted, EPA is implementing a Human Capital Accountability Plan.
Protecting Critical Infrastructure from Non-Traditional Attacks
28 U. S. Executive Office of the President. "The President's Management Agenda." Washington, DC: Available only on the
Internet at: http://www.results.gov/agenda/index.htnii
29 U.S. EPA, Office of Administration and Resources Management. "Strategy for Human Capital, Investing in Our People II,
2004 and Beyond." Washington, DC: EPA. Available only on the Intranet at: http:"intranet.epa.gov/oanM/2003shc.-''indgx.html
30 U. S. EPA, Office of Administration and Resources Management. "National Strategic Workforce Planning System."
Washington, DC: EPA. Available only on the intranet at: http:/7intranet.epa.gov/institute/wds/planning.htm
jl U. S. EPA Office of Administration and Resources Management. "Workforce Development Strategy." Washington, DC:
EPA. Available only on the Intranet at: http://intraMet.epa.gov/institute/wds.htm
SA-11
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
While EPA's efforts to enhance critical infrastructure protection are commendable, EPA
needs to better define expectations and develop systems to effectively measure and analyze
program performance to ensure the desired state of security and achieve its goals. This issue has
been an OIG management challenge since FY 2002.
EPA made significant progress in implementing the Agency's Homeland Security
Strategic Plan;"2 a comprehensive approach to carrying out EPA's responsibilities m responding
to and recovering from acts of environmental and other terrorists attacks. In FY 2003, EPA
established an Office of Homeland Security (OHS) as the lead office for ensuring
implementation of the Homeland Security Strategic Plan, coordinating homeland security policy
development across EPA, and serving as primary liaison with senior officials in the Department
of Homeland Security and other Federal agencies with responsibilities for homeland security.
The Homeland Security Strategic Plan was updated and is currently undergoing a quality control
review. EPA plans to release the updated Plan during the second quarter of FY 2004.
EPA responded to requests for information and reports from the White House Homeland
Security Council, Department of Homeland Security, White House Office of Management and
Budget, General Accounting Office, Congress, and members of the public. The Agency is also
developing a homeland security information management system.
EPA is working to complete a number of inter- and intra-agency efforts related to
homeland security, including critical infrastructure, bio-defense, and laboratory capacity. In
addition, EPA convened a Homeland Security Policy Coordinating Committee, and is working
with senior staff to develop and resolve homeland security policy priorities at EPA. EPA also
formed a working group to explore issues associated with the management and analysis of
national security information and other sensitive information. The group completed a program
review during the first quarter of FY 2004, and EPA is currently reviewing proposed
recommendations. EPA's plans to implement accepted recommendations should begin during
the second quarter of FY 2004.
Linking Mission and Management
OIG believes that EPA has begun developing the process for linking resources to results,
but needs to strengthen its ability to link costs to goals by working cooperatively with its State
and Federal agency partners to develop more outcome-oriented goals and measures, and by
improving Agency accounting procedures. This issue has been an OIG management challenge
from FY 2001 to FY 2003.
EPA's sustained focus on improving the way the Agency manages for results and uses
cost and performance information hi decision making has resulted in government-wide
recognition for the Agency's achievements in Budget and Performance Integration under the
32 U.S. EPA Strategic Plan for Homeland Security. Available at
http://www..q?a.gov/epahome/downlpads/epa homelancLseciirity strategic plan.pdf
SA-12
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
President's Management Agenda. The Agency's accomplishments hi FY 2003 include the
following: (1) revising EPA's strategic plan to include five outcome-oriented goals and
supporting objectives and sub-objectives that have clear linkages with the work of regions,
states, and tribes; (2) developing Regional Plans as a common framework for linking EPA's
Regional priorities to the Agency's five strategic goals; (3) increasing the use of annual
performance information and trend data in developing the FY 2005 budget; and (4) developing
more outcome-oriented annual performance goals and measures as well as efficiency measures.
In addition, in FY 2003, EPA enhanced its cost accounting capabilities and strengthened the
linkages between resources and performance by developing a new accounting framework that
will allow EPA to track resources across the five new goals. Further, EPA released a Draft
Report on the Environment33 as part of the Agency's "environmental indicators initiative," which
is intended to help assess the current state of the environment and to provide a baseline against
which future performance can be measured.
EPA joined only two other Federal agencies hi receiving a "green" status score for
Improved Financial Performance. OMB provided this distinction in recognition of the Agency's
significant accomplishments in these areas, including EPA's use of financial and performance
information in day-to-day program management and decision making. OMB also provided the
Agency with progress scores of "green" for Budget and Performance Integration under the
President's Management Agenda for the seventh consecutive quarter since June 2002. EPA
received a 2003 President's Quality Award for financial management,34 the highest recognition
hi government given to Federal agencies for excellence hi management. In addition, EPA was
selected as a finalist last year for the 2002 President's Quality Award in the area of Budget and
Performance Integration.35 While EPA acknowledges the importance of the improvement
opportunities identified by the OIG, it has made significant progress hi this area, and is
effectively working on further achievements.
Grants Management and Use of Assistance Agreements
EPA needs to improve oversight for the award and administration of assistance
agreements to ensure effective and efficient use of resources. From FY 2001 to FY 2003 this
issue has been an EPA weakness, and a GAO, OMB or OIG management challenge.
Each fiscal year, EPA awards, on the average, slightly less than half of the Agency's
budget hi grants,36 and it is implementing a comprehensive approach to manage these grant
dollars effectively and ensure they further the Agency's mission. Specifically, hi FY 2003, EPA
33 U.S. EPA Draft Report on the Environment 2003 (EPA-260-R-02-006, June 2003), available at
http://www.epa.gov/mdicators/roe/indgx.htm.
34 EPA received 2003 Presidential Award for Management Excellence, media advisory. Available at
ht^/www.opm.gpy/pressrel/2003/WA-PQA.asp.
35 EPA selected as finalist for the 2002 Presidential Quality Award in Area of Budget and Performance Integration, news
release. Available at httpi/vwww.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/11/20021125 2.html.
36 U.S. EPA, Office of Administration and Resources Management. "EPA Grants Information and Control System (GICS)
database." Washington, DC: EPA.
SA-13
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
developed the Agency's first long-term Grants Management Plan.37 The Plan provides the
framework for ensuring that EPA's grant programs meet the highest management and fiduciary
standards and further the Agency's strategic program goals.
A key objective of the long-term Plan is to strengthen accountability for grants
management. To that end, EPA issued directives emphasizing the need to hold staff accountable
for effective grants management, and requiring managers to include compliance with grants
management policies in mid-year performance discussions with staff. In addition, EPA is
requiring Headquarters and Regional offices to include hi then: Integrity Act Assurance letters a
description of their efforts to address the grants management weakness. The Agency is
supplementing these efforts with an ongoing review of employee performance standards to
ensure that standards adequately reflect grants management responsibilities.
EPA is aggressively implementing its recently established policies for grants competition
and post-award monitoring. In FY 2003, the Agency has more than doubled the percentage of
competitive awards to non-profit organizations covered by the competition policy over the level
achieved in FY 2002, and the new post-award monitoring policy will significantly increase the
level of baseline and advanced monitoring of grantees. All Agency Senior Resource Officials
(SROs) submitted FY 2003 post-award monitoring plans to ensure a strong level of commitment
to effective grants management and accountability. EPA also has developed a new performance
incentives award program for grants management that will recognize offices that exceed the
performance measures in the long-term Plan. Other accomplishments include: revamped training
programs focusing on core competencies of project officers and grants specialists; a
comprehensive, new system of grants management reviews of EPA offices; highlighting in the
Agency's 2003 Strategic Plan the importance of effective grants management in carrying out the
Agency's strategic goals; developing an interim policy on grant environmental results; and
convening two meetings of the Grants Management Council, composed of SROs, to provide for
high-level planning and coordination.
37 U.S. EPA, Office of Administration and Resources Management. "EPA Grants Management Plan." Washington, DC: EPA.
Available only through the Intemet:http://www.epa.gov/ogd/EO/fiiialreport.pdf
SA-14
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
EPA USER FEE PROGRAM
In FY 2005, EPA will have several user fee programs in operation. These user fee
programs are as follows:
Current Fees
• Pre-Manufacturing Notification Fee
Since 1989, this fee has been collected for the review and processing of new chemical
Pre-Manufacturing Notifications (PMN) submitted to EPA by the chemical industry.
These fees are paid at the time of submission of the PMN for review by EPA's Office of
Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances. PMN fees are authorized by the Toxic
Substances Control Act and contain a cap on the amount the Agency may charge for a
PMN review. EPA expects to collect $1,800,000 in PMN fees in FY 2005 if the existing
fee structure is not altered hi FY 2004. The removal of the statutory fee cap is discussed
below under User Fee Proposals.
• Lead Accreditation and Certification Fee
The Toxic Substances Control Act, Title IV, Section 402(a)(3), mandates the
development of a schedule of fees for persons operating lead training programs
accredited under the 402/404 rale and for lead-based paint contractors certified under this
rule. The training programs ensure that lead paint abatement is done safely. Fees
collected for this activity are deposited in the U.S. Treasury. EPA estimates that less than
$500,000 will be deposited in FY 2005.
Pesticides Fees
The FY 2005 President's Budget assumes passage of the FY 2004 Omnibus
Appropriations Act, which includes authorization for a new fee structure for the pesticides
program, under the Pesticides Registration Improvement Act for 2003. The new structure
includes an extension to the Maintenance fee for older pesticide review, and a new Enhanced
Registration Services fee, which will allow the Agency to accelerate the review of new
registration actions for pesticides.
• Pesticides Maintenance Fee Extension
The Maintenance Fee provides funding for both the Tolerance Reassessment and the
Reregistration programs. The Pesticides Registration Improvement Act extends the
maintenance fee through 2008, to coincide with the schedules for these programs.
Tolerance reassessment is slated for completion in 2006, under the FQPA statute, and the
final reregistration decisions are scheduled for 2008. In FY 2005, the Agency expects
collections of $27,000,000.
SA-15
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Enhanced Registration Services
The Pesticides Registration Improvement Act includes fees for accelerated service on
registration decisions for pesticides. This will allow industry to move new pesticides to
the market more quickly, often providing an alternative to older, riskier pesticides in use.
These fees will be paid to the Agency at the time the registration action request is
submitted. In FY 2005, Agency collections are estimated at $19,400,000.
Removal of the Statutory Cap on the Pre-Manufacturing Notification Fee
The Agency is proposing authorizing and appropriations language to remove the statutory
cap on the existing Pre-Manufacturing Notification (PMN) fees to allow EPA to cover
the full cost of the PMN program. The authorizing language would remove the current
statutory cap in the Toxic Substances Control Act on the total fee that EPA is allowed to
charge. The fee change would be subject to an appropriations language trigger that
would allow the fees to be counted as discretionary. Under the current fee structure, the
Agency would collect $1,800,000 in FY 2005. The increase hi PMN fees will be
deposited into a special fund in the U.S. Treasury, available to the Agency, subject to
appropriation. After the anticipated rulemaking, the Agency estimates collections of an
additional $4,000,000 in FY 2005.
Pesticides Registration Fee
The Pesticides Registration Improvement Act rescinds the authority to collect pesticides
registration fees to offset base program costs. This budget proposes amending the Act to
allow collection of this fee. Collections are estimated at $26,000,000.
Motor Vehicle and Engine Compliance Program Fee
This fee is authorized by the Clean Air Act of 1990 and is managed by the Office of Air
and Radiation. Fee collections began in August 1992. This fee is imposed on
manufacturers of light-duty vehicles, light and heavy trucks and motorcycles. EPA has a
final rule currently under review at OMB that updates fees for industries currently paying
fees and setting forth fees for newly regulated vehicles and engines. The fees established
for new compliance programs are imposed on heavy-duty, in-use, and nonroad industries,
including large diesel and gas equipment (earthmovers, tractors, forklifts, compressors,
etc), handheld and non-handheld utility engines (chainsaws, weed-wackers, leaf-blowers,
lawnmowers, tillers, etc.), marine (boat motors, tugs, watercraft, jet-skis), locomotive,
aircraft and recreational vehicles (off-road motorcycles, snowmobiles). The fees cover
EPA's cost of certifying new engines and vehicles and monitoring compliance of in-use
engines and vehicles. In FY 2005, EPA expects to collect $18,000;000 from this fee.
SA-16
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
WORKING CAPITAL FUND
In FY 2005, the Agency begins its ninth year of operation of the Working Capital Fund
(WCF). It is a revolving fund authorized by law to finance a cycle of operations, where the costs
of goods and services provided are charged to users on a fee-for-service basis. The funds
received are available without fiscal year limitation, to continue operations and to replace capital
equipment. EPA's WCF was implemented under the authority of Section 403 of the
Government Management Reform Act of 1994 and EPA's FY 1997 Appropriations Act.
Permanent WCF authority was contained in the Agency's FY 1998 Appropriations Act.
The Chief Financial Officer initiated the WCF in FY 1997 as part of an effort to: (1) be
accountable to Agency offices, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Congress; (2)
increase the efficiency of the administrative services provided to program offices; and (3)
increase customer service and responsiveness. The Agency has a WCF Board which provides
policy and planning oversight and advises the CFO regarding the WCF financial position. The
Board, chaired by the Associate Chief Financial Officer, is composed of eighteen permanent
members from the program offices and the regional offices.
Two Agency Activities begun in FY 1997 will continue into FY 2005. These are the
Agency's data processing and telecommunications operations, managed by the Office of
Technology Operations and Planning, and Agency postage costs, managed by the Office of
Administration. The Agency's FY 2005 budget request includes resources for these two
Activities in each National Program Manager's submission, totaling approximately $148.0
million. These estimated resources may be increased to incorporate program office's additional
service needs during the operating year. To the extent that these increases are subject to
Congressional reprogramming notifications, the Agency will comply with all applicable
requirements.
SA-17
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
STATE and TRIBAL ASSISTANCE GRANTS (STAG)
Appropriation Account
(Dollars in thousands)
FY2003
Enacted
Budget
FY2004
President's
Budget
FY2005
Pres Bud
Total
Difference
FY 2005 PB
v.
FY 2004 PB
STATE and TRIBAL GRANT
ASSISTANCE
INFRASTRUCTURE ASSISTANCE
State Revolving Funds
Clean Water State Revolving Fund
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund
Total Infrastructure
STAG PROJECTS
Brownfields Projects
Clean School Bus Initiative
Special Needs Projects
Mexican Border
Alaskan Native Villages
Puerto Rico
Total Special Needs Projects
Congressional Earmarks
Total - STAG Projects
TOTAL STAG
$1,142,901.8 $1,202,700.0 $1,252,300.0
$49,600.0
$1,341,225.0 $850,000.0 $850,000.0 $0.0
$844,475.0 $850,000.0 $850,000.0 $0.0
$2,185,700.0
$89,911.8
$49,675.0
$42,723.1
$92,398.1
$323,992.3
$506,302.2
$1,700,000.0
$120,500.0
$50,000.0
$40,000.0
$8,000.0
$98,000.0
$0.0
$218,500.0
$1,700,000.0
$120,500.0
$65,000.0
$50,000.0
$40,000.0
$4,000.0
$94,000.0
$0.0
$279,500.0
$0.0
$0.0
$65,000.0
$0.0
$0.0
-$4,000.0
-$4,000.0
$0.0
$61,000.0
$3,834,904.0 $3,121,200.0 $3,231,800.0 $110,600.0
SA-18
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
CATEGORICAL GRANTS PROGRAM (STAG)
(Dollars in millions)
$643 ,$665,
$645
$674
$745
$880
$885
$1,006
$1,074
$1,202
$1,252
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
In FY 2005, the President's Budget requests a total of $1,252 million for 25 "categorical"
program grants for state and Tribal governments. This is an increase of $49.6 million over FY
2004. EPA will continue to pursue its strategy of building and supporting state, local and Tribal
capacity to implement, operate, and enforce the Nation's environmental laws. Most
environmental laws envision establishment of a decentralized nationwide structure to protect
public health and the environment. In this way, environmental goals will ultimately be achieved
through the actions, programs, and commitments of state, Tribal and local governments,
organizations and citizens.
In FY 2005, EPA will continue to offer flexibility to state and Tribal governments to
manage their environmental programs as well as provide technical and financial assistance to
achieve mutual environmental goals. First, EPA and its state and Tribal partners will continue
implementing the National Environmental Performance Partnership System (NEPPS). NEPPS is
designed to allow states more flexibility to operate their programs, while increasing emphasis on
measuring and reporting environmental improvements. Second, Performance Partnership Grants
(PPGs) will continue to allow states and tribes funding flexibility to combine categorical
program grants to address environmental priorities.
HIGHLIGHTS:
State & Local Air Quality Management, Radon, and Tribal Air Quality Management Grants
In FY 2005, the President's Budget includes $247.8 million for Air State and Local
Assistance grants to support state, local, and Tribal air programs as well as radon programs.
State and Local Air Quality Management grant funding is requested in the amount of $228.6
SA-19
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
million. These funds provide resources to state and local air pollution control agencies for the
development and implementation of programs for the prevention and control of air pollution or
for the implementation of national primary and secondary ambient ah* standards. They can also
be used to support certain research and development and related activities. Tribal Air Quality
Management grants, requested in the amount of $11.1 million, provide funds to Tribes to
develop and implement air pollution prevention and control programs, or to implement national
primary and secondary ambient air standards. Lastly, the President's Budget includes $8.2
million for Radon grants, to provide funding for state radon programs.
Pesticide Enforcement, Toxics Substance Compliance, and Sector Program Grants
In FY 2005, the President's Budget includes $27.3 million to build environmental
partnerships with states and tribes and to strengthen their ability to address environmental and
public health threats. The enforcement state grants request consists of $19.9 million for
Pesticides Enforcement, $5.15 million for Toxic Substances Enforcement Grants, and $2.25
million for Sector Grants. State and Tribal enforcement grants will be awarded to assist in the
implementation of compliance and enforcement provisions of the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA) and the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). These grants
support state and Tribal compliance activities to protect the environment from harmful chemicals
and pesticides.
Under the Pesticides Enforcement Grant program, EPA provides resources to states and
Indian tribes to conduct FIFRA compliance inspections and take appropriate enforcement actions
and implement programs for farm worker protection. Under the Toxic Substances Compliance
Grant program, states receive funding for compliance inspections of asbestos and
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and for implementation of the state lead abatement
enforcement program. The funds will complement other Federal program grants for building
state capacity for lead abatement, and enhancing compliance with disclosure, certification and
training requirements.
Pesticides Program Implementation Grants
The President's FY 2005 budget includes $13.1 million for Pesticides Program
Implementation grants. These resources will assist states and tribes hi implementing the safer
use of pesticides, including: worker protection; certification and training of pesticide applicators;
protection of endangered species; tribal pesticide programs; integrated pest management and
environmental stewardship; and protection of water from pesticide contamination.
Lead Grants
The President's FY 2005 budget includes $13.7 million for Lead grants. This funding
will support the development of authorized programs in both States and Tribes to prevent lead
poisoning through the training of workers who remove lead-based paint, the accreditation of
training programs, the certification of contractors, and renovation education programs. Another
SA-20
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
activity that this funding will support is the collection of lead data to determine the nature and
extent of the lead problem within an area.
Pollution Prevention Grants
The FY 2005 request includes $6.0 million for Pollution Prevention grants. The grant
program provides technical assistance towards the achievement of reduced pollution through
source reduction.
Environmental Information Grants
In FY 2005, the President's Budget includes $25.0 million to continue a grant program,
started in 2002, which provides states and tribes assistance to develop the Exchange Network.
This grant program will support state and Tribal efforts to complete necessary changes to their
information management systems to facilitate participation, and enhance state information
integration efforts. The Exchange Network will improve environmental decision making,
improve data quality and accuracy, ensure security of sensitive data, and reduce the burden on
those who provide and those who access information
Underground Storage Tanks (UST) Grants
The President's FY 2005 budget includes $37.9 million for Underground Storage Tank
grants, an increase of $26 million over 2004. The proposed $26 million increase in state and
tribal grants would allow EPA to fund additional inspections of underground storage tanks.
More inspections will ensure proper operation and maintenance of UST systems to prevent
future releases. This investment more than triples the size of Federal assistance to states and
tribes for the UST program. States and tribes will use these resources to ensure that UST owners
and operators routinely and correctly monitor all regulated tanks and piping in accordance with
regulations, and also to develop programs with sufficient authority and enforcement capabilities
to operate in lieu of the Federal program.
Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance Grants
In FY 2005, the President's Budget includes $106.4 million in funding for Hazardous
Waste Financial Assistance grants. Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance grants are used for
the implementation of both the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardous
waste management and minimization programs.
Brownflelds Grants
In FY 2005, the President's Budget includes $60.0 million, to continue the Brownfields
grant program that provides assistance to states and tribes to develop and enhance their state and
Tribal response programs. This funding will help states and tribes develop legislation,
regulations, procedures, and guidance, to establish or enhance the administrative and legal
structure of their response programs.
SA-21
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Water Pollution Control (Clean Water Act Section 106) Grants
In FY 2005, the President's Budget includes $222.4 million for Water Pollution Control
grants, an increase of $22.0 million over 2004. Of this increase, $17.0 million will fund grants to
states and tribes under the water quality monitoring initiative to support adoption of new
comprehensive monitoring strategies and the development of statistically valid monitoring
networks to help target activities and determine water quality status and trends. The remaining
$5 million will assist states in the implementation of the Concentrated Animal Feeding
Operations (CAFOs) programs and support issuance of storm sewer permits.
Wetlands Grants
In FY 2005, the President's Budget includes $20.0 million for Wetlands Program Grants.
These grant resources will be used to assist states and tribes in protecting wetlands and waters
not covered by the Clean Water Act.
Public Water System Supervision Grants
In FY 2005, the President's Budget includes $105.1 million for Public Water System
Supervision (PWSS) grants. These grants provide assistance to implement and enforce National
Primary Drinking Water Regulations to ensure the safety of the Nation's drinking water
resources and to protect public health.
Indian General Assistance Program Grants
In FY 2005, the President's Budget includes $62.5 million for the Indian General
Assistance Program (GAP) to help Federally recognized tribes and niter-tribal consortia develop,
implement and assume environmental programs.
Homeland Security Grants
In FY 2005, the President's Budget includes $5.0 million for homeland security grants to
support states' efforts to work with drinking water and wastewater systems to develop and
enhance emergency operations plans; conduct training in the implementation of remedial plans in
small systems; and, develop detection, monitoring and treatment technology to enhance drinking
water and wastewater security.
Water Quality Cooperative Agreements Grants
The FY 2005 President's Budget includes $20.5 million for Water Quality Cooperative
Agreements grants, an increase of $1.5 million over 2004. This increase will fund a new
technical assistance and demonstration grants program to show municipalities innovative ways
of managing infrastructure. Through the Water Quality Cooperative Agreement program, the
Agency continues to support the creation of unique and innovative approaches to address
SA-22
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
requirements of the NPDES program, with special emphasis on wet weather activities. In
addition, this grant program has long supported other programmatic activities such as sustainable
management systems for water pollution control and various other program innovations.
Underground Injection Control (UIC) Grants
The FY 2005 President's Budget includes $11.0 million for the Underground Injection
Control grants program. Ensuring safe underground injection of waste materials is a fundamental
component of a comprehensive source water protection program. Grants are provided to states that
have primary enforcement authority (primacy) to implement and maintain UIC programs.
Targeted Watershed Grants
The President's FY 2005 Budget funds Targeted Watershed grants at $25 million, an increase
of $5 million over to help municipalities meet requirements for nutrient loading reductions. The
program supports competitive grants to watershed stakeholders ready to undertake immediate
action to improve water quality, and to improve watershed protection measures with tools,
training and technical assistance. Special emphasis will be given to projects that promote water
quality trading opportunities to more efficiently achieve water quality benefits through market-
based approaches.
State and Tribal Performance Fund
The President's FY 2005 Budget includes $23 million for a new performance grants
program that will be available to states and tribes on a competitive basis for all activities eligible
for categorical grant assistance. The award process will be performance-focused, with winners
selected on the basis of environmental and/or public health outcomes. This will encourage
development of projects with tangible, performance-based environmental and health outcomes
that can be models for implementation across the nation..
Wastewater Operator Training Grants
The President's FY 2005 Budget includes $1.5 million as a transfer from EPM to STAG
to better align its budget with its performance goals and reflect the environmental partnerships
supported by these funds. States and state universities receive funding to provide technical
assistance for municipally owned wastewater treatment plants.
Elimination of Tribal Cap on Non-Point Sources
In 2005, the President's Budget eliminates the statutory one-third-of-one-percent cap on
Clean Water Act Section 319 Nonpoint Source Pollution grants that may be awarded to tribes.
Tribes applying for and receiving Section 319 grants have steadily increased from two in 1991 to
over 70 in 2001. This proposal recognizes the increasing demand for resources to address Tribal
nonpoint source program needs.
SA-23
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
CATEGORIAL PROGRAM GRANTS (STAG)
by National Program
and State Grant
(Dollars in Thousands)
Grant
Air & Radiation
State and Local Assistance
Tribal Assistance
Radon
Water Quality
Pollution Control (Section 106)
Beaches Protection
Nonpoint Source (Section 319)
Wetlands Program Development
Water Quality Cooperative Agrmts
Targeted Watersheds
Wastewater Operator Training Grants
Drinking Water
Public Water System Supervision (PWSS)
Underground Injection Control (UIC)
Homeland Security
Hazardous Waste
H.W. Financial Assistance
Brownfields
Underground Storage Tanks
Pesticides & Toxics
Pesticides Program Implementation
Lead
Toxic Substances Compliance
Pesticides Enforcement
Multimedia
Environmental Information
Pollution Prevention
Sector Program
Indian General Assistance Program
State and Tribal Performance Fund
TOTALS
FY2004
President's
Budget
$228,550.0
$11,050.0
$8,150.0
$247,750.0
$200,400.0
$10,000.0
$238,500.0
$20,000.0
$19,000.0
$20,000.0
$0.0
$507,900.0
$105,100.0
$11,000.0
$5,000.0
$121,100.0
$106,400.0
$60,000.0
$11,950.0
$178,350.0
$13,100.0
$13,700.0
$5,150.0
$19,900.0
$51,850.0
$25,000.0
$6,000.0
$2,250.0
$62,500.0
$0.0
$95,750.0
FY2005
President's
Budget
$228,550.0
$11,050.0
$8,150.0
$247,750.0
$222,400.0
$10,000.0
$209,100.0
$20,000.0
$20,500.0
$25,000.0
$1,500.0
$508,500.0
$105,100.0
$11,000.0
$5,000.0
$121,100.0
$106,400.0
$60,000.0
$37,950.0
$204,350.0
$13,100.0
$13,700.0
$5,150.0
$19,900.0
$51,850.0
$25,000.0
$6,000.0
. $2,250.0
$62,500.0
$23,000.0
$118,750.0
$1,202,700.0 $1,252,300.0
Difference
FY2005v
FY2004
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
. $22,000.0
$0.0
($29,400.0)
$0.0
$1,500.0
$5,000.0
$1,500.0
$600.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$26,000.0
$26,000.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$23,000.0
$23,000.0
$26,250.0
SA-24
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
FY 2005 STAG CATEGORICAL PROGRAM GRANTS
Statutory Authority and Eligible Uses
(Dollars in Thousands)
Grant Title
State and Local
Air Quality
Management
State and Local
Air Quality
Management
Statutory
Authorities
Clean Air Act,
§103
Clean Air Act,
§103
Eligible
Recipients*
Air pollution
control
agencies as
defined in
section 302(b)
of the CAA.
Multi-
jurisdictional
organizations
(non-profit
organizations
whose boards
of directors or
membership is
made up of
CAA section
302(b) agency
officers and
Tribal
representatives
and whose
mission is to
support the
continuing
environmental
programs of
the states).
Eligible Uses
S/L monitoring
and data
collection
activities in
support of the
establishment of
aPM2.5
monitoring
network and
associated
program costs.
Coordinating or
facilitating a
multi-
jurisdictional
approach to
addressing
regional haze.
FY2004
Request
$42,500.0
$10,000.0
FY2005
Goal/
Objective
Goal 1,
Ohi 1
wUJ. 1
Goal 1,
r\L.: t
UDJ. 1
FY2005
Request
$42,500.0
$10,000.0
SA-25
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Grant Titte
State and Local
Air Quality
Management
Statutory
Authorities
Clean Air Act,
Sections 103,
105, 106
Eligible
Recipients*
Air pollution
control
agencies as
defined in
section 302(b)
of the CAA;
Multi-
jurisdictional
organizations
(non-profit
organizations
whose boards
of directors or
membership is
made up of
CAA section
302(b) agency
officers and
whose mission
is to support
the continuing
environmental
programs of
the states);
Interstate air
quality control
region
designated
pursuant to
section 107 of
the CAA or of
implementing
section 176A,
or section 184
NOTE: only
the Ozone
Transport
Commission is
eligible as of
2/1/99
Eligible Uses
Carrying out the
traditional
prevention and
control programs
required by the
CAA and
associated
program support
costs;
Coordinating or
facilitating a
multi-
jurisdictional
approach to
carrying out the
traditional
prevention and
control programs
required by the
CAA; Supporting
training for CAA
section 302(b) air
pollution control
agency staff;
Coordinating or
facilitating a
multi-
jurisdictional
approach to
control interstate
ah" pollution.
FY2004
Request
$176,050.0
FY2005
Goal/
Objective
Goal 1,
Ohi 1
\S*JJ* -I
FY2005
Request
$176,050.0
SA-26
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Grant Title
Tribal Air
Quality
Management
Radon
Water Pollution
Control (Section
106)
Statutory
Authorities
Clean Air Act,
Sections 103 and
105; TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts
Toxic Substances
Control Act,
Sections 10 and
306; TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
FWPCA, as
amended, §106;
TCA in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
Eligible
Recipients*
Tribes;
Intertribal
Consortia;
State/Tribal
college or
university.
State
Agencies,
Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
States, Tribes
and Intertribal
Consortia, and
Interstate
Agencies
Eligible Uses
Conducting air
quality
assessment
activities to
determine a
tribe's need to
develop a CAA
program;
Carrying out the
traditional
prevention and
control programs
required by the
CAA and
associated
program costs;
Supporting
training for CAA
for federally
recognized
tribes.
Assist in the
development and
implementation
of programs for
the assessment
and mitigation of
radon.
Develop and
carry out surface
and ground water
pollution control
programs,
including
NPDES permits,
TMDL's, WQ
standards,
monitoring, and
NFS control
activities.
FY2004
Request
$11,050.0
$8,150.0
$200,400.0
FY2005
Goal/
Objective
Goal 1,
Obj. 1
Goal 1,
/-vr : *\
Obj. 2
Goal 2,
/-vt_* f\
Obj. 2
FY2005
Request
$11,050.0
$8,150.0
$222,400.0
SA-27
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Grant TMe
Nonpoint Source
(NFS - Section
319)
Wetlands
Program
Development
Water Quality
Cooperative
Agreements
Statutory
Authorities
FWPCA, as
amended,
§319(h);TCA
in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
FWPCA, as
amended,
§104(b)(3);
TCA in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
FWPCA, as
amended,
§104(b)(3);Safe
Drinking Water
Act, §1442; TCA
in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
Eligible
Recipients*
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
States, Local
Governments,
Tribes,
Interstate
Organizations,
Intertribal
Consortia, and
Non-Profit
Organizations
States, Local
Governments,
Tribes, Non-
Profit
Organizations,
Intertribal
Consortia, and
Interstate
Organizations
Eligible Uses
Implement EPA-
approved State
and Tribal
nonpoint source
management
programs and
fund priority
projects as
selected by the
State.
To develop new
wetland
programs or
enhance existing
programs for the
protection,
management and
restoration of
wetland
resources.
Creation of
unique and
innovative
approaches to
pollution control
and prevention
requirements
associated with
wet weather
activities, AFOs,
TMDLs, source
water protection,
watersheds; and
sustainable
infrastructure
management for
both wastewater
and drinking
water systems.
FY2004
Request
$238,500.0
$20,000.0
$19,000.0
FY2005
Goal/
Objective
Goal 2,
/~lt*« O
Ubj. 2
Goal 4,
Obj.3
~rj* ""
Goal 2,
Obj. 1 and
Obj.2
FY2005
Request
$209,100.0
$20,000.0
$20,500.0
SA-28
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Grant Title
Targeted
Watershed
Grants
Public Water
System
Supervision
(PWSS)
Homeland
Security Grants
Underground
Injection Control
[UIC]
Statutory
Authorities
FWPCA, as
amended, FY05
Appropriations
Act
Safe Drinking
Water Act,
§1443(a); TCA
in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
Safe Drinking
Water Act,
1442; TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
Safe Drinking
Water Act, §
1443(b);TCAin
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
Eligible
Recipients*
States, Local
Governments,
Tribes,
Interstate
Organizations,
Intertribal
Consortia, and
Non-Profit
Organizations
States, Tribes,
and Intertribal
Consortia
States, Tribes,
and Intertribal
Consortia
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
Eligible Uses
Assistance for
watersheds to
expand and
improve existing
watershed
protection
efforts.
Assistance to
implement and
enforce National
Primary Drinking
Water
Regulations to
ensure the safety
of the Nation's
drinking water
resources and to
protect public
health.
To assist States
and Tribes in
coordinating
then- water
security activities
with other
homeland
security efforts.
Implement and
enforce
regulations that
protect
underground
sources of
drinking water
by controlling
Class I-V
underground
injection wells.
FY2004
Request
$20,000.0
$105,100.0
$5,000.0
$11,000.0
FY2005
Goal/
Objective
Goal 4,
Obj. 3
Goal 2,
Obi 1
Vj'l/t . 1
Goal 2,
Obj. 1
J
Goal 2,
Obj. 1
FY2005
Request
$25,000.0
$105,100.0
$5,000.0
$11,000.0
SA-29
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Grant Title
Beaches
Protection
Wastewater
Operator
Training Grants
Hazardous Waste
Financial
Assistance
Statutory
Authorities
Beaches
Environmental
Assessment and
Coastal Health
Act of 2000;
TCA in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
Clean Water Act;
Section 104(g)(l)
Resource
Conservation
Recovery Act,
§3011;
FY 1999
Appropriations
Act (PL 105-
276); TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
Eligible
Recipients*
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia,
Local
Governments
State Agencies
and
educational
institutions
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
Eligible Uses
Develop and
implement
programs for
monitoring and
notification of
conditions for
coastal recreation
waters adjacent
to beaches or
similar points of
access that are
used by the
public.
To fiiriH
JL \J JLUlJXi
programs for the
development of
training/
retraining of
people in the
fields of
operation,
maintenance and
security of
wastewater
treatment works
and related
activities to
maintain the
effectiveness of
systems.
Development &
Implementation
of Hazardous
Waste Programs
FY2004
Request
$10,000.0
$1,500.0 in
theEPM
account
$106,400.0
FY2005
Goal/
Objective
Goal 2,
Obi. 1
V VJ* *•
Goal 2, Obj.
2
Goal 3,
Obj. 1
Obj. 2
FY2005
Request
$10,000.0
$1,500.0 in
the STAG
account
$106,400.0
SA-30
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Grant Title
Brownfields
Underground
Storage Tanks
[UST]
Statutory
Authorities
Comprehensive
Environmental
Response,
Compensation
and Liability Act
of 1980, as
amended,
Section 128
Resource
Conservation
Recovery Act
Sections 8001
and 2007(f) and
FY 1999
Appropriations
Act (PL 105-
276); TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
Eligible
Recipients*
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
State, Tribes
and Intertribal
Consortia
Eligible Uses
Build and
support
Brownfields
programs which
will assess
contaminated
properties,
oversee private
party cleanups,
provide cleanup
support through
low interest
loans, and
provide certainty
for liability
related issues.
Demonstration
Grants,
Inspections,
Surveys and
Training;
Develop &
implement UST
program.
FY2004
Request
$180,500.0
$11,950.0
FY2005
Goal/
Objective
Goal 4,
Obi. 2
•v vj,» •»•*
Goal 3
/~\l*i 1
Obj. 1
FY2005
Request
$180,500.0
$37,950.0
SA-31
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Grant Title
Pesticides
Program
Implementation
Statutory
Authorities
The Federal
Insecticide,
Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act
§ 20 & 23; the
FY 1999
Appropriations
Act (PL 105-
276); FY 2000
Appropriations
Act (P.L. 106-
74); TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
Eligible
Recipients*
States, Tribes
and Intertribal
Consortia
Eligible Uses
Assist states and
tribes to develop
and implement
pesticide
programs,
including
programs that
protect workers,
ground-water,
and endangered
species from
pesticide risks ,
and other
pesticide
management
programs
designated by the
Administrator;
develop and
implement
programs for
certification and
training of
pesticide
applicators;
develop
Integrated
Pesticides
Management
(IPM) programs;
support
pesticides
education,
outreach, and
sampling efforts
for tribes.
FY2004
Request
$13,100.0
FY2005
Goal/
Objective
Goal 2,
f\L.; 1
Ubj. 1
Goal 4,
/"yf_i I
Ubj. 1
FY2005
Request
$13,100.0
SA-32
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Grant Title
Lead
Toxic Substances
Compliance
Pesticide
Enforcement
Statutory
Authorities
Toxic Substances
Control Act, -
§ 404 (g); TSCA
10; FY2000
Appropriations
Act (P.L. 106-
74); TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
Toxic Substances
Control Act,
§28(a) and 404
(g); TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
FIFRA
§23(a)(l);FY
2000
Appropriations
Act (P.L. 106-
74); TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
Eligible
Recipients*
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
States,
Territories,
Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
States,
Territories,
Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
Eligible Uses
To support and
assist states and
tribes to develop
and carry out
authorized state
lead abatement
certification,
training and
accreditation
programs; and to
assist tribes in
development of
lead programs.
Assist in
developing and
implementing
toxic substances
enforcement
programs for
PCBs, asbestos,
and lead-based
paint.
Assist in
implementing
cooperative
pesticide
enforcement
programs.
FY2004
Request
$13,700.0
$5,150.0
$19,900.0
FY2005
Goal/
Objective
Goal 4,
Obj. 1
GoalS,
Obj. 1
Goal 5,
Obj. 1
FY2005
Request
$13,700.0
$5,150.0
$19,900.0
SA-33
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Grant Titte
National
Environmental
Information
Exchange
Network
(NEIEN,aka
"the Exchange
Network")
Statutory
Authorities
As appropriate,
Clean Air Act,
Sec. 103; Clean
Water Act, Sec.
104; Solid Waste
Disposal Act,
Sec. 8001;
FIFRA, Sec 20;
TSCA, Sec. 10
and 28; Marine
Protection,
Research and
Sanctuaries Act,
Sec. 203; Safe
Drinking Water
Act, Sec. 1442;
Indian
Environmental
General
Assistance
Program Act of
1992, as
amended; FY
2000
Appropriations
Act (P.L. 106-
74); Pollution
Prevention Act,
Sec. 6605; FY
2002
Appropriations
Act and FY 2003
Appropriations
Acts.
Eligible
Recipients*
States, tribes,
interstate
agencies, tribal
consortium,
and other
agencies with
related
environmental
information
activities.
Eligible Uses
Assists states and
others to better
integrate
environmental
information
systems, better
enable data-
sharing across
programs, and
improve access
to information.
FY2004
Request
$25,000.0
FY2005
Goal/
Objective
Goal 4
Obj.2
FY2005
Request
$25,000.0
SA-34
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Grant Title
Pollution
Prevention
Sector Program
(previously
Enforcement &
Compliance
Assurance)
Statutory
Authorities
Pollution
Prevention Act
of 1990, §6605;
TSCA 10;
FY2000
Appropriations
Act (P.L. 106-
74); TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
As appropriate,
Clean Air Act,
Sec. 103; Clean
Water Act, Sec.
104; Solid Waste
Disposal Act,
Sec. 8001;
FIFRA, Sec 20;
TSCA, Sec. 10
and 28; Marine
Protection,
Research and
Sanctuaries Act,
Sec. 203; Safe
Drinking Water
Act, Sec. 1442;
Indian
Environmental
General
Assistance
Program Act of
1992, as
amended; FY
2000
Appropriations
Act(P.L. 106-
74); TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
Eligible
Recipients*
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
State,
Territories,
Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia,
Multi-
jurisdictional
Organizations
Eligible Uses
To assist state
and tribal
programs to
promote the use
of source
reduction
techniques by
businesses and to
promote other
Pollution
Prevention
activities at the
state and tribal
levels.
Assist in
developing
innovative
sector-based,
multi-media, or
single-media
approaches to
enforcement and
compliance
assurance
FY2004
Request
$6,000.0
$2,250.0
FY2005
Goal/
Objective
Goal 4,
Obj. 1
Goal 5,
/~\U4 1
Ubj. 1
FY2005
Request
$6,000.0
$2,250.0
SA-35
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Grant Title
Indian General
Assistance
Program
State and Tribal
Performance
Fund
Statutory
Authorities
Indian
Environmental
General
Assistance
Program Act of
1992, as
amended; TCA
in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
FY 2005
President's
Budget
Eligible
Recipients*
Tribal
Governments
and Intertribal
Consortia
State and
Tribal
Governments
Eligible Uses
Plan and develop
Tribal
environmental
protection
programs.
Projects with
performance-
based
environmental
and public health
outcomes
FY2004
Request
$62,500.0
$0.0
F¥2005
Goal/
Objective
Goal 5,
Obj.3
Goal 5,
Obj.2
FY2005
Request
$62,500.0
$23,000.0
* The Recipients listed in this column reflect assumptions in the FY 2005 Budget Request in terms of expected and/or anticipated
eligible recipients.
SA-36
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
INFRASTRUCTURE / STAG PROJECTS FINANCING
(Dollars in millions)
Infrastructure Financing
Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF)
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF)
STAG Projects
Brownfields Environmental Projects
Clean School Bus Initiative
Mexico Border Projects
Alaska Native Villages
Targeted Projects - Puerto Rico
Total
FY2004
President's Budget
$850.0
$850.0
$120.5
$0.0
$50.0
$40.0
$8.0
$1,918.5
FY 2005
President's Budget
$850.0
$850.0
$120.5
$65.0
$50.0
$40.0
$4.0
$1,979.5
Infrastructure and Special Projects Funds
The President's Budget includes a total of $1,979.5 million in 2005 for EPA's
Infrastructure programs. Of the total infrastructure request, $1,744 million will support EPA's
Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water, $170.5 million will support EPA's Goal 4: Healthy Communities
and Ecosystems.
Infrastructure funding under the State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
appropriation provides financial assistance to states, municipalities and Tribal governments to
fund a variety of drinking water, wastewater, air and Brownfields environmental projects. These
funds are essential to fulfill the Federal government's commitment to help our state, Tribal and
local partners obtain adequate funding to construct the facilities required to comply with Federal
environmental requirements and ensure public health and revitalize contaminated properties.
Providing STAG funds to capitalize State Revolving Fund (SRF) programs, EPA works
in partnership with the states to provide low-cost loans to municipalities for infrastructure
construction. As set-asides of the SRF programs, grants are available to Indian Tribes and
Alaska Native Villages for drinking water and wastewater infrastructure needs based on national
priority lists. The Brownfields Environmental Program provides states, tribes, political
subdivisions (including cities, towns, and counties) the necessary tools, information, and
strategies for promoting a unified approach to environmental assessment cleanup,
SA-37
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
characterization, and redevelopment at sites contaminated with hazardous wastes and petroleum
contaminants.
The resources included in this budget will enable the Agency, in conjunction with EPA's
state, local, and Tribal partners, to achieve several important goals for 2005. Some of these goals
include:
94 percent of the population served by community water systems will receive drinking
water meeting all health-based standards with compliance dates of December 2001 or
earlier.
Award 126 assessment grants under the Brownfields program, bringing the cumulative
total grants awarded to 806 by the end of FY 2005 paving the way for productive reuse of
these properties. This will bring the total number of sites assessed to 6,800 while
leveraging a total of $7.5 billion in cleanup and redevelopment funds since 1995.
GOAL 1; CLEAN AIR AND GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE
Clean School Bus USA Initiative
In FY 2005, EPA will receive $65 million to retrofit school buses, a significant source of
emissions that can cause health hazards in children. EPA began the Clean School Bus USA pilot
program in April 2003 to provide schools and school districts cost-share grants to reduce diesel
emissions from school buses. More than 24 million children that ride buses to school are at risk
of exposure to high levels of diesel exhaust. Idling school buses can also compromise air quality
around buses, including sidewalks, schoolyards, playgrounds, and even inside nearby buildings.
By adopting better idling practices, retrofitting buses with modern emission control technology,
using cleaner fuels and replacing older school buses, we have the potential of reducing PM
emissions by more than 90 percent, helping to put tomorrow's cleaner buses on the road today.
GOAL 2: CLEAN AND SAFE WATER
Capitalizing Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds
The Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Fund programs demonstrate a true
partnership between states, localities and the Federal government. These programs provide
Federal financial assistance to states, localities, and Tribal governments to protect the nation's
water resources by providing funds for the construction of drinking water and wastewater
treatment facilities. The state revolving funds are two important elements of the nation's
substantial investment in sewage treatment and drinking water systems which provides
Americans with significant benefits in the form of reduced water pollution and safe drinking
water.
EPA will continue to capitalize the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF).
Through this program, the Federal government provides financial assistance for wastewater and
SA-38
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
other water projects, including nonpoint source, estuary, stormwater, and sewer overflow
projects. Water infrastructure projects contribute to direct ecosystem improvements by lowering
the amount of nutrients and toxic pollutants in all types of surface waters.
The President's Budget includes funding the CWSRF at $850 million each year through
2011. More than $20 billion has already been provided to capitalize the CWSRF, over twice the
original Clean Water Act authorized level of $8.4 billion. Total CWSRF funding available for
loans since 1987, reflecting loan repayments, state match dollars, and other funding sources, is
approximately $47 billion, of which more than $43.5 billion has been provided to communities
as financial assistance.
The dramatic progress made in improving the quality of wastewater treatment since the
1970s is a national success. In 1972, only 84 million people were served by secondary or
advanced wastewater treatment facilities. Today, 99 percent of community wastewater treatment
plants, serving 181 million people, use secondary treatment or better.
The DWSRF will be self-sustaining in the long run and will help offset the costs of
ensuring safe drinking water supplies and assisting small communities in meeting their
responsibilities. As noted in the May 2003 Report to Congress, since its inception hi 1997, the
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) program has made available $5.2 billion to
finance 1,900 infrastructure improvement projects nationwide, with a return of $1.60 for every
$1 of federal funds invested.
State Flexibility between SRFs: The Agency requests continuation of authority provided in the
1996 Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Amendments which allows states to transfer an amount
equal to 33 percent of their DWSRF grants to their CWSRF programs, or an equivalent amount
from then: CWSRF program to their DWSRF program. The transfer provision gives states
flexibility to address the most critical demands in either program at a given tune. The statutory
transfer provision expired September 30, 2002.
Set-Asides for Tribes: To improve public health and water quality in Indian Country, the
Agency will continue the 1 1/2% set-aside of the CWSRF for wastewater grants to tribes as
provided in the Agency's 2002 appropriation. More than 70,000 homes in Indian country have
inadequate or nonexistent wastewater treatment. EPA and the Indian Health Service estimate
that Tribal wastewater infrastructure needs exceed $650.0 million.
Alaska Native Villages
The President's Budget includes. $40.0 million for Alaska native villages for the
construction of wastewater and drinking water facilities to address serious sanitation problems.
EPA will continue to work with the Department of Health and Human Services' Indian Health
Service, the State of Alaska, and local communities to provide needed financial and technical
assistance.
SA-39
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Puerto Rico
The President's Budget includes $4 million for the design of upgrades to Metropolitano's
Sergio Cuevas treatment plant hi San Juan, Puerto Rico. When all upgrades are complete, EPA
estimates that about 1.4 million people will enjoy safer, cleaner drinking water.
GOAL 4: HEALTHY COMMUNITIES AND ECOSYSTEMS
Brownfields Environmental Projects
The President's Budget includes a total of $120.5 million for brownfields environmental
projects. EPA will award grants for assessment activities, cleanup, and Brownfields cleanup
revolving loan funds (BCRLF). Additionally, this includes cleanup of sites contaminated by
petroleum or petroleum products and environmental job training grants.
Mexico Border
The President's Budget includes a total of $50.0 million for water infrastructure projects along the
U.S./Mexico Border. The goal of this program is to reduce environmental and human health risks along the
U.S./Mexico Border. The communities along both sides of the Border are facing unusual human health and
environmental threats because of the lack of adequate wastewater and drinking water facilities. EPA's U.S./Mexico
Border program provides funds to support the planning, design and construction of high priority water and
wastewater treatment projects along the U.S./Mexico Border. The Agency's FY 2005 goal is to have a cumulative
total of 1.5 million people in the Mexico border area protected from health risks because of adequate water and
wastewater sanitation systems funded.
SA-40
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
PROGRAM PROJECTS
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
Acquisition Management
Acquisition Management
Acquisition Management
Administrative Law
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC)
Beach / Fish Programs
Brownfields
Brownfields
Categorical Grant: Beaches Protection
Categorical Grant: Brownfields
Categorical Grant: Environmental
Information
Categorical Grant: Hazardous Waste
Financial Assistance
Categorical Grant: Homeland Security
Categorical Grant: Lead
Categorical Grant: Nonpoint Source
(Sec. 3 19)
Categorical Grant: Pesticides
Enforcement
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Program
Implementation
Categorical Grant: Pollution Control
(Sec. 106)
Categorical Grant: Pollution Prevention
Categorical Grant: Public Water System
Supervision (PWSS)
Categorical Grant: Radon
Appropriation
EPM
SUPERFUND
LUST
EPM
EPM
SUPERFUND
SUPERFUND
IG
SUPERFUND
EPM
EPM
SUPERFUND
STAG
STAG
STAG
STAG
STAG
STAG
STAG
STAG
STAG
STAG
STAG
STAG
STAG
FY2003
Actuals
$24,061.8
$16,452.8
$226.3
$4,464.4
$877.9
$0.0
$12,110.4
$34,502.5
($6.5)
$3,197.3
$20,635.1
$1,978.3
$7,473.3
$48,605.7
$18,514.0
$104,940.8
$4,508.5
$15,137.6
$228,776.9
$20,341.8
$13,165.5
$193,648.9
$5,360.4
$92,694.2
$9,415.3
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$25,227.6
$16,417.8
$200.9
$4,705.1
$1,153.4
$0.0
$13,213.6
$36,807.7
$0.0
$3,689.5
$27,820.6
$0.0
$10,000.0
$60,000.0
$25,000.0
$106,400.0
$5,000.0
$13,700.0
$238,500.0'
$19,900.0
$13,100.0
$200,400.0
$6,000.0
$105,100.0
$8,150.0
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$24,264.3
$19,028.5
$366.7
$4,929.3
$1,014.9
$874.7
$13,138.6
$37,997.0
$0.0
$3,237.6
$28,002.3
$0.0
$10,000.0
$60,000.0
$25,000.0
$106,400.0
$5,000.0
$13,700.0
$209,100.0
$19,900.0
$13,100.0
$222,400.0
$6,000.0
$105,100.0
$8,150.0
SA-41
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
PROGRAM PROJECTS
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
Categorical Grant: Targeted Watersheds
Categorical Grant: Toxics Substances
Compliance
Categorical Grant: Tribal General
Assistance Program
Categorical Grant: Underground
Injection Control (UIC)
Categorical Grant: Underground Storage
Tanks
Categorical Grant: Wastewater Operator
Training
Categorical Grant: Water Quality
Cooperative Agreements
Categorical Grant: Wetlands Program
Development
Categorical Grant: Sector Program
Categorical Grant: State and Local Air
Quality Management
Categorical Grant: State and Tribal
Performance Fund
Categorical GrantTribal Air Quality
Management
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
Children and other Sensitive Populations
Civil Enforcement
Civil Enforcement
Civil Enforcement
Civil Rights / Title VI Compliance
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs
Climate Protection Program
Climate Protection Program
Commission for Environmental
Appropriation
STAG
STAG
STAG
STAG
STAG
STAG
STAG
STAG
STAG
STAG
STAG
STAG
EPM
SUPERFUND
LUST
EPM
EPM
SUPERFUND
OIL
EPM
EPM
S&T
EPM
S&T
EPM
FY2003
Actuals
$12,940.0
$5,229.8
$56,577.4
$10,465.7
$11,655.8
$0.0
$18,155.7
$14,206.2
$2,609.9
$229,633.4
$0.0
$13,483.1
$55,931.3
$18,303.9
$654.2
$3,737.1
$100,780.1
$133.2
$1,423.1
$8,491.7
$15,520.7
$4,189.4
$82,169.5
$19,588.0
$4,374.0
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$20,000.0
$5,150.0
$62,500.0
$11,000.0
$11,950.0
$0.0
$19,000.0
$20,000.0
$2,250.0
$228,550.0
$0.0
$11,050.0
$62,043.4
$23,150.4
$949.6
$7,080.4
$108,751.1
$142.7
$1,588.2
$12,113.8
$16,453.2
$9,352.9
$91,289.6
$17,320.3
$3,937.8
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$25,000.0
$5,150.0
$62,500.0
$11,000.0
$37,950.0
$1,500.0
$20,500.0
$20,000.0
$2,250.0
$228,550.0
$23,000.0
$11,050.0
$64,486.8
$21,218.1
$950.4
$7,121.3
$113,395.4
$142.0
$1,628.7
$12,414.2
$17,495.8
$9,352.9
$91,961.3
$17,458.9
$3,948.8
SA-42
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
PROGRAM PROJECTS
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
Cooperation
Compliance Assistance and Centers
Compliance Assistance and Centers
Compliance Assistance and Centers
Compliance Assistance and Centers
Compliance Incentives
Compliance Incentives
Compliance Monitoring
Congressional, Intergovernmental,
External Relations
Congressional, Intergovernmental,
External Relations
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Criminal Enforcement
Criminal Enforcement
Drinking Water Programs
Drinking Water Programs
Endocrine Disrupters
Enforcement Training
Enforcement Training
Environment and Trade
Environmental Education
Environmental Justice
Environmental Justice
Exchange Network
Exchange Network
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Appropriation
EPM
LUST
OIL
S&T
EPM
SUPERFUND
EPM
EPM
SUPERFUND
EPM
SUPERFUND
STAG
S&T
EPM
SUPERFUND
EPM
S&T
EPM
EPM
SUPERFUND
EPM
EPM
EPM
SUPERFUND
EPM
SUPERFUND
B&F
EPM
SUPERFUND
FY2003
Actuals
$24,786.3
$401.9
$198.6
$268.0
$9,185.2
$403.8
$56,567.5
$54,010.1
$138.2
$79,980.2
$28.9
$274,231.1
$44,613.9
$30,874.4
$9,574.1
$83,373.3
$2,746.4
$7,075.1
$3,797.0
$864.5
$1,769.6
$5,281.0
$3,721.6
$770.6
$18,806.4
$2,476.0
$28,204.9
$284,373.5
$61,632.5
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$27,205.8
$586.5
$279.9
$0.0
$9,081.2
$176.0
$58,155.0
$47,267.7
$184.5
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$30,276.1
$7,800.7
$96,132.8
$2,952.7
$9,002.7
$3,283.9
$754.7
$1,702.6
$0.0
$4,144.3
$900.0
$30,370.2
$2,925.1
$31,418.0
$313,311.4
$63,837.8
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$27,759.1
$585.3
$276.6
$0.0
$9,195.1
$175.6
$62,216.7
$48,366.0
$184.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$31,370.0
$8,535.7
$97,947.9
$2,999.7
$9,037.3
$3,302.4
$755.7
$1,723.1
$0.0
$4,230.5
$900.0
$25,419.7
$2,342.5
$31,418.0
$326,793.8
$70,981.9
SA-43
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
PROGRAM PROJECTS
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Federal Stationary Source Regulations
Federal Support for Air Quality
Management
Federal Support for Air Quality
Management
Federal Support for Air Toxics Program
Federal Support for Air Toxics Program
Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and
Certification
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG
Management
Financial Assistance Grants / LAG
Management
Forensics Support
Forensics Support
Geographic Program: Chesapeake Bay
Geographic Program: Great Lakes
Geographic Program: Gulf of Mexico
Geographic Program: Lake Champlain
Geographic Program: Long Island Sound
Geographic Program: Other
Great Lakes Legacy Act
Homeland Security: Communication and
Information
Homeland Security: Critical
Infrastructure Protection
Homeland Security: Critical
Infrastructure Protection
Homeland Security: Critical
Infrastructure Protection
Homeland Security: Preparedness,
Response, and Recovery
Appropriation
LUST
OIL
S&T
EPM
EPM
S&T
EPM
S&T
S&T
EPM
SUPERFUND
SUPERFUND
S&T
EPM
EPM
EPM
EPM
EPM
EPM
EPM
EPM
EPM
SUPERFUND
S&T
EPM
FY2003
Actuals
$1,036.7
$503.6
$9,249.6
$19,120.1
$83,423.5
$9,950.6
$27,092.6
$1,426.0
$55,525.5
$15,073.7
$2,718.5
$3,264.7
$11,581.2
$21,755.2
$16,810.7
$4,383.0
$2,666.6
$2,225.5
$5,73 L7
$0.0
$874.0
$3,820.0
$361.1
$14,186.4
$688.8
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$1,053.1
$504.4
$8,715.8
$23,702.2
$87,004.8
$10,033.3
$26,498.2
$2,560.0
$60,446.8
$17,373.8
$2,939.6
$5,695.9
$12,562.5
$20,777.7
$18,104.2
$4,431.7
$954.8
$477.4
$4,762.5
$15,000.0
$3,820.3
$6,844.2
$770.7
$24,782.3
$1,827.4
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$883.9
$504.4
$8,715.8
$24,302.0
$93,283.6
$10,048.7
$25,181.2
$2,582.9
$64,466.5
$20,328.9
$2,933.2
$4,189.3
$12,721.5
$20,816.6
$21,194.8
$4,477.8
$954.8
$477.4
$6,789.7
$45,000.0
$4,320.3
$6,840.8
$852.6
$3,515.6
$1,839.8
SA-44
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
PROGRAM PROJECTS
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
Homeland Security: Preparedness,
Response, and Recovery
Homeland Security: Preparedness,
Response, and Recovery
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA
Personnel and Infrastructure
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA
Personnel and Infrastructure
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA
Personnel and Infrastructure
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA
Personnel and Infrastructure
Human Health Risk Assessment
Human Health Risk Assessment
Human Resources Management
Human Resources Management
Human Resources Management
Indoor Air: Asthma Program
Indoor Air: Environment Tobacco
Smoke Program
Indoor Air: Radon Program
Indoor Air: Radon Program
Indoor Air: Schools and Workplace
Program
Indoor Air: Schools and Workplace
Program
Information Security
Information Security
Information Security
Infrastructure Assistance: Alaska Native
Villages
Infrastructure Assistance: Brownfields
Projects
Infrastructure Assistance: Clean School
Bus Initiative
Infrastructure Assistance: Clean School
Appropriation
SUPERFUND
S&T
B&F
EPM
SUPERFUND
S&T
SUPERFUND
S&T
EPM
SUPERFUND
LUST
EPM
EPM
EPM
S&T
EPM
S&T
EPM
SUPERFUND
S&T
STAG
STAG
EPM
STAG
FY2003
Actuals
$66,237.6
$3,273.7
$10,281.4
$23,719.6
$0.0
$5,967.1
$1,796.4
$25,739.6
$39,536.6
$6,955.1
$0.0
$9,062.6
$2,832.8
$5,376.3
$467.3
$7,955.7
$1,049.5
$19,594.1
$1,948.9
($26.8)
$41,810.6
$81,953.4
$0.0
$0.0
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$35,625.2
$24,917.6
$11,500.0
$6,288.0
$600.0
$2,100.0
$3,916.9
$32,578.1
$42,384.6
$6,803.4
$3.0
$11,097.0
$3,617.5
$5,492.2
$378.9
$10,320.2
$856.0
$13,337.4
$0.0
$0.0
$40,000.0
$120,500.0
$1,500.0
$0.0
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$29,163.2
$25,396.0
$11,500.0
$6,344.3
$600.0
$2,100.0
$3,951.8
$32,880.4
$44,139.5
$4,410.6
$3.0
$11,197.3
$3,695.1
$5,667.1
$398.5
$10,352.1
$906.1
$4,188.3
$508.9
$0.0
$40,000.0
$120,500.0
$0.0
$65,000.0
SA-45
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
PROGRAM PROJECTS
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
Bus Initiative
Infrastructure Assistance: Clean Water
SRF
Infrastructure Assistance: Drinking
Water SRF
Infrastructure Assistance: Mexico Border
Infrastructure Assistance: Puerto Rico
International Capacity Building
IT / Data Management
IT / Data Management
IT / Data Management
IT / Data Management
IT / Data Management
Legal Advice: Environmental Program
Legal Advice: Environmental Program
Legal Advice: Support Program
LUST/UST
LUST/UST
LUST Cooperative Agreements
LUST Cooperative Agreements
Marine Pollution
National Estuary Program / Coastal
Waterways
NEPA Implementation
Offsetting Receipts
Oil Spill: Prevention, Preparedness and
Response
Pesticides: Field Programs
Pesticides: Registration of New
Pesticides
Pesticides: Registration of New
Pesticides
Pesticides: Review / Reregistration of
Appropriation
STAG
STAG
STAG
STAG
EPM
EPM
SUPERFUND
LUST
OIL
S&T
EPM
SUPERFUND
EPM
EPM
LUST
EPM
LUST
EPM
EPM
EPM
Offsetting
Receipts
OIL
EPM
EPM
S&T
EPM
FY2003
Actuals
$1,386,537.4
$866,607.7
$113,426.6
$0.0
$11,774.0
$88,443.9
$16,381.7
$52.2
$37.7
$3,527.6
$33,132.3
$781.4
$8,871.3
$6,770.6
$12,645.8
$10.8
$55,787.9
$7,070.0
$22,712.0
$11,204.2
$0.0
$12,543.8
$21,120.5
$40,362.9
$2,096.0
$48,487.3
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$850,000.0
$850,000.0
$50,000.0
$8,000.0
$6,176.9
$116,081.7
$17,459.0
$143.7
$23.8
$4,057.8
$33,879.1
$843.8
$12,240.9
$7,144.2
$10,581.0
$0.0
$58,399.1
$12,049.9
$19,094.2
$12,315.4
($4,000.0)
$12,897.5
$25,757.7
$33,699.0
$2,282.6
$61,933.8
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$850,000.0
$850,000.0
$50,000.0
$4,000.0
. $6,854.0
$133,182.4
$18,067.3
$177.6
$32.8
$4,821.4
$34,678.8
$844.0
$12,521.7
$7,094.5
$10,499.6
$0.0
$58,450.0
$12,296.0
$19,229.3
$12,654.2
($30,000.0)
$13,064.7
$27,185.9
$42,907.0
$2,403.2
$58,053.9
SA-46
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
PROGRAM PROJECTS
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
Existing Pesticides
Pesticides: Review / Reregistration of
Existing Pesticides
Pollution Prevention Program
POPs Implementation
Radiation: Protection
Radiation: Protection
Radiation: Protection
Radiation: Response Preparedness
Radiation: Response Preparedness
RCRA: Corrective Action
RCRA: Waste Management
RCRA: Waste Minimization &
Recycling
Regional Geographic Initiatives
Regional Science and Technology
Regulatory Innovation
Regulatory/Economic-Management and
Analysis
Research: Air Toxics
Research: Drinking Water
Research: Endocrine Disrupter
Research: Environmental Technology
Verification (ETV)
Research: Human Health and
Ecosystems
Research: Human Health and
Ecosystems
Research: Land Protection and
Restoration
Research: Land Protection and
Restoration
Research: Land Protection and
Restoration
Research: Land Protection and
Appropriation
S&T
EPM
EPM
EPM
SUPERFUND
S&T
EPM
S&T
EPM
EPM
EPM
EPM
EPM
EPM
EPM
S&T
S&T
S&T
S&T
SUPERFUND
S&T
SUPERFUND
LUST
OIL
S&T
FY2003
Actuals
$2,434.7
$15,450.3
$2,090.9
$11,111.8
$2,138.0
$3,860.4
$3,009.5
$1,119.3
$36,816.6
$59,706.6
$15,433.3
$6,855.9
$2,840.1
$14,082.3
$21,261.8
$14,257.2
$43,253.7
$13,161.9
$2,619.0
$1.8
$163,548.9
$14,190.3
$607.8
$875.9
$9,448.8
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$2,380.6
$17,098.7
$2,224.4
$12,443.4
$2,336.5
$4,084.9
$2,401.0
$1,680.2
$40,363.8
$67,381.6
$12,771.6
$8,755.7
$3,609.2
$21,931.7
$18,468.6
$15,700.9
$46,053.4
$12,984.7
$4,011.8
$0.0
$190,730.8
$24,960.5
$628.5
$915.0
$10,064.5
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$2,417.1
$22,496.2
$2,235.4
$11,811.7
$2,323.2
$2,847.0
$2,610.9
$2,239.0
$40,975.6
$67,422.3
$14,301.7
$8,799.5
$3,626.2
$21,992.2
$18,551.8
$17,638.9
$46,118.1
$8,044.0
$2,996.8
$0.0
$177,407.5
$22,671.1
$628.5
$917.8
$8,841.9
SA-47
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
PROGRAM PROJECTS
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
Restoration
Research: Particulate Matter
Research: Pesticides and Toxics
Research: Pollution Prevention
Research: Pollution Prevention
Research: SITE Program
Research: Troposphere Ozone
Research: Water Quality
Research: Computational Toxicology
Research: Fellowships
Research: Global Change
Science Advisory Board
Science Policy and Biotechnology
Small Business Ombudsman
Small Minority Business Assistance
State and Local Prevention and
Preparedness
Stratospheric Ozone: Domestic Programs
Stratospheric Ozone: Multilateral Fund
SUPERFUND: Emergency Response
and Removal
SUPERFUND: Enforcement
SUPERFUND: EPA Emergency
Preparedness
SUPERFUND: EPA Emergency
Preparedness
SUPERFUND: Federal Facilities
SUPERFUND: Federal Facilities lAGs
SUPERFUND: Remedial
SUPERFUND: Support to Other Federal
Agencies
Surface Water Protection
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk
Management
Appropriation
S&T
S&T
SUPERFUND
S&T
SUPERFUND
S&T
S&T
S&T
S&T
S&T
EPM
EPM
EPM
EPM
EPM
EPM
EPM
SUPERFUND
SUPERFUND
EPM
SUPERFUND
SUPERFUND
SUPERFUND
SUPERFUND
SUPERFUND
EPM
EPM
FY2003
Actuals
$64,437.9
$32,664.7
$408.9
$31,095.2
$4,781.1
$4,804.2
$46,934.1
$5,436.9
$2,040.8
$22,354.9
$3,748.7
$850.2
$3,048.6
$2,105.8
$10,273.0
$5,994.8
$9,518.9
$217,880.1
$158,487.3
($0.2)
$17,927.0
$28,838.1
$6,749.0
$656,387.4
$10,178.8
$169,838.6
$10,464.4
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$63,620.6
$36,784.8
$593.0
$38,405.6
$6,941.1
$4,942.3
$47,178.5
$8,948.6
$6,402.8
$21,528.6
$4,409.0
$1,603.8
$3,764.9
$2,214.5
$12,508.1
$5,786.6
$11,000.0
$199,803.9
$155,307.5
$0.0
$10,130.1
$32,744.2
$10,022.6
$732,042.6
$10,676.0
$190,234.5
$9,243.1
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$63,690.8
$29,017.7
$593.0
$33,467.5
$6,927.7
$4,900.9
$46,809.8
$13,028.7
$8,261.6
$20,689.6
$4,757.1
$1,707.2
$3,838.7
$2,282.0
$12,134.8
$5,839.6
$13,500.0
$201,088.0
$155,537.2
$0.0
$10,091.4
$32,182.0
$10,044.4
$725,483.8
$10,676.0
$191,796.6
$9,514.2
SA-48
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
PROGRAM PROJECTS
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk
Review and Reduction
Appropriation
Credit Subsidy
Re-estimate
FY2003
Actuals
$905.5
FY2004
Pres. Bud.
$0.0
FY2005
Pres. Bud.
$0.0
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk
Review and Reduction
Toxic Substances: Lead Risk Reduction
Program
TRI / Right to Know
TRI / Right to Know
Tribal - Capacity Building
US Mexico Border
Wetlands
EPM
$41,306.9
$45,536.2
$45,878.8
EPM
EPM
S&T
EPM
EPM
EPM
$11,263.0
$14,490.6
$197.0
$9,555.8
$4,967.7
$17,129.2
$14,832.9
$14,609.2
$81.4
$10,494.1
$6,484.4
$19,299.9
$11,082.6
$15,940.9
. $0.0
$10,641.7
$5,784.8
$19,752.8
SA-49
-------
o
«
I
oa
1-8
•3
e
i-^ O
& -8
C 09
S «
M &,
^ C
fl O
I u
•s •§
I I
2 s
PH ^
"3 ^
2 »
C U
« e
e es
I g
o >-
! I
c
•S
o
o
r-CP^HO
0
es
P
3
j
cs
Q
1 1
"S o
-------
1.
2.
3.
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
AIR TOXICS
Recommendation
Increase funding for toxic air pollutant programs
in the FY 2004 budget by $7 million in State
grants for monitoring to help fill data gaps,
Next Milestone
Final funding level will be determined during the
agency's FY 2004 operating plan development
process.
Completion Date
04/01/04
Next Milestone Date
04/01/04
On Track? (Y/N)
Y
Lead Organization
Office of Air and
Radiation
Comments on Status
Requested funding provided by
Congress.
Lead Official
Jerry Kurtzweg
Recommendation
Focus on maximizing programmatic net benefits
and mlaamtang the cost per deleterious health
effect avoided
Next Milestone
Completion of remaining MACT standards
Completion Date
Ongoing
Next Milestone Date
02/29/04
On Track? (Y/N)
Y
Lead Organization
Office of Air and
Radiation
Comments on Status
EPA will complete the
remaining MACT standards
and continue work on the
residual risk program.
Lead Official
Jerry Kurtzweg
Recommendation
Establish better performance measures ^including
a» appropriate efficiency measure).
Completion Date
Ongoing
On Track? (Y/N)
Y
Comments on Status
Proposed efficiency measure
submitted to OMB in PART
update. For further information
consult the Efficiency
Measures / Measure
Development Plan subsection
within the Goal 1 Objective 1
SA-51
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Next Milestone
Potential efficiency measures identified; further
analysis needed to develop measure.
Next Milestone Date
07/01/04
Lead Organization
Office of Air and
Radiation
section. For further
information consult the
Efficiency Measures / Measure
Development Plan subsection
within the Goal 1 Objective 1
section.
Lead Official
Jerry Kurtzweg
NONPOINT SOURCE PROGRAM
1.
Recommendation
Develop an owtetMae-based efficiency measure
that demonstrates the ttiarginal to ibe
enviroianaettt per dollars expended for ffee
progcam
Completion Date
09/04/04
On Track? (Y/N)
Y
Next Milestone
Continue to work with state partners to improve
efficiency measure and develop actions based on
OMB's 05 recommendations
Next Milestone Date
06/30/04
Lead Organization
Office of Water
Comments on Status
OMB approved revised long-
term performance measures
but rejected efficiency measure
in 05 PART reassessment.
Program will work with OMB
to develop efficiency measure.
For further information consult
the Efficiency Measures /
Measure Development Plan
subsection within the Goal 2
Objective 2 section.
Lead Official
Mike Mason
SA-52
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
SUPERFUND/CERCLA REMOVAL/EMERGENCY RESPONSE
1.
Recommendation
Establish better "Outcome" perfofmaaee
measures
Completion Date On Track? (Y/N)
TBD Y
Next Milestone
Effectiveness measure developed for testing
Next Milestone Date
03/01/04
Lead Organization
Office of Solid Waste
and Emergency
Response
Comments on Status
OSWER currently has a
contractor tasked with
reviewing historical Removal
Action data to determine what
types of measures of
effectiveness of removals
(such as lives saved or
protected, environment
protected, etc.) might be
workable, especially to show
improvement from one year to
the next. For further
information consult the
Efficiency Measures / Measure
Development Plan subsection
within the Goal 3 Objective 2
section.
Lead Official
Dana Stalcup
2.
Recommendation
Completion Date On Track? (Y/N)
Comments on Status
SA-53
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Establish efficiency measures.
TBD
Next Milestone
Draft efficiency measure developed
Next Milestone Date
10/01/04
Lead Organization
Office of Solid Waste
and Emergency
Response
We have begun looking at
ways to categorize different
types of removals, based on
things such as size and
complexity, to allow for
possible efficiency analyses.
For further information consult
the Efficiency Measures /
Measure Development Plan
subsection within the Goal 3
Objective 2 section
Lead Official
Dana Stalcup
3.
Recommendation
Completion Date On Track? (Y/N)
Comments on Status
SA-54
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Increase Efforts in Program Evaluation
TBD
Next Milestone
All relevant program offices participate in
ongoing Program Evaluation Network meetings
and provide input to the evaluation planning
process.
Next Milestone Date
03/30/04
Lead Organization
Office of Solid Waste
and Emergency
Response
While the Superfund removal
program does not have a
planned regular, independent
program evaluation process,
we have conducted program
reviews of recent responses
(such as the World Trade
Center and the Anthrax
responses). In addition,
OSWER has recently
implemented an office-wide
Program Evaluation Team and
Network to foster increased
program evaluation efforts
across all OSWER programs,
including the Superfund
removal program. Priorities
for evaluation will be based on
the potential risks/
vulnerabilities posed by a
program or component thereof
and the potential improvement
in operation and efficiency that
could be gained from that
evaluation.
Lead Official
Bruce Pumphrey
SA-55
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
4.
Recommendation
Improve Strategic Planning
Completion Date On Track? (Y/N)
TBD Y
Next Milestone
Complete WTC/Anthrax Lesson Learned
Implement National Approach to Response, and
assess its effectiveness
Next Milestone Date Lead Organization
Office of Solid Waste
and Emergency
Completed Response
03/30/04 and
10/31/04
Comments on Status
While the Superftind Removal
program, by its emergency and
response orientation, does not
have a regular strategic
planning process in place, we
have taken significant
programmatic action as a result
of lessons learned from the
World Trade Center and
Anthrax responses. The
National Approach to
Response (NAR) was
developed to deal with many
of the issues identified during
those responses. A national
work plan to implement the
NAR has been issued which
provides strategic direction for
the removal program over the
next several years.
Lead Official
Dana Stalcup
5.
Recommendation
Completion Date On Track? (Y/N)
Comments on Status
SA-56
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Improve Collection of Program Performance
Data
TBD
Next Milestone
Complete WTC/Anthrax Lesson Learned
Implement National Approach to Response, and
assess its effectiveness
Next Milestone Date
Completed
02/29/04
Lead Organization
Office of Solid Waste
and Emergency
Response
We are currently collecting
program performance data via
the Core ER, and will continue
to improve the data collection
and performance analysis
process over the next year. We
have taken significant
programmatic action as a result
of lessons learned from the
World Trade Center and
Anthrax responses. The
National Approach to
Response (NAR) was
developed to deal with many
of the issues identified during
those responses. A national
work plan to implement the
NAR has been issued which
provides strategic direction for
the removal program over the
next several years.
Lead Official
Dana Stalcup
DRINKING WATER STATE REVOLVING FUND
1.
Recommendation
Completion Date On Track? (Y/N)
Comments on Status
SA-57
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Develop an outcome efficiency measure that
demonstrates the marginal benefit to public
health per dollars expended for the program.
Next Milestone
Continue to develop efficiency measures
9/30/04
Y
Next Milestone Date Lead Organization
06/01/04
Office of Water
OMB reassessment in FY O5
approved revised performance
measures but rejected proposed
efficiency measures. TheDW
SRF program will work with
its state partners in developing
efficiency measures. For
further information consult the
Efficiency Measures / Measure
Development Plan subsection
within the Goal 2 Objective 1
section.
Lead Official
Mike Mason
PESTICIDE REGISTRATION
1.
Recommendation
Improve long-term performance measures;
develop baselines and targets; improve outcome
focus
Next Milestone
Proceed with analysis of potential measures:
analysis funded; next step: complete analysis
Completion Date
ongoing
Next Milestone Date
09/30/04
On Track? (Y/N)
Y
Lead Organization
Office of Prevention,
Pesticides, and Toxic
Substances
Comments on Status
Revisions to long-term
measures made in new
strategic plan; additional
measures under analysis.
Lead Official
Carol Terris
2.
Recommendation
Completion Date On Track? (Y/N)
Comments on Status
SA-58
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Improve long-term performance measures;
develop baselines and targets; improve outcome
focus
Next Milestone
One potential outcome measure/data set
identified. Next step: integrate into program
operation.
09/30/04
Next Milestone Date
09/30/04
Lead Organization
Office of Prevention,
Pesticides, and Toxic
Substances
Revisions to long-term
measures made in new
strategic plan; additional
measures under analysis.
Lead Official
Carol Terris
PESTICIDE REREGISTRATION
1.
Recommendation
Improve long-term performance measures:
develop baselines and targets; improve outcome
focus.
Next Milestone
Proceed with analysis of potential measures:
analysis funded; next step: complete analysis
Completion Date On Track? (Y/N)
Ongoing Y
Next Milestone Date Lead Organization
9/30/04
Office of Prevention,
Pesticides, and Toxic
Substances
Comments on Status
Revisions to long-term
measures made in new
strategic plan; additional
measures under analysis.
Lead Official
Carol Terris
NEW CHEMICALS
1.
Recommendation
Completion Date On Track? (Y/N)
Comments on Status
SA-59
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Establish more outcome-oriented measures
including at least one efficiency measure.
9/30/04
Next Milestone
Amualized targets developed.
Next Milestone Date Lead Organization
06/30/04 Office of Prevention,
Pesticides, and Toxic
Substances
Improved outcome and
efficiency measure in place but
more work is underway to
develop/refine annualized
targets. OCFO/OPEI funded
project to improve efficiency
and outcome measures for
New Chemicals program this
year. For further information
consult the Efficiency
Measures / Measure
Development Plan subsection
within the Goal 4 Objective 1
section.
Lead Official
Carol Terris
2.
Recommendation
Improvement of the program's strategic planning,
including an independent evaluation of the
program, which can result in significant
improvement of program results.
Next Milestone
Canadian peer review of PMN process and tools
initiated in '03
Completion Date
09/30/04
On Track? (Y/N)
Y
Next Milestone Date Lead Organization
09/30/04 Office of Prevention,
Pesticides, and Toxic
Substances
Comments on Status
FDA independent assessment
submitted
Lead Official
Carol Terris
SA-60
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
EXISTING CHEMICALS
Recommendation
Establish better performance measures
Next Milestone
Monitor against revised targets
Completion Date On Track? (Y/N)
09/30/04
Next Milestone Date Lead Organization
Ongoing Office of Prevention,
Pesticides, and Toxic
Substances
Comments on Status
RSEI analyses were shared
with OMB as part of the EPA
Appeal to the FY 2005 PART
results. A new long-term,
ambitious target was
established for the RSEI goal
and annual targets reflect
incremental progress towards
the longer-term goal.
Lead Official
Carol Terris
Recommendation
Establish efficiency measures,
Next Milestone
Three potential efficiency measures identified,
further analysis needed to verify or develop
baselines/metrics
Completion Date
09/30/04
Next Milestone Date
09/30/04
On Track? (Y/N)
Y
Lead Organization
Office of Prevention,
Pesticides, and Toxic
Substances
Comments on Status
Potential efficiency measures
have been developed but
additional program and trends
analysis required.
Lead Official
Carol Terris
SA-61
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
AMERICAN INDIAN ENVIRONMENTAL GENERAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
Recommendation
Encourage EPA to develop
performance targets fear its annual and efficiency
Completion Date On Track? (Y/N)
09/30/04
measures,
Next Milestone
Work with tribal partners to develop more
accurate targets.
Next Milestone Date Lead Organization
09/30/04 Office of
Water/American
Indian Environmental
Office
Comments on Status
OMB approved revised
performance measures in 05
PART reassessment. Program
rating moved from "results not
demonstrated" to "adequate."
For further information consult
the Efficiency Measures /
Measure Development Plan
subsection within the Goal 5
Objective 3 section.
Lead Official
Mike Mason
CIVIL ENFORCEMENT
Recommendation
Completion Date On Track? (Y/N)
Comments on Status
Fund '$5 raiffioii ia the FY 2004 for an
improved compliance data system.
9/31/03
Five million dollars for
modernization of the Clean
Water Act (CWA) data system
was included in the President's
FY 2004 Budget. This is the
second phase of the compliance
SA-62
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
data system modernization
effort known as ICIS (Integrated
Compliance Information
System). Continued delay in
passage of EPA's FY 2004
appropriations bill may delay
efforts to modernize the CWA
data system.
Next Milestone
Next Milestone Date
Lead Organization
Lead Official
Final funding level will be determined during the
agency's FY 2004 operating plan development
process.
04/01/04
Office of
Enforcement and
Compliance
Assurance
Michael Stahl
SA-63
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
SPECIAL ANALYSIS
Acquisition Management, SA-41
Administrative Law, SA-41
Alternative Dispute Resolution, SA-41
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations, SA-
41
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC),
SA-41
Beach / Fish Programs, SA-41
Brownfields, SA-18, SA-21, SA-24, SA-31,
SA-37, SA-38, SA-40, SA-41, SA-45
Brownfields Projects, SA-45
Categorical Grant
Beaches Protection, SA-41
Brownfields, SA-41
Environmental Information, SA-41
Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance,
SA-41
Homeland Security, SA-41
Lead, SA-41
Nonpoint Source (Sec. 319), SA-41
Pesticides Enforcement, SA-41
Pesticides Program Implementation, SA-
41
Pollution Control (Sec. 106), SA-41
Pollution Prevention, SA-41
Public Water System Supervision
(PWSS), SA-41
Radon, SA-41
Sector Program, S A-42
State and Local Air Quality Management,
SA-42
State and Tribal Performance Fund, SA-
42
Targeted Watersheds, SA-42
Toxics Substances Compliance, SA-42
Tribal Air Quality Management, SA-42
Tribal General Assistance Program, SA-
42
Underground Injection Control (UIC),
SA-42
Underground Storage Tanks, SA-42
Wastewater Operator Training, SA-42
Water Quality Cooperative Agreements,
SA-42
Wetlands Program Development, SA-42
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance,
SA-42
Children and other Sensitive Populations,
SA-42
Civil Enforcement, SA-42, SA-62
Civil Rights / Title VI Compliance, SA-42
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs,
SA-42
Clean School Bus Initiative, SA-18, SA-37,
SA-45, SA-46
Climate Protection Program, SA-42
Commission for Environmental
Cooperation, SA-43
Compliance Assistance and Centers, SA-43
Compliance Incentives, SA-43
Compliance Monitoring, SA-43
Congressional, Intergovernmental, External
Relations, SA-43
Congressionally Mandated Projects, SA-43
Criminal Enforcement, SA-43
Drinking Water Programs, SA-43
Endocrine Disrupters, SA-43
Enforcement Training, SA-43
Environment and Trade, SA-43
Environmental Education, SA-43
Environmental Justice, SA-43
Exchange Network, SA-9, SA-21, SA-34,
SA-43
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations, SA-
43, SA-44
Federal Stationary Source Regulations, SA-
44
Federal Support for Air Quality
Management, SA-44
Federal Support for Air Toxics Program,
SA-44
Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and
Certification, SA-44
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG
Management, SA-44
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
SPECIAL ANALYSIS
Forensics Support, SA-44
Geographic Program
Chesapeake Bay, SA-44
Great Lakes, SA-44
Gulf of Mexico, SA-44
Lake Champlain, SA-44
Long Island Sound, SA-44
Other, SA-44
Great Lakes Legacy Act, SA-44
Homeland Security
Communication and Information, SA-44
Critical Infrastructure Protection, SA-44
Preparedness, Response, and Recovery,
SA-44, SA-45
Protection of EPA Personnel and
Infrastructure, SA-45
Human Health Risk Assessment, SA-45
Human Resources Management, SA-45
Indoor Air
Asthma Program, SA-45
Environment Tobacco Smoke Program,
SA-45
Radon Program, SA-45
Schools and Workplace Program, SA-45
Information Security, SA-8, SA-45
Infrastructure Assistance
Alaska Native Villages, SA-45
Clean Water SRF, SA-46
Drinking Water SRF, SA-46
Mexico Border, SA-46
Puerto Rico, SA-46
International Capacity Building, SA-46
IT / Data Management, SA-46
Legal Advice
Environmental Program, SA-46
Support Program, SA-46
LUST/UST, SA-46
LUST Cooperative Agreements, SA-46
Marine Pollution, SA-46
Mexican Border, SA-18
National Estuary Program / Coastal
Waterways, SA-46
NEPA Implementation, SA-46
Oil Spill
Prevention, Preparedness and Response,
SA-46
Pesticides
Field Programs, SA-46
Registration of New Pesticides, SA-46
Review / Reregistration of Existing
Pesticides, SA-47
Pollution Prevention Program, SA-47
POPs Implementation, SA-47
Radiation
Protection, SA-47
Response Preparedness, SA-47
RCRA
Corrective Action, SA-47
Waste Management, SA-47
Waste Minimization & Recycling, SA-47
Regional Geographic Initiatives, SA-47
Regional Science and Technology, SA-47
Regulatory Innovation, SA-9, SA-47
Regulatory/Economic-Management and
Analysis, SA-47
Research
Air Toxics, SA-47
Computational Toxicology, SA-48
Drinking Water, SA-47
Endocrine Disrupter, SA-47
Environmental Technology Verification
(ETV), SA-47
Fellowships, SA-48
Global Change, SA-48
Human Health and Ecosystems, SA-47
Land Protection and Restoration, SA-47,
SA-48
Particulate Matter, SA-48
Pesticides and Toxics, SA-48
Pollution Prevention, SA-48
SITE Program, SA-48
Troposphere Ozone, SA-48
Water Quality, SA-48
Science Advisory Board, SA-4, SA-48
Science Policy and Biotechnology, SA-48
Small Business Ombudsman, SA-48
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2005 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
SPECIAL ANALYSIS
Small Minority Business Assistance, S A-48
State and Local Prevention and
Preparedness, SA-48
Stratospheric Ozone
Domestic Programs, SA-48
Multilateral Fund, SA-48
Surface Water Protection, SA-48
Toxic Substances
Chemical Risk Management, SA-48
Chemical Risk Review and Reduction,
SA-49
Lead Risk Reduction Program, SA-49
TRI / Right to Know, SA-49
Tribal - Capacity Building, SA-49
US Mexico Border, SA-49
Wetlands, SA-22, SA-24, SA-28, SA-49
------- |