For Official Use Only
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
FISCAL YEAR 2014
Justification of Appropriation
Estimates for the Committee
on Appropriations
EPA- 190-R-13-003 April 2013
www.epa.gov/ocfo
Recycled/Recyclable Printed on paper that contains at least 50% recycled fiber
-------
FISCAL YEAR
2014
Justification of
Appropriation
Estimates for the
Committee
on Appropriations
APRIL
2013
FISCAL YEAR
2014
Justification of
Appropriation
Estimates for the
Committee
on Appropriations
APRIL
2013
-------
Mission
The mission of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is to protect
human health and the environment.
Budget in Brief Overview
The mission of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is to protect human health and the
environment by keeping pollution out of the air we breathe, toxins out of the water we drink and
swim in, and harmful chemicals out of the food we eat and the lands where we build our homes
and our communities. The Agency's FY 2014 budget request supports new directions in
transforming our work as well as critical core efforts in the agency's priorities. Advancing
environmental justice and achieving transparency in agency decision-making are an integral part
of achieving our mission.
Environmental challenges and health threats have the capacity to limit opportunity and hold back
the progress of entire communities. The environmental impact of disasters, both natural and
man-made, whether regional or local in scale, reinforce the critical importance of fulfilling
EPA's mission and providing the safeguards that the American people look to the agency to
deliver. We will meet these challenges by using the best available scientific information and
ensuring fair and effective enforcement of environmental laws. By instituting transformational
changes to how we do our work made possible by advances in technology, we will be able to
provide all parts of society—communities, individuals, businesses, and federal, state, local, and
tribal governments—access to accurate information so that they may participate effectively in
managing human health and environmental risks. EPA's work is guided by the best possible data
and research and a commitment to transparency and the accountability that comes with it.
EPA strives to be a good steward of taxpayer resources and to deliver environmental protection
in the most efficient way. To learn more about how the agency accomplishes its mission,
including information on the organizational structure and regional offices, visit:
http://www2.epa.gov/aboutepa/.
FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and President's Budget (including FY 2012 Annual
Performance Report)
The EPA's FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and President's Budget requests $8.153 billion,
$296 million or 3.5 percent below FY 2012 Enacted funding. EPA's budget request includes a
balanced approach to meeting our core program responsibilities in FY 2014 and into the future
by investing in transformational change and making necessary reductions to programmatic
spending and significant cuts to infrastructure financing. As part of adapting to the current fiscal
reality, the FY 2014 budget focuses on core work and significantly reduces or eliminates
programs where the mission has been largely achieved or can be accomplished by other
organizations - either public or private. The budget also reflects savings from program and
operational efficiencies, changes to EPA's workforce, and continued efforts to manage EPA's
real estate footprint.
In FY 2014, the EPA seeks to maintain the strength of federal, state and tribal core programs.
-------
The agency recognizes the difficult fiscal situation the nation is facing and made very difficult
decisions resulting in reductions to support for water infrastructure and other select activities
within EPA's operating budget. This budget proposes large strategic reductions that allow
continued support for our established priorities and core work to sustain necessary and
fundamental human health and environmental protection. Recognizing the limitations of the
federal budget and the declining resources of the states, the agency will continue to implement
strategies that use resources more efficiently and find opportunities to focus and leverage efforts
at all levels to achieve results. This budget highlights actions to reduce costs and redirect our
resources to higher priorities across programmatic lines.
An essential aspect of the FY 2014 budget is our investment in transformational change to how
we do our work; adapting and embracing opportunities for innovation and reinvention. The
budget identifies resources critical to this process and to achieving a more efficient way to
deliver environmental protections and the vision of a Government of the 21st Century. Changing
business, technology, and resource challenges require EPA to take a new approach to accomplish
our mission.
The EPA strives to connect the results we have achieved to our planning and budgeting decisions
and to support our overall strategic direction and priorities. The EPA's FY 2012 performance
information is highlighted throughout the budget request.
FY 2014 Funding Priorities
Support for Core Mission and Priorities
The FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and Budget of $8.153 billion invests in transformational
change to how we do our work and where we do it, provides resources critical to dealing with
tomorrow's challenges today, funds our core programs to advance our priorities, and maintains
support for states and tribes. Our FY 2014 request will continue our progress in clean air and
climate change, protecting the nation's waters, supporting sustainable water infrastructure,
protecting our lands, ensuring the safety of chemicals, and realizing the benefits of technology by
implementing the Next Generation Compliance initiative designed to transform enforcement and
compliance approaches and improve environmental protection. Additional details and supporting
information can be found in the program descriptions.
E-Enterprise
A total of $60 million across the agency supports this effort in FY 2014. The vision of E-
Enterprise is a world where businesses routinely conduct environmental business transactions
with regulators electronically. EPA will develop a single portal where "customers" register to
conduct business with EPA, much like online banking. The system will "push" tailored
information out to customers based on their unique needs. They will be able to go online to apply
for permits, check compliance status, report their emissions, and learn about new regulations that
may apply to them. A goal of E-Enterprise is to replace outdated, paper-reporting with integrated
e-reporting systems using advanced technology and shared IT services. The paperwork and
regulatory reporting burden would be reduced by more efficient collection, reporting, and use of
data, plus regulatory revisions to eliminate redundant or obsolete information requests.
11
-------
Through a combination of e-reporting and regulatory streamlining, the regulatory reporting
burden would be reduced while simultaneously giving industry, government and the public better
information on sources, pollutant releases and environmental conditions. E-Enterprise will
enable local communities to have quicker and broader access to information about environmental
conditions and pollution sources in their neighborhoods. The effectiveness of collaboration
between EPA and states will be enhanced, resulting in more effective public programs.
Enforcement and Compliance
In FY 2014, the EPA seeks to maintain the strength of its core national enforcement and
compliance assurance program. Recognizing the challenging fiscal climate at both the federal
and state level, the agency will implement strategies to use resources more efficiently and find
opportunities to focus and leverage efforts to assure compliance with environmental laws. The
EPA has achieved impressive pollution control and health benefits through vigorous compliance
monitoring and enforcement, but the sheer number of regulated facilities and the contribution of
large numbers of smaller sources of pollution, combined with federal and state budget
constraints, means that the EPA needs to find approaches that go beyond the traditional single
facility inspection and enforcement model to ensure widespread compliance.
In light of fiscal constraints, there is a need to innovate so the EPA can achieve gains in
compliance over the long-term. The EPA is developing and implementing new methods based on
advances in both monitoring and information technology that will improve compliance and our
ability to focus on the most serious violations. This initiative, Next Generation Compliance,
includes five key components: the use of state-of-the-art monitoring technology to detect
pollution problems; leveraging electronic reporting to enhance government efficiency and reduce
paperwork and regulatory reporting burden; enhancing transparency so the public is aware of
facility and government environmental performance; implementing innovative enforcement
approaches; and structuring regulations to be more effective in facilitating improved compliance.
Next Generation Compliance complements E-Enterprise.
Climate Change
A request of $176.5 million for climate change supports the President's commitment to address
this important challenge. This level of funding, $8.1 million above FY 2012 will support efforts
across multiple EPA programs to address the impacts of climate change. Funding will allow the
agency to continue to support a mix of voluntary and regulatory approaches to reducing
greenhouse gas (GHGs). The ENERGY STAR program, the Global Methane Initiative, the GHG
Reporting Rule, Clean Air Act permits, and state and local technical assistance and partnership
programs, such as SmartWay, will all help reduce GHGs.
The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) report, Adapting to the Impacts of Climate Change1
highlights the impacts to environmental systems that are crucial to our social and economic well-
being. The report indicates that climate change is associated with increased flooding, prolonged
drought, more severe heat waves, more frequent wildfires, and changes in wetland, forest, and
grassland habitats. These events result in substantial economic consequences through the
contamination of drinking water resources, impaired air and water quality, and reduced capacity
of ecosystems to provide the services to society that we depend upon. Better information about
http://dels.nas.edu/resources/static-assets/materials-based-on-reports/reports-in-brief/Adapting_Report_Brief_final.pdf
iii
-------
the severity and extent of these impacts will enable the EPA to achieve its goals in environmental
and human health protection.
The EPA will consider the results of a range of international assessments to address climate
impacts of short-lived climate forcers. These traditional air pollutants, including black carbon, a
constituent of particulate matter (PM), and ozone have an immediate impact on climate.
Reducing emissions of these pollutants can reap immediate climate and public health benefits.
EPA's work to establish the new fuel and national emissions standards to reduce emissions of air
pollution and educate consumers on the ways their actions affect the environment have led to
real success stories. The most recent, the new corporate average fuel economy (cafe) standards,
require cars and light trucks to get a minimum of 54.5 miles to the gallon starting with the model
year 2025 - saving 12 billion barrels of oil and eliminating 6 billion metric tons of carbon
dioxide pollution, along with saving consumers $1.7 trillion at the pump over the life of the
program.
Improving Air Quality
The EPA is dedicated to protecting and improving the quality of the nation's air to promote
public health and protect the environment. Improving air quality has important economic
benefits for American citizens. Scientific studies have linked climate change to worsening air
quality, which is linked to adverse impacts such as reduced productivity through missed work
and school days, increased hospital visits, respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, and even
premature death - especially for certain vulnerable populations like the elderly, the poor, and
children. EPA's budget includes resources that will be dedicated to improving air quality in FY
2014, maintaining the progress already made over the last several years.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue its Clean Air Act prescribed responsibilities to administer the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) by taking federal oversight actions and by
developing regulations and policies to ensure continued health and welfare protections. EPA will
maintain support for core work in particulate matter (PM) NAAQS to include the 2012 PM
NAAQS revisions; the new Renewable Fuel Standards (RFS2) program; and implementing the
Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 2005 and the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of
2007. We will continue work addressing risks and exposures to air toxics from multiple sources
and fulfilling Clean Air Act and court-ordered obligations. Funding also supports our continued
efforts in indoor air, stratospheric ozone and radiation programs.
Protecting America's Waters
The EPA's ecosystem protection programs encompass a wide range of approaches that address
specific at-risk regional areas and larger categories of threatened systems, such as urban waters,
estuaries, and wetlands. Locally generated pollution, combined with pollution carried by rivers
and streams and through air deposition, can accumulate in these ecosystems and degrade them
over time. The EPA and its federal partners along with states, tribes, municipalities, and private
parties, will continue efforts to restore the integrity of the impaired waters of the United States as
part of the agency's mission and also in recognition of the expected long-term benefits of healthy
aquatic systems as economic cornerstones vital to property values, tourism, recreational and
commercial fishing, and hunting.
IV
-------
From nutrient loadings and stormwater runoff to invasive species, energy extraction, and
drinking water contaminants, water quality programs face complex challenges that can be
addressed effectively only through a combination of traditional and innovative strategies. The
EPA will continue to work hand-in-hand with states and tribes to develop and implement nutrient
limits; focus on Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) and National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permits; and continue to strengthen the nationwide monitoring
network.
Resources for core program work will support continued progress and lead to important
milestones and improvements in FY 2014. EPA will complete statistically valid surveys of the
nation's waters and develop or publish the National Rivers and Streams Assessment3
(monitoring in 2014; due in 2016), the National Wetland Condition Assessment4 (due in 2014),
and the National Lakes Assessment (due FY 2015). The EPA will continue to promote the
application of new reporting, monitoring and assessment tools to support the integration of
federal, regional, state and local monitoring efforts for water quality management. The EPA
Water Quality Exchange5 launched in 2007 allows states, tribes and other organizations to share
their monitoring data over the Internet.
The EPA will continue to emphasize watershed stewardship, watershed-based approaches, water
efficiencies and best practices. The EPA will focus specifically on green infrastructure, nutrients,
and trading among point sources and nonpoint sources for water quality improvements and urban
waters. In FY 2014, the agency will advance the water quality monitoring initiative under the
Clean Water Act and develop important rules and implementation activities under the Safe
Drinking Water Act. Related efforts to improve monitoring and surveillance will help advance
water security nationwide. As part of our transformational change efforts under E-Enterprise, the
request includes a total of $3.4 million to replace the EPA-operated SDWIS/Fed with SDWIS
Next-Gen. This will enable electronic data exchange among laboratories, states, and EPA; more
efficient reporting and display of drinking water quality; and a reduction in the cost of the system
over time.
Much remains to be done, and progress is incremental; the most recent impaired waters listing
numbered over 41,000. The 2012 Coastal Conditions survey found our nation's coasts in fair
condition, essentially the same as the last report four years ago. Great Lakes' conditions were
rated the lowest, although this Administration's Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) is
yielding improvements. This effort has contributed to the removal of 21 Beneficial Use
Impairments at 12 different Great Lakes Areas of Concern, meeting EPA's cumulative target of
33 for this measure and exceeding the GLRI Action Plan target.6 In FY 2014, EPA will fund the
Great Lakes effort at $300 million. Overall geographic programs are funded at $410.9 million
and include $73 million for Chesapeake Bay, another significant national effort.
2 For more information, visit: http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/lawsguidance/cwa/tmdl/index.cfm.
3 For more information, visit: http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/rsl/monitoring/riverssurvey/index.cfm
4 For more information, visit: http://water.epa.gov/type/wetlands/assessment/survev/index.cfm.
For more information, visit: http://www.epa. gov/storet/wqx/.
6 Results are achieved through GLRI funding as well as other non-GLRI federal and/or state funding.
V
-------
Sustainable Water Infrastructure
The Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds are provided $1.912 billion in FY
2014, a $472 million reduction from FY 2012. As part of the Administration's long-term
strategy, the EPA is implementing a Sustainable Water Infrastructure Policy that focuses on
working with states and communities to enhance technical, managerial and financial capacity
which also addresses "green infrastructure" options and their multiple benefits. Federal dollars
provided through the State Revolving Funds will act as a catalyst for efficient system-wide
planning and ongoing management of sustainable water infrastructure. New infrastructure
improvement projects for public drinking water systems are supported by $817 million for the
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund and by $1.095 billion for public water treatment systems
under the Clean Water State Revolving Fund.
Protecting Our Land
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue its core program work to cleanup, redevelop, and revitalize
contaminated sites through the Superfund, Brownfields, RCRA Corrective Action, and Leaking
Underground Storage Tanks programs. Many communities across the country regularly face
risks posed by intentional and accidental releases of hazardous substances into the environment.
To address exposures to releases that have already occurred and/or will occur in the future, the
EPA will continue to identify and implement opportunities to integrate and leverage the full
range of the agency's land cleanup authorities to accelerate the pace of cleanups, address a
greater number of contaminated sites, and put these sites back into productive use while
protecting human health and the environment. One example is the $0.3 million increase to
support Strong Cities, Strong Communities to provide guidance, technical assistance and
analytical support to local efforts to update land use codes to support the economic trajectory of
the community and better catalyze economic redevelopment.
The Superfund program protects the American public and its resources by cleaning up
contaminated sites which pose an imminent or long-term risk of exposure and harm to human
health and the environment. In FY 2014, the agency will maintain the funding level necessary to
respond to emergency releases of hazardous substances as well as maintain the goal of sites
achieving human exposure and groundwater migration under control at cleanup sites. As of
October 2012, the EPA had controlled human exposures to contamination at 1,361 National
Priority List sites.
The EPA also will continue to implement its Community Engagement Initiative to ensure
transparent and accessible decision-making processes, deliver information that communities can
use to participate meaningfully, and help the EPA produce outcomes that are responsive to
community perspectives and that ensure timely cleanup decisions. Also increasing transparency
and creating efficiencies, the e-Manifest system will reduce paperwork burden for firms
regulated under RCRA's hazardous waste provisions by a range of $77 million to $126 million
annually and provide access to key information about hazardous wastes being transported.
System development will begin for this component of E-Enterprise in FY 2014.
Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals
Ensuring the safety of new or existing chemicals in commerce to protect the American people
remains a key EPA priority. Chemicals are ubiquitous in our everyday lives and products. They
VI
-------
are used in the production of everything from our homes and cars to the cell phones we carry and
the food we eat. Chemicals often are released into the environment as a result of their
manufacture, processing, use, and disposal. The $686.2 million requested in FY 2014 will allow
the EPA to sustain its success in managing the potential risks of new chemicals entering
commerce without impacting progress in assessing and ensuring the safety of existing chemicals.
In FY 2014, the approach focuses on: 1) using all available authorities under the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA) to take immediate and lasting action to eliminate or reduce
identified chemical risks and develop proven safer alternatives; 2) using regulatory mechanisms
to fill remaining gaps in critical exposure data and increasing transparency and public access to
information on TSCA chemicals; and 3) using data from all available sources to conduct detailed
chemical risk assessments on the chemicals EPA identified in its TSCA Work Plan to determine
which risk management actions may be needed and why. The EPA's pesticide licensing program
will continue to evaluate new pesticides before they reach the market and will continue to ensure
that pesticides already in commerce are safe when used in accordance with the label.
Achieving an environmentally sustainable future demands that the EPA address today's
environmental problems while simultaneously preparing for long-term challenges. These efforts
support the development and employment of approaches for alternative sustainable product
formulations found by studying chemical life cycles to address issues of cumulative risk,
environmental chemical mixtures, population-vulnerability, and environmental justice, as related
to exposure disparities. Chemical safety research is directed to manage the risks arising from
exposure to hazardous chemical substances. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue the multi-year
transition away from the traditional assays used in the endocrine disrupter screening program
through efforts to validate and use computational toxicology and high throughput screening
methods. This is expected to allow the agency to more quickly, efficiently, and cost-effectively
assess potential chemical toxicity.
Supporting State and Tribal Partners
Supporting our state and tribal partners, the primary implementers of environmental programs on
the ground, is a long-held priority of the EPA. Funding to states and tribes in the State and Tribal
Assistance Grants (STAG) account continues to be the largest percentage of the EPA's budget
request, at nearly 40% in FY 2014. The FY 2014 budget includes a total of $1,135.8 million in
categorical grants, an increase of $47 million over FY 2012 levels. These funds support core
regulatory program work conducted by states and tribes essential to maintaining hard won
progress in environmental and human health protection in the air, water, waste management, and
pesticides programs. The request also will provide a much needed increase for Tribal
governments in building environmental protection program capacity. In FY 2014, the request
includes resources for our state, local and tribal partners, as part of the E-Enterprise Initiative, to
build integrated data systems that will reduce burden on industry and improve services for the
regulated community and the public.
Priority Science and Research
Science and research continue to be the foundation of all our work at the EPA. The Research and
Development program's integrated and cross-disciplinary organization of the scientific research
programs provides a systems perspective that leverages expertise to address the multi-
vn
-------
dimensional challenges facing the agency, increasing the benefits from high-quality science.
Superior science leads to shared solutions; everyone benefits from clean air and clean water.
Rigorous science leads to innovative solutions to complex environmental challenges. In FY
2014, the EPA is focusing research on the most critical issues facing the agency, ensuring the
best scientific underpinning for regulatory actions and finding more sustainable solutions for
environmental issues. These include assessing the human health and environmental impacts of
energy production and use; minimizing the impacts of climate change; and developing effective,
systems-based watershed management approaches as well as forward-looking national, regional
and community level strategies for green infrastructure, chemical safety and other innovative
alternative practices.
One area of continued importance in FY 2014 is hydraulic fracturing. Energy and mineral
extraction and production are important to the nation's economy but also have the potential to
impact surface and subsurface water resources. Multiple federal agencies are engaged in
hydraulic fracturing (HF) research, and the EPA is committed to collaborating across agencies.
In FY 2014 HF research will focus on understanding and preventing the potential impacts of
associated activities on water resources. The EPA will publish the Impacts of Hydraulic
Fracturing on Drinking Water Resources draft report that is expected for release in the late
calendar year of 2014. This report will outline the results of research focused on whether HF has
adverse effects on drinking water resources, and, if so, what the driving factors are.
Eliminations and Efficiencies
Recognizing the tight limits on discretionary spending across government, the EPA has
evaluated and reprioritized its work and made necessary adjustments to focus FY 2014 resources
toward the agency's highest priorities and most critical needs. These reductions and eliminations
and the projected impacts are described in fuller detail in appropriate sections of the FY 2014
Justification of Appropriation.
Eliminations
The EPA continues to examine its programs to find those that have served their purpose and
accomplished their mission. The FY 2014 budget proposes the elimination of programs totaling
$54 million. Many of these were included as elimination in the FY 2013 President's Budget
including: the Clean Automotive Technology Program; Beach categorical grants; Environmental
Education; State Indoor Radon Grants; the Support to Other Federal Agencies program within
Superfund; and the Fibers program. As a continuation of this effort, in FY 2014, the Sun Wise
program and the Greener Economy programs also are proposed for elimination.
Efficiencies
As part of the overall effort to transform into the EPA of the 21st Century, EPA is examining
how it can do its work differently, both programmatically and administratively, to achieve
efficiencies and results. In addition to E-Enterprise, EPA has been taking a series of important
steps to lay the groundwork for longer-term efficiencies. Major projects include continued
enhancement of collaboration tools and IT systems, implementing Regional Centers of Expertise
and consolidating or reconfiguring our space (including the Las Vegas facilities), all of which
will help ensure the best use of human and financial resources. The EPA is continuing the effort
Vlll
-------
to analyze staffing levels and deploy human resources to achieve the Agency's mission more
effectively and efficiently. To that end, the FTE request of 16,870 in the FY 2014 budget is the
lowest in 20 years.
IX
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Resource Summary Tables
APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 3
Budget Authority 3
Full-time Equivalents (FTE) 4
-------
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION SUMMARY
Budget Authority
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
Environmental Program &
Management
Inspector General
Building and Facilities
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Super fund Program
IG Transfer
S&T Transfer
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Leaking Underground Storage
Tanks
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Hazardous Waste Electronic
Manifest System Fund
SUB-TOTAL, EPA
Rescission of Prior Year
Funds
SUB-TOTAL, EPA
(INCLUDING
RESCISSIONS)
Recovery Act Resources
Sandy Supplemental
TOTAL, EPA
FY 2012
Enacted
$793,728.0
$2,678,222.0
$41,933.0
$36,370.0
$18,245.0
$1,180,890.0
$9,939.0
$22,979.0
$1,213,808.0
$104,142.0
$3,612,937.0
$0.0
$8,499,385.0
($50,000.0)
$8,449,385.0
$0.0
$0.0
$8,449,385.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$795,394.8
$2,660,116.0
$45,801.9
$38,161.0
$19,432.2
$1,272,284.7
$11,003.9
$25,021.6
$1,308,310.2
$106,185.5
$4,238,523.7
$0.0
$9,211,925.3
$0.0
$9,211,925.3
$6,038.0
$0.0
$9,217,963.3
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$798,586.0
$2,694,613.0
$42,189.0
$36,592.0
$18,356.0
$1,183,086.0
$10,000.0
$23,120.0
$1,216,206.0
$104,779.0
$3,589,781.0
$0.0
$8,501,102.0
$0.0**
$8,501,102.0
$0.0
$607,725.0
$9,108,827.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$783,926.0
$2,812,757.0
$45,227.0
$54,364.0
$21,268.0
$1,145,771.0
$11,054.0
$23,549.0
$1,180,374.0
$99,242.0
$3,153,842.0
$2,000.0
$8,153,000.0
$0.0
$8,153,000.0
$0.0
$0.0
$8,153,000.0
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the
Superfund account.
**Due to requirements for sequester calculations, under 2013 annualized CR, rescissions of $44,992 have been
included in appropriation line totals.
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION SUMMARY
Full-time Equivalents (FTE)
Science & Technology
Environmental Program &
Management
Inspector General
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Super fund Program
IG Transfer
S&T Transfer
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Leaking Underground Storage
Tanks
WCF-Reimbursable
Rereg. & Exped. Proc. Rev Fund
Pesticide Registration Fund
UIC Injection Well Permit BLM
TOTAL, EPA
FY 2012
Enacted
2,434.2
10,719.2
293.0
101.0
2,981.0
65.1
105.3
3,151.4
69.7
136.6
150.0
0.0
0.0
17,055.1
FY 2012
Actuals
2,437.2
10,675.3
290.7
103.0
3,041.3
60.6
109.6
3,211.5
65.8
144.4
121.4
53.3
3.0
17,105.6
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
2,434.2
10,719.2
293.0
101.0
2,981.0
65.1
105.3
3,151.4
69.7
136.6
150.0
0.0
0.0
17,055.1
FY 2014
Pres Budget
2,437.6
10,621.7
300.0
113.4
2,875.2
65.8
105.5
3,046.5
62.5
143.6
145.0
0.0
0.0
16,870.3
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the
Superfund account.
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Goal and Objective Overview
GOAL, APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 7
Budget Authority 7
Authorized Full-time Equivalents (FTE) 9
Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality 11
Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters 23
Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development 37
Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution 53
Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws 60
-------
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
GOAL, APPROPRIATION SUMMARY
Budget Authority
(Dollars in Thousands)
Taking Action on Climate Change
and Improving Air Quality
Inspector General
Environmental Program &
Management
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Science & Technology
Building and Facilities
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Protecting America's Waters
Inspector General
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Science & Technology
Environmental Program &
Management
Building and Facilities
Cleaning Up Communities and
Advancing Sustainable
Development
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Hazardous Waste Electronic
Manifest System Fund
Inspector General
Environmental Program &
Management
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Science & Technology
Leaking Underground Storage
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,024,783.4
$5,541.3
$459,181.0
$288,693.9
$258,789.9
$8,636.5
$3,940.7
$4,095,282.5
$25,498.3
$2,945,985.7
$148,158.5
$969,679.0
$5,960.9
$1,934,343.1
$15,729.3
$0.0
$5,391.9
$334,032.1
$317,749.4
$189,845.8
$103,279.1
FY 2012
Actuals
$1,036,506.9
$6,330.4
$457,169.3
$302,444.1
$258,290.2
$8,939.3
$3,333.6
$4,691,946.4
$33,086.9
$3,542,813.9
$144,132.0
$965,785.7
$6,128.0
$2,040,129.2
$16,720.8
$0.0
$6,163.6
$335,613.8
$327,528.5
$191,292.1
$105,444.8
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$1,018,962.1
$5,538.1
$461,613.3
$278,882.1
$260,415.9
$8,689.2
$3,823.5
$4,107,887.3
$25,711.2
$2,942,665.6
$149,059.5
$984,453.7
$5,997.3
$1,936,821.3
$15,837.3
$0.0
$5,386.6
$339,604.1
$308,602.8
$191,068.9
$103,916.2
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$1,072,318.9
$6,547.5
$499,208.2
$280,279.7
$269,244.1
$13,034.4
$4,005.0
$3,664,552.3
$25,933.9
$2,491,426.8
$147,520.2
$990,689.4
$8,982.0
$1,889,380.8
$18,091.9
$2,000.0
$5,970.4
$345,114.7
$312,716.4
$164,500.3
$98,363.7
-------
Tanks
Building and Facilities
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals
and Preventing Pollution
Inspector General
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Environmental Program &
Management
Science & Technology
Building and Facilities
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Enforcing Environmental Laws
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Inspector General
Environmental Program &
Management
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Science & Technology
Leaking Underground Storage
Tanks
Building and Facilities
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Sub- Total
Rescission of Prior Year Funds
Sandy Supplemental
Total
FY 2012
Enacted
$7,238.2
$961,077.4
$659,346.0
$3,034.0
$34,228.9
$426,184.7
$178,859.6
$9,995.7
$7,043.1
$785,630.0
$2,515.7
$2,467.5
$489,145.1
$26,279.1
$18,074.2
$862.9
$4,538.7
$241,746.7
$8,499,385.0
($50,000.0)
$0.0
$8,449,385.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$7,711.2
$1,049,654.4
$661,328.6
$3,443.5
$37,523.7
$414,146.3
$182,691.4
$10,651.5
$12,872.2
$788,052.2
$2,711.4
$2,815.6
$487,400.9
$28,213.6
$18,989.1
$740.7
$4,731.0
$242,449.9
$9,217,963.3
$0.0
$0.0
$9,217,963.3
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$7,282.4
$965,123.1
$654,506.1
$3,066.6
$33,839.8
$420,750.6
$179,918.4
$10,056.7
$6,874.0
$782,925.2
$2,518.7
$2,486.5
$488,191.3
$25,790.7
$18,123.2
$862.8
$4,566.4
$240,385.5
$8,501,102.0
$0.0**
$607,725.0
$9,108,827.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$10,672.8
$931,950.6
$686,194.9
$3,600.2
$36,135.3
$440,510.5
$183,849.3
$14,859.5
$7,240.1
$840,553.1
$3,176.1
$3,174.9
$537,234.3
$33,283.8
$18,812.2
$878.3
$6,815.2
$237,178.3
$8,153,000.0
$0.0
$0.0
$8,153,000.0
^Recovery Act funds are included in the goal totals above. See Appropriation tables for more details on Recovery Act funds.
* *Due to requirements for sequester calculations, under 2013 annuatized CR, rescissions of $44,992 have been included in
appropriation line totals.
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
GOAL, APPROPRIATION SUMMARY
Authorized Full-time Equivalents (FTE)
Taking Action on Climate Change
and Improving Air Quality
Envir. Program & Mgmt - Reim
Science and Tech. - Reim
Inspector General
Environmental Program &
Management
Science & Technology
Hazardous Substance Superfund
WCF-REIMB
Inspector General - Reim
Protecting America's Waters
Envir. Program & Mgmt - Reim
UIC Injection Well Permit BLM
Science and Tech. - Reim
Inspector General
Science & Technology
Environmental Program &
Management
WCF-REIMB
Inspector General - Reim
Cleaning Up Communities and
Advancing Sustainable
Development
Oil Spill Response
Superfund Reimbursables
Envir. Program & Mgmt - Reim
Oil Spill Response - Reim
Science and Tech. - Reim
Inspector General
FY 2012
Enacted
2,718.1
0.0
1.5
38.7
1,868.4
759.3
18.6
31.6
0.0
3,418.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
178.2
490.2
2,724.1
26.2
0.0
4,334.4
83.7
50.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
37.7
FY 2012
Actuals
2,714.0
2.1
0.0
35.3
1,884.0
743.2
16.2
32.9
0.2
3,454.6
10.2
3.0
0.1
184.3
470.9
2,757.1
27.8
1.3
4,451.1
79.0
112.0
4.0
9.0
0.4
34.3
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
2,719.3
0.0
1.5
38.5
1,870.4
759.3
18.1
31.6
0.0
3,470.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
178.6
490.2
2,775.6
26.2
0.0
4,349.0
83.7
50.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
37.4
FY2014
Pres Budget
2,759.1
0.0
1.5
43.4
1,903.2
760.3
17.1
33.6
0.0
3,433.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
172.0
492.5
2,742.1
27.3
0.0
4,262.1
95.7
22.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
39.6
-------
Environmental Program &
Management
Science & Technology
Leaking Underground Storage
Tanks
Hazardous Substance Superfund
WCF-REIMB
Inspector General - Reim
Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals
and Preventing Pollution
Rereg. & Exped. Proc. Rev Fund
Pesticide Registration Fund
Envir. Program & Mgmt - Reim
Inspector General
Environmental Program &
Management
Science & Technology
Hazardous Substance Superfund
WCF-REIMB
Inspector General - Reim
Enforcing Environmental Laws
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Superfund Reimbursables
Envir. Program & Mgmt - Reim
Inspector General
Environmental Program &
Management
Science & Technology
Leaking Underground Storage
Tanks
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Inspector General - Reim
WCF-REIMB
Total
FY 2012
Enacted
1,646.9
525.0
65.0
1,899.2
26.3
0.0
2,679.3
150.0
0.0
0.0
21.2
1,883.1
568.0
22.0
34.9
0.0
3,904.7
17.3
0.0
0.0
17.2
2,596.7
90.2
4.7
1,160.9
0.0
17.5
17,055.1
FY 2012
Actuals
1,629.2
568.1
61.7
1,925.3
28.0
0.2
2,686.8
121.4
53.3
15.1
19.2
1,837.9
570.2
32.4
37.2
0.1
3,799.1
15.0
18.5
2.2
15.7
2,533.5
84.3
4.1
1,107.1
0.1
18.5
17,105.6
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
1,653.4
525.0
65.0
1,907.6
26.3
0.0
2,633.6
150.0
0.0
0.0
21.3
1,838.4
568.0
21.0
34.9
0.0
3,882.6
17.3
0.0
0.0
17.3
2,581.5
90.2
4.7
1,154.0
0.0
17.5
17,055.1
FY2014
Pres Budget
1,601.5
523.7
57.8
1,893.9
27.1
0.0
2,592.7
145.0
0.0
0.0
23.9
1,796.1
569.7
21.3
36.7
0.0
3,822.5
17.7
0.0
0.0
21.1
2,578.8
89.8
4.7
1,091.5
0.0
18.8
16,870.3
10
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Reduce greenhouse gas emissions and develop adaptation strategies to address climate change,
and protect and improve air quality.
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES:
• Achieve and maintain health-based air pollution standards and reduce risk from toxic air
pollutants and indoor air contaminants.
• Restore the earth's stratospheric ozone layer and protect the public from the harmful
effects of UV radiation.
• Minimize unnecessary releases of radiation and be prepared to minimize impacts should
unwanted releases occur.
• Reduce the threats posed by climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and
taking actions that help communities and ecosystems become more resilient to the effects
of climate change
GOAL, OBJECTIVE SUMMARY
Budget Authority
Full-time Equivalents
(Dollars in Thousands)
Taking Action on Climate
Change and Improving Air
Quality
Reduce Unnecessary Exposure to
Radiation
Restore the Ozone Layer
Improve Air Quality
Address Climate Change
Total Authorized Workyears
FY2012
Enacted
$1,024,783.4
$38,496.5
$17,964.8
$768,371.9
$199,950.2
2,718.1
FY 2012
Actuals
$1,036,506.9
$36,465.4
$17,782.0
$792,440.4
$189,819.1
2,714.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$1,018,962.1
$38,007.5
$17,989.5
$761,908.6
$201,056.4
2,719.3
FY2014
Pres Budget
$1,072,318.9
$40,585.8
$17,735.1
$801,083.7
$212,914.3
2,759.1
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$47,535.5
$2,089.3
($229.7)
$32,711.8
$12,964.1
41.0
11
-------
Introduction
The EPA is dedicated to protecting and improving the quality of the nation's air to protect public
health and the environment. The agency continues to partner with states, local governments, and
tribes to implement programs and standards. Air pollution concerns are diverse and significant,
and include: climate change, outdoor and indoor air quality, stratospheric ozone depletion, and
radiation protection.
Since passage of the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) in 1990, nationwide air quality has
improved significantly. Levels of those pollutants linked to the greatest health impacts continue
to decline. From 2003 to 2011 population-weighted ambient concentrations of fine particulate
matter and ozone have decreased 26 percent and 16, respectively. Despite this progress, in 2010,
approximately 40 percent of the U.S. population lived in counties with air that did not meet
health-based standards for at least one pollutant. Long-term exposure to elevated levels of certain
air pollutants has been associated with increased risk of cancer, premature mortality, and damage
to the immune, neurological, reproductive, cardiovascular, and respiratory systems. Short-term
exposure to elevated levels of certain air pollutants can exacerbate asthma and lead to other
adverse health effects and economic costs. The impact of degradation of views in national and
state parks is difficult to quantify but is likely to affect tourism and quality of life.
The issues of highest importance facing the air program over the next few years will continue to
be greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation and climate change adaptation, and ozone and particulate
air pollution and their precursors. The program also works to reduce interstate transport of these
air pollutants, emissions from transportation sources, toxic air pollutants, and indoor air
pollutants. The EPA uses a variety of approaches to reduce pollutants in indoor and outdoor air.
Strategies include traditional regulatory tools; innovative market-based techniques; public- and
private-sector partnerships; community-based approaches; voluntary programs that promote
environmental stewardship; and programs that encourage cost-effective technologies and
practices.
The EPA will continue to address the impacts of climate change through careful, cost-effective
rulemaking and voluntary programs that focus on the largest entities and encourage businesses
and consumers to limit unnecessary greenhouse gas emissions. The EPA will continue to
implement its Climate Change Adaptation Plan, released to the public in February 2013, to meet
the agencywide priorities on climate adaptation. The climate is warming, as evidenced by
observations published in the peer-reviewed scientific literature that show increasing
temperatures, rising sea levels, and widespread melting of snow and ice. As the number of days
with extremely hot temperatures increases, severe heat waves are projected to intensify and lead
to heat-related mortality and sickness. The increase in frequency and intensity of extreme
weather events also has caused mortalities across the country. Additionally, with time, more
Americans are likely to be affected by certain diseases that thrive in areas with higher
temperatures and greater precipitation, including pest-borne diseases and food and water-borne
pathogens. The costs of these impacts of climate change include increased hospital visits,
respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, and even premature death - especially for certain
vulnerable populations like the elderly, the poor, and children.
12
-------
The EPA continues to implement a suite of climate change programs that work with key industry
sectors to reduce greenhouse gases and facilitate energy-efficiency improvements. As an
example of the EPA's voluntary partnerships, this past year the ENERGY STAR program rolled
out new and more rigorous requirements for homes to earn the ENERGY STAR label. These
new home specifications represent a multiyear development process that redefined nearly every
aspect of the program, which had already labeled more than 1.3 million homes and achieved a 26
percent national market share in 2011.
Among the most common and significant sources of air pollution are highway motor vehicles
and their fuels. The EPA establishes national emissions standards to reduce air pollution from
these sources. The agency also provides emissions and fuel economy information for new cars to
educate consumers on the ways their actions affect the environment. The EPA's motor vehicle
GHG and renewable fuels standards have already begun changing the cars Americans drive and
the fuels they use. The supply and diversity of biofuels in America grow every year, and new
automobile technologies, including several new plug-in hybrids and all-electric vehicles,
continue to "hit the road." The EPA, in coordination with the National Highway Transportation
Safety Administration (NHTSA), will continue to reduce GHGs from light-duty and heavy-duty
mobile sources. This national program is particularly important given that the White House
announced, in August 2012, a significant tightening of future fuel efficiency standards. In model
year 2025, the EPA and NHTSA standards will require average fuel economy for cars and light
trucks of approximately 54.5 miles to the gallon, a significant increase from current average
vehicle fuel efficiency. The national program of fuel economy and greenhouse gas standards for
model year 2011 through 2025 light-duty vehicles will save approximately 12 billion barrels of
oil and prevent 6 billion metric tons of GHG emissions over the lifetimes of the vehicles sold
through model year 2025.
The EPA's air toxic control programs are critical to continued progress in reducing public health
risks and improving the quality of the environment. The EPA will continue to focus efforts on
communities with greater levels of industrial and mobile source activity (e.g., near ports or
distribution areas), which, according to the 2005 National-Scale Air Toxics Assessment, often
have greater cumulative exposure to air toxics than non-industrial areas. In 2013 and 2014,
approximately 81 stationary source air toxics rules are due for review under Section 112 of the
CAA, of which 30 are on court-ordered deadlines and are in some stage of development. To
develop effective standards, the EPA needs accurate information about actual emissions, their
composition, specific emission points, and transport into communities.
Because people spend much of their lives indoors, the quality of indoor air is a major concern.
For example, indoor allergens and irritants play a significant role in making asthma worse and
triggering asthma attacks. Over 25 million Americans currently have asthma, which annually
accounts for over 500,000 hospitalizations, more than 10 million missed school days, and over
$50 billion in economic costs. In addition, indoor radon causes an estimated 21,000 lung cancer
deaths annually in the U.S.
13
-------
Major FY 2014 Changes and Efficiencies
To address resource constraints, and continue funding critical priorities within resource limits,
the EPA carefully evaluated air program activities to assess where the pace of progress could be
slowed, where other governmental entities could provide needed support, or where requested
increases had not been appropriated. In FY 2014, resources are focused on the agency's core
statutory work to reduce public health risks through standards setting, market-driven and
partnership innovations, and support for state and tribal partners. The requested FY 2014
resources will enable the agency to maintain progress toward longer-term goals in critical areas.
• A request of $114.5 million for Climate Protection will allow the agency to continue to
reduce GHGs through approaches including ENERGY STAR, the Global Methane
Initiative, the GHG Reporting Rule, and state and local technical assistance and
partnership programs, such as SmartWay.
• The agency is increasing its resources to issue and oversee increased numbers of
Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Title V permits with new requirements
for GHG emissions control and permitting sources in Indian country. The agency expects
that it will review an increasing number of permits issued by states, tribes, or local
agencies and review changes to state, tribal, and local PSD and Title V programs due to
the incorporation of GHG provisions.
• The requested FY 2014 funding to improve air quality will enable the agency and state
and tribal partners to oversee compliance with air toxics regulations and conduct core
statutorily mandated work on the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for
criteria pollutants.
• In FY 2014, the EPA requests $270 million in state and local air quality management
grant and tribal air quality management grant funding, an increase of $21.5 million from
the FY 2012 Enacted Budget for state and local air quality management grant and tribal
air quality management grants.
• The FY 2014 resources also will support review of criteria pollutant standards in
accordance with the statutory schedule and monitoring of the nation's air by EPA and its
state and tribal partners. The requested funding will allow the EPA to continue to
coordinate actions to meet multiple CAA objectives for controlling both criteria and toxic
air pollutants while considering their cost effectiveness and technical feasibility, as well
as providing greater certainty for regulated industry.
• In FY 2014, the EPA will transform its Fuel and Fuel Additive Registration Reporting
System to be fully integrated with the EPA's E-Enterprise initiative. E-Enterprise will
create an easy-to-use, one-stop access point for all of the EPA's programs that will
provide the user with customized content, reusable e-forms and tailored notifications of
relevant information.
14
-------
• In FY 2014, the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act (DERA) program funding request is $6
million, a $24 million reduction from the FY 2012 Enacted Budget. DERA provides
emission reductions from existing diesel engines through retrofits, rebuilds and
replacements of older, dirtier engines; switching to cleaner fuels; idling reduction
strategies; and other clean diesel strategies. In FY 2014, a modified funding strategy
using grants and rebates will be used to concentrate resources on communities in high
exposure areas. Through the rebate mechanism, the agency will more precisely target the
awards toward the dirtiest, most polluting engines and can provide funding directly to
private fleets.
• The agency is eliminating Radon Categorical Grants ($8 million in STAG) in FY 2014
and cutting approximately $2 million from regional portion of the Radon program. Over
the 23 years of its existence, the EPA's radon program has provided guidance and
significant funding to help states establish their own programs. Because exposure to
radon gas continues to be a significant risk to human health, EPA will focus resources on
implementing the Federal Radon Action Plan, a multi-year, multi-agency strategy for
reducing risks from radon exposure, by leveraging existing federal housing programs and
more efficiently implementing radon-related activities.
Priority Goals
The EPA's FY 2012-2013 Priority Goal to improve the nation's ability to measure and control
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions is:
• Reduce greenhouse gas emissions from cars and trucks. Through September 30, 2013, the
EPA, in coordination with DOT's fuel economy standards program, will be implementing
vehicle and truck greenhouse gas standards that are projected to reduce GHG emissions by
1.2 billion metric tons and reduce oil consumption by about 98 billion gallons over the
lifetime of the affected vehicles and trucks.
The EPA is on track to complete implementation of this Priority Goal in FY 2013.
Note: As part of the formulation of the FY 2015 budget, the EPA will develop new FY 2014-
2015 Priority Goals that advance the Administrator's Priorities and the agency's Strategic Plan.
Additional information on the agency's Priority Goals can be found at www.performance.gov.
FY 2014 Activities
Address Climate Change
The EPA's strategy to address climate change supports the President's GHG reduction goals.
Climate change poses risks to public health, the environment, cultural resources, the economy,
and quality of life. Many impacts of climate change are already evident and will intensify in the
future. Climate change impacts include increased temperatures and more stagnant air masses that
make it increasingly challenging to achieve air quality standards for smog in many regions of the
15
-------
country. This adversely affects public health if areas cannot attain or maintain clean air and
increased costs to local communities.
The agency's request for $176.5 million will allow it to work with partners and stakeholders to
provide tools and information related to greenhouse gas emissions and impacts and will reduce
emissions domestically and internationally through cost-effective, voluntary programs while
pursuing additional regulatory actions as needed. In FY 2014, the agency will focus on core
program activities including:
• Implement the ENERGY STAR program across the residential, commercial and industrial
sectors.
• Implement the important new vehicle fuel economy labeling requirements. For the first time,
the new label provides consumers with GHG, as well as fuel economy, information.
• Implement the harmonized DOT and EPA fuel economy and GHG emission standards for
light-duty vehicles (model years 2012-2016) and heavy-duty vehicles (model years 2014-
2018). The EPA will begin developing a second phase of heavy-duty GHG regulations that
may incorporate a wider range of advanced technologies, including hybrid vehicle drive
trains. The EPA is considering several petitions asking the agency to develop GHG emission
standards for a wide range of non-road equipment, locomotives, aircraft, and transportation
fuels.
• Support implementation and compliance with GHG emission standards for light-duty and
heavy-duty vehicles and National Highway and Transportation Safety Administration
(NHTSA's) CAFE standards. Under the CAA and the Energy Policy Act, the EPA is
responsible for issuing certificates and ensuring compliance with both the GHG and CAFE
standards.
• Address the pending proposal to set a standard for carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from new
power plants and evaluate petitions seeking the establishment of GHG emissions standards
for a variety of industrial sectors and mobile source categories.
• Support reporting and verification in the GHG Reporting Program of emissions across 41
industry sectors and emission sources and approximately 10,000 reporters. Work in FY 2014
includes continued support for users on how to comply with the rule and how to report
emissions using the electronic reporting tool. Continuing activities also will include
expanding the database management systems to ensure alignment with regulatory
amendments, verifying reported data and sharing data with the public, other federal agencies,
state and local governments and reporting entities.
• Lead the Global Methane Initiative (GMI) and enhance public-private sector cooperation to
reduce global methane emissions and deliver clean energy to markets.
• Promote cost-effective corporate GHG management practices and provide recognition for
superior efforts through a joint award program with non-government organizations.
16
-------
Improve Air Quality
Clean Air
Particulate Matter (PM) is linked to tens of thousands of premature deaths per year and repeated
exposure to ozone can cause acute respiratory problems and lead to permanent lung damage.
Short term exposure to elevated levels of sulfur dioxide (862) can result in adverse respiratory
effects, including narrowing of the airways which can cause difficulty breathing and increased
asthma symptoms, particularly in at risk populations including children, older adults, and people
with asthma.
Implementation of the PM National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), including the
2012 PM NAAQS revisions, is among the agency's highest priorities for FY 2014. The EPA will
provide technical and policy assistance to states developing or revising attainment State
Implementation Plans (SIPs) and will designate areas as attainment or nonattainment. The EPA
will also continue to partner with states, tribes, and local governments to create a comprehensive
compliance program to ensure that multi-source and multi-pollutant reduction targets and air
quality improvement objectives, including consideration of environmental justice issues, are met
and sustained. The budget includes $257.2 million in state and local air quality management
grants to support core state workload for implementing NAAQS, reducing exposure to air toxics
to ensure improved air quality in communities, and for additional air monitors required by
revised NAAQS. In FY 2014, the EPA also will continue its work with states, tribes, and
communities to implement the existing ozone standard. The EPA will provide technical and
policy assistance to states developing or revising SIPs or regional haze implementation plans and
will continue to review and act on SIP submissions in accordance with the CAAA. These
objectives are supported by ongoing technical assistance to state, tribal and local agencies. This
support includes source characterization analyses, emission inventories, quality assurance
protocols, improved testing and monitoring techniques, and air quality modeling. EPA also will
work with the states to address the interstate transport of pollution.
The EPA will continue to implement the new Renewable Fuel Standards (RFS2) program and
carry out other actions required by the Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 2005 and the Energy
Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007. The EPA is responsible for establishing test
procedures to estimate the fuel economy of new vehicles and for verifying car manufacturers'
data on fuel economy. In FY 2014, the EPA will utilize its upgraded vehicle, engine, and fuel
testing capabilities at the National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory (NVFEL) to increase
testing and certification capacity to ensure that new vehicles, engines, and fuels are in
compliance with new vehicle and fuel standards. In 2012, the EPA provided certifications for
over 4,100 different types of engines - a workload that has quadrupled over the past decade. The
EPA's workload will continue to grow, as the agency begins to implement new and more
stringent GHG emission standards promulgated in 2012 and 2013 for additional classes of
vehicles and engines. Also, FY 2014 resources will support increased oversight of credit trading
under RFS2 and engine regulations and to manage critical data reporting systems.
17
-------
Air Toxics
The agency will continue to work with state, tribal, and local air pollution control agencies and
community groups to assess and address air toxics emissions in areas of greatest concern.
Additionally, the program will focus on disproportionately impacted communities where the
most vulnerable members of our population live, work, and go to school.
One of the top priorities for the air toxics program is to eliminate unacceptable health risks and
exposures to air toxics from multiple sources in affected communities and to fulfill its CAAA
and court-ordered obligations. The CAAA requires that all technology-based standards be
reviewed and updated as necessary every eight years. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to
conduct risk assessments to determine whether the technology-based rules appropriately protect
public health.
The EPA will continue development of its multi-pollutant efforts by constructing and organizing
analyses around industrial sectors. By addressing individual sectors' emissions comprehensively
and prioritizing regulatory efforts on the pollutants of greatest concern, the EPA will continue to
identify ways to take advantage of the co-benefits of pollution control. In developing sector and
multi-pollutant approaches, the agency seeks innovative solutions that address pollutants in the
various sectors and minimize costs to the EPA, states, tribes, local governments and the
regulated community.
The EPA will continue to improve the dissemination of information to state, local and tribal
governments, and the public, using analytical tools such as the National Air Toxic Assessment
(NATA), enhancing quantitative assessment tools such as BenMAP, improving emission
inventory estimates for toxic air pollutants, and managing information for regulated entities
electronically in a single location by modernizing the Air Facility System (AFS) database. The
EPA anticipates that these improvements will increase the agency's ability to meet aggressive
court-ordered schedules to complete rulemaking activities, especially in the Risk Technology
Review program.
Indoor Air
The EPA will continue to promote comprehensive asthma care that integrates management of
environmental asthma triggers and health care services by building community capacity for
delivering comprehensive asthma care programs through the Communities in Action for Asthma-
Friendly Environments Campaign. By implementing the Federal Asthma Disparities Action
Plan, the EPA will place a particular emphasis on improving asthma health outcomes for
vulnerable populations, including children, and low-income and minority populations as well as
improving indoor air quality (IAQ) in homes and schools. Over the past four years, at least
16,000 health care professionals, including school nurses and primary care physicians, have been
trained by the EPA and its partners on environmental management of asthma triggers.
Additionally, approximately one third of our nation's schools now have effective indoor air
quality management programs in place, helping to ensure asthma-friendly school environments.
18
-------
The EPA will deliver clear and verifiable protocols and specifications to ensure good indoor air
quality in homes and schools through the Indoor airPlus program and protocols that protect IAQ
during energy upgrades. The EPA will collaborate with public and private organizations to
integrate these protocols and specifications into existing energy-efficiency, green-building and
health-related programs and initiatives. FY 2014 activities include equipping the affordable
housing sector with training and guidance to promote adoption of these best practices with the
aim of creating healthier, more energy-efficient homes for low income families.
EPA will drive action to reduce radon-induced lung cancer health by implementing the Federal
Radon Action Plan, published in June 2011. In 2012, the EPA invested and established
committees to establish standards for school measurement and mitigation, multifamily
mitigation, and quality assurance. These actions will promote testing for indoor radon, fixing
homes and schools when radon levels are high, and building new homes and schools with radon-
resistant features. It is estimated that 1.1 million existing homes found with high radon levels
now have active radon mitigation systems in them and 1.9 million new homes have been built
with radon-resistant features.
Restore the Ozone Layer
The stratospheric ozone program implements the provisions of the CAAA and the Montreal
Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal Protocol). Under the CAAA and
the Montreal Protocol, the EPA is authorized to control and reduce ozone depleting substances
(ODS) in the U.S., and to contribute to the Montreal Protocol Multilateral Fund. As of January 1,
2010, ODS production and imports were capped at 3,810 ODP-weighted metric tons, which is 25
percent of the U.S. baseline under the Montreal Protocol. In 2015, U.S. production and import
will be reduced further, to 10 percent of the U.S. baseline, and in 2020, all production and import
will be phased out except for exempted amounts. As ODS and many of their substitutes are
potent GHGs, appropriate control and reduction of these substances also provides significant
benefits for climate protection. As a signatory to the Montreal Protocol, the U.S. is committed to
ensuring that our domestic program is at least as stringent as international obligations and to
regulating and enforcing its terms domestically. In FY 2014, the EPA will focus its work to
ensure that ODS production and import caps under the Montreal Protocol and CAAA continue to
be met. Funding for the Sun Wise program, which provided awareness of health risks from UV
radiation and sun safety behaviors, has been eliminated.
Reduce Unnecessary Exposure to Radiation
In FY 2014, the EPA Radiation program, in cooperation with federal agencies, states, tribes, and
international radiation protection organizations, will develop and use voluntary and regulatory
programs, public information, and training to protect the public from unnecessary exposures to
radiation. Responding to improved science and industry advances, the agency is updating its
radiation protection standards for the uranium fuel cycle, developed over 30 years ago, and its
health and environmental protection standards for uranium and thorium mill tailings. In addition,
the agency will begin work in FY 2014 to ensure that the nation has generic, non-site-specific
standards that protect public health and the environment from risks associated with geologic
disposal of high-level radioactive waste.
19
-------
In FY 2014, the EPA's Radiological Emergency Response Team (RERT) will maintain and
improve the level of readiness to support federal radiological emergency response and recovery
operations under the National Response Framework (NRF) and the National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). The National RadNet ambient radiation air
monitoring system, which includes the country's 100 most populous cities, will provide data to
assist in protective action determinations.
Research
Environmental challenges in the 21st century are complex. These challenges are complicated by
the interplay between air quality, climate change, and emerging energy options, and they require
different thinking and solutions than those used in the past. Reducing risk can no longer be the
only approach to environmental protection. Industry and government are turning to innovative
solutions that enhance economic growth and social well-being, as well as protect public health
and the environment. These solutions require research that transcends disciplinary lines and
includes all stakeholders in the process — the EPA's regional and program offices, states and
communities — who rely on the EPA's research. Ultimately, the EPA is seeking technological
innovations that support environmentally responsible solutions and foster new economic
development.
In FY 2014, the EPA will strengthen its planning and delivery of science by continuing the more
integrated research approach begun in FY 2012. Integrated research looks at problems more
systematically and holistically. This approach will yield benefits beyond those possible from
more narrowly targeted approaches that focus on single chemicals or problem areas.
The Air, Climate and Energy (ACE) program, funded at $105.7 million for FY 2014, an increase
of $7.7 million from FY 2012, conducts high priority research on environmental and human
health impacts related to air pollution, climate change, and biofuels. Exposure to an evolving
array of air pollutants is a considerable challenge to human health and the environment. By
integrating air, climate and energy research, the EPA can better understand, define and address
the complexity of these interactions. The agency will provide models and tools necessary for
communities and for decision makers at all levels of government to make the best decisions.
For example, the ACE research program will improve the widely-used Community Multiscale
Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system. State and local agencies and the EPA rely on this tool to
implement the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Specifically, nations, states,
and communities use CMAQ to model how air pollution levels change when different emission
reduction alternatives are used. With this tool, decision-makers can test a range of strategies and
determine what approach best fits their situation. Improvements to CMAQ will increase users'
capability to accurately model changes in ozone, particulate matter, and hazardous air pollutant
concentrations. The CMAQ model has over 1,500 users in the U.S. and 1,000 more in over 50
countries.
The ACE research program will continue to address critical science questions under three major
research themes.
20
-------
Theme 1: Assess Air Quality and Climate Impacts - Assess human and ecosystem exposures and
effects associated with air pollutants and climate change. Evaluate the effects of air pollution and
climate change on individuals, ecosystems, communities, and regions (including the effects on
those most susceptible or vulnerable).
Theme 2: Prevent and Reduce Emissions - Provide the science needed to develop and evaluate
approaches to preventing and reducing harmful air emissions. The EPA decision makers and
other stakeholders need such data and methods to analyze the full life-cycle impacts of new and
existing energy technologies. With ACE's data, decision makers can determine which energy
choices are most environmentally and economically appropriate.
Theme 3: Respond to Changes in Climate and Air Quality - Provide modeling and monitoring
tools, metrics, and information on air pollution exposure. Individuals, communities, and
governmental agencies will use these tools and information to make public health decisions
related to air quality and climate change.
Figure 1: Integration of Air, Climate, and Energy1
Figure 1, "Integration of Air, Climate, and Energy" illustrates the relationships among air,
climate, and energy. The figure identifies the major earth and human systems impacted by air
pollution and climate change. It portrays the responses and social factors influencing the
relationships among each.
Exposuresto and Effects on
In FY 2014, research will study the generation, fate, transport, and chemical transformation of air
emissions to identify individual and population health risks. The ACE research program
considers the environmental impacts of energy production and use across the full life cycle. For
example, increased use of wood in residences can reduce greenhouse gas emissions but cause
1 Adapted from IPCC, 2007: Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II, and III to the Fourth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
21
-------
local air pollution problems. The program will incorporate air, climate, and energy research to
ensure the development of sustainable solutions and attainment of statutory goals in a complex
multi-pollutant environment. The ACE program will conduct research to better understand and
assess the effects of global change on air quality, water quality, aquatic ecosystems, land use,
human health, and social well-being.
In addition, the program will conduct systems-based sustainability analyses that include
environmental, social and economic dimensions. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to study the
impacts of energy production from unconventional oil and gas operations on air, water quality,
and ecosystems. This research will complement the EPA's current study on potential impacts of
unconventional oil and gas operations on drinking water. The ACE and Safe and Sustainable
Water Resources (SSWR) programs are collaborating with the Department of Energy (DOE) and
the Department of the Interior (DOI) to evaluate the impacts of unconventional oil and gas
operations, including those related to air quality.
22
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters
Protect and restore our waters to ensure that drinking water is safe, and that aquatic ecosystems
sustain fish, plants and wildlife, and economic, recreational, and subsistence activities.
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES:
• Reduce human exposure to contaminants in drinking water, fish and shellfish, and
recreational waters, including protecting source waters.
• Protect the quality of rivers, lakes, streams, and wetlands on a watershed basis, and
protect urban, coastal, and ocean waters.
GOAL, OBJECTIVE SUMMARY
Budget Authority
Full-time Equivalents
(Dollars in Thousands)
Protecting America's Waters
Protect and Restore Watersheds
and Aquatic Ecosystems
Protect Human Health
Total Authorized Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$4,095,282.5
$2,799,161.1
$1,296,121.4
3,418.6
FY 2012
Actuals
$4,691,946.4
$3,092,226.6
$1,599,719.7
3,454.6
FY2013
Annualized
CR
$4,107,887.3
$2,805,717.8
$1,302,169.5
3,470.5
FY2014
Pres Budget
$3,664,552.3
$2,479,570.4
$1,184,982.0
3,433.9
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY2012
Enacted
($430,730.2)
($319,590.7)
($111,139.4)
15.3
23
-------
Introduction
While much progress to improve water quality has been made over the last two decades,
America's waters remain imperiled. Increased demands, land use practices, population growth,
aging infrastructure, and climate variability continue to pose challenges to our nation's water
resources. The National Coastal Condition Report IV shows that although improvement has
taken place since 1990, the overall condition of the nation's coastal resources continues to be
n T
rated fair . In addition, the latest national assessments confirm that America's waters are
stressed by nutrient pollution, excess sedimentation, and degradation of shoreline vegetation,
which affect more than 50 percent of our lakes and streams. The rate at which new waters are
listed for water quality impairments exceeds the pace at which restored waters are removed from
the list. For many years, nonpoint source pollution —principally nitrogen, phosphorus, and
sediments — has been recognized as the largest remaining impediment to improving water
quality, and it is difficult to address the varied and widespread sources of this pollution. Pollution
discharged from industrial, municipal, agricultural, and stormwater point sources continue to
cause a decline in the quality of our waters. Other significant contributors to degraded water
quality include: loss of habitat; habitat fragmentation; and changes in the way water is infiltrated
into soils, runs off the land, and flows down streams (hydrologic alteration).
From nutrient loadings and stormwater runoff, to invasive species, energy extraction, and
drinking water contaminants, water quality programs face complex challenges that can be
addressed effectively only through a combination of traditional and innovative strategies. The
EPA will continue to work hand-in-hand with states and tribes to develop and implement nutrient
limits and intensify our work to restore and protect the quality of the nation's streams, rivers,
lakes, bays, oceans, and aquifers. We will continue the increased focus on communities,
particularly those disadvantaged communities facing disproportionate impacts, or that have been
historically underserved. We also will use our authority to protect and restore threatened natural
treasures such as the Great Lakes, the Chesapeake Bay, and the Gulf of Mexico; address our
neglected urban rivers; ensure safe drinking water; and reduce pollution from nonpoint and
industrial dischargers. The EPA will continue to address post-construction runoff, water-quality
impairments from surface mining, and drinking water contamination.
As part of the agency's long-term strategy, the EPA is implementing a Sustainable Water
Infrastructure Policy that focuses on working with states and communities to promote more
effective management and enhance technical, managerial and financial capacity within the
drinking water and wastewater sectors. Important to the enhanced technical capacity will be
alternatives analyses to expand "green infrastructure" options and their multiple benefits. Federal
dollars provided through the State Revolving Funds will act as a catalyst for efficient system-
wide planning and ongoing management of sustainable water infrastructure.
2 U.S. EPA. 2012. National Coastal Condition Report IV. EPA-842-R-10-003. Available at
http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/oceb/assessmonitor/nccr/upload/NCCR4-Report.pdf.
3 U.S. EPA, 2006. Wadeable Streams Assessment: A Collaborative Survey of the Nation's Streams. EPA 841-B-06-002.
Available at http://www.epa.gov/owow/streamsurvey. See also EPA, 2010. National Lakes Assessment: A Collaborative Survey
of the Nation 'sLakes. EPA 841-R-09-001. Available at http://www.epa.gov/lakessurvey/pdf/nla chapter0.pdf.
24
-------
The EPA continues to work with its partners across the Federal government to leverage resources
and avoid duplication of efforts. The EPA and USDA continue to enhance existing coordination
efforts in reducing nonpoint source pollution. The EPA, DOT, and DOE are working together to
research the impacts of hydraulic fracturing activities to support the state and Federal agencies
that oversee this growing energy extraction method.
Major FY 2014 Changes
To address resource constraints, the EPA carefully evaluated water program activities to assess
where the pace of progress could be slowed, where other governmental entities could provide
needed support, and where requested increases had not been appropriated in order to continue
funding critical agency priorities. The EPA will direct limited resources to best protect: 1) public
health, especially in disadvantaged communities; 2) support the core work of state and tribal
partners; and 3) focus on the largest pollution problems. Part of this effort is the continued
review of operations for savings which has resulted in administrative savings and efficiencies.
The requested FY 2014 resources are pivotal to enabling the agency to maintain progress toward
longer-term goals in critical areas.
In FY 2014, the agency is requesting $1.91 billion, a reduction of $472 million, for the Clean
Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds (SRFs). The Budget will allow the SRFs to
finance approximately $6 billion in wastewater and drinking water infrastructure projects
annually.
The Administration has strongly supported the SRFs, having received and/or requested funding
totaling over $20 billion since 2009. Since their inception, the SRFs have been funded at over
$55 billion. Going forward, the EPA will work to target assistance to small and underserved
communities with a limited ability to repay loans, while maintaining state program integrity. The
Administration strongly supports efforts to expand the use of green infrastructure to meet Clean
Water Act goals. To further these efforts, the Budget will target funding for green infrastructure
approaches to manage stormwater, which helps communities improve water quality while
creating green space, mitigating flooding, and enhancing air quality.
• The FY 2014 budget request maintains funding for most categorical grants at FY 2012
levels. The total increase to these Goal 2 categorical grants is approximately $14.8
million4. The EPA is requesting an additional $4.4 million in categorical grants for Public
Water System Supervision to augment assistance to states and replace the state-operated
Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS/State) with a web-based system,
SDWIS Next Generation (Next-Gen).
• The agency is requesting a $20.3 million increase (8.5 percent increase from FY 2012
enacted amount) to the CWA Section 106 Water Pollution Control grants. The increase
will support state e-enterprise activities, which will enhance the management of
electronic data and improve automation in screening and analysis of water quality data.
Further, the EPA will provide $15.0 million of Section 106 funds to support states,
4 $14.8 M = PWSS categorical grant dollar increase, $4.4 million, plus Pollution Control (Sectionl06) categorical grant dollar
increase, $20.3million, minus Beaches categorical grant dollar decrease, $9.9million.
25
-------
interstate agencies and tribes that commit to strengthening their nutrient management
efforts consistent with EPA Office of Water guidance issued in March 2011.
• The Chesapeake Bay Program's FY 2014 budget request of about $73 million, an
increase of approximately $15.7 million over FY 2012 enacted levels, will allow the
EPA-led interagency Federal Leadership Committee to continue implementing the
President's Executive Order on Chesapeake Bay Protection and Restoration and meet its
broad responsibilities under Clean Water Act Section 117.
• The FY 2014 budget includes an increase of $9.4 million for Surface Water Protection
Programs, reflecting, for the most part, increased workforce costs to support clean water
activities that protect and restore the nation's waters. In addition, the budget includes a
total of $3.4 million for the Drinking Water program to integrate the antiquated
SDWIS/Fed with the states' SDWIS Next-Gen.
• In this difficult financial climate, the agency will eliminate the Beaches Grant Program in
FY 2014, as initially proposed in FY 2013. While beach monitoring continues to be
important, well-understood guidelines are in place, and state and local government
programs have the technical expertise and procedures to continue beach monitoring
without federal support.
Priority Goals
The EPA's two FY 2012-2013 Priority Goals to improve water quality are:
• Improve, restore, or maintain water quality by enhancing nonpoint source program
accountability, incentives, and effectiveness. By September 30, 2013, 50 percent of the
states will revise their nonpoint source program according to new Section 319 grant
guidelines that the EPA released recently.
• Improve public health protection for persons served by small drinking water systems by
strengthening the technical, managerial, and financial capacity of those systems. By
September 30, 2013, the EPA will engage with twenty states to improve small drinking
water system capability through two EPA programs, the Optimization Program and/or the
Capacity Development Program.
Please note, as part of the formulation of the FY 2015 budget, the EPA will be developing new
FY 2014-2015 Priority Goals that advance the agency's priorities and the agency's Strategic
Plan. Additional information on the Agency Priority Goals can be found at
www.performance.gov.
FY 2014 Activities
The EPA will continue to emphasize watershed stewardship, watershed-based approaches, water
efficiencies, and best practices. The EPA will focus specifically on green infrastructure,
nutrients, and trading among point sources and nonpoint sources for water quality improvements
26
-------
and urban waters. In FY 2014, the agency will continue to advance the water quality monitoring
initiative under the Clean Water Act and develop important rules and implementation activities
under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Related efforts to improve monitoring and surveillance will
help advance water security nationwide.
Drinking Water
To help achieve the agency's priority to protect America's waters, in FY 2014 the EPA will
continue to implement its Drinking Water Strategy, an approach to expanding public health
protection for drinking water. The strategy will streamline decision-making, expand protection
under existing laws, and promote cost-effective new technologies to meet the needs of rural,
urban and other water-stressed communities. The agency will focus on regulating groups of
drinking water contaminants, improving water treatment technology and expanding
communication with states, tribes and communities.
In FY 2014, as discussed above, the agency is proposing a $4.4 million increase in categorical
grants for Public Water System Supervision. These funds will be used to replace the state-
operated Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS/State), enabling primacy agencies to
use a single system; reduce costs of maintaining individual data systems; manage their PWSS
programs more efficiently; share data with EPA; and more effectively target resources to assist
public water systems to comply with regulations. In addition, the request includes a total of $3.4
million to replace the EPA operated SDWIS/Fed. These funds would be used to design and build
SDWIS Next-Gen, enabling electronic data exchange among laboratories, states, and EPA; more
efficient reporting and display of drinking water quality; and a reduction in the cost of the system
over time. The shared web services will provide the user with customized content and functions,
including reusable e-forms and notifications.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to provide PWSS grants to support state and tribal efforts to meet
existing drinking water regulations and prepare for implementation of new regulations, including the
Revised Total Coliform Rule. States and tribes will work to ensure that systems can acquire and
maintain basic implementation capabilities and can conduct sanitary surveys according to
required schedules. These resources also will be used by states and tribes as they provide
technical assistance and training to help meet the continued needs of the small water systems.
The grants have been successful in helping public water systems achieve compliance with
standards, as well as decreasing the number of small systems that have repeat health-based
violations of standards. As of the end of FY 2012, 91 percent of community water systems
(CWSs) are meeting all applicable health-based standards, surpassing the performance target of
90 percent. The program also ensured safe drinking water in FY 2012, as 95 percent of the
population served by CWSs received drinking water that met all applicable health-based drinking
water standards, well above the performance target of 91 percent.
To help ensure water is safe to drink and address the nation's aging drinking water infrastructure,
$817 million for the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund will support new infrastructure
improvement projects for public drinking water systems in FY 2014 and beyond. Getting these
funds to where they are most needed in a timely manner is important. Beginning in FY 2014,
appropriated DWSRF funds will be allocated to the states based on the new 2011 Needs Survey
27
-------
scheduled to be reported to Congress in 2013. The DWSRF tribal set-aside also will be allocated
based on a new formula accounting for drinking water access needs. These funds have been
utilized effectively by the states. Since FY 2006, the fund utilization rate5 for the DWSRF has
surpassed its target, and most recently in FY 2012, the DWSRF utilization rate of 90 percent
exceeded the EPA's target of 89 percent. In concert with the states, the EPA will focus this
affordable, flexible financial assistance to support utility compliance with safe drinking water
standards. The EPA also will work with utilities to promote technical, financial, and managerial
capacity as a critical means to meeting infrastructure needs and enhancing program performance
and efficiency. For small drinking water systems, this is an Agency Priority Goal. On schedule
with the goal's quarterly milestones, EPA has conducted many webinars for the states, water
utilities and even the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA), to help the VA recruit veterans into
the water sector.
Clean Water
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to collaborate with states and tribes to make progress toward
the EPA's clean water goals. Programs for controlling nonpoint sources of pollution are key to
reducing the number of impaired waters nationwide. The programs provide a multi-faceted
approach to the problem, combining innovative development strategies to help leverage
traditional tools. The EPA will support efforts of states, tribes, other federal agencies, and local
communities to develop watershed-based plans to achieve water quality standards. Maximizing
the partnership with USDA will allow more targeted, results-focused nonpoint source control
efforts. Working with states to more fully utilize the revolving fund capitalization grants will
help build, revive, and "green" our aging infrastructure. In FY 2014, a funding level of $558.9
million in categorical grants for clean water programs will enable the EPA, states, and tribes to
implement core clean water programs and promising innovations on a watershed basis to
accelerate water quality improvements.
In FY 2014, the EPA and USDA will continue their ongoing partnership to ensure that federal
resources - including both the EPA's Section 319 grant funds and the USDA Farm Bill funds -
are managed in a coordinated manner, where feasible, to protect water quality from agricultural
pollution sources. In FY 2012, 154 watersheds were selected for targeted conservation
investments. In FY 2013, additional selections will be considered by NRCS, which may result in
the addition of a limited number of watersheds. In FY 2014, the EPA will work with states to
provide monitoring support in these watersheds to demonstrate water quality progress from
implemented conservation practices. Tackling nonpoint source pollution is an Agency Priority
Goal with quarterly milestones.
Building on 30 years of clean water successes, the EPA, in conjunction with states and tribes,
will address the requirements of the Clean Water Act by focusing on two primary tools: Total
Maximum Daily Loads6 (TMDLs) and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permits, built upon scientifically sound water quality standards and technology-based
Utilization rate is the cumulative dollar amount of loan agreements divided by cumulative funds available for projects.
Cumulative funds available include the federal capitalization grant portion and everything that is in the SRF (state match, interest
payments, etc.).
6 For more information, visit: http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/lawsguidance/cwa/tmdl/index.cfm.
28
-------
pollutant discharge limits. The EPA policy is for TMDLs to be established for all pollutants on
an impaired water body segment within 8-13 years from the time the impairment is identified.
TMDLs focus on clearly defined environmental goals and pollutant budgets, implemented
through local, state, and federal watershed plans/programs. In FY 2012, about 2,900 TMDLs
were established or approved by EPA on schedule, meeting the Agency's annual target. More
recently, states have started to address more difficult TMDLs, such as broad-scale mercury and
nutrient TMDLs, which require involvement at the state and federal level across multiple
programs. Since FY 2007, the number of water body segments meeting their standards has
increased more than 150%, from 1,409 to 3,527. With 3,527 water body segments now fully
attaining their water quality standards, the EPA has met its 2015 Strategic Target early.
The EPA will continue to work with states to structure the permit program to better support
comprehensive protection of water quality on a watershed basis. Progress has been steady in
improving water quality conditions in impaired watersheds nationwide. In 2008 there were only
60 watersheds that experienced improved water quality conditions. By FY 2012, this number
had risen to 332, exceeding the target of 312. It remains a significant challenge, with
approximately 41,000 impaired water bodies nationwide. In FY 2014, the EPA will focus on key
focus areas, including: promoting the use of green infrastructure in stormwater permits;
controlling discharges from concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs); and addressing
issues of permitting for new waste streams, such as shale gas extraction; and steam electric
power plants. To combat stormwater as a main contributor of nutrients and sediments, the agency
issued a final 2012 NPDES general permit for stormwater discharges from large and small
construction activities. The general permit will strengthen requirements for stormwater
discharges from, at minimum, eligible existing and new construction projects in all areas of the
country where EPA is the NPDES permitting authority.
The EPA will continue to provide annual capitalization to the Clean Water State Revolving Fund
(CWSRF). As of June 2012, the CWSRF has offered over 32 thousand assistance agreements to
local communities, providing over $95.4 billion in affordable financing for wastewater
infrastructure, nonpoint source pollution control, and estuary management projects. The
CWSRF's Green Project Reserve invests in green infrastructure to promote environmentally
innovative activities; in FY 2014 EPA proposes setting aside 20 percent of capitalization grants
for green infrastructure projects. Recognizing what has already been achieved and the long-term
benefits to come, the EPA is continuing our CWSRF commitment by requesting $1.095 billion in
FY 2014. The fund utilization rate for the CWSRF in FY 2012 was 98 percent, surpassing the
target of 94.5 percent.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to strengthen the nationwide monitoring network and
complete statistically valid surveys of the nation's waters. The results of these efforts are
scientifically defensible water quality data and information essential for cleaning up and
protecting the nation's waters. With its partners, the EPA will develop or publish the National
Rivers and Streams Assessment7 (monitoring in 2014; due in 2016), the National Wetland
Condition Assessment8 (due in 2014), and the National Lakes Assessment (due FY 2015). The
7 For more information, visit: http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/rsl/monitoring/riverssurvey/index.cfm
8 For more information, visit: http://water.epa.gov/type/wetlands/assessment/survev/index.cfm.
29
-------
National Wetland Condition Assessment9 is the first ever statistically valid comprehensive
survey of nation wetland condition. In FY 2014, the EPA/State Steering Committee for the
National Coastal Assessment10 will be planning the next survey, targeted for monitoring to
commence in 2015. The EPA will continue to promote the application of new reporting,
monitoring and assessment tools to support the integration of federal, regional, state and local
monitoring efforts for water quality management. The EPA Water Quality Exchange11 launched
in 2007 allows states, tribes and other organizations to share their monitoring data over the
Internet.
The EPA, in cooperation with federal, state and tribal governments and other stakeholders will
continue to make progress toward achieving the national goal of no net loss of wetlands under
the Clean Water Act Section 404 regulatory program. In addition, the agency is requesting $15.1
million for Wetlands Program Development Grants.
Since 2002, almost one and a half million acres of habitat have been protected or restored within
National Estuary Program study areas. The agency's FY 2014 budget requests of $27.2 million
for National Estuaries Programs and Coastal Waterways that will enable the protection or
restoration of more than one hundred thousand habitat acres.
The agency will continue in FY 2014 to assist communities - particularly underserved
communities - in their local efforts to restore and protect the quality of their urban waters. By
integrating water quality improvement activities with local priorities, the EPA will help to
sustain local commitment for water quality improvement in urban watersheds. In support of the
President's America's Great Outdoors (AGO) initiative, the EPA will provide grants and
technical assistance and will partner with federal, state, local, and non-governmental
organizations to support community stewardship of local urban water restoration efforts, helping
communities revitalize their waterfronts and accelerate measurable water quality improvements.
Under the Urban Waters Federal Partnership, the EPA will coordinate with member agencies to
deliver technical assistance to communities. Two new federal agencies have joined the
partnership, and there are now a total of thirteen members. In many cities, stormwater has
become a growing challenge to protecting and improving water quality. However, green infra-
structure, such as green roofs, rain gardens, wetlands, and forest buffers, can be a cost-effective
way to manage stormwater and meet Clean Water Act goals. In 2014, the Urban Waters Federal
Partnership will partner with at least two communities to incorporate green infrastructure into
their stormwater management plans, eventually providing models for others also facing the same
challenges. The EPA is requesting $4.4 million to support federal partnership activities, technical
assistance and the Urban Waters grant program that will fund innovative local approaches for
water quality improvements in urban watersheds.
Climate Change
9 For more information, visit: http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/lakes/lakessurvev_index.cfm.
10 For more information, visit: http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/oceb/assessmonitor/nccr/index.cfm.
1' For more information, visit: http://www.epa.gov/storet/wqx/.
30
-------
Climate change also contributes to changes in water quality and poses significant challenges to
water resource managers. Impacts of climate change include too little water in some places and
too much water in others, while some locations are subject to all of these conditions during
different times of the year. Water cycle changes are expected to continue and will adversely
affect energy production and use, human health, transportation, agriculture, and ecosystems. In
2012, the National Water Program published the second National Water Program 2012 Strategy:
Response to Climate Change., which describes a set of long-term goals for the management of
sustainable water resources for future generations in light of climate change and charts the key
"building blocks" that would need to be taken to achieve those goals. It also reflects the wider
context of climate change-related activity that is underway throughout the nation. The 2012
Strategy is intended to be a roadmap to guide future programmatic planning and inform decision-
makers during the Agency's annual planning process.
WaterSense, Climate Ready Estuaries, Climate Ready Water Utilities, and Green Infrastructure
are examples of programs that will help stakeholders adapt to climate change in FY 2014. The
Climate Ready Water Utilities initiative will help water systems of all sizes integrate climate
variability considerations into their long-range planning. Efforts to incorporate climate change
considerations into key programs will help protect water quality and the nation's investment in
drinking water and wastewater treatment infrastructure.
EPA's Safe and Sustainable Water Resources (SSWR) research program is developing resource-
management tools to allow decision makers and environmental managers to assess the
sustainability of watersheds and the services they provide under current and future land use and
management practices, and to systematically consider complex tradeoffs occurring in a
watershed on a regional or national scale. Researchers are focusing on watersheds in order to
understand their resilience to stressors, identify specific watersheds that require enhanced
protection, and understand factors that affect successful watershed restoration.
Geographic Water Programs
The Administration has expanded and enhanced numerous cross-agency efforts to promote
collaboration and coordination among agencies, which include a suite of large aquatic ecosystem
restoration efforts. Three prominent examples of the EPA of cross-agency restoration efforts are
the Great Lakes, the Chesapeake Bay, and the Gulf of Mexico. Working with its partners and
stakeholders, the EPA has established special programs to protect and restore each of these
unique natural resources.
The EPA's ecosystem protection programs encompass a wide range of approaches that address
specific at-risk regional areas and larger categories of threatened systems, such as urban waters,
estuaries, and wetlands. Locally generated pollution, combined with pollution carried by rivers
and streams and through air deposition, can accumulate in these ecosystems and degrade them
over time. The EPA and its federal partners along with states, tribes, municipalities, and private
parties, will continue efforts to restore the integrity of imperiled waters of the United States.
31
-------
Puget Sound:
The Puget Sound program's FY 2014 budget request of $17 million will allow the EPA to
support efforts to protect and restore the Puget Sound by implementing the Puget Sound Action
Agenda. The Action Agenda emphasizes three areas: shellfish, stormwater, and habitat. The
goal is for the estuary to support balanced indigenous populations of shellfish, fish and wildlife,
and the extensive list of recognized uses of the Puget Sound, as well as to meet obligations under
federal tribal treaties. In FY 2012 the Puget Sound was able to report almost an additional 2,000
acres of near shore, riparian, and wetland habitat acres protected or restored since 2011.
The EPA Region 10 provides leadership for the Puget Sound Federal Caucus and co-chairs the
overall federal effort to address Treaty Rights at Risk12. For FY 2014, consistent with past years,
EPA proposes to provide 25 percent of the total program funding directly to tribes. Additionally,
fifty percent of the total funding will be directed to assistance agreements addressing salmon and
shellfish recovery, and specifically riparian buffers and habitat protection. We expect that
funding for these activities will directly benefit tribal interests in Puget Sound.
Great Lakes:
In FY 2014, $300 million in funding for the EPA-led Great Lakes Restoration Initiative will
address priority environmental issues (e.g., toxic substances, nonpoint source pollution, habitat
degradation and loss, and invasive species) in the largest freshwater system in the world. This
carefully coordinated interagency effort involves the White House Council on Environmental
Quality, U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Department of Commerce, Department of Health
and Human Services, Department of Homeland Security, Department of Housing and Urban
Development, Department of State, Department of Defense, Department of Interior, and
Department of Transportation. This effort has contributed to the removal of 21 Beneficial Use
Impairments at 12 different Great Lakes Areas of Concern, meeting EPA's cumulative target of
33 for this measure and exceeding the GLRI Action Plan target.
The EPA expects to continue to achieve substantial public and environmental health results
through both federal projects and projects conducted in collaboration with states, tribes,
municipalities, universities, and other organizations. Progress will continue in each of the Great
Lakes Restoration Initiative's five focus areas: Toxic Substances and Areas of Concern; Invasive
Species; Nearshore Health and Nonpoint Source; Habitat and Wildlife Protection and
Restoration; and, Accountability, Education, Monitoring, Evaluation, Communication and
Partnerships. The EPA will place a priority on: 1) cleaning up and de-listing Areas of Concern;
2) reducing phosphorus contributions from agricultural and urban lands that contribute to
harmful algal blooms and other water quality impairments; and 3) invasive species prevention. A
few expected outcomes with FY 2014 GLRI and other agency base funds include remediation of
over 400 thousand cubic yards of contaminated sediment; delisting of one or more Areas of
Concern; reduction or control of terrestrial invasive species on about 1,000 acres; and targeting
of sources of excess nutrients in sub-watersheds of the western basin of Lake Erie, Saginaw Bay
on Lake Huron, and Green Bay on Lake Michigan.
Chesapeake Bay:
12For more information, visit: http://nwifc.Org/w/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2011/08/whitepaper628fmalpdf.pdf
32
-------
The Chesapeake Bay program's FY 2014 budget request of about $73 million, an increase of
approximately $15.7 million over the FY 2012 enacted levels, will allow the EPA-led inter-
agency Federal Leadership Committee to continue to implement the President's Executive Order
on Chesapeake Bay Protection and Restoration and meet its broad responsibilities under Clean
Water Act Section 117. The key initiatives include: assisting states in implementing their Phase
II Watershed Implementation Plans; maintaining oversight of state permitting and compliance
actions for the various sectors; assisting Bay jurisdictions in developing effective offset and
trading programs; expanding and improving a publicly accessible TMDL tracking and
accountability system; maintaining and improving the Bay monitoring system; deploying
technology to integrate discrete Bay data systems and to present the data in an accessible
accountability system called ChesapeakeStat. This increased funding will help the Chesapeake
Bay Program continue to implement pollution controls necessary to restore Bay water quality.
The program met or exceeded its FY12 targets for pollution controls. By FY 2014, the program
expects to achieve 30 percent of its goals for implementing nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment
reduction actions to achieve final TMDL allocations, as measured through the phase 5.3
watershed model.
The EPA will direct investments toward local governments and watershed organizations based
on their ability to reduce nutrient and sediment loads through such key sectors as land
development and agriculture. The Chesapeake Bay Program's grant programs are important
tools for ensuring progress on the seven Bay jurisdictions' Watershed Implementation Plans, and
the EPA is working to ensure that the states provide support to local governments as they take
the on-the-ground actions necessary to achieve the goals of the Chesapeake Bay TMDL.
Several of the Bay watershed jurisdictions have established or expanded water quality trading
programs to support the goals of their WIPs and other milestones. In FY 2014, the EPA will
provide additional resources to Bay watershed jurisdictions that wish to improve the viability and
integrity of their water quality offset and trading programs, including through development of
and participation in pilot interstate trading projects, where appropriate.
Gulf of Mexico Program:
The Gulf of Mexico program's FY 2014 budget request of $4.5 million will allow the EPA to
continue its support for Gulf restoration work, such as habitat conservation and replenishment
and protection of coastal and marine resources. The EPA will actively support the Gulf Coast
Ecosystem Restoration Council and other activities in the Gulf of Mexico. The coastal waters of
the Gulf of Mexico received an overall health rating of 2.4 out of 5 in the National Coastal
Conditions Report, meeting its FY 2012 target. The index is a compilation of 5 individual indices
measuring a broad range of environmental conditions: water quality, sediment quality, benthic
zone conditions, condition of coastal habitats, and fish tissue contaminants.
The Gulf of Mexico program will continue to restore and enhance the environmental and
economic health of the Gulf of Mexico through cooperative partnerships to address the
program's long-term restoration goals. These goals include: restoring and conserving habitat;
restoring water quality; replenishing and protecting living coastal and marine resources;
education and outreach; and enhancing community resilience. Specifically in FY 2014, the EPA
will support Gulf state nutrient criteria pilots and develop science and management tools for the
characterization of nutrients in coastal ecosystems; address excessive nutrient loadings that
33
-------
contribute to water quality impairments in the basin; foster regional stewardship and awareness
through annual Gulf Guardian Awards; support initiatives that include direct involvement from
underserved and underrepresented populations and enhance local capacity to reach these
populations; and work towards the goal of fully attaining water quality standards in at least 360
impaired segments in priority coastal watersheds. In FY 2012, 316 impaired segments were
restored, just short of the agency's annual target for that year of 320.
Homeland Security
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to build its capacity to identify and respond to threats to
critical national water infrastructure. The EPA's wastewater and drinking water security efforts
will continue to support the water sector by providing access to information-sharing tools and
mechanisms that 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.
In FY 2014, the EPA requests support for its Regional Centers of Expertise for Water Teams.
Currently, all ten regions have water emergency response teams that are available to assist in
responses to large-scale or multiple environmental impact events. The two Regional Centers
requested in FY 2014 will provide desk and field staff in instances where an incident may
overwhelm other regional offices' more modest emergency response capabilities. They also will
conduct training and exercises designed to ensure a higher level of preparedness.
Research
Environmental challenges in the 21st century are more complex than before. Causes of
environmental and health risks, such as climate change, urbanization, nonpoint source water
pollution, and increased water demand have become universal and require different thinking and
solutions than in the past. Reducing risk can no longer be the only approach to environmental
protection. Industry and government are looking toward solutions that enhance economic
growth, social well-being, public health, and environmental quality.
Increased demands, land use practices, population growth, aging infrastructure, and climate
change and variability, pose significant threats to our nation's water resources. (See Figure 1)
34
-------
.create-
affect -
-produce
Drivers
Agriculture,
Forestry,
Fishing
Energy/Mineral
Extraction
and Injection
Manufacturing
Recreation,
Tourism
:3ublic works,
Construction
| Transportation J
Pressures
[ Emissions J
Climate change 1
( Water 1
I withdrawal J
[Pollution]
Invasive
species
[Harvest^
Responses
Land use planning j
& BMPs j
Water quality
management
Water quantity
management
Dam operations j
Wetlands restoration J
Climate adaptation
Species and
habitat protection
Figure 1: Conceptual model for watersheds, where socioeconomic forces influence the ecosystem;
human activities place stress on the ecosystem; the state is the condition of the ecosystem; the
impact relates to benefits that ecosystems provide, and their value to human well-being; and
responses are the environmental management actions and decisions by society.
Such competing interests require the development of innovative new solutions for water resource
managers and other decision makers. To address these challenges, the EPA's Safe and
Sustainable Water Resources (SSWR) research program provides the information and tools that
the EPA needs to meet its legal, statutory, and policy challenges. Research will integrate social,
economic, and environmental sciences to support the nation's range of growing water-use and
ecological requirements.
SSWR is developing resource management tools to allow decision makers to systematically
consider complex tradeoffs occurring in a watershed on a regional or national scale. For
example, wetland health indicators and the interpretation of national wetlands survey data is
informing the EPA's first National Wetlands Condition Report scheduled for FY 2014.13 This
report will form the baseline for analyzing future wetland changes and trends in response to
programs and policies.
Research also addresses and adapts to future water resources management needs to ensure that
natural and engineered water systems have the capacity and resiliency to meet current and future
water needs. The SSWR program will continue developing, implementing, and providing
guidance on green infrastructure projects as a cost-effective approach to stormwater
management. Additionally, the SSWR research program will continue to ensure the safety of
America's water resources through new approaches to monitor and mitigate aging distribution
and collection systems.
SSWR research also focuses on protecting and restoring water resources for designated uses
(e.g., drinking water, aquatic life, recreation, industrial processes). In FY 2014, the EPA's
researchers will continue to develop tools for the better detection and assessment of groups of
13
For more information, see: http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/wetlands/assessment/survev/index.cfm.
35
-------
highly harmful waterborne chemicals and microbial contaminants. The EPA also is conducting
research on uses of systems-based approaches to identify and manage nutrient-degraded water
resources and to promote protection and recovery of those resources. In FY 2014, the SSWR
research program will continue developing integrated nutrient management methods for
estuarine ecosystems and watersheds to develop solutions that can be broadly applied to the
nation's coastal watersheds.
Energy and mineral extraction and production also have the potential to impact surface and
subsurface water resources. The SSWR program is developing assessment techniques to assist
our policy and decision makers in creating an environmentally responsible energy policy. In
particular, in FY 2014 hydraulic fracturing (HF) research will focus on understanding the
potential negative impacts of energy-associated activities on water resources.
Multiple federal agencies are engaged in HF research, and the EPA is committed to collaborating
across agencies. In April 2012, the EPA signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with DOE
and DOI, develop a multi-agency program to focus on timely, policy relevant science to support
sound policy decisions by state and Federal agencies for ensuring the prudent development of
energy sources while protecting human health and the environment. Additional goals include
minimizing potential risks in developing these resources, maximizing each agency's particular
strength, and reducing interagency overlap.
The EPA expects to publish the Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Resources
final report in late calendar year 2014. This report will outline the results of research focused on
the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water resources, and, if so, what the
driving factors are. Additionally, in a coordinated effort between the SSWR and the Air, Climate
and Energy (ACE) research programs, the EPA will study potential impacts of hydraulic
fracturing on air, water quality, water resources, ecosystems, and health risk.
36
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Clean up communities, advance sustainable development, and protect disproportionately
impacted low-income, minority, and tribal communities. Prevent releases of harmful substances
and clean up and restore contaminated areas.
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES:
• Prepare for and respond to accidental or intentional releases of contaminants and clean up
and restore polluted sites.
• Support federally-recognized tribes to build environmental management capacity, assess
environmental conditions and measure results, and implement environmental programs in
Indian country.
• Conserve resources and prevent land contamination by reducing waste generation,
increasing recycling, and ensuring proper management of waste and petroleum products.
• Support sustainable, resilient, and livable communities by working with local, state,
tribal, and federal partners to promote smart growth, emergency preparedness and
recovery planning, brownfield redevelopment, and the equitable distribution of
environmental benefits.
GOAL, OBJECTIVE SUMMARY
Budget Authority
Full-time Equivalents
(Dollars in Thousands)
Cleaning Up Communities and
Advancing Sustainable
Development
Restore Land
Promote Sustainable and Livable
Communities
Strengthen Human Health and
Environmental Protection in
Indian Country
Preserve Land
Total Authorized Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,934,343.1
$1,126,822.4
$485,885.6
$88,397.6
$233,237.5
4,334.4
FY2012
Actuals
$2,040,129.2
$1,226,188.9
$492,179.5
$92,603.8
$229,157.0
4,451.1
FY2013
Annualized
CR
$1,936,821.3
$1,133,361.9
$485,270.6
$87,093.8
$231,095.0
4,349.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$1,889,380.8
$1,102,147.1
$452,387.6
$95,705.3
$239,140.8
4,262.1
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($44,962.3)
($24,675.3)
($33,498.0)
$7,307.7
$5,903.3
-72.3
37
-------
Introduction
The EPA strives to protect and restore land, one of America's most valuable resources, by
cleaning up communities to create a safer environment for all Americans. Hazardous and non-
hazardous wastes on land can migrate to air, groundwater and surface water, contaminating
drinking water supplies, causing acute illnesses and chronic diseases, and threatening healthy
ecosystems. The EPA will continue efforts to prevent and reduce risks posed by releases of
harmful substances to land, clean up communities, strengthen state and Tribal partnerships,
expand the conversation on environmentalism, and work for environmental justice. The agency
also will advance sustainable development and maximize efforts to protect disproportionately
impacted low-income, minority, and Tribal communities through outreach and protection efforts
for communities historically underrepresented in the EPA's decision-making.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to partner with state and tribal partners to prevent and reduce
exposure to contaminants. Improved compliance at high-risk oil and chemical facilities through
inspections will help prevent exposure and lower the risk of accidents. The EPA and its key state,
tribal, and local partners, including affected communities, have matured in our collaborative
approaches to identifying and cleaning up contaminated sites and putting these sites back into
productive use for communities. The EPA will continue the multi-year Integrated Cleanup
Initiative (ICI) program for the fifth year. The ICI identifies and implements opportunities to
integrate and leverage the full range of the agency's land cleanup authorities to accelerate the
pace of cleanups, address a greater number of contaminated sites, and put these sites back into
productive use while protecting human health and the environment. Furthermore, the EPA will
build on the lessons learned, such as increased communication, partnering and planning, or
phased tasking of remedial investigation projects. These changes in contracting approaches are
expected to improve performance, increase opportunities for optimization, and enhance contract
award opportunities for small and socio-economically disadvantaged businesses.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue its work to cleanup, redevelop, and revitalize contaminated
sites, such as Superfund sites, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) sites,
brownfield sites, and leaking underground storage tanks. Many communities across the country
regularly face risks posed by intentional and accidental releases of hazardous substances into the
environment. Through its RCRA Corrective Action program, the EPA and its state partners
issue, update, or maintain RCRA permits for 2,465 hazardous waste facilities. Through these
efforts, the EPA has achieved a total of 3,041 RCRA facilities with human exposures to toxins
under control as of the end of FY 2012. In addition, there are 1,676 sites on the Superfund
National Priorities List (NPL), 364 of which have been deleted. Sites are placed on the NPL
when the presence of contamination, often from complex chemical mixtures of hazardous
substances, has impacted groundwater, surface water, and/or soil. The precise impact of many
contaminant mixtures on human health remains uncertain; however, substances commonly found
at Superfund sites have been linked to a variety of human health problems, such as birth defects,
infertility, cancer, and changes in neurobehavioral functions. As of October 2012, the EPA had
controlled human exposures to contamination at 1,361 NPL sites.
Improvements to land cleanup programs (e.g., Superfund, Brownfields, RCRA Corrective
Action, and Leaking Underground Storage Tanks) to address the cleanup needs at individual
38
-------
sites will be supported by sound scientific data, research, and cost-effective tools that alert the
EPA to emerging issues and inform agency decisions on managing materials and addressing
contaminated properties. The EPA also will continue to implement its Community Engagement
Initiative to ensure transparent and accessible decision-making processes, deliver information
that communities can use to participate meaningfully, and help the EPA produce outcomes that
are responsive to community perspectives and that ensure timely cleanup decisions.
The Risk Management Program (RMP) provides the foundation for community and hazard
response planning by requiring chemical facilities to take preventative measures, as well as
collecting and sharing data to assist other stakeholders in preventing and responding to releases
of all types. Taken together, the RMP and Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know
Act (EPCRA) establish a structure within which federal, state, local, and Tribal partners can
work together to protect the public, the economy, and the environment from chemical risks.
Since FY 1996, there has been a significant decrease in accidents reported at RMP facilities,
from a high of 478 accidents in FY 1998 to a low of 122 accidents in FY 2011. Overall accident
reductions could be attributed to a number of factors including those actions taken by facilities to
prevent spills. The EPA has worked to increase inspection activities at high-risk facilities, made
it possible to submit RMPs online, and increased the number of RMP inspectors.
Accidents at RMP Facilities FY 1997-2011
400
200
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005 2006
2007
2008
2009
2010 2011
Major FY 2014 Changes
To address resource constraints, the EPA carefully evaluated all cleanup activities to assess
where the pace of progress could be slowed, where other governmental entities could provide
needed support, or where requested increases had not been appropriated in order to continue
funding critical priorities. The EPA will direct limited resources to best protect public health,
especially in disadvantaged communities; support core work of state and Tribal partners; and
focus on the largest problems. Part of this effort addresses operational efficiencies, under
implementation of the Administration's Management Agenda which has resulted in
39
-------
administrative savings and efficiencies. The requested FY 2014 resources will enable the agency
to maintain progress toward longer-term goals in critical areas.
• The request of $539.1 million represents a decrease of $25.9 million from the FY 2012
Enacted Budget for EPA's Superfund Remedial program. In recognition of these budget
constraints, the EPA will downsize and rebalance the overall Superfund Remedial
program to give priority to completing projects at various stages in the response process
as opposed to starting new project phases.
• The request of $85 million represents a $9.8 million decrease in funding from the FY
2012 Enacted Budget for Brownfields Projects grants. At this level of funding, the
Brownfields program will continue to foster federal, state, Tribal, local, and public-
private partnerships to return properties to productive economic use in communities.
• The $72.6 million request maintains support for the Tribal General Assistance Program
(GAP) at a $5.0 million increase compared to the FY 2012 Enacted Budget. As the
largest single source of the EPA's funding to tribes, the Tribal GAP grants assist tribes to
establish the capacity to implement programs to address environmental and public health
issues in Indian County.
• The agency requests a total of $4.4 million in RCRA Waste Management within two
appropriations accounts for the development of an e-Manifest system, a key component
of the agency's E-Enterprise initiative. When fully implemented, the e-Manifest program
is estimated to reduce the burden of reporting costs for regulated businesses in the range
of $77 million to $126 million annually.
• In FY 2014, the EPA will reduce support to states in LUST prevention assistance
agreements by $1.5 million and in LUST cooperative agreements by $1.6 million,
resulting in 2,400 fewer inspections conducted and approximately 155 fewer cleanups,
respectively. The decreased funding in FY 2014 may reduce state staff levels, as
approximately 75 and 80 percent of the state assistance agreements are used for state staff
salaries respectively. As EPA and states have increased frequency of inspections and
implement other prevention efforts, there has also been a decrease in new confirmed
releases. Continued reduction in confirmed releases will remain a critical component in
backlog reduction, but maintaining a strong prevention program and cleanup progress are
essential as well.
• The EPA's Oil Spill program protects U.S. waters and communities. The request of $17.1
million for the Oil Spill: Prevention, Preparedness and Response program is an increase
of $2.4 million from the FY 2012 Enacted Budget. This level reflects an increase to
improve the federal capacity to prevent oil spills by conducting up to 34 additional high-
risk facility inspections, thereby providing additional protection of the oil storage
network, the public, and the environment from accidental releases.
40
-------
Oil Facility Compliance
I Found Initially Compliant
I Brought Into Compliance
Facility Type & Year
Priority Goal
The EPA has established an FY 2012-2013 Priority Goal to highlight progress made in cleaning
up contaminated sites. Four cleanup programs contribute to the priority goal - Brownfields,
Underground Storage Tanks, Superfund and RCRA Corrective Action. The Priority Goal is:
• Clean up contaminated sites and make them ready for use. By September 30, 2013, an
additional 22,100 sites will be ready for anticipated use.
Since the EPA began collecting the number of sites ready for anticipated use (RAU) in FY 2008,
the cumulative number of sites RAU has increased. As of October 2012, 428,825 sites and
1/1
01
Cumulative Sites and Acres
Ready for Anticipated Use
FY08-FY12
994,254 1,059,886
378,741^ 390,44
FY08 FY09 FY10
• Sites • Acres
FY11
FY12
41
-------
2,428,822 acres were made ready for anticipated use. Over the past three years
the annual number of sites made RAU has decreased. This is primarily because of the increasing
cost and complexity of cleanups as well as a recalibration of cleanup targets due to the expiration
of funding such as that associated with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. For FY
2012, EPA achieved 99.3% (over 11,500 sites) of the FY 2012 milestone for this Priority Goal.
The graphs below highlight incremental progress in meeting RAU long-term and annual
performance goals, which is also the focus of the FY 2012-2013 Priority Goal.
Please note, as part of the formulation of the FY 2015 budget, the EPA will be developing new
FY 2014-2015 Priority Goals that advance the agency's priorities and the agency's Strategic
Plan. Additional information on the agency's Priority Goals can be found at
www.performance.gov.
FY 2014 Activities
Work under Goal 3 supports four objectives: 1) Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities,
2) Preserve Land; 3) Restore Land; and 4) Strengthen Human Health and Environmental
Protection in Indian Country.
Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to use several approaches to promote sustainable, healthier
communities and protect vulnerable populations and disproportionately impacted low-income,
minority, and Tribal communities. The agency especially is concerned about threats to sensitive
populations, such as children, the elderly, and individuals with chronic diseases.
Annual Sites
Ready for Anticipated Use
FY09 - FY12
15,000
13.428
12,171
12,003
11,555
FY09 FY10 FY11
• Tanks • Brownfields «SF BRCRACA
FY12
42
-------
Brownfields:
The EPA's Brownfields program is funded at nearly $158.6 million, which includes related
Smart Growth activities. This program supports states, local communities, and Tribes in their
efforts to assess and cleanup sites that may be contaminated within their jurisdiction and return
them to productive reuse. Although, the $9.8 million reduction in grants may result in 20 fewer
assessment grants, four fewer Revolving Loan Fund grants, nine fewer cleanup grants, and two
fewer Environmental Workforce Development and Job Training grants, the EPA will still be able
to award approximately 120 assessment grants, 51 cleanup grants, eight Revolving Loan Fund
grants, 11 Environmental Workforce Development and Job Training grants, 20 area wide
planning grants, and a variety of technical assistance, targeted assessment, and petroleum
brownfields grants. In FY 2014, this support includes the continued assessment and cleanup of
brownfields sites along with activities that advance the goals of the HUD-DOT-EPA Partnership
for Sustainable Communities, including greater use among local and state governments of
sustainable redevelopment approaches to brownfields.
The EPA requests $2.4 million to oversee, manage and support hundreds of brownfields
cooperative agreements awarded each year, while removing barriers and creating incentives for
brownfields cleanup and redevelopment. This program will continue to provide technical
assistance for brownfields redevelopment in cities in transition (areas struggling with high
unemployment as a result of structural changes to their economies). In addition, the Brownfields
program, in collaboration with the EPA's Smart Growth program, will address critical issues for
brownfields redevelopment, including financing, accountability to uniform systems of
information for land use controls, and other factors that influence the economic viability of
brownfields redevelopment. The FY 2014 funding request also includes a $300 thousand
increase to support Strong Cities, Strong Communities to provide guidance, technical assistance
and analytical support to local efforts to update land use codes to support the economic trajectory
of the community and better catalyze economic redevelopment. In FY 2014, the Brownfields
program will continue to foster federal, state, local, and public-private partnerships to return
properties to productive economic use in communities.
Smart Growth:
The agency's Smart Growth program works across the EPA and with other federal agencies to
help communities strengthen their economies and protect the environment through use of smart
growth and sustainable design approaches. This program focuses on streamlining, concentrating,
and leveraging state and federal assistance in urban, suburban, and rural communities that offer
the greatest opportunity for development that will deliver environmental and economic benefits.
In FY 2014, the EPA requests $1.9 million to continue its work to help community and
government leaders meet environmental standards through sustainable community and building
development, design, policies, and infrastructure investment strategies. The program does this by
providing technical assistance to states, regions, and local and Tribal governments; conducting
research and developing tools that help communities see the connection between development
and the environment, the economy, and public health; and engaging, leveraging and aligning
community-based activities and investments with other federal agencies. The program will
continue to innovate and use new mechanisms to address the growing demand from communities
43
-------
for more direct technical assistance, including in rural areas, in areas that are disadvantaged, or in
areas that have been adversely affected by contamination and environmental degradation.
The agency also will continue its support for the HUD-DOT-EPA Partnership for Sustainable
Communities by coordinating efforts across the three agencies that impact housing,
transportation, air quality, and protection of land and water resources. EPA and the Partnership
will help support a broader Administration commitment to help communities improve their
resilience through direct technical assistance, provision of useful data and tools, and support for
planning. By aligning grant resources and program investments, and through continued
coordination among the three agencies, EPA is helping to ensure that the federal government
makes investments that advance the Livability Principles and deliver economic, environmental
and community benefits.
Environmental Justice:
The EPA is committed to environmental justice (EJ) regardless of race, color, national origin, or
income. Recognizing that minority and/or low-income communities frequently may be exposed
disproportionately to environmental harm and risks, the agency works to protect these
communities and to ensure they are given the opportunity to participate meaningfully in
environmental decisions, including clean-ups. In FY 2014, the implementation of the EPA's
strategic plan on environmental justice, Plan EJ 2014, by agency programs and regional offices is
a key component of the EJ program's efforts. The EPA requests $7.6 million for the EJ program
to continue its efforts to incorporate EJ considerations into rulemaking and permitting processes,
and to maintain the successful ongoing grants program with an emphasis on ensuring evidence to
support needs described in proposed projects. In FY 2014, the EJ program will continue to apply
effective methods suitable for decision-making involving disproportionate environmental health
impacts on minority, low-income, and Tribal populations. The EPA also is implementing
technical guidance to advance the integration of EJ considerations in analyses that support the
EPA's actions.
U.S.-Mexico Border:
In FY 2014, the EPA is requesting $4.4 million for the US-Mexico Border program within Goal
3. The 2,000 mile border between the U.S. and Mexico is one of the most complex and dynamic
regions in the world. The U.S.-Mexico Border region hosts a growing population of more than
14 million people and accounts for three of the ten poorest counties in the U.S. These
demographics pose unique drinking water and wastewater infrastructure challenges as well as air
pollution issues. The Border 2020 program identifies five long-term strategic goals to address the
serious environmental and environmentally-related public health challenges including the impact
of transboundary transport of pollutants in the border region. The goals are: reduce air pollution;
improve access to clean and safe water; promote materials management, waste management and
clean sites; enhance joint preparedness for environmental response; and enhance compliance
assurance and environmental stewardship.
44
-------
Preserve and Restore Land
In FY 2014, the agency is requesting over $1.341 billion to continue to apply the most effective
approaches to preserve and restore land by developing and implementing prevention programs,
improving response capabilities, and maximizing the effectiveness of response and cleanup
actions under RCRA, Superfund, LUST and other authorities. This strategy will help ensure that
human health and the environment are protected and that land is returned to beneficial use in the
most effective way.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to use a hierarchy of approaches to protect the land: reducing
waste at its source, recycling waste, managing waste effectively by preventing spills and releases
of toxic materials, and cleaning up contaminated properties. The agency is especially concerned
about threats to sensitive populations, such as children, the elderly, and individuals with chronic
diseases, and prioritizes cleanups accordingly.14
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA, or
Superfund) and RCRA provide legal authority for the EPA's work to protect the land. The
agency and its partners use Superfund authority to clean up uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous
waste sites, allowing land to be returned to productive use. Under RCRA, the EPA works in
partnership with states and tribes to address risks associated with anyone who generates,
recycles, transports, treats, stores, or disposes of waste.
In FY 2014, the EPA will work to preserve and restore the nation's land by ensuring proper
management of waste and petroleum products, reducing waste generation, increasing recycling
and by supporting its cleanup programs and oversight of oil and chemical facilities. These efforts
are integrated with the agency's efforts to promote sustainable and livable communities. The
EPA's land program activities for FY 2014 include seven broad efforts: 1) Integrated Cleanup
Initiative; 2) Land Cleanup and Revitalization; 3) RCRA Waste Management and Corrective
Action; 4) Recycling and Waste Minimization; 5) Underground Storage Tanks management; 6)
Oil Spills and Chemical Safety, and 7) Homeland Security. Note, for FY 2014 the EPA will no
longer provide automatic transfers to other federal agencies from the Superfund Account.
Integrated Cleanup Initiative15:
In FY 2010, the EPA initiated a multi-year strategy called the Integrated Cleanup Initiative (ICI)
to improve accountability, transparency, and effectiveness by better integrating and leveraging
the agency's land cleanup authorities. The ICI establishes a framework of activities, milestone
dates, and deliverables to enable the EPA to address a greater number of sites, accelerate the
pace of cleanups, and put those sites back into productive use while protecting human health and
the environment. One of the primary goals of ICI is to communicate progress, successes, and
challenges in a transparent manner to stakeholders and the public. For example, ICI helped
streamline the review processes of both the National Remedy Review Board (NRRB) and the
Contaminated Sediments Technical Advisory Group (CSTAG) by improving review
14 Additional information on these programs can be found at: www.epa.gov/superfund.
http://www.epa.gov/oem/content/er_cleanup.htnu http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/ca/, http://www.epa.gov/Brownfields/.
http://www.epa.gov/swerustl/, http://www.epa.gov/swerffrr/ and http://www.epa.gov/landrevitalization/index.htm
15 Additional information on this initiative may be found on http://www.epa.gov/oswer/integratedcleanup.htm.
45
-------
coordination by the different boards, increasing opportunity for stakeholder input, and increasing
the transparency of board findings.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to accelerate and otherwise improve comprehensive
management of all aspects of the agency's cleanup programs while addressing the three critical
points in the cleanup process—starting, advancing, and completing site cleanup. The agency is
exploring new project management efficiencies, broadening the use of optimization techniques,
and improving the efficiency of the grants and contracting processes that are so important to our
cleanup programs.
Land Cleanup and Revitalization:
In addition to promoting sustainable and livable communities, the EPA's cleanup programs (e.g.,
Superfund Remedial, Superfund Federal Facilities Response, Superfund Emergency Response
and Removal, RCRA Corrective Action, Brownfields, TSCA PCB Cleanup and Disposal, and
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) Cooperative Agreements) and their partners are
taking proactive steps to facilitate the cleanup and revitalization of contaminated properties. To
support the Land Revitalization Initiative, EPA created the Land Revitalization Agenda16 to
integrate reuse into EPA's cleanup programs, establish partnerships, and help make land
revitalization part of EPA's organizational culture. In FY 2014, the agency will continue to help
communities clean up and revitalize these once productive properties by removing
contamination, helping limit urban sprawl, fostering ecologic habitat enhancements, enabling
economic development, taking advantage of existing infrastructure, and maintaining or
improving quality of life. In addition, the EPA will continue to support the RE-Powering
America's Land initiative17 in partnership with the Department of Energy, and support ongoing
work with the General Services Administration to expeditiously identify parcels of federally-
owned property ready for reuse as part of cleanup. These projects encourage reuse and
development on currently or formerly contaminated land.
Due to tough budget choices, funding levels for the Superfund Emergency Response and
Removal program are reduced by approximately $1.8 million to $187.8 million. The agency will
continue to support all emergency actions and focus on encouraging viable PRPs, when
available, to conduct removal actions. In FY 2014, the EPA will oversee 170 PRP removal
actions and 170 Superfund-lead removal actions where no viable PRP has been identified. In
addition, the agency is funding the Superfund Remedial program at $539.1 million. The agency
will continue to give priority to completing projects at various stages in the response process,
such as investigation, remedy design, and remedy construction. This strategy will create a
potential backlog of approximately 40-45 new construction projects by the end of FY 2014.
However, the agency will continue to maintain its levels of sites achieving human exposures
under control and ground water migration under control, its statutorily mandated actions to
operate ground water remedies, and to monitor and assess the protectiveness of the constructed
remedies. In addition, the program estimates accomplishing 115 remedial action project
completions in FY 2014. This projection is consistent with the FY 2013 target. The program also
will continue to place emphasis on promoting site reuse in affected communities and estimate
16 Additional information on this agenda can be found on http://www.epa.gov/landrevitalization/agenda_full.htm
17 Additional information on this initiative can be found on http://www.epa.gov/renewableenergyland/.
46
-------
bringing the program's cumulative total to 726 final and deleted NPL sites ready for anticipated
use by the end of FY 2014.
The EPA is making significant progress in assuring that prior to completion of cleanups,
unacceptable human exposures are eliminated or controlled as soon as possible. The RCRA
Corrective Action and Superfund programs have made significant progress in stabilizing
exposure, while longer-term cleanup progresses. The EPA will continue to take action to address
any unacceptable exposures and eliminate acute risks while continuing to pursue long-term,
permanent cleanups. This is exemplified by the EPA's goal to control contaminated groundwater
migration at 1,099 final and deleted NPL sites and control human exposures to contamination at
1,381 final and deleted NPM sites by the end of FY 2014.
RCRA Waste Management, Corrective Action and Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance:
In partnership with the states, the agency requests $211.4 million to implement RCRA, which is
critical to comprehensive and protective management of solid and hazardous materials for the
entire lifecycle. In FY 2014, the EPA and the states will oversee and manage RCRA permits for
10 thousand hazardous waste units at 2,465 facilities. The EPA is responsible for the continued
oversight and maintenance of the regulatory controls at facilities covered by RCRA and directly
implements the entire RCRA program in Iowa and Alaska.18 The EPA provides leadership,
work-sharing, and support to the 50 states and territories authorized to implement the permitting
program. With declining state resources, the EPA is facing the potential of an increasing amount
of direct implementation responsibility.
The EPA's Corrective Action program is responsible for overseeing and managing cleanups that
protect human health and the environment at active RCRA sites. The EPA focuses its corrective
action resources on the 3,747 operating hazardous waste facilities that are a subset of
approximately 6 thousand sites with corrective action obligations. These facilities include some
of the most highly contaminated, technically challenging, and potentially threatening sites the
EPA confronts in any of its cleanup programs.19 In FY 2014, the EPA will focus resources on
those sites that present the highest risk to human health and the environment and implement
actions to end or reduce these threats. To this end, the agency will build on its achievement of
completing final remedy constructions at an estimated total of 1,836 RCRA corrective action
facilities as of October 2012. In addition, the EPA will focus on controlling the migration of
groundwater at 80 percent of RCRA facilities and controlling human exposures to toxins at 90
percent of RCRA facilities in FY 2014. The agency also will support national PCB cleanup and
disposal activities by assessing emerging technologies and issuing approvals (no states can be
authorized for PCBs), evaluating PCB wastes against the criteria specified in the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA).
Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest:
On October 5, 2012, the President signed the Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest
Establishment Act, requiring the EPA to assemble and maintain the information contained in the
http://www.epa.gov/wastes/hazard/tsd/permit/pgprarpt.htm
19 There are additional facilities that have corrective action obligations that the EPA does not track under GPRA, as they are
typically smaller, less significant facilities or sites. The EPA recognizes that the total universe of such facilities or sites "subject
to" corrective action universe is between five and six thousand facilities or sites.
47
-------
estimated 5 million forms accompanying hazardous waste shipments across the nation. In FY
2013, the EPA initiated the effort to develop a program that provided for the submission of
information electronically, as well as in paper form. This investment at the federal level will
significantly reduce the time and costs for state regulators and regulated entities associated with
submitting, maintaining, processing, and publishing data from hazardous waste manifests. When
fully implemented, the electronic hazardous waste manifest (e-Manifest) program will reduce the
reporting burden for firms regulated under RCRA's hazardous waste provisions by a range of
$77 million to $126 million annually. The legislation contains aggressive deadlines for
rulemaking and system development. Once this system is in place, the legislation provides that
fees collected through the program will be used to fund the operation of the program.
In FY 2014, the EPA requests a total of $4.4 million, which includes $2.4 million in RCRA
Waste Management, to begin the e-Manifest system acquisition/development process to meet the
requirements outlined during the project planning phase; begin to develop the economic models
to support the development of a user-fee rule; and begin needed analyses to support further
revision of EPA regulations needed to implement an e-Manifest system. E-Manifest will be a key
component of the E-Enterprise initiative, and will provide a number of framework components in
support of E-Enterprise.
Recycling and Waste Minimization:
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to advance the sustainable materials management (SMM)
practices and a cradle-to-cradle perspective representing an important emphasis shift from waste
management to materials management. The agency's approach to SMM integrates the safe reuse
of materials with economic opportunity. In FY 2014, the EPA will utilize SMM to offset the use
of virgin resources by 8,603,033 tons of materials and products. In FY 2014, the EPA will
continue to work on sustainable food management and used electronics, and will expand SMM
work into other sectors, such as strengthening the EPA's knowledge of the sustainability and the
beneficial use of industrial materials. SMM is managed through the RCRA: Waste Minimization
and Recycling program, for which the EPA has requested $9.4 million in FY 2014.
The EPAct and Underground Storage Tanks:
r-*-, -*—, 90
The EPAct contains numerous provisions that significantly affect federal and state underground
storage tank (UST) programs and requires that the EPA and states strengthen tank release and
prevention programs. In FY 2014 the EPA will continue to provide grants to states to help them
meet their EPAct responsibilities, which include: 1) mandatory inspections every three years for
all underground storage tanks and enforcement of violations discovered during the inspections;
2) operator training; 3) prohibition of delivery for non-complying facilities; and 4) secondary
containment or financial responsibility for tank manufacturers and installers.
The EPA's goal is to prevent future releases of wastes in the environment. The Agency
understands that accidents can happen but proper prevention leads to fewer and fewer releases.
For example, the number of confirmed releases from USTs has dropped 25 percent, from 7,570
For more information, refer to http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-
bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109 cong public Iaws&docid=f:publ058.109.pdf (scroll to Title XV - Ethanol And Motor Fuels,
Subtitle B - Underground Storage Tank Compliance, on pages 500-513 of the pdf file).
48
-------
in FY 2007 to 5,674 in FY 2012. The number of active tanks over that period dropped six
percent, from 629,866 to 583,508.
The LUST program has achieved significant success in closing releases since the beginning of
the program. Of the 507,540 total confirmed releases, by the end of FY 2012, 84 percent (or
425,637) were closed. The LUST program continues to make progress decreasing the overall
backlog; however, the pace of cleanups is declining. In FY 2012, the program completed 97
percent of the annual cleanup goal of 11,250 sites by finishing 10,927 cleanups. Achieving these
cleanup rates in the future will be more challenging. In FY 2011, the LUST program completed a
study of its cleanup backlog. The EPA's backlog study helped identify potential strategies to
address the approximately 83 thousand UST releases remaining. EPA is working with states to
develop and implement specific strategies and activities applicable to their particular sites to
reduce the UST releases remaining to be cleaned up.
There is a strong relationship between LUST clean up success and reducing the number of new
releases through the prevention program. Since 2007, the EPA has placed an increased emphasis
on monitoring compliance through increased frequency of inspections and other Energy Policy
Act (EPAct) provisions. During this time, compliance rates have increased and there has been a
significant decrease in new confirmed releases. The continued reduction in confirmed releases
will remain a critical component in backlog reduction, but maintaining cleanup progress is
essential as well.
Oil Spills and Chemical Safety:
The discharge of oil into U.S. waters can threaten human health, cause severe environmental
damage, and induce great financial loss to businesses and the public. The Oil Spill program helps
protect U.S. waters by effectively preventing, preparing for, responding to, and monitoring oil
spills. The EPA serves as the lead responder for cleanup of all inland zone spills, including
transportation-related spills from pipelines, trucks, and other transportation systems, and
provides technical assistance and support to the U.S. Coast Guard for coastal and maritime oil
spills. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to focus efforts on oil spill prevention, preparedness,
compliance assistance, and enforcement activities associated with the more than 600 thousand
non-transportation-related oil storage facilities that the EPA regulates through its Spill
Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Program. In addition, the agency will finalize
development and begin implementation of the National Oil Database including identifying
requirements for electronic submission of Facility Response Plans in order to create reporting
efficiencies for the agency, states, local government and industry.
In FY 2014, the EPA requests a total of $17.1 million which includes a $2.4 million increase to
improve the federal capacity to prevent oil spills by conducting up to 34 additional high-risk
facility inspections. The EPA will perform inspections of regulated high-risk oil facilities to
better implement prevention approaches and to bring 50 percent of SPCC inspected facilities
found to be non-compliant during the FY 2010 through FY 2013 inspection cycle into
compliance. In 2014, EPA anticipates performing 454 inspections, of which 154 are expected to
be at high risk facility inspections.
49
-------
In FY 2014, the EPA also requests $14.1 million which includes a $0.8 million increase to
support additional high-risk chemical facility inspections. There is a critical need for the agency
to continue efforts to prevent and respond to accidental releases of harmful substances by
developing clear authorities, training personnel, and providing proper equipment. Accidents
reported to the EPA since 2005 by the current universe of RMP facilities have resulted in the
deaths of approximately 60 workers and other people, over 1.3 thousand injuries, nearly 200
thousand people sheltered in place, and more than $1.6 billion in on-site and off-site damages.
Homeland Security:
The EPA's Homeland Security work is an important component of the agency's prevention,
protection, and response activities. The FY 2014 President's Budget requests $38.7 million to:
maintain its capability to respond effectively to incidents that may involve harmful chemical,
biological, and radiological (CBR) substances; maintain the Environmental Response
Laboratory Network (ERLN); develop and maintain agency expertise and operational readiness
for all phases of consequential management following a CBR incident, specifically
environmental characterization, decontamination, laboratory analyses and clearance; maintain
the Emergency Management Portal (EMP); and conduct CBR training for agency responders to
improve CBR preparedness.
Improve Human Health and the Environment in Indian Country
In FY 2014, the EPA will work with Tribal governments to develop and implement strategic
planning through joint Tribal-EPA partnership plans. This will assist the agency and Tribal
governments in identifying key procedures and milestones for building capacity for specific
programs. Capacity to develop environmental education and outreach programs, develop and
implement integrated solid waste management plans, and identify serious conditions posing
immediate public health and ecological threats, is important for the health of Tribal communities.
In FY 2014, Tribal GAP grants will maintain progress toward building Tribal capacity and assist
tribes in leveraging other EPA and federal funding to contribute towards environmental and
human health protection for this underserved population. Due to continued high staff turnover
rates within tribes, the funding increases requested in the President's Budget are critical for
building and sustaining core environmental program capacities.
Under federal environmental statutes, the EPA has responsibility for protecting human health
and the environment in Indian country. Since adopting the EPA Indian Policy in 1984, the EPA
has worked with federally-recognized tribes on a government-to-government basis, in
recognition of the federal government's trust responsibility to federally-recognized tribes. In FY
2014, the EPA's Office of International and Tribal Affairs will continue to lead agency-wide
program efforts to work with tribes, Alaska Native Villages, and inter-tribal consortia to fulfill
this responsibility. The EPA's strategy for achieving this objective has two major components:
• Work with federally-recognized tribes who want to create an environmental program
through: direct technical assistance; implementation of the Indian General Assistance
Program (GAP); development of joint strategic plans; and development of measures for
tracking progress made toward achieving environmental program goals.
50
-------
• Gather, track, analyze and provide the information and data necessary to access, review, and
prioritize Tribal environmental conditions for joint planning uses and to determine the
effectiveness of the EPA and Tribal programs in improving environmental.
Research
The Sustainable and Healthy Communities Research Program (SHCRP) will continue research to
support the EPA's program offices, and our state and Tribal partners in protecting and restoring
land, and supporting community health. The work of the SHCRP falls into four inter-related
themes:
1. Data and Tools to Support Sustainable Community Decisions uses interactive social
media and other innovative means to enable communities and stakeholders to actively
engage in the planning, design, and implementation of SHC research to meet their desired
sustainability goals;
2. Forecasting and Assessing Ecological and Community Health will enable communities to
ensure the sustainable provision of ecosystem services and to assess how the natural and
built environment affects the health and well-being of their residents;
3. Near-term Approaches for Sustainable Solutions builds upon the EPA's program office
experience to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of methods for addressing existing
sources of land and groundwater contamination, while moving to innovative approaches
that reduce new sources of contamination and enable recovery of energy, materials, and
nutrients from waste;
4. Integrated Solutions for Sustainable Outcomes assesses the state of the art of sustainable
practices for four high-priority community decision areas: waste and materials
management; infrastructure, including energy and water; transportation; and planning and
zoning for buildings and land use. It will use whole-system modeling to integrate these
four areas to better achieve outcomes with multiple benefits and to develop and test
Taskforce on Research to Inform and Optimize (TRIO) accounting methods.
In FY 2014, the SHCRP will address many facets of site contamination and cleanup. This
includes source elimination of contaminated ground water and migration at Superfund sites and
plume management to reduce exposures via drinking water and vapor intrusion. Research efforts
are leading to screening, sampling, and modeling approaches to assess risks from vapor intrusion
and to define the need for mitigation in homes, schools, and places of employment. This science
will be used to develop guidance on site assessment and in remedial investigations.
Research will characterize contaminated sediments, remediation options, and ways to enhance
cleanup of contaminated sediments, leading to restored ecological functioning and lifting offish
consumption advisories in impaired waters. The EPA will use this research to improve the cost
effectiveness of sediment remediation cleanups and achieve human health, environmental, and
economic benefits of cleanup projects along lakes and rivers. This research provides site-specific
51
-------
and general technical support to the EPA as it evaluates options for remediation of Superfund
sites.
The EPA will continue to develop or revise protocols to test oil spill control agents or products
for listing on the National Contingency Plan Product Schedule, including dispersants'
performance and behavior in deep water. In addition, the agency is requesting $498 thousand to
support research for the Underground Storage Tanks program. The SHCRP will deliver
improved characterization and remediation methods for fuels released from leaking underground
storage tanks.
52
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Reduce the risk and increase the safety of chemicals and prevent pollution at the source.
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES:
• Conserve and protect natural resources by promoting pollution prevention and the
adoption of other stewardship practices by companies, communities, governmental
organizations, and individuals.
• Reduce the risk of chemicals that enter our products, our environment, and our bodies.
GOAL, OBJECTIVE SUMMARY
Budget Authority
Full-time Equivalents
(Dollars in Thousands)
Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals
and Preventing Pollution
Promote Pollution Prevention
Ensure Chemical Safety
Total Authorized Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$659,346.0
$58,028.5
$601,317.5
2,679.3
FY 2012
Actuals
$661,328.6
$55,952.7
$605,375.9
2,686.8
FY2013
Annualized
CR
$654,506.1
$56,613.2
$597,892.9
2,633.6
FY 2014
Pres
Budget
$686,194.9
$58,558.7
$627,636.2
2,592.7
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$26,848.9
$530.2
$26,318.7
-86.6
53
-------
Introduction
Chemicals are ubiquitous in our everyday lives and products. They are used in the production of
everything from our homes and cars to the cell phones we carry and the food we eat. Chemicals
often are released into the environment as a result of their manufacture, processing, use, and
disposal. Research shows that children are getting steady infusions of industrial chemicals before
they are even given solid food.21'22'23 Other vulnerable groups, including low-income, minority,
and indigenous populations, may be disproportionately impacted by chemical exposure and thus
particularly at risk.24'25'26
Under existing Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) authorization, the EPA is charged with the
responsibility of assessing the safety of commercial chemicals and to act upon those chemicals if
there are significant risks to human health or the environment. The $686.2 million requested in
FY 2014 will allow the EPA to sustain its success in managing the potential risks of new
chemicals entering commerce without impacting progress in assessing and ensuring the safety of
existing chemicals. In FY 2014, the approach focuses on: 1) using all available authorities under
TSCA to take immediate and lasting action to eliminate or reduce identified chemical risks and
develop proven safer alternatives; 2) using regulatory mechanisms to fill remaining gaps in
critical exposure data, and increasing transparency and public access to information on TSCA
chemicals; and 3) using data from all available sources to conduct detailed chemical risk
assessments on priority chemicals to determine which risk management actions may be needed
and why. In FY 2014, the EPA will discontinue funding for the fibers program. The fibers
program, which is primarily administered by States via their departments of environmental
protection or health, will continue to be where the public gets their information about asbestos.
EPA will continue asbestos-related efforts elsewhere through the provision of State grants for
asbestos compliance.
In FY 2014, the EPA's pesticide licensing program will continue to evaluate new pesticides
before they reach the market and will continue to ensure that pesticides already in commerce are
safe when used in accordance with the label. As directed by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide,
and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), and the
Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA), the EPA will register pesticides to protect consumers,
pesticide users, workers who may be exposed to pesticides, children, and other sensitive
populations. The EPA also will review potential impacts on the environment, with particular
attention to endangered species.
21 The Disproportionate Impact of Environmental Health Threats on Children of Color
(http://vosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/8d49f7ad4bbcf4ef852573590040b7f6/79a3n3c301688828525770c0063b277iOpenD
ocumenfl
22 Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
23 Guide to Considering Children's Health When Developing EPA Actions: Implementing Executive Order 13045 and EPA's
Policy on Evaluating Health Risks to Children
(http://vosemite.epa.gov/ochp/ochpweb.nsf/content/ADPguide.htm/SFile/EPA ADP Guide 508.pdf)
24 Holistic Risk-based Environmental Decision Making: a Native Perspective
(http://www.ncbi.nhn.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12411711
25 Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income
Populations
26 Interim Guidance on Considering Environmental Justice During the Development of an Action
(http://www.epa.gov/compliance/ei/resources/policv/considering-ei-in-rulemaking-guide-07-2010.pdf)
54
-------
The EPA has a long history of collaboration on a wide range of domestic and global
environmental issues. The EPA envisions that environmental progress in cooperation with
international partners can catalyze even greater progress toward protecting our environment,
including ensuring that trade-related activities sustain environmental protection, enhancing the
ability of our trading partners to protect their environments and develop in a sustainable manner,
and improving cooperation and enhancing opportunities through effective consultation and
collaboration related to issues of mutual interest. To advance all of these efforts, the EPA
continues to focus on the following international priorities: building strong environmental
institutions and legal structures; improving air quality; expanding access to clean water; reducing
exposure to toxic chemicals; and cleaning up e-waste.
Chemical safety research is directed to manage the risks arising from exposure to hazardous
chemical substances. The complexity of twenty-first century socio-environmental challenges
demand enhanced risk prevention and mitigation tools for new and existing chemicals that
consider the proactive and sustainable design, manufacture, use, and disposal of chemicals. One
of the principal examples of this forward thinking is the computational toxicology work under
the Toxicity Forecaster (ToxCast) program, which will focus on the following issues:
improvement of computational systems models of pathways and tissues, development of rapid
cost-efficient exposure models (ExpoCast), and the implementation of web-based tools
(Dashboards) for analysis and decision support. Achieving an environmentally sustainable future
demands that the EPA address today's environmental problems while simultaneously preparing
for long-term challenges. These efforts support the development and employment of approaches
for alternative sustainable product formulations found by studying chemical life cycles to address
issues of cumulative risk, environmental chemical mixtures, population-vulnerability, and
environmental justice, as related to exposure disparities. The EPA's Science Advisory Board
(SAB) recognizes that solutions must tackle issues collectively, rather than individually, to be
effective.27 This belief is a core philosophy of the EPA's FY 2014 research program and it will
position the Agency to address the environmental challenges of the 21st Century.
Pollution prevention is central to the EPA's sustainability strategies. In FY 2014, the EPA will
enhance cross-cutting efforts to advance sustainable practices, safer chemicals, sustainable lower
risk processes and practices, and safer products. The combined effect of community-level
actions, geographically-targeted efforts, attention to chemicals, and concern for ecosystems —
implemented through the lens of science, transparency, and law — will bring real environmental
improvements and protections.
Major FY 2014 Changes
Recognizing the tight limits on discretionary spending across government, the EPA has
evaluated its priorities and made necessary adjustments to focus FY 2014 resources on the most
significant efforts that help protect health and the environment from chemical risks. The EPA
request represents an increase in FY 2014 of approximately $6.2 million above the FY 2012
Enacted Budget for critical work in the objective of Ensuring Chemical Safety under the
Chemical Risk Review and Reduction program. This increase is targeted to the following
activities: continue development and peer review in order to finalize risk assessments of
http://vosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/E989ECFC125966428525775B0047BElA/SFile/EPA-SAB-10-010-unsigned.pdf
55
-------
additional TSCA work plan chemicals; and increase the pace of its review of existing TSCA
confidential business information cases, with the goal of having all such reviews completed a
year in advance of the target date in the FY 2011 - 2015 EPA Strategic Plan.
FY 2014 Activities
Chemicals Program
The chemicals program addresses new chemicals, existing chemicals and legacy chemicals. The
major activity of the new chemicals program is premanufacture notices (PMN) review and
management, which addresses the potential risks from approximately 1,000 chemicals, products
of biotechnology, and new chemical nanoscale materials received annually prior to their entry
into the US marketplace. In FY 2014, the toxics program will maintain its 'zero tolerance' goal
in preventing the introduction of unsafe new chemicals into commerce.
The greatest challenge is to address existing chemicals already in use but where available
information is limited. Existing chemicals activities fall into three major components: 1)
obtaining, managing, and making chemical information public; 2) screening and assessing
chemical risks; and 3) reducing chemical risks. Progress will be made to address existing
chemicals already in commerce under EPA's comprehensive approach to enhance the Agency's
existing chemicals management program, including under EPA's TSCA Work Plan that
evaluates these chemicals in a manner which is efficient and prioritized according to potential
risk.
In FY 2014, EPA also expects to complete final risk assessments in FY 2014 for three of the 83
TSCA Work Plan Chemicals identified in March 2012, while making further progress in
assessing risks for up to 18 additional chemicals.
In FY 2014, the agency will continue to implement the chemicals risk management program to
further eliminate risks from high-risk "legacy" chemicals. As illustrated in the following figure,
the EPA will build on the successful national effort to reduce childhood blood lead incidences
and continue ongoing implementation of the Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) Rule
through outreach efforts and targeted activities to support renovator certifications.
Children's Risk
Blood Lead Levels for Children aged 1-5
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
>10 ug/dL
Elevated Lead
Levels
New Concern Lead
Levels
>5 ug/dL
TARGET Lead Levels
For near Future
56
-------
Endocrine Disrupter Program
In FY 2014, the endocrine disrupter screening program will focus on several areas. The program
plans to
• Finalize the inter-laboratory validation of test protocols to be used to determine the
endocrine-related effects caused by potential endocrine disrupters at various doses;
• Prioritize and select additional chemicals to undergo screening to determine potential for
endocrine disruption;
• Continue to issue orders to conduct testing for selected chemicals; and
• Review test data submitted and conduct weight of evidence (WoE) evaluations to
determine whether pesticide chemicals have the potential to interact with endocrine
systems, and whether the chemical warrants further testing for endocrine effects.
Further, the program will continue coordination and collaboration with the research and
development program to identify computational toxicology-based approaches which may be used
for chemical prioritization and to develop a more targeted approach to assess a chemical's
potential to interact with the estrogen, androgen, and thyroid systems.
Pesticides Program
Identifying, assessing, and reducing the risks presented by the pesticides on which our society
and economy depend are integral to ensuring chemical safety. Chemical and biological pesticides
help meet national and global demands for food. They provide effective pest control for homes,
schools, gardens, highways, utility lines, hospitals, and drinking water treatment facilities while
also controlling animal vectors of disease. The program ensures that the pesticides available in
the U.S. are safe when used as directed. In addition, the program places priority on reduced risk
pesticides that, once registered, will result in increased societal benefits.
In FY 2014, $129.5 million is requested to support the EPA pesticide review processes for all
pesticide applications. The EPA also will focus on improving pesticide registrations' compliance
with the Endangered Species Act and ensuring that pesticides are correctly registered and applied
to ensure protection of water quality. The EPA will continue registration and reregi strati on
requirements for antimicrobial pesticides which differ somewhat from those of other pesticides.
The EPA also will continue to emphasize the protection of potentially sensitive groups, such as
children, by reducing exposures from pesticides used in and around homes, schools, and other
public areas. In addition, the agency worker protection, certification, and training programs will
encourage safe application practices. Together, these programs will minimize exposure to
pesticides, maintain a safe and affordable food supply, address public health issues, and
minimize property damage that can occur from insects, pests and microbes.
Pollution Prevention Program
In FY 2014, the requested funding of $20.3 million for the EPA's pollution prevention (P2)
program will target technical assistance, information, and assessments to encourage the use of
greener chemicals, technologies, processes, and products. The EPA will continue to support
programs with proven records of success, including Environmentally Preferable Purchasing
(EPP), Design for the Environment (DfE), Green Suppliers Network, Pollution Prevention
57
-------
Technical Assistance, Partnership for Sustainable Healthcare, Green Chemistry and Green
Engineering. In addition, the EPA's P2 Programs will support the Economy, Energy, and
Environment (E3) Partnership among federal agencies, local governments, and manufacturers to
promote energy efficiency, job creation, and environmental improvement. E3 partnerships are
active in 18 states; organizations in another 15 states and territories have begun the E3 process.
Work under these programs also supports the energy reduction goals under Executive Order
13514. Through these efforts, the EPA will continue to encourage government and business to
adopt source reduction practices that can help prevent pollution and avoid potential adverse
human health and environmental impacts. In FY 2014, the EPA will leverage expertise from
other EPA programs to enhance new pollution prevention education and outreach resources and
create mechanisms to ensure their use. Through an intra-agency working group, each program
office will disseminate educational resources and information to the public.
International Priorities
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to work to improve air quality, expand access to clean water,
and protect vulnerable communities from toxic pollution that extends from North America to
nearly 180 nations worldwide. Through collaborative efforts with partners from around the
world, the EPA is working to facilitate commerce, promote sustainable development, protect
vulnerable populations and engage in environmental issues. In June 2012 Administrator Lisa
Jackson attended the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, commonly
referred to as Rio+20. The Administrator worked to advance U.S. positions in promoting a
global green economy.
Specifically, the EPA's bilateral and multilateral partnerships will continue to address
environmental health outcomes. The agency's international priorities will guide collaboration
with Commission on Environmental Cooperation (CEC) and all international partners.
Through these partnerships, the EPA will maintain focus on several priorities. It will continue
building strong environmental institutions and legal structure and combating climate change by
limiting pollutants and improving air quality in the U.S. and around the world. The EPA expects
to focus on assisting less developed countries with technical support needed for ratification of the
Minamata Mercury Convention, a legally-binding convention directed at reducing global
mercury pollution that was adopted by delegates from over 140 countries in January 2013. The
EPA also expects to focus on continued technical and policy support for global and regional
efforts to address international sources of mercury use and emission. Reducing exposure to toxic
chemicals and cleaning up e-waste also will be a priority.
Research
The EPA's Chemical Safety and Sustainability, Human Health Risk Assessment, and Homeland
Security Research programs underpin the analysis of risks and potential health impacts across the
broad spectrum of EPA programs and provide the scientific foundation for chemical safety and
pollution prevention. In FY 2014, the EPA will further strengthen its planning and delivery of
science by continuing an integrated research approach that tackles problems systematically
instead of individually.
58
-------
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue the multi-year transition away from the traditional assays
used in the endocrine disrupter screening program through efforts to validate and use
computational toxicology and high throughput screening methods. This is expected to allow the
agency to more quickly, efficiently, and cost-effectively assess potential chemical toxicity. In FY
2014, the EPA will continue to evaluate endocrine-relevant ToxCast high throughput assays to
increase coverage for known endocrine toxicity pathways through the scientific understanding of
adverse outcome pathways.
In FY 2014, the agency's Human Health Risk Assessment research program will continue to
develop assessments and other research products including:
• Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) health hazard and dose-response assessments;
• Integrated Science Assessments (IS As) of criteria air pollutants;
• Community Risk and Technical Support; and
• Methods, models, and approaches to modernize risk assessment for the 21st Century.
In FY 2014, the program will release a final Integrated Science Assessment evaluating the health
effects of nitrogen oxides and sulfur oxides to contribute to the EPA's review of the primary
NAAQS for these air pollutants. The program also will make significant progress toward
completion health hazard assessments of high priority chemicals (e.g., arsenic (inorganic) and
cumulative phthalates).
The Homeland Security research program (HSRP) will continue to enhance the nation's
preparedness, response, and recovery capabilities for homeland security incidents and other
hazards. The HSRP will provide stakeholders with valuable detection and response analytics for
incidents involving chemical, biological, or radiological agents. The program will emphasize
research needed to support response and recovery from wide-area attacks involving radiological
agents, nuclear agents, and biothreat agents such as anthrax.
The EPA will allocate $164.3 million to the Chemical Safety and Sustainability, Human Health
Risk Assessment, and Homeland Security Research programs in FY 2014.
59
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws
Protect human health and the environment through vigorous and targeted civil and criminal
enforcement. Assure compliance with environmental laws.
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES:
• Pursue vigorous civil and criminal enforcement that targets the most serious water, air,
and chemical hazards in communities. Assure strong, consistent, and effective
enforcement of federal environmental laws nationwide.
GOAL, OBJECTIVE SUMMARY
Budget Authority
Full-time Equivalents
(Dollars in Thousands)
Enforcing Environmental Laws
Enforce Environmental Laws
Total Authorized Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$785,630.0
$785,630.0
3,904.7
FY 2012
Actuals
$788,052.2
$788,052.2
3,799.1
FY2013
Annualized
CR
$782,925.2
$782,925.2
3,882.6
FY 2014
Pres
Budget
$840,553.1
$840,553.1
3,822.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$54,923.1
$54,923.1
-82.2
60
-------
Introduction
The EPA's civil and criminal enforcement programs assure compliance with our nation's
environmental laws. A strong and effective enforcement program is essential to ensuring
compliance with our laws and regulations and maintaining a level economic playing field, and to
realizing the public health and environmental protections our federal statutes were created to
achieve. The EPA is committed to helping support public health in communities
disproportionately burdened by pollution through integrating and addressing issues of
environmental justice (EJ) in the EPA's programs and policies as part of its day-to-day business.
The EPA's EJ program promotes accountability for compliance with Executive Order 12898,
"Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations."
On January 18, 2011, President Obama issued a "Presidential Memoranda - Regulatory
Compliance"28 which reaffirms the importance of effective enforcement and compliance with
regulations. It states "Sound regulatory enforcement promotes the welfare of Americans in many
ways, by increasing public safety, improving working conditions, and protecting the air we
breathe and the water we drink. Consistent regulatory enforcement also levels the playing field
among regulated entities, ensuring that those that fail to comply with the law do not have an
unfair advantage over their law-abiding competitors."
In FY 2014, the EPA seeks to maintain the strength of its core national enforcement and
compliance assurance program. Recognizing the tight fiscal climate at both the federal and state
level, the agency will implement strategies that use resources more efficiently and find
opportunities to focus and leverage efforts to assure compliance with environmental laws.
The EPA has achieved impressive pollution control and health benefits through vigorous
compliance monitoring and enforcement, but the sheer number of regulated facilities, the
contribution of large numbers of smaller sources of pollution, combined with federal and state
budget constraints has made it necessary for the EPA to go beyond the traditional single facility
inspection and enforcement approach to ensure widespread compliance. In light of fiscal
constraints, the need to innovate is even greater in order for the EPA to achieve gains in
compliance over the long-term. The EPA is developing and implementing new methods based
on advances in both monitoring and information technology that will improve compliance and
our ability to focus on the most serious violations and through electronic reporting will reduce
paperwork burdens on business and our governmental partners.
This initiative, Next Generation Compliance, incorporates multiple components: the use of state-
of-the-art monitoring technology to detect pollution problems; leveraging electronic reporting to
enhance government efficiency and reduce paperwork reporting burden; enhancing transparency
so the public is aware of facility and government environmental performance; implementing
innovative enforcement approaches; and structuring regulations to be more effective to achieve
improved compliance. In FY 2014, the EPA's national enforcement and compliance assurance
program will continue its efforts to implement Next Generation Compliance approaches to
achieve the EPA's goals more efficiently and effectively. Next Generation Compliance
Please see: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/01/18/presidential-memoranda-regulatorv-compliance
61
-------
complements the agency's new E-Enterprise initiative. The agency's E-Enterprise initiative
supports all of the agency's goals and programs. By the end of FY 2013, the EPA expects to
finalize and formally endorse key operational components of the agency's E-Enterprise initiative,
including the plan for joint governance by the states and the EPA, and the framework for
business case analyses which will guide operations. The initiative will reduce the paperwork and
regulatory reporting burden on regulated entities and provide easier access to and use of
environmental data. E-Enterprise resources in the Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
program will support three initiatives: 1) Developing a field collection, evidence management,
and reporting system for conducting compliance monitoring inspections; 2) Partnering with
states to develop and implement fillable e-forms for electronically reporting NPDES
information; and 3) Supporting e-reporting rule development and program evaluation.
In FY 2014, the agency proposes to accelerate its Next Generation Compliance approaches to
harness state-of-the-art technology to make this program more efficient and effective. In
particular, the burden and costs of monitoring and compliance reporting will be reduced for the
EPA and others by investing in state-of-the-art monitoring technology and supporting electronic
interaction with the regulated community. This will allow the EPA and others to move away
from the traditional model of reliance on time-consuming and expensive individual facility
inspections and paper reporting. For example, the Ohio National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) program was able to increase compliance and achieve efficiencies by
switching from a system of paper-based Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) to electronic
submissions. With more efficient management of the DMR process, the Ohio program was able
10000
c 8000
o
•5 6000
I 4000
k.
o! 2000
Ohio E-DMR Usage vs. NPDES Compliance Rate in FY 2009
(7/08-6/09)
.4- 100%
80%
-- 60%
r- 40%
Q
0)
O)
c
'55
=
(/)
0)
20% s
o
re
0%
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Reporting Month
I Sample Frequency Violations
l Limit Violations
•%eDMR Useage
to reduce data staff from eight employees to two, allowing the redeployment of six FTE to other
priority work. Additionally, non-compliance rates were reduced by over 50 percent in one year
by managing DMRs electronically. Data errors were reduced from 50,000 per month to 5,000.
The EPA is pursuing a national NPDES rule to replicate similar efficiencies and improved
compliance nationwide.
62
-------
The agency also will continue to emphasize the importance of making compliance information
publicly available to better serve the American people and provide an incentive to promote
greater compliance with environmental laws. The agency's Enforcement and Compliance
History Online (ECHO) tool is the EPA's premier web-based tool that provides public access to
compliance and enforcement information for approximately 800,000 EPA-regulated facilities.
The EPA, state and local environmental agencies collect/report data from facilities and from their
own activities and submit that data to EPA databases. In addition, ECHO includes State
Performance dashboards for the Clean Water Act (CWA), Clean Air Act (CAA) and Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) to allow users to assess each state's performance in
enforcing the various environmental statutes as well as integrate facility information across
media specific data systems. Through ECHO and its reports, users can now view this data in a
comprehensive and organized manner, including a search function. ECHO reports provide a
snapshot of a facility's environmental record, showing dates and types of any violations, as well
as the state or federal government's response. The system allows the public to monitor
environmental compliance in communities, corporations to monitor compliance across facilities
they own, and investors to more easily factor environmental performance into their decisions.
ECHO usage has grown to more than two million queries in FY 2012.
Number ECHO Queries by Fiscal Year
2,500,000
2,000,000 -
0
13 Million+ Queries Run Since Nov 2002.
Includes publicand government data use
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 200S 2009 2010 2011 2012
The Next Generation Compliance effort will enable the EPA to evaluate the effectiveness of its
enforcement and compliance strategies. The agency is working to develop tools that will help
collect data to establish a baseline level of environmental compliance information. For example,
converting paper-based reporting to electronic will reduce reporting burdens on facilities. The
conversion to electronic reporting coupled with advanced monitoring will provide the EPA and
the states with more complete data on regulated sources, their emissions/discharges and their
compliance status. More complete, timely information will allow the agency to evaluate
compliance, experiment with new approaches and identify what works. This more complete data
can be made publicly available, with transparency itself serving as a compliance driver.
63
-------
Major FY 2014 Changes
In FY 2014, the EPA requests $604 million for its National Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance program to support Goal 5.29 The EPA's FY 2014 budget submission for the
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program continues to focus on the highest priority work
- those pollution problems that pose the greatest threat to human health and the environment,
including work on the national enforcement initiatives. The budget also reflects efforts to reshape
and realign the workforce to accommodate changes in programmatic direction and strengthen
expertise by balancing the appropriate skill mix, and reducing administrative support through
efficiencies. The EPA carefully evaluated program activities and will direct limited resources to
where they can best protect public health, especially in disadvantaged communities; support core
work of state and Tribal partners; and focus on the largest pollution problems.
• With the overall objective of assisting the agency with achieving its goals more
efficiently and effectively, the EPA's National Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
program is in the process of restructuring its workforce and reducing a total of 62.8 FTE,
a cut of 2.0 percent from FY 2012 FTE levels. The EPA will prioritize resources to
continue to address the most important public health and environmental compliance
problems. This effort, in part, will allow for additional resources to assist the program
with the following activities:
• $6.4 million to maintain the capacity and support for case development, negotiation,
and litigation;
$4.1 million for high priority activities such as conducting compliance inspections,
maintaining compliance monitoring tools for effective targeting and supporting
EPA's enforcement data systems; and
$2.8 million to provide support for targeted, intelligence-led enforcement activities
which will permit criminal agents to more quickly and effectively investigate
complex cases.
• In FY 2014, the agency requests $4.0 million for a new Evidence-Based Enforcement
grant program. This competitive grant program will assist states in developing evidence-
based, innovative approaches for enforcement and compliance, as well as collecting data
to assess and improve the enforcement and compliance program.
• In FY 2014, the EPA requests an increase of $15.0 million in E-Enterprise for the
Enforcement program to assess and streamline regulations where possible and transition
from paper-based to electronic reporting to reduce burden on regulated entities and
provide easier access to and use of environmental data. These resources also will increase
the EPA's ability to detect violations that impact public health, reduce transaction costs,
and better engage the public to drive behavioral changes in the regulated community.
29 EPA requests a total of $625 million for the National Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program. There are additional
resources for the program under Goals 2, 3 and 4.
64
-------
Priority Goal
The EPA FY 2012-2013 Priority Goal on electronic reporting is part of the Agency-wide E-
Enterprise initiative. While the enforcement program has a lead role in implementing this goal by
co-chairing a newly-formed EPA task force, this is a cross-program agency goal. The Priority
Goal is:
• Increase transparency and reduce burden through e-Reporting. By September 30, 2013,
develop a plan to convert existing paper reports into electronic reporting, establish
electronic reporting in at least four key programs, and adopt a policy for including
electronic reporting in new rules.
Please note, as part of the formulation of the FY 2015 budget, the EPA will develop new FY
2014-2015 Priority Goals that advance the agency's Priorities and the agency's Strategic Plan.
Additional information on the agency's Priority Goals can be found at www.performance.gov.
FY 2014 Activities
The FY 2014 budget incorporates difficult decisions to reduce spending for activities where we
have made significant progress (and therefore no longer require as active an enforcement
presence), or that, while important, do not address the most substantial impacts to human health.
The agency remains committed to implementing a strong enforcement and compliance program
focused on identifying and reducing non-compliance and deterring future violations. To meet
this commitment, the program employs a variety of activities, including data collection and
analysis, compliance monitoring, assistance, civil and criminal enforcement efforts and
innovative and evidence-based problem-solving approaches to identify and address the most
significant environmental issues. In FY 2014 these efforts will be enhanced through Next
Generation Compliance approaches that rely on modern reporting and monitoring tools to
advance implementation of the agency's priorities and core program work.
Focus Areas:
• Protecting Air Quality: In FY 2014, the EPA will help improve air quality in communities by
targeting large pollution sources, especially in the utility, acid, cement, glass and natural gas
exploration and production industries that are not complying with environmental laws and
regulations. Where the EPA finds non-compliance, the agency will take action to bring them
into compliance, which may include installing controls that will benefit communities or
improving emission monitoring. Enforcement activities to cut toxic air pollution in
communities improve the health of residents, particularly those overburdened by pollution. In
FY 2014 the EPA will undertake an effort to examine the general deterrent effect of EPA
enforcement actions on the pollution control practices of air toxics emitters.
• Protecting America's Waters: In FY 2014, the EPA will work with states to revamp
compliance and enforcement approaches to more effectively and efficiently address the most
important water pollution problems. Our focus will include getting raw sewage out of water,
cutting pollution from animal waste, and reducing pollution from stormwater runoff. The EPA
65
-------
also will continue to promote an integrated planning strategy for addressing municipal sewage
and stormwater challenges, including the use of lower cost and innovative approaches. These
efforts will help to clean up great waters like the Chesapeake Bay and will focus on
revitalizing urban communities by protecting and restoring urban waters. Enforcement efforts
will also support the goal of assuring clean drinking water for all communities, including
small systems and in Indian country.
• Cleaning Up Our Communities: In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to protect communities by
ensuring that responsible parties conduct Superfund and other cleanups, saving federal dollars
for sites where there are no viable contributing parties. Ensuring that responsible parties clean
up the sites also reduces direct human exposure to hazardous pollutants and contaminants,
provides for long-term human health protection, and ultimately makes contaminated
properties available for reuse. We will continue to integrate environmental justice into the site
remediation enforcement program by using EJ criteria when enforcing RCRA corrective
action requirements to meet RCRA 2020 goals and ensuring that institutional controls are
implemented at sites in environmental justice areas of concern.
• Chemical Safety: In FY 2014, the EPA will strengthen chemical safety enforcement and
reduce exposure to pesticides, improving the health of Americans. An active enforcement
program reduces direct human exposures to toxic chemicals and pesticides and supports long-
term human health protection. Ensuring compliance with the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA) lead based paint requirements is a top priority for the TSCA monitoring and
enforcement program. Lead exposure is particularly dangerous to children as even low levels
of exposure have been associated with delays in physical and mental development, lower IQ
levels, shortened attention spans, and increased behavior problems. An important remaining
source of lead exposure in children is dust reissued that accumulate on the floors and window
sills of homes that were painted with pre-1970's lead-based paint.
Compliance Monitoring
The EPA's compliance monitoring program reviews and evaluates the activities of the regulated
community to determine compliance with applicable laws, regulations, permit conditions and
settlement agreements, as well as to determine whether conditions presenting imminent and
substantial endangerment exist.
In FY 2014, the EPA's compliance monitoring activities will be both environmental media-based
and sector-based. The EPA's media-based inspections complement those performed by states
and Tribes, and are a key part of the strategy for meeting the long-term and annual goals
established for the air, water, pesticides, toxic substances and hazardous waste programs. The
EPA will target its inspections to the highest priority areas and coordinate inspection activity
with states and Tribes. In FY 2012, the EPA conducted 20,000 federal inspections and
evaluations. In FY 2014, as part of Next Generation Compliance, the agency will continue to
enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the compliance monitoring program by leveraging
electronic reporting to reduce paperwork burdens, increasing transparency by enhancing systems
to report, synthesize, utilize, and disseminate monitoring data, designing analytic tools to help
understand and utilize data and deploying state of the art monitoring equipment to the field.
66
-------
Synchronizing data systems to utilize electronic transmissions from regulated facilities will
benefit the compliance monitoring program by allowing the EPA to better apply evidence-based
approaches to the program and determine what strategies achieve the best results.
Compliance monitoring also includes the EPA's management and use of data systems to oversee
its compliance and enforcement programs under the various statutes and programs that the
agency enforces. In FY 2014, the EPA will accelerate the process of enhancing its data systems
to integrate with E-Enterprise and to support electronic interaction with regulated facilities,
providing more comprehensive, accessible data to the public and improving integration of
environmental information with health data and other pertinent data sources from other federal
agencies and private entities. The agency will complete Phase III of the Integrated Compliance
Information System (ICIS), the modernization of the Air Facility System (AFS). ICIS supports
both compliance monitoring and civil enforcement.
In FY 2014, the proposed compliance monitoring budget is $128.9 million.
Civil Enforcement
The civil enforcement program's overarching goal is to assure compliance with the nation's
environmental laws and regulations in order to protect human health and the environment. The
program collaborates with the Department of Justice, states, local agencies and tribal
governments to ensure consistent and fair enforcement of all environmental laws and regulations.
The program seeks to protect public health and the environment and ensure a level playing field
by strengthening partnerships with co-implementers in the states, encouraging regulated entities
to rapidly correct their own violations, ensuring that violators do not realize an economic benefit
from noncompliance and pursuing enforcement to deter future violations.
The civil enforcement program develops, litigates and settles administrative and civil judicial
cases against serious violators of environmental laws. In FY 2012, the EPA's enforcement
actions required companies to invest an estimated $9.1 billion in actions and equipment to
control pollution (injunctive relief). Also in FY 2012, the EPA's enforcement actions required
companies to reduce pollution by an estimated 6.6 billion pounds per year. Sustained and
focused enforcement attention on serious violations of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)
resulted in a 60 percent reduction in violations in the past three years as a result of combined
federal and state actions and enforcement work.
In FY 2014, the EPA's civil enforcement program will focus on national enforcement initiatives
and repeat violators, especially in communities that may be disproportionately exposed to risks
and harm from pollutants in their environment, including minority and/or low-income areas.
Specifically, the EPA will focus on National Enforcement Initiatives selected for FY 2014-2016
through a collaborative selection process taking place in FY 2013. These national initiatives
address problems that remain complex and challenging. Current initiatives include Clean Water
Act "wet weather" discharges, violations of the Clean Air Act New Source Review/Prevention of
Significant Deterioration requirements and Air Toxics regulations, RCRA violations at mineral
processing facilities, and multi-media problems resulting from energy extraction activities.
67
-------
Information on initiatives, regulatory requirements, enforcement alerts and EPA results will be
made available to the public and the regulated community through websites.
In FY 2014, the civil enforcement program will benefit from the Next Generation Compliance
initiative of deploying state of the art monitoring equipment to the field and increasing support
for electronic interaction with the regulated community. For example, the agency will begin to
nc£» £»miccir\n mr\mtr\rinrr rlata r»r\11 £»r»t£»rl K\7 f*arMliti£»c anrl r£»mi1atr\rc anrl channrr that 1rt'
Advanced Emissions Technology:
Estimating versus Knowing
(A Case Illustration)
iation
Two large refineries assumed a 98% combustion efficiency (full compliance and proper steaming) and used emission factors
Those refineries reported VOC emissions of 453 and 123 TRY, respectively
Advanced monitoring technologies allowed EPA to calculate actual emissions which were far higher-5,609 and 3,119 TRY
(lower actual combustion efficiency and higher actual flows of waste gas)
Communities exposed to far more HAPs than assumed
1
As with the compliance monitoring program, EPA's enforcement program will benefit from
synchronizing data systems to receive electronic transmissions from regulated facilities and by
having more complete and timely data with which to evaluate which enforcement approaches are
most effective. This utilizes the transformative information system-based work of the larger E-
Enterprise initiative. The EPA and states will be able to better prioritize enforcement resources in
those areas where they are most needed such as complex industrial operations requiring physical
inspection, repeat violators, cases involving significant harm to human health or the
environment, or potential criminal violations.
The civil enforcement program also will focus on how tools, such as fenceline monitoring, can
be applied in enforcement settlements, in order to make more data more available, as well as
using independent third parties to monitor compliance with the settlement. Fenceline monitoring
can be used to monitor the environment immediately surrounding a regulated entity, thereby
providing the surrounding community information about emissions.
68
-------
The civil enforcement program also provides support for other priority programs, including the
Environmental Justice program and the Chesapeake Bay program. For example, the civil
enforcement program will help to implement a compliance and enforcement strategy for the
Chesapeake Bay, providing strong oversight to ensure existing regulations are complied with
consistently and in a timely manner.
In FY 2014, the proposed budget for civil enforcement is $193.0 million.
Criminal Enforcement
Criminal enforcement underlies the EPA's commitment to pursuing the most serious pollution
violations. The EPA's criminal enforcement program investigates and helps prosecute
environmental violations that seriously threaten public health and the environment and involve
intentional, deliberate or criminal behavior on the part of the violator. The criminal enforcement
program deters violations of environmental laws and regulations by demonstrating that the
regulated community will be held accountable through jail sentences and criminal fines.
Bringing criminal cases to court sends a strong deterrence message to potential violators,
enhances aggregate compliance with laws and regulations, and protects communities at risk. In
FY 2012, the EPA has a 95% conviction rate for criminal defendants.
To maximize efficient use of resources, in FY 2014 the program will reduce case work in lower
priority areas and will use its special agent capacity to identify and investigate cases with the
most significant environmental, human health and deterrence impact. The EPA's criminal
enforcement program will target cases across all media that involve serious harm or injury;
hazardous or toxic releases; ongoing, repetitive, or multiple releases; serious documented
exposure to pollutants; and violators with significant repeat or chronic noncompliance or prior
criminal conviction.
In FY 2014, the proposed budget for Criminal Enforcement is $61.3 million.
Forensics Support
The Forensics support program provides specialized scientific and technical support for the
nation's most complex civil and criminal enforcement cases, as well as technical expertise for
agency compliance efforts. The work of the EPA's National Enforcement Investigations Center
(NEIC) is critical to determining non-compliance and building viable enforcement cases. The
NEIC maintains a sophisticated chemistry laboratory and a corps of highly trained inspectors and
scientists with a wide range of expertise. In FY 2014, NEIC will continue to function under
rigorous International Standards Organization 17025 requirements for environmental data
measurements to maintain its accreditation.
In FY 2014, the proposed budget for Forensics Support is $17.0 million.
69
-------
Superfund Enforcement
The EPA's Superfund enforcement program protects communities by ensuring that responsible
parties conduct cleanups of hazardous waste sites, preserving federal dollars for sites where there
are no viable contributing parties. Superfund enforcement uses an "enforcement first" approach
that maximizes the participation of liable and viable parties in performing and paying for
cleanups in both the remedial and removal programs. The EPA will focus Superfund
enforcement resources to support Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) searches, cleanup
settlements, and cost recovery. Similarly, the Superfund Federal Facilities enforcement program
will place greater reliance on federal agencies actively managing their own cleanup efforts. The
agency will continually assess its priorities and embrace new approaches that can help achieve its
goals more efficiently and effectively.
Enforcement authorities play a unique role under the Superfund program. The authorities are
used to ensure that responsible parties conduct a majority of the cleanup actions and reimburse
the federal government for cleanups financed by federal resources. In tandem with this approach,
various reforms have been implemented to increase fairness, reduce transaction costs, promote
economic development and make sites available for appropriate reuse.30 Ensuring that
responsible parties cleanup sites ultimately reduces direct human exposures to hazardous
pollutants and contaminants, provides for long-term human health protections and makes
contaminated properties available for reuse.
The Department of Justice supports the EPA's Superfund enforcement program through
negotiations and judicial actions to compel PRP cleanup and litigation to recover Trust Fund
monies. The agency will provide $23.3 million to the Department of Justice through an
Interagency Agreement. In FY 2012, the Superfund enforcement program secured private party
commitments of nearly $900 million. Of this amount, PRPs have committed to future response
work with an estimated value of $657.3 million; have agreed to reimburse the agency for $172.1
million in past costs; and have been billed by the EPA for approximately $67.5 million in
oversight costs. The EPA also works to ensure that required legally enforceable institutional
controls and financial assurance instruments are in place and adhered to at Superfund sites and at
facilities subject to RCRA Corrective Action to ensure the long-term protectiveness of cleanup
actions.
In FY 2014 the proposed budget for Superfund enforcement is $166.9 million.
Partnering with States and Tribes
In FY 2014, the Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program will sustain its environmental
enforcement partnerships with states and tribes and work to strengthen their ability to address
environmental and public health threats. In FY 2014, the Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance program will provide $27.7 million in grants to the states and tribes. This request
includes $4.0 million for a new Evidence-Based Enforcement grant program. This competitive
grant program will assist the states in developing and collecting innovative measures for
30 For more information regarding the EPA's enforcement program and its various components, please refer to
http://www.epa.gov/compliance/cleanup/superfund/
70
-------
assessing the performance of the enforcement and compliance program. These grants will
support state efforts to electronically collect data, and use new analytic approaches to more
effectively direct program resources. Examples of focus areas could include: utilization of
electronic facility performance information that reduces reliance on site specific inspections and
provides whole-universe data; development of tools and data systems that automate the
transmission of data from inspections and other investigations to enhance program management
and prioritization; implementation of advanced emissions monitoring technologies that reduce
costs and increase accuracy of both on-site and remote assessments; and the integration of a
broader range of data, such as ambient environmental data, health data, and economic data to
make prioritization more efficient and effective. These grants also will support states' efforts to
improve compliance through increased transparency and to measure the effectiveness of
compliance and enforcement approaches. Examples of focus areas could include: electronic
collection of performance information that reduces reliance on site-specific inspections;
development of tools and data systems to automate transmission of data from inspections and
other investigations; and implementation of advanced emissions monitoring technologies that
reduce costs and increase accuracy of both on-site and remote assessments.
In addition, the agency continues to request resources 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, the EPA will continue to provide resources to
states and Indian tribes to conduct FIFRA compliance inspections and take appropriate
enforcement actions and implement programs for farm worker protection. The Toxic Substance
Compliance Grants protect the public and the environment from PCBs, asbestos, and lead-based
paint.
71
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Science and Technology
Resource Summary Table 74
Program Projects in Science & Technology 74
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate 78
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs 79
Climate Protection Program 84
Federal Support for Air Quality Management 86
Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certification 88
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation 98
Indoor Air: Radon Program 99
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air 101
Radiation: Protection 103
Radiation: Response Preparedness 105
Program Area: Enforcement 107
Forensics Support 108
Program Area: Homeland Security 110
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection 111
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and Recovery 116
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure 122
Program Area: IT / Data Management / Security 124
IT / Data Management 125
Program Area: Operations and Administration 128
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 129
Program Area: Pesticides Licensing 132
Pesticides: Protect Human Health from Pesticide Risk 133
Pesticides: Protect the Environment from Pesticide Risk 138
Pesticides: Realize the Value of Pesticide Availability 142
Program Area: Research: Air, Climate and Energy 145
Research: Air, Climate and Energy 146
Program Area: Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources 156
Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources 157
72
-------
Program Area: Research: Sustainable Communities 166
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities 167
Program Area: Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability 177
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability 178
Human Health Risk Assessment 186
Program Area: Water: Human Health Protection 193
Drinking Water Programs 194
Program Area: Congressional Priorities 197
Water Quality Research and Support Grants 198
73
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION: Science & Technology
Resource Summary Table
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
Budget Authority
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$793,728.0
2,434.2
FY 2012
Actuals
$795,394.8
2,437.2
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$798,586.0
2,434.2
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$783,926.0
2,437.6
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($9,802.0)
3.4
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the
Superfund account.
Bill Language: Science & Technology
For science and technology, including research and development activities, which shall include
research and development activities under the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended; necessary expenses for personnel and
related costs and travel expenses; procurement of laboratory equipment and sup- plies; and
other operating expenses in support of research and development, $783,926,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2015.
Program Projects in Science & Technology
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
Clean Air and Climate
Clean Air Allowance Trading
Programs
Climate Protection Program
Federal Support for Air Quality
Management
Federal Support for Air Toxics
Program
Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards
and Certification
Subtotal, Clean Air and Climate
Indoor Air and Radiation
FY 2012
Enacted
$9,082.0
$16,319.0
$7,091.0
$0.0
$91,886.0
$124,378.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$10,189.4
$14,063.3
$6,964.6
$218.0
$88,102.3
$119,537.6
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$9,183.0
$16,445.0
$7,137.0
$0.0
$92,398.0
$125,163.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$9,594.0
$8,313.0
$7,690.0
$0.0
$100,374.0
$125,971.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$512.0
($8,006.0)
$599.0
$0.0
$8,488.0
$1,593.0
74
-------
Program Project
Indoor Air: Radon Program
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air
Radiation: Protection
Radiation: Response Preparedness
Subtotal, Indoor Air and Radiation
Enforcement
Forensics Support
Homeland Security
Homeland Security: Critical
Infrastructure Protection
Water Security Initiative
Homeland Security:
Critical Infrastructure
Protection (other activities)
Subtotal, Homeland Security:
Critical Infrastructure
Protection
Homeland Security: Preparedness,
Response, and Recovery
Decontamination
Homeland Security:
Preparedness, Response,
and Recovery (other
activities)
Subtotal, Homeland Security:
Preparedness, Response, and
Recovery
Homeland Security: Protection of
EPA Personnel and Infrastructure
Subtotal, Homeland Security
IT / Data Management / Security
IT / Data Management
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations
Rent
Utilities
Security
Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations (other activities)
FY 2012
Enacted
$210.0
$370.0
$2,094.0
$4,076.0
$6,750.0
$15,269.0
$8,606.0
$2,755.0
$11,361.0
$17,256.0
$12,579.0
$29,835.0
$578.0
$41,774.0
$3,652.0
$33,901.0
$20,162.0
$10,696.0
$7,260.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$254.3
$351.7
$2,072.6
$3,783.5
$6,462.1
$16,352.8
$8,605.3
$2,757.8
$11,363.1
$16,777.8
$10,254.4
$27,032.2
$577.0
$38,972.3
$3,250.7
$33,901.0
$19,522.7
$10,564.3
$8,940.5
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$210.0
$372.0
$2,102.0
$4,086.0
$6,770.0
$15,302.0
$8,685.0
$2,765.0
$11,450.0
$17,379.0
$12,675.0
$30,054.0
$584.0
$42,088.0
$3,669.0
$33,901.0
$20,162.0
$10,696.0
$7,675.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$0.0
$428.0
$2,133.0
$4,097.0
$6,658.0
$15,874.0
$7,073.0
$2,820.0
$9,893.0
$15,894.0
$13,650.0
$29,544.0
$579.0
$40,016.0
$4,029.0
$34,489.0
$21,010.0
$11,172.0
$9,019.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($210.0)
$58.0
$39.0
$21.0
($92.0)
$605.0
($1,533.0)
$65.0
($1,468.0)
($1,362.0)
$1,071.0
($291.0)
$1.0
($1,758.0)
$377.0
$588.0
$848.0
$476.0
$1,759.0
75
-------
Program Project
Subtotal, Facilities Infrastructure
and Operations
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
Pesticides Licensing
Pesticides: Protect Human Health
from Pesticide Risk
Pesticides: Protect the Environment
from Pesticide Risk
Pesticides: Realize the Value of
Pesticide Availability
Subtotal, Pesticides Licensing
Research: Air, Climate and Energy
Research: Air, Climate and Energy
Human Health
Global Change
Clean Air
Research: Air, Climate and
Energy (other activities)
Subtotal, Research: Air, Climate
and Energy
Subtotal, Research: Air, Climate and
Energy
Research: Safe and Sustainable Water
Resources
Research: Safe and Sustainable
Water Resources
Drinking Water
Water Quality
Research: Safe and
Sustainable Water
Resources (other activities)
Subtotal, Research: Safe and
Sustainable Water Resources
Subtotal, Research: Safe and Sustainable
Water Resources
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy
Communities
FY 2012
Enacted
$72,019.0
$72,019.0
$3,757.0
$2,289.0
$517.0
$6,563.0
$0.0
$18,213.0
$77,841.0
$1,994.0
$98,048.0
$98,048.0
$50,152.0
$62,584.0
$50.0
$112,786.0
$112,786.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$72,928.5
$72,928.5
$3,532.4
$2,249.1
$417.8
$6,199.3
$772.7
$22,198.7
$78,552.4
$2,107.7
$103,631.5
$103,631.5
$10,608.7
$15,098.7
$88,550.2
$114,257.6
$114,257.6
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$72,434.0
$72,434.0
$3,771.0
$2,296.0
$519.0
$6,586.0
$0.0
$18,346.0
$78,333.0
$2,004.0
$98,683.0
$98,683.0
$50,454.0
$62,944.0
$51.0
$113,449.0
$113,449.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$75,690.0
$75,690.0
$3,425.0
$2,293.0
$510.0
$6,228.0
$0.0
$20,440.0
$83,225.0
$2,059.0
$105,724.0
$105,724.0
$50,973.0
$66,859.0
$52.0
$117,884.0
$117,884.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$3,671.0
$3,671.0
($332.0)
$4.0
($7.0)
($335.0)
$0.0
$2,227.0
$5,384.0
$65.0
$7,676.0
$7,676.0
$821.0
$4,275.0
$2.0
$5,098.0
$5,098.0
76
-------
Program Project
Human Health
Ecosystems
Research: Sustainable and
Healthy Communities
(other activities)
Subtotal, Research: Sustainable
and Healthy Communities
Subtotal, Research: Sustainable
Communities
Research: Chemical Safety and
Sustainability
Human Health Risk Assessment
Research: Chemical Safety and
Sustainability
Human Health
Endocrine Disrupters
Computational Toxicology
Research: Chemical Safety
and Sustainability (other
activities)
Subtotal, Research: Chemical
Safety and Sustainability
Subtotal, Research: Chemical Safety and
Sustainability
Water: Human Health Protection
Drinking Water Programs
Congressional Priorities
Water Quality Research and Support
Grants
Subtotal, Water Quality Research
and Support Grants
TOTAL, EPA
FY 2012
Enacted
$44,697.0
$60,723.0
$68,105.0
$173,525.0
$173,525.0
$39,336.0
$0.0
$16,861.0
$20,849.0
$53,144.0
$90,854.0
$130,190.0
$3,782.0
$4,992.0
$4,992.0
$793,728.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$43,826.9
$59,797.6
$69,899.3
$173,523.8
$173,523.8
$43,342.5
$7,080.2
$16,409.4
$23,045.4
$46,612.9
$93,147.9
$136,490.4
$3,728.2
$60.0
$60.0
$795,394.8
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$45,028.0
$61,015.0
$68,612.0
$174,655.0
$174,655.0
$39,512.0
$0.0
$16,983.0
$21,028.0
$53,428.0
$91,439.0
$130,951.0
$3,788.0
$5,048.0
$5,048.0
$798,586.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$43,120.0
$59,972.0
$44,280.0
$147,372.0
$147,372.0
$40,219.0
$0.0
$15,896.0
$21,409.0
$57,320.0
$94,625.0
$134,844.0
$3,636.0
$0.0
$0.0
$783,926.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($1,577.0)
($751.0)
($23,825.0)
($26,153.0)
($26,153.0)
$883.0
$0.0
($965.0)
$560.0
$4,176.0
$3,771.0
$4,654.0
($146.0)
($4,992.0)
($4,992.0)
($9,802.0)
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the
Superfund account.
77
-------
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate
78
-------
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$20,680.0
$9,082.0
$29,762.0
87.6
FY 2012
Actuals
$20,266.2
$10,189.4
$30,455.6
80.3
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$20,805.0
$9,183.0
$29,988.0
87.6
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$20,469.0
$9,594.0
$30,063.0
84.1
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($211.0)
$512.0
$301.0
-3.5
Program Project Description:
This program develops, implements, assesses, and provides regulatory and modeling support for
multi-state programs that address major regional and national air issues from the power sector
and other large combustion stationary sources. Clean air allowance trading programs help
implement the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and reduce acid deposition,
toxics deposition, and regional haze. Pollutants include sulfur dioxide (862), nitrogen oxides
(NOX), and, as a co-benefit of 862 emission reductions, mercury.
Power plant emissions of SO2 andNOx are carried long distances by wind and weather and travel
across state lines. As the pollution is transported, it reacts in the atmosphere and contributes to
harmful levels of ground-level ozone (smog) and fine particles (soot),1 which are scientifically
linked to widespread illnesses and premature deaths and prevent many cities and communities
from enjoying healthy air quality. Transported SC>2 and NOX emissions are significant
contributors to nonattainment in many states in the eastern half of the U.S. and under the "good
neighbor" provision of the Clean Air Act (CAA),2 upwind states must share responsibility for
achieving air quality goals.
Operating programs in FY 2014 will include the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) program for
regional control of transported ozone and fine particle (PIVb.s) pollution in addition to the
national Acid Rain SC>2 and NOX emission reduction programs authorized under Title IV of the
1990 CAA Amendments (described in the Clean Air Allowance Trading Program description
under the Environmental Programs and Management appropriation). The regional air programs
are designed to control the significant contributions of power plant emissions of 862 and NOX to
air quality problems (i.e., nonattainment and interference with maintenance of ozone and PM2.5
standards) in downwind areas.
1 Seinfeld, John H. and Spyros N. Pandis. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics: From Air Pollution to Climate Change. John
Wiley & Sons, Inc. (New York). 1998. Describes pollution transport and formation of ground-level ozone and fine particles in
the atmosphere from sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides emissions.
2 Section 110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA.
79
-------
The EPA finalized the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) Federal Implementation Plans to
Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone in 27 States; Correction of SIP
Approvals for 22 States in July 2011.3 The rule was intended to replace the 2005 CAIR, which
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ordered the EPA to revise in 2008.
On December 30, 2011, in response to challenges by industry and certain states, the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued a ruling to stay CSAPR pending judicial review and to
continue to leave CAIR in place. The EPA ceased implementation of CSAPR and worked to
ensure that the transition back to CAIR occurred as seamlessly as possible. On August 21, 2012,
the Court issued an opinion vacating CSAPR,4 and the Court subsequently denied the requests
for rehearing from the EPA and other parties. The agency is reviewing its remaining legal
options and will determine an appropriate further course of action once that review is complete.
The CAIR remains in effect and no immediate action from states or affected sources is expected
at this time. Please see the Bulletins page at http://www.epa.gov/airtransport/bulletins.html for
updates on CSAPR and the continuing implementation of CAIR. The EPA will continue
implementation of CAIR annual (PIVb.s) and seasonal (ozone) programs, and operating CAIR
allowance trading programs, until instructed otherwise by the Court.
Annual SO2 emissions from sources subject to the CAIR PM2.5 program in 2011 were 3.87
million tons, a 57 percent drop from the program baseline (2005) and 12 percent (544 thousand
tons) lower than the previous year (2010). Each year, SO2 emissions have made steady progress
towards successful achievement of the program goal, the regulatory Phase II cap of 2.6 million
tons scheduled to go into effect in 2015. Annual NOX emissions from sources subject to the
CAIR PM2.5 program in 2011 were 1.35 million tons, a 51 percent drop from the baseline and 5
percent (74 thousand tons) lower than the previous year. During the 2011 ozone season, NOX
emissions from sources subject to the CAIR ozone program were 566 thousand tons, a drop of
30% from the baseline and 5 percent (28 thousand tons) lower than the previous year. Although
CAIR implementation has been making significant reductions in NOX emissions, EPA's analysis
indicates that more needs to be done for public health protection.5 For additional information on
CAIR, please visit http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets.
The EPA is responsible for managing the Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNET), a
long-term atmospheric deposition monitoring network, established in 1987, which serves as the
nation's primary source for atmospheric data on the dry deposition component of acid
deposition, rural ground-level ozone, and other forms of particulate and gaseous air pollution.
Used in conjunction with the National Atmospheric Deposition Program (NADP) and other
networks, CASTNET's long-term datasets and data products are used to determine the
effectiveness of national and regional emission control programs through monitoring geographic
patterns and temporal trends in ambient air quality and atmospheric deposition in non-urban
areas of the country. Maintaining the CASTNET monitoring network has been and continues to
be critical for accountability of the Acid Rain program and regional programs for controlling
3 26 FR 48208 (August 8,2011). Please visit http://www.epa.gov/crossstaterule for additional information on the CSAPR.
4 EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696 F.3d 7 (D.C. Cir. 2012).
(1) U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 2011. Second External Review Draft Integrated Science Assessment for
Ozone and Related Photochemical Oxidants (EPA/600/R-10/076B). National Center for Environmental Assessment. (2) Clean
Air Act Advisory Committee Ozone Review Panel. 2011. CASAC Comments on EPA's Integrated Science Assessment for
Ozone and Related Photochemical Oxidants (March 2011). Final Report.
80
-------
transported emissions and reduction of secondary pollutant formation of fine particles.
Moreover, CASTNET's rural ozone monitoring is essential to implementation of the ozone
NAAQS and the agency's reconsideration of current ozone standards.
Surface water chemistry is a direct indicator of the environmental effects of acid deposition and
enables assessment of how water bodies and aquatic ecosystems are responding to reductions in
sulfur and nitrogen emissions (as well as to climate change and other terrestrial factors). Two
EPA-administered programs, the Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems (TIME)
program and the Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) program, were specifically designed to assess
whether the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments have been effective in reducing the acidity of
surface waters in New England, the Adirondack Mountains, the Northern Appalachian Plateau
(including the Catskill and Pocono mountains), and the Ridge and Blue Ridge region (including
streams in Western Pennsylvania). Both programs are operated cooperatively with numerous
partners in state agencies, academic institutions, and other federal agencies.
In FY 2014, the TEVIE/LTM surface water chemistry monitoring program will continue to
provide valuable field measurements for understanding biogeochemical changes in sulfur,
nitrogen, acid neutralizing capacity (ANC), aluminum, and carbon in streams and lakes in
relation to changing pollutant emissions and deposition as well as for the emerging area of
climate change detection and ecological response. The TEVIE/LTM program is one of the
longest running projects in EPA history, providing an important long-term dataset based on
sampling and measurements that go back to 1983.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Reducing emissions of SC>2 and NOX remains a crucial component of the EPA's strategy for
cleaner air. Particulate matter can be formed from direct sources (such as diesel exhaust or
smoke), but also can be formed through chemical reactions in the air. Emissions of 862 and NOX
can be chemically transformed into tiny sulfate and nitrate particles that- when inhaled - can
cause serious respiratory problems and may lead to premature mortality. Winds can carry
sulfates and nitrates hundreds of miles from the emitting source. These same small particles also
are a main pollutant that impairs visibility across large areas of the country, particularly
damaging in national parks known for their scenic views. Nitrogen dioxide emissions also
contribute substantially to the formation of ground-level ozone. Ozone, when inhaled in
sufficient concentrations, can cause serious respiratory problems.
In FY 2014, the EPA will:
• Assure the continuation of ongoing NOX and SC>2 emission reductions from power plants
in the eastern half of the U.S. by implementing, depending on instruction from the Court,
either the CSAPR, or the CADI in concert with a replacement rule program for control of
transported ozone and PM2.5 pollution.
• Provide legal and technical assistance to states in developing and implementing state
plans and rules for NOX and SO2 control programs for emissions that significantly
contribute to nonattainment or interference with maintenance of ozone and/or PM2.5
NAAQS in another state. Assist states in resolving issues related to source applicability,
81
-------
emissions monitoring, monitor certification, reporting, and Title V permitting as desired
by the affected states. Continue to provide assistance to states, subject to the NOX SIP
call,6 in developing and implementing state plans and rules to assure ozone season NOX
reductions required under that regulation will continue.
• Operate and maintain EPA-administered allowance trading systems and emissions
monitoring and reporting systems for the clean air allowance trading programs. Conduct
annual/seasonal reconciliation of facility emissions against allowances for compliance.
• Maintain and modify, as needed, the operating infrastructure for clean air allowance
trading program implementation. Effective and efficient operation of multi-state
programs for controlling interstate emissions transport depends critically upon ongoing
maintenance and continuous improvement of the infrastructure supporting the electronic
emissions reporting, monitor certification, and compliance determination systems.
• Ensure accurate and consistent results for the program. Successful air pollution control
and trading programs require accurate and consistent monitoring of source emissions and
environmental results. Work will continue on performance specifications and
investigating monitoring alternatives and methods to improve the efficiency of monitor
certification and emissions data reporting.
• Continue quality assurance, analysis, and reporting of environmental data from the
CASTNET deposition/rural ozone and TIME/LTM surface water monitoring networks.
Analyze and assess trends in sulfur and nitrogen deposition, rural ozone concentrations,
surface water quality, and other indicators of ecosystem health and ambient air quality in
non-urban areas of the U.S.
In FY 2014, the program will continue to provide analytical support for the interagency National
Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP). NAPAP coordinates federal acid deposition
research and monitoring of emissions, acidic deposition, and their effects, including assessing the
costs and benefits of Title IV.
In FY 2014, the program will continue to manage the CASTNET ambient monitoring program
and the TIME/LTM program for monitoring surface water chemistry and aquatic ecosystem
response in sensitive areas of the U.S. The FY 2014 request level for CASTNET is $4.89 million
and for TIME/LTM is $0.95 million.7
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in the Clean Air Allowance Trading
Programs under the Environmental Program and Management Tab and can be found in the
Performance Eight-Year Array in the Program Performance and Assessment section.
6 Findings of Significant Contribution and Rulemaking for Certain States in the Ozone Transport Assessment Group Region for
Purposes of Reducing Ozone Regional Transport. 63 FR 57356 (October 27, 1998).
7 For additional information on CASTNET, please visit http://www.epa.gov/castnet/iavaweb/index.html. For additional
information on TIME/LTM, please visit http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/assessments/surfacewater.html.
82
-------
The EPA tracks the change in nitrogen deposition and sulfur deposition to assess the
effectiveness of the Acid Rain and related programs with performance targets set for every three
years. Please visit http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progress/progress-reports.html for additional
information.
The EPA tracks changes in surface water acidity in lakes and streams in acid sensitive regions to
assess change in the number of chronically acidic water bodies. This is a long-term measure
with a performance target set for 2030. Please visit
http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progress/progress-reports.html for additional information.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$512.0) This increases technical assistance to states in support of the Allowance
Trading programs.
Statutory Authority:
CAA (42 U.S.C. 7401-7661f).
83
-------
Climate Protection Program
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Address Climate Change
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY2012
Enacted
$99,436.0
$16,319.0
$115,755.0
250.5
FY2012
Actuals
$95,982.8
$14,063.3
$110,046.1
243.0
FY2013
Annualized
CR
$100,523.0
$16,445.0
$116,968.0
250.5
FY2014
Pres Budget
$106,199.0
$8,313.0
$114,512.0
244.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY2012
Enacted
$6,763.0
($8,006.0)
($1,243.0)
-6.5
Program Project Description:
The Climate Protection Program supports implementation and compliance with GHG emission
standards for light-duty and heavy-duty vehicles developed under the EPA's Federal Vehicle and
Fuels Standards and Certification program. Resources under this program also support
compliance activities for implementing the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's
(NHTSA) Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards. Under authorities contained in
the Clean Air Act and the Energy Policy Act, the EPA is responsible for issuing certificates and
ensuring compliance with both the GHG and CAFE standards. These historic programs,
including the proposal for model years 2017-25, if implemented properly, will save American
consumers about $1.7 trillion in fuel costs and the nation 12.5 billion barrels of fuel and reduce
more than 6 billion metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions over the life of the vehicles.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources under this program will support implementation and compliance activities associated
with the EPA's GHG emission standards and NHTSA's CAFE fuel economy for light-duty and
heavy-duty vehicles and engines. Resources will support the following activities:
Certification and Compliance - Implementation of the first-ever greenhouse gas (GHG) emission
standards for light-duty and heavy-duty vehicles and engines will significantly increase EPA's
certification and compliance workload. These new GHG emission standards will not only result
in a changing fleet of vehicles but also will introduce numerous innovative features into the
vehicle certification process that provide greater flexibility for manufacturers in how they
comply with the standards, but also increase the program's complexity and workload for EPA
and the manufacturers. These features include new and more comprehensive trading programs,
credits for off-cycle emission reductions, and new Federal test procedures that EPA and the
manufacturers must deploy. Heavy-duty vehicle and engine certifications alone are expected to
increase by 170% with the inclusion of this entirely new industry segment. Another major
requirement is to modify information technology systems (which provide an efficient means for
84
-------
manufacturers to apply for and receive certificates of conformity) to reflect the revised
compliance and certification requirements of the new light-duty and heavy-duty GHG standards.
Vehicle and Engine Testing Services - Over the past several years, the EPA has invested
significant levels of resources to upgrade its vehicle and engine testing capacity and capability at
its National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory in order to implement new standards for
fuels, vehicle, and engine emissions. This includes adding new 4-wheel drive dynamometers and
analytical systems needed to conduct certification testing of hybrid vehicles and vehicles
operating on renewable fuels; adding a new cold temperature test facility needed to confirm that
new light-duty vehicles are in compliance with mobile source air toxics emissions standards;
adding a new hot temperature testing facility needed to confirm that new light-duty vehicles are
in compliance with emission standards while operating in high temperatures and using air
conditioning; adding a new plug-in hybrid/electric vehicle test facility to verify manufacturer
fuel economy label values, such as electric range and electricity consumption for plug-in hybrid
electric vehicle (PHEV) and electric vehicle (EV) vehicles; and building and equipping a new
heavy-duty certification test facility to address GHG emissions from heavy-duty vehicles. Staff
must conduct and run testing operations and develop new test procedures in these new test cells.
These services are valuable tools to spur innovation in the U.S. and ensure a level-playing field
with foreign imports.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in the Climate Protection Program
under the Environmental Program and Management Tab and can be found in the Performance
Eight-Year Array in the Program Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$338.0 / +0.3 FTE) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs. The increased resources include 0.3 FTE
and associated payroll of $42.0.
• (-$8,344.0) This change reflects a transition in funding from the support of vehicle and
engine technology development under the Clean Automotive Technology program to
support of implementation and compliance activities associated with the EPA's new
GHG emission standards and NHTSA's CAFE fuel economy standards for light-duty and
heavy-duty vehicles and engines.
Statutory Authority:
CAA Amendments, 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. - Sections 102, 103, 104, and 108; Energy Policy Act
of 2005; Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007; Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas
Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards (40 CFR Parts 85, 86, and
600); Pollution Prevention Act, 42 U.S.C. 13101 et seq. - Sections 6602, 6603, 6604, and 6605;
NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. - Section 102; Global Climate Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. 2901 -
Section 1103
85
-------
Federal Support for Air Quality Management
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$123,058.0
$7,091.0
$130,149.0
824.6
FY 2012
Actuals
$123,602.0
$6,964.6
$130,566.6
829.6
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$123,338.0
$7,137.0
$130,475.0
824.6
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$132,805.0
$7,690.0
$140,495.0
852.7
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$9,747.0
$599.0
$10,346.0
28.1
Program Project Description:
Federal support for the criteria pollutant and air toxics programs includes a variety of tools to
help characterize ambient air quality and the level of risk to the public from air pollutants and to
help measure national progress toward improving air quality and reducing associated risks. The
program supports development of State Implementation Plans (SIPs) through modeling and other
tools and assists states in implementing, maintaining, and enforcing the national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS) for criteria pollutants. The program also develops and provides
information and tools to assist state, Tribal, and local agencies, as well as communities, to reduce
air toxics emissions and risk specific to their local areas. Finally, the program includes activities
related to the Clean Air Act's (CAA) stationary source residual risk program, which involves an
assessment of source categories subject to Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT)
standards to determine if more stringent standards are needed to further reduce the risks to public
health (taking into account developments in practices, processes, and control technologies).
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
As part of implementing the ozone and particulate matter (PM) standards, the EPA will continue
providing state and local governments with assistance in developing SIPs during FY 2014. The
EPA also will help states identify the most cost-effective control options available and provide
guidance, as needed, to assist them with attaining the NAAQS. The EPA will ensure national
consistency in how conformity determinations are conducted across the U.S. and the agency will
work with state and local air quality agencies to ensure that PM hot-spot analyses are conducted
in a manner consistent with the transportation conformity regulation and guidance.
In FY 2014, the EPA will work with partners to continue improving emission factors and
inventories, including the National Emissions Inventory. This effort includes gathering improved
activity data and using geographic information systems and satellite remote sensing, where
possible, for key point, area, mobile, fugitive sources, and global emission events. The EPA is
working on improving monitoring systems to fill data gaps and to get a better assessment of
actual population exposure to toxic air pollution.
86
-------
The EPA, collaborating with the states, will: implement federal measures; assist with the
development of SIPs; and develop air toxics tools to continue improving air quality (as measured
by the Air Quality Index and other measures) and to continue reducing air toxics risk. This work
has been shown to provide extensive health benefits to the public, especially to children within
sensitive populations.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in the Federal Support for Air
Quality Management Program in the Environmental Program and Management Tab and can be
found in the Performance Eight-Year Array in the Program Performance and Assessment
section.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$242.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$16.0 / +0.1 FTE) This reflects an increase for technical assistance to states. The
increased resources include 0.1 FTE and associated payroll of $16.0.
• (-$29.0) This change reflects a reduction found from IT efficiencies and consolidation in
IT contracts that support the air quality program.
• (+$370.0) This increase will improve the agency's ability to provide technical assistance
to state agencies developing State Implementation Plans (SIPs) and develop air toxics
tools to improve air quality, including analytical tools such as source characterization
analyses, emission factors and inventories, statistical analyses, source apportionment
techniques, quality assurance protocols and audits, improved source testing and
monitoring techniques, urban and regional-scale numerical grid air quality models, and
augmented cost/benefit tools to assess control strategies.
Statutory Authority:
CAA (42 U.S.C. 7401-7661f).
87
-------
Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certification
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Address Climate Change; Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$91,886.0
$91,886.0
341.3
FY 2012
Actuals
$88,102.3
$88,102.3
332.2
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$92,398.0
$92,398.0
341.3
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$100,374.0
$100,374.0
343.6
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$8,488.0
$8,488.0
2.3
Program Project Description:
The Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certification program develops, implements, and
ensures compliance with national standards to reduce mobile source related air pollution from
light-duty cars and trucks, heavy-duty trucks and buses, nonroad engines and vehicles, and from
the fuels that power these engines. The program also evaluates emission control technology and
provides state, Tribal, and local air quality managers and transportation planners with access to
information on transportation programs and incentive-based programs. As part of ensuring
compliance with national standards, the program tests vehicles, engines, and fuels, and
establishes test procedures for federal emissions and fuel economy standards.
The National Vehicle and Fuel Emission Lab (NVFEL) will continue to ensure fair competition
in the marketplace by conducting testing operations on motor vehicles, heavy-duty engines,
nonroad engines, and fuels to certify that all vehicles, engines, and fuels that enter the U.S.
market comply with all federal clean air and fuel economy standards. The NVFEL conducts
vehicle emission tests as part of pre-production tests, certification audits, in-use assessments, and
recall programs to ensure compliance with mobile source clean air programs.
The EPA works with states and local governments to ensure the technical integrity of the mobile
source controls in State Implementation Plans (SIPs) and transportation conformity
determinations. The EPA also develops and provides information and tools to assist state, local,
and Tribal agencies, as well as communities, to reduce air toxic emissions and risks specific to
their local areas. Reductions in emissions of mobile source air toxics, such as components of
diesel exhaust, are achieved through establishing national emissions standards and innovative
partnership approaches working with state, local, and Tribal governments, as well as a variety of
stakeholder groups.
88
-------
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Climate Change
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to take action related to mobile sources to address climate
change by targeting the transportation sector's largest contributors to oil consumption and
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. These efforts will include implementing the harmonized fuel
economy and GHG emission standards for light-duty vehicles (model years 2012-2016 and
2017-2025) and heavy-duty vehicles (model years 2014-2018). These efforts were finalized by
the EPA in FY 2013 in coordination with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
(NHTSA) and the EPA is responsible for implementing both the emission standards and
significant aspects of the fuel economy standards. These new standards will save American
consumers about $1.7 trillion and the nation 12.2 billion barrels of fuel and more than 6 billion
metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions over the life of the vehicles. The harmonized standards
also will provide regulatory certainty to the marketplace and spur innovation in vehicle
technology over the coming decade.
The EPA and NHTSA also will build on progress achieved through the coordinated heavy-duty
fuel efficiency and GHG standards established for Model Years 2014-2018, including exploring
a more complete vehicle standard-setting approach and encouraging a wider range of advanced
technologies, including hybrid vehicle drive trains and more aerodynamic trucks. In cases where
the EPA default certification procedures do not fully recognize the benefits of an advanced
technology, the EPA will explore special testing options to help evaluate such advanced vehicles
to assess their contribution to improving fuel economy and GHG emissions and to provide
special incentives for these vehicles.
A comprehensive evaluation of advanced technologies will support the EPA's Technology
Review for the second phase of light-duty and heavy-duty GHG standards. For example, the
EPA will perform testing on vehicles and fuels to support the 2017+ GHG Midterm Technology
Review. The Midterm Technology Review is a critical element of the light-duty GHG rule and
requires both the EPA and NHTSA to make a formal assessment of the technology feasibility
required to meet the final model year 2025 standards. Testing will be performed on conventional
engines including both naturally aspirated and downsized turbo-charged engines, as well as
transmissions and various electrified vehicle technologies.
As part of the EPA's efforts to control GHG emissions from heavy-duty vehicles, the agency
committed in the final Phase 1 GHG heavy-duty program to work with NHTSA to evaluate fuel
efficiency program options for heavy-duty trailers. In FY 2014, the EPA will begin to undertake
this work, including development of proposal options for new standards and test procedures, as
well as potential options for a voluntary incentive-based proposal.
The EPA also will work to assess GHG emissions from non-road sources. The EPA will conduct
work to assess endangerment including cause and contribute findings for GHG emissions from
aircraft under Section 231 of the Clean Air Act, and evaluate whether and when to commence
similar work on GHG emissions for other nonroad equipment, including nonroad land
machines/engines locomotives and marine vessels. The EPA is participating in the appropriate
89
-------
international forums for ocean-going vessels (International Maritime Organization-IMO) and
aircraft (International Civil Aviation Organization-ICAO) to address GHG emissions from these
sources. As part of the US delegation to EVIO, the EPA is developing a ship efficiency program
for international shipping in coordination with the State Department and US Coast Guard. The
EPA also is coordinating its efforts with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to develop
GHG standards and testing procedures for aircraft at ICAO.
In FY 2014, the EPA will oversee compliance with recently revised vehicle fuel economy
labelling requirements, which provide consumers with GHG as well as fuel economy
information. The new label enables consumers to compare the energy and environmental
impacts of both traditionally- and alternatively-fueled vehicles, including those using renewable
fuels, gaseous fuels, and electricity. Consumers will be able to make car-by-car comparisons to
ensure they have the best information to help save on fuel costs and reduce emissions.
The EPA also has received petitions from several stakeholders to develop a consumer label for
heavy-duty pickup trucks and vans. In FY 2014, the EPA will begin developing options to define
a test procedure and label design for such vehicles.
In the fuels area, the EPA will continue to implement the Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS)
program and to carry out several other actions required by the Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of
2005 and the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007. EISA dramatically
expanded the renewable fuels provisions of EPAct and requires additional EPA studies in
various areas of renewable fuel use.
EISA Applicable Volumes of Renewable Fuel - Targets
Type of Fuel (Categories)
Total Renewable Fuels by 2022
Corn Ethanol (Starch Based)
** Fy el that can count toward the standard
Advanced Biofuels — Includes imported biofuelsand biodiesel.
Includes 1 billion gpy biodiesel starting in 2009
All must achieve > 50% reduction of GHG emissions from
baseline*
Cellulosic Fuels - Includes cellulosic ethanol, biobutanol,
green diesel, green gasoline
All must achieve >60% reduction of GHG emissions from
baseline*
BGY
36 BGY
15 BGY
cap**
21
16
*
90
-------
EISA requires that the EPA set an annual volume standard for renewable fuels and the 2015 RFS
volume requirements will be promulgated in FY 2014. EISA also required the EPA to develop a
comprehensive lifecycle GHG methodology to implement the Act's GHG threshold requirements
for the RFS, and the EPA will continue to further develop and update its lifecycle model.
Producers of new and advanced biofuels regularly seek to qualify their fuels under RFS and the
EPA will continue to apply its lifecycle analysis to such fuels to evaluate and determine
eligibility for the program.
In FY 2014, the agency will increase oversight of the RFS program and continue to ensure
compliance with RFS provisions through its real-time reporting system, which is used to track
shipments and trades of renewable fuel. This real-time tracking system handles 4,000 to 6,000
submissions per day, encompassing 30 thousand to 40 thousand transactions per day, and the
generation of 1.3 billion Renewable Identification Numbers (RINs) per month. RINs are
assigned to each gallon of renewable fuel generated and recording RINs allows for an accurate
tracking of the renewable fuel throughout the supply chain.
In FY 2014, the EPA will complete its capital investment plan to upgrade its vehicle, engine, and
fuel testing capabilities at the National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory (NVFEL).
Because the EPA is responsible for establishing the test procedures needed to measure emissions
and estimate the fuel economy of new vehicles, and for verifying car and truck manufacturers'
data on fuel economy, the agency is investing in additional testing and certification capacity to
ensure that new vehicles, engines, and fuels are in compliance with new vehicle and fuel
standards. In FY 2014, the EPA plans to install a Mid-Range Diesel Engine Test Site with testing
equipment that will be needed to ensure compliance with criteria pollutants in the post 2010
diesel engine standards.
In FY 2014, the EPA will transition its Fuel and Fuel Additive Registration Reporting System to
an interactive system that is fully integrated with the EPA's new e-Enterprise project. E-
Enterprise will create an easy-to-use, one-stop access point for all of the EPA's programs.
Shared web services will center on providing the user with customized content and functions,
including reusable e-forms and tailored notifications of relevant information. The Fuel and Fuel
Additive Registration Reporting System is one of a handful of systems that will be included in
the first set of offerings in the new customer-facing web service.
The fuels and fuel additive universe includes approximately 630 fuel manufacturers, 1,250
additive manufacturers, 750 registered fuels, and 7,500 registered additives. This project, known
as the Electronic Fuels Unified Reporting project, will reduce regulatory reporting burden
through hours saved by reducing the number of reports and duplicate fields, reusing existing data
elements in a company's profile, previous reports, or entered in other data systems (EMTS), and
providing an easy to use interface with guidance built into the web-form. The EPA anticipates a
10% time reduction under RFS and a 20% reduction under other Fuels programs for an estimated
170 thousand annual hour reduction in time spent. Through the Electronic Fuels Unified
Reporting project EPA will transform 66 quarterly and annual reports with some 1,300 data
fields, currently submitted to the EPA in multiple formats, into a single quarterly web-form
report. Manufacturers will also save through reduced costs in the preparation of the reports and
the elimination of paper, ink, and delivery costs.
91
-------
Criteria Pollutants and Mobile Source Air Toxics
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to achieve results in reducing pollution from mobile sources,
especially nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions associated with national emissions standards included
in the agency's National Clean Diesel Campaign. The Tier 2 Vehicle program, which took effect
in 2004, makes new cars, SUVs, and pickup trucks 77 to 95 percent cleaner than 2003 models.
The Clean Trucks and Buses program, which began in 2007, makes new highway diesel engines
as much as 95 percent cleaner than previous models. Under the Non-road Diesel Program, new
fuel and engine requirements will reduce sulfur in off-highway diesel by more than 99 percent.
Under the Locomotive and Marine Engines Rule, new fuel and engine requirements will reduce
dangerous fine particle pollution (PM) by 90 percent and NOx by 80 percent for newly-built
locomotives and marine diesel engines. Combined, these measures will prevent over 26,000
premature deaths each year, reduce millions of tons of pollution a year, and prevent hundreds of
thousands of respiratory illnesses by 2030, avoiding 20,000 hospital admissions and 3.3 million
lost work days.
Clean Fuel/Engine Standards will Lead to
Substantial Air Quality/Health Benefits in 2030
2030
NOx (short tons)
PM2 5 (short tons)
VOC (short tons)
SOX (short tons)
Cost
Net Benefits
Avoided Premature
Mortality
Avoided Hospital
Admission
Avoided Lost Work
Days
Light-duty
Tier 2
2,800,000
36,000
401 ,000
281 ,000
$5 billion
$25 billion
4,300
3,000
700,000
Heavy-duty
2007
2,600,000
1 09,000
115,000
142,000
$4 billion
$70 billion
8,300
7,100
1 .5 million
Nonroad
Diesel
Tier 4
738,000
1 29,000
34,000
376,000
$2 billion
$80 billion
12,000
8,900
1 .0 million
Locomotive
& Marine
Diesel
795,000
27.000
43,000
0
$740 million
$11 billion
1,400
870
1 20,000
2030 Total
6,933,000
301,000
593,000
799,000
$11. 74 billion
$186 billion
26,000
19,870
3,320,000
In addition, recent standards to control emissions from ocean-going vessels will reduce NOx
emission rates by 80 percent and PM emission rates by 85 percent, compared to the current limits
applicable to this class of marine engines. The reductions will prevent an additional 13,000
premature deaths annually (40 CFR Parts 80, 85, et al).
Additional reductions to criteria pollutant emissions from light-duty vehicles will be key to
helping areas attain the ozone, PM, and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQSs) and in reducing exposure to air toxics for the millions of people living,
working, or going to school near major roads.
92
-------
EPA modeling shows that additional reductions to criteria pollutant emissions from light-duty
vehicles will be key to helping areas maintain and attain the ozone, PM, and nitrogen dioxide
(NC>2) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQSs) and in reducing exposure to toxics
for the millions of people living, working, or going to school near major roads. In FY 2014, the
EPA is planning to finalize the rule and prepare to implement new light-duty vehicle and fuel
standards (called Tier 3), which could include lower sulfur limits for gasoline, and improved
exhaust and evaporative standards for vehicles, including hydrocarbon, NOx, and PM standards.
The agency also will be addressing other mobile source emissions, including nonroad engines.
Standards establishing onboard diagnostics (OBD) requirements for nonroad engines will be
developed to ensure that engines are properly maintained and compliant, ensuring that the full
benefits of the emission standards are realized in the real world. The agency will continue
working with the International Maritime Organization (EVIO) and the International Civil
Aviation Organization (ICAO) to develop further programs to control conventional pollutant
emissions from marine and aircraft engines, respectively. In addition, the EPA will continue its
efforts, in coordination with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), to evaluate
endangerment from lead emissions from piston-engine aircraft using leaded aviation gasoline.
The EPA has achieved major improvements in the area of emissions modeling with the
implementation of its new emission model called MOVES. MOVES is greatly improving the
agency's ability to support the development of emission control programs, as well as providing
support to states in their determination of program needs to meet air quality standards. In FY
2013, the EPA will release MOVES2013, a major upgrade to the MOVES modeling platform.
This new version of MOVES will incorporate new data gathered from emission testing programs
and expand the application of the model to include additional nonroad sources and toxic
emissions. In FY 2014, EPA will continue work on future MOVES upgrades, including a full
integration of nonroad sources into the MOVES architecture. A critical part of the EPA's support
of states' emissions modeling efforts includes comprehensive training courses given throughout
the country. This supports states in keeping up with the latest modeling and methodology that
serves as the basis for protecting air quality in their communities.
The EPA will continue to ensure manufacturer compliance by conducting testing operations on
motor vehicles, heavy-duty engines, nonroad engines, and fuels to certify that all vehicles,
engines, and fuels that enter the U.S. market comply with all federal clean air and fuel economy
standards. The EPA will continue to conduct vehicle emission tests as part of pre-production
tests, certification audits, in-use assessments, and recall programs to ensure compliance with
mobile source clean air programs. Tests are conducted as a spot check comparison for motor
vehicles, heavy-duty engines, nonroad engines, and fuels to: 1) certify that vehicles and engines
meet federal air emission 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 2014, the EPA will continue to conduct testing activities for tailpipe emissions, fuel
economy, gasoline sulfur, reformulated gasoline, ultra low sulfur diesel, alternative fuel vehicle
conversion certifications, on-board diagnostics (OBD) evaluations, certification audits, and recall
programs.
93
-------
In FY 2014, the EPA anticipates reviewing and approving more than 5,000 vehicle and engine
emissions certification requests, including light-duty vehicles, heavy-duty diesel engines,
nonroad engines, marine engines, locomotives, and others. This represents a significant increase
in demand for EPA's certification services compared to 1995 levels, due in part to the addition of
certification requirements for stationary engines and for marine and small spark-ignited engines.
The EPA charges fees to manufacturers to partially offset the cost to the agency of certifying that
these manufacturers can legally introduce their products into commerce. In FY 2014, the EPA
plans to develop a rule to update these fees.
The EPA uses in-use emissions data provided by light-duty vehicle manufacturers as a means to
measure compliance and determine if any follow-up evaluation or testing is necessary. Since
2000, light-duty vehicle manufacturers have been required, by regulation, to test a number of
newer and older in-use vehicles and provide the data to the EPA. The EPA receives over 2,000
test results annually. The EPA reviews the data and is able to determine if there are any specific
vehicles, models, or manufacturers that are having problems complying with the emission
standards. The EPA uses this information to focus on further review and analysis, if necessary. If
there are a number of vehicle models that are failing emissions in-use, the EPA will procure
some of the same vehicles and perform further emission testing to assess whether there is an
emission problem that needs to be addressed. The EPA also uses this information to determine if
there are vehicle models that should be targeted for EPA certification testing for the upcoming
model year prior to granting the manufacturer a certificate of conformity which allows the
manufacturer to sell vehicles in the U.S. By having manufacturers test in-use vehicles, the EPA
has access to far more data than could be cost-effectively generated by the agency on its own.
This also allows the EPA to focus its testing efforts on vehicles that have already been screened
and determined to have a potential problem.
The EPA also will continue to be responsible for vehicle Corporate Average Fuel Economy
(CAFE) and gas guzzler fuel economy testing and for providing the fuel economy data to the
Department of Transportation (DOT), the Department of Energy (DOE), and the Internal
Revenue Service (IRS).
As part of implementing the eight-hour ozone and fine particulate matter (PIVb.s) standards, the
EPA will continue to provide state and local governments with substantial assistance in
developing State Implementation Plans (SIPs) and making transportation conformity
determinations during this period. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to ensure national
consistency in how conformity determinations are conducted across the United States and
continue to ensure consistency in adequacy findings for motor vehicle emissions budgets in air
quality plans, which are used in conformity determinations.
The EPA also will continue to provide assistance to state and local transportation and air quality
agencies working on PM2.5 hot-spot analyses to make sure analyses use the latest available
information and that there is some measure of consistency across the nation. In addition, the EPA
will work with states and local governments to ensure the technical integrity of the mobile source
controls in the SIPs for the eight-hour ozone and PM2.5 air quality. The EPA will assist in
identifying control options available and provide guidance, as needed, for areas that implement
conformity.
94
-------
The EPA will continue partnering with states, tribes, and local governments to create inspection
and maintenance (I/M) programs that focus on in-use vehicles and engines. Basic and/or
enhanced I/M testing is currently being conducted in over 30 states with technical and
programmatic guidance from the EPA.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to work with a broad range of stakeholders to develop
targeted, sector-based, and place-based incentives for diesel fleets (including construction, ports,
freight, and agriculture) to limit emissions from older, pre-2007 diesel engines not subject to
stringent emissions standards. Reducing emissions from diesel engines will help localities meet
air quality standards and reduce exposure to air toxics from diesel engines. The EPA also is
working with industry to bring about field testing and emissions testing protocols for a variety of
energy-efficient, emissions reducing innovative technologies for the legacy fleet.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(O40) Percent of small nonroad engines tested in EPA surveillance program that comply with
emissions requirements
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
TBD
Units
Percent in
Compliance
Measure
Target
Actual
(N35) Limit the increase of Carbon Monoxide (CO) emissions from mobile sources compared to
a 2000 baseline.
FY 2007
1.18
1.18
FY 2008
1.35
1.35
FY 2009
1.52
1.52
FY 2010
1.69
1.69
FY2011
1.86
1.86
FY 2012
2.02
2.02
FY 2013
2.19
FY 2014
2.36
Units
Tons
Emitted
Measure
Target
Actual
(O33) Cumulative millions of tons of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) reduced since 2000
from mobile sources.
FY 2007
1.20
1.20
FY 2008
1.37
1.37
FY 2009
1.54
1.54
FY 2010
1.71
1.71
FY2011
1.88
1.88
FY 2012
2.05
2.05
FY 2013
2.23
FY 2014
2.4
Units
Tons
Reduced
Measure
Target
Actual
(O34) Cumulative millions of tons of Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) reduced since 2000 from mobile
sources.
FY 2007
2.37
2.37
FY 2008
2.71
2.71
FY 2009
3.05
3.05
FY 2010
3.39
3.38
FY2011
3.73
3.73
FY 2012
4.07
4.07
FY 2013
4.41
FY 2014
4.74
Units
Tons
Reduced
Measure
Target
Actual
(P34) Cumulative tons of PM-2.5 reduced since 2000 from mobile sources.
FY 2007
85,704
85,704
FY 2008
97,947
97,497
FY 2009
110,190
110,190
FY 2010
122,434
122,434
FY2011
136,677
136,677
FY 2012
146,921
146,921
FY 2013
159,164
FY 2014
171,407
Units
Tons
Reduced
Performance results for the reduction of toxicity-weighted emissions are supported by work
under the Federal Stationary Source Regulations Program under Environmental Programs and
95
-------
Management and can be found in the Performance Eight-Year Array in the Program
Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$2,774.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$314.0 / +2.2 FTE) This increases support to the vehicle and engine compliance
program for additional oversight of the Renewable Fuel Standard program. The
additional resources include 2.2 FTE and associated payroll of $314.0.
• (-$83.0) This reflects a reduction in travel to support the Administration's Management
Agenda goal of reducing travel and conference spending.
• (+$414.0 / +0.1 FTE) This funding supports the E-Enterprise initiative. As part of an
agencywide effort, this investment will support streamlining the reporting process and
burden under the agency's fuel and fuel additive registration process. The goal of the
streamlining effort would be to transform 66 quarterly and annual reports with some
1,300 data fields submitted to EPA into a single quarterly web-form report. The
additional resources include 0.1 FTE and associated payroll of $14.0.
• (-$340.0) This change reflects a reduction found from IT efficiencies and consolidation in
IT contracts that support the mobile source program.
• (+$925.0) This reflects an increase to update EPA's primary fuel effects model with the
latest scientific understanding of the impact of various fuel properties (e.g. aromatic
content, ethanol content, vapor pressure, etc.) on light-duty vehicle emissions. This
updated fuel effects model will be used to support on-going implementation of current
standards, as well as any future standard setting efforts.
• (+$2,081.0) This reflects additional resources to address vulnerabilities in EPA's
certification and compliance testing programs. These vulnerabilities are the result of a
more than four-fold increase in demand for EPA vehicle and engine certifications, more
challenging compliance oversight requirements, the increasing diversity of sophisticated
technologies, and the expanded universe of regulated parties that must be monitored,
particularly in the area of imported small engines. Currently, the EPA conducts very
limited testing of small imported engines, yet a high fraction of those engines fail EPA's
tests.
• (+$2,163.0) This reflects additional resources required to evaluate feedstocks and fuel
pathways for future fuels and processes, including resources to update the science and
scientific tools needed to allow evaluation and assessment of new biofuel technologies.
EPA is currently addressing a number of submitted petitions for new biofuels and
anticipates that it will continue to receive an increasing number of petitions in the future.
In addition, these funds are required to make further progress addressing climate change,
96
-------
by beginning the technical work and analyses necessary to support GHG standards for
non-road sources, such as locomotives, marine craft, and aircraft.
• (+$240.0) This increase is required to cover increases in fixed costs to operate and
maintain the agency's vehicle and fuel testing laboratory in Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Statutory Authority:
CAA (42 U.S.C. 7401-766If); Motor Vehicle Information Cost Savings Act; Alternative Motor
Fuels Act of 1988; National Highway System Designation Act; NEP Act, SAFETEA-LU of
2005; EPAct of 2005; EISA of 2007; Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards
and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards (40 CFR Parts 85, 86, and 600); Control of
Emissions from New Marine Compression-Ignition Engines at or Above 30 Liters per Cylinder
(40 CFR 80, 85, 86, 94, 1027, 1033, 1039, 1042, 1043, 1045, 1048, 1051, 1054, 1060, 1065, and
1068).
97
-------
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
98
-------
Indoor Air: Radon Program
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY2012
Enacted
$3,861.0
$210.0
$4,071.0
23.0
FY2012
Actuals
$4,292.9
$254.3
$4,547.2
25.8
FY2013
Annualized
CR
$3,875.0
$210.0
$4,085.0
23.0
FY2014
Pres Budget
$2,271.0
$0.0
$2,271.0
9.6
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY2012
Enacted
($1,590.0)
($210.0)
($1,800.0)
-13.4
Program Project Description:
Title III of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) authorized the EPA to undertake a variety
of activities to address the public health risks posed by exposures to indoor radon. Under the
statute, the EPA studied the health effects of radon, assessed exposure levels, set an action level,
and advised the public of steps they can take to reduce exposure. The EPA also evaluated
mitigation methods, instituted training centers to ensure a supply of competent radon service
providers, established radon contractor proficiency programs, and assisted states with program
development through the administration of a grants program.
This program, combined with the Indoor Air EPM Program, supported the National Center for
Radiation Field Operations (NCRFO) in Las Vegas, NV. NCRFO is the only federal National
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) radon laboratory.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
There is no request for this program in FY 2014. Over the 23 years of its existence EPA's radon
program has provided important guidance and significant funding to help states and other entities
establish their own programs. In a few cases, some states may be able to sustain their radon
protection efforts. Because exposure to radon gas continues to be an important risk to human
health, at the Federal level EPA will continue its headquarters program, including
implementation of the Federal Radon Action Plan, a multi-year, multi-agency strategy for
reducing the risk from radon exposure by leveraging existing Federal housing programs and
more efficiently implementing radon-related activities to have a greater impact on public health.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in Indoor Air: Radon Program under
Environmental Programs and Management and can be found in the Performance Eight-Year
Array in the Program Performance and Assessment section.
99
-------
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$210.0 / -1.5 FTE) The EPA will eliminate S & T funding support to communities for
radon testing. The reduced resources include 1.5 FTE and associated payroll of $171.0.
Statutory Authority:
CAA Amendments of 1990; Radon Gas and Indoor Air Quality Research Act; Title IV of the
SARA of 1986; TSCA, Section 6, Titles II and Title III (15 U.S.C. 2605 and 2641-2671); and
IRAA, Section 306.
100
-------
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$17,135.0
$370.0
$17,505.0
53.7
FY 2012
Actuals
$17,301.5
$351.7
$17,653.2
58.4
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$17,288.0
$372.0
$17,660.0
53.7
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$17,204.0
$428.0
$17,632.0
52.9
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$69.0
$58.0
$127.0
-0.8
Program Project Description:
Title IV of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) gives the EPA
broad authority to conduct and coordinate research on indoor air quality, develop and
disseminate information, and coordinate efforts at the federal, state, and local levels.
EPA will conduct field measurements and assessments and provide technical support for indoor
air quality remediations, when requested. EPA's indoor air quality technical assistance and
training work is primarily focused toward tribal communities and cost-effectively meets an
identified need for federal assistance.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to provide limited support to Tribal communities with field
measurements and assessments, upon request, and provide technical support for indoor air
quality remediation.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in the Reduce Risks from Indoor Air
program under the Environmental Program and Management Tab and can be found in the
Performance Eight-Year Array in the Program Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$56.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$2.0) This increase will support field measurements and assessments.
101
-------
Statutory Authority:
CAA Amendments of 1990; Title IV of the SARA of 1986.
102
-------
Radiation: Protection
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Reduce Unnecessary Exposure to Radiation
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$9,540.0
$2,094.0
$2,468.0
$14,102.0
75.4
FY 2012
Actuals
$9,454.8
$2,072.6
$2,247.3
$13,774.7
75.2
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$9,575.0
$2,102.0
$2,465.0
$14,142.0
75.4
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$10,623.0
$2,133.0
$2,476.0
$15,232.0
73.7
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,083.0
$39.0
$8.0
$1,130.0
-1.7
Program Project Description:
This program supports the ongoing radiation protection capability at the National Analytical
Radiation Environmental Laboratory (NAREL) in Montgomery, Alabama, and the National
Center for Radiation Field Operations (NCRFO) in Las Vegas, Nevada. These two organizations
for field and analytical operations provide radio-analytical and mixed waste testing, quality
assurance, analysis of environmental samples, field radiological support, and field measurement
systems and equipment to support site assessment, clean-up, and response activities in the event
of an accident or radiological incident.
Together, these organizations provide technical support for conducting site-specific radiological
characterizations and cleanups, using the best available science to develop risk assessments.
They also develop guidance, in collaboration with the public, industry, states, tribes, and other
governments, for cleaning up Superfund and other sites that are contaminated with radioactive
materials.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA, in cooperation with states, tribes, and other federal agencies, will provide
ongoing site characterization and analytical support for site assessment activities, remediation
technologies, and measurement and information systems. The EPA also will provide analytical
support to states and industry to assist with radon measurement accuracy efforts and conduct
laboratory intercomparisons. The EPA also will provide training and direct site assistance,
including field surveys and monitoring, laboratory analyses, health and safety, and risk
assessment support at sites with actual or suspected radioactive contamination. Some of these
sites are located near at-risk communities, emphasizing the Administration's commitment to
protect vulnerable communities.
NAREL and NCRFO will continue to support Regional Superfund Remedial Project Managers
(RPMs) and On-Scene Coordinators (OSCs), providing laboratory and field-based
103
-------
radioanalytical and mixed waste analyses, technical services, guidance, and quality assurance
oversight.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in the Radiation Protection program
in the Environmental Programs and Management Tab and can be found in the Performance
Eight-Year Array in the Program Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$133.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$13.0 / +0.1 FTE) This increase is to support lab assistance for conducting site-specific
radiological characterization. The additional resources include 0.1 FTE and associated
payroll of $13.0.
• (-$107.0) This reduces support for training and may increase analysis times when
providing direct site assistance to sites with suspected or actual radioactive
contamination.
Statutory Authority:
Atomic Energy Act (AEA) of 1954, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq. (1970), and
Reorganization Plan #3 of 1970; Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments of 1990; Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended by the
SARA of 1986; Energy Policy Act (EPA) of 1992, P.L. 102-486; Executive Order 12241 of
September 1980, National Contingency Plan, 3 CFR, 1980; National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 CFR 300; Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA)
of 1982; Public Health Service Act (PHSA), as amended, 42 U.S.C. 201 et seq.; Safe Drinking
Water Act (SOWA); Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) of 1978; Waste
Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Land Withdrawal Act of 1992.
104
-------
Radiation: Response Preparedness
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Reduce Unnecessary Exposure to Radiation
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$3,015.0
$4,076.0
$7,091.0
41.9
FY 2012
Actuals
$2,998.0
$3,783.5
$6,781.5
43.3
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$3,026.0
$4,086.0
$7,112.0
41.9
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$3,132.0
$4,097.0
$7,229.0
42.2
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$117.0
$21.0
$138.0
0.3
Program Project Description:
The National Analytical Radiation Environmental Laboratory (NAREL) in Montgomery,
Alabama, and the National Center for Radiation Field Operations (NCRFO) in Las Vegas,
Nevada, provide field sampling and analyses, laboratory analyses, and direct scientific support to
respond to radiological and nuclear incidents. 8 This work includes measuring and monitoring
radioactive materials and assessing radioactive contamination in the environment. This program
comprises direct scientific field and laboratory activities to support preparedness, planning,
training, and procedure development. In addition, selected personnel are members of the EPA's
Radiological Emergency Response Team (RERT), a component of the agency's emergency
response program, and are trained to provide direct expert scientific and technical assistance in
the field. The EPA's Radiation and Indoor Air program's RERT asset is identified as an agency
Critical Infrastructure/Key Resource (CI/KR).
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA's RERT will continue to improve the level of readiness to support federal
radiological emergency response and recovery operations under the National Response
Framework (NRF) and the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
(NCP). The RERT members in NAREL and NCRFO will conduct training and exercises to
enhance and demonstrate their ability to fulfill the EPA responsibilities in the field, using mobile
analytical systems. They also will support field operations with fixed laboratory analyses and
provide rapid and accurate radionuclide analyses in environmental matrices.9
Additional information can be accessed at: http://www.epa.gov/radiation/rert/
105
-------
In FY 2014, NAREL and NCRFO, will continue to develop rapid deployment capabilities to
ensure that field teams are ready to provide scientific data, analyses, and updated analytical
techniques for radiation emergency response programs across the agency. Both organizations
also will maintain readiness for radiological emergency responses; participate in emergency
exercises; provide on-site scientific support to state radiation, solid waste, and health programs
that regulate radiation remediation; participate in the Protective Action Guidance (PAG)
development and application; and respond, as required, to radiological incidents.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in the Radiation: Response
Preparedness program under the Environmental Programs and Management Tab and can be
found in the Performance Eight-Year Array in the Program Performance and Assessment
section.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$126.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$39.0 / +0.3 FTE) This increase will support enhanced assistance for the emergency
response activities. The increased resources include 0.3 FTE and associated payroll of
$39.0.
• (-$144.0) This reduces the GIS communication capability of mobile assets used in
responding to radiological incidents, depriving decision-makers of critical GIS data.
Statutory Authority:
Atomic Energy Act (AEA) of 1954, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq. (1970), and
Reorganization Plan #3 of 1970; Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments of 1990; Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA); National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 CFR 300; 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;
Homeland Security Act of 2002; Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006
(PKEMRA); Public Health Service Act (PHSA), as amended, 42 U.S.C. 201 et seq.; Robert T.
Stafford Disaster Relief and EAA, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.; Safe Drinking Water Act
(SOWA); and Title XIV of the Natural Disaster Assistance Act (NDAA) of 1997, PL 104-201
(Nunn-Lugar II).
106
-------
Program Area: Enforcement
107
-------
Forensics Support
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Enforcing Environmental Laws
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$15,269.0
$2,419.0
$17,688.0
103.9
FY 2012
Actuals
$16,352.8
$2,657.2
$19,010.0
97.5
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$15,302.0
$2,415.0
$17,717.0
103.9
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$15,874.0
$1,169.0
$17,043.0
94.8
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$605.0
($1,250.0)
($645.0)
-9.1
Program Project Description:
The Forensics Support program provides expert scientific and technical support for the nation's
most complex civil and criminal enforcement cases, as well as technical expertise for the
agency's compliance efforts. The work of the EPA's National Enforcement Investigations Center
(NEIC) is critical to determining non-compliance and building viable enforcement cases. The
NEIC maintains a sophisticated chemistry laboratory and a corps of highly trained inspectors and
scientists with expertise across media. The NEIC work closely with the EPA Criminal
Investigation Division to provide technical support (e.g., sampling, analysis, consultation and
testimony) to criminal investigations. The NEIC also works closely with the Headquarters and
Regional Offices to provide technical assistance, consultation, on-site inspection, investigation,
and case resolution services in support of the agency's Civil Enforcement program.
The NEIC is an environmental forensic center accredited for both laboratory and field sampling
operations to generate environmental data for law enforcement purposes. It is a fully accredited
environmental forensics center under International Standards Organization (ISO) 17025, the
main standard used by testing and calibration laboratories, as recommended by the National
Academy of Sciences. ° Accreditation is the recognition of technical competence through a third-
party assessment of a laboratory's quality, administrative, and technical systems. It also provides
the general public and users of laboratory services a means of identifying those laboratories that
have successfully demonstrated compliance with established international standards. The NEIC's
accreditation standard has been customized to cover both laboratory and field activities.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The NEIC will continue to apply its technical resources in support of the agency's national civil
and criminal enforcement priorities. Efforts to stay at the forefront of environmental enforcement
in FY 2014 include focused refinement of single and multi-media compliance monitoring
10 Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward, National Academy of Sciences, 2009, available at
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php7record id=12589.
108
-------
investigation approaches, as well as creating and refining customized laboratory methods to
solve unusual enforcement case challenges.
In response to case needs, the NEIC will conduct applied research and development to identify,
develop, and deploy new capabilities, test and/or enhance existing methods and techniques, and
provide technology transfer to other enforcement personnel involving environmental
measurement and forensic applications. For example, NEIC will use forensic chemistry
techniques to determine if unconventional wastes (e.g., potentially explosive mixtures and
electronic wastes) exhibit toxic characteristics under the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA). Consistent with these activities and working with appropriate organizations across
the agency, the NEIC also will play a role in evaluating the scientific basis and/or technical
enforceability of select regulations of the EPA.
In FY 2014, the NEIC will continue to function under rigorous ISO requirements for
environmental data measurements to maintain its laboratory and field accreditation. The program
also will continue to utilize advanced technologies to support field measurement and laboratory
analyses. NEIC also will continue to develop innovative technologies including geospatial
measurement of air pollution and remote monitoring in environmental justice communities.
In addition, in FY 2014, NEIC will continue to work with Region 8 and the Office of
Administration and Resource Management (OARM) to advance the implementation of the
consolidation of its laboratories to improve space and resource efficiency. This is part of the
agencywide effort to review overall space requirements.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$785.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$59.0 / -0.4 FTE) The program will reduce a modest amount of FTE supporting NEIC
operations. The reduced resources include 0.4 FTE and associated payroll of $59.0.
• (-$121.0) This change reflects a reduction found from IT efficiencies and the
consolidation of IT contracts that support the NEIC.
Statutory Authority:
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; Clean Water Act; Safe Drinking Water Act; Clean
Air Act; Toxic Substances Control Act; Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act;
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act,; Ocean Dumping Act (i.e., MPRSA);
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act.
109
-------
Program Area: Homeland Security
no
-------
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection
Program Area: Homeland Security
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect Human Health
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,063.0
$11,361.0
$12,424.0
24.8
FY 2012
Actuals
$1,191.4
$11,363.1
$12,554.5
26.8
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$1,077.0
$11,450.0
$12,527.0
24.8
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$1,577.0
$9,893.0
$11,470.0
24.1
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$514.0
($1,468.0)
($954.0)
-0.7
Program Project Description:
This program provides resources to coordinate and support protection of the nation's critical
water infrastructure from terrorist threats and all-hazard events. Reducing risk in the water sector
requires a multi-step approach to: determine risk through vulnerability, threat, and consequence
assessments; reduce risk through security enhancements; prepare to effectively respond to and
recover from incidents; and measure the water sector's progress in risk reduction. The Public
Health Security and Bioterrorism Response and Preparedness Act of 2002 (Bioterrorism Act)
also provides that the EPA support the water sector in such activities.
11
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Since the events of 9/11, the EPA has been designated as the sector-specific agency responsible
for infrastructure protection activities for the nation's drinking water and wastewater systems.
The EPA is utilizing its position within the water sector and working with its stakeholders to
provide information to help protect the nation's drinking water supply from terrorist or all-hazard
events. Specifically, the EPA is responsible for assessing new security technologies to detect and
monitor contaminants as part of the Water Security Initiative (WSI), establishing a national water
laboratory alliance, and planning for and practicing for response to both natural and intentional
emergencies and incidents.
In FY 2014, the EPA will focus on completing software tools that provide practical, tailored
guidance for the water sector on deploying drinking water contamination warning systems, along
with conducting outreach and training on those tools. The EPA also will continue to support
water sector-specific agency responsibilities, including the Water Alliance for Threat Reduction,
to protect the nation's critical water infrastructure. The agency will continue to oversee the
regional laboratory networks that form the Water Laboratory Alliance. The Water Laboratory
Alliance enables the water sector to rapidly analyze a surge of laboratory samples during a
significant contamination event. All of these efforts support the agency's responsibilities and
commitments under the National Infrastructure Protection Plan, as defined within the Water
See http://www.epa.gov/safewater/watersecurity
111
-------
Sector Specific Plan, which includes specific milestones for work related to the WSI, the Water
Laboratory Alliance, and metric development.
Water Security Initiative and Water Laboratory Alliance
The EPA's goal is to develop a "robust, comprehensive, and fully coordinated surveillance and
monitoring system"12 for drinking water and a water laboratory network that would support water
surveillance and emergency response activities. The overall goal of the initiative is to design and
demonstrate an effective system for timely detection and appropriate response to drinking water
contamination threats and incidents through a pilot program that has broad application to the
nation's drinking water utilities in high threat cities.
The Water Security Initiative consists of five general components: (1) enhanced physical security
monitoring; (2) water quality monitoring; (3) routine and triggered sampling for high priority
contaminants; (4) public health surveillance; and (5) consumer complaint surveillance. Recent
simulation analyses underscore the importance of a contaminant warning system that integrates
all five components of event detection, as different contaminants are detected by different
sequences of triggers or "alarms." Resources appropriated to date have enabled the EPA to
award a total of five drinking water security pilots for the Water Security Initiative.
The Water Security Initiative is intended to demonstrate the concept of an effective
contamination warning system that drinking water utilities in high threat cities of all sizes and
characteristics could adopt. The FY 2014 request includes $5.9 million for necessary Water
Security Initiative activities to develop tools and conduct outreach to disseminate knowledge
from water security pilots and $1.1 million for the Water Alliance for Threat Reduction.
The EPA has completed analysis of the first Water Security Initiative pilot, and continues
collecting data and lessons learned from the four remaining pilots. In FY 2013, these remaining
pilots will end, and the EPA will receive full data sets from each. Through a meta-analysis of
data from all the Water Security Initiative pilots, the EPA will assess, for example, component
and system availability, alarm rates, operation and maintenance costs, and the success of water
utilities in responding to warning system triggers. This actual performance data will be
supplemented with data based on modeled simulations of contamination events at the pilot
utilities.
In FY 2013, the EPA is using results and lessons learned from the Water Security Initiative pilots
to begin developing tools, including software tools that provide practical, actionable information
for water systems to use in deploying and evaluating contamination warning systems. In keeping
with the recommendations of a stakeholder group of water industry and state representatives, the
software tools will provide guidance to help water utilities tailor approaches based on their
particular needs and goals.
Funding in FY 2014 will allow EPA to develop these software tools and other guidance
materials. The EPA also will carry out a national outreach and training program, in cooperation
with stakeholder groups, to promote the use of these tools for the adoption of effective,
12 Homeland Security Presidential Directive-9 (HSPD-9).
112
-------
implementable, and sustainable contamination warning systems in the water sector. Consistent
with the findings of the stakeholder group, the EPA believes that results from the Water Security
Initiative pilots demonstrate that such adoption of contamination warning systems can reduce
potential public health and economic consequences from a major contamination event.
In a contamination event, the sheer volume or unconventional type of samples could quickly
overwhelm the capacity or capability of a single laboratory. To address this potential deficiency,
the EPA has established a national alliance of laboratories harnessed from the range of existing
lab resources from the local (e.g., water utility) to the federal levels (e.g., the Center for Disease
Control's Laboratory Response Network) into a Water Laboratory Alliance. The Water
Laboratory Alliance focuses solely on water and provides specialized expertise to support the
water component of the EPA's Environmental Response Laboratory Network. The
Environmental Response Laboratory Network is a network with a similar purpose as the Water
Laboratory Alliance but with a focus on analyses of all other environmental media. The Water
Laboratory Alliance will reduce the time necessary for confirming an intentional contamination
event in drinking water and speed response and decontamination efforts. Launched in 2009, the
Water Laboratory Alliance is composed of a number of environmental, public health, and
commercial laboratories across the nation with membership increasing steadily. In FY 2014,
efforts will continue to focus on the national implementation of the Water Laboratory Alliance
through the Water Laboratory Alliance Plan, a national plan which provides a protocol for
coordinated laboratory response to a surge of analytical needs.
The EPA also will continue work with regional and state environmental laboratories to conduct
exercises, within the framework of the Water Laboratory Alliance Response Plan, and continue
efforts to expand the membership of the Water Laboratory Alliance with the intention of
achieving nationwide coverage. As of January 4, 2013, the Water Laboratory Alliance has 138
member laboratories that are geographically diverse and can provide a wide range of chemical,
biological, and radiological analyses. In order for the Water Laboratory Alliance to become a
robust infrastructure that can cover major population centers and address a diverse array of high
priority contaminants, membership must continue to increase, and activities in FY 2014 will
target laboratories located in areas where the Water Laboratory Alliance has both inadequate
membership and gaps in laboratory analytical capabilities. In addition, EPA is currently
expanding the membership to include small/medium utilities. Our initial membership drive was
focused on establishing a network of highly capable laboratories to address a surge of water
samples. The agency also will continue to support environmental laboratories and utilities by
facilitating access to supplemental analytical capacity and improved preparedness for analytical
support to an emergency situation.
Under the Water Laboratory Alliance, the EPA also will establish partnerships with stakeholders,
such as the CDC and state public health laboratories, to further efforts necessary to validate
analytical methods for contaminants of high concern for intentional contamination in drinking
water. About 90 percent of these contaminants currently lack validated methods.
113
-------
Water Sector-Specific Agency Responsibilities
The EPA is the sector-specific agency "responsible for infrastructure protection activities" for
the water sector (drinking water and wastewater utilities). The EPA is responsible for developing
and providing tools and training on improving security to the 53,000 community water systems
and 16,000 publicly-owned treatment works.
In addition, under the February 12, 2013 Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity
Executive Order, EPA will engage with its Federal partners to develop voluntary guidelines,
identify high priority water systems, and promote voluntary cybersecurity practices across the
industry. EPA also will be working with stakeholders to assess whether changes or updates are
required in its current regulatory framework to support cybersecurity and resiliency practices.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue working to ensure that water sector utilities have tools and
information to prevent, detect, respond to, and recover from terrorist attacks, other intentional
acts, and natural disasters. The following preventive and preparedness activities will be
implemented for the water sector in collaboration with the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) and states' homeland security and water sector officials:
• Conduct webcasts to prepare utilities, emergency responders, and decision-makers to
evaluate and respond to physical, cyber, and contamination threats and events;
• Disseminate tools and provide technical assistance to ensure that water and wastewater
utilities and emergency responders react rapidly and effectively to intentional
contamination and natural disasters. Tools include: information on high priority
contaminants, incident command protocols, sampling and detection protocols and
methods, and treatment options;
• Sustain operation of the Water Desk in the agency's Emergency Operations Center in the
event of an emergency by updating roles/responsibilities, training staff in the incident
command structure, ensuring adequate staffing during activation of the desk, and
coordinating with EPA regional field personnel and response partners;
• Support the adoption and use of mutual aid agreements among utilities to improve
recovery times;
• Provide practical, easy to use tools under the Climate Ready Water Utilities initiative that
enable water systems of all sizes to integrate climate variability considerations into long-
range planning;
• Provide tools that enable water systems to adapt to the challenges posed by all-hazards
inclusive of extreme climate variability;
• Continue to implement specific recommendations for emergency response, as developed
by the EPA and water sector stakeholders, including providing an expanded set of tools
(e.g., best security practices, incident command system and mutual aid training, recovery,
and resiliency) in order to keep the water sector current with evolving water security
priorities;
• Coordinate with other federal agencies, primarily Department of Homeland Security,
Centers for Disease Control, Food and Drug Administration, and Department of Defense,
on biological, chemical, and radiological contaminants of high concern, and how to
detect and respond to their presence in drinking water and wastewater systems;
114
-------
• Continue to implement specific recommendations of the Water Decontamination Strategy
as developed by the EPA and water sector stakeholders (e.g., defining roles and
responsibilities of local, state, and federal agencies during an event); and
• Develop annual assessments, as required under the National Infrastructure Protection
Plan, to describe existing water security efforts and progress in achieving the sector's key
metrics.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports the EPA's Protect Human Health objective. Currently, there
are no performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$256.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$1,533.0 / -0.7 FTE) This decrease reflects completion of activities under the Water
Security Initiative including data collection and evaluation efforts for the pilots. The
reduced resources include 0.7 FTE and associated payroll of $107.0.
• (-$191.0) This reflects a decrease to prevention and preparedness activities provided to
the water sector.
Statutory Authority:
SDWA 42 U.S.C. §300f-300j-9 as added by Public Law 93-523 and the amendments made by
subsequent enactments, Sections - 1431, 1432, 1433, 1434, 1435; CWA, 33 U.S.C. §1251 et
seq.; Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Emergency and Response Act of 2002; Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act, 42 U.S.C. §11001 et seq - Sections 301, 302, 303,
and 304.
115
-------
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and Recovery
Program Area: Homeland Security
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Ensure Chemical Safety
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Reduce Unnecessary Exposure to Radiation
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$29,835.0
$40,545.0
$70,380.0
176.4
FY 2012
Actuals
$27,032.2
$40,547.7
$67,579.9
168.7
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$30,054.0
$40,648.0
$70,702.0
176.4
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$29,544.0
$40,800.0
$70,344.0
175.9
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($291.0)
$255.0
($36.0)
-0.5
Program Project Description:
EPA's Homeland Security Research Program (HSRP) enhances the nation's preparedness,
response, and recovery capabilities for large-scale catastrophic incidents including chemical,
biological, or radiological (CBR) terrorist threats and attacks and other disasters. Human lives
can be at stake when people are exposed to hazardous chemicals, microbial pathogens, and
radiological materials purposely released into the environment by terrorists or by unintentional
releases resulting from industrial accidents or natural disasters. Such events also can result in
economic turmoil. Our communities and country can recover more quickly and cost effectively
from these events if effective tools, methods, information, and guidance are developed and
successfully delivered to local, state, and federal decision-makers.
EPA's work to support community resilience often highlights scientific and technological gaps
that, if filled, would improve EPA's guidance and tools for a variety of national, state, and local
decision-makers. The EPA established HSRP to lead efforts at filling critical gaps associated
with EPA's homeland security responsibilities. Over the years, the research program has
developed many products that address critical terrorism-related issues while having applicability
to resilience to other natural and manmade disasters.
HSRP collaborates with other federal agencies including the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS), Department of Defense (DOD), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and
the Federal Bureau of Investigation, on key research areas of mutual interest. These include
materials decontamination and disposal, threat assessment, contaminant exposure, and sampling
and analytical methods. By planning research based on the needs of partners and stakeholders
(EPA's Homeland Security Program, Water Program, Solid Waste and Emergency Response
Program, and the Regions), HSRP efficiently and effectively furthers its applied research and
technical support program while simultaneously preventing duplication of scientific and
technical work conducted by other agencies. Using a cradle-to-grave approach, HSRP delivers
116
-------
timely products to its internal partners and the aforementioned federal stakeholders operating
within the arena of homeland security research and implementation.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In accordance with Presidential Policy Directive 8, HSRP is pursuing an all-hazards approach in
conducting its work in order to provide the tools and capabilities necessary to prepare the nation
for disasters of all types. Building resiliency in the nation's communities requires that they be
prepared to respond to disasters that are terrorism-based, accidental, or naturally occurring.
HSRP, by utilizing input from the relevant EPA Program Offices and Regions, is focusing on
reacting to terrorism-related issues to better provide products with multiple benefits that are
applicable to a broader set of disasters.
In FY 2014, Homeland Security-specific all-hazards science and engineering research will
improve the agency's, and partner-agencies' ability to carry out expanded homeland security
responsibilities. In this way, HSRP is aiding the homeland security community in improving
responses to and recovery plans from incidents involving CBR agents or contaminants. This is
done by providing Program Office and Regional partners and agency stakeholders with a broad
spectrum of applied science and technical support. HSRP prioritizes contributions in order of
perceived threat to focus on biological contaminants, followed by radiological contaminants, and
lastly chemical contaminants. As new chemical agents emerge, priorities will be informed and
adjusted as information from DOD and DHS is received. In addition, the Food Safety
Modernization Act (FSMA) authorized the EPA to assist communities to prepare for, assess,
decontaminate, and recover from food and agricultural emergencies (Pub. Law 111-353, Section
208). HSRP continues research to address this mandated agency responsibility by determining
initial best practices to manage large volumes of contaminated food and agricultural waste and to
address the associated need for sampling and analytical methods for waste characterization.
HSRP will continue to provide support and assistance to water utilities for securing the nation's
water systems and drinking water infrastructure and will continue to provide other applied
science and technical support to EPA's response community, which includes: the Consequence
Management Advisory Team, the Environmental Response Team, the Radiological
Environmental Response Team, the Regions' Removal Managers, and On-Scene Coordinators.
Recent examples of the critical support provided by HSRP's experts for emergency responses
include: (1) the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and (2) the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear reactor
meltdown. In both cases, relevant EPA scientific data and tools, along with support from ORD
scientists and engineers, augmented responders' knowledge. These two cases highlight the need
and utility of the agency's all-hazards oriented research to respond to various types of disasters,
whether they are related to terrorism, accidents, or natural events.
Decontamination Research
Decontamination research addresses existing scientific knowledge gaps in responding to and
recovering from wide-area CBR attacks on urban centers, transportation hubs, sports arenas, and
other public areas. HSRP, therefore, conducts research on characterizing contamination in
117
-------
support of EPA's Environmental Response Laboratory Network (ERLN)13; determining risk and
clean up goals; and materials decontamination and waste management approaches. Examples of
this include the compilation and development of analytical methods for the widely-accepted and
regularly-updated Selected Analytical Methods for Environmental Remediation and Recovery14
(SAM). Additionally, HSRP is developing more broadly available Provisional Advisory Levels
(PALs) for chemical agents to protect human health during recovery operations.15 PALs also will
continue to address exposure knowledge gaps for chemicals in contaminated sites and situations.
Decontamination research also is making information available on the relative persistence of bio-
threat agents16 and the best ways to negate their effects.
In FY 2014, decontamination research will continue to work to fill the most critical scientific and
technical gaps to improve agency preparedness capabilities. As an example, development and
extension of a rapid and sensitive molecular assay for viable anthrax spores to similar bio-threat
agents will support more robust clean-up goals after wide-area biological attacks making cleanup
efforts more efficient and effective. Similarly, the development of PALs for additional critical
chemical agents informs responders and building occupants of the dangers of exposure to
chemicals in a building after an attack. Finally, strategies to clean-up chemical, biological, and
radiological (CBR-agent) contaminated areas are continuing with an improved understanding of
the fate and transport of agents, developing methods to clean urban surfaces,17 and approaches to
manage the contaminated waste. An illustration of the type of planned work is HSRP's ROD
Waste Estimation Support Tool (WEST), a planning tool released in FY 2012 for estimating the
potential volume and radioactivity levels of waste generated by a radiological incident and
subsequent decontamination efforts. WEST directly supports decision makers by generating a
first-order estimate of the quantity and characteristics of waste resulting from a radiological
incident which allows the user to evaluate various decontamination/demolition strategies to
examine the impact of those strategies on waste generation.
Water Infrastructure Protection Research
Water Infrastructure Protection Research has made significant impacts by providing scientific
data and tools to protect, detect contamination in, and recover after an attack on water systems
and drinking water infrastructure.18 Water Security Initiative pilot demonstrations have deployed
products that provide performance information on water quality sensors,19 sensor placement
software Threat Ensemble Vulnerability Assessment- Sensor Placement Optimization Tool
(TEVA-SPOT), and award winning event detection software Canary20 in Cincinnati, San
Francisco, New York City, Philadelphia, and Dallas. Products such as Canary have proven
innovative and warranted efforts to commercialize and privatize them for wider use. As an
illustration of the planned work in this area, HSRP in 2012 released the Canary Quick Start guide
13 http://www.epa.gov/oemerlnl/
14 http://epa.gov/sam/
15 http://www.epa.gov/nhsrc/news/newsl21208.html
16http://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_record_report.cfm?address=nhsrc/&dirEntryId=235666
17http://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_record_report.cfm?address=nhsrc/&dirEntryId=234944
18 This research directly supports the national Water Security Initiative, in support of HSPD-9 which directed EPA, as the Sector
Specific Lead Agency (SSA) for water, to "develop robust, comprehensive, and fully coordinated surveillance and monitoring
systems ... for ... water quality that provide early detection and awareness of disease, pest, or poisonous agents.".
19 http://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_record_report.cfm?address=nhsrc/&dirEntryId=212368
20 http://www.epa.gov/nhsrc/water/teva.html
118
-------
to help water utilities, consultants, and researchers to quickly install and run the Canary event
detection software to analyze data from water quality sensors in water distribution systems and
help rapidly detect contamination incidents. These HSRP products further the protection of the
nation's water systems through innovative science by making possible the rapid detection of
contaminants in real world situations.
In FY 2014, Water Infrastructure Protection Research will focus on developing and testing
decontamination approaches for water infrastructure and on treating CBR contaminated water
caused by terrorist attacks, natural disasters, or accidents. Accordingly, research on real time
distribution system models and methods to isolate and treat contaminated water, clean
distribution systems, redirect water, and return water systems to service quickly and affordably is
in progress. HSRP is investigating the chemical, biological, and physical aspects of
decontamination processes to design and optimize the cleanup process for removal or mitigation
of CBR contamination in wastewater.
As part of the ongoing Water Security Initiative effort, HSRP will continue to provide technical
assistance to utilities as they use these models and methods to bring their water contamination
warning systems online. As new and improved water contamination sensors become
commercially available, HSRP will conduct performance testing to help utilities make more
informed decisions about the security of their drinking water and infrastructure.
Efforts in FY 2014 also will build upon previously completed work to inform the design of new
and of retrofitted distribution systems so that they are inherently safer from a variety of
contamination possibilities. Modeling tools will be developed and applied to both idealized and
real systems to support decisions, the design of new networks of pipes, or to retrofit existing
networks.
Radiation Monitoring
Maintenance of the RadNet air monitoring network supports EPA's responsibilities under the
Nuclear/Radiological Incident Annex to the National Response Framework (NRF). The network
includes deployable monitors and near real-time stationary monitors. This network is identified
as an EPA Critical Infrastructure/Key Resource (CI/KR) asset.
Through FY 2013, the EPA expects to install 10 additional RadNet fixed monitors bringing the
national total to 134. All 134 monitors provide near real-time radiation monitoring coverage for
each of the 100 most populous U.S. cities, as well as expanded geographic coverage. In FY
2014, the agency will operate and maintain the expanded RadNet air monitoring network. Fixed
stations will operate routinely and, should there be an emergency, in conjunction with as many as
40 deployable monitors following a radiological incident. The expanded RadNet air monitoring
network will provide the agency, first responders, and the public with greater access to data,
improving officials' ability to make decisions about protecting public health and the environment
during and after an incident. The EPA will continue to update its fixed and deployable
monitoring systems including their communications capability across various media.
Additionally, the data will be used by scientists to better characterize the effect of a radiological
incident.
119
-------
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(HS1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Homeland Security
research program.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
100
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(HS2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients and partners to improve their
capabilities to respond to contamination resulting from homeland security events and related
disasters.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
100
78
FY2013
100
FY2014
100
Units
Percent
The tables reflect the HSRP's annual performance measures. The EPA uses these measures to
assess our effectiveness in delivering needed products and outputs to clients (decision-makers,
states, and local governments).
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$408.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$199.0) This represents a restoration of resources transferred to the Sustainable and
Healthy Communities program to support Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR).
For SBIR, the EPA is required to set aside 2.5 percent of funding for contracts to small
businesses to develop and commercialize new environmental technologies.
• (+$134.0 / +0.9 FTE) This reflects an increase to support the Water Security research
program. The increased resources include 0.9 FTE and associated payroll of $134.0.
• (+$52.0 / -0.2 FTE ) This reflects the net result of realignments of infrastructure, FTE and
resources such as equipment purchases and repairs, travel, contracts, and general
expenses that are proportionately allocated across programs to better align with
programmatic priorities. These resources include a decrease of 0.2 FTE and associated
payroll of $30.0.
• (-$325.0 / -0.3 FTE) This reduction reflects administrative savings from continued efforts
to streamline operational expenses and activities, including information technology (IT)
support activities. The reduced resources include 0.3 FTE and associated payroll of
$45.0.
• (-$775.0 / -0.2 FTE) This represents a reduction to pilot scale and field application testing
as well as engineering and operational aspects of decontamination methods. The reduced
resources include 0.2 FTE and associated payroll of $30.0.
120
-------
• (+$17.0 / +0.1 FTE) These resources will provide support for the RadNet monitoring
network. The additional resources include 0.1 FTE and associated payroll of $12.0.
• (-$1.0) This reflects a reduction in travel to support the Administration's Management
Agenda goal of reducing travel and conference spending.
Statutory Authority:
AEA of 1954, as through P.L. 105-394, November 13, 1998, 42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq. - Section
275 Reorganization Plan #3 of 1970; CAA Amendments 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq - Sections 102
and 103; CERCLA, as amended by the SARA 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq., Sections 104, 105 and
106; 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; PHSA, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 201 et seq., Section 241; Robert T.
Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. -
Sections 201, 204, 303, 402, 403, and 502; SDWA 42 U.S.C. 300 et seq. - Sections 1433, 1434
and 1442; NDAA of 1997, Public Law 104-201, Sections 1411 and 1412; PHSBPRA of 2002,
Public Law 107-188, 42 U.S.C. 201 et seq., Sections 401 and 402 (amended the SDWA);
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 53 - Section 2609; OPA, 33 U.S.C. 2701 et seq; PPA, 42 U.S.C 133; RCRA
42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq; EPCRA 42 U.S.C. 11001 et seq.; CWA 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; FIFRA 7
U.S.C. 136 et seq.; FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 9; FQPA 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq. Executive Order 10831
(1970); FSMA, Pub. Law 111-353 - Sections 203 and 208; Executive Order 13486:
Strengthening Laboratory Biosecurity in the United States (2009).
121
-------
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure
Program Area: Homeland Security
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Building and Facilities
Hazardous Substance SuperrUnd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$5,966.0
$578.0
$7,044.0
$1,170.0
$14,758.0
3.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$4,309.2
$577.0
$5,726.7
$1,671.0
$12,283.9
4.2
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$6,053.0
$584.0
$7,087.0
$1,176.0
$14,900.0
3.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$6,063.0
$579.0
$8,038.0
$1,172.0
$15,852.0
5.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$97.0
$1.0
$994.0
$2.0
$1,094.0
2.0
Program Project Description:
This program involves activities to ensure that EPA's physical structures and assets are secure
and operational and that certain physical security measures are in place to help safeguard staff in
the event of an emergency. These efforts also protect the capability of EPA's vital laboratory
infrastructure assets. Specifically, funds within this appropriation support security needs for the
National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory (NVFEL).
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the agency will continue to provide enhanced physical security for the NVFEL and
its employees. This funding supports the incremental cost of security enhancements required as
part of an agency security assessment review.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1.0) This increase provides additional funding for security needs at the NVFEL.
122
-------
Statutory Authority:
CAA (42 U.S.C. 7401-766If); Motor Vehicle Information Cost Savings Act; Alternative Motor
Fuels Act of 1988; National Highway System Designation Act; NEP Act, SAFETEA-LU of
2005; EPAct of 2005; EISA of 2007.
123
-------
Program Area: IT / Data Management / Security
124
-------
IT / Data Management
Program Area: IT / Data Management / Security
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$87,939.0
$3,652.0
$15,339.0
$106,930.0
485.7
FY 2012
Actuals
$86,196.5
$3,250.7
$14,843.5
$104,290.7
490.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$88,632.0
$3,669.0
$15,391.0
$107,692.0
485.7
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$86,599.0
$4,029.0
$13,865.0
$104,493.0
487.8
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($1,340.0)
$377.0
($1,474.0)
($2,437.0)
2.1
Program Project Description:
The work performed in the Information Technology/Data Management (IT/DM) program
encompasses more than 30 distinct activities. For descriptive purposes, activities can be
categorized into the following major functional areas: information access; geospatial information
and analysis; Envirofacts; IT/Information Management (IT/EVI) policy and planning; quality
assurance; electronic records and content management; Libraries; One EPAWeb (formerly
Internet Operations and Maintenance Enhancements); information reliability and privacy; and
IT/EVI infrastructure. IT/DM programs facilitate the agency's Science and Technology programs
by delivering essential services to agency staff to allow them to conduct their work effectively
and efficiently. The following four themes are reflected in IT/DM program activities: (1)
facilitating mission activities through better information and tools; (2) improving agency work
processes to promote efficiencies; (3) increasing transparency and innovation in the agency's
work processes; and (4) enabling the workforce with reliable tools. IT/IM, EPA Libraries, and
OneEPA Web activities are funded under S&T.
Resources support the development, collection, management, and analysis of environmental data
(to include both point source and ambient data) to manage statutory programs and to support the
agency in strategic planning at the national, program and regional levels. The EPA provides a
secure, reliable information infrastructure based on data standardization, integration and public
access. IT/DM resources help ensure the EPA's processes and data are of high quality and adhere
to federal guidelines and also support regional information technology infrastructure,
administrative and environmental programs and telecommunications.
Resources under this program also fund the agencywide Quality Program. The Quality Program
is a key data management component that ensures the quality of all EPA products and services.
125
-------
The program develops EPA Quality Assurance policy and oversees implementation of national,
program and regional level quality systems for science and technology, which are the foundation
of all of EPA environmental programs. The Quality Program also oversees the implementation of
the EPA Information Quality Guidelines.21
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA's IT/DM functions have continuously and progressively integrated new and
transformative approaches to the way IT is managed across the agency. FY 2014 activities
represent significant components of the agency's work to transform its digital services within
base resources. In FY 2014, the following IT/DM activities will continue to be provided using
S&T resources:
• One EPA Web [formerly Internet Operations and Maintenance Enhancements
(IOME)] - FY 2014 activities in this area implement and maintain the EPA Home Page
(www.EPA.gov) and over 200 top-level pages that facilitate access to the many
information resources available on the EPA website. In addition, One EPA Web provides
the funding to support Web hosting for all of the agency's websites and Web pages. The
EPA website is the primary delivery mechanism for environmental information to the
public, our partners, stakeholders and EPA staff, and is becoming a resource for
emergency planning and response. (In FY 2014, One EPA Web activities will be funded
at $0.17 million in non-payroll funding under the S&T appropriation.)
• IT/Information Management (IT/IM) Policy and Planning - FY 2014 activities will
ensure that all appropriate steps are taken to reduce redundancy among information
systems and databases, streamline and systematize the planning and budgeting for all
IT/EVI activities, and monitor the progress and performance of all IT/EVI activities and
systems. The EPA's Quality Program has consistently played a major role in each of
these areas. In FY 2014, the Quality Program plans to issue quality assurance policies,
procedures, standards and guidance to enhance the agency's quality system; to conduct
internal environmental program quality assurance assessments to ensure the integrity of
the agency's quality system and to streamline internal QA processes. (In FY 2014,
Quality Program activities will be funded at $2.68 million in non-payroll funding and
$1.18 million in payroll funding under the S&T appropriation.)
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
21 Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of Information Disseminated by the
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, 2002.
http://www.epa.gov/quality/informationguidelines/documents/EPA InfoQualityGuidelines.pdf.
126
-------
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$562.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$31.0 / +0.2 FTE) This increase reflects an increase of 0.2 FTE and associated payroll
of $31.0 for FY 2014 planned efforts to improve data quality and access.
• (-$19.0) This change reflects a reduction found from IT efficiencies and consolidation in
IT contracts that support the agency's Quality program.
• (-$197.0) This change reflects a reduction in funding for Internet Operations and
Maintenance due to efficiencies gained through the agency's utilization of OneEPA Web.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 42 U.S.C. 553 et seq. and Government Information
Security Act (GISRA), 40 U.S.C. 1401 et seq. - Sections 3531, 3532, 3533, 3534, 3535 and
3536 and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA),
42 U.S.C. 9606 et seq. - Sections 101-128, 301-312 and 401-405 and Clean Air Act (CAA)
Amendments, 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. - Sections 102, 103, 104 and 108 and Clean Water Act
(CWA), 33 U.S.C. 1314 et seq. - Sections 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 107, and 109 and Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2611 et seq. - Sections 201, 301 and 401 and Federal
Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. 36 et seq. - Sections 136a - 136y
and Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA), 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq. - Sections 102, 210, 301 and 501
and Safe Drinking Water Act (SOWA) Amendments, 42 U.S.C. 300 et seq. - Sections 1400,
1401, 1411, 1421, 1431, 1441, 1454 and 1461 and Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346 et seq. and Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
(EPCRA), 42 U.S.C. 11001 et seq. - Sections 322, 324, 325 and 328 and Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA), 42 U.S.C. 6962 et seq. - Sections 1001, 2001, 3001 and 3005 and
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA), 39 U.S.C. 2803 et seq. - Sections 1115,
1116, 1117, 1118 and 1119 and Government Management Reform Act (GMRA), 31 U.S.C. 501
et seq. - Sections 101, 201, 301, 401, 402, 403, 404 and 405 and Clinger-Cohen Act (CCA), 40
U.S.C. 1401 et seq. - Sections 5001, 5201, 5301, 5401, 5502, 5601 and 5701and Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. - Sections 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111,
112 and 113 and Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552 et seq. and Controlled
Substances Act (CSA), 21 U.S.C. 802 et seq. - Sections 801, 811, 821, 841, 871, 955 and 961
and Electronic Freedom of Information Act (EFOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552 et seq. - Sections 552(a)(2),
552 (a)(3), 552 (a)(4) and 552(a)(6).
127
-------
Program Area: Operations and Administration
128
-------
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Building and Facilities
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$535.0
$319,777.0
$72,019.0
$29,326.0
$915.0
$80,541.0
$503,113.0
414.4
FY 2012
Actuals
$512.2
$309,977.8
$72,928.5
$32,434.3
$877.0
$75,550.6
$492,280.4
407.7
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$535.0
$321,266.0
$72,434.0
$29,505.0
$916.0
$80,471.0
$505,127.0
414.4
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$509.0
$329,916.0
$75,690.0
$46,326.0
$839.0
$78,151.0
$531,431.0
411.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($26.0)
$10,139.0
$3,671.0
$17,000.0
($76.0)
($2,390.0)
$28,318.0
-2.9
Program Project Description:
Science & Technology (S&T) resources in the Facilities Infrastructure and Operations program
fund the rental of laboratory and office space, utilities, security, and centralized administrative
activities and support services. This includes health and safety, environmental compliance,
occupational health, medical monitoring, fitness, wellness, safety, environmental management
functions, facilities maintenance and operations, energy conservation, greenhouse gas reduction,
sustainable buildings programs, and space planning. Funding is allocated for such services
among the major appropriations for the agency.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The agency reviews space needs on a regular basis, and continues to implement a long-term
space consolidation plan that includes reducing the number of occupied facilities, consolidating
space within the remaining facilities, and reducing the square footage wherever practical. Since
2006, the EPA has released approximately 417 thousand square feet of space at headquarters and
facilities nationwide, resulting in a cumulative annual rent avoidance of over $14.2 million.
These achieved savings and potential savings partially offset the EPA's escalating rent and
security costs. For example, replacement leases for Regional Offices in Boston, Kansas City, San
Francisco, and Seattle are significantly higher than those previously negotiated. The agency will
continue to manage its lease agreements with the General Services Administration and other
private landlords by conducting reviews and verifying that billing statements are correct. For FY
129
-------
2014, the agency is requesting a total of $34.49 million for rent, $21.01 million for utilities, and
$11.17 million for security in the S&T appropriation.
The agency will continue its plans to enhance workplace flexibility at the EPA by consolidating
and disposing of existing assets, optimizing real property and portfolio performance, and
reducing environmental impacts. Through planned moves of regional offices with expiring leases
and opportunities to reconfigure existing space, the agency will incorporate space
reconfiguration to reduce the overall space footprint and support the government-wide
mobile/flexible workplace initiative.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to improve operating efficiency and encourage the use of
advanced technologies and energy sources. The EPA will direct resources towards acquiring
alternative fuel vehicles and more fuel-efficient passenger cars and light trucks to meet the goals
of Executive Order (EO) 13423,22 Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and
Transportation Management. Additionally, the agency will attain the Executive Order's
environmental performance goals related to buildings through several initiatives, including:
comprehensive facility energy audits; re-commissioning; sustainable building design for
construction and alteration projects; energy savings performance contracts; energy load reduction
strategies; green power purchases; and, the use of off-grid energy equipment and Energy Star
rated products and building standards. The EPA will continue to improve the management of its
laboratory enterprise and take advantage of potential efficiencies. In FY 2014, the agency plans
to reduce energy utilization (or improve energy efficiency) by approximately 37 billion British
Thermal Units or three percent and to use approximately 27 percent less energy than it did in FY
2003 which will result in annual cost savings of $5.9 million.
EO 13514, Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance, expands
upon EO 13423 and requires additional reductions to greenhouse gas emissions. To meet the
requirements of EO 13514 the EPA will manage existing building systems to reduce
consumption of energy, water, and materials, consolidate and dispose of existing facilities,
optimize real property and portfolio performance, reduce environmental impacts, and implement
best real property management practices for enhancing energy-efficiency.
As part of the agency's commitment to promoting employee health and wellness, and supporting
OPM's and OMB's wellness initiative, the agency has finalized a long-term action plan and
seeks to achieve an OPM goal of 75 percent employee participation in core program services,
which include physical fitness, medical screening, nutrition and education and outreach
activities. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue implementing the action plan with the goal of
increasing employee participation by 50 percent from the baseline level of 2012 and expects to
meet OPM's established goal. It is hoped that the availability and increased utilization of
wellness services will result in a healthier and more productive work force with lower medical
costs consistent with the President's goal in EO 13507.
22 Information is available at http://www.fedcenter.gov/programs/eol3514/. Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and
Economic Performance', and http://www.fedcenter.gov/programs/eol3423/. Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and
Transportation Management
130
-------
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports the performance measures in the Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations program under the EPM appropriation. These measures can also be found in the
Eight Year Performance Array in the Program Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$588.0) This change is the net effect of projected contractual rent increases and the rent
reduction realized from space consolidation efforts.
• (+$848.0) This reflects the net effect of an increase in utility costs and a reduction in
utility consumption realized from energy conservation initiatives.
• (+$476.0) This reflects an increase in security guard contractual costs.
• (-$167.0) This reflects a reduction in transit subsidy costs based on projected needs.
• (+$1,867.0) This reflects an increase in funding for Regional moves for the Reproductive
Toxicology Facility (RTF), begins its move to the main campus in Research Triangle
Park (RTF) during the fourth quarter of FY 2014. The move, which will be completed in
the second quarter of FY 2015, will result in an annual cost avoidance of $2.4 million in
rent and utilities, and approximately $250 thousand in security costs.
• (-$131.0) This change reflects a reduction found from IT efficiencies and consolidation in
IT contracts that support the Facilities Infrastructure and Operations program.
• (+$190.0) This reflects increased facility operation costs at EPA's facilities in Research
Triangle Park, NC. This funding will allow the agency to meet basic operations including
custodial contracts, labor costs, and ground maintenance.
Statutory Authority:
FPASA; PBA; Annual Appropriations Act; CWA; CAA; D.C. Recycling Act of 1988; Executive
Orders 10577 and 12598; United States Marshals Service, Vulnerability Assessment of Federal
Facilities Report; Presidential Decision Directive 63 (Critical Infrastructure Protection); Energy
Policy Act of 2005; Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007.
131
-------
Program Area: Pesticides Licensing
132
-------
Pesticides: Protect Human Health from Pesticide Risk
Program Area: Pesticides Licensing
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Ensure Chemical Safety
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$57,732.0
$3,757.0
$61,489.0
447.2
FY 2012
Actuals
$56,278.0
$3,532.4
$59,810.4
441.7
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$57,872.0
$3,771.0
$61,643.0
447.2
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$58,400.0
$3,425.0
$61,825.0
435.7
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$668.0
($332.0)
$336.0
-11.5
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Pesticides Program screens new pesticides before they reach the market and ensures
that pesticides already in commerce are safe. As directed by FIFRA, the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), and the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996 as well as the
Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act of 2012 (known as PRIA3) that amended
FIFRA and FFDCA, the EPA is responsible for registering and re-evaluating pesticides to protect
consumers, pesticide users, workers who may be exposed to pesticides, children, and other
sensitive populations. To make regulatory decisions and establish tolerances for the maximum
allowable pesticide residues on food and feed, the EPA must balance the risks and benefits of
using the pesticide, consider cumulative and aggregate risks, and ensure extra protection for
children.
The National Program Laboratories for the EPA Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
Program/Pesticide Programs consists of four laboratories that support the goal of protecting
human health through diverse analytical testing and analytical method development and
validation efforts. The laboratories also provide a variety of technical services to the EPA, other
federal and state agencies, Tribal nations, and other organizations.
EPA 's Microbiology Laboratory
The Microbiology laboratory work includes testing the efficacy of antimicrobial pesticides used
to combat infections due to human pathogenic microorganisms and the development of methods
for new and emerging pathogens. It has been found that approximately 30 percent of the hospital
disinfectants do not work as labeled. In FY 2013, based on a request from the Office of the
Inspector General, the laboratory evaluated food contact sanitizers to determine if this class of
antimicrobials meets the current regulatory performance standards. While the study showed that
food contact sanitizers were effective at controlling organisms typically found in food
preparation areas, certain products failed to meet either the chemistry or efficacy standards.
Additionally, S&T funding has supported efficacy testing of 245 hospital disinfectants and
tuberculocides. The data provided by the laboratory forms the foundation for the agency to
133
-------
remove ineffective products from the marketplace or to work with the industry to make
appropriate changes to the product label.
This laboratory is the only federal government laboratory currently evaluating, modifying, or
developing methods for disinfectant products used in the hospital environment and products used
for food preparation areas particularly for infectious microorganisms (such as Escherichia coif)
that cause disease in humans. Additionally, the laboratory has the lead for issues related to
chemical control agents and testing for Clostridium difficile (C. difficile). Deaths related to C.
difficile continue to increase due in part to a stronger germ strain, and have now reached 14
thousand deaths per year. Almost half of the infections occur in people younger than 65, but
more than 90 percent of the deaths occur in people 65 and older. The organism has been shown
to persist in the hospital environment and disinfectants are essential to reduce disease
transmission. Any new emerging human or animal pathogen (H1N1, Clostridium difficile,
MRSA, etc.) represents a new method development challenge for evaluating disinfectants.
The laboratory also has developed new methods used to evaluate hospital disinfectants. These
methods have been adopted or are currently under review at standard setting organizations such
as the American Society for Testing and Materials or Association of Official Analytical
Communities and posted at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/methods/atmpindex.htm.
EPA 's Analytical Chemistry Laboratory
The Analytical Chemistry laboratory provides technical review of enforcement methods, method
validation, and serves as a third-party confirmation laboratory. In FY 2012 and FY 2013, the
laboratory analyzed over 350 antimicrobial products and found approximately 8 percent of them
deficient, necessitating a response which may include removal of deficient products from the
market. In addition, the laboratory provides analytical and technical support to various EPA
Regional offices in enforcement cases, such as evaluating possible adverse effects of pesticide
use, including possible pet poisoning and contaminated or deficient products. The laboratory
develops and validates multi-residue pesticide analytical methods to monitor and enforce
agricultural uses of pesticides, which are a more efficient (time and monetary) "one stop shop"
method for multiple (100+) pesticides, based on their mode of action and chemical properties.
The Analytical Chemistry laboratory also works to standardize analytical methods to provide the
agency with scientifically valid data for use in risk assessment, such as for determining the
permeability of agricultural tarps to fumigants. This work assists EPA in determining potential
buffer zone credit of fumigated fields and assists crop growers with information to help
determine the best tarps for their practices.
Additionally, the Analytical Chemistry laboratory operates the OPP National Pesticide Standard
Repository (NPSR), which collects and maintains pesticide standards (i.e., samples of pure active
ingredients or technical grade active ingredients for pesticides), and distributes these standards to
the EPA and other federal and Tribal laboratories involved in pesticide enforcement.
Finally, the Analytical Chemistry laboratory provided analytical data for a FIFRA Scientific
Advisory Panel (SAP) on health effects of atrazine and its metabolites on humans and their
134
-------
reproductive systems. Data generated by the laboratory were successfully used in the September
2010 SAP for atrazine.23
EPA 's Environmental Chemistry Laboratory
The Environmental Chemistry laboratory located in Bay St. Louis, MS, provides the EPA with
specialized testing and analyses across a broad range of sample matrices such as food products,
sediments, animal tissues, water, soil, air, and commercial pesticide products. The laboratory
provides expertise in high resolution mass spectrometric analyses for legacy and current use
pesticides and toxic compounds. The laboratory provides a number of specific analyses to
support various agency initiatives to protect human health and the environment, for example on
dioxin, dairy feeds and feed components, human breast milk, and food samples. These analyses
assist EPA staff in carrying out pesticide-related work such as developing tolerance levels and
reviewing pesticide registration submissions.
The Environmental Chemistry laboratory assisted in a cooperative agreement with the
governments of Canada and Mexico in the establishment of the Mexican Dioxin Air Monitoring
Network (MDAMN), similar to EPA's National Dioxin Air Monitoring Network (NDAMN).
The laboratory provided analytical services in the analyses of ambient air samples collected from
a number of sites in Mexico over the past four years in response to the Commission for
Environmental Cooperation (CEC) and in accordance with the North American Agreement on
Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC). Its work was to support cooperation among the NAFTA
partners to address environmental issues of continental concern, including the environmental
challenges and opportunities presented by continent-wide free trade.
Finally, the Environmental Chemistry laboratory is analyzing ambient air samples collected in a
low income community adjunct to a major waste treatment facility at Kettleman City, California
at the request of the State of California Air Resources Board (CARB). This study was conducted
in response to elevated developmental problems in children in the community. The laboratory
also is measuring the concentrations of dioxins and furans in sediment profiles in St Louis Bay,
an estuary impacted by Hurricane Katrina, in association with the University of Southern
Mississippi.
EPA 's Microarray Research Laboratory
The Microarray Research Laboratory (MARL) located at Fort Meade, Maryland, is a state of the
art research facility. MARL conducts research on the effects of antimicrobial active ingredients
on pathogenic bacterial genomes, including the increasing emergence of antimicrobial and
disinfectant resistant pathogens. CDC statistics on nosocomial infections (infections contracted
during the receipt of medical care) shows that more than 2 million Americans get infected and 90
thousand die annually from these infections. MARL is the only laboratory in the government
working on the effects of antimicrobial active ingredients on pathogenic bacterial genomes. Data
generated by MARL can help the EPA understand the genetics behind the functioning of
pathogenic bacteria, will help in the design of agents that target the specific bacteria, and will be
http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap/meetings/2010/september/091410minutes.pdf
135
-------
helpful to the public, including in hospital environments, who use these products on a daily basis
to disinfect and kill the bacteria.
For more information on the laboratories, please visit:
http://www.epa.gov/opp00001/labs/index.htm.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the agency will protect human health by ensuring the availability of appropriate
analytical methods for detecting pesticide residues in food and feed, ensuring suitability for
monitoring pesticide residues, and enforcing tolerances. The Microbiology laboratory will
continue with efficacy testing of antimicrobials including C. difficile claims, complete current
method development activities, evaluate the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD) collaborative data and determine course of action with respect to the
method, conduct collaborative studies of Quantitative Petri Plate method for towelettes and One
Step Method (for C. difficile), and publish the new performance standard for the use dilution
method. Post-registration testing of antimicrobials enables the agency to remove ineffective
products from the market. New methods enable the regulated community to register new
products for use against emerging pathogens.
The Analytical Chemistry laboratory will continue to: (a) develop improved analytical methods
using state of the art instruments to replace outdated methods, thus increasing laboratory
efficiency and accuracy of the data; (b) continue to provide analytical support to fill in data gaps
for the Pesticide Programs' risk assessment and Section 18 emergency exemptions, and to
perform studies for use in risk mitigation; (c) provide analytical assistance and technical advice
to all EPA Regions in their enforcement cases; (d) continue operation of the NPSR; (e) continue
verifying that antimicrobial pesticides are properly formulated; and (f) validate, optimize, and
standardize a method to determine permeability of agricultural tarps to fumigants.
The Environmental Chemistry laboratory will continue to support the National Children's Study,
method development and validation, and provide agency assistance in the area of assessing and
monitoring dioxins, furans, and co-planar PCBs for human food sources, habitats, and ambient
air. The laboratory also will continue to represent the agency in national and international dioxin
forums.
The Microarray Research Laboratory will continue to use microarray technology in the field of
genomics, researching current microbiological techniques for testing the effectiveness of
antimicrobial agents. The laboratory also will study genome-wide changes in pathogenic bacteria
in response to antimicrobials exposure and genome-wide changes in pathogenic bacteria in
response to exposure to antimicrobials. Global gene profiles will be analyzed to better
understand the mechanisms involved in toxicity and resistance.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results listed in EPM Pesticides: Protect
136
-------
Human Health from Pesticide Risk and can be found in the Eight-Year Array, in the Program
Performance and Assessment section. Some of this program's performance measures are
program outputs, which represent 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 realizing benefits in that the
program's safety review prevents dangerous pesticides from entering the marketplace. Currently,
there are no performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$185.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$15.0 / +0.1 FTE) This increase reflects resources to support the development of
analytical methods for detecting pesticide residues and ensuring their suitability for
monitoring tolerance enforcement. This increase includes 0.1 FTE and associated payroll
of$15.0.
• (+$84.0) This increase supports laboratory fixed costs.
• (-$79.0) The EPA is reducing funding for further testing of food contact sanitizers in
order to focus on higher priority activities.
• (-$75.0) This reduction recognizes efficiencies in the adoption of the Organization for
Economic Co-operation and Development approved standards. Adoption of these
standards will require less resources resulting from fewer repeat/confirmatory testing
requirements and provide higher confidence in the data.
• (-$462.0) The EPA is reducing funding needed to support the pesticides programs'
laboratories due to efficiencies in operations primarily supporting registration and
efficacy testing.
Statutory Authority:
Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act of 2012 (known as PRIA3); Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended; Federal Food, Drug
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) as amended, §408 and 409; Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA);
Endangered Species Act (ESA).
137
-------
Pesticides: Protect the Environment from Pesticide Risk
Program Area: Pesticides Licensing
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Ensure Chemical Safety
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$37,704.0
$2,289.0
$39,993.0
287.6
FY 2012
Actuals
$36,969.0
$2,249.1
$39,218.1
294.9
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$37,810.0
$2,296.0
$40,106.0
287.6
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$39,047.0
$2,293.0
$41,340.0
281.2
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,343.0
$4.0
$1,347.0
-6.4
Program Project Description:
The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), section 3(c)(5), states that the
Administrator shall register a pesticide if it is determined that, when used in accordance with
labeling and common practices, the product "will not generally cause unreasonable adverse
effects on the environment." FIFRA defines "unreasonable adverse effects on the environment",
as "any unreasonable risk to man or the environment, taking into account the economic, social,
and environmental costs and benefits of the use of any pesticide."24
In complying with FIFRA, the EPA must conduct risk assessments using the latest scientific
methods to determine the risks that pesticides pose to human health and ecological effects on
plants, animals, and ecosystems that are not the targets of the pesticide. The agency's regulatory
decisions are posted for review and comment to ensure that these actions are transparent and that
stakeholders, including at risk populations, are engaged in decisions which affect their
environment. Under FIFRA, the EPA must determine that a pesticide will not cause
unreasonable adverse effects on the environment. For food uses of pesticides, this standard
requires the EPA to determine that food residues of the pesticide are "safe." For other risk
concerns, the EPA must balance the risks of the pesticides with benefits provided from the use of
the product. To ensure unreasonable risks are avoided, the EPA may impose risk mitigation
measures such as modifying use rates or application methods, restricting uses, or denying uses.
In some regulatory decisions, the EPA may determine that uncertainties in the risk determination
need to be reduced and may subsequently require monitoring of environmental conditions, such
as effects on water sources or the development and submission of additional laboratory or field
study data by the pesticide registrant.
In addition to FIFRA responsibilities, the agency has responsibilities under the Endangered
Species Act (ESA).25 Under ESA, the EPA must ensure that pesticide regulatory decisions will
24 Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act. Sections 2 and 3, Definitions, Registration of Pesticides (7 U.S.C. §§
136a). Available online at http://www.epa.gov/opp00001/regulating/laws.htm.
25 The Endangered Species Act of 1973 sections 7(a)(l) and 7 (a)(2); Federal Agency Actions and Consultations (16 U.S.C.
1536(a)). Available at U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered Species Act of 1973 internet site:
http://www.fws.gov/endangered/laws-policies/section-7.html
136,
138
-------
not destroy or adversely modify designated critical habitat or result in jeopardy to the continued
existence of species list by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) or National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) as threatened or endangered. Where risk are identified, the EPA must
work with the FWS and NMFS in a consultation process to ensure these pesticide registrations
will meet the ESA standard.
The National Program laboratories for the Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention Program
provide a diverse range of environmental data that are used by the EPA to make informed
regulatory decisions. The work of the Analytical Chemistry Laboratory, Microbiology
Laboratory, and the Environmental Chemistry Laboratory each provide critical laboratory testing
and support activities to support the decision-making processes of the agency. The laboratories
develop efficacy data, and validate environmental and analytical chemistry methods to ensure
that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA), the EPA offices, and states have reliable methods to measure and monitor pesticide
residues in food and in the environment.
EPA 's Microbiology Laboratory
The Microbiology Laboratory provides analyses that support the development of efficacy data
for pesticides used for decontamination of buildings such as chlorine dioxide, to support research
on methods and rapid detection assays, and evaluates commercial products used for remediation
and decontamination of sites contaminated with biothreat agents including Bacillus anthracis
(commonly known as anthrax). There are currently no antimicrobial products registered for use
against Bacillus anthracis. In response, the laboratory developed data to enable the agency to
issue Section 18 emergency exemptions. In addition the Microbiology laboratory is the only EPA
laboratory with a Select Agent registration under the CDC Select Agent Program, enabling the
laboratory to receive, transfer, and work with biothreat agents. Finally, the laboratory ensures
that pesticides deliver intended results by evaluating efficacy and registrant claims.
EPA 's Analytical Chemistry Laboratory
The Analytical Chemistry Laboratory supports the work of the EPA to determine the risks that
pesticides pose to the ecological effects on plants, animals, and ecosystems, such as bees, that are
not the targets of the pesticide by bringing new analytical methods online and using in-house
expertise to develop and validate multi-residue pesticide analytical methods. Additional benefits
are gained by transferring technologies, such as the multi-residue methods, to other EPA
organizations and state laboratories for use in monitoring pesticide residues in the environment
and ecological systems, and the standard method for testing permeability of agricultural tarps to
fumigants, which is currently used by tarp manufacturers to measure the efficiency of newly
developed and manufactured tarps.
The Analytical Chemistry laboratory will continue to provide analytical support to fill data gaps
for the Pesticide Programs risk assessment and Section 18 emergency exemptions, and to
perform studies for use in risk mitigation. Additionally, the Analytical Chemistry laboratory
provides the Pesticide programs analytical assistance and technical advice to all EPA Regional
139
-------
offices for use in enforcement cases including reviewing and validating analytical methods or
studies submitted as part of a pesticide registration.
EPA 's Environmental Chemistry Laboratory
The Environmental Chemistry laboratory, under the North American Agreement on
Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC), assisted in conducting research in the areas of
environmental health with respect to the presence of dioxins and related compounds in lacustrine
sediments and ambient air for the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC). The
Environmental Chemistry laboratory also assisted the Research and Development program in
extending the number of emerging contaminants to be analyzed, specifically perfluorinated
compounds (PFCs), in its Drinking Water Part II Study for the analyses of source and drinking
water sites within the United States. The laboratory also completed analyses of twenty-five
sampling sites along many of the major river systems in the U.S. which are used to provide
drinking water to millions of urban residents.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will realize the benefits of pesticides by operating the National Pesticide
Standard Repository (NPSR) and conducting chemistry and efficacy testing for antimicrobials.
As the recognized source for expertise in pesticide analytical method development, the EPA's
laboratories will continue to provide quality assurance and technical support and training to the
EPA's regions, state laboratories, and other federal agencies that implement FIFRA.
The Microbiology laboratory will complete the method verification of the OEM rapid PCR
method, evaluate various environmental surface coupons and vegetative biothreat agents, and
complete activities to retain its Select Agent registration certificate.
The Analytical Chemistry laboratory will continue to focus on analytical method development
and validations as well as special studies to address specific short-term, rapid turnaround priority
issues. The laboratory will continue to provide technical and analytical assistance to the IR-4 on
various IR-4 projects, which benefit specialty crop growers, globally and in the US.
The Environmental Chemistry Laboratory will continue to evaluate and develop test methods for
pesticides in soil and water and provide analytical support to national dioxin initiatives and
monitoring studies. Work on the National Children's Study will continue.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in EPM Pesticides: Protect the
Environment from Pesticide Risk and can be found in the Program Performance and Assessment
section. Some of the measures for this program are program outputs which measure progress
towards meeting the program's statutory requirements. This is to ensure that pesticides entering
the marketplace are safe for human health and the environment, and when used in accordance
with the packaging label, ensure a reasonable certainty of no harm. While program outputs are
140
-------
not the best measures of risk reduction, they do provide a means for reducing risk, in that the
program's safety reviews prevent dangerous pesticides from entering the marketplace.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$45.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$14.0 / +0.1 FTE) This increase reflects resources to support the development of
analytical methods for detecting pesticide residues and ensuring their suitability for
monitoring and for tolerance enforcement. This increase includes 0.1 FTE and associated
payroll of $14.0.
• (+$224.0) This increase represents additional funds to support laboratory fixed costs for
the pesticides program.
• (-$238.0) This decrease represents a reduction in support to perform analysis on priority
chemicals and an analysis of pesticide residues.
• (-$41.0) This reduction recognizes efficiencies from implementing operational changes to
reduce laboratory costs. The efficiencies include improvements in: (1) providing method
validation, technical review of enforcement methods, and third-party confirmation
laboratory services; and (2) the ability to receive, transfer, and work with biothreat agents
by maintaining Select Agent registration under the CDC Select Agent Program.
Statutory Authority:
Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act of 2012 (known as PRIA3); Pesticide
Registration Improvement Renewal Act (PRIRA); Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended; Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) as
amended §408 and 409; Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA); Endangered Species Act (ESA).
141
-------
Pesticides: Realize the Value of Pesticide Availability
Program Area: Pesticides Licensing
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Ensure Chemical Safety
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$12,514.0
$517.0
$13,031.0
87.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$13,924.9
$417.8
$14,342.7
90.7
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$12,554.0
$519.0
$13,073.0
87.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$12,350.0
$510.0
$12,860.0
84.2
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($164.0)
($7.0)
($171.0)
-2.8
Program Project Description:
The Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention's national program laboratories make significant
contributions to help the EPA realize the value of pesticides.
EPA 's Microbiology Laboratory
The Microbiology laboratory evaluates and develops data to support Section 18 requests for
emerging or novel pathogens such as prions, or new use sites such as those colonized by
biofilms, as well as conducts applied research on new methods for novel antimicrobials. In many
cases of new claims or pathogens, there is no standard method available for determining the
efficacy to support a pesticidal claim. For example, it is recognized that microorganisms that
exist as biofilm communities may be more resistant to disinfection. The laboratory has technical
expertise on managing unusual pathogens for which Section 3 registration of a pesticide might
not be economically viable. The evaluation of these requests increases pesticide availability in
the marketplace for these unusual or emergency situations. Examples include H1N1, prions, foot
and mouth disease, and SARs. The Microbiological laboratory also evaluates the efficacy of
antimicrobials to assist EPA in removing ineffective products from the market. The
Microbiology laboratory also provides technical support on numerous non-standard protocols for
antimicrobials, including: foggers, chemicals used for inactivation of prions, use of citric acid for
control of foot and mouth disease, and evaluation of requests from other federal agencies to use
paraformaldehyde for decontamination of laboratory environments.
EPA 's Analytical Chemistry Laboratory
The data will be used to determine if a representative crop from a crop group, instead of the
entire crop group, can be used as a model in establishing tolerances. Such a validation also would
support the concept of crop grouping being accepted in the Codex and by the Organization for
Economic Co-operation and Development. Over 500 samples analyzed in support of this project
have been analyzed to date. The laboratory also is providing analytical support to the USDA's
Inter-Regional Research Project No. 4 (IR-4) Global Study in evaluating the influence of spatial
142
-------
variation between various geographic locations around the world on the level of pesticide
residues in field grown tomatoes, when subjected to standardized application parameters and
rates. This work is not currently being done by any other EPA organization
EPA 's Environmental Chemistry Laboratory
The Environmental Chemistry laboratory conducts environmental chemistry method reviews in
support of pesticide registration activities. Results from the laboratory's method validation are
used to judge the quality, reliability, and consistency of analytical results that can be achieved by
the registrant's methods. This work is not currently being done by any other EPA organization.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The Microbiology laboratory will continue to evaluate Section 18 and novel protocol requests for
new uses and novel pathogens. The Analytical Chemistry laboratory will continue its work with
the IR-4 Global Study and IR-4 Crop Group Validation Study. The Environmental Chemistry
Laboratory will continue to evaluate environmental chemistry methods for the EPA and other
federal agencies, as requested.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results listed in Pesticides: Realize the
Value of Pesticide Availability under the Environmental Programs and Management account and
found in the Eight-Year Array in the Program Performance and Assessment section. Some of
this program's performance measures are program outputs, which represent 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 realizing benefits in that the program's safety review prevents dangerous
pesticides from entering the marketplace. Currently, there are no performance measures for this
specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$3.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to adjustments in
salary and benefit costs.
• (+$14.0 / +0.1 FTE) This increase reflects resources to support the development of analytical
methods for detecting pesticide residues and ensuring their suitability for monitoring and
tolerance enforcement. Work supported includes assessment of the economic impact of
registering or not registering a pesticide. Laboratory support provided by this program
includes Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) Section 18 efforts in
determining the benefits of issuing an emergency exemption and evaluation of products
crucial to infection control. This increase includes 0.1 FTE and associated payroll of $14.0.
143
-------
• (-$55.0) This decrease represents a reduction of support in assessment of the economic
impact of registering or not registering a pesticide. Additionally, it reduces the determination
of the benefits of issuing a Section 18 emergency exemption.
• (+$41.0) This increase represents additional funds to support laboratory fixed costs for the
pesticides program.
• (-$10.0) This decrease reflects efficiencies to help the agency realize the value of pesticides.
Areas improved include: (1) providing environmental chemistry method reviews to support
pesticide registration activities by determining the quality, reliability, and consistency of
analytical results that can be achieved by registrant methods; and (2) developing more
economical and time efficient methods to establish tolerance costs.
Statutory Authority:
Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act of 2012 (known as PRIA3); Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended; Federal Food, Drug
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) as amended, §408 and 409; Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA);
Endangered Species Act (ESA).
144
-------
Program Area: Research: Air, Climate and Energy
145
-------
Research: Air, Climate and Energy
Program Area: Research: Air, Climate and Energy
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Address Climate Change; Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$98,048.0
$98,048.0
306.6
FY 2012
Actuals
$103,631.5
$103,631.5
308.5
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$98,683.0
$98,683.0
306.6
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$105,724.0
$105,724.0
305.9
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$7,676.0
$7,676.0
-0.7
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Air, Climate, and Energy (ACE) research program conducts research to inform
policy and regulatory action. The EPA relies on this scientific and technical information to
understand the interplay between air quality, climate change and the changing energy landscape.
ACE's research data, models, and tools are fundamental in making accurate and defensible
policy decisions. With ACE research, the EPA can effectively meet Clean Air Act (CAA) and
other statutory and regulatory obligations.
American communities face serious health and environmental challenges from air pollution and
the growing effects of climate change. The ACE program engages with the EPA's partners and a
wide range of stakeholders to provide research to inform policy and regulatory action that
considers the impacts beyond the stack or tailpipe to more effectively meet the EPA's strategic
goals. ACE focuses on the following key challenges:
• Understanding the multi-pollutant nature of air pollution and its impacts;
• Developing options on the most cost-effective approaches to reducing air pollution;
• Informing strategies to adapt to and minimize the impacts of climate change on air
quality and water quality;
• Assessing the human health and environmental impacts of energy production and use;
and
• Understanding how to work within the social, behavioral, and economic conditions that
influence the effectiveness of air quality and climate policies.
The ACE research program also is integrated with other EPA research programs. For example,
ACE collaborates on nutrient management research with the Safe and Sustainable Water
Resource (SSWR) and the Sustainable and Healthy Communities (SHC) research programs.
ACE, SSWR and SHC also study community exposure and vulnerability from nitrogen source
analyses.
Environmental challenges in the twenty-first century are more complex than ever before.
Stressors such as climate change, urbanization, and air quality are universal concerns. These
146
-------
public and environmental health issues require more innovative thinking and collaborative
solutions. Effectively addressing these types of challenges will require systems-based solutions
that seek to optimize and balance environmental, social and economic objectives. These
solutions will require research that transcends disciplinary lines. In response, the EPA's research
includes stakeholder input in defining what research is needed and how the solutions are to be
integrated across diverse needs and concerns. Furthermore, the EPA is promoting technological
innovation that supports environmentally responsible solutions and fosters new economic
development.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Improving air quality and developing strategies to respond to climate change are central to the
agency's mission to protect public health and the environment. In FY 2014, the EPA will
continue to address critical science questions regarding air quality and the impacts of climate
change on air quality, water quality, and ecosystem health. To address the needs of decision-
makers and other stakeholders, the ACE research program is organized around interlinked
themes:
• Assess Air Quality and Climate Impacts: ACE will provide research on the environmental
exposures to, and the health effects of, air pollution. This air quality research will inform
decisions that impact air quality for regions, communities, and individuals—including the
effects on those most susceptible or vulnerable to air pollution. ACE also will examine how
the changing climate affects the nation's ability to maintain and achieve air quality and water
quality standards and the health of aquatic ecosystems.
• Prevent and Reduce Emissions: The ACE research program will provide data and tools to
develop and evaluate approaches for preventing and reducing air pollution. The EPA is
seeking cost-effective, innovative, multipollutant and sector-based approaches to reduce and
prevent air pollution. The EPA will analyze the full life-cycle impacts of new and existing
energy technologies to evaluate the broad environmental effects (positive or negative) related
to our energy choices, and how those effects impact communities and their environmental,
social, and economic health.
• Respond to Changes in Climate and Air Quality: The ACE research program will develop
human exposure and environmental models, monitors, metrics, and information on air
pollution exposure and climate change impacts. Individuals, communities and governmental
agencies need these tools and information to adapt to the environmental impacts of climate
change and make public health decisions regarding air quality.
Though guided by these themes, many research projects cut across disciplines to provide deeper
insight than would otherwise occur. Below are examples of several major research efforts
planned for FY 2014.
147
-------
Supporting NAAQS through a Multi-Pollutant Assessment of Emissions, Exposures, and Effects:
The EPA's research has provided the scientific basis for air quality standards and management
practices that are far-reaching in their impacts—both in terms of costs to the economy and
benefits to public health.26 ACE will continue to provide the underlying research to support the
agency's implementation of the CAA, which mandates the review of the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS). The EPA research currently provides 40 percent of the cited
fundamental data used to develop the NAAQS levels.27
The ACE research program is laying the foundation for new air quality management approaches.
In FY 2014, the EPA will conduct research that evaluates the multipollutant nature of air
pollution. The EPA will examine the effects from exposures to air pollutant mixtures rather than
single contaminants. Single pollutant approaches have been effective to date. However, our
Nation needs a more integrated approach—one that reflects real-life exposure—to protect the
public and the environment. Instead of focusing on individual pollutants, this research will study
exposures and health impacts of pollutant mixtures related to sources of air pollution (automobile
exhaust, coal-fired power plants) and the relevant exposure scenarios or settings (near roadways).
With a multi-pollutant approach, the agency can provide more effective and comprehensive
exposure examinations than have been possible before. This research provides the foundation for
developing scientifically sound strategies for air quality management.
This and other air pollutant research will inform the EPA on the causes of air pollution related
health effects. The multi-pollutant approach will include research to examine a variety of health
endpoints. It also will allow the EPA to account for additive, synergistic, or antagonistic effects
of contaminant mixtures on individuals and ecosystems. For example, the EPA will study the
cardiovascular and respiratory effects associated with exposures to single and multiple
pollutants. The EPA's scientists will investigate what factors, such as age, impact susceptibility
to these health impacts. To accomplish this research, ACE relies on the work from the EPA's
Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) program, which also is shifting from single-pollutant
science assessments to multi-pollutant assessments. To help achieve our goals, ACE will
continue to fund multi-pollutant research at numerous universities.
Modeling and Decision Support Tools to Support Air Quality Management:
In FY 2014, the ACE research program will continue to develop models and methods to support
effective air quality management. State and local agencies and the EPA rely on such tools to
implement NAAQS. The NAAQS levels are set by the EPA and based on the Human Health
Risk Assessment program's Integrated Science Assessments of criteria air pollutants (particulate
matter, ozone, lead, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and carbon monoxide). Improvements to the
globally used Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system will increase users'
capabilities to address and understand multipollutant issues and interactions by accurately
modeling changes in ozone, particulate matter, and hazardous air pollutant concentrations. With
over 1,500 users in the U.S. and 1,000 more around the world, CMAQ models how air pollution
levels change when different emission reduction alternatives are used. CMAQ allows users
26 http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/legislative/reports/2010_Benefit_Cost_Report.pdf
27 http://www.epa.gov/ncea/isa/
148
-------
(governments, states, and communities) to test a range of strategies and determine what approach
best fits their situation.
The CMAQ model has primarily been used to understand and implement regional air quality
management issues, but air quality management issues are expanding to global scales and
decreasing to local scales. The ACE program is responding by developing modeling tools to help
inform decisions at multiple scales. For example, ACE is developing local and urban scale
modeling tools, including a fine scale version of CMAQ, to understand air pollution exposures in
close proximity to sources. In addition, ACE is developing CMAQ's capabilities to model air
pollution transport into the U.S. from other locations in the northern hemisphere and evaluate the
impacts of a changing climate on air quality. These tools require specific information about
atmospheric and physical process that also will be investigated in the ACE program.
In addition, ACE is partnering with other research programs to develop multi-media modeling
tools to inform and improve decisions. Specifically, the ACE program will develop modeling
tools to understand and estimate how air pollution impacts water quality and other ecological
endpoints. The research is integrated across the ACE, SSWR, and SHC research programs.
Collectively, models developed by these research programs will allow policymakers to examine
options and design more effective management practices for nitrogen, supporting decision
making at the community, state and national levels.
Improving Emissions and Measurements of Air Pollutants:
A robust monitoring network that measures and tracks pollutants, identifies pollutant sources,
and provides information on how Americans are exposed to air pollutants is vital to improving
the nation's air quality. Effective air monitors and practices are crucial to compliance and
enforcement of air regulations. However, declining budgets strain already struggling national,
state, and local air pollution monitoring resources. Governments face growing demands for
information to address complex environmental problems. Current monitoring methods and
approaches can no longer meet all of these needs. ACE seeks to change the paradigm for air
pollution monitoring by augmenting traditional monitoring approaches with the next generation
of more innovative, cost-effective air monitoring technologies.
To respond to the needs of EPA and state and local governments, the EPA is working with the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to examine how to use satellite data to
improve air quality management activities. The EPA also is developing approaches to integrate
longitudinal and geospatial data collected from air monitors with models. Because monitors
capture information at a specific location and point in time, integration with modeling data will
allow our nation's communities to understand how air pollution changes over time in areas and
timeframes not covered by a monitor. In addition, the EPA will evaluate small and low cost
sensor technologies that characterize emissions and improve information on air pollution
exposure. Mobile monitoring approaches also will be used to characterize and quantify air
emissions in real time. As these new approaches are developed, the EPA will evaluate and
demonstrate their application. Such approaches will support and enhance community monitoring,
provide public information, inform health research, and address compliance and enforcement of
air pollution regulations, including the NAAQS.
149
-------
In FY 2014, the EPA will improve techniques for measuring and monitoring organic emissions
(benzene, toluene, ethylene, and xylene) and greenhouse gas emissions (methane, carbon
dioxide). These results will support improved emission inventories and will be incorporated into
CMAQ and other models. This will improve the models' results and give air quality managers a
better understanding of how their decisions will affect air quality.
Finally, in FY 2014, the EPA will improve methods for monitoring concentrations of the
following air pollutants: ozone, nitrogen dioxide, lead and acrolein. These improved monitoring
methods will then be deployed in national air monitoring networks. Such networks support
compliance with air pollution standards and inform community exposure assessments that are
important to local decision-making.
Assessing the Impacts of Climate Change and Developing Effective Responses:
Climate change is now affecting, and will continue to affect, the health and quality of our
environment. The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) report, Adapting to the Impacts of
Climate Change28 highlights the impacts to environmental systems that are crucial to our social
and economic well-being. The report indicates that climate change is associated with increased
flooding, prolonged drought, more severe heat waves, more frequent wildfires, and changes in
wetland, forest, and grassland habitats. These events result in substantial economic consequences
through the contamination of drinking water resources, impaired air and water quality, and
reduced capacity of ecosystems to provide the services to society that we depend upon. These
extreme events cause increased stresses on fisheries, wildlife, forestry, and recreational areas.
Better information about the severity and extent of these impacts will enable the EPA to better
protect human health and the environment.
In FY 2014, the EPA's researchers will continue to coordinate research with other federal and
state agencies through the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP). Together they will
continue to develop a coordinated national research approach to better understand how climate
change is impacting human health, the environment, and the economy. The ACE program will
continue to identify important science issues that need to be addressed by USGCRP partners.
The EPA's global change research supports the USGCRP priority research topics for FY14, with
a particular emphasis on "Actionable Science for Informed Policy-making and Management."
Specifically, two USGCRP priority areas, "Support Agency Adaptation Planning," and
"Advance Science to Inform Decisions," are addressed by ACE research on climate impacts and
adaptation. For example, climate models and observations of environmental changes are critical
to the EPA's ability to achieve its goals to improve and maintain clean air, clean water and
healthy ecosystems. ACE research, including research through the STAR grants program, plays
an important role in the USGCRP's sustained, multi-agency efforts. This research contributes
critical environmental science results and is used by the EPA and other agencies to assess
climate change impacts and inform decisions at local, state, and national levels.
The two key policy responses to climate change are adaptation and mitigation. Communities,
states, and businesses are already making efforts to revise design guidelines for water treatment
3 http://dels.nas.edu/resources/static-assets/materials-based-on-reports/reports-in-brief/Adapting_Report_Brief_final.pdf
150
-------
systems, based in part on information developed by the EPA's research efforts. They also are
modifying existing systems to adapt to climate-driven changes in the frequency and intensity of
precipitation events that can overwhelm treatment systems and degrade water quality. The ACE
research program will provide expanded and improved information and tools to support such
activities, which allow these communities to adapt to the impacts of climate change on air quality
and water quality. In coordination with the SHC and the SSWR research programs and other
federal agencies, ACE's adaptation research will focus on understanding how climate change is
affecting the most vulnerable populations and ecosystems. As an example of research
coordinated under the USGCRP, the EPA is working with the National Oceanic Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), the U.S. Geological Survey and the Army Corps of Engineers to study
the impacts of climate change on estuarine ecosystems. This research will provide needed
information for watershed and coastal resource managers to protect productive fisheries and
habitats as climatic conditions change. More generally, the EPA will identify the most important
stressors (whether individual or in combination with other stressors) for specific subpopulations,
species, or habitats within a geographical location. The EPA will generate new data from
experiments and field surveys. In FY 2014, considerable effort will be devoted to synthesizing
existing information (from the EPA, USGCRP and other efforts) into summary products and to
populate decision support tools. The EPA also will develop web sites as decision support tools to
inform decisions on the global and local impacts of a changing climate. In addition, the ACE
research program will develop tools to support integrated analyses of potential climate and air
quality management practices to understand synergies and trade-offs.
Under standing the Environmental Impacts of Energy Production and Use:
Hydraulic fracturing and natural gas drilling are expanding in use and can have potentially
significant economic and environmental benefits. Yet, despite these foreseeable benefits,
significant public and environmental health questions remain. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue
to study the impacts of energy production from unconventional oil and gas operations on air,
water quality, and ecosystems. This research will complement the EPA's current study on
potential impacts of unconventional oil and gas operations on drinking water. ACE and SSWR
are collaborating with the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Department of the Interior
(DOI) to evaluate the impacts of unconventional oil and gas operations, including those related
to air quality. In April 2012, the EPA signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the
Department of Energy and the Department of Interior to develop a multi-agency program to
focus on timely, policy relevant science to support sound policy decisions by state and Federal
agencies for ensuring the prudent development of energy sources while protecting human health
and the environment.
The United States strives to meet the demands of a growing economy by relying more on clean
energy. In FY 2014, the ACE research program will evaluate how changes in national policy and
energy technology may affect air pollutants and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other
environmental and human health endpoints. This work also will help the EPA understand how
clean energy technologies impact water quality. The results of this research will guide policy
makers at federal, state and local levels. The ACE research program broadly considers the
environmental impacts of energy production and use across the full life cycle, such as how
increased use of residential wood boilers for home heating can reduce GHG emissions but cause
151
-------
local air pollution problems. This research will inform policies and strategies developed by the
DOE, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), and other agencies to build an
economically and environmentally sustainable energy system for the United States.
Research Partnerships:
In these efforts, ACE will continue to build on successful research partnerships with academia
and private sector research organizations, through the EPA's Clean Air Research Centers and the
Health Effects Institute. Approaching air pollution and climate change from a perspective of
sustainability requires the agency to strengthen its existing interactions with other state and
federal agencies, including the NOAA, the DOE, the USDA, the National Institutes of Health
(NIH), the Federal Highway Administration, and the National Association of Clean Air
Agencies. These partnerships have made the ACE research program more useful to decision
makers. The EPA's research partnerships help us achieve multiple goals in less time and with
fewer resources than would otherwise have been possible.
Recent accomplishments include:
Protecting Cardiovascular Health from Air Pollution
In 2012, the EPA and the EPA-funded studies revealed important insight into the relationship
between particulate matter (PM) air pollution and cardiovascular health including the following:
• The EPA-supported epidemiologists from Harvard and Brown Universities examined the
medical records of 1,700 stroke patients over a 10-year period and compared them to hourly
measurements of fine particle air pollution. The epidemiologists found a correlation between
the pollution and an increased risk of ischemic strokes (the kind that occur when blood
vessels to the brain are blocked).
• The EPA scientists collaborated with researchers from Duke University to find that people
exposed to a combination of PM and nitrogen dioxide may suffer worse health effects than
just PM alone.
• In a study by the EPA scientists, researchers found the potential for omega-3 fatty acids to
protect the cardio vascular system from the harmful effects of fine PM.
• The EPA scientists advanced the understanding of the relationship between cardiovascular
health and another air pollutant: ground level ozone. While previous studies had shown
statistical associations between ozone exposure and such health problems, the EPA research
identified a biologically-based explanation for these effects.
New Technology to Improve Local Air Quality Monitoring, Reduce Costs
In 2012, the EPA scientists and engineers continued to advance the use and development of
innovative technologies for researching, monitoring, and managing air pollution. The new
technologies show the promise of establishing low cost, round-the-clock monitoring capabilities
that would serve as both an early warning system for industry to stop potentially costly leaks and
better protect neighboring communities from air pollution.
Leading the Way to Cleaner Cookstoves
For roughly half the world's population, the source for both cooking and keeping warm is a
simple fire pit surrounded by three large stones arranged to keep a pot, grill, or cooking surface
152
-------
above the flames. The EPA engineers and scientists are helping lead an international effort to
develop a new generation of clean burning cookstoves that will bring relief to those exposed to
cookstove emissions in the developing world.
In 2012, the EPA research engineers and their colleagues published results from the most
extensive independent study done to date to analyze emissions and energy efficiency of
cookstoves. The researchers tested 22 different cookstove designs; they measured emissions of
air pollutants that cause harmful health effects and contribute to climate change, including
carbon monoxide, particulates, carbon dioxide, and black carbon.
Health Effects of Biodiesel
In 2012, the EPA researchers continued to advance the work of examining how biodiesel fuels
burn by working to identify the amount and types of pollutants in biodiesel exhaust, and how the
pollutants in those emissions might affect human health.
Exploring Climate Change and Air Quality Scenarios
EPA's Integrated Climate and Land Use Scenarios (ICLUS) project is an online tool and model
that enables researchers to tap existing climate change science to run models that calculate
potential environmental scenarios related to the connections between climate change and U.S.
land use patterns. In January 2012, ICLUS researchers released data for each region in the
contiguous United States to support the National Climate Assessment.
The EPA researchers completed the first Industrial Sector Integrated Solutions model for the
cement industry sector, allowing the agency to better evaluate the potential impacts of various
emissions control technologies on domestic and international competitiveness, as well as help to
estimate the most cost-effective control technologies on a plant-by-plant basis.
Reducing Hazardous Air Pollutants from Industrial Boilers
New studies conducted by EPA researchers are playing a critical role in agency efforts to reduce
hazardous air pollution while also making it easier and less costly for industries and boiler
operators to comply with new National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAP) rules under the Clean Air Act.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(AC1) Percentage of products completed on time by Air, Climate, and Energy research
program.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
100
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(AC2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients for use in taking action on
climate change or improving air quality.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
100
77
FY2013
100
FY2014
100
Units
Percent
153
-------
The table reflects the ACE program's annual performance measures. The EPA uses these
measures to assess our effectiveness in delivering needed products and outputs to clients
(decision-makers, states, and local governments).
To assess research performance and provide strategic direction, two federal advisory Committees
reviewed the EPA's research programs. In March, the Science Advisory Board (SAB)
acknowledged its support of the EPA's 2012 realignment of ORD research programs into four
trans-disciplinary, systems- and sustainability-oriented programs. They also support the continuation
of two existing ORD programs. In July 2012, both the SAB and the Board of Scientific
Counselors (BOSC) acknowledged ACE's research progress and ambitiousness.
The EPA collaborates with several science agencies and the research community to assess our
research performance. For instance, the EPA is partnering with the National Institutes of Health,
the National Science Foundation, the DOE, and the USDA. The agency also will work with the
White House's Office of Science and Technology Policy. The EPA supports the interagency
Science and Technology in America's Reinvestment—Measuring the Effect of Research on
Innovation, Competitiveness and Science (STAR METRICS) effort. This interagency effort is
helping the EPA to more effectively measure the impact federal science investments have on
society, the environment, and the economy.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,697.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefits.
• (+$3,769.0 / +4.5 FTE) This increase reflects support for hydraulic fracturing within the
ACE research program to address the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing (HF) on air
quality as part of the interagency effort with DOE and DOI. This increase includes 4.5 FTE
and associated payroll of $626.0.
• (+$3,238.0 / -0.3 FTE) This reflects a net effect of an increase in resources and decrease of
FTE and associated payroll. In FY 2014, the EPA will support research to understand the
impacts of climate change on human health and vulnerable ecosystems. The research will
accelerate efforts to: evaluate the interactions between climate change and air quality; initiate
development of methods to measure carbon dioxide from geological sequestration sites; and
increase efforts to develop approaches to adapt to a changing climate. This research will
provide regions, tribes, states, and cities with more tools and technologies to support their
climate change programs. This net change includes a decrease of 0.3 FTE and associated
payroll of $42.0.
• (+$1,270.0) This increase reflects support for biofuels research to expand our understanding
of the potential impacts to human health and ecosystems related to the increased production
and use of second-generation biofuels as required by the Energy Independence and Security
Act (EISA). The additional resources will support research on emerging feedstocks such as
corn stover and other cellulosic materials.
154
-------
• (+$797.0) This increase represents a restoration of resources transferred to the SHC research
program to support Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR). For SBIR, the EPA is
required to set aside 2.5 percent of funding for contracts to small businesses to develop and
commercialize new environmental technologies.
• (+$193.0 / +2.8 FTE) This reflects the net result of realignments of infrastructure, FTE, and
resources such as equipment purchases and repairs, travel, contracts, and general expenses
that are proportionately allocated across programs to better align with programmatic
priorities. The increased resources include 2.8 FTE and associated payroll of $389.0.
• (-$214.0) This decrease reflects elimination of the EPA's fluid modeling research facility
used to study the effect of roadway configuration and wind direction on near-road dispersion.
• (-$619.0 / -2.2 FTE) This reflects a decrease in resources and FTE for particulate matter
(PM) decision support tools and efforts to assess residential and personal exposure to air
pollution. This reduction scales back the development of decision support tools related to
managing PM and its precursors. The EPA will continue to conduct research on
multipollutant decision support tools and approaches to support the NAAQS reviews. The
reduced resources include 2.2 FTE and associated payroll of $306.0.
• (-$984.0 / -4.2 FTE) This reduction eliminates the Mercury Research Program. The EPA will
no longer study mercury characterization or evaluate mercury emission control technologies
as a separate research effort. Mercury emission and control characterization will be
conducted as one of several co-emitted pollutants. Currently, the agency collects mercury
emissions data directly from utilities, which show the effectiveness of existing technologies
to meet current reduction requirements, thereby reducing the need for technology research.
The reduced resources include 4.2 FTE and associated payroll of $584.0.
• (-$1,471.0 / -1.3 FTE) This reduction reflects both administrative savings and cost cutting
efforts to streamline operational expenses and activities, including laboratory efficiencies and
information technology (IT) support activities. The reduced resources include 1.3 FTE and
associated payroll of $181.0.
Statutory Authority:
CAA 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Title 1, Part A - Sec. 103 (a) and (d) and Sec. 104 (c); CAA 42
U.S.C 7402(b) Section 102; CAA 42 U.S.C 7403(b)(2) Section 103(b)(2); Clinger Cohen Act, 40
U.S.C 11318; Economy Act, 31 U.S.C 1535; EISA, Title II Subtitle B; ERDDA, 33 U.S.C. 1251
- Section 2(a); Intergovernmental Cooperation Act, 31 U.S.C. 6502; NCPA; NEPA, Section 102;
PPA; USGCRA 15 U.S.C. 2921.
155
-------
Program Area: Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
156
-------
Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
Program Area: Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems; Protect Human Health
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$112,786.0
$112,786.0
436.3
FY 2012
Actuals
$114,257.6
$114,257.6
416.1
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$113,449.0
$113,449.0
436.3
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$117,884.0
$117,884.0
439.7
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$5,098.0
$5,098.0
3.4
Program Project Description:
The Safe and Sustainable Water Resources (SSWR) research program supports the EPA's
National Water Program and Regional Offices in achieving their statutory and regulatory
obligations under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SOWA) and the Clean Water Act (CWA) by:
• Characterizing and managing risks to human health and the environment across the water
continuum;
• Providing data, tools, and technical support for the development of drinking water and
water quality criteria;
• Developing effective systems-based watershed management approaches;
• Applying technological options to restore and protect bodies of water by providing
information on effective identification, treatment, and management alternatives; and
• Developing and demonstrating new integrated approaches for water and wastewater
treatment and resource recovery.
Adequate and safe water underpins the nation's health, economy, security, and ecology (National
9Q
Research Council, 2004). Failure to manage our nation's waters in an integrated and sustainable
manner will limit economic prosperity and jeopardize both human and aquatic ecosystem health.
To ensure our nation's water resources are safe and sustainable to meet societal, economic and
environmental needs now and for future generations, the EPA's Research and Development
program is developing innovative solutions to address complex twenty-first century water
challenges. These solutions require research that transcends disciplinary lines and includes
stakeholder input in the process of defining research and determining how solutions are
integrated. Such new integrated, trans-disciplinary approaches require innovation at all steps of
the process, from conceptualizing issues to technological advancements, to allow for the creation
of new and inventive environmentally responsible solutions that foster economic development.
The SSWR research program integrates drinking water and water quality research and
collaborates with other EPA research programs. For example, the Sustainable and Healthy
29 For more information, please see Confronting the Nation's Water Problems: the Role of Research
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php7record id=11031.
157
-------
Communities (SHC) research program's Enviro Atlas project provides national land cover data
and watershed delineation for use in the SSWR program's development of watershed integrity
indices. The results of this collaborative research are then provided to users through the Enviro
Atlas program for improved decision making.
Although the EPA provides much of the scientific foundation for protecting the environmental
and public health of America's water resources, it does not act alone. The SSWR research
program works with states and federal agencies, including the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, Department of Energy (DOE), Department of the Interior (DOT), Department of
Agriculture (DOA), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and Department of Defense in
this effort.
In addition, SSWR and other EPA national research programs, have partnered with the
Department of Defense in support of their effort to achieve more sustainable and resilient
military installations and, specifically, with the Army in support of their Net Zero Initiative.
SSWR and the other research programs are demonstrating innovative water technologies that
will help the Army meet its goals of Net Zero energy, water and waste by 2020 across the
country and overseas. Currently, there is a demonstration site at Fort Riley, Kansas, and another
planned at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Washington.
The EPA's Nitrogen Research Strategy provides an example of high-priority, cross-program
research. Specifically, SSWR is leading this effort using a holistic, systems approach to address
sustainable nitrogen management. This work is highly integrated with the Sustainable and
Healthy Communities (SHC) and the Air, Climate and Energy (ACE) research programs and
leveraged through collaboration with the EPA regional labs and the states' efforts. The Nitrogen
Research Strategy will produce interoperable tools that address nitrogen and co-pollutant
management across multiple scales and multiple media to inform policy decisions. SSWR
projects include:
• Support for development of numeric nutrient criteria for inland and coastal waters;
• Water-quality simulation modeling for nitrogen and phosphorous impact levels;
• Sustainable nutrient removal technologies;
• Systems-based approaches for watershed protection; and
• Holistic and practical nitrogen and co-pollutant management solutions development.
The EPA's Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) has commended SSWR for its
responsiveness to stakeholder input, for addressing the needs of the EPA's Water, Air and
Radiation programs and Regional Offices, while also incorporating the recommendations of the
EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB).
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, SSWR will continue to address critical science questions related to the maintenance
and preservation of safe water resources and the restoration of impaired of water resources for
future generations. SSWR is organized around two interrelated themes: Sustainable Water
Resources and Sustainable Water Infrastructure Systems.
158
-------
Sustainable Water Resources
Research conducted under this theme integrates social, economic, and environmental sciences to
provide effective and efficient tools to ensure safe and sustainable water quality and availability
for the protection of human and ecosystem health. Therefore, research focuses on protecting and
restoring water resources for designated uses (e.g., drinking water, aquatic life, recreation,
industrial processes).
Watersheds, and associated aquatic resources, provide essential goods and services that support
our economy and society. Stressors (e.g., climate change and variability, habitat alteration,
invasive species, pollutants) have degraded a large number of watersheds across the nation. The
goals of SSWR research are to:
• Improve understanding of the resiliency of watersheds to stressors;
• Characterize watersheds that require enhanced protection to sustain water resources; and
• Understand factors affecting successful watershed restoration to improve prioritization of
restoration efforts.
In FY 2014, the EPA will support this effort by:
• Developing approaches to assess watershed integrity, resilience and restoration potential
by establishing key watershed indicators;
• Using a systems-based approach to investigate methods for sustaining water quality in
watersheds;
• Continuing to study the social, economic, human health and environmental impacts of
water quality degradation; and
• Evaluating cost-effective watershed management strategies.
Naturally occurring contaminants and land-use practices (e.g., energy production, mineral
extraction, deep-well injection activities, agriculture, forestry, urbanization) can impair
watershed integrity, lead to loss of wetland acreage and function; degrade riparian, estuarine and
coastal ecosystems, contaminate drinking water supplies; and deplete groundwater resources.
Decision makers and environmental managers need tools to assess the sustainability of
watersheds and the services they provide under current and future land-use and management
practices.
The SSWR program is developing resource management tools that allow decision makers to
systematically consider complex tradeoffs occurring in a watershed on a regional or national
scale. For example, research conducted thus far, including the development of wetland health
indicators and the interpretation of national wetlands survey data, is informing the National
Wetlands Condition Report.30 This EPA report, targeted for release by the end of 2013, will be
the first and only report on national wetland condition, and complements the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service status report on wetland acreage and type. Together, these collaborative efforts
D For more information, see: water.epa.gov/type/wetlands/assessment/survey/index.cfm
159
-------
will form the baseline for analyzing future wetland changes and trends in response to programs
and policies.
Protection of surface and subsurface water that is necessary for human and ecological use is
compromised by the inability to adequately assess and mitigate risks posed by waterborne
chemical and microbial contaminants. In FY 2014, the EPA's researchers will continue to
develop tools for better detection and assessment of individual and groups of harmful waterborne
chemicals and microbial contaminants. These assessments and tools allow decision makers to
more effectively reduce risks, improve cost-effective treatment options, and develop guidance
for the use of less hazardous products.
The EPA is conducting research on uses of systems-based approaches to identify and manage
nutrient degraded water resources and to promote protection and recovery of those resources.
The SSWR research program will continue developing integrated nutrient management methods
for estuarine ecosystems and watersheds to develop solutions that can be broadly applied to the
nation's coastal watersheds.
Energy (and mineral) extraction has the potential to impact surface and subsurface water
resources. The SSWR program is studying these potential impacts to assist decision makers
(Federal and state policy makers, industry, and the public) in making environmentally
responsible energy extraction decisions. In particular, research devoted to unconventional oil and
gas (UOG) activities, including hydraulic fracturing (HF), will focus on understanding and
preventing/mitigating potential impacts on drinking water resources associated with UOG
activities.
Hydraulic fracturing is expanding in use and offers significant potential economic and other
benefits. It is vital that the EPA seek to understand any potential public and environmental health
impacts of this and other UOG practices. To achieve this goal, the EPA will continue to conduct
research as part of its Study of Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water
Resources, including a draft report expected to be released for peer review late in calendar year
2014. This report will provide a synthesis of the state of the science including the results of
research focused on whether HF impacts drinking water resources, and if so, what are the driving
factors.
In April 2012, the EPA signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the Department of
Energy and the Department of Interior to develop a multi-agency program to focus on timely,
policy relevant science to support sound policy decisions by state and Federal agencies for
ensuring the prudent development of energy sources while protecting human health and the
environment. The interagency collaboration is devoted to:
• Improving our understanding of the impacts associated with developing our nation's oil
and gas resources;
• Minimizing any potential risks in developing these resources;
• Maximizing each agency's particular strength to efficiently meet diverse challenges; and
• Reducing and eliminating interagency overlap.
160
-------
The results of this research will assist decision makers (federal and state policy makers, industry,
and the public) in making environmentally responsible decisions that ensure sustainable
approaches to oil and natural gas extraction. EPA will work with its federal partners and in a
coordinated effort between the SSWR and the Air, Climate and Energy (ACE) research
programs, the EPA will study potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on air, water quality,
water resources, ecosystems, and health risk. This research will complement current agency
work on the potential impacts of HF on drinking water.
Sustainable Water Infrastructure Systems
Research conducted under this theme focuses on developing innovative water infrastructure
management approaches and techniques for reducing institutional and behavioral barriers to
improved water-resources management. A systems-based approach to water management
considers such issues as water conservation, use of wastewater and grey water, groundwater
recharge, incorporation of green infrastructure, and resource conservation and recovery.
Research will encompass system design, treatment alternatives and potential negative/positive
health effects, life-cycle analysis, best management practices (BMP), resiliency and viability.
Storm events that result in heavy rain running over impervious surfaces in developed areas can
cause flooding of roads, buildings and city sewer systems. Combined sewer systems that collect
municipal sewage and stormwater into a single pipe system often overflow, resulting in
combined sewer overflows (CSO) of sewage and other pollutants into nearby waterways.
Excessive stormwater discharges and CSO may cause adverse environmental impacts, which can
lead to a loss of permit compliance under the Clean Water Act. Green infrastructure projects
(e.g., rain gardens, rain barrels, cisterns, and natural areas that absorb or reduce runoff) offer a
more cost-effective way to manage these storm-related flows. Green infrastructure BMPs retain
and infiltrate stormwater and provide benefits such as new jobs, recreational opportunities,
community revitalization, and increased property values.
In FY 2014, SSWR will continue developing and evaluating green infrastructure in several
regional projects and will release a report on the effectiveness of green infrastructure BMPs.
Research will provide guidance to assist with the selection and implementation of appropriate
green infrastructure technologies at various scales and locations. This information is important
for municipal governments facing stormwater consent decrees and for capital planning projects
to meet both the current and future needs of their constituencies. The EPA continues to provide
technical guidance to municipalities, such as Philadelphia, Omaha, Louisville, Cleveland, and
Kansas City, to improve water quality by incorporating green infrastructure with grey
infrastructure into plans to better control water pollution during storm events.
The EPA is collaborating with the city of Omaha and the Nebraska Department of
Environmental Quality (NDEQ). The EPA scientists are analyzing soils to understand how
excess stormwater will (or will not) move through soil layers, and deploying equipment to
monitor the incidence of combined sewer overflows when green infrastructure is present. The
EPA is providing guidance on how the city and NDEQ can incorporate green infrastructure into
their CSO control plan.
161
-------
In addition, the SSWR research program will continue developing complete life-cycle
assessments of several types of water systems (e.g., different sizes, conditions, costs) to aid
regional, state, and municipal water managers in making decisions that result in sustainable
infrastructure to provide safe water. This integration of public health, socio-economic, and
ecological factors is important for stakeholder comparisons between current and alternative
scenarios for water services.
The program also will continue to develop, evaluate, and demonstrate new water infrastructure
technologies to improve cost-effectiveness and efficiency in water systems through research at
the Water Technology and Innovation Cluster in Cincinnati. Researchers will continue working
with metropolitan partners to demonstrate treatment technologies for drinking water and
wastewater treatment at the cluster facilities and elsewhere. Results of this research will be
provided to communities and regions to assist in future planning.
Breaches in aging drinking water distribution systems, between the treatment plant and the
consumer's tap, can result in exposure to detrimental amounts of contaminants (both chemicals
and pathogens), and substantial water loss (up to 40 percent). These contaminants represent a
significant source of adverse waterborne health impacts. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to
conduct research to develop innovative approaches to monitor aging water distribution and
collection systems and work toward mitigating those impacts.
Recent Accomplishments include:
• Hydraulic Fracturing
o Released Final Plan to Study the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on
Drinking Water Resources. This report reflects extensive input from the EPA's
Science Advisory Board (SAB), Office of Water, Region Offices; industry;
environmental and public health groups; states; tribes; and communities.
• Water Technology Innovation Cluster
o In support of the regional Water Technology Innovation Cluster, EPA provided
funding to develop and deploy cost-effective, innovative technologies to address the
nation's sustainable water management challenges. These included the development
of sustainable approaches, including the use of renewable energy, to develop
innovative solutions for water quality and quantity
• Waters of the U.S.
o Completed external peer review of draft technical support document Connectivity of
Streams and Wetlands to Downstream Waters: a Review and Synthesis of the
Scientific Evidence. This report is a literature review and synthesis of the
hydrological, biological, and chemical connectivity of waters and effects on
downstream waters to inform potential rulemaking by the EPA's Water program
distinguishing jurisdictional waters under the Clean Water Act.
• National Coastal Condition Assessment
o A nationally consistent, unbiased assessment of the condition of coastal aquatic
ecosystems is a considerable effort led by the EPA, with contributions from NOAA
and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, that builds on previous data and assessments
162
-------
to convey robust information on trends that are important to the EPA, partner
agencies, coastal states and the public.
• Beaches
o Research on the development of methods, monitoring, and modeling to characterize
and track human exposure to pathogens at beaches was completed.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(SW1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Safe and Sustainable
Water Resources research program.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
100
86
FY2013
100
FY2014
100
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(SW2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients and partners to improve the
Agency's capability to ensure clean and adequate supplies of water that support human well-
being and resilient aquatic ecosystems.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
50
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Units
Percent
The table reflects the SSWR program's annual performance measures. The EPA uses these
measures to assess its effectiveness in delivering needed products and outputs to clients (decision
makers, states, and local governments).
To assess research performance and provide strategic direction, two Federal Advisory
Committees reviewed the EPA's research programs. The EPA's SAB acknowledged its support
of the EPA's 2012 realignment of research programs into trans-disciplinary, systems- and
sustainabiliry-oriented programs. In July 2012, both the EPA's SAB and the BOSC
acknowledged SSWR's ambitious research progress.
The EPA collaborates with several science agencies and the research community to assess our
research performance. For example, the EPA is partnering with the National Institutes of Health
(Nffl), National Science Foundation (NSF), DOE, and DOA. The EPA also works with the
White House's Office of Science and Technology Policy and supports the interagency Science
and Technology in America's Reinvestment-Measuring the Effect of Research on Innovation,
Competitiveness and Science (STAR METRICS) effort. This interagency effort is helping the
EPA to more effectively measure the impact federal science investments have on society, the
environment, and the economy.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$5,468.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
163
-------
• (+$4,272.0 7+5.5 FTE) This increase in resources is separate and distinct from current
research to study the potential impacts of HF on drinking water. This investment will address
the potential impacts of HF on water quality aquatic ecosystems, as part of the interagency
effort with DOE and DOT. The additional resources include 5.5 FTE and associated payroll
of $743.0.
• (+$1,800.0) This increase in resources will support development of regional projects that
integrate natural and built water infrastructure as well as research to monitor and understand
the benefits of existing integrated natural, built and green infrastructure. Projects will result
in significant savings for states and communities through avoidance of combined sewer
overflow impacts.
• (+$690.0) This increase reflects a restoration of resources transferred to the SHC research
program to support Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR). For SBIR, EPA is required
to set aside 2.5 percent of funding for contracts to small businesses to develop and
commercialize new environmental technologies.
• (+$479.0 / +3.4 FTE) This reflects the net result of realignments of infrastructure, FTE and
resources such as equipment purchases and repairs, fixed costs, contracts, and general
expenses that are proportionately allocated across programs to better align with
programmatic priorities. The additional resources include 3.4 FTE and associated payroll of
$459.0.
• (-$513.0 / -3.8 FTE) This decrease in resources will slow ongoing research on developing
tools and approaches that range from chemical and microbial waterborne contaminants to
solutions for sustainable nutrient management. The reduced resources include 3.8 FTE and
associated payroll of $513.0.
• (-$1,000.0) This decrease reflects a reduction in the Green Infrastructure research program in
the EPA's Research and Development program under Science and Technology appropriation.
These funds have transferred to EPA's Water program under Environmental Programs
Management appropriation.
• (-$1,008.0) This decrease will result in a slowing down and limiting of the number of
projects and demonstrations that are developing innovative drinking water and wastewater
technologies and approaches to clean, monitor, and manage water resources.
• (-$1,104.0 / -1.5 FTE) This reduction reflects an elimination of research to model and track
human exposure to pathogens at beaches. The EPA has met requirements set forth in the
court settlement agreement and consent decree. The reduced resources include 1.5 FTE and
associated payroll of $203.0.
• (-$1,660.0 / -0.2 FTE) This reduction reflects both administrative savings and cost cutting
efforts to streamline operational expenses and activities, including laboratory efficiencies and
information technology (IT) support activities. The reduced resources include 0.2 FTE and
associated payroll of $27.0.
164
-------
• (-$2,326.0) This reflects a reduction of funding from innovative drinking water technology
research, including a competitively awarded center for research on small drinking water
systems, with additional reductions to drinking water and water quality research for technical
support activities.
Statutory Authority:
SDWA Part E, Sec. 1442 (a)(l); CWA Title I, Sec. 101(a)(6) 33 U.S.C. 1254 - Sec 104 (a) and
(c) and Sec. 105; ERDDA 33 U.S.C. 1251 - Section 2(a); MPRSA Sec. 203, 33 U.S.C. 1443;
ODBA Title II; SPA; CVA; WRDA; WWWQA; MPPRCA; NISA; CZARA; CWPPRA; (ESA;
NAWCA; FIFRA 1 U.S. C. 135 et seq; TSCA U.S. C. 136 et seq.
165
-------
Program Area: Research: Sustainable Communities
166
-------
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Program Area: Research: Sustainable Communities
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Science & Technology
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Hazardous Substance SuperrUnd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$613.0
$173,525.0
$396.0
$17,757.0
$192,291.0
612.7
FY 2012
Actuals
$1,051.7
$173,523.8
$338.8
$19,395.7
$194,310.0
654.5
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$626.0
$174,655.0
$397.0
$17,852.0
$193,530.0
612.7
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$594.0
$147,372.0
$498.0
$18,243.0
$166,707.0
611.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($19.0)
($26,153.0)
$102.0
$486.0
($25,584.0)
-1.2
Program Project Description:
The Sustainable and Healthy Communities Research Program (SHC) conducts research and
development to inform and empower decision-makers to equitably weigh and integrate human
health, socio-economic, environmental (including ecological) factors into their decisions in a
way that fosters community sustainability. Communities rarely focus on all of these objectives
when making critical decisions about transportation, materials management and solid waste, land
use, and the built environment. EPA's SHC program is based on the principle that an integrated
systems approach will improve a community's ability to simultaneously address all of these
objectives while avoiding unanticipated consequences.
To assist decision makers in fostering sustainability, future approaches to protecting human and
the environment must:
• Utilize systems analyses to consider the inextricable link between the natural
environment and human well-being;
• Incorporate proactive, preventative strategies that optimize management of multiple
chemical, material, and energy streams;
• Evaluate the implications of alternative policies and management actions; and
• Utilize indicators to measure results and track changes after decisions have been
implemented.
EPA's SHC research program provides research and tools to decision-makers at the federal,
regional, state, Tribal, and local levels whose actions affect community sustainability. EPA's
SHC's research is organized into four inter-related themes:
• Data and Tools to Support Sustainable Community Decisions uses decision science,
interactive social media, spatial analyses, and sustainability assessment methods to
167
-------
provide communities with tools to frame their decision options, outcomes and potential
costs and benefits;
• Forecasting and Assessing Ecological and Community Health utilizes the sciences of
ecosystem services and human health to enable communities to assess how the natural
and built environment affects the health and well-being of their residents;
• Implementing Near-term Approaches for Sustainable Solutions builds upon federal,
regional and state experiences. This research aims to improve the efficiency and
effectiveness of mechanisms that address land and groundwater contamination. This
research will also review and characterize innovative approaches that communities can
use to:
o Reduce new sources of contamination,
o Enable recovery of energy, materials, and nutrients from waste, and
o Enable brownfields sites to be put to new, economically productive uses that
benefit communities; and
• Integrated Solutions for Sustainable Outcomes research will help communities by
developing methods and data that allows communities to consider the full costs and
benefits of their decisions. For example, EPA will review and characterize systems
modeling approaches that communities can use to account for the linkage among:
o Waste and materials management,
o Building codes and zoning for land use planning,
o Transportation options, and
o Provision of infrastructure, including water and energy.
The most important outcome of this research for communities is to:
• Provide tools to improve communities' ability to proactively make environmental
management choices based on a full accounting of the costs, benefits, and tradeoffs
among social, economic, health and ecological outcomes of alternative management
actions.
The most important outcomes for the EPA Program and Regional Offices are to:
• Provide the EPA Regional and Program offices with tools to help develop regulations
that are less expensive and implement them in cost-effective ways. Where possible,
SHC's research helps avoid the need for regulation by providing information on
innovative and effective non-regulatory approaches.
• Support critical regulatory and policy needs, such as:
o Managing waste and materials,
o Remediating contaminated sites,
o Protecting children's health,
o Integrating environmental justice into the agency's activities and programs to
decrease environmental and health disparities,
o Providing essential information for the EPA's Report on the Environment (ROE),
and
168
-------
o Responding to other ongoing regional and program office needs, as they arise.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Research Activities to Support Communities
In FY 2014, EPA will continue research to develop decision analysis and support tools. In
conjunction with the EPA's Program and Regional Offices, SHC will interact with communities
so they can participate directly in the design and implementation of the research. The tools
developed will allow decision-makers to fully account for the environmental (ecological and
human health), economic, and social consequences and inter-relationships involved in making
decisions at the community level. Examples of this program's continuing research activities and
products in this area include:
• Developing a National EnviroAtlas which will display national, regional, and
community-scale ecosystem services. The EnviroAtlas will include ecosystem production
functions that communities can use to forecast the impacts of change and policy as well
as management alternatives;
• Providing the science to update the EPA's Report on the Environment (ROE). The ROE
is a comprehensive source of national-level indicators describing the conditions and
trends in human health and the environment. The updated ROE is an electronic document
that will include a dynamic website interface that features interactive, customizable
graphics and mapping capability including estimates of uncertainty;
• Producing a classification of U.S. communities based on characteristics such as
biophysical setting (climate, landform, soils, vegetation), community attributes (local
governance, sustainability practices), demographic attributes (size, growth/decline,
density, distribution), and ecosystem service characteristics. Understanding the
characteristics of communities will assist in targeting EPA research and development
toward the disparate needs of different types of communities while allowing for the
generalization of results from community-based case studies to other communities with
similar characteristics.
• Developing a decision support tool known as DASEES (Decision Analysis for a
Sustainable Environment, Economy and Society). DASEES is a framework and web-
based application. This is applicable to all kinds of decisions, including, for example,
decisions about sediment run-off, material and solid waste handling, contaminated site
management, and site restoration and revitalization. DASEES is an open-source, web-
based decision analysis framework to implement "structured decision making." That is,
DASEES enables multiple stakeholders to contribute to decisions while accounting for
the many physical, chemical, biological, economic, and societal aspects of community
decisions.
• Developing a suite of linked web-based tools that enables communities to:
o Concurrently access detailed environmental metrics and improved demographic
maps,
o Incorporate indicators and indices of environmental quality and public health and
well-being that reflect local condition and inform community decision-making.
Input to these tools includes federal, state and locally-provided data, geospatial
169
-------
information, information on community priorities and values, and aspects of life-
cycle analysis;
o Develop statistically based indices that describe vulnerabilities and identify
opportunities for mitigation.
In FY 2014, EPA will also continue research to develop information and methods that
communities need to assess how the natural and built environment affects the health and well-
being of their residents. This research is conducted in two major areas: 1) ecosystem goods and
services and 2) human health and well-being. Specific research includes:
• Collaborations with several other federal agencies (United States Geological Survey, the
United States Forest Service, the United States Department of Agriculture, and the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) to develop a system to classify
ecosystems in terms of the services they provide (air or water purification, habitat).
EPA's SHC program and its partners also will identify metrics and indicators that
decision-makers can use to determine how to best support that system;
• Developing cost-effective methods to transfer measured ecosystem goods and services to
ecologically similar, but currently unmonitored locations, so decision-makers can utilize
information about their landscape;
• Developing partnerships within the EPA and with communities to demonstrate how to
incorporate measured ecosystem goods and services in specific decision-making
contexts;
• Developing techniques on how to use integrative ecosystem goods and services and
system based models to help inform market decisions (how to estimate credits for
markets). To fully inform full value accounting of alternate decisions, SHC is
collaborating with the Safe and Sustainable Water Resources (SSWR) research program
on information on costs and benefits associated with green versus gray infrastructure and
the Air, Climate, and Energy (ACE) research program on projections of energy supply
and demand, deposition and distribution of air pollutants;
• The Tribal- and Community-Focused Environmental Risk and Sustainability Tool31 pilot
(T-FERST, C-FERST) are prime examples of how these tools are meeting both program
and community needs. Specifically, the EPA has provided critical support to Region 1
with collaborative projects to build capacity and identify integrated solutions for the
Passamaquoddy Pleasant Point Tribe, ME. For the Passamaquoddy tribe, EPA has
provided decision support related to changes in local flora, sustainable handling of
municipal solid waste, and modeled projections of sea level rise affecting critical tribal
infrastructure. In the communities of Portland, ME and Springfield, MA, EPA has
helped the communities prioritize local issues and devise solutions that affect air quality,
traffic control, and economic revitalization; and
• Developing the science to support the EPA's efforts to address environmental justice in
America's communities32. EPA is conducting this research collaboratively with the
EPA's Program Offices and the Office of Environmental Justice along with the
31 The Tribal-Focused Environmental Risk and Sustainability Tool (Tribal-FERST) is a web-based geospatial decision support
tool, which serves as a research framework to provide tribes with easy access to the best available human health and ecological
science.
32 See Science Tools Development: http://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/plan-ej/
170
-------
Department of Health and Human Service's National Institute on Minority Health and
Health Disparities (NIMHD). The research will assess interactions between social,
natural, and built environmental systems together with the conditions and policies that
result in poorer environmental health conditions among diverse disadvantaged population
groups, communities, neighborhoods, and individuals. This research will assess drivers of
current and changing patterns of social inequalities in environmental health and develop
strategies to alleviate systemic drivers of these inequalities.
In FY 2014, EPA will conduct research to understand children's exposures to environmental
hazards where they live, learn, play, and work. Communities will use this research to minimize
risks and inform decisions. While addressing challenges remaining in the EPA's Strategy for
Research on Environmental Risks to Children,33 this also responds to the Coordinated Federal
Action Plan for Reducing Racial and Ethnic Asthma Disparities34. This research also responds to
other federal initiatives, such as the National Prevention Strategy35 and President's Task Force
on Childhood Obesity36 For instance, EPA is currently investigating and validating the use of
both in vivo and in vitro models to better understand the impact of in utero and early-life
environmental exposures on childhood obesity. EPA research on life stage susceptibility will
directly benefit regulatory and programmatic needs of four EPA program offices - Chemical
Safety and Pollution Prevention, Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Water, and Air and
Radiation. In addition, SHC will collaborate with ORD's Chemical Safety for Sustainability
program, especially on systems models such as the Virtual Embryo, the Air, Climate, and Energy
program especially on the impacts of air pollution on childhood asthma and the Human Health
Risk Assessment program on child-specific exposure factors. SHC research will support the
Environmental Justice and Children's Health Protection programs' efforts to reduce children's
health disparities such as asthma, obesity, and neurodevelopmental disorders. Much of this
research will be in collaboration with the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
(NIEHS), especially through the EPA-NIEHS co-funded Children's Environmental Health
Centers Program.
In FY 2014, EPA will continue developing products that will enable communities to understand
the linkages among the management of waste and materials, energy, water, transportation, and
planning and zoning for buildings and land use into their decisions. SHC research will also draw
on cumulative risk of environmental contaminants data and tools developed by the Chemical
Safety for Sustainability (CSS), ACE, and the SSWR research programs. The outputs of this
research will include:
• Reports which synthesize available literature and case studies to describe and benchmark
the current state of the practice and science for each sector;
• Systems models to allow communities to explore and characterize the range in outcomes
associated with alternative decision options; and
• Methods and data for full cost accounting of multiple implications of a given decision
alternative including costs and benefits.
33 http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=20068
34 http://www.epa.gov/childrenstaskforce/federal_asthma_disparities_actionj)lan.pdf
35 http://www.healthcare.gov/prevention/nphpphc/strategy/report.pdf
36 http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/presidential-memorandum-establishing-a-task-force-childhood-obesity
171
-------
EPA has identified a test community, Durham, NC, in which to provide community decision-
makers with tools to account for the full cost of alternative policy and management approaches.
The over-arching goal of this research is to integrate issue-specific tools and approaches with
findings from other components of the EPA's SHC research program to:
• Inform a proof of concept pilot study in Durham, NC (with planned completion in FY
2014) to incorporate the tools described above; and
• Create a framework to assist communities in their efforts to achieve a more socio-
economically and environmentally responsible state.
The Administration is proposing a comprehensive reorganization to facilitate a cohesive national
strategy of STEM education programs to increase the impact of Federal investments in four
areas: K-12 instruction; undergraduate education; graduate fellowships; and education activities
that typically take place outside the classroom. The reorganization involves consolidating or
restructuring 90 programs across 11 agencies and improving the delivery, impact, and visibility
of STEM efforts. Nearly $180 million will be redirected from consolidated programs to the
Department of Education, the National Science Foundation (NSF), and the Smithsonian
Institution to implement initiatives in the four core reform areas. The Administration will ensure
that all science mission agencies have input into the development and implementation of these
initiatives so that they align with agency goals while improving STEM education at all levels in a
streamlined way. As part of this effort, funding for EPA's Science to Achieve Results (STAR)
and Greater Research Opportunities (GRO) fellowships will be consolidated at NSF.
Research Activities to Support the EPA Regional and Program Offices
In FY 2014, EPA will continue to support high-priority agency research needs. These are
research efforts that are largely underway, and that the EPA's program and regional offices are
depending on to fulfill their statutory and regulatory requirements. For example, EPA's SHC
research program is developing materials management technologies that reduce volume of
contaminants, conserve resources, or minimize risks of exposure to people and ecosystems. The
EPA's Solid Waste and Emergency Response program, states, and tribes can apply this science
as they develop policy and regulations, and implement their programs.
Furthermore, our research is used by the EPA's Emergency Management (OEM) program to
revise the National Contingency Plan Product Schedule for responding to oil spills. OEM also is
using our research to finalize guidance on addressing vapor intrusion at contaminated sites. The
EPA's SHC research program also is conducting research and technical support in Puerto Rico at
the request of Region 2. One recent project involves an assessment of waste management units.
Ongoing efforts involve applying sustainability metrics to regional decisions in Guanica Bay and
island-wide decisions.
In coordination with the EPA's Air and Radiation and Water programs, EPA' SHC research
program is working collaboratively with the SSWR and ACE research programs. Together, the
programs are developing tools that support the development of standards and policies to deal
with increasing levels of nitrogen pollution. This includes developing nitrogen management tools
172
-------
and information to provide a scientific foundation for nitrogen management approaches and
policy across the EPA. This research also will provide information to the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) process, guiding the standards, and monitoring the response of
ecosystems to changes in standards. It also will provide information to the EPA's Water and
Regional programs to improve nutrient management, provide information about sources of
nitrogen, and the best ways to reduce it. The SHC research program is developing scenario
analyses tools that assess vulnerabilities of regional air and water quality to nitrogen sources. For
select communities, SHC is examining local vulnerability to air sheds and watersheds that may
transport nitrogen pollution into the community from neighboring areas.
The SHC research program will provide additional technical support to the EPA program and
Regional offices as needed to continue supporting the agency's mission. While many of the
agency's research needs are known and ongoing, new and urgent needs will inevitably arise
outside of the process of multi-year research planning. In these instances, SHC will provide
support to any of the EPA programs or Regional Offices in which our researchers' knowledge
and skills can better enable development, implementation, or evaluation. EPA is committed to
providing a scientific foundation for agency and community decisions.
Recent accomplishments include:
• Continued efforts on the "EnviroAtlas" to Support Community Decisions. The
EPA's EnviroAtlas is a collection of tools and resources that provide data and analysis on
the relationships between nature, people, health, and the economy. The EPA researchers
are working with partner agencies to develop this online, interactive decision-support
tool. EnviroAtlas collaborators currently include the Natural Resources Conservation
Service and U.S. Forest Service (both part of the U. S. Department of Agriculture), the
U.S. Geological Survey (Department of the Interior), the National Geographic Society,
the nonprofit organization NatureServe, and the City College of New York. The
EnviroAtlas is a web-based mapping tool that allows users to view and analyze multiple
ecosystem services in a specific region— such as drinking water supplies or recreational
and cultural amenities. This mapping tool provides information that community decision
makers need to make strategic choices about development and environmental policy. For
example, decision-makers can use the Atlas to forecast what will happen to these natural
resources under future scenarios.
• Continued efforts on the Community and Tribal-Focused Environmental Risk and
Sustainability Tools (C-FERST37' T-FERST38). C/T-FERST are resource access web
tools and geographic information systems (GIS). They are integrated with the
EnviroAtlas and are designed to support cumulative human exposure and risk screening
assessments and help build sustainable, healthy communities. These tools assist
communities in identifying and prioritizing issues and in making decisions about
exposures and risks within their community. The EPA scientists are working with agency
community programs, other federal agencies (CDC, HUD, NIEHS), communities, tribes,
and tribal organizations to design and test C/T-FERST, including the EPA's first Health
Impact Assessment. This research responds to requests from the EPA Regional Offices
37 http://www.epa.gov/heasd/c-ferst/
38 http://www.epa.gov/research/healthscience/health-tferst.htm
173
-------
and communities as well as recommendations from the National Academy of Sciences,
National Academy of Public Administration, and other agency peer reviews.
• Completed an Inventory of Relevant Community Sustainability Tools. To ensure we
can build on existing tools and data, EPA completed an inventory of tools intended to
support communities in making sustainable decisions. This effort included peer review
evaluations of effectiveness and accessibility of existing tools. The EPA's Research and
Development program is sharing this inventory with its Program Office and Regional
partners to enhance the use of common, coordinated approaches to similar problems
arising from multiple pollution sources.
• Issued Maps and Tool to Assist Communities in Responding to Increasing Nitrogen
Levels. Many ecosystems are adversely impacted by the increasing concentrations of
nitrogen occurring in the US. Nitrogen sources include fertilizer, manure, industrial
sources, and wastewater. The EPA issued maps that demonstrate nitrogen concentrations
around the US to inform decision-makers about nitrogen loading to watersheds. The EPA
also issued a database and website relating nitrogen loading to lake ecosystem services in
the northeast. Under this effort, the SHC research program completed a tool that will
allow communities to examine nitrogen sinks and sources within the landscape, thus
enabling them to better protect the environment.
• Released the Eco-Health Relationship Browser39' which illustrates the linkages
between human health and ecosystem services (benefits supplied by nature). This
interactive tool provides information about our nation's ecosystems, the services they
provide, and how those services, or their degradation and loss, may affect people. For
instance, ecosystems (such as wetlands and forests) provide a wide variety of goods and
services, many of which we use every day, such as air filtration and water purification.
This web-based tool allows users to easily explore the services ecosystems provide and
how those services affect human health and well-being.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(HC1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Sustainable and
Healthy Communities research program.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
100
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(HC2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients, partners, and stakeholders
for use in pursuing their sustainability goals.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
100
50
FY2013
100
FY2014
100
Units
Percent
The table reflects the EPA's annual performance measures for research on safe and health
communities. The EPA uses these measures to assess our effectiveness in delivering needed
products and outputs to clients (decision-makers, states, and local governments).
5 http://www.epa.gov/research/healthscience/browser/index.html
174
-------
To assess research performance and provide strategic direction, two Federal Advisory
Committees review the EPA's research programs. In March, the Science Advisory Board (SAB)
acknowledged its support of the EPA's 2012 realignment of the EPA's Research and
Development programs into transdisciplinary, systems- and sustainability-oriented programs. In
their July 2012 review of the SHC research program, the EPA's Science Advisory Board and the
Board of Scientific Counselors (SAB/BOSC) indicated, "the SHC program has integrated
sustainability into its plans exceptionally well.4 "
The EPA collaborates with several science agencies and the research community to assess our
research performance. For instance, the EPA is partnering with the National Institute of Health,
the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy, and the US Department of
Agriculture. The program also works with the White House's Office of Science and Technology
Policy. The EPA supports the interagency Science and Technology in America's Reinvestment -
Measuring the Effect of Research on Innovation, Competitiveness and Science (STAR
METRICS) effort. This interagency effort is helping the EPA to more effectively measure the
impact federal science investments have on society, the environment, and the economy.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$205.0) This reduction reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to adjustments
in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$500.0 / -1.3 FTE) This reflects the net result of realignments of infrastructure, FTE and
resources such as equipment purchases and repairs, travel, contracts, and general expenses
that are proportionately allocated across programs to better align with programmatic
priorities. The net results include a reduction of 1.3 FTE and associated payroll of $179.0.
• (-$97.0 / -0.7 FTE) This decrease in resources and FTE will delay ongoing human health
research in the SHC research program on local human health problems. The reduced
resources include 0.7 FTE and associated payroll of $97.0.
• (-$768.07+3.7 FTE) EPA will reduce its overall research on ecosystems goods and services to
predict ecological impacts on community and environmental health decisions. This research
program does include 3.7 additional FTE and associated payroll.
• (-$1,000.0) EPA will reduce research to understand the impacts of environmental exposures
on community health, children's health and minority population health.
• (-$1,000.0) EPA will reduce research to undersatand the impacts of exposure to cleaning
materials in schools on children's health.
• (-$2,000.0) The 2014 Budget does not request additional funding for EPA's Laboratory
Study, which was funded in FY 2012.
'http://epa.gov/osp/bosc/pdf/120928rpt.pdf
175
-------
• (-$2,423.0 / -1.0 FTE) This reduction reflects administrative savings from continued efforts
to streamline operational expenses and activities, including information technology (IT)
support activities, laboratory efficiency projects and agency laboratory fixed cost
adjustments. The reduced resources include 1.0 FTE and associated payroll of $138.0.
• (-$2,784.0) This decrease reflects an adjustment for Small Business Innovation Research
(SBIR). Enacted funding levels for this program include the amount the EPA is required to
set aside for contracts to small businesses to develop and commercialize new environmental
technologies. This adjustment is necessary because the SBIR set aside is redistributed to
other research programs in the President's Request.
• (-$16,376.0 / -2.0 FTE) Funding for EPA's Science to Achieve Results (STAR) and the
Greater Research Opportunities (GRO) fellowship programs, and all funds, includng $2,000
in nanotechnology fellowships, will be consolidated as part of a comprehensive
reorganization to facilitiate a cohesive national strategy of STEM education programs to
increase the impact of Federal investment in four areas: K-12 instructions; undergraduate
education; fellowships and scholarships; and information education. The reduced resources
include 2.0 FTE and associated payroll of $276.0.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Air Act, Sections 103 and 104. 42 U.S.C. 7403, 42 U.S.C. 7404,103; 104; Clean Water
Act, Sections 101, 104 & 404, 33 U.S.C. 1254; Clinger Cohen Act, 40 U.S.C. 11318; Coastal
Zone Management Act (CZMA), 16 U.S.C. 1451 - Section 302; Executive Order 12898,
Executive Order 13045; Executive Order 13508; Environmental Research, Development &
Demonstration Authorization Act; Endangered Species Act (ESA), 16 U.S.C. 1531 - Section 2;
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act Sections 18 and 20; Food Quality and
Protection Act P.L. 104-170, 110 Stat. 1489, Intergovernmental Cooperation Act; 31 U.S.C.
6502 (provided specialized or technical services to state or local governments); Indoor Radon
abatement Section 306; Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act, Section 203, 33 U.S.C.
1443; National Environmental Education Act, 20 U.S.C. 5503(b)(3) and (b) (11); National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Sections 102 and 4332; Toxic Substances Control Act,
Section 10. 15 U.S.C. 2609; Water Resources Research Act.
176
-------
Program Area: Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
177
-------
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Program Area: Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Ensure Chemical Safety
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$90,854.0
$90,854.0
291.2
FY 2012
Actuals
$93,147.9
$93,147.9
290.4
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$91,439.0
$91,439.0
291.2
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$94,625.0
$94,625.0
290.8
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$3,771.0
$3,771.0
-0.4
Program Project Description:
An increasingly complex array of inter-related environmental stressors affects the societal,
economic, and environmental health of Americans. Chemical safety research has always
attempted to manage the risks arising from exposure to hazardous chemical substances. The
complexity of twenty-first century socio-environmental challenges demand enhanced risk
prevention and mitigation tools for new and existing chemicals that consider the proactive and
sustainable design, manufacture, use, and disposal of chemicals.
To meet these challenges, the EPA has reshaped relevant chemicals research with the goal of
developing innovative and cost-effective approaches and tools that better inform decisions to
reduce harmful effects of chemicals on human health and the environment. The EPA's Chemical
Safety and Sustainability (CSS) research program will lead development of innovative science to
support safe, sustainable use of chemicals and materials required to promote ecological
wellbeing, including human and environmental health, as well as to protect vulnerable species
and populations.
Three concepts are central to the CSS research program:
• Life Cycle: The cradle-to-grave life cycle perspective to chemical design, manufacture,
use, and fate, with the aim to manage potential risk of exposure and impacts;
• Inherency: The physico-chemical and material properties of the chemical, and how
those properties affect the behavior of chemicals in the environment; and
• Sustainability: The broad social, economic, and environmental impacts of chemical use.
These concepts strengthen the agency's decision making process by enabling the consideration
and evaluation of complex interactions and biological systems.
As chemicals are produced, used in products, and throughout their life cycle from design, to
manufacture to disposal, opportunities arise for exposure to and biological interactions with
178
-------
human and ecological systems. The complex interactions of chemicals in a community context
require a holistic systems approach to understand the links between exposure and toxicity
pathways involved in disease. Defining the sequence of events at different levels of biological
organization (e.g., molecule, cell, tissue, organ, and organism) in humans and wildlife allows for
the development of molecular and cellular biomarkers of exposure and disease, and molecular
assays for toxicity screening and testing. These considerations are important for understanding
possible health and environmental impacts in communities.
Substantial components of CSS research focus on identifying Adverse Outcome Pathways
(AOPs) and defining linkages between adverse effects and disturbances in specific toxicity
pathways. The outputs of the CSS research program will enable the EPA's Sustainable and
Healthy Communities (SHC) research program to provide tools and data that support
community-level decisions.
The CSS research program also enhances understanding of properties of molecular structure,
function, and formulation relevant to exposure and biological effects across chemical life cycles.
With its innovative research perspectives, methods and tools, the program increases the quality,
quantity, and availability of information that informs decisions on chemical safety and generates
new information to address knowledge gaps.
Recent accomplishments that provide the foundation for FY14 enhanced performance include:
Improvements in Predictive Capacity
The CSS program has integrated diverse scientific disciplines to develop innovative
prioritization and predictive methods. These methods have strengthened our understanding of the
hazard and exposure potential for environmental chemicals. CSS researchers generated high
throughput toxicity screening data on 1,000 chemicals of interest to the Endocrine Disruption
Screening Program and those regulated under the Toxic Substance Control Act41. Key
stakeholders for this effort include the EPA's program offices, the National Toxicology Program,
the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), the Food and Drug
Administration, and international organizations such as the OECD.
Better Children's Health Protection
CSS researchers have completed five studies of high profile chemical related issues to address
immediate needs and better understand the sources and exposures to Polychlorinated Biphenyls
(PCBs) in schools. These studies provide information that supports decisions pertaining to
mitigating risks to children. The research included an evaluation of two different mitigation
methods.
Advances in Sustainable Manufacturing
Currently, pulp and paper mills direct hundreds of thousands of pounds of wastes - including
toxic sulfur compounds and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) - into giant incinerators for
burning; this practice in itself entails large energy costs. The EPA scientists have pioneered a
safe technology that captures these polluting compounds and converts them into commodity
chemicals that can be sold on the open market. This technology removes methanol from the pulp
http://epa.gov/ncct/toxcast/files/ToxCast%20Chemical%20Summary%2014Dec2010.pdf
179
-------
and paper industry waste streams and selectively converts it into methyl formate -
an environmentally friendly solvent and a precursor to formic acid, which is used as a
preservative and antibacterial agent.
In addition to creating a marketable resource, this new technology even clears the factory air of
most of its unpleasant odor. Initial studies have shown that the new technology removes roughly
98 percent of the chemical pollutants responsible for the boiling cabbage smell of pulp and paper
mills. Ninety percent of toxic methanol gas is also removed from the factory waste.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to collaborate with government and non-government
stakeholders in order to achieve its mission of evaluating the safety of chemicals and products.
To this end, the EPA's program and Regional Offices have worked with the EPA's Research and
Development program to identify critical science questions that guide the CSS research program.
The Administration's science and technology priorities42 stress the need for multidisciplinary
research that transforms approaches used to address the nation's problems. In line with that goal,
the CSS research program will generate the data and develop methods and tools to guide the
prioritization and testing process. This process, from screening approaches through to the more
complex testing and assessments, informs the EPA's policies behind integrated solutions in
support of chemical management.
Additionally, the CSS research program will work collaboratively with key science advisors and
senior staff across the EPA's programs, including the Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
program and the Solid Waste and Emergency Response program, to identify chemical risk
assessment and management problems. CSS will incorporate this diverse expertise to develop
products that address these problems.
Activities in FY 2014 are driven by efforts to fulfill the EPA's and its partners' needs for the
following:
• Scientific knowledge, tools, and models for integrated evaluation strategies;
• Improved assessment and management approaches for chemical safety and sustainability;
and,
• Ability to target high priority research needs for immediate and focused attention.
Because the needs of our program and Regional Office partners drive CSS research, the CSS
research team is committed to conducting research to meet both short and long-term needs.
Partners are members of the ongoing research planning and evaluation teams whose input assists
in ensuring that the resulting outputs meet the intended purposes. Furthermore, the CSS research
program includes efforts to evaluate the success of research activities in order to guarantee a high
level of product utility and to prevent using resources on research for the sake of research. These
efforts support the development and employment of approaches for alternative sustainable
product formulations found by studying chemical life cycles to address issues of cumulative risk,
42 For more information, see the Executive Office of the President memorandum:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/memoranda/2012/m-12-15.pdf
180
-------
environmental chemical mixtures, population-vulnerability, and environmental justice, as related
to exposure disparities.
In FY 2014, the EPA will focus a portion of the CSS research program's activities to build on
existing research of cost-efficient and resource and energy-efficient methods for synthesizing
chemicals and products. The CSS program will continue to evaluate life cycle impacts that
demonstrate the benefits of more sustainable approaches, provide information on the release of
and exposure to nanomaterials, and inform effective solutions to enhance sound decisions
regarding human health and the environment through the use of these materials.
The FY 2014 efforts of the CSS research program will occur within three key program areas:
Computational Toxicology — Computational toxicology uses mathematical and computer models
to assess chemical-associated hazardous effects while simultaneously reducing the use of
animals for testing. In FY 2014, Computational Toxicology work under CSS will focus on the
following main issues of continuation of the Toxicity Forecaster (ToxCast) program:
• improvement of computational systems models of pathways and tissues,
• development of rapid cost-efficient exposure models (ExpoCast), and
• the implementation of web based tools (Dashboards) for analysis and decision support.
The ToxCast Program performs cost-effective, state-of-the-art chemical screening to assess how
chemicals may affect human health. ToxCast simultaneously tests thousands of chemicals using
hundreds of high-throughput and high-content approaches. This allows the EPA to more rapidly
examine environmental chemicals' role in human disease processes, cell systems, and pathway
targets. EPA scientists are analyzing the high-throughput screening data obtained during Phase
II of this program. The results of Phase II, which covers 1,080 chemicals, will be released and
publicly available in FY 2013. Phase III, which will test additional high priority chemicals, is
essential for computational systems models predicting chemical toxicity. Phase III chemical data
will be available in FY 2014.
The EPA's ongoing research collaboration with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the
Food and Drug Administration (FDA), referred to as Tox21 program, pushes existing resources
to develop faster, more thorough predictions of how chemicals will affect human and
environmental health. In FY 2014, Tox21's high-speed robot screening system will continue
testing over 8,000 unique chemicals, to include nanomaterials and other chemicals found in
industrial and consumer products, food additives, and drugs, for potential toxicity.
The data from the innovative chemical screening programs, ToxCast and Tox21, are used to
build computational systems models predicting toxicity and simulating adverse outcomes and
diseases in human tissues and wildlife. This systems-model research examines how chemicals
interact with human and wildlife biological processes; beginning with the effects of chemical
exposures on pathways that lead to adverse outcomes and environmentally caused diseases.
In FY 2014, ExpoCast models, in combination with ToxCast-based hazard models, will support
high-throughput risk-characterizations and develop cost-efficient and rapid-risk assessments that
181
-------
prioritize thousands of chemicals for further study. This will be done in order to ensure that
necessary exposure science and computational tools are developed and ready to rapidly predict
human and wildlife exposure effects and to pursue an early focus of this research program to
improve public access to exposure information.
The EPA's Dashboards research is developing and deploying web-based interactive tools to
allow decision-makers to access summary information derived from ExpoCast, ToxCast,
computational systems models, and other data sources. These Dashboards will provide a process
for incorporating information from these diverse sources in integrative risk-assessment and risk-
management decisions. Prototype Dashboards from FY 2013 will be modified based on feedback
from agency end-users and risk assessors, to create for FY 2014 internal and external, web-
accessible versions that will enhance the speed, quality, and transparency of regulatory decisions.
In FY 2014, the CSS research program will improve Dashboards that provide partners and
decision makers with intuitive and user-friendly tools and graphical depictions of chemical data
that is useful for addressing specific regulatory and environmental questions. Additionally,
research efforts will aim to develop methods to translate the research findings of the CSS
program into decision support tools that are useful and usable by the other agency Research
Programs: Air, Climate, and Energy; Sustainable Water and Water Resources; Sustainable and
Healthy Communities; Human Health Risk Assessment; and Homeland Security.
Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals — The goal of the EPA's Endocrine Disrupter Screening
Program (EDSP) is to identify potential endocrine disrupting chemicals in the environment and
generate data useful for appropriate risk assessment and management. In years past, the EDSP
has suffered from the constraints of translational approaches and a slow pace despite the
significant risk endocrine disrupting chemicals pose to the health of Americans, especially
children. In FY 2014, the EPA is continuing efforts to develop newer computational toxicology
approaches that incorporate data from ToxCast and Tox21 and that will hasten the pace and
efficiency of the EDSP. These enhanced chemical screening and priority testing approaches will
produce smarter, context-relevant chemical assessment and management methods.
Operating under amendments to the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) and Safe Drinking
Water Act (SDWA), EDSP has developed two-tiers of assays to identify chemicals that may
potentially affect human and wildlife endocrine systems. These assays include chemicals that
affect androgens, estrogens, and thyroid hormones. In FY 2014, the EPA's CSS research
program will continue to develop new relevant approaches by including the use of high-throughput
screening and computational models to prioritize chemicals in EDSP.
This effort is part of the EPA's larger Endocrine Disrupter Screening Program for the 21st
Century (EDSP21) Work Plan that incorporates in silico models and in vitro high throughput
assays in the EDSP43. Some CSS endocrine disrupter research supports EDSP21 by developing
advanced assays that utilize new technologies and provide direct support of the current Tier 2
Testing assays of EDSP. The CSS work supporting EDSP will be conducted with the National
Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the EPA's partners
through the Tox21 Consortium.
' http:// www.epa.gov/endo/pubs/
182
-------
Nanotechnology — In concert with domestic academic and federal partners, as well as the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the EPA is conducting
collaborative research to investigate a core set of nanomaterials that are present in carbon, metal,
and metal oxide-based commercial products subject to the EPA's oversight. In FY 2014, the CSS
research program will investigate the physical and chemical properties that influence the fate,
exposure to, and effects of these nanomaterials with the goal of ascertaining behavioral trends
and impacts.
This effort also will incorporate integrated multi-tiered computational toxicology approaches to
determine and predict the impact of exposure to nanomaterials. Results from this research will
allow more streamlined assessments of the fate and effects of these materials by enabling the
grouping of nanomaterials into classes of concern. These research directions are in keeping with
the environmental health and safety research needs identified by the National Nanotechnology
Initiative44 in October of 2011.
In FY 2014, the CSS program will develop and use data on inherent chemical properties to
generate, translate, and impart to users available scientific information about chemicals in ways
that are useful to the decision-making process.
Studying chemical interactions from source-to-outcome at multiple levels and scales requires
assembling data, tools and expertise to create chemical exposure and adverse impacts data. In FY
2014, CSS also will produce chemical structure files that cover the EPA's eco-toxicological
databases, high throughput testing programs like ToxCasf™ and Tox21, and the FDA's food
additive database (PAFA). These files support predictive modeling efforts and will be
incorporated into structure-searching tools and CSS Dashboards for ongoing use.
Another goal of CSS is to provide and demonstrate solutions for the sustainable design,
production and use of new chemicals in FY 2014. These solutions will use life cycle chemical
assessment perspectives to employ the use of principles of green engineering to reduce the
utilization of energy-intensive chemical processes. Newly refined tools for estimating species
sensitivity to pesticides and other contaminants will accompany these solutions.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(CS1) Percentage of pla
Sustainability research
FY2007
FY2008
nned research products completed on time by the Chemical Safety for
program.
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
100
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Units
Percent
4 http://www.nano.gov/node/138
183
-------
Measure
Target
Actual
(CS2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients and partners to improve their
capability to advance the environmentally sustainable development, use, and assessment of
chemicals.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
50
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Units
Percent
The table reflects the CSS program's annual performance measures. The EPA uses these
measures to assess our effectiveness in delivering needed products and outputs to clients
(decision-makers, states, and local governments). To assess research performance and provide
strategic direction, two Federal Advisory Committees reviewed the EPA's research programs. In
March, the Science Advisory Board (SAB) acknowledged its support of the EPA's 2012
realignment of its research programs into four trans-disciplinary, systems- and sustainability-
oriented programs. They also highly supported the continuation of two existing research
programs. In July 2012, both the SAB and the Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC)
acknowledged CSS's research progress.
The EPA collaborates with several science agencies and the research community. The EPA is
partnering with the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation, the
Department of Energy, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture. We also work with the White
House's Office of Science and Technology Policy. The EPA supports the interagency Science
and Technology in America's Reinvestment—Measuring the Effect of Research on Innovation,
Competitiveness and Science (STAR METRICS) effort. This interagency effort is helping the
EPA to effectively measure the impact federal science investments have on society, the
environment, and the economy.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,957.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$4,091.0 / +0.9 FTE) This increase represents an emphasis on research to develop
inherently safer processes and products that minimize or eliminate the potential adverse
human health and environmental impacts associated with the manufacture, use, and disposal
of chemicals, including nanomaterials, while maximizing their economic benefit. This
includes efforts to develop tools for use by environmental decision makers in sustainable
molecular design and lifecycle analysis for improving chemical safety. The increased
resources include 0.9 FTE and associated payroll of $124.0.
• (+$881.0) This increase represents a restoration of resources transferred to the Research:
Sustainable and Healthy Communities to support Small Business Innovation Research
(SBIR). For SBIR, the EPA is required to set aside 2.5 percent of funding for contracts to
small businesses to develop and commercialize new environmental technologies.
• (+$176.0 / +2.0 FTE) This reflects the net result of realignments of infrastructure, FTE and
resources such as equipment purchases and repairs, fixed costs, contracts, travel, and general
184
-------
expenses that are proportionately allocated across programs to better align with
programmatic priorities. The additional resources include 2.0 FTE and associated payroll of
$276.0.
• (-$373.0 / -2.7 FTE) EPA is reducing funds for research of endocrine disrupting chemicals,
nanotechnology, and the use of computational toxicology to develop systems models that
inform chemical risk management in order to focus research to develop inherently safer
processes and products, as noted above. The reduced resources include 2.7 FTE and
associated payroll of $373.0.
• (-$642.0) This reflects a reduction to research on nanomaterial properties and life cycle
assessment research to inform decisions on pesticides, TSCA chemicals, and fuel additives
that contain nano-scale materials.
• (-$1,162.0 / -0.6 FTE) This reduction reflects both administrative savings and cost cutting
efforts to streamline operational expenses and activities, including information technology
(IT) support activities. The reduced resources include 0.6 FTE and associated payroll of
$83.0.
• (-$1,157.0) This reflects a reduced effort to develop a broader understanding of risks
associated with endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs), commodity chemicals,
nanomaterials, and other chemical concerns, in order to focus research to develop inherently
safer processes and products, as noted above. More specifically, there will be a reduced level
of effort to develop and apply methods, models, and measures to evaluate real-world
exposures to EDCs, to characterize related effects resulting from these exposures for humans
and wildlife, and to develop high-throughput assays for predictive modeling of reproductive
and developmental toxicity modulated through the endocrine system.
Statutory Authority:
CAA, Sec. 103, 104 & 154; CCA, 40 U.S.C. 11318; CERCLA; Children's Health Act; 21st
Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act, 15 U.S.C. 750; CWA, Sec. 101 - 121;
Economy Act, 31 U.S.C 1535; ERDDAA, 42 U.S.C. 4361-4370; FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. Sec. 346;
FIFRA; FQPA; Intergovernmental Cooperation Act, 31 U.S.C. 6502; National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969, Section 102; PPA, 42 U.S.C. 13103; RCRA; SOW A, 42 U.S.C.; TSCA,
Section 10, 15, 26 U.S.C.
185
-------
Human Health Risk Assessment
Program Area: Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Ensure Chemical Safety
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$39,336.0
$3,311.0
$42,647.0
193.4
FY 2012
Actuals
$43,342.5
$3,918.2
$47,260.7
203.3
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$39,512.0
$3,330.0
$42,842.0
193.4
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$40,219.0
$3,197.0
$43,416.0
195.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$883.0
($114.0)
$769.0
1.6
Program Project Description:
The Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) research program plays a unique role in serving
the needs of the EPA's programs and regions, as well as the broader risk assessment and
management community. The HHRA program identifies, evaluates, synthesizes, and integrates
scientific information on individual chemicals and chemical mixtures that are in the
environment. The HHRA research program's state-of-the-science, independently peer-reviewed
human health assessments provide a sound scientific basis for many of the agency's decisions
(e.g., regulations, site-specific cleanup decisions). HHRA's work ultimately allows the EPA to
better understand the possible implications of exposure and predict and reduce risk.
The central component of the HHRA research program is the generation of multidisciplinary
approaches and methods for conducting human health risk assessment in support of the agency's
mission to protect public health and the environment. HHRA seeks to modernize risk assessment
approaches, align with partner-identified needs, and integrate with other national research
programs. Integration of assessment approaches across research programs will further contribute
to the EPA's strategic goals of protecting America's air and waters, advancing sustainable
development, and ensuring the safety of chemicals.
Outside of the agency, HHRA builds close relationships with federal, state, and international
partners in both accessing data and through collaborative risk assessment development activities
and training. In addition, the program provides scientific and technical support to meet partner
and stakeholder needs.
The HHRA research program is comprised of:
• Integrated Risk Information System health hazard and dose-response assessments;
• Integrated Science Assessments of criteria air pollutants;
• Community Risk and Technical Support; and
• Methods, models, and approaches to modernize risk assessment.
186
-------
Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) health-hazard and dose-response assessments:
The HHRA research program prepares peer-reviewed qualitative and quantitative health
hazard assessments on environmental pollutants of major relevance to the EPA's regulatory
mandates. IRIS assessments range from the evaluation of chemicals with limited health effects
data and less complexity (e.g., beryllium, uranium) to assessments of chemicals having much
more extensive and challenging datasets requiring complex modeling and interpretation (e.g.,
Libby asbestos, chromium VI, formaldehyde). In recent years, the IRIS program has begun to
assess mixtures of related chemicals to better characterize potential "real-world" exposures and
risks.
The EPA's IRIS program is the only federal program that provides qualitative and quantitative
assessments of both cancer and non-cancer risks. No other federal health assessment program has
a similar mission and scope with numerous opportunities for public involvement and rigorous
peer review. These assessments provide a critical part of the scientific foundation for the
agency's risk assessment and risk management decisions. In addition, other agencies and the
public can combine IRIS toxicity values with specific exposure information to help characterize
public health risk from chemicals in site-specific situations and to support risk management
decisions designed to protect public health. Currently, the IRIS database contains hazard
identifications and dose-response evaluations on more than 550 chemicals.
Integrated Science Assessments (ISAs) of Criteria Air Pollutants:
The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to periodically review the scientific evidence for six criteria
air pollutants—paniculate matter, ozone, lead, sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, and carbon
monoxide—to support regulatory decisions on the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS). Integrated Science Assessments (ISAs) provide a concise evaluation and synthesis of
science necessary to inform decision-making. They also communicate science judgments that
provide a critical part of the foundation for reviewing the NAAQS. ISAs are major scientific
assessments that undergo rigorous external peer review by the Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee (CASAC).. These assessments also inform the benefit-cost analyses that support the
regulations that are designed to allow states and local areas to meet the NAAQS.
Community Risk and Technical Support (CRTS):
The HHRA research program develops data, tools, and methods that enhance the ability of the
EPA's programs and Regional Offices to quickly make sound, risk-based decisions regarding
emerging issues of concern in their communities, thereby reducing risks for sensitive and
susceptible populations. HHRA scientists rapidly assess problems and formulate an approach for
evaluating potential exposure and risk, estimate doses based on a variety of factors, and estimate
risks.
Additionally, HHRA scientists develop Provisional Peer Reviewed Toxicity Values (PPRTVs) to
support the EPA's Solid Waste and Emergency Response program by providing needed toxicity
values to help inform clean up decisions at contaminated Superfund sites. Along with developing
PPRTVs, HHRA develops exposure assessment tools that are used by Superfund risk assessors
to make site specific clean-up decisions. For example, HHRA issues the Exposure Factors and
187
-------
Child-Specific Exposure Factors Handbooks and is developing the EPA-Expo-Box, a web-based
compendium of tools for exposure assessors. HHRA is also exploring approaches for
characterizing risks posed by cumulative exposures to multiple chemicals and other stressors
(e.g., nutritional deficiencies) as an alternative to the traditional individual chemical approach for
assessing exposure and risk.
Methods, models, and approaches to modernize risk assessment:
The HHRA research program plays a leadership role in adopting recent analytic innovations.
HHRA's activities in this area focus on translating new research in molecular biology and
computational sciences, such as that being conducted by the Chemical Safety for Sustainability
(CSS) research program, into practical applications for developing IRIS, ISA, and PPRTV
assessments. HHRA scientists take advantage of recent breakthroughs in computational methods
and molecular biology to translate these findings into more robust health risk assessments that
are faster and less expensive to produce.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to develop IRIS and other health hazard assessments. The
program will make significant progress on health hazard assessments of important chemicals
(e.g., arsenic (inorganic) and cumulative phthalates), completing draft assessments for agency
and interagency science consultation and review, external review, for posting on the IRIS
website, www.epa.gov/iris/. The IRIS database will continue to provide access to hazard and
dose-response information on chemicals in the environment, meeting the needs of the EPA's
scientists and decision-makers. In FY 2014, the IRIS program also will continue to provide
streamlined documents to make information more transparent, accessible, and useful to other
government agencies, industry, and the American public.
The EPA continues to improve the process for developing IRIS chemical assessments. In
response to the recommendations made by the National Academy of Sciences' National
Research Council (NRC) in their April 2011 report,45 the agency is strengthening the IRIS
process and database. New IRIS assessment documents are shorter, clearer, and more
transparent. In FY 2012, in response to Congressional direction, the EPA engaged with the NRC
to conduct a comprehensive review of the EPA's IRIS draft assessment development process
including changes currently being made or planned by the EPA. The NRC committee to review
the IRIS draft development process and methods met twice in 2012. In addition, a separate NRC
committee will develop a peer review report on the EPA's external review draft of the IRIS
Toxicological Review of Inorganic Arsenic (Cancer and Non-Cancer Effects of Oral Exposures).
The EPA has had its Science Advisory Board (SAB) form a new standing committee to provide
expert peer review and advice about chemical assessments with plans for them to review four
IRIS assessments.
The EPA will continue to develop ISAs of criteria air pollutants, as a mandated prerequisite to
the EPA's review of the NAAQS. The ISAs provide important scientific analyses in support of
the EPA rulemakings related to the NAAQS. In FY 2014, the program will release the final ISA
'http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=13142
188
-------
evaluating the health effects of nitrogen oxides to contribute to the EPA's review of the primary
NAAQS for these air pollutants and create state-of-the-science methods for continuous
evaluation of assessments of new scientific information on criteria air pollutants. As
recommended by the 2008 CAS AC consultation on the EPA's draft plan for the Primary
NAAQS for Carbon Monoxide and the 2004 NRC report on Air Quality Management, the EPA
is developing Multipollutant Science Assessment Documents (MSADs) to evaluate air pollution-
induced health effects. The MSADs reflect the fact that people are not exposed to pollutants in
isolation, and are intended to serve as a companion to the individual pollutant ISAs.
In addition, the EPA will continue to develop health hazard assessments to support program and
regional decision-making. The EPA will respond with science assessment support on chemical
contaminant issues requiring rapid action and, ultimately, timely decisions and solutions, as we
did in the context of, Hurricane Katrina and the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Responding to these
types of events is a key part of the EPA's mission to protect human health and the environment
and is consistent with peer review advice including from the Board of Scientific Counselors
(BOSC) (July 12, 2010 recommendation46).
The EPA continues to be a leader in the development of risk assessment methods, models, and
approaches to enhance the quality and objectivity of assessments through the incorporation of
contemporary scientific advances. The EPA's efforts will focus on addressing high priority
agency needs as identified by risk managers by incorporating recent advances in molecular
biology and computational sciences into risk assessments; tracking specific scientific issues; and
implementing approaches informed by recommendations from a number of expert advisory
bodies, including the NRC.
The EPA continues improving the Health and Environmental Research Online (HERO) system
to support a more continuous process to identify, compile, characterize, and prioritize new
scientific studies for human health and ecological assessment development. The HERO database
lends transparency to the process of assessment development by allowing access to the data used
for scientific decisions. Greater access to this information benefits not only the EPA, but also
state and local governments, environmental and public health organizations, industry,
communities, and individual citizens.
Recent accomplishments include:
• Completing final IRIS assessments for dioxin (noncancer), tetrachloroethylene (also
known as perchloroethylene or perc), trichloroethylene and methylene chloride;
• Releaseing an IRIS Progress Report to Congress describing progress in implementing
April 2011 National Research Council (NRC) recommendations related to developing
draft IRIS assessments;
• Initiating a new effort to increase and expand stakeholder and public engagement to
improve the IRIS process and modernize and refocus HHRA research;
• Posting the third external review drafts of the ISAs for ozone and lead (Pb), the last
review step before they are finalized; and
http://www.epa.gov/osp^sc/pdf/hhral 007rpt.pdf
189
-------
• Issuing the Highlights of the Exposure Factors Handbook report, a quick reference guide
for risk assessors.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(RA1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Human Health Risk
Assessment research program.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
100
100
FY2013
100
FY2014
100
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(RA2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients and partners for use in
informing human health decisions.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
38
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(RA7) Annual milestone progress score for completing draft IRIS health assessments.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
50
8
FY2013
50
FY2014
40
Units
Score
Measure
Target
Actual
(RA8) Annual progress score for finalizing IRIS health assessments.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
20
17
FY2013
20
FY2014
15
Units
Score
Measure
Target
Actual
(RA6) Number of regulatory decisions in which decision-makers used HHRA peer-reviewed
assessments (TRIS, PPRTVs, exposure assessments and other assessments)
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
no target
established
NA
FY2013
20
FY2014
20
Units
Number
The table above reflects HHRA's annual performance measures. The EPA uses these measures
to assess our effectiveness in delivering needed products and outputs to clients (decision-makers,
states, and local governments). The FY 2014 targets for the measures that report annual progress
scores on the completion of draft and final IRIS health assessments have been adjusted to reflect
internal process improvements with phased implementation of the 2011 NRC recommendations,
changes to the interagency review process for IRIS, and further process changes anticipated from
the ongoing NRC review. Additionally, a reduction in resources to support draft assessment
development in FY 2014 will impact the number of assessments which can be completed.
To assess research performance and provide strategic direction, two federal advisory Committees
reviewed the EPA's research programs. In reporting to Congress on the EPA's fiscal year 2013
budget request in May 201247, the SAB acknowledged its support of the EPA's 2012 realignment
'http://vosemite.epa.gov/sab/SABPRODUCT.NSF/1190D2161DBCAD3B852579F3005FCOCF/SFile/EPA-SAB-12-
190
-------
of research programs into trans-disciplinary, systems-oriented programs. In their joint review of
the HHRA program, the SAB and the Board of Scientific Counselors indicated during their oral
summary on July 11, 2012 that "With an extensive portfolio of risk assessment activities, the
[HHRA] provides a superb platform for carrying out applied research. An agenda of research
should be maintained that builds from this opportunity."4
The EPA collaborates with several science agencies across the Executive Branch, including the
White House's Office of Science and Technology Policy. The EPA supports the interagency
Science and Technology in America's Reinvestment—Measuring the Effect of Research on
Innovation, Competitiveness and Science (STAR METRICS) effort. This interagency effort is
helping the EPA to effectively measure the impact federal science investments have on society,
the environment, and the economy.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,956.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$388.0 / +2.8 FTE) This reflects the net result of realignments of infrastructure, FTE
and resources such as equipment purchases and repairs, travel, contracts, and general
expenses that are proportionately allocated across programs to better align with
programmatic priorities. The increased resources include 2.8 FTE and associated payroll
of $400.0.
• (+$217.0) This increase represents a restoration of resources transferred to the SHC
research program to support Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR). For SBIR, the
EPA is required to set aside 2.5 percent of funding for contracts to small businesses to
develop and commercialize new environmental technologies.
• (-$474.0 / -0.1 FTE) This reflects a redirection of IRIS research resources to support the
newly formed Chemical Assessment Advisory Committee to provide expert peer review
under the auspices of the EPA's SAB, and a redirection of resources to support IRIS
assessments. This includes the reduction of 0.1 FTE and associated payroll of $14.0.
• (-$548.0 / -0.7 FTE) This reflects a reduction to resources for the ISAs program and will
further delay the multipollutant assessment of ecological effects of deposition of nitrogen
oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx), and other pollutants. Development of the individual
ISAs examining the human health effects of NOx and SOx in support the NAAQS will
not be impacted. The reduced resources include 0.7 FTE and associated payroll of
$100.0.
• (-$656.0 / -0.5 FTE) This reduction reflects administrative savings from continued efforts
to streamline operational expenses and activities, including information technology (IT)
006unsigned-SS.pdf
48http://vosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/36EBF661CA14106185257A380048FEAE/$File/HHRA+Overview final.pdf
191
-------
support activities. The reduced resources include 0.5 FTE and associated payroll of
$72.0.
Statutory Authority:
CAA Amendments, 42 U.S.C. 7403 et seq. - Sections 103, 108, 109, and 112; CERCLA
(Superfund, 1980) Section 209(a) of Public Law 99-499; CWA Title I, Sec. 101(a)(6) 33 U.S.C.
1254 - Sec 104 (a) and (c) and Sec. 105; ERDDA 33 U.S.C. 1251 - Section 2(a); FIFRA (7
U.S.C. s/s 136 et seq. (1996), as amended), Sec. 3(c)(2)(A); FQPA PL 104-170; SDWA (1996)
42 U.S.C. Section 300J-18; TSCA (Public Law 94-469): 15 U.S.C. s/s 2601 et seq. (1976), Sec.
4(b)(l)(B), Sec. 4(b)(2)(B).
192
-------
Program Area: Water: Human Health Protection
193
-------
Drinking Water Programs
Program Area: Water: Human Health Protection
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect Human Health
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$98,547.0
$3,782.0
$102,329.0
583.2
FY 2012
Actuals
$97,070.3
$3,728.2
$100,798.5
567.1
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$98,931.0
$3,788.0
$102,719.0
583.2
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$104,033.0
$3,636.0
$107,669.0
574.6
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$5,486.0
($146.0)
$5,340.0
-8.6
Program Project Description:
This program supports drinking water programs through the Technical Support Center, which
evaluates engineering and scientific data (including treatment technology information) to
establish its applicability to the drinking water program's needs. The Center also:
• Develops and implements regulations to support national occurrence surveys and assists
in the assessment of the contaminant occurrence data resulting from those surveys;
• Develops and evaluates monitoring approaches and analytical methods, including
assessing data provided by others to demonstrate the effectiveness of new/alternate
analytical methods;
• Trains regional and state certification officers, develops guidelines for the drinking water
laboratory certification program, and conducts Quality Systems Assessments of Regional
Drinking Water Programs;
• Works with the EPA regional offices and states to help drinking water utilities better
understand their treatment and distribution systems and implement improvements to
optimize performance; and
• Provides other technical support to develop and implement National Primary Drinking
Water Regulations (NPDWRs). The Center also provides technical assistance to states,
tribes, and drinking water systems in support of the EPA regional and state drinking
water programs.
49
49 For additional program information see: http://www.epa.gov/safewater
https://www.cfda.gov/index?s=program&mode=form&tab=stepl&id=63cecb6866ee587d2bfafc7b77c3563c&cck=l&au=&ck
194
-------
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the Drinking Water Technical Support Center will:
• Provide technical and scientific support for the development and implementation of
drinking water regulations. This includes the development and revision of analytical
methods for rules and implementing the third Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule
(UCMR3), which requires the EPA to collect data for contaminants suspected to be
present in drinking water, but that do not have health-based standards set under the Safe
Drinking Water Act (SOWA) and responding to technical implementation questions
regarding the entire range of NPDWRs;
• Implement the EPA's Drinking Water Laboratory Certification Program. This program
sets standards and establishes methods for the EPA, state, and privately-owned
laboratories that analyze drinking water samples. Through this program, the EPA will
conduct three regional program reviews during FY 2014. The EPA visits each regional
office on a triennial basis and evaluates their oversight of the state laboratories and the
state laboratory certification programs within their purview. The EPA will deliver three
(chemistry, microbiology, and cryptosporidium) certification officer training courses for
state and regional representatives;
• Support small drinking water systems' efforts to optimize their treatment technology
under the drinking water treatment Area Wide Optimization Program (AWOP). AWOP is
a highly successful technical/compliance assistance and training program that enhances
the ability of small systems to meet existing and future microbial, disinfectant, and
disinfection byproducts standards and also addresses distribution system integrity issues.
During FY 2014, the EPA will continue to work with four regional offices and 21 states
to facilitate the transfer of specific skills and build upon other drinking water
implementation program efforts to reduce health based compliance challenges;
• Continue Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 3 (UCMR3) monitoring. UCMR3
was promulgated in 2012 and the EPA initiated monitoring in January 2013.
Implementation of UCMR3 involves extensive coordination with states and Regional
Offices to carry out the agency's monitoring and reporting responsibilities. Key activities
for the EPA include approval and oversight of supporting laboratories, troubleshooting
and technical assistance, review and validation of data, and management of all aspects of
small system monitoring. The EPA is required by Section 1452(o) of the Safe Drinking
Water Act (SDWA), as amended, to annually set aside $2 million of Drinking Water
State Revolving Funds to pay the costs of small system monitoring and sample analysis
for contaminants for each cycle of the UCMR; and
• Provide analytical method development/validation to enable implementation of the
nation's drinking water compliance monitoring and future occurrence data gathering on
emerging contaminants of concern.
195
-------
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(aa) Percent of population served by CWSs that will receive drinking water that meets all
applicable health-based drinking water standards through approaches including effective
treatment and source water protection.
FY2007
94
91.5
FY2008
90
92
FY 2009
90
92.1
FY 2010
90
92
FY2011
91
93.2
FY 2012
91
94.7
FY 2013
92
FY 2014
92
Units
Population
Measure
Target
Actual
(apm) Perc
through ap
FY2007
89
89
ent of community water systems that meets all applicable health-based standards
jroaches including effective treatment and source water protection.
FY2008
89.5
89
FY2009
90
89.1
FY2010
90
89.6
FY2011
90
90.7
FY2012
90
91
FY2013
90
FY2014
90
Units
Systems
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$121.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$51.0 / -0.4 FTE) This decrease reflects reduced engineering and scientific data
evaluation. This reduction includes 0.4 FTE and associated payroll of $51.0.
• (-$215.0) This reduces resources in administrative efficiencies including reducing
training, supplies, and IT and telecommunications resources.
• (-$1.0) This reflects a reduction in travel to support the Administration's Management
Agenda goal of reducing travel and conference spending.
Statutory Authority:
SOW A, 42 U.S.C. §300f-300j-9 as added by Public Law 93-523 and the amendments made by
subsequent enactments.
196
-------
Program Area: Congressional Priorities
197
-------
Water Quality Research and Support Grants
Program Area: Congressional Priorities
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$14,975.0
$4,992.0
$19,967.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$14,975.0
$60.0
$15,035.0
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$15,209.0
$5,048.0
$20,257.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($14,975.0)
($4,992.0)
($19,967.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
In FY 2012, Congress appropriated $4.992 million for a Science and Technology: National
Priority competitive grant program to fund high-priority water quality and availability research.
The EPA was instructed to award grants on a competitive basis and give priority to not-for-profit
organizations that: conduct activities that are national in scope; can provide a ten-percent match,
including in-kind contributions; and often partner with the agency.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA is not requesting funds to support this grant program in FY 2014.
Performance Targets:
There are no performance targets for this program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$4,992.0) The EPA is not requesting funds to support this grant program in FY 2014.
Statutory Authority:
CAA 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Title 1, Part A - Sec. 103 (a) and (d) and Sec. 104 (c); CAA 42
U.S.C. 7402(b) Section 102; CAA 42 U.S.C. 7403(b)(2) Section 103(b)(2); Clinger Cohen Act,
40 U.S.C. 11318; CERCLA (Superfund, 1980) Section 209(a) of Public Law 99-499; Children's
Health Act; CWA, Sec. 101 - 121; CWPPRA; CZARA; CZMA 16 U.S.C. 1451 - Section 302;
Economy Act, 31 U.S.C. 1535; EISA, Title II Subtitle B; ERDDA, 33 U.S.C. 1251 - Section
2(a); ESA, 16 U.S.C. 1531 - Section 2; FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. Sec. 346; FIFRA (7 U.S.C. s/s 136 et
seq. (1996), as amended), Sec. 3(c)(2)(A); FQPA PL 104-170; Intergovernmental Cooperation
Act, 31 U.S.C. 6502; MPRSA Sec. 203, 33 U.S.C. 1443; NAWCA; NCPA; National
Environmental Education Act, 20 U.S.C. 5503(b)(3) and (b)(ll); NEPA of 1969, Section 102;
198
-------
NISA; ODBA Title II; PPA, 42 U.S.C. 13103; RCRA; SDWA (1996) 42 U.S.C. Section 300j-
18; SDWA Part E, Sec. 1442 (a)(l); TSCA, Section 10, 15, 26, U.S.C. 2609; USGCRA 15
U.S.C. 2921; WRDA; WRRA; and WWWQA.
199
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Environmental Programs and Management
Resource Summary Table 203
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate 209
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs 210
Climate Protection Program 214
Federal Stationary Source Regulations 223
Federal Support for Air Quality Management 228
Stratospheric Ozone: Domestic Programs 238
Stratospheric Ozone: Multilateral Fund 242
Program Area: Brownfields 244
Brownfields 245
Program Area: Compliance 251
Compliance Monitoring 252
Program Area: Enforcement 259
Civil Enforcement 260
Criminal Enforcement 266
Environmental Justice 270
NEPA Implementation 273
Program Area: Geographic Programs 276
Great Lakes Restoration 277
Geographic Program: Chesapeake Bay 289
Geographic Program: San Francisco Bay 295
Geographic Program: Puget Sound 299
Geographic Program: Long Island Sound 303
Geographic Program: Gulf of Mexico 308
Geographic Program: South Florida 312
Geographic Program: Lake Champlain 316
Geographic Program: Other 320
Program Area: Homeland Security 329
Homeland Security: Communication and Information 330
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection 333
200
-------
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure 336
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach 338
Children and Other Sensitive Populations: Agency Coordination 339
Environmental Education 343
Congressional, Intergovernmental, External Relations 345
Exchange Network 350
Small Business Ombudsman 356
Small Minority Business Assistance 359
State and Local Prevention and Preparedness 362
Tribal - Capacity Building 370
Program Area: International Programs 374
US Mexico Border 375
International Sources of Pollution 378
Trade and Governance 381
Program Area: IT / Data Management / Security 384
Information Security 385
IT / Data Management 388
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review 397
Administrative Law 398
Alternative Dispute Resolution 400
Civil Rights / Title VI Compliance 402
Legal Advice: Environmental Program 406
Legal Advice: Support Program 410
Regional Science and Technology 414
Integrated Environmental Strategies 417
Regulatory/Economic-Management and Analysis 422
Science Advisory Board 427
Program Area: Operations and Administration 429
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 430
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance 434
Acquisition Management 438
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management 441
Human Resources Management 444
Program Area: Pesticides Licensing 447
201
-------
Pesticides: Protect Human Health from Pesticide Risk 448
Pesticides: Protect the Environment from Pesticide Risk 456
Pesticides: Realize the Value of Pesticide Availability 464
Science Policy and Biotechnology 469
Program Area: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 472
RCRA: Waste Management 473
RCRA: Corrective Action 480
RCRA: Waste Minimization & Recycling 484
Program Area: Toxics Risk Review and Prevention 489
Endocrine Disrupters 490
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Review and Reduction 495
Pollution Prevention Program 503
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Management 510
Toxic Substances: Lead Risk Reduction Program 513
Program Area: Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST) 518
LUST/UST 519
Program Area: Water: Ecosystems 523
National Estuary Program / Coastal Waterways 524
Wetlands 529
Program Area: Water: Human Health Protection 535
Beach /Fish Programs 536
Drinking Water Programs 538
Program Area: Water Quality Protection 547
Marine Pollution 548
Surface Water Protection 553
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation 566
Indoor Air: Radon Program 567
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air 569
Radiation: Protection 572
Radiation: Response Preparedness 575
Program Area: Congressional Priorities 578
Water Quality Research and Support Grants 579
202
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION: Environmental Program & Management
Resource Summary Table
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Budget Authority
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$2,678,222.0
10,719.2
FY 2012
Actuals
$2,660,116.0
10,675.3
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$2,694,613.0
10,719.2
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$2,812,757.0
10,621.7
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$134,535.0
-97.5
Bill Language: Environmental Programs and Management
For environmental programs and management, including necessary expenses, not otherwise
provided for, for personnel and related costs and travel expenses; hire of passenger motor
vehicles; hire, maintenance, and operation of aircraft; purchase of reprints; library
memberships in societies or associations which issue publications to members only or at a price
to members lower than to subscribers who are not members; administrative costs of the
brownfields program under the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization
Act of 2002; and not to exceed $9,000 for official reception and representation expenses,
$2,812,757,000, to remain available until September 30, 2015.
Program Projects in EPM
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
Clean Air and Climate
Clean Air Allowance Trading
Programs
Climate Protection Program
Energy STAR
Methane to markets
Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Registry
Climate Protection Program
(other activities)
Subtotal, Climate Protection
Program
Federal Stationary Source
Regulations
FY 2012
Enacted
$20,680.0
$49,668.0
$5,013.0
$15,757.0
$28,998.0
$99,436.0
$27,298.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$20,266.2
$51,601.5
$3,750.3
$15,233.4
$25,397.6
$95,982.8
$26,766.5
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$20,805.0
$50,249.0
$5,068.0
$15,941.0
$29,265.0
$100,523.0
$27,484.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$20,469.0
$52,915.0
$4,803.0
$18,865.0
$29,616.0
$106,199.0
$34,103.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($211.0)
$3,247.0
($210.0)
$3,108.0
$618.0
$6,763.0
$6,805.0
203
-------
Program Project
Federal Support for Air Quality
Management
Federal Support for Air Toxics
Program
Stratospheric Ozone: Domestic
Programs
Stratospheric Ozone: Multilateral
Fund
Subtotal, Clean Air and Climate
Indoor Air and Radiation
Indoor Air: Radon Program
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air
Radiation: Protection
Radiation: Response Preparedness
Subtotal, Indoor Air and Radiation
Brownfields
Brownfields
Compliance
Compliance Monitoring
Enforcement
Civil Enforcement
Criminal Enforcement
Environmental Justice
NEPA Implementation
Subtotal, Enforcement
Geographic Programs
Great Lakes Restoration
Geographic Program: Chesapeake
Bay
Geographic Program: San Francisco
Bay
Geographic Program: Puget Sound
Geographic Program: Long Island
Sound
Geographic Program: Gulf of
Mexico
Geographic Program: South Florida
FY 2012
Enacted
$123,058.0
$0.0
$5,570.0
$9,479.0
$285,521.0
$3,861.0
$17,135.0
$9,540.0
$3,015.0
$33,551.0
$23,642.0
$106,707.0
$177,290.0
$48,123.0
$6,848.0
$17,298.0
$249,559.0
$299,520.0
$57,299.0
$5,838.0
$29,952.0
$3,956.0
$5,455.0
$2,058.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$123,602.0
$784.7
$5,538.2
$9,451.0
$282,391.4
$4,292.9
$17,301.5
$9,454.8
$2,998.0
$34,047.2
$23,824.1
$106,690.9
$177,402.3
$49,545.3
$7,164.8
$16,748.9
$250,861.3
$280,806.1
$62,297.6
$5,901.7
$29,931.6
$3,983.6
$5,434.3
$1,998.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$123,338.0
$0.0
$5,608.0
$9,627.0
$287,385.0
$3,875.0
$17,288.0
$9,575.0
$3,026.0
$33,764.0
$23,708.0
$107,102.0
$177,516.0
$48,207.0
$6,895.0
$17,333.0
$249,951.0
$304,025.0
$58,075.0
$5,924.0
$30,404.0
$4,018.0
$5,515.0
$2,082.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$132,805.0
$0.0
$5,002.0
$9,690.0
$308,268.0
$2,271.0
$17,204.0
$10,623.0
$3,132.0
$33,230.0
$26,002.0
$127,540.0
$189,192.0
$53,609.0
$6,954.0
$18,087.0
$267,842.0
$300,000.0
$72,982.0
$4,819.0
$17,150.0
$2,940.0
$4,482.0
$1,704.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$9,747.0
$0.0
($568.0)
$211.0
$22,747.0
($1,590.0)
$69.0
$1,083.0
$117.0
($321.0)
$2,360.0
$20,833.0
$11,902.0
$5,486.0
$106.0
$789.0
$18,283.0
$480.0
$15,683.0
($1,019.0)
($12,802.0)
($1,016.0)
($973.0)
($354.0)
204
-------
Program Project
Geographic Program: Lake
Champlain
Geographic Program: Other
Northwest Forest
Lake Pontchartrain
Community Action for a
Renewed Environment
(CARE)
Geographic Program:
Other (other activities)
Subtotal, Geographic Program:
Other
Subtotal, Geographic Programs
Homeland Security
Homeland Security:
Communication and Information
Homeland Security: Critical
Infrastructure Protection
Homeland Security: Preparedness,
Response, and Recovery
Decontamination
Subtotal, Homeland Security:
Preparedness, Response, and
Recovery
Homeland Security: Protection of
EPA Personnel and Infrastructure
Subtotal, Homeland Security
Information Exchange / Outreach
Children and Other Sensitive
Populations: Agency Coordination
Environmental Education
Congressional, Intergovernmental,
External Relations
Exchange Network
Small Business Ombudsman
Small Minority Business Assistance
State and Local Prevention and
Preparedness
TRI/ Right to Know
Tribal - Capacity Building
Subtotal, Information Exchange /
FY 2012
Enacted
$2,395.0
$1,294.0
$1,952.0
$0.0
$0.0
$3,246.0
$409,719.0
$4,249.0
$1,063.0
$0.0
$0.0
$5,966.0
$11,278.0
$7,481.0
$9,699.0
$47,638.0
$17,724.0
$2,693.0
$2,079.0
$13,320.0
$16,322.0
$13,736.0
$130,692.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$2,415.0
$1,271.1
$1,952.0
$16.1
$15.3
$3,254.5
$396,022.4
$3,388.1
$1,191.4
$300.9
$300.9
$4,309.2
$9,189.6
$7,782.9
$10,082.2
$48,673.0
$16,479.3
$2,756.4
$2,281.1
$12,250.4
$15,605.8
$13,716.6
$129,627.7
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$2,432.0
$1,294.0
$1,982.0
$0.0
$2.0
$3,278.0
$415,753.0
$4,275.0
$1,077.0
$0.0
$0.0
$6,053.0
$11,405.0
$7,553.0
$9,810.0
$47,701.0
$17,930.0
$2,714.0
$2,094.0
$13,403.0
$16,469.0
$13,775.0
$131,449.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$1,399.0
$1,445.0
$948.0
$1,000.0
$2,000.0
$5,393.0
$410,869.0
$4,000.0
$1,577.0
$0.0
$0.0
$6,063.0
$11,640.0
$8,486.0
$0.0
$53,208.0
$33,659.0
$3,131.0
$2,289.0
$14,101.0
$16,726.0
$15,196.0
$146,796.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($996.0)
$151.0
($1,004.0)
$1,000.0
$2,000.0
$2,147.0
$1,150.0
($249.0)
$514.0
$0.0
$0.0
$97.0
$362.0
$1,005.0
($9,699.0)
$5,570.0
$15,935.0
$438.0
$210.0
$781.0
$404.0
$1,460.0
$16,104.0
205
-------
Program Project
Outreach
International Programs
US Mexico Border
International Sources of Pollution
Trade and Governance
Subtotal, International Programs
IT / Data Management / Security
Information Security
IT / Data Management
Subtotal, IT / Data Management /
Security
Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic
Review
Administrative Law
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Civil Rights / Title VI Compliance
Legal Advice: Environmental
Program
Legal Advice: Support Program
Regional Science and Technology
Integrated Environmental Strategies
Regulatory/Economic-Management
and Analysis
Science Advisory Board
Subtotal, Legal / Science / Regulatory /
Economic Review
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations
Rent
Utilities
Security
Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations (other activities)
Subtotal, Facilities Infrastructure
and Operations
Central Planning, Budgeting, and
FY 2012
Enacted
$4,283.0
$7,591.0
$5,609.0
$17,483.0
$6,786.0
$87,939.0
$94,725.0
$5,198.0
$1,282.0
$11,618.0
$42,606.0
$14,539.0
$2,591.0
$14,754.0
$15,256.0
$5,135.0
$112,979.0
$165,242.0
$10,105.0
$28,916.0
$115,514.0
$319,777.0
$72,290.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$4,410.6
$7,646.0
$6,257.2
$18,313.8
$8,551.9
$86,196.5
$94,748.4
$5,207.7
$1,476.9
$11,639.9
$43,393.6
$15,535.4
$2,796.8
$14,619.7
$16,056.6
$4,907.2
$115,633.8
$164,997.6
$9,642.6
$27,655.2
$107,682.4
$309,977.8
$75,138.2
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$4,305.0
$7,605.0
$5,661.0
$17,571.0
$6,858.0
$88,632.0
$95,490.0
$5,205.0
$1,286.0
$11,657.0
$42,651.0
$14,550.0
$2,628.0
$14,874.0
$15,292.0
$5,153.0
$113,296.0
$165,242.0
$10,105.0
$28,916.0
$117,003.0
$321,266.0
$72,659.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$4,384.0
$8,543.0
$6,284.0
$19,211.0
$6,939.0
$86,599.0
$93,538.0
$5,397.0
$1,492.0
$14,339.0
$44,590.0
$16,413.0
$2,970.0
$16,258.0
$23,258.0
$6,761.0
$131,478.0
$171,099.0
$10,493.0
$32,643.0
$115,681.0
$329,916.0
$78,506.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$101.0
$952.0
$675.0
$1,728.0
$153.0
($1,340.0)
($1,187.0)
$199.0
$210.0
$2,721.0
$1,984.0
$1,874.0
$379.0
$1,504.0
$8,002.0
$1,626.0
$18,499.0
$5,857.0
$388.0
$3,727.0
$167.0
$10,139.0
$6,216.0
206
-------
Program Project
Finance
Acquisition Management
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG
Management
Human Resources Management
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
Pesticides Licensing
Pesticides: Protect Human Health
from Pesticide Risk
Pesticides: Protect the Environment
from Pesticide Risk
Pesticides: Realize the Value of
Pesticide Availability
Science Policy and Biotechnology
Subtotal, Pesticides Licensing
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA)
RCRA: Waste Management
eManifest
RCRA: Waste
Management (other
activities)
Subtotal, RCRA: Waste
Management
RCRA: Corrective Action
RCRA: Waste Minimization &
Recycling
Subtotal, Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA)
Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
Endocrine Disrupters
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk
Review and Reduction
Pollution Prevention Program
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk
Management
Toxic Substances: Lead Risk
Reduction Program
Subtotal, Toxics Risk Review and
FY 2012
Enacted
$33,175.0
$24,002.0
$37,839.0
$487,083.0
$57,732.0
$37,704.0
$12,514.0
$1,754.0
$109,704.0
$0.0
$63,500.0
$63,500.0
$39,066.0
$9,468.0
$112,034.0
$8,255.0
$56,497.0
$15,269.0
$5,982.0
$13,798.0
$99,801.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$37,238.9
$24,577.1
$39,628.0
$486,560.0
$56,278.0
$36,969.0
$13,924.9
$1,635.4
$108,807.3
$0.0
$62,115.1
$62,115.1
$39,160.2
$8,918.4
$110,193.7
$6,807.0
$55,235.8
$14,889.8
$6,417.2
$13,404.8
$96,754.6
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$33,289.0
$24,079.0
$37,927.0
$489,220.0
$57,872.0
$37,810.0
$12,554.0
$1,765.0
$110,001.0
$0.0
$63,696.0
$63,696.0
$39,159.0
$9,499.0
$112,354.0
$8,358.0
$56,812.0
$15,333.0
$6,004.0
$13,829.0
$100,336.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$33,893.0
$26,518.0
$40,047.0
$508,880.0
$58,400.0
$39,047.0
$12,350.0
$1,510.0
$111,307.0
$2,376.0
$63,833.0
$66,209.0
$40,210.0
$9,400.0
$115,819.0
$6,891.0
$62,732.0
$15,423.0
$3,596.0
$14,852.0
$103,494.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$718.0
$2,516.0
$2,208.0
$21,797.0
$668.0
$1,343.0
($164.0)
($244.0)
$1,603.0
$2,376.0
$333.0
$2,709.0
$1,144.0
($68.0)
$3,785.0
($1,364.0)
$6,235.0
$154.0
($2,386.0)
$1,054.0
$3,693.0
207
-------
Program Project
Prevention
Underground Storage Tanks (LUST /
UST)
LUST/UST
Water: Ecosystems
National Estuary Program / Coastal
Waterways
Wetlands
Subtotal, Water: Ecosystems
Water: Human Health Protection
Beach / Fish Programs
Drinking Water Programs
Subtotal, Water: Human Health
Protection
Water Quality Protection
Marine Pollution
Surface Water Protection
Subtotal, Water Quality Protection
Congressional Priorities
Water Quality Research and Support
Grants
Subtotal, Water Quality Research
and Support Grants
TOTAL, EPA
FY 2012
Enacted
$12,742.0
$27,014.0
$21,160.0
$48,174.0
$2,552.0
$98,547.0
$101,099.0
$12,898.0
$203,856.0
$216,754.0
$14,975.0
$14,975.0
$2,678,222.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$12,925.5
$27,231.5
$22,275.9
$49,507.4
$2,380.8
$97,070.3
$99,451.1
$12,400.5
$207,190.3
$219,590.8
$14,975.0
$14,975.0
$2,660,116.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$12,791.0
$27,324.0
$21,197.0
$48,521.0
$2,574.0
$98,931.0
$101,505.0
$13,003.0
$204,799.0
$217,802.0
$15,209.0
$15,209.0
$2,694,613.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$12,345.0
$27,227.0
$27,656.0
$54,883.0
$724.0
$104,033.0
$104,757.0
$11,556.0
$213,302.0
$224,858.0
$0.0
$0.0
$2,812,757.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($397.0)
$213.0
$6,496.0
$6,709.0
($1,828.0)
$5,486.0
$3,658.0
($1,342.0)
$9,446.0
$8,104.0
($14,975.0)
($14,975.0)
$134,535.0
208
-------
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate
209
-------
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$20,680.0
$9,082.0
$29,762.0
87.6
FY 2012
Actuals
$20,266.2
$10,189.4
$30,455.6
80.3
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$20,805.0
$9,183.0
$29,988.0
87.6
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$20,469.0
$9,594.0
$30,063.0
84.1
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($211.0)
$512.0
$301.0
-3.5
Program Project Description:
The Acid Rain Program, established under Title IV of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,
requires major reductions in sulfur dioxide (802) and nitrogen oxide (NOX) emissions from the
U.S. electric power generation industry. The program continues to be recognized as a model for
flexible and effective air pollution regulation, both in this country and abroad. The 862 program
uses a market-based approach with tradable units called "allowances" (one allowance authorizes
the emission of one ton of SC>2 in a given or later year). The authorizing legislation sets a
permanent cap on the total amount of SO2 that may be emitted annually by affected electric
generation units (EGUs) in the contiguous U.S. The program was phased in, with the final 862
cap beginning in 2010 set at 8.95 million tons, a level at approximately one-half the amount
these sources emitted in 1980.
Reducing emissions of 862 and NOX continues to be an important component of the EPA's
strategy for cleaner air. 862 and NOX are not only the key pollutants in the formation of acid
deposition (or "acid rain"), which contributes to acidification of lakes and streams and makes
them unable to support fish and other aquatic life, but also they contribute to the formation of
fine particles (sulfates and nitrates) that are associated with significant health effects and regional
haze. Winds can carry fine particles (PM^.s) hundreds of miles from their source. When inhaled,
PM2.5 can cause serious respiratory problems, particularly for individuals who suffer from
asthma or are in sensitive populations. Numerous studies have linked these exposures with
premature mortality from heart and lung diseases.1 These same small particles also impair
visibility and are of particular concern in national parks — known for their scenic views. NOX
emissions also contribute substantially to the formation of ground-level ozone. Ozone, when
inhaled in sufficient concentrations, also can cause serious respiratory problems.
The program implements Title IV by continuing to measure, quality assure, and track emissions
1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 2009. Integrated Science Assessment for Particulate Matter (Final Report).
EPA-600-R-08-139F. National Center for Environmental Assessment - RTF Division. December. Available on the Internet at
http://cfpub. epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay. cfm?deid=216546.
210
-------
for SC>2 and/or NOX from Continuous Emissions Monitoring Systems (CEMS) or equivalent
direct measurement methods at over 3,600 affected EGUs in the U.S. Both the SO2 and NOX
program components require accurate and verifiable measurement of emissions. The program
conducts electronic and field audits and certifies and periodically recertifies emission monitors to
ensure accurate emissions measurement and reporting. Allowance transfers are recorded in
electronic tracking systems and the allowances held are reconciled against emissions for all
affected sources to ensure compliance. The Acid Rain Program has maintained perfect or near-
perfect (e.g., over 99 percent) compliance every year.
The program also is responsible for implementing U.S. commitments under the US-Canada Air
Quality Agreement of 1991 to reduce and maintain lower SC>2 and NOX emissions. The EPA's
Acid Rain Program provides affected sources flexibility to select their own methods of
compliance so the required emission reductions are achieved at the lowest cost (both to industry
and government). For additional information on the Acid Rain Program, please visit
http ://www. epa.gov/airmarkets.
In 2011, total SC>2 emissions from 3,640 EGUs subject to the Acid Rain Program were 4.5
million tons, a drop of 0.6 million tons from 2010 and approximately half the statutory annual
permanent cap. Total NOX emissions were 1.9 million tons in 2011, triple the Title IV NOX
emission reduction objective. However, the EPA's health studies and ecological assessments,
analyses by the Interagency National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP),2 and
data from long-term monitoring networks all indicate that further reductions in SC>2 and NOX
emissions, beyond those specified in Title IV, are necessary to allow sensitive forests and aquatic
ecosystems to recover from acidification. The program's environmental objective to improve
ecosystems in acid-sensitive regions of the U.S. cannot be attained without more reductions in
SC>2 and NOX, the key pollutants involved in the formation of acid rain. These assessments also
show that additional reductions in these emissions are needed for many areas to achieve and
maintain health-based protective air quality standards for fine particulate matter (PIVb.s) and
ozone.
To help attain these protective standards, the EPA began administering the NOXBudget Program
(NBP) in 1998, a regional cap-and-trade program for reducing NOX emissions and transported
ozone in the eastern U.S. The NBP was established initially in the Northeast Ozone Transport
Region (OTR) under a Memorandum of Understanding among nine states and the District of
Columbia. The NBP expanded under the NOX State Implementation Plan (SIP) call when 12
states were added and the number of sources doubled. The NBP transitioned under the Clean Air
Interstate Rule (CAIR) to the CAIR seasonal NOX program for control of transported ozone
pollution and summer NOX emissions. Six additional states, which had not been subject to NBP,
began reporting emissions for the CAIR seasonal NOX program and participated in the EPA-
administered regional allowance trading program. Units in the seasonal program reduced their
NOX emissions during the ozone season to 566 thousand tons in 2011, a drop of 28 thousand tons
or five percent below 2010 levels.
2 National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program Report to Congress: An Integrated Assessment. 2005.
http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/resource/docs/NAPAP.pdfPages 65-73.
211
-------
The National Academy of Sciences has commended the EPA on its Acid Rain Accountability
Program, which relies on the Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNET) for monitoring
deposition, ambient sulfate and nitrate concentrations, and other air quality indicators. EPA uses
the Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems (TIME) and Long-Term Monitoring
(LTM) programs for assessing how water bodies and aquatic ecosystems are responding to
reductions in sulfur and nitrogen emissions. The Acid Rain Accountability Program issues
comprehensive annual reports on compliance and environmental results from implementation of
the Acid Rain and related programs. These reports track progress in not only reducing 862 and
NOX emissions from the affected sources, but also assess the impacts of these reductions on acid
deposition, air quality (e.g., ozone levels), surface water acidity, forest health, and other
environmental indicators. For more information, please visit
http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progress/index.html.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the program is projected to measure, quality assure, and track emissions for 862 and
NOxfrom Continuous Emissions Monitoring systems (CEMs) or equivalent direct measurement
methods at over 4,700 fossil-fuel fired units in Acid Rain and related programs. In addition, the
program will conduct audits, certify emission monitors, and report on the progress of these
programs in achieving performance targets and environmental objectives. Allowance transfers
are recorded in electronic tracking systems and the allowances held are reconciled against
emissions for all affected sources to ensure compliance.
Nitrogen dioxide emissions also contribute substantially to the formation of ground-level ozone.
Achieving and maintaining the EPA's national air quality standards is an important step towards
ensuring the air is safe to breathe. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to work with states, tribes,
and local government partners toward this goal.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(A01) Annual emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) from electric power generation sources.
FY2007
9,900,000
8,900,000
FY2008
9,400,000
7,600,000
FY2009
9,400,000
5,700,000
FY2010
8,450,000
5,166,000
FY2011
6,000,000
4,544,000
FY2012
6,000,000
Data
Avail
12/2013
FY2013
6,000,000
FY2014
6,000,000
Units
Tons
Emitted
The EPA tracks the change in nitrogen deposition and sulfur deposition to assess the
effectiveness of the Acid Rain program with performance targets set for every three years. Please
visit http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progress/index.html for additional information.
The EPA tracks changes in surface water acidity in lakes and streams in acid sensitive regions to
assess change in the number of chronically acidic water bodies. This is a long-term measure
' National Academy of Sciences Report: Air Quality Management in the United States. 2004. www.nap.edu/catalog/10728.html
212
-------
with a performance target set for 2030. Please visit
http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progress/index.html for additional information.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$481.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$523.0 7-3.5 FTE) This reduces technical assistance to the states' field audit program.
Fewer field audits will be conducted as well as a reduction in the state staff training
activities associated with these field quality assurance audits. The reduced resources
include 3.5 FTE and associated payroll of $523.0.
• (-$168.0) This decrease will reduce support for the Allowance Trading programs.
• (-$1.0) This reflects a reduction in travel to support the Administration's Management
Agenda goal of reducing travel and conference spending.
Statutory Authority:
CAA (42 U.S.C. 7401-7661f).
213
-------
Climate Protection Program
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Address Climate Change
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$99,436.0
$16,319.0
$115,755.0
250.5
FY 2012
Actuals
$95,982.8
$14,063.3
$110,046.1
243.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$100,523.0
$16,445.0
$116,968.0
250.5
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$106,199.0
$8,313.0
$114,512.0
244.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$6,763.0
($8,006.0)
($1,243.0)
-6.5
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Climate Protection Program promotes efforts to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions and the Administration's priority of taking action on climate change through programs
such as voluntary partnerships with key industries, technical assistance and reporting, and
verification and publication of GHG data.
The EPA's voluntary public-private partnership programs are designed to capitalize on the cost-
effective opportunities consumers, businesses, state and local governments, and other
organizations have to invest in greenhouse gas reducing technologies, policies, and practices.
These investments avoid greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, mobile sources, and
various other sources.
Partners of EPA's Climate Protection Programs have achieved reductions or avoided increasing
carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases, such as methane, nitrous oxide and fluorinated
greenhouse gases - including hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs) and sulfur
hexafluoride (SFe). Actions taken today will continue to deliver environmental and economic
benefits for many years to come, since the investments made by the EPA's partners as a result of
the EPA programs often have lifetimes of ten years or more. For every dollar spent by the EPA
on its voluntary climate change partnership programs, the EPA estimates that the programs have
reduced greenhouse gas emissions by up to 3.6 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent,
delivered more than $75 in energy bill savings, and facilitated more than $15 in private sector
investment.4
The EPA manages a number of voluntary efforts that remove barriers in the marketplace in order
to deploy cost-effective technologies more rapidly. The EPA's programs do not provide financial
subsidies. Instead, they work by overcoming widely acknowledged barriers to energy efficiency
4 Climate Protection Partnerships Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2012.
http://www.energvstar.gov/ia/partners/publications/pubdocs/2011 AnnualReport Final low-res 12-13-12.pdf?36f5-5477
214
-------
and deployment of GHG reduction measures such as: lack of clear, reliable information on
technology opportunities; lack of awareness of energy efficient products, services, and
transportation choices; and the need for additional incentives for manufacturers to invest in
efficiency research and development.
The EPA started the ENERGY STAR program in 1992. The program achieves significant and
growing greenhouse gas reductions by dismantling identifiable market barriers stifling the
adoption of cost-effective, energy-efficient technologies and practices in the residential,
commercial, and industrial sectors. In 1996, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) joined with
the EPA and assumed specific ENERGY STAR program responsibilities for several product
categories. The agencies' respective areas of responsibilities reflect expertise and placed the EPA
in charge of the ENERGY STAR brand. The EPA manages the specification process for all
product categories (more than 65) and continues to implement the New Homes program. For
commercial buildings, the EPA is the brand manager when ENERGY STAR is applied to whole
buildings, including marketing, outreach, monitoring and verification, and performance levels.
The ENERGY STAR program continues to yield significant results through its 20,000 partners.
Americans, with the help of ENERGY STAR, prevented an estimated 242 million metric tons of
carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCC^E), saving $24 billion on their annual utility bills in 2012
alone.5
The EPA operates several voluntary programs that promote cost-effective reductions of methane
and fluorinated gases by working collaboratively with industry. The AgSTAR program is a
collaboration between the EPA and the Department of Agriculture that focuses on methane
emission reductions from livestock waste management operations through biogas recovery
systems. The Coalbed Methane Outreach Program promotes opportunities to profitably recover
and use methane emitted from coal mining activities. The Landfill Methane Outreach Program
promotes abatement and energy recovery of methane emitted from landfills. The Voluntary
Aluminum Industry Partnership helps the aluminum industry reduce their fluorinated greenhouse
gas emissions, and the SF6 Partnership for Electric Power Systems helps that industry reduce
their greenhouse gas emissions.
The EPA also manages the implementation of the Global Methane Initiative (GMI), formerly
called the Methane-to-Markets Partnership, a U.S. led, international public-private partnership
that brings together over 40 partner governments and over one thousand public and private sector
organizations to advance methane recovery and use as a clean energy source. GMI builds on the
success of the EPA's domestic methane programs and focuses on advancing project development
from agriculture manure management operations, coal mines, landfills, oil and gas systems, and
municipal wastewater systems. The EPA will work with its partners to strengthen GMI to
include new resource commitments from developed countries, to explore methane abatement
opportunities in addition to recovery and use opportunities, and to develop and implement
country action plans to facilitate more effective and efficient international methane reduction
efforts. As of 2012, the U.S. is supporting over 620 projects around the world and has leveraged
over $400 million in public and private sector investments. These projects are yielding results
now, with actual annual reductions of nearly 27 MMTCO2E in 2011, with an additional 50
•'Based on initial 2012 program benefits analysis.
215
-------
million MTCO2E in potential reductions from projects that have not yet been fully
implemented.6
Launched by the EPA in 2004, the SmartWay Transport program is a voluntary partnership
between the EPA and industry to reduce fuel use and emissions from goods movement.
SmartWay helps its partners (shippers, motor carriers, rail carriers, logistics companies, and
others) identify fuel-saving operational and technical solutions. These solutions accelerate the
deployment of fuel saving, low emission technologies and best practices and promote fuel
savings and GHG reductions across the global supply chain. A relatively small federal
investment has brought significant change to this sector.
SmartWay is the only voluntary program working across the entire freight system to
comprehensively address key national economic, energy, and environmental goals related to
goods movement and freight sustainability. Numerous states, countries, international
organizations, and private companies rely on SmartWay's supply chain tools, testing protocols
and public-private partnership approach for their freight transport efficiency programs.
California has used SmartWay verified technologies and testing protocols for their GHG
programs and numerous states have used SmartWay's model idle-reduction ordinances. Canada,
Mexico, China, and the European Union currently use or are in the process of adopting all or
many of the critical elements of the SmartWay program.
Today, over 2,900 U.S. corporations and organizations - including virtually all of the nation's
largest truck carriers, all the class 1 rail companies, and many of the top Fortune 500® companies
- utilize SmartWay's supply chain accounting tools and methods. To date, these businesses have
saved $6.1 billion dollars by cutting their fuel use by 50 million barrels of oil. This is equivalent
to annual emissions from about three million cars.
Collectively, SmartWay partners have reduced 16.5 MMTCC^E, 235 thousand tons NOx, and 9
thousand tons PM emissions, contributing to our nation's clean air and climate goals. Improving
supply chain efficiency helps these companies grow the economy, protect and generate jobs,
reduce the use of oil, contribute to our nation's energy security, and be good environmental
stewards.
SmartWay's innovative finance programs further accelerate deployment of cleaner, more
efficient vehicles and equipment to help protect the health and well-being of citizens, especially
in low-income communities near ports, truck stops, and borders. In developing new national
standards to bring cleaner, more efficient trucks to market, the EPA and DOT drew from the
SmartWay experience that includes developing test procedures to evaluate trucks and truck
components and determining how these features and components perform.
The EPA manages a number of other partnership programs that advance clean energy solutions
to reducing GHG emissions. The EPA's Combined Heat and Power (CHP) Partnership offers
tools and services to facilitate and promote cost-effective, highly efficient CHP projects, while
its Green Power Partnership supports the procurement of green power by Fortune 500®
companies, small and medium sized businesses, local, state, and federal governments, and
' Additional information at: www.epa.gov/globalmethane and www.globalmethane.org
216
-------
colleges and universities. The State and Local Climate and Energy Program helps states and
local governments reduce GHGs primarily by adopting cost-effective EE/RE/CHP policies
particularly where they help lower costs to comply with air standards and enhance public health
and well-being.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA will continue to implement its government/industry partnership efforts to achieve
greenhouse gas reductions. In addition to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, these efforts are
projected to reduce other forms of pollution, including criteria and toxic air pollutants such as
nitrogen oxides (NOX), particulate matter, and mercury by accelerating the adoption of energy
efficient products and practices.
The EPA will continue to implement the ENERGY STAR program across the residential,
commercial, and industrial sectors consistent with Administration commitments to enhance it by:
• Maintaining consumer confidence in the ENERGY STAR label through effective third-
party certification of qualifying products. To earn the label, ENERGY STAR qualified
products must be certified as meeting program requirements by an accredited third-party
certification body. Certification includes qualification testing before product labeling and
post-market verification testing to confirm that products continue to meet program
requirements. The Agency's continuing role in this area will include:
o Oversight of the accreditation bodies, laboratories, and certification bodies
recognized by EPA to participate in the program.
o Response and follow up to verification testing failures across more than 65 product
categories.
• Ensuring that products with the ENERGY STAR label continue to represent top efficiency
performance by updating product specifications in terms of stringency in a timely manner.
For product categories with rapidly evolving models (e.g., consumer electronics, office
equipment), specifications will be updated about every two years and, where appropriate,
will include out-year specification criteria so that industry can anticipate upcoming
revisions. For all other product categories, the EPA will consistently monitor market share
and launch revisions, as appropriate.
• Increasing the use of the ENERGY STAR label on products by adding products to the
program, with a particular focus on products in the rapidly evolving electronics market.
• Continuing to support the ENERGY STAR New Homes program to ensure the technical
rigor of the ENERGY STAR specifications, and offering unique solutions for participating
builders, Home Energy Raters, and utility partners to facilitate their success in
implementing these specifications through technical and training support.
• Educating and empowering homeowners with unbiased information on how to improve
their homes' energy efficiency through on-line home assessment tools and ENERGY STAR
recommended practices, including sealing air leaks around the home and adding insulation,
properly maintaining heating and cooling systems for optimum performance, and getting
quality installation when replacing equipment.
• Engaging regional, state and utility energy efficiency programs and trade associations to
integrate ENERGY STAR as a platform to reduce energy use in commercial and industrial
217
-------
buildings into voluntary energy awareness campaigns and competitions including the use of
EPA's National Building Competition as an educational platform to motivate immediate
energy reductions in the commercial and industrial markets.
• Supporting local mandates and ordinances that require energy benchmarking and disclosure
using EPA's ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager programs that are now in place in more
than 7 jurisdictions via technical assistance support, Portfolio Manager enhancements, and
training.
• Enhancing reporting functionality and data exchange for the redesigned Portfolio Manager,
EPA's ENERGY STAR measuring and tracking tool.
• Expanding efforts to measure energy use by adding new ENERGY STAR energy
performance scales for additional commercial building types as well as updating existing
ratings as data becomes available.
• Achieving new levels of industrial efficiency by promoting the ENERGY STAR Challenge
for Industry, and updating Industrial Energy Guides and Energy Performance Indicators
(EPIs) in several sectors.
The EPA also will maintain its priorities to reduce CC>2 and other air emissions through the CHP
and Green Power Partnerships in FY 2014. The CHP Partnership will continue to support
Executive Order 13624 ("Accelerating Investment in Industrial Energy Efficiency") in
promoting the installation of CHP systems and the inclusion of output-based limits in air
regulations and permits. The Green Power Partnership will remain focused on expanding
innovative initiatives that increase demand for renewable energy such as collaborative solar
procurement within communities and leveraging relationships with key NGOs to reach a broader
set of potential partners and stakeholders.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to promote cost-effective corporate GHG management
practices and provide recognition for superior efforts through a joint award program with non-
government organizations. The virtual Center for Corporate Climate Leadership will contribute
to this effort through providing tools and resources to organizations and overseeing the award
program.
The State and Local Climate and Energy Program will continue in FY 2014 to work with its
partners to provide robust, strategically-focused expertise and resources: technical assistance,
policy guidance, analytical tools, trainings, peer exchange, workshops listservs, expertise and
relationships that foster cross-cutting, multi-agency cooperation. At the community level, the
program will continue to leverage the accomplishments and outcomes of the 50 Climate
Showcase Community grantees that were funded in 2009 and 2010. The expertise gained from
the community grants will support many others' use of grant-developed products (i.e. tools,
outreach strategies, measurement resources).
The FY 2014 Budget Request for the ENERGY STAR program totals $52.9 million.
The EPA will continue the SmartWay Transport Partnership to increase energy efficiency and
lower emissions of freight transportation through verification and promotion of advanced
technologies including: anti-idling technologies, lower rolling resistance tires, improved
218
-------
aerodynamic truck designs, and improved freight logistics. SmartWay also will continue its
efforts to:
• develop GHG accounting protocols for heavy-duty diesel trucks and explore opportunities
to evolve protocols for the multimodal freight supply chain network;
• promote SmartWay designated light duty and heavy duty vehicles that meet SmartWay's
criteria for environmentally superior performance;
• expand our SmartWay partner recruiting efforts while streamlining partner management
processes;
• update, as needed, federal guidance on low GHG-emitting vehicles for implementation of
Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) Section 141 federal vehicle purchase
requirements;
• continue to provide expertise and serve as a technical test bed in support of the Agency's
future policy direction for greenhouse gas emissions;
• promote suite of new partner tools, designed to more easily benchmark and track
performance, for shipper, carrier and logistics companies; and
• encourage the adoption of SmartWay methods and tools internationally through
stakeholder development, information sharing, and collaboration on pilot projects.
The FY 2014 Budget Request for the SmartWay Transport Partnership program totals $2.7
million.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to work to reduce emissions of methane and fluorinated
greenhouse gases through voluntary partnerships with industry. The EPA will continue to lead
the Global Methane Initiative (GMI) and enhance public-private sector cooperation to reduce
global methane emissions and deliver clean energy to markets. Methane, a short-lived climate
pollutant, is a potent greenhouse gas that is second in global importance only to carbon dioxide.
Because methane is emitted across the globe, methane mitigation efforts anywhere have
important implications in making near-term emissions reductions. The EPA will support the
development and implementation of methane recovery and use projects at landfills, agricultural
waste operations, coal mines, wastewater systems, and natural gas and oil facilities in key
developing countries and countries with economies in transition. The EPA support will involve
identifying and addressing technical, institutional, legal, regulatory, and other barriers to project
development based on strategic planning and coordination with partner country's methane action
plans. The EPA's work will leverage investments and assistance provided by the private sector
and other partners. The FY 2014 Budget Request for the Global Methane Initiative totals $4.8
million.
The EPA will continue to fulfill U.S. obligations under the U.N. Framework Convention on
Climate Change (UNFCCC). This includes preparing the annual Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse
Gas Emissions and Sinks and providing technical assistance to developing countries. The focus
of the work is on efforts to monitor, report, and verify greenhouse gas emissions and
sequestration through cost-effective measures.
219
-------
The EPA will continue to develop and implement the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program.
Established in October 2009, this program has a total of 41 sectors, with approximately 10
thousand reporters. Focus areas for the GHG Reporting Program will include:
• expanding the database management systems to ensure alignment with regulatory
amendments;
• carrying out a comprehensive QA/QC and verification process through a combination of
electronic checks, staff reviews, and follow-up with facilities when necessary;
• providing guidance and training to reporters, using the results of verification to focus the
training and outreach to ensure that reports are submitted in an accurate and timely
manner; and
• sharing data with the public in a timely manner, within the federal Government, with
state and local governments, with reporting entities, and with the public to support
improved understanding of both emission levels and opportunities for GHG reductions.
In FY 2014, the budget request for the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program, in the EPM
appropriation, is $18.9 million.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(G02) Million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTCO2E) of greenhouse gas reductions in
the buildings sector.
FY2007
107.8
132.4
FY2008
118.8
140.8
FY 2009
130.2
143.4
FY 2010
143.0
163.5
FY2011
156.9
189.0
FY 2012
168.7
Data
Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
182.6
FY 2014
196.2
Units
MMTCO2e
Measure
Target
Actual
(G06) Million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTCO2E) of greenhouse gas reductions in
the transportation sector.
FY2007
2.2
2.2
FY2008
3.3
4.2
FY2009
5.5
5.9
FY2010
15.4
16.5
FY2011
23.7
23.6
FY2012
28.0
Data
Avail
12/2013
FY2013
33.0
FY2014
37.0
Units
MMTC02e
Measure
Target
Actual
(G16) Million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTCO2E) of greenhouse gas reductions in
the industry sector.
FY2007
229.6
267.3
FY2008
248.3
289.7
FY 2009
267.3
293.7
FY 2010
304.0
362.8
FY2011
346.2
386.4
FY 2012
372.9
Data
Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
421.9
FY 2014
461.8
Units
MMTCO2e
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,314.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
220
-------
• (-$979.07-6.8 FTE) This reduces and reallocates FTE among the voluntary programs: +2.7
FTE to Energy Star, -7.3 FTE from the Global Methane Initiative program, + 3.2 FTE to
the Greenhouse Gas Registry and -5.4 FTE from other Climate Change programs. The
reduced resources include 6.8 FTE and associated payroll of $979.0.
• (-$7.0) This reflects a reduction in travel to support the Administration's Management
Agenda goal of reducing travel and conference spending.
• (+$2,389.0) This increase will support the Energy Star program. These resources are for
oversight of the third-party certification system for ENERGY STAR products and the
implementation of the EPA's verification process for residential, commercial and
industrial buildings. The increase will improve quality control over the ENERGY STAR
product labeling program which impacts more than 1,500 manufacturing companies
seeking to qualify their products and close to 7,000 building owners certifying
commercial buildings as ENERGY STAR annually. In addition, the increased funds will
be utilized to revise product and building specifications to advance energy efficiency and
allow ENERGY STAR to continue to be a differentiator in the marketplace.
• (+$500.0) This increase supports efforts to promote the adoption of biodigesters and to
build the business case for the commercial viability of this technology.
• (+$763.0) These funds will be used to support the ongoing Global Methane Initiative.
• (+$2,390.0) The additional resources will enable the program to handle increases in the
general reporting and verification workload across the many industry sectors and
emission sources as well as our work with states. It includes outreach to reporters on
topics such as how to comply with the rule and how to report emissions using the
electronic reporting tool as well as how to address any potential reporting errors prior to
data publication. These resources will provide assistance to reporting entities, ensure data
accuracy, and provide transparency into the major sources of GHG emissions across the
nation.
• (+$136.0) The increase will be used to support public and private organizations
implementing the full range of least cost compliance and mitigation options associated
with the EPA's power sector air regulations, including Clean Energy resources like end-
use energy efficiency, combined heat and power, and renewable energy.
• (+$54.0) This reflects resources for web tools and technology infrastructure to support
activities across the program. This supports core IT functions.
• (+$203.0) This reflects resources to support the Agency's efforts to reduce travel by
utilizing green teleconferencing. These funds support more cost-efficient Agency
communications.
221
-------
Statutory Authority:
CAA Amendments, 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. - Sections 102, 103, 104 and 108; Pollution
Prevention Act (PPA), 42 U.S.C. 13101 et seq. - Sections 6602, 6603, 6604 and 6605; National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. - Section 102; Grand Canyon
Protection Act (GCPA), 15 U.S.C. 2901 - Section 1103; Federal Technology Transfer Act
(FTTA), 15 U.S.C. - Section 3701a; CWA, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq. - Section 104; SWDA, 42
U.S.C. 6901 et seq.- Section 8001; EPA, 42 U.S.C. 16104 et seq.
222
-------
Federal Stationary Source Regulations
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Address Climate Change; Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$27,298.0
$27,298.0
111.9
FY 2012
Actuals
$26,766.5
$26,766.5
119.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$27,484.0
$27,484.0
111.9
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$34,103.0
$34,103.0
127.9
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$6,805.0
$6,805.0
16.0
Program Project Description:
Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), the EPA is required to set National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) for widespread pollutants from numerous and diverse sources considered
harmful to public health and the environment. The EPA has set NAAQS for six common
pollutants. The agency also has set emission standards for sources of these "criteria" pollutants.
The CAA requires the EPA to periodically review the science upon which the NAAQS are based
and the standards themselves. These national standards form the foundation for air quality
management and establish goals that protect public health and the environment.
The CAA established two types of NAAQS. Primary standards set limits with an adequate
margin of safety to protect public health, including the health of at-risk populations, such as
children, older adults, and persons with pre-existing cardiovascular and respiratory disease such
as asthma. Secondary standards set limits to protect public welfare from any known or
anticipated adverse effects, including protection against decreased visibility and damage to
animals, crops, vegetation, and buildings. The six pollutants for which the EPA has established
NAAQS include: particulate matter (PM), ozone, sulfur dioxide (802), nitrogen dioxide (NC^),
carbon monoxide (CO), and lead.
This program also includes activities, mandated by the CAA, directed toward reducing air
emissions of toxic, criteria, and other pollutants from stationary sources. Specifically, this
program provides for the development of control technology-based standards for major sources
(i.e., Maximum Achievable Control Technology - MACT standards) and area sources, the
development of standards of performance and emissions guidelines for waste combustion
sources, the assessment and regulation of residual risk remaining after implementation of the
control technology-based standards, the periodic review and revision of the control technology-
based standards, and associated national guidance and outreach. The program also includes
issuing, reviewing, and periodically revising, as necessary, New Source Performance Standards
(NSPS) for criteria and certain listed pollutants, setting standards to limit emissions of volatile
organic compounds (VOC) from consumer and commercial products, and establishing
Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) through issuance and periodic review and
revision of control technique guidelines (CTG).
223
-------
In addition to existing CAA and court-ordered mandates, the EPA is required to periodically
review and revise both the list of air toxics subject to regulation and the list of source categories
for which standards must be developed. Available information indicates that these requirements
will continue to require significant effort for the foreseeable future. Activities described within
Federal Stationary Source Regulations support the Addressing Climate Change and Improving
Air Quality objectives in the Strategic Plan.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Addressing Climate Change
The CAA requires the EPA to set NSPS for industrial categories that cause, or significantly
contribute to, air pollution that may endanger public health or welfare. The EPA will continue
work to address NSPS for sources of greenhouse gases (GHGs), consistent with the requirements
of the CAA. Section 111 of the CAA requires the EPA, at least every eight years, to review and,
if appropriate, revise NSPS for each source category for which such standards have been
established. To improve efficiencies for the EPA and state implementation, safeguard public
health, and increase certainty for industry, concurrently with this ongoing review for listed
source categories, the EPA, in FY 2014, will perform analyses and make determinations to
address whether regulation of GHG emissions from such listed source categories is warranted as
resources allow. Using emission inventory data and control technology information, the EPA
will determine feasible emission control within a reasonable timeframe, and whether or where
significant emission reductions could be achieved cost-effectively. The supporting analyses will
include developing emission estimates, evaluating the availability and costs of control, and, to
the extent possible, quantifying economic, environmental, and energy impacts. The EPA will
perform only a limited number of analyses of prioritized sectors. In response to petitions and
other requests the EPA has received to date, the agency expects to undertake consideration of
such actions for petroleum refining, pulp and paper facilities, municipal solid waste landfills,
iron and steel production, coal mines, animal feeding operations, and portland cement.
Improving Air Quality
In FY 2014, the EPA will be continuing its reviews of several NAAQS, including ozone, lead,
NC>2 and 862, in accordance with the statutory mandate to review the standards every five years,
and make revisions, as appropriate. In particular, the EPA will be working to complete the
reviews of the ozone and lead standards, including issuing rules to revise those standards, if
appropriate, by the end of 2014. Conducting multiple concurrent reviews requires a substantial
investment in highly trained staff and the allocation of significant analytical resources. Each
review involves a comprehensive review, synthesis, and evaluation of the scientific information,
the design and conduct of complex air quality and risk and exposure analyses, the development
of a comprehensive policy assessment providing a transparent staff analysis of the scientific
basis for alternative policy options, and the development of proposed and final rules. The
assessments providing the foundation for the agency's decisions undergo extensive internal and
external scientific peer review.
224
-------
In addition to reviewing existing standards, work is currently underway to achieve and maintain
compliance with existing standards. These include the ozone standards established in 2008,
1997, and 1979; the 1997 PMio and PM2.5 standards; the 2012 and 2006 PM2.5 standards; the
2008 lead standard; the 2010 NO2 standard; the 1971 CO standard; and the 2010 SO2 standard.
Air toxics are pollutants known to cause or suspected of causing cancer, birth defects,
reproductive effects, or other serious health problems. The 2005 National Air Toxics Assessment
(NATA) estimated that all 285 million7 people in the U.S. at the time of the assessment had an
increased cancer risk of at least 10 in a million due to the inhalation of toxic air pollutants from
outdoor sources. Additionally, the 2005 NAT A showed that about 13.8 million people—about 5
percent of the total U.S. population based on the 2000 census—were exposed to air toxics levels
that result in a person's increased cancer risk of 100 in a million or greater. These higher risk
populations occur mainly in urban locations where a combination of sources results in elevated
risk levels. To reduce or eliminate the unacceptable health risks and exposures to air toxics from
multiple sources in affected communities and to fulfill its statutory and court-ordered obligations
more efficiently, the EPA will continue to pursue opportunities to meet multiple CAA
requirements for stationary sources in more integrated ways in 2014. For example, where the
CAA requires the agency to take multiple regulatory actions that affect the same industry, the
EPA will consider aligning the timing of these rulemaking actions to take advantage of synergies
between the multiple rules, where feasible. Coordinating such actions allows the agency to use
fewer resources to meet multiple CAA objectives for controlling both criteria and toxic air
pollutants while considering cost effectiveness and technical feasibility of controls. It also
creates greater certainty for regulated industry. Even with the greater efficiency provided by this
approach, resources are needed to complete the court-ordered and statutorily required review and
promulgation of standards and conduct rigorous analysis to incorporate the best available
science. Among the sectors affected by this effort are pulp and paper, chemical production, and
petroleum refining.
In 2013 and 2014, there are approximately 81 stationary source (e.g., air toxics) rules due for
review under Section 112 of the CAA. Thirty of these are already on court-ordered deadlines and
are in some stage of development at the present time. The EPA will prioritize its work, according
to resources, to meet court-ordered deadlines and to meet its CAA statutory obligations. For
example, section 112(d)(6) of the CAA requires the EPA to review and revise, as necessary,
within 8 years, all of the MACT standards that have been promulgated under CAA section 112
since 1990. These reviews include collection of new information and emissions data from
industry; review of emission control technologies; and associated economic analyses for the
affected industries. Similarly, section 112(f) of the CAA requires the EPA to conduct reviews of
the risk that remains after the implementation of MACT standards within 8 years of
promulgation. Accordingly, the agency is expecting additional litigation over these pending or
already-missed deadlines on another 50 risk and technology reviews and about 150 other rules.
Since 1990, the EPA has published 96 statutorily-required MACT standards covering 187
pollutants emitted from 174 industrial categories. However, a number of these rules have been
found deficient by the courts, necessitating substantial revisions to comply with requirements set
forth in the CAA.
7 The 2005 NATA used the 2000 census, which estimated the U.S. population to be 285 million.
225
-------
Reductions in emissions from prioritized sectors (such as petroleum refining, iron and steel,
chemical plants, coatings, and portland cement) will reduce emissions of air toxics, help ozone
nonattainment areas, and enhance our climate change efforts. Additional controls at these sources
also will reduce emissions near affected communities, including low income and minority
communities. The EPA will address programmatic elements, including court-vacated rules that
apply across many industrial sources (such as exemptions for start-up, shutdown and
malfunction, and the collection and application of the best available data). The EPA has
reviewed existing regulations to identify potential emissions monitoring deficiencies and the
agency has embarked upon a course to correct these, including the application of new, advanced
monitoring technologies. In FY 2014, the agency will develop modifications to reporting
procedures to allow facilities to report compliance data electronically, reducing the burden and
costs at the industry, state, and federal levels.
Significant resources are needed to fulfill legal and statutory deadline obligations to complete
certain MACT and waste incineration standards, to issue residual risk and technology review
standards for MACT categories, to review and revise NSPS, and to issue control technique
guidelines for control of VOCs. These obligations arise out of Clean Air Act mandates and court
orders requiring us to review, revise, or update a number of rules.
The EPA will engage in rulemaking efforts to review and revise, as necessary and appropriate,
Petroleum Refineries NSPS, Petroleum Refineries MACT I and II, Iron and Steel MACT and
NSPS, Chemical Plants, Coatings and portland cement MACT and NSPS. To address standards
that are part of the residual risk litigation settlement, the EPA also will make significant progress
in issuing standards for the following categories: Phosphoric Acid and Phosphate Fertilizer;
Flexible Polyurethane Foam Production; Acrylic and Modacrylic Fibers Production;
Polycarbonate Production; Off-Site Waste and Recovery Operation; Aerospace, Group III
Polymers and Resins, Ferroalloys , Mineral Wool, Wool Fiberglass, Pesticide Active Ingredients,
Polyether Polyols, Group IV Polymers and Resins, Primary Aluminum, and Secondary
Aluminum.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(001) Cumulative percentage reduction in tons of toxicity -weighted (for cancer risk) emissions
of air toxics from 1993 baseline.
FY2007
35
39
FY2008
35
40
FY 2009
36
40
FY 2010
36
40
FY2011
36
Data
Avail
12/2013
FY 2012
37
Data
Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
42
FY 2014
42
Units
Percent
Reduction
Measure
Target
Actual
(002) Cumulative percentage reduction in tons of toxicity-weighted (for non-cancer risk)
emissions of air toxics from 1993 baseline.
FY2007
58
53
FY2008
59
53
FY2009
59
53
FY2010
59
53
FY2011
59
Data
Avail
12/2013
FY2012
59
Data
Avail
12/2013
FY2013
59
FY2014
59
Units
Percent
Reduction
226
-------
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$21.0) This decrease is the net effect of the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$1.0) This reflects an increase in travel to support rulemaking efforts, especially in
supporting technical staff to conduct staff visits that enhance the agency's ability to
understand the operations at sources that may be subject to rulemaking.
• (+$2,172.07 +7.9 FTE) This reflects an increase to support climate change efforts in this
program such as determinations to address whether NSPS for sources of greenhouse
gases (GHGs) are warranted. The additional resources also will improve the EPA's
ability to perform analyses of prioritized sectors. The additional resources include 7.9
FTE and associated payroll of $1,083.0.
• (+$4,653.0 / +8.1 FTE) This increase will provide additional resources for the agency to
meet court-ordered deadlines and to meet its CAA statutory obligations. To complete
statutorily-required reviews of existing air toxics MACT regulations, the EPA must
collect new information and emissions data from industry, review emission control
technologies, and perform associated economic analyses for the affected industries. In
addition, CAA also requires the EPA to conduct reviews of the risk that remains after the
implementation of the MACT standards within 8 years of promulgation. The EPA is
expecting additional litigation over these pending or already-missed deadlines on 50 risk
and technology reviews and about 150 other rules. The additional resources include 8.1
FTE and associated payroll of $1,111.0.
Statutory Authority:
CAA (42 U.S.C. 7401-7661f).
227
-------
Federal Support for Air Quality Management
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Address Climate Change; Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$123,058.0
$7,091.0
$130,149.0
824.6
FY 2012
Actuals
$123,602.0
$6,964.6
$130,566.6
829.6
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$123,338.0
$7,137.0
$130,475.0
824.6
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$132,805.0
$7,690.0
$140,495.0
852.7
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$9,747.0
$599.0
$10,346.0
28.1
Program Project Description:
Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), the EPA is required to set National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) for widespread pollutants from numerous and diverse sources considered
harmful to public health and the environment. The EPA has set NAAQS for six common
pollutants. The agency also has set emission standards for sources of these "criteria" pollutants.
The CAA requires the EPA to periodically review the science upon which the NAAQS are based
and the standards themselves. These national standards form the foundation for air quality
management and establish goals that protect public health and the environment.
The CAA established two types of NAAQS. Primary standards set limits to protect public health
with an adequate margin of safety, including the health of at-risk populations, such as children,
older adults, and persons with pre-existing cardiovascular or respiratory disease such as asthma.
Secondary standards set limits to protect public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse
effects, including protection against decreased visibility and damage to animals, crops,
vegetation, and buildings. The six pollutants for which the EPA has established NAAQS include:
particulate matter (PM), ozone, sulfur dioxide (802), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), carbon monoxide
(CO), and lead.
The Federal Support for Air Quality Management Program assists states, tribes, and local air
pollution control agencies in the development, implementation, and evaluation of programs to
implement the NAAQS, establish standards for reducing air toxics, and sustain visibility
protection. The EPA develops federal measures and regional strategies that help to reduce
emissions from stationary and mobile sources; however, states and tribes have the primary
responsibility for developing clean air measures necessary to meet the NAAQS and protect
visibility. The EPA partners with states, tribes, and local governments to create a comprehensive
compliance program to ensure that multi-source and multi-pollutant reduction targets and air
quality improvement objectives, including consideration of environmental justice issues, are met
and sustained. The EPA also supports training for state, Tribal, and local air pollution
professionals on rulemakings and other significant actions.
228
-------
For each of the six criteria pollutants, the EPA tracks two kinds of air pollution trends: air
pollutant concentrations based on actual measurements in the ambient (outside) air at selected
monitoring sites throughout the country, and emissions based on engineering estimates or
measurements of the total tons of pollutants released into the air each year. The EPA works with
state and local governments to ensure the technical integrity of source controls in State
Implementation Plans (SIPs) and with tribes to ensure the technical integrity of source controls in
Tribal Implementation Plans (TIPs). The EPA assists states, tribes, and local agencies to identify
the most cost-effective control options available, including consideration of multi-pollutant
reductions and innovative strategies. This program includes working with other federal agencies
to ensure a coordinated approach and working with other countries to address pollution sources
outside U.S. borders that pose risks to public health and the environment within the U.S. This
program also supports the development of risk assessment methodologies for air pollutants.
Toxic air pollutants are known to cause or suspected of causing increased risk of cancer and
other serious health effects, such as neurological damage and reproductive harm. This Federal
Support Program assists state, Tribal, and local air pollution control agencies in reducing air
toxic emissions through modeling, inventories, monitoring, assessments, and strategies. The EPA
also supports programs that reduce inhalation risk and multipathway risk posed by deposition of
air toxics to water bodies and ecosystems (e.g., the Great Waters program), facilitate
international cooperation to reduce transboundary and intercontinental air toxics pollution,
develop and update the National Emissions Inventory (NEI), develop risk assessment
methodologies for toxic air pollutants, and provide training for air pollution professionals.
Although the agency has not updated the National Air Toxics Assessment (NATA) recently
because of budget constraints, the program provides for collaboration with state, local and Tribal
air pollution control agencies, both in the implementation of federal air toxics standards and in
conducting the triennial National Air Toxics Assessment (NATA).
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Addressing Climate Change
During FY 2014, the EPA will continue to take steps to address climate change. The agency will
issue additional policy and guidance on greenhouse gas (GHG) related issues for the Title V
operating permits and Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) programs. The EPA will
continue to issue permits directly to sources in areas where states, tribes, or local agencies do not
issue permits. In addition, the EPA will oversee the activities of state and local permitting
programs as they review GHG permit applications which are expected to increase in 2014. Under
Steps 1, 2, and 3 of the EPA's Tailoring Rule, the agency recognizes that some sources will need
to obtain Title V permits for the first time due to their GHG emissions. The majority of these
newly permitted sources will likely be large solid waste landfills and industrial manufacturers.
There could be additional PSD permitting actions each year triggered by increases in GHG
o
emissions from new and modified emission sources.
8 Fact sheet for Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Final Rule
http://www.epa.gov/nsr/documents/20100413fs.pdf
229
-------
In FY 2014, the EPA regional offices will continue to issue and oversee increased numbers of
PSD and Title V permits because of the new requirements for GHG emissions control and new
requirements for permitting sources in Indian country. Additionally, the regional offices will
issue GHG PSD permits in states where the EPA has issued Federal Implementation Plans
(FIPs). Regional offices review approximately 70 percent of all initial operating permits and 25
percent of all operating permit renewals issued by states, tribes, or local agencies. It is expected
that regional offices will review an increasing number of permits issued by states, tribes, or local
agencies and review changes to state, Tribal, and local PSD and Title V programs due to the
incorporation of GHG provisions. The EPA will continue to address complex national policy
questions that arise and ensure national consistency as new GHG requirements are implemented.
The EPA will consider the results of a range of international assessments to address the climate
impacts of short-lived climate forcers. These traditional air pollutants, including black carbon, a
constituent of particulate matter (PM), and ozone are having an immediate effect on climate.
Reducing emissions of these pollutants can reap immediate climate and public health benefits.
The EPA will continue to identify the most significant domestic and international sources of
black carbon and ozone precursor emissions by working through the multilateral Climate and
Clean Air Coalition (CCAC), through collaboration with the Arctic Council and the Convention
on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution (LRTAP), and other related international efforts.
Based on these findings and enhanced analytical capabilities, the EPA will pursue effective steps
for reducing these emissions. For example, the EPA will collaborate with CCAC partners to
develop a rapid assessment tool to enable countries to determine the benefits of mitigating short
lived climate pollutants.
Improving Air Quality
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue its CAA prescribed responsibilities to administer the NAAQS
by taking federal oversight actions and by developing regulations and policies to ensure
continued health and welfare protection during the transition between the pre-existing and new
standards. The EPA will provide technical and policy assistance to states developing or revising
attainment SIPs, and will designate or redesignate areas as attainment or nonattainment, as
appropriate. The NAAQS improve air quality and reduce related health and welfare impacts and
their costs to the nation.
Particulate Matter (PM) is linked to tens of thousands of premature deaths per year as well as
aggravation of cardiovascular and respiratory disease (as indicated by increased hospital and
emergency department visits, and development of chronic respiratory disease). Exposure to
ozone is associated with a wide range of adverse health effects that range from decreased lung
function and increased respiratory symptoms to serious indicators of respiratory morbidity
including emergency department visits and hospital admissions for respiratory causes and new
onset asthma as well as premature mortality. Elevated levels of lead in children have been
associated with IQ loss, poor academic achievement, and delinquent behavior. Short-term
exposure to sulfur dioxide (862) can result in adverse respiratory effects, including narrowing of
the airways, which can cause difficulty breathing and increased asthma symptoms, particularly in
at-risk populations, including people with asthma who are active outdoors, and children and
older adults. Exposure to nitrogen dioxide (NC^) has been associated with a variety of health
230
-------
effects, including increased respiratory symptoms, especially among asthmatic children, and
respiratory-related emergency department visits and hospital admissions, particularly for children
and older adults.
In addition to meeting CAA requirements under Sections 111, 112, and 129 for new or revised
emission standards for criteria, toxic, and other air pollutants for a wide variety of stationary
source categories, the EPA will develop its multi-pollutant and sector based efforts by
constructing and organizing initiatives around industrial sectors. The focus of these efforts is to
comply with the CAA requirements for new source performance standards and national emission
standards for hazardous air pollutants by addressing an individual sector's emissions
comprehensively and to prioritize regulatory efforts to address the sources and pollutants of
greatest concern. The EPA will continue to look at all pollutants in an industrial sector and
identify ways to take advantage of the co-benefits of pollution control. In developing sector and
multi-pollutant approaches, the EPA seeks innovative solutions that address the differing nature
of the various sectors. This approach can provide greater certainty and reduce costs to industry
by combining multiple standards.
One of the EPA's top priorities is to mitigate health risks in affected communities and to enable
the agency to fulfill its CAA and court-ordered obligations. The CAA requires that the
technological bases for all Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards be
reviewed and updated as necessary every eight years. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to
conduct risk assessments to determine whether the MACT rules appropriately protect public
health.
In 2013 and 2014, there are approximately 81 stationary source (e.g., air toxics) rules due for
review under Section 112 of the CAA. Thirty of these are already on court-ordered deadlines and
are in some stage of development at the present time. The agency is prioritizing the other 51
categories and will begin work as resources allow. To develop effective standards, the EPA
needs accurate information about actual emissions, their composition, specific emission points,
and transport into communities.
The E-Enterprise initiative is an agencywide effort to modernize our business processes and
systems to reduce reporting burden on states and regulated facilities, and improve the
effectiveness and efficiency of regulatory programs for the EPA, states and tribes. The EPA will
enhance its ability to collect electronic submissions of emissions data directly from the sources
subject to CAA regulations as one aspect of the agency's E-Enterprise initiative. In the cases
where the EPA currently requires paper-based reporting, requiring facilities to report emissions
data electronically should reduce reporting burden and costs for industry, states, and federal
activities. The agency's goal is to reduce the need to develop information collection requests that
are otherwise a part of the rule development process. The electronic collection of air toxics
emissions data will expedite the development and revision of emissions factors and improve the
quality of the data underpinning the air toxics regulations.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to implement the Urban Air Toxics Strategy which helps
provide information and training to states and communities through documents, websites, and
workshops on tools to help them in conducting assessments and identifying risk reduction
231
-------
strategies for air toxics. The agency will emphasize activities to help environmental justice
communities address air toxics concerns.
The EPA will continue its efforts to improve dissemination of information between the EPA
offices, the state, local and Tribal governments, and the public. The EPA will work through an
intraagency workgroup to create educational resources to disseminate information about new air
toxics and mercury standards. These environmental outreach activities will support the EPA's
mission to expand the conversation on environmentalism and work to improve air quality. The
purpose of these activities will be to ensure that the American public is educated about air quality
issues and standards. These resources will be available to educate the public, specifically
teachers, informal educators, and parents.
The EPA will continue to enhance analytical capabilities to develop effective regulations
including: analyzing the economic impacts of regulations and policies; developing and refining
existing emission test methods for measuring pollutants from smokestacks and other industrial
sources; developing and refining existing source sampling measurement techniques to determine
rates of emissions from stationary sources; and conducting dispersion modeling that
characterizes the atmospheric processes that disperse a pollutant emitted by a source. The
Science and Technology component of this program supports the scientific development of these
capabilities. The EPA's current assessments indicate that while many air toxics are widespread,
areas of concentrated emissions, such as communities with concentrated industrial and mobile
source activity (near ports or distribution areas), often have greater cumulative exposure.
Working with stakeholders and informed by analysis of air quality health risk data, the EPA is
working to prioritize key air toxics regulations that can be completed expeditiously and that will
address significant risks to public health.
In FY 2014, the EPA will provide assistance to state, Tribal, and local agencies in implementing
national programs and assessing their effectiveness. The EPA uses a broad suite of analytical
tools such as source characterization analyses, emission factors and inventories, statistical
analyses, source apportionment techniques, quality assurance protocols and audits, improved
source testing and monitoring techniques, urban and regional-scale numerical grid air quality
models, and augmented cost/benefit tools to assess control strategies. Please see
http://www.epa.gov/ttn for further details. The agency will maintain these tools (e.g., integrated
multiple pollutant emissions inventory, air quality modeling platforms, etc.) to provide the
technical underpinnings for more efficient and comprehensive air quality management and for
integration with climate change activities.
The EPA works to help attainment areas take action in order to keep ozone and PM levels below
the NAAQS to ensure continued health protection and better position areas to remain in
attainment. The EPA will work with state, Tribal, and local agencies to share information about
available tools, resources, and data that may be of use to identify emission reduction and public
participation options.
The EPA will continue to implement a strategy that, where appropriate, supports the
development and evaluation of multiple pollutant measurements. This strategy includes changes,
where the agency deems necessary, to effectively implement revised NAAQS monitoring
232
-------
requirements for ozone, lead, SC>2, nitrogen dioxide (NC>2), carbon monoxide (CO), and PM.
The EPA will continue development of emissions measurement methods for condensable PM2.5
for cross-industry application to ensure that accurate and consistent measurement methods can be
employed in the NAAQS implementation program. The EPA will continue to assist other federal
agencies and state and local governments in implementing the conformity regulations. The
regulations require federal agencies, taking actions in nonattainment and maintenance areas, to
determine that the emissions caused by their actions will conform to the SIP.
In addition, in FY 2014, the EPA will continue to participate in assessing and addressing the
effects of global and hemispheric transboundary air pollution on U.S air quality management
efforts. The EPA will continue participating in negotiations and implementing activities under
international treaties, such as the U.S.-Canada Agreement, the Convention on Long-range
Transboundary Air Pollution, and the UNEP Global Mercury Treaty to address fine particles,
ozone, mercury, and persistent organic pollutants. In addition, the EPA will continue working on
mutually beneficial capacity building efforts with key countries and regions (e.g., China, Asia,
and Mexico) to reduce transboundary air pollution.
The EPA will continue to operate and maintain the Air Quality System (AQS), which houses the
nation's air quality data and allows for exchanges of data and technology. The EPA will modify
AQS, as necessary, to reflect new ambient monitoring regulations and to ensure that it complies
with critical programmatic needs and with the agency's architecture and data quality standards.
The EPA will continue to operate and maintain the AQS Data Mart, which provides access to the
scientific community and others to obtain air quality data via the internet. The EPA will modify
the AQS Data Mart, as necessary, to ensure it reflects changes made to AQS9. The EPA will
continue to operate and maintain AirNow, which provides real-time air quality data and forecasts
nationwide10. Further, the EPA will continue to operate and maintain the Emissions Inventory
System (EIS), a system used to quality assure and store current and historical emissions
inventory data, and to generate the National Emissions Inventory (NET). The NEI is used by the
EPA, states, and others to analyze the public health risks from air toxics and to develop strategies
to manage those risks and support multipollutant analysis covering air toxics, NAAQS
pollutants, and GHGs.
The EPA will continue to support permitting authorities on the timely issuance of renewal
permits and to respond to petitions under the Title V operating permits program. The EPA will
continue to address monitoring issues in underlying federal and state rules and to take
appropriate action to more broadly improve the Title V program. Please see
http://www.epa.gov/air/oaqps/permits/ for further details. The agency will perform monitoring
and modeling support associated with permit issuance and National Environmental Policy Act
evaluation. The EPA maintains the RACT/BACT/LAER clearinghouse (RBLC) to help permit
applicants and reviewers make pollution prevention and control technology decisions for
stationary air pollution sources, and includes data submitted by several U.S. territories and all 50
states on over 200 different air pollutants and 1000 industrial processes. Please see
http://cfpub.epa.gov/RBLC/ for more information on the RBLC.
9 For more information about AQS, visit http://epa.gov/ttn/airs/airsaqs/. and for the AQS Data Mart,
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/airs/aqsdatamart/basic info.htm
10 For more information about AirNow, visit www.aimow.gov
233
-------
In FY 2014, the EPA will undertake analyses aimed at developing New Source Review (NSR)
regulations to more effectively address sources of criteria pollutants and GHGs and the EPA will
continue to work with state and Tribal governments to implement revisions to the PSD
requirements and NSR rules, including updates to delegation agreements (for delegated states)
and review of implementation plan revisions (for SIP-approved states and TIP-approved tribes).
The EPA will continue to review and respond to reconsideration requests and (working with the
Department of Justice) legal challenges related to NSR program revisions, take any actions
necessary to respond to court decisions, and work with states and industries on NSR applicability
issues. Emphasis will be given to assisting tribes in implementing the Tribal NSR Rule and help
them develop the capacity to assume delegation of the rule or to effectively participate in reviews
of permits issued by the EPA in Indian country.
To improve the NAAQS federal program, the EPA will continue, within current statutory and
resource limitations, to address deficiencies in designations and implementation. For example,
the EPA has been working to synchronize the issuance of implementation guidance with the final
revised NAAQS. The agency's goal is to provide this guidance as early as possible in the process
to assist states in implementing standards. The agency will continue consulting with states to
determine additional methods to improve the SIP development and implementation process that
are within current statutory limitations.
The EPA will continue to offer technical support to state and local agencies as they implement
the National Air Toxics Monitoring Network. The network has two main parts: the National Air
Toxics Trends Sites (NATTS) and Local Scale Monitoring (LSM) projects. The NATTS,
designed to capture the impacts of widespread pollutants, is comprised of 27 permanent
monitoring sites, and the LSMs are comprised of scores of short-term monitoring projects, each
designed to address specific local issues. Please see http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/airtoxpg.html
for additional information. The EPA continues to use its technical expertise to improve
monitoring systems to fill data gaps and get a better assessment of actual population exposure to
toxic air pollution. Also, the EPA will continue updating analytical efforts designed to provide
nationwide information on ambient levels of criteria and toxic air pollutants.
The EPA also is working to improve its analytical tools. These improvements include completing
the next National Air Toxics Assessment (NATA). The next NATA will be conducted using
emission data from 2011, and will include updates to specific methods used in the analysis. For
example, the EPA will update methods for estimating area and mobile source emissions, and
update air dispersion modeling based on recent advances in the science. The EPA also will
enhance its quantitative benefits assessment tools. In particular, the EPA is redesigning the
environmental Benefits Mapping and Analysis Program (BenMAP) as an open-source and
community owned software package; this new version will improve the agency's ability to
perform multi-pollutant benefits assessments. The EPA anticipates that these improvements will
increase the agency's ability to meet aggressive court ordered schedules to complete rulemaking
activities, especially in the Risk Technology Review program.
In addition, the EPA will improve emission inventory estimates for toxic air pollutants using the
data collected through source and ambient monitoring; and manage enforcement and compliance
234
-------
information (e.g., regulatory requirements, compliance status, pollutant release information,
permitting status) for regulated entities electronically in a single location by modernizing the Air
Facility System (AFS) database.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(M94) Percent of major NSR permits issued within one year of receiving a complete permit
application.
FY2007
75
83
FY2008
78
79
FY2009
78
76
FY2010
78
46
FY2011
78
73
FY2012
78
Data
Avail
12/2013
FY2013
78
FY2014
78
Units
Percent
Issued
Measure
Target
Actual
(M95) Percent of significant Title V operating permit revisions issued within 18 months of
receiving a complete permit application.
FY2007
94
81
FY2008
97
85
FY 2009
100
87
FY 2010
100
82
FY2011
100
84
FY 2012
100
Data
Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Units
Percent
Issued
Measure
Target
Actual
(M96) Percent of new Title V operating permits issued within 18 months of receiving a complete
permit application.
FY2007
87
51
FY2008
91
72
FY2009
95
70
FY2010
99
67
FY2011
99
72
FY2012
99
Data
Avail
12/2013
FY2013
99
FY2014
99
Units
Percent
Issued
Measure
Target
Actual
(MM7) Percent of State Implementation Plans (SIPs) removed from backlog
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
10
FY2014
10
Units
Percentage
Removed
Measure
Target
Actual
(M9) Cumulative percentage reduction in population-weighted ambient concentration of ozone
in monitored counties from 2003 baseline.
FY2007
6
6
FY2008
8
9
FY 2009
10
13
FY 2010
11
15
FY2011
12
16
FY 2012
13
Data
Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
15
FY 2014
17
Units
Percent
Reduction
Measure
Target
Actual
(M91) Cumulative percentage reduction in population-weighted ambient concentration of fine
particulate matter (PM-2.5) in all monitored counties from 2003 baseline.
FY2007
3
8
FY2008
4
13
FY 2009
5
17
FY 2010
6
23
FY2011
15
26
FY 2012
16
Data
Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
20
FY 2014
25
Units
Percent
Reduction
235
-------
Measure
Target
Actual
(MM9) Cumulative percentage reduction in the average number of days during the ozone
season that the ozone standard is exceeded in non-attainment areas, weighted by population.
FY2007
FY2008
19
37
FY2009
23
47
FY2010
26
56
FY2011
29
58
FY2012
45
Data
Avail
12/2013
FY2013
50
FY2014
50
Units
Percent
Reduction
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$5,485.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$3,190.0 / +23.2 FTE) This increase reflects support for climate change efforts in the
program such as greenhouse gas (GHG) related issues for expanded PSD programs and
Title V operating permits reviews by the Regional Offices and sector- and source-specific
guidance from headquarters, including guidance on significant national policy issues. The
additional resources include 23.2 FTE and associated payroll of $3,190.0.
• (+$523.0 7+3.8 FTE) This reflects an increase to provide assistance to state, Tribal, and
local agencies in implementing national programs and assessing their effectiveness. This
assistance includes source characterization analyses, emission factors and inventories,
statistical analyses, source apportionment techniques, quality assurance protocols and
audits, improved source testing and monitoring techniques, urban and regional-scale
numerical grid air quality models, and augmented cost/benefit tools to assess control
strategies. The additional resources include 3.8 FTE and associated payroll of $523.0.
• (+$1,970.0 / +1.0 FTE) This reflects an increase to support the development of electronic
emissions reporting. This increase will enhance the agency's ability to collect electronic
submissions of emissions data directly from the sources subject to CAA regulations as
part of the agency's E-Enterprise initiative. Where the agency currently requires paper-
based reporting, this effort will reduce the reporting burden and costs for industry, states,
and federal activities. The additional resources include 1.0 FTE and associated payroll of
$138.0.
• (-$228.0) This reflects a reduction in travel to support the Administration's Management
Agenda goal of reducing travel and conference spending.
• (-$2,507.0) This reflects a reduction to support that the agency provides to states through
contract dollars. This reduction will impact the agency's efforts to provide timely air
quality planning guidance and policy to states and tribes.
• (-$264.0) This change reflects a reduction found from IT efficiencies and consolidation in
IT contracts that support the stationary source air program.
236
-------
• (+$1,500.0) This reflects an increase in resources for the integration of environmental
outreach activities through an intra-agency workgroup to create educational resources to
disseminate information to the public and increase transparency about new air toxics and
mercury standards and other critical environmental issues. These environmental outreach
activities will support the EPA's core mission to expand the conversation on
environmentalism.
• (+$78.0) This increase is to support expanded analyses and information access tools, such
as the National Air Pollution Assessment, National Air Toxic Assessment, BenMAP, and
Air Facility System.
Statutory Authority:
CAA Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7401-7661F).
237
-------
Stratospheric Ozone: Domestic Programs
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Restore the Ozone Layer
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$5,570.0
$5,570.0
23.6
FY 2012
Actuals
$5,538.2
$5,538.2
24.9
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$5,608.0
$5,608.0
23.6
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$5,002.0
$5,002.0
23.2
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($568.0)
($568.0)
-0.4
Program Project Description:
The stratospheric ozone layer protects life by shielding the Earth's surface from harmful
ultraviolet (UV) radiation. Scientific evidence, amassed over the past 35 years, demonstrates that
ozone-depleting substances (ODS) used around the world destroy the stratospheric ozone layer
and contribute to climate change.11 Overexposure to increased levels of UV radiation due to
ozone layer depletion is expected to continue to raise the incidence of skin cancer and other
illnesses.12 Skin cancer is the most common cancer in the U.S. One American dies almost every
hour from melanoma, the deadliest form of skin cancer.13 Increased UV levels are associated
with other human and non-human effects, including cataracts, immune suppression, and effects
on aquatic ecosystems and agricultural crops.
The EPA estimates that in the U.S. alone, the worldwide phase-out of ODS will avert millions of
non-fatal and fatal skin cancers, as well as millions of cataracts, between 1990 and 2165.14
Cataracts are the leading cause of blindness worldwide, and in the U.S., a significant source of
cost to the Medicare budget. The EPA's estimates regarding the U.S. health benefits from the
ODS phase-out are based on the assumption that international ODS phase-out targets will be
achieved, allowing the ozone layer to recover later this century. According to current
atmospheric research, the ozone layer is not expected to recover until mid-century at the earliest,
due to the long lifetimes of ODS in the stratosphere.15
The EPA's Stratospheric Ozone Protection Program implements provisions of the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990 (the Act) and the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone
11 World Meteorological Organization (WMO). Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2010. Global Ozone Research and
Monitoring Project-Report No. 52, 516 pp., Geneva, Switzerland. 2011.
12 Fahey, D.W., and M.I. Hegglin (Coordinating Lead Authors), Twenty questions and answers about the ozone layer: 2010
Update, In Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2010, Global Ozone Research and Monitoring Project-Report No. 52, 516
pp., World Meteorological Organization, Geneva, Switzerland,2011.
13 American Cancer Society. "Skin Cancer Facts." Accessed February 2, 2013. Available on the internet at
http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/CancerCauses/SunandUvExposure/skin-cancer-facts.
14 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.
15 WMO, 2011.
238
-------
Layer (Montreal Protocol), continuing the control and reduction of ODS in the U.S. and lowering
health risks to the American public. Since ODS and many of their substitutes also are potent
greenhouse gases, appropriate control and reduction of these substances also provide significant
benefits for climate protection. The Act provides for a phase-out of production and consumption
of ODS and requires controls on their use, including banning certain emissive uses, requiring
labeling to inform consumer choice, and requiring sound servicing practices for the use of ODS
in various products (e.g., air conditioners and refrigerators). The Act also prohibits venting ODS
or their substitutes, including hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs).
As a signatory to the Montreal Protocol, the U.S. is committed to ensuring that our domestic
program is at least as stringent as international obligations and to regulating and enforcing the
terms of the Protocol domestically. With 197 Parties and universal participation, the Montreal
Protocol is the most successful international environmental treaty in existence.16 With U.S.
leadership, the Parties to the Montreal Protocol agreed in 2007 to a more aggressive phase-out
for ozone-depleting hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs). This adjustment to the Montreal
Protocol requires dramatic global HCFC reductions during the period 2010-2040, equaling a 47
percent reduction in overall emissions compared to previous commitments under the Protocol.
The EPA also will provide data to the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE), a data
system being developed by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, for importers and exporters
to use to submit reports to over 40 agencies and for Customs to make admissibility decisions
about products and shipments at U.S. ports of entry, including those containing ODS. The
Stratospheric Ozone Protection Program also works with the supermarket industry through the
GreenChill Partnership.17 GreenChill helps supermarkets transition to environmentally-friendlier
refrigerants, reduce harmful refrigerant emissions, and move to advanced refrigeration
technologies, strategies, and practices that lower the industry's impact on the ozone layer and
climate. The program now includes more than 7,800 stores in all 50 states. In 2011, partners
reduced leak rates to 50 percent below the national average and established plans to reduce leaks
even more.
The EPA's Responsible Appliance Disposal (RAD) Program18 is a partnership that protects the
ozone layer and reduces emissions of greenhouse gases through the recovery of ODS and HFCs
from old refrigerators, freezers, air conditioners, and dehumidifiers. RAD currently has over 50
partners, including manufacturers, retailers, utilities, and state governments. In 2011, RAD
partners disposed of more than 890 thousand refrigerant-containing appliances, reducing
emissions by 330 ozone depletion potential (ODP)-weighted tons and 2.38 million metric tons of
carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2eq).
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In carrying out the requirements of the Act and the Montreal Protocol in FY 2014, the EPA will
continue to implement the domestic rulemaking agenda for control and reduction of ODS.
16 See: http://ozone.unep.org/Publications/MP_Key_Achievements-E.pdf,
http://www.eoearth.org/artic le/Montreal_Protocol_on_Substances_that_Deplete_the_Ozone_Layer,
http://ozone.unep.org/highlights.shtml (Nov 2, 2009, entry)
17 For more information, see: www.epa.gov/greenchill
18 For more information, see: www.epa.gov/ozone/partnerships/rad
239
-------
Ongoing work of the Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program to evaluate and
regulate substitutes for ozone depleting chemicals will continue to advance this agenda. The EPA
will provide compliance assistance and enforce rules controlling ODS production, import, and
emission.
In FY 2014, the EPA will focus its work to ensure that ODS production and import caps under
the Montreal Protocol and Clean Air Act continue to be met. The Clean Air Act requires
reductions and a schedule for phasing out the production and import of ODS. These requirements
correspond to the domestic consumption cap for class II HCFCs as set by the Parties to the
Montreal Protocol. As of January 1, 2010, ODS production and imports were capped at 3,810
ODP-weighted metric tons, which is 25 percent of the U.S. baseline under the Montreal Protocol.
Each ODS is weighted based on its ozone depleting potential. In 2015, U.S. production and
import will be reduced further, to 10 percent of the U.S. baseline, and in 2020, all production and
import will be phased out, except for exempted amounts.
Given the 2010 and 2015 milestones for the ODS phase-out, the EPA is receiving and
responding to an increased number of ODS substitute applications, many of which represent
options with lower global warming potential (GWP). Under the SNAP program,19 the EPA
reviews alternatives to assist the market's transition to alternatives that are safer, including for
the climate system. The purpose of the program is to allow a smooth transition away from ODS
by identifying substitutes that offer lower overall risks to human health and the environment. As
necessary, the EPA restricts the use of alternatives for given applications that, if not restricted,
would be more harmful to human health and the environment on an overall basis. In FY 2014,
the EPA will consider the suite of available substitutes for each of approximately 50 end uses
(e.g., appliance foam-blowing agents, domestic refrigeration, air conditioning) in eight industrial
sectors, and with the listing of new alternatives, review previous decisions, as necessary. The
program also yields other benefits. Many of these alternatives warrant increased focus because
they offer significant energy efficiency gains as part of the overall transition.
The EPA also will continue to work with federal and international agencies to halt the illegal
import of ODS. Additional efforts foster the smooth transition to non ozone depleting
alternatives in various sectors.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(SOI) Remaining US Consumption of hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), chemicals that
deplete the Earth's protective ozone layer, measured in tons of Ozone Depleting Potential
(ODP).
FY2007
<9,900
6,296
FY2008
<9,900
5,667
FY2009
<9,900
3,414
FY2010
<3,811
2,435
FY2011
<3,811
2,339
FY2012
<3,700
Data
Avail
12/2013
FY2013
<3,700
FY2014
<3,700
Units
ODP Tons
19 For more information, see: www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/
240
-------
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$266.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$58.0 /-0.4 FTE) This reduces resources available for the review of low-GWP
substitute applications. The reduced resources include 0.4 FTE and associated payroll of
$58.0.
• (-$998.0) This reduction eliminates funding for the SunWise program.
• (+$222.0) This increase will support the SNAP work. EPA is receiving and responding
to an increased number of ODS substitute applications, many of which represent options
with lower global warming potential (GWP).
Statutory Authority:
CAA Amendments of 1990, Title I, Parts A and D (42 U.S.C. 7401-7434, 7501-7515), Title V
(42 U.S.C. 7661-7661F), and Title VI (42 U.S.C. 7671-7671q); The Montreal Protocol on
Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer.
241
-------
Stratospheric Ozone: Multilateral Fund
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Restore the Ozone Layer
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$9,479.0
$9,479.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$9,451.0
$9,451.0
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$9,627.0
$9,627.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$9,690.0
$9,690.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$211.0
$211.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
The ozone layer in the stratosphere protects life on Earth by preventing harmful ultraviolet (UV)
radiation from reaching the Earth's surface. Scientific evidence amassed over the past 35 years
demonstrates that ozone depleting substances (ODS) used around the world destroy the
90
stratospheric ozone layer and contribute to climate change. Increased levels of UV radiation,
due to ozone depletion, contribute to increased incidence of skin cancer, cataracts, and other
health effects.21 Skin cancer is the most common cancer, accounting for nearly half of all
cancers.22 Increased UV levels also are associated with other human and non-human effects,
including cataracts, immune suppression, and effects on aquatic ecosystems and agricultural
crops.23
The EPA estimates that in the U.S. alone, the worldwide phase-out of ODS will avert millions of
9zl 9S
non-fatal and fatal skin cancers and millions of cataracts between 1990 and 2165. According
to current research, the ozone layer is expected to recover later this century. This long recovery
period is due to the long atmospheric lifetime of ODS.26 These estimates are based on the
assumption that international ODS phase-out targets will be achieved through full participation
by all countries (both industrialized and developing), allowing the ozone layer to recover. If
developing countries go back to using ODS, at even 70 percent of historic rates, within twenty
World Meteorological Organization (WMO). Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2010. Geneva, Switzerland. 2011.
21 Fahey, D.W., and M.I. Hegglin (Coordinating Lead Authors), Twenty questions and answers about the ozone layer: 2010
Update, In Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2010, Global Ozone Research and Monitoring Project-Report No. 52, 516
pp., World Meteorological Organization, Geneva, Switzerland,2011..
22 American Cancer Society. "Skin Cancer Facts." Accessed August 9, 2010. Available on the Internet at
http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/CancerCauses/SunandUvExposure/skin-cancer-facts.
23 United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), UNEP, Environmental Effects of Ozone Depletion: 2006 Assessment.
Nairobi, Kenya, 2007.
24 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act 1990-2010: EPAReportto
Congress. EPA: Washington, DC. November 1999. Also:
25 Protecting the Ozone Layer Protects Eyesight - A Report on Cataract Incidence in the United States Using the Atmospheric
and Health Effects Framework Model. Accessed August 9, 2010. Available on the Internet at:
http://www.epa.gov/ozone/science/effects/AHEFCataractReport.pdf
26 WMO, 2011.
242
-------
years the environmental and health gains to date would be negated, as would billions of dollars
spent.
Under the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal Protocol),
the U.S. and other developed countries contribute to the Multilateral Fund to support projects and
activities in developing countries to eliminate the production and use of ODS. The Montreal
Protocol is the first multilateral treaty to have universal participation with ratification by all 197
countries. The U.S. contribution to the Multilateral Fund, which is split between the EPA and the
Department of State, is 22 percent of the total based on the U.N. scale of assessment. The
Multilateral Fund draws heavily on U.S. expertise and technologies, and the permanent seat of
the U.S. on the Executive Committee ensures cost-effective assistance. Negotiated text
supporting the 2007 adjustment to the Protocol commits donor countries, including the U.S., to
"stable and sufficient" funding to the Multilateral Fund. The Parties to the Montreal Protocol
agreed, in the 2007 adjustment, to a more aggressive phase-out for ozone-depleting
hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), which involves dramatic HCFC reductions during the
period from 2010-2040, equaling a 47 percent reduction in overall emissions. Most of these
reductions will occur in developing countries. As most ODS are strong greenhouse gases
(GHGs), this faster phase-out also will result in large reductions in GHG emissions.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA's contributions to the Multilateral Fund in FY 2014 will help continue support for cost-
effective projects designed to build capacity and eliminate ODS production and consumption in
over 60 developing countries. Today, the Multilateral Fund supports over 6,000 activities in 148
countries that, when fully implemented, will prevent annual emissions of more than 451,000
metric tons of ODS. Additional projects will be submitted, considered, and approved in
accordance with Multilateral Fund guidelines.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in the Stratospheric Ozone:
Domestic Program under the Environmental Program and Management Tab and can be found in
the Performance Eight-Year Array in the Program Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$211.0) This increases resources for conversion and capacity building projects to
eliminate ODS production and consumption in developing countries.
Statutory Authority:
CAA Amendments of 1990, Title 1, Parts A and D (42 U.S.C. 7401-7434, 7501-7515), Title V
(42 U.S.C. 7661-7661f), and Title VI (42 U.S.C. 7671-7671q); The Montreal Protocol on
Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer.
243
-------
Program Area: Brownfields
244
-------
Brownfields
Program Area: Brownfields
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$23,642.0
$23,642.0
145.6
FY 2012
Actuals
$23,824.1
$23,824.1
141.4
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$23,708.0
$23,708.0
145.6
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$26,002.0
$26,002.0
138.6
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$2,360.0
$2,360.0
-7.0
Program Project Description:
The Brownfields program is designed to help states, tribes, local communities, and other
stakeholders involved in environmental revitalization and economic redevelopment to work
together to plan, inventory, assess, safely cleanup, and reuse brownfields. Brownfield sites 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. Brownfields
redevelopment is a key to revitalizing downtown areas, neighborhoods, and rural communities,
thereby increasing property values and creating jobs. A 2011 EPA program evaluation concluded
that cleaning up brownfield properties leads to residential property value increases of 5.1 to 12.8
percent.27 According to a 2007 study, an average of 10 jobs is created for every acre of
brownfields redevelopment.28 Revitalizing these once productive properties helps communities
by removing blight, improving environmental conditions and providing public health benefits,
satisfying the growing demand for land, helping to reduce urban sprawl, fostering ecologic
habitat enhancements, enabling economic development, and maintaining or improving quality of
life. This program comprises the administrative component necessary to achieve the Brownfields
mission. It includes human resources, travel, training, technical assistance, and research
activities.
The EPA's work is focused on removing barriers and creating incentives for brownfields cleanup
and redevelopment. The EPA's Brownfields program funds research efforts, clarifies liability
issues, develops and maintains federal, state, Tribal, and local partnerships, conducts
environmental outreach and training activities, and creates related job training and workforce
development programs. The program provides the necessary administrative framework to
develop the funding solicitations, and to select, award and manage the ongoing and
approximately 300 additional grant awards each year. The EPA brownfield grants are
administered through cooperative agreements and require considerable investment by the agency
27 Haninger, Kevin, Ma, Lala, and Timmons, Christopher. 2012. "Estimating the Impacts of Brownfields Remediation on
Housing Property Values." Duke Environmental Economics Working Paper Series. Working Paper EE12-08. The program
evaluation is available at http://sites.nicholasinstitute.duke.edu/environmentaleconomics/files/2013/01AVP-EE-12-08.pdf
28 Rowland, Marie. 2007. "Employment Effects of Brownfields Redevelopment, What Do We Know from the Literature?"
Journal of Planning Literature. 22:91.
245
-------
to ensure successful performance by the recipient and that applicable grant management
requirements are being met by the recipient.
Agency staff oversees and manage hundreds of brownfields cooperative agreements awarded
each year. Regional project officers are managing as many as 30 cooperative agreements per
project officer which is well above the ten cooperative agreements that the program's workload
model suggest each project officer should manage. This constrains the EPA's ability to
expeditiously process grant applications and provide timely grant funding. This program project
supports the staffing and cooperative agreement management responsibilities. The program also
provides financial assistance for: (1) hazardous substances training for organizations representing
the interests of states and Tribal co-implementers of the Brownfields law and (2) technical
outreach support to address environmental justice issues and brownfields research by providing
tools and technical resources to help a variety of stakeholders identify technologies, technical
help, contacts, and other resources to aid in the assessment and cleanup of brownfield properties.
Technical assistance to communities in the form of research, training, and analyses can lead to
appropriate and cost effective implementation of brownfields redevelopment projects by
providing communities the knowledge necessary to understand market conditions, evaluate
technical and economic alternatives available and understand potential obstacles to implementing
effective and economically productive solutions. Technical assistance to grantees has proven
valuable and needed in today's economy. The EPA assistance provides crucial help in addressing
important redevelopment details.
The program provides funding for staff to work across the agency's other programs, such as the
air, water, enforcement and other media offices to advance approaches for Brownfields cleanup
and redevelopment that will improve environmental outcomes - such as reducing vehicle miles
traveled and reducing stormwater runoff and pollutant loadings. This program will continue to
identify opportunities to support communities whose vision includes the revitalization of
brownfields and other contaminated properties for conservation and recreational purposes, as
well as collaborate with our partner agencies and communities in identifying critical resources
that may be appropriately employed in pursuit of restoring and protecting our outdoors legacy. In
addition, the EPA will work with other agencies to bring to bear implementation reforms.
The EPA's enforcement program develops guidance and tools that clarify potential
environmental cleanup liabilities, thereby providing greater certainty and comfort for parties
seeking to reuse these properties. The enforcement program also can provide direct support to
parties seeking to reuse contaminated properties in order to facilitate transactions through
consultations and the use of enforcement tools.
The Brownfields Program employs smart growth and sustainable design approaches in
brownfield redevelopment. The smart growth activities include: (1) working with state and local
governments and other stakeholders to create cross-cutting solutions that improve the economic
and institutional climate for Brownfields redevelopment; (2) removing barriers and creating
incentives for Brownfields redevelopment; (3) ensuring improved water and air quality in
Brownfields redevelopment; and (4) connecting Brownfields redevelopment efforts to larger
area-wide and regional planning efforts. These activities are consistent with and help to achieve
the objectives of the HUD-DOT-EPA Partnership for Sustainable Communities.
246
-------
One of the key benefits of redeveloping brownfields is that it can often lead to a reduced need for
green space development. According to a 2001 study, industrial projects moving on to one acre
of brownfields land would have required an average of 6.2 acres of green space; residential
projects would have required 5.6 acres, and commercial projects 2.4 acres.29 In addition, fewer
resources are often required to develop a project on brownfields land because of pre-existing
infrastructure, such as roads and utilities.
The Land Revitalization Program within Brownfields works with communities facing challenges
related to the revitalization of brownfields and other contaminated lands. The primary mission of
the Land Revitalization program is to support communities in their efforts to restore
contaminated lands into sustainable community assets that maximize beneficial economic,
ecological, and social uses to the community and ensure protection of human health and the
environment. A priority for both the Land Revitalization and Brownfields programs is to assist
communities facing the difficult challenge of recovering from the recession, particularly those
areas affected by the closing of manufacturing facilities and reorganization of the U.S. auto
industry. The auto industry is beginning to recover and this recovery is contributing to the
nation's overall economic recovery. However, part of the necessary restructuring implemented by
the auto industry included the abandonment of unwanted assets such as former manufacturing
plants. Many communities across the country are faced with finding solutions for the assessment,
cleanup and repurposing of former manufacturing and auto industry properties. The agency is
setting a priority to work with these communities to assist them in finding solutions so that these
properties can once again become assets to their communities. The Land Revitalization and
Brownfields programs can assist these communities with planning, training, and technical
assistance to plan for and implement solutions that will result in the cleanup and revitalization of
former manufacturing facilities.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Throughout FY 2014, the Brownfields program will continue to foster federal, state, Tribal,
local, and public-private partnerships to return properties to productive economic use in
communities. This approach emphasizes environmental health and protection that also achieves
economic development and job creation through the redevelopment of Brownfields properties,
particularly in underserved and disadvantaged communities.
In FY 2014, the EPA's Brownfields program will manage a significant workload of assessment,
cleanup, revolving loan fund (RLF), and Environmental Workforce Development and Job
Training cooperative agreements. The program also manages brownfields research, training, and
technical assistance grants. Project officers for these grants negotiate and award new cooperative
agreements as part of current workload as well as manage the grants throughout their full life-
cycle. The FY 2014 Budget focuses on the agency's capability to provide administrative and
technical support to the EPA Regional Offices through the necessary contractual support to
29 Deason, IP., G.W. Sherk, and G.A. Carroll (2001). Final Report: Public Policies and Private Decisions Affecting the
Redevelopment of Brownfields: An Analysis of Critical Factors, Relative Weights and Areal Differentials. Submitted to U.S.
EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response by Deason et al, George Washington University, Washington, D.C.
247
-------
manage the Program's numerous grant funding competitions,30 and to manage and upgrade the
critical database system that collects data from grantees regarding the specific activities and
environmental outcomes of the grant funding (the Assessment, Cleanup and Redevelopment
Exchange System (ACRES) database). The Program requires this support to assist with
management of the considerable cooperative agreement workload.
In addition to supporting the operations and management of the Brownfields program, funds in
FY 2014 will provide financial assistance for training on hazardous waste to organizations
representing the interests of state and Tribal co-implementers of the Small Business Liability
Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act (SBLRBRA), otherwise known as the 2002
Brownfields Amendments. The program also offers outreach support for the Administrator's
priority of promoting environmental justice issues affecting Tribal and native Alaskan Villages
or other disadvantaged communities facing perceived or real hazardous substance contamination
at sites in their neighborhood or community.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to work with other programs through an intra-agency
workgroup to carry out environmental outreach activities through enhancing educational
resources and disseminating information about the Brownfields program including
environmental justice and brownfields redevelopment and cleanup. Other outreach activities
include community training through issuance of grants, innovative awards, and collaboration
with national environmental organizations.
In FY 2014, the EPA's Brownfields program request includes over $1.5 million for the smart
growth program. This program addresses critical issues for Brownfields redevelopment,
including land assembly, development permitting issues, financing, parking and street standards,
accountability to uniform systems of information of land use controls, and other factors that
influence economic viability of Brownfields redevelopment and support their sustainable release.
The best practices, tools, and lessons learned from the smart growth program will directly inform
and assist the EPA's efforts to increase area-wide planning for assessment, cleanup, and
redevelopment of Brownfields sites.
Also in FY 2014, the EPA is requesting $300 thousand for the Smart Growth program to fund
Strong Cities, Strong Communities (SC2), a customized pilot initiative to strengthen local
capacity and spark economic growth in local communities, while ensuring taxpayer dollars are
used wisely and efficiently. As a member of the White House Council on SC2,3 the agency is
committed to improve the way the government does business; provide assistance and support -
working with local communities to find ground up, not top down solutions; and develop critical
partnerships with key local and regional stakeholders that encompass not only municipal and
state governments, but also new partnerships with the business community, non-profits, anchor
institutions, faith-based institutions, and other public, private, and philanthropic leaders.
30 Included within this funding is maintaining the agency's relationship with the National Older Worker Career Center, an
important source of short-term technical expertise. On average, EPA awards approximately 235 grants a year (ranging from $60
to $65 million total) and provides supplemental funding to another 20-30 high performing RLFs (ranging from $ 10 to $ 15 million
total).
31 Please see: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/03/15/executive-order-establishing-white-house-council-strong-
cities-strong-co.
248
-------
In FY 2014, the EPA is requesting a net decrease of $97 thousand for the Brownfields
enforcement. The EPA's Brownfields enforcement program will continue to work
collaboratively with our partners at the state and local level on innovative approaches to help
achieve the agency's land reuse priorities. It also will continue to develop guidance and tools to
provide greater certainty and comfort regarding potential liability concerns for parties seeking to
reuse these properties.
The National Brownfields Training Conference is the largest and most comprehensive
conference in the nation focused on environmental revitalization and economic redevelopment
issues. Starting in FY 2013, the EPA plans to realize efficiencies by distributing a larger portion
of the total cost of planning and delivering the Brownfields Training Conference to conference
attendees by charging a registration fee for the Conference. The cost to the agency will be
reduced by the amount of revenue collected through registration fees. Therefore, the EPA is
optimistic that the agency's portion of funding for the National Brownfields Training Conference
will be significantly less during the planning time and execution of the Conference. Results of
this approach will be evaluated in FY 2014.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the STAG: Brownfields and can be
found in the Eight-Year Performance Array in Tab 11.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,307.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$841.0 / -6.0 FTE) This change reflects both a decrease of 6.0 FTE and associated
payroll of $841.0. The decrease in staffing will reduce programmatic assistance and
support for managing cooperative agreements under the Healthy Communities initiative.
• (-$143.0 / -1.0 FTE) This reduction of 1.0 FTE and associated payroll represents a
reduction of support Brownfields enforcement activities.
• (+$1,612.0) This net increase covers: 1) enhancing the agency's capability to provide
administrative and technical support to the regional offices through contract support and
management of the ACRES database; 2) allowing the program to promote training and
technical support activities to brownfields communities, including training to increase
compliance activities such as ACRES reporting and compliance with the All Appropriate
Inquiries regulation; and 3) reducing support for Brownfields enforcement activities.
• (+$125.0) This increase is to provide resources to integrate environmental outreach
resources and training to the public and increase transparency about the Brownfields
program, environmental justice and other environmental issues. These environmental
outreach activities will support the EPA's core mission to expand the conversation on
environmentalism.
249
-------
• (+$300.0) This increase supports Strong Cities, Strong Communities and will provide
guidance, technical assistance and analytical support to local efforts to update land use
codes to support the economic trajectory of the community and better catalyze economic
redevelopment.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act , as amended by the
Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act, 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq. -
Sections 101, 107 and 128 and the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq. - Section 8001.
250
-------
Program Area: Compliance
251
-------
Compliance Monitoring
Program Area: Compliance
Goal: Enforcing Environmental Laws
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Environmental Program &
Management
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$138.0
$106,707.0
$1,221.0
$108,066.0
616.7
FY 2012
Actuals
$122.5
$106,690.9
$1,191.0
$108,004.4
612.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$138.0
$107,102.0
$1,226.0
$108,466.0
616.7
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$142.0
$127,540.0
$1,182.0
$128,864.0
625.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$4.0
$20,833.0
($39.0)
$20,798.0
8.8
Program Project Description:
The Compliance Monitoring program's overarching goal is to assure compliance with the
nation's environmental laws and protect human health and the environment through inspections
and other compliance monitoring activities. Compliance monitoring is comprised of activities to
determine whether regulated entities are in compliance with applicable laws, regulations, permit
conditions, and settlement agreements. In addition, compliance monitoring activities are
conducted to determine whether conditions exist that may present imminent and substantial
endangerment to human health and the environment. Compliance monitoring activities include
data collection, analysis, data quality review, on-site compliance inspections/evaluations,
investigations, and reviews of facility records and monitoring reports.
The EPA's Compliance Monitoring activities target areas that pose significant risk to human
health or the environment, display patterns of non-compliance, or involve disproportionately
exposed populations. The EPA's Compliance Monitoring program manages compliance and
enforcement data and associated information systems, which are then used to manage the
compliance and enforcement program.32 The agency uses multi-media approaches such as sector
initiatives and risk-based targeting to take a more holistic approach to protecting human health
and ecosystems and to solving the more intractable environmental problems. In addition, the
agency reviews and responds to 100 percent of the notices for movement of hazardous waste,
Cathode Ray Tube export notices for recycling, and Spent Lead Acid Battery export notices for
recycling across U.S. international borders. The agency ensures that these wastes are properly
handled in accordance with international agreements and Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) regulations.33
The EPA coordinates, supports, and oversees the performance of states, local agencies, and
Tribal governments that conduct compliance monitoring activities. The agency's Compliance
32 For more information, refer to: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/monitoring/index.html
33 For more information about the Import/Export program, refer to: www.epa.gov/compliance/intemational/importexport.html
252
-------
Monitoring program also provides technical assistance and training to federal, state, and Tribal
inspectors. The EPA's efforts complement state and Tribal programs to ensure compliance with
laws throughout the United States. The EPA works with states and Tribes to identify where these
monitoring, inspection, evaluation, and investigation activities will have the greatest impact on
achieving environmental results.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA has achieved impressive pollution control and health benefits through vigorous
compliance monitoring and enforcement, but enforcement alone will not address all non-
compliance problems. The sheer number of regulated facilities, the contributions of large
numbers of smaller sources to environmental problems, and limited resources, mean the EPA can
no longer rely primarily on the traditional single facility inspection and enforcement approach to
ensure widespread compliance.34 In FY 2014, the agency will continue to examine new and
innovative methods, and begin implementing the most promising in order to achieve gains in
compliance over the long term.
Recognizing that traditional enforcement approaches will not be enough to address
noncompliance problems, EPA is focusing efforts on moving to the "next generation" of
compliance. This approach, which will be formalized in a strategic plan to be completed in FY
2013, aims to increase compliance with environmental regulations by capitalizing on advances in
information technology and advanced pollutant technology, combined with a focus on designing
more effective rules and permits, to help improve compliance, expand transparency, and protect
communities while reducing costs for states, Tribes and regulated facilities. There are five main
components to this initiative: 1) structuring our regulations to be more effective and achieve
higher compliance; 2) using advanced pollutant detection technology to find out about pollution
as it's happening in real-time; 3) moving from paper to electronic reporting to enhance
government efficiency and reduce paperwork burden; 4) making pollution and compliance
information more accessible, user-friendly, and available to the public to promote accountability;
and 5) using innovative approaches to enforcement to focus limited resources on the biggest
pollution problems.
In FY 2014, the EPA's national enforcement and compliance assurance program will continue its
efforts to implement Next Generation Compliance approaches to achieve the EPA's goals more
efficiently and effectively. Next Generation Compliance compliments the agency's new E-
Enterprise initiative. The agency's E-Enterprise initiative supports all of the agency goals and
programs. E-Enterprise is a joint initiative of states and the EPA to improve environmental
outcomes and enhance service to the regulated community and the public by maximizing the use
of information technologies to optimize operations and increase transparency. The initiative will
reduce the paperwork burden on regulated entities and provide easier access to and use of
environmental data. E-Enterprise resources in the Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
program will support: 1) leveraging advanced monitoring technologies by providing inspectors
with handheld devices so they can monitor pollution, collect data and manage information while
in the field; 2) partnering with states to develop and implement an enterprise fillable forms
solution that can be used for other programs, thereby leveraging resources to support more
www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/civil/cwa/actionplanl01409.pdf
253
-------
efficient reporting efforts for electronically reporting National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) information; and, 3) evaluating innovative enforcement and compliance tools
and approaches.
In the following areas, the Compliance Monitoring program will:
Expand Full Electronic Interaction. In FY 2014, the agency will move forward with efforts to
streamline key paper reporting regulations to an electronic format. Replacing paper based
reporting will decrease unnecessary paperwork burdens on industry and improve the efficiency
of the EPA and state partners. A key action in this effort is the agency's NPDES e-reporting rule,
currently under OMB review. Other key reporting regulations to convert from paper-based
reporting to electronic reporting will be selected based on an agencywide review conducted in
FY 2013. In FY 2013, the EPA will implement a new policy to include full electronic interaction
(rather than paper reporting) in new regulations whenever reporting is appropriate.
Design More Effective Regulations to Improve Compliance. As part of the process of developing
new rules, the EPA will consider Next Generation Compliance principles and tools (such as self-
monitoring and/or self-certification, third party certification, public accountability) to create
more effective rules that are expected to be easier to implement and result in higher compliance.
Expand electronic data collection and dissemination capability.
• Use a market-based approach for full electronic interaction with regulated entities. As
part of the E-Enterprise initiative, the EPA will work to develop an open platform
"electronic reporting file" data exchange standard modeled after that used by the IRS to
collect tax data. The intent is to leverage the expertise of the private sector to create new
reporting tools. These private sector tools would be based on data standards of the EPA
and would replace the largely paper-based reporting forms that evolved over the past 30
years. Further, in those programs where the EPA has already built tools, the agency may
engage the private sector to enhance existing tools to better support industry needs,
reducing the EPA's need to fund the operation and maintenance of these tools.
• Expanding the capability of the EPA and state data systems will allow the program to
better determine compliance and improve capability to track and analyze emission
reductions. Under the E-Enterprise initiative, the EPA will continue to expand its
capability to receive, analyze, use, and make publicly available information on the
compliance status of facilities and their impact on public health and the environment.
In FY 2013, the agency's Compliance Monitoring program is analyzing data and consulting with
stakeholders to consider candidates for the National Enforcement Initiatives for FY 2014 - 2016.
This process allows the program to incorporate new information and results to date in
establishing national priorities for the enforcement program. The agency will identify the
National Enforcement Initiatives for FY 2014-2016 in late FY 2013.
254
-------
Current National Enforcement Initiatives include:
• Municipal Infrastructure - keeping raw sewage and contaminated stormwater out of our
nation's waters;
• Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFO) - preventing animal waste from
contaminating surface and ground waters;
• Air Toxics - cutting toxic air pollution from facilities out of compliance with the Clean
Air Act;
• Clean Air Act New Source Review/Prevention of Significant Deterioration - reducing
widespread air pollution from the largest sources, especially the coal-fired utility, cement,
glass, and acid sectors;
• Mining and Mineral Processing Initiative - protecting and cleaning up our communities
from toxic and hazardous waste; and
• Energy Extraction Sector - assuring compliance with environmental laws.
The National Enforcement Initiatives focus civil and criminal enforcement resources and
expertise on serious pollution problems affecting our communities. The Initiatives employ
traditional enforcement approaches in conjunction with innovative evidence-based approaches.
For example, the agency has developed a geospatial suite of tools, data, and services, for the
Energy Extraction National Initiative that will allow us to better target inspections and
enforcement actions by utilizing locational, census, and environmental data. This use of data will
help the agency address significant multi-media public health and environmental concerns.
Additionally, the agency is taking steps to increase transparency by publicizing information
about the Initiatives on the EPA website. The website includes information about our goals for
addressing these sectors, the progress we have made to date, and the locations of facilities that
have been addressed.35
To ensure the quality of compliance monitoring activities, the EPA is continuing to develop
national policies, update inspection manuals, provide required training for inspectors, and issue
inspector credentials. In FY 2014, the EPA's National Enforcement Training Institute (NETI)
will continue to conduct training to ensure the inspectors/investigators are: 1) knowledgeable of
environmental requirements and policies; 2) technically proficient in conducting compliance
inspections/evaluations and taking samples; and 3) skilled at interviewing potential witnesses
and documenting inspection/evaluation results. The EPA will develop web-based environmental
enforcement training courses that feature current e-learning techniques. These e-learning courses
will provide continual access to high quality training to federal, state, local, and Tribal
environmental enforcement personnel. This reduces the cost of training and related travel for the
EPA, state, Tribal, and local agency personnel. Compliance monitoring activities include
oversight of and support to states and tribes, as well as authorizing state/Tribal employees to
conduct inspections and evaluations on the EPA's behalf. The program works across the agency
and with states and tribes to build capacity, share tools and approaches, and develop networks of
professionals that can share and help build expertise.
35 For more information on EPA's National Enforcement Initiatives, please visit:
http://www.epa.gov/compliance/data/planning/initiatives/index.html
255
-------
In FY 2014, the agency will improve its efficiency by integrating technology and the electronic
capture of data from the field into the inspection process. Adopting modern tools provides an
opportunity to improve the timeliness and accuracy of data collection and entry while increasing
national consistency and uniformity in the inspection and evaluation process and increasing the
efficiency of submitting inspection and evaluation reports. Utilizing modern technology also
creates efficiencies for industry, as well as state and Tribal partners.
Compliance monitoring includes the use of data systems to run compliance and enforcement
programs under the various statutes and programs that the EPA enforces. In FY 2014, the EPA
will focus on enhancing its data systems to support full electronic interaction with regulated
facilities via fillable forms, providing more comprehensive and accessible data to the public
through Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO)36, OECA's interactive public web
site, and allowing for improved integration of environmental information with health data and
other pertinent data sources from other federal agencies and private sources. The EPA will
continue to develop additional tools and obtain new data sets (e.g., geospatial) for public use.
The agency will continue its multi-year project to modernize its internet-accessible national
enforcement and compliance data system, the Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS),
which supports both compliance monitoring and civil enforcement. The final phase of ICIS's
three phases of development will be completed in FY 2014:
• Phase I of ICIS established the multi media federal enforcement and compliance
component of ICIS in FY 2002.
• Phase II of ICIS, the modernization of the Permit Compliance System (PCS) that is used
to manage the NPDES program, was completed in December 2012. The PCS legacy
system will be officially shut down in April 2013.
• Phase III of ICIS expands the system to include the unique requirements of the Clean Air
Act stationary sources compliance and enforcement program through the modernization
of the Air Facility System (AFS). In FY 2012, the EPA developed a final draft of the
AFS modernization requirements and completed an initial detailed technical design. In
FY 2013, the EPA will complete the development of the detailed design for the new
system, begin system development and perform initial testing on the modernized AFS
system. The ICIS Phase III, AFS Modernization, is targeted for completion in FY 2014.
The EPA is committed to making more transparent facility compliance information available and
accessible to the public. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to increase the transparency of its
monitoring and enforcement program by making multi-media compliance monitoring
information available to the public through the ECHO website. In FY 2013, the EPA developed
State Dashboard and Comparative Maps that provides the public with information about the
performance of state and EPA enforcement and compliance programs across the country. ECHO
has been recognized as an example for other federal agencies to use in making access to
' http://www.epa-echo.gov/echo/
256
-------
compliance data more transparent37. ECHO, and its powerful companion tool for regulators, the
Online Targeting and Information System (OTIS), serves more than four hundred government
entities. Together, OTIS and ECHO provide the public and regulators with information on
facility compliance, pollutant releases, and environmental quality, averaging 200,000 queries per
month for the first 3 quarters of FY 2012. Modernization of ECHO and OTIS will be completed
in FY 2014.
The EPA will continue to review all notices for trans-boundary movement of hazardous waste
and for export of Cathode Ray Tubes and Spent Lead Acid Batteries to ensure compliance with
domestic regulations and international agreements. In FY 2012, electronic data exchange was
initiated on a government-to-government basis between the EPA and Environment Canada to
assure more timely and accurate transmission of notice information for compliance monitoring
purposes. This same capability has since been developed with Mexico. While the vast majority
of the hazardous waste trade occurs with Canada, the United States also has international trade
agreements with Mexico, Malaysia, Costa Rica, and the Philippines. The United States is a
member of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which issued a
Council Decision regarding trans-boundary movement of hazardous waste applicable to all
member countries. In FY 2012, the EPA responded to 1,914 notices representing 531 import
notices and 1,383 export notices.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(409) Number of federal inspections and evaluations.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
19,000
20000
FY2013
17,000
FY2014
17,000
Units
Inspections/
Evaluations
Measure
Target
Actual
(412) Percentage of open consent decrees reviewed for overall compliance status.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
91
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Units
Percent
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$3,700.0) The increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$13,064.0 / +8.8 FTE) This change reflects a redirection of resources within other
enforcement programs for the implementation of the agency's E-Enterprise initiative
which will reduce paperwork burden on regulated entities and provide easier access to
and use of environmental data. Specific projects include: leveraging advanced monitoring
technologies by providing inspectors with handheld devices so they can monitor
pollution, collect data and manage information while in the field partnering with states to
37 See White House Press Release January 11,2011, "Presidential Memoranda - Regulatory Compliance" at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-ofiice/2011/01/18/presidential-memoranda-regulatory-compliance
257
-------
develop and implement Tillable e-forms that can be used for other programs, thereby
leveraging resources to support more efficient reporting efforts for electronically
reporting NPDES information; and, evaluating innovative enforcement and compliance
tools and approaches. These resources also will increase the EPA's ability to detect
violations that impact public health, reduce transaction costs, and better engage the public
to drive behavioral changes in the regulated community. The additional resources include
$1,223.0 associated payroll for 8.8 FTE.
• (+$4,069.0) This change reflects an increase of resources for high priority activities such
as conducting compliance inspections, maintaining compliance monitoring tools for
effective targeting and supporting EPA's enforcement data systems. These resources are
critical to maintain adequate capabilities in enforcing the many statutes and programs and
ensuring environmental outcomes are met over time (i.e., using indicator of targets for
total pounds of pollution prevented).
Statutory Authority:
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; Clean Water Act; Safe Drinking Water Act; Clean
Air Act; Toxic Substances Control Act; Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know
Act; Residential Lead-Based Pain Hazard Reduction Act; Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act; National Environmental Policy Act; North American Agreement on
Environmental Cooperation; La Paz Agreement on US-Mexico Border Region.
258
-------
Program Area: Enforcement
259
-------
Civil Enforcement
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Enforcing Environmental Laws
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Environmental Program &
Management
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$2,286.0
$177,290.0
$789.0
$180,365.0
1,205.1
FY 2012
Actuals
$2,514.1
$177,402.3
$678.7
$180,595.1
1,174.8
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$2,289.0
$177,516.0
$789.0
$180,594.0
1,205.1
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$2,955.0
$189,192.0
$816.0
$192,963.0
1,188.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$669.0
$11,902.0
$27.0
$12,598.0
-17.1
Program Project Description:
The Civil Enforcement program's overarching goal is to assure compliance with the nation's
environmental laws to protect human health and the environment. Effective enforcement is
essential to deter violations and to promote compliance with federal environmental statutes and
regulations. The program collaborates with the United States Department of Justice, states, local
agencies, and tribal governments to ensure consistent and fair enforcement of all environmental
laws and regulations. The program seeks to focus on violations that threaten communities,
maintain a level economic playing field by ensuring that violators do not realize an economic
benefit from noncompliance, and deter future violations. The Civil Enforcement program
develops, litigates, and settles administrative and civil judicial cases against serious violators of
environmental laws.
The EPA's National Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program is responsible for
maximizing compliance with 12 environmental statutes, 28 distinct programs under those
statutes, and dozens of regulatory requirements under those programs which apply in various
combinations to a universe of approximately 40 million regulated federal and private entities. As
a means for focusing its efforts, the enforcement program identifies, in three year cycles, serious
noncompliance patterns as national initiatives. The enforcement program reviews data and
coordinates the selection of these initiatives with programs and regional offices within the EPA,
and with states, local agencies and Tribes, in addition to soliciting public comment. In FY 2013,
the EPA is soliciting and exploring candidates for the FY 2014 - FY 2016 cycle.
The enforcement program provides oversight of authorized state and local agency performance
to ensure that national environmental laws are enforced in a consistent, equitable manner that
protects public health and the environment. The EPA also works directly with Tribal
governments to build their capacity to implement environmental enforcement programs.
260
-------
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA has achieved impressive pollution control and health benefits through vigorous
compliance monitoring and enforcement, but traditional enforcement methods alone will not
address all noncompliance problems. The sheer number of regulated facilities, the contributions
of large numbers of smaller sources to environmental problems, and limited resources, mean the
agency can no longer rely primarily on the traditional single facility inspection and enforcement
approach to ensure widespread compliance.38 Instead, the agency needs to develop and
implement new methods that rely heavily on advances in both monitoring and information
technology.
This approach is called "Next Generation Compliance". There are multiple components to this
initiative: the use of modern monitoring technology to detect pollution problems; eliminating
paper based reporting to enhance government efficiency and reduce paperwork burden;
enhancing transparency so the public is aware of facility and government environmental
performance; implementing innovative enforcement approaches; and structuring our regulations
to be more effective and achieve higher compliance. In FY 2014, the Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance program will continue to implement Next Generation Compliance
approaches to help achieve the enforcement goals more efficiently and effectively. Next
Generation Compliance is fully consistent with and a key component of the agency's new E-
Enterprise initiative. The wider E-Enterprise initiative aims at reducing burden on industry,
improving services for the regulated community and the public, and transforming the way
environmental protection work is done by the EPA, states, and Tribes in the future.
Under the Next Generation Compliance effort, as part of the process of developing new rules, the
EPA will identify opportunities to use objective self-monitoring, self-certification or third party
certification, public accountability, and advanced monitoring to create more effective rules that
are easier to implement and result in higher compliance. The agency also will review compliance
reporting requirements contained in existing rules to identify opportunities for conversion to a
national electronic format. Additionally, the EPA will continue to seek to decrease unnecessary
paperwork burdens on industry and states by eliminating paper based reporting requirements.
These efforts also will ensure government and facilities have accurate and timely information on
compliance and pollutants.
In FY 2014, the agency will continue to focus on complex and challenging national pollution
problems. Current national initiatives include Clean Water Act "wet weather" pollutant
discharges, violations of the Clean Air Act New Source Review/Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (NSR/PSD) requirements and Air Toxics regulations, and Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) violations at mineral processing facilities and ensuring protective
energy extraction. Information on initiatives, regulatory requirements, enforcement alerts, and
results from civil enforcement activities will be made available to the public and the regulated
community on the EPA's web sites.39
38 For more information, visit: www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/civil/cwa/actionplanl01409.pdf
39 For more information, visit: http://www.epa.gov/enforcement/
261
-------
The agency's civil enforcement resources provide primary support for the U.S. Department of
Justice's civil action against BP, Anadarko, and others responsible for the Deepwater Horizon oil
spill. The Department of Justice filed its complaint on behalf of the EPA, the U.S. Coast Guard
and other federal plaintiffs in December 2010. The EPA is actively participating in the litigation
and discovery process in response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, and this is expected to
continue through FY 2014.
The Civil Enforcement program encompasses the full range of environmental issues such as
water, air, waste, and others issues, including the regulation of federal facility sites. The Federal
Facilities Enforcement program will continue to expeditiously pursue enforcement actions at
Federal facilities where significant violations are discovered, with a specific focus expected on
noncompliance with stormwater, RCRA waste requirements, and other priority areas. The
program also will continue its partnership in FedCenter,40 the federal facility environmental
stewardship and compliance assistance center cosponsored and funded by more than a dozen
federal agencies.
In FY 2012, through its efforts in the core program and national initiatives, the EPA achieved
reduction commitments totaling 6.6 billion pounds of pollution and hazardous waste from
enforcement cases. The EPA enforcement actions required companies to invest an estimated $9.1
billion in actions and equipment to control pollution (injunctive relief) in FY 2012. In addition,
sustained and focused enforcement attention on serious violations of the Safe Drinking Water
Act (SDWA) resulted in a 60 percent reduction in violations in the past three years as a result of
combined federal and state actions and enforcement work. The program will continue to leverage
its resources by seeking environmental improvements beyond direct penalties in enforcement
cases.
The EPA's Clean Water program will continue to work with states, Tribes, and communities to
improve our nation's impaired waters. In addition, the EPA, working with permitting authorities,
is revamping compliance and enforcement approaches to make progress on the most important
water pollution problems. This work includes getting raw sewage out of water, cutting pollution
from animal waste, and reducing pollution from stormwater runoff. These efforts will help to
clean up great waters like the Chesapeake Bay and will focus on revitalizing urban communities
by protecting and restoring urban waters. Enforcement also will support the goal of assuring
clean drinking water for all communities, including small systems and in Indian country.
The EPA will collaborate with states, Tribes, and communities to reduce air toxics pollution,
especially pollution affecting vulnerable communities. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to
support the air toxics initiative by targeting air monitoring, inspections, and enforcement
activities to reduce toxic emissions.
The EPA's RCRA Corrective Action enforcement program supports the goal set by the agency
and its state partners of attaining remedy construction at 95 percent of 3,772 RCRA facilities by
the year 2020. In 2010, the EPA issued the "National Enforcement Strategy for Corrective
Action" (NESCA) to promote and communicate nationally consistent enforcement and
compliance assurance principles, practices, and tools to help achieve this goal. In fiscal years
For more information, visit: http: //www. fedcenter. gov/
262
-------
2010, 2011, and 2012, EPA Regional Offices issued more Corrective Action enforcement orders
than in any year since 1999. A discussion of the increase in Corrective Action orders and other
progress under NESCA can be found in the September 2012 NESCA assessment report.41 In FY
2014, the EPA will continue implementing NESCA with a focus on communication and
coordination with states, exploring opportunities for increased Corrective Action compliance
monitoring and enforcement.
The Renewable Fuels Standard regulations that became effective in July of 2010 under the
Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007 require increased use of renewable fuels.
The increasing use of new feedstocks, production processes and fuels, create a need for the Civil
Enforcement program to help the regulated community understand their statutory obligations
under the EISA. In FY 2014, the program also will inspect renewable fuel production facilities;
monitor compliance with renewable fuel requirements; monitor and enforce the credit trading
program; and undertake administrative and judicial enforcement actions against violators when
necessary.
In FY 2014, reliable information on compliance and program performance remains critical. The
EPA's Civil Enforcement program will continue to rely heavily on the Integrated Compliance
Information System (ICIS) to manage federal compliance and enforcement activities by tracking
the status of all civil judicial and administrative enforcement actions, as well as compliance and
enforcement results. The EPA will continue to make information on its enforcement work more
publically accessible and transparent on its Enforcement and Compliance History Online
(ECHO) interactive web site and obtain new data sets (e.g., geospatial) for public use.
The Civil Enforcement program also supports the Environmental Justice program by focusing
enforcement actions on industries that have repeatedly violated environmental laws in
communities that may be disproportionately exposed to risks and harm from environmental
contaminants, including minority and/or low-income areas. The EPA works to protect these and
other burdened communities from adverse human health and environmental effects through
programs consistent with environmental and civil rights laws.
It is critically important that the EPA continually assess priorities and embrace new approaches
that can help achieve the agency's goals more efficiently and effectively. The EPA's FY 2014
budget submission for the Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program continues to invest
resources in high priority areas with the greatest impact on public health, while reducing
resources where we have made significant progress (and therefore no longer require as active an
enforcement presence), or that, while important, do not address the most substantial impacts to
human health. The EPA will continue to examine the areas most appropriate for reduction while
implementing new enforcement approaches through Next Generation Compliance to make the
program more efficient and effective.
For more information, visit: http: //www.epa. gov/compliance/resources/publications/cleanup/rcra/nesca-assessment-2012 .pdf
263
-------
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(400) Millions of pounds of air pollutants reduced, treated, or eliminated through concluded
enforcement actions.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
480
410
FY2011
480
1,100
FY2012
480
250
FY2013
450
FY2014
350
Units
Million
Pounds
Measure
Target
Actual
(402) Millions of pounds of water pollutants reduced, treated, or eliminated through concluded
enforcement actions.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
320
1,000
FY2011
320
740
FY 2012
320
500
FY 2013
320
FY 2014
280
Units
Million
Pounds
Measure
Target
Actual
(404) Millions of pounds of toxic and pesticide pollutants reduced, treated, or eliminated
through concluded enforcement actions.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
3.8
8.3
FY2011
3.8
6.1
FY 2012
3.8
1,400
FY 2013
3.0
FY 2014
2.5
Units
Million
Pounds
Measure
Target
Actual
(405) Millions of pounds of hazardous waste reduced, treated, or eliminated through concluded
enforcement actions.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
6,500
11,800
FY2011
6,500
3,600
FY2012
6,500
4,400
FY2013
6,000
FY2014
5,000
Units
Million
Pounds
Measure
Target
Actual
(410) Number of civil judicial and administrative enforcement cases initiated.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
3,300
3,000
FY 2013
3,200
FY 2014
3,200
Units
Cases
Measure
Target
Actual
(411) Number of civil judicial and administrative enforcement cases concluded.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
3,200
3,000
FY 2013
3,000
FY 2014
2800
Units
Cases
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$7,308.0) The increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$1,834.0 / -17.5 FTE) This reduction reflects the agency's efforts to restructure the
workforce by shifting resources from lower enforcement priorities and invest in new
skills that will rely heavily on advances in information and monitoring technology
increasing the agency's ability to detect violations that impact public health and the
environment. The reduced resources include 17.5 FTE and associated payroll of $2,415.0.
264
-------
• (+$6,428.0) This increase provides resources to maintain the capacity and support for
case development, negotiation, and litigation. These resources help to secure contract
support for high priority enforcement and litigation to ensure compliance with
environmental statutes and regulations that protect public health and the environment.
Statutory Authority:
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; Clean Water Act; Safe Drinking Water Act; Clean
Air Act; Toxic Substances Control Act; Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know
Act; Residential Lead-Based Pain Hazard Reduction Act; Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act; North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation; La Paz Agreement
on US/Mexico Border Region; National Environmental Policy Act; Small Business Liability
Relief and Brownfields Revitalization and Environmental Restoration Act; Community
Environmental Response Facilitation Act; Atomic Energy Act;; Uranium Mill Tailings
Radiation; Energy Policy Act.
265
-------
Criminal Enforcement
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Enforcing Environmental Laws
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$48,123.0
$7,903.0
$56,026.0
294.9
FY 2012
Actuals
$49,545.3
$7,811.9
$57,357.2
294.4
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$48,207.0
$7,888.0
$56,095.0
294.9
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$53,609.0
$7,675.0
$61,284.0
294.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$5,486.0
($228.0)
$5,258.0
-0.9
Program Project Description:
A strong enforcement program is a key component of an effective, results-focused environmental
compliance strategy. The EPA's Criminal Enforcement program enforces the nation's
environmental laws through targeted investigation of criminal conduct, committed by individual
and corporate defendants, that threatens public health and the environment. Successful, visible
prosecutions deter other potential violators, eliminate the incentive for companies to "pay to
pollute," and help ensure that businesses that follow the rules do not face unfair competition
from those that break the rules.
The EPA's criminal enforcement agents (Special Agents) investigate violations of environmental
statutes and associated violations of Title 18 of the United States Code such as fraud, conspiracy,
false statements, and obstruction of justice. Special Agents conduct all aspects of case
development, assisted by forensic scientists, attorneys, technicians, engineers, and other
specialists. Special Agents provide prosecutorial support, evaluate leads, interview witnesses,
serve and support search warrants, and review documentary evidence, including data from prior
inspections. Agents assist in plea negotiations, and in planning sentencing conditions that require
remediation, environmental management systems, or other projects that improve environmental
conditions.
The EPA's Special Agents also participate in task forces and specialized training at the Federal
Law Enforcement Training Center along with other federal, state, and local law officials. These
joint efforts and training help build state, local, and Tribal environmental expertise, which helps
them protect their communities and offer valuable opportunities to exchange information that can
inform future efforts.42 Criminal enforcement also sends a strong deterrence message in
economically disadvantaged communities and traditionally industrial areas, where residents may
have suffered disproportionate pollution impacts, in part due to criminal actions.
• http://www.epa. gov/enforcement/criminal/
266
-------
The EPA's criminal enforcement attorneys provide legal and policy support for all of the
program's responsibilities, including forensics and expert witness preparation, to ensure that
program activities are carried out in accordance with legal requirements and the policies of the
agency. These efforts support environmental crime prosecutions primarily by the United States
Attorneys and the Department of Justice's Environmental Crimes Section, and occasionally by
state, Tribal, and local prosecutors.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the Criminal Enforcement program will continue to emphasize cases with
significant human health, environmental, and deterrent impacts, while balancing its overall case
load across all pollution statutes. The Criminal Enforcement program continues to "tier"
significant cases based upon categories of human health and environmental impacts (e.g., death,
serious injury, human exposure, remediation), release and discharge characteristics (e.g.,
hazardous or toxic pollutants, continuing violations), and subject characteristics (e.g., national
corporation, recidivist violators). In FY 2012, criminal charges were brought against 231
defendants, and criminal defendants were assessed a total of $44 million in fines and restitution.
The EPA's Criminal Enforcement program is committed to fair and consistent enforcement of
federal laws and regulations nation-wide, balanced with the flexibility to respond to region-
specific environmental problems. In FY 2014, the Criminal Enforcement program will continue
to oversee all investigations to ensure compliance with program priorities, and conduct regular
"docket reviews" (detailed review of all open investigations in each regional office) to ensure
consistency with agency guidance and enforcement priorities.
The Criminal Enforcement program is implementing an enhanced targeting and investigations
strategy as part of the Next Generation Compliance initiative. This approach emphasizes the use
of expanded access to electronic data resources on regulated facilities and persons, along with
remote/specialized monitoring to enhance the effectiveness of criminal targeting and
investigations. This approach is critical to faster and more efficient criminal investigations
particularly in the early stages. Subsequently, potential criminal violations will be investigated
by the EPA's Special Agents, and prepared for potential prosecution where appropriate, using an
expanded range of tools, including advanced monitoring equipment and techniques.
Successful prosecutions are the result of careful collection and expert evidence analysis. In FY
2014, the Criminal Enforcement program will continue to realize the benefits of enhanced crime
scene investigation support, forensic evidence collection, and improved sampling support for
complex criminal enforcement efforts involving highly contaminated crime scenes and major
releases to the environment. High-quality forensic data collection and analysis also are key to
establishing personal culpability of individual violators, which can lead to sentences that may
include incarceration.
A fully integrated enforcement and compliance strategy is essential for the Agency to fulfill its
mission to protect human health and the environment. The Criminal Enforcement program
continues to enhance its collaboration and coordination with the Civil Enforcement program to
ensure that the EPA enforcement program as a whole responds to violations as effectively as
267
-------
possible. The Criminal Enforcement program will work with the Civil Enforcement program to
identify national enforcement initiative cases and violations of national priorities of the EPA that
would most effectively be addressed through criminal prosecution. This coordinated approach is
accomplished by employing an effective regional case screening process to identify the most
appropriate civil or criminal enforcement responses for a particular violation, and by taking
criminal enforcement actions against long-term or repeat significant non-compliers where
appropriate.
In FY 2014, the EPA also will seek to deter environmental crime by pursuing leads reported by
the public as appropriate through the tips and complaints link on the EPA's website, and will
continue to use the fugitive website.43 The fugitive website enlists the public and law
enforcement agencies to help apprehend defendants who have fled the country, are in hiding to
avoid prosecution for alleged environmental crimes, or are in hiding to avoid sentencing for
crimes for which they have been found guilty.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(418) Percentage of criminal cases having the most significant health, environmental, and
deterrence impacts.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
43
45
FY2013
43
FY2014
43
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(419) Percentage of criminal cases with individual defendants.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
75
70
FY2013
75
FY2014
75
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(420) Percentage of criminal cases with charges filed.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
40
44
FY 2013
40
FY 2014
40
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(421) Percentage of conviction rate for criminal defendants.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
85
95
FY 2013
85
FY 2014
85
Units
Percent
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$2,685.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$2,801.0 / +2.8 FTE) This change allows the program to maintain contract support for
targeted, intelligence-led enforcement activities which will permit criminal agents to
For more information visit: http://www.epa.gov/fugitives/
268
-------
more quickly and effectively investigate complex cases. This includes an increase of 2.8
FTE and $561.0 in associated payroll, which will help support the continuing criminal
investigation against existing and potential additional defendants in the Deepwater
Horizon oil spill case.
Statutory Authority:
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; Clean Water Act; Safe Drinking Water Act; Clean
Air Act; Toxic Substances Control Act; Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know
Act; Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act; Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act; Ocean Dumping Act (i.e., MPRSA); Pollution Prosecution Act; Title 18
General Federal Crimes (e.g., false statements, conspiracy); Powers of Environmental Protection
Agency (18 U.S.C. 3063).
269
-------
Environmental Justice
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$6,848.0
$583.0
$7,431.0
32.7
FY 2012
Actuals
$7,164.8
$578.5
$7,743.3
35.5
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$6,895.0
$582.0
$7,477.0
32.7
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$6,954.0
$601.0
$7,555.0
32.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$106.0
$18.0
$124.0
-0.2
Program Project Description:
The EPA is committed to fostering public health in communities disproportionately burdened by
pollution through integrating and addressing issues of environmental justice (EJ) in the EPA's
programs and policies as part of its day-to-day business. The EPA's EJ program promotes
accountability for compliance with Executive Order 12898, "Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations." The EPA's
program offices implement the EPA's strategic plan on Environmental Justice, Plan EJ 2014.44
The EJ Program facilitates this implementation by: (1) supporting and promoting the agency's
efforts to address environmental justice issues; (2) supporting the EPA's outreach to other
federal agencies through the interagency working group on environmental justice; and, (3)
promoting opportunities for communities to be heard on environmental justice issues.
The EJ program conducts outreach to overburdened communities and provides financial and
technical assistance that empowers low income and minority communities to take action to
protect themselves from environmental harm. The EJ program partners with other agency
programs to develop scientific, legal, and public engagement guidance documents that enable the
incorporation of environmental justice considerations into the EPA's regulatory and policy
decisions. Finally, the EJ program supports agency efforts to strengthen internal mechanisms to
integrate environmental justice into the EPA's programs and activities including communication,
training, performance management, and accountability measures.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA's Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, Research and Development,
and Policy programs will collaborate with agency program offices and Regional Offices to
implement technical guidance to support and monitor the integration of environmental justice
considerations in rulemaking and other analyses that inform the EPA's decisions and actions.
This has been an ongoing priority for the EPA to develop rules that implement existing statutory
Plan EJ 2014 can be found at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/environmentaliustice/plan-ei/index.html
270
-------
authority, while working to reduce disproportionate pollutant burdens and cumulative impacts
from multiple sources on low income and minority communities. In addition, the agency will
continue efforts to enhance the ability of overburdened communities to participate fully and
meaningfully in permitting processes and decisions. Together, these plans guide the agency's EJ
efforts across the full spectrum of activities.
In FY 2014, the agency will continue to facilitate the integration of environmental justice
considerations into planning and performance measurement processes. The EPA's EJ program
will continue to work with program and Regional Offices to maintain an inventory of successful
efforts that track and report progress in achieving results in communities disproportionately
burdened by environmental pollution.
The EPA will implement environmental justice activities consistent with the vision and
commitments outlined in the agency's FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan, the FY 2014 annual action
plan for the Cross-Cutting Fundamental Strategy for EJ and Children's Health, and Plan EJ 2014.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to manage its Environmental Justice Small Grants program,
which assists community-based organizations and other groups in developing solutions to local
environmental issues. Since its inception in 1994, the EJ program has awarded over $24 million
through its small grants program to more than 1,300 community-based organizations such as
non-profit organizations, local governments, Tribal governments, and Tribal organizations to
support their efforts to address local environmental and health issues. In FY 2012, the EPA
awarded 50 Environmental Justice Small Grants.45 The EJ program will continue to provide
federal assistance to overburdened and vulnerable communities to enhance their capacity to
address environmental challenges in their communities.
In FY 2014, the EJ program will continue to support the EJ eco-Ambassadors program that
provides an opportunity for graduate students to work collaboratively with the EPA to support
community-based programs and increase the capacity of local communities to address
environmental concerns. In a pilot effort in FY 2012, four eco-Ambassadors worked at EPA over
a 10-week period. An additional four eco-Ambassadors were placed in regional EJ offices over
the summer of FY 2012. Successful projects completed by the graduate students include creating
a social media network grounded in the principles of environmental justice for children in a local
community; supporting an initiative to reduce and eliminate dumping through community
engagement; and updating a stakeholder database used for maintaining a list of non-profit
organizations, universities, and Gulf of Mexico Environmental Justice Conference participants.
The program also facilitates career development opportunities for participants who have been
involved in or have a strong interest in environmental justice.
The National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) is the agency's Federal
Advisory Committee Act (FACA) committee on environmental justice issues. The Council
provides advice and recommendations about broad, cross-cutting issues related to environmental
justice, from all stakeholders involved in the environmental justice dialogue. In addition, the
NEJAC provides a valuable forum for discussions about integrating environmental justice with
45 For more information on EJ Small Grants, please visit:
http://www.epa.gov/compliance/ei/resources/publications/factsheets/fact-sheet-ei-small-grant-2012-04.pdf
271
-------
other priorities and initiatives of the EPA. During FY 2014, the EJ program will convene two
face-to-face meetings of the NEJAC. These meetings will be augmented by meetings of issue-
specific work groups and public teleconference meetings.
Finally, in FY 2014, the EJ program will continue to work with other federal agencies to
continue building strong relationships with historically underrepresented communities. Pursuant
to "Memorandum of Understanding on Environmental Justice and Executive Order 12898
(August 4, 2011)", the EPA will continue to convene the Interagency Working Group on
Environmental Justice (EJIWG) and will use this mechanism to provide and foster training and
technical assistance to other federal agencies on the integration of environmental justice into
their programs. The EPA, in conjunction with other federal agency partners in the EJIWG, will
develop a training implementation plan that focuses on increasing awareness of environmental
justice principles. The EJ program will work with other federal agencies to advance
consideration of environmental justice through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
The EJ program also will continue to assist program offices and other environmental
organizations and government agencies to deliver customized training to increase the capacity of
their personnel to effectively address issues of environmental justice. Moreover, the EJ program
will use the EJIWG and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) -
Department of Transportation (DOT) - and the EPA Partnership for Sustainable Communities to
identify collaborative opportunities to support the achievement of healthy and sustainable
community goals.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives that benefit disproportionately
burdened minority, low-income, and Tribal populations. Currently, there are no performance
measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$224.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$118.0 / -0.3 FTE) This reflects a net reduction in administrative support for meetings
reflecting expanded use of video conferencing. The reduced resources include 0.3 FTE
and associated payroll of $42.0.
Statutory Authority:
Executive Order 12898; Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; Clean Water Act; Safe
Drinking Water Act; Clean Air Act; Toxic Substances Control Act; Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Act; Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act; National
Environmental Policy Act; Pollution Prevention Act; and Comprehensive Environmental Response.
Compensation, and Liability Act.
272
-------
NEPA Implementation
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Promote Pollution Prevention
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$17,298.0
$17,298.0
116.1
FY 2012
Actuals
$16,748.9
$16,748.9
121.4
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$17,333.0
$17,333.0
116.1
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$18,087.0
$18,087.0
112.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$789.0
$789.0
-4.1
Program Project Description:
As required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Section 309 of the Clean Air
Act, the NEPA Implementation program reviews Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) that
evaluate the anticipated environmental impacts of proposed major federal actions. The review
includes assessing options for avoiding or mitigating environmental impacts, while making
comments available to the public and allowing for public input. The NEPA Implementation
program also guides the EPA's own compliance with NEPA and other relevant statutes and
Executive Orders. The program also manages the official EIS filing system for all federal EISs,
in accordance with a Memorandum of Understanding with the Council on Environmental
Quality. Finally, the program manages the review of Environmental Impact Assessments of non-
governmental activities in Antarctica, in accordance with the Antarctic Science, Tourism and
Conservation Act (ASTCA).
In support of its mission, the program fosters cooperation with other federal agencies to ensure
compliance with applicable environmental statutes, promotes better integration of pollution
prevention and ecological risk assessment elements into their programs, and provides technical
assistance in developing projects that prevent adverse environmental impacts. The program
encourages other federal agencies to incorporate environmental justice considerations into their
decision making as they perform environmental analyses (both EISs and Environmental
Assessments) under NEPA. In its review of EISs associated with major federal actions, the
NEPA Implementation program focuses closely on high impact federal program areas such as
energy development, and transportation and water resources projects. The program also develops
agency policy and technical guidance on issues related to NEPA, the Endangered Species Act,
the National Historic Preservation Act and relevant Executive Orders (EOs).
46
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to work with other federal agencies to streamline, modernize,
and improve the NEPA process by encouraging early involvement in the project scoping process
' For more information, refer to: www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa
273
-------
and promoting approaches for working collaboratively with federal, state, local and Tribal
partners on project proposals. The program will continue to use and promote NEPAssist, a
geographic information system (GIS) tool developed to assist users (the EPA, other federal
agencies, and the public) with environmental reviews.47 The EPA will continue to build on the
recent public release of NEPAssist, which promotes transparency in the NEPA process.
NEPAssist also will allow the public to engage more effectively on the review of NEPA
documents.
Work also will focus on a number of key areas such as reviewing and commenting on proposals
for oil and gas leasing and extraction, coal and hard-rock mining, renewable energy development
(e.g., solar and wind projects); nuclear power licensing/re-licensing; highway and airport
expansion; flood control, port development and management of national forests and public lands.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue work related to Appalachian coal mining, including the
multi-year effort to develop a cumulative impact assessment method for addressing impacts of
surface coal mining. In addition, the EPA will continue its successful collaboration efforts with
federal land management agencies to ensure the growing number of oil and natural gas
development projects do not cause significant adverse air quality impacts. The EPA also will
continue to utilize and improve e-NEPA, a web-based system for federal agencies to file EISs
with the EPA, and to make comments on EISs accessible to the public on a centralized website.
After a successful pilot period, e-NEPA became fully operational and agencies were required to
file electronically starting in FY 2013.
The EPA will continue with its NEPA Compliance work, ensuring compliance with applicable
statutes and EOs. The NEPA program will continue to ensure environmental justice concerns are
properly addressed in all actions where the EPA must comply with NEPA. In FY 2014, at least
90 percent of the EPA projects subject to NEPA environmental assessment or EIS requirements
are expected to result in no significant environmental impact.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in NEPA Implementation and can be
found in the Eight-Year Performance Array in Tab 11.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$772.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$558.0 / -4.1 FTE) This reduction reflects the agency's efforts to restructure the
workforce by shifting resources from lower priorities and reinvest in new skills that will
rely heavily on advances in information and monitoring technology increasing the
agency's ability to detect violations that impact public health and the environment. The
reduced resources include 4.1 FTE and associated payroll of $558.0.
47 For more information, refer to: www.epa.gov/oecaerth/nepa/nepassist-mapping.html
274
-------
• (+$621.0) This reflects an increase in contractual support for tools and analysis that will
assist EPA in its review of EISs prepared by other federal agencies, maintain a national
filing system for all EISs, and assure the EPA's actions comply with NEPA requirements.
Specifically, support will fund tools such as NEPAssist that assist the EPA, other Federal
Agencies, and the public with environmental reviews and project planning to help
streamline the NEPA process and improve transparency. The EPA also will continue to
support and improve e-NEPA, the new system for electronic filing of EISs developed to
modernize the process, and the EIS database, which stores EISs filed through e-NEPA,
and EIS data that supports a central searchable collection of EISs on the EPA's website.
• (-$46.0) This reduction supports the Administration's Agenda goal of reducing travel and
conference spending.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Air Act; NEPA; Antarctic Science, Tourism, and Conservation Act; Clean Water Act;
Endangered Species Act; National Historic Preservation Act; Archaeological and Historic
Preservation Act; Fishery Conservation and Management Act; Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act; Executive Order 12898.
275
-------
Program Area: Geographic Programs
276
-------
Great Lakes Restoration
Program Area: Geographic Programs
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$299,520.0
$299,520.0
83.2
FY 2012
Actuals
$280,806.1
$280,806.1
83.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$304,025.0
$304,025.0
83.2
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$300,000.0
$300,000.0
83.7
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$480.0
$480.0
0.5
Program Project Description:
The Great Lakes are the largest system of surface freshwater on earth, containing 20 percent of
the world's surface freshwater and 95 percent of the United States' surface freshwater. The
watershed includes 2 nations, 8 U.S. states, 2 Canadian provinces, and more than 40 tribes.
Through a coordinated interagency process48 led by the EPA, implementation of the Great Lakes
Restoration Initiative (GLRI) is helping to restore the Great Lakes ecosystem, enhance the
economic health of the region, and ultimately improve the public health protection for the area's
30 million Americans. This interagency collaboration accelerates progress, avoids potential
duplication of effort, and saves money. The goal of the GLRI is to restore and maintain the
environmental integrity of the Great Lakes ecosystem, in accordance with the Great Lakes Water
Quality Agreement and the Clean Water Act. As outlined in the FY 2010 to FY 2014 GLRI
Action Plan49 (Action Plan), the GLRI targets restoration work in five focus areas. In these five
focus areas, the EPA and its partners are already achieving key results since the inception of the
GLRI, such as:
Focus Area
Highlights
Toxic Substances
and Areas of
Concern
In February 2013, the Presque Isle, PA Area of Concern (AOC) was delisted.
By January 2013, all management actions necessary for delisting were
completed at the Sheboygan, WI AOC. We continue to accelerate work to
complete management actions at five or more AOCs through FY 2014.50
From GLRI's inception through FY 2012, 21 Beneficial Use Impairments
(BUIs) at 12 different AOCs have been removed, bringing the cumulative
removal total to 33 and exceeding the cumulative GLRI Action Plan target of
314
48 In addition to EPA, the other members of the Interagency Task Force overseeing the GLRI are: White House Council on
Environmental Quality, U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Department of Commerce, Department of Health and Human
Services, Department of Homeland Security, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of State, Department
of Defense, Department of Interior, and Department of Transportation.
49 http://www.epa. gov/greatlakes/glri/
http://greatlakesrestoration.us/pdfs/gki actionplan.pdf
50 Highlights marked with "4" were achieved through GLRI funding as well as other non-GLRI federal and/or state funding.
277
-------
o Over 1 million cubic yards of contaminated sediments have been remediated.
Invasive Species
o Over 31,000 acres (doubling EPA's target) were managed in order to keep
populations of invasive species controlled to a target level.
o GLRI has been central to the Administration's coordinated efforts keeping self-
sustaining Asian carp populations out of the Great Lakes.4
Nearshore Health
and Nonpoint
Source Pollution
Approximately 280,000 acres in the Great Lakes watershed were put into
USDA conservation practices to reduce erosion, nutrients and/or pesticide
loadings under Farm Bill Programs in FY 2012.4
Actions have been taken at many Great Lakes beaches to reduce or eliminate
sources of beach contamination.4
Habitat and
Wildlife
Protection and
Restoration
Over 800 river-miles have been cleared for fish passage by removing or
bypassing barriers.
Over 90,000 acres of wetland, coastal, upland, and island habitat were
protected, restored, or enhanced.
Accountability,
Education,
Monitoring,
Evaluation,
Communication
and Partnerships
The Great Lakes Sea Grant Network, through their newly formed Center for
Great Lakes Literacy, is increasing environmental stewardship and improving
Great Lakes literacy through training, mentoring, community-building, and
place-based stewardship opportunities.
Over 300 educational institutions have already incorporated Great Lakes
specific material into their curricula.
GLRI funds are appropriated to the EPA. After agreement on priorities, the EPA then provides a
substantial portion of those funds to its partner federal agencies. GLRI funds principally
supplement (but do not supplant) agencies' base funding for Great Lakes activities. Agencies
fund projects performed by public entities like states, tribes, municipalities, and universities, or
private entities, such as non-governmental organizations. EPA and its GLRI partners have put
mechanisms in place to quickly obligate federal funding. EPA has taken concrete steps to
accelerate the expenditure of GLRI funds, such as: (1) looking at potential recipients' past
expenditure rates before issuing new awards; (2) increasing monitoring of award recipients; and
(3) taking steps to hold recipients to their workplan commitments.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, its fifth year, the GLRI will support programs and projects which, in accordance
with the Action Plan, target the most significant environmental problems in the Great Lakes.
Special priority will continue to be placed on: 1) cleaning up and de-listing Areas of Concern; 2)
reducing phosphorus contributions from agricultural and urban lands that contribute to harmful
algal blooms and other water quality impairments; and 3) invasive species prevention. Key
expected activities are described below.
Toxic Substances and Areas of Concern:
Persistent toxic substances, such as mercury and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), are still
present in the Great Lakes at levels that warrant fish consumption advisories in all five lakes.
278
-------
Twenty-nine U.S. and binational Great Lakes AOCs remain degraded with an estimated 37
million cubic yards of contaminated sediments. Ongoing sources of persistent toxic substances
include: releases from contaminated bottom sediments, industrial and municipal point sources,
and nonpoint sources, including agricultural and urban runoff, atmospheric deposition, and
contaminated groundwater. Principal actions proposed to prevent or reduce toxic substances and
restore AOCs include:
• Prevention and Reduction of Toxics. The EPA, with federal, state, Tribal, and local
government partners (as well as non-governmental organizations and academia) will take
steps to mitigate the use and release of toxic substances into the Great Lakes. The EPA will
issue grants to address chemicals of emerging concern and other pollutants (such as PCBs or
mercury) in products.
Great Lakes Areas of Concern
Areas of Concern Restoration. The GLRI achieved a significant milestone in February
2013 with the delisting of the Presque Isle, PA AOC. This is only the second U.S. AOC
delisted and the first U.S. delisting since 2006. The EPA and its federal partners work with
and fund stakeholders to remove Beneficial Use Impairments (indicators of environmental
health) in AOCs. Forty-six of 261 Beneficial Use Impairments are expected to be eliminated
by the end of FY 2014. In FY 2012, the EPA and its partners removed 7 Beneficial Use
Impairments, meeting the EPA's cumulative target (33) for this measure. By 2014, we expect
to complete management actions at additional AOCs in Illinois, Michigan, and Ohio, beyond
the three to date at Oswego River (NY), Presque Isle Bay (PA), and Sheboygan River (WI).
While continuing to support work across all 29 remaining AOCs, the EPA, U.S. Fish and
279
-------
Cumulative Volume of Sediment Remediated
via the Great Lakes Legacy Act Program
(AsofJuly2012|
i"™
1" 1 !
I™-
i 1 1
,,-,-,-. .„- |
:: B|||
--" -
101
~j
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
OH
Wildlife Service, U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, U.S. Geological Survey, and National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) are working together to accelerate action
at AOCs across the Great Lakes basin where delisting is within reach.
Through the Great Lakes Legacy Act (part of the
GLRI), three to five sediment remediation projects
will begin and be supplemented with navigational
channel dredging by the U.S. Army Corp of
Engineers and habitat enhancements by the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service. GLRI funding of Great
Lakes Legacy Act projects in FY 2014 is expected
to ultimately result in remediation of over 400
thousand cubic yards of contaminated sediment and
the delisting of one or more Areas of Concern.
Invasive Species.
The Great Lakes have been significantly affected by non-native invasive species. Over 180 non-
native species now exist in the Great Lakes. These species can propagate and spread, ultimately
degrading habitat and out-competing native species. Invasive species (such as the Asian carp) are
introduced through various pathways, including: commercial shipping, canals and waterways,
trade of live organisms, and activities of recreational and resource users. Furthermore, the Great
Lakes are the aquatic "gateway" to most of the interior United States. Once invasive species
establish a foothold in the Great Lakes, they are virtually impossible to eradicate and have the
potential to spread to the rest of the country. Principal actions proposed to stop the introduction
of or stop the further spread of non-native invasive species in the Great Lakes include:
• Prevention. The Department of Transportation's Maritime Administration, the U.S. Coast
Guard, and the EPA will fund performance testing of up to four ballast water treatment
systems for use in freshwater ecosystems. Furthermore, the U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service will deploy portable boat washing units to limit the spread of invasive
species by recreational boaters. EPA will fund up to 12 projects that will prevent new
introductions of invasive species by addressing introduction vectors and by promoting safe
recreation and resource use.
280
-------
Timeline of Aquatic Invasive Species in the Great Lakes
ISOO's
Purple
loosestrife
Introduced
into North
America;
Sea Lamprey
Observed In
Lake Ontario
1959
St. Lawrence
Seaway opens,
allowing
ocean-going
1988
Zebra mussels
Identified in
Lake St. Clalr
to the Great
Lakes
1994
Asian carp
(bighead and
silver) escaped
from aqua culture
ponds Into the
lower Mississippi
River due to floods
2002
Asian carp
discovered
50 miles from
Lake Michigan
In the Illinois River
and 21 miles
downstream of the
electrical dispersal
barrier
2006
Bloody red
shrimp
detected
in Muskegon,
Michigan
2010
Use of
eDNA
testing shows
that Asian
Carp are
likely within
Chicago Area
Waterway
System
1921
Sea lamprey
expand into the
upper Great
Lakes due to
alteration to the
Wetland Canal
1982
Spiny
water flea
detected In Lake
Ontario
1900
Round goby first
reported in St.
Clalr Rrver
1998
Fishhook waterf lea
(Ceropaagls pengoQ
Identified In Lake
Ontario
2003
The North
America strain
of the viral
Hemorrhagic
Septicemia (VMS)
virus found In
Lake St. Clair
2009
Asian carp
found seven
miles
downstream
of the
electrical
dispersal
barrier
Early Detection and Control. The EPA and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will continue to
conduct monitoring surveys that will detect new invaders in Great Lakes locations. The U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service and the Bureau of Indian Affairs will support on-the-ground
implementation of Aquatic Nuisance Species Management Plans for Great Lakes states and
tribes, which includes conducting five rapid response exercises to demonstrate and refine
multi-agency response capabilities. The Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Forest
Service, and National Park Service will work with agricultural producers and other
landowners to implement practices that reduce terrestrial invasive species on over 1,000
acres. The Great Lakes Fishery Commission will advance sea lamprey control methods using
pheromones and telemetry, and the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers will enhance the use of
barriers to further reduce sea what is the "Nearshore"?
lamprey populations. The The aquatic nearshore begins at the shoreline and generally extends
FPA will ieenp rmrmptitivp offshore to a depth of 20-30 meters deep. Terrestrial nearshore areas
r,r/\ wiu issue compeiiuve range from narrow beaches to inland features influenced by Great
grants to communities and Lakes processes.
organizations to reduce or
control terrestrial invasive
species on approximately
1,000 acres. In FY 2012, the
EPA and its partners managed
over 31,000 acres to control
populations of invasive
species, accomplishing twice
the cumulative target
established for FY 2012.
Nearshore Health and
Nonpoint Source Pollution.
Legend
Nearshore waters
100 200 Km
Great Lakes nearshore water
quality has become degraded, as evidenced by eutrophication; harmful algal blooms; the
281
-------
formation of thick odorous mats of the green algae Cladophora that can wash onto beaches;
outbreaks of avian botulism; and "no-swim" advisories at beaches. The environmental stressors
causing these problems include: excessive nutrient loadings from agriculture; high
concentrations of bacteria and other pathogens; and building and development in shoreline areas,
which removes or disrupts habitat and alters nutrient and contaminant runoff patterns.
Nonpoint sources are now the primary contributors of many Great Lakes pollutants because
control strategies implemented thus far have not been sufficient. It is noteworthy that some
control strategies, such as implementation of watershed management practices, can have multiple
benefits, including simultaneous reductions in runoff of soils, nutrients, and pesticides. Principal
actions proposed to improve the health of Great Lakes nearshore areas include:
• Identification and Remediation of Sources of Impairments. To reduce the number and
severity of the types of ecosystem disruptions
discussed above, Natural Resources Conservation
c. „ A o • TTCA /~i c GLRI Priority: Impaired Watersheds
Service, U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Army Corps or
' ' •> r Lower Fox River, Wl
Engineers, National Park Service, U.S. Geological
Survey, NOAA, and the EPA will collaborate to
understand the linkages between nearshore
impairments and their causes; enhance or implement
practices to reduce the causes, including the export of
nutrients and soils to the nearshore waters; establish
and implement Total Maximum Daily Loads and
Watershed Action Plans for phosphorus, nitrogen, and
other non-toxic pollutants; and evaluate the effectiveness of such efforts so decisions can be
refined in the future. The agencies continue to target the watersheds highlighted in the Action
Plan (i.e., the western basin of Lake Erie, Saginaw Bay on Lake Huron, and Green Bay on
Lake Michigan) by focusing on priority sub-watersheds within these targeted areas.
• Reduce or Eliminate Sources of Great Lakes Beach Contamination. To assist local health
officials in better protecting beach-goers, the EPA and partner agencies will implement
actions to reduce, manage, or eliminate sources of bacteriological, algal or chemical
contamination that have been identified through, or are consistent with, sanitary surveys at
Great Lakes beaches.
Habitat and Wildlife.
Numerous factors threaten the health of habitat and wildlife in the Great Lakes watershed. They
have been impacted by development, competition from invasive species, the alteration of natural
lake level fluctuations and flows from dams and other control structures, toxic compounds, poor
land management practices, and nonpoint sources of pollution. These impacts have led to an
altered food web, loss of biodiversity, and poorly functioning ecosystems. Principal actions
proposed to protect and restore Great Lakes habitat and wildlife include:
• Protection and Restoration of Native Species and Habitats Agencies will implement
protection and restoration actions to improve habitat and restore wildlife. Federal agencies,
282
-------
including the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, Bureau of Indian Affairs, the EPA, Federal
Highway Administration, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Great Lakes Fishery Commission,
NOAA, National Park Service, Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Forest Service,
U.S. Geological Survey, and Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service will continue to
implement projects to reduce sedimentation and nutrient inputs, restore natural hydrological
regimes, improve water quality, and protect and restore habitat including islands, beaches,
sand dunes, and upland areas. Long-term results will include: restoration and protection of
6,500 acres of wetlands and associated uplands, as well as coastal, upland, and island
habitats, and restored critical habitat for native species. The EPA and its partners have
protected, restored, and enhanced a total of over 65,000 acres of wetlands and wetland-
associated uplands and over 28,000 acres of coastal, upland, and island habitats.
• Improvement of Aquatic Ecosystem Resiliency. U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, Federal Highway
Administration, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and National Park Service will begin
implementation of projects to remove large woody debris in floodplains and streams, replace
barrier culverts to restore fish passage and stream/river connectivity, and restore forested
edges in riparian areas. Long-term results will include benefits to populations of key species
such as lake sturgeon, brook trout and migratory birds; removal of 25 fish passage barriers;
and restoration of 250 miles of stream to promote fish passage and stream bank stabilization.
Accountability, Education, Monitoring, Evaluation, Communication, and Partnerships.
Oversight, coordination, and communication are critical to GLRI success, as are a
comprehensive and efficient accountability system and well-defined metrics to track progress.
Measuring ecosystem function and the impact of GLRI projects also are important. Principal
efforts related to information gathering and education and outreach include:
• Evaluation of Program Effectiveness and the Health of the Great Lakes Ecosystem
Using the Best Available Science. The EPA will work with all Great Lakes Restoration
Initiative agencies to continue implementation of the Great Lakes Accountability System to
incorporate transparency and accountability throughout the GLRI. The Great Lakes
Accountability System provides access to information for planning, budgeting, grant
activities, and tracking results.
In its January 2012 report reviewing the GLRI Action Plan, the EPA Science Advisory Board
recommended the creation of an integrated science-based framework. In response, the EPA
and the other GLRI agencies will have developed a Science Plan by 2013 that establishes an
adaptive management framework that helps ensure future decisions are refined based on
current science. This framework will direct the evaluation of program effectiveness and the
health of the Great Lakes ecosystem using the best available science.
The EPA, U.S. Geological Survey, and NOAA will improve existing programs that assess
the physical, biological, and chemical integrity of the Great Lakes by strengthening the
scientific foundation of these programs. The EPA and U.S. Geological Survey will continue
to refine and use scientific indicators of ecosystem health.
283
-------
The EPA will continue to implement the Coordinated Science and Monitoring Initiative with
other federal agencies, state agencies, and Environment Canada to address lake-specific
science and monitoring needs in Lake Erie in 2014 (to be followed by Lakes Michigan,
Superior, Huron, and Ontario in consecutive years). The EPA and U.S. Geological Survey
will continue to develop the necessary infrastructure for uniform data quality management
and timely access to data and information.
• Enhanced Communication, Partnerships, and Outreach. The EPA and NOAA will work
to improve Great Lakes literacy and increase environmental stewardship through training,
mentoring, community-building, and place-based stewardship opportunities for educators
(formal and informal), their students, and other interested citizens.
The EPA will lead and support coordination and collaboration among Great Lakes partners to
ensure that GLRI actions, projects, and programs are efficient, effective, and consistent with
the U.S.-Canada Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. Through the newly created Great
Lakes Advisory Board, the EPA and the other federal agencies will seek advice and
recommendations on annual priorities of the GLRI. The U.S. Department of State will
support the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement through cooperative efforts with Canadian
partners on issues of binational importance. Partnerships will be advanced and resources and
capabilities leveraged through existing collaborative efforts, such as the IATF and its
Regional Working Group, the U.S.-Canada Binational Executive Committee, the State of the
Lakes Ecosystem Conference, the U.S.-Canada Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy,
Lakewide Management Plans, the Coordinated Science Monitoring Initiative and Great
Lakes fisheries management. Based on Lakewide Management Plans, partner agencies will
implement programs and projects, using public fora to assist with the transfer and
dissemination of information.
Funding Allocations. The EPA leads the Interagency Task Force (IATF) process to develop
funding allocations for member agencies. The EPA, following consultation with members of the
IATF, determines the final programs and projects for funding.
Summary of FY 2010 - 2014 Allocations by Focus Area and by Agency
Focus Area Allocations (Dollars in Thousands)
Focus Area
Toxic Substances and Areas of Concern
Invasive Species
Nearshore Health and Nonpoint Source Pollution
Habitat and Wildlife Protection and Restoration
Accountability, Education, Monitoring,
Evaluation, Communication, and Partnerships
TOTAL
FY2010
$146,946
$60,265
$97,331
$105,262
$65,196
$475,000
FY 2011
$100,400
$57,500
$49,250
$63,000
$29,250
$299,400
FY 2012
$106,300
$57,500
$54,800
$56,800
$24,100
$299,500
FY2013
$110,500
$57,500
$55,000
$54,000
$23,000
$300,000
FY2014*
$110,700
$53,000
$56,400
$58,800
$21,100
$300,000
* Based on nominal allocations approved by the Interagency Task Force.
* *Agency GLRI funding for Asian carp is included in agency totals through F Y 2012. Agency GLRI allocations for Asian carp
have not yet been determined for FY 2013 or FY 2014.
284
-------
Agency Allocations (Dollars in Thousands)
DHS-USCG
DOC-NOAA
DOD-USACE
DOI-BIA
DOI-NPS
DOI-FWS
DOI-USGS
DOT-FHWA
DOT-MARAD
HHS-ATSDR
USDA-APHIS
USDA-NRCS
USDA-USFS
EPA, GLFC, IJC and Misc.
Interagency Agreements
Multiple: Asian Carp**
TOTAL
FY 2010 (actual)
$6,350
$30,537
$49,587
$3,416
$10,505
$69,349
$23,717
$2,500
$4,000
$5,500
$1,885
$34,092
$15,458
$218,104
$475,000
FY 2011
$2,725
$18,289
$31,425
$6,316
$4,861
$48,690
$14,532
$1,218
$2,695
$2,196
$637
$16,788
$8,890
$140,138
$299,400
FY2012
$2,700
$15,600
$33,800
$4,700
$3,400
$43,600
$12,400
$1,200
$2,400
$2,200
$1,100
$24,200
$6,700
$145,500
$299,500
FY 2013
$1,900
$23,600
$27,700
$4,000
$3,200
$33,000
$7,700
$1,000
$2,300
$1,800
$900
$23,400
$6,300
$143,700
$19,500
$300,000
FY 2014*
$1,900
$15,200
$20,600
$4,000
$3,100
$32,700
$11,400
$1,000
$2,300
$1,700
$900
$23,300
$6,300
$156,100
$19,500
$300,000
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(626) Number of Areas of Concern in the Great Lakes where all management actions necessary
for delisting have been implemented (cumulative).
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
1
2
FY 2012
o
J
2
FY 2013
4
FY 2014
5
Units
AOCs
Measure
Target
Actual
(628) Acres managed for populations of invasive species controlled to a target level
(cumulative).
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
1,500
13,045
FY 2012
15,500
31,474
FY 2013
34,000
FY 2014
36,000
Units
Acres
Measure
Target
Actual
(629) Number of multi-agency rapid response plans established, mock exercises to practice
responses carried out under those plans, and/or actual response actions (cumulative).
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
4
8
FY2012
12
23
FY2013
26
FY2014
29
Units
Number
Responses/
Plans
Measure
Target
Actual
(632) Acres in Great Lakes watershed with USDA conservation practices implemented to
reduce erosion, nutrients, and/or pesticide loading.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
2
62
FY2012
8
70
FY2013
20
FY2014
30
Units
Acres
Measure
(634) Number of acres of wetlands and wetland-associated uplands protected, restored and
enhanced (cumulative).
Units
285
-------
Target
Actual
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
5,000
9,624
FY2012
11,000
65,639
FY2013
68,000
FY2014
70,000
Acres
Measure
Target
Actual
(635) Number of acres of coastal, upland, and island habitats protected, restored and enhanced
(cumulative).
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
15,000
12,103
FY2012
15,000
28,034
FY2013
33,000
FY2014
38,000
Units
Acres
Measure
Target
Actual
(636) Number of species delisted due to recovery.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
0
1
FY2012
1
1
FY2013
2
FY2014
2
Units
Species
Measure
Target
Actual
(433) Improve the overall ecosystem health of the Great Lakes by preventing water pollution
and protecting aquatic systems (using a 40-point scale).
FY2007
21
22.7
FY2008
21
23.7
FY2009
No Target
Establish
ed
FY2010
No Target
Establish
ed
FY2011
23.4
21.9
FY2012
21.9
23.9
FY2013
23.4
FY2014
23.4
Units
Point on a
40-point
scale
Measure
Target
Actual
(606) Cubic yards of contaminated sediment remediated (cumulative from 1997) in the Great
Lakes.
FY2007
4.5
4.5
FY2008
5.0
5.5
FY 2009
5.9
6.0
FY 2010
6.3
7.3
FY2011
8
8.4
FY 2012
9.1
9.7
FY 2013
10.3
FY 2014
11
Units
Cubic
Yards
(Million)
Measure
Target
Actual
(620) Cumulative percentage decline for the long-term trend in concentrations of PCBs in whole
lake trout and walleye samples.
FY2007
5
6
FY2008
5
6
FY2009
5
6
FY2010
10
43
FY2011
37
44
FY2012
40
42.8
FY2013
43
FY2014
46
Units
Percent
Decline
Measure
Target
Actual
(625) Number of Beneficial Use Impairments removed within Areas of Concern (cumulative).
FY2007
FY2008
16
11
FY 2009
21
12
FY 2010
20
12
FY2011
26
26
FY 2012
33
33
FY 2013
41
FY 2014
46
Units
BUIs
Removed
Measure
Target
Actual
(627) Number of nonnative species newly detected in the Great Lakes ecosystem.
FY 2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
1.0
0.83
FY 2012
0.8
0.77
FY 2013
0.8
FY 2014
0.8
Units
Species
286
-------
Measure
Target
Actual
(630) Five-year average annual loadings of soluble reactive phosphorus (metric tons per year)
from tributaries draining targeted watersheds.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
0
Data
Unavaila
ble
FY 2012
0.5
Data
Unavaila
ble
FY 2013
1.0
FY 2014
1.0
Units
Metric
Tons/Year
Measure
Target
Actual
(633) Percent of populations of native aquatic non-threatened and non-endangered species self-
sustaining in the wild (cumulative).
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
33%;
48/147
31%;
46/147
FY2012
33%;
48/147
33%;
48/147
FY2013
34%;
50/147
FY2014
35%;
52/147
Units
Species
Measure
Target
Actual
(623) Cost per cubic yard of contaminated sediments remediated (cumulative).
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
200
122
FY2010
200
125
FY2011
200
144
FY2012
200
131
FY2013
200
FY2014
200
Units
Dollars/Cub
ic Yard
The EPA will track and report on progress through annual reporting on the measures set forth in
the GLRI Action Plan. The EPA also uses the measures table in this budget document to report
progress on a subset of 15 of those measures.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$733.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$71.0 / +0.5 FTE) This increase reflects partial replacement of a vacant position for
grants management pertaining to the Great Lakes Restoration program. This includes 0.5
FTE and associated payroll of $71.0.
• (-$324.0) This reflects a decrease in funding for contracts and grants to support
restoration activities.
Statutory Authority:
1990 Great Lakes Critical Programs Act; Great Lakes Legacy Reauthorization Act of 2008;
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; 1909 The Boundary Waters Treaty; 1978 Great
Lakes Water Quality Agreement; 1987 Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement; and 1987
Montreal Protocol on Ozone Depleting Substances.
The EPA is again proposing the statutory language pertaining to administrative provisions that
was first included in the FY 2010 Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related
287
-------
Agencies Appropriations Act. Among other things, the language provides EPA independent
statutory authority to enter into interagency agreements for the implementation of grants and
contracts to support the GLRI and the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. Continuation of
this authority is important to the success of the GLRI. Agencies are expected to use numerous
other statutory authorities, intrinsic to their programs, in support of the GLRI.
288
-------
Geographic Program: Chesapeake Bay
Program Area: Geographic Programs
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$57,299.0
$57,299.0
49.3
FY 2012
Actuals
$62,297.6
$62,297.6
57.8
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$58,075.0
$58,075.0
49.3
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$72,982.0
$72,982.0
46.3
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$15,683.0
$15,683.0
-3.0
Program Project Description:
In 1983, the Chesapeake Bay region states, the District of Columbia and the Chesapeake Bay
Commission joined forces with the federal government to restore and protect the Chesapeake
Bay and its watershed. This partnership, called the Chesapeake Bay Program, was created to help
coordinate restoration efforts across state boundaries. The EPA represents the federal
government on the partnership's Chesapeake Executive Council (EC) and is called, under
Section 117 of the Clean Water Act, to maintain an office and to work with the EC to coordinate
activities of the partnership through implementation of the Chesapeake Bay Agreements.
On December 29, 2010, the EPA established the Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load
(TMDL), an historic and comprehensive "pollution diet" with appropriate accountability
measures to initiate sweeping actions to restore clean water in the Chesapeake Bay and the
region's streams, creeks, and rivers. The TMDL is required under federal law and responds to
consent decrees in Virginia and Washington, D.C. dating to the late 1990s. It also is a keystone
commitment of the Executive Order strategy. The TMDL includes pollution limits to meet water
quality standards in the Bay and its tidal rivers. The TMDL is designed to ensure that all
nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment pollution control efforts needed to fully restore the Bay and
its tidal rivers are in place by 2025, with controls, practices and actions in place by 2017 that
would achieve 60 percent of the necessary reductions. The TMDL is supported by appropriate
accountability measures. More information about the TMDL is available at
http://www.epa.gov/chesapeakebaytmdl/.
In May 2009, President Obama signed Executive Order 13508 "to protect and restore the health,
heritage, natural resources, and social and economic value of the nation's largest estuarine
ecosystem and the natural sustainability of its watershed." The Executive Order also tasked a
Federal Leadership Committee (FLC) to draft a way forward for protection and restoration of the
Chesapeake Bay watershed. More information about EO 13508 is available at
http://executiveorder.chesapeakebay.net/.
Also, in May 2009, the Chesapeake Executive Council established specific two-year milestones
for each jurisdiction to reduce pollution to the Bay and its rivers. These milestones, which are
289
-------
available at http://www.epa.gov/reg3wapd/tmdl/ChesapeakeBay/EnsuringResults.html, contain
"contingencies" and are subject to ongoing EPA oversight and backstopping actions where they
fall short.
In May 2010, the Federal Leadership Committee released the Strategy for Protecting and
Restoring the Chesapeake Bay Watershed [EPA-903-R-10-003]
(http://executiveorder.chesapeakebay.net/file. axd?file=2010%2f5%2fChesapeake+EO+Strategy
%20.pdf). The EPA holds primary responsibility for numerous actions under the Executive Order
strategy.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA is requesting approximately $73 million for the Chesapeake Bay Program,
which will further the EPA's progress to improve water quality and restore the Bay under EO
13508. Work under EO 13508 can be categorized according to the Goal Areas and Supporting
Strategies identified in the EO strategy. Most of the EPA's direct efforts center around the first
goal, Restore Water Quality, achieved primarily through implementation of the Chesapeake Bay
TMDL and support for the seven Bay watershed jurisdictions in implementing their Watershed
Implementation Plans. Additional Goal Areas supported by the EPA and its federal partners
include Recover Habitat, Sustain Fish and Wildlife, and Conserve Land and Increase Public
Access. Additionally, EPA is charged with chairing the Federal Leadership Council under EO
13508 and maintaining the Chesapeake Bay Program Office to support the Chesapeake
Executive Council under Clean Water Act Section 117, as amended.
Executive Order 13508 requires scheduling of and reporting on this work through annual action
plans and progress reports, available at
http://executiveorder.chesapeakebay.net/category/Reports-Documents.aspx. Similar reporting is
required by Section 117(h) of the Clean Water Act.
290
-------
Highlights of the EPA's Actions to Restore Clean Water
The EPA's focus in FY 2014 will be to continue progress to restore the Bay's water quality by
reducing loadings of phosphorous, nitrogen and sediment to achieve the expectations of EO
13508. Additionally, the EPA's responsibility under Clean Water Act Section 117 includes
coordinating the activities of partners, which may include goals related to fisheries, habitat,
agriculture, and other areas. The EPA's primary focus will be to continue assisting the states in
implementing the Chesapeake Bay TMDL, providing states with the tools necessary for effective
regulatory implementation, creating better tools for scientific analysis and accountability, and
supporting regulatory compliance and enforcement. In FY 2012, the seven Chesapeake Bay
jurisdictions submitted and began implementation of second-generation ("Phase II") Watershed
Implementation Plans (WIPs) that define how the jurisdictions' TMDL allocations will be
achieved, in part, through local efforts. The EPA is working to ensure that the states provide
necessary support to local governments as they take the on-the-ground actions necessary to
achieve the pollution reduction goals of the Chesapeake Bay TMDL.
To ensure the most effective and cost-efficient achievement of environmental results in the Bay,
the Chesapeake Bay Program partnership is using an internal adaptive management process to
critically review components of the Chesapeake Bay Program. The EPA, the seven watershed
jurisdictions, and other key federal agencies also established two-year milestones for the
outcomes outlined in the EO strategy, the Bay TMDL, and the jurisdictions' WIPs. The first set
of two-year milestones under the Bay TMDL was released in January 2012 and covers calendar
years 2012 and 2013. The milestones related to water quality in the Chesapeake Bay watershed
are available at http://executiveorder. chesapeakebay.net/EO_13508_Water_Ouality_Milestones-
2012-01-06.pdf.
291
-------
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue its close work with the Bay watershed jurisdictions and
thousands of local governments that will be instrumental in meeting the Bay TMDL allocations
by providing implementation support and guidance to achieve the most efficient implementation
of the TMDL. The EPA will assist the jurisdictions in making scientifically informed
determinations of the most effective ways to meet their Bay TMDL obligations that will provide
individually tailored solutions. Also, the EPA will continue to work with the seven Bay
watershed jurisdictions to refine and implement state-developed offset and trading programs to
aid in identifying cost-effective solutions for meeting the TMDL waste load and load allocations
throughout the watershed.
The EPA will continue to support implementation of innovative environmental market
mechanisms as a means of effectively achieving the goals of the TMDL. The basic premise of
an environmental market is that an entity that needs to reduce its effects on the environment can
purchase credits to achieve an equivalent or greater amount of environmental improvement. The
Chesapeake Bay TMDL establishes the expectation that the Bay jurisdictions will expand or
establish offset programs to allow development while continuing to reduce pollutant loads to the
Bay and its tributaries. Several of the Bay watershed jurisdictions have established or expanded
water quality trading programs to support the goals of their WIPs and other milestones. The EPA
will provide additional resources to Bay
watershed jurisdictions that wish to improve
the viability and integrity of their water
quality offset and trading programs,
including through development of and
participation in pilot interstate trading
projects, where appropriate.
To ensure that the states are able to meet the
EPA's expectations under the TMDL and
any new rulemakings, the EPA will continue
its broad range of grant programs and will
prioritize funding to jurisdictions which are
demonstrating progress. The EPA will direct
investments toward local governments and
watershed organizations based on their
ability to reduce nutrient and sediment loads
via key sectors such as development and
agriculture in urban and rural areas. The
EPA has continued to improve its guidance
for accountability and implementation grants
that ensures a high level of accountability for
the use of these resources. These grants are
an essential part of achieving the goals
established for the Chesapeake Bay and its
watershed. The FY 2013 grant guidance is
available at
http://www.epa.gov/region03/chesapeake/grants.htm. In FY 2014, the EPA will increase the
Flow-adjusted trends for total nitrogen for 31 sites
in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. 1985-2010.
292
-------
funding made available through such grants to assist the Bay watershed jurisdictions and local
governments in WIP implementation by $12 million over FY 2012 Enacted funding levels.
ChesapeakeSfcrf (http://stat.chesapeakebay.net/) is a key element in the next generation of tools
the EPA is developing to significantly enhance the accountability of program partners.
ChesapeakeStat is a web based, geo-enabled tool for performance-based interactive decision-
making for all Bay partners. The system allows the public to track progress and become
informed and engaged in restoring the Bay. ChesapeakeStat will leverage the parallel effort
being undertaken to develop a common Chesapeake data enterprise which will allow for timely
access to a wealth of environmental data from across the partnership. In FY 2014, the Agency
will continue refining and improving Chesapeake<5Ya^ by better integrating monitoring and
modeling data to track implementation of the Chesapeake Bay TMDL at multiple geographic
scales.
To ensure that the Bay jurisdictions are effectively implementing the TMDL, the EPA will
improve and expand the Bay Tracking and Accounting System. The EPA will support an
expansion of sampling sites in the Chesapeake Bay Program's non-tidal water quality monitoring
network to better track Bay TMDL progress. The EPA also will invest in bringing more non-
traditional monitoring partners, including watershed organizations, permittees, and local
governments, into the tidal waters and watershed monitoring networks, increasing the data
available to states, local governments, and watershed organizations to assess local stream and
Bay health and responses to management actions.
In FY 2014, the continued implementation of the compliance and enforcement strategy for the
Bay watershed will target sources of pollution impairing the Bay in the watershed and airshed.
The EPA's multi-year, multi-state strategy combines the Agency's water, air and waste
enforcement authorities to address violations of federal environmental laws resulting in nutrient,
sediment, and other pollution in the Bay.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue implementation of a basin-wide Best Management Practice
verification framework, working with the seven watershed jurisdictions to enhance their efforts
to verify the implementation of pollutant load reduction practices, treatments, and technologies.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(cb6) Percent of goal achieved for implementing nitrogen reduction actions to achieve the final
TMDL allocations, as measured through the phase 5.3 watershed model.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
1
8
FY 2012
15
21
FY 2013
22.5
FY 2014
30
Units
Percent
Goal
Achieved
Measure
Target
Actual
(cb7) Percent of goal achieved for implementing phosphorus reduction actions to achieve final
TMDL allocations, as measured through the phase 5.3 watershed model.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
1
1
FY 2012
15
19
FY 2013
22.5
FY 2014
30
Units
Percent
Goal
Achieved
293
-------
Measure
Target
Actual
(cb8) Percent of goal achieved for implementing sediment reduction actions to achieve final
TMDL allocations, as measured through the phase 5.3 watershed model.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
1
11
FY2012
15
30
FY2013
22.5
FY2014
30
Units
Percent
Goal
Achieved
Measure
Target
Actual
(234) Reduce per capita nitrogen loads (pounds per person per year) to levels necessary to
achieve Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load allocations.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
15.17
FY2014
15
Units
Pounds/Pers
on/Year
For FY 2014, EPA, along with the other agencies involved in responding to the President's
Executive Order, will be working toward the 12 outcomes articulated in the Executive Order
strategy document. These outcomes relate to the specific actions identified in the strategy and are
a shared responsibility between the EPA and the other federal agencies participating in the
Chesapeake Bay Program partnership. Shorter-term goals are identified in the annual Executive
Order action plan and the federal two-year milestones released in FY 2012.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$256.0) This decrease is the net effect of the recalculation of base workforce costs due
to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$15,417.0 / +0.2 FTE) This increase is to improve the rate of progress in implementing
the Chesapeake Bay TMDL and meeting the expectations of the President's Executive
Order, primarily by increasing implementation and accountability grants to the six
Chesapeake Bay states and the District of Columbia to facilitate implementation of their
Phase II Watershed Implementation Plans (WIPs) and integration of state and local
efforts in implementing the actions and practices described in the Phase II WIPs. This
funding has proven essential to the Bay watershed jurisdictions in supporting the wide
range of activities necessary to achieve the pollution reductions required by the
Chesapeake Bay TMDL. The resources include 0.2 FTE and associated payroll of $30.0.
• (+$1,000.0) This increase is to assist those Bay watershed jurisdictions interested in
developing an interstate water quality offset and trading program.
• (-$478.0 / -3.2 FTE) This reflects a reduction in program FTE. These reduced resources
include 3.2 FTE and associated payroll of $478.0.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C. 26 et seq. - Sections 1267 and 1313; Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA), 42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq; Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. 85 et seq.
294
-------
Geographic Program: San Francisco Bay
Program Area: Geographic Programs
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$5,838.0
$5,838.0
2.5
FY 2012
Actuals
$5,901.7
$5,901.7
2.6
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$5,924.0
$5,924.0
2.5
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$4,819.0
$4,819.0
2.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($1,019.0)
($1,019.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
Since 1987, the EPA has made a concerted effort to partner with agencies and non-governmental
organizations (NGOs) to protect and restore the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin
Delta Estuary. In August 2012, the EPA released an Action Plan that identifies seven priority
actions for setting new water quality standards, strengthening and implementing Total Maximum
Daily Loads (TMDLs) for a variety of contaminants, curbing pesticide discharges, and restoring
wetlands across the Bay Delta region while effectively managing methylmercury. The EPA's
actions support the water quality programs administered by California's State Water Resources
Control Board (State Board) and the two Regional Water Boards covering the Central Valley and
San Francisco Bay and ensure these programs are consistently implemented to protect the
beneficial uses designated by the state.
Economic and environmental services provided by the Bay Delta include:
52
Drinking water for 25 million residents.51
Irrigation water that underpins an agricultural sector worth $37.5 billion3" in revenue.
Aquatic habitat for two-thirds of California's salmon - a fishery whose closure cost the
state over 1,800 jobs and $118.4 million in income (2008-2009). 3
Wetlands habitat for at least 50 percent of the migratory water birds on the Pacific
Flyway.
Recreational assets, including 6.4 million boating-related visitor days in the year 2000
alone.54
51 Sustainable Water and Environmental Management in the California Bay-Delta. 2012. National Academies Press
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php7record id=13394&page=l
Agricultural Statistical Overview. 2011-2012. California Department of Food and Agriculture.
http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/statistics/pdfs/AgStatOverview2011-12.pdf
UOP Business Forecasting Center. 2010. Employment Impacts of California Salmon Fishery Closures in 2008 and 2009 .
http://forecast.pacific.edu/BFC%20salmon%20iobs.pdf
54 Public Policy Institute of California. 2007. Envisioning Futures for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, pages 5-6.
http://www.ppic.Org/content/pubs/report/R 207JLR.pdf
295
-------
The EPA's Action Plan responds to the issues and opportunities identified by the EPA based on
an assessment we did following the release of the 2011 Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
for Water Quality Challenges in the San Francisco Bay/ Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuary
(ANPR). The ANPR documented the adverse effects of pollutants such as ammonia, selenium,
pesticides, and contaminants of emerging concern on water quality and aquatic life and evaluated
the water quality factors (e.g., salinity and temperature) that degrade estuarine habitat and
impede fish migration. The EPA prepared the ANPR and Action Plan, consistent with the 2009
Interim Federal Action Plan (IFAP) for the California Bay-Delta. The IFAP signaled the federal
government's intent to protect and restore the Bay Delta Estuary by addressing water supply,
water consumption, ecosystem restoration, recovery of listed species, and floodwater
management. The Department of the Interior and the Council on Environmental Quality serve as
co-chairs of the Federal Leadership Committee, which oversees implementation of the Interim
Plan, and other members of the federal team include the Department of Commerce, the
Department of Agriculture's Natural Resource Conservation Service, and the Army Corps of
Engineers.
The federal agencies who work under the IFAP banner also partner with State agencies and
water contractors toward the preparation of the Bay-Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP). Sponsors
of the BDCP are mindful of the "co-equal goals" in California's 2009 Delta Reform legislation
for improving the reliability of California's water supply while protecting and restoring the
Delta. As a Cooperating Agency under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for the
BDCP, the EPA is providing early input to our interagency partners, especially on the potential
impacts the proposed water conveyance system will have on water quality in the Delta.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will focus on the following activities which support federal and state goals
to address degradation in the Bay-Delta ecosystem through sound management of our water
resources and through habitat restoration:
• Increase the effectiveness of Clean Water Act programs by implementing the EPA's
Action Plan for the Bay Delta Estuary (2012);
• Support the State Water Board toward implementing their Strategic Workplan for the
Bay-Delta, and developing and implementing new water quality standards, permits, and
TMDLs for the Bay Delta Estuary;
• Continue collaborating with agencies and NGOs to establish a regional water quality
monitoring and assessment program for the Delta and its tributaries that integrates the
information needs of all agencies in a more efficient and effective system;
• Continue collaborating with the science community to further understand the causes of
and methods for reversing the decline of pelagic organisms and salmonids in the Delta;
296
-------
• Continue EPA's stewardship of the San Francisco Bay Area Water Quality Improvement
Fund, a competitive grant program to improve water quality and restore habitat within the
nine-county Bay Area;
• Support the restoration of floodplains and wetlands and the refinement of methods to
minimize the formation and transport of methylmercury in aquatic environments;
• Provide technical support to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation's (DOT) program to advance
the implementation of the San Joaquin River Restoration Settlement Act (P.L. 111-11);
• Support activities that predict, mitigate, and adapt to the effects of climate change on the
Bay-Delta watershed consistent with the Climate Change Handbook for Regional Water
Planning prepared by the EPA in partnership with the California Department of Water
Resources, the Army Corps of Engineers, and the Resources Legacy Fund;
• Advance the ongoing implementation of the San Francisco Estuary Partnership's
Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan per Clean Water Act Section 320 -
especially actions that reduce the adverse effects of urban/suburban runoff on water
quality - through watershed planning, implementation of TMDLs, and the use of low
impact development (LID) strategies in the design of new development and
redevelopment; and
• Continue to collaborate with federal partners under IFAP and with state agencies to
ensure the successful design and implementation of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports the Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
objective, but there are no performance measures for this specific program. The EPA is
contributing to improvements in water quality and ecosystem health for the Bay Delta, and
performance is measured using a diverse set of metrics (see the Summary of Bay Health., 2011,
page V in the State of San Francisco Bay 2011 Report)5 We also have made tangible progress
toward meeting TMDL targets established for the greater Bay Delta watershed including:
• The removal from the 303(d) list of 79 river miles on the Feather and Sacramento rivers
for diazinon impairments (2010) attributed to Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) label changes and cancellation of registrations for most non-
agricultural uses along with the pollution prevention work of stakeholders who were
motivated by the basic need for clean water and impending regulation;56
55 State of San Francisco Bay 2011 Report.
http://www.bav.org/assets/The%20State%20of%20San%20Francisco%20Bav,%202011 .pdf
2011 Pulse of the Delta: Re-thinking Water Quality Monitoring.
http://www.sfei.org/news_items/2011-pulse-delta-re-thirLking-water-qualitv-monitoring
56 Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. 2010.
Improving California Central Valley Watersheds:Diazinon Reduction in the Feather and Sacramento Rivers
http://www.epa.gov/sfbay-delta/pdfs/2010SacFeatherRiverSP12final-Rpt.pdf
297
-------
• The removal from the 303(d) list of 10 miles of Salt Slough and 40.4 miles across three
segments of the San Joaquin River for selenium impairments (2008 and 2010,
respectively) attributed to a decade of work (1998-2009) by farmers affiliated with the
Grasslands Bypass Project. The farmers prevented the discharge of more than 22,300
pounds of selenium and 80,735 acre-feet of contaminated drainage water into the San
Joaquin River watershed.57
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$4.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$33.0) This reduces support for implementing projects that improve water quality and
restore habitat in the San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary as called for in the San Francisco
Estuary Partnership's Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan.
• (-$990.0) This eliminates the Congressionally directed increase from the FY 2012
Budget.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act (CWA).
57 Nonpoint Source Success Stories — Grasslands Bypass Project Reduces Selenium in the San Joaquin Basin
http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/success319/ca san.cfm
298
-------
Geographic Program: Puget Sound
Program Area: Geographic Programs
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$29,952.0
$29,952.0
7.9
FY 2012
Actuals
$29,931.6
$29,931.6
8.6
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$30,404.0
$30,404.0
7.9
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$17,150.0
$17,150.0
8.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($12,802.0)
($12,802.0)
0.1
Program Project Description:
The Puget Sound Program works to protect and restore Puget Sound, which has been designated
as an estuary of national significance under the Clean Water Act National Estuary Program. It is
one of the most ecologically diverse ecosystems in North America. The health and productivity
of Puget Sound is a cornerstone of the region's quality of life and vibrant economy, from sport
fishing to salmon and shellfish production to tourism. Nearly 71 percent of all jobs and 77
percent of total income in Washington State are found in the Puget Sound Basin.58 The waters
in this basin provide a significant source of seafood for Tribal, commercial, and recreational
harvesters. In 2010, over 23 million pounds of salmon were harvested commercially by treaty
Tribal and non-treaty fishers.59 Beyond the commercial and conservation value, Puget Sound
Tribes rely on the natural resources of the basin for subsistence, ceremonial, religious, and
spiritual purposes.
The EPA's efforts are focused on the following high-priority environmental activities consistent
with the State of Washington's 2020 Puget Sound Action Agenda:
• Restoring and protecting watersheds, nearshore and marine habitat;
• Improving water quality and upgrading shellfish bed classifications;
• Managing stormwater;
• Reducing sources of toxics and nutrients;
• Improving monitoring, performance management, and the science needed to understand
and address the issues facing Puget Sound; and
• Effectively engaging residents of the basin in stewardship efforts.
http://www.psp. wa. go v/downloads/AA2012_Mv/Julv3 ActionAgendaBookl.pdf
59 http://www.psp.wa.gov/vitalsigns/commercial_fisheries_harvestphp
299
-------
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the Puget Sound Program will ensure effective implementation of the Puget Sound
Action Agenda (updated and revised in August 2012) by focusing on management of its funding
agreements and technical and policy support for Management Conference partners. The Action
Agenda identifies and prioritizes actions required to restore and maintain the Puget Sound
environment by 2020, emphasizing three areas: shellfish, storm water, and habitat. An important
outcome of restoring Puget Sound's ecological functions is its ability to support balanced,
indigenous populations of shellfish, fish and wildlife, and the extensive list of recognized uses of
Puget Sound, as well as meeting obligations under federal Tribal treaties. Of special significance
is EPA Region 10's implementation of its commitments in the Federal Habitat Plan and its
participation in the Tribal-Federal Habitat Forum currently under development. The EPA Region
10 provides leadership for the Puget Sound Federal Caucus and co-chairs the overall federal
effort to address Treaty Rights at Risk,60 consistent with the roles assigned by the Council on
Environmental Quality. These efforts include ensuring that appropriated funding is effectively
used to address the highest priority habitat and pollution impacts to Puget Sound and that the
inherent Tribal rights associated with these natural resources are protected. For FY 2014,
consistent with past years, EPA proposes to provide 25 percent of the total program funding
directly to tribes. Additionally, fifty percent of the total funding will be directed to assistance
agreements addressing salmon and shellfish recovery, and specifically riparian buffers and
habitat protection. We expect that funding for these activities will directly benefit tribal interests
in Puget Sound.
Puget Sound funding is awarded competitively and through direct awards to address the
following critical areas:
• Addressing growth management and land-use issues that impact habitat preservation and
recovery efforts, by working with federal, Tribal, state, and local partners;
• Restoring and protecting nearshore habitat - especially habitat needed to restore
endangered Pacific Salmon stocks - by implementing projects identified as priorities in
consultation with federal, Tribal, state, and local partners. The EPA's target is to restore
and protect an additional two thousand acres of tidally and seasonally-influenced
estuarine wetlands in FY 2014. The Puget Sound program's performance in recent years
reflects the increased resources and effort directed at restoring and protecting habitat; and
• Restoring and protecting shellfish harvesting areas by improving water quality,
supporting local efforts to identify sources of pathogen pollution and implementing
improved practices to reduce those sources. Additionally, efforts are directed to reducing
discharges of toxics and nutrient pollution by identifying emerging contaminants of
concern, controlling sources of persistent, bioaccumulative pollutants, and preventing
nutrient inputs from on-site septic systems and agricultural sources. Pathogen, toxics and
nutrient pollution control efforts are strategically directed by the Puget Sound program's
lead organization state agencies, and include projects implemented at the local level
across the Basin. The universe of potentially recoverable shellfish beds in Puget Sound
closed due to nonpoint source pollution is approximately 10,000 acres. The goal is to
protect human health by upgrading and protecting the harvest classifications of 7,758
'http://nwifc.0rg/w/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2011/08/whitepaper628finalpdf.pdf
300
-------
acres (cumulative since 2006) of commercial shellfish beds in FY 2014. To achieve this
performance measure, the program must make gains while minimizing any additional
losses. Program investments are used to recover previously impacted shellfish harvest
areas and also to minimize and respond to the sources of pollution that can lead to
downgrades of current shellfish harvest areas. For a detailed map of Puget Sound
Shellfish Growing Area please see:
http://www.epa.gov/regionlO/images/puget sound shellfish
growing areas map 072012.JPG
Stormwater is a leading stressor on watershed health as identified in the 2020 Action Agenda.
Increasingly, stormwater sources of pollution are threatening the safety of shellfish harvest areas
and the overall water quality and health of the Puget Sound. In 2011, a downgrading of
approximately 4,000 acres in Samish Bay occurred due to nonpoint source pollution.
Unfortunately, those acres were not recovered in FY 2012 due to high pathogen levels from
unknown sources. The Puget Sound Program strategically directed resources in FY 2012 to
increase the work to address the pathogen pollution impacting shellfish harvest in the Samish and
the rest of Puget Sound. The EPA is supporting increased cooperation among local jurisdictions
through Pollution Identification and Correction (PIC) programs with approximately $4.2 million
in funding to local counties and health districts from 2011 through 2013. Under these PIC
programs, sources of potential fecal contamination are being tracked down and corrected. Health
districts in the Puget Sound basin are systematically identifying failing on-site septic systems and
providing assistance for repair and maintenance. The Washington Department of Health had
inspected over 19,000 on-site septic systems as of January 2012, and is on target to complete
over 31,000 inspections by 2015, and 50,000 inspections by 2020, with the objective of fixing all
failing systems identified in the basin. This 2020 target represents 95% of the 53,000 on-site
septic systems in the Puget Sound basin.
Currently, conservation districts and county land use departments also are conducting parcel by
parcel inspections of unregulated small farms, where farm animals or pets might be contributing
to fecal coliform loadings in small streams and tributaries and where land application of manure
may be contributing to nonpoint source runoff. As potential sources are identified, land owners
are connected to local and regional sources of technical and financial assistance for
implementing best management practices to control these sources of fecal water pollution. If
pollution sources are identified and land owners refuse to correct problems, enforcement actions
are taken by local or State agencies. For example, in FY 2012, over 300 land parcels adjacent to
the Samish River have had on-the-ground inspections and/or drive-by assessments of farm land
parcels during the November to March wet season. Over 40 follow-up inspections were
conducted, resulting in 15 landowners being provided technical assistance and one Critical Areas
Ordinance enforcement case initiated. Two additional Critical Areas compliance cases were
resolved during that time as well. The program is taking this approach in focusing on specific
geographical locations (e.g. Samish Bay) and in the long-term for the universe of potentially
recoverable shellfish acres basin-wide in Puget Sound. By providing technical and financial
support to local governments through the Puget Sound Program's lead organization state agency
for watersheds, the Management Conference is reducing the adverse impacts of stormwater on
the health of watersheds.
301
-------
EPA and its Puget Sound partners have put mechanisms in place to quickly obligate federal
funding and reduce unliquidated obligations. EPA has taken concrete steps to accelerate the
expenditure of these funds.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(psl) Improve water quality and enable the lifting of harvest restrictions in acres of shellfish
bed growing areas impacted by degrading or declining water quality.
FY2007
FY2008
450
1,566
FY 2009
600
1,730
FY 2010
1,800
4,453
FY2011
4,953
1,525
FY 2012
3,878
2,489
FY 2013
7,758
FY 2014
7,758
Units
Acres
Measure
Target
Actual
(ps3) Number of near shore, riparian, and wetland habitat acres protected or restored.
FY2007
FY2008
2,310
4,413
FY2009
3,000
5,751
FY2010
6,500
10,062
FY2011
12,363
14,629
FY2012
19,063
23,818
FY2013
31,818
FY2014
33,818
Units
Acres
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$9.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$13.0 / +0.1 FTE) This reflects an increase for protecting and restoring Puget Sound.
The increased resources include 0.1 FTE and associated payroll of $13.0.
• (-$2,134.0) This reduces resources to support implementing the Puget Sound Action
Agenda.
• (-$10,690.0) This eliminates the Congressionally directed increase in FY 2012.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act; Water Resources Development Act of 1996; Water Resources Development
Act of 2000; Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976; Comprehensive Environmental
Response Compensation and Liability Act; Economy Act of 1932; Intergovernmental
Cooperation Act; Clean Air Act; Safe Drinking Water Act; Toxic Substances Control Act;
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act; Pollution Prevention Act; Marine Protection,
Research, and Sanctuaries Act; National Environmental Education Act.
302
-------
Geographic Program: Long Island Sound
Program Area: Geographic Programs
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$3,956.0
$3,956.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$3,983.6
$3,983.6
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$4,018.0
$4,018.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$2,940.0
$2,940.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($1,016.0)
($1,016.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
The EPA supports the protection and restoration of Long Island Sound through its Long Island
Sound Office, established under Section 119 of the Clean Water Act, as amended. The Sound
provides feeding, breeding, nesting and nursery areas for a diversity of plant and animal life, and
contributes an estimated $9.68 billion per year in 2012 dollars from commercial and sport
fishing, swimming, beach-going, and sight-seeing alone.61 The EPA assists the states in
implementing the Sound's 1994 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP),
developed under Section 320 of the Clean Water Act. The EPA and States of Connecticut and
New York work in partnership with regional water pollution control agencies, scientific
researchers, user groups, environmental organizations, industry, and other interested
organizations and individuals to restore and protect the Sound and its critical ecosystems.
The CCMP identifies six critical environmental problem areas that require sustained and
coordinated action to address the effects of hypoxia on the ecosystem, including living marine
resources and commercially valuable species, such as the American lobster; the impacts of toxic
contamination on the food web and on living resources; pathogen contamination and pollution;
floatable debris; the impacts of habitat degradation and loss on the health of living resources; and
the effects of land use and development on the Sound, its human population, and public access to
its resources. The CCMP also identifies public education, information, and participation as
priority action items in protecting and restoring the Sound.
The Long Island Sound Study has developed agreements to guide and prioritize implementation
of the CCMP - such agreements were developed in 1996, 2003, and 2006. Most recently, the
Long Island Sound Study developed an Action Agenda that identifies priority actions from 2011
61 Marilyn A. Altobello, The Economic Importance of Long Island Sound's Water Quality-Dependent Activities, January 1992;
NB: updated to 2012 dollar value using Dept. of Labor Consumer Price Index calculator.
303
-------
to 2013 and sets the stage for a more comprehensive update to the CCMP planned for 2014.
Please see http://www.longislandsoundstudy.net for further information.
62
63
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA will continue to oversee implementation of the Long Island Sound Study CCMP in FY
2014 by coordinating the cleanup and restoration actions of the Long Island Sound Study
Management Conference as authorized under Sections 119 and 320 of the Clean Water Act.
In FY 2014, the EPA will focus on the following:
• Reducing the area of the seasonally impaired fish and shellfish habitats through continued
emphasis on lowering Long Island Sound nitrogen loads to alleviate low oxygen levels (a
condition called hypoxia). Specifically, the EPA Long Island Sound Office will work
with the States of New York and Connecticut to revise and implement the nitrogen Total
Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) first approved by the EPA in April 2000; the EPA will
continue its efforts to include the upland states of Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and
Vermont in this regulatory framework to address their nitrogen contributions from Sound
tributaries;
Long Island Sound
Point Source Nitrogen Trade-Equalized Loads
1995-2011
105 NY/CT STPs
fin
^n
oc :
^°»
HE :
5 ^
n
ff
3
f
g
§
S
—
**
*
*
*
#
j?
,
A
Target
UNY
3CT
,
"•
f
*
4?
"*
—
s
1C
f
3
§
i— i
s
#
«
1
1
.1
/
8
g
—
1
^
—
5
^
.£
—
e
*-
—
'•#
c
4=
*
S & tf
64
Figure 1M
Coordinating priority watershed protection programs through the Long Island Sound
Management Conference partners to ensure that efforts are directed toward priority river
62 The Action Agenda is available at http://longislandsoundstudv.net/about/our-mission/sound-agreements/action-agenda-2011-
20137
63 For more information:
https://www.cfda.gov/index?s=program&mode=form&tab=stepl&id=6504cc92476f05523fc836b5dc099c2f
64 Data from EPA's Permit Compliance System, Discharge Monitoring Reports for treatment plants discharging to Long Island
Sound. Note: Red line in chart is the 2014 target level.
304
-------
and stream reaches that affect Long Island Sound. The EPA will use the principles of its
Healthy Watershed Initiative in working with partners to ensure that watershed protection
and nonpoint source pollution controls will help reduce the effects of runoff pollution on
rivers and streams discharging to the Sound. Restoration and protection efforts will
increase streamside buffer zones as natural filters of pollutants and runoff and
development of local ordinances to create and protect stream buffers;
• Supporting and funding state and local monitoring (year-round and seasonal) for water
quality indicators such as biological indicators, e.g., chlorophyll a and environmental
indicators such as dissolved oxygen levels, temperature, salinity, and water clarity. This
monitoring will assist Management Conference partners in assessing environmental
conditions that may contribute to impaired water quality and in developing strategies to
address impairments;
LONG ISLAND SOUND STUDY
A PARTNERSHIP TO RESTORE AND PROTECT THE SOUND
Maximum Area Duration
26 Year Averages: 56.6 days/195.8 mi2
1.200
rj.
£ 1,000
§
-' 800
I
•
£ 600
L = 2000-2011
Hypoxii = <3.0 mg/l DO
5 year rolling
-------
• Promoting management of the thirty-three ecologically, scientifically, and recreationally
significant Long Island Sound Stewardship areas in New York and Connecticut to
support compatible public access and uses of the Sound's key land resources;
• Coordinating with and supporting the Long Island Sound Citizens Advisory Committee
in developing an educated population that is aware of significant environmental problems
and that understands the management approach to, and their role in, addressing problems;
• Coordinating with the Long Island Sound Science and Technical Advisory Committee in
conducting and funding focused scientific research into the causes and effects of
pollution on the Sound's living marine resources, ecosystems, water quality, and human
uses to assist managers and public decision-makers in developing policies and strategies
to address environmental, social, and human health impacts; and
• Continuing to work with all federal, state and local partners, and private and public
stakeholders to update the 1994 CCMP for Long Island Sound by 2014, incorporating the
latest science and including recommendations on coastal and marine spatial management
and coastal resiliency.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(Ii5) Percent of goal achieved in reducing trade-equalized (TE) point source nitrogen discharges
to Long Island Sound from the 1999 baseline of 59,146 TE Ibs/day.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
52
70
FY2011
72
69
FY2012
74
83.3
FY2013
76
FY2014
78
Units
TE
Pounds/Day
Measure
Target
Actual
(Ii8) Restore, protect or enhance acres of coastal habitat from the 2010 baseline of 2,975 acres.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
218
537
FY2013
420
FY2014
410
Units
Acres
Measure
Target
Actual
(Ii9) Reopen miles of river and stream corridors to diadromous fish passage from the 2010
baseline of 17.7 river miles by removal of dams and barriers or by installation of bypass
structures.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
28
72.3
FY 2013
75
FY 2014
1.5
Units
Miles
The States of New York and Connecticut are reducing nitrogen through their innovative and
nationally-recognized pollution trading and bubble permit programs. In calendar year 2012, 106
sewage treatment plants in New York and Connecticut discharged 33,878 trade-equalized pounds
per day of nitrogen to Long Island Sound, a significant decrease in loads. This represents 27
million fewer pounds of nitrogen per year from the circa 1990s baseline from entering the Sound
306
-------
from treatment plants. As of 2012, the states of New York and Connecticut are 70 percent toward
the goal of reducing nitrogen loads to the Sound by 58.5 percent by 2014 (see Figure 1).
In 2012, the maximum area of hypoxia in the Sound was estimated to be 288.5 square miles.
While this is greater than the 13-year pre-TMDL average of 208 square miles, progress should
not be measured in one-year increments. The 2012 summer was one of the warmest for water
temperatures in the Sound. The 5-year running average area of hypoxia is shown to be measured
at 173.6 square miles, possibly linking the reduction of anthropogenic nitrogen from treatment
plants to a corresponding improvement in dissolved oxygen in the Sound. However,
environmental response is not necessarily linear and the sedimentary contribution of legacy
nitrogen may affect response.
In calendar year 2012, with EPA financial assistance, the states restored or protected 537 acres of
critical coastal habitat, and reopened 72.3 miles of river corridors to diadromous fish passage
through construction of fishways or removal of barriers to fish passage. The EPA will work with
the states, through the Long Island Sound Futures Fund Grant Program, to continue to assist in
restoring and protecting critical habitat and reopening rivers to fish passage.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$994.0) This eliminates a Congressionally directed increase from FY 2012.
• (-$22.0) This reduces grant support for state and local cleanup and restoration actions for
Long Island Sound.
Statutory Authority:
Long Island Sound Restoration Act, P.L. 106-457 as amended by P.L. 109-137; 33 U.S.C. 1269.
Long Island Sound Stewardship Act, P.L. 109-353; 33 U.S.C. 1269.
307
-------
Geographic Program: Gulf of Mexico
Program Area: Geographic Programs
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$5,455.0
$5,455.0
12.9
FY 2012
Actuals
$5,434.3
$5,434.3
14.9
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$5,515.0
$5,515.0
12.9
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$4,482.0
$4,482.0
13.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($973.0)
($973.0)
0.1
Program Project Description:
The efforts of the EPA's Gulf of Mexico Program (GMPO) are dedicated to the protection,
restoration and enhancement of the water bodies and coastal environments associated with the
greater Gulf of Mexico region. The GMPO is committed to voluntary, non-regulatory actions
and solutions which are based on sound scientific and technical information as informed by our
work with partners and the public.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Enhance and/or Protect Coastal Habitat and Ecosystems
Reversing ongoing habitat degradation and preserving the remaining healthy habitats is
necessary to protect the communities, cultures, and economy of the Gulf Coast. For decades, the
Gulf Coast has endured extensive damage to key habitats such as coastal wetlands, estuaries,
barrier islands, upland habitats, seagrass beds, oyster reefs, corals, and offshore habitats. The
overall wetland loss in the Gulf area is on the order of fifty percent and protection of the critical
habitat that remains is essential to restoring the health of the Gulf aquatic system. In FY 2014,
the EPA will enhance cooperative planning and programs across the Gulf states and federal
agencies to protect wetland and estuarine habitat.
The wise management of sediments for wetland creation, enhancement, and sustainability is of
critical importance to the Gulf Coast region, especially given locally high rates of subsidence, or
settling, and the region-wide threat from potential future impacts of climate change, including
rising water levels. To successfully sustain and enhance coastal ecosystems, a broad sediment
management effort is needed that incorporates beneficial use of dredge material, and other means
of capturing all available sediment resources. The EPA's role in this effort includes actions such
as providing input from regional and national perspectives to partner agencies developing policy
and guidance which reflects changes to sediment resource practices; and, improving beneficial
resource management by taking a "strategic use" approach, where practicable and ecologically
acceptable, for effective and sustainable habitat restoration.
308
-------
Improve Water Quality
The Clean Water Act provides authority and resources that are essential to protecting water
quality in the Gulf of Mexico and in the larger Mississippi River Basin, which contributes
pollution, especially oxygen demanding nutrients, to the Gulf. Enhanced monitoring and research
is needed in the Gulf Coast region to make data more readily available. The EPA regional offices
and the Gulf of Mexico Program Office will work with states to continue to maximize the
efficiency and utility of water quality monitoring efforts for local managers by coordinating and
standardizing state and federal water quality data collection activities in the Gulf region. These
efforts will assure the continued effective implementation of core clean water programs, ranging
from discharge permits, to nonpoint pollution controls, to wastewater treatment, to protection of
wetlands. The Gulf of Mexico Program also partners with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the U.S. Geological Survey in support of
this goal.
Specifically, in FY 2014, the EPA will address excessive nutrient loadings that contribute to
hypoxic conditions in the Gulf of Mexico. Working with the Hypoxia Task Force, and the states
within the Mississippi/Atchafalaya River Basins, and other federal agencies, the EPA will
continue to support nutrient reduction strategies that include an accountability framework for
point and nonpoint sources contributing nitrogen and phosphorus loading to the Gulf as well as
watershed plans that provide a road map for addressing nonpoint sources. The EPA will
continue to coordinate with the U.S. Department of Agriculture and with federal and state
partners to support monitoring best management practices and water quality improvement
through work with the partner organizations and states and to leverage resources to focus
wetland restoration and development and habitat restoration efforts toward projects within the
Mississippi River Basin that will sequester nutrients, as appropriate, from targeted watersheds
and tributaries.
Enhance Community Resilience
The Gulf Coastal communities continuously face and adapt to various challenges of living along
the Gulf of Mexico such as storm risk, sea-level rise, land and habitat loss, depletion of natural
resources, and compromised water quality. The economic, ecological, and social losses from
coastal hazard events have grown as population growth places people in harm's way and as the
ecosystems' natural resilience is compromised by development and pollution. In order to sustain
and grow the Gulf region's economic prosperity, individuals, businesses, communities, and
ecosystems all need to be more adaptable to change. In FY 2014, the Gulf of Mexico Program
will assist with the development of information, tools, technologies, products, policies, or public
decision processes that can be used by coastal communities to increase resilience to coastal
natural hazards and sea level rise. The EPA is working collaboratively with multiple agencies
that share responsibility in this area, including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration's Sea Grant Programs and the U.S. Geological Survey.
309
-------
Environmental Education and Outreach
Education and outreach are essential to accomplish the EPA's goal of healthy and resilient
coastal habitats. Gulf residents and decision-makers need to understand and appreciate the
connection between the health of the Gulf of Mexico and its watersheds and coasts, their own
health, the economic vitality of their communities, and their overall quality of life. There also is
a nationwide need for a better understanding of the link between the health of the Gulf of Mexico
and the U.S. economy. The EPA's long-term goal is to increase awareness and stewardship of
Gulf coastal resources and promote action among Gulf citizens. In 2014, the Gulf of Mexico
Program will foster regional stewardship and awareness of Gulf coastal resources through
biennial Gulf Guardian Awards and will support initiatives that include direct involvement from
underserved and underrepresented populations and enhance local capacity to reach these
populations.
Gulf Restoration
In FY 2014, the EPA expects to actively provide scientific and management support to efforts
related to the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill, including:
• The Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA), where the EPA was made a co-trustee on
the Deepwater Horizon NRDA Trustee Council. The EPA, in coordination with other Trustees,
will seek advance funding or reimbursement for this work from responsible parties as
appropriate.
• Resources and Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist Opportunities and Revived Economics of the
Gulf Coast States (RESTORE) Act, which established the RESTORE Council (Council). The
EPA is a member of the Council, along with the five Gulf Coast States, the Department of
Commerce (Chair of the Council), and four other Federal agencies.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(22b) Improve the overall health of coastal waters of the Gulf of Mexico on the Good/Fair/Poor
scale of the National Coastal Condition Report.
FY2007
2.4
2.4
FY2008
2.5
2.2
FY2009
2.5
2.2
FY2010
2.5
2.4
FY2011
2.5
2.4
FY2012
2.4
2.4
FY2013
2.4
FY2014
2.4
Units
Scale
Measure
Target
Actual
(xgl) Restore water and habitat quality to meet water quality standards in impaired segments
in 13 priority coastal areas (cumulative starting in FY 2007).
FY2007
FY2008
64
131
FY 2009
96
131
FY 2010
96
170
FY2011
202
286
FY 2012
320
316
FY 2013
360
FY 2014
360
Units
Impaired
Segments
Measure
Target
Actual
(xg2) Restore, enhance, or protect a cumulative number of acres of important coastal and
marine habitats.
FY2007
FY2008
18,200
25,215
FY 2009
26,000
29,344
FY 2010
27,500
29,552
FY2011
30,000
30,052
FY 2012
30,600
30,248
FY 2013
30,600
FY 2014
30,600
Units
Acres
310
-------
For FY 2014, the EPA Gulf of Mexico Program will continue to support specific actions and
solutions designed to improve the environmental and economic health of the Gulf of Mexico
region through cooperative efforts and partnerships. The EPA Gulf of Mexico Program also will
actively support NRDA and the RESTORE Council.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$76.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$13.0 / +0.1 FTE) This increase in resources will enhance EPA efforts to restore the
Gulf of Mexico. The resources include 0.1 FTE and associated payroll of $13.0.
• (-$991.0) This decrease eliminates a congressionally directed increase to the Gulf of
Mexico Program in FY 2012 supporting EPA's efforts leading the Gulf Coast Ecosystem
Restoration Task Force, which was terminated after the Council was established.
• (-$71.0) This reduction in resources reduces EPA's contractor support for the Gulf of
Mexico Program.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act (CWA).
311
-------
Geographic Program: South Florida
Program Area: Geographic Programs
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$2,058.0
$2,058.0
3.9
FY 2012
Actuals
$1,998.0
$1,998.0
3.1
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$2,082.0
$2,082.0
3.9
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$1,704.0
$1,704.0
3.9
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($354.0)
($354.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
The backbone of the South Florida economy is tourism and clean, clear oceans, lakes, and rivers
supporting activities such as fishing, scuba diving, swimming, sailing, lobster harvesting and
other outdoor activities. A recent study revealed that ocean activities in Florida - many centered
in South Florida - generated revenues of $63 billion annually and produced nearly one million
jobs.65 Agriculture - vegetables, fruits, nurseries, sugar cane, livestock and aquaculture - is a
multi-billion dollar industry for South Florida. The federal government is committed to
protecting and restoring the Everglades - an extraordinary ecosystem and international treasure.
South Florida has much to lose if the lakes, rivers, and near shore waters are polluted.
The EPA's South Florida program coordinates activities in the Florida Keys, where water quality
and habitat are directly affected by the pollution from, and restoration efforts in, the Everglades.
The EPA implements, coordinates, and facilitates activities, including the Clean Water Act
(CWA) Section 404 Wetlands Protection Program, the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration
Program, the Water Quality Protection Program for the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary,
the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Water Quality Monitoring Program, the Coral Reef
Environmental Monitoring Program, the Benthic Habitat Monitoring Program, the Southeast
Florida Coral Reef Initiative as directed by the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force, the Brownfields
Program, and other programs. For more information, please visit:
http://www.epa.gov/region4/water/southflorida/.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA South Florida program targets efforts to protect and restore various communities and
ecosystems impacted by environmental problems. In FY 2014, the EPA will focus on the
following activities:
65 Natural Resources Defense Council. (2006). Florida's Coastal and Ocean Future. A Blueprint for Economic and
Environmental Leadership (Second printing), http://www.nrdc.org/water/oceans/florida/flfuture.pdf
312
-------
• Continue coordinating and facilitating the ongoing implementation of the Water Quality
Protection Program for the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary, including
management and funding of long-term status and trends monitoring projects (water
quality, coral reef, and seagrass) and the web-enabled data management program;
• Implement Phase IV of the Everglades Ecosystem Assessment Program utilizing a
probability-based design to assess the health of the Everglades' effectiveness of
ecosystem restoration efforts. This long-term project (Phase I was implemented in 1993)
documents the status and trends of phosphorus and mercury concentrations within the
Everglades. Planning efforts are underway to resume field sampling in FY 2013 and FY
2014;
• Continue the EPA's National Environmental Policy Act and water quality coordination
with the Jacksonville U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District and South Florida Water
Management District with ongoing activities associated with Comprehensive Everglades
Restoration Project (CERP) implementation. CERP is the largest ecosystem restoration
effort in the world and is currently projected to cost $14 billion over several decades;
• Continue implementation of the Florida Keys Wastewater and Stormwater Master Plan to
eliminate all traditional septic tanks, cesspits, and non-compliant wastewater facilities in
the Florida Keys by December 31, 2015;
• Continue post implementation monitoring of the Little Venice area in Marathon, Florida.
In calendar year 2004, the 540 residents of Little Venice serviced by antiquated septic
systems or cesspit disposal were connected to an advanced centralized wastewater
system. Monitoring data are indicating a documentable reduction in bacterial numbers,
decreasing nutrient levels, and improved water quality in canals and nearshore waters;
• Provide monetary and/or technical/managerial support for priority environmental projects
and programs in South Florida, including:
o Everglades Ecosystem Assessment Program to assess the health of the
Everglades;
o Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Water Quality Monitoring Program;
o Benthic Habitat (seagrass) Monitoring Program;
o Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Coral Reef Evaluation and
Monitoring Program; and
o Water Quality Protection Strategy for the South Florida Ecosystem.
• Support implementation of CWA Section 404, including wetlands conservation,
permitting, dredge and fill and mitigation banking strategies with U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers;
• Continue collaborative efforts through interagency workgroups including: South Florida
Ecosystem Restoration Task Force; Florida Bay Program Management Committee; and
313
-------
Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Water Quality Protection Program Steering
Committee:
• The EPA proposed TMDLs for the southeast Florida coast in November 2012. The EPA
expects to finalize all proposed TMDLs in 2013 and anticipates completion of the TMDL
consent decree in 2014;
• Implement two special studies projects - one to address the impact of intense mosquito
spraying on aquatic resources within the Florida Keys due to a recent dengue virus scare
and the second to provide funding to Monroe County to develop a comprehensive plan to
address polluted residential canals; and
• Continue assisting with the development and tracking of National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System permits within the Everglades, including discharge limits that are
consistent with state and federal law and federal court consent decree requirements.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(sO) At least seventy -five percent of the monitored stations in the near shore and coastal waters
of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary will maintain Chlorophyll a(CHLA) levels at
less than or equal to 0.35 ug 1-1 and light clarity (Kd) levels at less than or equal to 0.20 m-1.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
75
85.4
FY 2012
75
CHLA:
70.9; KD:
72.5
FY 2013
75
FY 2014
75
Units
Stations
Measure
Target
Actual
(sf4) At least seventy-five percent of the monitored stations in the near shore and coastal waters
of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary will maintain dissolved inorganic nitrogen
(DIN) levels at less than or equal to 0.75 uM and total phosphorus (TP) levels at less than or
equal to 0.25 uM
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
75
73.6
FY 2012
75
DIN: 81;
TP: 89.5
FY 2013
75
FY 2014
75
Units
Stations
Measure
Target
Actual
(sf5) Improve the water quality of the Everglades ecosystem as measured by total phosphorus,
including meeting the 10 ppb total phosphorus criterion throughout the Everglades Protection
Area marsh and the effluent limits for discharges from stormwater treatment areas.
FY2007
FY2008
Maintain
Not
Maintaine
d
FY 2009
Maintain
Not
Maintaine
d
FY 2010
Maintain
Not
Maintaine
d
FY2011
Maintain
Not
Maintaine
d
FY 2012
Maintain
Not
Maintaine
d
FY 2013
Maintain
FY 2014
Maintain
P
Baseline
Units
Parts/Billio
n
The South Florida program has made significant strides in making progress toward the 2016 goal
of eliminating all traditional septic tanks, cesspits and non-compliant wastewater facilities within
314
-------
the Florida Keys. In the late 1990s, the EPA identified improperly treated wastewater as the
major source of nutrient and bacteria to the near shore waters of the Keys. As a result, the
Florida Legislature mandated that Monroe County address onsite systems. To date, $500 million
has been invested in wastewater upgrades and 47,505 of the 74,575 (64 percent) of the total
equivalent dwelling units (way of assigning wastewater fees/rates and an implementation
measure) are Advanced Wastewater Treatment or Best Available Technology compliant.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$18.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$372.0) This decrease reduces support for water quality, coral and seagrass status and
trend monitoring programs used for directing implementation activities in the Florida
Keys National Marine Sanctuary. This reduction also would reduce support for the
Everglades and Assessment Monitoring Program, a long-term monitoring program for
documenting status and trends, variability and detecting response to management actions.
Statutory Authority:
Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary and Protection Act of 1990; National Marine
Sanctuaries Program Amendments Act of 1992; Clean Water Act; Water Resources
Development Act of 1996; Water Resources Development Act of 2000.
315
-------
Geographic Program: Lake Champlain
Program Area: Geographic Programs
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$2,395.0
$2,395.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$2,415.0
$2,415.0
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$2,432.0
$2,432.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$1,399.0
$1,399.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($996.0)
($996.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
Lake Champlain was designated as a resource of national significance by the Lake Champlain
Special Designation Act (Public Law 101-596) that was signed into law on November 5, 1990,
(amended in 2002). A management plan for the watershed, "Opportunities for Action," (revised
in 2010) was developed to achieve the goal of the Act: to bring together people with diverse
interests in the lake to create a comprehensive pollution prevention, control, and restoration plan
for protecting the future of the Lake Champlain Basin. The EPA's efforts to protect Lake
Champlain support the successful interstate, interagency, and international partnerships
undertaking the implementation of the Plan. "Opportunities for Action" addresses various threats
to Lake Champlain's water quality, including phosphorus loadings, invasive species, and toxic
substances.66 "Opportunities for Action" is designed to protect and restore the ecological and
cultural resources of the Basin while maintaining a vital regional economy. The goals of
Opportunities for Action include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Reduce phosphorus inputs to Lake Champlain to promote a healthy and diverse
ecosystem and provide for sustainable human use and enjoyment of Lake Champlain.
• Reduce contaminants that pose a risk to public health and the Lake Champlain
ecosystem.
• Maintain resilient and diverse communities offish, wildlife, and plants.
• Prevent the introduction, limit the spread, and control the impact of non-native aquatic
invasive species to preserve the integrity of the Lake Champlain ecosystem.
• Identify potential changes in climate and develop appropriate adaptation strategies to
minimize adverse impacts on Lake Champlain's ecosystem and socioeconomic resources.
• Promote healthy and diverse economic activity and sustainable development principles
while improving water quality and conserving natural and cultural heritage resources.
66 For additional information see: http://www.epa.gov/NE/eco/lakechamplain/index.html
http: //www. lcbp.org
http://nh.water.usgs.gov/champlain feds
http://www.cfda. gov
316
-------
Importance of Lake Champlain to Vermont's and New York's Economy
The Lake Champlain Basin is home to more than 600 thousand people and draws millions of
visitors. The Lake Champlain Basin Program recognizes the importance of healthy natural
resources to the Basin's people, its industries, and the economy as a whole. In particular,
recreational activities on Lake Champlain depend upon a clean, healthy ecosystem and are an
integral factor for the region's economy. For example, it has been estimated that total tourist
expenditures within the Lake Champlain Basin were $3.8 billion in 1998-1999, with roughly 71
percent in the Vermont portion of the Basin ($2.7 billion) and 29% in the New York portion
($1.1 billion). Fishing-related expenditures were estimated at $204 million in 1997 for the Basin.
In 1997, the owners of the 98 fishing-related businesses within 10 miles of Lake Champlain
estimated that $5.6 million of their total income was from anglers using Lake Champlain.67 Bird
and other wildlife viewing activities generated more than $122 million in 2006. Clearly, this
/-Q
demonstrates the integral relationship between a healthy lake and healthy economy.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Reducing Phosphorous Inputs to Lake Champlain
Federal, state, provincial, and local partners will continue addressing high levels of phosphorous
by implementing priority actions to reduce phosphorus loads from point, urban, and agricultural
nonpoint sources.69 "Opportunities for Action" 2010 noted that continued efforts have helped
maintain good water quality conditions in several segments of Lake Champlain. Notably,
Burlington, Shelburne, and Cumberland Bays, three of the most heavily developed lakefront
areas, remained below phosphorus concentration targets.
Since 1991, phosphorous loads from wastewater treatment facilities' discharge have declined by
85 percent. Despite this progress, substantial reductions in nonpoint phosphorus runoff are
required in agricultural and developed lands to meet phosphorous targets. In 2001, developed
lands contributed about 46 percent of the phosphorus runoff basin-wide, and agricultural lands
contributed about 38 percent.70
Protecting and restoring forests, wetlands, floodplains, and stream corridors to maximize storage
of phosphorus in the Lake's watershed will continue in 2014. In 2012, an additional 271 acres of
wetlands were restored, which brings the total acres restored, since 2010, to 1,332 acres. It is
estimated that an additional 1,000 acres could be restored by 2014 in partnership with the State
of Vermont and US Fish and Wildlife Service. Several Wetland Reserve Program easements and
restorations are in progress as well.
67 People and Economy Lake Champlain Atlas, Economics of the Basin - http://lcbp.org/Atlas/html/so_econ.htm
68 Lake Champlain Basin Program, Opportunities for Action Database, http://plan.lcbp.org/ofa-database/chapters/introduction
69 The Phosphorus Total Maximum Daily Load for the Vermont portion of Lake Champlain is currently being revised.
Additional information will be available in FY 2012.
70 Troy et al. 2007 in Lake Champlain Basin Program 2012, State of the Lake Report
317
-------
Tracking Implementation and Adaptive Management Framework
Federal, state, and provincial partners will develop and implement an adaptive management
framework for evaluating the results of management efforts in the Lake Champlain Basin based
on water quality and other ecosystem indicators. This framework will evaluate phosphorus Total
Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) allocations through quantitative methods. The adaptive
management plan will include current and future TMDL implementation scenarios and identify
cost-effective alternatives to attain TMDL allocations.
Invasive Species Prevention
Aquatic invasive species are non-native species that harm the environment, economy, or human
health, and include aquatic plants, animals, and pathogens. Lake Champlain was home to 49
known non-native aquatic species in 2010, many of which are invasive.71 A continued priority
will be to prevent the introduction, limit the spread, control the impact of aquatic invasive
species, and implement the Rapid Response Task Force protocols, if necessary. It is anticipated
that work with partners will continue in FY 2014 to contain the spread of the Spiny Water Flea.
The Water Chestnut Management Program will continue to monitor and reduce the density and
distribution of water chestnut. Overall, there has been a steady decline of water chestnut densities
at 68 sites. However, despite progress, water chestnut remains a major problem because its
dense mats limit boating, swimming, and other recreational activities, out-compete native plants,
and deplete oxygen needed by fish and other aquatic organisms.
Toxic Cyanobacteria
Work will continue in FY 2014 to understand the high seasonal concentrations of toxic
cyanobacteria; report on its potential health impacts; and provide necessary information to the
health departments of New York and Vermont to close beaches, protect drinking water intakes,
or take other actions, as necessary.
Additional Activities Planned for FY 2014
• Implement recommendations from climate change studies to reduce impacts on water
quality;
• Develop new approaches for urban stormwater control with state partners;
• Support the Lake Champlain Basin Program's evaluation of the 2011 flooding impacts and
investigate the development of flood mitigation plans for future events; and
• Continue water quality and biological sampling for the Lake Champlain Long-Term Water
Quality and Biological Monitoring Program.
71 Lake Champlain Basin Program. 2012. State of the Lake and Ecosystem Indicators Report
2012, Grand Isle, Vermont.
318
-------
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports the Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
objective. Currently, there are no performance measures for this specific program. However, the
goals and tasks presented in "Opportunities for Action" do provide a framework for the Lake
Champlain Basin Program's performance targets. In particular, reducing phosphorous levels,
toxic contaminants and pathogens, maintaining and restoring healthy wildlife, fish and plant
communities, and preventing the introduction and spread of aquatic invasive species.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$996.0) This eliminates a Congressionally directed increase from FY 2012.
Statutory Authority:
1909 The Boundary Waters Treaty; 1990 Great Lakes Critical Programs Act; 2002 Great Lakes
and Lake Champlain Act; Clean Water Act; North American Wetlands Conservation Act; U.S.-
Canada Agreements; National Heritage Areas Act of 2006; Water Resources Development Act
of 2000 and 2007.
319
-------
Geographic Program: Other
Program Area: Geographic Programs
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$3,246.0
$3,246.0
8.4
FY 2012
Actuals
$3,254.5
$3,254.5
7.7
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$3,2 78.0
$3,278.0
8.4
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$5,393.0
$5,393.0
8.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$2,147.0
$2,147.0
0.1
Program Project Description:
The EPA targets efforts to protect and restore various communities and ecosystems impacted by
environmental problems. Under this program, the Agency develops and implements community-
based approaches to mitigate diffuse sources of pollution and cumulative risk for geographic
areas. The Agency also fosters community efforts to build consensus and mobilize local
resources to target highest risks.
Community Action for a Renewed Environment
The Agency developed the Community Action for a Renewed Environment (CARE) program in
response to community requests for help in addressing environmental concerns and in
recognition of the need for a new approach to help communities develop locally-led solutions to
address these concerns. CARE requires the collaborative local partnership to first complete a
community assessment of their environmental concerns, then specifically develop and implement
environmental solutions.
Through the CARE program, the EPA provides funding, tools, and technical support that enable
communities to create collaborative partnerships to take effective actions to address local
environmental problems. The CARE program delivers funding through two types of cooperative
agreements. In the smaller Level I agreements, the community, working with the EPA, creates a
collaborative problem-solving group of community stakeholders that includes business, local
organizations, and government. That group assesses the community's toxic exposure,
environmental problems and priorities, and begins to identify potential solutions.
In the larger Level II agreements, the community, working with the EPA, selects and funds
projects that reduce risk and improve the environment in the community. For each of the CARE
communities, the EPA works together with the community to see their problems holistically, the
320
-------
way they see them, and forms cross-media teams to manage and implement the cooperative
agreements.
Since its launch in 2005, the CARE program has awarded 101 grants worth $16 million to 85
communities in 40 states and territories. These communities have leveraged EPA grant funding
dollar-for-dollar with financial and in-kind donation from local health agencies, businesses,
foundations, churches, universities and other federal agencies. CARE communities have
engaged 1,700 partners, visited 4,000 homes, met with 2,800 businesses and worked with 6,000
youth. Communities are working to address one or more of the EPA's priorities: air pollution
(92 percent); safety of chemicals (76 percent); cleanup of communities (73 percent); and water
issues (87 percent).
In addition, the CARE program carries out key EPA programs through cross agency
collaboration efforts, while at the same time; CARE communities carry out cross neighborhood
efforts with stellar results in working with business partners at the local level (additional
information available at http://www.epa.gov/care/). In May 2009, the National Academy of
Public Administration (NAPA) evaluated the CARE program and found that CARE had
successfully combined Agency expertise with community capacity-building to deliver funding
and technical assistance that addresses environmental risks.
The CARE program ended its successful demonstration period in FY 2010. In FY 2011, the EPA
statutory authority continued allowing the CARE Program to award Level I agreements and
provided a waiver to award Level II agreements (e.g., which would have ended with the
demonstration period in FY 2010) to only those CARE communities who had previously
received a CARE Level I cooperative agreement by FY 2009.
The Northwest Forest Program
The Northwest Forest Program supports a targeted Agency effort to participate in interagency
and intergovernmental efforts that coordinate and leverage resources for water quality and
drinking water efforts in seven72 Western states. The Program pursues collaborative efforts that
conserve and restore water quality on forest and range lands in seven Western states as
alternatives to traditional regulatory and enforcement approaches. It provides technical and
facilitation support for local and community-based watershed restoration and drinking water
conservation efforts.
The Northwest Forest Program addresses water quality impairments in forested watersheds and
works to improve the quality of surface water so that drinking water/source water protection
goals are met. The EPA is under a consent decree to develop TMDLs in Washington. The EPA
is required to backstop 1,156 TMDLs with interim milestones. In Oregon, the EPA is working
with the State to develop a TMDL along Oregon's mid-coast as an option for meeting the terms
of a Settlement Agreement between EPA/NOAA and Northwest Environmental Advocates.
Northwest Forest Program dollars support EPA efforts to inform management in key source
water areas. This is critical because in Oregon and Washington, 40 to 90 percent of the land
areas of individual national forests west of the Cascade Range crest are in municipal watersheds.
! California, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Washington.
321
-------
In addition, the Program supports monitoring of watershed conditions across 72 million acres of
forest and rangelands in the Northwest. The Northwest Forest Program funding allows EPA to
provide critical support to the Aquatic Riparian Effectiveness Monitoring Program (AREMP)
and the Pacfish/Infish Biological Opinion Monitoring Program (PIBO). These are the only
regional scale watershed monitoring programs in place in the Pacific Northwest and they play a
key role in determining how riparian areas on 72 million acres of federal land should be
managed. These areas are critical for aquatic/riparian habitat, ecosystem function (connectivity)
and water quality.
Funding for the Northwest Forest Program helps the EPA to respond to Tribal trust and treaty
responsibilities. The EPA staff are key to protection and restoration of watersheds important to
tribes. EPA has tribal trust responsibilities in the Northwest related to tribes reliant on salmon
and shellfish.
The Lake Pontchartrain Basin Restoration Program
The Pontchartrain Basin, known for its slow-flowing rivers and bayous, tranquil swamps, and
lush hardwood forests, provides essential habitat for countless species of fish, birds, mammals,
reptiles, and plants. The famous wetlands and marshes that surround the Basin's waters provide
a beautiful setting for wildlife and are the heart of the region's commercial and recreational
fisheries. The Pontchartrain Basin also is the center of southeastern Louisiana's unique cultural
heritage. With almost 2.1 million residents, including rural farming communities, metropolitan
New Orleans, and the fishing, shrimping, crabbing, and oyster industries, the area is brimming
with a diversity of people bound by a common interest: the desire for clean and healthy waters in
the Pontchartrain Basin. The Basin comprises over 10 thousand square miles of land in 16
Louisiana parishes and four Mississippi counties.73 According to the Louisiana Agricultural
Center Research and Extension, the combined total value in these parishes in 2011 for
production of agriculture, forestry, fisheries and wildlife is over $800 million.74 Much of this
production requires adequate quantity and quality of water. All of these lands drain into rivers
and bayous, which empty into Lake Pontchartrain and its connecting sister Lakes, Maurepas and
Borgne.
The Lake Pontchartrain Basin Restoration Program, through a collaborative and voluntary effort,
strives to restore ecological health by developing and funding restoration projects within the
sixteen parishes in the Basin. The program continues to support the efforts of the Lake
Pontchartrain Basin Foundation to restore and preserve the water quality, coast, and habitats of
the entire Lake Pontchartrain Basin. The Lake Pontchartrain Basin Foundation (LPBF) conducts
sampling of the lake and tributary water quality to support related scientific and public education
projects.
732010 U.S. Census Bureau, http://www.census.gov/popfmder/
74 Louisiana Ag Center Research and Extension. http://www.lsuagcenter.com/agsummarv/archive/2011/Parish-
Totals/201 lParishTotals.pdf
322
-------
Southeastern New England Coastal Watershed Restoration Program:
Southeastern New England (from Westerly, RI to Chatham, MA) faces environmental challenges
that are both unique and representative. The region's coastal watershed problems include rivers
that are hydrologically disconnected by dams and restrictions, drained and filled wetlands,
urbanized watersheds, as well as excess nutrient (nitrogen) pollution from wastewater,
stormwater runoff, and atmospheric deposition. Excess nutrients have contributed to severe
water quality problems including algal blooms, low dissolved oxygen conditions, fish kills,
impaired benthic communities, and habitat loss (sea grass and salt marsh) in the estuaries and
near-coastal waters of this region. The impacts of climate change will further stress these
systems in coming years. Yet these same threatened resources are key to recreation and tourism
that represent major economic sectors in Rhode Island and Massachusetts. In these two states,
estuary and coastal regions comprise an average of more than 90 percent of the population and
the states' economies.75 Travel and tourism in Rhode Island generate more than $2 billion for the
state's economy.76 In Cape Cod, tourism represents the largest segment of their economic base
(accounting for 43 percent).77
The Southeastern New England Coastal Watershed Restoration Program will draw upon
stakeholders and their networks to strategically direct resources to visible, high-impact projects
that will increase the efficiency of regional restoration efforts, enhance the impact of local
restoration projects, and limit unnecessary duplication of efforts. The goal is to spur:
• investment in regionally significant and/or landscape-scale restoration opportunities;
• integrated restoration opportunities across multiple agencies and organizations;
• development and adoption of innovative, cost-effective restoration and protection
practices, as well as new regulatory, economic, and technology approaches;
• regional approaches for addressing sources and impacts of watershed degradation; and
• documentation of approaches and a body of expertise and lessons learned to improve the
delivery of restoration programs across the region.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA and partner agencies will protect and restore various communities and
ecosystems impacted by various sources of pollution. These collaborative and transparent
community-based approaches will decrease the cumulative risk for geographic areas. The EPA's
FY 2014 efforts will focus on the following:
75 The Economic and Market Value of Coasts and Estuaries: What's At Stake? by Linwood Pendleton, Page 44; Restore
America's Estuaries | The Economic Value of Coasts & Estuaries
76 The 2012 Briefing Book from Grow Smart Rhode Island, page 10 http: //www. gro wsmartri. org/wp-
content/uploads/2012/08/gsri-2012-briefmg-book.pdf
77 The Cape Cod Chamber of Commerce website Cape Cod Chamber of Commerce - Cape Cod News and Events
323
-------
Community Action for a Renewed Environment
Total FY 2014 funding of $1.0 million in the CARE program will address pollution problems in
underserved and environmentally overburdened communities. The EPA will help communities
use collaborative processes to select and implement local actions and will award federal funding
for projects to reduce exposure to toxic pollutants and local environmental problems. In FY
2014, the EPA is requesting grant authority to implement the CARE program to continue serving
communities across the nation.
In FY 2014, the CARE program will provide support to communities to help them assess and
improve their local environments and health by:
• Selecting and awarding up to 10 CARE Level I assistance agreements to create and
strengthen local partnerships, local capacity, and civic engagement to improve local
environments and health and to ensure sustainability of environmental health efforts over
time;
• Providing technical support and training to help Community Action for a Renewed
Environment communities build partnerships, improve their understanding of
environmental risks from all sources, set priorities, and take actions to reduce risks;
• Improving community access to EPA programs and helping communities utilize these
programs to reduce risks; and
• Conducting outreach to share lessons learned by Community Action for a Renewed
Environment communities and encouraging other communities to build partnerships and
take actions to reduce risks.
Northwest Forest
In FY 2014, the EPA will request $1.445 million (including funding for 8.5 FTEs) in the
Northwest Forest Program for the following activities:
• Continue stream reach sampling on 643 stream reaches and watershed condition/trend
monitoring in 510 sub-watersheds in California, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, and
Washington;
• Use remote sensed data and Geographic Information Systems data layers and field data to
support a trend assessment on 5,679 6th field watersheds78 in Oregon, Washington,
Northern California, Montana, Idaho, Nevada, and Utah;
78 A sixth field watershed is a hydro logical unit. Watersheds in the United States were delineated by the U.S. Geological Survey
using a national standard hierarchical system based on surface hydrologic features and are classified into the following types of
hydrologic units: First-field (region); Second-field (sub-region); Third-field (accounting unit); Fourth-field (cataloguing unit);
Fifth-field (watershed); and Sixth-field (sub-watershed). For more information visit: http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/huc.html.
324
-------
• Utilize upslope analysis, in-channel assessments, emerging research, and decision support
models to inform management decisions and refine future monitoring efforts;
• Compile temperature and macroinvertebrate data and establish approximately 530 year-
round temperature monitoring stations to support state water quality and aquatic habitat
reporting, including 303(d) listings;
• Complete/utilize field reviews of grazing activities and evaluate stream and riparian
conditions to tie back to monitoring trends and inform necessary management changes;
• Refine shade models to assist managers in prioritizing restoration opportunities to address
stream temperature and sediment issues;
• Utilize aquatic monitoring to detect invasive species in streams and riparian areas;
• Assist the state of Oregon in the development of implementation-ready Total Maximum
Daily Loads and Best Management Practices for forestry practices in five Oregon coastal
basins. This work is in response to a Settlement Agreement between the EPA/National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and Northwest Environmental Advocates;
• Address sediment and temperature impairments in forested watersheds. Sediment and
temperature impairments affect key fish and shellfish operations in the Northwest.
Commercial and recreational fishing salmon fishing has in recent years generated an
estimated 62 thousand jobs and more than $1 billion per year in economic income to the
Pacific Northwest and Northern California.79 Shellfish growers contribute $110 million a
Q(-\
year to the Pacific coast economy;
• Inform management in key source water areas with the objective of ensuring production
and delivery of clean and sustainable water while achieving economic efficiencies.
Effective management of forest cover in source water areas can decrease drinking water
O 1
treatment and chemical costs by 20 percent;
• Engage in an interagency forum at the executive and management levels for Washington,
Oregon, and California and a similar forum for the interior Columbia Basin.82 These two
broad-scale collaborative efforts address policy, management, and technical natural
resource issues that are key to water quality and drinking water protection;
79 Figures from an independent economic study done by the Pacific Rivers Council (January, 1992), The Economic Imperative of
Protecting Riverine Habitat in the Pacific Northwest. This study was based on official federal salmon harvest figures for the 1988
baseline year — catch figures which were already far below the productive capacity of prior years, reduced largely due to
widespread habitat loss, including wetlands losses regionwide, which reduced the number of juvenile salmon able to be produced
by damaged watersheds.
80 Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers Association http://www.pcsga.net/farming-science/economic-benefits/
81 Ernst, Caryn. 2004. Protecting the Source. Published by the Trust for Public Land and American Water Works Association.
Available at http://cloud.tpl.org/pubs/water-protecting-the-source-04.pdf Accessed July 25, 2012
82 Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Utah, Eastern Oregon/Washington
325
-------
• Engage in collaborative efforts including the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board,
Northwest Forest Plan Interagency Executive Committees, and Northwest Forest Plan
Advisory Committees. These collaborative efforts are at the forefront of efforts to
conserve and restore water quality using alternatives to traditional regulatory and
enforcement-related approaches;
• Provide technical and facilitation support for local and community-based watershed
restoration and drinking water conservation efforts.
Lake Pontchartrain
The program will work to restore the ecological health of the Lake Pontchartrain Basin. In FY
2014, the EPA will request $948 thousand in the Lake Pontchartrain Basin Program for the
following activities:
• Continuing implementation of the Lake Pontchartrain Basin Program Comprehensive
Management Plan83 and Comprehensive Habitat Management Plan to support:
o Planning and design of consolidated wastewater treatment systems to support
sustainable infrastructure;
o Repair and replacement studies to improve existing wastewater systems; and
o Investigation and design of stormwater management systems.
• Conducting water quality monitoring outreach and public education projects that address
the goals of the Lake Pontchartrain Basin Program Comprehensive Management Plan to:
o Improve the management of animal waste lagoons by educating and assisting
the agricultural community on lagoon maintenance techniques;
o Protect and restore critical habitats and encourage sustainable growth by
providing information and guidance on habitat protection and green
development techniques; and
o Reduce pollution at its source and mitigate any impacts to Lake Pontchartrain
from the past major oil spill.
Southeastern New England Coastal Watershed Restoration Program:
The Southeastern New England Coastal Watershed Restoration Program will serve as the hub of
a collaborative strategy to protect, enhance, restore, and improve the resilience of the coastal
watersheds of Southeastern New England and ensure clean water, healthy diverse habitats, and
associated populations of fish, shellfish, and other aquatic dependent organisms now and in the
future.
http://www.saveourlake.org/management-plan.php
326
-------
In FY 2014, the EPA will request $2 million in technical assistance, grants, and/or contracts
under the Southeastern New England Coastal Watershed Restoration Program for the following
activities:
• Increase efforts to protect, enhance, restore, and improve the resilience of the coastal
watersheds of Southeastern New England between Westerly, RI and Chatham, MA. The
Program will focus on habitat restoration, water quality (nutrients, stormwater, nonpoint
source pollution, etc.), climate change, and management of cumulative impacts.
• Coordinate closely with ongoing efforts on Cape Cod and in the Narragansett Bay and
Buzzards Bay national estuary programs. Implement a restoration strategy with on-the-
ground pilot projects that demonstrate successful restoration projects and approaches that
can be replicated across Southeastern New England with an initial focus on nutrients.
• Oversee pilot project development and implementation, and identify technology needs
based on restoration priorities and potential for innovation.
• Ensure coordinated operating principles for funding and implementing restoration
projects (process, mechanisms, and authorities of different agencies) to increase
efficiency, effectiveness, and ability to leverage more resources.
Performance Targets:
Work under these programs supports the Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic
Ecosystems objective. Currently, there are no performance measures for this specific program.
The CARE program has two indicator measures that will continue to be tracked and reported
under the Office of Air's National Program Guidance. The indicator measures are:
• Number and percent of communities who have developed and agreed on a list of priority
toxic and environmental concerns using the CARE partnership process (annual); and
• Number and percent of communities who, through the CARE Program, implement local
solutions to address an agreed upon list of priority toxic and environmental concerns
using the CARE partnership process (annual).
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$47.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$151.0 / +0.1 FTE) This reflects an increase for protecting and restoring the Northwest
Forest, including enhanced monitoring activities in the Northwest Forest Program. The
resources include 0.1 FTE and associated payroll of $15.0.
• (-$54.0) This reduction reduces support for water quality monitoring and other activities
to address water issues in the Lake Pontchartrain watershed.
• (-$997.0) This reduction eliminates a congressionally directed increase to the Lake
Pontchartrain program in FY 2012.
327
-------
• (+$2,000.0) This reflects an increase of resources for the Southeastern New England
Coastal Watershed Restoration Program to support an increased emphasis on restoration.
$1,000.0 of the increase is transferred from Science and Technology funds in the Office
of Research and Development to Environmental Program and Management funds in the
Office of Water.
• (+$1,000.0) This funding will support awarding up to 10 CARE assistance agreements to
communities to improve local environmental health.
Statutory Authority:
The Lake Pontchartrain Basin Restoration Act of 2000, codified as Clean Water Act §121, 33
U.S.C. §1273, directed the EPA to establish a Lake Pontchartrain Basin Restoration Program "to
restore the ecological health of the Basin by developing and funding restoration projects and
related scientific and public education projects." Clean Water Act §121(b); Clean Water Act,
Section 104(b)(3); Clean Water Act §320; Water Resources Development Act of 1996; Water
Resources Development Act of 2000; Economy Act of 1932; Intergovernmental Cooperation
Act; Clean Air Act, Section 103(b)(3); Solid Waste Disposal Act, Section 8001 (a); Toxic
Substances Control Act, Section 10(a) as supplemented by P.L. 106-74 (1999); Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act Section 20(a) as supplemented by P.L. 106-74
(1999); Pollution Prevention Act; Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act, Section 203;
and National Environmental Policy Act, Section 102(2)(F).
328
-------
Program Area: Homeland Security
329
-------
Homeland Security: Communication and Information
Program Area: Homeland Security
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$4,249.0
$4,249.0
15.9
FY 2012
Actuals
$3,388.1
$3,388.1
16.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$4,275.0
$4,275.0
15.9
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$4,000.0
$4,000.0
14.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($249.0)
($249.0)
-1.9
Program Project Description:
The White House, Congress, and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have defined
their expectations of the EPA in the event of a homeland security incident through a series of
statutes, Presidential directives, and national plans. EPA uses the Homeland Security
Collaborative Network (HSCN), a cross-agency leadership group, to support its ability to
implement this broad range of homeland security responsibilities, ensure consistent development
and implementation of homeland security policies and procedures, avoid duplication, and build a
network of partnerships. The EPA's homeland security program also capitalizes on the concept
of "dual-benefits" so that its homeland security efforts enhance and integrate with EPA's core
environmental programs that serve to protect human health and the environment.
Timely and effective environmental information also is a key factor in the protection of human
health and the environment during an emergency. Homeland security information technology
efforts are closely coordinated with the Agencywide information security and infrastructure
activities, which are managed in the Information Security and Information Technology (IT)/Data
Management programs. These IT support programs also enable video contact among localities,
headquarters, Regional offices, and laboratories in emergency situations.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, EPA's Homeland Security Program will:
• Support federal, state, Tribal, and local efforts to prevent, protect, mitigate, respond to,
and recover from natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other emergencies by providing
leadership and coordination across EPA program offices and regions.
330
-------
• Ensure a coordinated approach to the EPA's homeland security activities and resources
that are in unison with government-wide, homeland security priorities and requirements.
• Update (annually) the Homeland Security workplan to address priority gaps in planning,
preparedness, response, and recovery for nationally significant incidents.
• Focus on maintaining the Agency's level of preparedness to respond to and recover from
a significant event through maintenance of personnel and equipment capabilities and
capacities.
• Fill critical knowledge and technology gaps that may be essential for an effective EPA
response, including working with our interagency partners to define collective
capabilities and resources that may contribute to closing common homeland security
gaps.
• Ensure that interagency intelligence-related planning and operational requirements are
met. This will be achieved through coordination with the U.S. Intelligence Community,
including the Office of the Director for National Intelligence, the Department of
Homeland Security, the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Defense, and the White House
National Security Staff.
• Support the implementation of structural reforms to improve the security of classified
networks and the responsible sharing and safeguarding of classified information.
• Track emerging national/homeland security issues, through close coordination with the
U.S. Intelligence Community, to anticipate and avoid crisis situations and target the
Agency's efforts proactively against threats to the United States.
The EPA's FY 2014 resources also will support national cybersecurity efforts through
monitoring across the Agency's IT infrastructure to detect, remediate, and eradicate malicious
software or Advanced Persistent Threats (APT) from the EPA's computer and data networks and
through improved detection capabilities. The EPA will enhance internal Computer Security
Incident Response Capability (CSIRC) to ensure rapid identification and reporting of suspicious
activity and will increase training and awareness of cybersecurity threats. EPA personnel are
active participants in Government Forum of Incident Response Teams (GFIRST), a DHS-led
group of experts from incident response and security response teams. Indicators and warnings are
shared between the EPA incident responders and their cleared counterparts in other agencies and
with the Intelligence Community.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
331
-------
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$170.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$13.0) This change reflects an increase in contractual support for the detection,
remediation, and eradication of malicious software and threats from the EPA's computer
and data networks.
• (-$307.07-1.9 FTE) This reflects a reduction that will be achieved by consolidating and
combining similar projects among existing staff, expanding their assignment portfolio to
meet mission needs, and increasing efficiency. The reduced resources include 1.9 FTE
and associated payroll of $307.0.
• (-$2.0) This reflects a reduction in travel to support the Administration's Management
Agenda goal of reducing travel and conference spending.
• (-$123.0) This represents a decrease in resources that support homeland security
coordination activities. This decrease will not affect the Agency's ability to maintain its
preparedness to respond and recover from a significant event.
Statutory Authority:
Homeland Security Presidential Directives, 5 U.S.C. 101 et seq. - HSPD 1 - 25 and National Oil
and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), 42 U.S.C. 3231 et seq. - Sections
300, 300.1, 300.2, 300.3, 300.4, 300.5, 300.6 and 300.7 and Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. 9606 et seq. - Sections 101-
128, 301-312, and 401-405 and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), 42 U.S.C.
6962 et seq. - Sections 1001, 2001, 3001, and 3005 and Safe Drinking Water Act (SOWA)
Amendments, 42 U.S.C. 300 et seq. - Sections 1400, 1401, 1411, 1421, 1431, 1441, 1454, and
1461 and Clean Water Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C. 1314 et seq. - Sections 101, 102, 103, 104, 105,
107, and Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments, 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. - Sections 102, 103, 104,
and 108 and Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2611 et seq. - Sections 201, 301,
and 401 and Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. 36 et seq. -
Sections 136a - 136y and Bio Terrorism Act of 2002, 42. U.S.C. 201 et seq. - Sections 303, 305,
306, and 307 and Homeland Security Act of 2002, 116 U.S.C. 2135 et seq. - Sections 101, 102,
103, 201, 202, 211-215, 221-225, 231-235, and 237 and Post-Katrina Emergency Management
Reform Act, 6 U.S.C. 772 et seq. - Sections 501, 502, 503, 504, 505, 506, 507, 508, 509, 510,
511, 512, and 513 and Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction Act, 50 U.S.C. 2302 et
seq. (Title XIV of Public Law 104-201).
332
-------
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection
Program Area: Homeland Security
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect Human Health
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,063.0
$11,361.0
$12,424.0
24.8
FY 2012
Actuals
$1,191.4
$11,363.1
$12,554.5
26.8
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$1,077.0
$11,450.0
$12,527.0
24.8
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$1,577.0
$9,893.0
$11,470.0
24.1
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$514.0
($1,468.0)
($954.0)
-0.7
Program Project Description:
This program includes a number of the EPA activities that coordinate and support the protection
of the nation's critical public infrastructure from terrorist threats and all-hazard events. The EPA
activities support effective information sharing and dissemination to help protect critical water
infrastructure.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Information Sharing Networks & Water Security
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to build its capacity to identify and respond to threats to
critical national water infrastructure. The EPA's wastewater and drinking water security efforts
will continue to support the water sector by providing access to information sharing tools and
mechanisms that 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. The EPA will continue to support effective
communication conduits to disseminate threat and incident information and to serve as a
clearinghouse for sensitive information. The EPA promotes information sharing between the
water sector and such groups as environmental professionals and scientists, emergency services
personnel, law enforcement, public health agencies, the intelligence community, and technical
assistance providers. Through this exchange, water systems can obtain up-to-date information on
current technologies in water security, accurately assess their vulnerabilities to terror acts, and
work cooperatively with public health officials, first responders, and law enforcement officials to
respond effectively in the event of an emergency.
The EPA continues to promote information sharing to aggressively disseminate up-to-date
security information to drinking water and wastewater utilities. This effort ensures that these
utilities have access to a comprehensive range of important materials, including tools, training,
and protocols, some of which may be sensitive and therefore not generally available through
other means. In addition to promoting information sharing, the EPA will continue to develop
333
-------
materials to ensure that utilities will have the most updated information. This work will enable
participating water utilities of all sizes to access timely information such as specific tools and
training that enhance the security, preparedness, and resiliency of the water sector. Under this
work, EPA strives to ensure that water utilities receive timely and informative alerts about
changes in the homeland security advisory level or about regional and national trends in certain
types of water-related incidents. For example, should there be types of specific water related
incidents that are recurring, EPA, in coordination with DHS and other appropriate agencies,
needs to alert the utilities of the increasing multiple occurrences or "trends" of these incidents.
Effective information sharing protocols allow the water sector not only to improve their
understanding of the latest water security and resiliency protocols and threats, but also to reduce
their risk by enhancing their ability to prepare for an emergency. The FY 2014 request level for
the information sharing networks is $1.1 million.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to request support for its Regional Centers of Expertise for
Water Security Teams. Currently, all ten regions have water emergency response teams that are
available to assist in responses to large-scale or multiple environmental impact events. The two
Regional Centers will provide desk and field staff in instances where an incident may overwhelm
other regions' more modest emergency response capabilities and conduct training and exercises
designed to ensure a higher level of preparedness. Each region retains a core emergency response
capability, but these Regional Centers will ensure that EPA has a robust ability to fulfill its
Emergency Support Function-3 (Public Work and Engineering) responsibilities under the
National Response Framework.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$5.0) This decrease is the net effect of the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$500.0) This increase provides resources for two Regional Centers of Expertise for
Water Security Teams. These Regional Centers will provide desk and field staff in
instances where an incident may overwhelm other regions' more modest emergency
response capabilities. Each region will retain a core emergency response capability, but
these Regional Centers will ensure that EPA has a robust ability to fulfill its Emergency
Support Function-3 (Public Work and Engineering) responsibilities under the National
Response Framework.
• (+$19.0) This reflects an increase to provide smaller systems with resources to support
effective information sharing and dissemination.
334
-------
Statutory Authority:
SOW A, 42 U.S.C. §300f-300j-9 as added by Public Law 93-523 and the amendments made by
subsequent enactments, Sections - 1431, 1432, 1433, 1434, and 1435; CWA, 33 U.S.C. §1251 et
seq.; Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Emergency and Response Act of 2002.
335
-------
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure
Program Area: Homeland Security
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Science & Technology
Building and Facilities
Hazardous Substance SuperrUnd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$5,966.0
$578.0
$7,044.0
$1,170.0
$14,758.0
3.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$4,309.2
$577.0
$5,726.7
$1,671.0
$12,283.9
4.2
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$6,053.0
$584.0
$7,087.0
$1,176.0
$14,900.0
3.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$6,063.0
$579.0
$8,038.0
$1,172.0
$15,852.0
5.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$97.0
$1.0
$994.0
$2.0
$1,094.0
2.0
Program Project Description:
This portion of EPA's Homeland Security Program supports physical security, personnel
security, and the National Security Information (NSI) program. Physical security focuses on
assessing and overseeing mitigation of physical security vulnerabilities at agency facilities;
personnel security ensures the suitability and fitness of the agency workforce and the eligibility
of those with a need-to-know to access NSI. The NSI program manages and safeguards the
agency's classified information.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
As part of nationwide protection of the EPA's buildings and critical infrastructure, the Agency
will perform approximately 24 onsite vulnerability assessments; identify and recommend
security risk mitigations; oversee access control measures; determine physical security measures
for new construction and leases; identify and protect Agency critical infrastructure; and manage
security equipment lifecycle.
Through its investigative and related personnel security functions, the Agency will designate
position risk levels; initiate approximately 2,600 background investigations; adjudicate
approximately 3,700 investigative results; determine employee suitability and contractor fitness;
determine eligibility to access classified NSI; and maintain approximately 25,000 personnel
security records.
336
-------
EPA's protection of classified NSI includes overseeing the safeguarding of NSI; providing
mandatory NSI security education and training; conducting on-site NSI inspections and
vulnerability assessments; overseeing the EPA's Sensitive Compartmented Information Program
and Industrial Security Program; and developing and managing NSI-related databases.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$77.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$20.0) This increases resources for the EPA's Personnel Access Security System
(EPASS) to support Investigative and Related Personnel Security Functions.
• (+2.0 FTE) This reimbursable FTE increase will support the Agency in conducting
background investigations.
Statutory Authority:
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004; Executive Orders 10450, 13526,
13467, 13488, 12829, and 12968; Title 5 CFR Parts 731 and 732; 32 CFR Part 2001; Privacy
Act; Interagency Security Committee (ISC) Physical Security Criteria for Federal Facilities; ISC
Facility Security Level Determinations for Federal Facilities; Presidential Policy Directive 21.
337
-------
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach
338
-------
Children and Other Sensitive Populations: Agency Coordination
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Ensure Chemical Safety
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$7,481.0
$7,481.0
18.2
FY 2012
Actuals
$7,782.9
$7,782.9
30.6
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$7,553.0
$7,553.0
18.2
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$8,486.0
$8,486.0
25.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,005.0
$1,005.0
6.8
Program Project Description:
The agency coordinates and advances the protection of children's environmental health through
regulatory development, science policy, program implementation, communication and effective
results measurement as an explicit part of the its mission to protect human health. The children's
health protection effort is directed by the 1997 Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children's
Health from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks and the 2010 memorandum from
EPA's Administrator, the EPA's Leadership in Children's Environmental Health. Legislative
mandates such as the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA), the Safe Drinking
Water Amendments of 1996, and the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 also direct the agency
Q/1 Q C
to protect children and other vulnerable life stages. '
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to use a variety of approaches to protect children from
environmental health hazards by addressing children's health concerns associated with the
implementation of community based programs, the regulatory development process, research,
and outreach. At the same time, the program will periodically evaluate EPA's performance to
ensure that is making steady progress. The Office of Children's health Protection (OCHP) will
take the lead in ensuring that EPA's programs and regional offices are successful in their efforts
to protect children's environmental health. These activities include the following:
• As part of the agency's emphasis on healthy communities, the OCHP will work internally
and with other agencies, states and tribes to improve coordination across the agency to ensure
84 The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 directs the EPA to produce guidelines on the safe siting of schools and
guidelines to states on school environmental health programs in order to protect children from environmental hazards where they
leam.
85 The 1996 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act require the EPA to strengthen protection of children by considering the
risk to the most vulnerable populations and life stages when setting standards. The Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996
amended the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Federal Food Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA) to include stricter safety standards for pesticides, especially for infants and children, and a complete reassessment of all
existing pesticide tolerances.
339
-------
that policies and programs explicitly consider and use the most up-to-date data and methods
for protecting children from heightened public health risks.
• OCHP will serve as a co-lead for the interagency efforts of the President's Task Force on
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks to Children with the Department of Health and
Human Services and coordinate with other related agencies to improve federal government-
wide support in implementing children's health legislative mandates and children's health
outreach. OCHP will provide children's environmental health expertise on interagency
activities and coordinate expertise from program offices, on topics including Integrated Pest
Management (TPM) and chemical exposures, as needed. OCHP will work to advance task
force initiatives - including the Coordinated Federal Action Plan to Reduce Racial and
xA
Ethnic Asthma Disparities. OCHP will also coordinate EPA's activities under Advancing
Healthy Housing - A Strategy for Action (a report from the Federal Healthy Homes Work
Group).87
• OCHP will serve as the lead program in the implementation of the School Siting Guidelines
and Voluntary Guidelines for States: Development and Implementation of a School
Environmental Health Program.^ These guidelines were finalized in September 2011 and
2012 (respectively), and will assist states in establishing environmental health programs for
K-12 schools in accordance with the EISA. OCHP will collaborate with schools, NGOs and
state and local governments to implement the guidelines. OCHP also will work to ensure the
infrastructure for environmental health programs established in the guidelines are adopted by
schools.
• OCHP will address the potential for unique exposures, health effects, and health risks in
children during the development of agency regulations and policies by actively participating
on regulatory workgroups and ensuring that regulatory developers receive children's health
training.
• OCHP will work with internal and external partners to improve the scientific understanding
of children's environmental health concerns by:
o Coordinating with research partners to fill critical knowledge gaps on children's
unique vulnerabilities. OCHP will collaborate with the Office of Research and
Development, Children's Environmental Health and Disease Prevention Research
Centers and others on many activities including: research planning, relevancy
reviews, research presentations and publications, translating and applying research
findings.
o Improving the EPA's risk assessment and science policies and their implementation
tools to ensure that they address unique, early-life health susceptibilities including
86 The Asthma Disparities Action Plan can be found at
http://www.epa.gov/childrenstaskforc e/federal_asthma_disparities_action_plan.pdf.
87 The Healthy Housing Strategy for Action can be found at
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/healthv_homes/advhh.
88 The School Siting Guidelines can be found at http://www.epa.gov/schools/siting/index.html. The State School Environmental
Health Guidelines can be found at http://www.epa.gov/schools/ehguidelines/index.html.
340
-------
those for multiple environmental hazards and stressors. For example, continuing to
work with the Agency to implement updated blood lead reference levels.
• In addition OCHP will:
o Share scientific data for the development of standards, policies, and guidance that
protect children domestically and internationally by eliminating potentially harmful
prenatal and childhood environmental exposures;
o Increase environmental health knowledge (i.e., working the Pediatric Environmental
Health Specialty Units (PEHSU)) of health care providers related to prenatal and
childhood exposures and health outcomes with a focus on vulnerable groups through
outreach activities; and
o Continue to work on the established targets of the agency's goals.
(In FY 2014, the Children and other Sensitive Populations: Agency Coordination program will
be funded at $8.5 million and 25.0 FTE.)
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports the multiple goals and strategic objectives. Currently, there
are no performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$34.0) This decrease reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$1,047.0 / +6.8 FTE) This increase supports the coordination and implementation of
the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, and provides technical assistance to
states and communities on implementation of voluntary school siting and environmental
health guidelines. The resources will also support the agency's emphasis on Healthy
Communities by working internally and with other agencies, states and tribes to improve
coordination across the agency to ensure that policies and programs explicitly consider
and use the most up-to-date data and methods for protecting children from heightened
public health risks. These resources include $1,047.0 in associated payroll and 6.8 FTE.
• (-$4.0) This reflects a reduction in travel to support the Administration's Management
Agenda goal of reducing travel and conference spending.
• (-$63.0) This change reflects a reduction in IT efficiencies and consolidation in IT
contracts that provide basic infrastructure and workforce support for the Children's
Health program.
341
-------
• (-$105.0) This decrease in contract resources reflects the work that Office of Children's
Health Protection has undertaken to institutionalize the consideration of children's health
issues in regulatory development and the development of tools that EPA programs can
use to ensure children's health issues continue to be considered in future regulatory and
programmatic decisions. These efforts should result in efficiencies that will accommodate
increased assistance to states and communities.
• (+$164.0) This reflects an increase in grants to support the agency's emphasis on healthy
communities. Funding would be used to coordinate expertise and efforts across programs
to provide technical assistance to states and communities.
Statutory Authority:
Executive Order 13045; Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007; Food Quality
Protection Act of 1996; Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996.
342
-------
Environmental Education
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$9,699.0
$9,699.0
19.5
FY 2012
Actuals
$10,082.2
$10,082.2
15.4
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$9,810.0
$9,810.0
19.5
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($9,699.0)
($9,699.0)
-19.5
Program Project Description:
This program has ensured that Environmental Education, using a science-based approach and
effective education practices, has been used as a tool to promote the protection of human health
and the environment, and has encouraged student academic achievement. Environmental
Education has taught the public about choices and environmental stewardship to produce the
next generation of environmentally literate citizens and stewards, and has generated support for
environmental policy. The National Environmental Education Act has provided a foundation for
the activities that the agency has conducted under this program project.
FY 2013 Activities and Performance Plan:
No new activities or funding is planned for this program in FY 2014. The agency is eliminating
its Environmental Education program in order to focus our limited resources on further
integrating environmental education activities into existing environmental programs under a
streamlined approach. The EPA established the intra-agency Environmental Education
Workgroup to incorporate environmental literacy and stewardship activities across all of the
EPA's programs. By aligning environmental education and outreach activities with the
appropriate national programs, the EPA is improving the accountability and outcomes of these
activities. Elimination of the Environmental Education program will allow the EPA to better
leverage its resources for environmental outreach activities which will be carried out under a
streamlined and coordinated approach, thus better serving the public while promoting
environmental literacy. The agency also will enhance efforts to develop additional public-private
partnership to help support environmental education stakeholders.
Performance Targets:
There are no current performance measures for this specific Program Project.
343
-------
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$9,699.0 / -19.5 FTE) This eliminates the Environmental Education program. These
resources include $2,566.0 in associated payroll for 19.5 FTE.
Statutory Authority:
National Environmental Education Act (PL 101-619); Section 103 of the Clean Air Act; Section
104 of the Clean Water Act; Section 8001 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act; Section 1442 of the
Safe Drinking Water Act; Section 10 of the Toxic Substances Control Act; Section 20 of the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
344
-------
Congressional, Intergovernmental, External Relations
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$47,638.0
$47,638.0
360.6
FY 2012
Actuals
$48,673.0
$48,673.0
346.9
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$47,701.0
$47,701.0
360.6
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$53,208.0
$53,208.0
358.1
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$5,570.0
$5,570.0
-2.5
Program/Project Description:
This program includes a number of different offices and functions that provide critical executive
and logistical support for the EPA Administrator. In addition to the Administrator's Immediate
Office (IO), resources in this program support five headquarters offices that help the agency
protect human health and the environment, including the Office of Congressional and
Intergovernmental Relations (OCIR), the Office of Federal Advisory Committee Management
and Outreach (OFACMO), the Office of Executive Services (OES), the Office of the Executive
Secretariat (OEX), and the Office of External Affairs and Environmental Education (OEAEE).
Funding in this program also supports the EPA's ten Regional Administrators' offices across the
country. The activities conducted by the headquarters and regional offices are a critical link to
the agency's engagement with outside entities including Congress, state and local governments,
nongovernmental organizations, national and community associations, and the public.
Within this program, key functions include, but are not limited to, setting the agency's strategic
goals and priorities; responding to Congressional requests for information; coordinating and
providing outreach to state and local governments, agricultural and rural communities;
maintaining public relations and communication with the press; and managing the EPA's Federal
Advisory Committee Act (FACA) process. This program also includes functions that support the
administrative management services involving correspondence control and records management
systems; human resources management, budget formulation and execution, and information
technology management services. As a result of the funding provided through this program, the
EPA Administrator can better coordinate across the agency, utilize more efficient management
practices and provide greater accountability and transparency to our stakeholders.
345
-------
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the Immediate Office of the Administrator (IO) will provide management,
leadership and direction to all of the EPA's programs and activities and develop the guidance
necessary to ensure the achievement of the agency's strategic goals and priorities. To ensure that
regional views and priorities are considered in the formulation of its policies and during major
phases of decision making, each Regional Administrator's office will work closely with the IO
and the Office of Regional Operations to raise and address national, regional and local
environmental concerns. These three units work with government policy makers, states, local
governments, tribes, and the public to communicate agency proposals, actions, policies, research,
and data through meetings as well as mass media, print publications, and the web. In FY 2012,
administrative personnel within the IO provided secretarial support to accomplish the following
activities: managed and processed approximately 100 invitations received per week for the
Administrator to participate in various activities, staffed the agency's main phone line which
receives approximately 25,000+ calls per year; managed scheduling (i.e., the Administrator has
approximately 8-10 meetings per day); coordinated travel and facilitated advance work.
In FY 2014, resources in IO will primarily support payroll and telecommunications needs for
staff. The Agency will continue to work to identify efficiencies that will allow the Office of the
Administrator to continue to manage, lead and direct the EPA's programs and activities while
ensuring achievement of the Agency's strategic goals and priorities. In FY 2014, the
Headquarters IO will be funded at a level of $3.875 million and 23.8 FTE.
The Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations (OCIR) serves as the EPA's
principal point of contact for Congress, states and local governments. This office serves as a
liaison with these constituencies on the agency's major programs (e.g., Air/Pesticides and Water)
as well as on intergovernmental issues. OCIR serves as a direct contact for Congress and state
and local government officials during a crisis. In FY 2014, OCIR will continue to prepare the
EPA's officials for hearings and meetings with members of Congress, oversee responses to
written inquiries (In FY 2012, OCIR had over 1,300 such inquiries) and oversight requests from
members of Congress, and coordinate and provide technical assistance and briefings on
legislative areas of interest to members of Congress and their staff. As needed, OCIR will work
with program offices to prepare nominees for confirmation hearings. In addition, OCIR will
coordinate with the White House's Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs and the
Council for Environmental Quality on issues related to achieving the goals and priorities of the
agency.
OCIR's Intergovernmental Office serves as the Agency's liaison to state and local government
officials and will manage the Administrator's Local Government Advisory Committee and the
Small Community Advisory Subcommittee. These activities will help to ensure that the EPA's
policies and regulations consider impacts on state and local governments. The Office also will
monitor regulations to ensure that proper consultation with state and local governments takes
place in accordance with Federalism guidelines. The Office will continue to work closely with
program offices to more fully integrate the National Environmental Performance Partnerships
System (NEPPS) framework and principles into the agency's core business practices. NEPPS is a
performance-based system of environmental protection designed to improve the efficiency and
346
-------
effectiveness of state-EPA partnerships. By focusing the EPA's and state resources on the most
pressing environmental problems and taking advantage of the unique capacities of each partner,
performance partnerships may help achieve greater environmental and human health protection
within the same resource level.89 OCIR's efforts will support the EPA's strategic plan and the
Administrator's priority for building on state partnerships.
In FY 2012, OCIR completed a review of NEPPS implementation practices and identified
opportunities to improve overall effectiveness. The review, which assessed how and to what
extent NEPPS implementation has helped to realize the goals for strengthening the EPA-state
partnership, discussed both the progress NEPPS has made since 1995 and the challenges the
program faces going forward, and identified opportunities to improve overall effectiveness.
Recommendations were developed under the following categories: the NEPPS process and tools;
performance measurement and flexibility; state oversight; resource and workload issues. As a
result of OCIR's collaboration with OMB to promote Performance Partnership Grants (PPG) as a
model to achieve administrative flexibility and efficiency, OMB's final report included
recommendations to develop pilot programs that would allow states to blend federal funds from
similar programs within or across agencies, citing the EPA's PPG program. In FY 2014, the
OCIR will be funded at a level of $7.925 million and 58.6 FTE.
As a staff office of the EPA Administrator, the Office of Federal Advisory Committee
Management and Outreach (OFACMO) serves as the secretariat for all of the EPA's federal
advisory committees. The EPA currently has 22 chartered committees that advise the
Administrator and other senior officials on a range of topics relevant to the work of the agency.
OFACMO's goal is to enable each of these committees to provide expert, timely
recommendations from a diverse range of stakeholders. OFACMO works to ensure that all of the
agency's advisory committees are operated in full compliance of the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA). It also provides support to each committee manager, who has the title
"Designated Federal Officer (DFO)", by convening regular working sessions during which
information and expertise is shared across committees.
In FY 2014, OFACMO will conduct no less than nine comprehensive "oversight/assist" visits to
ensure that the EPA's federal advisory committees comply with notice, open meeting, public
document, and record keeping requirements. These visits will help reduce practices that expose
the committees to legal challenges and vulnerabilities. OFACMO will also continue to
implement a strategic outreach initiative to environmental justice and science-based groups,
schools and organizations to increase the number of underrepresented and underserved
communities on the EPA's federal advisory committees. An enhanced pool allows participation
on existing committees by individuals, communities and groups that have traditionally been
underserved and/or underutilized on the EPA's committees allowing for more balanced, diverse
points of views, a key component of the FACA process. This "diversity" database will be a key
resource for the agency's advisory committees.
To strengthen its public participation function, OFACMO also will implement a plan to expand
the conversation on environmentalism. This will include integrating new technologies, including
videoconferencing, webcasting, and other forms of social media, with other communication and
9Please refer to http://www.epa.gov/ocir/nepps/index.htm for additional information.
347
-------
outreach efforts. By using these tools, OFACMO can ensure links between the EPA's federal
advisory committees. Moreover, it will allow the Office to hold public meetings, attend
conferences, and form partnerships with Minority Academic Institutions, the National Science
Foundation, and other science/policy based organizations. In FY 2014, OFACMO will be funded
at a level of $2.153 million and 12.0 FTE.
The Office of External Affairs and Environmental Education (OEAEE) facilitates the exchange
of information between the EPA and the public, congress, and state and local government;
broadly communicates the EPA's mission to protect human health and the environment;
promotes public awareness of environmental issues; advances and develops environmental
outreach and training; and solicits stakeholder commitment to environmental stewardship and
environmental protection.
In FY 2014, OEAEE headquarters and Regional offices will work together to ensure that
reporters continue to receive information in a timely manner. The Office will continue to update
and streamline the agency's web pages, focusing on microsites, to ensure consistency with One
EPA web guidelines and provide all stakeholders with transparent, accurate and comprehensive
information on the EPA's activities and policies. In addition, OEAEE will strengthen its
customer service by continuing to reach out to stakeholders, including faith-based,
neighborhood, multilingual, educational, and health groups and underserved populations. This
outreach will ensure that these groups and individuals have a better understanding of the actions
that the EPA is taking to protect public health and the environment. OEAEE will continue to use
traditional and social media, the website, and both standard and innovative channels such as
webinars, virtual town halls, public service announcements, photo projects, and videos to reach
students, communities, and multilingual populations. Finally, OEAEE will continue to lead the
retooling of the EPA's environmental outreach effort by integrating environmental outreach and
training activities within core EPA environmental programs, thus better serving the public. In FY
2014, the Headquarters OEAEE will be funded at a level of $12.226 million and 51.1 FTE.
As the central administrative management component of the Office of the Administrator (AO),
the Office of Executive Services (OES) provides advice, tools, and assistance to the AO's
programmatic operations including human resources management, budget and financial
management, information technology and security, and audit management. In FY 2014, the
Headquarters OES will be funded at a level of $3.729 million and 21.9 FTE.
The Office of the Executive Secretariat (OEX) serves as the correspondence, records
management and Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) hub of the AO. OEX manages executive
correspondence, oversees the FOIA process (for example, 146 FOIA requests were processed in
FY 2012), maintains the Administrator's and Deputy Administrator's records, ensures that AO
meets its records management responsibilities and manages the agency's Correspondence
Management System (CMS). In FY 2012, OEX processed approximately 12,618 pieces of
executive correspondence addressed to the Administrator or Deputy Administrator. In FY 2014,
OEX resources will support operation of the CMS information technology application, including
its electronic records management component. OEX resources will also assist staff, national-
program offices and regional offices in implementing paperless technologies for correspondence,
records management and FOIA processing. This will ensure greater efficiency, reduce storage
348
-------
and other costs, improve accountability and ensure faster responses to the public, stakeholders
and members of Congress. In FY 2014, the OEX will be funded at a level of $2.086 million and
14.6 FTE.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple goals and strategic objectives. Currently, there are
no performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$5,388.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$343.0 / -2.5 FTE) This reflects a reduction of 0.5 FTE in headquarters and 2.0 FTEs in
all ten regions. These reductions in FTE represent a consolidation of workload and
further efficiencies gained as a result of reallocating that workload.The reduced resources
include 2.5 FTE and associated payroll of $343.0.
• (-$34.0) This reflects a reduction in travel to support the Administration's Management
Agenda goal of reducing travel and conference spending.
• (+$559.0) This increase covers basic and mandatory IT and telecommunications support
costs for the on board workforce, including support for desktop services, telephone and
Local Area Network (LAN). These resources are needed to enable employees working at
Headquarters and in the regions to carry out their day-to-day work supporting the
agency's mis si on.
Statutory Authority:
As provided in Appropriations Act funding; Federal Advisory Committee Act; Environmental
Impact Assessment Act; North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act;
Residential Lead Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act; North American Anti-Epileptic Drug
Pregnancy Registry; La Paz Agreement U.S./Mexico Border; Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability Act.
349
-------
Exchange Network
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$17,724.0
$1,431.0
$19,155.0
29.6
FY 2012
Actuals
$16,479.3
$1,383.6
$17,862.9
36.3
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$17,930.0
$1,440.0
$19,370.0
29.6
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$33,659.0
$1,433.0
$35,092.0
31.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$15,935.0
$2.0
$15,937.0
1.4
Program Project Description:
The Exchange Network (EN) is a standards-based, secure approach for the EPA and its state,
Tribal and territorial partners to exchange and share environmental data. The EN facilitates and
streamlines electronic reporting, sharing, integration, analysis and use of environmental data
from many different sources. Through its use of technology and data standards, open-source
software, shared services and reusable tools and applications, the EN offers its partners
tremendous potential for managing and analyzing environmental data more effectively and
efficiently, leading to improved decision making.
The Central Data Exchange (CDX)90 is the largest component of the EN program. CDX is the
electronic gateway through which environmental data enters the agency. It enables fast, efficient
and more accurate environmental data submissions from state and local governments, tribes and
industry to the EPA. It also provides a set of core services, enabling agency programs to avoid
creating duplicative services. The reuse of existing central services like CDX promotes leaner
and more cost-effective enterprise architecture for the agency and enables more robust central
services. Because CDX serves as the EPA's connection to the EN, it provides a common way to
promote data integration and sharing with states and tribes. CDX resources support infrastructure
for development, testing and production; sophisticated open source hardware and software; data
exchange and Web form programs; built-in data quality checks; standards-setting projects with
states, tribes and territories for e-reporting; and significant security and quality assurance
activities. By reducing the data management burden on EPA programs, CDX helps
environmental programs focus their resources on programmatic and enforcement work, rather
than on data collection and manipulation. CDX also provides central support for virtual signature
1 For more information on the Central Data Exchange, please visit: http://www.epa.gov/cdx/.
350
-------
service and reporting, and support for the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE), a system
for import and export services for the U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
Other tools and services in the EN program include the Facility Registry System (FRS) and the
other registries within the System of Registries. The FRS is a widely used source of mapping and
environmental data about facilities. It supports multimedia integration, query, analysis and
visualization of a wide variety of environmental information keyed to single or multiple facilities.
FRS serves as a key point of entry for the public interested in the EPA's data stores, such as
Envirofacts, the Geoplatform, MyEnvironment, Cleanups In My Community and a host of other
tools. The registries provide a platform to link data across data systems, environmental programs
and even other agencies' data, enabling the EPA to bring data together for greater understanding
of environmental issues. The registries are key integrators that promote discovery, access, sharing
and understanding of the EPA's information and assets.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The program will pilot projects in FY 2014 that transform the EN from a closed partnership of
states and tribes to a more open platform of services that the public or third parties can use to
develop tools and applications to make environmental data reporting, sharing and analysis faster,
simpler and cheaper.
In support of the agency's E-Enterprise investment, EPA requests an increase of $16.1 million in
FY 2014 for the EN program. With the additional funds the program will work with the
Environmental Council of States to develop a single portal where states, tribes, and regulated
facilities ("customers") would register to conduct business with EPA similar to on-line banking.
The system would "push" tailored information out to customers based on their unique regulatory
requirements. It will create a single EPA infrastructure that enables specific programs and state
systems to allow businesses to routinely conduct electronic environmental business transactions
with regulators. Facilities could go on-line to apply for permits, check compliance, report their
emissions, and learn about new regulations that could apply to them. E-Enterprise enables
customers of EPA and its co-regulators (states tribes, territories) to conduct environmental
business electronically and in a dynamically customizable way based on who they are and what
they need.
To implement the vision for E-Enterprise, the EN program in FY 2014 will use the requested
resources to expand its central services by embracing a "Cloud-first" strategy and offering cloud-
based services that will reduce costs for states and tribes that rely on the Exchange Network to
share data with the EPA. By centralizing the provision of these services within the EN program,
the EPA hopes to use the requested resources to reduce the overall cost to states, tribes, and the
EPA of providing these services. The EPA will also expand its effort to implement a
standardized web-services framework for electronic reporting and user signatures. EPA offices
implementing electronic reporting will adopt standard solutions, facilitating reuse, increasing
integration and lowering costs long term.
In FY 2014, the EPA will create these efficiencies for state and Tribal partners by migrating data
exchange services to a new EPA-hosted cloud-based service on the Exchange Network. States
351
-------
and tribes will have the same level of control over their data, but EPA will pay for installing,
configuring and maintaining the hardware and software. This migration will enable states and
tribes to reallocate limited staff resources and expertise to other priorities. Two systems that the
EPA plans to migrate to an EPA-hosted cloud-based service are the Air Facilities System for air
enforcement, and the electronic Notice of Intent system that supports the water program. In the
near term, these migrations will reduce costs for states and tribes, but in the longer term the
migration to an EPA-hosted cloud-based service will enable regulated facilities to more easily
report data directly to EPA.
Several enhancements will be rolled out in FY 2014 to support the E-Enterprise effort. Major
activities will include a complete redesign of the interface that states and tribes use to comply
with user identification standards, improving the quality of user registration data and raising the
efficiency of the EPA's user identity management. Leveraging shared customer identities, a new -
customized homepage will be developed to integrate services for states, tribes, and regulated
facilities (customers).
• Develop Front-Door for Agency Customers: The homepage will serve as a portal for
states, tribes, and regulated facilities to submit and and obtain data, connect to individual
IT applications, and access a streamlined reporting interface for multiple reporting and
permitting systems.
As EPA's primary node, or "point of presence" on the Exchange Network, CDX is primed to
serve as the data publishing engine for the agency by providing the transport of data from the
EPA, not only to trusted partners, but potentially to the public as well. This role and expansion of
CDX will be pursued through FY 2014 as part of the architecture redesign.
Separate from EPA's work to directly support states, tribes, and regulated facilities, CDX will
continue to support and build capacity for agency program data flow requirements, such as a
Transportation and Air Quality system that manages reporting from industry on compliance with
the Renewable Fuels Standard. In addition, the EN program will work with program offices to
integrate additional reporting systems into CDX, such as Clean Air Act State Implementation
Plan reporting and updates, the high volume National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
reporting program, and the expansion of Toxic Substances Control Act, which mandates that
industry report to either states or the EPA electronically.
The Automated Commercial Environment (ACE), a system for import and export services for the
U.S. Customs and Border Protection, allows the trade industry to file early to determine if their
shipment will meet EPA reporting requirements before it is loaded on a truck, train, ship or
plane. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to support its partnership with Customs through its
pilot programs for electronic filings, automated review and simplified entry to the applicable
regulatory programs at ports nationwide.
Planned activities in FY 2014 for the System of Registries include continuing efforts to allow
greater sharing and better understanding of the EPA's data. These efforts include metadata-
providing services at the system, dataset, and data element levels:
352
-------
• The EPA's inventory of systems and computational models, the Registry of EPA
Applications and Databases (READ), will continue to evolve to meet agency federal
reporting and information management needs;
• The EPA's dataset registry, the Environmental Data Gateway, is an inventory of available
datasets from a variety of sources. The datasets will continue to grow to meet EPA's
priority of improving data accessibility. To capitalize on CDX's potential as a data
publishing engine and to enhance data by providing geographic context, the agency will
employ a web API data structuring concept where applicable to help facilitate the sharing
of information with the public, private sector entities, and between agencies;
• The EPA will continue to develop data dictionaries for systems cataloged in READ. This
will serve as a first-stop for system development by encouraging reuse of data elements
in existing systems, thereby improving standards and reducing burden. This system
positions the agency to meet future requirements for federal-wide standardization; and
• The EPA also will continue to improve information management of its IT resources
through its catalog of IT services (e.g., widgets, Web services, reusable code). The
Reusable Component Services are a resource that enables EPA programs to reuse
standard system functions in whole or in part, thus saving the EPA, states and Tribal
governments' money and time.
Planned activities in FY 2014 for the Facility Registry System include:
• Continuing to improve FRS data quality and its utilization across the EPA, tribes and
states by building on FY 2013 initiatives to establish a strong FRS data stewards network
and community of interest;
• Enhancing FRS data to support improved analysis and access and adding additional
spatial geographies and attributes and emerging semantic Web technologies; and
• Providing means of managing and accessing a richer set of facility information, to
include sub-facility and corporate information and offer real time data feeds.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(052) Number of major
enabling faster receipt,
FY2007
36
37
FY2008
45
48
EPA environmental systems that use the CDX electronic requirements
processing, and quality checking of data.
FY2009
50
55
FY2010
60
60
FY2011
60
64
FY2012
67
68
FY2013
75
FY2014
80
Units
Systems
Measure
Target
Actual
(053) States, tribes and territories will be able to exchange data with CDX through nodes in real
time, using standards and automated data-quality checking.
FY2007
55
57
FY2008
55
59
FY 2009
60
59
FY 2010
65
69
FY2011
65
72
FY 2012
80
92
FY 2013
95
FY 2014
98
Units
Users
353
-------
Measure
Target
Actual
(999) Total number of active unique users from states, tribes, laboratories, regulated facilities
and other entities that electronically report environmental data to EPA through CDX.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
Baseline
Year
56,200
FY 2012
58,000
65,238
FY 2013
70,000
FY 2014
75,000
Units
Users
The EPA has employed a suite of performance measures for the Exchange Network program
including number of active, individual users of CDX, CDX's operational availability, and cost
per transaction using CDX.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$122.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$54.0 / -1.6 FTE) This reduces 1.6 FTE and $251.0 in associated payroll to reflect
anticipated efficiencies in providing agency-wide network services. If EPA is unable to
achieve the anticipated savings, the Exchange Network program may need to reduce
spending on quality control efforts within the System of Registries.
• (+$1,149.0 / +1.0 FTE) This change realigns resources from the IT/Data Management
program to the Exchange Network program for the Environmental Dataset Gateway and
the Facilities Registry Service to better reflect where the work is being done. This shift
includes 1.0 FTE and associated payroll of $154.0, as well as $995.0 in contractual
resources.
• (-$1,500.0) This change reduces the ACE contract resources for development, as
Customs and Border Protection is not yet ready to exchange ACE data with EPA.
Remaining funds for this activity support nationwide testing and maintain the partnership
with CBP. The program may require an increase in the future as CBP ramps up and
changes/adjustments are required to the system to accommodate CBP readiness and
growth.
• (+$16,110.0 / +2.0 FTE) As part of the agency's E-Enterprise investment, this increase
will begin the establishment of a single portal where "customers" will exchange data with
the EPA and its partners. It will virtually tie together the EPA's environmental program
databases and information requirements and allow businesses to routinely conduct
environmental business transactions with the EPA. The users could go on-line to apply
for permits, check compliance, report their emissions, and learn about new regulations.
The system will incorporate a shared Internet-based process management platform and
shared data registries and will use federal open data standards. The additional resources
include 2.0 FTE, $314.0 in associated payroll.
354
-------
Statutory Authority:
Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 42 United States Code 553 et seq. and Government
Information Security Act (GISRA), 40 U.S.C. 1401 et seq. - Sections 3531, 3532, 3533, 3534,
3535 and 3536 and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
(CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. 9606 et seq. - Sections 101-128, 301-312 and 401-405 and Clean Air Act
(CAA) Amendments, 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. - Sections 102, 103, 104 and 108 and Clean Water
Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C. 1314 et seq. - Sections 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 107, and 109 and Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2611 et seq. - Sections 201, 301 and 401 and Federal
Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. 36 et seq. - Sections 136a - 136y
and Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA), 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq. - Sections 102, 210, 301 and 501
and Safe Drinking Water Act (SOWA) Amendments, 42 U.S.C. 300 et seq. - Sections 1400,
1401, 1411, 1421, 1431, 1441, 1454 and 1461 and Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346 et seq. and Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
(EPCRA), 42 U.S.C. 11001 et seq. - Sections 322, 324, 325 and 328 and Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA), 42 U.S.C. 6962 et seq. - Sections 1001, 2001, 3001 and 3005 and
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA), 39 U.S.C. 2803 et seq. - Sections 1115,
1116, 1117, 1118 and 1119 and Government Management Reform Act (GMRA), 31 U.S.C. 501
et seq. - Sections 101, 201, 301, 401, 402, 403, 404 and 405 and Clinger-Cohen Act (CCA), 40
U.S.C. 1401 et seq. - Sections 5001, 5201, 5301, 5401, 5502, 5601 and 5701and Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. - Sections 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111,
112 and 113 and Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552 et seq and Controlled
Substances Act (CSA), 21 U.S.C. 802 et seq. - Sections 801, 811, 821, 841, 871, 955 and 961;
Privacy Act; Electronic Freedom of Information Act, Security and Accountability for Every
(SAFE) Port Act, Executive Order 13439. Exchange Network Program funding has been
provided by the annual appropriations for EPA: FY 2002 (Public Law 107-73), FY 2003 (Public
Law 108-7), FY 2004 (Public Law 108-199) FY 2005 (Public Law 108-447) and FY 2006
(Public Law 109-54), FY 2007 (Public Law 110-5), FY 2008 (Public Law 110-161), and FY
2009 (Public Law 111-8)
355
-------
Small Business Ombudsman
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Promote Pollution Prevention
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$2,693.0
$2,693.0
9.9
FY 2012
Actuals
$2,756.4
$2,756.4
11.2
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$2,714.0
$2,714.0
9.9
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$3,131.0
$3,131.0
10.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$438.0
$438.0
0.1
Program Project Description:
The Small Business Ombudsman program includes the Asbestos and Small Business
Ombudsman (ASBO) and the small business activities located in the Office of Policy's Office of
Regulatory Policy and Management (ORPM). ASBO serves as the agency's leading advocate for
small business regulatory issues through its partnership with EPA Regional Small Business
Liaisons, state Small Business Environmental Assistance Programs (SBEAPs) nationwide and
hundreds of small business trade associations. These partnerships provide the information and
perspective EPA needs to help small businesses achieve their environmental goals.
The Small Business Ombudsman is a comprehensive program that provides networks, resources,
tools, and forums for education and advocacy on behalf of small businesses.91 The ORPM assists
the EPA's program offices with analyzing and considering the impacts of its regulatory actions
on small businesses and identifying less burdensome alternatives, and leading EPA's
implementation of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA). Under the RFA, the EPA evaluates the impact
of its regulations on small businesses and engages with small entity representatives, the Office of
Management and Budget and the Small Business Administration to understand the impacts of
and identify less burdensome alternatives for rulemakings that could significantly impact these
entities.
The core program functions include participating in the regulatory development process,
operating and supporting the program's hotline and homepage, participating in EPA's program
and regional offices' small business-related meetings, and supporting internal and external small
business activities. The program helps small businesses learn about new actions and
developments within the EPA, and helps the agency learn about the concerns and needs of small
businesses. The program also provides technical assistance through the ASBO in the form of
workshops, conferences, hotlines, and training forums designed to help small businesses become
better environmental performers.
Please refer to: http://www.epa.gov/sbo.
356
-------
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the Small Business Ombudsman program will:
• Assist in carrying out the EPA's implementation of the RFA including establishing Small
Business Advocacy Panels for regulations that might have a significant and adverse
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
• Expand quality and efficiency of technical and regulatory assistance to small businesses by
providing enhanced information to small business owners, communities, trade associations
and other audiences on recent regulatory actions and media program offices through a toll-
free hotline. The Asbestos Hotline receives an average of 600 calls per month. Support and
promote the EPA's Small Business Strategy by encouraging small businesses, states, and
trade associations to comment on the EPA's proposed regulatory actions, as well as
providing updates on the agency's rulemaking activities in the quarterly Smallbiz@EPA
electronic bulletin (see http://www.epa.gov/sbo/bulletin.htm).
• Serve as the agency's point of contact for the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act by
coordinating efforts with the agency's program offices to further reduce the information
collection burden for small businesses with fewer than 25 employees.
• Participate with the Small Business Administration and other federal agencies in
Business.USA.gov, an official site of the U.S. Government that helps small businesses
understand their legal requirements and locate government services supporting the nation's
small business community. This work helps to improve services and reduces the burden on
small businesses by guiding them through government rules and regulations.
• Strengthen and support partnerships with state SBEAP's and trade associations, and
recognize state SBEAPs, small businesses, and trade associations that have directly impacted
the improved environmental performance of small businesses. Develop a compendium of
small business environmental assistance success stories that demonstrate what really works.
• Support the EPA's efforts to limit potential adverse impacts on small entities by assisting
program offices in characterizing the possible impacts of its regulations and considering
alternative requirements.
In this program, resources of $1.8 million and 5.0 FTE support the Office of Small Business
Programs. The remaining $1.3 million and 5.0 FTE support activities related to the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act in the Office of Policy, Office of Regulatory
Policy and Management.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple goals and strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
357
-------
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$298.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$17.0 / +0.1 FTE) This increase in resources will support the EPA SBO ability to carry
out its statutorily required mandate (42 U.S.C. 766If) to monitor the effectiveness of the
state programs and support the networking, resource and tools development for the
improvement of environmental performance by small businesses. Additional staff will
carry out the training, outreach and monitoring responsibilities of the SBO. The
associated resources include $17.0 in payroll resources and 0.1 FTE.
• (+$140.0) This reflects an increase in contract resources and expenses which will support
more detailed analysis of: the impacts of the EPA's regulatory actions on small
businesses and attempt to identify less burdensome alternatives in accordance with the
Regulatory Flexibility Act; the design architecture for including SBO's outreach and
assistance material electronically; and the development of a compendium of the agency's
small business environmental assistance initiatives.
• (-$19.0) This reflects a decrease in resources to cover basic and mandatory IT and
telecommunications support costs for the on board workforce, including support for
desktop services, telephone and local area Network (LAN).
• (+$2.0) This reflects an increase in resources to support the Office's partnership efforts
with state Small Business Environmental Assistance Providers and to award a grant to a
state to host an annual training. The annual training is imperative to coordinating
compliance assistance efforts within the states and the EPA.
Statutory Authority:
1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA), section 507, Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5
U.S.C. §§ 601 et seq., as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA)
358
-------
Small Minority Business Assistance
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$2,079.0
$2,079.0
9.7
FY 2012
Actuals
$2,281.1
$2,281.1
10.4
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$2,094.0
$2,094.0
9.7
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$2,289.0
$2,289.0
9.8
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$210.0
$210.0
0.1
Program Project Description:
The agency's Office of Small Business Programs (OSBP) manages the agency's Small and
Minority Business Assistance Programs, which include the Direct Procurement Program, the
Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program, and the Minority Academic Institutions
(MAI) Program. This program provides technical assistance to small businesses and agency
procurement professionals to ensure that small, disadvantaged, women-owned, Historically
Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone), service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses
(SDVOSBs), and MAIs receive a fair share of the EPA's procurement dollars and grants, where
applicable. This program enhances the ability of these entities to participate in the protection of
human health and the environment. The functions involve accountability for evaluating and
monitoring contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements entered into by the EPA's headquarters
and Regional Offices. This will ensure that the agency's procurement and grant practices comply
with federal laws and regulations regarding the utilization of small and disadvantaged
businesses, and further the policies and mandates of Executive Orders associated with MAIs.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, under the agency's Small and Minority Business Assistance Programs, small and
disadvantaged business procurement experts will provide training, technical assistance, and
consultation to headquarters and regional program office personnel and small business owners to
ensure that Small Disadvantaged Businesses (SDBs), Women-Owned Small Businesses
(WOSBs), HUBZone firms, and SDVOSBs receive a fair share of the EPA's procurement
dollars. The EPA negotiates a number of national goals with the Small Business Administration
(SBA) every two years, which are targeted at increasing opportunities for the above mentioned
categories of small businesses. (In FY 2014, the funding for the Small Minority Business
Assistance Program is $2.29 million and 9.8 FTE).
359
-------
In FY 2014, the EPA's Small and Minority Business Assistance Program will continue the
implementation of applicable provisions of the 2010 Small Business Jobs Act, and the WOSB
regulation92 enacted in 2011. The EPA will work to eliminate contract bundling to help ensure
opportunities for America's small business community. Emphasis will be placed on
implementing the WOSB rule, authorizing contracting officers to restrict competition to eligible
WOSBs for certain federal contracts in industries that the SBA has determined are
underrepresented or substantially underrepresented in federal procurement. The agency will
emphasize contracting with SDVOSBs, as mandated by Executive Order 13360, which requires
increased federal contracting opportunities for this group of entrepreneurs. For both the WOSB
and SDVOSB programs "strong emphasis" will include targeted training of the EPA's
acquisition professionals on the utilization of the programs; targeted outreach and training to the
SDVOSB and WOSB communities on how to navigate the EPA's procurement process; specific
review of the EPA's procurements to ensure the utilization of both programs; and providing
technical assistance to the EPA's program offices to assist in the identification of SDVOSBs and
WOSBs for their procurement needs.
As a result of the Supreme Court's decision in Adarand v. Pena, 115 S. Ct. 2097 (1995), the
EPA promulgated the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Rule (40 CFR Part 33). The
EPA's implementation of the DBE Rule requires that the EPA's grant recipients perform good
faith efforts to ensure that DBEs have an opportunity to compete for contracts funded by the
EPA's assistance agreements. The DBE Program, has a statutory goal often percent utilization
of Minority Business Enterprises/Worn en-Owned Business Enterprises for research conducted
under the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, as well as a statutory eight percent goal for all
other programs. The DBE program encourages the agency and its financial assistance recipients
to meet these indirect procurement goals. This includes training EPA grant personnel on the
scope and utilization of the DBE Program; providing technical assistance and counseling to EPA
grant recipients on the requirements of the DBE Program; targeted outreach efforts to encourage
minority and women owned businesses to seek contract opportunities funded by the EPA's
grants; and monitoring the program through the compilation and analysis of required grantee
DBE program reports. These efforts will enhance the ability of America's small and
disadvantaged businesses to help the agency protect human health and the environment while
creating more jobs.
Under its MAI program, the agency develops strategies, collects data, provides technical
assistance, and produces reports on its efforts to meet the initiatives of Executive Order 13515,
Increasing Participation of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders in Federal Programs;
Executive Order 13555, White House Initiative on Educational Excellence for Hispanics;
Executive Order 13532, Promoting Excellence, Innovation, and Sustainability at Historically
Black Colleges and Universities; and Executive Order 13592, Improving American Indian and
Alaska Native Educational Opportunities and Strengthening Tribal Colleges and Universities.
Specific activities under this program for FY 2014 include, preparing agency-wide reports on
MAI accomplishments, as required by all four Executive Orders; preparing agency-wide plans to
support MAIs, as required by all four executive orders; redirecting resources to maintain core
mission support contracts as well as support programs; providing internal and external technical
92 Please see: http://frwebgatel.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/PDFgate.cgi?WAISdocID=DHurqp/0/2/0&WAISaction=retrieve for
further information.
360
-------
assistance and training on the MAI Program; and managing an agency-wide contract to provide
the agency with a diverse pool of interns.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple goals and strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$167.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$14.0 / +0.1 FTE) This increase will support the staffing needs of the program, and
required training, monitoring and outreach to small businesses at the local level.
• (+$29.0) This increase reflects resources used to cover basic and mandatory IT and
telecommunications support costs for the on board workforce, including support for
desktop services, telephone and Local Area Network (LAN). These resources also enable
the Office of Small Business Programs' Minority Academic Institutions (MAI) program
to manage an agency-wide contract to provide the agency with a diverse pool of
internships and jobs for students.
Statutory Authority:
Small Business Act, sections 8 and 15, as amended; Small Business Jobs Act; Executive Orders
12073, 12432, 12138, 13256, 13270, 13230, 13360 and 13216; P.L. 106-50; Clean Air Act.
361
-------
State and Local Prevention and Preparedness
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$13,320.0
$13,320.0
57.5
FY 2012
Actuals
$12,250.4
$12,250.4
53.4
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$13,403.0
$13,403.0
57.5
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$14,101.0
$14,101.0
62.9
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$781.0
$781.0
5.4
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Chemical Emergency Preparedness and Prevention Program has responsibility for the
national regulatory framework to prevent, prepare for and respond to catastrophic accidental
chemical releases at industrial facilities throughout the United States. This program includes the
Clean Air Act Section 112(r) Risk Management program and the Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) program. The purpose of these programs is to prevent
devastating accidents such as the 1984 accident at Union Carbide in Bhopal India, which resulted
in thousands of deaths and at least 200 thousand injuries, and the domestic chemical accidents in
Pasadena and Texas City, Texas which resulted in hundreds of injuries and dozens of deaths.
Accidents at chemical facilities have resulted in injury and death, severe environmental damage,
and great financial loss. Accidents reported to the EPA since 2005 by the current universe of
Risk Management Program facilities have resulted in approximately 60 worker and public
deaths, over 1,300 injuries, nearly 200 thousand people sheltered in place, and more than $1.6
billion in on-site and off-site damages. States and communities often lack the strong
infrastructure needed to address these emergencies or to prevent them from happening in the first
place.
The Risk Management Program provides the foundation for community and hazard response
planning by requiring facilities to take preventative measures, as well as collecting and sharing
data to assist other stakeholders in preventing and responding to releases of all types. Taken
together, the Risk Management Program and EPCRA establish a structure, within which federal,
state, local, and Tribal partners can work together to protect the public, the economy, and the
environment from chemical risks.
Under Section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act, the EPA's regulations require that facilities handling
more than a threshold quantity of certain extremely hazardous substances must implement a Risk
Management Program. The Risk Management Program requires regulated chemical facilities to
conduct the following:
362
-------
• Perform a hazard assessment that estimates the harmful effects of serious chemical
releases from the facility and describes the facility's history of serious accidents;
• Implement accident prevention measures such as using written safe operating procedures,
maintaining the mechanical integrity of chemical process equipment, safely managing
process and equipment changes, investigating process incidents, and other measures that
aim to prevent serious accidents;
• Implement an emergency response program that minimizes the harmful effects of any
chemical release that may occur; and
• Prepare and submit a risk management plan (RMP) to the EPA. RMPs are collated within
a single national database that contains current and historical chemical hazard
information for approximately 13 thousand U.S. chemical facilities.
The RMP describes the approach the facility is taking to prevent and mitigate chemical
accidents. The plan addresses the hazards of the chemicals used by the facility, the potential
consequences of worst case and other accidental chemical release scenarios, the facility's five
year accident history, the chemical accident prevention program in place at the site, and the
emergency response program used by the site to minimize the impacts on the public and
environment should a chemical release occur.
There has been a significant decrease in accidents reported at RMP facilities since FY 1996 (see
chart below)93. Overall accident reductions could be attributed to a number of factors including
those actions taken by facilities to prevent spills. The EPA has worked to increase inspection
activities at high-risk facilities, made it possible to submit RMPs online, and provided more
specialized training for RMP inspectors. These activities, along with consistent outreach with
regulated communities, advancing technologies, and improved safety systems, have helped to
maximize the effectiveness of prevention and preparedness at chemical facilities.
93 Data is current as of February 2013. The FY 2010 and FY 2011 numbers may be artificially low due to lag in reporting. Results
from 2012 will be available in late-2013.
363
-------
Accidents at RMP Facilities FY 1997 - 2011
600
500
400
01
;o
'o
1 300
i_
01
J2
E
^ 200
100
478
445
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Every dollar spent on basic chemical accident prevention measures and preparedness for prompt
response by businesses and by the EPA's compliance assistance efforts potentially saves from
hundreds to tens of thousands of dollars in avoided costs. Chemical accident cleanups require
significant funding to clean up community resources, food supplies, sensitive environmental
areas, recover the use of key assets, restore economic vitality, and to protect human health from
the harm associated with chemical accidents.
Facilities are required to update their RMP at least once every five years or sooner if major
changes are made at the facility. The EPA provides RMP data to state and local emergency
planning entities, and to other federal agencies, such as the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) and the U.S. Chemical Safety Board. The EPA's RMP regulation works together with
DHS's Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS) rule to cover all potential causes of
hazardous substance release. CFATS addresses acts of malfeasance, while the Risk Management
Program focuses on accidental events. For security reasons, RMPs are made available to the
public at federal reading rooms, in redacted form.
Under EPCRA, State Emergency Response Commissions (SERCs) and Local Emergency
Planning Committees (LEPCs) were formed to serve as the infrastructure for local emergency
planning and to inform the public about chemicals in their community. In order to accomplish
this goal, the requirements of EPCRA stipulate that facilities provide information to the SERCs
and LEPCs about the chemical they produce, use, and store. LEPCs use this information to
develop local emergency response plans and work with facilities to reduce chemical risks and
improve chemical safety, as well as make available to the public information on the chemicals
364
-------
risks in their community. EPCRA covers several hundred thousand facilities; significantly more
than the number of facilities that are required to submit an RMP.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to conduct audits and inspections at RMP facilities to ensure
their compliance with the regulations. The EPA has identified approximately 13 thousand RMP
facilities nationwide. These facilities represent the largest identified stockpiles of highly toxic
and flammable industrial chemicals in the United States. Of these, approximately 1.9 thousand
facilities have been designated as "high-risk" based upon their accident history, extremely large
quantity of chemicals on site, or proximity to large residential populations. While the EPA is
responsible for oversight of all RMP facilities, the agency places special focus on high-risk RMP
facilities because of their potential for causing great damage to the public and environment in the
event of an accident. However, oversight and inspections at high-risk facilities require more
resources, including technical experts and time, due to their complex processes, larger scale, and
potential risk.94
In FY2014, the EPA is requesting an increase to its chemical accident prevention and emergency
planning programs in order to increase inspections and reduce risks at high-risk chemical
facilities. These additional resources will be devoted to inspections conducted at high-risk
facilities in order to improve the federal government's capacity to identify and address problems
before they become disasters.
As part of its ongoing RMP efforts, the EPA will continue to work with state and local
governments to provide grants, technical support, outreach, and training. The EPA also will work
with communities to provide chemical risk information about local facilities, as well as helping
them understand how the chemical risks may affect their citizens through the issuance of
appropriate guidance.
The EPA will continue to support ongoing development of emergency planning and response
tools such as the Computer-Aided Management of Emergency Operations (CAMEO) software
suite. With this information and these tools, communities are better prepared to reduce and
mitigate hazardous chemical releases that may occur. The EPA will also conduct inspections at
facilities subject to EPCRA, both to support state and local implementation of the program and to
ensure that facilities comply with the statute's chemical inventory reporting and emergency
release notification provisions.
The EPA will continue to maintain the RMP database, which is the nation's premier source for
information on chemical process risks, and will share data with other federal, state, Tribal and
local partners that need the best and latest information on U.S. hazardous chemical facility risks.
In addition, the EPA will continue to conduct analyses of RMP data to identify regulated
facilities, chemical accident trends, and industrial sectors that may be more accident-prone.
These analyses will help the agency focus efforts on compliance inspections, regulatory
94 The agency's prioritization of resource intensive high-risk inspections over the last two years has resulted in fluctuations in the
gross number of facilities targeted for inspected as the percentage of resources dedicated to high-risk facilities has increased.
365
-------
enforcement actions and outreach toward those facilities that potentially pose the most risk to
communities and gain knowledge on the effectiveness of risk management measures.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to focus attention on identifying where the most significant
vulnerabilities exist, in terms of scale and potential risk, which includes the following activities:
• Provide national coordination for chemical accident prevention and emergency response
planning program policy, inspections, compliance, and enforcement;
• Conduct program oversight, monitoring, and support for the CAMEO system;
• Conduct training for the EPA and state implementing agency RMP and EPCRA
inspectors;
• Continue efforts to identify facilities that did not file RMPs by comparing the list of
current RMP facilities against other available data sources; and
• Conduct EPCRA compliance inspections at regulated facilities.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(CH2) Number of risk management plan inspections conducted.
FY2007
400
628
FY2008
400
628
FY 2009
400
654
FY 2010
400
618
FY2011
560
630
FY 2012
530
648
FY 2013
500
FY 2014
460
Units
Inspections
The funding requested will enable the EPA to conduct 460 RMP inspections in FY 2014. Of
these RMP inspections, 34 percent will be conducted at high-risk facilities during FY 2014.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$75.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs and a cost of
living adjustment for existing FTE.
• (+$761.0 / +5.4 FTE) This increase includes 5.4 FTE and associated payroll of $761.0 for
inspectors, allowing the agency to increase its emphasis on high-risk facility inspections.
The additional resources will support additional high risk facility inspections.
• (-$55.0) This decrease reflects a reduction in prevention activities including outreach,
training and/or informational materials.
Statutory Authority:
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), 42 U.S.C. 11001 et seq. -
Sections 11001-11023 and the Clean Air Act, as amended by the Chemical Safety Information,
Site Security, and Fuels Regulatory Relief Act, 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. - Section 112(r).
366
-------
TRI / Right to Know
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Ensure Chemical Safety
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$16,322.0
$16,322.0
50.5
FY 2012
Actuals
$15,605.8
$15,605.8
47.6
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$16,469.0
$16,469.0
50.5
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$16,726.0
$16,726.0
55.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$404.0
$404.0
4.5
Program Project Description:
The EPA's success in carrying out its mission to protect human health and the environment is
contingent on collecting timely, high-quality, relevant information. The Toxics Release
Inventory (TRI) program95 supports the EPA's mission by making the waste management and
pollution prevention data on over 650 toxic chemicals from approximately 20,000 industrial and
federal facilities readily and annually available to the public. TRI data help inform communities
and other stakeholders about toxic chemical releases and other waste management issues in any
locality including their own neighborhoods. It also can be used to help ensure facility compliance
with environmental laws and regulations, as well as promote pollution prevention and source
reduction activities by facilities. Due to the broad scope and timeliness of the data, the TRI
Program, which operates under Section 313 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-
to-Know Act of 1986 and Section 6607 of the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990, is a premier
source of toxic chemical release data for communities, non-governmental organizations,
industrial facilities and government agencies.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to enhance the regulatory foundation of TRI to help ensure
that communities have access to timely and meaningful data on toxic chemical releases and
pollution prevention activities of facilities. As part of this effort, the TRI program will continue
to clarify toxic chemical reporting requirements, improve the reporting experience and explore
opportunities for how this valuable information can be used along with sharing pollution
prevention approaches which may be of interest.
The TRI program provides facilities with an online reporting application, TRI-MEweb, to
facilitate the electronic preparation and submission of TRI reports through the EPA's Central
Data Exchange (CDX). The EPA will continue to encourage greater participation in the TRI
Data Exchange (TDX) by states, tribes and territories, thereby reducing reporting burdens on
' http://www.epa.gov/tri/
367
-------
TRI facilities. Facilities located in states which participate in TDX can submit their TRI reports
simultaneously through the EPA's CDX, rather than submitting separate reports to the EPA and
the states in which they are located.
The TRI program will continue to conduct data quality analyses to help ensure the accuracy and
completeness of the reported data. The TRI program will also provide compliance assistance and
enforcement support to the EPA's of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance programs. In FY
2014, the TRI program will continue to make the data available to the public within weeks after
the July 1st reporting deadline. The data are available as downloadable data files (via the TRI
website and Data.gov) and through online analytical tools (such as Envirofacts and TRI
Explorer). The TRI Program will continue to release the annual TRI National Analysis, which
describes relevant trends in toxic chemical releases and other waste management; industry sector
profiles and parent company analyses; and TRI information reported from facilities in specific
urban communities, large aquatic ecosystems, Indian country, and Alaska Native Villages.
The TRI Program will continue to work with outside organizations, such as the Environmental
Council of the States, to foster stakeholder discussions and collaboration in analyzing and using
the TRI data. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to engage a wide range of TRI stakeholders
(industry, government, academia, non-governmental organizations, and the public) in
discussions, analysis, and use of TRI data across the country.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(998) EPA's TRI program will work with partners to conduct data quality checks to enhance
accuracy and reliability of environmental data.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
500
FY 2014
500
Units
Quality
Checks
EPA's TRI program will work with partners to conduct data quality checks to enhance accuracy
and reliability of environmental data. In FY 2014, a minimum of 500 quality checks will be
performed.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$477.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$567.0 / +3.8 FTE) This change is a realignment of resources, including 3.8 FTE,
$547.0 associated payroll, and $20.0 non-payroll resources from the IT/Data
Management program to the Toxics Release Inventory program to support data quality
and analysis for the Environmental Dataset Gateway web-based service and Facility
Registry System database.
368
-------
• (+$102.0 / +0.7 FTE) This change reflects an increase of 0.7 FTE and associated payroll
of $102.0 to better support data access, analysis and accountability within the TRI
program.
• (-$742.0) This change reflects an efficiency gained by focusing on electronic reporting,
streamlining information technology tools and improving automated data quality checks.
Statutory Authority:
Section 313 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA)
and Section 6607 of the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 (PPA).
369
-------
Tribal - Capacity Building
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Strengthen Human Health and Environmental Protection in Indian Country
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$13,736.0
$13,736.0
87.3
FY 2012
Actuals
$13,716.6
$13,716.6
88.8
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$13,775.0
$13,775.0
87.3
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$15,196.0
$15,196.0
88.1
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,460.0
$1,460.0
0.8
Program Project Description:
Under federal environmental statutes, the EPA has responsibility for protecting human health
and the environment in Indian country. Under the EPA's 1984 Indian Policy, the Agency works
with tribes on a government-to-government basis in recognition of the federal government's trust
responsibility to federally-recognized tribes and that the "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."
The EPA's American Indian Environmental Office (AIEO) leads agency-wide efforts to ensure
environmental protection in Indian country. Please see http://www.epa.gov/tribal/ for more
information.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Furthering the Agency's priority of strengthening Tribal partnerships, the EPA will continue to
work toward its goal of building Tribal capacity through a number of mechanisms in FY 2014.
Capacity Building: The EPA continues to encourage development of Tribal capacity to
implement federal environmental programs through technical assistance, including the use of
Direct Implementation Tribal Cooperative Agreement (DITCA) authority and "treatment in a
manner similar to a state" (TAS). In FY 2014, the Agency plans to continue its targeted
technical assistance and support in response to requests from Tribal governments to help them
build capacity to acquire TAS status for environmental programs. The EPA will examine ways
to improve capacity building performance measurement, recognizing that the numbers of TAS
applications are expected to slow.
Tribal EcoAmbassadors: In FY 2014, the Agency will continue to support environmental
research projects with Tribal Colleges and Universities that will expand capacity to address
issues of concern in Tribal communities. These Tribal EcoAmbassador projects have benefitted
the professors and students involved while demonstrating an ability to focus resources and
370
-------
leverage support within Tribal communities. This priority effort has enabled the EPA to address
community-based environmental issues that were otherwise not being addressed.
Indian Environmental General Assistance Program (GAP) Capacity Building Support:
GAP grants to Tribal governments help build the basic components of a Tribal environmental
program. In May 2013, the EPA will publish new "Guidance on the Award and Management of
General Assistance Agreements for Tribes and Intertribal Consortia." In FY 2014, the new
Guidance will be implemented to enhance the EPA-Tribal partnerships supported by the GAP
program by establishing a framework for joint strategic planning with the Agency, identification
of mutual responsibilities for environmental protection, and targeting resources to build Tribal
environmental program capacities. The Agency will work with tribes to develop the EPA-Tribal
Environmental Plans (ETEPs) that reflect intermediate and long-term goals for developing,
establishing, and implementing environmental protection programs, and will link these goals
with GAP work plans. The ETEPs help tribes and the EPA identify mutual roles and
responsibilities for addressing particular environmental priorities and issues, focusing on joint
planning and priority-setting, increasing flexibility to direct resources to the most pressing
environmental problems and measuring results. The EPA also will work to establish baseline
capacities for media-specific Tribal environmental protection programs, which will allow the
agency to better measure the Tribal capacity being built by tribes.
GAP Online: In a related effort, the EPA will continue to use GAP Online, an internet-based
database that helps tribes and the EPA develop, review, and archive GAP work plans and
progress reports. The EPA and tribes use the database to negotiate and track progress with
individual grantees, and as an easily accessible record to help mitigate the negative impacts from
relatively high rates of staff turnover in many Tribal environmental departments. In addition,
GAP Online is one of the key tools the EPA uses to evaluate overall program effectiveness by
describing specific activities rather than broad descriptions of overall program performance. In
FY 2014, the EPA will implement improvements to GAP Online to align with the new GAP
Guidance and allow for streamlined, efficient assessment of a tribe's progress under individual
assistance agreements. The EPA also will work to integrate GAP Online data with data contained
in other Agency systems to better assess environmental protection program capacity.
Tribal Program Management System: The Tribal Program Management System (TPMS)
tracks commitments and progress in Tribal environmental program data, which contribute to
achieving the performance targets under the EPA's FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan under Goal 3,
Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Stewardship Development, Objective 4, Strengthen
Public Health and Environmental Protection in Indian country, and other EPA metrics. The chart
below depicts the increasing number of Tribal Quality Assurance Project Plans (QAPPs) for
environmental monitoring and assessment activities. The EPA requires all organizations
conducting the EPA-funded environmental monitoring and assessment activities to have an EPA-
approved QAPP, which serves as a blueprint for how the organization will ensure environmental
data standards are met. Thus, QAPPs are one important indicator of tribes' capacity to administer
an environmental protection program.
371
-------
FY 2014 resources will be used to support the TPMS database and to leverage additional Tribal
environmental data throughout the agency while assessing how to better streamline database
maintenance costs and reduce data entry burden.
# of Environmental Monitoring Programs
1800
1993 1995 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Tribal Consultation: In May 2011, the EPA released its Policy for Consultation and
Coordination Policy with Indian Tribes, consistent with E.O. 13175. The final policy builds on
the EPA's 1984 Indian policy and reflects the Administration's commitment to strengthen Tribal
partnerships by establishing clear Agency standards for the consultation process, to promote
consistency and coordination. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to support a key feature of its
Consultation Policy, the Agency Tribal Consultation Opportunities Tracking System (TCOTS).
TCOTS is a publically accessible database used to communicate upcoming and current EPA
consultation opportunities for Tribal governments. The system provides a management, oversight
and reporting structure that helps ensure accountability and transparency on the EPA
consultations with Tribal governments.
National Tribal Operations Committee: Nineteen Tribal government leaders and the Agency's
Senior Leadership Team serve on the EPA's National Tribal Operations Committee (NTOC).
The Tribal leaders, known as the National Tribal Caucus (NTC), as a subset of the NTOC,
provide recommendations and feedback to the Agency on environmental issues of national
significance affecting tribes. In FY 2014, NTC members and the EPA staff will explore options
for developing inter-Agency agreements to allow tribes to interact with the EPA and other
federal agencies more effectively, thereby leveraging resources and reducing administrative
burden.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
372
-------
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$588.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$6.0) This reflects a reduction in travel to support the Administration's Management
Agenda goal of reducing travel and conference spending.
• (+$878.0 / +0.8 FTE) This increase supports Tribal capacity efforts through developing
and implementing individual environmental strategic plans between each tribe and the
EPA, programmatic support of grants to rural Alaskan communities, implementing
required IT data modifications to strengthen management on the over 500 annually
awarded GAP grants, and capturing improved indicators for assessing tribes' and the
EPA's progress on environmental program capacity development. The increased
resources include 0.8 FTE and associated payroll of $109.0.
Statutory Authority:
Annual Appropriation Acts; Indian Environmental General Assistance Program Act; PPA;
FIFRA; CAA; TSCA; NEPA; CWA; SDWA; RCRA; CERCLA; NAFTA; MPRSA; Indoor
Radon Abatement Act; OPA; and additional authorities.
Work within this Tribal Capacity Building Program supports the above authorities as well as
additional statutory authorities that influence environmental protection and affect human health
and environmental protection in Indian country.
373
-------
Program Area: International Programs
374
-------
US Mexico Border
Program Area: International Programs
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$4,283.0
$4,283.0
20.9
FY 2012
Actuals
$4,410.6
$4,410.6
20.7
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$4,305.0
$4,305.0
20.9
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$4,384.0
$4,384.0
18.4
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$101.0
$101.0
-2.5
Program Project Description:
The two thousand mile border between the United States and Mexico is one of the most complex
and dynamic regions in the world, where the benefits of the EPA's international programs are
perhaps most apparent. This region accounts for three of the ten poorest counties in the U.S.,
with an unemployment rate 250-300 percent higher than the rest of the United States.96 In
addition, over 430 thousand of the 14 million people in the region live in 1,200 colonias97 which
are unincorporated communities characterized by substandard housing and unsafe drinking
water. Still, the 1983 La Paz Agreement and the adoption of the Border 2012 program in 2003
have gone a long way to protect and improve the health and environmental conditions along a
border that extends from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific Ocean. In August 2012, the Border
2020 program was adopted.
Building on the successes of the Border 2012 program, the Border 2020 program lays out a
roadmap for continued environmental cooperation over the next eight years. The Border 2020
program, like its predecessor, emphasizes local priority-setting, focuses on measurable
environmental results, and encourages broad public participation. Border 2020 builds on the
2012 program work highlighting regional areas where environmental improvements are most
needed, establishing thematic goals supporting the implementation of projects, considering new
fundamental strategies, and encouraging the achievements of more ambitious environmental and
public health goals.
The Border 2020 program identifies five long-term strategic goals to address the serious
environmental and environmentally-related public health challenges including the impact of
transboundary transport of pollutants in the border region. The five goals are: reduce air
pollution; improve access to clean and safe water; promote materials management, waste
management, and clean sites; enhance joint preparedness for environmental response; and
enhance compliance assurance and environmental stewardship.
96 http://www.nmsu.edu/~bec/BEC/Readings/10.USMBHC-TheBorderAtAGlance.pdf
97 http://www.borderhealth.org/border region.php
375
-------
The EPA and the Mexican Environment Secretariat (SEMARNAT) will continue to closely
collaborate with the ten border states (four U.S. / six Mexican), twenty-six U.S. federally-
recognized Indian tribes, and local communities in prioritizing and implementing projects that
address their particular needs.
Note: The Border water and wastewater infrastructure programs are described in the State and
Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG) appropriation, Infrastructure Assistance: Mexico Border
Program.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
There are Border areas that do not yet meet health-based air quality standards, with negative
effects on public health, especially for particulate matter and/or ozone, including San
Diego/Tijuana, Imperial County/Mexicali, Ambos Nogales, and El Paso/Juarez and the lower
valley of the Rio Bravo. Sources of air emissions are diverse, but often include passenger
vehicles, buses, diesel trucks, manufacturing and electricity generation, dust from unpaved roads,
and agricultural practices, including open burning. The EPA will work with state and local
constituencies to develop community level strategies and responsibilities for reducing these
varying emissions.
In addition, the EPA and SEMARNAT will build on the successful air quality work conducted
thus far, which has resulted in a significant decrease in pollutants and improved public health. In
FY 2014, the EPA will continue to focus on air pollution reductions in binational airsheds, work
on reducing greenhouse gas emissions through energy efficiency and alternatives or renewable
energy project, and by 2018 plans to maintain effective air quality monitoring networks and
timely access to air quality data. Watersheds in the U.S.-Mexico border region are shared
bilaterally, with rivers flowing from one country to the other or forming the international
boundary (usually flowing north from Mexico into the U.S.). The border region faces significant
challenges associated with the shared watersheds that are exacerbated by high population growth
rates and potential impacts of climate change. Under the Border 2020's water goal, Mexico and
the U.S. expect to promote the increase in the number of homes connected to safe drinking water
and wastewater treatment; help drinking water and wastewater utilities implement sustainable
infrastructure practices to reduce operating costs, improve energy efficiency, use water
efficiently, and adapt to climate change; reduce surface water contamination in transboundary
waterbodies and watersheds; and provide the public with timely access to water quality data.
Each region of the northern border presents different economic, social and cultural situations,
bringing as a result the generation of waste and management of materials. Sustainable priority
waste goals can be achieved by creating or increasing institutional capabilities through technical
assistance, thus enabling the development of programs, projects or actions taking into account
the life cycle analysis and the support recycling markets for the materials contained in the waste
that would otherwise be lost in landfills. The EPA will lead smaller scale projects focused on
efforts at the community level based on Border 2020 to promote Materials and Waste
Management and Clean sites by developing the capacity to improve collection and recycling of
e-waste, plastics and trash, continue the work to reduce and prevent scrap tire piles, and develop
institutions' capacity to clean up border contaminated sites. The EPA will collaborate and partner
376
-------
on demonstration projects with sustainable priority waste streams to develop and improve the
collection of materials such as plastic bottles through public-private partnership programs and
infrastructure investments in the border region to avoid costly cleanup efforts. Additionally, the
two countries will work together to enhance joint preparedness for environmental response and
facilitate easier trans-boundary movement of equipment and personnel. Finally, Mexico and the
U.S. will work to improve information sharing between enforcement agencies on the movement
of hazardous waste across the border using the Toxics Release Inventory (in the U.S.) and the
Emissions and Contaminant Transfer Registry (RETC in Mexico.)
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$126.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$359.0 / -2.5 FTE) This reduction reflects slowing of the EPA's staffing of
programmatic bi-national outreach efforts on providing safe drinking water and reducing
the risk of exposure to hazardous waste. The reduced resources include 2.5 FTE and
associated payroll of $359.0.
• (-$1.0) This reflects a reduction in travel to support the Administration's Management
Agenda goal of reducing travel and conference spending.
• (+$335.0) This increase provides for smaller scale projects to improve the environment
and protect the health of the nearly 14 million people living along the U.S.-Mexico
border. The resources augment local bi-national outreach efforts towards addressing
environmental and human health issues by cleaning the air, strengthening watershed
protection efforts on streams entering the US, and ensuring emergency preparedness
along the U.S.-Mexico border. Projects are identified with input from the citizens and
implemented at the local level.
Statutory Authority:
In conjunction with NEPA section 102(2)(F)98: CAA 103(a), 42 U.S.C. 7403(a); CWA 104(a)(l)
and (2), 33 U.S.C. 1254(a)(l) and (2); SDWA 1442(a)(l), 42 U.S.C. 300j-l(a)(l); SWDA
8001(a)(l), 42 U.S.C. 6981(a)(l); FIFRA §17(d) and 20(a) , 7 U.S.C. §136o(d) and 136r(a);
TSCA§10(a) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. §2609(a) (in consultation
and cooperation with the Department of Health and Human Services and with other appropriate
departments and agencies); MPRSA 203(a)(l), 33 U.S.C. 1443(a)(l), 42 U.S.C. 4332; Annual
Appropriation Acts.
377
-------
International Sources of Pollution
Program Area: International Programs
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Ensure Chemical Safety
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$7,591.0
$7,591.0
44.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$7,646.0
$7,646.0
41.4
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$7,605.0
$7,605.0
44.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$8,543.0
$8,543.0
43.6
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$952.0
$952.0
-0.4
Program Project Description:
To achieve our domestic environmental objectives, it is important for the U.S. to work with
international partners to address international sources of pollution. It also is important for the
U.S. to work with international partners to address the impacts of pollution from the U.S. on
other countries and the global environment. Key countries such as Canada, Mexico, Brazil,
Russia, China, and vital regions including Asia, Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East, are
necessary partners in addressing these issues. The EPA has identified six priority areas for
international action: Build Strong Environmental and Legal Structures; Improve Access to Clean
Water; Improve Air Quality; Limit Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Forcing
Pollutants; Reduce Exposure to Toxic Chemicals; and Reduce Hazardous Waste and Improve
Waste Management.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to engage both bilaterally and through multilateral
institutions with the objective of improving international cooperation to address the
transboundary movement of pollution. Specifically, the EPA will address air pollution and air
quality with international partners that contribute significant pollution to the environment and
who are committed to improving their environmental performance. For example, China is
improving its clean air laws with advice and lessons learned from the United States.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue its work in the Partnership for Clean Fuels and Vehicles
(PCFV), a global partnership that has worked to reduce air pollution from the global fleet of on-
road vehicles. As the global car fleet is predicted to triple by 2050, with most of that increase in
the developing world," reducing harmful vehicle emissions is critical both because of human
health impacts and GHG emissions. The EPA also will continue its efforts to reduce
transboundary pollution from ships, which carry most goods in international trade and will see
traffic levels and emissions increase in the future - absent intervention - as global trade
increases.
1IEA 2008 Energy Technology Perspectives 2008—Scenarios and Strategies to 2050, International Energy Agency, Paris.
378
-------
In January 2013, a U.S. delegation, including representatives from the EPA, participated in
negotiations to adopt the legally-binding Minamata Convention on Mercury, which is directed at
reducing global mercury pollution.100 In 2014, the EPA expects to focus on ratification of the
Minamata Convention by less developed countries, and on continued technical and policy
support for global and regional efforts to address international sources of mercury use and
emissions.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to strengthen partnerships to address environmental problems
and build capacity in areas such as green growth technologies and environmental laws and legal
institutions. For example, the EPA will lead United States Government (USG) efforts in the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) to advance the new Green
Growth Strategy promoting green jobs and sustainable urban development worldwide and will
work with the Global Shale Gas Initiative and European Union to promote environmentally
sound approaches to shale gas development.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to strengthen our activities in the Arctic. Working with
Alaska, Tribes, federal agencies, and the private sector, the EPA is building international support
for U.S. environmental policy objectives through the Arctic Council on a range of topics
including short-lived climate forcers such as black carbon, tropospheric ozone, and methane.
Beyond the arctic region, the EPA will continue to work with the State Department, United
Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and other international partners as part of the
international Climate and Clean Air Coalition (CCAC). The goal of these efforts is to realize
immediate climate, health, and other benefits of reducing short-lived climate pollutants at
sufficient scale, locally and regionally.
Collaboration with global partners is needed to build upon awareness of water pollution issues
and to promote watershed and marine environmental protection. For FY 2014, the EPA will
continue to promote clean water and drinking water programs in Africa, Asia, and Latin
America, focusing on improving the quality of water sources and managing other environmental
risks.
In FY 2014, the EPA will strengthen implementation of global, regional, and national programs
to address electronic waste (e-waste) and promote sound reuse and recycling of discarded used
electronics. These efforts will help reduce risks from exposure to toxic substances contained in e-
waste such as lead, mercury, cadmium, and hexavalent chromium. These efforts support the
National Strategy for Electronics Stewardship report101 released in July 2011.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
100 http://www.epa.gov/international/toxics/mercurv/mnegotiations.html; http://www.state.gOV/e/oes/rls/pr/2013/203651.htm
101 http://www.epa.gov/osw/conserve/materials/ecycling/taskforce/docs/strategy.pdf
379
-------
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$383.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$569.0 / -0.4 FTE) This augments programmatic international environmental efforts to
strengthen capacity building efforts, promote green economies, especially in the area of
green technology, work with the United Nations and with other countries bilaterally to
address electronic waste management, and strengthen environmental laws and legal
institutions. This also strengthens the EPA's efforts to address and mitigate significant
sources of pollution, such as sources of hazardous waste, mercury, and black carbon, in
the Arctic affecting the U.S., indigenous populations, and other Arctic countries. The
resources include a reduction of 0.4 FTE and associated payroll reduction of $64.0.
Statutory Authority:
In conjunction with NEPA section 102(2)(F)102: CAA 103(a), 42 U.S.C. 7403(a); CWA
104(a)(l) and (2), 33 U.S.C. 1254(a)(l) and (2); SDWA 1442(a)(l), 42 U.S.C. 300j-l(a)(l);
SWDA 8001(a)(l), 42 U.S.C. 6981(a)(l); FIFRA §17(d) and 20(a) , 7 U.S.C. §136o(d) and
136r(a); TSCA§10(a) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. §2609(a) (in
consultation and cooperation with the Department of Health and Human Services and with other
appropriate departments and agencies); MPRSA 203(a)(l), 33 U.S.C. 1443(a)(l), 42 USC 43,
Annual Appropriation Acts.
102 Section 102(2 )(F) of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. §4332(2)(F), directs all Federal agencies,
where consistent with the foreign policy of the United States, to lend appropriate support to initiatives, resolutions, and programs
designed to maximize international cooperation in anticipating and preventing a decline in the quality of the world environment.
EPA construes the explicit authority to conduct education and training and to render technical assistance contained in the statutes
cited above, as supplemented by § 102(2 )(F) of NEPA, as implicitly supporting activities which will benefit foreign governments
and foreign, international, and domestic organizations in the international arena to protect the quality of the environment.
380
-------
Trade and Governance
Program Area: International Programs
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Ensure Chemical Safety
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$5,609.0
$5,609.0
16.1
FY 2012
Actuals
$6,257.2
$6,257.2
19.9
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$5,661.0
$5,661.0
16.1
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$6,284.0
$6,284.0
16.1
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$675.0
$675.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
The nexus between environmental protection and international trade has long been a priority for
the EPA and since the 1972 Trade Act mandated the U.S. Trade Representative to engage in
interagency consultations, the EPA has played a key role in trade policy development.
Specifically, the EPA is a member of the Trade Policy Staff Committee (TPSC) and the Trade
Policy Review Group (TPRG), which are interagency mechanisms that provide advice, guidance,
and clearance to the USTR in the development of U.S. international trade and investment policy.
It is now understood that trade influences the nature and scope of economic activity, and
therefore the levels of pollution emissions and natural resource use. As such, the EPA seeks to
mitigate the potential domestic and global environmental effects from trade, and to prevent any
potential conflicts with domestic environmental mandates. The EPA's work also helps to level
the playing field with our trade partners and create export opportunities for the United States.
U.S. trade with the world has grown rapidly from $48.6 billion in 1961 to $4.8 trillion in 2011,
as stated by the U.S. Census Bureau, Foreign Trade Division.103 This increase underscores the
importance of addressing the environmental consequences associated with trade.
The EPA is the lead U.S. agency for the implementation of the North American Agreement on
Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC). Beyond its primary objective to foster the protection and
improvement of the environment in the region, NAAEC's creation represented a commitment by
the U.S., Canada, and Mexico to integrate environmental protection considerations into their
trade negotiations. As the first environmental cooperation agreement under a trade agreement,
the NAAEC paved the way for many of the EPA's subsequent efforts under other Free Trade
Agreements and serves as a good example of the EPA's approach to trade related work. Beyond
NAFTA, the EPA plays an important role in several trade negotiating fora, including the World
Trade Organization (WTO) and regional and bilateral free trade agreements. The EPA also
participates in the development and delivery of U.S. positions in other trade and economic fora,
such as the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Asia Pacific
Economic Cooperation, and Bilateral Investment Treaties. To engage a variety of domestic
http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/historical/goods.pdf.
381
-------
stakeholders, the USTR and the EPA co-host the Trade and Environment Policy Advisory
Committee (TEPAC), a Congressionally-mandated advisory group that provides advice and
information in connection with the development, implementation, and administration of U.S.
trade policy.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
During FY 2014, the EPA will continue to play an important role as we move towards
conclusion of the negotiations of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP), which is
designed to promote trade throughout the Trans-Pacific region. The TPP will include specific
core obligations with respect to the environment. In addition, environmental issues have emerged
as important elements in other areas of the negotiations, including the provisions regarding
investment, services, market access, and regulatory coherence.
The EPA also will provide targeted capacity building support under the TPP, similar to
governance and capacity building under previously negotiated U.S. free trade agreements. With
negotiated agreements with South Korea, Panama, and Colombia, the EPA will provide
appropriate capacity building assistance, which may include strengthening legal and regulatory
frameworks to improve human health and the environment; and promote a green economy, and
related expansion of opportunities for U.S. business, especially in the area of green technologies.
The EPA also will continue to work with U.S. trading partners to help them meet their
obligations under trade agreements and to provide input to new bilateral or regional free trade
agreements, and other trade and investment agreements.
Together, the EPA's contributions help create and build international demand for environmental
technologies and export opportunities for U.S. manufacturers within the TPP region and
throughout the world. In FY 2013, the EPA launched its Export Promotion Strategy to contribute
to the President's National Export Initiative by incorporating the EPA analysis into export
promotion work in government and the private sector. Building on the momentum of that effort,
the EPA is working with environmental technologies stakeholders to broaden the technical areas
of focus for this effort, intensify domestic and international outreach, and improve the
functionality and presentation of the "Environmental Solutions Exporter Portal" web-based tool.
The Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) promotes environmental cooperation in
North America and addresses environmental issues from a regional perspective, with a particular
focus on those issues that arise in the context of deeper economic, social, and environmental
linkages. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to encourage the CEC to consider not just
environmental but also social and economic impact brought about by the integration of our North
American economies. The EPA also will work with CEC's Joint Public Advisory Group to
continue to raise the awareness among various stakeholder groups regarding the CEC and its
goals and objectives.
At the 2012 annual meeting of the CEC Council, the environment ministers of Canada, Mexico,
and the U.S. reasserted efforts to work together in areas such as electronic waste (e-Waste), short
lived climate pollutants and clean energy with a trilateral focus and to develop strategic projects
382
-------
focusing on Low-Carbon Economy and Greening the Economy in North America that will
produce significant results under the next operational plan.
The Rio+20 Conference (June 2012) provided support for several global efforts related to green
economy and strengthening good environmental governance. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue
to be engaged on several of the outcomes from Rio+20, in particular the implementation of the
ten-year framework of programs on sustainable consumption and production. The EPA also will
work on implementing actions under the Rio theme of environmental governance including work
to ensure that international environmental governance (i.e., the system of ensuring that global
commitments are met and global goals achieved) is managed in a more efficient and effective
manner in these resource constrained times.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$198.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$477.0) This increase augments international trade environmental efforts through
providing technical and policy capacity assistance under the FTAs (e.g., European Union,
South Korea, Colombia, and Panama). This leads to strengthening legal and regulatory
frameworks and promotes health, environment, and green economy.
Statutory Authority:
In conjunction with NEPA section 102(2)(F)104: CAA 103(a), 42 U.S.C. 7403(a); CWA
104(a)(l) and (2), 33 U.S.C. 1254(a)(l) and (2); SDWA 1442(a)(l), 42 U.S.C. 300j-l(a)(l);
SWDA 8001(a)(l), 42 U.S.C. 6981(a)(l); FIFRA §17(d) and 20(a) , 7 U.S.C. §136o(d)and
136r(a); TSCA§10(a) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. §2609(a) (in
consultation and cooperation with the Department of Health and Human Services and with other
appropriate departments and agencies); MPRSA 203(a)(l), 33 U.S.C. 1443(a)(l), 42 U.S.C.
4332; Annual Appropriation Acts; Executive Order 12915 (May 13, 1994) (implementation of
NAFTA environmental side agreement); Executive Order 13141 (Environmental Review of
Trade Agreements); Executive Order 13277 (Delegation of Certain Authorities and Assignment
of Certain Functions Under the Trade Act of 2002), as amended by E.G. 13346 (July 8, 2004).
104 Section 102(2)(F) of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. §4332(2 )(F), directs all Federal agencies,
where consistent with the foreign policy of the United States, to lend appropriate support to initiatives, resolutions, and programs
designed to maximize international cooperation in anticipating and preventing a decline in the quality of the world environment.
EPA construes the explicit authority to conduct education and training and to render technical assistance contained in the statutes
cited above, as supplemented by §102(2)(F) of NEPA, as implicitly supporting activities which will benefit foreign governments
and foreign, international, and domestic organizations in the international arena to protect the quality of the environment.
383
-------
Program Area: IT / Data Management / Security
384
-------
Information Security
Program Area: IT / Data Management / Security
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$6,786.0
$728.0
$7,514.0
15.2
FY 2012
Actuals
$8,551.9
$462.2
$9,014.1
14.5
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$6,858.0
$732.0
$7,590.0
15.2
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$6,939.0
$728.0
$7,667.0
15.3
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$153.0
$0.0
$153.0
0.1
Program Project Description:
Information is a strategic resource to the EPA. It allows each program office to fulfill its mission
in support of the protection of human health and the environment. The agency's Information
Security program is designed to protect the confidentiality, availability and integrity of the
EPA's information assets. The protection strategy for the Environmental Program and
Management(EPM) program includes, but is not limited to, policy, procedure and practice
management; information security awareness, training and education; risk-based governance and
oversight; weakness remediation; operational security management; incident response and
handling; and Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) compliance and
reporting.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Effective information security requires vigilance and adaptation to new challenges every day.
Agency security practitioners respond to increasingly creative and sophisticated attempts to
breach protections. In FY 2014, the EPA's integrated efforts will allow the agency's Information
Security Program to take a more proactive role in dealing with these threats.
The EPA will continue to protect, defend and sustain its information assets by improving its
Information Security program. The agency will continue to focus on training and awareness,
asset definition and management, compliance, incident management, knowledge and information
management, risk management and technology management. Secondary activities in FY 2014
include, but are not limited to, access management, measurement and analysis, and service
continuity. These efforts will strengthen the agency's ability to ensure operational resiliency. The
final result is an information security program that can rely on effective and efficient processes
and documented plans when threatened by disruptive events.
385
-------
Concurrently, the EPA will continue its performance-based information security activities with a
particular emphasis on risk management, incident management and information security
architecture. These three areas are critical to the agency's Information Security program. They
are also key components of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) information security
initiatives, including requirements for (1) Trusted Internet Connection (TIC); (2) Domain Name
Service Security (DNSSec); and (3) United States Government Configuration Baseline
(USGCB). Controls implementing these initiatives, which will be operational throughout FY
2014, are rapidly enhancing the agency's security requirements for information policy,
technology standards and practices.
The EPA will support and expand continuous monitoring to detect and remediate Advanced
Persistent Threats to the agency's Information Technology (IT) networks. The EPA will enhance
our internal Computer Security Incident Response Capability (CSIRC) to ensure the rapid
identification, alerting and reporting of suspicious activity. CSIRC's primary function is to detect
unauthorized attempts to access, destroy, or alter EPA data and information resources. The
incident response capability includes components such as tool integration, detection and analysis;
forensics; and containment and eradication activities. To help ensure tools, techniques, and
practices are current, CSIRC monitors new trends in information security and threat activity.
Additionally, the EPA will continue implementing Homeland Security Presidential Directive
12(HSPD-12) requirements for logical access as identified in the Federal Information Processing
Standards (FIPS) 201, Personal Identity Verification (PIV) of Federal Employees and
Contractors.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no specific
performance measures for this program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$225.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$16.0 / +0.1 FTE) This change reflects an increase of 0.1 FTE and associated payroll of
$16.0 to better support the agency's Information Security activities.
• (-$112.0) This change reflects a reduction found from IT efficiencies and consolidation in
IT contracts that support the Information Security program.
• (+$24.0) This increase in contractual support will assist in activities such as the support
and monitoring of potential threats to the agency's IT networks.
386
-------
Statutory Authority:
Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA), 44 United States Code 3541 et seq. -
Sections 301, 302, 303, 304, 305, 401 and 402 and Government Performance and Results Act
(GPRA), 39 U.S.C. 2803 et seq. - Sections 1115, 1116, 1117, 1118 and 1119 and Government
Management Reform Act (GMRA), 31 U.S.C. 501 et seq. - Sections 101, 201, 301, 401, 402,
403, 404 and 405 and Clinger-Cohen Act (CCA), 40 U.S.C. 1401 et seq. - Sections 5001, 5201,
5301, 5401, 5502, 5601 and 5701 and Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. -
Sections 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112 and 113 and Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552 et seq. and Electronic Freedom of Information Act (EFOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552
et seq. - Sections 552(a)(2), 552 (a)(3), 552 (a)(4) and 552(a)(6).
387
-------
IT / Data Management
Program Area: IT / Data Management / Security
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Science & Technology
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$87,939.0
$3,652.0
$15,339.0
$106,930.0
485.7
FY 2012
Actuals
$86,196.5
$3,250.7
$14,843.5
$104,290.7
490.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$88,632.0
$3,669.0
$15,391.0
$107,692.0
485.7
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$86,599.0
$4,029.0
$13,865.0
$104,493.0
487.8
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($1,340.0)
$377.0
($1,474.0)
($2,437.0)
2.1
Program Project Description:
The work performed under the Information Technology/Data Management program
encompasses more than 30 distinct activities in the following major functional areas: information
access; Geospatial information and analysis; Envirofacts; IT/Information Management policy
and planning; electronic records and content management; One EPA Web (formerly Internet
Operations and Maintenance Enhancements,); information reliability and privacy; and IT/EVI
infrastructure. IT/DM program activities support the Administration's goals of transparency,
participation, engagement and collaboration to expand the conversation on environmentalism.
IT/DM also supports the expansion of the agency's IT services that enable citizens, regulated
facilities, states and other entities to interact with the EPA electronically to get the information
they need, to understand what it means, and to submit and share environmental data with the
least cost and burden. The program also provides essential technology to agency staff, enabling
them to conduct their work effectively and efficiently.
IT/DM supports agency priorities by providing critical IT infrastructure and data management
needed for: 1) rapid, secure and efficient communication; 2) exchange and storage of data,
analysis and computation; 3) access to scientific, regulatory and best practice information needed
by agency staff, the regulated community and the public; and 4) analytical support for
interpreting and understanding environmental information. The program is integral to the
implementation of agencywide systems such as the Exchange Network and the Integrated
Compliance Information System; it also provides IT training, library resources, application
development support and statistical consulting. IT/DM also administers agencywide programs
such as compliance with Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act, privacy, security and records
management.
388
-------
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA's IT/DM functions have continuously and progressively integrated new and
transformative approaches to the way IT is managed across the agency. Already completed or
well underway in FY 2014 are initiatives to redesign geospatial analysis for greater effectiveness
and efficiency; to replace an inadequate paper-based records management system with electronic
discovery and auto-categorization services; to implement cloud-based email and collaboration
tools; and to redesign the provision of print services to incorporate significant efficiencies. Taken
together, these activities represent significant components of the agency's work to transform its
digital services within base resources.
In FY 2014, the EPA will implement the E-Enterprise initiative, which is designed to improve
how EPA interacts and exchanges regulatory information with the states, tribes, and regulated
facilities, with the goal of improving the quality of environmental data and reducing the burden
of reporting data to EPA. With the funds requested for this program, EPA will work with the
Environmental Council of States to develop a single portal where states, tribes, and regulated
facilities ("customers") would register to conduct business with EPA similar to on-line banking.
The system would "push" tailored information out to customers based on their unique regulatory
requirements. It will create a single EPA infrastructure that enables specific programs and state
systems to allow businesses to routinely conduct electronic environmental business transactions
with regulators. Facilities could go on-line to apply for permits, check compliance, report their
emissions, and learn about new regulations that could apply to them.
The IT/DM program in FY 2014 will help implement E-Enterprise by helping to develop one
field collection, evidence management, and reporting system for conducting all programmatic
compliance monitoring inspections. This project is intended to improve the quality, consistency,
and efficiency of EPA inspections in support of the agency's overall enforcement and
compliance monitoring mission. The system will support and manage all aspects of the
compliance monitoring program from initial targeting and planning to development and
documentation of the final inspection report and accompanying evidence, and will feature
integration of the data systems supporting each program. By integrating field collection,
evidence management, data management and integrity, training, and reporting tools, the agency
will gain a national consistency that strengthens the agency's inspection capabilities.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue coordinated efforts with the Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations program and the IT/DM program to reconfigure the agency's workspace. This effort
addresses a series of critical technological needs for the workforce to function effectively and
efficiently. The agency will take advantage of available technology, resulting in reductions to the
office space requirements of the agency and a more efficient and collaborative workplace. This
effort will enable the agency to reconfigure existing space and reduce the agency's overall
footprint while supporting the government-wide Telework Enhancement Act of 2010 and
providing options for a mobile work space.
One EPA Workplace - the EPA's intranet site that provides EPA personnel with easy access to
the most widely used online agency resources - and the ability to log on to the site remotely are
key components of the EPA's strategy for facilitating telework across the agency. In FY 2014,
389
-------
building upon the agency's move to a new email and collaboration tools suite, the EPA will
continue the enhanced use of technical solutions to improve employees' productivity regardless
of their geographical location and provide employees with the resources they need to telework
effectively.
The IT/DM program will focus on developing discovery tools and data publishing infrastructure
for facilitating access to EPA data assets, including an automated capability to access and query
data from programmatic databases. This work also will promote interactions with the developer
community and encourage public participation. The EPA will continue to seek opportunities to
leverage the creativity of the public to address environmental or human health problems.
Additional tools are being developed for more specific use with programmatic datasets, such as
air, water and enforcement. Work also will include the conversion of existing data into a number
of different data formats, such as open geospatial standards, to enhance data integration and
collaboration. Final products will be available in the form of Web services and syndicated feeds
to a variety of users inside and outside the EPA, including publishing the data through the
Exchange Network.
IT/DM also will support the EPA's One EPA Web initiatives. One EPA Web focuses Web
resources on priority topics and provides a common look-and-feel for EPA's online information
resources. This effort will allow the EPA to invest Web resources based on agency priorities,
improve search capabilities, create a unified Web governance structure and professionalize the
Web workforce.
In FY 2014, the program will continue to work with the National Advisory Council for
Environmental Policy and Technology and the Environmental Council of the States on ways to
effectively communicate environmental information to diverse and underserved communities.
For example, the program will continue its work to increase the availability of plain-language
information and tools on air toxics for at-risk communities, including information on
environmental health issues affecting schools and children; and maintain the EPA's technology
infrastructure to provide the capacity needed to support use of information technologies in
outreach programs.
In FY 2014, the following IT/DM activities will continue to be provided using Environmental
Program and Management resources:
• Information Access and Analysis - FY 2014 activities will continue making
environmental information accessible and understandable to all users. Activities include
maintaining the agency's libraries, digitizing library resources, and developing and
maintaining applications/tools to support program-specific collaboration activities.
In FY 2014, the agency will continue expanding One EPA Workplace, which includes
agencywide collaboration tools, to provide employees with uniform access to enterprise
Web-based tools, applications and resources both in the office and remotely. As part of
the One EPA Workplace effort, the EPA will continue enhancing the intranet to improve
its usability and functionality; expand single sign-on capabilities; improve intranet search
capabilities; ensure employees can securely access the EPA's network information; and
390
-------
provide access to social collaboration, enterprise networking, Web conferencing and
expertise locators.
Emphasis will continue in FY 2014 on the EPA's support for transparency and open
government, which includes streamlined contributions to Data.gov. Key activities will
ensure increased access to critical data (e.g., regulated facilities, toxic releases) through
Data.gov and the Environmental Data Gateway, Data.gov communities, and EPA's
GeoPlatform, providing opportunities for collaboration and intergovernmental
partnerships, reducing duplication of data investments and offering the public easy access
to important federal services for businesses. (In FY 2014, the Information Access
activities will be funded at $0.20 million in payroll funding and $1.79 million in non-
payroll funding.)
Geospatial Information and Analysis105 - In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to expand
its role in providing support for place-based data for analysis of environmental conditions
and trends across the country. Geospatial information and analysis play a critical role in
the agency's ability to respond rapidly and effectively in times of emergency, in addition
to meeting everyday program and region-specific business needs. By implementing
geospatial data, applications and services through a holistic enterprise solution, the
agency saves time and money, assures compatibility and reduces the need for multiple
subscriptions to software, data and analytical services. Throughout FY 2014, the agency
will continue to consolidate geospatial tools to expand the capabilities of the EPA
GeoPlatform, our shared technology enterprise for geospatial information and analysis.
The agency provides a core set of central/enterprise, reusable geospatial IT services
encompassing data, analytics, infrastructure, hosting and development via the EPA
GeoPlatform and associated enterprise licenses for software and data. Numerous
geospatial and non-geospatial data and applications are integrated and linked into the
GeoPlatform to increase the power of place-based analytics at the agency. In FY 2014,
the Geospatial program will support several tools, including the EPA Environmental
Analyst, EJ Screen, TRI visualization tools and a growing number of map views
generated by EPA staff to support their work collaboratively. The GeoPlatform also will
be used to provision interactive mapping content across the EPA's public website in a
consistent and cost-effective manner. Non-GeoPlatform tools, such as Enviromapper106
and MyEnvironment will evolve to rely on GeoPlatform data and geoprocessing services.
These tools collectively provide basic GIS capabilities to non-GIS experts across the EPA
and the GeoPlatform provides a vehicle for agency GIS experts to publish their data and
analysis for non-GIS experts.
Additionally, EPA continues to play a leadership role in both the Federal Geographic
Data Committee and the National Geospatial Platform. In FY 2014, EPA staff will
continue to work with their partners from other agencies to define shared services for
geospatial technology that will drive more effective and cost-efficient capabilities across
105 For more information on the Geospatial program, please visit: http://www.epa.gov/geospatial/.
106 For more information on Enviromapper, please visit: http://www.epa.gov/emefdata/em4ef.home.
391
-------
government. (In FY 2014, the Geospatial Program activities will be funded at $2.24
million in payroll funding and $2.73 million in non-payroll funding.)
Envirofacts107 - In FY 2014, this area will continue to support a single point of access to
EPA databases containing information about environmental activities that may affect air,
water and land anywhere in the United States. It will house data that has been collected
from regulated entities and the states, and makes those data accessible to environmental
professionals, the regulated community, citizen groups and state and EPA employees
through an easy-to-use, one-stop access point. It will support approximately 3-4 million
hits per month, Envirofacts will ensure access to critical data (e.g., regulated facilities,
toxic releases) and will enhance partnerships with other data providers and software
developers to increase the availability of environmental information. (In FY 2014,
Envirofacts activities will be funded at $0.21 million in payroll funding and $0.80 million
in non-payroll funding.)
IT/IM Policy and Planning - This category supports the EPA's Enterprise Architecture
and the Capital Planning and Investment Control108 process to assist the agency in
making better-informed decisions on IT/IM investments and resource allocations. In FY
2014, the EPA will continue to review information systems and databases for redundancy,
streamline and systematize the planning and budgeting for all IT/IM activities, and
monitor the progress and performance of all IT/IM activities and systems. Specifically,
the EPA will continue to conduct structured portfolio reviews for all major IT
investments following the Federal TechStat investment review model to control costs and
identify efficiencies. The agency does not currently have any high-risk IT projects. (In FY
2014, the IT/IM Policy and Planning activities will be funded at $7.19 million in payroll
funding and $2.57 million in non-payroll funding.)
Electronic Records, Content Management and Digital Government - This category
uses innovative analysis tools to support the EPA's transition to electronic records
management. It includes the expansion of enterprise-wide electronic discovery services
(eDiscovery) to support more efficient collection and analysis of information needed for
litigation, Freedom of Information Act and congressional requests.
In FY 2014, activities in this area will include the establishment and maintenance of
processes that convert appropriate paper documents into electronic documents and
convert paper-based processes into systems that manage electronic documents. These
activities will reduce costs, improve accessibility and support litigation efforts. A single
copy of an electronic document can be accessed simultaneously by numerous individuals
and from virtually any location. Previously fragmented data storage approaches will be
converted into a single, standard platform that is accessible to everyone, reducing data
and document search time while improving security and information retention efforts.
The agency's transition to a new email and collaboration tools suite includes the redesign
of the agency's Electronic Content Management solution, an enterprise-wide multimedia
107 For more information on Envirofacts, please visit: http://www.epa.gov/enviro.
108 For more information on the Capital Planning and Investment Control Process, please visit: http://www.epa.gov/OEI/cpic/.
392
-------
solution designed to manage and organize records and documents for EPA headquarters,
Regional offices, field offices and laboratories to provide greater records access to all
programs and regions across the agency. In FY 2014, the results of Regional and
headquarters pilots in paper-to-electronic conversion will be used to inform our focus on
a long-term solution for reducing the agency's paper footprint. This solution will enable
more efficient and coordinated records management regardless of format.
FY 2014 activities also will see greater access to a standard set of tools to support and
improve electronic discovery processes across the agency. An agencywide electronic
discovery service will be expanded to support increased program and Regional demand
for additional services, including accelerating information retrieval, de-duplication, and
review for litigation, Freedom of Information Act and Congressional requests.
In FY 2014 the EPA will deploy innovative analysis tools to support the auto-
categorization of electronic information and records and to assist in the interpretation of
and ability to discern patterns in large volumes of information to improve agency
business operations (e.g., enforcement targeting, human health and environmental risk
analysis, ambient monitoring, etc.). While the potential efficiencies and cost savings have
yet to be calculated, widespread evidence points to dramatic improvements in operational
efficiency and novel understanding of data which previously went undetected. (In FY
2014, the Electronic Records, Content Management and Digitization activities will be
funded at $0.35 million in payroll funding and $1.34 million in non-payroll funding.)
• One EPA Web [formerly Internet Operations and Maintenance Enhancements (IOME)] -
The EPA maintains over 200 top-level pages that facilitate access to the varied
information resources available on the EPA website for the public, our partners,
stakeholders and agency staff. The EPA is continuing to consolidate the infrastructure
associated with the Internet and the Web CMS investment under the One EPA Web
umbrella. In 2014, the EPA will support One EPA Web and the EPA's website and Web
Content Management System, while continuing modernization of the EPA's existing Web
infrastructure to contemporary technology. (In FY 2014, the One EPA Web IT/EVI
activities will be funded at $1.69 million in non-payroll funding and $0.45 million in non-
payroll funding.)
• Information Reliability and Privacy - In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to protect
information in a manner that is consistent with its privacy needs and to validate data
sources as authoritative to ensure data collected by the agency are reliable. These efforts
apply to environmental information, including data that are submitted by and shared
among the states, tribes and territories, as well as other types of information, such as
business information that is reported by various industry communities, and personal
information for all EPA employees. (In FY 2014, the Information Reliability and Privacy
activities will be funded at $0.31 million in payroll funding and $0.79 million in non-
payroll funding.)
• IT/IM Infrastructure - This area supports the foundation from which all EPA
employees—those supporting information technology infrastructure, administrative and
393
-------
environmental programs—conduct agency business. More specifically, these activities
include the provision of desktop computing equipment, network connectivity, e-mail,
application hosting, remote access, telephone services and maintenance, Web and
network servers, and IT-related maintenance. The investment supports a distributed EPA
workforce at over 100 locations, including EPA Headquarters, all ten Regional offices
and the various labs and ancillary offices. The Internet age has required the adoption of an
anywhere/anytime model and, through successive strategic information technology
investments; the agency has ensured that the EPA's IT infrastructure is able to meet
burgeoning IT demands.
The agency continues to consolidate data centers and incorporate industry best
management practices and virtualization across its data centers. The agency has
completed a phased virtualization program across the National Computer Center—the
EPA's primary data center—including optimizing the efficient use of floor space and
turning off air handlers. Currently, the EPA is hosting more than 200 individual agency
business applications in an innovative shared hosting environment offering with many of
the features of private cloud services. Over the next two years, the EPA will consolidate
small data centers and computer rooms in various locations across the country in an effort
to gain more efficiencies. Virtualization efforts will be expanded in FY 2014, with efforts
focused on application and desktop virtualization.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to build on a multi-year effort that sustains and
renews technical services (e.g., desktop hardware, software and maintenance) in a stable,
least-cost manner as technologies change. The EPA also will expand and support the
agency's cloud computing initiative. The agency is committed to using cloud computing
technologies and will take advantage of those technologies where feasible. The agency
has in place an enterprise-wide cloud hosting service. (In FY 2014, the IT/EVI
Infrastructure activities will be funded at $16.00 million in payroll funding and $16.21
million in non-payroll funding.)
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no specific
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$2,766.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$567.0 / -3.8 FTE) This change is a realignment of resources, including 3.8 FTE,
$547.0 in associated payroll, and $20.0 in associated travel and workforce support from
the IT/Data Management program to the Toxics Release Inventory Program to better
reflect where the work is being done.
394
-------
• (-$1,149.0 / -1.0 FTE) This change realigns resources from the IT/Data Management
program to the Exchange Network program to support the Environmental Dataset
Gateway service and the Facilities Registry Service database. This shift includes 1.0 FTE
and associated payroll of $154.0, as well as $995.0 in contractual resources.
• (+$274.0 / +1.9 FTE) This change reflects current FTE utilization rates while taking into
consideration new initiatives in FY 2014. This includes 1.9 FTE and associated payroll of
$274.0.
• (+$3,000.0) As part of the "One EPA Workplace" effort, this redirection supports
investments in information technology for digitizing records and videoconferencing
capabilities to allow EPA to expand telework and consolidate physical space. This
redirection also includes funds to engage in small-scale pilots and evaluations of
collaboration tools and software applications. These redirected resources will facilitate
the continued consolidation of space and reduction in the agency's footprint.
• (+$2,165.0) As part of the agency's E-Enterprise investment, this change reflects an
investment in IT application development and infrastructure build-out to support the
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance's "National Enforcement and
Inspection System (NEIS)." NEIS will provide EPA regional and state inspectors with
the capability to receive, analyze and report information from the field, improving
compliance and significantly reducing time and resources to conduct inspections. This
investment will enable the agency to securely exchange enforcement sensitive data
nationwide using mobile devices. An initial pilot involves the exchange of Resource
Conservation Recovery Act information within EPA's Region 4. Following the pilot,
NEIS will be deployed on a wider scale to support additional states and environmental
compliance programs.
• (-$1,960.0) This change reflects a reduction in management support and IT contracts as
part of efforts to reduce contract spending and to streamline and consolidate activities.
• (-$1,403.0) This reduction reflects a disinvestment in the agency's Portal application,
which has reached its end of life. The One EPA Workplace effort will provide the same
services to the agency more efficiently.
• (-$550.0) This change reflects a reduction in Identity Access Management and Enterprise
Architecture and planning. These cuts will reduce the agency's ability to add applications
to the existing web access management infrastructure and will extend the timeframes for
completion of enterprise wide IT planning efforts.
• (-$2,308.0) This change reflects a reduction found from IT efficiencies and consolidation
in IT contracts that provide basic infrastructure and support for EPA personnel within the
EPM appropriation.
395
-------
• (-$1,608.0) This change reflects a reduction in funding for Internet Operations and
Maintenance Enhancements due to efficiencies gained in the agency's utilization of One
EPA Web.
• (+5.0 FTE) This change reflects an increase in reimbursable FTE that provides
eDiscovery service agencywide. This service will provide more efficient collection and
analysis of information needed for litigation, Freedom of Information Action and
congressional requests.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 42 U.S.C. 553 et seq. and Government Information
Security Act (GISRA), 40 U.S.C. 1401 et seq. - Sections 3531, 3532, 3533, 3534, 3535 and
3536 and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA),
42 U.S.C. 9606 et seq. - Sections 101-128, 301-312 and 401-405 and Clean Air Act (CAA)
Amendments, 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. - Sections 102, 103, 104 and 108 and Clean Water Act
(CWA), 33 U.S.C. 1314 et seq. - Sections 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 107, and 109 and Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2611 et seq. - Sections 201, 301 and 401 and Federal
Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. 36 et seq. - Sections 136a - 136y
and Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA), 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq. - Sections 102, 210, 301 and 501
and Safe Drinking Water Act (SOWA) Amendments, 42 U.S.C. 300 et seq. - Sections 1400,
1401, 1411, 1421, 1431, 1441, 1454 and 1461 and Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346 et seq. and Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
(EPCRA), 42 U.S.C. 11001 et seq. - Sections 322, 324, 325 and 328 and Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA), 42 U.S.C. 6962 et seq. - Sections 1001, 2001, 3001 and 3005 and
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA), 39 U.S.C. 2803 et seq. - Sections 1115,
1116, 1117, 1118 and 1119 and Government Management Reform Act (GMRA), 31 U.S.C. 501
et seq. - Sections 101, 201, 301, 401, 402, 403, 404 and 405 and Clinger-Cohen Act (CCA), 40
U.S.C. 1401 et seq. - Sections 5001, 5201, 5301, 5401, 5502, 5601 and 5701and Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. - Sections 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111,
112 and 113 and Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552 et seq. and Controlled
Substances Act (CSA), 21 U.S.C. 802 et seq. - Sections 801, 811, 821, 841, 871, 955 and 961
and Electronic Freedom of Information Act (EFOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552 et seq. - Sections 552(a)(2),
552 (a)(3), 552 (a)(4) and 552(a)(6).
396
-------
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
397
-------
Administrative Law
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$5,198.0
$5,198.0
33.3
FY 2012
Actuals
$5,207.7
$5,207.7
32.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$5,205.0
$5,205.0
33.3
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$5,397.0
$5,397.0
33.4
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$199.0
$199.0
0.1
Program Project Description:
This program supports the EPA's Administrative Law Judges (ALJ) and the Environmental
Appeals Board (EAB or the Board). The ALJ preside in hearings and issue initial decisions in
cases initiated by the EPA's enforcement program concerning environmental violations. The
EAB issues final decisions in environmental adjudications (primarily enforcement and permit-
related), that are on appeal to the Board. The EAB also serves as the final approving body for
proposed settlements of enforcement actions initiated by the agency. ALJ issue orders and
decisions under the authority of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and the various
environmental statutes that establish administrative enforcement authority. The EAB issues
decisions under the authority delegated by the Administrator. The decisions reflect findings of
fact and conclusions of law.
By adjudicating disputed matters, the ALJ and the EAB further the agency's mission to protect
human health and the environment. The ALJ provides legal process and review for hearings and
issue initial decisions in cases brought by the agency's enforcement program against those
accused of violations under various environmental statutes. The right of affected persons to
appeal those decisions is conferred by various statutes, regulations and constitutional due process
rights. The EAB adjudicates administrative appeals in a thorough, fair and timely manner. In
approximately ninety percent of cases decided by the Board, no further appeal is taken to federal
court, providing a final resolution to the dispute. The EAB and ALJ also offer parties an
opportunity for alternative dispute resolution.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the ALJ will convene formal hearings in the location of the alleged violator or
violation, as required by statute. In FY 2014, ALJ will evaluate the electronic filing system
implemented in FY 2013 to determine the extent of reductions in: mailing delays for all parties,
398
-------
mailing costs for alleged violators, and requests for paper documents from the ALJ. Upon
request and/or availability of funds, ALJ also will offer public training events on administrative
hearing procedures for EPA employees and the regulated community, as well as work with EAB
to support judicial environmental training efforts.
In FY 2014, the Board will implement its new streamlined procedures under 40 CFR, Section
124.19 for processing permit appeals under all statutes, including appeals in Clean Air Act New
Source Review cases. In addition, the EAB will work to streamline resolution of appeals through
its Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) program. In FY 2014, the Board expects to receive
several ADR negotiation requests. The Board also will implement its updated electronic filing
system in order to make the system more user-friendly and allow users to file pleadings and
retrieve electronic filings more quickly. Finally, resources will be provided to maintain the
EPA's hearing room.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple goals and strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$258.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$15.0 / +0.1 FTE) This reflects an increase in resources to improve OALJ's ability to
meet its obligations that are conferred by various statues, regulations, and constitutional
due process. The resources include $15.0 associated payroll for 0.1 FTE.
• (-$34.0) This reduces resources for maintaining the EPA's central hearing room and in
costs associated with operating the ALJ/EAB court programs.
• (-$40.0) This reflects a reduction in IT efficiencies and consolidation in IT contracts that
provide basic infrastructure and workforce support brought about by the advent of e-
filing systems.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA); Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); Clean Water Act; Clean Air Act; Toxic
Substance Control Act (TSCA); Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); Safe
Drinking Water Act (SDWA); Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
(EPCRA); Administrative Procedure Act (APA); as provided in Appropriations Act funding.
399
-------
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,282.0
$844.0
$2,126.0
7.2
FY 2012
Actuals
$1,476.9
$828.6
$2,305.5
6.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$1,286.0
$847.0
$2,133.0
7.2
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$1,492.0
$792.0
$2,284.0
7.3
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$210.0
($52.0)
$158.0
0.1
Program Project Description:
The Agency's General Counsel and Regional Counsel Offices provide environmental Alternative
Dispute Resolution (ADR) services. The EPA utilizes ADR as a method for preventing or
resolving conflicts prior to engaging in formal litigation and includes the provision of legal
counsel, facilitation, mediation and consensus building. The intent is to offer cost-effective
processes to resolve disputes and improve Agency decision making.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the Agency will continue to provide conflict prevention and ADR services to the
EPA headquarters and regional offices and external stakeholders on environmental matters. The
national ADR program assists in 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. As in previous years, the agency expects to support at least 60 non-
Superfund cases with neutral third party support in areas including: tribal consultation,
Environmental Justice, community engagement and collaborative dialogues.
Additionally, these resources will enable the agency to make efforts to provide ADR and
collaboration advice and conflict coaching to 150 non-Superfund cases where headquarters and
regional offices are working with stakeholders to improve environmental results. The agency
expects to provide at least 20 training events, reaching at least 500 EPA employees to continue to
build the agency's capacity to resolve environmental issues in the most efficient way and to
achieve the agency's strategic objectives. Under the EPA's ADR policy and the OMB/CEQ
400
-------
memorandum on Environmental Conflict Resolution109, 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 actions, civil judicial enforcement
actions, permit issuance, protests of contract awards, administration of contracts and grants,
stakeholder involvement, negotiations, and litigation.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports all five of the agency's strategic goals. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$36.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$20.0 / +0.1 FTE) This change reflects the current FTE utilization rate for ADR
services.
• (-$7.0) This reflects a reduction in travel to support the Administration's Management
Agenda goal of reducing travel and conference spending.
• (+$149.0) This increase provides resources enabling the agency to continue offering cost-
effective processes to resolve disputes and improve agency decision-making. Resources
will provide non-Superfund cases with neutral third party support and enable the delivery
of ADR training.
• (+$12.0) This increase provides resources to cover basic and mandatory IT and
telecommunications resources for the on-board workforce. Examples of support areas
include desktop services, telephone and Local Area Network (LAN). These resources are
needed to enable employees to carry out their day-to-day operations supporting the
agency's mis si on.
Statutory Authority:
Administrative Dispute Resolution Act (ADRA) of 1996, 5 United States Code (U.S.C.) Sections
571, 572, and 573, Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1996, 5 U.S.C. Sections 563, 565, 566, and
568; EPA's General Authorizing Statutes.
109 See http://www.ecr.gov/pdf/OMB_CEO_Joint_Statement.pdf. An updated OMB/CEQ memorandum on environmental
conflict resolution is currently under final Agency review.
401
-------
Civil Rights / Title VI Compliance
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$11,618.0
$11,618.0
69.1
FY 2012
Actuals
$11,639.9
$11,639.9
70.7
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$11,657.0
$11,657.0
69.1
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$14,339.0
$14,339.0
74.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$2,721.0
$2,721.0
5.4
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Office of Civil Rights (OCR) provides policy direction and guidance on equal
employment opportunity, civil rights, affirmative employment, diversity, and reasonable
accommodations for the agency's program offices, Regional Offices and laboratories. This
program includes:
• Intake, processing and adjudication of Title VI complaints of discrimination from the public
about the EPA's financial assistance recipients and civil rights compliance reviews;
• Intake, processing, and adjudication of Title VII complaints of discrimination from agency
employees and applicants for employment;
• Implementation of processes and programs in support of reasonable accommodation; and
• Provide Reasonable Accommodations for Disability training and request processing.
Program functions also include accountability for implementation, program evaluation and
compliance monitoring of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Titles VI and VII), statutory
requirements, and executive orders covering civil rights and affirmative employment. OCR also
interprets policies and regulations and ensures compliance with Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC) directives and equal employment initiatives.
402
-------
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, OCR will continue implementing recommendations noted in Developing a Model
Civil Rights Program at EPA (Executive Committee Report)110 Issued in April 2012, this report
provides a blueprint for implementing a model civil rights program at EPA, including approaches
for improving Title VI case management as described below. The additional resources requested
will enable OCR to strengthen the Title VI and Title VII programs and support the multiple goals
and strategic objectives identified in the Executive Committee Report.
Title VI
• Continue use of the Title VI Case Management Protocol - As noted in the Executive
Committee Report, this protocol establishes a consensus process across the EPA for
dedicating adequate analytical resources and technical support to Title VI investigations.
OCR will lead the process, working with regions and programs across the agency to develop
and implement a case management plan, participate in informal resolution efforts, conduct
investigations, and issue final agency decisions. Successful implementation will include: 1)
staff development and training, 2) project management and facilitation, 3) developing an
internal communications strategy, 4) updating/maintenance of the Title VI tracking system,
i.e., the External Case Tracking System (EXCATS), and 5) technical support and analysis
identified in the case management plans that are developed.
• Strengthen Title VI compliance and prevention through monitoring and oversight
mechanisms (e.g. integrate with the grants process and develop a Title VI post-award
compliance program).
In FY 2014, the agency will continue its compliance efforts by:
• Effectively processing Title VI complaints. The EPA currently has 23 open Title VI
complaints that are either in process or backlogged. The EPA will reduce the number of
these 23 open Title VI complaints by 50 percent by the end of FY 2014.
• Identifying the EPA's financial assistance recipients that have frequent occurrences of Title
VI complaints. This effort will help OCR ensure the effective utilization of compliance
review resources, aid OCR in ensuring recipients' compliance with federal civil rights laws
and regulations, and provide the public greater assurance of recipients' equitable
implementation of environmental policies in a non-discriminatory fashion.
• Promoting the increased use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) for Title VI
complaints and recipients. In FY 2014, OCR will increase extramural funding used for
mediating Title VI cases to cover approximately 20 percent of the existing case load.
1 Please refer to: http://www.epa.gov/epahome/pdf/executive committee final report.pdf for further information.
403
-------
Title VII
In FY 2014, the agency will:
• Promote the use of ADR to resolve Title VII complaints at the informal stages of the EEO
complaint process. OCR anticipates that using ADR in this way will help reduce costs
associated with adjudicating formal complaints. With regard to formal complaints, OCR
currently has 35 backlogged cases pending investigation and anticipates reducing that
backlog by 50 percent in FY 2014.
• Monitor and evaluate the implementation of the EPA's policy and procedures on
harassment/discrimination in the workplace by examining the number and bases of
complaints filed in the agency in order to reduce future EEO harassment related complaints.
OCR will work to reduce the number of complaints relative to FY 2012 when there were 30
harassment claim cases.
• Update the on-line mandatory annual training for the No FEAR Act to address employee
feedback received during the 2012 cycle.
• Process and track accommodation requests and ensure that Reasonable Accommodation
decisions are made within EEOC timeframes. Monitor the agency's compliance with the
statutes, EEOC regulations and the agency policies and procedures related to reasonable
accommodation of qualified applicants and employees with disabilities. Continue to provide
Reasonable Accommodations training for managers and supervisors.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple goals and strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$832.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$1,474.0 / +5.4 FTE) This funding will support the agency's effort to institutionalize
capacity to address new critical needs in the Office of Civil Rights. The increase will
support the agency's Title VI and Title VII programs' effort to meet statutory
requirements for the timely processing of cases; reduce the number of Title VI
complaints; raise the awareness of Title VI requirements to recipients of EPA's funds;
and improve the management of Title VII EEO complaints. These resources include
$778.0 of associated payroll and 5.4 FTE.
• (+$418.0) This increases extramural resources that support the agency's Title VI and
Title VII programs efforts to meet statutory requirements for the timely processing of
cases; reduce the number of Title VI complaints; raise the awareness of Title VI
404
-------
requirements to recipients of EPA's funds and improve the management of Title VII
complaints. Contractual support will be sought for developing a pre- and post-award
compliance program and increasing the use of ADR to reduce complaints adjudicated by
the agency, among other activities.
• (-$3.0) To support the Administrator's Management Agenda goal of reducing travel and
conference spending.
Statutory Authority:
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended (42 U.S.C. §2000d to 2000d-7); 40 C.F.R.
Part 7; Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; Section 13 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act Amendments of 1972; Title IX of the Education Act amendments of 1972; Age
Discrimination Act of 1975; Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended (42 U.S.C.
§2000e et seq.); Equal Pay Act of 1963 (29 U.S.C. §206(d)); Section 501 of the Rehabilitation
Act of 1973; Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. §12101); ADA Amendments
Act of 2008, Older Workers Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA) as amended; Age Discrimination
in Employment Act (ADEA) of 1967, as amended (29 U.S.C. § 621-634); Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (EEOC) Management Directive 715).
405
-------
Legal Advice: Environmental Program
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$42,606.0
$682.0
$43,288.0
249.5
FY 2012
Actuals
$43,393.6
$722.3
$44,115.9
244.4
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$42,651.0
$680.0
$43,331.0
249.5
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$44,590.0
$708.0
$45,298.0
250.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,984.0
$26.0
$2,010.0
0.5
Program Project Description:
This program provides legal representational services, legal counseling and legal support for all
the agency environmental activities.111 The legal support provided by this program is essential to
the agency's core mission and goes to every aspect of the agency's Strategic Plan. It provides
legal counsel on issues arising under all the EPA's environmental statutes including, but not
limited to: the Clean Air Act (CAA), the Clean Water Act (CWA), the Safe Drinking Water Act
(SOWA), the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the Pollution Prevention Act, the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act, the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), the Marine
Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA), the Oil Pollution Act (OPA), and the Administrative Procedures Act (APA).
When the agency acts to protect the public from dangerous chemicals in the air we breathe, in the
water we drink, or in the food we eat, this program provides counsel on the agency's authority to
take that action, and provides the advice and support necessary to the regulatory process. When
that action is then challenged in court, this program defends it. This program plays a central role
in all statutory and regulatory interpretation and all guidance development under the EPA's
environmental authorities. This program provides essential legal advice for every petition
response, every judicial response and every emergency response. It provides counsel on every
major action the agency takes.
Resources for legal services to support agency operations are included in the Legal Advice: Support program.
406
-------
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, OGC will continue to provide full legal support for all the EPA programs, in
response to agency needs, to advance the Administrator's priorities, and in support of the
Strategic Plan Goals. In FY 2014, OGC expects the agency to need legal support in its efforts to
reduce environmental and human health risks.
The following chart provides concrete examples of the types of support that OGC provided to the
119
agency in FY 2012 and how that support lines up with the EPA's Strategic Plan Goals. OGC
expects to provide similar support in FY 2014, which includes analyzing defensibility of agency
actions, drafting significant portions of final agency actions, and actively participating in
litigation. These examples illustrate OGC's important role in implementing the agency's core
priorities and mission to protect public health and the environment.
Goal
Specific EPA OGC Support
Goal 1 -
Climate
Change and
Air Quality
1. Successfully defended litigation challenging the 2010 revisions to the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for both SOx and NOx,
which will improve public health protections, especially for children, the
elderly, and people with asthma.
2. Provided legal counsel to the Office of Air and Radiation and all ten
regions to ensure national consistency and to address complex issues raised
by 88 proposed and final regulatory actions to improve visibility in
National Parks and other Class I areas.
3. Successfully defended litigation challenging the EPA's decision to allow
the use of gasoline with 15 percent ethanol, which will contribute to
improving the nation's energy security and help meet the renewable fuel
goals established by Congress.
4. Developed the EPA's first suite of greenhouse gas (GHG) regulations, and
successfully defended those regulations in the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the DC Circuit.
5. Provided legal counsel on the final joint EPA/DOT regulations limiting
GHG emissions from and improving fuel efficiency of model year 2017-25
passenger vehicles.
6. Provided legal counsel on significant and complex legal issues essential to
the development of the first-ever proposed federal rule to regulate
greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, the single largest stationary
112 The Plan identifies five strategic goals to guide the Agency's work:
• Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
• Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters
• Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
• Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
• Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws
407
-------
Goal 2 -
Improving
Water Quality
Goal 3-
Cleaning up
Communities
and
Sustainable
Development
Goal 4 -
Safety of
Chemicals and
Prevention of
Pollution
source of such pollution.
7. Provided legal advice and support on the development of the Mercury and
Air Toxics Standards, as well as legal counsel in support of reconsidering
and rectifying certain issues.
1. Provided advice and support for the United States' amicus briefs to the
Supreme Court in three matters, PPL Montana v. State of Montana, Decker
v. NEDC, and LA Flood Control District v. NRDC.
2. Provided legal support for the agency's development of a restoration plan
for the Florida Everglades.
3. Supported development of two rulemakings establishing precedent-setting
nutrient criteria in Florida and successful defense of the agency's rule for
inland waters.
4. Provided support and coordination on actions related to hydraulic
fracturing, including issuance of draft guidance under the Safe Drinking
Water Act.
5. Provided drafting and counsel in support of the final effluent limitations
guidelines and standards for Airport pavement deicing.
1. Advanced the initiative on Environmental Justice by providing key support
for the EPA's Plan EJ 2014.
2. Provided legal support to the agency's Tribal Consultation Policy.
3. Provided legal advice and support for the development of the proposed rule
to amend the Underground Storage Tank regulations.
4. Provided legal counseling in the development of the final rule to establish a
conditional exemption from RCRA hazardous waste regulation for
geologically sequestered carbon dioxide.
5. Provided legal counseling in the development of revisions to the Non-
hazardous Secondary Materials rule.
1. Successfully defended an amendment to the TSCA Lead Renovation,
Repair, and Painting Rule, designed to protect children from lead
poisoning.
2. Provided support for the successful development and implementation of the
TSCA Chemical Data Rule (CDR), the most comprehensive source of
exposure-related information on chemicals.
3. Provided legal counsel and extensive support for the initiation of a
cancellation action against certain rodenticide registrations because of
unnecessary risks to children, pets, and wildlife.
4. Successfully defended a challenge to the use of time-limited pesticide
registrations, which allow for early marketing and use during additional
data development, while providing an option for quick removal of the
pesticide if the data are not developed or reveal an unexpected risk
concern.
408
-------
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports all five of the agency's strategic goals. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$2,069.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$95.0 / +0.5 FTE) This change reflects current resource utilization in providing legal
and day-to-day office operations support. These resources will enable the agency to
perform research to defend the agency's rulemakings and other actions, as well as
provide legal support essential to ensuring that the EPA meets judicial deadlines. This
increase includes $85.0 in associated payroll and $10.0 in costs supporting these FTE.
• (-$180.0) This change reflects a reduction in IT efficiencies and consolidation in IT
contracts and general expenses that provide basic infrastructure and workforce support
for this program.
Statutory Authority:
Toxic Substances Control Act, 15 United States Code (U.S.C.) 2601 et seq.; Pollution Prevention
Act, 42 U.S.C. 13101 et seq.; Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, 7 U.S.C. 136
et seq.; Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C. 346a; Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Act, 42 U.S.C. 11023; Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 33
U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.; Marine Protection,
Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, 33 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.; Solid Waste Disposal Act as
Amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), 42 U.S.C. §6901 et seq.,
Sections 2002, 3001 - 3023, 4001 - 4010, 6001 - 6004, 7003 - 7006, 8001 - 8007, and 9001 -
9010; Clean Water Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C. § 1321, Section 311; Oil Pollution Act (OPA), 33
U.S.C. § 2701 - 2762, Sections 1001 - 7002; Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-
Know Act (EPCRA), 42 U.S.C. § 11001 et seq., Sections 302-304, 311-313, and 325, 326;
Mercury Export Ban Act (MEBA), Public Law No. 110-414; EPA's General Authorizing
Statutes.
409
-------
Legal Advice: Support Program
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$14,539.0
$14,539.0
85.6
FY 2012
Actuals
$15,535.4
$15,535.4
84.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$14,550.0
$14,550.0
85.6
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$16,413.0
$16,413.0
86.3
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,874.0
$1,874.0
0.7
Program Project Description:
This program provides legal representational services, legal counseling and legal support for all
activities necessary for the EPA's operations.113 It provides legal counsel on issues including, but
not limited to: Ethics, Employment Law, Intellectual Property Law, Information Law,
Appropriations, Real Property, Grants, Contracts, Claims, and all aspects of Civil Rights law.
For example, if an EPA program office needs to know how to respond to a Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) request, whether it may spend money on a certain activity, how to create
a trademark for a voluntary program (e.g., Energy Star), or what to do when a plaintiff files a tort
claim against the Agency, this program is the source of answers, options, and advice. This
program supports the EPA in maintaining high ethical standards and in complying with all laws
and policies that govern Agency operations.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, OGC will continue to provide legal support for all of the EPA's programs in support
of the Agency's mission and Strategic Plan Goals.114 In FY 2014, increased legal support will be
provided to implement Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental
113 Resources for legal services to support Environmental Programs are included in the Legal Advice: Environmental program.
114 The Plan identifies five strategic goals to guide the Agency's work:
• Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
• Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters
• Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
• Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
• Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws
410
-------
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, as well as for the ongoing effort
to strengthen the EPA's program under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, including support for the
evaluation of potential long-term institutional changes to the Agency's Title VI complaint
process.
Funding within this program goes to support the staff necessary to address these legal needs,
including salaries, legal research tools, basic computer and telephone needs, and other minor
overhead costs. The following chart provides concrete examples of the types of support that this
OGC program provided to the Agency during FY 2012 and how that support lines up with the
EPA's Strategic Plan Goals. OGC expects to provide similar support in FY 2014, which includes
analyzing defensibility of agency actions, drafting significant portions of final Agency actions,
and actively participating in litigation. These examples illustrate OGC's important role in
implementing the Agency's core priorities and mission.
Goal
Specific EPA OGC Activity
All Goals
1. OGC has provided essential support for procurement and implementation
of the EPA's next generation of technology tools, which will allow the
EPA's offices to work together more efficiently and effectively, and to
more quickly and accurately gather and produce large collections of
documents.
2. OGC favorably resolved employment law cases, which provided both
financial and morale benefits to the Agency. Several EEO cases against
the Agency were dismissed upon summary judgment.
3. Provided essential direction, analysis, and drafting assistance in the
development and filing of the EPA's Annual EEO Program Status
Report.
4. Assisted in the EPA's investigation of complaints of discrimination by
assistance recipients under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, including
advanced settlement negotiations.
5. Assisted in a re-write of the EPA Acquisition Handbook to provide more
thorough and effective legal review of procurements actions.
6. Coordinated with the Department of Justice, FEMA and OSHA to
concurrently adjudicate administrative tort claims arising out of the
World Trade Center disaster.
7. Assisted the Office of Grants and Debarment (OGD) in completing a
revision to its audit resolution manual.
8. Assisted OGD in developing a Grants Policy to address the identification
of nonprofit organizations' membership fees as program income across
Agency grant programs.
9. Provided legal guidance and drafting assistance for multiple initiatives to
create a more robust Title VI program, including strategic plans, briefing
documents, regulations and policy development.
10. Provided legal guidance and drafting assistance that allowed the EPA to
file its Diversity and Inclusion Plan with the Office of Personnel
Management in a timely manner.
411
-------
11. Provided training to stakeholders on Title VI and VII of the Civil Rights
Act.
12. Effectively managed national ethics program to ensure that all the EPA's
employees comply with the Standards of Ethical Conduct, the criminal
conflict of interest statutes, the Hatch Act and the STOCK Act.
13. Fulfilled annual requirements to:
• Review financial disclosure reports and oversee the collection system
and process,
• Accept gifts from non-federal sources under the Ethics Reform Act of
1989 and the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act,
• Provide advice on the Hatch Act, and
• Implement the STOCK Act.
Transparency
1. OGC has steadily improved processing of Freedom of Information Act
appeals, with median response time down to 31.5 days in FY 2012 from
183.5 in FY 2008.
2. Provided guidance and direction to support collection, review, and
production of documents in response to a group of related FOIA requests.
These requests were the first to utilize the new E-Discovery tools and
totaled over 200,000 responsive documents.
Goals 1-4
OGC developed guidance for the EPA regarding how to address
intellectual property law issues in "Challenge Contests" used to spur
research and development.
OGC attorneys visited the EPA's labs to promote the patenting of the
EPA's inventions, thereby enabling the transfer of this technology to the
world.
OGC attorneys fended off a potential trademark infringement claim that
could have forced the cancellation of the American Innovation for
Sustainability Forum.
Goal 3 -
Cleaning up
Communities
and Sustainable
Development
Provided comprehensive analysis and advice about the Agency's special
account authority under CERCLA 122(b)(3).
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports all five of the Agency's strategic goals. Currently, there are
no performance measures for this specific Program Project.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,238.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
412
-------
• (+$123.0 / +0.7 FTE) This increase reflects anticipated legal support to implement
Executive Order 12898 and to comply with the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This increase
will enable the EPA to provide resources to additional staff including IT and
telecommunications support and other general office expenses. This includes 0.7 FTE
and associated payroll of $123.0.
• (+$513.0) This increase provides resources to fund basic and mandatory IT and
telecommunications costs, as well as general expenses supporting the onboard workforce.
These resources are needed to enable employees to carry out their day-to-day operations
supporting the Agency's mission. The increase also provides funds for the EPA's Lexis
and Westlaw contracts. These contracts provide vital research tools needed by attorneys
agencywide when offering sound legal counsel and advice to the EPA's leadership.
Statutory Authority:
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 United States Code (U.S.C.) §§ 2000d - 2000d-7;
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 2 U.S.C. § 794; Section 13 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, 33 U.S.C. §1251; Title IX of the Education
Amendments of 1972, 20 U.S.C. §§ 1681 - 1688; The Age Discrimination Act of 1975, 42
U.S.C. §§6101-6107; Section311 of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; Oil Pollution
Act of 1990, 33 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.; EPA's General Authorizing Statutes.
413
-------
Regional Science and Technology
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$2,591.0
$2,591.0
2.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$2,796.8
$2,796.8
1.9
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$2,628.0
$2,628.0
2.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$2,970.0
$2,970.0
2.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$379.0
$379.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Regional Science and Technology (RS&T) organizations' activities assist all of the agency's
national programs. This includes but is not limited to programs implementing the agency's
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, Toxic Substances Control Act, Clean Water Act, Safe
Drinking Water Act, Clean Air Act, and Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Liability Act programs. The RS&Ts support the agency's strategic goals by
performing laboratory analysis, field monitoring, and sampling investigations to provide
scientific data on environmental pollutants and conditions to agency decision makers. The
RS&Ts also assist State environmental agencies by providing specialized technical assistance
and by building Tribal capacity for environmental monitoring and assessment. The funding in
this program supports the acquisition and maintenance of scientific equipment and
instrumentation for the Regional laboratories, field investigations and mobile laboratory units.
The RS&T organizations provide essential expertise and scientific data for a wide array of
environmental media, including ambient air; surface, drinking and ground water; soil and
sediment; solid and hazardous waste; and biological tissue. They provide expertise in areas such
as environmental biology, microbiology, chemistry, field sampling, enforcement and criminal
investigations, and quality assurance. The organizations' applied science expertise is often used
to develop, modify, and improve analytical methods for specialized science, such as emerging
chemicals of concern, and to provide scientific consultation to agency, State, and Tribal partners.
This differs from the agency's research operations by focusing on the more immediate scientific
information needed to make short term decisions and actions, rather than short or long-term
research to guide the agency's long range regulatory process.
Funding for scientific equipment is essential to the RS&Ts' state of the art operations. The
RS&T organizations respond to emergencies and emerging environmental issues, and are always
seeking to improve efficiencies in analysis, field investigations, and data collection. Newer,
414
-------
advanced instrumentation has improved environmental data collection and laboratory analytical
capacity and capability. New and improved technology strengthens science-based decision
making for regulatory efforts, environmental assessment of contaminants, and development of
critical and timely environmental data in response to accidents and natural disasters.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, RS&T resources will continue to support regional implementation of the agency's
statutory mandates through laboratory and field operations for environmental sampling and
monitoring. In FY 2014, resources will provide direct laboratory and monitoring support at the
local level and improve timely decision-making in regional program management and
implementation. This will enable the agency to address environmental issues specific to
particular geographic areas (e.g. energy extraction, mining, wood treating operations, oil
refining, specialty manufacturing, etc.).
In FY 2014, the Regional laboratories will continue to coordinate within the Regional Laboratory
Network (RLN) to provide needed scientific services. The Regional laboratories have the
capability to analyze a full suite of contaminants using an array of established methods. Some
regional laboratories have analytical expertise unique to particular regions and when requested,
can quickly modify established methods to address specific/unique needs. Regional laboratories
provide increased levels of service and meet national programs' analytical needs by coordinating
efforts and optimizing network expertise and assistance.
In FY 2014, resources will provide more efficient analytical support for identifying and assessing
risks associated with pesticides and other high risk chemicals as well as supporting agencywide
science priorities. The agency requests resources to perform analytical work and support
equipment purchases, upgrades and maintenance. The need for equipment technology upgrades
is driven by agency core science mission activities that require better sensitivity, lower detection
limits, and increased numbers of samples requiring faster analysis. Almost all scientific
instrumentation is computer controlled/interfaced. As computer technology improves, instrument
efficiencies and sensitivity also improve. Advances in technology leading to lower detection
levels are essential as the agency's regulations to protect human health and the environment
require scientific data at lower levels. Some examples of the necessary equipment include:
sample concentrators; autosamplers; mass spectrometry systems; direct mercury analyzers;
inductively coupled plasma (metals) analyzers; air toxics sampling equipment; and various soil
and water analyzers. These resources for the regional laboratories will:
• Enhance agencywide enforcement efforts and allow regional laboratories to perform
forensic analysis on a wide variety of samples collected as part of criminal investigations
and enforcement actions. These analyses require cutting edge, high quality, defensible
laboratory data.
• Support agencywide science priorities by enabling regional laboratories to explore the
impacts of emerging contaminants (e.g. pharmaceuticals) and support methods
development and applied science.
415
-------
• Allow the laboratories to provide scientific data at the lower levels necessary to inform
agency decisions.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple goals and strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$82.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$297.0) This increase reflects the general expenses and contract resources necessary
for the Regional laboratories to provide the levels of service that meet national programs'
analytical needs. This funding will enhance the regional laboratories abilities to perform
analytical work and support equipment purchases, upgrades and maintenance.
Statutory Authorities:
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; Toxic Substances Control Act; Clean Water Act; Safe
Drinking Water Act; Clean Air Act; Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation
and Liability Act, Pollution Prevention Act; Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act.
416
-------
Integrated Environmental Strategies
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$14,754.0
$14,754.0
53.8
FY 2012
Actuals
$14,619.7
$14,619.7
67.5
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$14,874.0
$14,874.0
53.8
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$16,258.0
$16,258.0
52.2
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,504.0
$1,504.0
-1.6
Program Project Description
The Integrated Environmental Strategies program supports key agency work in smart growth and
sustainable design and in strategic environmental management to foster increased integration,
coordination, and streamlining across headquarters and regional offices. The Smart Growth and
sustainable design program helps community and government leaders meet environmental
standards through sustainable community and building development, design, policies, and
infrastructure investment strategies. Through the Partnership for Sustainable Communities, the
EPA works with the U.S. Department of Transportation and the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development to improve public transportation and access to affordable housing. These
efforts enable the agency to meet its core mission goals of protecting human health and the
environment by providing key tools and resources to help build stronger, more economically and
environmentally resilient communities.
The strategic environmental management program furthers the agency's mission by fostering
harmonization among the EPA's offices and adoption of more effective management policies
and practices. Because the EPA is composed of distinct program offices designed to address
individual statutes (e.g., air, water, waste), the strategic environmental management program
helps to ensure that the agency works across program offices to identify more coordinated,
effective environmental protection strategies, as well as making available the tools and expertise
to evaluate and improve agency programs.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan
Program activities planned for FY 2014 include:
Promoting Smart Growth and Sustainable Design
Since 1996, the EPA's smart growth and sustainable design work has helped community and
government leaders improve the environmental outcomes of their development decisions. The
EPA accomplishes this by:
417
-------
• Providing technical assistance to states, regions, and local and Tribal governments.
• Conducting research and developing tools that help communities see the connection
between development and the environment, the economy, and public health.
• Engaging, leveraging and aligning community-based activities and investments with
other federal agencies.
In FY 2014, the Smart Growth program will be funded at $8.5 million under the Integrated
Environmental Strategies program and $1.9 million under the Brownfields program.
Providing technical assistance. The EPA provides direct technical assistance to state and local
governments to help them develop in ways that protect the environment while helping them grow
their economies and create jobs. Since 2005, the EPA has received more than 1,330 technical
assistance applications and has assisted more than 280 communities. EPA has reorganized its
assistance programs to meet growing demand. In FY 2012, the EPA was able to deliver
assistance to 146 communities. This work is the cornerstone of the EPA's smart growth approach
to development-related environmental challenges in communities.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to scale up its technical assistance to reach a greater number
of communities by leveraging other organizations to deliver tools previously developed by the
EPA. By packaging the tools for delivery by other organizations, the EPA can effectively
multiply the reach of its tools and ensure that hundreds of additional Tribal, regional, and local
governments receive assistance. Also in FY 2014, the EPA will expand efforts to deliver targeted
assistance to communities recovering from natural disasters and pursuing climate change
adaptation planning through the EPA's ongoing collaboration with FEMA.
• Conducting research and developing tools. The EPA's research on emerging trends
serves as the foundation for developing tools that will be useful to communities and all
levels of government. In FY 2014, the EPA will develop tools to help local governments
evaluate the environmental impacts of different development scenarios. For example, the
EPA will develop an evaluation tool to make initial assessments of human exposure to
emissions from nearby high traffic streets. This could be used for both existing and
proposed development.
• In addition, the EPA will refine and expand sustainable community development training
modules to expand use of the EPA's tools and resources and build capacity of staff at
state, regional, local, and tribal governments as well as the EPA and other federal
agencies. In particular, the EPA will work to support USDA's Stronger Economies
Together (SET) state-based program, by delivering customized training to SET staff for
use in helping USDA counterparts better understand the environmental benefits
associated with rural smart growth approaches.
Engaging federal partners. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to partner with other federal
agencies to align investments, grant criteria, and planning requirements to better support
community smart growth and sustainable design efforts. The cornerstone of this work is the
Partnership for Sustainable Communities, formed in June 2009 by the EPA, the U.S. Department
of Transportation (DOT), and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
418
-------
The Partnership helps protect the environment by providing communities with more options for
public transportation and better access to sustainable, affordable housing. In FY 2014, EPA and
the Partnership will help support a broader Administration commitment to help communities
improve their resilience through direct technical assistance, provision of useful data and tools,
and support for planning.
Since it was formed in 2009, this Partnership has received more than 7,700 applications for
assistance and has funded approximately 740 projects in communities in all 50 states plus the
District of Columbia and Puerto Rico with approximately $3.51 billion. The EPA's specific work
under this Partnership has included a variety of smart growth technical assistance programs,
brownfields planning assistance, and guidance on water infrastructure investments. Across these
projects the three agencies provide input to each other during both the solicitation and selection
process; work collaboratively on the ground with communities; and share information on
outcomes. Each of the EPA's ten regional offices have joined with HUD and DOT (and
sometimes other federal agencies) to form local partnerships to work together on sustainable
communities' projects and issues. In these ways, the EPA improves coordination and ensures
efficient use of federal funds. This work also makes the EPA's resources, and those from other
federal agencies, easier for communities to access and understand.
The EPA will continue work with other federal agencies whose decisions, rules, investments and
policies influence where and how development occurs, including working with the Government
Services Administration (GSA) on federal facility siting by helping to develop a tool to evaluate
building lease opportunities based on the level of transit access and proximity to walkable
destinations. The EPA will also continue to partner with Appalachian Regional Commission to
deliver focused resources and assistance to small towns and rural communities seeking to adopt
sustainable community development and design approaches.
Strategic Environmental Management
The strategic environmental management program provides the agency with the capacity to
identify and address issues that cut across media program offices and/or across regional offices.
Because many environmental issues are not limited to one media or location, and regulated
entities often have multiple facilities in more than one location that may be subject to
requirements addressing more than one media, this program allows the agency to address
overarching management and policy issues across programs and regions to maximize agency
efficiency and effectiveness for the benefit of the public and regulated entities. In FY 2014, work
in the Strategic Environmental Management program will include program analysis,
coordination among programs and regions, decision-making support to senior agency leadership,
program evaluation to improve design and outcomes, and analysis and management of emerging
cross-cutting environmental policy issues.
In FY 2014, the strategic environmental management program will continue to perform program
analysis through consideration of measurement information and other data to inform senior level
decision-making on management and other issues. Coordination among programs and regions
will be facilitated by organizing and staffing standing and temporary committees to address
cross-cutting issues identified by senior leadership and staff knowledgeable about developments
419
-------
across the agency. Decision-making support will continue to be provided through a series of
regularly scheduled meetings of agency leadership to examine how relevant organizations,
program activities, regulations, policies, and practices are meeting agency responsibilities and
priorities. In conjunction with these activities, work in this program will include business process
improvement techniques (e.g., Lean Government) and other strategic management tools to
improve the effectiveness and efficiency of agency programs and operations.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to increase its capacity to conduct and apply the results of
program evaluation. In response to the May 2012, Memorandum from then OMB Director,
Jeffrey Zients, calling for the "Use of Evidence and Evaluation in the 2014 Budget"
(http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/memoranda/2012/m-12-14.pdf), the agency
is improving its ability to ensure that evaluation and evidence-bearing activities focus on critical
areas of program implementation and policy decision-making by applying in-house performance
management tools (e.g., logic modeling, strategy mapping, performance measurement), as well
as building capacity for evidence-based grant-making, use of evidence in enforcement, data-
mining, and comparative studies. In FY 2014, the EPA will invest evaluation resources to build
agency capacity to learn from state approaches in enforcement and compliance. The EPA will
examine the enforcement and compliance approaches used in evidence-based grants, and
evaluate how these approaches inform and support an evidence-based framework for the agency,
and promote adoption of the most effective practices. The EPA will employ rigorous evaluation
methods (using independent, objective third-party evaluators as appropriate); ensure
transparency of evaluation studies; and ensure that data are made available to external evaluators.
The EPA is committed to using multimedia tools to disseminate evaluation findings publicly and
to deliver performance management training to agency staff and grantees.
The agency will be conducting greater analysis and management of emerging, cross-cutting
policy issues, with a focus on priority issues that will advance environmental protection,
economic competitiveness, and fiscal growth. In FY 2014, the EPA will build on the efforts of
individual programs and Regional Offices by looking more broadly at the potential impacts and
opportunities to improve environmental outcomes at potentially lower cost. In particular, the
EPA will strengthen its system for developing regulatory actions by more systematically
considering cross-media (air, water, land) and other impacts and identifying more efficient,
integrated approaches that yield better results for communities and regulated entities. The EPA
also will focus on improving the consistency, utility, and availability of collected environmental
data to facilitate use by the agency, other government agencies, businesses, and the public in
tracking environmental performance and outcomes. The EPA will continue to provide analytical
and operational support to achieve a more coordinated approach to cross-cutting activities (e.g.,
permitting, project reviews) to avoid duplicative efforts among program offices. The agency will
finalize the efforts began in FY 2013 to discontinue the Greener Economy program and refocus
resources on emerging and cross-cutting policy issues.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple goals and strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
420
-------
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,405.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$4.0) To support the Administration's Management Agenda goal of reducing travel and
conference spending.
• (+$253.0) This increase in extramural resources reflects EPA's intent to focus additional
resources on its LEAN business process improvement efforts to realize important, cost,
time and/or efficiency savings. Ultimately, the dedication of resources to streamlining
approaches is intended to increase the focus of EPA's limited resources on mission
critical activities.
• (-$899.0) This change reflects a reduction in IT efficiencies and consolidation in IT
contracts that provide basic infrastructure and workforce support for the IES program.
• (+$1,000.0) This increase is an investment in evaluation resources to build the Agency's
capacity to develop an evidence-based framework for the Agency, disseminate lessons
learned, and promote adoption of the most effective practices. Specifically, the EPA will
examine the enforcement and compliance approaches used in evidence-based grants to
states, and evaluate how these approaches inform and support program operations and
direction.
• (-$2,262.0 / -1.6 FTE) This decrease represents the final disinvestment in the Green
Economy program. Resources have been transitioned to the Analysis and Management of
Emerging, Cross-Cutting Policy Issues program in order to focus on priority issues that
will advance environmental protection, economic competitiveness, and fiscal growth. The
reduced resources include $251.0 in payroll and associated 1.6 FTE.
• (+$2,011.0) This increase represents an internal transfer of funding from the Green
Economy program to the Analysis and Management of Emerging, Cross-Cutting Policy
Issues program. The agency will be conducting greater analysis and management of
emerging, cross-cutting policy issues, with a focus on priority issues that will advance
environmental protection, economic competitiveness, and fiscal growth.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act (CWA), Section 104(b)(3); Clean Air Act (CAA), Section 104(b)(3).
421
-------
Regulatory/Economic-Management and Analysis
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$15,256.0
$15,256.0
100.4
FY 2012
Actuals
$16,056.6
$16,056.6
89.8
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$15,292.0
$15,292.0
100.4
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$23,258.0
$23,258.0
100.3
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$8,002.0
$8,002.0
-0.1
Program Project Description:
The Regulatory/Economic, Management and Analysis program resources are used to ensure that
agency regulations comply with statutory and Executive Order (E.O.) requirements, such as the
Congressional Review Act, and the Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. The program is responsible for the routine
review of agency regulations and also coordinates the agency's periodic review of its existing
regulations in order to identify ways to modify or address overly burdensome regulations. As
part of these responsibilities, resources are used to assess and consider impacts of the EPA's
regulations on businesses (particularly small businesses), government entities, and the economy
more broadly.
Transparency, outreach and consultation are also priorities with one of the program's goals to
make information on the EPA's upcoming regulatory activities available to the public, states,
other agencies and Congress as soon as possible through a variety of mechanisms including the
EPA website, the Federal Register, and the Regulatory Agenda.
The program ensures consistent and appropriate economic analysis of regulatory policy options;
reviews and enhances economic analyses (including benefit-cost analyses and employment
impact analysis) prepared by regulatory programs; develops, identifies and analyzes regulatory
and non-regulatory approaches for consideration in rulemaking; considers interactions between
regulatory actions in various program offices from a multimedia perspective; and addresses
policy priorities.
422
-------
Objectives of the program include:
• Ensuring that the agency's decision-making processes are invested with high-quality, timely
and consistent scientific, economic and regulatory analyses and that an appropriate range of
alternatives are considered during the development of regulatory actions.
• Leading periodic review of existing regulations to identify obsolete or overly burdensome
provisions or those that need strengthening. This work includes management, analysis, and
quality assurance of agency's implementation of E.O. 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review.
• Ensuring that regulations are consistent with statutory requirements and other executive order
directives.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, activities will be driven by specific regulatory actions. However, key program
activities planned for FY 2014 include:
• Actively participating in the development of agency regulatory actions to ensure that
regulations address statutory and E.O. directives (e.g., conducting benefit-cost analysis for
every economically significant regulation) and policy priorities, and providing technical
assistance when needed to help meet agency goals, such as finding less burdensome
approaches to achieve environmental protection.
• Ensuring regulations address unnecessary divergences between the U.S. and major trading
partners, thereby improving the ability of U.S. business to compete in the global economy.
This work is guided by E.O. 13609: Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation as well
as upcoming negotiations of a comprehensive trade and investment agreement with the
European Union.
• Serving as the agency's liaison with the Office of the Federal Register by reviewing, editing
and submitting documents for publication so that the public, states, other agencies, and
Congress can be informed about the EPA's activities in a timely manner.
• Updating existing regulatory development processes in order to modernize them and save
resources. For example, the EPA is working to develop a process that will eliminate the need
to provide hardcopy documents for publication in the Federal Register.
• Developing the EPA's Regulatory Agenda and maintaining public information about
regulations through the Laws and Regulations website, accessible from www.epa.gov.
• Reviewing existing rules in FY 2014 to determine more effective and efficient ways to
improve compliance reporting, with an emphasis towards e-reporting and monitoring as part
of the agency's e-enterprise initiative.
423
-------
• Managing the agency's internal Action Development Process, Economic Guidelines, and
related requirements (e.g., OMB Circular A-4 on Regulatory Analysis). The EPA will be
reviewing and revising the economic guidelines so that they remain current with
advancements and reflect best practices in the profession.115
• Maintaining regulatory planning and tracking tools to facilitate timely decisions and
coordination across programs.
• Serving as the agency's liaison with the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
(OIRA) within the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to facilitate review of agency
actions under E.O. 12866, and leading the EPA's review of regulatory actions from other
agencies and Departments and draft Executive Orders and Presidential Memoranda.
• Conducting periodic assessments of regulatory reviews and the accuracy of the estimated
costs of past regulations pursuant to E.O. 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review.
• Maintaining and enhancing the agency's commitments to implement Plan EJ 2014 through
successful roll-out, use, and public release of the EPA's environmental justice screening tool
(EJ SCREEN) to identify and support EJ communities of concern and through external peer
review of data, metrics, environmental factors and national results of the tool.
• Transforming the Action Develop Process using SharePoint and other modern IT tools to
increase collaboration and transparency and break down agency "stove-pipes." Modern IT
tools, such as SharePoint, can provide collaborative workspaces where rule development
activities can happen in an open and transparent manner - engaging key stakeholders inside
and outside the agency in a timely and meaningful way.
• Improving agencywide regulatory impact analyses, including continuing efforts to better
capture the actual cost burdens of regulations (including impacts on small business and
government agencies), enhancing the EPA's understanding of regulatory impacts on job
creation and growth when the economy is at less than full employment, and examining the
potential international trade impacts of regulations on competitiveness and the ability of U.S.
industries to compete in global markets.
• Developing, in conjunction with the EPA's Office of Research and Development, improved
analytical tools to advance the EPA's risk assessment methods used in quantifying human
health benefits, particularly to children.
• Supporting new research and breakthroughs in the development of analytical tools and
methods to use in quantifying the economic costs and benefits of the EPA's regulations. High
priority research topics include: examining the costs and benefits of electronic reporting,
developing better methods to understand employment impacts of regulations, and improving
models for assessing the costs and benefits of climate change related policies and regulations.
Please refer to: http://yosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/eed.nsf/webpages/Guidelines.html for additional information.
424
-------
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple goals and strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget level (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$3,266.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$16.0 / -0.1 FTE) This reflects a slight adjustment to overall workforce levels. The
reduced resources include 0.1 FTE and associated payroll of $16.0.
• (+$752.0) This increase will be used to modernize and transform the EPA's regulatory
process and analyses to improve the Agency's ability to produce scientifically based rules
and allow the EPA to engage outside stakeholders in a timely, meaningful, and low cost
way. This tool will be nationally consistent and improve agencywide regulatory impact
analysis, including continuing efforts to better capture the actual cost burdens of
regulations.
• (+$1,000.0) This increase supports continued implementation of E.O. 13563 (Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review) to perform a retrospective analysis of agency rules
that may be outmoded or excessively burdensome, and to modify or repeal them in
accordance with what has been learned.
• (+$1,000.0) This increase supports the development, refinement and peer review of
methodologies used to improve agencywide regulatory impact analysis, including better
estimates of the economic impacts of regulations. This work will include new efforts to
better capture the actual cost burden on firms from regulations.
• (+$1,000.0) This increase will enable the agency to incorporate recommendations from
the National Academy of Sciences and conduct high-quality external technical peer
reviews of influential methods and models. This work will include developing new, more
accurate methods for assessing cancer and non-cancer risks from toxic chemicals, and
methods to address uncertainties in risk and economic analyses.
• (+$1,000.0) This increase will support the refinement of methodologies to estimate the
social costs and benefits of the agency's rules and policies affecting energy and climate.
This work will include examination of key barriers to adopting energy efficient
technologies by commercial and industrial enterprises, and investigate policies and
regulatory designs that can reduce or eliminate those barriers.
425
-------
Statutory Authority:
Toxic Substances Control Act sections 4, 5, and 6 (15 United States Code (U.S.C.) 2603, 2604,
and 2605); Clean Water Act sections 304 and 308 (33 U.S.C. 1312, 1314, 1318, 1329-1330,
1443); Safe Drinking Water Act section 1412 (42 U.S.C. 210, 300g-l); Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act/Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendment : (33 USC 40(IV)(2761), 42 USC
82(VIII)(6981-6983)); Clean Air Act: 42 USC 85(I)(A)(7403, 7412, 7429, 7545, 7612);
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act: 42 U.S.C.
103(III)(9651); Pollution Prevention Act (42 U.S.C. 13101-13109); FTTA.
426
-------
Science Advisory Board
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$5,135.0
$5,135.0
26.6
FY 2012
Actuals
$4,907.2
$4,907.2
24.4
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$5,153.0
$5,153.0
26.6
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$6,761.0
$6,761.0
28.3
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,626.0
$1,626.0
1.7
Program Project Description:
Congress established the EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB) in 1978 and gave it a broad
mandate to advise the Administrator on a wide range of highly visible and important scientific
matters to ensure that the EPA's technical products are of the highest quality. The SAB and two
other statutorily mandated chartered Federal Advisory Committees, the Clean Air Scientific
Advisory Committee and the Advisory Council on Clean Air Compliance Analysis draw from a
balanced range of non-EPA scientists and technical specialists from academia, communities,
states, independent research institutions, and industry. This program provides management and
technical support to these Advisory committees charged with providing the EPA's Administrator
with independent advice and peer review on scientific and technical aspects of environmental
problems, regulations, and research planning.116
FY 2014 Activities and Performance:
In FY 2014, the SAB plans to conduct approximately 36 reviews and produce approximately 36
reports. These reports will convey science advice on various topics to the Administrator. The
SAB will provide scientific and technical advice on 1) the technical basis of the EPA's actions
including National Drinking Water Standards for drinking water contaminants, National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for criteria air pollutants, and ambient water quality criteria as
required under the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Clean Air Act, and the Clean Water Act,
respectively; 2) highly influential scientific assessments underlying major environmental
decisions including chemical assessments in support of the EPA's Integrated Risk Information
System (IRIS) program; 3) cost and benefits analyses of the EPA's air quality programs; and 4)
the EPA's research and technological programs of national importance (e.g., hydraulic fracturing
research).
' Please refer to: http://www.epa.gov/sab/ for further information.
427
-------
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple goals and strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$221.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$267.0 / +1.7 FTE) This reflects an increase in staff resources to enhance the technical
assessments of IRIS chemicals. This increase will ensure that the Chemical Assessment
Advisory Committee performs additional IRIS reviews in FY 2014, thus increasing the
total number of IRIS chemical reviews completed. The resources include $267.0
associated payroll for 1.7 FTE.
• (+$161.0) This increase reflects an increase in travel resources to be used to fund travel
for its twenty six members to discuss technical assessments of IRIS chemicals and to
perform IRIS reviews in FY 2014, as appropriate.
• (+$862.0) This increase reflects an increase in extramural resources to increase the
contractor support for hosting meetings to assess IRIS chemicals. This increase will
ensure that logistical support is provided (e.g. reserve meeting space, audio and visual
aide support and note taking) to help SAB adhere to Federal Advisory Committee Act
(FACA) basic record keeping requirements.
• (+$83.0) This change reflects an increase in IT efficiencies and consolidation in IT
contracts that provide basic infrastructure and workforce support for the Science
Advisory Board program.
• (+$32.0) This increase will cover the cost for this vital support associated with
administrative support and coordination of the Federal Register Notice process required
for each FACA committee meeting.
Statutory Authority:
Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration Authorization Act (ERDDAA); 42
U.S.C. § 4365; FACA, 5 U.S.C. App. C; CAA Amendments of 1977; 42 U.S.C. 7409(d)(2);
CAA Amendments of 1990; 42 U.S.C. 7612.
428
-------
Program Area: Operations and Administration
429
-------
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Environmental Program &
Management
Science & Technology
Building and Facilities
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$535.0
$319,777.0
$72,019.0
$29,326.0
$915.0
$80,541.0
$503,113.0
414.4
FY 2012
Actuals
$512.2
$309,977.8
$72,928.5
$32,434.3
$877.0
$75,550.6
$492,280.4
407.7
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$535.0
$321,266.0
$72,434.0
$29,505.0
$916.0
$80,471.0
$505,127.0
414.4
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$509.0
$329,916.0
$75,690.0
$46,326.0
$839.0
$78,151.0
$531,431.0
411.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($26.0)
$10,139.0
$3,671.0
$17,000.0
($76.0)
($2,390.0)
$28,318.0
-2.9
Program Project Description:
Environmental Program and Management (EPM) resources in the Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations program fund the rental of office and laboratory space, utilities, and security. This
program also manages centralized administrative activities and support services within the EPA,
including health and safety, environmental compliance, occupational health, medical monitoring,
fitness, wellness, safety, and environmental management functions. Resources for this program
support a full range of ongoing facilities management services, including facilities maintenance
and operations, space planning, shipping and receiving, property management, printing and
reproduction, mail management, and transportation services. Funding is allocated for such
services among the major appropriations for the agency.
This program also includes the agency's Protection Services Detail (PSD) that provides physical
protection for the Administrator through security for daily activities and events. The PSD
coordinates all personnel and logistical requirements including scheduling, local support, travel
arrangements, and the management of special equipment.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The agency reviews space needs on a regular basis, and continues to implement a long-term
space consolidation plan that includes reducing the number of occupied facilities, consolidating
space within the remaining facilities, and reducing the square footage wherever practical. Since
430
-------
2006, the EPA has released approximately 417 thousand square feet of space at headquarters and
facilities nationwide, resulting in a cumulative annual rent avoidance of over $14.2million. These
achieved savings and potential savings partially offset the EPA's escalating rent and security
costs. For example, replacement leases for regional offices in Boston, San Francisco, and Seattle
are significantly higher than those previously negotiated. The agency will continue to manage its
lease agreements with the General Services Administration and other private landlords by
conducting reviews and verifying that billing statements are correct. For FY 2014, the agency is
requesting a total of $171.10 million for rent, $10.49 million for utilities, and $32.64 million for
security in the EPM appropriation.
The agency will continue its plans to enhance workplace flexibility at the EPA by consolidating
and disposing of existing assets, optimizing real property and portfolio performance, and
reducing environmental impacts. Through planned moves of Regional Offices with expiring
leases and opportunities to reconfigure existing space, the agency will incorporate space
reconfiguration to reduce the overall space footprint and support the governmentwide
mobile/flexible workplace initiative.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to improve operating efficiency and encourage the use of
advanced technologies and energy sources. The EPA will direct resources towards acquiring
alternative fuel vehicles and more fuel-efficient passenger cars and light trucks to meet the goals
of Executive Order (EO) 13423,11? Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and
Transportation Management. Additionally, the agency will attain the Executive Order's
environmental performance goals related to buildings through several initiatives, including:
comprehensive facility energy audits; re-commissioning; sustainable building design for
construction and alteration projects; energy savings performance contracts; energy load reduction
strategies; green power purchases; and, the use of off-grid energy equipment and Energy Star
rated products and building standards. The EPA will continue to improve the management of its
laboratory enterprise and take advantage of potential efficiencies. In FY 2014, the agency plans
to reduce energy utilization (or improve energy efficiency) by approximately 37 billion British
Thermal Units or three percent and to use approximately 27 percent less energy than it did in FY
2003 which will result in annual cost savings of $5.9 million.
EO 13514, Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance, expands
upon EO 13423 and requires additional reductions to greenhouse gas emissions. To meet the
requirements of EO 13514 the EPA will manage existing building systems to reduce
consumption of energy, water, and materials, consolidate and dispose of existing facilities,
optimize real property and portfolio performance, reduce environmental impacts, and implement
best real property management practices for enhancing energy-efficiency.
As part of the agency's commitment to promoting employee health and wellness, and supporting
OPM's and OMB's wellness initiative, the agency has finalized a long-term action plan and
seeks to achieve an OPM goal of 75 percent employee participation in core program services,
which include physical fitness, medical screening, nutrition and education and outreach
117 Information is available at http://www.fedcenter.go v/programs/eo 13 514A Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and
Economic Performance', and http://www.fedcenter.gov/programs/eol3423/. Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and
Transportation Management
431
-------
activities. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue implementing the action plan with the goal of
increasing employee participation by 50 percent from the baseline level of 2012 and expects to
meet OPM's established goal. It is hoped that the availability and increased utilization of
wellness services will result in a healthier and more productive work force with lower medical
costs consistent with the President's goal in EO 13507.
In FY 2014, the Agency's Protection Services Detail (PSD) will continue to provide physical
protection for the EPA Administrator, during daily activities, events, and travel.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(010) Cumulative percentage reduction in Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Scopes 1 & 2 emissions.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
1.0
79.5
FY2011
0.4
59
FY2012
6.4
54.1
FY2013
12.2
FY2014
16.3
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(098) Cumulative percentage reduction in energy consumption.
FY2007
6
9
FY2008
9
13
FY2009
12
18
FY2010
15
18.3
FY2011
18
18.1
FY2012
21
23.7
FY2013
24
FY2014
27
Units
Percent
The agency has surpassed its initial targets for the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions goal in part
due to green power purchases. EPA's GHG reduction effort is accomplished through a range of
energy conservation efforts, including the purchase of renewable energy credits. Information on
the agency's energy/GHG reduction initiative can be found in the agency's Strategic
Sustainability Performance Plan at http://www.epa.gov/planandbudget/strategicplan.html.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$2,853.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$210.0 / -1.6 FTE) This realigns resources for the Financial Assistance Grants program
from the Facilities Infrastructure and Operations program. The realignment is necessary
to meet needs in grant oversight. The resources include $210.0 associated payroll for 1.6
FTE.
• (-$1,442.0) This reflects a reduction in transit subsidy costs based on projected needs.
• (+$5,857.0) This change is the net effect of projected contractual rent increases and the
rent reduction realized from space consolidation efforts.
• (+$388.0) This change reflects a net effect of increases in utility costs offset by
reductions in utility consumption.
• (+$3,727.0) This change reflects an increase in security contractual costs.
432
-------
• (-$66.0) This reflects a reduction in travel to support the Administration's Management
Agenda goal of reducing travel and conference spending.
• (+$2,990.0) This increase supports regional moves in San Francisco (Region 9) and
Seattle (Region 10). As part of the agency's ongoing consolidation plans, the EPA will
continue to reduce its space footprint and will look to enhance workplace flexibility in
these regions through space reconfiguration and support the government telework
initiative.
• (-$3,296.0) This reduction recognizes efficiencies from implementing operational
changes to reduce regional and headquarter facility costs.
• (-$662.0) This change reflects a reduction resulting from IT efficiencies and
consolidation in IT contracts that support the Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
program.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Property and Administration Services Act; Public Building Act; Annual Appropriations
Act; Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act; CWA; CAA; RCRA;
TSCA; NEPA; CERFA; D.C. Recycling Act of 1988; Energy Policy Act of 2005; Executive
Orders 10577, 12598, 13150 and 13423; Emergency Support Functions (ESF) #10 Oil and
Hazardous Materials Response Annex; Department of Justice United States Marshals Service,
Vulnerability Assessment of Federal Facilities Report; Presidential Decision Directive 63
(Critical Infrastructure Protection).
433
-------
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$72,290.0
$512.0
$21,632.0
$94,434.0
536.9
FY 2012
Actuals
$75,138.2
$416.3
$26,165.5
$101,720.0
536.4
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$72,659.0
$512.0
$21,599.0
$94,770.0
536.9
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$78,506.0
$414.0
$24,284.0
$103,204.0
530.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$6,216.0
($98.0)
$2,652.0
$8,770.0
-6.9
Program Project Description:
Activities under the Central Planning, Budgeting and Finance program support the management
of integrated planning, budgeting, financial management, performance and accountability
processes, and systems to ensure effective stewardship of resources. This includes developing,
managing, and supporting a performance management system consistent with the Government
Performance and Results Modernization Act for the agency that involves strategic planning and
accountability for environmental, fiscal, and managerial results; providing policy, systems,
training, reports, and oversight essential for the financial operations of the EPA; managing the
agencywide Working Capital Fund; providing financial payment and support services for the
EPA through three finance centers, as well as specialized fiscal and accounting services for many
EPA programs; and managing the agency's annual budget process. Also included is the EPA's
Environmental Finance program that provides grants to a network of university-based
Environmental Finance Centers which deliver financial outreach services, such as technical
assistance, training, expert advice, finance education, and full cost pricing analysis to states, local
communities and small businesses.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA will continue to provide high-quality resource stewardship to ensure that all agency
programs operate with fiscal responsibility and management integrity and are efficiently and
consistently delivered nationwide and demonstrate results.
In FY 2014, the agency will be working to migrate Payroll Accounting services to the
Department of the Interior's Interior Business Center (IBC), a shared service provider, with final
434
-------
go-live expected in FY 2014. This effort is part of the agency's larger initiative to implement the
Human Resources Line of Business, which will automate and integrate the agency's human
resources and payroll information technology tools with Compass, and improve capability and
reduce costs to the agency. Taken together, these activities comprise an important part of the
agency's work to transform its digital services within the base resources. Work associated with
the migration will involve the development of guidance and reporting tools, as well as
modification to the Compass financial system, which was launched in October 2011. The project
was selected as the next step in the agency's financial systems modernization effort, which is in
line with the OMB financial systems sequencing guidance. This work will be framed by the
agency's Enterprise Architecture and will make use of enabling technologies for e-Gov
initiatives.
In FY 2014, the EPA expects to modernize and modify the Account Code Structure to improve
tracking and reporting capabilities, maximizing the benefits within the new Compass financial
system. Congressional and OMB requirements will be incorporated and the structure will be
simplified, eliminating complicated and conflicting data structures and allowing for improved
agency-level reporting. Coordinating the updated account structure with other changes to the
financial systems will create programming and implementation efficiencies.
In FY 2014, the EPA expects to upgrade its Budget Formulation System to replace the current
Budget Automation System. The new system will create efficiencies through automating a
number of manual, time-intensive processes and providing new enterprise tools for agency
resource management, and eliminate the need for some local systems. The new software will
enable the EPA to completely re-design the performance module to streamline and align with
OMB and agency requirements, as well as support agency enterprise technology initiatives. The
system also has the potential to be a shared service with other agencies using Cloud technology.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to improve its transparency, accountability, and effectiveness
of operations through improved coordination and integration of internal control assessments over
financial activities as required under revised OMB Circular A-123, as well as controls over
programmatic operations under the Federal Manager's Financial Integrity Act. Improvements in
internal controls will further support the EPA's initiatives for enhanced financial performance.
The EPA also will continue to improve accessibility to data to support accountability, cost
accounting, budget and performance integration, and management decision-making. The EPA
will support development and implementation of a government-wide Performance Management
Line of Business. The EPA will continue to accelerate audit resolution and follow-up to improve
the EPA programs as required under the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended and OMB
Circular A-50. The EPA will ensure timely audit follow-up and reporting on progress in carrying
out audit recommendations.
Since the implementation of the Improper Payments Information Act of 2002, the EPA has
reviewed, sampled, and monitored its payments to protect against erroneous payments.
Historically, the EPA is well under the government-wide threshold of 2.5 percent, with an
average 5-year error rate of less than 1.0 percent across all categories (e.g., grants, contracts,
commodities). In FY 2014, the EPA will continue these activities to reduce the potential for
435
-------
improper payments pursuant to the Improper Payments Information Act of 2002, as amended by
the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act of 2010, (P.L. 111-204).
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$4,219.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$644.0 / -4.6 FTE) This decrease reflects agency's decision to reduce FTE and payroll,
including a reduction of 4.6 FTE and associated payroll of $644.0 to support performance
management.
• (-$1,034.0) This change reflects a decrease to the Environmental Finance Centers grant
program and other grants. Over the years, the Centers have matured and have been
successful in leveraging other resources to support working with stakeholders to evaluate
and identify financing options for continued environmental improvements.
• (+$2,640.0 / -4.7 FTE) This change reflects an increase in funding for a full year of
contractor costs to support maintenance for the Compass financial system, which became
operational in October 2011, and the necessary support for the Compass interface with
the Human Resources Line of Business (HRLoB). This change shifts 4.7 FTE and
associate payroll of $658.0 to support the HRLoB. This increase is offset by reductions
for the Integrated Financial Management system and tools replaced by Compass.
• (+$1,035.0 / +5.1 FTE) This reflects an increase to support several systems offset by a
reduction in small systems and lower priority non-system contracts. The additional
resources will support the following efforts: 1) migration of payroll to the IBC as part of
the agency's implementation of HRLoB, scheduled in FY 2014; 2) implementation of the
new Account Code Structure; and 3) initiation of the Budget Formulation System
upgrades. This increase includes 5.1 FTE and associated payroll of $714.0, including
FTE shifted from Compass. Increases are offset by reductions to lower priority non-
systems contracts.
Statutory Authority:
Annual Appropriations Act; Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996; Computer Security Act of 1987; E-
Government Act of 2002; Electronic Freedom of Information Act of 1996; Federal Grant and
Cooperative Agreement Act of 1977; Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act of 1998; Federal
Acquisition Regulations, contract law and the EPA's Assistance Regulations (40 CFR Parts 30,
31, 35, 40, 45, 46, 47); Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act of 1982; Freedom of
Information Act of 1966; Government Management Reform Act of 1994; Improper Payments
436
-------
Information Act of 2002; Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act of 2010; Inspector
General Act of 1978 as Amended; Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; Privacy Act of 1974;
Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990; Government Performance and Results Act of 1993; The
Prompt Payment Act of 1982; Title 5, U.S.C; National Defense Authorization Act.
437
-------
Acquisition Management
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$33,175.0
$163.0
$24,111.0
$57,449.0
357.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$37,238.9
$170.6
$24,841.5
$62,251.0
361.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$33,289.0
$164.0
$24,067.0
$57,520.0
357.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$33,893.0
$152.0
$24,339.0
$58,384.0
342.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$718.0
($11.0)
$228.0
$935.0
-14.5
Program Project Description:
Environmental Program and Management (EPM) resources in this program support the agency's
contract and acquisition management activities. Sound contract management fosters efficiency
and benefits the entire agency. The EPA seeks to maintain a high degree of integrity in managing
its procurement activities.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In accordance with the President's guidelines for civilian agencies in the Acquisition Workforce
Development Strategic Plan for FY 2010-2014, in FY 2014 the EPA will use EPM acquisition
management resources to train and develop its acquisition workforce, and to strengthen its
contract management training program. Resources also will address the information technology
needs of management and the acquisition workforce, and will support the recruitment, retention,
and hiring of the acquisition workforce in line with the Office of Federal Procurement Policy
Act, as amended (41 U.S.C. 401 et seq.).
The EPA's Strategic Sourcing Program (SSP) allows the agency to research, assess, and award
contract vehicles that will maximize time and resource savings for services and products. The
SSP serves as a strong foundation for effective financial and resource management because it
simplifies the acquisition process and makes it less costly.
The EPA also plans to reinforce its contract oversight responsibilities through A-123 Entity
Level Assessments, increased targeted oversight training for acquisition management personnel,
and Simplified Acquisition Contracting Officer (SACO) reviews. These measures will strengthen
438
-------
the EPA's acquisition management business processes and will enhance contract oversight. In
addition, the EPA will take the following steps to achieve acquisition savings efficiencies:
• Eliminate contracts that are redundant in scope, no longer necessary to the agency's
programmatic needs, or may be combined with other acquisitions to achieve greater
buying power via economies of scale; and
• Use government-wide procurement sources to reduce the need for new contracts. To date,
the EPA has used this for office supplies and mail delivery.
In FY 2014, the agency expects to achieve the following benefits from adopting a Centers of
Expertise approach: the implementation of cost saving strategies, increased operational
efficiencies, and more effective and responsive contracting support. Such strategies may include
a realignment of certain contracting functions and/or workload, re-engineered business
processes, and specializing strategic acquisition vehicles for commonly acquired goods and
services.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(009) Increase in number and percentage of certified acquisition staff (1102)
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
335/80
323/85
FY2013
323 / 80
FY2014
323/85
Units
Number/
Percent
In FY 2014, the EPA aims to certify 85 percent of contracting professionals in line with Federal
Acquisition Certification in Contracting (FAC-C) program requirements. In addition, work under
this program also supports performance results in the Acquisition Management Program Project
and can be found in the Eight Year Performance Array in the Program Performance and
Assessment section.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,241.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$479.0 / -6.6 FTE) This reflects a net change in resources in the Acquisition
Management program for contracts oversight efforts. This decrease reflects efficiencies
achieved in acquisition management as a result of implementing the Center of Expertise.
The reduction partially offsets a slight increase for licenses for the EPA's Acquisition
System (EAS). The reduced resources include 6.6 FTE and associated payroll.
• (+$25.0) This reflects an increase to Regional office travel resources for training of
acquisition workforce.
• (-$69.0) This change reflects a reduction found from IT efficiencies and consolidation in
IT contracts that support the Acquisition Management program.
439
-------
Statutory Authority:
EPA's Environmental Statutes; annual Appropriations Acts; FAR. Office of Federal
Procurement Policy Act, as amended (41 U.S.C. 401 et seq.).
440
-------
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$24,002.0
$3,128.0
$27,130.0
174.9
FY 2012
Actuals
$24,577.1
$3,198.9
$27,776.0
182.5
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$24,079.0
$3,121.0
$27,200.0
174.9
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$26,518.0
$3,169.0
$29,687.0
176.8
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$2,516.0
$41.0
$2,557.0
1.9
Program Project Description:
Grants and Interagency Agreements comprise over half of the agency's budget. Environmental
Program and Management (EPM) resources in this program support the management of
Financial Assistance Grants/Interagency Agreements (IA), and suspension and debarment
activities at Headquarters and Regional offices. The key components of this program ensure that
the EPA's management of grants and lAs meet the highest fiduciary standards, that grant funding
produces measurable results for environmental programs, and that the suspension and debarment
program effectively protects the government's business interest.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to focus on key objectives under its Grants Management
Transformation Initiative which is designed to achieve efficiencies while enhancing quality and
accountability. Specific focus areas include: 1) business process re-engineering; 2) risk-based
reviews of internal controls and policies; 3) leveraging technology to make work easier for
Project Officers (POs) and Grants Specialists (GS); 4) leveraging resources to address PO and
GS workload issues; and 5) reducing burden on applicants and recipients. Additionally, in FY
2014, the EPA will issue a new Grants Management Plan establishing the strategic direction for
grants management for the period FY 2014-2018.
To promote accountability, the EPA will continue to conduct on-site and pre-award reviews of
grant recipients and applicants and perform indirect cost rate and unliquidated obligation
reviews. The agency also will continue to provide Tribal technical assistance and administer
training programs to maintain a skilled grants management work force. This will include class
room and on-line training for the agency's grant POs, a certification and training program for the
441
-------
EPA's GSs, and mandatory training for managers and supervisors involved in grants
management.
To improve the management of state grants and reduce the accumulation of grant unliquidated
obligations (ULOs), the EPA issued two policies applicable to state categorical grants awarded
on or after October 1, 2012. The first policy aligns state grant workplans and progress reports
with the agency's Strategic Plan and requires a time frame for workplan commitments. The
second policy streamlines the state grant process to facilitate timely awards and highlights the
importance of ULO management. In FY 2014, the EPA will assess the effectiveness of these
policies and, in consultation with Tribes, will issue similar policies for Tribal grants.
The EPA plans to continue using its legacy system, the Integrated Grants Management System,
which was originally scheduled for retirement in FY 2013. After extensive analysis of alternative
systems under the Grants Management Line of Business Initiative, the EPA decided in FY 2012
to delay migration in light of the need to: 1) complete the upgrades of the agency's financial and
human resource systems; and 2) re-engineer and streamline EPA's grant business processes to
align them with the federal model. As part of the Grants Management Transformation initiative
noted above, the agency will complete the re-engineering process by the end of FY 2014 and
evaluate available system alternatives in FY 2015.
The EPA is developing an internal controls plan to oversee the funding provided to the agency
for activities to address the consequences of Hurricane Sandy. In FY 2014, the EPA will
continue to implement the plan to ensure that the funds are expended timely for eligible costs.
The EPA is a recognized leader in Suspension and Debarment. The agency will continue to
make aggressive use of discretionary debarments and suspensions as well as statutory
debarments under the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, performance
measures for this specific program are outlined in the EPA's 2009-2013 Grants Management
Plan.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$883.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$210.0 / +1.6 FTE) This realigns resources for the Financial Assistance Grants
program from the Facilities Infrastructure and Operations program. The realignment is
necessary to better support tribes in grant oversight activities. These resources include
$210.0 associated payroll for 1.6 FTE.
442
-------
• (+$1,423.0) This change reflects an increase in operations and maintenance funding for
the Integrated Grants Management System and it supports efforts to find a more suitable
and cost effective IT system which will streamline the agency's business processes.
Statutory Authority:
EPA's Environmental Statutes; Annual Appropriations Acts, including the Disaster Relief
Appropriations Act, 2013; Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act; Title 2 Code of
Federal Regulations; Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 30, 31, 35, 40, 45, 46, and 47;
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
443
-------
Human Resources Management
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$37,839.0
$6,346.0
$44,185.0
275.3
FY 2012
Actuals
$39,628.0
$3,938.4
$43,566.4
278.6
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$37,927.0
$6,344.0
$44,271.0
275.3
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$40,047.0
$7,585.0
$47,632.0
252.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$2,208.0
$1,239.0
$3,447.0
-22.8
Program Project Description:
Environmental Programs and Management (EPM) resources for the Human Resources
Management program support activities that influence the broad spectrum of human capital and
human resources management services throughout the agency. As requirements and initiatives
change, the agency continually evaluates and improves human resource functions in outreach
and recruitment, and in hiring and developing the workforce to help the agency achieve its
mission while ensuring management and employee satisfaction.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the agency will continue to implement the comprehensive hiring reform laid out in
the Presidential Memorandum Improving the Federal Recruitment and Hiring Process, which
required executive departments and agencies to "overhaul the way they recruit and hire our
civilian workforce." The memorandum reaffirms managers' leadership roles, systematizes the
recruiting and selecting process, and emphasizes accountability for these important managerial
responsibilities. The key facets of the hiring reform are: to ease the hiring process while raising
the bar on candidate quality; to increase engagement of agency leaders in the recruitment and
selection process; and to monitor agency efforts to increase the speed and quality of hiring.
In FY 2014, the agency will continue to focus on utilizing data to drive business decisions,
streamlining the recruitment process, transitioning from a manual to automated processes to
reduce hiring time (for both GS and SES hires), and institutionalizing workforce planning and
incorporating it into the agency's budget plans. The EPA also will increase management
involvement and accountability with performance standards.
444
-------
As part of our One Great Place to Work initiative, the agency is committed to fostering a work
environment that advances the talents, drive and interests of all employees. The initiative, which
seeks a supportive work environment, and professional development, is focused on developing
an enhanced telework policy. Identifying the appropriate telework eligibility selection criteria,
collaboration tools, training, and clearly defined performance expectations will help improve the
employee work/life balance. A final draft of the telework plan has been completed and is being
vetted with the unions. Further, the EPA's One EPA: One Great Place to Work intranet site will
continue to publicize announcements and programs that help employees develop their careers,
thrive in their work environment, balance work and personal demands, and lead healthier lives.
The EPA will continue to streamline human resources management with the E-Government
initiative and the Human Resources Line of Business (HR LoB) program. HR LoB offers
government-wide, cost effective, and standardized HR solutions while providing core
functionality to support the strategic management of human capital. EPA expects to yield long-
term improvements to its HR business process through automated processing of HR forms, an
integrated time and attendance payroll system, and seamless data transfer starting with the
recruitment process.
In May 2011, the EPA and the Department of Interior Business Center (IBC) signed an
agreement to plan the migration of the agency's HR and payroll activities to IBC systems.
Significant progress has been made in how to securely transfer files to and from the EPA and
IBC and establishing the support necessary during migration. Migration to IBC's system is
scheduled for March 2014. These activities represent significant components of the agency's
work to transform its digital services.
Performance Targets:
The EPA uses a government-wide performance metric (found at
http://hr.performance.gov/initiative/hire-best/agencv/EPA) to track its progress in reducing the
average number of days required to hire a new employee. For FY 2010 the EPA reported an
average of 161 days to hire an employee, the government-wide average was 105 days. For FY
2011 the EPA showed an improvement in performance, reporting an average of 156 days to hire
an employee, the government-wide average was 93 days. Through the agency's hiring reform
efforts, including automating processes and improving hiring tools and practices, the EPA
expects to continue to reduce the number of days to hire new employees. For FY 2012 the EPA
will report an average of 94 days to hire an employee.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,426.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$2,524.0 / -21.5 FTE) This reduces resources in the Human Resources Management
program for the EPA Career Intern program (ECIP). This decrease reflects the EPA's
decision to eliminate centralized resources for ECIP. This Program will continue to
operate with the dedication and management of existing resources from participating
445
-------
EPA programs. The reduced resources include 21.5 FTE and associated payroll of
$2,524.0.
• (+$302.0) This reflects an increase in workers compensation.
• (+$50.0) This reflects an increase in the agency's childcare subsidy.
• (+$2,251.0) This change reflects funding required for EPA to continue processing HR
actions using the People-Plus system while the agency works to migrate to the DOI's IBC
system. In addition to supporting People-Plus's on-going operations and maintenance
until March 2014, these resources also fund its decommissioning and retirement, which
demands that the agency securely transfer all of HR information to the IBC system.
• (+$585.0) This increase reflects fees the agency must pay to DOI for EPA to transition its
HR and payroll services to align with the IBC system.
• (-$85.0) This change reflects a reduction found from IT efficiencies and consolidation in
IT contracts that support Human Resources Management program.
• (-$100.0) This reflects a decision to eliminate travel funding for the agency's Leadership
and Professional Development Rotation Program. This program will continue to operate
with the dedication and management of existing resources from participating EPA
programs.
• (+$303.0) This change increases resources for the EPA's Sign Language program.
Statutory Authority:
Title V United States Code, Fair Act.
446
-------
Program Area: Pesticides Licensing
447
-------
Pesticides: Protect Human Health from Pesticide Risk
Program Area: Pesticides Licensing
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Ensure Chemical Safety
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$57,732.0
$3,757.0
$61,489.0
447.2
FY 2012
Actuals
$56,278.0
$3,532.4
$59,810.4
441.7
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$57,872.0
$3,771.0
$61,643.0
447.2
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$58,400.0
$3,425.0
$61,825.0
435.7
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$668.0
($332.0)
$336.0
-11.5
Program Project Description:
Under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of
1996 and the Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act of 2012 (known as PRIA3), the
EPA is charged with protecting people from the health risks that pesticide use can pose. FIFRA
requires the EPA to register pesticide products before they are allowed to be marketed for use in
the United States. Registration is based on review by EPA scientists and decision-makers of
scientific data sufficient to demonstrate that the product can perform its intended function
without unreasonable adverse effects on people or the environment.
The statutes above charge the EPA to issue pesticide registrations and set tolerances (maximum
residue levels) for pesticides in food and animal feed and to periodically review the registrations
and tolerances that the agency issues, to ensure that public health is adequately protected. The
program addresses these requirements by conducting risk assessments using the latest scientific
methods for new and existing pesticides. Agency scientists examine the risks that pesticides pose
to human health through the diet and through exposure at work, at home, in school, or at play.
The EPA pesticide program also reduces the risks of disease by ensuring the efficacy of public
health pesticides (pesticides that control pests that vector disease or for other recognized health
protection uses). The EPA encourages the development and use of safer pesticides and educates
pesticide users and the public in general through labeling as well as public and environmental
outreach.
Pesticide Registration and Tolerance Setting
Under the FFDCA, if a pesticide is to be used in a manner that may result in pesticide residues in
food or animal feed, before it can be registered, the EPA must establish a tolerance, or maximum
legal residue level or exemption from the requirement of a tolerance, for each affected food or
feed commodity. To establish a tolerance, the EPA must find that the residues are "safe," which,
under FFDCA, means that there is a reasonable certainty of no harm to human health from
448
-------
aggregate exposure to the pesticide residue in food and from all other exposures except
occupational exposures.
The passage of FQPA in 1996, which amended both FIFRA and FFDCA, not only introduced
this stricter safety standard, it also mandated the consideration of a number of other factors
including cumulative and aggregate effects. When assessing a pesticide registration or tolerance,
the EPA also must consider the cumulative effects of related pesticides with a common mode of
toxicity and the potential for endocrine disruption effects, and apply an appropriate safety factor
to ensure the protection of infants and children. In addition, the EPA must include aggregate
exposures, including all dietary exposure, drinking water, and non-occupational exposures. All
these pesticide exposures - from food, drinking water, and home and garden use - must be
considered when determining allowable levels of pesticides in food. Also since FQPA, the
EPA's risk assessment process must incorporate a 10-fold safety factor (10X) for infants and
children unless reliable information in the database on the chemical indicates that it can be
reduced or removed. Under FQPA, even the limited, temporary use under an emergency
exemption may not be allowed without the establishment of a tolerance.
To comply with statutory mandates, the EPA conducts risk assessments using the latest scientific
methods to determine the risks that pesticides pose to human health, including reviewing
comprehensive toxicity, residue chemistry, and other data submitted by pesticide manufacturers
(registrants) including at the request of EPA, and consulting public literature or other sources of
supporting information regarding the pesticide's effects or exposure. Toxicity data are used to
identify the hazard potential of a pesticide. Residue chemistry data are used to determine the
identity and amount of pesticide in or on food. The agency reviews all data to make sure they
were developed according to standard practices within the discipline and the EPA's test
guidelines. In addition to toxicity and residue chemistry data, the EPA may also use other data to
refine and make more realistic exposure assessments for residues on food and exposure to
workers and other bystanders and people who live, work, play, and go to school in treated areas.
For example, to approximate people's actual exposures and potential risks from current uses of a
pesticide, the agency scientists incorporate regional exposures (from monitoring and/or modeling
results) from residential and drinking water sources, thus accounting for the variation of potential
exposures in different parts of the country. This could result in label restrictions in certain areas
to reduce the exposure predicted from water. Risk assessments undergo an internal peer review
and regulatory decisions are posted on the Internet for review and comment to ensure that these
actions are transparent and stakeholders are engaged in decisions affecting their health and
environment. When complex scientific issues arise, the agency consults the FIFRA Scientific
Advisory Panel (http://www.epa.gov/scipolv/sap/) for independent scientific advice.
Periodic Review of Registrations and Tolerances
Not only must the EPA conduct risk assessments before the initial registration of each pesticide
for each use, but the FQPA amendments also introduced the requirement that every pesticide
registration be reviewed at least every 15 years. This periodic review is accomplished through
our Registration Review Program.118 In the interest of efficiency and fairness and to facilitate the
assessment of cumulative exposures, the agency reviews certain related pesticides (such as the
!http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrdl/registration_review/highlights.htm
449
-------
pyrethroids and pyrethrins, the neonicotinoids, or the fumigants) at the same time. Pesticide
cases may be related by chemical class or structure, mode of action, use, or for other reasons.
Ensuring Proper Use and Mitigating Risks of Pesticides through Labeling
Under FIFRA, it is illegal to use a registered pesticide in a manner inconsistent with the label
instructions and precautions. Therefore, the EPA uses pesticide labels to indicate what uses are
appropriate in order to ensure that the pesticide does not cause unreasonable adverse effects on
the environment, as determined by the risk assessment. EPA pesticide product registrations
include required labeling instructions and precautions. When risks are identified during the initial
registration or during registration review, the agency may mitigate those risks by requiring label
changes, for example, requiring personal protective equipment for applicators, or changing the
application method or rate or the time when the treated area may be reentered. Ensuring the
proper use of pesticides prevents unnecessary pesticide exposure to the person applying the
pesticide and people working, living, or playing nearby. It also prevents excessive residues in the
food people eat and in animal feed.
Reducing Pesticide Risks to People through the Registration of Lower Risk Pesticides
To further protect human health, this program emphasizes the use of reduced risk methods of
pest control, including the use of reduced risk pesticides, and helping growers and other pesticide
users learn about new, safer products and methods of using pesticides. The EPA began
promoting reduced risk pesticides in 1993 by giving registration priority to pesticides that have
lower toxicity to humans and non-target organisms such as birds, fish, and plants; low potential
for contaminating groundwater; lower use rates; low pest resistance potential; and compatibility
with Integrated Pest Management (IPM).119 Biological pesticides and biotechnology often
represent lower risk solutions to pest problems.
Several other countries and international organizations also have instituted programs to facilitate
registering reduced risk pesticides. The EPA works with the international scientific community
and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) member countries to
register new reduced risk pesticides and to establish related tolerances (maximum residue limits).
Through these efforts, the EPA can help reduce risks to Americans from foods imported from
other countries.
Protecting Workers from On-the-Job Pesticide Risks
Millions of America's workers are exposed to pesticides in occupations such as agriculture, lawn
care, food preparation, and landscape maintenance. Protecting workers from potential effects of
pesticides is an important role of the Pesticide Program. Workers in several occupations may be
exposed to pesticides when they prepare pesticides for use, such as by mixing a concentrate with
water or loading the pesticide into application equipment; apply pesticides, such as in an
agricultural or commercial setting; or when they enter an area where pesticides have been
applied to perform allowed tasks such as picking crops. The Worker Protection Standard (WPS)
119 See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Pesticides: Health and Safety, Reducing Pesticide Risk internet site:
http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/health/reducing.htm.
450
-------
for Agricultural Pesticides is a federal regulation aimed at reducing the risks of illness or injury
resulting from workers' and handlers' occupational exposures to pesticides used in the
production of agricultural plants on farms, forests, nurseries, and greenhouses. . Implementing
the WPS is a key part of the EPA's strategy for reducing occupational exposures to agricultural
pesticides. It requires employers to ensure that their employees understand the basic concepts of
pesticide safety. Employees need to be trained by qualified trainers and must have the
opportunity to ask questions during the training session. Certification and training regulations
require that some restricted use pesticides may be applied only by or under the direct supervision
of specially trained and certified applicators. Certification and training programs are conducted
by states, territories, and tribes in accordance with national standards.
Preventing Disease through Public Health Pesticides
Antimicrobial pesticides play an important role in public health and safety by killing germs,
bacteria, viruses, fungi, protozoa, algae, and slime. Some of these products are used to sterilize
hard surfaces in hospitals. Chemical disinfection of hard, non-porous surfaces such as floors, bed
rails and tables is one component of the infection control systems in hospitals, food processing
operations, and other places where disease-causing microorganisms, such as bacteria and viruses,
may be present. In reviewing registrations for antimicrobials, EPA is required to ensure that
antimicrobials maintain their effectiveness.120 The EPA's Antimicrobial Testing Program has
been testing hospital sterilants, disinfectants, and tuberculocides since 1991 to help ensure that
products in the marketplace meet stringent efficacy standards. Other pesticides also protect
public health, such as insecticides and rodenticides that combat insects and other pests that
vector disease such as West Nile virus, Lyme disease, and rabies.
Outreach and Education
Giving priority to reduced risk and IPM friendly pesticides is one step toward protecting human
health. It is also important for the people using pesticides to be well informed, understand the
importance of reading and following labels and the importance of proper disposal, and the also
need to understand how to protect themselves from pests that can transmit disease. The
Pesticides Program must, therefore, invest in outreach and training efforts for growers, pesticide
applicators, and workers, as well as the public in general. The EPA will work to reduce the
number and severity of pesticide exposure incidents by developing effective communication,
environmental outreach, and training programs.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will review and register new pesticides, new uses for existing pesticides,
and other registration requests in accordance with statutory requirements. To further advance the
EPA's cross cutting strategy of working for environmental justice and children's health, the EPA
will process these registration requests with special consideration given to susceptible
populations, especially children. Specifically, the EPA will focus on the foods commonly eaten
by children in order to reduce pesticide exposure to children where the science identifies
potential concerns. The EPA uses data from various sources, including the Pesticide Data
:0FIFRA section 3(h)(3), 7 U.S.C. 136a(h)(3).
451
-------
Program (PDF) and the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), to assess
children's potential risk from pesticides. Pesticide registration actions focus on the evaluation of
pesticide products before they enter the market.121 The EPA will review pesticide data and
implement use restrictions and instructions needed to ensure that pesticides used according to
label directions will not result in unreasonable risk. During its pre-market review, the EPA will
consider human health and environmental concerns as well as the pesticide's potential benefits.
The EPA will continue to emphasize the registration of reduced risk pesticides, including
biopesticides, in order to provide farmers and other pesticide users with new alternatives. In FY
2014, the agency, in collaboration with the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA),
will work to ensure that minor use registrations receive appropriate support. The EPA also will
ensure that needs are met for reduced risk pesticides for minor use crops. Additionally, the EPA
will assist farmers and other pesticide users in learning about new, safer products and methods of
using existing products through workshops, demonstrations, small grants, and materials available
on the website and in print.
During FY 2014, the EPA will continue to implement registration review of existing pesticides
and develop work plans for pesticides entering the review pipeline. The goal of the registration
review process is to review pesticide registrations every fifteen years to ensure that pesticides
already in the marketplace meet the most current scientific standards and address concerns
identified after the original registration.122 The completion of the first round of these reviews is
due in FY 2022. Implementation of the program, as mandated by statute, supports the EPA's
priorities including assuring the safety of chemicals and protecting America's waters.
Through Reregi strati on Eligibility Decision (RED) implementation, the EPA will continue to
address activities vital to effective "real world" risk reduction. These activities include:
reviewing product label amendments that incorporate the mitigation measures from the REDs;
publishing proposed and final product cancellations; promoting partnerships which provide
fast/effective risk reduction; and approving product reregistrations.
In FY 2014, the agency will continue to work toward our commitment in environmental justice
and protection of children's health. The EPA will continue to provide locally-based technical
assistance and guidance by partnering with states and tribes on implementation of pesticide
decisions. Technical assistance and outreach such as workshops, demonstration projects,
briefings, and informational meetings will continue in areas including pesticide safety training
and use of lower risk pesticides.
In keeping with the EPA's priority of expanding the conversation on the environment, the
agency will continue to engage the public, the scientific community, and other stakeholders in its
policy development and implementation. This will encourage a reasonable transition for farmers
and others from the older, potentially more hazardous pesticides, to the newer pesticides that
121 See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Pesticides: Topical & Chemical Fact Sheets, Pesticide Registration Program
Internet site: http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/registration.htm.
122 See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Registration Review Internet site:
http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrdl/registration review/index.htm
452
-------
have been registered using the latest available scientific information. To address the fiscal
climate in FY 2014, the EPA has made the strategic decision to incrementally reduce support for
several outreach activities and to focus limited resources on other core activities, specifically
those activities associated with registration and registration review. Some of the outreach
activities affected include stewardship activities such as IPM, incident reporting, and analysis
support and training, including certification of applicators.
The EPA also will continue to conduct pre-market evaluations of efficacy data for public health
claims and ensure that the products will work for their intended purposes. Through the
Antimicrobial Testing Program, the agency will continue to conduct post-market surveillance to
monitor the efficacy of hospital disinfectants.
To better leverage partner capacity, the EPA will continue to engage states, tribes, and the
private sector, encouraging them to assume a bigger role in implementing regulatory decisions.
The agency will continue support for implementation and enforcement of pesticide specific rules
and decisions made. Additionally, the EPA will initiate efforts toward establishing a self-
monitoring and/or self-certification process and self-reporting requirements for components of its
regulatory programs.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue implementing improvements to the Pesticide Registration
Information System, to create an interactive system that is fully integrated with the EPA's new
E-Enterprise project. E-Enterprise will create an easy-to-use, one-stop access point for all of the
EPA's programs. Shared web services will center on providing the user with customized content
and functions, including reusable e-forms and tailored notifications of relevant information. The
focus of the project is to achieve paperwork burden reduction by converting paper-based
processes into electronic processes for the Pesticides Program's regulated entities, creating a
streamlined electronic workflow to support pesticide product registration and chemical review,
and creating a centralized repository of regulatory decisions and scientific information. Overall,
the project will streamline approximately 150 existing business processes.
The agency will continue to review and update, as appropriate, the pesticide review and use
policies to ensure compliance with the latest scientific methods, keeping true to its commitment
of advancing science, research, and technological innovation. Several of the EPA offices have
joined together, including programs responsible for FIFRA, Toxic Substances Control Act, the
Clean Air Act, and the Toxic Release Inventory to develop a simplified and integrated reporting
system focused on the chemical industry with simplified navigation and access for stakeholders
to information they need. The system will create efficiencies and paperwork burden relief
through elimination of hurdles for registering, filing and records management; simplifying paper-
based to electronic conversion; information reuse; consolidation of more than 140 reports;
providing fillable forms; and eliminating thousands of service calls to help desks and agency
staff.
This initiative is an element of the project being done by a cross-programmatic team (Pesticides,
Fuels, Toxics, and TRI) to ensure a multi-purpose design. It also will result in more efficient
processing, data storage and analysis. Taken together, these activities represent significant
components of the agency's work to transform its digital services within base resources.
453
-------
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(143) Percentage of agricultural acres treated with reduced-risk pesticides.
FY2007
18
20
FY2008
18.5
21
FY2009
20
21.5
FY2010
21
21
FY2011
21
22
FY2012
22
Data
Avail
10/2013
FY2013
22.5
FY2014
22.5
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(012) Percent reduction of children's exposure to rodenticides.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
10
0
FY2012
5
6
FY2013
5
FY2014
10
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(266) Reduction in concentration of targeted pesticide analytes in the general population.
FY2007
10
5
FY2008
30
Data
Avail
10/2013
FY2009
No Target
Establish
ed
Biennial
FY2010
50
Data
Avail
10/2013
FY2011
No Target
Establish
ed
Biennial
FY2012
50,50
Data
Avail
10/2013
FY2013
No Target
Establish
ed
FY2014
50,50
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(Jll) Reduction in moderate to severe exposure incidents associated with organophosphates
and carbamate insecticides in the general population.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
10
16
FY 2013
15
FY 2014
25
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(J15) Reduction in concentration of targeted pesticide analytes in children.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
50,50
Data
Avail
10/2013
FY2013
No Target
Establish
ed
FY2014
50,50
Units
Percent
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue the implementation of FIFRA, FFDCA, PRIA 3, FQPA and
ESA, in fulfilling the agency's commitments to protect human health and the environment
through our regulatory programs. In order to provide better accountability, the agency will track
these areas through the measures indicated above.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,770.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
454
-------
• (-$1,240.0) EPA is reducing funding for pesticides stewardship implementation activities,
including outreach and training for growers, pesticide applicators and workers, in order to
focus on higher priority activities such as other outreach efforts to the public.
• (+$1,000.0) This increase provides resources to integrate environmental outreach
activities through an intra-agency workgroup, disseminate information to the public and
increase transparency about pesticide safety and the use of lower risk pesticides. These
resources will be available to educate the public, specifically teachers, informal educators
and parents. These environmental outreach activities will support the EPA's core
mission, to expand the conversation on environmentalism.
• (-$1,281.0 / -7.5 FTE) This reduction reflects a strategic decision to focus on core
pesticide program activities and reduce the Registration program to comply with agency
wide efforts to better leverage resources. This decrease includes 7.5 FTE and associated
payroll of $1,102.0.
• (+$4.0) This change reflects a re-prioritization of regional travel.
• (+$415.0 / +0.1 FTE) This increase supports the agency's E-Enterprise efforts to enhance
electronic reporting of required submissions, focusing on simplifying reporting for small
businesses, enabling larger businesses to more readily apply data from their own
environmental management systems and integrating environmental and administrative
information from several EPA chemical management programs so as to eliminate
duplicative data entry on the part of submitters. This increase includes 0.1 FTE and
associated payroll of $15.0.
Statutory Authority:
Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act of 2012 (known as PRIA3); Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA), §408 and 409, Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA); and Endangered Species Act
(ESA).
455
-------
Pesticides: Protect the Environment from Pesticide Risk
Program Area: Pesticides Licensing
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Ensure Chemical Safety
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$37,704.0
$2,289.0
$39,993.0
287.6
FY 2012
Actuals
$36,969.0
$2,249.1
$39,218.1
294.9
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$37,810.0
$2,296.0
$40,106.0
287.6
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$39,047.0
$2,293.0
$41,340.0
281.2
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,343.0
$4.0
$1,347.0
-6.4
Program Project Description:
The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) requires the EPA to register a
pesticide if, among other things, when used in accordance with labeling and common practices,
the product "will not generally cause unreasonable adverse effects on the environment." The goal
of this program is to protect the environment from the potential risks posed by pesticide use. The
EPA must conduct risk assessments before the initial registration of each pesticide for each use,
as well as re-evaluate each pesticide at least every 15 years, as required by the Food Quality
Protection Act (FQPA). This periodic review is accomplished through the EPA Pesticide
Programs' Registration Review Program.
In addition to FIFRA responsibilities, the agency is required by the Endangered Species Act
-^^ 19^
(ESA), to ensure that pesticide regulatory decisions will not destroy or adversely modify
designated critical habitat or result in likely jeopardy to the continued existence of species listed
by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) or National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) as
threatened or endangered.
Assessing the Risks Pesticides Pose to the Environment
r-*-, -*—, 194
To accomplish the goals set out in the statutes, the EPA conducts ecological risk assessments
to determine what risks are posed by each pesticide to plants, animals, and ecosystems that are
not the targets of the pesticide and whether changes are necessary to protect the environment.
The EPA has extensive authority to require the submission of data to support its scientific
decisions and uses the latest scientific methods to conduct these ecological risk assessments. The
agency requires applicants for pesticide registration to conduct and submit a wide range of
environmental laboratory and field studies that examine the ecological effects or toxicity of a
pesticide and its breakdown products to various terrestrial and aquatic animals and plants and the
chemical fate and transport of the pesticide (how it behaves and where it goes in soil, air, and
123 http://www.fws.gov/endangered/laws-policies/section-7.html
124 http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/ecosystem/ecorisk.htm
456
-------
water resources. EPA uses this and other data to prepare an environmental fate assessment and a
hazard, or ecological effects, assessment that interprets the relevant toxicity information for the
pesticide and its degradation products. Using environmental fate data and exposure models, the
EPA's scientists estimate exposure of different animals and plants to pesticide residues in the
environment. Finally, these scientists integrate the toxicity information with the exposure data to
determine the ecological risk from the use of the pesticide, or whether it is safe for the
environment and wildlife. These processes are described more fully below.
Assessing Toxicity to Wildlife and Plants
Toxicology studies are carried out on plants and animals that have been chosen for testing
because they broadly represent non-target organisms (living things the pesticide is not intended
to kill). Animals and plants are exposed to different amounts of a pesticide to determine short-
and long-term responses to varying concentrations. Some of the impacts on animals the EPA
evaluates are the short- and long-term effects of varying amounts of pesticide exposure to insects
and other invertebrates, fish, and birds. For plants, the EPA's scientists assess how poisonous a
pesticide is to plants, how the pesticide affects a seed's ability to germinate and emerge, as well
as how healthy and vigorous the plant grows to be. Toxicological testing and scientific
measurements are conducted under strict guidelines and approved methods.125 Exacting
standards are necessary for consistency in evaluations of pesticide safety and for comparisons
among chemicals.
Determining the Environmental Fate of a Pesticide
After determining the toxicity of a pesticide, it is important to find out what happens to it in the
environment after it has been applied and therefore how it might affect the environment.
Required studies measure the interaction of pesticides with soils, air, sunlight, surface water, and
ground water. Some of the basic questions that must be answered in these studies are: (1) How
fast and by what means does the pesticide degrade? (2) What are the breakdown chemicals? (3)
How much of the pesticide or its breakdown chemicals will travel from the application site, and
where will they accumulate in the environment? These tests include how the pesticide breaks
down in water, soil, and light; how easily it evaporates in air; and how quickly it travels through
soil. The EPA uses these tests to develop estimates of pesticide concentrations in the
environment. The EPA's scientists also evaluate the role of the drift of spray and dust from
pesticide applications on pesticide residues that can cause health and environmental effects and
property damage.
Putting the Pieces Together
To evaluate a pesticide's environmental risks, the EPA examines all the toxicity and
environmental fate data together to determine what risks its use may pose to the environment.
The process of comparing toxicity information and the amount of the pesticide a given organism
may be exposed to in the environment is called risk assessment. A pesticide can be toxic at one
exposure level, and have little or no effect at another. Thus, the risk assessor's job is to determine
the relationship between possible exposures to a pesticide and the resulting harmful effects.
'http://www.epa.gov/raf/publications/guidelines-ecological-risk-assessment.htm
457
-------
If the ecosystem will not be exposed to levels of a pesticide shown to cause problems, the EPA
concludes that the pesticide is not likely to harm plants or wildlife. On the other hand, if the
ecosystem exposure levels are suspected or known to produce problems, the program will then
work to better understand the risks and reduce the risks to acceptable levels. If the risk
assessment indicates a high likelihood of hazard to wildlife, the program may require additional
testing, require that the pesticide be applied only by specially-trained people, or decide not to
allow its use. In addition, EPA may require monitoring of environmental conditions, such as
effects on water sources, or may require additional data from the registrant. Decisions on risk
reduction measures are based on a consideration of both pesticide risks and benefits.
The agency reviews all data to make sure they were developed according to standard practices
within the discipline and the EPA's test guidelines. Risk assessments are peer reviewed and
regulatory decisions are posted on the Internet for review and comment to ensure that these
actions are transparent and that stakeholders are engaged in decisions which affect their
environment. When complex scientific issues arise, the agency consults the FIFRA Scientific
Advisory Panel (http://www.epa.gov/scipolv/sap/) for independent scientific advice.
Risk Mitigation
To ensure unreasonable risks are avoided, the EPA may impose risk mitigation measures such as
modifying use rates or application methods, restricting uses, or denying uses. In some regulatory
decisions, the EPA may determine that uncertainties in the risk determination need to be reduced
and may subsequently require monitoring of environmental conditions, such as effects on water
sources or the development and submission of additional laboratory or field study data by the
pesticide registrant.
The EPA's Pesticide Programs has been actively engaged in a number of initiatives to help
prevent problems related to the drift of spray and dust from pesticide applications. These
initiatives include broadening this understanding of the science and predictability of pesticide
drift based on many new studies; improving the clarity and enforceability of product label use
directions and drift restrictions; facilitating the use of drift reducing application technologies and
best management practices to minimize drift; and promoting applicator education and training
programs.
Ensuring Proper Pesticide Use through Labeling
Under FIFRA, it is illegal to use a registered pesticide in a manner inconsistent with the label
instructions and precautions. The EPA uses pesticide labels to indicate what uses are appropriate
and to ensure that the pesticide is used at the application rates and according to the methods and
timing approved as a condition of registration. When the EPA registers a pesticide product, it
requires specific labeling instructions and precautions. When risks are identified during the
initial registration or during registration review, the agency may mitigate those risks by requiring
label changes, for example, requiring buffer zones around water sources to prevent
contamination of water or endangering aquatic plants and wildlife or changing the application
458
-------
method or rate or timing applications when pollinators are not present to prevent risks to
pollinators such as bees.
Reducing Risk Through the Use of Safer Pesticides and Methods126
To further protect the environment, this program emphasizes the use of reduced risk methods of
pest control, including the use of reduced risk pesticides; helping growers and other pesticide
users learn about new, safer products and methods of using pesticides. The EPA began
promoting reduced risk pesticides in 1993 by giving registration priority to pesticides that have
lower toxicity to people and non-target organisms such as birds, fish, and plants; low potential
for contaminating groundwater; lower use rates; low pest resistance potential; and compatibility
with Integrated Pest Management (http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/ipm/). Biological pesticides
and biotechnology often represent lower risk solutions to pest problems.
Protecting Endangered Species
As noted above, EPA is responsible for complying with the ESA. Given approximately 600
active ingredients in more than 19,000 products — many of which have multiple uses - and
approximately 1,200 listed species with diverse biological attributes, habitat requirements, and
geographic range, this presents a great challenge. As part of the EPA's determination whether a
pesticide product may be registered for a particular use, the agency assesses whether listed
endangered or threatened species or their designated critical habitat may be affected by use of the
product. Where risks are identified, the EPA must work with the FWS and the NMFS in a
consultation process to ensure these pesticide registrations will meet the ESA standard. The
EPA's Endangered Species Protection Program (ESPP) helps promote the recovery of listed
species by determining whether pesticide use in a certain geographic area may affect any listed
species. If limitations on pesticide use are necessary to protect listed species in that area, the
information is related through Endangered Species Protection Bulletins. The goal of this program
is to carry out our responsibilities under FIFRA in compliance with the ESA, without placing
unnecessary burdens on agriculture and other pesticide users.
Minimizing Environmental Impacts through Outreach and Education
Through public outreach, worker and applicator training, and programs like the Environmental
Stewardship Program,127 the agency continues to encourage the implementation of Integrated
Pest Management (IPM) and other approaches to maximize the benefits pesticides can yield
while minimizing the impacts on the environment. IPM emphasizes minimizing the use of broad
spectrum chemicals and on maximizing the use of sanitation, biological controls, and selective
methods of application. The agency continues these efforts, including development and
dissemination of brochures, education on potential benefits of IPM implementation, and outreach
on successes of IPM to encourage its use. To encourage responsible pesticide use that doesn't
endanger the environment, the EPA reaches out to the public through the internet and to workers
and professional pesticide applicators through worker training programs.
126 Reducing Pesticide Risk (http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/health/reducing.htm)
127 http://www.epa.gov/pestwise/pesp/
459
-------
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
While review of pesticides currently in the marketplace and implementation of the decisions
made as a result of these reviews are a necessary aspect of meeting the EPA's goals, they are not
sufficient. Attainment of the goal to reduce risks would be significantly hampered without the
availability of alternative products to these pesticides for the consumer. Consequently, the
success of the Registration Program in ensuring lower risk and the availability of effective
alternative products plays a large role in meeting the environmental outcome of improved
ecosystem protection. Various outreach and communication activities including workshops,
demonstrations, grants, printed materials, and the internet, will be scaled down to focus on core
activities and to accommodate regulatory priorities. The EPA will continue to assist pesticide
users in learning about new, safer products and methods of using existing products at a slower
pace.
The agency will continue to implement its statutory mandates for pesticide registration review.
Additionally, during registration review, the EPA will support obtaining risk mitigation earlier in
the process by encouraging registrants to agree to changes in uses and applications of a pesticide
beneficial to protecting endangered species prior to the EPA completing consultation with FWS
and NMFS. The EPA has developed a performance measure that tracks this work.
Protection of Endangered Species
The EPA also will continue to ensure that pesticides already in the marketplace meet the latest
safety standards by conducting risk assessments and issuing regulatory decisions to mitigate risk
to the environment. In FY 2014, pesticides beginning registration review are expected to require
comprehensive environmental assessments, including determining potential endangered species
impacts. This effort will continue to expand the office's workload due to the necessity of issuing
data call-ins (DCIs) and conducting additional environmental assessments for pesticides already
in the review pipeline.
The EPA will continue to emphasize protection of threatened or endangered species from
pesticide use, while minimizing regulatory burdens on pesticide users. The EPA will use science-
based methods and the best available data to assess the potential risk of pesticide exposure to
federally-listed threatened or endangered species and will work with partners and stakeholders to
improve complementary information and databases. As pesticides are reviewed throughout the
course of the registration review cycle, databases that describe the location and characteristics of
species, pesticides, and crops will be refined continuously with new information to help ensure
consistent and efficient consideration of potential risks to listed species.
In FY 2014, in cooperation with FWS and NMFS, the agency will continue to work toward
improving compliance with the ESA. Toward this end, the agency will consider available
recommendations from the committee of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) National
Research Council (NRC) regarding scientific and technical issues related to the methods and
assumptions used by the EPA, the FWS, and the NMFS to carry out their joint responsibilities
under the ESA and FIFRA.
460
-------
The EPA also will continue to implement use limitations through appropriate label statements,
referring pesticide users to EPA-developed Endangered Species Protection Bulletins, which are
available on the internet via Bulletins Live!128 These bulletins will, as appropriate, contain maps
of pesticide use limitation areas necessary to ensure protection of listed species and compliance
with the ESA. Any such limitations on a pesticide's use will be enforceable under the misuse
provisions of FIFRA. Bulletins are a critical mechanism for ensuring protection of listed species
from pesticide applications while minimizing the burden on agriculture and other pesticide users
by limiting pesticide use in the smallest geographic area necessary to protect the species. In FY
2014, the EPA will continue revising Bulletins Live! to provide a more interactive and more
geographically discrete platform for pesticide users to understand the use limitations necessary to
protect endangered or threatened species.
The agency will continue to provide technical support for compliance with the requirements of
the ESA. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue the integration of state-of-the-science models,
knowledge bases, and analytic processes to increase productivity and better address the challenge
of potential risks of specific pesticides to specific species. Interconnection of the various
databases within the program office will provide improved support to the risk assessment process
during registration review by allowing risk assessors to more easily analyze complex scenarios
relative to endangered species.
Protection of Water Resources
Reduced concentrations of pesticides in water sources are an indication of the efficacy of the
EPA's risk assessment, management, mitigation, and communication activities. Using sampling
data collected under the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Water Quality Assessment
(NWQA) program for urban watersheds, the EPA will continue to monitor the impact of our
regulatory decisions for three priority chemicals - diazinon, chlorpyrifos, and carbaryl. In
agricultural watersheds, the program will monitor the impact of our regulatory decisions on
azinphos-methyl and chloropyrifos, and consider whether any additional action is necessary.129
In FY 2014, the Agency will continue to work with USGS to develop sampling plans and refine
program goals. Water quality is a critical endpoint for measuring exposure and risk to the
environment. It is a high level measure of the EPA's ability to reduce exposure from these key
pesticides of concern. Two program measures will evaluate the reduction in water concentrations
of pesticides as a means to protect aquatic life, providing the EPA with information of the
efficacy of the agency's risk assessments, risk management, and risk mitigation actions for
incorporation into our regulatory and policy decisions in improving environmental protection
from the use of pesticides.
To measure program effectiveness, the EPA tracks reductions of concentrations for these four
organophosphate insecticides that most consistently exceeded the EPA's OPP's aquatic life
benchmarks for aquatic ecosystems
(http://www.epa.gov/oppefedl/ecorisk_ders/aquatic_life_benchmark.htm) during the last ten
http://www.epa.gov/espp/bulletins.htm
129Gilliom, R.J., et al. 2006. The Quality of Our Nation's Waters: Pesticides in the Nation's Streams and Ground Water, 1992-
2001. Reston, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1291, p 171. Available on the Internet at:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/2005/1291/.
461
-------
years of monitoring by the USGS NWQA program. Registration review decisions and
implementation of associated Reregi strati on Eligibility Decisions (REDs) for these four
compounds are expected to result in lower use rates and the elimination of certain uses, which
will directly contribute to reduced concentrations of these materials in the nation's waters.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(Oil) Number of Product Reregistration Decisions
FY2007
545
962
FY2008
1,075
1,194
FY2009
2,000
1,482
FY2010
1,500
1,712
FY2011
1,500
1,218
FY2012
1,200
1,255
FY2013
1,200
FY2014
1,100
Units
Decisions
Measure
Target
Actual
(091) Percent of decisions completed on time (on or before PRIA or negotiated due date).
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
99
99.7
FY2011
99
98.4
FY2012
99
99.1
FY2013
99
FY2014
99.0
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(164) Number of pesticide registration review dockets opened.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
70
75
FY2011
70
81
FY 2012
70
79
FY 2013
72
FY 2014
73
Units
Dockets
Measure
Target
Actual
(230) Number of pesticide registration review final work plans completed.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
70
70
FY2011
70
75
FY 2012
70
70
FY 2013
72
FY 2014
73
Units
Work Plans
Measure
Target
Actual
(276) Percent of registration review chemicals with identified endangered species concerns, for
which EPA obtains any mitigation of risk prior to consultation with DOC and DOL
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
5
Data
Avail
11/2013
FY 2013
5
FY 2014
15
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(268) Percent of urban watersheds that do not exceed EPA aquatic life benchmarks for three
key pesticides of concern (diazinon, chlorpyrifos and carbaryl).
FY2007
FY2008
25, 25, 30
40, 0, 30
FY2009
No Target
Establish
ed
Biennial
FY2010
5, 0, 20
6.7, 0, 33
FY2011
No Target
Establish
ed
Biennial
FY2012
5, 0, 10
0,0,9
FY2013
No Target
Establish
ed
FY2014
0,0,0
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
(269) Percent of agricultural watersheds that do not exceed EPA aquatic life benchmarks for
two key pesticides of concern (azinphos-methyl and chlorpyrifos).
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
0, 10
FY2011
No Target
Establish
ed
FY 2012
0, 10
FY 2013
No Target
Establish
ed
FY 2014
0,0
Units
Percent
462
-------
Actual
0,8
Biennial
7,7
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue the implementation of FIFRA, FFDCA, ESA, and the
Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act of 2012 (known as PRIA 3)130 in the exercise
of the agency's responsibilities for the registration and review activities. As part of the EPA's
efforts to improve accountability, the agency will track these areas through the measures above.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$2,058.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$849.0 / -5.7 FTE) This change reflects a reduction of FTE from both Registration and
stewardship implementation due to workforce restructuring in compliance with the
Agency-wide effort to better leverage our resources. This reduction includes 5.7 FTE and
associated payroll of $849.0.
• (+$133.0) This is an increase to contracting resources required by the reduction in both
FTE and payroll.
• (+$1.0) This change reflects a re-prioritization of regional travel.
Statutory Authority:
Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act of 2012 (known as PRIA3); Endangered
Species Act (ESA); Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); Food Quality
Protection Act (FQPA); Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
1 http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-l 12publl77.pdf
463
-------
Pesticides: Realize the Value of Pesticide Availability
Program Area: Pesticides Licensing
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Ensure Chemical Safety
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$12,514.0
$517.0
$13,031.0
87.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$13,924.9
$417.8
$14,342.7
90.7
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$12,554.0
$519.0
$13,073.0
87.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$12,350.0
$510.0
$12,860.0
84.2
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($164.0)
($7.0)
($171.0)
-2.8
Program Project Description:
The primary federal law that governs how the EPA oversees pesticide manufacture and use in the
United States is the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), originally
enacted in 1947. This law has been significantly amended several times, notably in the recent
past by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA) and the Pesticide Registration
Improvement Extension Act of 2012 (known as PRIA3). FIFRA requires that the EPA register
pesticides based on a finding that they will not cause unreasonable adverse effects on people and
the environment, taking into account the economic, social, and environmental costs and benefits
of the use of any pesticide. Each time the law has been amended, while Congress has
strengthened the safety standards of the act, it continues to recognize the benefits of pesticides.
This program seeks to realize the value of pesticides that can be used safely to generate the
nation's abundant and wholesome food supply, to protect the program from disease-carrying
pests, to protect our environment from the introduction of invasive species from other parts of
the world, to kill viruses and bacteria in America's hospitals, and to protect the nation's homes
from invasive insects, rodents, molds, and other unwelcome guests.
Addressing Special Local Needs
FIFRA Section 24(c), and EPA's implementing regulations, provides States with authority to
issue their own state-specific registrations under certain conditions while the EPA is responsible
for overseeing the general program. States may register a new end use product or an additional
use of a federally registered pesticide product, if the following conditions exist:
• A Special Local Need - an existing or imminent pest problem within a state for which
the state lead agency, based on satisfactory supporting information, has determined that
an appropriate federally registered pesticide product is not sufficiently available.
• The additional use is covered by any necessary tolerances or other clearances under the
464
-------
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
Registration for the same use has not previously been denied, disapproved, suspended,
or canceled by the EPA or voluntarily canceled by the registrant subsequent to issuance
of a notice of intent to cancel because of health or environmental concerns.
Registration is in accord with the purposes of FIFRA.
These 24(c) registrations become federal registrations within 90 days unless the EPA objects to
them. The EPA's role is to ensure that each 24(c) registration meets the requirements of FIFRA.
Emergency, Quarantine, and Crisis Exemptions
FIFRA Section 18, and EPA's implementing regulations, authorizes the EPA, in the event of an
emergency, such as a severe pest infestation, to allow an unregistered use of a pesticide for a
limited time if the EPA determines that emergency conditions exist which require such an
exemption.
An "Emergency Condition" is an urgent, non-routine situation that requires the use of a
pesticide(s). Emergency exemptions may be requested by any state or federal agency, but
typically come from state lead agricultural agencies. The agency must also establish any
necessary tolerances (maximum allowable residue levels) to cover pesticide residues in food, if
applicable. Tolerances established for emergency exemption uses are time-limited,
corresponding to the time that treated commodities might be found in channels of trade.
A second type of emergency exemption is allowed for "public health" emergencies. A state or
federal agency may request a public health emergency exemption to control a pest that will cause
a significant risk to human health.
The third type of exemption, the "Quarantine" exemption, is requested to control the introduction
or spread of an invasive pest species not previously known to occur in the United States and its
Territories.
Finally, when the emergency is so immediate that there is not enough time to go through the
normal review for an exemption and there is an immediate need, or, following communication
with and clearance by the EPA, a state lead agency or federal agency may issue a "crisis
exemption" allowing the unregistered use to proceed for up to 15 days. During the consultation
before the state or federal agency declares a crisis, the EPA performs a brief review to determine
whether there are any apparent concerns, and whether the appropriate safety findings required by
FQPA may be made. If the EPA identifies concerns, the crisis exemption may not be allowed
unless those concerns can be resolved.
Meeting Agriculture's Need for Safe, Effective Pest Control Products
With the passage of FQPA, Congress acknowledged the importance of and need for "reduced-
risk pesticides" and supported expedited agency review to help these pesticides reach the market
sooner and replace older and potentially riskier chemicals. The law defined a reduced risk
pesticide as one which "may reasonably be expected to accomplish one or more of the following:
465
-------
(1) reduces pesticide risks to human health; (2) reduces pesticide risks to non-target organisms;
(3) reduces the potential for contamination of valued, environmental resources, or (4) broadens
adoption of Integrated Pest Management (http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/ipm.htm) or
makes it more effective." The EPA developed procedures and guidelines on expedited review of
applications for registration or amendments for a reduced risk pesticide. The agency expanded
the reduced risk pesticide program to include consideration of new active ingredients, new uses
of active ingredients already deemed to be reduced risk, and amendments to all uses deemed to
be reduced risk. The EPA gives priority to review of reduced risk pesticides and works with the
regulated community and user groups to refine review and registration procedures.
FIFRA 's Version of "Generic " Pesticides
FIFRA also authorizes the EPA to register products that are identical or substantially similar to
already registered products (known as "me too" products). Applicants for these substantially
similar products may rely on, or "cite" (and offer to pay a fair share for) data already submitted
by another registrant. The entry of these new products into the market can cause price reductions
resulting from new competition and broader access to products. These price declines generate
competition that provides benefits to farmers and other consumers.
"Minor Crops " - Addressing Growers' Need for Pest Control
The FQPA amendments also made special provisions for minor uses of pesticides. Minor uses of
pesticides are defined as uses for which pesticide product sales do not provide sufficient
economic incentive to justify the costs of developing and maintaining its registrations with the
EPA. Such "minor" crops include many fruits and vegetables. Minor uses also include use on
commercially grown flowers, trees and shrubs, certain applications to major crops such as wheat
or corn where the pest problem is not widespread, and many public health applications.
Some minor uses have been lost through lack of registrant support during the reregi strati on
process, resulting in grower concerns that adequate pest control tools will no longer be available
for many minor crops. The agency works closely with the USDA's Inter-Regional Research
Project No. 4 (IR-4) (http://ir4.rutgers.edu/) to generate residue data for tolerances on minor
crops in order to minimize the burden of data generation for minor uses. The EPA and the USDA
operate early alert systems to notify growers when a pesticide use for a minor crop is about to be
canceled. The EPA also provides advance public notice of a proposed cancellation to allow time
for another registrant to consider maintaining the pesticide use.
Meeting the Need for Non-agricultural Pesticides
Farmers are not the only ones who need pesticides. Pest control is also needed in our homes,
schools, and workplaces. Pesticides control pests that spread disease like West Nile Virus,
malaria and rabies, to name a few. They disinfect our swimming pools and sanitize bathrooms;
they combat mold and are essential to sterilize surfaces in hospitals and other health care
facilities.
466
-------
Outreach and Education
Giving priority to reduced risk and Integrated Pest Management (IPM) friendly pesticides is one
way of protecting people and the environment. IPM emphasizes minimizing the use of broad
spectrum chemicals and on maximizing the use of sanitation, biological controls, and selective
methods of application, and it relies on pesticide users being well-informed about the pest
control options available and how to best use them. For example, bed bug infestations have
increased dramatically throughout the country. The demand for efficacious bed bug control has
increased right along with it; EPA has posted on its website a list of pesticides registered for
bedbug control.131 But it is not enough to have pesticide products registered to control bed bugs.
People need to know which ones to use, how to use them, and how to maintain the site, so they
do not return. The Pesticide Program is invested in outreach and training efforts for people who
use pesticides and the public in general.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA's statutory and regulatory functions for the pesticides program include registration,
product reregi strati on, registration review implementation, risk reduction implementation,
rulemaking, and program management. During FY 2014, the EPA will review and register new
pesticides, new uses for existing pesticides, and act on other registration requests in accordance
with FIFRA and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) standards as well as PRIA
3 timeframes. Many of these actions will be for reduced-risk pesticides which, once registered
and used by consumers, will increase benefits to society. Working together with the affected user
communities, through IPM and related activities, the agency plans to accelerate the adoption of
these lower-risk products.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to support the IPM efforts in schools and agriculture to
enhance a healthy environment. Through implementation of IPM activities, the agency will
continue to address a wide range of school and agricultural risk from pesticides in food.
Implementation of IPM methods also will help to reduce exposure to pesticide drift in
communities. By leveraging partnerships with states and tribes, the EPA will continue to support
implementation of IPM-related activities. The agency will engage partners in the development of
tools and informational brochures to promote IPM efforts and to provide guidance to schools,
farmers, other partners, and stakeholders.
Similarly, the agency will continue its work sharing efforts with its international partners.
Through these collaborative activities and resulting international registrations, international trade
barriers will be reduced, enabling domestic users to more readily adopt these newer pesticides
into their crop protection programs and reduce the costs of registration through work sharing.
The Section 18 Program provides exemptions to growers for use of pesticides that are not
registered for their crops during emergency situations. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to
process incoming requests for emergency exemptions. The agency is tracking responsiveness to
emergency situations through a performance measure with the goal of reaching a decision within
45 days of the submittal. The economic benefit of the Section 18 Program to growers is the
http: //cfpub. epa. go v/oppref/bedbug/
467
-------
avoidance of potential losses incurred in the absence of pesticides exempted under FIFRA's
emergency exemption provisions.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(240) Maintain timeliness of Section 18 Emergency Exemption Decisions
FY2007
45
36.60
FY2008
45
34
FY 2009
45
40
FY 2010
45
50
FY2011
45
52
FY 2012
45
43
FY 2013
45
FY 2014
45
Units
Days
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$474.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$520.0 / -2.9 FTE) This reflects a reduction to both the registration program and in
stewardship implementation activities due to workforce restructuring complying with the
agencywide efforts for better leveraging of resources. This reduction includes 2.9 FTE
and associated payroll of $409.0.
• (-$123.0) This change reflects a reduction from IT efficiencies and consolidation of IT
contracts to support the Pesticides Program.
• (+$5.0) This change reflects a re-prioritization of regional travel resources.
Statutory Authority:
Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act of 2012 (known as PRIA3); Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended; Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) as amended, §408 and 409; Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA);
and Endangered Species Act (ESA).
468
-------
Science Policy and Biotechnology
Program Area: Pesticides Licensing
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Ensure Chemical Safety
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,754.0
$1,754.0
6.3
FY 2012
Actuals
$1,635.4
$1,635.4
7.6
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$1,765.0
$1,765.0
6.3
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$1,510.0
$1,510.0
6.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($244.0)
($244.0)
-0.3
Program Project Description:
The Science Policy and Biotechnology Program provides scientific and policy expertise,
coordinates the EPA's intra-agency, interagency, and international efforts, and facilitates
information sharing related to core science policy issues concerning pesticides, toxic chemicals,
and products derived through biotechnology. Many offices within the EPA regularly address
biotechnology issues and the coordination among affected offices allows for coherent and
consistent scientific policy from a broad agency perspective. The Biotechnology Program assists
in formulating the EPA's and United States' positions on biotechnology issues, including
representation on United States delegations to international meetings. Such international activity
is coordinated with the Department of State. In addition, the Science Policy and Biotechnology
Program provides for independent, external scientific peer review through the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act Scientific Advisory Panel (FIFRA SAP), a federal
advisory committee.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA will continue to have a lead role in evaluating the scientific and technical issues
associated with plant-incorporated protectants (PIPs) including those based on plant viral coat
proteins. The EPA also will, in conjunction with an interagency workgroup, continue to maintain
and further develop the U.S. Regulatory Agencies Unified Biotechnology web site which focuses
on the laws and regulations governing agricultural products of modern biotechnology and
includes a searchable database of genetically engineered crop plants that have completed review
and are approved for use in the United States.132
The EPA will continue to evaluate the regulatory structure for PIPs and, as needed, clarify the
legal requirements of PIP products at various production phases. The EPA also will continue to
identify and respond to instances where there are potentially significant violations and also
address those activities that the agency does not believe warrant regulation under FIFRA.
http://wwwl.usgs.gov/usbiotechreg/
469
-------
In addition, a number of biotechnology international activities will continue to be supported by
the EPA. Examples include representation on the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development's Working Group on the Harmonization of Regulatory Oversight in Biotechnology
and the Task Force on the Safety of Food and Feed.
The FIFRA SAP, operating under the rules and regulations of the Federal Advisory Committee
Act, will continue to serve as the primary external independent scientific peer review mechanism
for the EPA's pesticide programs. As the nation's primary pesticide regulatory agency, the EPA
makes decisions on a wide-range of pesticide uses in the United States. These decisions require
that EPA review scientific data on risks that pesticides pose to wildlife, farm workers, pesticide
applicators, sensitive populations, and the general public. The scientific data involved in these
decisions are complex, which requires the EPA to seek technical advice from the FIFRA SAP.
Scientific peer review is a critical component of the EPA's use of the best available science.
The FIFRA SAP typically conducts eight to ten reviews each year on a variety of scientific
topics. Specific topics to be placed on the SAP agenda are usually confirmed a few months in
advance of each session and include difficult, new, or controversial scientific issues identified in
the course of the EPA's Pesticide Program activities.
Performance Targets:
The Science and Biotechnology program supports the registration of new pesticides and review
of existing pesticides; and efforts related to toxic substances, specifically, the Chemical Risk
Review and Reduction program. In addition, the Science Policy and Biotechnology program
supports performance results in other programs such as the Endocrine Disrupters Screening
Program. These measures can be found in the 8-year array in the Program Performance and
Assessment section. Currently, there are no performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$121.0) This decrease is the net effect of the recalculation of base workforce costs due
to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$57.0 / -0.3 FTE) This decrease reflects savings achieved through implementation of
innovative technological changes in data access and storage. The reduced resources
include 0.3 FTE and associated payroll of $44.0.
• (-$62.0) This change reflects a reduction found from IT efficiencies and consolidation in
IT contracts that support the science policy and biotechnology program.
• (-$4.0) This decrease is a minor technical adjustment for administrative expenses.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) 7 U.S.C.136(a),136(c), 136(e),
136(f), 136(g), 136(j), 136(o), 136w(a)(b)(d)(e); Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) 15
470
-------
U.S.C. 2604h (5) (A), 2607b; Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act (FFDCA) 21 U.S.C. 346a,
371; Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) 5aU.S.C. 9,10,11,12 & 14.
471
-------
Program Area: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
472
-------
RCRA: Waste Management
Program Area: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Preserve Land
(Dollars in Thousands)
Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest
System Fund
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$0.0
$63,500.0
$63,500.0
368.3
FY 2012
Actuals
$0.0
$62,115.1
$62,115.1
367.5
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$0.0
$63,696.0
$63,696.0
368.3
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$2,000.0
$66,209.0
$68,209.0
371.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$2,000.0
$2,709.0
$4,709.0
2.7
Program Project Description:
The Waste Management program implements the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act,
which is critical to comprehensive and protective management of solid and hazardous materials
from cradle to grave. The comprehensive national regulations define solid and hazardous waste,
and impose standards on anyone who generates, recycles, transports, treats, stores, or disposes of
waste.
Under RCRA, the EPA has been working successfully in partnership with state and local
governments, as well as American businesses and non-governmental organizations, to facilitate
significant change in waste and materials management practices to:
• design better waste management systems that prevent contamination from adversely
impacting our communities;
• place the costs of cleaning up contamination on facilities that pollute rather than
taxpayers; and
• consider wastes as potential commodities that can be incorporated into development of
new products, allowing us to conserve valuable natural resources, save energy, and
reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
The national RCRA program continues the environmental and human health improvements
begun by other EPA programs. For example, solid waste generated by improvements in air
pollution control devices and wastewater treatment systems that have removed organic and
inorganic contaminants from our air and water, is managed by RCRA. The RCRA program's
waste management activities facilitate the safe management of waste, providing a critical service
to the U.S. economy, also providing jobs to those directly involved in the waste management
sector.
In partnership with the states, the program leverages resources to achieve compliance with the
requirements of the RCRA waste program. It protects human health, communities, and the
473
-------
environment through: enforceable controls, including permits that minimize hazardous waste
generation; as well as preventing the release of hazardous constituents from hazardous waste
facilities; and provide for safe management of hazardous wastes.
The RCRA program requires facility owners or operators to demonstrate that they have financial
mechanisms in place for any eventual closure, post-closure and corrective action activities. The
EPA's expertise in assessing cost estimates and financial assurance documentation is critical to
protecting taxpayer dollars by ensuring that non-federal funds will be available to properly close,
clean up, and monitor the site if, for example, the facility is abandoned or the owner goes
bankrupt.
One of the key purposes of the RCRA permitting program is to prevent hazardous waste
treatment, storage and disposal (TSD) facilities from turning into future Superfund sites that
contaminate the nation's air, land, and water resources. According to a 2007 study, Analysis of
40 Potential TSDs133, the EPA has been successful in achieving this goal. The study looked at a
group of the 40 potential RCRA TSD facilities that were proposed to the Superfund National
Priorities List after 1990. It concluded that the contamination at the recently proposed sites
primarily occurred before the RCRA permitting program was established, and that the RCRA
regulations worked as intended.
Finally, recognizing the benefits of recycling, the EPA is seeking to provide guidance designed
to encourage solid and hazardous materials recycling with adequate safeguards. The agency must
ensure that materials are destined for legitimate recycling in order to protect human health and
the environment. The EPA also is working to ensure that the public is educated about recycling
and solid waste reduction through environmental outreach and training activities.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Assisting Hazardous Waste Management
Major activities in FY 2014 will involve managing the RCRA permitting program and
continuing development of the electronic hazardous waste manifest program (e-Manifest). The
RCRA permitting program protects people and ecosystems from exposure to dangerous
chemicals from hazardous waste generated during the production of goods and services. The
permitting program is responsible for the hazardous waste permits issued under RCRA, as the
permitting of municipal solid waste facilities is the purview of our state and local partners. One
of the goals of RCRA's permitting process is to influence facility design and operation in ways
that ensure protection of human health and the environment. The national RCRA program
provides leadership and oversight of states which receive State and Tribal Assistance Grant
funds through the Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance Program for meeting our legal
obligation to:
• reassess land disposal permits every five years;
• renew all permits at least every ten years;
• maintain permits by modifying them to address changes in operations; and
http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/tsd/td/ldu/financial/documents/forty.pdf.
474
-------
• monitor facility performance to ensure that permits continue to protect people and
ecosystems from harmful exposures to hazardous pollutants.
Although the vast majority of hazardous waste management facilities have government-approved
controls in place, there is a continuing challenge to process modification requests or renewal
applications in a timely manner so that permittees who seek changes to their facility design or
operations (e.g., to take advantage of improvements in technology or shifts in waste streams
being managed), are not delayed in effecting such changes.
In FY 2014, the RCRA permitting program continues to properly update permits so they remain
protective. To prevent future contamination and to protect the health of million of Americans
who live within one mile of a hazardous waste management facility (such as a RCRA corrective
action facility and/or a facility subject to RCRA permitting requirements), the EPA and its state
partners will issue, update, or maintain RCRA permits for approximately 10 thousand hazardous
waste units (such as incinerators and landfills) at 2,465 facilities that treat, store, or dispose of
hazardous waste. In addition, the EPA directly implements the entire RCRA program in Iowa
and Alaska.134 The EPA provides leadership, worksharing, and support to the 50 states and
territories authorized to implement the permitting program. The RCRA permitting program,
which ensures the controls remain protective, faces a significant workload of approximately 380
backlog135 and 80-117 new facilities added each year. The EPA is facing an increasing amount of
implementation support responsibility at the request of states, including addressing complex
regulatory and statutory interpretation issues. Requests of this type of support are expected to
continue through FY 2014.
The EPA will work with states to meet the annual target of implementing permits, initial
approved controls, and updated controls at 100 RCRA hazardous waste management facilities,
however it is possible that this target will not be met. The EPA expects that the existing backlog
of permits and program implementation support requests will remain constant or increase in the
foreseeable future.
In FY 2014, the agency will continue to work on developing136 an electronic hazardous waste
manifest program, as authorized by the Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest Establishment Act
of 2012. When fully implemented, the e-Manifest program will reduce the time and cost
associated with issuing, maintaining, using and processing data from hazardous waste manifests.
It will also decrease the reporting burden for firms regulated under RCRA's hazardous waste
provisions by a range of $77 to $126 million annually. The e-Manifest program contributes to the
agency's goal to reduce the paperwork burden on regulated entities where feasible and is a
flagship program for EPA's E-Enterprise investment.
134 http://www.epa.gov/wastes/hazard/tsd/pennit/pgprarpt.htm.
135 The "backlog" is composed of the facilities that have unmet permitting requirements for initial permits (41) and facilities that
need a permit renewal and are past their permit expiration date (338) (current data as of 7-20-12). In the process of adjusting the
baseline after the end of the FY 2012 plan, a number of facilities were found not to need permit renewals when the data was
reviewed and corrected.
136 For the purpose of the e-manifest system the term 'development' means the appropriate mix of purchasing or enhancing
relevant COTS (commercial off-the-shelf) or GOTS (government off-the-shelf) software and developing new components needed
to meet the requirements specified during the e-manifest planning phase in 2013.
475
-------
The Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest Establishment Act requires this system to be in place
by October 2015. Once this system is in place, the Administrator may impose reasonable service
fees on users to implement the program. The fees can be used to offset both the system
development costs and the annual operations and maintenance costs for the system. In FY 2014,
the agency is requesting $2.4 million in the EPM appropriation and an additional $2 million in
the new e-Manifest appropriation, both under the Waste Management program, for a total of $4.4
million for system and rule development.
In FY 2013, EPA will complete the project planning phase and expects to award one or more
contracts by the fourth quarter of FY 2013. EPA also expects to have completed the regulation
that authorizes the electronic transmittal of manifests. In FY 2014, EPA will perform the
following key activities:
• begin the e-Manifest system acquisition/development process to meet the requirements
outlined during the project planning phase;
• conduct state and industry outreach;
• begin to develop the economic models to support the development of a user-fee rule; and
• begin needed analyses to support further revision of EPA regulations needed to
implement an e-manifest program.
Providing Adequate Protection
An important objective in FY 2014 is ensuring owners and operators of hazardous waste
facilities and reclamation facilities provide proof of their ability to pay for the cleanup, closure,
and post-closure care of their facilities. Verifying adequate financial assurance protects taxpayer
dollars, avoiding the risk of sites being addressed by the Superfund program, at the taxpayers'
expense.137 By reviewing information submitted to RCRAInfo by the permitted community, the
EPA evaluates the adequacy of current cost estimates for closure and post-closure care of typical
hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal facilities.
The agency will continue to pursue multiple high priority regulatory actions under RCRA,
including encouraging proper management of coal combustion residuals; promulgating
regulations to improve the management of pharmaceutical waste; and updating regulations on
hazardous waste generators.
The waste management program implements the national polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB)
cleanup and disposal program in accordance with the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) by
issuing PCB cleanup and disposal approvals and providing national leadership and expertise
(e.g., by identifying cross-cutting issues of national importance, issuing guidance, and
responding to inquiries from the EPA regional offices, states, and the regulated community). The
approvals are issued to ensure safe management of PCB wastes and support PCB cleanup
137 For additional information, see EPA's financial assurance guidance documents at:
http://yosemite.epa.gov/osw/rcra.nsf/ea6e50dc6214725285256bf00063269d/2bd455873baf7f6b852572a7006b8023IOpenDocum
entand
http://yosemite.epa.gov/osw/rcra.nsf/ea6e50dc6214725285256bf00063269d/B570C524A55489C9852573D2005EOD02/$file/147
79.pdf
476
-------
activities. As noted below, EPA is reducing funding in FY 2014 for Regional offices including
resources for PCB approvals in order to focus on higher priority activities. Since PCB approvals
are issued by EPA regional offices and EPA headquarters, and not delegated to the states, EPA
expects some delays in approvals at the national level. The Agency estimates approximately 20
disposal and storage approvals are issued per year, and as of July 2012, the program included
more than 100 permitted disposal and/or storage facilities.
138
The RCRA program will work with the Department of Agriculture, the Food and Drug
Administration, and the Department of Homeland Security to prepare for possible threats to the
food supply in FY 2014. These responsibilities are consistent with specific requirements laid out
in such recent documents as the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2010 and the National
Security Strategy139 that define the EPA's role in providing guidance and technical support to
communities.
Additional work that the Waste Management program will pursue in FY 2014 includes the
following:
• working with states and others to implement the new Definition of Solid Waste rule and
to encourage environmentally-sound hazardous waste recycling;
• providing technical expertise for waste management in natural or man-made disasters;
• supporting partnership efforts on electronics and the U.S.-Mexico Border program;
• providing technical waste management assistance to tribes;140
• implementing the regulation identifying non-hazardous secondary materials that are solid
waste, providing technical support to the regulated community through determinations
about the scope of the rule and its applicability;
• ensuring that environmental outreach resources are continuing to be disseminated to the
public about recycling through an intra-agency workgroup and increasing transparency
about America's solid waste reduction. Other outreach activities include community
training through issuance of grants, innovative awards, and collaboration with national
environmental organizations. These environmental outreach activities will continue to
support the EPA's core mission to expand the conversation on environmentalism; and
• implementing the conditional exemption for carbon dioxide sequestration, pursuant to
recommendations from the President's Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) Task Force
report.141
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(HWO) Number of hazardous waste facilities with new or updated controls.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
100
115
FY2010
100
140
FY2011
100
130
FY2012
100
117
FY2013
100
FY2014
100
Units
Facilities
138 EPA is developing a national database to better track the number of PCB approvals.
139 http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/national_securitv_strategy.pdf.
140 Of the 574 federally recognized tribes, as of September 2011, 134 have an integrated waste management plan. This is an
increase of 17 tribes from FY 2010.
141 http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/policy/ccs task force.html.
477
-------
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$2,411.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$28.0 / +0.2 FTE) As part of the agency's E-Enterprise investment, this increases 0.2
FTE and $28.0 in associated payroll to begin the process to streamline financial reporting
requirements across multiple EPA programs. As several environmental statutes (e.g.
RCRA, CERCLA, SDWA, and TSCA) impose financial assurance requirements on the
regulated community, the agency will use these resources to assimilate these
requirements with the goal to reduce reporting burden on industry.
• (+$2,370.0 / +0.5 FTE) As part of the agency's E-Enterprise investment, this change
reflects an investment to develop an interactive federal data system that will provide the
capability for industry to submit their hazardous waste data to EPA electronically rather
than on paper. This shared solution will reduce reporting burden on industry and improve
services for the regulated community. This funding will be used to develop an e-Manifest
program by providing project management oversight; developing the user-fee rule; and
identifying changes to existing regulations to support integration with the Biennial
Report. These resources include $2.3 million in contract dollars and 0.5 FTE, $70.0 in
associated payroll.
• (+$290.0 / +2.0 FTE) This additional FTE and associated payroll will provide increased
support for state permitting activities. In addition, these FTE will help support increased
implementation support responsibility at the request of authorized states, such as
performing risk assessments for hazardous waste combustor facilities and providing
technical assistance on site-specific permitting issues. This increase includes 2.0 FTE and
$290.0 in associated payroll.
• (-$2,515.0) EPA is reducing funding for Regional offices, resources for PCB approvals,
and support and outreach provided to tribes for their integrated waste management plans
in order to focus on higher priority activities. The reduction decreased activities under
state worksharing arrangements and resulted in corresponding changes to performance
measures.
• (+$375.0) This increase is to provide resources to integrate environmental outreach
activities through an intra-agency workgroup to create educational resources to
disseminate information to the public and increase transparency about solid waste
reduction, recycling and other critical environmental issues. These resources will be
available to educate the public, specifically teachers, informal educators and parents.
These environmental outreach activities will support the EPA's core mission to expand
the conversation on environmentalism.
478
-------
• (-$213.0) This reflects a reduction in travel to support the Administration's Management
Agenda goal of reducing travel and conference spending.
• (-$37.0) This change reflects a reduction found from IT efficiencies and consolidation in
IT contracts that provide basic infrastructure and workforce support for the RCRA Waste
Management program.
Statutory Authority:
Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and the
Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest Establishment Act, 42 United States Code (U.S.C.) 6901
et seq. - Sections 3004, 3005, 3024, and 8001, and the Toxic Substance Control Act, 15 U.S.C.
2605 et seq. - Section 6.
479
-------
RCRA: Corrective Action
Program Area: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Restore Land
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$39,066.0
$39,066.0
244.1
FY 2012
Actuals
$39,160.2
$39,160.2
234.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$39,159.0
$39,159.0
244.1
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$40,210.0
$40,210.0
240.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,144.0
$1,144.0
-3.6
Program Project Description:
An essential element of the EPA's hazardous waste management program under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act is the statutory requirement that facilities managing hazardous
wastes must clean up releases of hazardous constituents that could adversely impact human
health and the environment. The EPA focuses its corrective action resources on the 3,747
operating hazardous waste facilities that are a subset of approximately sic thousand sites with
potential corrective action obligations.142 The total area covered by these corrective action sites is
approximately 18 million acres.143 These facilities include some of the most highly
contaminated, technically challenging, and potentially threatening sites the EPA confronts in any
of its cleanup programs. The cost to clean up sites under the RCRA program can vary widely,
with some costing less than $1 million, and others exceeding $50 million dollars.
A successful RCRA corrective action program assures that hazardous waste management
facilities address contamination during the operational life of the facility when they are
financially viable. RCRA saves the taxpayers from bearing the significant cleanup costs under
Superfund and shortens the time for completing protective cleanups.
The EPA works in partnership with states, having authorized 43 states and territories to directly
implement the corrective action program.144 The agency continues to provide leadership and
support to its state partners and serves as lead regulator at a significant, and increasing, number
of facilities. States have been hit particularly hard in the cleanup area due downsizing and are
looking to the federal program for assistance. As a result and at the request of states, EPA has
resumed work previously agreed to by states under work-sharing agreements, particularly for
142 EPA tracks corrective action obligations for RCRA-permitted facilities. There are additional non-permitted facilities that may
have corrective action obligations not tracked by EPA. The EPA recognizes that the total universe of such facilities or sites
"subject to" corrective action universe is between five and six thousand facilities or sites, and is evaluating this universe to
determine if cleanup work is needed.
143 As compiled by RCRA Info.
144 State implementation of the CA Program is funded through the STAG (Program Project 11) and matching State contributions.
480
-------
sites that have complex issues
assessments.
145
or for more specialty components such as ecological risk
In conjunction with the states, the EPA established a long-term goal of constructing cleanup
remedies, assuring that human exposures are eliminated and controlling groundwater migration
at 95 percent of these facilities by FY 2020. Once these remedies are in place, the EPA and the
states will need to monitor their implementation until contaminant cleanup goals are met, and
will have to maintain institutional controls at many of these facilities for extended periods of
time.
In addition, the agency maintains a national hazardous waste information system, RCRAInfo,
which is critical for managing corrective action and the overall RCRA program. This data
management system provides reporting capabilities and data analysis support to the EPA and the
states.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA has made considerable progress in assuring that prior to completion of cleanups,
unacceptable human exposures are eliminated or controlled as soon as possible. As can be seen
in the graph below, the RCRA corrective action program is making significant progress
preventing exposure to toxic chemicals, while longer-term cleanup progresses. At these facilities,
the EPA has taken action to address any unacceptable exposures and eliminate acute risks while
continuing to pursue long-term, permanent cleanups. Since FY 2002, the number of RCRA
corrective action sites designated as having human exposure to contaminants under control has
increased by 196 percent.
4000
3000
2000
1000
Cumulative Number of RCRA CA Sites with Human
Exposure to Contaminants Under Control
FY 2002-FY 2014
FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13* FY14*
* Estimated achievements for FY13 and FY14 based on current goals
The EPA's role is to see that corrective action facilities are cleaned up and nearby communities
are protected from the hazards they pose before these facilities become Superfund sites.
' For example, vapor intrusion, wetlands contamination or extensive groundwater issues.
481
-------
In FY 2014, the EPA will focus resources on those sites that present the highest risk to human
health and the environment and implement actions to end or reduce these threats. The agency
will focus on completing site investigations to identify threats, establishing interim remedies to
reduce and eliminate exposure; and selecting and constructing safe, effective long-term remedies
that maintain the viability of the operating facility. These activities will be consistent with the
programmatic response developed by the agency after a 2011 GAO report on the RCRA
146
corrective action program.
The RCRA corrective action universe contains a range of hundreds of very large, highly
contaminated sites, in addition to many small, but equally contaminated sites. In FY 2014, EPA
will reduce funding for contracts support in order to increase resources for corrective action
contracts and grant resources and other higher priorities. Reduced funding for contracts support
correspondingly changes targets related to the program's annual GPRA goals. EPA will also
decrease contracts for technical assistance at priority sites, delay policy and technical guidance,
reduce community engagement activities, slow work at some sites, and delay implementation of
interim and final remedies.
To improve the accountability, transparency, and effectiveness of cleanup programs, the agency
initiated the multi-year Integrated Cleanup Initiative (ICI) in FY 2010. The ICI better utilizes the
EPA's assessment and cleanup authorities and resources to address a greater number of
contaminated sites, accelerate cleanups, and put sites back into safe, productive use. Ensuring
sustainable future uses for RCRA corrective action facilities is considered in remedy selections
and in the construction of those remedies, and is consistent with the EPA's emphasis on land
restoration in its FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan. As in previous years, the agency continues to
provide technical assistance to authorized states in the areas of site characterization, sampling,
remedy selection, and long-term stewardship at our 2020 baseline sites.
In addition, the EPA will continue to implement the program under Section 761 of the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA) to reduce polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) exposure from
improper disposal and spills through cleanups. Each year, the EPA must review and approve
cleanups involving PCBs because authority for PCBs is not delegated to the states. These
cleanups are at times extensive, complex, and challenging (e.g., Superfund PCB sediment sites or
impaired water bodies). In addition, the EPA also addresses cleanups of PCB-contaminated
caulk147 in such places as elementary schools, office buildings, airport runways, and drinking
water basins. Annually, the EPA approves over 100 cleanup applications by site owners and
operators. Each application is unique and can take months to review and approve, making the
workload difficult to predict. The EPA continues to work closely with the regulated community
to answer technical questions, provide opportunities for community input to cleanup decision-
making, and issue guidance on the safe cleanup and disposal of PCB wastes.
146 Hazardous Waste: Early Goals Have Been Met in EPA's Corrective Action Program but Resource and Technical Challenges
Will Constrain Future Progress (GAO-11-514), July 2011.
147 PCB contamination in caulk can be upwards of 100,000 ppm (i.e., 10%).
482
-------
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(CA1) Cumulative percentage of RCRA facilities with human exposures to toxins under control.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
No Target
Establish
ed
65
FY 2010
69
72
FY2011
72
77
FY 2012
81
81
FY 2013
85
FY 2014
90
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(CA2) Cumulative percentage of RCRA facilities with migration of contaminated groundwater
under control.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
No Target
Establish
ed
58
FY2010
61
63
FY2011
64
67
FY2012
69
72
FY2013
73
FY2014
80
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(CAS) Cumulative percentage of RCRA facilities with final remedies constructed.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
No Target
Establish
ed
32
FY2010
35
37
FY2011
38
42
FY2012
46
47
FY2013
51
FY2014
57
Units
Percent
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,558.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$511.0 / -3.6 FTE) EPA will reduce funding for federal oversight, technical assistance,
and contracts support to states. The reduction includes 3.6 FTE, $511.0 in associated
payroll.
• (+$97.0) This reflects an increase in corrective action contracts and grant resources to
provide for enhanced focus on site investigations to identify threats, the establishment of
interim remedies to reduce and eliminate exposure, and the selection and construction of
safe, effective long-term remedies that maintain the viability of the operating facility.
Statutory Authority:
Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42
United States Code (U.S.C.). 6901 et seq. - Sections 3004, 3005, SOOland the Toxic Substance
Control Act, 15 U.S.C. 2605 et seq. - Section 6.
483
-------
RCRA: Waste Minimization & Recycling
Program Area: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Preserve Land
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$9,468.0
$9,468.0
53.3
FY 2012
Actuals
$8,918.4
$8,918.4
55.6
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$9,499.0
$9,499.0
53.3
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$9,400.0
$9,400.0
52.4
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($68.0)
($68.0)
-0.9
Program Project Description:
Section 6902 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) supports the protection of
human health and the environment through the conservation of materials and energy resources.
The EPA is investing in Sustainable Materials Management (SMM) practices to create a national
cradle-to-cradle approach. This involves practicing conservation during the useful life of
materials and natural resources, thereby reducing and reusing the total quantity of materials and
avoiding waste. An effective cradle-to-cradle approach integrates information to create a national
focus, formulates and issues appropriate policy, and addresses market challenges. Strong federal
leadership and action is needed, due to the impact the U.S. economy has on global materials
usage. U.S. raw material use rose 5.1 times faster than the population in the last century.148 The
generation, recycling and disposal of materials is also associated with 42 percent of U.S.
greenhouse gas emissions.149
The EPA continues to encourage safe, beneficial uses of materials that are protective of human
health and the environment. While EPA's former Resource Conservation Challenge program
focused on materials' "end of life," SMM is structured to look at a larger universe of materials,
the products and services they are used for, and analyze materials from all life cycle stages.
SMM requires the EPA to consider the human health and environmental impacts associated with
the full life cycle of materials—from raw materials extraction, through transportation,
processing, manufacturing, and use, as well as reuse, recycling, and disposal. The cradle-to-
cradle approach highlights that waste materials are commodities that can be utilized to grow key
industries and associated jobs, as well as allows the U.S. to conserve virgin resources, including
fossil fuels, minerals, and precious metals. SMM preserves resources in the following ways:
• Minimizing inefficient or unnecessary waste generation.
• Encouraging the use of materials with less environmental impact.
148 Center for Sustainable Systems, U.S. Material Factsheets (2010) and USGS (2007) Effects of Regulation and Technology on
End Uses of Nonfuel Mineral Commodities in the United States.
149 U.S. EPA, OSWER, OCPA. "Opportunities to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions through Materials and Land Management
Practices." September 2009. Online: http://www.epa.gov/oswer/docs/ghg land and materials management.pdf.
484
-------
• Reducing and offsetting virgin material consumption through sustainable materials
management, including reusing and recycling materials.
The EPA continues to play an essential role in SMM by convening stakeholders, providing
credible science and information, providing transparent and public information, promoting new
ideas and approaches via challenges and recognition, and developing standards. The EPA will
focus on a small set of clearly-articulated, results-driven priorities that emphasize the principles
of SMM and are well integrated with work in other parts of the EPA (e.g., Pollution Prevention)
and states.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The implementation of SMM is fundamental to ensuring that adequate resources are available to
meet today's needs and those of the future. In FY 2014, the RCRA program will focus on the
advancement of the SMM concept and specifically:
• Provide national leadership and direction on materials management and the safe and
effective reuse/recycling of materials.
• Convene meetings with parties who would otherwise not come together—industry,
government representatives, non-profits, and others—to pursue solutions to resource
conservation.
• Implement targeted robust challenges to encourage participants to modify business
practices to increase resource efficiency with demonstrable results
• Develop and promote national solutions for waste management.
• Partner with industry to pursue innovative policies and solutions to non-regulated
environmental problems.
• Provide credible scientific information and data.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to work on Sustainable Food Management and Used
Electronics, two targeted sectors that were identified by the Sustainable Materials Management:
The Road Ahead Report150 The EPA also will expand SMM work into other sectors, such as
strengthening the EPA's knowledge of the sustainability, and the beneficial use, of industrial
materials.
• Sustainable Food Management - The EPA continues to focus on sustainable
purchasing practices and increasing food donation and composting. The Food
Recovery Challenge757 challenges participants to reduce as much of their food waste
150 U.S. EPA OSWER ORCR. Sustainable Materials Management: The Road Ahead. June 2009
http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/conserve/smm/pdf/vision2.pdf.
151 http://www.epa.gov/wastes/conserve/smm/foodrecovery/index.htm.
485
-------
ISO
as possible. This work will be coordinated with the largest generators of food waste
- universities, events/sports venues, and grocery stores. In FY 2014, the EPA will lay
the foundation to expand the challenge beyond the initial three targeted sectors and
increase public education efforts.
• Used Electronics - In July 2011, the National Strategy for Electronics Stewardship
(NSES)153 established a framework for responsible electronics design, purchasing,
management, and recycling. The EPA supports various commitments under the
National Strategy, including efforts to increase the amount of used electronics
managed by accredited third party certified electronics recyclers via the EPA's
Electronics Challenge154. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue implementation of the
Electronics Challenge, building on demonstrated results from FY 2013 in terms of the
number of participating organizations and overall tonnage of electronics in the U.S.
recycled by third-party certified electronics recyclers. The Electronics Challenge will
help to build the domestic recycling industry and capture valuable materials for
recycling and reuse.
In addition to these targeted sectors, the EPA has challenged the federal government to lead by
example by reducing its environmental footprint, specifically in waste-related areas as follows:
• Federal Green Challenge155 - The federal government spends more than $400 billion
annually on goods and services and consumes more than $3.5 billion of energy each
year. The EPA will continue to lead by example, and will use SMM principles to
serve as a change agent and consultant to other federal agencies. The EPA will help
other federal agencies adopt specific and integrated waste reduction strategies
towards sustainability and promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, which
furthers the goals of Executive Order 13514. The EPA estimates that the national
implementation of the Federal Green Challenge will save the taxpayers more than $10
million by the end of FY 2014.
The EPA's SMM work in FY 2014 will continue to encourage beneficial use of industrial
materials in a manner that is protective of human health and the environment. Specifically, the
agency will develop tools to assess the protective beneficial use of coal combustion and other
industrial residuals. In addition, the EPA will work with regions and states to begin to prioritize
protective beneficial use activities.
The EPA's SMM work in FY 2014 includes the improvement of metrics to assist in identifying
data gaps, prioritizing work, and measuring performance. The agency continues to invest in
developing and maintaining tools such as the Waste Reduction Model that estimates accrued
materials life cycle benefits in terms of greenhouse gas reductions and energy savings.
http://www.epa.gov/waste/conserve/foodwaste/
153 http://www.epa.gov/wastes/conserve/materials/ecvcling/taskforce/.
154 http://epa.gov/smm/electronics/index.htm.
155 http://www.epa.gov/federalgreenchallenge/.
486
-------
SMM activities funded in FY 2014 will achieve substantial, tangible results in coming years,
including money savings for the federal government. Activities will also inform opportunities for
other material streams. For instance, through the Federal Green Challenge in FY 2011, federal
facilities in the EPA's Region 10 recycled 33,705 tons of material, composted 5,279 tons of
material, recycled 1,041 tons of electronics, and had one million dollars in cost savings.
156
Resources provided under this program also support the EPA's Municipal Solid Waste (MSW)
Characterization Report, which provides data and trends since 1960 and analyzes the
composition and amounts of municipal solid waste in the U.S., as well as how those materials are
recycled, incinerated, and landfilled. In FY 2012, the EPA began implementation of report
improvements to align it more effectively with SMM, which will continue in FY 2014 and
beyond.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(MW2) Increase in percentage of coal combustion ash that is beneficially used instead of
disposed.
FY2007
1.8
-0.7
FY2008
1.8
1.8
FY 2009
1.8
-3.1
FY 2010
1.4
-0.6
FY2011
1.4
Data
Avail
12/2013
FY 2012
1.4
Data
Avail
12/2014
FY 2013
1.4
FY 2014
1.4
Units
Percent
Increase
Measure
Target
Actual
(MW5) Number of closed, cleaned up, or upgraded open dumps in Indian country or on other
tribal lands.
FY2007
30
107
FY2008
30
166
FY2009
27
129
FY2010
22
141
FY2011
45
82
FY2012
45
74
FY2013
45
FY2014
45
Units
Dumps
Measure
Target
Actual
(MW8) Number of tribes covered by an integrated solid waste management plan.
FY2007
27
28
FY2008
26
35
FY 2009
16
31
FY 2010
23
23
FY2011
14
17
FY 2012
3
13
FY 2013
3
FY 2014
3
Units
Tribes
Measure
Target
Actual
(SMI) Tons of materials and products offsetting use of virgin resources through sustainable
materials management.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
8,549,502
Data
Avail
12/2013
FY2013
8,501,537
FY2014
8,603,033
Units
Tons
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$236.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs and a cost of
living adjustment for existing FTE.
156 These figures were reported to EPA Region 10 by federal facilities participating in the Federal Green Challenge during CY
2011. CY 2012 results are currently being processed.
487
-------
• (-$173.0) This decrease to funding is due to efficiencies realized as areas of Sustainable
Materials Management have reached the implementation phase.
• (-$131.0 / -0.9 FTE) This decrease reflects the transition of the program from the
Resource Conservation Challenge to the SMM approach. The comparatively narrower
focus of SMM requires less FTE support than RCC. This decrease includes 0.9 FTE,
$131.0 in associated payroll.
Statutory Authority:
Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42
United States Code 6901 et seq. - Sections 1002, 1003, 2002, and 8001.
488
-------
Program Area: Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
489
-------
Endocrine Disruptors
Program Area: Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Ensure Chemical Safety
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$8,255.0
$8,255.0
10.8
FY 2012
Actuals
$6,807.0
$6,807.0
20.7
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$8,358.0
$8,358.0
10.8
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$6,891.0
$6,891.0
10.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($1,364.0)
($1,364.0)
-0.8
Program Project Description:
The Endocrine Disrupter Screening Program (EDSP) was established under authorities contained
in the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) and Safe Drinking Water Act (SOWA).157 The
program consists of several ongoing activities that support a two-tiered approach to the screening
of chemicals for potential disruption to endocrine systems. In Tier 1, chemicals are screened for
their potential to interact with endocrine systems (specifically the estrogen, androgen, and
thyroid systems). If Tier 1 screening identifies a chemical as having the potential to interact with
endocrine systems, it may be further evaluated in appropriate Tier 2 or targeted tests, if
necessary, to generate effects information that can be used in risk assessment. Current activities
within the EDSP include assay development and validation, priority setting for screening,
establishing policies and procedures, and data evaluation.
Assay development and validation provides validated scientific test methods used to screen
pesticides and other chemicals to determine their potential to interact with the endocrine systems
(Tier 1) and, ultimately, to characterize their effects (Tier 2). Currently, EDSP has validated the
11 Tier 1 assays that constitute the Tier 1 screening battery and one Tier 2 assay158 is considered
valid for use. EDSP has made significant progress toward validating four additional Tier 2 assays
with plans to finalize their validation decisions by FY 2013.
Consistent with directives in the FY 2010 House Appropriations Committee Report, on
November 17, 2010, EDSP published a second list of 134 chemicals that includes drinking water
contaminants. In the first quarter of FY 2012, EDSP marked an important step in the
continuation of the program with the release of the EDSP21 Work Plan.159 The work plan
outlines the steps necessary to transition the screening program from its current state into one
that is less reliant on whole animal based assays and incorporates computational models and
higher throughput in vitro methods to screen for the potential for endocrine disruption. The
157 http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/index.cfm
158
EPA accepts the mammalian 2-generation reproduction study performed according to the 1998 guidelines (or the Extended 1-
generation reproduction study), as valid.
159 http://www.epa.gov/endo/pubs/edsp21 work plan summarv%20 overview final.pdf
490
-------
EDSP21 Work Plan will serve as the road map for future assay development/validation and
priority setting efforts for the EDSP.
More recently, in response to the May 2011 OIG evaluation report, "EPA's Endocrine Disrupter
Screening Program Should Establish Management Controls to Ensure More Timely Results,"160
the agency has issued its EDSP Comprehensive Management Plan161 on June 28, 2012. The
EDSP management plan describes how the agency intends to continue its implementation of the
EDSP in three major parts: 1) scientific advancement of Tier 1 data reviews and Tier 2 assay
development and validation (includes advancing the state of the science in chemical priority
setting and screening), 2) test order management and implementation including prioritizing
chemicals, developing policies and procedures, and issuing and managing test orders, and 3) data
management by developing an enhanced and consolidated information infrastructure
(information technology or IT).
The Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention program is working collaboratively with National
Center for Computational Toxicology and the Research and Development program to determine
to what extent ToxCast can be used in the endocrine chemical prioritization process. As an
initial step, both programs have engaged the FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel in the review of
the ToxCast, and other computational methods for EDSP chemical prioritization. The external
peer review meeting was held between January 29 and February 1st, 2013. The final report is
due in May of 2013.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
During FY 2014, the Endocrine Disrupter Screening Program (EDSP) will fulfill several key
milestones including:
• Completion of the inter-laboratory validation of Tier 2 assays and development of the
scientific evaluation procedures and finalization of the test guidelines;
• Prioritizing and selecting additional chemicals for Tier 1 screening using a scientific
process informed by a combination of scientifically peer-reviewed, in silico, structure
activity, expert judgement, physiochemical properties based, read across, chemical
categorization, and other computational toxicology-based approaches, (e.g., high
throughput technology);
• Continuing to issue additional Tier 1 Test Orders for select chemicals in the EDSP
universe of chemicals (subject to obtaining an approved Information Collection Request
(ICR); without an approved ICR, test orders cannot be issued to registrants,
manufacturers or importers for Tier 1 assay data for chemical screening);
• Evaluation of the Tier 1 screening data submitted for the first list of pesticide chemicals;
• Conducting scientific Weight of Evidence (WoE) evaluations to determine which
pesticide chemicals have the potential to interact with endocrine systems and, if so,
whether they should be advanced for further testing in Tier 2 assays;
• Issue List 1, Tier 2 Test Orders for those chemicals that, based on WoE, are determined
to advance for further testing (subject to obtaining an approved Information Collection
Request); and
1(50 http://www.epa.gov/oig/reports/2011/20110503-1 l-P-0215.pdf
161 http://www.epa.gov/endo/pubs/EDSP-comprehensive-management-plan.pdf
491
-------
• Continuing coordination and collaboration with the Research and Development program
to determine the applicability of computational toxicology-based approaches for
developing more targeted testing approaches that better assess a chemical's potential to
interact with the estrogen, androgen, and thyroid systems.
In FY 2014, the EDSP will continue its work to protect communities from harm caused by
substances in the environment that may adversely affect health through specific endocrine
effects. Of note, in FY 2014, the EDSP will continue reviewing data received in response to the
first set of test orders issued for the Tier 1 screening of pesticide chemicals. Other activities
expected in FY 2014 include the continued collaboration with the EPA's Research and
Development Program on computational toxicology-based approaches to support more refined
chemical prioritization and continue efforts to demonstrate "proof of concept" and increase
scientific confidence in these approaches so they can expedite and streamline the scientific
methods used by the EDSP for screening chemicals for the potential to interact with the
endocrine system.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue the multi-year transition away from the traditional assays
used in EDSP through efforts to validate and use computational toxicology and high throughput
screening methods. This will allow the agency to more quickly, efficiently, and cost-effectively
assess potential chemical toxicity. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to evaluate endocrine-
relevant ToxCast high throughput assays to increase coverage for known endocrine toxicity
pathways through the scientific understanding of adverse outcome pathways.
EDSP also will continue to collaborate with international partners, through the Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), to maximize the efficiency of the EPA's
resource use and promote adoption of internationally harmonized test methods for identifying
endocrine disrupting chemicals. The EPA represents the U.S. as either the lead or a participant in
OECD projects involving the improvement of assay systems including the development of non-
animal prioritization and screening methods and validation of Tier 2 assays.
For more information, please see http://www.epa.gov/endo/.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(E01) Number of chemicals for which Endocrine Disrupter Screening Program (EDSP)
decisions have been completed
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
3
3
FY2012
5
1
FY2013
20
FY2014
59
Units
Chemicals
Measure
Target
Actual
(E04) Number of chemicals with Tier 1 screenin
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
g assay results reviewed.
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
52
Units
Chemicals
492
-------
Measure
Target
Actual
(EOS) Number of chemicals for which scientific weight of evidence determinations have been
completed.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
52
Units
Chemicals
Measure
Target
Actual
(E06) Number of High Throughput (HTP) assays and Quantitative Structure Activity
Relationship (QSAR) tools validated for use in a chemical prioritization scheme, screening or
data replacement for EDSP.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
8
Units
Assays and
Tools
In FY 2014, three new performance measures (E04, EOS, and E06) will be introduced and two
measures will be discontinued (E02, EOS) after FY 2013. Overall, these changes reflect the
progressive transition from a focus on EDSP test order issuance to implementation of state-of-the
science, risk assessment and data review phase. These new performance measures also signal the
evolution of the program from one based on low throughput, traditional whole animal test
methods towards the use of computational toxicology and high throughput methods, with less
reliance on animal testing.
Performance measure E04 tracks the number of chemicals with Tier 1 screening assay results
reviewed. This is linked to E01, but differs by accounting for those scientific data evaluation
records that have undergone primary and secondary technical reviews and does not include the
specific regulatory decisions.
Performance measure EOS tracks the number of chemicals for which weight of evidence
determinations have been completed. This measure differs from E04 in that it accounts for the
number of scientific weight of evidence and hazard characterizations completed. These hazard
characterizations will be based on the integrated scientific reviews of the 1) Tier 1 data in
combination with, 2) other scientifically relevant information, and 3) existing toxicity
information (e.g., 40 CFR part 158).
Performance measure E06 tracks the number of High Throughput (HTP) assays and Quantitative
Structure Activity Relationship (QSAR) tools validated for use in a chemical prioritization
scheme, screening or data replacement for EDSP. This measure reflects the advancement in
technology replacing validation of traditional screening and testing methods with new Tox21
computational tools, as recommended by the NAS 2007 report.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$83.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$142.0) This decrease reflects savings achieved through implementation of innovative
technological changes in data access and storage.
493
-------
• (-$296.0) This change reflects a reduction found from IT efficiencies and consolidation in
IT contracts that support the endocrine disrupter screening program.
• (-$1,009.0 / -0.8 FTE) As the Endocrine Disrupters Screening Program shifts from in
vitro and in vivo EDSP test method development to data review and full implementation,
a decreased need for funding is reflected in this change. The EDSP anticipates progress
being made in the area of EDSP assay validation. In FY 2014, the program projects
having a full set of Tier 2 test methods, completing the 2-tiered test method development
envisaged when the program was developed in 1999. As the state of the science
continues to advance, additional validation efforts are anticipated to focus on technical
improvements to existing test systems and more efficient and effective methodologies for
EDSP screening such as high throughput screening and computational approaches will be
explored. The reduced resources include 0.8 FTE and associated payroll of $131.0.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) Section 408 (p) (21 U.S.C. 346a(p)); Safe
Drinking Water Act (SOWA) 42 U.S.C. 300J-17.
494
-------
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Review and Reduction
Program Area: Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Ensure Chemical Safety
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$56,497.0
$56,497.0
243.4
FY 2012
Actuals
555,235. 8
$55,235.8
247.4
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$56,812.0
$56,812.0
243.4
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$62,732.0
$62,732.0
244.1
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$6,235.0
$6,235.0
0.7
Program Project Description:
Chemicals are used by U.S. industries to produce a wide variety of consumer products, industrial
solvents and additives and in other aspects of commerce, in some cases leading to significant
public and environmental exposure. While these chemicals play an important role in people's
everyday lives, some may have the potential to adversely affect human health and the
environment.
Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the EPA has significant responsibilities for
ensuring that chemicals in commerce do not present unreasonable risk to human health or the
environment. The EPA's Chemical Risk Review and Reduction (CRRR) Program works to
ensure the safety of:
• Existing chemicals, by obtaining needed data, assessing those data and taking regulatory
and non-regulatory actions to eliminate or significantly reduce any unreasonable risk they
may pose; and
• New chemicals, by reviewing and acting on new chemical notices submitted by industry,
including Pre-Manufacture Notices (PMNs), to ensure that no unreasonable risk is posed
when those chemicals are introduced into U.S. commerce.
The EPA is continuing to implement a basic transformation of its approach for ensuring chemical
safety to make significant and long overdue progress in protecting human health and the
environment, particularly from existing chemicals that have not been tested for adverse health or
environmental effects. This approach, as reflected in the Fiscal Year 2011 - 2015 EPA Strategic
Plan, has as its focal points:
• Filling information gaps on existing chemicals by taking a range of TSCA information
gathering actions (including the Chemical Data Reporting Rule and test rules) and
expanding electronic reporting and increasing transparency, thereby establishing a
495
-------
sustainable chemical safety information pipeline to support future assessments and risk
management actions;
• Screening and assessing human health and environmental risks posed by existing
chemicals, using data from all available sources; and
• Eliminating, reducing or managing identified unreasonable chemical risks using all
available authorities under TSCA and other statutes.
The EPA also recognizes that there is a need to modernize and strengthen the statutory
authorities available in TSCA to increase confidence that chemicals used in commerce and vital
to the U.S. economy are safe. To help inform efforts underway in Congress to reauthorize and
strengthen the statute, the EPA has issued a statement of principles for updated legislation that
will give the EPA the mechanisms and authorities to obtain needed information and
1 69
expeditiously assess and regulate new and existing chemicals.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
FY 2014 represents a crucial stage in the further implementation of the agency's approach to
chemical risk review and reduction, particularly regarding existing chemicals that have not been
tested for adverse health or environmental effects, with the objective of meeting the goals put
forward in the EPA FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan to ensure chemical safety. This current budget
request will allow the EPA to sustain progress in managing the potential risks of new chemicals
entering commerce and to continue making substantial progress in assessing and ensuring the
safety of existing chemicals.
Existing Chemicals Program:
The EPA is requesting resources in FY 2014 to continue progress in ensuring the safety of
existing chemicals. The EPA and the Administration are committed to working with Congress to
update the authorities for the agency's chemicals management program under the Toxic
Substances Control Act. While that work is underway, the agency also has made it a top priority
to improve implementation of the program under current authorities.
1) Obtaining, Managing, and Making Chemical Information Public:
In FY 2014, the resources requested will support the EPA's continued development of a
sustainable chemical information pipeline to support future chemical risk assessments and risk
management actions. The EPA will use both regulatory and non-regulatory approaches to
address remaining gaps in exposure and health and safety data for chemicals already in
commerce, improve management of TSCA information resources and maximize the availability
and usefulness of this information to the public. Planned actions include:
! Essential Principles for Reform of Chemicals Management Legislation
496
-------
• Issuing and implementing TSCA Section 4 Test Rules and Section 8 information
reporting rules to obtain data needed to evaluate the safety of existing chemicals,
including:
o Obtaining and processing data required by four TSCA test rules issued between
2006 and 2013 covering High Production Volume (HPV) chemicals not
sponsored under the HPV Challenge Program, which sought to obtain basic
hazard and environmental fate data voluntarily from companies for the HPV
chemicals known in the late 1990s; and
o Developing additional testing rules and implementing additional testing actions as
needed;
• Increasing transparency by reviewing all new submissions to the EPA under TSCA where
chemical identity is claimed as Confidential Business Information (CBI) in health and
safety studies; reviewing the remaining approximate 5 thousand CBI cases of the 22,483
submitted prior to August 2010, with the goal of having all such reviews completed by
the end of FY 2014 - a year in advance of the target date in the Fiscal Year 2011 - 2015
EPA Strategic Plan; and, where appropriate, continuing to challenge CBI claims and
make health and safety studies publicly available;
• Digitizing approximately 16 thousand documents received under TSCA Sections 4, 5 and
8, covering more than 90% of TSCA industry reporting; and, where appropriate, making
those data available to the public;
• Providing guidance for electronic submission of TSCA Section 8(e) TSCA health and
safety notices and fully deploying 21st century information technology to more
effectively and efficiently store and disseminate TSCA information, including
implementing an interactive website to enhance access and usability of TSCA chemical
information; and
• Enhancing EPA's TSCA information management system, including: integrating the
system with scientific tools, dashboards and models used for making chemical
management decisions; redesigning the system to allow broader access by other EPA
programs to TSCA chemical information; and providing for automated posting of non-
confidential TSCA data to the EPA's public websites.
• Transitioning the EPA's TSCA information management system to be fully integrated
with the agency's new E-Enterprise initiative, which will enhance electronic reporting of
required submissions by simplifying reporting for small businesses, enabling larger
businesses to more readily apply data from their own environmental management
systems and integrating environmental and administrative information from several EPA
chemical management programs so as to eliminate duplicative data entry on the part of
submitters.
497
-------
The EPA is planning to allocate $14,657.0 and 63.8 FTE to this work area in FY 2014.
2) Screening and Assessing Chemical Risks:
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue related work to assess the risks of the 83 Work Plan
chemicals identified in March 2012 so as to inform decision making on prospective risk
management actions for those chemicals. The TSCA Work Plan chemicals were selected for
detailed assessment through a two-step process that (1) identified a set of chemicals subject to
TSCA that have targeted risk-related characteristics163 and (2) further prioritized those chemicals
for detailed assessment according to specific factors set out in the EPA's "TSCA Work Plan
Chemicals: Methods Document" (February 2012).164
Specific steps planned for FY 2014 include:
• Revising and, in some cases, finalizing detailed chemical risk assessments based on
peer review and public comment for seven Work Plan chemicals, five165 of which
were released in draft for peer review and public comment in January 2013;
• Completing final risk assessments in FY2014 for three of the 83 TSCA Work Plan
Chemicals identified in March 2012, while making further progress in assessing risks
for up to 18 additional chemicals;
• Developing a schedule for assessing the remaining Work Plan chemicals in FY 2015
and beyond;
• Continuing work initiated by the EPA in FY 2012 to develop and implement web-
accessible dashboard applications that will enhance the speed, quality and
transparency of the EPA's decision-making by enabling users within and outside the
agency to easily access information derived from Computational Toxicology
(Comptox) applications including ToxCast, ExpoCast, and many other data sources;
and
• Developing new tools and improving/expanding existing methods such as chemical
categories and Quantitative Structure Activity Relationships (QSARs) to better assess
risks from existing chemicals.
The EPA is planning to allocate $13,720.0 and 44.8 FTE to this work area in FY 2014.
3) Reducing Chemical Risks:
163 U.S. EPA, "TSCA Work Plan Chemicals: Methods Document" (February 2012), pp. 2 et seq.
164 Ibid, page 16
165 The five draft risk assessments released in January 2013 address the following chemicals and associated uses: methylene
chloride or dichloromethane (DCM) and n-methylpyrrolidone (NMP) in paint stripper products, trichloroethylene (TCE) as a
degreaser and a spray-on protective coating, antimony trioxide (ATO) as a synergist in halogenated flame retardants and HHCB
as a fragrance ingredient in commercial and consumer products.
498
-------
In FY 2014, the resources requested will support the agency's portfolio of risk management
actions, including:
• Advancing, as appropriate, risk management actions initiated in response to the Action
Plans posted on the EPA's Existing Chemicals Program website;
• Considering initiating, as appropriate, up to five new risk management actions in FY
2014;
• Continuing programmatic implementation of two regulations implementing the TSCA
Title VI Formaldehyde Standards for Composite Wood Products Act (Public Law 111-
199), which are anticipated to be finalized in FY 2013. Title VI establishes national
emission standards for formaldehyde in new composite wood products;
• Conducting alternatives assessments for selected chemicals, including completion of the
alternatives assessment for flame retardants in low density polyurethane foam, adding to
the inventory of assessments to be completed prior to FY 2014 (decaBDE and BPA
(drafts issued in July, 2012), and NP/NPEs (finalized in May, 2012); and
• Reviewing and revising certain use authorizations for Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs),
including a potential proposed rule relating to PCB manufacture, processing, use and
distribution in commerce.
The EPA will continue to work closely with other federal agencies to coordinate efforts on
addressing identified chemical risks. To ensure that children's health and impacts on minorities,
low income and indigenous populations are considered, the EPA will exercise its responsibilities
under Executive Order 13045.166
For more information on the EPA's efforts to assess and act on existing chemicals, please see
http://www.epa.gov/oppt/chemtest/.
The EPA is planning to allocate $20,120.0 and 64.2 FTE to this work area in FY 2014.
New Chemicals Program:
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue reviewing new chemical submissions to determine whether
the chemicals would pose unreasonable risk to human health or the environment once they enter
U.S. commerce, and taking risk management actions, where needed, to prevent such risks. Each
year, the EPA reviews and manages, as necessary, the potential risks from approximately 1,000
new chemicals, products of biotechnology and new chemical nanoscale materials prior to their
entry into the marketplace.
For more information, please see www.epa.gov/opptintr/newchems.
'http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-1997-04-23/pdf/97-10695.pdf
499
-------
The EPA is planning to allocate $14,235.0 and 71.3 FTE to this work area in FY 2014.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(CIS) Percentage of exi
reviewed and, as appro
FY2007
FY2008
•ting CBI claims for chemical identity in health and safety studies
3riate, challenged.
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
5
5.3
FY 2012
10
59.6
FY 2013
13
FY 2014
22
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(C19) Percentage of CBI claims for chemical identity in health and safety studies reviewed and
challenged, as appropriate, as they are submitted.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
100
100
FY2012
100
100
FY2013
100
FY2014
100
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(RA1) Annual number of chemicals for which risk assessments are finalized through EPA's
TSCA Existing Chemicals Program.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
o
J
Units
Risk
Assessment
s
Completed
Measure
Target
Actual
(247) Percent of new chemicals or organisms introduced into commerce that do not pose
unreasonable risks to workers, consumers, or the environment.
FY2007
100
100
FY2008
100
100
FY 2009
100
97
FY 2010
100
91
FY2011
100
100
FY 2012
100
Data
Avail
10/2013
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(D6A) Reduction in concentration of PFOA in serum in the general population.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
1
Data
Avail
10/2014
FY 2013
No Target
Establish
ed
FY 2014
25
Units
Percent
Reduction
Measure
Target
Actual
(281) Reduction in the cost per submission of managing PreManufacture Notices (PMNs)
through the Focus meetings as a percentage of baseline year cost per submission.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
61
50
FY2011
63
59
FY2012
65
65
FY2013
67
FY2014
81
Units
Percent
The EPA is using the measures described above to evaluate program performance.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to review and, where appropriate, challenge all new TSCA
CBI claims for chemical identity in health and safety studies as they are submitted, consistent
500
-------
with the EPA's 2015 Strategic Plan goal through FY 2015 of making all health and safety studies
available to the public for chemicals in commerce, to the extent allowed by law. In recent years,
hundreds of such claims have been submitted annually. Additionally, the EPA will continue to
review and, where appropriate, challenge all CBI claims existing as of August 2010 that have not
yet undergone review. To achieve these goals, the EPA will take the following steps for both
new and existing submissions: 1) determine if a challenge to the CBI claim is warranted; 2)
execute the challenge if warranted; and 3) where legally defensible, declassify the information
claimed as CBI.
The EPA, through a system review, accelerated its timetable for completing reviews of existing
CBI claims, with this effort now expected to be finished a year early. Of the 22,483 existing CBI
claim cases targeted in this multi-year effort, approximately 3 thousand remain to be completed
in FY 2013 and 5 thousand in FY 2014. These remaining reviews will be more challenging,
focusing on relatively complex pre-1990 filings which will require closer review of the
documents on a broader scale than previously required and more direct contact with the
submitter.
Existing CBI Claims Reviewed (Cumulative)
100%
« 80%
D 60%
M-
o
£ 40%
01
20%
0%
FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015
Original Targets —^— Revised Targets
The annual performance measure tracking the percent of new chemicals or organisms introduced
into commerce that do not pose unreasonable risk to human health or the environment illustrates
the effectiveness of the EPA's New Chemicals Program as a gatekeeper. This measure analyzes
previously reviewed new chemicals with incoming TSCA 8(e) notices of substantial risk. TSCA
requires that chemical manufacturers, importers, processors and distributors notify the EPA
within thirty days of receiving any new information on chemicals that may lead to a conclusion
of unreasonable risk to human health or the environment. Information from approximately thirty
8(e) notices each year is used to check the accuracy of New Chemicals Program analytical tools
and to make process improvements for future review of new chemicals. The agency recognizes
that this measure does not involve systematic sampling and testing of all PMN-reviewed
chemicals that have entered U.S. commerce, but believes nonetheless that it represents an
efficient approach for using available information to assess and improve the effectiveness of the
501
-------
EPA's new chemicals risk screening tools and decision-making processes. The EPA continues to
explore more robust options for tracking the performance of the New Chemicals Program.
In FY 2014, the EPA will introduce a new performance measure tracking the annual number of
chemicals for which risk assessments are finalized through the EPA's TSCA Existing Chemicals
Program, with a FY 2014 target of completing final risk assessments for three of the seven
TSCA Work Plan chemicals identified in March 2012.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$719.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$446.0 / +0.3 FTE) This increase supports the agency's E-Enterprise efforts to enhance
electronic reporting of required submissions, focusing on simplifying reporting for small
businesses, enabling larger businesses to more readily apply data from their own
environmental management systems and integrating environmental and administrative
information from several EPA chemical management programs so as to eliminate
duplicative data entry on the part of submitters. This increase includes 0.3 FTE and
associated payroll of $46.0.
• (-$381.0) This change reflects a reduction found from IT efficiencies and consolidation in
IT contracts that support the Chemical Risk Review and Reduction program.
• (-$152.0 / -1.0 FTE) This reduction reflects agency workforce restructuring efforts, and is
associated with a reduction in development of hazard characterizations as the EPA shifts
focus to risk assessments. This decrease includes 1.0 FTE and associated payroll of
$152.0.
• (+$5,603.0 / +1.4 FTE) This increase will enable the EPA to initiate, continue
development and peer review of, as well as finalize risk assessments of, additional TSCA
Work Plan chemicals, including completion of final risk assessments for three chemicals
while making further progress in assessing risks for up to 18 additional chemicals; and
increasing the pace of reviewing existing TSCA CBI cases, with the goal of having all
such reviews completed a year in advance of the target date established in the Fiscal Year
2011 to 2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The increase also will support implementing an
interactive website to enhance access and usability of TSCA chemical information and
will the completion of a proposed SNUR covering certain polybrominated diphenyl
ethers (PBDEs). Finally, the increase also will help the Agency consider initiating, as
appropriate, up to five new risk management actions for selected chemicals. This increase
includes 1.4 FTE and associated payroll of $213.0.
Statutory Authority:
Toxic Substances Control Act, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq. — Sections 1-31.
502
-------
Pollution Prevention Program
Program Area: Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Promote Pollution Prevention
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$15,269.0
$15,269.0
76.2
FY 2012
Actuals
$14,889.8
$14,889.8
72.6
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$15,333.0
$15,333.0
76.2
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$15,423.0
$15,423.0
69.3
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$154.0
$154.0
-6.9
Program Project Description:
The Pollution Prevention (P2) Program is one of the EPA's primary tools for advancing
environmental stewardship by federal, state and tribal governments; businesses; communities
and individuals. The P2 Program seeks to alleviate environmental problems by achieving
significant reductions in the use of hazardous materials, energy and water; reductions in the
generation of greenhouse gases; cost savings; and increases in the use of safer chemicals and
products.
This is accomplished by working with stakeholders to foster the development of P2 innovations
and practices and to promote the adoption, use and market penetration of those innovations and
practices through such activities as providing technical assistance and demonstrating the benefits
of P2 solutions. Focusing efforts on environmental issues in specific sectors, geographic areas
or for specific chemicals, the P2 Program accomplishes its mission by: encouraging cleaner
production processes and technologies; promoting development and use of safer, "greener"
materials and products; and supporting implementation of improved practices, such as
conservation techniques and reuse and remanufacturing of hazardous secondary materials in lieu
of their discard, including offsite reuse/remanufacturing under appropriate conditions. These
efforts advance the agency's priorities to pursue sustainability, take action on climate change and
reduce chemical risks. The P2 Program is augmented by a counterpart P2 Categorical Grants
Program in the State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG) account.
The program accomplishes its mission through several centers of results described below. For
more information about the EPA's Pollution Prevention Program, please see
http ://www. epa.gov/p2/.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Environmentally Preferable Purchasing (EPP) Program
The main goal of the Environmentally Preferable Purchasing (EPP) Program is to assist federal
agencies in complying with "green" purchasing requirements in support of the federal objectives
503
-------
to reduce energy use under Executive Order 13514.16? In doing so, EPP stimulates market
demand for products and services that are more environmentally benign and also provides
models for state and local governments, businesses, and private individuals seeking to move
toward greener products when they make purchasing decisions.
-^^ -^^ -^^ 1 f\%.
An important element of the EPP Program is the Federal Electronics Challenge (FEC) , a
partnership program in which participating federal agencies and facilities receive technical
assistance to assist them in meeting their electronic stewardship goals. The FEC encourages
federal facilities and agencies to purchase greener electronic products, reduce their impacts
during use and manage obsolete electronics in an environmentally safe way. In FY 2014, the
FEC will work collaboratively with the Federal Green Challenge - a national effort under EPA's
Sustainable Materials Management Program which challenges the EPA and other federal
agencies throughout the country to lead by example in reducing the federal government's
environmental impact - to increase its reach to a broad audience of federal agencies.
The EPP Program also supports the development of tools which aid in procurement decision-
making, such as the Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEAT), which helps
purchasers compare electronic equipment options based on their environmental attributes.
Results associated with EPEAT are quantified169 through an expert-reviewed electronics
environmental benefits calculator.170 In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to support the
development of new voluntary consensus standards for additional electronic products, including
computer system servers, as well as support the revision and update of the original standard for
computers.
The EPP Program will continue to promote advances in the manufacture and use of greener
products through participation in processes to develop voluntary consensus standards for a
variety of product categories, including flooring, roofing, carpets and textiles. Further, the EPP
Program is working collaboratively across the agency to develop guidelines and criteria that
program staff may use as they engage in standards development.
See http://www.epa.gov/oppt/epp/pubs/about/about.htm for more information about the EPP
Program.
The EPA is planning to allocate $2,699.0 and 10.4 FTE to this work area in FY 2014.
Economy, Energy and Environment (E3) Initiative and Green Suppliers Network (GSN)
Under the Pollution Prevention Act, the EPA partners with five other federal agencies - the
Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Energy and Labor and the Small Business
Administration - to implement the Energy, Economy and Environment (E3) Initiative. The E3
Initiative enables communities to work with their manufacturing base to adapt and thrive in a
new business era focused on sustainability. E3 provides manufacturers with customized, hands-
167 http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/pdf/E9-24518.pdf
168 http://www.epa.gov/fec/
169 http://www.epeat.net/FastBenefits.aspx
170 http://www.federalelectronicschallenge.net/resources/bencalc.htm
504
-------
on assessment of production processes to reduce energy consumption, minimize their carbon
footprint, prevent pollution, increase productivity, and drive innovation. The EPA's role in this
initiative is to help identify environmental improvements and cost savings and to help
manufacturers identify resources with which to implement sustainable changes to their business
practices.
As a part of the E3 framework, the EPA's Green Suppliers Network (GSN) focuses specifically
on working with large manufacturers to enable small and medium-size suppliers to improve their
environmental sustainability while reducing business costs. In FY 2014, the GSN will continue
to work with the U.S. Department of Commerce and state pollution prevention programs to
conduct facility-specific assessments for small and medium-sized suppliers to help them reduce
business costs, improve productivity and efficiency, and measure greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions.
The E3 Initiative and GSN have grown to include more than 400 industry partners, even though
the federal cost share for GSN assessments has been eliminated. In FY 2013 and FY 2014, the
number of technical assessments is expected to increase rapidly as new E3 projects are
launched.171 In FY 2014, E3 and GSN will work with the Department of Energy to strengthen
technical assistance offerings in the energy efficiency and environmental areas. A key goal in FY
2014 will be to improve E3's and GSN's analytic methodologies to support the reporting of more
rigorous and transparent program results.
For more information on the GSN, visit http://www.greensuppliers.gov. For more information on
the E3 initiative, visit http://www.e3.gov.
The EPA is planning to allocate $3,501.0 and 17.9 FTE to this work area in FY 2014.
Green Chemistry
The Green Chemistry Program fosters the design of chemical products and processes that help to
reduce the generation and use of hazardous substances. Green chemistry approaches can be
applied successfully across a product's life cycle - design, manufacture, use and retirement - to
build in safer attributes, reduce energy and resource consumption, eliminate waste and the need
for costly treatment.172 One of the program's primary vehicles for achieving these results is the
Presidential Green Chemistry Challenge, in which businesses, academia and non-profit
institutions compete for recognition. The EPA routinely receives more than 100 nominations for
these awards.
In FY 2014, the Green Chemistry Program will administer the 19th annual Presidential Green
Chemistry Challenge, and also will augment its current activities by working with federal
partners to develop an integrated model of enterprise assistance for green chemistry innovation.
The program plans to devote more attention to analyzing green chemistry innovations
(particularly those nominated for awards) and facilitating market adoption and penetration of
new commercially successful chemistries and technologies. With several hundred Green
171 http://www.epa.gov/greensuppliers/e3.html
172 http://www.epa.gov/greenchemistry/index.html
505
-------
Chemistry Challenge awardees and nominees from recent years, there are substantial
opportunities to pursue this goal.
For more information, please see http://www.epa.gov/greenchemistry.
The EPA is planning to allocate $1,323.0 and 5.9 FTE to this work area in FY 2014.
Design for the Environment and Green Engineering
The Design for the Environment (DfE) Program works in partnership with a broad range of
stakeholders to evaluate health and environmental considerations, performance and cost for
traditional and alternative technologies, materials and processes. In support of these goals, DfE
provides hazard information on potential substitutes for priority chemicals; assists companies in
making product design improvements to help reduce risks; develops associated technical tools
and methodologies; and provides training for stakeholders. This is especially important to small
businesses that do not have the broad range of scientific and technical expertise needed to
conduct a hazard assessment. DfE also allows companies making products that are safer for the
environment to communicate their safer chemical leadership to customers through the use of a
DfE logo under its Safer Product Labeling Program. The program currently allows more than
500 different manufacturers the use of the DfE logo on more than 2,800 cleaning and other
products that are safer than similar products currently on the market. To enhance transparency,
DfE has listed the chemicals that meet applicable DfE criteria and are allowed in DfE-labeled
products on the program's web site. The Safer Chemical Ingredients List now contains almost
500 safer chemicals; EPA expects to continue updating this list over the next year as DfE
evaluates chemical ingredients and approves products for the DfE label. The program has helped
companies reduce or eliminate the use of more than almost 800 million pounds of hazardous
chemical products in calendar year 2012 alone.173 In FY 2014, the DfE Program will continue to
expand its Safer Product Labeling Program. The DfE Program has finalized enhancements to its
Standard for Safer Products - the criteria for determining which products can bear the DfE logo
- that will require ingredient disclosure, sustainable packaging and limits on volatile organic
compounds, in addition to the stringent current requirements that address a wide range of
toxicological and environmental endpoints.
This program area also includes the Green Engineering (GE) Program which provides leadership
in the development of sustainability engineering education materials, including life-cycle and
risk-based assessment tools. In FY 2014, the GE Program will continue its efforts to maximize
adoption of its educational materials by colleges and universities, including two textbooks:
Green Engineering: Environmentally Conscious Design of Chemical Processes, being revised in
FY 2013, and Sustainable Engineering: Concepts, Design and Case Studies, released in FY
2012. GE educational materials are already used in nearly 90 institutions of higher education.
The GE Program also works with industry to reduce the environmental footprints of industrial
processes through implementation of green engineering approaches and tools. In FY 2014, the
program will continue to work with the pharmaceutical sector and other industrial sectors to
extend the life of used solvents. This work has been strengthened by recent revisions to the
http://www.epa.gov/dfe/product label consumer.html#consumers
506
-------
EPA's Definition of Solid Waste (DSW) Rule under the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act, which have facilitated increased reuse of solvents in a number of manufacturing sectors.
For more information, please visit http://www.epa.gov/dfe/ and
http://www.epa.gov/oppt/greenengineering/.
The EPA is planning to allocate $2,384.0 and 9.6 FTE to this work area in FY 2014.
Partnership for Sustainable Healthcare (PSH)
This voluntary program, formerly known as Hospitals for a Healthy Environment (H2E), will
continue to coordinate agency work that improves the environmental performance of the
healthcare sector by providing technical expertise to the Partnership for Sustainable Healthcare
(PSH), an independent non-profit organization with more than 1,250 hospital partners. In FY
2014, the EPA, through the PSH, expects to start up new GSN- or E3-related efforts and promote
the use of additional safer products in the health care sector.
For more information, please visit http://www.epa.gov/p2/pubs/psh.htm.
The EPA is planning to allocate $176.0 and 1.1 FTE to this work area in FY 2014.
Pollution Prevention Technical Assistance
The EPA provides technical assistance to industry (primarily small and medium-sized
businesses), government and the public directly through its ten Regional Offices and through
Source Reduction Assistance (SRA) grants issued annually on a competitive basis. SRA grants
support pollution prevention solutions resulting in energy and water conservation, reduction of
greenhouse gases and a wide variety of reductions in the use of hazardous materials and
generation of other pollutants. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to leverage expertise from
other agency programs to enhance new pollution prevention education and outreach resources
and create mechanisms to ensure their use. Other outreach activities include community training
through issuance of grants, innovative awards and collaboration with national environmental
organizations to ensure that the American public is educated about pollution prevention.
In FY 2014, the EPA will leverage expertise from across its programs to enhance new pollution
prevention education and outreach resources and create mechanisms to ensure their use. Through
an intra-agency working group, each program office will disseminate educational resources and
information to the public. Other outreach activities include community training through issuance
of grants, innovative awards, and collaboration with national environmental organizations. The
purpose of these activities will be to ensure that the American public is educated about pollution
prevention.
Lastly, the EPA supports state and tribal P2 programs and the Pollution Prevention Information
Network (PPIN) under the companion Categorical Grants: Pollution Prevention Program.
The EPA is planning to allocate $5,340.0 and 24.4 FTE to this work area in FY 2014.
507
-------
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(P25) Percent increase in use of safer chemicals
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
7
62
FY2013
7
FY2014
85
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(262) Gallons of water reduced through pollution prevention.
FY2007
1.79
1.75
FY2008
1.64
21.18
FY2009
1.79
4.67
FY2010
26.2
29.8
FY2011
28.6
29.1
FY2012
27.8
Data
Avail
10/2013
FY2013
24.8
FY2014
24.1
Units
Gallons
(Billions)
Measure
Target
Actual
(263) Business, institutional and government costs reduced through pollution prevention.
FY2007
44.3
282.7
FY2008
45.9
227.2
FY2009
130
276.5
FY2010
1,060
935.6
FY2011
1,042
1,057
FY2012
847
Data
Avail
10/2013
FY2013
738
FY2014
695.8
Units
Dollars
Saved
(Millions)
Measure
Target
Actual
(264) Pounds of hazardous materials reduced through pollution prevention.
FY2007
414
386.1
FY2008
429
469.8
FY2009
494
605.6
FY2010
1,625
1,383.7
FY2011
1,549
1,589
FY2012
1,064
Data
Avail
10/2013
FY2013
935
FY2014
1,459.9
Units
Pounds
(Millions)
Measure
Target
Actual
(297) Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (MTCO2e) reduced or offset through pollution
prevention.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
2
1.618
FY2010
5.9
3.45
FY2011
5.7
4.6
FY2012
6.8
Data
Avail
10/2013
FY2013
4.2
FY2014
3.84
Units
MTC02e
(Millions)
The P2 Program aggregates results from all of the programs described above within a transparent
and consistent measurement framework focused on five common measures:
• Reduced use of hazardous materials;
• Reduced use of water;
• Reduced emission of greenhouse gases;
• Reduced costs to businesses, governments and institutions; and
• Increased use of safer chemicals.
In the case of the first four of these measures, performance targets and results reflect a
combination of new results produced with the support of each year's appropriations plus
"recurring results" - results produced in prior years that continue delivering environmental
508
-------
benefits over multiple years. Based on feedback from the EPA's Science Advisory Board, the P2
Program began counting recurring results in FY 2010 for an appropriate and reasonable
timeframe (specific to each of the program's results-generating activities) to realize fully the
ongoing benefits of program activities.
In FY 2012, the EPA began tracking the percent increase in the use of safer chemicals from the
2009 baseline of 476 million pounds. The EPA expects to achieve an 85 percent increase in FY
2014. The FY 2014 target has been set much higher than those for previous years due to better
than expected performance on this measure in FY 2011 and FY 2012.
Work under this program also supports performance results listed in the P2 Categorical Grants
Program description under the STAG account.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$526.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$4.0) This reflects a re-prioritization of regional travel.
• (-$143.0) This change reflects a reduction found from IT efficiencies and consolidation in
IT contracts that support the Pollution Prevention program.
• (+$250.0) This increase is to provide resources to integrate environmental outreach
activities through an intra-agency workgroup to create educational resources and training
to disseminate information to the public about pollution prevention and other critical
environmental issues. These environmental outreach activities will support EPA's core
mission to expand the conversation on environmentalism.
• (-$475.0 / -6.9 FTE) This reflects a net effect of an increase in resources and a decrease
of FTE and associated payroll. This is to support agency-wide workforce restructuring
efforts. EPA will reduce funding for work with stakeholders on P2 innovations in order to
focus on higher priority activities. Reduced resources include 6.9 FTE and associated
payroll of $1,062.0, which is offset by an increase of $587.0 in contracts and grants
funding.
Statutory Authority:
Pollution Prevention Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. et seq. - Sections 6601-6610; Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq. - Section 10.
509
-------
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Management
Program Area: Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Ensure Chemical Safety
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$5,982.0
$5,982.0
32.7
FY 2012
Actuals
$6,417.2
$6,417.2
38.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$6,004.0
$6,004.0
32.7
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$3,596.0
$3,596.0
20.2
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($2,386.0)
($2,386.0)
-12.5
Program Project Description:
The Chemical Risk Management (CRM) Program supports national efforts aimed at mitigating
chemical risk and exposure through reductions in use and safe removal, disposal and
containment of certain prevalent, high-risk chemicals - known generally as legacy chemicals.
Some of these chemicals were used widely in commerce and introduced into the environment
before their risks were known. In FY 2014, the CRM Program will focus on ensuring proper use
of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), limiting exposures to PCBs in schools and other buildings
and encouraging the use of non-mercury products.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)
In FY 2014, the EPA will be reducing the PCB program activities within the CRM program in
order to focus efforts on other environmental priorities. It will focus PCB efforts on reducing
174
175
potential risks from exposure to PCBs found in caulk and fluorescent light ballasts. These
materials were used in some schools and other buildings from the 1950s through the 1970s and
may contain PCBs that could pose risks to exposed children and adults over time. To minimize
any potential health risks, the EPA will continue to provide school administrators and building
managers with information and recommendations about managing PCBs in caulk and ballasts
together with tools to help avoid or minimize human exposure. As appropriate, guidance will be
updated to reflect new developments. In addition, public education and outreach efforts will
continue to encourage replacement of PCB-containing electrical equipment.
Please see the Chemical Risk Review and Reduction (CRRR) Program for information on the
EPA's work on reviewing existing authorizations for specific uses of PCBs.
174 http://www.epa.gov/pcbsincaulk/
175 http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/hazard/tsd/pcbs/pubs/ballasts.htm.
510
-------
Mercury
Within the CRM Program, the EPA's work in FY 2014 to reduce mercury risks will focus on
cooperative efforts to reduce the use of mercury in products. Particular emphasis will be placed
on reductions of mercury use in health care settings and schools and guidance on options for
proper mercury waste storage in those institutions. For more information, please see
http ://www. epa.gov/mercury/.
In addition, the EPA will continue implementing the Mercury Export Ban Act (MEBA), which is
intended to reduce the availability of elemental mercury in domestic and international markets,
and respond to any requests for exemption. MEBA prohibits the export of elemental mercury as
of January 1, 2013, among other requirements for EPA, DOE, and other federal agencies.
Asbestos/Fibers
In FY 2014, the EPA will be eliminating the fibers program. However, some parts of the fibers
program are administered in some states; and the EPA will continue to encourage additional
states to implement programs that meet the federal requirements for accrediting trainers (11
states do not yet meet this requirement). State requests to implement the asbestos in schools rule
will require formal EPA delegation before taking effect (38 states have not been delegated to
administer the asbestos in schools rule). The EPA's worker protection rule applies in 25 states
that do not have OSHA-approved health and safety plans. The EPA also will continue to use
existing information in responding to asbestos inquiries received by the TSCA Hotline. The EPA
will provide asbestos-related grants to 12 states in FY 2014 to do inspections on behalf of the
EPA and forward violations to EPA for follow-up.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports the EPA's objective to manage risks from well-known
chemicals. Currently, there are no performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$166.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$2,535.0 / -12.5 FTE) This decrease reflects elimination of the fibers program activities
and a reduction to PCBs program activities. EPA has devoted considerable resources to
both PCB & fibers over many years implementing a framework aimed at mitigating those
threats and must at this time redirect resources to other environmental priorities and
reduce resources allocated to PCBs. The PCBs program reduction will impact guidance
on light ballasts and building caulk containing PCBs in schools, as well as the program's
ability to provide direction to school administrators and other building managers in
determining how to respond to the presence of PCBs in their facilities. The reduced
resources include 12.5 FTE and associated payroll of $1,807.0.
511
-------
• (-$17.0) This change reflects a reduction found from IT efficiencies and consolidation in
IT contracts that support the Chemical Risk Management program.
Statutory Authority:
Pollution Prevention Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. et seq. - Sections 6601-6610; Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq. - Section 10.
512
-------
Toxic Substances: Lead Risk Reduction Program
Program Area: Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Ensure Chemical Safety
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$13,798.0
$13,798.0
84.8
FY 2012
Actuals
$13,404.8
$13,404.8
83.8
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$13,829.0
$13,829.0
84.8
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$14,852.0
$14,852.0
85.8
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,054.0
$1,054.0
1.0
Program Project Description:
Recent biomonitoring data show that significant progress has been made in the continuing effort
to eliminate childhood lead poisoning as a public health concern. At the same time, recent
studies have indicated that children's health may be adversely affected even at extremely low
blood levels, below 10 micrograms per deciliter.176 In response to this new information, and the
fact that approximately 38 million homes in the U.S. still have lead-based paint,177 the EPA is
now targeting reductions in the number of children with blood lead levels of 5 micrograms per
deciliter or higher. The lead program also targets reduction of disparities in blood lead levels
between low-income children and non-low-income children, which are shown to remain at
nearly 30% in the Centers for Disease Control's (CDC's) most recent data through 2010.178
The EPA's Lead Risk Reduction Program contributes to the goal of eliminating childhood lead
poisoning by:
• Establishing a national pool of certified firms and individuals who are trained to carry out
renovation and repair and painting projects while adhering to the lead-safe work practice
standards and to minimize lead dust hazards created in the course of such projects.
176 U.S.EPA. Air Quality Criteria for Lead (September 29,2006)
http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/CFM7recordisplav.cfm?deid=l 58823
Rogan WJ, Ware JH. Exposure to lead in children - how low is low enough? N Engl J Med.2003;348(16): 1515-1516
http://www.precaution.org/lib/rogan.neim.20030417.pdf
Lanphear BP, Homung R, Khoury J, et al. Low-level environmental lead exposure and children's intellectual function: an
international pooled analysis. Environ Health Perspect. 2005; 113(7): 894-899
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih. go v/articlerender.fcgi?doi= 10.1289/ehp.7688
177 Jacobs, D.E.; Clickner, R.P.; Zhou, J.Y.; Viet, S.M.; Marker, D.A.; Rogers, J.W.; Zeldin, B.C.; Broene, P.; and Friedman, W.
(2002). The prevalence of lead-based paint hazard in U.S. housing. Environmental Health Perspectives, 110(10): A599-A606
178 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Fourth Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals, Updated
Tables, (September, 2012). Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, http://www.cdc.gov/exposurereport/
513
-------
• Establishing standards governing lead hazard identification and abatement practices and
maintaining a national pool of professionals trained and certified to implement those
standards; and
• Providing information and outreach to housing occupants and the public so they can
make informed decisions and take actions about lead hazards in their homes.
The Lead Risk Reduction Program is augmented by a counterpart Lead Categorical Grant
Program in the State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG) account.
For more information, please see http://www.epa.gov/lead.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) Rules: Implementation & Development
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to implement the Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP)
Rule to address lead hazards created by renovation, repair and painting activities in homes and
child-occupied facilities.179 Through FY 2012, twelve States have been authorized to administer
and enforce this program. In the remaining non-authorized States, Tribes and territories, the EPA
will continue to accredit training providers, track training class notifications and certify
renovation firms. The EPA also will assist in the development and review of state and tribal
applications for authorization to administer training and certification programs, provide
information to renovators and homeowners, provide oversight and guidance to all authorized
programs and disseminate model training courses for lead-safe work practices. Through calendar
year 2012, the EPA and its authorized programs have accredited more than 600 training
providers, and more than 125,000 renovation firms have been certified.
Shortly after its promulgation, several petitions were filed challenging the RRP rule. On August
24, 2009, the EPA signed an agreement with environmental and children's health advocacy
groups in settlement of their petitions.180 The agreement called for the agency to undertake two
rulemakings to revise certain provisions of the RRP rule. These two rules - known as the "Opt
Out Rule" and "Clearance Rule" — have been issued.181
As part of the 2009 settlement, the EPA also agreed to issue a proposed rule to regulate: (1) the
exterior renovation of public and commercial buildings and (2) the interior renovation of public
and commercial buildings. Subsequently, on September 7, 2012, EPA and the litigants revised
the previous agreement to merge the interior and exterior rulemaking into a combined proposal
to be signed by July 1, 2015, unless the EPA determines that such renovations do not create a
lead-based paint hazard, and to take final action no later than 18 months after publication of the
179 http://www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/faq2.htm
180 "Lead; Amendment to the Opt-out and Recordkeeping Provisions in the Renovation, Repair and Painting Program: Lead,
Final Rule." Federal Register 74 (28 October 2009): 55506-55524. Print.
http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-TOX/2009/October/Dav-28/t25986.pdf
181 http://epa.gov/lead/pubs/regulation.htm
514
-------
proposal. In FY 2014, the EPA will be conducting analysis in support of the rulemaking actions
covering RRP activities for public and commercial buildings.
Revisit the Lead Dust Standard and Definition of Lead-Based Paint
On August 10, 2009, the EPA received a petition requesting the agency to lower lead dust hazard
standards and to modify the definition of lead-based paint in its regulations promulgated under
Sections 401 and 403 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The EPA responded to the
petition on October 22, 2009, agreeing to revisit the current lead dust hazards standard and to
work with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to reconsider the
definition of lead-based paint in its regulations.182
Implement the Lead-based Paint Activities (Abatement, Risk Assessment and Inspection) Rule
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to implement the Lead-based Paint Activities (Abatement,
Risk Assessment and Inspection) Rule by administering the federal program to review and
certify firms and individuals and to accredit training providers. Additionally, the agency will
continue to review and process requests by states, territories and tribes for authorization to
administer the lead abatement program in lieu of the federal program. Through calendar year
2012, 39 states and territories, three tribes, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico have
received such authorization. Lead abatement projects are designed to permanently eliminate
existing lead-based paint hazards in pre-1978 target housing and child-occupied facilities
through the removal of lead-based paint and contaminated dust and soil.
Other activities governed by this rule include inspection - a surface-to-surface investigation to
determine whether there is lead-based paint in a target home or facility and where it is located -
and lead risk assessment - an on-site investigation to determine the presence, type, severity and
location of lead-based paint hazards (including lead hazards in paint, dust and soil) and to
provide suggested ways to control them.
Provide Education and Outreach
In FY 2014, the agency will continue to provide education and outreach to the public on the
hazards of lead-contaminated paint, emphasizing compliance assistance and outreach to support
implementation of the RRP rule and to increase public awareness about preventing childhood
lead poisoning.
Particular attention will be given to educating low income communities on lead hazards in
support of the program's goal to reduce disparities in blood lead levels between low income
children and other children. Finally, the EPA will continue to provide support to the National
Lead Information Center (NLIC) to disseminate information to the public through a telephone
hotline and in electronic form.
Information on state and tribal grants for implementation of lead programs is presented in the
Categorical Grant: Lead budget justification narrative.
•http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/chemtest/pubs/petitions.html
515
-------
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(008) Percent of children (aged 1-5 years) with blood lead levels (>5 ug/dl).
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
3.5
2.1
FY2011
No Target
Establish
ed
Biennial
FY2012
1.5
Data
Avail
10/2014
FY2013
No Target
Establish
ed
FY2014
1.0
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(009) Cumulative number of certified Renovation Repair and Painting firms
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
100,000
59,143
FY2011
100,000
114,834
FY2012
140,000
126,323
FY2013
140,000
FY2014
138,000
Units
Firms
Measure
Target
Actual
(10D) Percent difference in the geometric mean blood level in low-income children 1-5 years old
as compared to the geometric mean for non-low income children 1-5 years old.
FY2007
No Target
Establish
ed
Biennial
FY2008
29
23.5
FY 2009
No Target
Establish
ed
Biennial
FY 2010
28
28.4
FY2011
No Target
Establish
ed
Biennial
FY 2012
13
Data
Avail
10/2014
FY 2013
No Target
Establish
ed
FY 2014
20
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(10A) Annual percentage of lead-based paint certification and refund applications that require
less than 20 days of EPA effort to process.
FY2007
90
92
FY2008
91
91
FY2009
92
92
FY2010
92
96
FY2011
92
95
FY2012
95
97
FY2013
95
FY2014
95
Units
Percent
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to measure progress toward reducing the percentage of young
children with blood lead levels above 5 micrograms per deciliter to the strategic target of no
more than 1.0 percent. Data are obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's
(CDC's) National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), the primary U.S.
database for national blood lead statistics.
Additionally, the Lead Program tracks the disparities in blood lead levels between low-income
children and non-low-income children. The program uses this performance measure to track
progress toward reducing the differential severity of childhood lead poisoning in vulnerable
populations. The EPA's long-term goal, as reflected in the Fiscal Year 2011-2015 EPA Strategic
Plan, is to close the gap between the geometric mean blood lead levels among low-income
children versus non-low-income children, from a baseline percentage difference of 45.7 percent
(1999-2002) to a difference of 20 percent by FY 2014.
516
-------
In FY 2010, the Lead Program introduced a supporting output measure that tracks the number of
firms certified in Renovation, Repair and Painting activities. The EPA's goal is to increase the
number of certified firms from zero in FY 2009 to 138,000 in FY 2014.
The Lead Program's annual efficiency measure tracks improvements in processing time for
certification applications for lead-based paint professionals and for refund applications.
Certification work represents a significant portion of the lead budget and overall efficiencies in
management of certification activities will result in numerous opportunities to improve program
management effectiveness. Since FY 2004, the percent of certification applications processed in
under 20 days has increased from 87 to 95 percent. The FY 2014 target sustains this high level of
achievement.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$512.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$590.0 / +1.0 FTE) This reflects an increase to improve the EPA's ability to implement
the Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) rule, which took effect April 22, 2010,
and to fulfill a federal court settlement agreement and an Agency response to a TSCA
citizen's petition binding the EPA to undertake several additional Lead rulemaking
actions. The additional resources will enable the EPA to keep pace in its rulemaking
actions being conducted under the court settlement and to increase efforts to inform the
public of the need to use trained and certified RRP contractors when conducting
renovation projects in the presence of lead-based paint. This increase includes 1.0 FTE
and associated payroll of $145.0.
• (-$48.0) This change reflects a reduction found in IT efficiencies and consolidation in IT
contracts that support the Lead Risk Reduction program.
Statutory Authority:
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq. - Sections 401-412.
517
-------
Program Area: Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST)
518
-------
LUST / UST
Program Area: Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST)
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Restore Land; Preserve Land
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$12,742.0
$11,962.0
$24,704.0
132.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$12,925.5
$12,542.3
$25,467.8
123.9
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$12,791.0
$11,991.0
$24,782.0
132.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$12,345.0
$10,195.0
$22,540.0
124.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($397.0)
($1,767.0)
($2,164.0)
-7.5
Program Project Description:
These funds support EPA staff and expenses for grants and contracts used to direct and manage
the national program to prevent releases from underground storage tanks (USTs). Staff and
program activities provide technical support and oversight for LUST Prevention Grants. These
resources support core program activities as well as the leak prevention activities under Title
XV, Subtitle B of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct). The EPA works with state183, Tribal
and other stakeholders to protect human health and the environment by preventing releases from
USTs. Potential adverse effects from chemicals such as benzene, methyl-tertiary-butyl-ether,
alcohols, or lead scavengers in gasoline and the cost to clean up these contaminants underscore
the importance of preventing UST releases and complying with UST requirements.184
Even a small amount of petroleum released from an underground storage tank can contaminate
groundwater, the drinking water source for many Americans. Since the beginning of the UST
program, preventing UST releases has been one of our primary goals. The EPA and our partners
have made major progress in reducing the number of new releases, yet thousands of new releases
are discovered each year. Preventing UST releases is more efficient and costs less than cleaning
up releases after they occur. Over the duration of the program, the EPA has also found that lack
of proper UST system operation and maintenance is a main cause of releases.185'186 As a result,
the EPA in FY 2012 proposed revisions to the UST regulations that address these and other
1 87
important issues.
Twice each year, the EPA collects data from states regarding UST performance measures and
makes the data publicly available. The EPA implements the UST program in Indian country and
provides performance measures data on that work. The data include information such as the
183 States as referenced here also include Territories as described in the definition of "State" in the Solid Waste Disposal Act.
184 See Statutory Authority section.
185 Petroleum Releases at Underground Storage Tank Facilities in Florida, Peer Review Draft, US EPA/OUST, March 2005.
186 Evaluation of Releases from New and Upgraded Underground Storage Tanks, Peer Review Draft, US EPA/OUST, August
2004.
187 See http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-ll-18/pdf/2011-29293.pdf
519
-------
number of active and closed tanks, releases reported, cleanups initiated and completed, facilities
in compliance with UST requirements, and inspections. The EPA compiles the data and presents
it in table format for all states, territories, and Indian country. See
www. epa. gov/oust/cat/camarchv.htm.
Since 2007, the EPA has placed an increased emphasis on monitoring compliance through
increased frequency of inspections and other Energy Policy Act (EPAct) provisions.188 Every
three years, each of the 584 thousand federally regulated UST systems must be inspected.
During this time, compliance rates have increased and there has been a significant decrease in
new confirmed releases. The number of confirmed releases from USTs has dropped 25 percent
from 7,570 in FY 2007 to 5,674 in FY 2012. In addition, continued rigorous prevention and
detection activities are necessary to maintain our progress in decreasing the number of confirmed
releases over the years and limiting future confirmed releases.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will undertake a program review of state use of third party programs to
meet their inspection and cleanup responsibilities associated with the UST program. This review
will evaluate the effectiveness and quality of these programs, and will also look at third party
program costs and benefits the state and tank owners have realized.
End of year FY 2012 data shows:
• Releases are continuing to occur, with 5,674 reported for FY 2012.
• Exceeding the FY 2012 performance measure target of 66.5 percent, at the end of FY
2012, 71.4 percent of the approximately 584 thousand federally regulated UST systems
were in significant operational compliance. However, approximately 29 percent still
need to attain and maintain compliance.
In FY 2014, the UST program will primarily focus on:
• maintaining efforts to meet the statutory mandate for the EPA or states to inspect every
tank at least once every three years, and
• implementing other leak prevention requirements, such as operator training, prohibiting
delivery for non-complying facilities, and secondary containment or financial
responsibility for tank manufacturers and installers.189
In FY 2014, the EPA will work closely with its partners to continue core program priorities to
bring UST systems into compliance and keep them in compliance. These activities include:
• continuing to support development and implementation of state and tribal UST programs;
188 Please refer to the "Confirmed Releases" and "Compliance Rate" charts in the LUST Prevention program project description.
For more information please refer to http://www.epa.gov/oust/fedlaws/epact 05.htm
189 For more information on these and other activities please refer to www.epa.gov/oust/fedlaws/epact 05.htm.
520
-------
• assisting states in conducting inspections by providing training to promote and enforce
violations discovered during inspections; and
• assisting other federal agencies to improve their compliance at UST facilities.
To strengthen our network of federal, state, tribal, and local partners (specifically communities
and vulnerable populations) and ensure implementation of the UST regulations, including any
revisions, the EPA will provide technical and compliance assistance and expert consultation to
state, Tribal, and other agency partners on both policy and technical matters. The EPA will
prepare guidance material and provide training opportunities and assistance tools to better
prepare UST inspectors and better inform UST owners.
The EPA is strengthening efforts to ensure required financial assurance mechanisms190 are
effective and create incentives for improved compliance by tank owners and operators. In FY
2014, the EPA will continue to better ensure compliance with financial assurance requirements
through a workgroup of the EPA, state, and other interested stakeholders. The workgroup is
tasked to improve the effectiveness of the two most common UST program financial assurance
mechanisms—insurance and state funds-as well as other mechanisms the workgroup identifies.
The EPA is primarily responsible for implementing the UST program in Indian country in
partnership with Tribes and maintaining information on USTs located in Indian country. Most
tribes do not have independent UST program resources. Therefore, the EPA's role is critical to
the implementation of the UST prevention and compliance program in Indian country.
The EPA is committed to ensuring an effective and safe transition to alternative fuels, which
includes identifying potentially widespread and avoidable environmental and health impacts. As
a result, the EPA will continue to work with states and tribes to assess and ensure UST
compatibility with alternative fuels. This issue is particularly important given that the EPA's
approval of additional ethanol mixtures, such as El5 for use in certain vehicles, will result in
some petroleum retailers storing fuel blends containing greater than 10 percent ethanol in their
USTs. In FY 2014, the EPA will respond to the increased use of biofuels by assessing biofuel
compatibility.7
The EPA is working with communities to bring formerly contaminated properties into productive
use. Many petroleum brownfields sites, predominately consisting of old gas stations, blight the
environmental and economic health of surrounding neighborhoods. While the UST program and
the Brownfields program jointly focus attention and resources on cleaning up and reusing
petroleum-contaminated brownfield sites, the UST program provides technical expertise on
petroleum-specific brownfields efforts. The UST program contributes to area-wide planning
approaches that can help communities revitalize petroleum sites. In FY 2014, the EPA will
continue implementing our Petroleum Brownfields Action Plan191.
190 See compatibility requirement at 40 CFR 280.32.
191 www.epa.gov/oust/pubs/petrobfactionplan2013 .pdf
521
-------
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in LUST Prevention and can be
found in the Eight-Year Performance Array in Tab 11.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$430.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$827.0 / -1.1 FTE) This decrease includes 1.1 FTE, $153.0 in associated payroll. EPA
will likely reduce efforts to inspect UST systems both in Indian country and in states.
Statutory Authority:
Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Energy Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq. -
Section 8001 and Sections 9001 -9011.
522
-------
Program Area: Water: Ecosystems
523
-------
National Estuary Program / Coastal Waterways
Program Area: Water: Ecosystems
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$27,014.0
$27,014.0
48.6
FY 2012
Actuals
$27,231.5
$27,231.5
47.2
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$27,324.0
$27,324.0
48.6
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$27,227.0
$27,227.0
48.1
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$213.0
$213.0
-0.5
Program Project Description:
The goal of the National Estuary (NEP)/Coastal Waterways Program is to restore the physical,
chemical, and biological integrity of estuaries of national significance and coastal watersheds by
protecting and restoring water quality, habitat, and living resources.
192
The economic value of many estuarine and coastal areas is largely based on the water quality and
ecological integrity of these unique areas. For example, when natural resources such as fisheries
are adversely impacted by upstream and coastal development, so too are the livelihoods of those
who live and work in estuarine watersheds. A 2007 Restore America's Estuaries study, "The
Economic and Market Value of Coasts and Estuaries," found that while the estuarine regions of
the U.S. comprise just 12.6 percent of U.S. land area, they contain 43 percent of the U.S.
population and provide 49 percent of all U.S. economic output. The Restore America's Estuaries
study stated that in 2004 alone, coastal and estuarine areas contributed $5.7 trillion to the United
States' gross domestic product.
Major project efforts for the NEP/Coastal Waterways program in FY 2014 include:
• Supporting the 28 NEPs' continued implementation of Comprehensive Conservation and
Management Plans, which includes direct support of other Clean Water Act core program
implementation in their estuarine watersheds;
• Identifying healthy and impaired watershed components, including significant
impairments outside the area addressed by the Comprehensive Conservation and
Management Plans, that could affect the water quality and ecological integrity of
estuaries;
• Monitoring and assessing coastal water quality conditions in estuaries and the associated
upstream waters of estuaries to be addressed by NEP Comprehensive Conservation and
Management Plans;
' For more information, visit http://www.epa. gov/owow/estuaries.
524
-------
• Aligning NEP/Coastal Waterways policy with Executive Order 13547 that directs
agencies to assume stewardship responsibility for our nation's ocean, our coasts, and the
Great Lakes;2
• Aligning the NEP/Coastal Waterways Program with the National Ocean Council draft
Implementation Plan, a new coordinating framework for all agencies to work together to
protect ocean resources and to maintain and form partnerships with other agencies
responsible for carrying out that proposed Implementation Plan19 ;
• Supporting enhancement of the NEP's capacity to develop and implement climate change
adaptation strategies.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Estuarine and coastal waters are among the most environmentally and economically valuable
natural resources in the nation. Resources in FY 2014 will support:
The National Estuary Program
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue support of this program by providing $16.8 million in Clean
Water Act Section 320 grants for the 28 NEPs ($600 thousand per NEP). This flagship watershed
protection program will help address continuing and emerging threats to the nation's estuarine
resources. The EPA will continue support of NEP Comprehensive Conservation and
Management Plan implementation, as well as implementation of other Clean Water Act core
programs. Specifically, the EPA's activities will include:
• Supporting the 28 NEPs' continued efforts to exercise local and regional leadership by
targeting protection and restoration of estuarine resources and promoting environmental
sustainability, including sustainable land practices, through Comprehensive Conservation
and Management Plan implementation. The EPA oversight of NEP Comprehensive
Conservation and Management Plan implementation includes the ongoing review of the
NEPs' environmental programs, projects, and results and leveraging of partner resources;
and
• Supporting efforts to achieve the EPA's goal of protecting and restoring 100 thousand
additional acres of habitat in FY 2014 and promoting alignment of NEP restoration goals
with those of Tribal, state, regional, and local agencies. Since 2002, over one million
acres of habitat have been protected or restored within National Estuary Program study
areas.
The effects of climate change, such as rising sea levels, changes in precipitation patterns,
increases in intensity of and damage from storms, changes in commercially and ecologically
significant species' distribution, as well as the impacts of coastal development, are a growing
concern in U.S coastal watersheds. The EPA will continue working with our NEP and non-NEP
193 For more information, visit http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ceq/initiatives/oceans. The nine National Priority
Objectives are on page 6.
525
-------
partners to identify, develop, and promote strategies aimed at: (1) improving the resilience of
coastal watershed communities and ecosystems and (2) enhancing those communities' capacity
to adapt to emerging climate change impacts.
Coastal Monitoring and Assessment
In FY 2014, the program will lead the effort to strengthen knowledge of our coasts and oceans by
monitoring and assessing the nation's coastal waters. Along with state and local partners, the
EPA will continue to track and report on coastal waters' health and progress made toward
meeting NEP/Coastal Waterway strategic targets. The EPA will collect data that will form the
basis for future editions of a National Coastal Condition Report and develop additional indicators
of coastal ecosystem health. The National Coastal Condition Report is the only statistically
significant measure of coastal water quality that covers both national and regional scales and
includes indicators covering coastal water quality, sediment quality, benthic condition, coastal
habitat, and fish tissue contamination. The fourth National Coastal Condition Report, based
largely on the EPA Research and Development Program's National Coastal Assessment data
from 2003-2006, was released in FY 2012.
Information on coastal ecological conditions generated by the National Coastal Condition Report
can be used by resource managers to efficiently and effectively target water quality actions and
manage those actions to maximize benefits. The National Coastal Condition Report is based on
data gathered by various federal, state, and local sources using a statistically valid design that
allows extrapolation to represent all coastal waters of a state, region, and the entire U.S.
Other Coastal Watersheds
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue other coastal watershed work, including:
• National Ocean Policy: Through improved interagency coordination of existing
programs, the EPA will support implementation of the nine National Priority Objectives
of the National Ocean Policy and the follow-on Implementation Plan with a particular
focus on the Water Quality and Sustainable Practices on Land, Climate Change and
Ocean Acidification, and Ecosystem-Based Management Priority Objectives.
• Large Aquatic Ecosystems: The EPA will foster collaboration among the agency's
ecosystem-based efforts (such as the Chesapeake Bay and the Great Lakes) and national
water programs with the goal to improve the health of the nation's large aquatic
ecosystems and strengthen links among these programs and to the national water
programs. These coordination activities complement resources in other programs for
individual ecosystems (e.g. Great Lakes, Long Island Sound, Puget Sound, and San
Francisco Bay).
194 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2012). National Coastal Condition Report IV.
http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/oceb/assessmonitor/nccr/upload/NCCR4-Report-Partl.pdf
526
-------
• Climate-Ready Estuaries: The EPA will continue to strengthen the capacity of NEPs and
other coastal watershed entities to lead coastal communities' adaptation to the impacts of
climate change. The agency will provide technical assistance and tools to the NEPs as
they: (1) develop and implement "Climate-Ready Estuary" models assessing watersheds'
vulnerabilities to climate change; (2) develop and implement climate adaptation
strategies; (3) engage and educate stakeholders about climate change impacts in their
coastal areas; and (4) share lessons learned with other coastal managers. The EPA also
will help promote increased resilience among NEPs and enhance the climate adaptation
capacity of NEPs and other coastal watershed communities through partnerships with
other agencies. The partnerships will provide tools, training, and scientific expertise to
communities working to build their capacity to prepare for and manage climate change
impacts.
• Gulf Hypoxia: The EPA's role in implementing the Action Plan for Reducing, Mitigating,
and Controlling Hypoxia in the Northern Gulf of Mexico will not only require overall
leadership in coordinating activities among federal and state agencies but also places the
EPA in the lead role for actions in the plan. A key goal is to improve water quality in the
Mississippi River Basin and the Gulf of Mexico by implementing approaches to reduce
nitrogen and phosphorus pollution into the Basin and to the Gulf. In the Mississippi River
Basin, which represents 41 percent of the contiguous United States and includes 31
states, high levels of nutrients in drinking water - nitrate in particular - and elevated
levels of by-products from disinfection agents used to treat the nitrate have been linked to
increased disease risks, illnesses, or even death.195 In addition to the public health risks,
the economic costs from impaired drinking water are considerable. Effective nutrient
reduction in the Gulf will be coordinated with other Hypoxia Task Force agencies (e.g.,
U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Geological Survey) in high-priority watersheds.
Resources in this program are particularly focused on support for the Gulf Hypoxia Task
Force and complement other coordination and implementation resources in the
Geographic Program: Gulf of Mexico and Surface Water Protection Program.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(202) Acres protected or restored in National Estuary Program study areas.
FY2007
50,000
102,462.9
FY2008
50,000
83,490
FY 2009
100,000
125,410
FY 2010
100,000
89,985
FY2011
100,000
62,213
FY 2012
100,000
114,575
FY 2013
100,000
FY 2014
100,000
Units
Acres
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$195.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
195 State-EPA Nutrient Innovations Task Group. (2009). An Urgent Call To Action Report of the State-EPA Nutrient Innovations
Task Group.
http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/standards/criteria/nutrients/upload/2009_08_27_criteria_nutrient_nitgreport.pdf
527
-------
• (+$18.0 / -0.5 FTE) This net change reflects support for protecting and enhancing water
quality and living resources in estuaries and costal watersheds. This change includes a
reduction of 0.5 FTE and associated payroll reduction of $76.0.
Statutory Authority:
1990 Great Lakes Critical Programs Act; 2002 Great Lakes and Lake Champlain Act; Clean
Water Act; Estuaries and Clean Waters Act of 2000; Protection and Restoration Act of 1990;
North American Wetlands Conservation Act; Water Resources Development Act; 1909 The
Boundary Waters Treaty; 1987 Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement; 1987 Montreal Protocol
on Ozone Depleting Substances; 1996 Habitat Agenda; 1997 Canada-U.S. Great Lakes Bi-
national Toxics Strategy; Coastal Wetlands Planning; U.S.-Canada Agreements.
528
-------
Wetlands
Program Area: Water: Ecosystems
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$21,160.0
$21,160.0
144.8
FY 2012
Actuals
$22,275.9
$22,275.9
153.2
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$21,197.0
$21,197.0
144.8
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$27,656.0
$27,656.0
159.7
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$6,496.0
$6,496.0
14.9
Program Project Description:
The Wetlands Protection Program has two programmatic areas: the Clean Water Act (CWA)
Section 404 regulatory program and the state, Tribal, and local government program, the latter of
which includes a focus on wetland scientific, outreach, financial support, and coordination
efforts. Both areas use authorities established under the CWA to ensure effective, scientifically
based and coordinated efforts to protect the nation's water resources. The Wetlands Program
operates under the broad national goal of "no net loss" of wetlands in the Section 404 regulatory
program and also works to increase the quality and quantity of wetlands nationwide.
Major activities of the Program include development and dissemination of guidance, information
and scientific tools to improve management and public understanding of wetland programs and
legal requirements; review of Section 404 permit applications submitted to the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (Corps) or authorized states; and management of financial assistance to support
development of state and Tribal wetland protection programs under the CWA.
Wetlands provide numerous functions that are critical to the nation's public health and
environmental integrity. While it can be difficult to calculate the economic value provided by a
single wetland, according to one assessment of natural ecosystems, the dollar value of wetlands
worldwide was estimated to be $14.9 trillion.196 Wetlands improve water quality; recharge water
supplies, including public drinking water; provide many recreational opportunities, including
hunting and fishing; reduce flood risks; provide fish and wildlife habitat; and support valuable
recreational and commercial fishing and shellfish industries. For example, coastal wetlands are
estimated to provide $23 billion of storm protection services each year in the United States.197
196 Costanza, et. al. (1997) The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital." Nature 387:253-260
197 Costanza et al. (2008) The Value of Coastal Wetlands for Hurricane Protection. Royal Swedish Academy of
Sciences Ambio Vol. 37, No. 4, June 2008
529
-------
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Implement Clean Water Act Section 404:
The Corps has responsibility for managing the day-to-day permit processes under Section 404 of
the CWA across the nation. However, the EPA has an oversight role in the Section 404 program
in the states of Michigan and New Jersey, which have assumed the responsibility for Section 404
permitting in some waters of their respective states. Moreover, in its supporting national role, the
EPA develops and interprets environmental criteria for evaluating permit applications; has final
authority to determine the scope of CWA jurisdiction; approves and oversees state assumption;
identifies activities that are exempt from permitting; reviews and comments on individual
permits; has authority to prohibit, deny or restrict the use of waters as a disposal site (Section
404(c)); can elevate specific proposed Corps permit decisions to Army Headquarters (Section
404(q)); and enforces Section 404 provisions. The agency will continue to fulfill its obligations
under Section 404 in FY 2014.
The EPA measures its performance in implementing Section 404 using a system known as Data
on Aquatic Resources Tracking for Effective Regulation (DARTER). DARTER provides a tool
for the EPA to track agency involvement in pre-application coordination, review of public
notices for proposed permits, and proposed jurisdictional determinations. In FY 2012, the EPA
coordinated with the Corps on 2,367 Section 404 public notices for proposed projects. Of the
permit applications reviewed by the EPA, 85 percent of the final permits showed environmental
improvements based on coordination with the Corps.
In 2010, the EPA began a process to assess the EPA wetlands program's activities and capacity.
The EPA developed a survey instrument to assess EPA regional capacity to undertake and meet
program expectations. The EPA uses this survey to identify actions to improve EPA regional
program effectiveness
Improve Clean Water Act Review of Surface Coal Mining:
Consistent with the CWA and existing regulations and memoranda, the EPA will provide
comments to the Corps, as appropriate, regarding permit applications for proposed discharges of
dredged or fill material pursuant to CWA Section 404. The EPA also will continue to coordinate
with other EPA, state, and federal programs, including the Section 402 permitting, Section 303
water quality standards, state Section 401 water quality certification, National Environmental
Policy Act, and environmental justice programs, to assure more effective and coordinated review
of new surface coal mining projects.
The EPA will work to develop and disseminate improved technical information regarding the
environmental and public health effects of pollutants from mining-related discharges to waters of
the U.S. These activities will assist the Corps in reviewing proposed projects, identifying
environmental concerns, minimizing impacts, and issuing permits that appropriately use Clean
Water Act authority to protect aquatic resources.
530
-------
Implement Executive Order 13604 for Modernizing Federal Permitting and Review:
Although the agency is not the principal permitting agency for CWA Section 404 permits, the
agency has a statutory role to provide input to the Corps as it reviews proposed discharges. In FY
2014, the agency will work as effectively as possible within the statutory framework of the CWA
and its existing implementing regulations to assist the Corps in its implementation of the
Executive Order for efficient permit decisions for nationally and regionally significant
infrastructure projects. As necessary, the EPA also will participate in interagency forums
designed to effectively resolve issues of concern and ensure that permit decisions are both timely
and environmentally protective.
Improve Efforts to Compensate for Unavoidable Wetland and Stream Impacts:
In FY 2014, the agency, working with the Corps and other partners, will continue to implement
the joint Corps-EPA Compensatory Mitigation Rule finalized in FY 2008. The EPA's primary
goal is to avoid or minimize aquatic resource losses. Where losses are unavoidable, the EPA and
the Corps promote using a watershed approach to compensatory mitigation site selection and
design with flexible tools such as mitigation banking and in-lieu fee mitigation programs to help
offset lost aquatic resource functions. In partnership with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS), the EPA will place greater emphasis on stream assessment and monitoring in order to
develop functionally-based crediting and debiting protocols and ecological performance
standards for stream compensatory mitigation projects. The EPA will continue to focus on
wetland and stream corridor restoration to regain lost aquatic resources, and the EPA and the
Corps will provide technical training in targeted regions, in addition to providing our annual
training course on mitigation banking and in-lieu fee programs for interagency review teams.
Strengthen State and Tribal Wetlands Program Efforts:
In FY 2014, the EPA will work with its state and Tribal partners to strengthen their wetland
programs in the areas of monitoring and assessment, voluntary restoration and protection,
regulatory programs (including CWA Section 401 certification), and wetland water quality
standards. The agency will assist states and tribes to develop and implement broad-based and
integrated monitoring and assessment programs that improve wetland data for decision-making
on wetlands within watersheds, address significant stressors, report on conditions, and geo-locate
wetlands on the landscape. In addition, the EPA will continue to work with states and tribes
interested in assuming administration of the CWA Section 404 program and approve state
programs consistent with the Section 404 program requirements. In support of state and Tribal
wetland programs, the EPA will continue to administer Wetland Program Development Grants
with a focus in FY 2014 on working more efficiently with states and tribes to achieve specific
program development outcomes and providing targeted technical assistance to states and tribes.
The EPA also works in partnership with non-governmental organizations and state, Tribal, and
local agencies to conserve and restore wetlands and other waters through watershed planning
approaches, voluntary and incentive-based programs, improved scientific methods, information
and education, and building the capacity of state and local programs.198
For more information, visit http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/ or http://www.cfda.gov.
531
-------
Continue the National Wetland Condition Assessment:
The National Wetland Condition Assessment is part of the National Aquatic Resource Surveys
designed to assess the condition of our nation's waters while advancing state capacity to monitor
and assess aquatic resources. It builds on the accomplishments of the USFWS and their
production of national reports on status and trends in wetland acreage. When taken together, the
National Wetland Condition Assessment and the USFWS Wetland Status and Trends results
will, over time, be used to measure progress toward attainment of the national goal to increase
the quantity and quality of the nation's wetlands. The National Wetland Condition Assessment
will be published in FY 2014 and will represent the first-ever statistically valid comprehensive
survey of national wetland condition. In FY 2014, the EPA will start planning for the second
National Wetland Condition Assessment.
Clarify Scope of Clean Water Act Protections for Waters of the U.S.:
Another key activity in FY 2014 will be the EPA's continued work, in coordination with the
Corps, to clarify the geographic scope of waters protected under the CWA. The value of our
nation's water is tremendous. At least 117 million Americans—more than one-third of the U.S.
population—get at least part of their drinking water from sources that are fed by small
streams.199 Over the past decade, in the wake of several Supreme Court rulings, there has been
uncertainty in the public about which waters and wetlands are protected from pollution. The EPA
and the Corps are exploring opportunities for providing additional clarity that are consistent with
the CWA and court decisions; understandable, predictable, and fair; and protect waters important
for public health, water quality, and the environment. On a day-to-day basis, the EPA will
continue to assist the Corps in jurisdictional determinations, including site visits.
Lead Interagency Team to Study and Address Coastal Wetlands Loss:
The USFWS reports the loss of 84.1 thousand acres of marine and estuarine wetlands between
2004 and 2009, with the highest rates of loss due to estuarine emergent wetlands.200 The
continued loss of coastal wetlands is of particular concern because these wetlands serve as
nurseries for many fish and shellfish of commercial and recreational importance and play key
roles as storm buffers and floodwater storage. The EPA leads an interagency collaboration with
other federal agencies, including the USFWS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, the United States Department of Agriculture, United States Geological Survey,
the Corps, and the Federal Highway Administration, to better understand the factors contributing
to coastal wetland losses and identify actions that could reduce or reverse these trends. In FY
2014, the EPA will use the agency's wetland program resources and authorities to improve
coastal wetland natural resource protection and restoration collaboration with other agencies,
including following through with the Regional Ecosystem Restoration and Protection Objective
199 U.S. EPA (2009). Percentage of Surface Drinking Water from Intermittent, Ephemeral, and Headwater Streams.
http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/guidance/wetlands/surface drinking water index.cfm
200 Status and Trends of Wetlands in the Conterminous United States 2004 to 2009, available at:
http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Documents/Status-and-Trends-of-Wetlands-in-the-Conterminous-United-States-2004-
to-2009.pdf
532
-------
of the National Ocean Policy. The Gulf of Mexico will remain an area of emphasis and attention,
in light of documented wetland losses in that region.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(4E) In partnership with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, states, and tribes, achieve no net
loss of wetlands each year under the Clean Water Act Section 404 regulatory program.
FY2007
No Net
Loss
Data
Unavaila
ble
FY2008
No Net
Loss
Data
Unavaila
ble
FY2009
No Net
Loss
No Net
Loss
FY2010
No Net
Loss
No Net
Loss
FY2011
No Net
Loss
No Net
Loss
FY2012
No Net
Loss
No Net
Loss
FY2013
No Net
Loss
FY
2014
No Net
Loss
Units
Acres
Measure
Target
Actual
(4G) Number of acres restored and improved under the 5-Star, NEP, 319, and great water body
programs (cumulative).
FY2007
FY2008
75,000
82,875
FY2009
88,000
103,507
FY2010
110,000
130,000
FY2011
150,000
154,000
FY2012
170,000
180,000
FY2013
190,000
FY2014
200,000
Units
Acres
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$838.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$48.0) This increase supports the Wetlands Program's travel needs, including site-
specific travel to implement the EPA's responsibilities under CWA Section 404.
• (+$5,480.0 / +14.9 FTE) The request reflects the EPA's continuous analysis of program
priorities and needs in light of current program levels and will allow the EPA to maintain
progress and regain momentum on high-priority activities. Funds will support the EPA's
implementation of core Clean Water Act responsibilities under Section 404, including
timely review of Section 404 permits, science reviews needed for defensible permits and
support for state efforts to establish and implement effective wetlands protection
programs. This increase includes 14.9 FTE and associated payroll of $2,012.0.
• (-$32.0) This change reflects a reduction found from IT efficiencies and consolidation in
IT contracts that support the Wetlands Program.
• (+$162.0) This change reflects an increase in IT and telecommunications resources.
Statutory Authority:
CWA; 1990 Great Lakes Critical Programs Act; Great Lakes and Lake Champlain Act; Wetlands
Planning, Restoration and Restoration Act of 2002; Estuaries and Clean Waters Act of 2000;
North American Wetlands Conservation Act; Wetlands Resources Development Act; 1909 The
533
-------
Boundary Waters Treaty; Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement of 1978; 1996 Habitat Agenda;
1997 Canada-U.S. Great Lakes Bi-national Toxics Strategy; U.S.-Canada Agreements.
534
-------
Program Area: Water: Human Health Protection
535
-------
Beach / Fish Programs
Program Area: Water: Human Health Protection
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect Human Health
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$2,552.0
$2,552.0
7.5
FY 2012
Actuals
$2,380.8
$2,380.8
7.5
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$2,574.0
$2,574.0
7.5
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$724.0
$724.0
3.9
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($1,828.0)
($1,828.0)
-3.6
Program Project Description:
The Fish Contamination Program includes fish advisories and fish tissue contamination studies.
The Fish Advisory Program (formerly Beach/Fish Program) provides sound science, guidance,
technical assistance, and nationwide information to state, Tribal, and federal agencies on the
human health risks associated with eating locally caught fish with contaminants at levels of
concern. The agency pursues the following activities to support this program: 1) publishing
criteria guidance that states and tribes can use to adopt health-based water quality standards,
assess their waters, and establish permit limits; 2) developing and disseminating sound scientific
risk assessment methodologies and guidance that states and tribes can use to sample, analyze,
and assess fish tissue in support of waterbody-specific or regional consumption advisories, or to
determine that no consumption advice is necessary; 3) developing and disseminating guidance
that states and tribes can use to communicate the risks of consuming chemically contaminated
fish; and 4) gathering, analyzing, and disseminating information to the public and health
professionals that inform decisions on when and where to fish, and how to prepare fish caught
for recreation and subsistence.
Mercury contamination in fish and shellfish is a special concern, and the EPA and Food and
Drug Administration issued a joint advisory concerning eating fish and shellfish. Mercury
contamination of fish and shellfish occurs locally as well as in ocean-caught fish. At higher
levels, it causes adverse health effects, especially in developing fetuses and young children.
The fish tissue contaminant studies sample and analyze fish tissue in different types of
waterbodies - in fish caught and consumed by recreational and subsistence fishers - for
chemicals that are of concern for human health. The program tracks the concentrations of
persistent, bio-accumulative, and toxic compounds (PBTs) that are known to be present in U.S.
waters. The studies also are a surveillance tool for detecting contaminants of emerging concern
(CECs), such as Pharmaceuticals, polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), and perfluorinated
compounds (PFC). Agency activities include: 1) designing and implementing independent or
collaborative statistically-representative human health fish tissue studies; 2) analyzing data and
preparing reports; and 3) disseminating reports and data that help to inform the public (especially
recreational and subsistence fishers) and the states, where states might decide to conduct
536
-------
additional monitoring to determine if fish have contamination levels that warrant issuing a fish
consumption advisory.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to:
• Update science and public policy to assess and manage the risks and benefits of fish
consumption, including updating national guidance for assessing the safety of consuming
recreationally and subsistence caught seafood; and
• Provide technical support to states in the operation of their monitoring programs,
determining acceptable levels of contaminant concentrations, and developing and
managing fish advisories.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(fsl) Percent of women of childbearing age having mercury levels in blood above the level of
concern.
FY2007
FY2008
5.5
Data
Unavaila
ble
FY 2009
5.2
2.8
FY 2010
5.1
Data
Unavaila
ble
FY2011
4.9
Data
Unavaila
ble
FY 2012
4.9
2.3
FY 2013
4.9
FY 2014
4.9
Units
Women of
Childbearin
gAge
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$67.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$576.0 / -3.6 FTE) This reduces resources for the Fish Advisory Program. The EPA
will not be able to maintain the National Listing of Fish Advisories (NLFA) database and
report on the amount of rivers and lakes that have fish advisories. The agency will
redirect ongoing work, where possible, to the Food and Drug Administration on joint
guidance issued to the public and also will encourage and support the states'
implementation of their Fish Advisory Programs. The reduced resources include 3.6 FTE
and associated payroll of $576.0.
• (-$1,319.0) This reduction reflects the elimination of the Beach Program. The agency is
proposing to eliminate certain mature program activities that are well-established, well
understood, and where there is the possibility of maintaining some of the human health
benefits through implementation at the local level.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act (CWA).
537
-------
Drinking Water Programs
Program Area: Water: Human Health Protection
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect Human Health
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$98,547.0
$3,782.0
$102,329.0
583.2
FY 2012
Actuals
$97,070.3
$3,728.2
$100,798.5
567.1
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$98,931.0
$3,788.0
$102,719.0
583.2
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$104,033.0
$3,636.0
$107,669.0
574.6
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$5,486.0
($146.0)
$5,340.0
-8.6
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Drinking Water Program is based on a multiple-barrier, or a source-to-tap, approach
to protect public health from contaminants in drinking water. The EPA protects public health
through: (1) source water assessment and protection programs; (2) promulgation of new or
revised, scientifically sound National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWRs); (3)
training, technical assistance, public health, environmental outreach and financial assistance
programs to enhance public water systems' capacity to comply with existing and new
regulations; (4) underground injection control programs; (5) the implementation of NPDWRs by
state and Tribal drinking water programs through regulatory, non-regulatory, and voluntary
programs and policies; and (6) supporting states in helping public water systems finance the
costs of infrastructure improvements/
201
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Safe drinking water is critical to protecting human health. More than 300 million Americans rely
on the safety of tap water provided by public water systems that are subject to national drinking
water standards.20 In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to protect the public from contaminants in
the drinking water by: (1) developing new and revising existing drinking water standards; (2)
supporting states, tribes, and water systems in implementing standards; (3) promoting sustainable
management of drinking water infrastructure; and (4) implementing the underground injection
control program. For FY 2014, the agency's goal is that 92 percent of the population served by
community water systems will receive drinking water that meets all applicable health-based
standards. Since FY 2008, the agency has met or surpassed its community water system goals. In
FY 2012, 95 percent of the population served by community water systems (CWSs) received
drinking water that met all applicable health-based drinking water standards, surpassing the
performance target of 91 percent. In addition, in FY 2012, CWSs provided safe drinking water
201 For more information, please see http://www.epa.gov/safewater and https: //www.cfda. go v for more information.
202 U.S. Environmental Protection agency Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS/FED),
httpV/water.epa.gov/scitecl^datait/databases/drink/sdwisfed/index.cfm.
538
-------
during 98 percent of total person months (all persons served by community water systems
multiplied by 12 months), surpassing the performance target of 95 percent.
The agency will continue to implement the Drinking Water Strategy in FY 2014203 to expand
public health protection for drinking water by: 1) Addressing contaminants in groups to
accelerate advancement of drinking water protection; 2) fostering development of new
innovations in drinking water technologies (especially those applicable to small systems) to
address health risks posed by a broad array of contaminants; 3) finding ways to use the authority
of multiple statutes to help protect drinking water; and 4) partnering with the states to share more
complete data from monitoring at public water systems (PWSs).
Drinking Water Implementation
In FY 2014, the agency will continue to work with states to implement requirements for all risk-
based rules to ensure that systems install appropriate levels of treatment. In particular, the EPA
will focus on working with states with newer requirements to protect against Cryptosporidium, to
control disinfection byproducts, and to ensure quality water from groundwater sources. The EPA
will assist states in implementing public water system health requirements for drinking water
contaminants, including those addressed by the Arsenic Rule, Revised Total Coliform Rule and
Lead and Copper Rule.
While most small systems consistently provide safe and reliable drinking water to their
customers, many small systems face aging infrastructure challenges, increased regulatory
requirements, workforce shortages/high-turnover, increasing costs, and declining rate bases.
Difficulties achieving compliance are reflected in FY 2012 performance results as small system
violations made up 93 percent of the overall violations from all size systems. In addition, 84
percent of the Indian Country population served by CWSs received drinking water that met all
applicable health-based standards, missing the performance target of 87 percent. The EPA will
continue to focus on small systems under the following principles: (1) every person served by a
public water system should be provided with safe drinking water; (2) EPA will utilize a variety
of strategies to address the full spectrum of needs; (3) EPA will promote the long-term
sustainability of small systems; and (4) assistance should be targeted to those small systems that
are most in need. In addition, the agency will continue to partner with the United States
Department of Agriculture's (USD A) Rural Utilities Service to target funding and promote water
and wastewater system sustainability through sustainable utility management practices (e.g.,
asset management) and aligning training and technical assistance for rural systems, as well as
avoiding duplication of effort on funding infrastructure projects.
In FY 2013, the EPA is working to replace obsolete and expensive-to-maintain drinking water
system information technology. In FY 2014, the agency will invest an additional $2.2 million to
upgrade its Safe Drinking Water Information System/Federal (SDWIS/Fed) to an interactive
system that is a component of EPA's E-Enterprise efforts. When combined with the state funding
requested in the Public Water System Supervision grants, E-Enterprise funding to improve the
SDWIS data system will create an easy-to-use, one-stop access point for State and EPA drinking
203 For more information, please see http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/dwstrategy/index.cfm for additional
information.
539
-------
water program officials. Shared web services under SDWIS-Next Gen will provide the user with
customized content and functions, including reusable e-forms and tailored notifications of
relevant information. The goal of this project is to achieve water system, laboratory, and state
burden reduction through:
1) Providing tools that automate state preliminary compliance determinations to ensure
consistent determinations for compliance with drinking water rules;
2) Enabling electronic data verifications;
3) Supporting efficient sharing of drinking water data between states and EPA; and
4) Reducing states and the EPA's total cost of system ownership.
Decreasing the overall costs to states, which currently must maintain individual data systems,
will allow them to utilize those funds to provide additional technical assistance to systems in
non-compliance and most in need, including those serving less than ten thousand people. The
SDWIS/Fed is one of a handful of systems that will be included in the first set of offerings in the
new customer-facing web service. Taken together, these activities represent significant
components of the agency's work to transform its digital services within base resources.
In addition, the EPA will be able to post more drinking water data on the Internet. This increased
transparency will provide more complete data on drinking water quality to the public to instill
confidence that America's drinking water meets protective EPA standards and is safe for public
consumption.
The EPA also will continue the following activities in order to facilitate compliance with rules:
• Support states in their efforts to assist small systems in attaining and maintaining the
technical, managerial, and financial capacity to consistently meet regulatory requirements
and achieve long-term sustainability;
• Oversee the national Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) program efforts by
establishing priorities, developing guidance, measuring program results, and administering
the PWSS Grants;
• Directly implement the Aircraft Drinking Water Rule, which affects over five thousand
aircraft;
• Carry out the Drinking Water Program where the EPA has primacy (e.g., Wyoming, the
District of Columbia, and Tribal lands), and where states have not yet adopted new
regulations;
• Provide guidance, training, and technical assistance to states, tribes, laboratories and
utilities on the implementation of drinking water regulations;
• Work with other EPA programs, through an intra-agency workgroup, to continue creating
educational resources to disseminate information to the public and increase transparency
about America's drinking water standards, pollution runoff, and improving water quality.
540
-------
Other education engagement activities include: training the public through issuance of
grants and innovative awards and collaboration with stakeholders and national
environmental and non-profit organizations. These resources will be available to educate
the public about water quality issues and support EPA's core mission to protect public
health; and
• Develop technical guidance and other follow-up activities related to the Revised Total
Coliform Rule.
Drinking Water Standards
To assure the American people that their water is safe to drink, the EPA's drinking water
regulatory program monitors for a broad array of contaminants, evaluates whether contaminants
are of public health concern, and regulates, where needed. As part of the Drinking Water
Strategy, the agency will continue to focus on regulating groups of drinking water contaminants
to more effectively address potential risks. In addition, the EPA will continue its communication
with states, tribes, and communities, thereby maintaining confidence in the quality of drinking
water.
The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) requires the agency to make regulatory determinations on
at least five Contaminant Candidate List (CCL) contaminants every five years in addition to
reviewing existing rules every six years. The EPA will make preliminary determinations for at
least five CCL 3 contaminants and, after considering public comments, will make final
regulatory determinations. After making the final determination, the EPA expects to develop and
publish the proposed regulation for any positive determination. The agency also will continue to
evaluate and address drinking water risks through other activities in 2014, including:
• Analyzing comments and beginning work on a proposal to regulate carcinogenic volatile
organic compounds (cVOCs) as a group. This proposed regulation will address a group of
up to 16 cVOCs as part of the Drinking Water Strategy to provide public health protection
more quickly and allow utilities to more effectively and efficiently plan for improvements.
This group includes tetrachloroethylene and trichloroethylene, which were announced as
candidates for revision in the agency's second Six-Year Review. The group also includes
both regulated and unregulated cVOCs. The final regulation is projected to be published in
2015.
• Evaluating public comments on the perchlorate regulation which is expected to be
proposed in calendar year 2013, analyzing new scientific data provided by commenters,
and preparing the final perchlorate regulation for promulgation.
• Evaluating public comments regarding proposed revisions to the Lead and Copper Rule to
be published in 2013 and preparing the final regulation for publication in 2014.
• Publishing the final fourth Contaminant Candidate List (CCL 4) of unregulated
contaminants.
541
-------
• Conducting the Six-Year Review. The EPA reviews each existing national primary
drinking water regulation (NPDWR) no less than every six years and revises the
NPDWR(s), if appropriate. The primary goal of the review is to identify those regulations
for which current health effects assessments, changes in technology, and/or other factors
provide a human health or technical basis to support a regulatory revision that maintains or
strengthens public health protection. As part of the third Six Year Review, the agency will
be reviewing more than 80 NPDWRs for chemical, microbial, and radiological
contaminants. The review of the Long-Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment (LT2)
Rule, also covered under the retrospective review, is included in the Six-Year Review.
• Collaborating with stakeholders to better understand water quality issues in distribution
systems.
In accordance with the EPA's Final Plan for Periodic Retrospective Review of Existing
Regulations, the agency is reviewing: (1) the Lead and Copper Rule to seek ways to simplify and
clarify requirements imposed on drinking water systems to maintain safe levels of lead and
copper in drinking water and plans to publish the final rule in 2014; and (2) the LT2 Rule by
assessing and analyzing new data/information regarding occurrence, treatment, analytical
methods, health effects, and risk to evaluate whether there are new or additional ways to manage
risk while assuring equivalent or improved public health protection.
Sustainable Infrastructure and Sustainable Systems
With the aging of the nation's infrastructure and a growing need for investment, the drinking
water and wastewater sectors face a significant challenge to maintain and advance the
achievements attained in protecting public health and the environment. The EPA's water and
wastewater sustainability efforts are designed to promote more effective management of water
utilities in order to continuously improve their performance and achieve long-term sustainability.
The EPA will continue to encourage drinking water utilities to be sustainable through successful
business practices by providing funding, technical assistance, and training including the
following:
• Providing states with funds, through the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF)
capitalization grants, for low-interest loans to assist utilities with financing drinking water
infrastructure needs, support utility compliance with SDWA standards, work with states,
tribes, and utilities to enhance technical, financial, and managerial capacity to meet
infrastructure needs, and enhance system performance and efficiency;
• Providing effective oversight of the DWSRF funds;
• Partnering with states and utility associations as part of the agency's Sustainability Policy
to promote: upfront planning processes to ensure that projects are environmentally and
financially sustainable; system partnerships to achieve greater efficiencies; and
development of asset management programs, water and energy efficiency, and source
water protection approaches to manage water resources; and
542
-------
• Working with states, other federal agencies, and stakeholders to address operator
workforce issues and identify options for utilities in response to climate change impacts
and water resource limitations.
Additionally, beginning in FY 2014, appropriated DWSRF funds will be allocated to the states
based on the new 2011 Needs Survey scheduled to be reported to Congress in 2013. The survey
will document 20-year capital investment needs of public water systems that are eligible to
receive DWSRF monies - approximately 53 thousand community water systems and 21
thousand not-for-profit non-community water systems. The EPA also will publish data
concerning the drinking water infrastructure needs of water systems serving tribes and Alaskan
Native Villages as a special focus of this survey. As directed by the SDWA, the EPA will use the
results of the survey to set the state DWSRF allocations beginning in FY 2014.
Source Water Protection
The EPA will continue supporting state and local efforts to identify and address current and
potential sources of drinking water contamination. These efforts are integral to the sustainable
infrastructure effort because source water protection can reduce the need for additional drinking
water treatment and the associated additional infrastructure costs and energy usage, while better
protecting public health. Success has resulted from these efforts, as in FY 2012, 91 percent of
CWSs met all applicable health-based standards through approaches that included source water
protection, surpassing the performance target of 90 percent. In FY 2014, the agency will:
• Continue to work with national, state, and local stakeholder organizations and the multi-
partner Source Water Collaborative to encourage collaboration at the state and watershed
levels to protect drinking water sources. The EPA also will work with other federal
agencies to support state and local source water protection actions; and
• Increase our work with states and other stakeholders to characterize current and future
pressures on drinking water supplies and how to address them.
Underground Injection Control (UIC)
The UIC program safeguards current and future drinking water from the underground injection
of contaminants and regulates the construction, operation, permitting, and closure of injection
wells that place fluids underground for storage, disposal, enhanced recovery of oil and gas, and
minerals recovery. The number of UIC wells, especially Class II oil- and gas-related wells, has
risen significantly in recent years, and we expect this trend to continue. In FY 2014, the agency
will:
• Work to meet emerging permitting demands associated with water supply needs, including
injection of fluids for aquifer storage and recovery, stormwater, water reuse and
desalination associated with water supply needs; and with permitting demands related to
injection of uranium solution mining fluids and produced water disposal associated with
energy exploration activities.
543
-------
• Ensure proper oversight of hydraulic fracturing operations where diesel fuel is used by
implementing permitting guidance under SDWA's Class II UIC program for hydraulic
fracturing injection activities using diesel fuels. The agency also will work with states and
stakeholders on developing and implementing voluntary strategies for encouraging the use
of alternatives to diesel in hydraulic fracturing and improving compliance with other Class
II regulations, including risks from induced seismic events and radionuclides in disposal
wells;
• Implement the Class VI Geologic Sequestration (GS) rulemaking by:
1) Conducting webinars for the regulated community and implementing authorities to
facilitate rule implementation and comprehension of guidance recommendations and
prepare additional implementation materials for the rule;
2) Reviewing and processing (by rulemaking) Class VI primacy applications from states
and tribes;
3) Directly implementing the regulation, where states have not yet obtained primacy, and
work directly with permit applicants, and
4) Providing technical assistance to states to analyze complex modeling, monitoring, siting,
and financial assurance data for new GS projects.
• Direct national UIC program efforts to protect underground sources of drinking water by
establishing priorities, developing guidance, measuring program results, administering the
UIC Grants; and
• Work with the states to populate the UIC database with all inventoried wells
(approximately seven hundred thousand in that year) for all states and tribes (69 UIC
programs).
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(E) Percent of the population in Indian Country served by community water systems that
receive drinking water that meets all applicable health-based drinking water standards.
FY2007
87
87
FY2008
87
83
FY 2009
87
81.2
FY 2010
87
87.2
FY2011
87
81.2
FY 2012
87
84
FY 2013
87
FY 2014
87
Units
Population
Measure
Target
Actual
(aa) Percent of population served by CWSs that will receive drinking water that meets all
applicable health-based drinking water standards through approaches including effective
treatment and source water protection.
FY2007
94
91.5
FY2008
90
92
FY2009
90
92.1
FY2010
90
92
FY2011
91
93.2
FY2012
91
94.7
FY2013
92
FY2014
92
Units
Population
544
-------
Measure
Target
Actual
(aph) Percent of community water systems that have undergone a sanitary survey within the
past three years (five years for outstanding performance or those ground water systems
approved by the primacy agency to provide 4-log treatment of viruses).
FY2007
95
92
FY2008
95
87
FY 2009
95
88
FY 2010
95
87
FY2011
95
92
FY 2012
95
89
FY 2013
95
FY 2014
79
Units
CWSs
Measure
Target
Actual
(apm) Perc
through ap
FY2007
89
89
ent of community water systems that meets all applicable health-based standards
>roaches including effective treatment and source water protection.
FY2008
89.5
89
FY2009
90
89.1
FY2010
90
89.6
FY2011
90
90.7
FY2012
90
91
FY2013
90
FY2014
90
Units
Systems
Measure
Target
Actual
(dw2) Percent of person months during which community water systems provide drinking
water that meets all applicable health-based standards.
FY2007
FY2008
95
97
FY2009
95
97.2
FY2010
95
97.3
FY2011
95
97.4
FY2012
95
97.8
FY2013
95
FY2014
95
Units
Person
Months
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$3,911.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$1,245.0 / -8.9 FTE) This decrease reflects a reduction of FTE for workforce
restructuring and the Agency's efforts to lay the groundwork for longer-term efficiencies.
The EPA is continuing the effort to analyze staffing levels and deploy human resources to
achieve the Agency's mission more effectively and efficiently. For drinking water
programs, these resources include 8.9 FTE and associated payroll of $1,245.0.
• (+$2,198.0 / +0.7 FTE) This increase will be used to replace the EPA's SDWIS/Fed with
a Next Generation System that will be accessible to primacy agencies via the agency's
central portal. This effort will reduce the total cost of data system ownership for States
and EPA. In addition, the Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) program will
achieve water system, laboratory, and state burden reduction; support greater data
transparency; and enable better and more efficient state and EPA programmatic and
regulatory decision making if a rule required drinking water data to be reported
electronically by water systems and laboratories. These resources include 0.7 FTE and
associated payroll of $98.0.
• (-$54.0) This change reflects a reduction in development of tools needed to improve and
maintain small system compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act.
• (+$875.0) This increase is to provide resources to integrate environmental outreach
activities through an intra-agency workgroup to increase transparency about America's
545
-------
drinking water standards, pollution runoff, improving water quality, and other critical
environmental issues. These environmental outreach activities will support EPA's core
mission to expand the conversation on environmentalism.
• (-$199.0) This reflects a reduction in travel to support the Administration's Management
Agenda goal of reducing travel and conference spending.
Statutory Authority:
SOW A; CWA.
546
-------
Program Area: Water Quality Protection
547
-------
Marine Pollution
Program Area: Water Quality Protection
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$12,898.0
$12,898.0
43.7
FY 2012
Actuals
$12,400.5
$12,400.5
43.6
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$13,003.0
$13,003.0
43.7
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$11,556.0
$11,556.0
43.2
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($1,342.0)
($1,342.0)
-0.5
Program Project Description:
The goals of the Marine Pollution Program are to ensure marine ecosystem protection by
controlling point source and vessel discharges, managing dredged material and ocean dumping,
developing regional and international collaborations, monitoring ocean and coastal waters, and
managing other marine issues, such as marine debris, invasive species, and the marine
transportation system. The Environmental Protection Agency works to integrate its management
of the oceans and coasts across federal agencies and with state, Tribal, and local governments.204
Major areas of effort for the Marine Pollution Program include:
• Developing and implementing regulations and technical guidance to control pollutants
from vessel operational discharges and point source ocean discharges, and issuing
permits for materials to be dumped in ocean waters;
• Designating, monitoring, and managing ocean dumping sites, reviewing for concurrence
ocean dumping permits for dredged material, and implementing provisions of the
National Dredging Policy;
• Participating with other federal agencies (U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Department of State, U.S. Department of the Interior, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, and Navy) in international marine protection programs to
develop international standards that address vessel-related transport of aquatic invasive
species, harmful antifoulants, operational discharges from vessels, dumping of wastes
and other matter at sea, environmental issues associated with vessels in polar regions, and
marine debris. The EPA is Head of the U.S. Delegation for the London
Convention/London Protocol Scientific Groups, Alternate Head of the U.S. Delegation
for the London Convention/London Protocol Consultative Meeting of the Parties, and a
member of the U.S. Delegation to the Marine Environmental Protection Committee; and
See http://water.epa.gov/type/oceb/index.cfm for more information.
548
-------
• Working with a wide variety of stakeholders to develop and implement ecosystem-based
management tools, strategies, and plans for coastal ecosystems in order to restore and
maintain the health of coastal aquatic communities on a priority basis, including
promotion of dredged material management in a watershed context.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Ocean and coastal waters are environmentally and economically valuable to the nation. Healthy
ocean and coastal waters support fishing, recreation, tourism, and industry. To protect and
improve water quality on a watershed basis, the EPA will continue existing marine pollution
programs in keeping with the coordinating principles of the National Policy for Stewardship of
the Ocean, Our Coasts, and Great Lakes.2 5 The EPA will work with states, tribes, agencies, and
stakeholders on enhancing the quality of our valuable coastal and ocean resources and applying
sustainable marine and land use practices. The health of ocean and coastal waters, as well as
progress toward meeting strategic targets, will be tracked through periodic issuance of National
Coastal Condition reports, which are a cooperative project with federal and state agencies, and
by identifying monitoring efforts to increase our knowledge of our oceans and coasts.
Key FY 2014 activities for the Marine Pollution Program include:
Controlling Vessel Operational Discharges
• Develop management practices and associated performance standards for discharges
incidental to the normal operation of recreational vessels;
• Evaluate and respond to rulemaking requests to revise the EPA vessel sewage standards
under the Clean Water Act;
• Support implementation and reissuance of the Vessel General Permit (Clean Water Act,
Section 402);
• Coordinate with the U.S. Coast Guard and with other EPA offices on activities related to
the control of sewage discharges from vessels;
• Participate on the U.S. delegation to the Marine Environment Protection Committee of
the International Maritime Organization to develop international standards and guidance
under the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships and other
International Maritime Organization conventions addressing operational discharges from
ships; and
• Support a nationally consistent policy for the designation of no discharge zones for vessel
sewage. Increase awareness and understanding of the no discharge zone program by
making maps of no discharge zones available on the EPA's website.
'http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-stewardship-ocean-our-coasts-and-great-lakes
549
-------
Managing the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act / Ocean Dumping Management
Program (including Dredged Material)
Dredging is essential for the maintenance of U.S. navigation systems and ensures that U.S. ports
can be reached by large sea-going vessels. Several hundred million cubic yards of sediment are
dredged each year from U.S. waterways, ports, and harbors. This directly impacts the U.S.
economy, national security, and the environment. The EPA's ocean dumping management
program regulates ocean dumping (including disposal of dredged material) to protect the
environment from any material that will degrade or endanger human health, welfare, or
amenities, the marine environment, ecological systems, and/or economic opportunities. Major
areas of effort for FY 2014 include:
• Monitoring active dredged material ocean dumping sites to ensure achievement of
environmentally acceptable conditions, as reflected in Site Management and Monitoring
Plans. On an annual basis, the EPA Regional offices will determine whether dredged
material ocean dumping sites are achieving environmentally acceptable conditions, as
defined by each Site Management and Monitoring Plan. Corrective actions will be taken
by the appropriate parties should a site not achieve acceptable conditions.
• Continuing work as co-chair with the Army Corps of Engineers of the National Dredging
Team, to implement a tracking system for beneficial use of dredged materials (as an
alternative to dumping in ocean or coastal waters).
• Working with other federal agencies and the international community to develop
guidance on sub-seabed carbon sequestration and address any requests for carbon
sequestration in the sub-seabed or by ocean fertilization, including any required
permitting under MPRSA.
• Ensuring that U.S. policy and procedures regarding ocean dumping are consistent with
the London Convention of 1972 and 1996 London Protocol. The EPA is Head of the U.S.
Delegation for the London Convention/London Protocol Scientific Groups and Alternate
Head of the U.S. Delegation for the London Convention/London Protocol Consultative
Meeting of the Parties.
• Continue work with other federal agencies to draft proposed amendments to Title I of the
Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act, also known as the Ocean Dumping
Act, to enable Congress to ratify the 1996 London Protocol, which the U.S. signed in
1998.
• Coordinating with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Coast Guard, and other
federal agencies and other EPA programs on activities related to ocean dumping.
• Evaluating ocean dumping permitting requests and supporting implementation of general
and other permits issued under the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act.
550
-------
Monitoring and Assessment
During FY 2014, the EPA will collect environmental data from several offshore areas for use in
the designation of dredged material disposal sites and monitor, as required, the 67 active dredged
material ocean disposal sites.
In FY 2014, the EPA will implement program revisions, as necessary, pursuant to a planned FY
2013 analysis of the Ocean Dumping Management Program coordinated with the EPA's Policy
organization.
Reducing Marine Debris
• Work with other members of the Interagency Marine Debris Coordinating Committee to
assess, reduce, and prevent marine debris per the Marine Debris Research, Prevention,
and Reduction Act of 2006.
• Lead an EPA workgroup tasked with developing a comprehensive approach to address
the types, sources, movement, and impacts of marine debris.
Interagency Collaborations for Ocean and Coastal Protection
• Continue to implement the objectives laid out in the Final Recommendations of the
Interagency Oceans Policy Task Force, which were adopted by Executive Order 13547.
The National Policy for the Stewardship of the Ocean, Our Coasts, and Great Lakes, and
the Framework for Coastal and Marine Spatial Planning strengthen the work that the
federal government conducts with states, tribes, and stakeholders to protect vital
resources in our waters.
• Continue to participate on the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force by supporting coral reef
ecosystem protection through ongoing efforts to reduce impacts from land-based sources
of pollution, rising water temperatures, ocean acidification, and vessel discharges.
• Participate on the Cabinet-level Committee on the Marine Transportation System to
identify strategic goals and actions required to meet the present and future needs of the
users of the marine transportation system. The EPA promotes the environmentally sound
integration of marine transportation with other modes of transportation and with other
ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes uses, such as dredging and dredged material
management, reducing pollutant sources during operations and cargo handling, reducing
environmental impacts, and responding to accidents.
• Participate on an interagency work group tasked to review and make recommendations in
a Report to Congress on best management practices for the storage and disposal of
obsolete vessels owned or operated by the federal government.
551
-------
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(co5) Percent of active dredged material ocean dumping sites that will have achieved
environmentally acceptable conditions (as reflected in each site's management plan).
FY2007
FY2008
95
99
FY2009
98
99
FY2010
98
90.1
FY2011
98
93
FY2012
95
97
FY2013
95
FY2014
95
Units
Sites
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$472.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$76.0 / -0.5 FTE) This reduces resources for ocean monitoring and assessment
activities. The reduced resources include 0.5 FTE and associated payroll of $76.0.
• (-$250.0) This reduction eliminates support for use of a helicopter to conduct surveys and
perform water sampling for the New York/New Jersey Harbor Complex.
• (-$1,488.0) This reduces resources for lower priority ocean monitoring and assessment,
limiting activities primarily to statutorily required Marine Protection, Research and
Sanctuaries Act site monitoring and designation survey work.
Statutory Authority:
Certain Alaskan Cruise Ship Operations Act (PL 106-554); Clean Boating Act (PL 110-288);
Clean Water Act; Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990; Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide and Rodenticide Act; Liberty Ship Act (16 U.S.C. §§ 1220, et seq.); Marine Debris
Research, Prevention and Reduction Act of 2006; Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control
Act of 1987; Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act; National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2004, Section 3516; National Environmental Policy Act, Section 102; NTS A
of 1996; North American Free Trade Agreement; Ocean Dumping Ban Act of 1988; Olympic
Air Pollution Control Authority; Pension Protection Act; Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act; Safe Drinking Water Act; Shore Protection Act; Toxic Substances Control Act; Water
Resources Development Act; Wet Weather Water Quality Act of 2000.
552
-------
Surface Water Protection
Program Area: Water Quality Protection
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$203,856.0
$203,856.0
1,111.5
FY 2012
Actuals
$207,190.3
$207,190.3
1,106.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$204,799.0
$204,799.0
1,111.5
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$213,302.0
$213,302.0
1,085.4
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$9,446.0
$9,446.0
-26.1
Program Project Description:
The Surface Water Protection Program, under the Clean Water Act, directly supports efforts to
protect, improve, and restore the quality of our nation's rivers, lakes, and streams. The EPA
works with states and tribes to make continued progress toward the clean water goals identified
in the agency's Strategic Plan by implementing core clean water programs, including
accelerating innovations that implement programs on a watershed basis. The program also
integrates environmental outreach and training activities to educate the public on improving
water quality.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will focus its work with states, interstate agencies, tribes and others in key
areas of the National Water Program. The main components and requested funding levels are:
water quality standards and technology ($49 million); National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) ($42 million); water monitoring ($23 million); TMDLs ($28 million);
watershed and nonpoint source management ($32 million); sustainable infrastructure
management ($19 million); water infrastructure grants management ($13 million); and Clean
Water Act Section 106 program management ($7 million).
Water Quality Criteria and Standards:
Water quality criteria and standards provide the scientific and regulatory foundation for water
quality protection programs under the Clean Water Act. The criteria define which waters are
clean and which waters are impaired, and thereby serve as benchmarks for decisions about
allowable pollutant loadings into waterways/
206
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to support state and Tribal programs by providing scientific
water quality criteria information, which will include conducting scientific studies and
developing or improving criteria for nutrients, pathogens, and chemical pollutants in ambient
water. The EPA will continue to work with state and Tribal partners to help them develop
For more information, visit http://www.epa. gov/waterscience/.
553
-------
standards that are "approvable" under the Clean Water Act, including providing advance
guidance and technical assistance, where appropriate, before the standards are formally
submitted to the EPA.
Excessive nutrients continue to be one of the leading causes for impaired waters. A key element
to making progress is the development of numeric nutrient criteria. However, many states lack
the technical and financial resources to develop them. The EPA will continue its efforts to work
with states to accelerate adoption of numeric nutrient criteria into their state water quality
standards.
The EPA will focus on the following key strategic areas:
• Update the Water Quality Criteria prioritization process for aquatic life and human health
to be more systematic, comprehensive, science-driven, and transparent.
• Develop Human Health Ambient Water Quality Criteria for viruses commonly believed
to be responsible for gastrointestinal illness in contaminated water with recreational uses.
This includes developing criteria for a viral indicator and work with the EPA's Research
and Development Program to modify biomolecular methods for pathogenic viruses
developed for the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule to function in surface
water.
• Develop new and revised Health Advisories or Health Advisory values that will support
state needs for information to support their own standards setting processes. The EPA
will leverage health endpoints from select states and international bodies.
• Update of methodologies for developing Ambient Water Quality Criteria for aquatic life
to ensure that they are based on state-of the-art science.
• Many new methods are developed by small businesses seeking access to the market
provided by water regulation. The EPA's Water Program will work with the Water
Innovation Technology Center (WITC) to develop standardized approaches to validating
and calibrating new biomolecular methods. This will facilitate introduction of new and
emerging analytical methods for use in criteria and advisory values. The WITC can hold
colloquia with stakeholders that will lead to guidance for validation and calibration of
new methods for use by industry and other stakeholders.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System and Effluent Guidelines:
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to implement and support the core water quality programs
that control point source discharges. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) program requires point source dischargers to be permitted and requires pretreatment
programs to control discharges from industrial and other facilities to the nation's wastewater
treatment plants. The EPA works with states to structure the permit program to better support
comprehensive protection of water quality on a watershed basis and also support the recent
increases in the scope of the program arising from court orders and environmental issues.
554
-------
As the chart shows, the size of the NPDES universe, that is the number of entities required to
obtain permits, has increased nearly threefold over the past 15 years, from 372 thousand in 1999
to nearly one million regulated entities in 2012. As a result, the EPA and the states have
experienced increasing demands to provide analytical and outreach services to the regulated
community and other interested stakeholders.
The EPA will focus on several other key strategic objectives for the NPDES programs, such as:
• Conduct regional program assessments and permit quality reviews to ensure the health
and integrity of the NPDES program. The EPA is transit!oning state program assessments
and permit quality reviews of state permits to the EPA Regional offices while integrating
permitting and enforcement oversight in the regions and headquarters and promoting
transparency of these integrated NPDES reviews;
• Collaborate with partner organizations to promote the use of green infrastructure in
stormwater permits and in plans to control overflows of combined and separate sanitary
sewer systems;
• Assist states to address permitting issues arising from unconventional oil and gas
extraction, such as shale gas and coal-bed methane, in a timely manner that is consistent
with state water quality standards and Clean Water Act technology requirements;
• Continue to work with states and permittees to resolve issues related to overflows in
separate sanitary sewer systems and bypasses at the treatment plant to ensure that water
quality is protected during wet weather events;
• Provide assistance to states to develop technology and water quality-based permit
conditions that address new waste streams, such as those from flue gas desulfurization;
• Continue to develop a proposed effluent guideline to address surface water discharges
from Steam Electric power plants;
• Continue to develop effluent guidelines to address on a consistent, national basis
discharges from Unconventional Extraction in the Oil and Gas Industry including
Coalbed Methane and Shale Gas; and
• Continue to develop final national standards for cooling water intake structures at
existing facilities to address aquatic organism mortality.
In FY 2014, the EPA also will continue to focus on a number of wet weather and other NPDES
program areas.
• The EPA will continue work to control pollutant discharges from Concentrated Animal
Feeding Operations (CAFOs). The EPA will work with states and tribes to implement
fully its 2008 CAFO rule to ensure that all CAFOs that discharge pollutants obtain
NPDES permit coverage.
555
-------
The agency is developing a rule to revise stormwater regulations. In late 2008, the National
Academies of Sciences/National Research Council issued an assessment of the national
stormwater program and made recommendations to better address pollution from stormwater.
Stormwater is a main contributor of nutrients and sediments, which are two of the top three
pollutants impairing waters in the United States. The EPA is currently revising its economic and
benefits analysis, as appropriate, and developing final options. The EPA is scheduled to propose
the stormwater rule in June 2013 and finalize in December 2014, per settlement agreement.
• In response to the Chesapeake Bay Executive Order 13508 and settlement agreement, the
EPA will conduct significant new regulatory, permitting, modeling, reporting and
planning efforts to protect and restore the water quality in the Chesapeake Bay watershed.
Examples of these actions include development of a national stormwater regulation,
which will address the type of water quality problems prevalent in the Bay watershed and
elsewhere. In addition, the EPA will continue to support states in effectively
implementing the NPDES program to improve the health of the watershed.
• As a result of a 2006 court ruling, approximately 70 thousand vessels that were
previously exempt from permitting are now covered by an NPDES permit. On December
18, 2008, the EPA issued a new NPDES general permit, the Vessel General Permit
(VGP), to regulate 26 types of discharges, including ballast water from vessels operating
in U.S. waters and reissued that permit in March 2013. The EPA will continue to develop
tools and training to implement the VGP after reissuance and to provide outreach to the
regulated community. Ballast water discharges have introduced numerous aquatic
invasive species, resulting in severe degradation of many ecosystems and billions of
dollars of economic impacts.
• On December 19, 2013, the upcoming EPA Vessel General Permit will go into effect.
The permits, regulating approximately 72 thousand vessels, contain requirements for
ballast water, oily discharges, nutrients, and other vessel pollution. EPA will be
responsible for implementing the permits, conducting outreach to the domestic and
international shipping communities, evaluating the efficacy of those permits, managing
and analyzing data from tens of thousands of these vessels, and beginning to identify and
research effluent limits and other requirements to be explored to improve or streamline
VGP. Additionally, EPA will be participating actively in international forums to facilitate
development of new international vessel standards, directly relevant to the VGP, to
maximize environmental protection from international actors operating in our nation's
waters and prepare for issuance of the 2018 VGP.
• Additionally, a Congressional moratorium exempts incidental discharges from
commercial fishing vessels and vessels less than 79 feet in length from NPDES
permitting until December 19, 2014. To address those discharges, EPA proposed the
small Vessel General Permit (sVGP) in November 2011. EPA intends to finalize the
sVGP to provide an administratively efficient mechanism for permit coverage for these
vessels in the event the moratorium expires. The sVGP would regulate approximately
120-140 thousand vessels.
556
-------
• In 2011, the EPA issued a general permit to pesticide applicators that discharge to waters
of the U.S. The EPA will continue to assist and oversee 44 authorized states in
developing their own general permits and assist in a national effort to educate the
pesticides application industry regarding how to comply with the new permits. The EPA
also will work with states in implementing changes to their enforcement programs for
pesticides discharges. Pesticides that are applied to water—or that enter water as a result
of off-target application of specific pesticides—may be highly toxic and may cause fish
kills, die-offs of crabs, lobsters, bird deaths, and human illnesses.
Monitoring and Assessment:
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue working with the states and tribes to implement the
Monitoring Initiative, which includes enhancements to state and interstate monitoring programs
consistent with their individual monitoring strategies and collaboration on statistically-valid
surveys of the nation's waters. Through the Monitoring and Assessment Partnership, the EPA
will work with states to develop and apply innovative and efficient monitoring tools and
techniques to optimize availability of high-quality data to support Clean Water Act program
needs and to expand the use of monitoring data and geo-spatial tools for water resource
protection to set priorities and evaluate effectiveness of water protection. This will allow the
EPA, states, and tribes to continue to report on the condition of the nation's waters, and make
significant progress toward assessing trends in water condition in a scientifically-defensible
manner.
As part of the National Survey effort, the EPA, states and tribes will collaborate to conduct field
sampling for the second National Rivers and Streams Assessment to determine changes since
2008 and 2009. This rivers-and-streams survey will be conducted in FY 2013 and 2014, and the
report will be completed in FY 2016. A portion of the FY 2013 Clean Water Act Section 106
Monitoring Initiative funds will be allocated for the second year of sampling for the National
Rivers and Streams Assessment in 2014. A report for the National Wetland Condition
Assessment will be issued in calendar year 2014. The EPA will oversee completion of data
quality assurance, analysis and peer review of the second National Lakes Assessment to meet the
FY 2015 report target date. In FY 2014, the EPA/State Steering Committee for the National
Coastal Assessment will be planning the next survey, targeted to be in the field in 2015.
In FY 2014, the EPA will work closely with states as they continue to enhance their monitoring
programs. The EPA stresses the importance of using statistical surveys to generate cost effective
statewide water quality assessments, targeted monitoring approaches to develop and evaluate
local protection and restoration activities and the transmission of water quality data to the
national storage and retrieval warehouse using the new Water Quality Exchange protocol. The
Water Quality Exchange allows states, tribes, and other organizations to submit water quality
data and share the data over the Internet. The EPA will assist tribes in developing monitoring
strategies appropriate to their water quality programs, support tribes to provide data in a format
accessible for storage in the EPA data systems, and encourage tribes to use water quality data to
protect and restore waters in Indian country.
557
-------
Total Maximum Daily Loads:
Development and implementation of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for 303(d) listed
impaired waterbodies is a critical tool for meeting water quality restoration goals. TMDLs focus
on clearly defined environmental goals and establish a pollutant budget, which is then
implemented via permit requirements and through local, state, and federal watershed plans and
programs. The EPA will continue to encourage states to organize schedules for TMDLs to
address all pollutants on an impaired segment when possible. Where multiple impaired segments
are clustered within a watershed, the EPA encourages states to organize restoration activities
across the watershed (i.e., apply a watershed approach). Cumulatively, states and the EPA have
made significant progress in the development and approval of Total Maximum Daily Loads and
have completed more than 52 thousand TMDLs through FY 2012.
Nonpoint Source Management:
Nonpoint source management is the integral piece to addressing most of the remaining water
quality problems and threats in the United States. Protection and restoration of water quality on a
watershed basis requires a careful assessment of the nature and sources of pollution, the location
and setting within the watershed, the relative influence on water quality, and the amenability to
preventive or control methods. In FY 2014, the EPA will support efforts of states, tribes, other
federal agencies, and local communities to develop and implement watershed-based plans that
successfully address all of these factors to restore waters through the national Nonpoint Source
Program (Section 319) while also continuing to protect those waters that are healthy.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to provide nonpoint source program leadership and technical
support to states, municipalities, watershed organizations, and concerned citizens by:
• Continuing coordination with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to ensure that
federal resources, including EPA grants and Farm Bill funds, are managed and targeted to
jointly-agreed-upon watersheds to maximize water quality improvement in impaired
waters and protection in all others. Also, the EPA will continue to work with the U.S.
Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, and other federal agencies with land
management responsibilities to address water quality impairments;
• Creating, supporting, and promoting technical tools that states and tribes need to
accurately assess water quality problems and analyze and implement solutions;
• Assuring accountability for results through (1) use of the EPA's nonpoint source program
grants tracking system (GRTS), which will continue to track the nationwide pollutant
load reductions achieved for phosphorus, nitrogen, and sediment and (2) tracking the
remediation of waterbodies that had been primarily impaired by nonpoint sources and
that were subsequently restored so that they may be removed from the Section 303(d) list
of impaired waters;207
' For more information, visit www.epa. gov/nps/success.
558
-------
• Focusing on the development and dissemination of new tools to promote Low-Impact
Development (LID), thereby preventing new nonpoint sources of pollution.208 LID can be
used as part of an integrated Smart Growth strategy to reduce stormwater runoff;
• Implementing the Healthy Watersheds Strategy, in cooperation with states, academia and
non-governmental organizations, which focuses on protection of the watersheds of
healthy waters, as well as healthy components of other watersheds. This strategy includes
providing assistance to states interested in conducting healthy watershed assessments,
planning, and implementation; continuing to communicate the importance of protection
of healthy waters; and providing additional tools such as a framework for interested states
to identify and list healthy waters; and
• Targeting efforts within critical watersheds to implement effective strategies that can
yield significant progress in addressing nonpoint source nutrient pollution. Specifically,
the EPA will continue to support state efforts to design and implement nutrient reduction
strategies and to design watershed plans; promote sustainable agricultural practices;
collaborate to leverage and focus the most effective nutrient and sediment reduction
practices; work to leverage resources of federal and state partners to address development
and wetland restoration; and support critical monitoring needs to inform decision-
making.
In 2011, the EPA completed a detailed evaluation of how states are using Section 319 resources,
including for implementation of Total Maximum Daily Loads and restoring impaired waters. In
calendar year 2012, GAO also conducted a study of the Nonpoint Source Water Control
Program. In FY 2012, the EPA began implementing program refinements based on these studies
by providing assistance to states to revise their nonpoint source programs in order to accelerate
water quality improvements and restoration with a focus on increased accountability and
enhanced targeting of the funds to ensure timely implementation of nonpoint source controls.
The EPA has a priority goal that tracks the revision of state Nonpoint Source Management Plans
and will update 50 percent of State Plans by September 2013. The update of state Nonpoint
Source Management Programs is important for the setting of state priorities and strategic
targeting of Section 319 funds (along with state match and other funds) towards the most
pressing nonpoint source problems. Nonpoint Source pollution, generated by runoff that carries
excess nutrients, pesticides, pathogens, toxics and other contaminants to waterbodies, is the
greatest remaining source of surface water quality impairments and threats in the United States.
An up-to-date state Nonpoint Source Management Program is the roadmap that drives strategic
implementation activities to control and prevent pollution for a state's entire Nonpoint Source
Program. It establishes the state's goals, priorities, and key milestones and actions over time. In
FY 2014, the EPA will continue to work with states to update their NFS Management Plans and
to ensure adherence to the Section 319 program reforms, including the new grant guidelines and
annual assessments of state progress.
! For more information, visit www.epa. gov/owow/nps/lid/lidlit.html
559
-------
Sustainable Infrastructure:
The EPA will continue to implement its Sustainable Infrastructure Strategy and work with its
partners to facilitate the voluntary adoption of effective management practices by water sector
utilities. The agency will work with other key partners, such as local officials and academia, to
help increase public understanding and support for sustaining the nation's water infrastructure.
The WaterSense program is a key component of the agency's efforts to ensure long-term
sustainable water infrastructure. WaterSense provides consumers with a reference tool to identify
and select water-efficient products to help reduce water demand and wastewater flows. Through
January 2013, the agency had issued voluntary specifications for three water-efficient service
categories (certification programs for irrigation system auditors, designers, and installation and
maintenance professionals) and five product categories (residential toilets, bathroom faucets and
accessories, showerheads, flushing urinals, and weather-based irrigation controllers). The
program also has a new-homes specification designed to save water indoors as well as outdoors
for new single family and multi-family homes. Product specifications include water efficiency as
well as performance criteria to ensure that products not only save water but also work as well as
standard products in the marketplace. Products may only bear the WaterSense label after being
independently certified to ensure that they meet WaterSense specifications.
In FY 2013, the agency expects to release a draft and final specification for commercial pre-rinse
spray valves. In FY 2014, the agency plans to release a draft specification for commercial toilets
and will continue to research other residential and commercial product and service categories to
inform future specifications. The program will promote best management practices developed to
support the commercial and institutional sector and investigate opportunities to develop
benchmarks and recognize commercial facilities that are using water more efficiently.
In a short timeframe, WaterSense has become a national symbol for water efficiency among
utilities, plumbing manufacturers, and consumers. Awareness of the WaterSense label is growing
every day. As of January 2013, more than fourteen hundred different models of high-efficiency
toilets, 5,100 faucet models and accessories, 220 models of flushing urinals, and one thousand
models of showerheads had earned the WaterSense label. Approximately two hundred homes
also have earned the WaterSense label. Cumulative savings in the program due to products
shipped through the end of 2011 (the most recent year for which there is data) exceeds 287
billion gallons and $4.7 billion in water, sewer, and energy bill savings - enough water to supply
all the homes in Georgia or Arizona for an entire year.
WaterSense has more than 2,600 partners which include manufacturers, retailers, builders,
utilities, irrigation professionals, and community organizations that help to educate consumers on
the benefits of switching to water-efficient products. WaterSense also is working within the
federal government to ensure that it leads by example through the use of water-efficient products
and practices.
560
-------
l%! I4%M gallons of water
191 I Wl I saved since 2006!
4444444444444444444444* 4->
,003
•44444444444444444
44444444444444444444444
44444444444444444444444 **<"•
44444444444444444444444 4™
44444444444444444444444
44444444444444444444444
44444444444444444444444
44444444444444444444444 galons
44444444444444444444444 s^"
4444444444444444444444
That's enough water to supply all the homes
in Georgia or Arizona
for a year!
Policy and oversight of the Clean Water State Revolving Funds, which provide low-interest
loans to help finance wastewater treatment facilities and other water quality projects, also are
supported by this program. In managing the Clean Water State Revolving Funds, the EPA
continues to work with states to meet several key objectives:
• Fund projects designed as part of an integrated watershed approach to sustain
communities, encourage and support green infrastructure, and preserve and create jobs;
• Link projects to environmental results through the use of water quality and public health
data;
• Maintain the excellent financial condition of the funds;
• Continue to support states' efforts in developing integrated priority lists to address
nonpoint source pollution, estuary protection, and wastewater projects; and
• Work with state and local partners to implement a sustainability policy, including a focus
on management and pricing issues for wastewater utilities, to encourage conservation and
to provide adequate long-term funding for future capital needs.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to document capital needs and compile technical information
for publicly-owned wastewater collection and treatment facilities, combined sewer overflows
(CSOs) control facilities, stormwater management facilities, decentralized wastewater (septic)
treatment systems, and nonpoint source (NPS) pollution control. The EPA will use the Clean
Watershed Needs Survey (CWNS) 2012 data to support funding prioritization and outreach
activities as well as permitting and other watershed-based management activities.
The program will continue to work with other EPA programs through an intra-agency workgroup
to create educational resources to disseminate information to the public and increase
transparency about the Clean Water Act and pollution runoff. Other outreach activities include
561
-------
community training through issuance of grants, innovative awards, and collaboration with
national environmental organizations. These environmental outreach activities will support
EPA's core mission to expand the conversation on environmentalism.
The agency also will provide oversight and support for Congressionally-mandated projects
related to water and wastewater infrastructure as well as management and oversight of grant
programs, such as the Section 106 grants, the Mexico Border program, and the Alaska Native
Villages program.
Healthy Communities:
In FY 2014, the agency will continue to assist communities, particularly underserved
communities, to support local efforts to restore and protect the quality of their urban waters. The
EPA will implement this Urban Waters program as part of the Urban Waters Federal Partnership.
Two new agencies have joined this growing partnership which now includes thirteen federal
agencies working to revitalize urban waters and the communities that surround them. This work
also supports the President's America's Great Outdoors (AGO) initiative.
Many urban waters are impaired by pathogens, excess nutrients, and contaminated sediments that
result from sanitary sewer and combined sewer overflows, polluted runoff from urban
landscapes, and legacy contamination. Such impairments impact public health and impact local
economic growth. The EPA will assist communities, particularly underserved communities, in
restoring urban waterways and the surrounding land through partnerships with governmental,
business, community organizations and other local partners. Areas of focus may include: water
quality restoration as a driver for economic development; human health and related risk
communication, green infrastructure solutions to integrate water quality and community
development goals, youth engagement, education and outreach, planning for sustainable
financing, technical support, and training.
The EPA will use a portion of the program funding to continue to provide grants of $40 to $60
thousand and targeted technical assistance to support community-driven solutions to accelerate
measurable improvements in water quality. The EPA received a total of nearly six hundred
applicants and was able to fund 46 grants in FY 2011 and FY 2012. This program will support
innovative approaches to water quality improvement and help local partnerships in revitalizing
their waterfronts. Best practices and innovations identified through this program will then be
incorporated into the EPA's base programs and communicated nationally using traditional and
new media. Under the Urban Waters Federal Partnership, the EPA will coordinate with member
agencies to deliver technical assistance to the seven pilot communities and new locations to help
local partnerships advance their water restoration and community revitalization goals. With the
addition of two new federal partners, the EPA will coordinate with all thirteen partner agencies
to: develop public-private partnerships for urban watershed restoration; deliver streamlined
technical assistance; and develop data sharing and mapping tools for communities. The EPA and
its partners will use lessons learned from both the grantee projects and the federal partnership
pilots to develop tools for use by other communities across the nation.
562
-------
To date, the partnership has aligned federal funding streams from the EPA, DOT, USDA and
other partners to meet local needs more effectively. The partnership has leveraged over one
million dollars in non-federal funds. The EPA also will work with member agencies in the
partnership to develop a public-private partnership fund to advance watershed restoration in
urban watersheds. This fund is directly responsive to a long-standing need at the local level:
access to funds for implementation of projects planned under EPA assistance. By helping local
communities gain access to private funding for implementation, the EPA is advancing restoration
projects that improve water quality.
The EPA also will promote green infrastructure, such as expanding successful low-impact
development and green streets pilot programs,. In 2014, the Urban Waters Federal Partnership
will partner with at least two communities to help incorporate green infrastructure into their
stormwater management plans, eventually providing models for others also facing the same
challenges. The EPA will engage both underserved communities near urban waters and the
practitioners who assist them via expanded outreach efforts, using both traditional and innovative
methods, such as social media.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(bpp) Percent of submissions of new or revised water quality standards from states and
territories that are approved by the EPA.
FY2007
85
85.6
FY2008
87
92.5
FY 2009
85
93.2
FY 2010
85
90.9
FY2011
85
91.8
FY 2012
85
88.9
FY 2013
87
FY 2014
88
Units
Submission
s
Measure
Target
Actual
(bps) Number of TMDLs that are established or approved by the EPA [total TMDL] on a
schedule consistent with national policy (cumulative). [A TMDL is a technical plan for reducing
pollutants in order to attain water quality standards. The terms "approved" and "established"
refer to the completion and approval of the TMDL itself]
FY2007
25,274
26,844
FY2008
33,801
35,979
FY 2009
38,978
41,866
FY 2010
44,560
46,817
FY2011
49,375
49,663
FY 2012
52,218
52,585
FY 2013
65,293
FY 2014
67,494
Units
TMDLs
Measure
Target
Actual
(bpv) Percent of high-priority EPA and state NPDES permits (including tribal) that are issued
in the fiscal year.
FY2007
95
104
FY2008
95
119
FY2009
95
144
FY2010
95
138
FY2011
100
132
FY2012
100
128
FY2013
80
FY2014
80
Units
Permits
Measure
Target
Actual
(uwl) Number of urban water projects initiated addressing water quality issues in the
community.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
3
46
FY2013
10
FY2014
10
Units
Projects
563
-------
Measure
Target
Actual
(L) Number of water body segments identified by states in 2002 as not attaining standards,
where water quality standards are now fully attained (cumulative).
FY2007
1,166
1,409
FY2008
1,550
2,165
FY 2009
2,270
2,505
FY 2010
2,809
2,909
FY2011
3,073
3,119
FY 2012
3,324
3,527
FY 2013
3,727
FY 2014
3,927
Units
Segments
Measure
Target
Actual
(wq2) Remove the specific causes of water body impairment identified by states in 2002
(cumulative).
FY2007
FY2008
4,607
6,723
FY2009
6,891
7,530
FY2010
8,512
8,446
FY2011
9,016
9,527
FY2012
10,161
11,134
FY2013
11,634
FY2014
12,134
Units
Causes
Measure
Target
Actual
(wq3) Improve water quality conditions in impaired watersheds nationwide using the watershed
approach (cumulative).
FY2007
FY2008
40
60
FY2009
102
104
FY2010
141
168
FY2011
208
271
FY2012
312
332
FY2013
370
FY2014
408
Units
Watersheds
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$10,391.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$3,464.0 / -25.1 FTE) This reduces resources due to workforce restructuring, affecting
federal implementation of the Clean Water Act. The reduced resources include 25.1 FTE
and associated payroll of $3,464.0.
• (-$138.0 / -1.0 FTE) As part of the agency's E-Enterprise implementation, this change
reflects a disinvestment in technical support for state programs and federal environmental
data collection and management for permitting and water quality monitoring, redirected
to other programs' implementation of the agency's E-Enterprise investment. The reduced
resources include 1.0 FTE and associated payroll of $138.0.
• (-$156.0) This reflects a reduction in travel to support the Administration's Management
Agenda goal of reducing travel and conference spending.
• (-$351.0) This change reflects a reduction found from IT efficiencies and consolidation in
IT contracts that support technical support for state programs and federal environmental
data collection and management for permitting and water quality monitoring.
• (+$1,357.0) This increase reflects enhanced support to urban communities, especially
underserved communities, working to achieve their water restoration goals as part of the
Urban Waters Program. Support includes community-based projects such as
demonstration projects as well as technical support and training related to: voluntary
monitoring, risk screening and communication, green infrastructure, source water
protection, community stewardship, visioning and planning, and sustainable financing.
This work also supports the President's America's Great Outdoors (AGO) initiative.
564
-------
• (+$875.0) This increase is based on agency priorities to provide resources to the public
and disseminate information about the Clean Water Act, watershed protection, pollution
runoff, and other critical environmental issues. These environmental outreach activities
will support the EPA's core mission to expand the conversation on environmentalism.
• (+$932.0) This increase reflects the EPA's advancement in a wide range of activities to
restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation's
waters. Key elements include: development and implementation of TMDLs, support the
water quality monitoring program, support partnerships with states to address nonpoint
source pollution, NPDES permit issuance support and oversight, agency efforts to
promote sustainability, and strengthening of water and wastewater infrastructure.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. - Various Sections 1251 to 1387.
565
-------
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
566
-------
Indoor Air: Radon Program
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$3,861.0
$210.0
$4,071.0
23.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$4,292.9
$254.3
$4,547.2
25.8
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$3,875.0
$210.0
$4,085.0
23.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$2,271.0
$0.0
$2,271.0
9.6
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($1,590.0)
($210.0)
($1,800.0)
-13.4
Program Project Description:
Title III of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) directs the EPA to undertake a variety of
activities to address the public health risk posed by exposure to indoor radon. Under the statute,
the EPA studies the health effects of radon, assesses exposure levels, sets an action level,
provides technical assistance, and advises the public of steps they can take to reduce exposure.
Radon is the second leading cause of lung cancer in the United States - and the leading cause of
lung cancer mortality among non-smokers - accounting for about 21,000 deaths per year. The
EPA's non-regulatory indoor radon program promotes actions to reduce the public's health risk
from indoor radon. The EPA and the Surgeon General recommend that people do a simple home
test and, if levels above EPA's guidelines are confirmed, reduce those levels by home mitigation
using inexpensive and proven techniques. The EPA also recommends that new homes be built
using radon-resistant features in areas where there is elevated radon. This voluntary program has
succeeded in promoting partnerships between national organizations, the private sector, and
state, local, and Tribal governmental programs to achieve radon risk reduction.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2011, the EPA launched a new radon initiative with other federal agencies - the Federal
Radon Action Plan - to attempt to significantly increase radon testing, mitigation, and radon
resistant new construction within each agency's sphere of responsibility. A significant portion of
the risk reduction activities in the Federal Radon Action Plan are targeted toward low income
Americans. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to implement the multi-agency plan, as well as
continue to implement the Agency's own radon program. The EPA will drive action at the
national level to reduce radon risk in homes and schools using partnerships with the private
sector and public health groups, information dissemination, participation in the development of
codes and standards and social marketing techniques. These actions are aimed at fixing homes
and schools when radon levels are high and building new homes and schools with radon resistant
features.
567
-------
In FY 2014, the EPA will engage in more limited public outreach and education activities,
encourage radon risk reduction as a normal part of doing business in the real estate marketplace,
promote local and state adoption of radon prevention standards in building codes, and participate
in the development of national voluntary standards (e.g., mitigation and construction protocols)
for adoption by states and the radon industry/
Performance Targets:
209
Measure
Target
Actual
(R50) Percentage of existing homes with an operating radon mitigation system compared to the
estimated number of homes at or above EPA's 4pCi/L action level.
FY2007
No Target
Establish
ed
10.3
FY2008
11.1
11.0
FY 2009
11.5
12.0
FY 2010
12.0
12.3
FY2011
12.5
12.9
FY 2012
13.3
Data
Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
13.9
FY 2014
13.9
Units
Percent of
Homes
Measure
Target
Actual
(R51) Percentage of all new single-family homes (SFH) in high radon potential areas built with
radon reducing features.
FY2007
No Target
Establish
ed
28.6
FY2008
30.0
31.0
FY 2009
31.5
36.1
FY 2010
33.0
40.1
FY2011
34.5
38.2
FY 2012
36.0
Data
Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
37.5
FY 2014
37.5
Units
Percent of
Homes
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$135.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$1,725.0 / -11.9 FTE) This disinvestment eliminates regional oversight for the State
Indoor Radon Grants, which EPA is also proposing for elimination. The funding
reduction will also eliminate regional radon outreach, education, and technical assistance
to the general public and states. This is a mature program that is being reduced in a tight
fiscal climate to focus EPA efforts on other environmental challenges. The reduced
resources include 11.9 FTE and associated payroll of $1,527.0.
Statutory Authority:
CAA Amendments of 1990; Radon Gas and Indoor Air Quality Research Act; Title IV of the
SARA of 1986; TSCA, Section 6, Titles II and Title III (15 U.S.C. 2605 and 2641-2671); and
IRAA, Section 306.
1 http://www.epa.gov/radon
568
-------
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$17,135.0
$370.0
$17,505.0
53.7
FY 2012
Actuals
$17,301.5
$351.7
$17,653.2
58.4
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$17,288.0
$372.0
$17,660.0
53.7
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$17,204.0
$428.0
$17,632.0
52.9
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$69.0
$58.0
$127.0
-0.8
Program Project Description:
Title IV of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) gives the EPA
broad authority to conduct and coordinate research on indoor air quality, develop and
disseminate information, and coordinate risk reduction efforts at the federal, state, and local
levels.
In this non-regulatory (voluntary) program, the EPA works through partnerships with non-
governmental organizations and federal, state, and local partners, as well as professional
organizations, to educate and encourage individuals, schools, industry, the health care
community, and others to take action to reduce health risks from poor indoor air quality in
homes, schools, and other buildings. For many reasons, including individuals' decisions to
smoke in their own homes, air inside homes, schools, and offices can be more polluted than
outdoor air even in the largest and most industrialized cities.210 People typically spend close to
90 percent of their time indoors - where concentrations of certain volatile organic compounds
and air toxic pollutants are often 2-5 times higher than outdoors.211 These conditions impact
everyone, but there is a disproportionate burden for children, the elderly, people with respiratory
conditions, including asthma, and low income families. Globally, indoor air pollution, primarily
from unvented cooking and heating appliances, is the fourth leading cause of premature death
and the worst environmental health risk factor in the world.3
The EPA uses technology transfer to improve the design, operation, and maintenance of
buildings, including schools, homes, and other buildings to promote healthier indoor air. The
EPA provides technical guidance and assistance that directly supports states, tribes, local
governments, as well as the general public and a wide range of non-governmental organizations
and networks, such as those representing public health professionals, business officials,
210U.S.EPA. 1987. The Total Exposure Assessment Methodology (TEAM) Study: Summary and Analysis Volume I. EPA 600-6-
87-002a. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
211 U.S. EPA. 1989. Report to Congress on Indoor Air Quality, Volume II: Assessment and Control of Indoor Air Pollution.
EPA40-6-89-001C. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
3World Health Organization. 2012. The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors 2010 Study.
569
-------
residential and commercial building designers and managers, school administrators, energy
managers, and indoor air quality service providers.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA's Indoor Air Program will continue to support the Agency's priorities,
including the protection of vulnerable subpopulations, especially children. The EPA will
continue to promote comprehensive asthma care that integrates management of environmental
asthma triggers and health care services by building community capacity for delivering
comprehensive asthma care programs through the Communities in Action for Asthma-Friendly
Environments Campaign. The EPA will place a particular emphasis on protecting vulnerable
populations, including children, and low-income and minority populations disproportionately
impacted by poor asthma outcomes. The EPA is one of three agency co-chairs of the
Coordinated Federal Action Plan to Reduce Racial and Ethnic Asthma Disparities, an initiative
under the auspices of the Taskforce on Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks to
Children.
The EPA will continue to provide, evolve, and extend existing program guidance to promote
good indoor air quality across a range of building types - homes, schools, and other buildings -
during multiple phases of the building life cycle. As part of this effort, the EPA will collaborate
with public and private sector organizations to provide clear and verifiable protocols and
specifications for promoting good indoor air quality and efficiently integrate these protocols and
specifications into existing energy efficiency, green building, and health-related programs and
initiatives. The comprehensive and integrated specifications and protocols will address the
control and management of moisture and mold, combustion gases, particles and VOCs, and
protection and management of HVAC systems to ensure adequate ventilation and combustion
safety. FY 2014 activities will include a special focus on equipping the affordable housing
sector with training and guidance to promote the adoption of these best practices with the aim of
creating healthier, more energy efficient homes for low income families.
Internationally, the EPA will continue to build on the action generated under the Partnership for
Clean Indoor Air by supporting the outreach and communication efforts of the Global Alliance
for Clean Cookstoves, a public-private initiative dedicated to developing a global market for
clean cookstoves and fuels. The EPA also will continue to provide technical expertise and
assistance to developing countries to assist organizations within those countries to reduce human
health risks due to indoor smoke from cooking and heating fires. Since 2003, the Indoor Air
Program has documented 10 million households worldwide who have adopted clean and efficient
cooking practices through the Partnership's programs, reducing 60 million people's exposure to
dangerous pollutants.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(R17) Additional health care professionals trained annually on the environmental management
of asthma triggers.
FY2007
2,000
4,582
FY2008
2,000
4,558
FY 2009
2,000
4,614
FY 2010
2,000
4,153
FY2011
2,000
5,600
FY 2012
3,000
4,914
FY 2013
3,000
FY 2014
3,000
Units
Professional
s Trained
570
-------
Measure
Target
Actual
(R16) Percentage of the public that is aware of the asthma program's media campaign.
FY2007
>20
Data Not
Avail
FY2008
>20
Data Not
Avail
FY 2009
>20
33
FY 2010
>30
Data Not
Avail
FY2011
>30
32
FY 2012
>30
Data
Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
>30
FY 2014
>30
Units
Percent
Aware
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$283.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$180.0 / -0.8 FTE) This reduces resources for technical guidance and assistance that
directly supports states, tribes, local governments, and a wide range of non-governmental
organization and networks to address health risks from poor indoor air quality. The reduced
resources include 0.8 FTE and associated payroll of $117.0.
• (-$2.0) This reflects a reduction in travel to support the Administration's Management
Agenda goal of reducing travel and conference spending.
• (-$32.0) This reflects a reduction found from IT efficiencies and consolidation in IT
contracts that support the indoor air program.
Statutory Authority:
CAA Amendments of 1990; Title IV of the SARA of 1986.
571
-------
Radiation: Protection
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Reduce Unnecessary Exposure to Radiation
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Science & Technology
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$9,540.0
$2,094.0
$2,468.0
$14,102.0
75.4
FY 2012
Actuals
$9,454.8
$2,072.6
$2,247.3
$13,774.7
75.2
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$9,575.0
$2,102.0
$2,465.0
$14,142.0
75.4
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$10,623.0
$2,133.0
$2,476.0
$15,232.0
73.7
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,083.0
$39.0
$8.0
$1,130.0
-1.7
Program Project Description:
Congress designated the EPA as the primary federal agency charged with protecting human
health and the environment from harmful and avoidable exposure to radiation. The EPA has
important general and specific duties depending on the enabling legislation (e.g., Atomic Energy
Act, Nuclear Waste Policy Act, Clean Air Act, etc). The EPA's Radiation Protection program
carries out this responsibility through its federal guidance and regulations/standards development
activities. The EPA provides oversight of operations at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP).
The EPA also regulates airborne radioactive emissions and ensures that the agency has
appropriate methods to manage radioactive releases and exposures under Section 112 of the
Clean Air Act, which governs the EPA's authority to regulate hazardous air pollutants.
Other EPA responsibilities include radiation clean-up and waste management guidance, radiation
pollution prevention, and guidance on radiation protection standards and practices to federal
agencies. The agency's radiation science is recognized nationally and internationally; it is the
foundation that the EPA, other federal agencies, and states use to develop radiation risk
management policy, guidance, and rulemakings. The agency works closely with other national
and international radiation protection organizations, such as the National Academy of Sciences,
the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, the International Atomic
Energy Agency, the International Commission on Radiation Protection, and the Organization of
Economic and Cooperative Development's Nuclear Energy Agency to advance scientific
understanding of radiation risk.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to implement its regulatory oversight responsibilities for
Department of Energy (DOE) activities at the WIPP facility, as mandated by Congress in the
WIPP Land Withdrawal Act of 1992. The EPA also will continue its oversight work to ensure
572
-------
919
the permanent and safe disposal, consistent with the EPA standards, of all radioactive waste
shipped to WIPP. This includes conducting inspections of waste generator facilities and
evaluating DOE's compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations every five
years.
The EPA will complete the revision to the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act
regulation (40 CFR 192), last reviewed in 1995, and the related Hazardous Air Pollutants,
Subpart W (40 CFR 61) update. The EPA will begin work to ensure that the nation has generic,
non-site-specific standards that protect public health and the environment from risks associated
with geologic disposal of high-level radioactive waste.
The EPA, in partnership with other federal agencies, will continue to promote the management
of radiation risks in a consistent and safe manner at water treatment facilities and during
cleanups at Superfund, DOE, Department of Defense (DOD), state, local, and other federal sites.
The agency will continue to conduct limited radiation risk assessments and provide guidance and
technical tools, when available.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(R37) Time to approve site changes affecting waste characterization at DOE waste generator
sites to ensure safe disposal of transuranic radioactive waste at WIPP.
FY2007
90
86
FY2008
80
75
FY 2009
70
75
FY 2010
70
66
FY2011
70
64
FY 2012
70
Data
Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
70
FY 2014
70
Units
Days
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$313.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to adjustments
in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$227.0 / -0.9 FTE) This decrease reflects reduced Headquarters staff and resources and
will delay the program's ability to complete needed updates to multiple agency
regulations on schedule. The reduced resources include 0.9 FTE and associated payroll of
$143.0.
• (-$3.0) This reflects a reduction in travel to support the Administration's Management
Agenda goal of reducing travel and conference spending.
• (+$1,000.0) This increase is for the development of generic, non-site-specific regulatory
standards that will protect public health and the environment from risks associated with
geologic disposal of high-level radioactive waste.
- Additional information at: http://www.epa.gov/radiation/wipp/background.html
573
-------
Statutory Authority:
AEA of 1954, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq. (1970), and Reorganization Plan #3 of 1970;
CAA Amendments of 1990; CERCLA as amended by the SARA of 1986; Energy Policy Act of
1992, P.L. 102-486; Executive Order 12241 of September 1980, National Contingency Plan, 3
CFR, 1980; NWPA of 1982; PHSA as amended, 42 U.S.C. 201 et seq.; SOW A; Uranium Mill
Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) of 1978; WIPP Land Withdrawal Act.
574
-------
Radiation: Response Preparedness
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Reduce Unnecessary Exposure to Radiation
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$3,015.0
$4,076.0
$7,091.0
41.9
FY 2012
Actuals
$2,998.0
$3,783.5
$6,781.5
43.3
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$3,026.0
$4,086.0
$7,112.0
41.9
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$3,132.0
$4,097.0
$7,229.0
42.2
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$117.0
$21.0
$138.0
0.3
Program Project Description:
The EPA generates policy guidance and procedures for the EPA's radiological emergency
response under the National Response Framework (NRF) and the National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). The EPA maintains its own Radiological
Emergency Response Team (RERT) and is a member of the Federal Radiological Preparedness
Coordinating Committee (FRPCC) and the Federal Advisory Team for Environment, Food, and
Health (the "A-Team"). The EPA responds to radiological emergencies, conducts national and
regional radiological response planning and training, and develops response plans for
radiological incidents or accidents.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA's RERT, a component of the agency's emergency response structure, will
continue to ensure that it maintains and improves the level of readiness to support federal
radiological emergency response and recovery operations under the NRF and NCP. The EPA
will design training and exercises to enhance the RERT's ability to fulfill the EPA's
responsibilities, as well as analyze them for improvements needed for overall radiation response
preparedness.213 Through personnel and asset training and exercises, the EPA will continue to
enhance and maintain its state of readiness for radiological emergencies.
The EPA will continue to coordinate with its interagency partners, under the FRPCC, to revise
federal radiation emergency response plans and develop radiological emergency response
protocols and standards. The agency will continue to develop guidance addressing lessons
learned from incidents, including the Fukushima Nuclear Incident, and exercises to ensure more
effective coordination of the EPA's support with other federal and state response agencies. The
EPA will continue to develop and maintain Protective Action Guides (PAGs) for use by federal,
' Additional information can be accessed at: http://www.epa.gov/radiation/rert/
575
-------
state, and local responders. Additionally, the EPA will provide training on the use of the PAGs to
users through workshops and radiological emergency response exercises.
The EPA will continue to participate in planning and implementing international and federal
table-top and field exercises including radiological anti-terrorism activities, with the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC), Department of Energy (DOE), Department of Defense (DOD),
and Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The EPA also will continue to train state, local,
and federal officials and provide technical support to federal and state radiation, emergency
management, solid waste, and health programs that are responsible for radiological emergency
response and development of their own preparedness programs.
The EPA will continue to develop and use both laboratory-based and field-based measurement
methods, procedures, and quality systems to support expedited assessment and characterization
of outdoor and indoor areas impacted with radiological contamination. Application of these
methods and procedures will support rapid assessment and triage of impacted areas (including
buildings, indoor environments, and infrastructure) and development of cleanup strategies.
The EPA's Special Teams will design and establish an instrument quality program for field-
based radiological measurements. The EPA's Special Teams also will develop procedures for
ensuring protection of responders by minimizing exposure and keeping the dose as low as
reasonably achievable.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(R35) Level of readiness of radiation program p
radiological emergency response and recovery o
FY2007
80
83
FY2008
85
87
FY 2009
90
90
FY 2010
90
97
ersonnel and assets to support federal
3erations.
FY2011
90
97
FY 2012
90
Data
Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
90
FY 2014
93
Units
Percent
Readiness
Measure
Target
Actual
(R36) Average time before availability of quality assured ambient radiation air monitoring data
during an emergency.
FY2007
1.3
1.3
FY2008
1.0
0.8
FY2009
0.8
0.8
FY2010
0.7
0.5
FY2011
0.7
0.5
FY2012
0.5
Data
Avail
12/2013
FY2013
0.5
FY2014
0.5
Units
Days
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$139.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$22.0) This reduction will limit support for radiological emergency response planning
and training.
576
-------
Statutory Authority:
Atomic Energy Act (AEA) of 1954, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq. (1970), and
Reorganization Plan #3 of 1970; Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments of 1990; Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA); National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 CFR 300; 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;
Homeland Security Act of 2002; Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006
(PKEMRA); Public Health Service Act (PHSA), as amended, 42 U.S.C. 201 et seq.; Robert T.
Stafford Disaster Relief and EAA, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.; Safe Drinking Water Act
(SOWA); and Title XIV of the Natural Disaster Assistance Act (NDAA) of 1997, PL 104-201
(Nunn-Lugar II).
577
-------
Program Area: Congressional Priorities
578
-------
Water Quality Research and Support Grants
Program Area: Congressional Priorities
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems; Protect Human Health
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$14,975.0
$4,992.0
$19,967.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$14,975.0
$60.0
$15,035.0
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$15,209.0
$5,048.0
$20,257.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($14,975.0)
($4,992.0)
($19,967.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
In 2012, Congress appropriated $14.975 million for an Environmental Protection: National
Priority competitive grant program to provide rural and urban communities with technical
assistance to improve water quality and provide safe drinking water. EPA was instructed to
award grants on a competitive basis and give priority to not-for-profit organizations that: conduct
activities that are national in scope; can provide a ten-percent match, including in-kind
contributions; and are supported by a majority of small community water systems, currently
provide multi-state regional technical assistance, or currently provide assistance to private well
owners. The agency was directed to allocate funds to grantees within 180 days of enactment of
this Act.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
EPA is not requesting funds to support this grant program in FY 2014.
Performance Targets:
There are no performance targets for this program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$14,975.0) The EPA is not requesting funds to support this grant program in FY 2014.
Statutory Authority:
SOW A, 42U.S.C. §300j-lc, Section 1442. CWA.104(b)(3).
579
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Inspector General
Resource Summary Table 582
Program Projects in Inspector General 582
Program Area: Audits, Evaluations And Investigations 583
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations 584
580
-------
581
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION: Inspector General
Resource Summary Table
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inspector General
Budget Authority
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$41,933.0
293.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$51,839.9
290.7
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$42,189.0
293.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$45,227.0
300.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$3,294.0
7.0
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the
Superfund account.
Bill Language: Inspector General
For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General in carrying out the provisions of the
Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, $45,227,000, to remain available until
September 30, 2015.
Program Projects in Inspector General
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Audits, Evaluations, and
Investigations
Subtotal, Audits, Evaluations, and
Investigations
TOTAL, EPA
FY 2012
Enacted
$41,933.0
$41,933.0
$41,933.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$51,839.9
$51,839.9
$51,839.9
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$42,189.0
$42,189.0
$42,189.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$45,227.0
$45,227.0
$45,227.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$3,294.0
$3,294.0
$3,294.0
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the
Superfund account.
582
-------
Program Area: Audits, Evaluations And Investigations
583
-------
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Program Area: Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inspector General
Budget Authority
Recovery Act Budget Authority
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$41,933.0
$41,933.0
$0.0
$9,939.0
$51,872.0
358.1
FY 2012
Actuals
$51,839.9
$45,801.9
$6,038.0
$11,003.9
$62,843.8
351.3
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$42,189.0
$42,189.0
$0.0
$10,000.0
$52,189.0
358.1
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$45,227.0
$45,227.0
$0.0
$11,054.0
$56,281.0
365.8
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$3,294.0
$3,294.0
$0.0
$1,115.0
$4,409.0
7.7
Program/Project Description:
The EPA's Office of Inspector General (OIG) provides audit, program evaluation, and
investigative services and products that fulfill the requirements of the Inspector General Act, as
amended, by identifying fraud, waste, and abuse in agency, grantee and contractor operations,
and by promoting economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in the operations of the agency's
programs. OIG activities add value and enhance public trust by providing the agency, the public,
and Congress with independent analyses and recommendations that help the EPA management
resolve risks and challenges, achieve opportunities for savings, and implement actions for
safeguarding the EPA resources and accomplishing the EPA's environmental goals. OIG
activities also prevent and detect fraud in the EPA's programs and operations, including financial
fraud, laboratory fraud, and cyber crime. The OIG consistently provides a significant positive
return on investment to the public in the form of recommendations for improvements in the
delivery of the EPA's mission, reduction in operational and environmental risks, costs savings
and recoveries, improvements in program efficiencies and integrity.
In addition, the EPA Inspector General serves as the IG for the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard
Investigation Board (CSB) providing the full range of audit, evaluation and investigative services
specified by the Inspector General Act, as amended. Specifically, the OIG will conduct required
audits of the CSB's financial statements and of CSB's compliance with the Federal Information
Security Management Act. In addition, the OIG will perform audits and evaluations of the CSB's
programmatic and management activities and follow-up on prior audit recommendations made to
the CSB.
584
-------
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA OIG will continue to assist the agency and the CSB in their efforts to reduce
environmental and human health risks by making recommendations to improve program
operations, save taxpayer dollars, and resolve previously identified major management
challenges and internal control weaknesses. In FY 2014, the OIG will continue focusing on areas
associated with risk, fraud, waste, and cyber intrusions, and will expand its attention to making
recommendations that improve operating efficiency, transparency, secured and trustworthy
systems, and the cost effective attainment of the EPA's strategic goals and positive
environmental impacts.
OIG plans will be implemented through audits, evaluations, investigations, and follow-up
reviews in compliance with the Inspector General Act, applicable professional standards of the
U. S. Comptroller General, and the Quality Standards for Federal Offices of Inspector General of
the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency. The following types of audits are
conducted: (1) program performance audits of agency operations, including those focused on the
award and administration of grants and contracts; (2) financial statement audits; (3) financial
audits of grantees and contractors; (4) efficiency audits, and (5) information resources
management audits. In addition, program evaluations will be conducted in the areas of the EPA's
mission objectives for improving and protecting the environment and public health via reviews
of: (1) air and research; (2) water and enforcement; (3) cross-media; and (4) special reviews
generated by Hotlines or Congressional requests. The OIG will also conduct investigations of,
and seek prosecution for, criminal activity and serious misconduct in the EPA programs and
operations that undermine agency integrity, the public trust, and create imminent environmental
risks, as well as, seek civil judgments to obtain recovery and restitution of financial losses. Major
areas of investigative focus include: financial fraud, infrastructure/terrorist threat, program
integrity, employee integrity, and theft of intellectual or sensitive data.
A significant portion of audit resources will be devoted to mandated work assessing the financial
statements of the EPA and the CSB, as required by the Chief Financial Officers Act and the
Accountability of Tax Dollars Act of 2002, respectively. OIG work will also include assessing
the information security practices of the EPA and the CSB as required by the Federal
Information Security Management Act and oversight of audits of the EPA assistance agreement
recipients conducted pursuant to the Single Audit Act. The OIG will examine the delivery of
national programs, as well as specific cross-regional and single region issues in response to
stakeholder concerns, and continue providing audit and investigative oversight on the application
of, and accountability for Recovery Act funds.
Based on prior work, cross-agency risk assessment, agency challenges, including those
associated with the Chemical Safety Board, future priorities, and extensive stakeholder input, the
OIG will concentrate its resources on efforts in the following strategic themes and prospective
assignment areas during FY 2014:
Sound and Economical Financial Management
• improper payments;
• internal controls;
585
-------
• annual financial statements;
• financial management system, including cost accounting capabilities;
• audits of costs claimed by grantees and contractors;
• effectiveness of cost recovery and cost determination/estimating;
• fee collections;
• grant and contract administration; and
• information technology capital investments.
Efficient Processes and Use of Resources
• management of the EPA's process improvement activities;
• Working Capital Fund;
• examination of and identification of the operational efficiencies, including consolidation
of functions;
• facilities management;
• organizational structure;
• partnering or coordination with other agencies to maximize efficiencies; and
• information technology enterprise architecture management.
Ensuring the Integrity of Science and Information
• protection from advanced persistent threats to steal/modify data;
• Federal Information Security Management Act compliance;
• Scientific integrity, including peer review;
• Agency efforts to enhance its capability to respond to cyber-attacks;
• data quality and databases;
• information technology and data management (governance, service delivery and analytic
capacity);
• cyber security/infrastructure development; and
• assessment of processes to ensure protection and security of information systems from
fraud, waste and abuse.
Addressing At-Risk Populations, Chronic and Emerging Environmental Health
Challenges
children's health agenda and national ambient air quality standards;
progress in advancing the EPA's environmental justice program;
assessment of scientific research on environmental etiology of autism;
addressing ozone and particulate matter health risks in major urban areas;
energy and natural resources (exploration/extraction of oil, natural gas, and coal);
blood lead levels;
adoption of innovative pollution control techniques/strategies;
air pollution in major urban areas;
reducing diesel emissions;
implementation of multi-pollutant strategies for air pollution;
protecting estuaries and coastal waters; and
the EPA's international responsibilities.
586
-------
Assessing Risk Management and Performance Measurement
• the EPA measurement and reporting on long-term safety/site reuse;
• implementation of Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act, Federal Information
Security Management Act and Government Performance and Results Act;
• fish consumption advisories;
• accuracy of air quality models;
• disaster response; and
• homeland security and emergency preparedness and response, including the Chemical
Safety and Hazard Investigation Board.
Reviewing Effectiveness of Stewardship, Sustainability and
Prevention
• use of waivers from secondary treatment requirements of the Clean Water Act;
• land reuse and revitalization; and
• sustainability importance in relationship to Agency decision-making processes, including
Tribal programs.
Assessing Program Integrity, Oversight, Enforcement and Efficient Rulemaking
oversight of delegated programs, data systems,/relationships with states/regions;
regulatory reform and elimination of duplicative programs;
grant/contract results in the achievement of intended environmental objectives;
data systems/requirements for state oversight;
the EPA's relationships with regions and states.
Investigations
OIG investigations focus on identifying criminal activity pertaining to agency programs. The
OIG will conduct investigations into allegations, and seek prosecution for: 1) fraudulent
practices in awarding, performing, and paying the EPA contracts, grants, or other assistance
agreements; 2) program fraud or other acts that undermine the integrity of, or confidence in
agency programs, and create imminent environmental risks; 3) laboratory fraud relating to data,
and false claims for erroneous laboratory results that undermine the bases for decision-making,
regulatory compliance, or enforcement actions; and 4) intrusions into and attacks against the
EPA's network supporting program data, as well as incidents of computer misuse and theft of
intellectual property or sensitive/proprietary data. Special attention will be directed towards
identifying the tactics, techniques, and procedures that are being utilized by cyber criminals to
obtain the EPA's information for their own motives. The OIG will directly assist the EPA senior
leadership as well as federal cyber criminal, counterintelligence, and counterterrorism
communities through collaboration with OIG counterparts in other federal agencies. Analyzing
intruded systems will allow the OIG to determine if the EPA systems are under attack,
recommend agency risk reduction techniques and pursue judicial remedies. OIG investigations
will also pursue civil actions for recovery and restitution of financial losses, and administrative
actions to prevent unscrupulous persons and businesses from participating in the EPA's
programs.
587
-------
Follow-up and Policy/Regulatory Analysis
To further promote economy, efficiency and effectiveness, the OIG will conduct follow-up
reviews of agency responsiveness to OIG recommendations to determine if appropriate actions
have been taken and intended improvements have been achieved. This process will serve as a
means for keeping the EPA leadership apprised of accomplishments, opportunities for needed
corrective actions, and facilitate greater accountability for results from OIG operations.
Additionally, as directed by the IG Act, the OIG also conducts reviews and analysis of proposed
and existing policies, rules, regulations and legislation to identify vulnerability to waste, fraud
and abuse. These reviews also consider possible duplication, gaps or conflicts with existing
authority, leading to recommendations for improvements in their structure, content and
application.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(35B) Environmental and business recommendations or risks identified for corrective action.
FY2007
925
949
FY2008
971
624
FY 2009
903
983
FY 2010
903
945
FY2011
903
2011
FY 2012
903
1242
FY 2013
786
FY 2014
786
Units
Recommen
dations
Measure
Target
Actual
(35D) Criminal, civil, administrative, and fraud prevention actions.
FY2007
80
103
FY2008
80
84
FY2009
80
95
FY2010
75
115
FY2011
80
160
FY2012
85
152
FY2013
90
FY2014
90
Units
Actions
Measure
Target
Actual
(35A) Environmental and business actions taken for improved performance or risk reduction.
FY2007
318
464
FY2008
334
463
FY2009
318
272
FY2010
334
391
FY2011
334
315
FY2012
334
216
FY2013
307
FY2014
307
Units
Actions
Measure
Target
Actual
(35C) Return on the annual dollar investment, as a percentage of the OIG budget, from audits
and investigations.
FY2007
150
189
FY2008
150
186
FY2009
120
150
FY2010
120
36
FY2011
120
151
FY2012
110
743
FY2013
125
FY2014
125
Units
Percent
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,002.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$2,292.0 / +7.0 FTE) This increase is required to perform vital audits and
investigations. These resources include 7.0 FTE to adequately support audits, and
evaluations, and address the vulnerabilities to fraud, waste and abuse.
588
-------
Statutory Authority:
Inspector General Act, as amended; Inspector General Reform Act; Reports Consolidation Act;
Single Audit Act; Chief Financial Officers Act (CFO Act); Accountability of Tax Dollars Act of
2002, Government Management Reform Act (GMRA); Pesticides Registration Improvement
Renewal Act (PRIA); Resource Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA); Federal Financial
Management Improvement Act (FFMIA); Federal Information Security Management Act
(FISMA); Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA); Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
Inspector General Reform Act:
The following information is provided pursuant to the requirements of the Inspector General
Reform Act:
• The aggregate request for the operations of the OIG is $56,281,000 ($45,227,000
Inspector General; $11,054,000 Superfund Transfer);
• The portion of the aggregate request needed for training is $900,000 ($738,000 Inspector
General; $162,000 Superfund Transfer);
• The portion of the aggregate request needed to support the council of the Inspector
General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE) is $157,587 ($129,221 Inspector General;
$28,366 Superfund Transfer);
"I certify as the Inspector General of the Environmental Protection Agency that the amount I
have requested for training satisfies all OIG training needs for FY 2014".
589
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Buildings and Facilities
Resource Summary Table 592
Bill Language: B&F 592
Program Projects in B&F 592
Program Area: Homeland Security 593
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure 594
Program Area: Operations and Administration 596
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 597
590
-------
591
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION: Building and Facilities
Resource Summary Table
(Dollars in Thousands)
Building and Facilities
Budget Authority
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$36,370.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$38,161.0
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$36,592.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$54,364.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$17,994.0
0.0
Bill Language: B&F
For construction, repair, improvement, extension, alteration, and purchase of fixed equipment or
facilities of, or for use by, the Environmental Protection Agency, $54,364,000, to remain
available until expended.
Program Projects in B&F
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
Homeland Security
Homeland Security: Protection of
EPA Personnel and Infrastructure
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations
Subtotal, Facilities Infrastructure
and Operations
TOTAL, EPA
FY 2012
Enacted
$7,044.0
$29,326.0
$29,326.0
$36,370.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$5,726.7
$32,434.3
$32,434.3
$38,161.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$7,087.0
$29,505.0
$29,505.0
$36,592.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$8,038.0
$46,326.0
$46,326.0
$54,364.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$994.0
$17,000.0
$17,000.0
$17,994.0
592
-------
Program Area: Homeland Security
593
-------
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure
Program Area: Homeland Security
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office of
Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Building and Facilities
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$5,966.0
$578.0
$7,044.0
$1,170.0
$14,758.0
3.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$4,309.2
$577.0
55,726.7
$1,671.0
$12,283.9
4.2
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$6,053.0
$584.0
$7,087.0
$1,176.0
$14,900.0
3.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$6,063.0
$579.0
$8,038.0
$1,172.0
$15,852.0
5.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$97.0
$1.0
$994.0
$2.0
$1,094.0
2.0
Program Project Description:
This program supports physical security efforts to safeguard the agency's workforce, facilities,
assets, and mission through federally mandated priorities that include physical access control
measures aimed at protecting critical infrastructure. The program also protects classified national
security information through construction and build-out of Secure Access Facilities (SAFs) and
Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities (SCIFs). The work under the Building and
Facilities appropriation supports larger physical security improvements to leased and owned
space.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to mitigate physical vulnerabilities in its facilities; incorporate
physical security measures in new construction, new leases, and major renovations; and provide a
full range of security improvements, all in accordance with the Interagency Security Committee
Physical Security Criteria for federal facilities. The EPA also will continue to install upgraded
Physical Access Control Systems as mandated by Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12
and its implementing standards. Additionally, the agency will expand or realign existing
laboratories for homeland security support activities and protect critical infrastructure.
Construction and build-out of SAFs and SCIFs will be carried out as needed.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives.
performance measures for this specific program.
Currently, there are no
594
-------
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$994.0) This reflects an increase to incorporate physical security measures in new
construction, leases, and major renovations. Such measures include high-security vehicle
barriers, bollards, CCTV, and security lighting. In FY 2014, physical security measures
will be put in place for newly signed leases in Regions 9 and 10 and for an infrastructure
replacement project at the Montgomery, Alabama laboratory.
Statutory Authority:
Executive Order 13526; 32 CFR 2001; Interagency Security Committee Physical Security Criteria
for Federal Facilities.
595
-------
Program Area: Operations and Administration
596
-------
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office of
Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Building and Facilities
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$535.0
$319,777.0
$72,019.0
$29,326.0
$915.0
$80,541.0
$503,113.0
414.4
FY 2012
Actuals
$512.2
$309,977.8
$72,928.5
$32,434.3
$877.0
$75,550.6
$492,280.4
407.7
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$535.0
$321,266.0
$72,434.0
$29,505.0
$916.0
$80,471.0
$505,127.0
414.4
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$509.0
$329,916.0
$75,690.0
$46,326.0
$839.0
$78,151.0
$531,431.0
411.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($26.0)
$10,139.0
$3,671.0
$17,000.0
($76.0)
($2,390.0)
$28,318.0
-2.9
Program Project Description:
Buildings and Facilities (B&F) appropriation activities include design, construction, repair, and
improvement projects for the EPA's federally owned and leased buildings. Construction
renovation and alteration projects costing more than $150 thousand must use B&F funding.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, B&F resources will fund facility-related construction, and the repair and
improvement (R&I) of the EPA's real estate inventory. The EPA's inventory includes World-War
two era buildings and aging laboratory research facilities that have been modified to meet
evolving research requirements and other programmatic needs. Good stewardship practices
demand that the physical conditions, functionality, safety and health, security and research
capabilities of our facilities are not compromised. B&F resources also are used to reduce
operating costs (via energy conservation projects) and to keep the size of EPA's research
infrastructure aligned with research needs.
B&F resources ensure that the agency complies with various requirements and goals established
in legal mandates including: the Energy Policy Act of 2005, the Energy Independence and
Security Act of 2007 (EISA), Executive Orders (EO) 13514 and 13423,* new alternative fuel
1 Information is available at http://www.fedcenter.gov/programs/eol3514/. Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and
Economic Performance; and http://www.fedcenter.gov/programs/eol3423/. Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and
Transportation Management.
597
-------
regulatory requirements, and regulatory mandates associated with soil and water pesticides
testing. The EPA also will apply funds to meet federal facility environmental targets and
objectives related to: Greenhouse Gas Scope 1 and 2 emissions (25 percent by FY 2020), energy
efficiency (annual energy use reductions of three percent per year through FY 2015); water
conservation (annual water use reductions of two percent per year through FY 2020); advanced
metering; stormwater management; upgrades to the EPA's existing real estate portfolio to meet
"high performance sustainable" green building standards (15 percent of existing real estate by FY
2015); and, the reduction of fossil fuel use in new buildings.
In FY 2014, the agency will invest $5 million to reconfigure the EPA's workplaces, with the goal
of reducing the long-term rent requirements at EPA. This work will enable the agency to release
office space in support of the President's June 10, 2012 memorandum on "Disposing of
Unneeded Federal Real Estate. Space consolidation and reconfiguration will enable the EPA to
reduce its footprint through a more efficient, collaborative, and technologically sophisticated
workplace. Since 2006, the EPA has released approximately 417 thousand square feet of space at
headquarters and facilities nationwide, resulting in a cumulative annual rent avoidance of over
$14.2 million. Failure to support the space consolidation and reconfiguration efforts places long-
term strain on the EPA's environmental programs as the rent budget will demand an increasing
share of the agency's resources.
In FY 2014, the EPA requests $12 million for the design and engineering of a new, consolidated
federally owned EPA multi-use facility, including a lab to replace the multiple EPA leased
locations in Las Vegas, Nevada, several of which have leases that are expiring. The new facility
will be a smaller footprint than the current leased locations and will be designed to be energy
efficient with lower anticipated operating and rent costs.
In addition, the EPA will continue our work on several major Building and Facility projects for
FY 2014. These projects are critical to the overall agency's efforts on space consolidation, rent
savings, increasing energy efficiency, and reaching various federal facility environmental targets.
• National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Lab (NVFEL) Modernization, Ann Arbor, MI.
Pursuant to the mandates of EISA, the EPA must conduct testing of four-wheel drive and
heavy duty vehicles. The Ann Arbor modernization project is the agency's sole means of
complying with this statutory requirement. This project also enables the EPA to meet the
demands of new science testing and research methods while maintaining all other
mandated testing programs.
• Build-out of the new Region 9 office lease, San Francisco, CA. Resources will
complete the construction of the new regional office in a smaller, more efficient and
sustainable footprint. Employing the EPA's new space guidelines will yield an immediate
reduction in the region's office space of more than 45 thousand square feet and an annual
rent avoidance of $1.8 million. The reduced footprint as well as significant upgrades to the
building infrastructure including the HVAC system, enhanced commissioning strategies
as well as energy and water reduction plans, will position the agency to meet enhanced
sustainability requirements associated with LEED certification. Construction is scheduled
598
-------
to begin in September 2013, proceed through 5 phases and be completed in September
2015.
• Consolidation of the RTF into the Main Laboratory, Research Triangle Park (RTF),
NC. This project will redistribute lab and office space to allow researchers in the
Reproductive Toxicology Division's laboratory to move from a leased facility into owned
labs adjacent to their fellow researchers. This move will also enhance the efficiency of the
lab and office space on the RTF campus and enable the agency to release all of its leased
space in the RTF. For example, the number of on-campus fume hoods will be reduced by
more than 30 percent and overall energy efficiencies will be realized by combining the
animal testing facilities on campus. As a result, the EPA will save over $2 million
annually in rent and utility costs, produce a net space reduction of more than 66 thousand
square feet, and realize a full return on investment in 10 years.
• Retrofitting the air handling system and infrastructure in a wing of the
Environmental Effects Research Lab, Narragansett, RL The current air handling
system is at the end of its useful life and, if not addressed, could affect science research
and the health and safety of staff. Funding will ensure safety and health, exposure control,
and permit continuity in quality research for the Program and Regional Offices while
complying with regulatory and enforcement missions. This project reduces the number of
laboratory research fume hoods by approximately 25 percent (these are energy intensive
and expensive to operate) and will reduce energy usage throughout the building to help
the agency meet its target of 3 percent energy reduction per year pursuant to EO 13514
and EISA 2007.
• Replacement of fume hoods and air handlers at the Air and Radiation Lab,
Montgomery, AL. This project will replace deteriorated ductwork and fume hoods, and
will renovate lab modules to ensure safety and health, exposure control, and permit
continuity in quality research. The project will reduce the number of fume hoods at the lab
by more than 10 percent, and will result in a net 30 percent reduction in energy usage.
• Implementation of Phase 2 of the Infrastructure Replacement Project at the ORD
laboratory in Corvallis, OR. This project will replace the ductwork, reduce the number
of fume hoods by more than 40 percent, and lab casework at the lab to meet changed
mission requirements, improve employee safety, and reduce energy usage by 20 percent.
B&F funding is critical for the agency to comply with the Energy Policy Act, the EISA, and
relevant EOs, and to achieve cost savings in utilities. Further, delaying essential repairs allows the
EPA's facilities to deteriorate, which exponentially increases long-term repair costs.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in the Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations program under the EPM appropriation and can be found in the Eight Year
Performance Array in the Program Performance and Assessment section.
599
-------
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$5,000.0) This increase supports construction associated with the agency's space
consolidation effort. This initiative will enable the agency to reduce its footprint resulting
in significant long term rent savings.
• (+$12,000.0) This increase supports construction design and engineering for a Las Vegas
laboratory. The project will consolidate EPA's Las Vegas employees that currently work
in many leased facilities under a single facility that will have a smaller footprint than the
current leased locations and will have lower anticipated operating and rent costs.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Property and Administration Services Act; Public Building Act; Annual Appropriations
Act; Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act; CWA; CAA; RCRA;
TSCA; NEPA; CERFA; D.C. Recycling Act of 1988; Energy Policy Act of 2005; Executive
Orders 10577, 12598, 13150, 13423, and 13514; Emergency Support Functions (ESF) #10 Oil
and Hazardous Materials Response Annex; Homeland Security Presidential Decision Directive 63
(Critical Infrastructure Protection).
600
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Superfund
Resource Summary Table 603
Bill Language: Hazardous Substance Superfund 603
Program Projects in Hazardous Substance Superfund 603
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation 607
Radiation: Protection 608
Program Area: Audits, Evaluations And Investigations 610
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations 611
Program Area: Compliance 615
Compliance Monitoring 616
Program Area: Enforcement 618
Environmental Justice 619
Superfund: Enforcement 621
Superfund: Federal Facilities Enforcement 626
Criminal Enforcement 628
Forensics Support 631
Program Area: Homeland Security 633
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and Recovery 634
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure 639
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach 641
Exchange Network 642
Program Area: IT / Data Management / Security 646
Information Security 647
IT / Data Management 649
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review 655
Alternative Dispute Resolution 656
Legal Advice: Environmental Program 658
Program Area: Operations and Administration 660
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 661
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management 665
Acquisition Management 668
601
-------
Human Resources Management 671
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance 674
Program Area: Research: Sustainable Communities 677
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities 678
Program Area: Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability 682
Human Health Risk Assessment 683
Program Area: Superfund Cleanup 688
Superfund: Emergency Response and Removal 689
Superfund: EPA Emergency Preparedness 693
Superfund: Federal Facilities 696
Superfund: Remedial 703
Superfund: Support to Other Federal Agencies 717
Superfund Special Accounts 719
Superfund Special Accounts 720
602
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION: Hazardous Substance Superfund
Resource Summary Table
(Dollars in Thousands)
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Budget Authority
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,213,808.0
3,151.4
FY 2012
Actuals
$1,308,310.2
3,211.5
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$1,216,206.0
3,151.4
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$1,180,374.0
3,046.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($33,434.0)
-104.9
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the
Superfund account.
Bill Language: Hazardous Substance Superfund
For necessary expenses to carry out the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended, including sections
lll(c)(3), (c)(5), (c)(6), and(e)(4) (42 U.S.C. 9611) $1,180,374,000, to remain available until
expended, consisting of such sums as are available in the Trust Fund on September 30, 2013, as
authorized by section 517(a) of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986
(SARA) and up to $1,180,374,000 as a payment from general revenues to the Hazardous
Substance Superfund for purposes as authorized by section 517(b) of SARA, as amended:
Provided, That funds appropriated under this heading may be allocated to other Federal
agencies in accordance with section 111 (a) of CERCLA: Provided further, That of the funds
appropriated under this heading, $11,054,000 shall be paid to the "Office of Inspector General"
appropriation to remain available until September 30, 2015, and $23,549,000 shall be paid to
the "Science and Technology" appropriation to remain available until September 30, 2015.
Program Projects in Hazardous Substance Superfund
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
Indoor Air and Radiation
Radiation: Protection
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Audits, Evaluations, and
Investigations
FY 2012
Enacted
$2,468.0
$9,939.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$2,247.3
$11,003.9
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$2,465.0
$10,000.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$2,476.0
$11,054.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$8.0
$1,115.0
603
-------
Program Project
Compliance
Compliance Monitoring
Enforcement
Environmental Justice
Superfimd: Enforcement
Superfund: Federal Facilities
Enforcement
Criminal Enforcement
Forensics Support
Subtotal, Enforcement
Homeland Security
Homeland Security: Preparedness,
Response, and Recovery
Decontamination
Laboratory Preparedness
and Response
Homeland Security:
Preparedness, Response,
and Recovery (other
activities)
Subtotal, Homeland Security:
Preparedness, Response, and
Recovery
Homeland Security: Protection of
EPA Personnel and Infrastructure
Subtotal, Homeland Security
Information Exchange / Outreach
Exchange Network
IT / Data Management / Security
Information Security
IT / Data Management
Subtotal, IT / Data Management /
Security
Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic
Review
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Legal Advice: Environmental
Program
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,221.0
$583.0
$165,534.0
$10,296.0
$7,903.0
$2,419.0
$186,735.0
$5,898.0
$5,626.0
$29,021.0
$40,545.0
$1,170.0
$41,715.0
$1,431.0
$728.0
$15,339.0
$16,067.0
$844.0
$682.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$1,191.0
$578.5
$171,560.1
$9,674.7
$7,811.9
$2,657.2
$192,282.4
$5,870.1
$5,427.9
$29,249.7
$40,547.7
$1,671.0
$42,218.7
$1,383.6
$462.2
$14,843.5
$15,305.7
$828.6
$722.3
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$1,226.0
$582.0
$165,229.0
$10,261.0
$7,888.0
$2,415.0
$186,375.0
$5,911.0
$5,653.0
$29,084.0
$40,648.0
$1,176.0
$41,824.0
$1,440.0
$732.0
$15,391.0
$16,123.0
$847.0
$680.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$1,182.0
$601.0
$166,947.0
$8,888.0
$7,675.0
$1,169.0
$185,280.0
$5,896.0
$5,645.0
$29,259.0
$40,800.0
$1,172.0
$41,972.0
$1,433.0
$728.0
$13,865.0
$14,593.0
$792.0
$708.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($39.0)
$18.0
$1,413.0
($1,408.0)
($228.0)
($1,250.0)
($1,455.0)
($2.0)
$19.0
$238.0
$255.0
$2.0
$257.0
$2.0
$0.0
($1,474.0)
($1,474.0)
($52.0)
$26.0
604
-------
Program Project
Subtotal, Legal / Science / Regulatory /
Economic Review
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations
Rent
Utilities
Security
Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations (other activities)
Subtotal, Facilities Infrastructure
and Operations
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG
Management
Acquisition Management
Human Resources Management
Central Planning, Budgeting, and
Finance
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy
Communities
Research: Chemical Safety and
Sustainability
Human Health Risk Assessment
Superfund Cleanup
Superfund: Emergency Response
and Removal
Superfund: EPA Emergency
Preparedness
Superfund: Federal Facilities
Superfund: Remedial
Superfund: Support to Other Federal
Agencies
Subtotal, Superfund: Support to
Other Federal Agencies
Subtotal, Superfund Cleanup
TOTAL, EPA
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,526.0
$46,797.0
$3,760.0
$8,269.0
$21,715.0
$80,541.0
$3,128.0
$24,111.0
$6,346.0
$21,632.0
$135,758.0
$17,757.0
$3,311.0
$189,590.0
$9,244.0
$26,199.0
$564,998.0
$5,849.0
$5,849.0
$795,880.0
$1,213,808.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$1,550.9
$44,948.5
$2,984.7
$7,849.8
$19,767.6
$75,550.6
$3,198.9
$24,841.5
$3,938.4
$26,165.5
$133,694.9
$19,395.7
$3,918.2
$200,976.9
$9,919.3
$28,356.6
$639,016.1
$5,849.0
$5,849.0
$884,117.9
$1,308,310.2
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$1,527.0
$46,595.0
$3,744.0
$8,233.0
$21,899.0
$80,471.0
$3,121.0
$24,067.0
$6,344.0
$21,599.0
$135,602.0
$17,852.0
$3,330.0
$190,248.0
$9,236.0
$26,188.0
$566,889.0
$5,881.0
$5,881.0
$798,442.0
$1,216,206.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$1,500.0
$45,464.0
$3,196.0
$9,130.0
$20,361.0
$78,151.0
$3,169.0
$24,339.0
$7,585.0
$24,284.0
$137,528.0
$18,243.0
$3,197.0
$187,826.0
$8,150.0
$26,866.0
$539,074.0
$0.0
$0.0
$761,916.0
$1,180,374.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($26.0)
($1,333.0)
($564.0)
$861.0
($1,354.0)
($2,390.0)
$41.0
$228.0
$1,239.0
$2,652.0
$1,770.0
$486.0
($114.0)
($1,764.0)
($1,094.0)
$667.0
($25,924.0)
($5,849.0)
($5,849.0)
($33,964.0)
($33,434.0)
605
-------
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the
Superfund account.
606
-------
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
607
-------
Radiation: Protection
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Reduce Unnecessary Exposure to Radiation
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$9,540.0
$2,094.0
$2,468.0
$14,102.0
75.4
FY 2012
Actuals
$9,454.8
$2,072.6
$2,247.3
$13,774.7
75.2
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$9,575.0
$2,102.0
$2,465.0
$14,142.0
75.4
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$10,623.0
$2,133.0
$2,476.0
$15,232.0
73.7
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,083.0
$39.0
$8.0
$1,130.0
-1.7
Program Project Description:
This program addresses potential radiation risks found at some Superfund and hazardous waste
sites. Through this program, the EPA ensures that Superfund site clean-up activities reduce
and/or mitigate the health and environmental risk of radiation to safe levels. In addition, the
program makes certain that appropriate clean-up technologies and methods are adopted to
effectively and efficiently reduce the health and environmental hazards associated with radiation
problems encountered at these sites, some of which are located near at-risk communities. Finally,
the program ensures that appropriate technical assistance is provided on remediation approaches
for National Priorities List (NPL) and non-NPL sites.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA's National Analytical Radiation Environmental Laboratory (NAREL) in
Montgomery, Alabama, and National Center for Radiation Field Operations (NCRFO) in Las
Vegas, Nevada, will continue to provide analytical and field support to manage and mitigate
radioactive releases and exposures. These two organizations routinely provide analytical and
technical support for the characterization and cleanup of Superfund and Federal Facility sites.
Support focuses on providing high quality data to support agency decisions at sites across the
country.
The Radiation and Indoor Air program also provides specialized technical support on-site,
including field measurements using unique tools and capabilities. In addition, NAREL and
NCRFO provide data evaluation and assessment, document review, and field support through
ongoing fixed and mobile capability. Thousands of radiochemical and mixed waste analyses are
performed annually at NAREL on a variety of samples from contaminated sites. NAREL is the
EPA's only laboratory with this in-house mixed waste analytical capability. NCRFO provides
field-based technical support for screening and identifying radiological contaminants at NPL and
non-NPL sites across the country, including mobile scanning, in-situ analysis, and air sampling
equipment and expert personnel.
608
-------
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in the Radiation: Protection Program
found under the Environmental Programs and Management Tab and can be found in the
Performance Eight-Year Array in the Program Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$111.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$115.0 / -0.9 FTE) This reduction may increase analysis times when addressing
potential radiation risks found at some Superfund and hazardous waste sites. The reduced
resources include 0.9 FTE and associated payroll of $115.0.
• (-$1.0) This reflects a reduction in travel to support the Administration's Management
Agenda goal of reducing travel and conference spending.
• (+$ 13.0) This reflects the net result of a reduction of radiological analytical and field support
and an increase for programmatic laboratory fixed costs.
Statutory Authority:
CERCLA, as amended by the SARA of 1986.
609
-------
Program Area: Audits, Evaluations And Investigations
610
-------
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Program Area: Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inspector General
Budget Authority
Recovery Act Budget Authority
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$41,933.0
$41,933.0
$0.0
$9,939.0
$51,872.0
358.1
FY 2012
Actuals
$51,839.9
$45,801.9
$6,038.0
$11,003.9
$62,843.8
351.3
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$42,189.0
$42,189.0
$0.0
$10,000.0
$52,189.0
358.1
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$45,227.0
$45,227.0
$0.0
$11,054.0
$56,281.0
365.8
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$3,294.0
$3, 294.0
$0.0
$1,115.0
$4,409.0
7.7
Program/Project Description:
The EPA's Office of Inspector General (OIG) provides audit, program evaluation, and
investigative services and products that fulfill the requirements of the Inspector General Act, as
amended, by identifying fraud, waste, and abuse in agency, grantee and contractor operations,
and by promoting economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in the operations of the agency's
Superfund program. OIG activities add value, promote transparency and enhance public trust by
providing the agency, the public, and Congress with independent analyses and recommendations
that help the EPA management resolve risks and challenges, achieve opportunities for savings,
and implement actions for safeguarding the EPA resources and accomplishing the EPA's
environmental goals. OIG activities also prevent and detect fraud in the EPA's programs and
operations, including financial fraud, laboratory fraud, and cyber crime. The OIG consistently
provides a significant positive return on investment to the public in the form of recommendations
for improvements in the delivery of the EPA's mission, program efficiency and integrity,
reduction in operational and environmental risks, costs savings and recoveries.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA's OIG will continue to assist the agency in its efforts to reduce environmental and
human health risks by making recommendations to improve Superfund program operations, save
taxpayer dollars, and resolve previously identified major management challenges and internal
control weaknesses. In FY 2014, the OIG will continue focusing on areas associated with risk,
fraud, waste, and cyber intrusions, and will expand its attention to making recommendations that
improve operating efficiency, transparency, secured and trustworthy systems, and the cost
611
-------
effective attainment of the EPA's strategic goals and positive environmental impacts related to
the Superfund program.
OIG plans will be implemented through audits, evaluations, investigations, and follow-up
reviews in compliance with the Inspector General Act, applicable professional standards of the
U. S. Comptroller General, and the Quality Standards for Federal Offices of Inspector General of
the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency. The following types of audits are
conducted: (1) program performance audits, including those focused on the award and
administration of grants and contracts; (2) financial audits of grantees and contractors; (3)
efficiency audits, and (4) information resources management audits. In addition, program
evaluations will be conducted in the areas of the EPA's mission objectives for improving and
protecting the environment and public health via reviews of Superfund and other land issues. The
OIG will also conduct investigations of, and seek prosecution of criminal activity and serious
misconduct in the EPA's Superfund program and operations that undermine agency integrity, the
public trust, and create imminent environmental risks, as well as seek civil judgments to obtain
recovery and restitution of financial losses. Areas of investigative emphasis include financial
fraud, infrastructure/terrorist threat, program integrity, employee integrity, and theft of
intellectual or sensitive data.
Audits and Evaluations
OIG audits and program evaluations related to Superfund will identify program and management
risks and determine if the EPA is efficiently and effectively reducing human health risks; taking
effective enforcement actions; cleaning up hazardous waste; restoring previously polluted sites to
appropriate uses; and ensuring long-term stewardship of polluted sites. OIG assignments will
include: (1) assessing the adequacy of internal controls in the EPA and its grantees and
contractors to protect resources and achieve program results; (2) project management to ensure
that the EPA and its grantees and contractors have clear plans and accountability for performance
progress; (3) enforcement to evaluate whether there is consistent, adequate and appropriate
application of the laws and regulations across jurisdictions with coordination between federal,
state and local law enforcement activities, and (4) grants and contracts to verify that such awards
are made based upon uniform risk assessment and capacity to account and perform, and that
grantees and contractors perform with integrity and value.
Prior audits and evaluations of the Superfund program have identified numerous barriers to
implementing effective resource management and program improvements. Therefore, the OIG
will concentrate its resources on efforts in the following prospective assignment areas:
• accuracy of costs claimed by Superfund contractors to comply with contract terms and
conditions;
• effectiveness of strategies and plans for implementing institutional controls at Superfund
sites;
• long-term stewardship of contaminated sites to include safety and appropriate reuse of
Superfund sites;
• Superfund cost management and actions for preventing cost overruns and project delays,
including the use of fixed-price contracts;
612
-------
• Superfund cost recovery;
• Superfund amounts reported in financial statements; and
• the reliability and validity of environmental data used to support actions and reported
results.
The OIG also will evaluate ways to minimize fraud, waste, and abuse, and maximize results
achieved from Superfund contracts and assistance agreements.
Investigations
OIG investigations focus on identifying criminal activity pertaining to the Superfund program.
The OIG will conduct investigations into allegations, and seek prosecution for: 1) fraudulent
practices in awarding, performing, and paying the EPA Superfund contracts, grants, or other
assistance agreements; 2) program fraud or other acts that undermine the integrity of, or
confidence in the Superfund program, and create imminent environmental risks; 3) laboratory
fraud relating to Superfund data, and false claims for erroneous laboratory results that undermine
the bases for Superfund decision-making, regulatory compliance, or enforcement actions, and 4)
intrusions into and attacks against the EPA's network supporting Superfund data, as well as
incidents of computer misuse and theft of intellectual property or sensitive/proprietary Superfund
data. Special attention will be directed towards identifying the tactics, techniques, and
procedures that are being utilized by cyber criminals to obtain the EPA's information for their
own motives. The OIG will directly assist EPA senior leadership as well as federal cyber
criminal, counterintelligence, and counterterrorism communities through collaboration with OIG
counterparts in other federal agencies. Analyzing intruded systems will allow the OIG to
determine if EPA systems are under attack, recommend agency risk reduction techniques and
pursue judicial remedies. OIG investigations will also pursue civil actions for recovery and
restitution of financial losses, and administrative actions to prevent unscrupulous persons and
businesses from participating in the EPA's Superfund program.
Follow-up and Policy/Regulatory Analysis
To further promote economy, efficiency and effectiveness, the OIG will conduct follow-up
reviews of agency responsiveness to OIG recommendations for the Superfund program to
determine if appropriate actions have been taken, and intended improvements have been
achieved. This process will keep the EPA leadership informed of accomplishments, apprised of
needed corrective actions, and will facilitate greater accountability for results from OIG
operations.
Additionally, as directed by the IG Act, the OIG will review and analyze proposed and existing
policies, rules, regulations and legislation pertaining to the Superfund program to identify
vulnerability to waste, fraud and abuse. These reviews also consider possible duplication, gaps or
conflicts with existing authority, leading to recommendations for improvements in their
structure, content and application.
613
-------
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance measures in the Audits, Evaluations, and
Investigations program project under the OIG appropriation. These measures can be found in the
Performance Eight-Year Array.
FY 2014 Change from the FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,305.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$95.0 / +0.7 FTE) This increase is vital to support audits and investigations and,
address vulnerabilities to fraud waste and abuse.
• (-$285.0) This reflects a realignment of non-payroll resources to more accurately reflect
actual utilization of resources.
Statutory Authority:
Inspector General Act, as amended; Inspector General Reform Act; Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act (SARA); Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Act (CERCLA).
Inspector General Reform Act:
The following information is provided pursuant to the requirements of the Inspector General
Reform Act:
• The aggregate request for the operations of the OIG is $56,281,000 ($45,227,000
Inspector General; $11,054,000 Superfund Transfer);
• The portion of the aggregate request needed for training is $900,000 ($738,000 Inspector
General; $162,000 Superfund Transfer);
• The portion of the aggregate request needed to support the council of the Inspector
General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE) is $157,587 ($129,221 Inspector General;
$28,366 Superfund Transfer).
"I certify as the Inspector General of the Environmental Protection Agency that the amount I
have requested for training satisfies all OIG training needs for FY 2014".
614
-------
Program Area: Compliance
615
-------
Compliance Monitoring
Program Area: Compliance
Goal: Enforcing Environmental Laws
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Environmental Program & Management
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$138.0
$106,707.0
$1,221.0
$108,066.0
616.7
FY 2012
Actuals
$122.5
$106,690.9
$1,191.0
$108,004.4
612.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$138.0
$107,102.0
$1,226.0
$108,466.0
616.7
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$142.0
$127,540.0
$1,182.0
$128,864.0
625.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$4.0
$20,833.0
($39.0)
$20,798.0
8.8
Program Project Description:
The Compliance Monitoring program's overarching goal is to assure compliance with the
nation's environmental laws and protect human health and the environment through inspections
and other compliance monitoring activities. Compliance monitoring is comprised of all activities
to determine whether regulated entities are in compliance with applicable laws, regulations,
permit conditions, and settlement agreements. In addition, compliance monitoring activities are
conducted to determine whether conditions exist that may present imminent and substantial
endangerment to human health and the environment. Compliance monitoring activities include
data collection, analysis, data quality review, on-site compliance inspections/evaluations,
investigations, and reviews of facility records and monitoring reports.
The Compliance Monitoring program conducts these activities to determine whether conditions
that exist at Superfund sites may present imminent and substantial endangerment to human
health or the environment and to verify whether regulated sites are in compliance with
environmental laws and regulations. The Superfund Compliance Monitoring program focuses on
providing information and system support for monitoring compliance with Superfund-related
environmental regulations and contaminated site clean-up agreements. The program also ensures
the security and integrity of its compliance information systems.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Superfund-related compliance monitoring activities are mainly reported and tracked through the
agency's Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS). In FY 2014, the Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance program will focus on improvements to the ICIS internet accessible
system to support customers (e.g., the EPA, states, Tribes, local agencies) use of and access to
the system to allow for reporting and retrieval of regulatory requirements of the federal
Enforcement and Compliance programs. In FY 2014, the Compliance Monitoring program will
include ongoing enhancements to ICIS for continued support of the federal Enforcement and
616
-------
Compliance Assurance program. The EPA will continue to ensure the security and integrity of
these systems, and will use ICIS data to support Superfund-related regulatory enforcement
program activities. In FY 2014, the Superfund portion of this program for ICIS-related work is
$190 thousand.
In FY 2014, the EPA also will continue to make Superfund-related compliance monitoring
information available in the Integrated Data for Enforcement Analysis (IDEA) data base, the
integrated data warehouse for Enforcement and Compliance History On-line (ECHO), and,
where appropriate, to the public through the (ECHO) website.1 This site provides communities
with interactive access to information on compliance status. The EPA will continue to develop
additional tools and obtain new data sets (e.g., geospatial) for public use.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in the Compliance Monitoring
Program under EPM and can be found in the Performance Eight-Year Array in the Program
Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget:
• (+$8.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$47.0) This change reflects a reduction found from IT efficiencies and consolidation in
IT contracts that support the Compliance Monitoring program.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act as amended;
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; Clean Water Act; Safe Drinking Water Act; Clean
Air Act; Toxic Substances Control Act; Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know
Act; Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act; Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act; Ocean Dumping Act; North American Agreement on Environmental
Cooperation; La Paz Agreement on US/Mexico Border Region; National Environmental Policy
Act.
For more information, refer to: http://www.epa-echo.gov/echo/
617
-------
Program Area: Enforcement
618
-------
Environmental Justice
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$6,848.0
$583.0
$7,431.0
32.7
FY 2012
Actuals
$7,164.8
$578.5
$7,743.3
35.5
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$6,895.0
$582.0
$7,477.0
32.7
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$6,954.0
$601.0
$7,555.0
32.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$106.0
$18.0
$124.0
-0.2
Program Project Description:
The EPA is committed to fostering public health and sustainability in communities
disproportionately burdened by pollution through integrating and addressing issues of
environmental justice (EJ) in the EPA's programs and policies as part of day-to-day business.
Implementation of the EPA's strategic plan on environmental justice, the agency's Plan EJ 2014,
is a key component to this commitment. The EPA's Environmental Justice program supports the
implementation of Plan EJ 2014 and is the focal point for facilitating this integration by building
the capacity of the agency to address environmental justice issues, promoting accountability,
promoting agency action on critical environmental justice issues, and fostering the community's
voice.
The EJ program conducts outreach to overburdened communities and provides technical
assistance that empowers low income and minority communities to take action to protect
themselves from environmental harm. The Superfund portion of the program focuses on issues
that affect communities at or near Superfund sites. The Environmental Justice program
complements and enhances the agency's community outreach and other work done under the
Superfund program at affected sites. The agency also supports state and Tribal environmental
justice programs and conducts outreach and technical assistance to states, local governments, and
other stakeholders on environmental justice issues.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to implement environmental justice activities in support of
the Superfund program consistent with the vision and commitments outlined in the agency's FY
2011-2015 Strategic Plan Cross-Cutting Fundamental Strategy for Environmental Justice and
Children's Health and Plan EJ 2014.
In FY 2014, the EJ program will continue to promote the active engagement of community
groups, other federal agencies, states, local governments, and Tribal governments to recognize,
support, and advance environmental protection and public health for overburdened communities
619
-------
at or near Superfund sites. The EJ program will guide the EPA's efforts to empower
communities to protect themselves from environmental harms. These efforts build healthy and
sustainable neighborhoods that enable disadvantaged groups to participate in the new green
economy through technical assistance. Together, these plans guide the agency's EJ efforts across
the full spectrum of activities.
In FY 2014, the EJ program will continue to partner with other programs within the agency to
create scientific analytical methods, a legal foundation, and public engagement practices that
enable the incorporation of environmental justice considerations in the EPA's regulatory and
policy decisions. Finally, the EJ program will continue to support the agency's efforts to
strengthen internal mechanisms to integrate environmental justice including communications,
training, performance management, and accountability measures, such as continuing to review
EPA enforcement cases for potential environmental justice concerns.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports activities that benefit disproportionately burdened minority,
low-income, and Tribal populations. Currently, there are no performance measures for this
specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$16.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$14.0 /O.I FTE) This change reflects an increase in resources addressing environmental
justice issues at or near Superfund sites. The additional resources include $14.0 associated
payroll for 0.1 FTE.
• (-$12.0) This decrease reflects a reduction in contract support for implementing Plan EJ.
Statutory Authority:
Executive Order 12898; Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act, as amended.
620
-------
Superfund: Enforcement
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Enforcing Environmental Laws
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws
(Dollars in Thousands)
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$165,534.0
$165,534.0
909.3
FY 2012
Actuals
$171,560.1
$171,560.1
897.6
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$165,229.0
$165,229.0
909.3
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$166,947.0
$166,947.0
877.2
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,413.0
$1,413.0
-32.1
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Superfund Enforcement program protects communities by ensuring that responsible
parties conduct cleanups, preserving federal dollars for sites where there are no viable
contributing parties. The Superfund Enforcement program ensures prompt site cleanup and uses
an "enforcement first" approach that maximizes the participation of liable and viable parties in
performing and paying for cleanups. In both the remedial and removal programs, the Superfund
Enforcement program initiates civil, judicial, and administrative site remediation cases. The
Superfund Enforcement program also provides litigation, legal and technical enforcement
support on Superfund enforcement actions and emerging issues. The Superfund Enforcement
program develops waste cleanup enforcement policies and provides guidance and tools that
clarify potential environmental cleanup liability, with specific attention to the reuse and
revitalization of contaminated properties. In addition, the Superfund Enforcement program
ensures that responsible parties cleanup sites to reduce direct human exposure to hazardous
pollutants and contaminants by providing long-term human health protections, which ultimately
make contaminated properties available for reuse.
The EPA negotiates cleanup agreements with Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) at
hazardous waste sites and, where negotiations fail, either takes enforcement actions to require
cleanup or expends Superfund appropriated dollars to remediate the sites, sometimes in
combination. The Department of Justice (DOJ) supports the EPA's Superfund Enforcement
program through negotiations and judicial actions to compel PRP cleanup and to recover
appropriated monies spent on cleanup. In tandem with this approach, the EPA has implemented
various reforms to increase fairness, reduce transaction costs, promote economic development,
and make sites available for appropriate reuse. The EPA also works to ensure that required
legally enforceable institutional controls and financial assurance requirements are in place at
Superfund sites to ensure the long-term protectiveness of Superfund cleanup remedies.
The agency promotes the "polluter pays" principle, cleaning up more sites and preserving
appropriated dollars for sites without viable PRPs. The cumulative value of private party
commitments for cleanup is over $37 billion ($31.2 billion for cleanup work and $6 billion in
cost recovery).
621
-------
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Throughout FY 2014, the Superfund Enforcement program will ensure PRP participation in
cleanups while promoting fairness in the enforcement process and will continue to recover costs
from PRPs when the EPA expends appropriated funds. The agency's goal is to maximize PRP
participation by reaching a settlement or taking an enforcement action by the time a remedial
action starts for at least 99 percent of non-federal Superfund sites that have viable, liable parties.
The EPA reached a settlement or took an enforcement action at 100 percent of non-federal
Superfund sites with viable, liable parties in FY 2012. The agency also seeks to ensure trust fund
stewardship through cost recovery efforts from responsible parties in order to recover response
costs that have been expended from the Superfund Trust Fund. In FY 2014, in an effort to
maximize the efficient use of Superfund enforcement appropriated resources, the EPA is
proposing to focus cost recovery efforts on those cases with unresolved past costs greater than
$500 thousand. This cost threshold is for prioritization purposes and will not eliminate cost
recovery efforts on cases below $500 thousand, or otherwise change the process.
In FY 2014, the agency will continue efforts to accelerate negotiations of remedial
design/remedial action cleanup agreements and will continue to focus efforts on negotiating
removal agreements at contaminated properties to address contamination impacting local
communities. When appropriated dollars are used to clean up sites, the program will seek to
recover the associated cleanup costs from the PRPs. If future work remains at a site, recovered
funds may be placed in a site-specific special account pursuant to the agreement. Special
accounts are sub-accounts within the EPA's Superfund Trust Fund. In accordance with the terms
of the settlement agreement, the EPA uses special account resources to finance site-specific
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) response
actions at the site for which the account was established. The agency will continue its efforts to
establish and maximize the effectiveness of special accounts to facilitate cleanup by continuing
to improve tracking and planning for special account funds.
Special accounts save taxpayers significant resources. In FY 2012, the EPA created 46 Special
Accounts, collected $221.1 million for response work and accrued $9.1 million in interest for a
total of $230.2 million. The agency disbursed or obligated $293.4 million for response work. The
EPA also closed 30 Special Accounts and transferred $2.7 million from Special Accounts into
the general part of the Superfund Trust Fund for future appropriation by Congress.
Since 1989, the EPA has created 1,175 Special Accounts, collected $3.9 billion for response
work and accrued $400.5 million in interest for a total of $4.3 billion. The agency has disbursed
or obligated $2.5 billion for response work. The EPA has closed 164 Special Accounts and
transferred $22 million from Special Accounts into the general part of the Superfund Trust Fund.
In FY 2014, the agency will provide the Department of Justice with $23.3 million through an
Interagency Agreement. Funding will provide support for the EPA's Superfund Enforcement
program through such actions as negotiating consent decrees with PRPs, preparing judicial
actions to compel PRP cleanup, and litigating to recover monies spent in cleaning up
contaminated sites. The EPA's Superfund Enforcement program is responsible for case
development and preparation, referral to the DOJ and post-filing actions, and for providing case
622
-------
and cost documentation support for the docket of current cases with the DOJ. The program also
ensures that the EPA meets cost recovery statute of limitation deadlines, resolves cases, issues
bills for oversight, and makes collections in a timely manner. By pursuing cost recovery
settlements, the program promotes the principle that polluters should either perform or pay for
cleanups. This approach preserves appropriated resources to address contaminated sites where
there are no viable, liable PRPs. The agency's expenditures will be recouped through
administrative actions and CERCLA Section 107 case referrals. The agency will continue to
refer delinquent accounts receivable to the DOJ for debt collection enforcement.
In FY 2012, the Superfund Enforcement program secured private party commitments of nearly
$900 million. Of this amount, PRPs have committed to perform future response work with an
estimated value of approximately $657.3 million; agreed to reimburse the agency for $172.1
million in past costs; and have been billed by the EPA for approximately $67.5 million in
oversight costs. During the past ten years, the Superfund civil enforcement investment has
resulted in an average return of eight dollars for every one appropriated dollar invested in the
program. The total commitments obtained from responsible parties over that ten year period
exceeded $14 billion.
In consideration of budget constraints, the EPA has assessed its priorities in compliance and
enforcement efforts in order to embrace new approaches that can help achieve the agency's goals
more efficiently and effectively. Reductions in the Superfund Enforcement program will be
directed toward FTE for PRP searches, cleanup settlements, and cost recovery (and associated
DOJ support), while maintaining external contract support for these activities. This reduction
reflects the agency's priorities in compliance and enforcement efforts in the civil and criminal
enforcement programs.
During FY 2014, the EPA's Office of the Chief Financial Officer will continue to perform the
financial management aspects of Superfund cost recovery and the collection of related debt to the
federal government. These efforts include tracking and managing Superfund delinquent debt,
maintaining the Superfund Cost Recovery Package Imaging and On-Line System (SCORPIOS),
and using SCORPIOS to prepare cost documentation packages. The program will continue to
refine and streamline the cost documentation process to gain further efficiencies, provide the
DOJ case support for Superfund sites, and calculate indirect cost and annual allocation rates to be
applied to direct costs incurred by the EPA for site cleanup. The program also will continue to
maintain the accounting and billing of Superfund oversight costs attributable to responsible
parties. These costs represent the EPA's cost of overseeing Superfund site cleanup efforts by
responsible parties as stipulated in the terms of settlement agreements and include a net increase
in resources to operate and maintain SCORPIOS. In FY 2012, the agency collected $45.4 million
in cost recoveries.
623
-------
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(078) Percentage of all Superfund st
unaddressed past Supefund costs eq
FY2007
100
98
FY2008
100
100
FY2009
100
100
atute of limitations cases addressed at sites with
ual to or greater than $500,000.
FY2010
100
100
FY2011
100
100
FY2012
100
100
FY2013
100
FY2014
100
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(285) Percentage of Superfund sites having viable, liable responsible parties other than the
federal government where EPA reaches a settlement or takes an enforcement action before
starting a remedial action.
FY2007
95
98
FY2008
95
95
FY2009
95
100
FY2010
95
98
FY2011
95
100
FY2012
99
100
FY2013
99
FY2014
99
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(417) Millions of cubic yards of contaminated soil and groundwater media EPA has obtained
commitments to clean up as a result of concluded CERCLA and RCRA corrective action
enforcement actions.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
300
400
FY2013
275
FY2014
225
Units
Million
Cubic
Yards
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$5,494.0) This reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to adjustments in
salary and benefit costs.
• (-$4,496.0 / -32.1 FTE) This reduction is associated with PRP searches, cleanup
negotiations, litigation, and settlements, including a refocusing on high dollar cost
recovery efforts. The agency will maintain contract services supporting PRP searches,
settlements, and cost recovery for Superfund sites. The agency's request reflects efforts to
reshape the workforce to include changes in programmatic direction and strengthening
programmatic expertise with the appropriate skill mix by reducing administrative support
through efficiencies. The reduction in funding includes $4,475.0 associated payroll for
32.1 FTE.
• (+$520.0) This net increase provides additional resources to operate and maintain
SCORPIOS.
• (-$105.0) This reflects a reduction in travel to support the Administration's Management
Agenda goal of reducing travel and conference spending.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act; Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996; Community Environmental Response Facilitation
Act; National Environmental Policy Act; Atomic Energy Act; Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation
624
-------
Land Withdrawal Act; Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Land Withdrawal Act; Safe Drinking
Water Act; Chrominated Cooper Arsenate; Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act;
Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act; Federal Acquisition Regulations; Federal Managers
Financial Integrity Act; Freedom of Information Act; Government Management Reform Act;
Improper Payments Information Act; Inspector General Act; Paperwork Reduction Act; Privacy
Act; Chief Financial Officers Act; Government Performance and Results Act; The Prompt
Payment Act; Executive Order 12241; Executive Order 12656.
625
-------
Superfund: Federal Facilities Enforcement
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Enforcing Environmental Laws
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws
(Dollars in Thousands)
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$10,296.0
$10,296.0
65.9
FY 2012
Actuals
$9,674.7
$9,674.7
54.8
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$10,261.0
$10,261.0
65.9
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$8,888.0
$8,888.0
53.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($1,408.0)
($1,408.0)
-12.4
Program Project Description:
The Superfund Federal Facilities Enforcement program ensures, consistent with law, that sites
with federal entities performing Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA) responses and CERCLA sites with federal ownership are monitored
and appropriate enforcement responses are pursued. After years of service and operation, some
federal facilities contain environmental contamination, such as hazardous wastes, unexploded
ordnance, radioactive wastes, or other toxic substances. To enable the cleanup and reuse of such
sites, the Federal Facilities Enforcement program identifies and coordinates creative solutions
that ensure the integrity of cleanups and protect both human health and the environment. These
enforcement solutions help restore facilities so they can once again serve an important role in the
economy and welfare of local communities and our country.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Pursuant to CERCLA Section 120, the EPA must enter into Interagency Agreements (lAs) with
responsible federal entities to ensure protective cleanup at a timely pace. Priority areas for FY
2014 include ensuring that: 1) all federal facility sites on the National Priorities List have lAs,
which provide enforceable schedules for the progression of the entire cleanup; 2) these lAs are
monitored for compliance; and 3) federal sites that are transferred to new owners are transferred
in an environmentally responsible manner. The EPA monitors progress (milestones) in existing
lAs, resolves disputes, takes appropriate enforcement actions to address noncompliance, and
oversees remedial work being conducted at federal facilities. The EPA works to ensure that
required legally enforceable institutional controls and five-year review requirements are in place
at Superfund sites to ensure the long-term protectiveness of cleanup actions. The EPA also will
continue its work with affected agencies to resolve outstanding compliance and enforcement
policy issues relating to the cleanup of federal facilities.
The Superfund Federal Facilities Enforcement program works closely with the EPA's Federal
Facilities Cleanup and Reuse programs to support their strategic programmatic goals to clean up
federal contaminated sites and make them safer for communities and available for other
economically productive uses. In addition, it is critically important, especially in a time of
626
-------
declining resources, that we continually assess our priorities, leverage our resources, and
embrace new approaches that can help achieve our goals more efficiently and effectively. The
Superfund Federal Facilities program will continue to focus its resources on the highest priority
sites and to those instances where the biggest potential return is realized on our enforcement
dollars.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in the Superfund Enforcement
Program and can be found in the Performance Eight Year Array in the Program Performance and
Assessment section.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$402.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$1,810.0 / -12.4 FTE) This change reflects a net reduction for federal compliance
assistance and cleanup oversight activities at Federal Facilities. The Superfund Federal
Facilities program will continue to focus its resources on the highest priority sites and to
those instances where the biggest potential return is realized on our enforcement dollars.
The reduced resources include $1,848.0 in associated payroll for 12.4 FTE.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act as amended;
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and Safe Drinking Water Act.
627
-------
Criminal Enforcement
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Enforcing Environmental Laws
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$48,123.0
$7,903.0
$56,026.0
294.9
FY 2012
Actuals
$49,545.3
$7,811.9
$57,357.2
294.4
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$48,207.0
$7,888.0
$56,095.0
294.9
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$53,609.0
$7,675.0
$61,284.0
294.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$5,486.0
($228.0)
$5,258.0
-0.9
Program Project Description:
A strong enforcement program is a key component of an effective, results-focused environmental
compliance strategy. The EPA's Criminal Enforcement program investigates and helps prosecute
violations of Superfund and Superfund-related laws through targeted investigation of criminal
conduct, committed by individual and corporate defendants, that threatens public health and the
environment. Successful, visible prosecutions deter other potential violators, eliminate the
incentive for companies to "pay to pollute," and help ensure that businesses that follow the rules
do not face unfair competition from those that break the rules.
The EPA's deterrence strategy is placing an increased emphasis on pursuing personal liability for
willful violation of environmental statues. Criminal enforcement also sends a strong deterrence
message in economically disadvantaged communities and traditionally industrial areas, where
residents may have suffered disproportionate pollution impacts, in part due to criminal actions.
The EPA's criminal enforcement agents (Special Agents) investigate violations of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and
associated violations of Title 18 of the United States Code such as fraud, conspiracy, false
statements, and obstruction of justice. Special Agents conduct all aspects of case development,
assisted by forensic scientists, attorneys, technicians, engineers, and other specialists. Special
Agents provide prosecutorial support, evaluate leads, interview witnesses, serve and support
search warrants, and review documentary evidence, including data from prior inspections.
Agents also assist in plea negotiations, and in planning sentencing conditions that require
remediation, environmental management systems, or other projects that improve environmental
conditions.
The EPA's criminal enforcement attorneys provide Superfund legal and policy support for all of
the program's responsibilities, including forensics and expert witness preparation, information
law, and personnel law to ensure that program activities are carried out in accordance with legal
requirements and the policies of the agency. These efforts support environmental crimes
628
-------
prosecutions primarily by the United States Attorneys and the Department of Justice's
Environmental Crimes Section, and occasionally by state, Tribal, and local prosecutors.
The EPA's Special Agents also participate in task forces, and in specialized training at the
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center along with other federal, state, and local law
enforcement officials. These joint efforts and training help build state, local, and Tribal
environmental enforcement expertise, which helps them protect their communities and offer
valuable leads to the EPA's program.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Successful prosecutions are the result of careful collection and expert analysis of evidence. In FY
2014, the Criminal Enforcement program will continue to realize the benefits of enhanced crime
scene investigation support, forensic evidence collection, and improved sampling support for
complex criminal enforcement efforts involving highly contaminated crime scenes and major
releases to the environment. High-quality forensic data collection and analysis are also key to
establishing the personal culpability of individual violators, which can lead to sentences that
include incarceration.
In FY 2014, the Criminal Enforcement program will continue to investigate and assist in the
prosecution of CERCLA related cases with significant environmental, human health, and
deterrence impacts. The Criminal Enforcement program continues to "tier" significant CERCLA
cases based upon categories of human health and environmental impacts (e.g., death, serious
injury, human exposure, required remediation), release and discharge characteristics (e.g.,
hazardous or toxic pollutants, continuing violations), and subject characteristics (e.g., national
corporation, recidivist violators).
The EPA's Criminal Enforcement program is committed to fair and consistent enforcement of
federal laws and regulations, balanced with the flexibility to respond to region-specific
environmental problems. In FY 2014, criminal enforcement will continue to oversee all
investigations to ensure compliance with program priorities, and conduct regular "docket
reviews" (detailed reviews of all open investigations in each Regional Office) to ensure
consistency with investigatory discretion guidance and enforcement priorities.
The Criminal Enforcement program will continue to enhance its collaboration and coordination
with the Civil Enforcement program to ensure that the enforcement program responds to
Superfund violations as effectively as possible. Enforcement is accomplished by employing an
effective regional case screening process to identify the most appropriate civil or criminal
enforcement responses for a particular violation and by taking criminal enforcement actions
against long-term or repeated significant non-compliers where appropriate.
In FY 2014, the program also will pursue leads reported by the public as appropriate through the
tips and complaints link on the EPA's website, and will continue to use the fugitive website.3
The EPA's fugitive website enlists the public and law enforcement agencies help in
For more information visit: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/criminal/index.html.
3For more information visit: http://www.epa.gov/fugitives/.
629
-------
apprehending defendants who have fled the country, are in hiding to avoid prosecution for
alleged environmental crimes, or are in hiding to avoid sentencing for crimes for which they
have been found guilty.
It is critically important, especially in a time of declining resources, that we continually assess
our priorities and embrace new approaches that can help achieve our goals more efficiently and
effectively. The program will continue to focus all of its criminal investigative resources on the
highest priority cases.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in the Criminal Enforcement
Program under Environmental Programs and Management and can be found in the Program
Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$265.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$493.0 / -3.7 FTE) This reduction is taken from support of lower priority criminal
casework with a small offset for Superfund legal and policy support. The reduced
resources include $640.0 associated payroll for 3.7 FTE.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act; Emergency
Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act; Pollution Prosecution Act; Title 18 General
Federal Crimes (e.g., false statements, conspiracy); Power of Environmental Protection Agency
(18U.S.C. 3063).
630
-------
Forensics Support
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Enforcing Environmental Laws
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$15,269.0
$2,419.0
$17,688.0
103.9
FY 2012
Actuals
$16,352.8
$2,657.2
$19,010.0
97.5
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$15,302.0
$2,415.0
$17,717.0
103.9
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$15,874.0
$1,169.0
$17,043.0
94.8
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$605.0
($1,250.0)
($645.0)
-9.1
Program Project Description:
The Forensics Support program provides expert scientific and technical support for the nation's
most complex Superfund civil and criminal enforcement cases, as well as technical expertise for
agency compliance efforts. The work of the EPA's National Enforcement Investigations Center
(NEIC) is critical to determining non-compliance and building viable enforcement cases. The
NEIC maintains a sophisticated chemistry laboratory and a corps of highly trained inspectors and
scientists with expertise across media. The NEIC works closely with the EPA Criminal
Investigation Division to provide technical support (e.g., sampling, analysis, consultation and
testimony) to criminal investigations. The NEIC also works closely with EPA Headquarters and
Regional Offices to provide technical assistance, consultation, on-site inspection, investigation,
and case resolution services in support of the agency's Civil Enforcement program.
The NEIC is an environmental forensic center accredited for both laboratory and field sampling
operations to generate environmental data for law enforcement purposes. It is a fully accredited
environmental forensics center under International Standards Organization (ISO) 17025, the
main standard used by testing and calibration laboratories, as recommended by the National
Academy of Sciences.4 Accreditation is the recognition of technical competence through a third-
party assessment of a laboratory's quality, administrative, and technical systems. The NEIC also
provides the general public and users of laboratory services a means of identifying those
laboratories which have successfully demonstrated compliance with established international
standards. The NEIC's accreditation standard has been customized to cover both laboratory and
field activities.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the NEIC will continue to support the agency's national enforcement priorities and
support the technical aspects of criminal investigations. In order to stay at the forefront of
4 Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward, National Academy of Sciences, 2009, available at
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php7record id=12589.
631
-------
environmental enforcement, the NEIC continues using customized laboratory methods to
identify potentially responsible parties. In response to Superfund case needs, the NEIC conducts
applied research and development to identify and deploy new capabilities, and to test and/or
enhance existing methods and techniques involving environmental measurement and forensic
situations.
In FY 2014, the NEIC will continue to function under the rigorous ISO 17025 requirements for
environmental data measurements to maintain its laboratory and field accreditation. The program
utilizes advanced technologies to support field measurement and laboratory analyses, as well as
identification of pollution sources at Superfund and other waste sites. In addition, the NEIC
provides expert consultation in support of the EPA's Regional Offices and Department of Justice
Superfund cost recovery efforts. Examples of this support include using advanced mass
spectroscopy to analyze potential sources of toxic metals and scientific determinations of when
the disposal of organic pollutants occurs.
The NEIC also will continue to develop innovative technologies including geospatial
measurement of air pollution (e.g., CERCLA Reportable Quantities) and remote monitoring in
environmental justice communities.
In addition, in FY 2014, the NEIC will continue to work with Region 8 and the Office of
Administration and Resource Management (OARM) to advance the implementation of the
consolidation of its laboratories to improve space and resource efficiency. This is part of the
agencywide effort to review overall space requirements.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports the objective to improve compliance under Goal 5. Currently,
there are no performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$114.0) This decrease reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$1,364.0 / -8.7 FTE) This decrease in FTE reflects the agency's efforts to reshape the
workforce by strengthening programmatic expertise with the appropriate skill mix and by
reducing administrative support through efficiencies. The reduced resources include
$1,275.0 associated payroll for 8.7 FTE.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act; Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act.
632
-------
Program Area: Homeland Security
633
-------
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and Recovery
Program Area: Homeland Security
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Restore Land
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Ensure Chemical Safety
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$29,835.0
$40,545.0
$70,380.0
176.4
FY 2012
Actuals
$27,032.2
$40,547.7
$67,579.9
168.7
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$30,054.0
$40,648.0
$70,702.0
176.4
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$29,544.0
$40,800.0
$70,344.0
175.9
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($291.0)
$255.0
($36.0)
-0.5
Program Project Description:
EPA's Homeland Security Preparedness, Response, and Recovery program develops and
maintains an agencywide capability to respond to large-scale catastrophic incidents with an
emphasis on those involving chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) agents. The
program builds upon EPA's long standing emergency response and removal program, which is
responsible for responding to and cleaning up both oil and hazardous substance releases. EPA's
homeland security effort develops these responsibilities through research and maintaining a level
of expertise, training, and preparedness specifically focused on threats associated with CBR
agents. This capability, as well as the supporting research, implemented as a comprehensive all-
hazards approach to emergency response, is a cornerstone of national preparedness and is an
essential element of national resiliency.
The agency Homeland Security program implements a broad range of activities for a variety of
internal and multi-agency efforts that are consistent with the Department of Homeland Security's
(DHS') National Response Framework. As mandated in Homeland Security Presidential
Directives (HSPDs) #5, #8, #9, #10, and #22, the agency leads or supports many aspects of
preparing for and responding to a nationally significant incident which may contain CBRN
agents. Other Federal agencies, including DHS, the Department of Defense, and the Department
of Health and Human Services, rely upon EPA's unique and critical environmental response
capability and expertise for CBR agents, and look to EPA to:
• sustain and operate national environmental laboratory capability and capacity for
chemical warfare agents and biological threats;
• provide expertise on environmental characterization, decontamination, and waste disposal
methods following the release of a CBR agent;
634
-------
• provide technical support and expertise during a response in evaluating environmental
and human health risks associated with the release of CBR agents; and
• strengthen the agency's own internal response capabilities, as well as coordinated
Federal, state, and local emergency response efforts through training, exercises, and the
maintenance of specialized field assets.
EPA Homeland Security assets, trained personnel, laboratory capabilities, and decontamination
technical expertise, provide a safety net for CBRN responses, as the EPA is solely responsible
for environmental sampling and decontamination during a CBRN response. The agency's
Consequence Management Advisory Team (CMAT) serves as an important federal technical
resource for all environmental consequence management activities, especially decontamination
of building infrastructures and environmental media. The Environmental Response Team (ERT)
will provide required health and safety and response readiness training to federal, state, local,
and tribal responders. The Environmental Response Laboratory Network resources focus on
improving national environmental laboratory capabilities and capacities to be better prepared to
analyze the high volume of environmental CBRN samples expected during national emergencies.
This program helps EPA have the capacity for understanding and responding to complex CBRN
incidents in a reasonable time frame as well as have a basic level of institutional expertise for
advising time critical and emergency cleanups. To meet this challenge, EPA will continue to use
a comprehensive approach which includes internal and external partnerships on research
priorities and brings together agency assets to implement efficient and effective responses.
In support of this work, the National Homeland Security Research Center (NHSRC) develops
and validates environmental sampling, analysis, and human health risk assessment methods for
known and emerging biological, chemical, and radiological threat agents.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the agency's homeland security preparedness, response, and recovery program will
continue to concentrate on four core areas:
1) maintaining a highly skilled, well-trained, and well-equipped response workforce that has
the capacity to respond to simultaneous incidents as well as threats involving CBRN
substances;
2) developing more effective site characterization, decontamination, and clearance strategies
for site reoccupation, to ensure that the nation can quickly recover from nationally
significant incidents;
3) ensuring maintenance of capability and capacity to analyze Chemical Warfare Agent
(CWA) samples while working to build and maintain EPA biological agent laboratory
analyses capability and capacity; and
4) implementing the EPA's National Approach to Response (NAR) to effectively manage
EPA's emergency response assets during large-scale activations.
635
-------
EPA activities in support of these efforts include the following:
• Maintain the skills of EPA's On-Scene Coordinators (OSCs) through specialized training,
exercises, and equipment. This professional development provides staff with information
on new technologies and supports direction to optimize an efficient and cost-effective
response process. In FY 2014, EPA and its federal, state, and tribal homeland response
partners will participate in exercises and trainings designed to test and improve EPA's
response capabilities.
• Sustain the agency's responder base during large-scale catastrophic incidents by training
volunteers of the Response Support Corps (RSC) and members of Incident Management
Teams (EVITs). These RSC volunteers provide critical support to Headquarters and
Regional Emergency Operations Centers and also assist with operations in the field. To
ensure technical proficiency, this cadre of response personnel requires initial training and
routine refresher training. In addition, EVITs receive training throughout the regions.
• Operate the Environmental Response Laboratory Network (ERLN), sustain and operate
CWA and biological labs, continue mobile capability through Portable High-Throughput
Integrated Laboratory Identification Systems (PHILIS) units, and continue coordination
of enhancement of radio-analytical capability. The agency will continue to participate
with the DHS led Integrated Consortium of Laboratory Networks (ICLN) to leverage
federal, state, and commercial capabilities. The DHS led ICLN has been in existence
since 2005 and continues to coordinate homeland security response issues through the
Joint Leadership Council, of which EPA's Homeland Security Program is a member, and
through the National Coordinating Group (NCG), of which the ERLN is a participating
member. The NCG is composed of Federal led laboratory networks from EPA, HHS
(CDC and FDA), USDA, FBI, and most recently DoD. While DoD has only recently
(within last 6 months) formed a formal laboratory network within the NCG, they have
coordinated with other NCG members through the ICLN to provide technical reachback,
subject matter expertise, and research coordination.
• EPA is responsible for the decontamination phase of a significant incident.
Decontamination is not possible without sampling and lab analyses to delineate and
characterize the site, to confirm successful decontamination, and for decisions on
clearance to re-enter the site. To assist with site characterization, EPA fixed and mobile
lab capabilities are needed; mobile labs, such as PHILIS, for deploying to sites for high
volume, quick turnaround analyses; and fixed labs for providing added chemical and
biological agent capacity and capability for non-routine analyses.
• Implement the NAR to maximize regional interoperability and to ensure that EPA's
OSCs and special teams will be able to respond to terrorist threats and large-scale
catastrophic incidents in an effective and nationally consistent manner.
• Continue to maintain one Airborne Spectral Photometric Environmental Collection
Technology (ASPECT) aircraft. ASPECT provides direct assistance to first responders by
detecting chemical and radiological vapors, plumes, and clouds with real-time data
636
-------
delivery. ASPECT is especially needed when other assets cannot be deployed to a release
(road and/or infrastructure damage, personnel concerns, etc.). ASPECT assistance is
often requested by other agencies and is a rapid response resource, with monitoring data
being available within five minutes.
• Maintain the Emergency Management Portal (EMP) modules. EMP ties together
prevention, preparedness, and response information to allow EPA's emergency
management community access to information they need to respond to and efficiently
store decontamination related data and track field personnel, equipment, and
reconnaissance data from large and small sites. During large-scale incidents, the public
can view site related data on a daily basis.
• Maintain Environmental Response Team (ERT) personnel and equipment in a state of
readiness for response to potential homeland security incidents. As the agency inland
scientific support coordinator, the ERT also will maintain capacity to provide required
health and safety and response readiness training to federal, state, local, and tribal
responders.
• Continue to focus on assessing the persistence of harmful materials and the effectiveness
of decontamination options for sites contaminated with biological or chemical agents. To
date, work has included decontamination of soil containing Bacillus anthracis,
persistence and decontamination of Brucella Suis, and assessment of enzymatic
decontamination.
• Continue the development of process indicators to assist in determining the effectiveness
of decontamination activities during remediation of sites contaminated with biological
agents. Such process indicators will more accurately predict inactivation of Bacillus
anthracis spores in order to support the clearance of sites based upon multiple lines of
evidence (i.e., increasing confidence in the decontamination process). This
decontamination and consequence management research will produce data and
technologies that further assist the EPA in developing standards, protocols, and
capabilities to recover from and mitigate the risks associated with biological attacks.
• Begin to implement a Regional Center of Expertise for CWA Laboratories to support
response and recovery and to effectively maintain this capability and capacity at selected
Regional laboratories. This will evaluate the most effective and efficient means of
consolidating facilities and equipment and developing a highly skilled and mobile staff
with the appropriate expertise. This consolidation is expected to result in centralized
operations, with the ability to better coordinate with: (a) Regions affected by an incident;
(b) National Homeland Security Research Center for new analytical method validation;
and (c) Headquarters work on response strategies for emerging threat agents. The
consolidation effort also is expected to produce results in the efficient maintenance of
response capability during non-event periods, and the development of a viable, cost-
effective surge strategy to sustain operations for extended response periods.
637
-------
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in the Science & Technology
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and Recovery program, which also can be found in
the Performance Eight-Year Array.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$747.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$697.0 / -0.8 FTE) This decrease reflects delays in planned training and participation in
exercises and also reflects delays in equipment upgrades. The reduced resources include
0.8 FTE and associated payroll of $123.0.
• (+$128.0) This reflects an increase for research to develop and test cleanup technologies
for radiological contamination that could result from terrorist attacks or nuclear disasters.
This research will give the response community better information on performance and
cost of remediation technologies thereby supporting improved decision-making.
• (+$54.0) This represents a restoration of resources transferred to the Research:
Sustainable and Healthy Communities program to support Small Business Innovation
Research (SBIR). For SBIR, the EPA is required to set aside 2.5 percent of funding for
contracts to small businesses to develop and commercialize new environmental
technologies.
• (+$23.0) This reflects the net result of realignments of infrastructure, FTE, and resources
such as equipment purchases and repairs, travel, contracts, and general expenses that are
proportionately allocated across programs to better align with programmatic priorities.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as
amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), 42 U.S.C. 9601 et
seq. - Sections 104, 105, 106; Clean Water Act 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; Oil Pollution Act, 33
U.S.C. 2701, etseq.
638
-------
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure
Program Area: Homeland Security
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Building and Facilities
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$5,966.0
$578.0
$7,044.0
$1,170.0
$14,758.0
3.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$4,309.2
$577.0
$5,726.7
$1,671.0
$12,283.9
4.2
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$6,053.0
$584.0
$7,087.0
$1,176.0
$14,900.0
3.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$6,063.0
$579.0
$8,038.0
$1,172.0
$15,852.0
5.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$97.0
$1.0
$994.0
$2.0
$1,094.0
2.0
Program Project Description:
This program's activities ensure that EPA's physical structures and assets are secure and
operational and that certain physical security measures are in place to help safeguard staff in the
event of an emergency. The program also includes the personnel security clearance process, the
protection of any classified information, and the provision of necessary secure communications.
EPA's policy is to have a comprehensive continuity of operations (COOP) program in place to
ensure continuity of its mission essential functions (MEFs) under all emergency circumstances.
Under Homeland Security Presidential Directive 20 (HSPD-20), EPA is required to designate an
Agency Continuity Coordinator charged with ensuring that EPA's continuity program is
consistent with federal policies. The Solid Waste and Emergency Response Program's
Emergency Management program is responsible for developing EPA's COOP Plan.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the agency will continue to follow the requirements outlined in the Department of
Homeland Security/Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Federal Continuity
Directive (FCD)-l. FCD-1 requires EPA to develop a continuity plan that ensures its ability to
accomplish its MEFs from an alternative site, with limited staffing and without access to
resources available during normal activities.
Consistent with a review of its needs and priorities pursuant to the directive, EPA will undertake
a number of activities, including but not limited to the following:
639
-------
• Conduct annual reviews of the Headquarters and Regional COOP plans and update the
plans, as needed, to reflect current operations;
• Conduct exercises of COOP deployment, activation of Emergency Relocation Group
personnel to the COOP site, and implementation of its MEFs from its alternate site(s),
including interagency operations. In FY 2014, EPA plans to support training activities
and participate in a major interagency COOP exercise and an EPA internal COOP
exercise with Headquarters and Regional offices; and
• Show progress toward meeting the requirements of National Communications System
Directive (NCSD) 3-10 through the purchase, installation, and maintenance of secure
communications equipment.
Currently, EPA's COOP Program is reviewed internally every month, according to criteria
established in FEMA's Continuity Evaluation Tool and Readiness Reporting System. The COOP
Program is evaluated in over 200 elements in 13 categories, including Program Plans and
Procedures, Risk Management, Budgeting, Essential Functions, and others. The results of the
internal review are delivered to FEMA, who in turn delivers the review results to the White
House. Every other year, FEMA performs an in-person review of EPA's COOP Program and
provides the results to the Administrator and to the White House. EPA's Program was reviewed
in 2012 and received an excellent review. FEMA will review the program again in FY 2014.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$2.0) This reflects an increase in resources to assist in agency COOP efforts.
Statutory Authority:
Public Health Service Act Amendments, 42 U.S.C. 201 et seq. - Section 2801; Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq. -Sections
104, 105, and 106.
640
-------
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach
641
-------
Exchange Network
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$17,724.0
$1,431.0
$19,155.0
29.6
FY 2012
Actuals
$16,479.3
$1,383.6
$17,862.9
36.3
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$17,930.0
$1,440.0
$19,370.0
29.6
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$33,659.0
$1,433.0
$35,092.0
31.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$15,935.0
$2.0
$15,937.0
1.4
Program Project Description:
The Exchange Network (EN) is a standards-based, secure approach for the EPA and its state,
Tribal and territorial partners to exchange and share environmental data. The EN facilitates and
streamlines electronic reporting, sharing, integration, analysis and use of environmental data
from many different sources to support the Superfund program. Through its use of technology
and data standards, open-source software, shared services and reusable tools and applications,
the EN offers its partners tremendous potential for managing and analyzing environmental data
more effectively and efficiently, leading to improved decision making.
The Central Data Exchange (CDX) is the largest component of the EN program. CDX is the
electronic gateway through which environmental data enters the agency and serves as the
agency's node, or "point of presence," on the EN. It enables fast, efficient and more accurate
environmental data submissions from state and local governments, tribes and industry to the
EPA. CDX reduces the data management burden on EPA programs and helps environmental
programs focus their resources on programmatic and enforcement work, rather than on data
collection and manipulation.
Because CDX serves as the EPA's connection to the EN, it provides a common way to promote
data integration and sharing with states and tribes. CDX provides a set of core services, enabling
agency programs to avoid creating duplicative services. The reuse of existing central services
like CDX promotes leaner and more cost-effective enterprise architecture for the agency and
enables more robust central services. CDX resources support infrastructure for development,
testing and production; sophisticated hardware and software; data exchange and Web form
programs; built-in data quality checks; standards-setting projects with states, tribes and territories
for e-reporting; and significant security and quality assurance activities.
642
-------
Other tools and services in the EN program include the Facility Registry System (FRS) and the
other registries within the System of Registries (SoR). The FRS is a widely used source of
mapping and environmental data about facilities. It supports multimedia integration, query,
analysis and visualization of a wide variety of environmental information keyed to single or
multiple facilities. It also identifies Superfund cleanup site locations and links to status pages
about the progress of the work to the site. FRS provides data locations from the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System. The Superfund
program uses FRS to improve the quality of CERCLIS data.
FRS serves as a key point of entry for the public interested in the EPA's data stores, such as
Envirofacts, the Geoplatform, MyEnvironment, Cleanups In My Community and a host of other
tools. The registries provide a platform to link data across data systems, environmental programs
and even other agencies' data, enabling the EPA to bring data together for greater understanding
of environmental issues. The registries are key integrators that promote discovery, access, sharing
and understanding of the EPA's information and assets.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Projects planned for FY 2014 will focus on building shared web services. The Superfund
program will pilot projects in FY 2014 that transform the EN from a closed partnership of states
and tribes to a more open platform of services that the public or third parties can use to develop
tools and applications to make environmental data reporting, sharing and analysis faster, simpler
and cheaper.
Several new enhancements to CDX are underway and will continue to be rolled out in FY 2014.
Major activities include: (1) Completely redesigning the CDX interface that states and tribes use
to comply with user identification standards, improving the quality of user registration data and
raising the efficiency of the EPA's user identity management (2) Enhancing CDX to serve as the
data publishing engine for the agency by providing the transport of data from the EPA, not only
to trusted partners, but potentially to the public as well. This role and expansion of CDX will be
pursued through FY 2014 as part of the architecture redesign.
Planned activities in FY 2014 for the Facility Registry Service include:
• Continuing to improve FRS data quality and its utilization across the EPA, tribes and
states by building on FY 2013 initiatives to establish a strong FRS data stewards network
and community of interest;
• Enhancing FRS data with value-added attributes and capabilities to support improved
analysis and access and adding additional spatial geographies and attributes and emerging
semantic Web technologies; and
• Providing means of managing and accessing a richer set of facility information, to
include sub-facility and corporate information and offer real time data feeds.
Planned activities in FY 2014 for the System of Registries include continuing efforts to allow
greater sharing and better understanding of the EPA's data. These efforts include metadata
providing services at the system, dataset and data element levels:
643
-------
• The EPA's inventory of systems and computational models, the Registry of EPA
Applications and Databases, will continue to evolve to meet agency federal reporting and
information management needs. The EPA's dataset registry, the Environmental Data
Gateway, is an inventory of available datasets from a variety of sources. The datasets will
continue to grow to meet EPA's priority of improving data accessibility. To capitalize on
CDX's potential as a data publishing engine, the agency will employ a web API data
structuring concept where applicable to help facilitate the sharing of information with the
public, private sector entities, and between agencies;
• The EPA will continue to develop data dictionaries for systems cataloged in READ,
through the Data Element Registry Services. DERS serves as a first-stop for system
development by encouraging reuse of data elements in existing systems, potentially
improving standards and reducing burden. DERS positions the agency to meet future
requirements for federal-wide standardization; and
• The EPA also will continue to improve information management of its IT resources
through its catalog of IT services (e.g., widgets, Web services, reusable code). The
Reusable Component Services is a resource that enables EPA programs to identify
existing IT services that can be reused in whole or in part, thus saving EPA, as well as
state and Tribal governments, money and time.
The Superfund program continues to improve information gathering and access through these
development and maintenance efforts.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports the performance measures in the Exchange Network Program
Project under the EPM appropriation. These measures can also be found in the Eight Year Table
of Tab 11.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$2.0) This increase reflects a change in contractual support for the Central Data
Exchange.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 42 United States Code 553 et seq. and Government
Information Security Act (GISRA), 40 U.S.C. 1401 et seq. - Sections 3531, 3532, 3533, 3534,
3535 and 3536 and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
(CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. 9606 et seq. - Sections 101-128, 301-312 and 401-405 and Clean Air Act
(CAA) Amendments, 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. - Sections 102, 103, 104 and 108 and Clean Water
Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C. 1314 et seq. - Sections 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 107, and 109 and Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2611 et seq. - Sections 201, 301 and 401 and Federal
Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. 36 et seq. - Sections 136a - 136y
and Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA), 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq. - Sections 102, 210, 301 and 501
and Safe Drinking Water Act (SOWA) Amendments, 42 U.S.C. 300 et seq. - Sections 1400,
1401, 1411, 1421, 1431, 1441, 1454 and 1461 and Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act
644
-------
(FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346 et seq. and Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
(EPCRA), 42 U.S.C. 11001 et seq. - Sections 322, 324, 325 and 328 and Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA), 42 U.S.C. 6962 et seq. - Sections 1001, 2001, 3001 and 3005 and
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA), 39 U.S.C. 2803 et seq. - Sections 1115,
1116, 1117, 1118 and 1119 and Government Management Reform Act (GMRA), 31 U.S.C. 501
et seq. - Sections 101, 201, 301, 401, 402, 403, 404 and 405 and Clinger-Cohen Act (CCA), 40
U.S.C. 1401 et seq. - Sections 5001, 5201, 5301, 5401, 5502, 5601 and 5701and Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. - Sections 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111,
112 and 113 and Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552 et seq. and Controlled
Substances Act (CSA), 21 U.S.C. 802 et seq. - Sections 801, 811, 821, 841, 871, 955 and 961;
Privacy Act; Electronic Freedom of Information Act, Security and Accountability for Every
(SAFE) Port Act, Executive Order 13439. Exchange Network Program funding has been provided
by the annual appropriations for EPA: FY 2002 (Public Law 107-73), FY 2003 (Public Law 108-7),
FY 2004 (Public Law 108-199) FY 2005 (Public Law 108-447) and FY 2006 (Public Law 109-54),
FY 2007 (Public Law 110-5), FY 2008 (Public Law 110-161), and FY 2009 (Public Law 111-8).
645
-------
Program Area: IT / Data Management / Security
646
-------
Information Security
Program Area: IT / Data Management / Security
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$6,786.0
$728.0
$7,514.0
15.2
FY 2012
Actuals
$8,551.9
$462.2
$9,014.1
14.5
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$6,858.0
$732.0
$7,590.0
15.2
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$6,939.0
$728.0
$7,667.0
15.3
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$153.0
$0.0
$153.0
0.1
Program Project Description:
Information is a strategic resource to the EPA. It allows each program office to fulfill its mission
in support of the protection of human health and the environment. The agency's Information
Security program is designed to protect the confidentiality, availability and integrity of the
EPA's information assets. The protection strategy for the Superfund program includes, but is not
limited to, policy, procedure and guidance management; information security awareness, training
and education; risk-based governance and oversight; weakness remediation; operational security
management; incident response and handling; and Federal Information Security Management
Act compliance and reporting.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Effective information security faces new challenges every day. Agency information security
practitioners are constantly responding to increasingly creative and sophisticated attempts to
breach protections. In FY 2014, the EPA's integrated efforts will allow the agency's Information
Security program to take a more proactive role in dealing with these threats under the Superfund
program.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to protect, defend and sustain its information assets related to
the Superfund program, such as the Superfund Cost Recovery Package Imaging and On-Line
System, through continued improvement to the Information Security program. The agency will
continue to focus on training and awareness, asset definition and management, compliance,
incident management, knowledge and information management, risk management and
technology management. Secondary activities in FY 2014 include, but are not limited to, access
management, measurement and analysis, and service continuity. These efforts will strengthen the
agency's ability to ensure operational resiliency resulting in an information security program that
647
-------
can rely on effective and efficient processes and documented plans when threatened by disruptive
events.
Concurrently, the EPA will continue its performance-based information security activities with a
particular emphasis on risk management, incident management and information security
architecture. These three areas are critical to the agency's Information Security program. They
are also key components of the Office of Management and Budget information security
initiatives, including requirements for (1) Trusted Internet Connection; (2) Domain Name Service
Security; and (3) the United States Government Configuration Baseline. Controls implementing
these initiatives, which will be operational throughout FY 2014, are rapidly enhancing the
agency's security requirements for information policy, technology standards and practices.
The EPA will support and expand continuous monitoring to detect and remediate Advanced
Persistent Threats to the agency's Information Technology networks. The EPA will enhance our
internal Computer Security Incident Response Capability to ensure the rapid identification,
alerting and reporting of suspicious activity. CSIRC's primary function is to detect unauthorized
attempts to access, destroy, or alter EPA data and information resources. The incident response
capability includes components such as tool integration, detection and analysis; forensics; and
containment and eradication activities. To help ensure that tools, techniques, and practices are
current, CSIRC monitors new trends in information security and threat activity. Additionally, the
EPA will continue implementing Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12 requirements for
logical access as identified in the Federal Information Processing Standards 201, Personal
Identity Verification of Federal Employees and Contractors.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no specific
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA), 44 United States Code 3541 et seq. -
Sections 301, 302, 303, 304, 305, 401 and 402 and Government Performance and Results Act
(GPRA), 39 U.S.C. 2803 et seq. - Sections 1115, 1116, 1117, 1118 and 1119 and Government
Management Reform Act (GMRA), 31 U.S.C. 501 et seq. - Sections 101, 201, 301, 401, 402,
403, 404 and 405 and Clinger-Cohen Act (CCA), 40 U.S.C. 1401 et seq. - Sections 5001, 5201,
5301, 5401, 5502, 5601 and 5701and Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. -
Sections 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112 and 113 and Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552 et seq. and Electronic Freedom of Information Act (EFOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552
et seq. - Sections 552(a)(2), 552 (a)(3), 552 (a)(4) and 552(a)(6).
648
-------
IT / Data Management
Program Area: IT / Data Management / Security
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$87,939.0
$3,652.0
$15,339.0
$106,930.0
485.7
FY 2012
Actuals
$86,196.5
$3,250.7
$14,843.5
$104,290.7
490.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$88,632.0
$3,669.0
$15,391.0
$107,692.0
485.7
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$86,599.0
$4,029.0
$13,865.0
$104,493.0
487.8
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($1,340.0)
$377.0
($1,474.0)
($2,437.0)
2.1
Program Project Description:
The work performed under the Information Technology/Data Management - program
encompasses more than 30 distinct activities in the following major functional areas: information
access; geospatial information and analysis; Envirofacts; IT/Information Management - policy
and planning; electronic records and content management; One EPA Web (formerly Internet
Operations and Maintenance Enhancements,); information reliability and privacy; and IT/EVI
infrastructure. IT/DM program activities support the Administration's goals of transparency,
participation, engagement and collaboration to expand the conversation on environmentalism.
IT/DM also delivers essential services to agency staff to allow them to conduct their work in
support of Superfund programs.
IT/DM reflects four themes: facilitating mission activities through better information and tools;
improving agency work processes to promote efficiencies; increasing transparency and
innovation in agency work processes; and supporting the work force with reliable tools and
services. This program houses the entire critical IT infrastructure and data management activities
needed for: 1) rapid and efficient communication; 2) exchange and storage of data, analysis and
computation; and 3) access to the scientific, regulatory and best-practice infrastructure needed by
agency staff, the regulated community and the public. These functions are integral to the
implementation of agency information technology programs and systems like the Exchange
Network.
This program manages and coordinates the agency's Enterprise Architecture and develops
analytical tools to ensure sound environmental decision-making. The program implements the
649
-------
agency's E-Government responsibilities and it designs, and develops and manages the agency's
Internet, intranet, and library resources.
More specifically, the IT/DM program: (1) supports the development, collection, management
and disposition of information; (2) supports the agency in strategic planning at the national,
program and Regional levels; (3) provides a secure, reliable and capable information
infrastructure based on a sound enterprise architecture which includes data standardization,
integration and public access; (4) manages the agency's Quality System ensuring the EPA's
processes and data are of good quality and adhere to federal guidelines; and (5) supports
Regional information technology infrastructure, telecommunications, administrative, and
environmental programs.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA's IT/DM functions have continuously and progressively integrated new and
transformative approaches into the way IT is managed across the agency. Already completed or
well underway in FY 2014 are ongoing initiatives to redesign geospatial analysis for greater
effectiveness and efficiency; to replace an inadequate paper-based records management system
with electronic discovery and auto-categorization services; to implement cloud-based email and
collaboration tools; and to redesign the provision of print services to incorporate significant
efficiencies. Taken together, these activities represent significant components of the agency's
work to transform its IT processes within base resources.
In FY 2014, the following IT/DM activities will continue to be provided using Superfund
resources:
• Geospatial Information and Analysis5 - In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to expand
its role in providing support for place-based data for analysis of environmental conditions
and trends across the country. Geospatial information and analysis play a critical role in
the agency's ability to respond rapidly and effectively in times of emergency, in addition
to meeting everyday program and region-specific business needs. By implementing
geospatial data, applications and services as a holistic enterprise solution, the agency
saves time and money, assures compatibility and reduces the need for multiple
subscriptions to software, data and analytical services. Throughout FY 2014, the agency
will continue to consolidate geospatial tools and capabilities to expand the capabilities of
the EPA GeoPlatform, our shared technology enterprise for geospatial information and
analysis.
The agency provides a core set of central/enterprise, reusable geospatial IT services
encompassing data, analytics, infrastructure, hosting and development via the EPA
GeoPlatform and associated enterprise licenses for software and data. Numerous
geospatial and non-geospatial data and applications are integrated and linked into the
GeoPlatform to increase the power of place-based analytics at the agency. In FY 2014,
the Geospatial program will support several tools, including the EPA Environmental
Analyst, EJ Screen, TRI visualization tools and a growing number of map views
5 For more information on the Geospatial program, please visit: http://www.epa.gov/geospatial/.
650
-------
generated by EPA staff to support their work collaboratively. The GeoPlatform also will
be used to provision interactive mapping content across the EPA's public Web site in a
consistent and cost-effective manner. Non-GeoPlatform tools such as Enviromapper6 and
MyEnvironment,7 will evolve to rely on GeoPlatform data and geoprocessing services.
These tools collectively provide basic GIS capabilities to non-GIS experts across the
EPA. The GeoPlatform provides a vehicle for agency GIS experts to publish their data
and analysis for non-GIS experts.
Additionally, EPA continues to play a leadership role in both the Federal Geographic
Data Committee and the National Geospatial Platform. In FY 2014, EPA staff will
continue to work with their partners from other agencies to define shared services for
geospatial technology that will drive more effective and cost-efficient capabilities across
government. (In FY 2014, the Geospatial Program activities will be funded, under the
Superfund appropriation, at $0.08 million in payroll funding and $0.64 million in non-
payroll funding.)
• Envirofacts - In FY 2014, Envirofacts will continue to serve as the agency's premier
single gateway to various program and facility data, including Superfund, serving
stakeholders within the federal government as well as the public. Supporting
approximately 3-4 million hits per month, Envirofacts offers popular queries and place-
based reporting and communicates environmental information to the public. (In FY 2014,
the Envirofacts activities will be funded, under the Superfund appropriation, at $0.29
million in non-payroll funding.)
• IT/Information Management (IT/IM) Policy and Planning - This category supports
the EPA's Enterprise Architecture and the Capital Planning and Investment Control8
(CPIC) process to assist the agency in making better-informed decisions on IT/IM
investments and resource allocations. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to review
information systems and data bases for redundancy, streamline and systematize planning
and budgeting for all IT/IM activities, and monitor the progress and performance of all
IT/IM activities and systems. Specifically, the EPA will continue to conduct structured
portfolio reviews for all major IT investments following the Federal TechStat investment
review model to control costs and identify efficiencies. The agency does not currently
have any high-risk IT projects. (In FY 2014, the IT/IM Policy and Planning activities will
be funded, under the Superfund appropriation, at $1.06 million in payroll funding and
$0.10 million in non-payroll funding.)
• Electronic Records, Content Management and Digital Government - This category
uses innovative analysis tools to support the EPA's transition to expanded electronic
records management. It includes the expansion of enterprise-wide electronic discovery
services (eDiscovery) to support more efficient collection and analysis of information
needed for litigation, Freedom of Information Act and congressional requests.
6 For more information on Enviromapper, please visit: http://www.epa.gov/emefdata/em4ef.home.
For more information on MyEnvironment, please visit: http: //www.epa. gov/mvenvironment.
8 For more information on the Capital Planning and Investment Control Process, please visit: http://www.epa.gov/OEI/cpic/.
651
-------
In FY 2014, activities in this area will continue to include the establishment and
maintenance of processes that convert appropriate paper documents into electronic
documents and convert paper-based processes into systems that manage electronic
documents. These activities will reduce costs, improve accessibility and security and
litigation. A single copy of an electronic document can be accessed simultaneously by
numerous individuals and from virtually any location. Previously fragmented data storage
approaches will be converted into a single, standard platform that is accessible to
everyone, which will reduce data and document search time while improving security and
information retention efforts.
The agency's transition to a new email and collaboration tools in FY 2014 will include
the redesign of the agency's Electronic Content Management (ECM) solution, an
enterprise-wide multimedia solution designed to manage and organize records and
documents for EPA headquarters, Regional offices, field offices, and laboratories to
provide greater records access to all programs and regions across the agency. In FY 2014,
the results of Regional and Headquarters pilots in paper-to-electronic conversion will be
used to inform our focus on a long-term solution for reducing the agency's paper
footprint. This solution will enable more efficient and coordinated records management
regardless of format.
FY 2014 activities also will see greater access to a standard set of tools to support and
improve electronic discovery processes across the agency. An agencywide electronic
discovery service will be expanded to support increased program and regional demand for
additional services, including accelerating information retrieval, de-duplication, and
review for litigation, Freedom of Information Act and Congressional requests.
In FY 2014, the EPA will deploy innovative analysis tools to support the auto-
categorization of electronic information and records and to assist in the interpretation of
and ability to discern patterns in large volumes of information to improve agency mission
business operations (e.g., enforcement targeting, human health and environmental risk
analysis, ambient monitoring, etc.). While the potential efficiencies and cost savings have
yet to be calculated, widespread evidence points to dramatic improvements in operational
efficiency and novel understanding of data which previously went undetected. (In FY
2014, Electronic Records and Content Management activities will be funded, under the
Superfund appropriation, at $0.29 million in non-payroll funding.)
One EPA Web - FY 2014 activities in this area will continue implementing and
maintaining the EPA home page and over 200 top-level pages that facilitate access to the
many information resources available on the EPA website. In addition, One EPA Web
supports web hosting for all of the agency's websites and pages. The EPA website is the
primary delivery mechanism for environmental information to the public, our partners,
stakeholders and EPA staff, and is a valuable resource for emergency planning and
response. (In FY 2014, One EPA Web activities will be funded, under the Superfund
appropriation, at $0.31 million in non-payroll funding.)
652
-------
• Information Reliability and Privacy - In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to protect
information in a manner that is consistent with its privacy needs and to validate data
sources as authoritative to ensure data collected by the agency are reliable. These efforts
apply to environmental information, including data that is submitted by and shared among
the states, tribes and territories, as well as other types of information, such as business
information that is reported by various industry communities, and personal information
for all EPA employees. (In FY 2014, the Information Reliability and Privacy activities
will be funded, under the Superfund appropriation, at $0.26 million in non-payroll
funding.)
• IT/IM Infrastructure - Infrastructure forms the foundation by which all EPA employees
- those supporting both administrative and environmental programs - conduct agency
business. More specifically, these activities include desktop computing, network
connectivity, e-mail, application hosting, remote access, telephone services and
maintenance, Web and network servers, IT-related maintenance, and electronic records
and data. The investment supports a distributed EPA workforce at over 100 locations,
including EPA Headquarters, all ten Regional offices, the labs, and ancillary offices.
Through successive strategic information technology investments the agency will
continue to ensure that the EPA's IT infrastructure is able to meet burgeoning mission,
reporting and administrative demands.
Currently, the EPA is hosting more than 200 individual agency business applications in
an innovative shared hosting environment offering many of the features of private cloud
services. In 2007 the EPA began an initiative to consolidate data centers and incorporate
industry best management practices and virtualization across its data centers. The agency
has completed a phased virtualization program across the National Computer Center - the
EPA's primary data center - including optimizing the efficient use of floor space and
turning off air handlers. Virtualization efforts will be expanded in FY 2014, with efforts
focused on application and desktop virtualization.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to build on a multi-year effort that sustains and
renews technical services (e.g., desktop hardware, software and maintenance) in a stable
least-cost manner as technologies change. The EPA also will expand and support the
agency's cloud computing initiative. The agency is committed to using cloud computing
technologies and will take advantage of those technologies, where feasible, in supporting
and furthering the mission of the EPA. (In FY 2014, the IT/IM Infrastructure activities
will be funded at $3.23 million in payroll funding and $6.07 million in non-payroll
funding.)
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no specific
performance measures for this specific program.
653
-------
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$247.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$27.0 / -0.2 FTE) This change reduces Regional FTE and will increase workload
burden per FTE supporting the management of Superfund site-specific electronic records.
This decrease includes 0.2 FTE, $27.0 in associated payroll.
• (-$1,380.0) This change reflects a reduction found from IT efficiencies and consolidation
in IT contracts that provide basic infrastructure and support for EPA personnel within the
Superfund program. This reduction also reflects efficiencies gained in information
management support services.
• (-$200.0) This change reflects a reduction in funding for Internet Operations and
Maintenance Enhancements.
• (-$114.0) This change reflects a reduction in contract funding supporting the agency's
Enterprise Architecture program.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 42 U.S.C. 553 et seq. and Government Information
Security Act (GISRA), 40 U.S.C. 1401 et seq. - Sections 3531, 3532, 3533, 3534, 3535 and
3536 and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA),
42 U.S.C. 9606 et seq. - Sections 101-128, 301-312 and 401-405 and Clean Air Act (CAA)
Amendments, 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. - Sections 102, 103, 104 and 108 and Clean Water Act
(CWA), 33 U.S.C. 1314 et seq. - Sections 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 107, and 109 and Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2611 et seq. - Sections 201, 301 and 401 and Federal
Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. 36 et seq. - Sections 136a - 136y
and Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA), 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq. - Sections 102, 210, 301 and 501
and Safe Drinking Water Act (SOWA) Amendments, 42 U.S.C. 300 et seq. - Sections 1400,
1401, 1411, 1421, 1431, 1441, 1454 and 1461 and Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346 et seq. and Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
(EPCRA), 42 U.S.C. 11001 et seq. - Sections 322, 324, 325 and 328 and Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA), 42 U.S.C. 6962 et seq. - Sections 1001, 2001, 3001 and 3005 and
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA), 39 U.S.C. 2803 et seq. - Sections 1115,
1116, 1117, 1118 and 1119 and Government Management Reform Act (GMRA), 31 U.S.C. 501
et seq. - Sections 101, 201, 301, 401, 402, 403, 404 and 405 and Clinger-Cohen Act (CCA), 40
U.S.C. 1401 et seq. - Sections 5001, 5201, 5301, 5401, 5502, 5601 and 5701and Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. - Sections 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111,
112 and 113 and Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552 et seq. and Controlled
Substances Act (CSA), 21 U.S.C. 802 et seq. - Sections 801, 811, 821, 841, 871, 955 and 961
and Electronic Freedom of Information Act (EFOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552 et seq. - Sections 552(a)(2),
552 (a)(3), 552 (a)(4) and 552(a)(6).
654
-------
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
655
-------
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,282.0
$844.0
$2,126.0
7.2
FY 2012
Actuals
$1,476.9
$828.6
$2,305.5
6.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$1,286.0
$847.0
$2,133.0
7.2
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$1,492.0
$792.0
$2,284.0
7.3
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$210.0
($52.0)
$158.0
0.1
Program Project Description:
The General Counsel and Regional Counsel Offices provide environmental Alternative Dispute
Resolution services (ADR). The EPA utilizes ADR as a method for preventing or resolving
conflicts prior to engaging in formal litigation and includes the provision of legal counsel,
facilitation, mediation and consensus building advice and support. Funding supports the use of
ADR in the Superfund program's extensive legal work with communities and Potentially
Responsible Parties (PRPs). The intent is to offer cost-effective processes to resolve disputes and
improve agency decision making without costly, protracted litigation.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the agency will continue to provide conflict prevention and ADR services to the
EPA headquarters and regional offices and external stakeholders on Superfund program matters.
The national ADR program assists in 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. In FY 2014, the agency plans to support 26 Superfund cases
with neutral third party support in areas including: community engagement, allocation
negotiations between PRPs, record of decision discussions and Environmental Justice issues
related to the cleanup and restoration of Superfund sites.
Additionally, the agency expects to provide ADR and collaboration advice and conflict coaching
for at least 73 Superfund cases where headquarters programs and regional offices are working
with stakeholders to improve environmental results. The agency also expects to provide at least
18 training events, reaching at least 450 of EPA's employees (Superfund and non-Superfund), to
continue to build the agency's capacity to resolve environmental issues in the most efficient way
to achieve the agency's strategic objectives. Under the EPA's ADR Policy and the OMB/CEQ
656
-------
memorandum on Environmental Collaboration and Conflict Resolution,9 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.
Providing facilitation/mediation support to Superfund cases and ADR training to agency
personnel pays dividends by reducing and often eliminating the need to litigate enforcement and
compliance cases, engage in defensive litigation and litigate hazardous waste remediation
determinations and requirements. Superfund site cleanups and their attendant public health
benefits occur sooner, and FTE and contract dollar savings accrue to OGC, program offices,
regions, EAB, OALJ and the Department of Justice. For example, in a small pilot study of
Superfund and non-Superfund ADR cases, EPA estimated 25 percent better environmental
outcomes and an average of more than $50,000 in FTE savings per case. We are planning to
conduct a more systematic evaluation of Superfund ADR in FY 2013 and are preparing an
Information Collection Request for that purpose.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports all five of the agency's strategic goals. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$21.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$73.0) This change reflects a reduction in non-payroll resources that could result in
ADR being used for fewer Superfund cases and fewer training events being offered than
in prior years.
Statutory Authority:
Administrative Dispute Resolution Act (ADRA) of 1996, 5 United States Code (U.S.C.) Sections
571, 572, and 573, Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA), Section 1111; EPA's General Authorizing Statutes.
9 See- http://www.ecr.gov/pdf/OMB_CEQ_Env_Collab_Conflict_Resolution_20120907.pdf. Issued 9/7/12 by OMB and CEQ
657
-------
Legal Advice: Environmental Program
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$42,606.0
$682.0
$43,288.0
249.5
FY 2012
Actuals
$43,393.6
$722.3
$44,115.9
244.4
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$42,651.0
$680.0
$43,331.0
249.5
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$44,590.0
$708.0
$45,298.0
250.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,984.0
$26.0
$2,010.0
0.5
Program Project Description:
This program provides legal representational services, legal counseling and legal support for
agency environmental activities under the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA). Funding supports legal advice needed in the
Superfund program's extensive work with Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) and other
entities and landowners involved in the program. For example, this program provides legal
analysis and advice to help inform EPA decisions regarding the assessment of certain
contaminants at a given Superfund site under Federal law, and a party's potential liability under
CERCLA.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, OGC will continue to provide legal support for all the EPA's programs in support of
the agency's mission, and in support of the agency's Strategic Plan Goals.10 The following chart
contains examples of the types of support that this OGC program provides to the agency and how
that support lines up with the EPA's Strategic Plan Goals. OGC expects to provide similar
support in FY 2014, which includes analyzing defensibility of agency actions, drafting
significant portions of agency actions, and actively participating in litigation. These examples
illustrate OGC's important role in implementing the agency's core priorities and mission.
10 The Plan identifies five strategic goals to guide the Agency's work:
Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters
Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws
658
-------
Goal
Goal 3 -
Cleaning up
Communities and
Sustainable
Development
Goals 2-3
Specific EPA OGC Activities
1 . In FY 2012, OGC provided legal advice and counseling
resulting in the agency's development and promulgation of final
rules adding 24 sites to the Superfund National Priorities List.
2. OGC drafted legal arguments and provided counseling in the
United States' successful amicus brief in Solutia, Inc. v.
McWane, Inc. (1 1th Cir); this resulted in a favorable opinion
important to contribution protection for responsible parties who
settle with the United States.
1 . OGC developed key legal positions regarding the Lower Fox
River cleanup in Wisconsin, resulting in the successful defense
of a first ever mandatory injunction requiring a potentially
responsible party to continue its cleanup.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports all five of the agency's strategic goals. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$10.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$16.0) This increase provides resources to fund basic and mandatory IT and
telecommunications costs, as well as general expenses supporting the onboard workforce.
These resources are needed to enable employees to carry out their day-to-day operations
supporting the agency's mission.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), 42
United States Code (U.S.C.) § 9601 - 9659, Sections 101 - 310; the EPA's General Authorizing
Statutes.
659
-------
Program Area: Operations and Administration
660
-------
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Building and Facilities
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$535.0
$319,777.0
$72,019.0
$29,326.0
$915.0
$80,541.0
$503,113.0
414.4
FY 2012
Actuals
$512.2
$309,977.8
$72,928.5
$32,434.3
$877.0
$75,550.6
$492,280.4
407.7
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$535.0
$321,266.0
$72,434.0
$29,505.0
$916.0
$80,471.0
$505,127.0
414.4
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$509.0
$329,916.0
$75,690.0
$46,326.0
$839.0
$78,151.0
$531,431.0
411.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($26.0)
$10,139.0
$3,671.0
$17,000.0
($76.0)
($2,390.0)
$28,318.0
-2.9
Program Project Description:
Superfund resources in the Facilities Infrastructure and Operations Program fund the rental of
laboratory and office space, utilities, security, and centralized administrative activities and
support services. These include health and safety, environmental compliance, occupational
health, medical monitoring, fitness, wellness, safety, environmental management functions,
facilities maintenance and operations, space planning, shipping and receiving, property
management, printing and reproduction, mail management, and transportation services. Funding
is allocated for such services among the major appropriations for the agency.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The agency reviews space needs on a regular basis, and continues to implement a long-term
space consolidation plan that includes reducing the number of occupied facilities, consolidating
space within the remaining facilities, and reducing the square footage where practical. Since
2006, the EPA has released approximately 417 thousand square feet of space at headquarters and
facilities nationwide, resulting in a cumulative annual rent avoidance of over $14.2 million.
These achieved savings and potential savings partially offset the EPA's escalating rent and
security costs. For example, replacement leases for regional offices in Boston, San Francisco,
and Seattle are significantly higher than those previously negotiated. The agency will continue to
manage its lease agreements with the General Services Administration and other private
landlords by conducting reviews and verifying that billing statements are correct. For FY 2014,
661
-------
the agency is requesting a total of $45.46 million for rent, $3.20 million for utilities, and $9.13
million for security in the Superfund appropriation to continue funding lab and office space,
utilities, security, and administrative services.
The agency will continue its plans to enhance workplace flexibility at the EPA by consolidating
and disposing of existing assets, optimizing real property and portfolio performance, and
reducing environmental impacts. Through planned moves of Regional Offices with expiring
leases and opportunities to reconfigure existing space, the agency will incorporate space
reconfiguration to reduce the overall space footprint and support the government-wide
mobile/flexible workplace initiative.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to support the Superfund program and improve operating
efficiency and encourage the use of advanced technologies and energy sources. The EPA will
direct resources towards acquiring alternative fuel vehicles and more fuel-efficient passenger
cars and light trucks to meet the goals of Executive Order (EO) 13423,11 Strengthening Federal
Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management. Additionally, the agency will attain
the Executive Order's environmental performance goals related to buildings through several
initiatives, including: comprehensive facility energy audits; re-commissioning; sustainable
building design for construction and alteration projects; energy savings performance contracts;
energy load reduction strategies; green power purchases; and, the use of off-grid energy
equipment and Energy Star rated products and building standards. The EPA will continue to
improve the management of its laboratory enterprise and take advantage of potential efficiencies.
In FY 2014, the agency plans to reduce energy utilization (or improve energy efficiency) by
approximately 37 billion British Thermal Units or three percent and to use approximately 27
percent less energy than it did in FY 2003 which will result in annual cost savings of $5.9
million.
EO 13514, Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance, expands
upon EO 13423 and requires additional reductions to greenhouse gas emissions. To meet the
requirements of EO 13514 the EPA will manage existing building systems to reduce
consumption of energy, water, and materials, consolidate and dispose of existing facilities,
optimize real property and portfolio performance, reduce environmental impacts, and implement
best real property management practices for enhancing energy-efficiency.
As part of the agency's commitment to promoting employee health and wellness, and supporting
OPM's and OMB's wellness initiative, the agency has finalized a long-term action plan and
seeks to achieve an OPM goal of 75 percent employee participation in core program services,
which include physical fitness, medical screening, nutrition and education and outreach
activities. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue implementing the action plan with the goal of
increasing employee participation by 50 percent from the baseline level of 2012 and expects to
meet OPM's established goal. It is hoped that the availability and increased utilization of
wellness services will result in a healthier and more productive work force with lower medical
costs consistent with the President's goal in EO 13507.
1' Information is available at http: //www. fedcenter. gov/programs/eo 13 514A Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and
Economic Performance', and http: //www. fedcenter. go v/pro grams/eo 13423 A Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and
Transportation Management
662
-------
Performance Targets:
The agency has surpassed its initial targets for the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions goal in part
due to green power purchases. EPA's GHG reduction effort is accomplished through a range of
energy conservation efforts, including the purchase of renewable energy credits. Information on
the agency's energy/GHG reduction initiative can be found in the agency's Strategic
Sustainability Performance Plan at http://www.epa.gov/planandbudget/strategicplan.html.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$84.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$152.07 -1.3 FTE) This reduces resources in the Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
program for facilities management activities. This decrease reflects efficiencies achieved
from implementing operational changes at EPA facilities. The reduced resources include
1.3 FTE and associated payroll of $152.0.
• (-$459.0) This reflects a reduction in transit subsidy costs based on projected needs.
• (-$1,333.0) This change is the net effect of projected contractual rent increases and the
rent reduction realized from space consolidation efforts.
• (-$564.0) This reflects a net decrease in projected utility costs due to consolidation of
office space, energy conservation activities and re-allocation of costs among major
appropriations.
• (+$861.0) This change reflects an increase in security contractual costs.
• (-$162.0) This reflects a decrease in operations and maintenance costs at EPA owned
regional laboratories.
• (-$792.0) This reflects a reduction in regional move and space configuration needs in the
Superfund appropriation.
• (+$135.0) This reflects an increase in operations and maintenance costs at EPA owned
headquarter facilities.
• (-$8.0) This reflects a reduction in travel to support the Administration's Management
Agenda goal of reducing travel and conference spending.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Property and Administration Services Act; Public Building Act; Annual Appropriations
Act; Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act; CWA; CAA; RCRA;
TSCA; NEPA; CERFA; D.C. Recycling Act of 1988; Energy Policy Act of 2005; Executive
663
-------
Orders 10577, 12598, 13150 and 13423; Emergency Support Functions (ESF) #10 Oil and
Hazardous Materials Response Annex; Presidential Decision Directive 63 (Critical
Infrastructure).
664
-------
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$24,002.0
$3,128.0
$27,130.0
174.9
FY 2012
Actuals
$24,577.1
$3,198.9
$27,776.0
182.5
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$24,079.0
$3,121.0
$27,200.0
174.9
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$26,518.0
$3,169.0
$29,687.0
176.8
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$2,516.0
$41.0
$2,557.0
1.9
Program Project Description:
Grants and Interagency Agreements comprise more than half of the agency's budget. Superfund
resources in this program support the management of Financial Assistance Grants/Interagency
Agreements (lAs), and suspension and debarment activities at headquarters and Regional offices.
The key objectives of this program ensure that the EPA's management of grants and lAs meets
the highest fiduciary standards, that grant funding produces measurable results for environmental
programs, and that the suspension and debarment program effectively protects the government's
business interest. These objectives are critically important for the Superfund program, as a
substantial portion of the program is implemented through lAs with the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers and the Coast Guard.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to focus on key objectives under its Grants Management
Transformation Initiative?, which is designed to achieve efficiencies while enhancing quality
and accountability. Specific focus ares include: 1) business process re-engineering; 2) risk-based
reviews of internal controls and policies; 3) leveraging technology to make work easier for
Project Officers (POs) and Grants Specialists (GS), including electronic records management for
lAs; 4) leveraging resources to address PO and GS workload issues; and 5) reducing burden on
applicants and recipients. Additionally, in FY 2014, the EPA will issue a new Grants
Management Plan establishing the strategic direction for grants management for the period FY
2014-2018.
To promote accountability, the EPA will continue to conduct on-site and pre-award reviews of
grant recipients and applicants and perform indirect cost rate and unliquidated obligation
reviews. The agency also will continue to provide Tribal technical assistance, and implement an
665
-------
agencywide training program for POs, GSs and managers. In FY 2014, particular emphasis will
be placed on the timely award of grants and lAs, and on monitoring awarded agreements to
ensure proper management of unliquidated obligations.
The EPA plans to continue using its legacy system, the Integrated Grants Management System,
which was originally scheduled for retirement in FY 2013. After extensive analysis of alternative
systems under the Grants Management Line of Business Initiative, the EPA decided in FY 2012
to delay migration in light of the need to: 1) complete the upgrades of the agency's financial and
human resource systems; and 2) re-engineer and streamline EPA's grant business processes to
align them with the Federal model. As part of the Grants Management Transformation initiative
noted above, the agency will complete the re-engineering process by the end of FY 2014, and
evaluate available system alternatives in FY 2015.
The EPA is developing an internal controls plan to oversee Superfund and other funding
provided to the agency for activities to address the consequences of Hurricane Sandy. In FY
2014, the EPA will continue to implement the plan to ensure that these funds are expended
timely for eligible costs. The EPA is a recognized leader in suspension and debarment and will
continue to make aggressive use of discretionary debarments and suspensions.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, agencywide
performance measures for grants management are outlined in the EPA's 2009-2013 Grants
Management Plan.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$56.0) This decrease is the net effect of the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$39.0 / +0.3 FTE) This increases resources for the Financial Assistance Grants
program to meet needs in grant oversight activities. The resources include $39.0
associated payroll for 0.3 FTE.
• (-$5.0) This reflects a reduction in travel to support the Administration's Management
Agenda goal of reducing travel and conference spending.
• (+$63.0) This change reflects an increase in operations and maintenance contract
expenses for the Integrated Grants Management System and to find a more suitable and
cost effective IT system which will support the streamlining of the agency's business
processes.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act; EPA's
Environmental Statutes; Annual Appropriations Acts; Disaster Relief Appropriations Act, 2013;
666
-------
Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act; the Economy Act; Title 2 Code of Federal
Regulations; Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations, Parts: 30, 31, 35, 40, 45, 46, and 47;
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
667
-------
Acquisition Management
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$33,175.0
$163.0
$24,111.0
$57,449.0
357.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$37,238.9
$170.6
$24,841.5
$62,251.0
361.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$33,289.0
$164.0
$24,067.0
$57,520.0
357.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$33,893.0
$152.0
$24,339.0
$58,384.0
342.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$718.0
($11.0)
$228.0
$935.0
-14.5
Program Project Description:
Acquisition Management resources fund support contracts and Superfund related acquisition
activities. The Superfund program is implemented through an enhanced approach to contracts
and, as a result, the EPA maintains a high degree of integrity in managing its procurement
activities. Superfund resources support contract and acquisition management for Superfund
Emergency Response and Removal, Remedial, Emergency Preparedness, and Federal Facilities
Response programs. These resources enable the agency to assess, cleanup, prepare and respond
to natural disasters and terrorist incidents, and to provide financial and technical assistance to
state, local, and Tribal governments and other federal agencies.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In accordance with the President's guidelines for civilian agencies in the Acquisition Workforce
Development Strategic Plan for FY 2010-2014, in FY 2014 the EPA will use Superfund
acquisition management resources to train and develop its acquisition workforce, and to
strengthen its contract management training program. Resources also will address the
information technology needs of management and the acquisition workforce, and will support
the recruitment, retention, and hiring of the acquisition workforce in line with the Office of
Federal Procurement Policy Act, as amended (41 U.S.C. 401 et seq.).
The EPA plans to reinforce its contract oversight responsibilities through A-123 Entity Level
Assessments, increased targeted oversight training for acquisition management personnel, and
Simplified Acquisition Contracting Officer (SACO) reviews. These measures will strengthen the
668
-------
EPA's acquisition management business processes and enhance contract oversight. In addition,
the EPA will take the following steps to achieve acquisition efficiencies:
• Eliminate contracts that are redundant in scope, no longer necessary to the agency's
programmatic needs, or may be combined with other acquisitions to achieve greater
buying power via economies of scale; and
• Use government wide procurement sources to reduce the need for new contracts. The
EPA has used this for office supplies and mail delivery.
In FY 2014, the agency expects to achieve the following from adopting a Centers of Expertise
approach: the implementation of cost saving strategies, increased operational efficiencies, and
more effective and responsive contracting support. Such strategies may include a realignment of
certain contracting functions and/or workload, re-engineered business processes, and specializing
strategic acquisition vehicles for commonly acquired goods and services.
Performance Targets:
In FY 2014, the EPA aims to certify 85 percent of contracting professionals in line with Federal
Acquisition Certification in Contracting (FAC-C) program requirements. In addition, work under
this program also supports performance results in the Acquisition Management Program Project
under the EPM appropriation and can be found in the Eight Year Performance Array in the
Program Performance and Assessment section. Currently, there are no performance measures for
this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,347.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$1,032.0 / -7.9 FTE) This reduces resources in the Acquisition Management program
for contracts oversight activities. This decrease reflects efficiencies achieved in
acquisition management as a result of implementing the Center of Expertise. The reduced
resources include 7.9 FTE and associated payroll of $1,032.0.
• (-$3.0) This reflects a reduction in travel to support the Administration's Management
Agenda goal of reducing travel and conference spending.
• (-$69.0) This change reflects a reduction found from IT efficiencies and consolidation in
IT contracts that support acquisition management activities.
• (-$15.0) This reduction recognizes efficiencies from implementing operational changes in
contracts management.
669
-------
Statutory Authority:
EPA's Environmental Statutes; Annual Appropriations Acts; contract law. Office of Federal
Procurement Policy Act, as amended (41 U.S.C. 401 et seq.).
670
-------
Human Resources Management
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$37,839.0
$6,346.0
$44,185.0
275.3
FY 2012
Actuals
$39,628.0
$3,938.4
$43,566.4
278.6
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$37,927.0
$6,344.0
$44,271.0
275.3
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$40,047.0
$7,585.0
$47,632.0
252.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$2,208.0
$1,239.0
$3,447.0
-22.8
Program Project Description:
Superfund resources for the Human Resources Management program support activities that
influence the broad spectrum of human capital and human resources management services
throughout the agency. As requirements and initiatives change, the agency continually evaluates
and improves Superfund program related human resource functions in outreach and recruitment,
and in hiring and developing the workforce to help the agency achieve its mission while
ensuring management and employee satisfaction.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the agency will continue to support the Superfund program through the
comprehensive hiring reform laid out in the Presidential Memorandum Improving the Federal
Recruitment and Hiring Process, which required executive departments and agencies to
"overhaul the way they recruit and hire our civilian workforce." The memorandum reaffirms
managers' leadership roles, systematizes the recruiting and selecting process, and emphasizes
accountability for these important managerial responsibilities. The key facets of the hiring
reform are: to ease the hiring process while raising the bar on candidate quality; to increase
engagement of agency leaders in the recruitment and selection process; and to monitor agency
efforts to increase the speed and quality of hiring.
In FY 2014, the agency will also support the Superfund program by continuing to focus on
utilizing data to drive business decisions, streamlining the recruitment process, transitioning
from a manual to automated processes to reduce hiring time (for both GS and SES hires), and
institutionalizing workforce planning and incorporating it into the agency's budget plans. The
EPA also will increase management involvement and accountability with performance
standards.
671
-------
As part of our One Great Place to Work initiative, the agency is committed to fostering a work
environment that advances the talents, drive and interests of all employees. The initiative, which
seeks a supportive work environment, and professional development, is focused on developing
an enhanced telework policy. Identifying the appropriate telework eligibility selection criteria,
collaboration tools, training, and clearly defined performance expectations will help improve the
employee work/life balance. A final draft of the telework plan has been completed and is being
vetted with the unions. Further, the EPA's One EPA: One Great Place to Work intranet site will
continue to publicize announcements and programs that help employees develop their careers,
thrive in their work environment, balance work and personal demands, and lead healthier lives.
The EPA will continue to streamline human resources management with the E-Government
initiative and the Human Resources Line of Business (HR LoB) program. HR LoB offers
government-wide, cost effective, and standardized HR solutions while providing core
functionality to support the strategic management of human capital. The EPA expects to yield
long-term improvements to its HR business process through automated processing of HR forms,
an integrated time and attendance payroll system, and seamless data transfer starting with the
recruitment process.
In May 2011, the EPA and the Department of Interior Business Center (IBC) signed an
agreement to plan the migration of the agency's HR and payroll activities to IBC systems.
Significant progress has been made in how to securely transfer files to and from the EPA and
IBC and establishing the support necessary during migration. Migration to IBC's system is
scheduled for March 2014.
Performance Targets:
The EPA uses a government-wide performance metric (found at
http://hr.performance.gov/initiative/hire-best/agencv/EPA) to track its progress in reducing the
average number of days required to hire a new employee. For FY 2010 the EPA reported an
average of 161 days to hire an employee, the government-wide average was 105 days. For FY
2011 the EPA showed an improvement in performance, reporting an average of 156 days to hire
an employee, the government-wide average was 93 days. Through the agency's hiring reform
efforts, including automating processes and improving hiring tools and practices, the EPA
expects to continue to reduce the number of days to hire new employees. For FY 2012 the EPA
will report an average of 94 days to hire an employee.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$86.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$147.0 / -1.3 FTE) This reduces resources in the Human Resources Management
program for the EPA Career Intern program (ECIP). This decrease reflects the EPA's
decision to eliminate centralized resources for ECIP. This Program will continue to
operate with the dedication and management of existing resources from participating
EPA programs. The reduced resources include 1.3 FTE and associated payroll of $147.0.
672
-------
• (+$68.0) This reflects an increase in workers compensation.
• (+$568.0) This change reflects funding required for the EPA to continue processing HR
actions using the People-Plus system while the agency works to migrate to the DOI's IBC
system. In addition to supporting People-Plus's on-going operations and maintenance
until March 2014, these resources also fund its decommissioning and retirement, which
demands that the agency securely transfer all of HR information to the IBC system.
• (+$665.0) This increase reflects fees the agency must pay to DOI for the EPA to
transition its HR and payroll services to align with the IBC systems.
• (-$1.0) This reflects a reduction in travel to support the Administration's Management
Agenda goal of reducing travel and conference spending.
Statutory Authority:
Title V USC, FAIR Act.
673
-------
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$72,290.0
$512.0
$21,632.0
$94,434.0
536.9
FY 2012
Actuals
$75,138.2
$416.3
$26,165.5
$101,720.0
536.4
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$72,659.0
$512.0
$21,599.0
$94,770.0
536.9
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$78,506.0
$414.0
$24,284.0
$103,204.0
530.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$6,216.0
($98.0)
$2,652.0
$8,770.0
-6.9
Program Project Description:
The EPA's financial management community maintains a strong partnership with the Superfund
program. The EPA's Office of the Chief Financial Officer recognizes and supports this
continuing partnership by providing a full array of financial management support services
necessary to pay Superfund bills and recoup cleanup and oversight costs for the Trust Fund. The
EPA's Office of the Chief Financial Officer manages Superfund activities under the Central
Planning, Budgeting and Finance program in support of integrated planning, budget formulation
and execution, financial management, performance and accountability processes, financial cost
recovery, and the systems to ensure effective stewardship of Superfund resources.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to provide high-quality resource stewardship to ensure that all
agency programs operate with fiscal responsibility and management integrity, and are efficiently
and consistently delivered nationwide and demonstrate results. The EPA will continue to provide
direction and support for the Superfund program in financial management activities;
implementing cost accounting requirements; financial payment and support services; and
Superfund-specific fiscal and accounting services.
In FY 2014, the agency plans to migrate Payroll Accounting services to the Department of the
Interior's Interior Business Center (TBC), a shared service provider, with final go-live expected
in FY 2014. This effort is part of the agency's larger initiative to implement the Human
Resources Line of Business, which will automate and integrate the agency's human resources
and payroll information technology tools with Compass, improve capability and reduce costs to
674
-------
the agency. Taken together, these activities comprise an important part of the agency's work to
transform its digital services within the base resources. Work associated with the migration will
involve ensuring that the appropriate tools are in place for Superfund site-specific cost recovery
and accounting of personnel time, as well as modifications to the Compass financial management
system launched in October 2011. This work will be framed by the agency's Enterprise
Architecture and make use of enabling technologies for e-Gov initiatives.
In FY 2014, the EPA also expects to initiate the Account Code Structure modernization and
modification process to improve tracking and reporting capabilities, consolidating historical and
current Superfund financial data and maximizing the benefits within the Compass financial
system. Congressional and OMB requirements will be incorporated and the account code
structure will be simplified, eliminating complicated and conflicting data structures and allowing
for improved agency-level reporting. Coordinating the updated account structure with other
changes to the financial systems will create significant programming and implementation
efficiencies.
In FY 2014, the EPA expects to upgrade its Budget Formulation System to replace the current
Budget Automation System. The new system will create efficiencies through automating a
number of manual, time-intensive processes and providing new enterprise tools for agency
resource management, eliminating the need for some local systems. The new software will
enable the EPA to completely re-design the performance module to streamline and align with
OMB and agency requirements, as well as support agency enterprise technology efforts. The
system also has the potential to be a shared service with other agencies using Cloud technology.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to improve its transparency, accountability, and effectiveness
of operations through improved coordination and integration of internal control assessments over
financial activities as required under revised OMB Circular A-123, as well as controls over
programmatic operations under the Federal Manager's Financial Integrity Act. Improvements in
internal controls will further support the EPA's initiatives for enhanced financial performance.
The EPA also will continue to improve accessibility to data to support accountability, cost
accounting, budget and performance integration, and management decision-making. The EPA
will continue to accelerate audit resolution and follow-up to improve the agency programs as
required under the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended and OMB Circular A-50. The
EPA will ensure timely audit follow-up and reporting on progress in carrying out audit
recommendations.
Since the implementation of the Improper Payments Information Act of 2002, the EPA has
reviewed, sampled, and monitored its payments to protect against erroneous payments.
Historically, the agency is well under the government-wide threshold of 2.5 percent, with an
average 5-year error rate of less than one percent across all categories (e.g., grants, contracts, and
commodities). In FY 2014, the EPA will continue these activities to reduce the potential for
improper payments pursuant to the Improper Payments Information Act of 2002, as amended by
the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act of 2010, (P.L. 111-204).
675
-------
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,023.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$27.0 7-3.8 FTE) This change reflects a net increase in funding to provide for a full
year of contractor costs to support maintenance for the Compass financial system, and the
necessary support for the Compass interface with the Human Resources Line of Business.
This increase is offset by reductions for the Integrated Financial Management system and
tools replaced by Compass. This reduction includes 3.8 FTE and associated payroll of
$490.0.
• (+$1,602.0 / +1.9 FTE) This change reflects an increase to support several systems offset
by a reduction in support of small systems and non-systems contracts of lower priority.
The additional resources will support the following efforts: 1) migration of payroll to the
IBC as part of the agency's implementation of HRLoB scheduled in FY 2014; 2)
implementation of the new Account Code Structure; and 3) initiation of the Budget
Formulation System upgrades. This increase includes 1.9 FTE and associated payroll of
$245.0.
Statutory Authority:
Annual Appropriations Act; Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996; Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability Act; Computer Security Act of 1987; E-Government Act
of 2002; Electronic Freedom of Information Act of 1996; Federal Grant and Cooperative
Agreement Act of 1977; Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act of 1998; Federal Acquisition
Regulations, contract law and the EPA's Assistance Regulations (40 CFR Parts 30, 31, 35, 40,
45, 46, 47); Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act of 1982; Freedom of Information Act of
1966; Government Management Reform Act of 1994; Improper Payments Information Act of
2002; Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act of 2010; Inspector General Act of 1978
as amended ; Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; Privacy Act of 1974; Chief Financial Officers
Act of 1990; Government Performance and Results Act of 1993; The Prompt Payment Act of
1982; Title 5, U.S.C; National Defense Authorization Act.
676
-------
Program Area: Research: Sustainable Communities
677
-------
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Program Area: Research: Sustainable Communities
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Ensure Chemical Safety
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Science & Technology
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$613.0
$173,525.0
$396.0
$17,757.0
$192,291.0
612.7
FY 2012
Actuals
$1,051.7
$173,523.8
$338.8
$19,395.7
$194,310.0
654.5
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$626.0
$174,655.0
$397.0
$17,852.0
$193,530.0
612.7
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$594.0
$147,372.0
$498.0
$18,243.0
$166,707.0
611.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($19.0)
($26,153.0)
$102.0
$486.0
($25,584.0)
-1.2
Program Project Description:
The Sustainable and Healthy Communities (SHC) research program, under the Superfund
appropriation, conducts integrated, trans-disciplinary research to:
• Provide decision makers with tools, methods, and information to assess current
conditions at Superfund sites;
• Evaluate the implications of alternative remediation approaches and technologies; and
• Utilize the latest science in policy development and implementation.
In doing so, the SHC research program is responsive to the Superfund law requirements1 for "...a
comprehensive and coordinated Federal program of research, development, demonstration, and
training for the purpose of promoting the development of alternative and innovative treatment
technologies that can be used in response actions under the CERCLA program." This research
directly addresses the agency's priority of cleaning up our communities.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The SHC research program will conduct research related to contaminated ground water, vapor
intrusion, contaminated sediments, and restoring contaminated land. This research responds to
program needs for additional clean-up challenges.
SHC groundwater research will aid the EPA Regional Offices in developing and evaluating
methods, approaches, and models to assess and manage contaminated ground water at Superfund
sites. Additionally, research will address source elimination and plume management, which will
678
-------
reduce drinking water contamination and vapor intrusion. Adoption of technologies from this
research program has resulted in documented cost- and time-savings associated with cleaning up
contaminated sites."
Vapor intrusion research continues to develop screening, sampling, and modeling approaches to
assess risks from contaminant migration. This research also informs the need for mitigation in
homes, schools, and places of employment. The EPA's Program and Regional Offices have used
this science in developing and implementing revised guidance for the vapor intrusion pathway in
site ranking and in remedial investigations.
SHC research will assist communities to restore contaminated land, make decisions about
contaminated sediments, and improve their environments. The EPA's research on contaminated
sediments will address contaminant characterization (including passive methods and biotic
indicators) and remediation options. This research also will examine the effectiveness of
remedies for cleaning up contaminated sediments and land. For instance, the EPA research on
restored land leads to restored ecological functioning and removal of fish consumption
advisories. The EPA Regional Offices rely on SHC science to improve the cost effectiveness of
sediment remediation. This science is critical to achieving the economic and environmental
benefits associated with cleaning up a lake or a river.
Research on restoring contaminated lands will provide site-specific and general technical support
to the EPA Program and Regional Offices that remediate Superfund sites. For example, SHC
scientists have provided technical support on bioavailability, that is, how much of a contaminant
like lead will be absorbed into the body when exposure occurs at a particular site. This support
has enabled regional decision makers to set science-based cleanup levels that are protective of
human health while reducing costs and community disruption. This work is request-driven as
decision-makers encounter complex hydrogeologic settings, mixtures of contaminants, uncertain
pathways of exposure, and performance issues with the tools and technologies available to
Superfund policymakers and site managers. Data (such as the type of technical support
requested) helps the SHC research program in setting research and development goals and
evaluating and improving research products.
Recent accomplishments include:
• The EPA research demonstrates that states and communities can save costs by using
radon as a proxy for monitoring carcinogenic volatile organic compounds
Understanding when and where radon and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) seep from the
earth into indoor air is key in protecting public health. For a year, the EPA collected weekly
measurements of soil gas and indoor air on a single house that incurs vapor intrusion of radon
and VOCs. This research demonstrates the VOC and radon concentration vary due to
seasonal changes. The research also provided valuable information on the best measurements
to use to determine long-term, chronic risk for harmful VOCs. The study determined that
radon, being much cheaper to measure than VOCs, is a good qualitative indicator of VOC
vapor intrusion. This finding will help individuals and states to more cost effectively
investigate and mitigate VOC vapor intrusion.
679
-------
• Journal report on the New Bedford Harbor long term monitoring program has national
impact on monitoring nation-wide Superfund sites
The New Bedford Harbor Superfund site (New Bedford, MA) has been under active
remediation since the 1990s. To support regional decision makers, the EPA scientists (in
collaboration with the Army Corps of Engineers) developed a long term monitoring program
to document the effectiveness of these remediation activities. The monitoring program has
been key in following concentration changes in sediment contaminants and in improving
decision-making related to remedial design and implementation. This research has had
national impact in that it has contributed to the development of successful long-term
monitoring programs at many Superfund sites.
• Research on PCBs is helping State of Ohio to identify sources of contamination
The EPA scientists, in collaboration with the Great Lakes National Program Office
(GLNPO), initiated a study on the Ottawa River to understand the higher than expected PCB
concentrations in dredged sediments. PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyl) are compounds used
as lubricants, heat-transfer fluids, and plasticizers. PCBs are harmful to the environment and
are especially deadly to fish and invertebrates, as they stay in the food chain for many years.
To determine the potential sources of PCBs to the river, the EPA conducted a longitudinal
study that looked at sediment samples, sediment traps, clams, and spiders. Scientists
demonstrated that the upper reaches of the river were not contributing significant PCBs to the
lower river, but, rather, that an additional source of PCBs was contributing to the remediated
areas. GLNPO and the State of Ohio are using the results of this study, while working with
SHC scientists, to conduct further investigations and to evaluate groundwater and storm
water outfalls as potential sources of PCBs.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in Sustainable and Healthy
Communities under the Science and Technology appropriation, which also can be found in the
Performance Eight-Year Array.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$609.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$441.0) This reflects the net result of projected savings from laboratory efficiency
projects and agency laboratory fixed cost adjustments.
• (-$10.0) This reduction reflects administrative savings from continued efforts to
streamline operational expenses and activities, including information technology (IT)
support activities.
• (-$58.0 / +0.9 FTE) This reflects the net result of realignments of infrastructure, FTE, and
resources such as equipment purchases and repairs, travel, contracts, and general
expenses that are proportionately allocated across programs to better align with
680
-------
programmatic priorities. This includes an increase of 0.9 FTE and associated payroll of
$127.0.
• (-$80.0) This reflects an adjustment for Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR).
Enacted funding levels for this program include the amount the EPA is required to set
aside for contracts to small businesses to develop and commercialize new environmental
technologies. This adjustment is necessary because the SBIR set aside, at this point in the
budget cycle, is redistributed to other research programs in the President's Budget
Request.
• (-$416.0 / -0.8 FTE) This reduction will scale back field studies on remedy performance
by about one quarter, eliminate NRMRL's contribution to passive methods for sediment
monitoring, and scale back NHEERL's contribution to remedies and methods for
sediment monitoring. This reduction also will scale back research on vapor intrusion by
one fifth and eliminate a planned increase in ground water research. The reduced
resources include 0.8 FTE and associated payroll of $113.0.
Statutory Authority:
CERCLA, Section 105(a)(4) and Section 115 read together with Executive Order 12580, 42.
U.S.C. 9605 (a)(4) and 9615; Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA) 104(i) and 42 U.S.C. 9660 - Sec. 311 (c) 42 U.S.C. 9602 - Section 102,
Section 311, 42 U.S.C. 9604 (i) (1); Superfund Amendments Reauthorization Act 42 U.S.C.
7401 - Sec. 209 (a) and Sec. 403 (a, b).
681
-------
Program Area: Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
682
-------
Human Health Risk Assessment
Program Area: Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Ensure Chemical Safety
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$39,336.0
$3,311.0
$42,647.0
193.4
FY 2012
Actuals
$43,342.5
$3,918.2
$47,260.7
203.3
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$39,512.0
$3,330.0
$42,842.0
193.4
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$40,219.0
$3,197.0
$43,416.0
195.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$883.0
($114.0)
$769.0
1.6
Program Project Description:
The Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) research program plays an important role in
supporting the EPA's Superfund program and the broader risk assessment and management
community by identifying, evaluating, synthesizing, and integrating scientific information on
individual chemicals and chemical mixtures that are in the environment. The state-of-the-
science, independently peer-reviewed human health assessments prepared by HHRA are a
critical part of the scientific foundation for the agency's decision-making (e.g., site-specific
cleanups and regulations). HHRA's work ultimately allows the agency to better understand the
possible implications of exposure and predict and reduce risk.
Another important component of the HHRA research program is developing innovative,
multidisciplinary approaches for conducting human health risk assessments that support the
agency's mission to protect public health and the environment. HHRA seeks to improve its risk
assessment approaches, align with identified partner needs, and integrate with other national
research programs.
Outside of the EPA, HHRA builds close relationships with federal, state, and international
partners to access data and collaborate on risk assessment training and development activities. In
addition, the program provides scientific and technical support to meet partner and stakeholder
needs.
HHRA's assessments directly support other facets of the agency's strategic goals by integrating
the science for media-specific chemical hazards and providing assessment methods to ensure air
quality, protect America's waters, advance sustainable development, ensure the safety of
chemicals, and clean up our communities. For example, the Provisional Peer Reviewed Toxicity
Values (PPRTVs) developed by HHRA are used to support the EPA's Solid Waste and
Emergency Response program by providing needed toxicity values to help inform clean up
decisions at contaminated Superfund sites. HHRA also works with the Sustainable and Healthy
Communities (SHC) research program to support work at contaminated Superfund sites through
the Superfund Technical Support Centers.
683
-------
The Superfund portion of the HHRA research program is comprised of:
• Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) health hazard and dose-response assessments;
and
• Community Risk and Technical Support.
Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) health hazard and dose-response assessments: The
HHRA research program prepares IRIS hazard characterization and dose-response profiles for
environmental pollutants of relevance to Superfund site assessments and remediation. Currently,
more than 550 health hazard assessments are available through the IRIS database. The majority
of these chemical assessments are relevant to Superfund's decision making. IRIS assessments
range from the evaluation of chemicals with limited health effects data and less complexity (e.g.,
beryllium, uranium) to assessments of chemicals having much more extensive and challenging
datasets requiring complex modeling and interpretation (e.g., Libby asbestos, chromium VI,
formaldehyde). In recent years, the IRIS program has begun to assess mixtures of related
chemicals to better characterize "real-world" risks.
Community Risk and Technical Support (CRTS)'. The HHRA research program develops data,
tools, and methods that enhance the ability of the EPA's Program and Regional Offices to
quickly make sound, risk-based decisions regarding emerging issues of concern in their
communities, thereby reducing risks for sensitive populations. HHRA scientists rapidly assess
problems and formulate an approach to evaluate potential exposure and risk, estimate doses
based on a variety of factors, and estimate risks. A key component of HHRA's community risk
work is the development of the Provisional Peer Reviewed Toxicity Values (PPRTVs), which
enable the EPA's Superfund program to make clean up decisions at contaminated Superfund
sites. PPRTVs are developed to assist the Superfund program in evaluating chemical specific
exposures at Superfund sites. The Superfund Technical Support Centers provide additional
support for the Superfund program, including the PPRTV assessments. Currently, new or
renewed PPRTVs are available for 301 chemicals.
In addition to developing PPRTVs, HHRA develops exposure assessment tools that are used by
Superfund risk assessors to make site specific clean-up decisions. For example, HHRA develops
the Exposure Factors and Child-Specific Exposure Factors Handbooks and developing EPA-
Expo-Box, a web-based compendium of tools for exposure assessors. HHRA scientists also
provide crucial technical support for emerging problems. HHRA also is exploring approaches for
characterizing risks posed by cumulative exposures to multiple chemicals and other stressors
(e.g., nutritional deficiencies) as an alternative to the traditional individual chemical approach for
assessing exposure and risk.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to develop IRIS assessments for environmental pollutants of
relevance to Superfund site assessments and remediation, completing work for agency and
interagency science consultation and review, external review, or posting on the IRIS website,
www.epa.gov/iris. The IRIS database will continue to contain hazard and dose-response
684
-------
information on chemicals in the environment, meeting the needs of the EPA scientists and
decision-makers.
The EPA will continue to accelerate and improve the process for developing IRIS chemical
assessments. In response to the recommendations made by the National Academy of Sciences'
National Research Council (NRC) in their April 2011 report,12 the agency is strengthening the
IRIS process and database. New IRIS assessment documents are shorter, clearer, and more
transparent. In FY 2012, in response to Congressional direction, the EPA engaged the NRC to
conduct a comprehensive review of the IRIS draft assessment development process including the
changes currently being made or planned by the EPA. The NRC met twice in 2012. In addition, a
separate NRC committee is beginning to develop a peer review report on the EPA's external
review draft of the IRIS Toxicological Review of Inorganic Arsenic (Cancer and Non-Cancer
Effects of Oral Exposures). The EPA also has had its Science Advisory Board (SAB) form a new
standing committee to provide expert peer review and advice about chemical assessments.
Communities have an urgent need for coordinated assistance to assess and address issues of
chemical and other environmental contamination. HHRA's community risk activities in FY 2014
provide continued essential technical assistance to the EPA's program and regional offices. The
HHRA research program will provide rapid risk assessments, combining problem formulation
and state-of-the-art exposure information and tools with hazard information. Chief among these
projects is the continued development of PPRTVs for evaluating chemical specific exposures at
Superfund sites. The EPA's Superfund Technical Support Centers will provide consultative
support for the PPRTV assessment development. These values are derived for use by the EPA's
Superfund program when a value is not available in the IRIS database. This work improves the
EPA's ability to make decisions and address site related environmental health problems.
Recent accomplishments include:
• The EPA completed final IRIS assessments for dioxin (noncancer), tetrachloroethylene
(also known as perchloroethylene or perc), trichloroethylene and methylene chloride
health assessments.
• The EPA released the draft Libby Amphibole Asbestos assessment for public comment
and peer review, receiving praise for the report.
• The EPA released an IRIS Progress Report to Congress describing progress in
implementing April 2011 National Research Council (NRC) recommendations related to
developing draft IRIS assessments.
• The EPA began a new effort to increase and expand stakeholder and public engagement
to improve the IRIS process and modernize and refocus HHRA research.
• The EPA completed numerous PPRTV documents based on needs and priorities of the
EPA's Solid Waste and Emergency Response program, including sulfolane to support
clean-up in Alaska.
• The EPA issued the Highlights of the Exposure Factors Handbook report, a quick
reference guide for risk assessors.
12 http ://www8. nationalacademies. org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID= 13142
685
-------
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in HHRA Science & Technology,
which also can be found in the Performance Eight-Year Array.
In their joint review of the HHRA program, the EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB) and
Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) indicated during their oral summary on July 11, 2012,
that "with an extensive portfolio of risk assessment activities, the HRRA provides a superb
platform for carrying out applied research. An agenda of research should be maintained that
builds from this opportunity."13
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$43.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$26.0) This increase represents a restoration of resources transferred to the Research:
Sustainable and Healthy Communities to support Small Business Innovation Research
(SBIR). For SBIR, the EPA is required to set aside 2.5 percent of funding for contracts to
small businesses to develop and commercialize new environmental technologies.
• (-$6.0 / +0.2 FTE) This reflects the net result of realignments of infrastructure, FTE and
resources such as equipment purchases and repairs, travel, contracts, and general
expenses that are proportionately allocated across programs to better align with
programmatic priorities. This includes an increase of 0.2 FTE and associated payroll of
$30.0.
• (-$15.0 / -0.1 FTE) This decrease in resources and FTE will limit development of human
health assessments and tools that assist the EPA Program and Regional decision-makers
to protect public health. The decreased resources include 0.1 FTE and associated payroll
of$15.0.
• (-$51.0) This reduction will result in delaying the start of new IRIS assessments related
Superfund cleanups, such as the manganese and elemental mercury.
• (-$111.0) This decrease reflects a reduction to development of the Provisional Peer
Reviewed Toxicity Values (PPRTVs), which are used by the EPA's Superfund and
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardous waste programs when the
more extensive Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) assessments are unavailable.
13http://vosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/36EBF661CA14106185257A380048FEAE/$File/HHRA+Overview final.pdf
686
-------
Statutory Authority:
CAA Amendments, 42 U.S.C. 7403 et seq. - Sections 103, 108, 109, and 112; CERCLA
(Superfund, 1980), Section 209(a) of Public Law 99-499; CWA Title I, Sec. 101(a)(6) 33 U.S.C.
1254 - Sec 104 (a) and (c) and Sec. 105; ERDDA 33 U.S.C. 1251 - Section 2(a); FIFRA (7
U.S.C. s/s 136 et seq. (1996), as amended), Sec. 3(c)(2)(A); FQPA PL 104-170; SDWA (1996)
42 U.S.C. Section 300J-18; TSCA (Public Law 94-469): 15 U.S.C. s/s 2601 et seq. (1976), Sec.
4(b)(l)(B), Sec. 4(b)(2)(B).
687
-------
Program Area: Superfund Cleanup
688
-------
Superfund: Emergency Response and Removal
Program Area: Superfund Cleanup
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Restore Land
(Dollars in Thousands)
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$189,590.0
$189,590.0
291.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$200,976.9
$200,976.9
297.1
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$190,248.0
$190,248.0
291.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$187,826.0
$187,826.0
281.4
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($1,764.0)
($1,764.0)
-9.6
Program Project Description:
The Superfund Emergency Response and Removal program (SF Removal) possesses the
capability to respond to a contamination incident, regardless of cause and without an upper limit
in terms of scale. SF Removal is a "backbone" or foundational capability of national response,
and as such, it is a capability that is essential to national resilience.
Response requirements arise as a result of: natural disasters such as major flooding, hurricanes
and tornados; industrial contamination such as hazardous substance releases to air, water or soil;
and acts of terror. Responses may be launched in order to contain and remove hazardous
substances, but also may be undertaken to address biological and/or radiological contamination.
In all these cases, the federal response involved the SF Removal program. From FY 2006 to FY
2012, the EPA completed or oversaw more than 2,500 removal actions across the country. These
cleanups were of varying complexity and contained a wide range of contaminants that posed a
threat to human health and the environment. Future responses of this nature, as well as responses
to hundreds of events annually that do not garner national attention, will be carried out under this
program.
The EPA's On-Scene Coordinators (OSCs) respond and/or provide technical assistance every
day. This assistance is carried out in support of local, state and Tribal first responders who often
are untrained or not equipped to manage certain types of emergency responses. Responding to
and removing the source of contamination is vital to the health and well-being of the impacted
community, and the EPA's role as this "safety net" is a fundamental part of the national response
system and is heavily relied upon to deal with environmental emergencies. Preservation of our
environment and the recovery and restoration of critical assets is vital to our economy and the
health of our communities.
The SF Removal program trains, equips and deploys resources in order to manage, contain and
remove the contaminants that will, if left unaddressed, pose an imminent threat to public health
and/or have a critical environmental impact on communities. The EPA's 24-hour-a-day response
capability is a cornerstone element of the National Contingency Plan (NCP). The SF Removal
program is identified by the White House as a Primary Mission Essential Function (PMEF).
689
-------
Specifically, the EPA's PMEF is to prevent, limit, mitigate or contain chemical, oil, radiological,
biological, and hazardous materials during and in the aftermath of an accident, natural or man-
made disaster in the United States, and provide environmental monitoring, assessment and
reporting in support of domestic incident management as part of the National Response
Framework (NRF).
The SF Removal program was initially designed and has been consistently used to complement
several Superfund response areas including agency homeland security activities.14 SF Removal
resources address releases that pose an imminent threat to public health or welfare and the
environment, while the Remedial program addresses more long-term cleanup activities. SF
Removal therefore partners with the Remedial program, as needed, for assessment and site
cleanup activities involving National Priorities List (NPL), Non-NPL, and Potentially
Responsible Party (PRP) actions.
The SF Removal program also is available to support other elements of the EPA (such as
Brownfields); other federal partners, such as the Department of Homeland Security, United
States Coast Guard and the Federal Emergency Management Agency under the NRF; and state,
local and Tribal first responders, who will often turn to the SF Removal program personnel as
subject matter experts and "reach back" liaisons into the rest of the EPA and into the larger
federal support capability. In this sense, the SF Removal personnel have become a critical
element of the emergency response capability in communities all across America, and are
performing a vital service in support of national resiliency at the grassroots level and on a day-to-
day basis, creating a model for interagency and cross-government cooperation.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the SF Removal program's focus is to continue to be a key federal responder to
contamination events, managing risks to human health, the economic viability of communities
and the environment. The program also will focus on providing response support to state, local,
Tribal and potentially responsible parties when their response capabilities are exceeded.
In FY 2012, the agency completed 232 Superfund-lead removal actions and oversaw 196 PRP
removal completions. Due to budget constraints, however, it is expected that fewer non-time
critical fund lead removal cleanups will be completed. As state and local agencies face economic
hardships, the SF Removal program support services are called upon more frequently to
adequately manage contamination and protect American communities. In FY 2014, the EPA will
continue to respond to environmental emergencies and conduct removal actions based upon the
risk to human health and the environment in urban, rural and Tribal communities.
The EPA's federal OSCs manage and/or provide support for emergency responses, removal
assessments, site stabilizations, and cleanup response actions at NPL and non-NPL sites. The
EPA OSCs bring a unique and critical level of expertise and ability to a response which includes
knowledge of specific hazardous substances, health and safety issues, and/or the utilization of
emerging technologies. They are able to determine the need for federal responses and can then
The EPA Homeland Security program, in turn, has developed into providing critical technical expertise, assets and support
during nationally significant incidents, including those involving the release of chemical, biological, and radiological substances.
690
-------
direct the response to threats that endanger the environment and present public health risks. The
EPA will continue to conduct limited readiness training for federal OSCs to develop and enhance
their critical skills and expertise to respond to, assess, mitigate, and clean up thousands of
releases, regardless of the cause. OSC training opportunities, which include specialized technical
skills in chemistry, biology, hydrology, geology, etc., have been utilized increasingly in national
responses (e.g., Deepwater Horizon and Hurricane Katrina).
The EPA will continue to support the National Response Center (NRC), which is the federal
entry point for reporting all oil and chemical discharges into the environment anywhere in the
United States and its territories. The NRC serves as the sole 24-hour-a-day contact point to
receive incident reports under the National Response System and disseminate reported release
reports to the responding federal OSC. Each year headquarters and regional emergency
operations centers receive approximately 30 thousand incident report notifications from the
NRC.
The Environmental Response Team (ERT) was established to fill the role of the inland scientific
support coordinator. The ERT provides assistance at the scene of hazardous substance releases,
offering expertise in such areas as treatment, biology, chemistry, hydrology, geology, and
engineering. In FY 2014, the ERT will continue to provide support for the full range of
emergency response actions, including unusual or complex emergency incidents. In such cases,
the ERT brings in special equipment and experienced responders, and provides the OSC or lead
responder with knowledge and advice. For example, ERT has provided technical expertise and
specialized equipment to assist with site modeling, soil and ground water sampling data, and
extent of contamination advice.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(132) Superfund-lead removal actions completed annually.
FY2007
195
200
FY2008
195
215
FY2009
195
214
FY2010
170
199
FY2011
170
214
FY2012
170
232
FY2013
170
FY2014
170
Units
Removals
Measure
Target
Actual
(135) PRP removal completions (including voluntary, Administrative Order on Consent, and
Unilateral Administrative Order actions) overseen by EPA.
FY2007
120
151
FY2008
125
157
FY2009
130
154
FY2010
170
192
FY2011
170
191
FY2012
170
196
FY2013
170
FY2014
170
Units
Removals
Measure
Target
Actual
(Cl) Score on annual Core NAR.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
No Target
Establish
ed
84.3
FY2010
55
87.9
FY2011
60
77.5
FY2012
70
75.8
FY2013
72
FY2014
75
Units
Percent
691
-------
With aggressive outreach and enforcement, the EPA has continued its effort to identify viable
Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) to conduct removal actions, and has been available to
assist and advise them. In FY 2014, the EPA will oversee 170 PRP removal actions (including
voluntary, Administrative Order on Consent, and Unilateral Administrative Order actions). In
addition, the EPA will conduct 170 Superfund-lead removal actions where no viable PRP has
been identified.
The EPA will continue to implement its annual assessment of its response and removal
preparedness via the Core National Approach to Response (Core NAR) assessment, which grew
out of its Core Emergency Response program and assessment. Core NAR addresses day-to-day
preparedness for removal actions for Regions, Special Teams, and Headquarters, as well as
national preparedness for chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear incidents. While EPA's
score on the annual Core NAR was lower in FY 2011 and FY 2012, it was mostly due to
additional elements that were incorporated to expand the scope of the evaluation to include
response readiness for chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) hazards. The target
for FY 2014 is a score of 75 percent.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$2,184.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$1,392.0 / -9.6 FTE) This decrease reflects a reduction in FTE who support removal
response actions. The reduced resources include 9.6 FTE and associated payroll of
$1,392.0. This will result in fewer completed removal cleanups.
• (-$2,508.0) This reflects a reduction in response contracts for cleanup action support and
for readiness training for federal OSCs. This will reduce non-time critical fund-lead
action removals while the agency continues to support all emergency actions and focus
on encouraging viable PRPs, when available, to conduct removal actions.
• (-$48.0) This change reflects a reduction from IT support for SF Removal Program
emergency portal enhancements which were based upon users' input.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, as amended, 42
United States Code SC 9601 et seq. - Sections 104, 105 and 106.
692
-------
Superfund: EPA Emergency Preparedness
Program Area: Superfund Cleanup
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Restore Land
(Dollars in Thousands)
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$9,244.0
$9,244.0
44.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$9,919.3
$9,919.3
45.7
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$9,236.0
$9,236.0
44.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$8,150.0
$8,150.0
42.9
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($1,094.0)
($1,094.0)
-1.1
Program Project Description:
The EPA implements the Emergency Preparedness program in coordination with the Department
of Homeland Security (DHS) and other federal agencies in order to deliver federal hazard
assistance to state, local, and Tribal governments during natural disasters and terrorist incidents.
The agency carries out this responsibility under multiple statutory authorities as well as the
National Response Framework (NRF), which provides the comprehensive federal structure for
managing national emergencies. The EPA is the designated lead for the NRF's Oil and
Hazardous Materials Response Annex - Emergency Support Function #10 which covers
responsibilities for responding to releases of hazardous materials, oil, and other contaminants
that are a threat to human health and the environment. As such, the agency participates and leads
applicable interagency committees and workgroups to develop national planning and
implementation policies at the operational level.
The EPA also is designated as the lead agency for the National Response System (NRS), the
Nation's comprehensive environmental program which integrates emergency preparedness for
and response to risks. The NRS, established over 40 years ago, assures that federal, state, Tribal,
local and private responders are linked through emergency planning and preparedness functions.
Area Committees, Local Emergency Planning Committees and Regional Response Teams
provide avenues for oil, hazmat, community, and facility preparedness and readiness to ensure
that responses are coordinated and organized in a manner that maximizes the efficiency and
effectiveness of planning for risks and execution. This leadership and the resulting community
preparedness is an essential element of national resiliency, and is a model for efforts now being
launched under the broader "Homeland Security" effort. The EPA continues to work closely with
DHS and other federal partners in developing similar levels of community preparedness focused
on security concerns and reducing their level of risk.
The EPA's leadership in federal preparedness begins with its chairing the 16-agency National
Response Team (NRT) and continues, through its co-chairing with the U.S. Coast Guard, the 13
Regional Response Teams (RRTs) throughout the United States and trust territories. These teams
coordinate the actions of federal, state, local, and Tribal partners to prevent, prepare for, and
respond to emergencies, and provide an all hazard response capability. The Superfund
693
-------
Emergency Preparedness program supports the agency's priorities of building state and Tribal
partnerships and protecting human health and the environment by assisting with the development
of Area Contingency Plans and other prevention and preparedness guidance documents that
serve a critical role in coordinating and expediting community response when environmental
emergencies and disasters do occur.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA's preparedness activities will focus on addressing key priority lessons
learned from actual responses. The agency will continue to fulfill its duties under the NRF as the
program's activities are reprioritized due to budget constraints. The base funding decrease in FY
2014 will result in a reduction in interagency participation and support with committees and
workgroups that support the NRF system. The net result of this reduction is that the EPA may
scale back on its technical support for certain guidance documents and projects on NRT
committees and subcommittees and may convene fewer RRT planning meetings and less
frequent updates for the Regional Contingency Plans.
As the program's activities have been reprioritized due to budget constraints, the EPA will
reduce its level of preparation activities with regard to the National Level Exercise (NLE)
scheduled for 2014 restricting its participation primarily to personnel resources and minimizing
travel. The base funding decrease also will limit future EPA participation in trainings with our
response partners across the country which, over time, may have the effect of eroding
coordination and agency preparedness.
The EPA will continue to lead the NRT and co-chair the 13 RRTs throughout the United States,
but will limit contracted support staff and the retention of external subject matter experts, relying
more heavily on internal staff. The NRT and RRTs coordinate federal partner actions to prevent,
prepare for, respond to, and recover from releases of hazardous substances, oil spills, terrorist
attacks, major disasters, and other emergencies, whether accidental or intentional. The NRT and
the RRTs are the only active environmentally-focused interagency executive committees focused
on addressing oil and hazardous substance emergencies. They serve as multi-agency
coordination groups supporting our responders when convened as incident specific teams.
Building on the large scale federal investment to better structure responses that have taken place
since Hurricane Katrina and current efforts to enhance national emergency response
management, the EPA and its partner NRT agencies will continue implementation of the
National Incident Management System and the NRF. The EPA and its partner NRT agencies will
strive to continuously improve notification and response procedures, develop response technical
assistance documents, implement and test incident command/unified command systems across
all levels of government and the private sector, and assist in the refinement of Regional
Contingency Plans and Local Area Plans.
The EPA also will continue to provide staff support as needed during national disasters,
emergencies, and high profile and large-scale responses carried out under the NRF. When
activated under the NRF, the EPA supports incident specific activities at the NRT, RRTs,
Domestic Resilience Group, and the National Operations Center. Such support during a response
694
-------
is normally funded on an incident specific basis through the Stafford Act or various trust funds.
Additionally, the EPA involvement on corrective action work will be limited to the top priority
lessons learned, primarily from actual response actions and those not requiring extramural
support.
As part of its strategy for improving effectiveness, the agency will continue to improve response
readiness in FY 2014 through information obtained from application of the agency's National
Approach to Response (NAR). The EPA's NAR ensures efficient use of emergency response
assets within the agency by maintaining highly skilled technical personnel in the field and
ensuring their readiness to respond to releases of dangerous materials without compromising
health and safety.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports strategic objective Restore Land under Goal 3. Currently,
there are no performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$194.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to adjustments
in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$1,288.0 / -1.1 FTE) This reduction reflects an agency reprioritization on how the EPA
preparedness program supports interagency programs at the federal, state, and local levels
in conjunction with the National Response System. Activities, including involvement on
national and local committees and subcommittees, would be reduced while maintaining
the EPA's national leadership responsibilities for those inter-agency groups. The reduced
resources include 1.1 FTE and associated payroll of $162.0.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, as amended, 42
United States Code 9601 et seq. - Sections 104, 105 and 106; Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief
and Emergency Assistance Act, as amended, 42 United States Code 5121 et seq.
695
-------
Superfund: Federal Facilities
Program Area: Superfund Cleanup
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Restore Land
(Dollars in Thousands)
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$26,199.0
$26,199.0
140.9
FY 2012
Actuals
$28,356.6
$28,356.6
142.8
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$26,188.0
$26,188.0
140.9
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$26,866.0
$26,866.0
127.7
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$667.0
$667.0
-13.2
Program Project Description:
The Superfund Federal Facilities Response program oversees and provides technical assistance
for the protective and efficient cleanup and reuse of federal facility sites. Nationwide, there are
thousands of federal facilities which are contaminated, or potentially contaminated, with
hazardous waste, military munitions, radioactive waste, and a variety of other toxic
contaminants. Superfund cleanups are undertaken to address long-term threats to public health
from hazardous substances and the environment. Superfund cleanup actions increase the nation's
well-being by improving human health and amenities, restoring ecosystems, improving land
productivity, and creating jobs. The human health benefits of remediating contaminated sites
include reduced mortality risk from illness and acute fatalities, and reduced morbidity risk from
asthma, nausea, cancer, birth defects, adverse reproductive or developmental disorders, and other
illnesses or injuries. Federal facilities under this program include various types of sites, such as
active realigning and closed military installations, current and former nuclear weapons
production facilities, landfills, and Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS). Often, the EPA and
the other federal agencies implementing the remedies face unique challenges due to the types of
contamination present, the size of the facility, the extent of contamination, ongoing facility
operation needs, complex community involvement requirements, and complexities related to the
redevelopment of the facilities.
The EPA fulfills a number of statutory and regulatory obligations at federal facilities, including
assessing sites for potential listing on the Superfund National Priorities List (NPL), conducting
oversight at NPL sites where cleanup is being completed by other federal agencies such as the
Department of Defense (DoD) and the Department of Energy (DOE), enforcing statutorily
required Federal Facility Agreements (FFAs), approving property transfers, and maintaining the
Federal Agency Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket (Docket).
The EPA's oversight authority, primarily exercised at NPL sites, provides a review of federal
cleanups that ensures work being conducted by other federal agencies is consistent with the site
cleanup plans and is protective of human health and the environment. The EPA, as required by
the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), is
responsible for activities such as: 1) reviewing and approving site cleanup documents; 2)
696
-------
participating in site meetings with the affected communities; 3) making final remedy selection
decisions at NPL sites; and 4) monitoring remediation schedules as outlined in the FFAs. These
FFAs state that the EPA has the final decision making authority for remedy selection to ensure
the protection of human health and the environment from releases of hazardous substances.
Decision documents, which support final remedy selection, are subject to statutorily required
review and assessment by the EPA in accordance with the milestones and timeframes established
in the FFA. The EPA's role provides substantive value in assisting other federal agencies in
achieving their program cleanup goals.
The Superfund Federal Facilities Response program ensures compliance with the limited
statutory responsibilities related to the transfer of contaminated federal properties at NPL sites.
CERCLA provides limited authority to the EPA for property transfers, which includes the
approval for transfers prior to implementation of remedies (i.e., early transfer at NPL sites), and
for determinations that remedies are Operating Properly and Successfully (OPS) at both NPL and
non-NPL sites. For more information about the program, please refer to
http ://www. epa.gov/fedfac/.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In addition to fulfilling its statutory responsibilities at NPL facilities, the EPA, as part of Section
120(d) of CERCLA, is required to take steps to assure that a Preliminary Assessment (PA) be
completed by federal facilities that manage hazardous waste or from which a reportable quantity
of hazardous substances have been released. Such sites are to be listed on the Docket and the
EPA evaluates these facilities for potential response action or inclusion on the NPL. Since the
last update of the Federal Facility Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket in November 2012,
there are 2,332 facilities currently listed on the Docket. The agency's oversight provides for both
technical capacity and a framework of accountability to ensure the highest priority releases are
addressed and listed on the NPL. Gone unchecked, federal facilities may succumb to competing
priorities where environmental protection is not the primary mission; thus the American public
would not be afforded the necessary independent oversight in validating environmental cleanup
decisions and the efficient and effective use of taxpayer dollars.
The agency is currently undertaking an effort to streamline and modernize the process for
producing the Docket to improve the timeliness, accuracy and efficiencies derived from the use
of technology. In FY 2013, the EPA, in coordination with other federal agencies, started
developing an Electronic Docket (E-Docket) to realize savings for both the EPA and other
federal agencies. In FY 2014, the EPA will finalize the E-Docket to more efficiently meet its
statutory obligation to publish the inventory of federal sites that have released hazardous
substances into the environment.
The Superfund Federal Facilities Response program's site evaluation project (FFSEP)
(http://www.epa.gov/fedfac/ffsep/index.htm) was a culmination of efforts which began in FY
2010 under the Integrated Cleanup Initiative (ICI) to determine the disposition of sites that
appeared to be making insufficient, if any, cleanup progress. The FFSEP advances the concepts
of transparency, public participation and collaboration with our federal partners in order to
promote efficient and effective federal facility cleanups. In the creation of FFSEP, the EPA
697
-------
collaborated with our federal and state partners to solicit and include site information from their
records. This collaboration was invaluable to the success of the project. The FFSEP also
addressed issues raised in the U.S. Government Accountability Office's March 2009 Report to
Congress entitled "Superfund - Greater EPA Enforcement and Reporting Are Needed to
Enhance Cleanup at DoD Sites." The EPA anticipates periodic updates as new information
is received and verified.
By the end of FY 2012, the FFSEP completed evaluating 514 federally owned sites that were
identified in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Information System (CERCLIS) where the site assessment or cleanup status was unknown or
undocumented. The goal of the FFSEP was to document the status of the sites and to reinvigorate
the assessment and evaluation process if a site was determined to be stalled or undocumented.
The next phase of the FFSEP project, which has commenced in FY 2013, entails documenting all
Federal Facility Other Cleanup Activities (OCA) and No Further Remedial Action Planned
(NFRAP) sites not on the initial FFSEP list to ensure that all proper documentation is in place.
Specifically, these efforts will entail verifying information and validating decisions to ensure that
adequate progress is being made at the OCA's. This work may lead to some federal facilities
requiring additional assessment and possible evaluation for inclusion on the NPL.
The initial launch of FFSEP has highlighted deficiencies in federal facility compliance with
CERCLA section 120(d). FFSEP information indicates close to 100 federal facilities may not
have conducted the statutorily required PA. A majority of the facilities which are overdue have
had many years to conduct the required assessments. The EPA's direction to federal facilities
(OSWER Directive 9200.3-14-1G-W) is to complete the PA within 18 months from inclusion on
the Docket. A timely completion of a PA allows the EPA to conduct an evaluation of the facility
within four years for a potential response action as required by CERCLA Section 116(b).
Without the PA information, the EPA is unable to fulfill this important obligation and cannot
determine whether a site poses little or no risk or requires further attention. Under Section 120 of
CERCLA, the EPA must take steps that assure completion of the PA by the responsible federal
agency. In FY 2014, the EPA will begin working cooperatively with states and Federal Facilities
on a multi-year effort to complete the outstanding facility assessments and close the compliance
gap. This valuable initiative will not only reduce potential federal liability, but will provide
critical information on whether further cleanup action may be warranted at sites which may have
been neglected for many years. The PA information provides the initial evaluation at a site where
a release has occurred to ensure site decisions are protective to workers and the public.
To ensure the long-term protectiveness of the remedies, the agency will continue monitoring,
overseeing progress, and improving the quality and consistency of five-year reviews being
conducted at federal sites where waste has been left in place and land use is restricted. Five-year
reviews are required under Section 121(c) of CERCLA and the EPA's role is to concur or make
its own independent protectiveness determination. In response to the October 2010 and
September 2011 Federal Cleanup Dialogue meetings, and to advance long-term stewardship, the
EPA is working collaboratively with DoD, DOE, and Department of the Interior (DOI) through a
Federal Workgroup to improve the technical quality, timeliness, and cost of the five-year review
reports and to ensure that the community is aware of the protectiveness status. To advance long
term stewardship, in FY 2012, the federal workgroup produced a community video, a training
698
-------
module, and a template for a site-specific fact sheet once the reviews are completed. In FY 2013,
the workgroup started developing a new training module for the writers and reviewers of the
report with a focus on improving the reports' technical quality. In FY 2014, the workgroup will
continue to assess the use of the community tools and will begin to document best management
practices that improve the five-year review process. The EPA will review approximately 40
federal NPL five-year review reports in order to fulfill statutory requirements and to inform the
public regarding the protectiveness of remedies at those NPL sites. We expect this will result in
reducing the cost and time of the five-year review and ensuring effective communication with
the public.
At the Dialogue meetings, the EPA and other federal agencies also received feedback from
stakeholders about the need for more accessible and useable information on the cleanup of
federal facilities across the country. The need for information will become increasingly
important as sites move into the long-term stewardship phase and face-to-face meetings between
stakeholders and federal agencies become less frequent. In response to stakeholder feedback, the
EPA held a series of FY 2012 webinars for the federal family, which featured demonstrations for
information platforms currently available from DOE, Department of the Navy and DOI. In
addition, the EPA included a demonstration on potential enhancements to information delivery.
The enhanced data sharing tools allow cleanup data to be displayed and accessed along with
publicly-available data sets, resulting in more interactive user experience. In FY 2013, these
webinars will be presented to external stakeholders for their feedback, and the EPA, along with
its federal partners, will work to incorporate the feedback into a set of common principles that
federal agencies would agree to use as guidance in sharing information to better meet
stakeholder's needs. In FY 2014, the EPA will continuing working with our federal partners and
interested communities on assuring that the information sharing principles continue to support
and foster effective community engagement through information access and transparency.
The EPA and the DoD continue to engage in a project aimed at harmonizing cleanup and
reporting metrics at federal Superfund sites. The EPA/DoD Goal Harmonization Workgroup,
which was established in FY 2009, provides a process for the two agencies to work
collaboratively on determining consistent and transparent approaches for performance measures
used to indicate progress at federal Superfund sites. The Workgroup has resulted in a cooperative
approach to better facilitate and align future cleanup goals and targets, while also demonstrating
clearer understanding of the cleanup processes. The EPA and the DoD will continue engaging in
this effort for the foreseeable future. Additionally, in FY 2013, the EPA will take its lessons
learned and efficiencies gained through working with DoD15 and will begin engaging with DOE
in a similar Goal Harmonization outreach effort.
In FY 2014, the Superfund Federal Facilities Response program will continue to focus on
accelerating cleanups at federal facilities and putting the sites back into productive use while
protecting human health and the environment. At the end of FY 2012, there were 173 federal
sites on the NPL. Despite the small number of federal sites on the NPL, the large size of these
federal sites results in the Superfund Federal Facilities Response program contributing
significantly to Superfund pipeline accomplishments. As of the end of 2012, the Superfund
15 Please refer to the following website for more information: http://www.epa.gov/fedfac/pdf/dod-
epa goal harmonization workgroup recommendations final.pdf
699
-------
Federal Facilities Response program signed 41 of the 63 (65 percent) Records of Decisions at all
Superfund NPL sites; started 38 of the 82 (46 percent) Remedial Action Projects; and completed
59 of the 142 (42 percent) Remedial Action Projects within the entire Superfund NPL program.
The EPA contributes to the efficient use of federal facility agency resources by leveraging staff
cleanup experience.
The Federal Facilities Response Site Activity Chart represents the known universe of hazardous
substances released into the environment at Federal Facilities, active remediation classified by
NPL versus Non NPL status and construction completed at NPL Federal Facilities.
Superfund Federal Facilities Response Site Activity
2,313 Federal Facility Universe
DActive Docket Non
NPL(679)
HE Active Non Docket
Non NPL (245)
n NPL Docket [148)
a NPL Non Docket
C25)
• Archived Docket
(1,021)
DArchived Non
Docket (195)
1,097 Active Federal Facilities
D Active Docket Non NPL
(679)
• Active Non Docket Non
NPL (245) /
n NPL Docket (148) I
U
m NPL Non Docket (25) X!
924 Active >~on >TL Federal Facilities 173 XPL Federal
D Study Pending (0)
in Study Pending ^^-''
[857) O Study Underway (4)
DStudy
Underway(33)
D Remedy
Selected (9}
• Design
Undenvay(2)
• Con stru ction
Undenvay(23)
H Remedy Selected (4) ,
D Design Underway (2)
D Construction Undertvay
(92)
31 Construction
Completed/Deleted (71)
71 Construction Completed Federal Facilities
[ECC and Deleted (17)
nCC and not Deleted
(54)
Progress is determined by most advanced operable unit Chart results generated from CERCLIS data, EOY 2012.
700
-------
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue strengthening oversight and technical assistance, as
appropriate, at DoD's military munitions response sites on the NPL. These military munitions
response sites contain unique chemical and explosive compounds and present cleanup
challenges, such as underwater munitions. The EPA supports DoD's development of new
technologies to streamline munitions cleanups. The newly emerging classification technology
may save DoD significant resources over conventional technologies and accelerate cleanup of
sites, but will require more extensive EPA oversight to ensure protectiveness. Emerging
contaminants and human health hazards, such as vapor intrusion, require direct agency oversight
as federal agencies reopen various site assessment and cleanup activities to address such
contamination.
The agency will continue supporting DoD at selected Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC)
installations that have been closed or realigned during the first four rounds of BRAC (BRAC I -
IV). This includes, but is not limited to, meeting and expediting statutory obligations for
overseeing cleanup and facilitating property transfer. The EPA's BRAC I - IV accelerated
cleanup program, which is steadily ramping down, continues to be funded through an
interagency agreement (IA). The current BRAC IA, which was signed on February 28, 2011, is
scheduled to expire on September 30, 2016. The FY 2014 request does not include additional
support for BRAC-related services to the DoD at those facilities affected by the fifth round of
BRAC in 2005.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(FF1) Percent of Superfund federal facility sites construction complete.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
86
Units
Percent
The Superfund Federal Facilities Response program's ability to meet its annual performance
targets is dependent on work performed by responsible federal agencies at NPL sites. Work
under this program also supports performance results in the Superfund Remedial program and
can be found in the Eight-Year Performance Array in the Program Performance and Assessment
section under Goal 3, Objective 3.
In FY 2014, the program will also be targeting a new percent construction complete measure
specifically for federal NPL sites. This new measure will demonstrate incremental construction
progress at federal NPL sites which are not already designated sitewide construction complete.
The measure is based on the average of three specific factors: 1) operable unit (OU) percent
complete; 2) total cleanup actions percent complete; and 3) duration of cleanup actions percent
complete (national cumulative). The FY 2012 baseline was 82% and the target for FY 2014 is
86%.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$565.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
701
-------
• (+$102.0 / +1.3 FTE) This reflects a net increase to provide additional oversight and
technical support on NPL sites, such as reviews of Records of Decisions (RODs) which
are public documents that evaluate/select cleanup alternatives. The additional resources
include 1.3 FTE and associated payroll of $175.0.
• (-14.5 FTE) This reflects a reduction in federal facility reimbursable regional FTE as the
performance periods for existing long term agreements end.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, as amended, 42
United States Code 9601 et seq. - Section 120; the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 United States Code 6901 et seq. - Section 7003;
and the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Acts of 1988, 1990, 1992, 1994, and 2004 as
amended by the National Defense Authorization Acts and the Base Closure Community
Redevelopment and Homeless Assistance Act.
702
-------
Superfund: Remedial
Program Area: Superfund Cleanup
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Restore Land
(Dollars in Thousands)
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$564,998.0
$564,998.0
934.8
FY 2012
Actuals
$639,016.1
$639,016.1
1,016.6
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$566,889.0
$566,889.0
934.8
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$539,074.0
$539,074.0
937.1
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($25,924.0)
($25,924.0)
2.3
Program Project Description:
The Superfund Remedial program protects the American public and the nation's resources by
assessing and cleaning up some of the most contaminated sites in the United States. As a result,
communities are safer, healthier, and realize economic benefits. The agency's actions also
protect and restore the nation's valuable groundwater and surface water resources. In addition,
some construction activities help to build, replace, or sustain critical components of the nation's
infrastructure (i.e. water, transportation and recreation). The Superfund Remedial program is
responsible for conducting longer term (as opposed to emergency and time-critical removal)
cleanup work as well as overseeing response work conducted by potentially responsible parties
(PRPs). Cleanup activities include characterizing the degree and scope of contamination from
releases to the environment, developing cleanup strategies, designing and constructing remedies,
conducting long-term operation and monitoring of certain remedies. In addition, funding is
provided to states, which supports site assessment work, provides payroll for state staff and
document review activities as well.
Since its inception in December 1980, the Superfund Remedial program and its state, Tribal, and
federal partners have screened or assessed more than 50,000 potentially contaminated sites.
Since the inception of the program, 82 percent of these sites have been pre-screened or assessed
and determined to be of no federal interest. Approximately 10 percent of these sites need cleanup
attention and have been referred to other state, Tribal, and federal cleanup programs. Only 3
percent (1,676) of the sites assessed since the beginning of the program have been determined to
be among the most contaminated sites in the country and have been added to the National
Priorities List (NPL). The remaining sites require initial or additional assessment to determine if
cleanup may be necessary.
Superfund sites exist in thousands of communities across the United States, ranging from remote
rural areas to large urban settings. Many sites are located in economically distressed
communities that suffer from disproportionate and adverse environmental exposures. The size
and complexity of Superfund sites also vary widely. A site may have a very small footprint or
may cover thousands of acres (land and/or water bodies). Contaminated media at a Superfund
site might include soils, buildings, sediments, surface water, air, and/or groundwater. Cost and
703
-------
time to clean up Superfund sites vary widely depending on the degree, type and location of
contamination. On average a typical NPL site will cost around $15 million; however some will
ultimately cost more than $100 million by the time they are completed. Cleanup actions can take
from a few months for a relatively straight forward soil excavation or capping remedy to
multiple decades for complex, multi-phased mining or area-wide groundwater remedies.
While there is no single way to characterize communities that are located near Superfund sites,
the EPA analyzed the 2000 Census data and found a larger proportion of people in poverty who
reside in block groups touching a one mile buffer of the modeled site boundary16 compared to
populations farther away (1-3 miles from the modeled site boundary). These communities may
have fewer resources with which to address concerns about their health and environment.
Superfund cleanup actions increase the nation's well-being by protecting human health, restoring
ecosystems, improving land productivity at formerly contaminated sites, and creating jobs and
associated tax revenue in affected communities. The human health benefits of remediating
contaminated sites include reduced mortality, and reduced morbidity risk from asthma, nausea,
cancer, birth defects, adverse reproductive or developmental disorders, and other illnesses or
injuries. For example, in a recent paper, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), UC
Berkeley and Columbia professors found that Superfund cleanups correlate with reduced
incidence of congenital anomalies by approximately 20 - 25 percent for those living within
5,000 meters of a site.17 Also, before and after cleanup blood level measurements in children at
six of the Superfund Remedial program's large NPL lead sites shows that the average children's
blood levels were reduced to levels below 5 ug/dL due to Superfund cleanup and education
efforts.18 Ecosystems also are improved by addressing pollutants from contaminated sites,
protecting drinking water supplies or fishery habitats. For example, at the Anaconda Smelter site
in Montana, the Superfund program has reconstructed wetlands and revegetated slopes to reduce
exposure to windblown dust and contaminant load into the ground water and area streams. As a
result, in addition to addressing risks to human health, the remedy is improving aquatic life and
has promoted the return of moose and antelope to their traditional wildlife habitat.
By working with communities and partners to make sure sites are safe for use, the EPA helps
transform sites into community assets. More than 680 NPL sites have some new, continued or
planned reuse, meaning that communities benefit through new uses, and they receive the benefits
of job creation, increased property values, enhanced local tax bases, and improved quality of life.
According to a recent study19 by economists at Duke University and the University of Pittsburgh,
properties within 3 miles of Superfund sites experience an 18.7 percent to 24.4 percent increase
in value when sites are cleaned up and deleted from the NPL. At the MacGillis & Gibbs
Superfund site in the City of New Brighton, Minnesota, for example, a $46.7 million increase in
property value and a $1.1 million increase in annual property taxes resulted from the
redevelopment of the property in 2009. The South Point Plant Superfund site in Lawrence
16 A circular site boundary, equal to the site acreage, was modeled around the latitude/longitude point for each site.
17 Currie, I, M. Greenstone and E. Moretti. 2011. "Superfund Cleanups and Infant Health." NBER Working Paper 16844.
18 The six sites are Omaha Lead in Nebraska, Bunker Hill in Idaho, Jasper in Missouri, Leadville in Colorado, Midvale in Utah,
and Tar Creek in Oklahoma. More information can be accessed at http://epa.gov/superfund/lead/success.htm.
19 Shanti Gamper-Rabindran and Christopher Timmins, "Does Cleanup of Hazardous Sites Raise Housing Values? Evidence of
Spatially Localized Benefits" Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, In Press, Corrected Proof, December 22,
2012.
704
-------
County, Kentucky, also has dramatically benefited from the cleanup actions taken there. The site
has transformed into a premier industrial park known as The Point. More than $12.2 million in
annual income went to the 320 employees located at The Point in 2011. The Point is expected to
support 2,000 to 3,000 jobs when fully developed, according to the Lawrence Economic
Development Corporation.
The Superfund program directly supports jobs, many of which are local. At the Welsbach &
General Gas Mantle Superfund site in and near Camden, New Jersey, for example, the EPA has
been successful in reducing radiation risks to nearby communities, restoring residential and
recreational properties for community use. More than 90 percent of the 330 workers who
participated in the cleanup came from the local area, providing an extra economic boost to the
community.
The following chart is a high-level depiction of Superfund remedial site activity that shows how
sites progress through the remedial pipeline from site assessment through NPL deletion. Later
sections describe the Superfund program workload throughout each phase of the pipeline.
All Superfund Site Activity
(Includes Federal Facilities)
Sit* Au*um*nt Accomplishments (51,329)
r>*t1iv« CIRCUS
• *ritf AuC^UTXnC
EPA- & PRP-Lead Site Activity
(Excludes Federal Facilities)
1,676 NPL Slt«s [1,312 Final, 364 D*l*Ud)
IS
I Study or Design - 106
i Construction Underway - 305
i CorotrutTion. Compfewd ICQ
-1144
i Oehrtjpd Deferred - 3
• CC and Deleted-361
I CC and Not Dekrsed - 783
1,144 Construction Completed Sites
1.5O3 NPL Sites (1.1
i Study Pending - 18
• Study Of Design • 196
• Construction Underway - 213
i Onvuur ticin Compkrwd (CO
1O73
I l>rt«T.cdD*
-------
For more information about the Superfund Remedial program, please refer to
http ://www. epa.gov/superfund.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In recognition of budget constraints, the FY 2014 request includes a net $25.9 million reduction
in the Superfund Remedial budget as compared to the FY 2012 Enacted level of $564.9 million.
This reduction will be allocated across the remedial pipeline leading to performance reductions
in the number of site assessments, remedial investigation/feasibility studies (RI/FSs), remedial
designs (RDs), remedial actions (RAs), and ongoing long-term response actions. In addition,
EPA anticipates delays in the initiation of construction work at approximately another 10-15
projects, so that 40-45 projects will be potentially unfunded by the end of FY 2014. This reflects
the agency's focus on completing ongoing work rather than starting new work. Further, the
agency is reducing its projection of construction completions in FY 2014 partially as a result of
the cumulative effects of reduced funding over the past few years for EPA-lead projects.
The Superfund Remedial program's top priority remains protecting the American public by
reducing risk to human health and the environment. The agency continues to place a priority on
achieving its goals for the two key environmental indicators, Human Exposures Under Control
(HEUC) and Groundwater Migration Under Control (GMUC). The targets for these measures
will remain at the FY 2013 levels, 10 and 15, respectively.
While continuing to rely on the agency's Enforcement First approach to encourage potentially
responsible parties to conduct and/or pay for cleanups, the Remedial program will continue to
focus on completing ongoing projects and maximizing the use of site-specific special account
resources.20 The agency also will emphasize cleaning up sites to foster site reuse, which reflects
the high priority that the EPA places on land revitalization as an integral part of the agency's
mission for the Superfund program. In FY 2014, the EPA's target for the Sitewide Ready for
Anticipated Use (SWRAU) measure will be 60, which is consistent with the FY 2013 target.
The program plans to conduct more than two hundred five-year reviews in FY 2014. The agency
also plans to reduce the administrative burdens of these reviews, through streamlining certain
types of reviews, streamlining headquarters review functions, and/or clarifying conditions that
trigger reviews, while still ensuring the effectiveness of remedies to protect human health and the
environment.
Remedial Program Activities
This section discusses the stages of review and action that sites follow when addressed through
the Superfund Remedial program.
1) Site Assessment & NPL Additions
The site assessment component of the Superfund Remedial program performs the critical
function of screening sites for contamination and developing the most appropriate approach for
1 Special account resources are funds EPA receives from PRPs through settlements and must be used site-specifically.
706
-------
cleanup. In FY 2014, the Remedial program expects to perform 700 remedial site assessments, of
which approximately one-half will be conducted by states and tribes through cooperative
agreement funding. This level of activity will ensure the EPA and its state, Tribal and federal
partners are made aware of new sites and emerging categories of sites posing potential threats to
human health and the environment.
The EPA uses the site assessment function to determine the best approach to address potentially
harmful sites, including adding them to the NPL. Other cleanup approaches that may be selected
at the conclusion of assessment work include deferral or referral to state/Tribal cleanup programs
such as state Voluntary Cleanup Programs, the EPA's Superfund removal program, state
corrective action and waste management programs, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Non-NPL cleanups have been implemented at approximately 5,000 sites assessed by the
Remedial program to date. A recent study conducted by the Association of State and Territorial
Solid Waste Management Officials of 28 states found that close to 40 percent of sites assessed in
those states with federal funding are ultimately cleaned up through state programs.21 Therefore,
limited federal site assessment resources leverage state and other resources in order to achieve
protective cleanups.
At the beginning of FY 2014, the EPA expects that approximately 2,500 sites will need initial or
additional assessment and, based on recent trends, the EPA expects 300 new sites will be
submitted to the Remedial program for assessment by citizens, states, tribes, other federal
agencies and other sources over the course of the year. Emerging workload demands may affect
the EPA's ability to make substantial progress on the sites still awaiting assessment. For
example, the EPA is reassessing sites based on renewed concerns about lead and dioxin levels.
Based on historical evidence, the EPA expects the following results from its expected completion
of 700 remedial assessments in FY 2014.
Remedial Assessment Results
Sites turned over to states/tribes for any further attention
(excludes pre-screen sites)
Site needs more complex assessment
Site needs remedial study/cleanup via the NPL or other cleanup
approach
Estimated Distribution of
FY 2014 Accomplishments
73%
23%
4%
Building on the work from the Integrated Cleanup Initiative, the EPA also will continue to
increase public access to assessment information in FY 2014. This will include enhanced access
to performance data so the public can better understand what assessment work has been
completed and what is still needed, as well as adding transparency to the EPA decision-making
process within the remedial site assessment program.
The NPL, including current sites on the NPL and sites that have been deleted, totals 1,676 sites.
The agency estimates that it will add between 10 and 20 sites to the NPL in FY 2014.
21 Please refer to http://www.astswmo.org/Files/Policies_and_Publications/CERCLA_and_Brownfields/2012.03.19-Site_Eval-
Phase II Report-FINAL.pdf for additional information.
707
-------
In order to reflect the science that evolved over the past two decades to help protect public
health, the EPA also will continue in FY 2014 to work on incorporating the subsurface vapor
intrusion exposure pathway into agency site assessment guidance and expects to propose
revisions to the Hazard Ranking System (HRS). Because the science regarding the risks posed by
exposure to vapor intrusion in buildings did not exist in the 1980s when CERCLA was passed,
this potential pathway has not yet been accounted for in placing sites on the NPL. Subsurface
intrusion sites have the potential to pose a higher level of risk than other exposure routes. The
EPA does not expect the net number of site assessments to increase due to any updated guidance
or revisions to the HRS but, rather, that all known exposure pathways are properly addressed.
For more information on the Superfund remedial assessment process, please refer to
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/npljirs/siteasmt.htm
2) Site Characterization and Remedy Selection
After a site is placed on the NPL, it must be investigated, risks determined, and a remedy
selected to address the threats posed by the site. Remedy selection decisions are documented in
Records of Decision (RODs) and amended RODs.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to maintain focus on completing existing work and expects
the number of new EPA-lead Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) projects to
remain at the FY 2013 projected levels.
Under the Integrated Cleanup Initiative (ICI), there have been several productive efforts that will
contribute significantly to improved site characterization, remedy selection, and the pace of
cleanup. For example, the program has streamlined the review processes of both the National
Remedy Review Board (NRRB) and the Contaminated Sediments Technical Advisory Group
(CSTAG) by improving review coordination by the different boards, increasing opportunity for
stakeholder input, and increasing the transparency of board findings. These improvements will
lead to better and more swiftly approved RODs. Additionally, applying lessons learned from
remedial action optimization work, the program has expanded its technical support agenda,
training activities, and analytical tools to earlier phases of the cleanup process. Such actions can
minimize potential remedy performance issues, thus enhancing efficiency.
Remedial Investigations/Feasibility Studies
RI/FS Ongoing Projects (EPA)
RI/FS Ongoing Projects (PRP)
Total RI/FS Ongoing Projects
Fiscal Year Actuals/Estimates
FY 2012
Actuals
245
272
517
FY 2013
Est. (CJ)*
230
270
500
FY 2014
Est. (CJ)
220
260
480
RI/FS Start (EPA)
RI/FS Starts (PRP)
Total RI/FS Starts
27
11
38
15
15-20
30-35
15
15-20
30-35
RODs - EPA/PRP-Lead
28
30-35
30-35
*FY 2013 CJ estimated accomplishments are subject to change pending the results of the FY 2013 Enacted Budget.
708
-------
3) Remedial Design and Construction
After a remedy has been selected and before selected remedies can be built, design plans to guide
the construction are needed. The Remedial Design (RD) provides the technical specifications for
cleanup remedies and technologies that include a series of engineering reports, documents,
specifications, and drawings detailing the steps to be taken to meet the goals established in the
ROD. The RD may also include sampling, pilot tests, and treatability studies.
In FY 2014, the Remedial program expects to continue focusing resources on completing
ongoing EPA-lead RDs rather than start significant numbers of new projects. As a result, the
EPA expects the number of such new start projects to be consistent with the FY 2013 estimate.
Remedial Design
RD Ongoing Projects (EPA)
RD Ongoing Projects (PRP)
Total RD Ongoing Projects
RD Starts (EPA)
RD Starts (PRP)
Total RD Starts
RD Completions (EPA)
RD Completions (PRP)
Total RD Completions
Fiscal Year Actuals/Estimates
FY 2012
Actuals
102
140
242
31
35
66
19
32
51
FY 2013
Est. (CJ)*
95
125
220
15
25
40
30
30
60
FY 2014
Est. (CJ)
80
120
200
15
25
40
30
30
60
*FY 2013 CJ estimated accomplishments are subject to change pending the results of the FY 2013 Enacted Budget.
Following the RD, construction or implementation of the cleanup remedy, called the Remedial
Action (RA), is performed by the EPA (or states with agency resources) or PRPs under EPA or
state oversight. A given remedy may contain multiple actions or projects,22 depending on the
nature of the remedy selected, that address discrete areas of contamination, such as groundwater
remediation projects that are distinct from soil remediation projects. Funding for EPA Superfund
construction projects is critical to achieving risk reduction and restoration of contaminated sites
to allow productive reuse.
Due to funding needs for projects started in prior years combined with funding needs for new
projects, the Remedial program's budget cannot support funding all the construction projects
ready to start. Consequently, the EPA will continue to focus on completing ongoing construction
projects and expects to start only a limited number of EPA-lead new construction projects during
FY 2014. The cumulative effect of funding reductions in recent years will potentially delay the
initiation of construction work at approximately 40-45 projects by the end of FY 2014.
22 Projects represent discrete actions taken to implement a site cleanup remedy as described in the Record of Decision. They are
typically defined to address discrete problems, such as specific media (e.g., groundwater contamination), areas of a site (e.g.,
discrete areas of contamination), or particular technologies (e.g., soil vapor extraction). A given remedy may contain multiple
actions or projects depending on the nature of the remedy selected.
709
-------
The Remedial program estimates that the EPA will accomplish 115 (including Federal facility-
lead) RA project completions in FY 2014. This projection is consistent with the FY 2013 target.
The RA completion measure augments the long-standing site-wide construction completion
measure that the EPA will continue to use for EPA-, PRP-, and Federal facility-lead sites as an
interim measure of progress toward making sites ready for reuse and achieving long term
cleanup goals. In FY 2014, the EPA will work to achieve site-wide construction completion at 15
sites, including Federal facility-lead sites. Through FY 2012, the cumulative total of sites that
have achieved construction complete is 1,142.
Remedial Action (RA) and
Construction Completion (CC)
RA Ongoing Projects (EPA)
RA Ongoing Projects (PRP)
Total RA Ongoing Projects
Fiscal Year Actuals/Estimates
FY 2012
Actuals
146
327
473
FY 2013
Est. (CJ)***
135
315
450
FY 2014 Est.
(CJ)
100
315
415
RA Starts (EPA)
RA Starts (PRP)
Total RA Starts
RA Completions (EPA)
RA Completions (PRP)
Total RA Completions*
12
36
48
45
41
86
0
40
40
35
40
75
****rpgj)
40
TBD
30
40
70
Construction Completions (CC)**
22
19
15
* The total number of completions shown does not equate to the measure target due to the exclusion of Federal
facility-lead projects.
"Includes EPA-, PRP-, and Federal facility-lead sites
***FY 2013 CJ estimated accomplishments are subject to change pending the results of the FY 2013 Enacted
Budget.
**** The FY 2014 CJ estimated RA New Starts (EPA) accomplishments will be determined pending the results of
the FY 2013 Enacted Budget and the status of ongoing construction projects.
4) Post-Construction (Long-term Response Actions, Five Year Reviews and Site
Deletions)
Long-term response actions (LTRAs) are post-construction activities (often pumping and treating
groundwater after a treatment plant has been constructed) that are intended to restore ground or
surface water to a level that assures protection of human health and the environment (e.g.,
restoring a contaminated aquifer to drinking water quality). Such activities may last decades, and
the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA)
allows the EPA to fund an LTRA for up to 10 years. Once this period of time has elapsed, the
state in which the site is located must take responsibility for continuing to operate and maintain
the system.
710
-------
In FY 2014, the EPA expects to transfer responsibility for 10 LTRAs to states where the EPA's
performance obligations are complete. The program also expects the number of ongoing LTRAs
to remain the same as in FY 2013 as remedial actions continue to complete and the EPA takes on
responsibility for new LTRAs.
During FY 2014, the EPA additionally plans to conduct more than 200 Five-Year Reviews
(FYRs), which are used to evaluate the implementation and performance of all components of
the implemented remedy and to determine whether the remedy remains protective of human
health and the environment.
The Remedial program will encourage regions to work with states and other federal agencies, as
appropriate, to delete sites or parts of sites from the NPL where sites have met the statutory
requirements for deletions. More deletions may facilitate Sitewide Ready for Anticipated Reuse
determinations and promote reuse.
Post-Construction
Ongoing Long Term Response Actions
Five Year Review Completions (EPA and PRP Lead)
NPL Deletions
Fiscal Year Actuals/Estimates
FY 2012
Actuals
356
185
11
FY 2013
Est. (CJ)*
340
216
12
FY 2014
Est. (CJ)
340
207
13
*FY 2013 CJ estimated accomplishments are subject to change pending the results of the FY 2013 Enacted Budget.
5) Environmental Indicators
The Human Exposure Under Control (HEUC) performance measure documents the number of
NPL sites at which the agency has brought human exposures to harmful chemicals under control,
while the Groundwater Migration Under Control (GMUC) performance measure documents
whether contamination in groundwater is within safe levels, or that there is no movement of
groundwater contamination.
In FY 2014, the agency plans to achieve control of all identified unacceptable human exposures
at 10 additional sites, bringing the program's cumulative total of HEUC sites to 1,381.
Additionally, the agency expects to achieve GMUC at 15 additional sites, bringing the program's
cumulative total to 1,099 sites.
Actions taken to achieve HEUC include, but are not limited to: reducing exposure to unsafe
drinking water by providing alternate water supply to affected communities; protecting children
from lead-contaminated soil around their homes through soil removal; or reducing exposure to
indoor air contaminated by harmful vapors by installing mitigation systems in homes. The EPA
is making significant progress in assuring that prior to completion of cleanups, unacceptable
human exposures are eliminated or controlled as soon as possible. The Superfund program has
made significant progress in stabilizing exposure at sites, while longer-term cleanup progresses.
The number of Superfund sites achieving HEUC has risen from 80 percent in 2002 to 86 percent
in 2012. This environmental indicator is an evidence-based program performance measure. It
711
-------
demonstrates the program's evaluation of real-time data related to completed human exposure
pathways and the agency's actions in eliminating them.
Actions to achieve GMUC include controlling the migration of contaminated groundwater
through engineered remedies or natural processes. This environmental indicator is also an
evidence-based program performance measure. It demonstrates the program's evaluation of real-
time data related to the spread of contaminated groundwater plumes and the agency's actions in
controlling them. The number of Superfund sites achieving GMUC has risen from 60 percent in
2002 to 75 percent in 2012 (sites that have no contaminated groundwater are not part of the
GMUC calculation).
6) Site Reuse
In FY 2014, the EPA expects 60 additional sites will qualify as Sitewide Ready for Anticipated
Use (SWRAU), bringing the program's cumulative total to 726 sites that are ready for reuse.
The SWRAU measure reflects the priority that the EPA places on land revitalization as an
integral part of the agency's mission for the Superfund program, as well as the priority that the
EPA now places on post-construction activities at NPL sites. As part of the cleanup process, the
EPA works with communities to understand likely future land uses and integrates those
considerations into cleanup plans. The agency also works with communities to address barriers
to reuse, implement institutional controls that protect current and future users, and ensure long-
term stewardship of remedies.
Actions to Improve Program Effectiveness
1) Optimizing Site Cleanups
During FY 2014, the agency will continue to implement the "National Strategy to Expand
Superfund Optimization Practices from Site Assessment to Site Completion" (the "Optimization
Strategy") by conducting approximately 20 to 30 optimization reviews annually and ensuring
effective tracking, reporting, and measurement of implementation performance. The overall
goals of the Optimization Strategy are more cost-effective expenditure of Superfund dollars, a
reduced energy/carbon footprint, improved remedy performance, protection of human health and
the environment, expedited consensus, improved decision-making, and acceleration of the pace
of project/site completion. Optimization recommendations tend to focus on reducing operating
and project management costs, creating more efficient monitoring networks, and identifying
treatment options for source contamination to reduce clean up timeframes or improve remedy
protectiveness. Furthermore, the Optimization Strategy encourages overarching changes to
Superfund business practices through more frequent and routine assessment of site cleanup
progress, technical performance and costs; and improved acquisition and contracts management
strategies to ensure that efficiencies are achieved throughout the cleanup lifecycle.
712
-------
The FY 2012 "Ground Water Remedy Optimization Progress Report: 2010-201123 provides an
indication of some of the costs avoided through optimization. For example, at the 10th Street
Superfund Site in Nebraska, the EPA reduced monitoring costs from approximately
$250,000/year to $124,000/year (-50 percent reduction) and project management and
engineering support costs from approximately $275,000/year to $190,000/year (-31 percent
reduction). At the Pemaco Superfund Site in California, the EPA reduced monitoring costs from
approximately $443,000/year to $230,000/year (-50 percent reduction). As implementation of
optimization recommendations progresses at sites, the Superfund program will continue to
benefit from more effective, protective and technically efficient remedial strategies.
2) Contracts Improvement Efforts
The EPA will continue its efforts to improve the efficiency of the Superfund program through
changes to its contracting strategy throughout FY 2014. By realigning similar types of work
among contract classes, the agency is working to create efficiencies across the entire suite of
Superfund contracts. Further, the program will build on the lessons learned from the program's
Integrated Cleanup Initiative, such as early constructor involvement, increased communication,
partnering and planning, or phased tasking of remedial investigation projects. These changes in
contracting approaches are expected to improve performance, increase opportunities for
optimization, and enhance contract award opportunities for small and socio-economically
disadvantaged businesses, thus helping to meet agency socio-economic goals.
3) Green Remediation
During FY 2014, the Superfund program will work to support project managers in reducing the
environmental footprint of the remedies at their sites by applying an environmental footprint
methodology first developed in FY 2012. Green remediation efforts in Superfund and other
cleanup programs are reflected in the agency's Strategic Plan and respond to the desire to protect
human health and the environment while minimizing the environmental externalities associated
with the construction and operation of remedies. Within the Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response, the Principles for Greener Cleanups provide overall implementation
guidance while the Superfund Green Remediation Strategy defines 40 specific activities to
advance the principles.24
4) Contract Laboratory Program
In FY 2014, the Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) will seek to reduce the costs associated
with providing analytical services to the Superfund program by decreasing the total extramural
cost per laboratory analysis up to 7 percent from FY 2011 levels. To realize these savings the
program will: 1) complete the solicitation of the Combined Analytical Services Contract (CASC)
which streamlines current CLP contracts; 2) fully implement efforts for nearly paperless
operations; 3) continue to use Regional Office allocation strategies; 4) emphasize the use of
special accounts for analytical services where sample collection, analysis and data validation are
23 Please refer to http://www.epa.gov/superfund/cleanup/postconstruction/pdfs/1011 optimization report.pdf for additional
information.
24 Please refer to http://www.epa.gov/oswer/greenercleanups/principles.html for additional information.
713
-------
needed to support decisions at sites with special accounts; and 5) evaluate every aspect of
contract support to find efficiencies, reduce nonessential services and create more efficient
business processes.
The CLP has a proven track record in reducing analytical service costs. Significant savings have
resulted from applying a number of cost reduction strategies that maximized productivity without
compromising quality. For example, using lower-cost analytical testing turn-around-times
(TATs) to the fullest extent possible has resulted in an estimated savings of $1 million. The
savings were subsequently applied towards additional analyses. Another example is streamlining
and automating additional processes related to sample and analysis scheduling, tracking,
invoicing, and reporting which yielded approximately $440,000 in cost savings. Additionally,
reducing the need to manage and store hard-copy analytical results has yielded approximately
$100,000 in immediate savings and additional long-term storage cost savings. These and other
practices have reduced the CLP's total extramural cost per laboratory analysis by 6.2 percent
between FY 2007 and FY 2012 with a total savings of approximately $1.4 million in FY 2012
alone. The CLP will apply the lessons learned from prior year cost savings efforts to meet its
goal for FY 2014.
5) Superfund Enterprise Management System (SEMS)
By FY 2014, the new Superfund Enterprise Management System (SEMS), which is scheduled to
be operational in calendar year 2013, will allow the program to improve the planning, tracking
and reporting of key performance measures in order to provide valuable evidence of outcomes
and results. New analytical components of the system also will provide additional functionality
when performing data analyses. Additionally, SEMS also will consolidate the records
management function of several systems into a single system, thus improving access to
Superfund records. Further, SEMS will enhance access to program records through an improved
web-based interface that stores information in a central repository for on-demand display through
public web sites. This enhanced approach to records management will improve accessibility to
the documentary evidence that supports key programmatic decisions, thereby supporting future
evaluations by both internal and external stakeholders.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(115) Number of Superfund remedial site assessments completed.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
900
1,020
FY2012
900
1,151
FY2013
650
FY2014
700
Units
Assessment
s
Measure
Target
Actual
(141) Annual number of Superfund sites with remedy construction completed.
FY2007
24
24
FY2008
30
30
FY2009
20
20
FY2010
22
18
FY2011
22
22
FY2012
22
22
FY2013
19
FY2014
15
Units
Completions
Measure
Target
(151) Number of Superfund sites with human exposures under control.
FY2007
10
FY2008
10
FY2009
10
FY2010
10
FY2011
10
FY2012
10
FY2013
10
FY2014
10
Units
Sites
714
-------
Actual
8
24
11
18
10
13
Measure
Target
Actual
(152) Number of Superfund sites with contaminated groundwater migration under control.
FY2007
10
19
FY2008
15
20
FY2009
15
16
FY2010
15
18
FY2011
15
21
FY2012
15
18
FY2013
15
FY2014
15
Units
Sites
Measure
Target
Actual
(170) Number of remedial action project completions at Superfund NPL sites.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
103
132
FY2012
130
142
FY2013
115
FY2014
115
Units
Completions
Measure
Target
Actual
(S10) Number of Superfund sites ready for anticipated use site-wide.
FY2007
30
64
FY2008
30
85
FY2009
65
66
FY2010
65
66
FY2011
65
65
FY2012
65
66
FY2013
60
FY2014
60
Units
Sites
The Superfund Remedial program reports its activities and progress toward long-term human
health and environmental protection via six performance measures that encompass the entire
cleanup process. For FY 2014, the program is reducing targets for one of its six performance
measures (construction completions) from FY 2013 levels, assuring focus on human health and
environmental protection while balancing the program's long-term site cleanup workload in a
resource constrained environment.
Note: Performance goals and measure for the Superfund Federal Facilities Response program are
a component of the Superfund Remedial program's measures.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$5,720.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$290.0 / +2.1 FTE) This increases the Superfund Remedial program by 2.1 regional
FTE and associated payroll of $290.0. Ongoing work at large, high-profile, and complex
remediation sites has required this increase in personnel.
• (+$28.0 / +0.2 FTE) As part of the agency's E-Enterprise investment, this increases 0.2
FTE and $28.0 in associated payroll to coordinate and streamline financial reporting
requirements across multiple EPA programs. As several environmental statutes (e.g.
RCRA, CERCLA, SDWA, and TSCA) impose requirements on the regulated community
to obtain financial assurance for environmental obligations, the agency will use these
resources to assimilate financial assurance reporting requirements with the intent to
reduce reporting burden on industry and improve services for the regulated community.
715
-------
• (-$31,620.0) This reduction rebalances the overall Superfund Remedial program to give
priority to completing projects at various stages in the response process as opposed to
starting new project phases. This reduction will have effects on program performance
throughout the remedial pipeline leading to a reduction in the number of site assessments,
remedial investigation/feasibility studies (RI/FSs), remedial designs (RDs), remedial
actions (RAs), and ongoing long-term response actions. It also will lead to a decline in
performance outputs for one of the six Remedial program performance measures
(construction completions) from FY 2013 target levels.
• (-$342.0) This change reflects a reduction found from IT efficiencies realized by
eliminating eFacts and CERCLIS and by consolidating their functions into the agency's
new Superfund Enterprise Management System (SEMS).
Statutory Authority:
The Superfund program was established by, and operates pursuant to, the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. sec. 9601 et seq., as
amended, and Executive Order 12580 (January 23, 1987).
716
-------
Superfund: Support to Other Federal Agencies
Program Area: Superfund Cleanup
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Restore Land
(Dollars in Thousands)
Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$5,849.0
$5,849.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$5,849.0
$5,849.0
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$5,881.0
$5,881.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($5,849.0)
($5,849.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
Other federal agencies are given responsibilities under the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) as further defined under the National Oil
and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). Since the inception of CERCLA,
automatic transfers were provided to agencies from the EPA's Superfund appropriation to
support their responsibilities. Over time, as the agencies' roles and responsibilities became more
defined, the agencies developed their own mission-specific programs around their areas of
expertise as the need for their support extended beyond Superfund-specific activities. As of FY
2012, there were only three agencies that still received automatic transfers from the Superfund
appropriation. These agencies include the Department of the Interior (DOT), the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the United States Coast Guard (USCG).
With the roles and responsibilities between federal agencies more succinctly defined, the EPA
has found that automatic transfers are outdated and that interagency assistance agreements which
can be entered on an as-needed basis are more appropriate.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
This program is being discontinued in FY 2014. Funding for support services by other federal
agencies may be pursued on an as-needed basis. The agency has determined that an automatic
transfer to other federal agencies is no longer required and interagency assistance agreements are
more appropriate.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supported the Restore Land Objective under Goal 3. However, there
are no performance measures for this eliminated program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$5,849.0) The automatic transfers to USCG ($4,417.0), NOAA ($957.0) and DOI
($475.0) are being discontinued.
717
-------
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, 42 United States
Code 9601 et seq. - Sections 104, 105 and 120.
718
-------
Superfund Special Accounts
719
-------
l-\£
Superfund Special Accounts
Background
Section 122(b)(3) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability
Act (CERCLA) authorizes the EPA to retain and use funds received pursuant to an agreement
with a Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) to carry out the purpose of that agreement. The EPA
retains such funds in special accounts, which are sub-accounts in the Superfund Trust Fund.
Pursuant to the specific agreements, which typically take the form of an Administrative Order on
Consent or Consent Decree, the EPA uses special account funds to finance site-specific
CERCLA response actions at the site for which the account was established. Through the use of
special accounts, the EPA pursues its "enforcement first" policy - ensuring responsible parties
pay for cleanup - so that appropriated resources from the Superfund Trust Fund are conserved
for sites where no viable or liable PRPs can be identified. Both special account resources and
appropriated resources are critical to the Superfund program.
Special account funds are used to conduct many different site-specific CERCLA response
actions, including, but not limited to, investigations to determine the extent of contamination and
appropriate remedy needed, construction and implementation of the remedy, enforcement
activities, and post-construction activities. The EPA also may provide special account funds as
an incentive to another PRP who agrees to perform additional work beyond the PRP's fair share
at the site, which the EPA might otherwise have to conduct using appropriated resources.
Because response actions may take many years, the full use of special account funds also may
take many years. Pursuant to the agreement, once site-specific work is complete and site risks are
addressed, the EPA may use special account funds to reimburse the EPA for site-specific costs
incurred using appropriated resources (e.g., reclassification), allowing the latter resources to be
allocated to other sites. Any remaining special account funds are generally transferred to the
Superfund Trust Fund, where they are available for future appropriation by Congress to further
support cleanup at other sites.
FY 2012 Special Account Activity
Since the inception of special accounts through the end of FY 2012, the EPA has collected
approximately $3.9 billion from PRPs and earned approximately $400.5 million in interest. In
addition, the EPA has transferred over $21.9 million to the Superfund Trust Fund. As of the end
of FY 2012, over $2.2 billion has been disbursed for site response actions and approximately
$269.7 million has been obligated but not yet disbursed. The aggregate $2.5 billion spent from
special accounts is more than 58 percent of the cumulative funds made available in special
accounts over time.
In FY 2012, EPA disbursed approximately $240 million from special accounts for response work
at more than 600 sites, which increased disbursements by 4 percent ($9.3 million) from FY 2011
House Report 111-180 of the FY 2010 Department of the Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriation Bill
directs the Agency to include in its annual budget justification a plan for using special account funds expeditiously. This
information is being provided in response to this request.
720
-------
(excluding reclassifications). The EPA is carefully managing more than $1.7 billion that was
available as of October 1, 2012.
The agency appreciates the Committee's acknowledgement of the steps EPA has taken towards
centralizing management of these accounts. The remaining balance of more than $1.7 billion
does not represent the level of annual funding available to EPA from special accounts since the
funds collected under settlements are intended to finance future cleanup work at particular sites
over the long term. The time frame for use of special account funds at a specific site depends on
several factors, including the specific requirements for fund use set forth in the agreement the
funds were collected under, the stage of site cleanup, the viability of other responsible parties to
conduct site cleanup, and the nature of the site contamination, among other things. As of the end
of FY 2012, the EPA developed multi-year plans to utilize the available balance and will
continue to fully plan 100 percent of the funds received to conduct site-specific response
activities, or reclassify and/or transfer excess funds to the Superfund Trust Fund for use at other
Superfund sites. Current plans indicate that the agency will utilize more than 47 percent of the
remaining available special account resources over the next five years for site-specific response
work.
The vast majority of open accounts (78 percent) have an available balance of less than $1 million
and collectively represent only 11 percent of the total resources available, while 3 percent of
open accounts have approximately 57 percent of the total resources available. Through its
enforcement efforts, the agency continues to receive site-specific settlement funds that are placed
in special accounts each year, so progress on actual obligation and disbursement of funds may
not be apparent upon review solely of the cumulative available balance, as current special
account balances are used while additional funds may be deposited. However, in FY 2012 the
cumulative amount available in special accounts decreased by approximately $48 million
compared to the cumulative amount available in special accounts as of the end of FY 2011 due to
more funds being obligated and disbursed than were collected in special accounts. In FY 2011
and FY 2012, the EPA received over $352 million and over $221 million, respectively, for site-
specific response work; however, most of these funds were for site response work to occur over
multiple years. For example, in FY 2012 three particular special accounts received deposits
totaling more than $10 million each as a result of Superfund enforcement efforts. More than $41
million was deposited in an account for the Bunker Hill site in Idaho, $25.7 million was
deposited in an account for the Midnite Mine site in Washington state, and $13.5 million was
deposited in an account for the Fletcher's Paint Works and Storage Site in New Hampshire.
These funds will help pay for future investigations and remedial construction to protect human
health and the environment for communities affected by these sites. In addition, during FY 2012
the special accounts with the largest amounts disbursed for response work were associated with
the Libby Asbestos Site in Montana, with more than $27 million disbursed, and the Omaha Lead
Site in Nebraska, with more than $20 million disbursed, both sites which require multi-year
cleanup efforts. EPA will continue to monitor the use of special account funds to ensure we are
conducting cleanups as quickly and efficiently as possible.
Exhibit 1 illustrates the cumulative status of open and closed accounts, FY 2012 program
activity, and planned multi-year uses of the available balance. Exhibit 2 provides the prior year
(FY 2012), current year (FY 2013), and estimated future budget year (FY 2014) activity for
721
-------
special accounts. Exhibit 3 provides prior year data (FY 2012) by EPA region to exhibit the
geographic use of the funds.26
26House Report 112-589 of the FY 2013 Department of the Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriation Bill states
"The Committee is encouraged by the steps EPA has taken toward the effective centralized management of Superfund special
accounts. However, the Committee remains concerned about the pace at which the $1.8 billion in balances residing in Special
Accounts is spent.. .The Committee directs EPA to incorporate the Superfund special accounts exhibit into the Superfund section
of the Congressional justification, add a new table to the exhibit showing the available balance at the beginning and end of year,
receipts, interest, obligations, reclassifications, and transfer to the Trust Fund for prior year, current year, and budget year. EPA
should also include a separate table that breaks out the prior year data outlined above by EPA region."
722
-------
Exhibit 1: Summary of FY 2012 Special Account Transactions
and Cumulative Multi-Year Plans for Using Available Special Account Funds
Account Status1
Cumulative Open
Cumulative Closed
FY 2012 Special Account Activity
Beginning Available Balance
FY 20 12 Activities
+ Receipts
- Transfers to Superfimd Trust Fund (Receipt Adjustment)
+ Net Interest Earned
- Net Change in Unliquidated Obligations
- Disbursements - For EPA Incurred Costs
- Disbursements - For Work Party Reimbursements under Final Settlements
- Reclassifications
End of Fiscal Year (EOFY) Available Balance2
Multi-Year Plans for EOFY 2012 Available Balance3
2012 EOFY Available Balance
- Estimates for Future EPA Site Activities based on Current Site Plans4
- Estimates for Potential Disbursement to Work Parties Identified in Final
Settlements5
- Estimates for Reclassifications for FYs 2013-20156
- Estimates for Transfers to Trust Fund for FYs 2013-20156
- Available Balance to be Planned for Site-Specific Response7
Number of
Accounts
1,011
164
$ in Thousands
$1,811,528.9
$221,105.5
($2,679.4)
$9,140.9
$17,421.6
($236,053.5)
($3,932.2)
($53.434.8)
$1,763,097.1
$ in Thousands
$1,763,097.1
$1,607,338.7
$61,050.9
$77,002.6
$6,052.3
$11,652.6
1 FY 2012 data is as of 10/01/2012. The Beginning Available Balance is as of 10/01/201 1.
2 Numbers may not add due to rounding.
3Planning data were recorded in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information
System (CERCLIS) as of 10/22/2012 in reference to special account available balances as of 10/01/2012.
4 "Estimates for EPA Future Site Activities" includes all response actions that EPA may conduct or oversee in the future,
such as removal, remedial, enforcement, post-construction activities as well as allocation of funds to facilitate a
settlement to encourage PRPs to perform the cleanup. Planning data are multi-year and cannot be used for annual
comparisons.
5 "Estimates for Potential Disbursements to Work Parties Identified in Finalized Settlements" includes those funds that
have already been designated in a settlement document, such as a Consent Decree or Administrative Order on Consent,
to be available to a PRP for reimbursements but that have not yet been obligated.
6 "Reclassifications" and "Transfers to the Trust Fund" are estimated for three FYs only. These amounts are only
estimates and may change as the EPA determines what funds are needed to complete site-specific response activities.
7 These include resources received by the EPA at the end of the fiscal year and will be assigned for site-specific response
activities.
723
-------
Exhibit 2: Actual and Estimated Special Account Transactions FY 2012 - FY 2014
(Dollars in Thousands)
Beginning Available Balance
Receipts
Transfers to Trust Fund (Receipt Adjustment)1
Net Interest Earned 2
Net Obligations1'3
Reclassifications1
End of Year Available Balance4
FY 2012
actual
$1,811,528.9
$221,105.5
($2,679.4)
$9,140.9
($222,564.1)
($53.434.8^
$1,763,097.1
FY 2013
estimate
$1,763,097.1
$289,000.0
($3,400.0)
$14,000.0
48,000.0)
($50.900.0^
$1,763,797.1
FY 2014
estimate
$1,763,797.1
$289,000.0
($3,400.0)
$19,000.0
($248,000.0)
($50.900.0^
$1,769,497.1
1 The estimates for Transfers to Trust Fund, Net Obligations, and Reclassifications are based on a 3 year
historical average.
2 This is an estimate utilizing current economic assumptions.
3 Net Obligations reflect special account funds no longer available for obligation, excluding reclassifications
and receipts transferred to the Trust Fund.
4 Numbers may not add due to rounding.
Exhibit 3: FY 2012 Special Account Transactions by EPA Region
(Dollars in Thousands)
Region 1
Region 2
Region 3
Region 4
Region 5
Region 6
Region 7
Region 8
Region 9
Region 10
Total
Beginning
Available
Balance1
$125,089.3
$210,695.3
$91,658.5
$65,204.3
$247,959.2
$71,817.0
$294,552.5
$225,048.0
$315,789.2
$163,715.5
$1,811,528.9
Receipts
$20,919.6
$19,616.8
$12,760.3
$9,063.7
$22,094.0
$3,262.4
$18,982.1
$7,228.3
$29,203.9
$77,974.4
$221,105.5
Transfers to
Trust Fund
(Receipt
Adjustment)
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
($6.9)
($2,411.4)
($21.3)
($27.9)
($194.2)
($6.0)
($11.6)
($2,679.4)
Net
Interest
Earned2
$1,024.5
$1,870.8
$706.5
$508.9
($3,955.5)
$608.6
$2,353.2
$1,858.7
$2,473.0
$1,692.2
$9,140.9
Net
Obligations3
($7,593.5)
($29,815.1)
($8,180.7)
($3,895.6)
($14,933.8)
($12,566.8)
($35,309.6)
($38,304.9)
($30,258.6)
($41,705.5)
($222,564.1)
1 FY 2012 data is as of 10/01/2012. The Beginning Available Balance is as of 10/01/201 1.
Reclassifications
($7,517.3)
($5,953.9)
($8,207.8)
($2,701.1)
($12,223.5)
($6,413.2)
($2,313.0)
($270.0)
($3,094.7)
($4,740.3)
($53,434.8)
End of Year
Available
Balance4
$131,922.5
$196,413.9
$88,736.9
$68,173.4
$236,528.9
$56,686.7
$278,237.3
$195,365.9
$314,106.8
$196,924.8
$1,763,097.1
2 Net Interest Earned reflects interest earned and made available for site-specific response work as well as reductions in interest that are
no longer required for future response work associated with a special account.
3 Net Obligations reflect special account funds no longer available for obligation, excluding reclassifications and receipts transferred to
the Trust Fund.
4 Numbers may not add due to rounding.
1 Section 209 (a) of Pub. L. 99-499.
n Land Research Program Science Applications Through Partnerships: A Progress Report 2005-2009
(http://www.epa.gov/landscience/partnerships/index.htm
724
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Resource Summary Table 727
Program Projects in LUST 727
Program Area: Enforcement 729
Civil Enforcement 730
Program Area: Operations and Administration 732
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 733
Acquisition Management 735
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance 737
Program Area: Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST) 739
LUST/UST 740
LUST Cooperative Agreements 745
LUST Prevention 749
Program Area: Research: Sustainable Communities 753
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities 754
725
-------
726
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Resource Summary Table
(Dollars in Thousands)
Leaking Underground Storage
Tanks
Budget Authority
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$104,142.0
69.7
FY 2012
Actuals
$106,185.5
65.8
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$104,779.0
69.7
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$99,242.0
62.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($4,900.0)
-7.2
Bill Language: LUST
For necessary expenses to carry out leaking underground storage tank cleanup activities
authorized by subtitle I of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended, $99,242,000, to remain
available until expended, of which $70,316,000 shall be for carrying out leaking underground
storage tank cleanup activities authorized by section 9003 (h) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as
amended; $28,926,000 shall be for carrying out the other provisions of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act specified in section 9508(c) of the Internal Revenue Code, as amended: Provided, That the
Administrator is authorized to use appropriations made available under this heading to
implement section 9013 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act to provide financial assistance to
federally recognized Indian tribes for the development and implementation of programs to
manage underground storage tanks.
Program Projects in LUST
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
Enforcement
Civil Enforcement
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations
Rent
Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations (other activities)
Subtotal, Facilities Infrastructure
FY 2012
Enacted
$789.0
$695.0
$220.0
$915.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$678.7
$695.0
$182.0
$877.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$789.0
$695.0
$221.0
$916.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$816.0
$636.0
$203.0
$839.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$27.0
($59.0)
($17.0)
($76.0)
727
-------
Program Project
and Operations
Acquisition Management
Central Planning, Budgeting, and
Finance
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
Underground Storage Tanks (LUST /
UST)
LUST/UST
LUST Cooperative Agreements
LUST Prevention
Subtotal, Underground Storage Tanks
(LUST/UST)
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy
Communities
Subtotal, Research: Sustainable
and Healthy Communities
TOTAL, EPA
FY 2012
Enacted
$163.0
$512.0
$1,590.0
$11,962.0
$58,956.0
$30,449.0
$101,367.0
$396.0
$396.0
$104,142.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$170.6
$416.3
$1,463.9
$12,542.3
$59,968.0
$31,193.8
$103,704.1
$338.8
$338.8
$106,185.5
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$164.0
$512.0
$1,592.0
$11,991.0
$59,355.0
$30,655.0
$102,001.0
$397.0
$397.0
$104,779.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$152.0
$414.0
$1,405.0
$10,195.0
$57,402.0
$28,926.0
$96,523.0
$498.0
$498.0
$99,242.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($11.0)
($98.0)
($185.0)
($1,767.0)
($1,554.0)
($1,523.0)
($4,844.0)
$102.0
$102.0
($4,900.0)
728
-------
Program Area: Enforcement
729
-------
Civil Enforcement
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Enforcing Environmental Laws
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Environmental Program & Management
Leaking Underground Storage
Tanks
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$2,286.0
$177,290.0
$789.0
$180,365.0
1,205.1
FY 2012
Actuals
$2,514.1
$177,402.3
$678.7
$180,595.1
1,174.8
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$2,289.0
$177,516.0
$789.0
$180,594.0
1,205.1
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$2,955.0
$189,192.0
$816.0
$192,963.0
1,188.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$669.0
$11,902.0
$27.0
$12,598.0
-17.1
Program Project Description:
To protect our nation's groundwater and drinking water from petroleum releases from
Underground Storage Tanks (UST), the Civil Enforcement program provides compliance
assistance tools, technical assistance, and training to promote and enforce UST systems
compliance and cleanups.1 The Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program uses its
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) resources to oversee cleanups by responsible
parties; enforce cleanups by recalcitrant parties; and pay for cleanups at sites where the owner or
operator is unknown, unwilling, or unable to respond, or which require emergency action. The
EPA may take enforcement action against owners and/or operators of LUSTs to achieve timely
and protective cleanup of contamination. The EPA takes enforcement action in response to an
UST release if the release poses a major public health or environmental emergency, the state or
the owner/operator is unable to respond, or the state requests assistance from the EPA.
The Civil Enforcement program's overarching goal is to assure compliance with the nation's
environmental laws to protect human health and the environment. The program collaborates with
the Department of Justice and states, local agencies, and Tribal governments to ensure consistent
and fair enforcement of all environmental laws and regulations. The program seeks to address
violations that threaten communities, level the economic playing field by ensuring that violators
do not realize an economic benefit from noncompliance, and deter future violations. The Civil
Enforcement program develops, litigates, and settles administrative and civil judicial cases
against serious violators of environmental laws. Compliance with environmental laws improves
when regulated entities, federal agencies, and the public have easy access to tools that help them
understand these laws and find efficient, cost-effective means for putting them into practice.
For more information refer to: www.epa.gov/swerustl/cat/index.htm.
730
-------
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to work with states to prioritize their state-specific UST
compliance inspection and enforcement goals. The agency and states will use innovative
compliance approaches, along with outreach and education tools, to bring more USTs into
compliance and to promote UST cleanups. The EPA also will continue providing guidance to
foster the use of new technology to enhance compliance.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in the Civil Enforcement Program
under EPM and can be found in the Program Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$44.0) The increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$17.0) This change reflects a reduction found from IT efficiencies and consolidation in
IT contracts that support the LUST Civil Enforcement Program.
Statutory Authority:
Pollution Prevention Act; Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act; National
Environmental Policy Act; Atomic Energy Act; Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act;
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
731
-------
Program Area: Operations and Administration
732
-------
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Building and Facilities
Leaking Underground Storage
Tanks
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$535.0
$319,777.0
$72,019.0
$29,326.0
$915.0
$80,541.0
$503,113.0
414.4
FY 2012
Actuals
$512.2
$309,977.8
$72,928.5
$32,434.3
$877.0
$75,550.6
$492,280.4
407.7
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$535.0
$321,266.0
$72,434.0
$29,505.0
$916.0
$80,471.0
$505,127.0
414.4
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$509.0
$329,916.0
$75,690.0
$46,326.0
$839.0
$78,151.0
$531,431.0
411.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($26.0)
$10,139.0
$3,671.0
$17,000.0
($76.0)
($2,390.0)
$28,318.0
-2.9
Program Project Description:
The Facilities Infrastructure and Operations program provides activities and support services in
many centralized administrative areas at the EPA. The Leaking Underground Storage Tank
(LUST) appropriation for this program supports a full range of ongoing facilities management
services. Funding is allocated among major appropriations for the agency.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The agency will continue to manage its lease agreements with the General Services
Administration and other private landlords by conducting rent reviews and verifying that
monthly billing statements are correct. For FY 2014, the agency is requesting a total of $0.64
million for rent in the LUST appropriation.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in the Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations program under the EPM appropriation and can be found in the Eight Year
Performance Array in the Program Performance and Assessment section.
733
-------
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$59.0) This change is the net effect of projected contractual rent increases and the rent
reduction realized from space consolidation efforts.
• (-$11.0) This reflects a reduction in transit subsidy costs based on projected needs.
• (-$6.0) This reduction recognizes efficiencies from implementing operational changes to
reduce regional facility costs.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Property and Administration Services Act; Public Building Act; Annual Appropriations
Acts; CWA; CAA; D.C. Recycling Act of 1988; Executive Orders 10577 and 12598; Homeland
Security Presidential Decision Directive 63 (Critical Infrastructure Protection).
734
-------
Acquisition Management
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Leaking Underground Storage
Tanks
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$33,175.0
$163.0
$24,111.0
$57,449.0
357.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$37,238.9
$170.6
$24,841.5
$62,251.0
361.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$33,289.0
$164.0
$24,067.0
$57,520.0
357.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$33,893.0
$152.0
$24,339.0
$58,384.0
342.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$718.0
($11.0)
$228.0
$935.0
-14.5
Program Project Description:
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) resources in the Acquisition Management program
support the agency's contract and acquisition management activities.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In line with the President's Acquisition Workforce Development Strategic Plan for FY 2010-
2014, Acquisition Management resources in LUST will enable the agency to train and develop
its acquisition workforce, and to strengthen its contract management training program. Resources
also will address the information technology needs of management and the acquisition
workforce, and will support the recruitment, retention, and hiring of the acquisition workforce in
line with the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act, as amended (41 U.S.C. 401 et seq.).
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports the performance results in the Acquisition Management
program under the EPM appropriation and can be found in the Eight Year Performance Array in
the Program Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$11.0) This change reflects a reduction resulting from efficiencies and consolidation in
IT contracts that support acquisition management activities.
735
-------
Statutory Authority:
EPA's Environmental Statutes; Annual Appropriations Acts; FAR; contract law. Office of
Federal Procurement Policy Act, as amended (41 U.S.C. 401 et seq.)
736
-------
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Leaking Underground Storage
Tanks
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$72,290.0
$512.0
$21,632.0
$94,434.0
536.9
FY 2012
Actuals
$75,138.2
$416.3
$26,165.5
$101,720.0
536.4
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$72,659.0
$512.0
$21,599.0
$94,770.0
536.9
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$78,506.0
$414.0
$24,284.0
$103,204.0
530.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$6,216.0
($98.0)
$2,652.0
$8,770.0
-6.9
Program Project Description:
The EPA's financial management community maintains a strong partnership with the Leaking
Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) program. Activities under the Central Planning, Budgeting
and Finance program support the management of integrated planning, budgeting, financial
management, performance and accountability processes, and systems to ensure effective
stewardship of resources. This includes developing, managing, and supporting a performance
management system consistent with the Government Performance and Results Modernization
Act (GPRMA) for the agency that involves strategic planning and accountability for
environmental, fiscal, and managerial results; providing policy, systems, training, reports, and
oversight essential for the financial operations of the EPA; managing the agencywide Working
Capital Fund; providing financial payment and support services for the EPA through three
finance centers, specialized fiscal and accounting services for the LUST programs; and
managing the agency's annual budget process.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA will continue to ensure sound financial and budgetary management of the LUST
program through the use of routine and ad hoc analysis, statistical sampling, and other evaluation
tools. In addition, more structured and more targeted use of performance measurement has led to
a better understanding of program impacts as well as opportunities for improvement to increase
effectiveness.
Since the implementation of the Improper Payments Information Act of 2002 (IPIA), the EPA
has reviewed, sampled, and monitored its payments to protect against erroneous payments.
-------
Historically, the agency is well under the government-wide threshold of 2.5 percent, with an
average 5-year error rate of less than one percent across all categories (e.g., grants, contracts, and
commodities). In FY 2014, the EPA will continue these activities to reduce the potential for
improper payments pursuant to IPIA, as amended by the Improper Payments Elimination and
Recovery Act of 2010 (IPERA), (P.L. 111-204).
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$5.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments and benefit costs.
• (-$103.0 / -0.8 FTE) This change reflects a reduction in overall support for the agency as
well as the discontinuation of support for the financial system (Compass). This decrease
includes 0.8 FTE, $103.0 in associated payroll.
Statutory Authority:
Annual Appropriations Act; Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996; Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended
by the Energy Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq. Sections 9001 - 9011; Computer Security Act
of 1987; E-Government Act of 2002; Electronic Freedom of Information Act of 1996; Federal
Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act of 1977; Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act of
1998; Federal Acquisition Regulations, contract law and the EPA's Assistance Regulations (40
CFR Parts 30, 31, 35, 40, 45, 46, 47); Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act of 1982;
Freedom of Information Act of 1966; Government Management Reform Act of 1994; Improper
Payments Information Act of 2002; Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act of 2010;
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; Privacy Act of 1974; Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990;
Government Performance and Results Act of 1993; The Prompt Payment Act of 1982; Title 5,
U.S.C; National Defense Authorization Act.
738
-------
Program Area: Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST)
739
-------
LUST / UST
Program Area: Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST)
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Restore Land
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Leaking Underground Storage
Tanks
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$12,742.0
$11,962.0
$24,704.0
132.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$12,925.5
$12,542.3
$25,467.8
123.9
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$12,791.0
$11,991.0
$24,782.0
132.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$12,345.0
$10,195.0
$22,540.0
124.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($397.0)
($1,767.0)
($2,164.0)
-7.5
Program Project Description:
These funds support EPA staff to direct and manage the national program to clean up releases
from leaking underground storage tanks (LUSTs). Staff and program activities provide technical
support and oversight for LUST Cooperative Agreements. The federal LUST program supports
the oversight and implementation of LUST cleanup programs in states,2 and directly implements
assessments and cleanups of petroleum contamination from underground storage tanks (USTs) in
Indian country. The EPA ensures program efficiency and effectiveness by providing oversight,
administrative and technical support of program activities, and leadership with respect to
performance goals and financial accountability. The EPA also supports states and tribes by
funding technical studies and analyses (e.g., opportunities for remedy optimization, or innovative
and environmentally friendly approaches to corrective action, such as green remediation), forums
for information exchange, and training opportunities to continually make program
implementation efficient and effective. Providing such support and training at the national level
helps all states and tribes as it eliminates duplicative effort across the country.
The EPA has primary responsibility for implementing the LUST program in Indian country and
will use a portion of its LUST funding to assess and clean up UST releases. To a large degree,
there is no other source of money for these activities. With few exceptions, tribes do not have
independent programmatic resources to pay for assessing and cleaning up UST releases. Thus,
the EPA's role is critical to protecting Indian country lands from leaking underground storage
tanks.
Twice each year, the EPA collects data from states regarding LUST performance measures and
makes the data publicly available. The EPA implements the LUST program in Indian country
and provides performance measures data on work. The data includes information such as the
number of active and closed tanks, releases reported, cleanups initiated and completed, facilities
in compliance with UST requirements, and inspections. The EPA compiles the data and presents
' States as referenced here also include Territories as described in the definition of "State" in the Solid Waste Disposal Act.
740
-------
it in table format for all states, territories, and Indian country. See
www. epa. gov/oust/cat/camarchv.htm.
End of year FY 2012 data shows that, of the approximately 508 thousand releases reported since
the beginning of the UST program, approximately 425 thousand (or 83.6 percent) have been
cleaned up. This means approximately 83 thousand releases remain.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA's backlog study found that almost half of the releases yet to be addressed were 15 years
old or older, and that at 75 percent of these releases, groundwater was contaminated.
Remediation of groundwater contamination is often more technically complex, takes longer and
is more expensive than the remediation of soil contamination.3
The chart below provides a ten-year history of the UST releases remaining. It demonstrates that
while considerable progress has been made over the last ten years, much work remains. There is
a strong relationship between LUST cleanup success and reducing the number of new releases
through the prevention program. Since 2007, the EPA has placed an increased emphasis on
monitoring compliance through increased frequency of inspections and other Energy Policy Act
(EPAct) provisions.4 During this time, compliance rates have increased and there has been a
significant decrease in new confirmed releases. The continued reduction in confirmed releases
will remain a critical component in backlog reduction, but maintaining cleanup progress is
essential as well. In partnership with state and Tribal programs, strategies to reduce the
remaining LUST cleanups will leverage best practices and support management, oversight and
enforcement activities, which are central to the EPA's Integrated Cleanup Initiative.
See The National LUST Cleanup Backlog: A Study Of Opportunities, September 2011, www. epa. go v/oust/cat/backlog .html
4 For more information please refer to http://www.epa.gOV/oust/fedlaws7epact_05.htm
741
-------
UST National Backlog:
FY 2002 - End of Year FY 2012
In FY 2014, the EPA will lead states and continue developing and implementing strategies to
reduce the UST releases remaining to be cleaned up. The EPA's backlog study5 helped identify
potential strategies to address the approximately 83 thousand UST releases remaining to be
cleaned up.
The EPA provides national guidance on technical issues facing the LUST program. In FY 2014,
the EPA will continue improving ways to characterize UST releases still requiring remediation
by providing guidance and technical support regarding cleanup approaches and technologies. We
will implement our petroleum vapor intrusion guidance and provide training to help investigators
evaluate potential risk from this exposure pathway. Additional training will include remediation
process optimization, remediation evaluation model (REM) fuel groundwater monitoring and
other corrective action courses.
The EPA will monitor the soundness of financial mechanisms, in particular insurance and state
cleanup funds that serve as financial assurance of LUST releases. In FY 2012, the EPA issued
guidance for overseeing state funds, began implementing the guidance, and tested an
accompanying workbook and data sheets. To ensure money is available for cleanups when
needed, the EPA will continue annual reviews of all active state funds. Given the difficult
economic times, the EPA is identifying the funding issues and working collaboratively with
states to seek ways to cover and control remediation costs as well as limit governmental
5 See The National LUST Cleanup Backlog:
http://www.epa.gov/OUST/cat/backlog.html.
Study of Opportunities, September 2011,
742
-------
liabilities.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue improving local community engagement and stakeholder
input by enhancing states' and tribes' policies and processes for public involvement. The EPA
developed several helpful documents regarding community engagement in the LUST program6,
and continues working with states and tribes to share successful practices and tools that will help
tailor community engagement for specific circumstances at LUST release sites.
To address leaking underground storage tanks (USTs) in Indian country, the EPA will provide
support for:
• Site assessments, investigations and remediation of high priority sites;
• Enforcement against responsible parties;
• Cleanup of soil and/or groundwater;
• Alternate water supplies;
• Cost recovery against UST owners and operators;
• Technical expertise and assistance;
• Response activities;
• Oversight of responsible party lead cleanups; and
• Support and assistance to Tribal governments.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(111) Percent of confirmed releases awaiting cleanup at UST facilities.
FY2007
No Target
Establish
ed
23
FY2008
No Target
Establish
ed
21
FY 2009
No Target
Establish
ed
21
FY 2010
No Target
Establish
ed
19
FY2011
No Target
Establish
ed
18
FY 2012
No Target
Establish
ed
16
FY 2013
No Target
Establish
ed
FY 2014
15
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(112) Number of LUST cleanups completed that meet risk-based standards for human exposure
and groundwater migration.
FY2007
13,000
13,862
FY2008
13,000
12,768
FY2009
12,250
12,944
FY2010
12,250
11,591
FY2011
12,250
11,169
FY2012
11,250
10,927
FY2013
10,100
FY2014
9,000
Units
Cleanups
Measure
Target
Actual
(113) Number of LUST cleanups completed that meet risk-based standards for human exposure
and groundwater migration in Indian Country.
FY2007
30
54
FY2008
30
40
FY 2009
30
49
FY 2010
30
62
FY2011
38
42
FY 2012
42
47
FY 2013
42
FY 2014
37
Units
Cleanups
The EPA counts the number of completed cleanups meeting risk-based standards for human
exposure and groundwater migration. For FY 2014, the EPA is setting a goal of 9,000 cleanups
achieving these standards; this is a decrease from the FY 2013 target of 10,100. The FY 2014
' See http://www.epa.gov/oust/communitvengagement/index.htm.
743
-------
target reflects a variety of challenges including the complexity of remaining sites, an increased
state workload, a decrease in available state resources, the increasing cost of cleanups, and a
recalibration based on the expiration of ARRA funding.
The EPA also has a measure that counts the percentage of historic releases awaiting cleanup at
UST facilities. Beginning in FY 2014, the EPA is setting a goal of decreasing the percentage to
15 percent.
Decreased EPA staffing in FY 2014 will result in fewer cleanups completed and reduced ability
to implement backlog reduction strategies. Reductions in tribal clean up funding will lead to
approximately five fewer cleanups completed, from 42 in FY 2013 to 37 in FY 2014.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$748.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$2,515.0 / -6.4 FTE) EPA will reduce implementation of backlog reduction strategies
through contracts and grants, and reduce support to state and tribal partners, requiring a
change in the cleanup goal to 9,000 from 10,100 in FY 13. This decrease includes 6.4
FTE, $915.0 in associated payroll.
Statutory Authority:
Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Energy Policy Act, 42 United States Code 6901 et
seq., Section 8001(a) and Sections 9001-9014.
744
-------
LUST Cooperative Agreements
Program Area: Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST)
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Restore Land
(Dollars in Thousands)
Leaking Underground Storage
Tanks
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$58,956.0
$58,956.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$59,968.0
$59,968.0
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$59,355.0
$59,355.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$57,402.0
$57,402.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($1,554.0)
($1,554.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
The EPA enters into leaking underground storage tank (LUST) cooperative agreements with
states7 to protect human health and the environment by overseeing and cleaning up petroleum
releases from underground storage tanks (USTs), as authorized under Section 9003(h) of the
Solid Waste Disposal Act. States, in partnership with the EPA, assess and clean up petroleum
release from USTs. Eighty percent of the funds appropriated to the agency for corrective action
must be distributed to the states under cooperative agreements.8 LUST cleanup funding awarded
under Section 9003(h) (7) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is subject to an annual, formula-based
allocation process. During FY 2012, the EPA worked in partnership with states to review and
ultimately modify the existing state grant allocation formula. The EPA initiated this review to
ensure the formula properly targets state program needs and best advances program priorities. A
number of factors were examined, including: universe of regulated tanks; number of sites
awaiting corrective action; potential for groundwater contamination; minimum resources needed
to support a core state LUST program; state program authorization status; etc. As a result of the
review, the EPA made changes to state grant allocation formula for FY 2013 and beyond.
Twice each year, the EPA collects data from states regarding LUST performance measures and
makes the data publicly available. The data includes information such as the number of active
and closed tanks, releases reported, cleanups initiated and completed, facilities in compliance
with UST requirements, and inspections. The EPA compiles the data and presents it in table
format for all states, territories, and Indian country. See www.epa.gov/oust/cat/camarchv.htm.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Funding will support states to manage, oversee, and enforce cleanups at LUST release sites.
These activities focus on increasing the efficiency of LUST cleanups nationwide, leveraging
private and state resources and enabling community redevelopment. The EPA and state programs
will consider best practices and implement strategies to reduce the remaining UST releases. UST
States as referenced here also include Territories as described in the definition of "State" in the Solid Waste Disposal Act.
1 See the Energy Policy Act of 2005, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-109publ58/html/PLAW-109publ58.htm.
745
-------
release reduction efforts will target high priority sites and examine potential economies-of-scale
savings from commonly owned or geographically proximate sites.
In FY 2014, funding is reduced for states' cooperative agreements for LUST cleanup activities.
Since approximately 75 percent of state cleanup cooperative agreements are used for state staff
salaries, this reduction will likely result in approximately 155 fewer cleanups for the states' FY
2014 performance results. This is based on an EPA estimate that states can either directly fund or
oversee approximately 100 sites for every $1 million in grant funding.
End of year FY 2012 data shows that, of the approximately 508 thousand releases reported since
the beginning of the UST program in 1988, approximately 425 thousand (or 83.6 percent) have
been cleaned up. This means approximately 83 thousand releases remain. LUST Recovery Act
money contributed significantly to closing sites beginning in FY 2010 through the present and
are included in the UST program's end of year cleanup totals; 2,451 sites have been closed
overall using LUST Recovery Act money; 832 of which were closed in FY 2012.
Remediation costs average between $100 thousand and $400 thousand per UST release,
depending on the presence of groundwater contamination.
The EPA's backlog study completed in FY 2012 provided significant information to characterize
the national inventory of sites awaiting corrective action. The EPA found that almost half of the
releases yet to be addressed were 15 years old or older, and that at 75 percent of these releases,
groundwater was contaminated. Remediation of groundwater contamination is often more
technically complex, takes longer and is more expensive than the remediation of soil
contamination. 9
The chart below provides a ten-year history of the UST releases remaining. It demonstrates that
while considerable progress has been made over the last ten years, much work remains. There is
likely a strong relationship between LUST cleanup success and maintaining well-funded state
grants for LUST prevention. As EPA has implemented improvements, and increased frequency
of inspections and other prevention efforts there has also been a decrease in new confirmed
releases. The continued reduction in confirmed releases will remain a critical component in
backlog reduction, but maintaining cleanup progress is essential as well. In partnership with state
and Tribal programs, strategies to reduce the remaining UST releases will leverage best practices
and support management, oversight and enforcement activities, which are central to the EPA's
Integrated Cleanup Initiative.
See The National LUST Cleanup Backlog: A Study Of Opportunities, September 2011, www. epa. go v/oust/cat/backlog .html
746
-------
160,000
UST National Backlog:
FY 2002 Through End of Year
FY 2012
2002
2003
2004
2010
2011
2012
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to enter into cooperative agreements with states to assist in
completing LUST cleanups. The EPA's backlog study helped identify potential strategies to
address the approximately 83 thousand UST releases remaining. States will develop and
implement specific strategies and activities applicable to their particular sites to reduce the UST
releases remaining to be cleaned up.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in the LUST/Underground Storage
Tanks program and can be found in the Eight-Year Performance Array in Tab 11.
The EPA counts the number of completed cleanups meeting risk-based standards for human
exposure and groundwater migration. For FY 2014, the EPA is setting a goal of 9,000 thousand
cleanups achieving these standards; this is a decrease from the FY 2013 target of 10.1 thousand.
The FY 2014 target reflects a variety of challenges including the complexity of remaining sites,
an increased state workload, a decrease in available state resources, the increasing cost of
cleanups, and recalibration based on the expiration of ARRA funding.
The EPA also has a measure that counts the percentage of historic releases awaiting cleanup at
UST facilities. Beginning in FY2014, the EPA is setting a goal of decreasing the percentage to
15 percent, a decrease of one percent from the FY2013 level of 16 percent. This decrease is in
line with the percent decrease experienced over each of the last four years.
747
-------
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$1,554.0) This reflects a reduction in funding for cooperative agreements for LUST
cleanup activities. This reduction will likely result in approximately 155 fewer cleanups
for the states' FY 2014 performance measure results. This is based on an EPA estimate
that states can either directly fund or oversee approximately 100 sites for every $1 million
in grant funding. Approximately 75 percent of state cleanup cooperative agreements are
used for state staff salaries. This reduction is necessary as part of the hard choices EPA is
making to reduce funding in light of the challenging budgetary environment.
Statutory Authority:
SWDA of 1976, as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986
(Subtitle I), Section 9003(h)(7).
748
-------
LUST Prevention
Program Area: Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST)
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Preserve Land
(Dollars in Thousands)
Leaking Underground Storage
Tanks
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$30,449.0
$30,449.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$31,193.8
$31,193.8
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$30,655.0
$30,655.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$28,926.0
$28,926.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($1,523.0)
($1,523.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
The EPA enters into leaking underground storage tank (LUST) assistance agreements with
state10 and Tribal partners to protect human health and the environment by preventing releases
from underground storage tanks (USTs). Even a small amount of petroleum released from an
underground storage tank can contaminate groundwater, the drinking water source for many
Americans. Since the beginning of the UST program, preventing UST releases has been one of
our primary goals. The EPA and our partners have made major progress in reducing the number
of new releases, yet thousands of new releases are discovered each year. Preventing UST
releases is more efficient and costs less than cleaning up releases after they occur. Over the
duration of the program, the EPA has also found that lack of proper UST system operation and
maintenance is a main cause of releases.11 Funding for LUST assistance agreements is subject to
an annual, formula-based allocation process.
During FY 2012, the EPA worked in partnership with states to review and ultimately modify the
existing state grant allocation formula. The EPA initiated this review to ensure the formula
properly targets state program needs and best advances program priorities. A number of factors
were examined, including universe of regulated tanks, minimum resources needed to support a
core state UST program, state program authorization status. Minor changes were made to the
formula, based on the review.
Twice each year, the EPA collects data from states regarding UST performance measures and
makes the data publicly available. The EPA implements the UST program in Indian country and
directly provides data on work there. The data include information such as the number of active
and closed tanks, releases reported, cleanups initiated and completed, facilities in compliance
with UST requirements, and inspections. The EPA compiles the data and presents it in table
format for all states, territories, and Indian country. See www.epa.gov/oust/cat/camarchv.htm.
Since 2007, the EPA has placed an increased emphasis on monitoring compliance through
States as referenced here also include Territories as described in the definition of "State" in the Solid Waste Disposal Act.
See http://www.gpo.gov/fdsvs/pkg/FR-2011-1 l-18/pdf/201 l-29293.pdf
749
-------
-^^ 1 r)
increased frequency of inspections and other Energy Policy Act (EPAct) provisions. Every
three years, each of the 584 thousand federally regulated UST systems must be inspected. During
this time, compliance rates have increased and there has been a significant decrease in new
confirmed releases. As indicated in the chart below, the annual number of confirmed releases
from USTs has dropped 25 percent from 7,570 in FY 2007 to 5,674 in FY 2012. Continued
rigorous prevention and detection activities are necessary to maintain our progress in decreasing
the number of confirmed releases over the years and limiting future confirmed releases. Since
about 80 percent of LUST prevention assistance agreements are used for state staff salaries, EPA
expects the FY2014 funding level to reduce the number of state inspections by approximately 2.4
thousand. This is necessary as part of the hard choices EPA is making to reduce funding in light
of the challenging budgetary environment.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will undertake a program review of state use of third party programs to
meet their inspection and cleanup responsibilities associated with the UST program. This review
will evaluate the effectiveness and quality of these programs, and will also look at third party
program costs and benefits the state and tank owners have realized.
End of year FY 2012 data shows:
• Releases are continuing to occur, with 5,674 reported for FY 2012.
• Exceeding the FY 2012 performance measure target of 66.5 percent, at the end of FY
2012, 71.4 percent of the approximately 584 thousand federally regulated UST systems
were in significant operational compliance. However, approximately 29 percent still
need to attain and maintain compliance.
The confirmed releases chart below shows the national number of UST petroleum releases
reported decreasing since implementation of the EPAct.
Confirmed Releases
FY05
FY06
FY07
FY08 FY09
Fiscal Year
FY10
FY11
FY12
For more information please refer to http://www.epa.gov/oust/fedlaws/epact_05.htm
750
-------
The compliance rate chart below shows the national percent of inspected UST facilities that met
release prevention and release detection requirements increasing since the implementation of the
EPAct.
Compliance Rate
100.(
-------
prohibition, secondary containment, and operator training. These activities emphasize bringing
UST systems into compliance with release detection and release prevention requirements and
minimizing future releases.
Tribal Activities
The EPA is responsible for implementing the UST regulations in Indian country in partnership
with Tribes. LUST prevention assistance agreements will provide assistance with all aspects of
the Tribal prevention programs (for example, developing inspection capacity). To help prevent
future releases, the EPA will work with tribes to develop their capacity to administer UST
programs. This includes providing money to support training for Tribal staff and educating
owners and operators in Indian country about UST requirements and in some cases assisting
Tribal staff to receive federal inspector credentials to perform inspection on behalf of the EPA.
With few exceptions, tribes do not have independent UST program resources. Thus, the EPA's
funding is critical in advancing the UST prevention and compliance program in Indian country.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(ST1) Reduce the number of confirmed releases at UST facilities to five percent (5%) fewer
than the prior year's target.
FY2007
<10,000
7,570
FY2008
<9,000
7,364
FY 2009
<9,000
7,168
FY 2010
<9,000
6,328
FY2011
<8,550
5,998
FY 2012
<8,120
5,674
FY 2013
<7,715
FY 2014
<7,330
Units
Releases
Measure
Target
Actual
(ST6) Increase the percentage of UST facilities that are in significant operational compliance
(SOC) with both release detection and release prevention requirements by 0.5% over the
previous year's target.
FY2007
67
63
FY2008
68
66
FY2009
65
66
FY2010
65.5
69
FY2011
66
71
FY2012
66.5
71.3
FY2013
67
FY2014
67.5
Units
Percent
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$1,523.0) This reflects a reduction in funding for LUST Prevention assistance
agreements. Since about 80 percent of this funding is used for state staff salaries, EPA
expects that this level will reduce the number of state inspections conducted by
approximately 2,400. This is necessary as part of the hard choices EPA is making to
reduce funding in light of the challenging budgetary environment.
Statutory Authority:
Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq. - Sections 9001-9011 and
Energy Policy Act of 2005 42 USC 15801 - Section 1529.
752
-------
Program Area: Research: Sustainable Communities
753
-------
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Program Area: Research: Sustainable Communities
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Science & Technology
Leaking Underground Storage
Tanks
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$613.0
$173,525.0
$396.0
$17,757.0
$192,291.0
612.7
FY 2012
Actuals
$1,051.7
$173,523.8
$338.8
$19,395.7
$194,310.0
654.5
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$626.0
$174,655.0
$397.0
$17,852.0
$193,530.0
612.7
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$594.0
$147,372.0
$498.0
$18,243.0
$166,707.0
611.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($19.0)
($26,153.0)
$102.0
$486.0
($25,584.0)
-1.2
Program Project Description:
Sustainable and Healthy Communities (SHC) research program under the Leaking Underground
Storage Tanks (LUST) appropriation focuses on the assessment and cleanup of leaks at fueling
stations. Research emphasizes identifying the environmental impacts and unintended
consequences of existing and new biofuels available in the marketplace. The EPA research
provides the scientific foundation for the agency's actions to protect America's land and
groundwater resources that could be impacted by the nation's more than 600,000 underground
fuel storage tanks. The purpose of the LUST component of the EPA research is to prevent and
control pollution at LUST sites. This research from SHC is of high importance to state
environmental programs.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
FY 2014 research in the SHC research program under the LUST appropriation will continue to
focus on providing decision-makers with tools, methods, and information. Such research and
tools will allow decision-makers to assess sites and evaluate the implications of alternative
remediation techniques, policies, and management actions. Specifically, the SHC research
program will conduct research on contaminated sites. This research will help communities
characterize and remediate contaminated sites at an accelerated pace and lower cost while
reducing human health and ecological impacts. The goal of this research is to help localities and
states return properties to productive use, thus enhancing communities.
SHC's scientists work with the EPA's Underground Storage Tanks program to deliver improved
characterization and remediation methods for fuels released from leaking underground storage
tanks. SHC's research includes the impact of the higher ethanol content in today's automotive
fuels on fuel component transport and biodegradation. Research also will address contaminant
754
-------
plume elongation and the associated risks to communities from the many underground storage
tanks at fueling stations located near residences and residential water supplies. This research will
inform tool development to assist communities and states to assess remediation needed to protect
local ground water resources. This tool will ultimately reduce costs to communities while better
protecting future water resources.
Recent accomplishments include:
• Helping States protect drinking water supplies from leaking underground storage tanks. The
EPA published an analysis and a series of maps demonstrating which ground water sources
are more vulnerable to contamination from underground storage tank releases. The maps
depict those areas that are more vulnerable to drinking water contamination throughout the
48 contiguous states. This information will help state regulatory authorities in prioritizing
assessments and responding to the backlog of more than 80 thousand leaking underground
storage tanks. This research is important to states and communities because many of these
leaking tanks are at fueling stations within populated areas, and some are situated over
shallow ground water that is or could be used as a drinking water supply.
Performance Targets:
Refer to the S&T narrative for a list of SHC's performance measures.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$25.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$77.0) This reflects the net result of realignments of infrastructure resources such as
equipment purchases and repairs, travel, contracts, and general expenses to better align
with programmatic priorities.
Statutory Authority:
Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984; Resource Conservation and Recovery Act,
Subtitle I, Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Trust Fund; Energy Policy Act of 2005;
Safe Drinking Water Act, Section 1442. 42 U.S.C. 300J-1; Solid Waste and Disposal Act,
Section 8001, as amended; Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, 42 U.S.C. 6901;
Solid Waste Disposal Act (SWDA), 42 U.S.C. 6901 - Section 1002, 42 U.S.C. 6905 - Section
1006; Solid Waste Disposal Act, Section 8001; 42 U.S.C. 6981.
755
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Inland Oil Spill
Resource Summary Table 758
Program Projects in Inland Oil Spill Programs 758
Program Area: Compliance 760
Compliance Monitoring 761
Program Area: Enforcement 763
Civil Enforcement 764
Program Area: Oil 766
Oil Spill: Prevention, Preparedness and Response 767
Program Area: Operations and Administration 772
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 773
Program Area: Research: Sustainable Communities 775
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities 776
756
-------
757
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION: Inland Oil Spill Programs
Resource Summary Table
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Budget Authority
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$18,245.0
101.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$19,432.2
103.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$18,356.0
101.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$21,268.0
113.4
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$3,023.0
12.4
Bill Language: Inland Oil Spill Programs
For expenses necessary to carry out the Environmental Protection Agency's responsibilities
under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, $21,268,000, to be derived from the Oil Spill Liability trust
fund, to remain available until expended.
Program Projects in Inland Oil Spill Programs
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
Compliance
Compliance Monitoring
Enforcement
Civil Enforcement
Oil
Oil Spill: Prevention, Preparedness
and Response
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations
Rent
Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations (other activities)
Subtotal, Facilities Infrastructure
and Operations
FY 2012
Enacted
$138.0
$2,286.0
$14,673.0
$437.0
$98.0
$535.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$122.5
$2,514.1
$15,231.7
$436.7
$75.5
$512.2
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$138.0
$2,289.0
$14,768.0
$437.0
$98.0
$535.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$142.0
$2,955.0
$17,068.0
$426.0
$83.0
$509.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$4.0
$669.0
$2,395.0
($11.0)
($15.0)
($26.0)
758
-------
Program Project
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy
Communities
Subtotal, Research: Sustainable
and Healthy Communities
TOTAL, EPA
FY 2012
Enacted
$535.0
$613.0
$613.0
$18,245.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$512.2
$1,051.7
$1,051.7
$19,432.2
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$535.0
$626.0
$626.0
$18,356.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$509.0
$594.0
$594.0
$21,268.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($26.0)
($19.0)
($19.0)
$3,023.0
759
-------
Program Area: Compliance
760
-------
Compliance Monitoring
Program Area: Compliance
Goal: Enforcing Environmental Laws
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Environmental Program & Management
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$138.0
$106,707.0
$1,221.0
$108,066.0
616.7
FY 2012
Actuals
$122.5
$106,690.9
$1,191.0
$108,004.4
612.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$138.0
$107,102.0
$1,226.0
$108,466.0
616.7
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$142.0
$127,540.0
$1,182.0
$128,864.0
625.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$4.0
$20,833.0
($39.0)
$20,798.0
8.8
Program Project Description:
The Compliance Monitoring program's overarching goal is to assure compliance with the
nation's environmental laws and protect human health and the environment through inspections
and other compliance monitoring activities. Compliance monitoring is comprised of all activities
to determine whether regulated entities are in compliance with applicable laws, regulations,
permit conditions, and settlement agreements. In addition, compliance monitoring activities are
conducted to determine whether conditions exist that may present imminent and substantial
endangerment to human health and the environment. Compliance monitoring activities include
data collection, analysis, data quality review, on-site compliance inspections/evaluations,
investigations, and reviews of facility records and monitoring reports.
The Oil Pollution Act (OPA) Compliance Monitoring program is designed to prevent oil spills.
The program uses compliance and civil enforcement tools and strategies to prepare for and
respond to any oil spill affecting the inland waters of the United States.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Pursuant to the Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 311 (oil spill and hazardous substances)
requirements, the agency will continue in FY 2014 to conduct inspections, investigations and
other core activities to determine regulated entities compliance with the OPA.
There is currently a universe of over 600 thousand Spill Prevention, Control, and
Countermeasure (SPCC) regulated facilities under the EPA's jurisdiction, including a subset of
roughly 4.3 thousand facilities that are subject to Facility Response Plan (FRP) requirements.
The EPA ensures that the management and oversight of the Enforcement and Compliance
program is enhanced by the integration of information from the FRP and SPCC data systems
with the EPA's Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS). This integration provides the
EPA the opportunity to effectively analyze enforcement and compliance resources on areas of
high risk, and increase the transparency of this enforcement and compliance data to the public. In
761
-------
addition, the integration of this compliance monitoring information into ICIS improves quality
and increases the completeness by eliminating the need to manually enter the data into two
separate systems. The EPA expects to complete the integration in FY 2013. Beyond FY 2013,
having access to this more complete universe of information in ICIS will support more
comprehensive analysis and management of the FRP and SPCC programs.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the Compliance Monitoring program
project in the Environmental Programs and Management (EPM) appropriation and can be found
in the Performance Eight-Year Array in the Program Performance and Assessment section. Work
under this program project supports the agency's Priority Goal, addressing water quality
(specified in full in Appendix A).
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$3.0) The increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to adjustments
in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$1.0) This reflects a small increase in support for compliance tools assisting in oil spill
prevention.
Statutory Authority:
Oil Pollution Act; Clean Water Act; National Environmental Policy Act; Public Health Service
Act; Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act; Safe Drinking Water Act; Executive Order
12241; Executive Order 12656.
762
-------
Program Area: Enforcement
763
-------
Civil Enforcement
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Enforcing Environmental Laws
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Environmental Program & Management
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$2,286.0
$177,290.0
$789.0
$180,365.0
1,205.1
FY 2012
Actuals
$2,514.1
$177,402.3
$678.7
$180,595.1
1,174.8
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$2,289.0
$177,516.0
$789.0
$180,594.0
1,205.1
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$2,955.0
$189,192.0
$816.0
$192,963.0
1,188.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$669.0
$11,902.0
$27.0
$12,598.0
-17.1
Program Project Description:
The Civil Enforcement program's overarching goal is to assure compliance with the nation's
environmental laws to protect human health and the environment. Effective enforcement is
essential to deter violations and to promote compliance with federal environmental statutes and
regulations. The program collaborates with the United States Department of Justice, states, local
agencies, and Tribal governments to ensure consistent and fair enforcement of all environmental
laws and regulations. The program seeks to focus on violations that threaten communities,
maintain a level economic playing field by ensuring that violators do not realize an economic
benefit from noncompliance, and deter future violations. The Civil Enforcement program
develops, litigates, and settles administrative and civil judicial cases against serious violators of
environmental laws.
The Oil Pollution Act (OPA) Civil Enforcement program is designed to prevent oil spills using
civil enforcement and compliance assistance approaches, as well as to prepare for and respond to
any oil spills affecting the inland waters of the United States. Pursuant to Clean Water Act
(CWA) Section 311 (Oil Spill and Hazardous Substances) requirements, the EPA's Civil
Enforcement program will develop policies, issue administrative cleanup orders, refer civil
judicial actions to the Department of Justice, assess civil penalties for violations of those orders
or for spills into the environment, and assist in the recovery of cleanup costs expended by the
government. The program provides support for field investigations and inspections of spills, as
well as Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) compliance assistance.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the Civil Enforcement program will continue efforts to ensure compliance to
prevent oil spills. These efforts are particularly critical, given the number of SPCC regulated
facilities (over 600 thousand facilities) and the comparatively modest number of inspection and
enforcement personnel. The EPA's efforts will be focused on high-risk facilities with the greatest
potential to impact public health and the environment. Many of these facilities are offshore or
764
-------
over water, which requires a large investment of enforcement resources to follow up on
violations discovered during complex inspections or enforcement investigations, in coordination
with other regulatory agencies (e.g., U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service).
Additionally, the EPA will address violations related to facility response plans and response
planning.
The EPA's response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill will continue in FY 2014 as we provide
primary support for the U.S. Department of Justice's civil action against BP, Anadarko, and
other responsible parties for the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. The Department of Justice filed its
complaint on behalf of the EPA, the U.S. Coast Guard and other federal plaintiffs in December
2010. The EPA is actively participating in this litigation responding to discovery requests,
document production, requests for admission, and other litigation-related activities. As the civil
trial began in February 2013, the EPA's role has expanded to include direct support in the
courtroom (witness preparation, reviewing depositions for cross-examination, etc.) This litigation
is expected to continue into FY 2014.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports the performance measures in the Civil Enforcement program
under EPM. These measures can also be found in the Performance Eight-Year Array in the
Program Performance and Assessment section. Work under this program supports the agency's
Priority Goal of addressing water quality. A list of the agency's Priority Goals can be found in
Appendix A.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$383.0) The increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$286.0 / +0.4 FTE) This net increase is provided for Deepwater Horizon litigation
support and discovery management, and the continuing civil investigation against
existing and potential additional defendants. Due to the complexities of this case as well
as the sections of the Clean Water Act which apply to the EPM and the Oil appropriation,
the EPA requests funds for Deepwater Horizon from both the EPM and the Oil
appropriations. The additional resources include $62.0 associated payroll for 0.4 FTE.
Statutory Authority:
Oil Pollution Act; Clean Water Act; National Environmental Policy Act.
765
-------
Program Area: Oil
766
-------
Oil Spill: Prevention, Preparedness and Response
Program Area: Oil
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Restore Land
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$14,673.0
$14,673.0
82.8
FY 2012
Actuals
$15,231.7
$15,231.7
87.3
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$14,768.0
$14,768.0
82.8
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$17,068.0
$17,068.0
94.8
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$2,395.0
$2,395.0
12.0
Program Project Description:
The Oil Spill program protects U.S. waters by preventing, preparing for, and responding to oil
spills. The EPA conducts oil spill prevention, preparedness, compliance assistance and
enforcement activities associated with more than 600 thousand non-transportation-related oil
storage facilities that the EPA regulates through its spill prevention program. The Spill
Prevention, Control and Countermeasures (SPCC) regulation and the Facility Response Plan
(FRP) regulation establish the Oil Spill program prevention regulatory framework. The National
Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) establishes the framework for
some of the EPA's preparedness responsibilities, such as the development of Area Contingency
Plans (ACPs). The EPA has responsibility for Subpart J of the NCP regulation, which includes a
Product Schedule that lists bioremediation, dispersants, surface washing, surface collection and
other agents that may be used to remediate oil spills. Finally, pursuant to the NCP, the EPA
serves as the lead responder for cleanup of all inland zone spills, including transportation-related
spills from pipelines, trucks, and other transportation systems.
The discharge of oil into U.S. waters from facilities can threaten human health, cause severe
environmental damage, and induce great financial loss to businesses at all levels of government
and the public. For example, the Deepwater Horizon (DWH) oil spill disaster resulted in 11
deaths, over 200 million gallons of spilled oil, and untold economic and environmental damage.
States and communities often lack the infrastructure and resources to address these national-level
emergencies or to work with oil facilities to prevent these discharges from happening in the first
place.
The EPA accesses the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, administered by the U.S. Coast Guard, to
obtain reimbursement for site-specific spill response activities. More than 30 thousand oil
discharges and hazardous substance releases occur in the U.S. every year, with a large number of
these spills occurring in the inland zone for which the EPA has jurisdiction. The EPA regional
offices respond to about 200 of these oil spills each year. On average, one spill of greater than
100 thousand gallons occurs every month from the EPA-regulated oil storage facilities and the
inland oil transportation network. For more information, refer to http://www.epa.gov/oilspill/.
767
-------
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to conduct inspections to (1) ensure appropriate and effective
prevention measures, (2) review and approve FRPs which document facilities' plans and ability
to respond to spills, (3) conduct exercises to maintain a coordinated level of preparedness, and
(4) work to revise and update existing regulations and processes that better characterize the
regulated universe and address risk.
Making sure facilities that store oil are compliant under the EPA's SPCC and FRP rules is a
crucial part of preventing oil spills. The percentage of SPCC facilities found in compliance
during their initial inspection is increasing while the percentage of FRP facilities, which are high
risk, found initially compliant with the FRP rule is remaining steady (see chart below).1
Oil Facility Compliance
I Found Initially Compliant
I Brought Into Compliance
2010
2011
SPCC
2012 2010 2011 2012
FRP
Facility Type & Year
Following the EPA's inspection efforts, SPCC and FRP facilities that are not initially compliant
are generally brought into compliance. The EPA has recently exceeded its yearly targets for
bringing facilities into compliance, helping to improve facility oil spill preparedness and prevent
oil spills.
As a result of DWH lessons learned, the EPA is focusing on revisions to Subpart J of the
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) that stipulates the
criteria for listing and managing the use of dispersants and other chemical and biological agents
used to mitigate oil spills. The EPA will continue to analyze potential revisions to Subpart J and
comments from stakeholders in order to:
Chart presents data as of February 2013.
768
-------
• Incorporate the latest scientific knowledge. This includes the expansion of efficacy and
toxicity testing for dispersants and bio-agents, as well as for other oil spill mitigating
products that address environmental toxicity;
• Develop new protocols and methods to address the bioaccumulation and degradation of
surfactants and solvents found in many NCP products; and
• Expand the provisions on how products are delisted.
The EPA will continue the work with state, local, Tribal, and federal officials to strengthen Area
Contingency Plans and Regional Contingency Plans. These enhancements will include the
following:
• Revising guidance to better ensure consistency and improving plans based on experience
such as the DWH and other large and small oil spills;
• Further discussion and coordination at National Response Team (NRT) and Regional
Response Teams (RRTs) meetings; and
• Conducting more enhanced preparedness exercises.
Comprehensive FRP and SPCC data maintained in the National Oil Database will be an
important enhancement for the Plans and related exercises. The ACPs detail the responsibilities
of various parties in the event of a spill/release, describe unique geographical features, sensitive
ecological resources, drinking water intakes for the area covered, and identify available response
equipment and its location.
The Plans also provide key information to responders and all stakeholders regarding potential
impacts and potential options available to OSCs and responders; this includes the highest priority
resources to protect, potential mechanical or chemical countermeasure response options, and
other resource considerations. Additionally, the EPA and U.S. Coast Guard will continue to
collaborate with the NRT and RRTs to review and revise ACPs to reflect lessons learned during
the DWH response and other relevant oil spill responses.
In FY 2014, the agency is requesting additional funding to improve the capacity of the Federal
government to prevent oil spills by increasing the frequency of inspections at high risk oil
facilities and thereby providing additional protection of the oil storage network. Trained EPA
inspectors will utilize their skills to review, audit, and analyze all aspects of the complicated
processes at these high-risk facilities. With these resources, the agency will conduct up to 34
additional targeted assessment of high-risk facilities and leverage technology in finalizing the
development and implementation of a National Oil database. Regions will play an active role in
assessing the database as it is implemented, making adjustments as the rollout happens.
This National Oil Database, which will begin implementation by the regional offices in FY 2013,
will help streamline the process for assisting facilities with compliance, to better equip inspectors
for more efficient inspection processes, and inform program management and measurement
769
-------
activities. The agency will identify requirements for electronic submission of FRPs. FRP
facilities are currently required to submit their plans to the EPA Regional offices, while SPCC
facilities maintain their plans onsite. The largest oil storage facilities and refineries must prepare
FRPs to identify response resources and ensure their availability in the event of a worst case
discharge. FRPs establish communication, address security, identify an individual with authority
to implement response actions, and describe training and testing drills at the facility.
The database also will manage information obtained from new and historical SPCC inspections
in an effort to supplement data from states and other sources about the SPCC regulated universe
in lieu of a costly registration requirement. The EPA will continue to develop guidance for Oil
Spill program inspectors on how to properly utilize and manage this database and ensure
consistent data entry. The National Oil Database will be the primary implementation tool used to
maintain data and measure program efficacy.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(337) Percent of all FRP inspected facilities found to be non-compliant which are brought into
compliance.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
15
48
FY2011
30
48
FY 2012
35
73
FY 2013
40
FY 2014
50
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(338) Percent of all Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) inspected facilities
found to be non-compliant which are brought into compliance.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
15
36
FY2011
30
45
FY2012
35
63
FY2013
40
FY2014
50
Units
Percent
The EPA's regulated universe includes approximately 4,500 FRP facilities and over 600
thousand SPCC facilities. In FY 2014, the EPA's goal is that 50 percent of FRP facilities found
to be non-compliant during FY 2010 through FY 2013 will be brought into compliance by the
end of the fiscal year. The EPA will emphasize emergency preparedness, particularly through the
use of unannounced drills and exercises, to ensure facilities and responders can effectively
implement response plans. Similar to the FRP measure mentioned above, the EPA's goal is that
50 percent of SPCC facilities found to be non-compliant during FY 2010 through FY 2013 will
be brought into compliance by the end of FY 2014.
The agency is on track to meet its current long-term oil strategic plan measure of bringing 60
percent of facilities into compliance by the end of FY 2015 (both SPCC and FRP).
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,070.0) This recalculation of base workforce costs due to adjustments in salary and
benefit costs.
770
-------
• (+$1,325.0 / +12.0 FTE) The increase will support FRP (high-risk) inspections. With the
additional resources, the funding request will allow up to 34 additional FRP inspections.
This increase includes 12.0 FTE, $581.0 in associated payroll.
Statutory Authority:
Section 311 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act as amended by section 4202 of the Oil
Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA). The regulatory framework includes National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) under 40 CFR Part 300. Subpart J is a section of
the NCP which stipulates the criteria for listing and managing the use of dispersants and other
chemical and biological agents used to mitigate oil spills. The Oil Pollution Prevention
regulation (40 CFR Part 112) includes the SPCC and FRP regulatory requirements. The purpose
of the SPCC requirements is to help facilities prevent a discharge of oil into navigable waters or
adjoining shorelines while the focus of the FRP requirements is to prepare a plan that describes
equipment, personnel and strategies to respond to an oil discharge to navigable waters or
adjoining shorelines.
771
-------
Program Area: Operations and Administration
772
-------
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Building and Facilities
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$535.0
$319,777.0
$72,019.0
$29,326.0
$915.0
$80,541.0
$503,113.0
414.4
FY 2012
Actuals
$512.2
$309,977.8
$72,928.5
$32,434.3
$877.0
$75,550.6
$492,280.4
407.7
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$535.0
$321,266.0
$72,434.0
$29,505.0
$916.0
$80,471.0
$505,127.0
414.4
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$509.0
$329,916.0
$75,690.0
$46,326.0
$839.0
$78,151.0
$531,431.0
411.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($26.0)
$10,139.0
$3,671.0
$17,000.0
($76.0)
($2,390.0)
$28,318.0
-2.9
Program Project Description:
The Facilities Infrastructure and Operations Program Inland Oil Spill Response appropriation
supports the agency's rent and transit subsidy accounts. Funding for such services is allocated
among major appropriations for the agency.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The agency will continue to conduct rent reviews and verify monthly billing statements for its
lease agreements with the General Services Administration and other private landlords. For FY
2014, the agency is requesting a total of $0.43 million for rent in the Inland Oil Spills
appropriation.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports the performance results in the Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations program under the EPM appropriation and can be found in the Eight Year Array
Performance in the Program Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$11.0) This change is the net effect of projected contractual rent increases and the rent
reduction realized from space consolidation efforts.
773
-------
• (-$15.0) This reflects a reduction in transit subsidy costs based on projected needs.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Property and Administration Services Act; Public Building Act; Annual Appropriations
Act; CWA; CAA; D.C. Recycling Act of 1988; Executive Orders 10577 and 12598; Department
of Justice United States Marshals Service, Vulnerability Assessment of Federal Facilities Report;
Presidential Decision Directive 63 (Critical Infrastructure Protection).
774
-------
Program Area: Research: Sustainable Communities
775
-------
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Program Area: Research: Sustainable Communities
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Science & Technology
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Hazardous Substance SuperrUnd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$613.0
$173,525.0
$396.0
$17,757.0
$192,291.0
612.7
FY 2012
Actuals
$1,051.7
$173,523.8
$338.8
$19,395.7
$194,310.0
654.5
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$626.0
$174,655.0
$397.0
$17,852.0
$193,530.0
612.7
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$594.0
$147,372.0
$498.0
$18,243.0
$166,707.0
611.5
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($19.0)
($26,153.0)
$102.0
$486.0
($25,584.0)
-1.2
Program Project Description:
The Sustainable and Healthy Communities (SHC) research program, under the Oil Spill
Response appropriation, seeks to protect human and ecosystem health from the negative impacts
of oil spills. The EPA is the lead Federal on-scene coordinator for inland spills and provides
technical assistance, when needed, for coastal spills. The EPA therefore is charged with
responsibilities for oil spill preparedness and response and associated research. The EPA's
research, planned in concert with our sister agencies, supports the EPA's lead role in developing
protocols for testing spill response products and agents. The EPA also develops and evaluates
response approaches involving dispersants, bioremediation, and other additives. Other agencies
address booms, skimmers, and other engineering responses.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA will continue to develop or revise protocols to test oil spill control agents or products
for listing on the National Contingency Plan (NCP) Product Schedule and will conduct other
research, as needed by the EPA's Emergency Management Program. In addition, the agency will
continue to conduct studies on the effectiveness of bioremediation of petroleum-based oil,
vegetable oil, and biodiesel. The SHC anticipates conducting research on dispersants'
performance and behavior in deep water and arctic spills. This dispersant research will be
conducted in collaboration with the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Safety and
Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) and Canada's Department of Fisheries and Oceans. The
SHC research program's expertise in ecology, combined with our ability to utilize other research
program expertise in eco-toxicology, enabled the EPA to respond to the needs of the Gulf Coast
communities quickly and effectively during the Deepwater Horizon spill response.
776
-------
Recent accomplishments include:
• The EPA research aids officials in developing protocols to combat oil spills on navigable
waters. The EPA officials in the Office of Emergency Management (OEM) relied on SHC's
research on surface washing agents and solidifier protocols. These protocols were used by
OEM to determine how effective such products are in responding to oil spills on navigable
waters. Using this research, OEM listed oil spill countermeasure products on the National
Contingency Plan Product Schedule, which is used nation-wide by emergency responders
and federal agencies to respond to events such as oil spills. Additionally, OEM relies on SHC
scientists to provide testing procedures that inform cleanup decisions during an emergency
spill response. For example, biodegradation research for different dispersants (JD2000,
Corexit 9500) and for different oils (Alaska Endicott crude, southern Louisiana crude, the
heavier refined IFO120) provided OEM with important information on the biodegradability
of surfactants used in dispersing oil during a spill. The EPA's research results will inform
decision makers on how long surfactant chemicals can potentially persist in the environment
after use in responding to an oil spill.
Performance Targets:
Refer to the S&T narrative for a list of SHC's performance measures.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$2.0) This decrease is the net effect of the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$17.0) This reflects the net result of realignments of infrastructure resources such as
equipment purchases and repairs, travel, contracts, and general expenses to better align
with programmatic priorities.
Statutory Authority:
Oil Pollution Act, 33 U.S.C. §2701, et seq.; Clean Water Act (CWA), §311, 33 U.S.C. §1321.
777
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Environmental Protection Agency 778
Resource Summary Table 780
Bill Language: STAG 780
Program Projects in STAG 782
Program Area: Categorical Grants 784
Categorical Grant: Beaches Protection 785
Categorical Grant: Brownfields 787
Categorical Grant: Lead 790
Categorical Grant: Environmental Information 793
Categorical Grant: Evidence-Based Enforcement Grants 797
Categorical Grant: Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance 799
Categorical Grant: Nonpoint Source (Sec. 319) 804
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Enforcement 808
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Program Implementation 810
Categorical Grant: Pollution Control (Sec. 106) 814
Categorical Grant: Pollution Prevention 820
Categorical Grant: Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) 822
Categorical Grant: Radon 827
Categorical Grant: State and Local Air Quality Management 829
Categorical Grant: Toxics Substances Compliance 833
Categorical Grant: Tribal Air Quality Management 835
Categorical Grant: Tribal General Assistance Program 837
Categorical Grant: Underground Injection Control (UIC) 840
Categorical Grant: Underground Storage Tanks 843
Categorical Grant: Wetlands Program Development 846
Program Area: State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG) 849
Infrastructure Assistance: Clean Water SRF 850
Infrastructure Assistance: Drinking Water SRF 855
Infrastructure Assistance: Alaska Native Villages 860
Brownfields Projects 863
778
-------
Diesel Emissions Reduction Grant Program 868
Infrastructure Assistance: Mexico Border 870
779
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION: State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Resource Summary Table
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Budget Authority
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$3,612,937.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$4,238,523.7
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$3,589,781.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$3,153,842.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($459,095.0)
0.0
Bill Language: STAG
For environmental programs and infrastructure assistance, including capitalization grants for
State revolving funds and performance partnership grants, $3,153,842,000, to remain available
until expended, of which:
(1) $1,095,000,000 shall be for making capitalization grants for the Clean Water State Revolving
Funds under title VI of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended (the "Act"); and of
which $817,000,000 shall be for making capitalization grants for the Drinking Water State
Revolving Funds under section 1452 of the Safe Drinking Water Act, as amended: Provided,
That for fiscal year 2014, to the extent there are sufficient project applications, not less than 20
percent of the funds made available under this title to each State for Clean Water State
Revolving Fund capitalization grants shall be used by the State for green infrastructure projects:
Provided further, That for fiscal year 2014, not less than 10 percent of the funds made available
under this title to each State for Drinking Water State Revolving Fund capitalization grants shall
be used for projects to address green infrastructure, water or energy efficiency improvements, or
other environmentally innovative activities: Provided further, That notwithstanding section
603(d)(7) of the Act, the limitation on the amounts in a State water pollution control revolving
fund that may be used by a State to administer the fund shall not apply to amounts included as
principal in loans made by such fund in fiscal year 2014 and prior years where such amounts
represent costs of administering the fund to the extent that such amounts are or were deemed
reasonable by the Administrator, accounted for separately from other assets in the fund, and
used for eligible purposes of the fund, including administration: Provided further, That for fiscal
year 2014, notwithstanding the limitation on amounts in section 518(c) of the Act and section
1452(i) of the Safe Drinking Water Act, up to a total of 2 percent of the funds appropriated for
State Revolving Funds under such Acts may be reserved by the Administrator for grants under
section 518(c) and section 1452(1) of such Acts: Provided further, That for fiscal year 2014,
notwithstanding the amounts specified in section 205(c) of the Act, up to 1.5 percent of the
aggregate funds appropriated for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund program under the Act
less any sums reserved under section 518(c) of the Act, may be reserved by the Administrator for
grants made under title II of the Clean Water Act for American Samoa, Guam, the
780
-------
Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas, and United States Virgin Islands: Provided further,
That for fiscal year 2014, notwithstanding the limitations on amounts specified in section
1452(j) of the Safe Drinking Water Act, up to 1.5 percent of the funds appropriated for the
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund programs under the Safe Drinking Water Act may be
reserved by the Administrator for grants made under section 1452(j) of the Safe Drinking Water
Act: Provided further, That not less than 20 percent but not more than 30 percent of the funds
made available under this title to each State for Clean Water State Revolving Fund capitalization
grants and not less than 20 percent but not more than 30 percent of the funds made available
under this title to each State for Drinking Water State Revolving Fund capitalization grants shall
be used by the State to provide additional subsidy to eligible recipients in the form of forgiveness
of principal, negative interest loans, or grants (or any combination of these), and shall be so
used by the State only where such funds are provided as initial financing for an eligible recipient
or to buy, refinance, or restructure the debt obligations of eligible recipients only where such
debt was incurred on or after the date of enactment of this Act;
(2) $5,000,000 shall be for architectural, engineering, planning, design, construction and related
activities in connection with the construction of high priority water and wastewater facilities in
the area of the United States-Mexico Border, after consultation with the appropriate border
commission; Provided, That no funds provided by this appropriations Act to address the water,
wastewater and other critical infrastructure needs of the colonias in the United States along the
United States-Mexico border shall be made available to a county or municipal government
unless that government has established an enforceable local ordinance, or other zoning rule,
which prevents in that jurisdiction the development or construction of any additional colonia
areas, or the development within an existing colonia the construction of any new home, business,
or other structure which lacks water, wastewater, or other necessary infrastructure;
(3) $10,000,000 shall be for grants to the State of Alaska to address drinking water and
wastewater infrastructure needs of rural and Alaska Native Villages: Provided, That, of these
funds: (1) the State of Alaska shall provide a match of 25 percent; and (2) no more than 5
percent of the funds may be used for administrative and overhead expenses;
(4) $85,000,000 shall be to carry out section 104(k) of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended, including grants,
inter agency agreements, and associated program support costs: Provided, That not more than
25 percent of the amount appropriated to carry out section 104(k) of CERCLA shall be used for
site characterization, assessment, and remediation of facilities described in section
101(39)(D)(ii)(II) of CERCLA;
(5) $6,000,000 shall be for grants under title VII, subtitle G of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, as
amended; and
(6) $1,135,842,000 shall be for grants, including associated program support costs, to States,
federally recognized tribes, interstate agencies, tribal consortia, and air pollution control
agencies for multi-media or single media pollution prevention, control and abatement and
related activities, including activities pursuant to the provisions set forth under this heading in
Public Law 104-134, and for making grants under section 103 of the Clean Air Act for
paniculate matter monitoring and data collection activities subject to terms and conditions
specified by the Administrator, of which: $47,572,000 shall be for carrying out section 128 of
CERCLA, as amended; $21,564,000 shall be for Environmental Information Exchange Network
grants, including associated program support costs; $1,490,000 shall be for grants to States
under section 2007(f)(2) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended, which shall be in addition
781
-------
to funds appropriated under the heading "Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund
Program" to carry out the provisions of the Solid Waste Disposal Act specified in section
9508(c) of the Internal Revenue Code other than section 9003(h) of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act, as amended; $4,000,000 shall be for a competitive grant program for states to develop and
collect innovative measures for assessing the performance of the enforcement and compliance
program or to design and implement innovative enforcement and compliance tools and
approaches and measure the impact of such; $18,500,000 of the funds available for grants under
section 106 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act shall be for State participation in
national- and State-level statistical surveys of water resources and enhancements to State
monitoring programs; and $15,000,000 of the funds available for grants under section 106 of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act shall be awarded to States to achieve nutrient reductions.
Program Projects in STAG
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
Infrastructure Assistance
Infrastructure Assistance: Clean
Water SRF
Infrastructure Assistance: Drinking
Water SRF
Infrastructure Assistance: Alaska
Native Villages
Brownfields Projects
Diesel Emissions Reduction Grant
Program
Infrastructure Assistance: Mexico
Border
Subtotal, Infrastructure Assistance
Categorical Grants
Categorical Grant: Beaches
Protection
Categorical Grant: Brownfields
Categorical Grant: Environmental
Information
Categorcial Grant: Evidence-Based
Enforcement Grants
Categorical Grant: Hazardous
Waste Financial Assistance
Categorical Grant: Lead
Categorical Grant: Nonpoint Source
(Sec. 319)
Categorical Grant: Pesticides
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,466,456.0
$917,892.0
$9,984.0
$94,848.0
$29,952.0
$4,992.0
$2,524,124.0
$9,864.0
$49,317.0
$9,964.0
$0.0
$102,974.0
$14,512.0
$164,493.0
$18,644.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$1,682,041.2
$1,199,237.2
$9,984.0
$98,783.8
$32,138.2
$4,992.0
$3,027,176.4
$10,887.1
$50,147.2
$11,233.4
$0.0
$103,596.8
$15,418.5
$173,332.4
$19,339.8
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$1,465,370.0
$923,509.0
$9,984.0
$89,848.0
$24,952.0
$0.0
$2,513,663.0
$9,681.0
$48,398.0
$9,779.0
$0.0
$101,059.0
$14,242.0
$168,738.0
$18,298.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$1,095,000.0
$817,000.0
$10,000.0
$85,000.0
$6,000.0
$5,000.0
$2,018,000.0
$0.0
$47,572.0
$21,564.0
$4,000.0
$102,974.0
$14,512.0
$164,493.0
$18,644.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($371,456.0)
($100,892.0)
$16.0
($9,848.0)
($23,952.0)
$8.0
($506,124.0)
($9,864.0)
($1,745.0)
$11,600.0
$4,000.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
782
-------
Program Project
Enforcement
Categorical Grant: Pesticides
Program Implementation
Categorical Grant: Pollution
Control (Sec. 106)
Monitoring Grants
Categorical Grant:
Pollution Control (Sec.
106) (other activities)
Subtotal, Categorical Grant:
Pollution Control (Sec. 106)
Categorical Grant: Pollution
Prevention
Categorical Grant: Public Water
System Supervision (PWSS)
Categorical Grant: Radon
Categorical Grant: State and Local
Air Quality Management
Categorical Grant: Targeted
Watersheds
Categorical Grant: Toxics
Substances Compliance
Categorical Grant: Tribal Air
Quality Management
Categorical Grant: Tribal General
Assistance Program
Categorical Grant: Underground
Injection Control (UIC)
Categorical Grant: Underground
Storage Tanks
Categorical Grant: Wastewater
Operator Training
Categorical Grant: Wetlands
Program Development
Subtotal, Categorical Grants
Congressional Priorities
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Subtotal, Congressionally
Mandated Projects
TOTAL, EPA
FY 2012
Enacted
$13,119.0
$18,433.0
$219,970.0
$238,403.0
$4,922.0
$105,320.0
$8,045.0
$235,729.0
$0.0
$5,081.0
$13,252.0
$67,631.0
$10,852.0
$1,548.0
$0.0
$15,143.0
$1,088,813.0
$0.0
$0.0
$3,612,937.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$14,897.1
$29,050.2
$224,802.8
$253,853.0
$5,292.9
$108,645.2
$8,614.0
$245,859.2
$359.9
$6,036.7
$13,870.1
$71,754.0
$10,655.3
$1,639.6
$80.4
$17,528.3
$1,143,040.9
$68,306.4
$68,306.4
$4,238,523.7
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$13,119.0
$18,090.0
$215,881.0
$233,971.0
$4,834.0
$103,362.0
$7,895.0
$231,346.0
$0.0
$4,986.0
$13,005.0
$66,374.0
$10,650.0
$1,519.0
$0.0
$14,862.0
$1,076,118.0
$0.0
$0.0
$3,589,781.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$13,119.0
$18,500.0
$240,164.0
$258,664.0
$4,922.0
$109,700.0
$0.0
$257,229.0
$0.0
$5,081.0
$13,252.0
$72,631.0
$10,852.0
$1,490.0
$0.0
$15,143.0
$1,135,842.0
$0.0
$0.0
$3,153,842.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$0.0
$2,067.0
$18,194.0
$20,261.0
$0.0
$4,380.0
($8,045.0)
$21,500.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$5,000.0
$0.0
($58.0)
$0.0
$0.0
$47,029.0
$0.0
$0.0
($459,095.0)
783
-------
Program Area: Categorical Grants
784
-------
Categorical Grant: Beaches Protection
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect Human Health
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$9,864.0
$9,864.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$10,887.1
$10,887.1
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$9,681.0
$9,681.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($9,864.0)
($9,864.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
This program awards grants to eligible coastal and Great Lakes states, territories, and tribes to
monitor water quality at beaches and to notify the public, through beach advisories and closures,
when water quality exceeds applicable standards. The Beach Grant Program is a collaborative
effort between the EPA and states, territories, local governments, and tribes to help ensure that
recreational waters are safe for swimming. Congress created the program with the passage of the
Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health Act in October 2000 with the goal of
reducing risk to the public of waterborne disease related to the use of recreational water.
The EPA has awarded grants to eligible states, territories, and tribes using an allocation formula
developed in consultation with states and other organizations. The allocation has taken into
consideration beach season length, shoreline miles, and coastal county population.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
To help meet fiscal challenges, the EPA has reviewed its programs for areas where any potential
efficiencies and streamlining can yield savings. As a result, the EPA is proposing that this grant
program be terminated. While beach monitoring continues to be important to protect human
health and especially sensitive individuals, states and local governments now have the technical
expertise and procedures to continue beach monitoring without federal support, as a result of the
significant technical guidance and financial support the Beach Program has provided.
No additional funding will be provided for the following: (1) implementing monitoring and
notification programs consistent with the EPA's National Beach Guidance and Required
Performance Criteria for Grants and (2) submitting monitoring and advisory data to the EPA so
that the agency can provide this information to the public in a timely and easily accessible
manner.
785
-------
Performance Targets:
This proposed disinvestment means that the agency will no longer retain the following measure:
• SS-1: Number of waterborne disease outbreaks attributable to swimming in or other
recreational contact with coastal and Great Lakes waters measured as a 5-year average.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$9,864.0) This reduction reflects the elimination of the Beach Program. The agency is
proposing to eliminate certain mature program activities that are well-established, well-
understood, and where there is the possibility of maintaining some of the human health
benefits through implementation at the local level.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act; Beach Act of 2000.
786
-------
Categorical Grant: Brownfields
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$49,317.0
$49,317.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$50,147.2
$50,147.2
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$48,398.0
$48,398.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$47,572.0
$47,572.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($1,745.0)
($1,745.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Brownfields program is designed to help states, tribes, local communities, and other
stakeholders involved in environmental revitalization and economic redevelopment to work
together to plan, inventory, assess, safely cleanup, and reuse brownfields. Brownfield sites 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. Brownfields
redevelopment is a key to revitalizing downtown areas, thereby increasing property values and
creating jobs. According to a 2007 study, an average of 10 jobs is created for every acre of
brownfields redevelopment.1 Revitalizing these once productive properties helps communities by
removing blight, improving environmental conditions, providing public health benefits,
satisfying the growing demand for land, helping to limit urban sprawl, fostering ecologic habitat
enhancements, enabling economic development, and maintaining or improving quality of life.
As authorized under Section 128(a) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), categorical grants are provided to states and tribes
to establish core capabilities and enhance their brownfields response programs. State and Tribal
response programs address contaminated brownfields sites that do not require federal action, but
need assessment and/or cleanup before the sites are considered to be ready for reuse. States and
tribes may use grant funding provided under this program in the following ways:
• Developing a public record;
• Creating an inventory of brownfields sites;
• Developing oversight and enforcement authorities or other mechanisms and resources;
• Developing mechanisms and resources to provide meaningful opportunities for public
participation;
1 Rowland, Marie. 2007. "Employment Effects of Brownfields Redevelopment, What Do We Know from the Literature?"
Journal of Planning Literature. 22:91.
787
-------
• Developing mechanisms for approval of a cleanup plan and that verification and
certification cleanup efforts are complete;
• Capitalizing a Revolving Loan Fund for Brownfields-related work;
• Purchasing environmental insurance;
• Developing state and Tribal tracking and management systems for land use, institutional
and engineering controls; and
• Conducting site-specific related activities, such as assessments and cleanups at
brownfields sites.2
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to issue grants establishing and enhancing eligible state,
territorial and Tribal response programs under CERCLA 128(a). As part of this assistance, the
EPA also will continue to provide resources to states and tribes for their response programs to
oversee assessment and cleanup activities at brownfield sites. In FY 2014, the EPA will place
renewed emphasis on building response program capacity of states and tribes to address the
assessment and cleanup of sites with actual or perceived contamination that will increase the
number of acres ready for reuse, an important first step in environmental revitalization and
economic development in communities across the country. Specifically, the state and Tribal
response grant program will continue to place a greater emphasis on the importance of tracking
institutional controls and engineering controls on brownfield sites to ensure that long term
stewardship activities maintain engineering controls and that institutional controls continue in
force to protect human health and the environment.
In FY 2014, the EPA is reducing grants in this program by $1.7 million from the FY 2012
enacted level. Since 2003, the EPA has provided funding in at least one funding cycle, to 160
states, tribes or territories and in FY 2012, the EPA provided funding to 150 states, tribes,
territories, and the District of Columbia. It is anticipated that the EPA will continue to provide
funding to at least this number of eligible entities, or slightly more as the number of requests for
funding continues to rise. The EPA will continue to allocate funding under this grant program in
a way that ensures that core programmatic functions are funded for those tribal and state
response programs making meaningful progress in developing their programs rather than
increasing capacity of well-established programs.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in State and Tribal Assistance
Grants: Brownfields Projects and can be found in the Eight-Year Performance Array in Tab 11.
• Refer to http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/state tribal/index.html.
788
-------
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$1,745.0) This change reduces funding for response program grants to states, tribes and
territories. The EPA will manage this reduction in a way that ensures that core
programmatic functions are funded for tribal and state response programs making
meaningful progress in developing their programs rather than increasing capacity of well-
established programs.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, as amended by the
Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act, 42 United States Code. 6901
et seq. - Section 128.
789
-------
Categorical Grant: Lead
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Ensure Chemical Safety
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$14,512.0
$14,512.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$15,418.5
$15,418.5
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$14,242.0
$14,242.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$14,512.0
$14,512.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
Recent biomonitoring data show that significant progress has been made in the continuing effort
to eliminate childhood lead poisoning as a public health concern. At the same time, recent
studies have indicated that children's health may be adversely affected even at extremely low
blood levels, below 10 micrograms per deciliter.3 In response to this new information and the
fact that approximately 38 million homes in the U.S. still have lead-based paint,4 the EPA is now
targeting reductions in the number of children with blood lead levels of 5 micrograms per
deciliter or higher. The Lead program also targets reduction of disparities in blood lead levels
between low-income children and non-low-income children, which are shown to remain at
nearly 30% in the Centers for Disease Control's (CDC's) most recent data through 2010.5
The EPA's Lead Risk Reduction Program contributes to the goal of eliminating childhood lead
poisoning by:
• Establishing a national pool of certified firms and individuals who are trained to carry out
renovation and repair and painting projects while adhering to the lead-safe work practice
standards and to minimize lead dust hazards created in the course of such projects;
• Establishing standards governing lead hazard identification and abatement practices and
maintaining a national pool of professionals trained and certified to implement those
standards; and
3 U.S.EPA. Air Quality Criteria for Lead (September 29, 2006) http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/CFM/recordisplav.cfm?deid=158823
Rogan WJ, Ware JH. Exposure to lead in children - how low is low enough? N Engl J Med.2003;348(16): 1515-1516
http://www.precaution.org/lib/rogan.neim.20030417.pdf Lanphear BP, Homung R, Khoury J, et al. Low-level environmental lead
exposure and children's intellectual function: an international pooled analysis. Environ Health Perspect. 2005; 113(7):894-899
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih. go v/articlerender.fcgi?doi= 10.1289/ehp.7688
4 Jacobs, D.E.; Clickner, R.P.; Zhou, J.Y.; Viet, S.M.; Marker, D.A.; Rogers, J.W.; Zeldin, B.C.; Broene, P.; and Friedman, W.
(2002). The Prevalence of Lead-based Paint Hazard in U.S. housing. Environmental Health Perspectives, 110(10): A599-A606
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Fourth Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals, Updated Tables,
(September, 2012). Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
http: //www. cdc. go v/expo surereport/
790
-------
• Providing information and outreach to housing occupants and the public so they can
make informed decisions and take actions about lead hazards in their homes.
The Lead Categorical Grant Program contributes to the Lead program's goals by providing
support to authorized state and tribal programs that administer training and certification
programs for lead professionals and renovation contractors. Please see http://www.epa.gov/lead
for more information.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the Lead Categorical Grants Program will continue providing assistance to states,
territories, the District of Columbia and tribes to develop and implement authorized programs for
the lead-based paint abatement program to operate in lieu of the federal program. Additionally,
the program will provide support to those entities to develop and implement authorized
Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) programs. The EPA directly implements these programs
in all areas of the country that are not authorized to do so. Activities conducted as part of this
program include accrediting training programs and certifying individuals and firms.
Through calendar year 2012, thirty-nine states and territories, three tribes, the District of
Columbia and Puerto Rico have been authorized to run the lead-based paint abatement program.
In addition, since 2010, twelve states have become authorized to administer the RRP program.
Through calendar year 2012, the EPA and the authorized programs have accredited more than
600 training providers and more than 125,000 renovation firms have been certified. In FY 2014,
the Lead Categorical Grant Program will provide assistance to existing authorized state and tribal
lead programs. The EPA also will provide assistance, using a targeted approach, to states and
tribes interested in becoming authorized to run the RRP program.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue implementing improvements to the Federal Lead-based Paint
Program Database (FLPP) to create an interactive system that is fully integrated with other
systems in use by the agency. Electronic reporting capability for the Lead Program application
and certification/accreditation processes will be achieved by providing for reuse of identification
data collected through other systems, shifting to the use of electronic forms and introducing
simplified or 'smart' applications that can help prevent data entry errors. Each of these steps is
expected to significantly reduce the amount of time applicants spend submitting
applications/reports, the number of errors and, therefore, the need for additional or corrected
applications to be submitted. Improvements also will prevent the payment of incorrect fee
amounts and subsequent refunds that have to be issued, which will reduce associated agency
workload and increase reporting efficiency.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in the Lead Risk Reduction Program
under the EPM account. Currently, there are no performance measures for this specific program.
791
-------
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue its practice of utilizing monitored performance results in
other programs to choose how best to apply available resources toward the achievement of Lead
Categorical Grant Program goals. For example, the EPA has a performance measure that
challenges program managers to achieve ambitious targets for certifying firms to conduct
renovation, repair and painting activities and a measure that tracks progress in timely processing
of applications for certification of lead-based paint professionals and associated refund requests.
These activities are supported by the Lead Categorical Grant Program where performed by
authorized states, tribes and territories.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq. - Section 404(g).
792
-------
Categorical Grant: Environmental Information
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Provide agencywide support for multiple goals to achieve their objectives. This support
involves agencywide activities primarily provided by EPA's six (6) support offices - the Office
of Administration and Resources Management (OARM), Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO), Office of Environmental Information (OEI), Office of General Counsel (OGC), Office
of the Administrator (OA), and the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$9,964.0
$9,964.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$11,233.4
$11,233.4
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$9,779.0
$9,779.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$21,564.0
$21,564.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$11,600.0
$11,600.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
In support of the agency's strategic goal for strengthening state, Tribal, and international
partnerships, the EPA supports and participates in the Environmental Information Exchange
Network (EN). The EN is a standards-based, secure approach for the EPA and its state, Tribal
and territorial partners to exchange and share environmental data. The EPA's participation in the
EN facilitates compliance with regulatory reporting requirements, supports other agency
strategic environmental protection goals and provides access to information for improved
decision making.
EN grants provide funding to states, territories, federally-recognized Indian tribes and Tribal
consortia to support their participation in the EN. These grants help EN partners acquire and
develop the hardware and software needed to connect to the EN; to use the EN to collect, report
and access the data they need with greater efficiency; and to integrate environmental data across
programs.
The Exchange Network will play a critical role in the development and implementation of the
agency's E-Enterprise initiative, which is designed to improve how EPA interacts and exchanges
regulatory information with the states, tribes, and regulated facilities, with the goal of improving
the quality of environmental data and reducing the burden of reporting data to EPA. With the
funds requested for this program, EPA will work with the Environmental Council of States to
develop a single portal where states, tribes, and regulated facilities ("customers") would register
to conduct business with EPA similar to on-line banking. The system would "push" tailored
information out to customers based on their unique regulatory requirements. It will create a
single EPA infrastructure that enables specific programs and state systems to allow businesses to
routinely conduct environmental business transactions with regulators. Facilities could go on-line
to apply for permits, check compliance, report their emissions, and learn about new regulations
that could apply to them.
793
-------
The grant program has enabled the EN to become the standard approach for reporting and
sharing environmental data. In collaboration with the EPA, the Environmental Council of the
States accepts the EN as the standard approach for EPA, state, tribe and territory data sharing.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA requests an increase of $11.6 million for the Environmental Information
grant program to provide additional grant funds to states and tribes to support the implementation
of E-Enterprise. The EPA envisions awarding competitive grants to states and tribes based on
criteria such that the funds would be used to:
1) Incorporate shared identity systems for E-Enterprise users among states, tribes, and EPA
to facilitate streamlined services and reduce reporting burden;
2) Map state environmental regulations to federal regulations which will enable users to
conduct reporting and related business in a more centralized way;
3) Reconfigure systems to allow interoperability with EPA and other central information
services over the Internet;
4) Standardize and harmonize data definitions across multiple organizations and enhance
environmental data systems to support interoperability of data across media programs and
all co-regulators;
5) Revise business processes and potential regulations to align with E-Enterprise's universal
method of electronic two-way business transactions; and
6) Participate and contribute to the E-Enterprise governance.
The anticipated strategy for funding grants to states, tribes and territories will follow a model
similar to the process specified in the annual "National Environmental Information Exchange
Network Grant Program Solicitation Notice".6 The EPA will establish criteria for evaluation
purposes. This will be based on applicability, alignment with E-Enterprise, and accordance with
processes overseen by the EPA Office of Grants and Debarment. The EPA will develop grant
guidance describing eligibility requirements, the process for application preparation and
submission, evaluation criteria, award administration information, and post-award monitoring
procedures.
Expansion of the EN is key to achieving potential environmental and health benefits, including
protecting vulnerable populations, enhancing scientific analysis, and strengthening the
collaborative network of federal, state, Tribal and local partners. The EN enables fast, efficient
and more accurate environmental data submissions from state and local governments, industry
and tribes to the EPA, thus reducing the long-term reporting burden for these entities. In
addition, demand for access to the EN is growing as more partners recognize the value of the EN
in terms of data exchange efficiencies and the ability to access and integrate timely and high-
quality data to address environmental problems. In FY 2012, the Environmental Information
Categorical Grant program awarded a total of 43 grants to federal, state, Tribal, and local
partners which included a total of 25 states, 11 tribes and one territory. The EN has completed
the first phase of development, which was to implement reporting by states, tribes and territories
to eight of the EPA's priority data systems, and has begun implementation of Phase 2. Phase 2
'http://www.epa.gov/exchangenetwork/grants
794
-------
places high emphasis on trading partners publishing data outward to increase access to
environmental information.
Aside from work in support of the E-Enterprise initiative, in FY 2014, the EPA will continue to
award Environmental Information grants to states and tribes for proposals that emphasize the
following activities:
• 24/7 Data Publishing: These activities lead to the creation of services that make a
partner's data available on demand to other partners. Providing data through web
application programming interfaces helps facilitate the sharing of information with the
public, private sector entities, and between agencies. Emphasis will be placed on projects
that support mobile and desktop applications, executive and program dashboards and
publishing environmental information sources for access.
• Phase 2 Flows: These are new flows of national significance including the Air Facility
System, Safe Drinking Water Act compliance (monitoring) data and the water program's
electronic Notice of Intent (to discharge).
• Virtual Data Sharing: The EN will be used to share cross-state, cross-Tribal, or state-
Tribal data, such as institutional controls at contamination sites, data on cleanup sites, and
data sets of national significance to tribes (e.g., open dumps).
• Virtual Node Implementation Support for States, Tribes and Territories: This supports
the transition to the EPA-hosted cloud-based network infrastructure, from nodes to virtual
nodes, creates data-publishing services and new data flows, and supports related security
analyses and plans.
• Shared Services and Components: States and tribes can design systems to utilize new
EPA Web services that provide electronic signature functionality, minimizing redundant
development by partners and streamlining the EPA application reviews/approvals.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$11,600.0) As part of the agency's E-Enterprise investment, this change reflects an
investment in our state, local and Tribal partners to convert to integrated data systems
that will reduce system duplication and paperwork reporting burden on industry and
improve services for the regulated community and the public. The resources are required
by our partners to build to the necessary requirements, standards and protocols to allow
states and other partners to link and share information from the EPA's network. Grants
will be used to assist with the development of interactive and shared solutions that are
more efficient to operate than current reporting. This work will build off the successful
795
-------
state/EPA collaboration with the Environmental Information Exchange Network, a
partnership which is enabling the exchange and sharing of critical environmental data,
leading to enhanced analysis of environmental conditions and improved decision making.
Statutory Authority:
Exchange Network Grant Program has been provided by the annual appropriations for EPA: FY
2002 (Public Law 107-73), FY 2003 (Public Law 108-7), FY 2004 (Public Law 108-199) FY
2005 (Public Law 108-447) and FY 2006 (Public Law 109-54), FY 2007 (Public Law 110-5),
FY 2008 (Public Law 110-161), FY 2009 (Public Law 111-8), and FY 2010 (Public Law 111-
88).
796
-------
Categorical Grant: Evidence-Based Enforcement Grants
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Enforcing Environmental Laws
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$4,000.0
$4,000.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$4,000.0
$4,000.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Evidence-Based Enforcement and Compliance grants program will assist states in
developing and implementing innovative measures for assessing the performance of enforcement
and compliance programs. It also will help the states design and implement innovative
enforcement tools or approaches and measure the impact of such approaches. These grants will
build capacity for collecting, using, and sharing enforcement and compliance data, and for
determining the most efficient and effective practices for improving compliance. Evaluation of
new approaches will help to determine those most promising for potential expansion and
replication.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA's Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program will award grants to
states that advance the development of compliance and enforcement tools and practices that are
based on innovative collection, use, and sharing of information. These grants will support state
efforts to electronically collect data, and use new analytic approaches to more effectively direct
program resources. Examples of focus areas could include: impact of self-certification and third
party certification on costs and rates of compliance in different sectors; electronic collection of
facility performance information that reduces reliance on site specific inspections and provides
whole-universe data; development of tools and data systems that automate the transmission of
data from inspections and other investigations to enhance program management and targeting;
and implementation of advanced emissions monitoring technologies that reduce costs and
increase accuracy of both on-site and remote assessments; and the integration of a broader range
of data, such as ambient environmental data, health data, and economic data to make targeting
more efficient and effective. These grants also will support states' efforts to improve compliance
through increased transparency and to measure the effectiveness of compliance and enforcement
approaches. Under the Evidence-Based Enforcement and Compliance grants program, grant
recipients will develop information about the approach being tested that is sufficient to allow the
EPA and other states to assess its effectiveness and potential for expansion or replication.
797
-------
Performance Targets:
There are no performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$4,000.0) This increase funds the new Evidence-based Enforcement and Compliance
grants program which will assist states in developing and implementing innovative
measures for assessing the performance of the enforcement and compliance assurance
program and designing and implementing innovative enforcement tools and approaches.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, Safe Drinking Water
Act, Toxic Substances Control Act, Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
798
-------
Categorical Grant: Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Restore Land; Preserve Land
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$102,974.0
$102,974.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$103,596.8
$103,596.8
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$101,059.0
$101,059.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$102,974.0
$102,974.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) authorizes and directs the EPA to assist
state programs through the Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance Grants program. These state
grants provide resources for authorized states to implement the hazardous waste management
program, and amount to well over half of the total resources available in state program budgets.7
Under RCRA, the EPA has been working successfully in partnership with state and local
governments, as well as American businesses and non-governmental organizations, to facilitate
significant change in waste and material management practices. Federal and state hazardous
waste programs cover a broad range of activities associated with life cycle management of
hazardous wastes. Through these programs, the EPA and the states protect human health and the
environment by minimizing waste generation, preventing the release of millions of tons of
hazardous wastes from hazardous waste generators and management facilities, and cleaning up
land and water. Authorized states conduct most direct implementation of the permitting,
corrective action, and enforcement components of the RCRA hazardous waste management
program. Millions of Americans live within one mile of RCRA corrective action facilities; most
of which are subject to RCRA permitting requirements.
Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance Grants help the states fulfill their RCRA obligations, and
states are required to provide a minimum level of matching funds - one state dollar for every
three federal grant dollars. This requirement leverages state funding in addition to EPA grant
funding which is essential for state implementation in fulfilling the intent of the comprehensive
framework of regulations the EPA has issued under RCRA to assure safe management of solid
and hazardous waste from cradle to grave8. The regulations define solid and hazardous waste,
and also impose standards on anyone who generates, recycles, transports, treats, stores, or
disposes of waste.
State RCRA Subtitle C Core Hazardous Waste Management Program Implementation Costs - Final Report (Association of
State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials (ASTSWMO), January 2007)
http://www.astswmo.org/Pages/Policies and Publications/Hazardous Waste.htm
8 For matching fund requirements, see 40 C.F.R. § 35.215 for states and 40 C.F.R. § 35.725 for tribes.
799
-------
Primarily through state implementation, the RCRA permitting program protects human health,
communities, and the environment through enforceable controls, including permits that minimize
hazardous waste generation, prevent the release of hazardous constituents from generators and
management facilities, and provide for safe waste management. Data from the U.S. Bureau of
Labor Statistics show an increasing trend in the number of jobs in the waste management and
remediation services industry with a 19.2 percent increase from January 2001 to December
2012.9
The grant resources in the program project also assist states in ensuring the safe clean up of past
and continuing releases through the RCRA corrective action program. The EPA and states focus
their corrective action resources on 3,747 operating hazardous waste facilities. These facilities
include some of the most highly contaminated, technically challenging, and potentially
threatening sites the EPA and states confront in any of their cleanup programs.10 Unaddressed,
RCRA corrective action sites present substantial risks from the release of toxic contaminants to
the air, on the land, and to ground and surface waters. In FY 2012, 81 percent of these facilities
had human exposures to toxins under control, 72 percent had migration of contaminated ground
water under control and 47 percent had final remedies constructed (as compared with
achievements in FY11 of reaching 78 percent for human health, 69 percent for ground water, and
45% for remedy construction).
The cost to clean up sites under the RCRA program can vary widely, with some costing less than
$1 million, and others exceeding $50 million. The length and complexity of the cleanups also
vary and can take from a year to decades to fully remediate and return the site to productive use.
By addressing contamination during the operational life of the facility, and before a facility goes
bankrupt, RCRA saves the taxpayers from bearing the significant cleanup costs under Superfund
and drastically shortens the time for completing protective cleanups.
This program applies to all 50 states and 6 territories. Currently, 48 states and 2 territories are
authorized to implement the RCRA program11 with regulatory direction and oversight from the
EPA. The agency provides funding assistance through the Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance
Grants program and participates in worksharing with authorized states. When appropriate, these
grants also are used to support tribes in conducting hazardous waste work in Indian Country. In
addition, the EPA directly implements the RCRA program in the states of Iowa and Alaska.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance Grants includes funding for the following:
• Issuing and renewing permits to hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal (TSD)
facilities within the permitting universe of 2,465 facilities;
9 Data extracted from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, February 2013. http://www.bls.gov/iag/tgs/iag562.htmSworkforce
10 EPA tracks corrective action obligations for RCRA-permitted facilities. There are additional non-permitted facilities that may
have corrective action obligations not tracked by EPA; these facilities are typically small sites. The EPA recognizes that the total
universe of such facilities or sites "subject to" corrective action universe is between five and six thousand facilities or sites, and is
evaluating this universe to determine if cleanup work is needed.
11 Within the overall RCRA program, 43 states and territories are authorized for direct implementation of the RCRA correction
action program.
800
-------
• Overseeing clean-ups of releases at 3,747 TSD and priority facilities;
• Inspecting facilities;
• Taking appropriate enforcement actions; and
• Maintaining data, support systems, and authorized regulations, for implementing these
programs.
State work is crucial to meeting key program goals, and state commitments toward the national
goals are negotiated into state grant agreements.
In conjunction with the states, the EPA established a goal of constructing cleanup remedies,
assuring that human exposures are eliminated and controlling groundwater migration at 95
percent of sites by FY 2020. The agency has authorized 43 states and territories to directly
implement the program at the majority of the sites with leadership and support from the EPA. In
FY 2014, the agency and states continue to face a significant workload to implement protective
cleanups for our nation's most significant operational cleanup sites.
At the beginning of FY 2014, the EPA estimates the remaining RCRA workload will include:
• Controlling human exposures to contaminants at 15 percent of the baseline sites (about
550 sites);
• Controlling groundwater at 27 percent of the baseline (approximately 1,000 sites); and
• Constructing final remedies at 49 percent of the baseline (approximately 1,800 sites).
Because states implement RCRA, the EPA's ability to meet these goals, as well as goals for
issuing permits, permit renewals, and other approved controls, will be negatively impacted by
state fiscal constraints.
In FY 2014, the EPA will focus resources on those sites that present the highest risk to human
health and the environment and implement actions to end or reduce these threats. A small
percentage (<1 percent) of STAG resources could be used to fund multi-year grants to provide
common services to states in order to facilitate the close coordination of state and EPA
management in the implementation of the RCRA program. The non-profit Association of State
and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials, for example, has provided such services
previously.
The agency and states will use site investigations to identify threats; establish interim remedies to
reduce and eliminate exposure; and select and construct safe, effective long-term remedies that
maintain the viability of the operating facility. The EPA and states continue to grapple with
hundreds of very large, highly contaminated sites and many small but equally contaminated sites.
Additionally, the agency will evaluate the remaining workload for the corrective action program
by taking into consideration the progress to date and available resources, as recommended by
GAO in its recent report.12 This analysis will focus on the resources needed to reach the EPA's
long-term goals for completing cleanups at over 3,000 corrective action facilities.
12 Hazardous Waste: Early Goals Have Been Met in EPA's Corrective Action Program but Resource and Technical Challenges
Will Constrain Future Progress (GAO-11-514), July 2011.
801
-------
Resources will be used to issue facility specific initial permits and review and improve permits
when they are modified or renewed. The national RCRA program provides leadership for
meeting our legal obligation to the following:
• Reassess land disposal permits every five years;
• Renew all permits at least every ten years;
• Maintain permits by modifying them to address changes in operations; and
• Monitor facility performance to ensure that permits continue to protect people and
ecosystems from harmful exposures to hazardous pollutants.
The RCRA permitting program faces a significant workload to ensure controls remain protective.
In FY 2014, the EPA and authorized states will oversee and manage RCRA permits for
approximately 10,000 hazardous waste units at 2,465 facilities. Due to declining state resources,
the EPA has received an increasing number of requests from authorized states for direct
implementation support, such as taking over the cleanup work at specific RCRA corrective
action sites within a state or doing the risk assessments for state permits. The number of requests
for direct implementation support varies among the states and regions.
States will continue to work to meet the annual target of implementing permits, initial approved
controls, and updated controls at 100 RCRA hazardous waste management facilities. Based on
current levels of state funding, the EPA expects that the current permit backlog will remain
reasonably constant in the foreseeable future since the new workload added each year is almost
the same as the annual accomplishments. Specifically, the EPA's annual target through FY 2014
is to achieve 100 permitting accomplishments (new and updated approved controls) each year.
EPA does expect to achieve this target, but the net result is diminished since an additional 80 -
117 existing permits expire each year that need to be revised and reissued.
An important objective in FY 2014 is ensuring owners and operators of hazardous waste
management facilities and reclamation facilities demonstrate that they have financial
mechanisms in place to cover the costs of closure, post-closure, and clean-up activities. EPA
understands that States that have been able to closely review initial cost estimates have found
them to be insufficient to cover the up-to-date costs of closure and post-closure. Verifying the
adequacy of cost estimates and financial assurance documentation requires specialized
knowledge and experience, and is a key talent that can protect taxpayer dollars by ensuring that
money will be available to properly close, clean up, and monitor the site if, for example, the
facility is abandoned or the owner goes bankrupt. Continued focus in this area can avoid the risk
of sites having to be addressed by the Superfund program.
Finally, in FY 2014 the EPA will be re-evaluating the state allocation formula for Hazardous
Waste Financial Assistance Grants. The agency will pursue appropriate updates to take effect in
FY 2014 that better align cooperative agreement funding to state needs, maximizing the
environmental benefits and program performance of this funding.
802
-------
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in the RCRA Waste Management
and RCRA Corrective Action programs and can be found in the Performance Eight Year Array
in the Program Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$0.0) No change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42
United States Code 6901 et seq. - Section 3011, and the Department of Veterans Affairs and
Housing and Urban Development and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act; Public Law
105-276; 112 Stat. 2461, 2499 (1988).
803
-------
Categorical Grant: Nonpoint Source (Sec. 319)
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$164,493.0
$164,493.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$173,332.4
$173,332.4
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$168,738.0
$168,738.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$164,493.0
$164,493.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
Section 319 of the Clean Water Act broadly authorizes states, territories, and tribes to use a range
of tools to implement their Nonpoint Source Protection Programs, including: regulatory and non-
regulatory programs, technical assistance, financial assistance, education, training, technology
transfers, and demonstration projects.13 Grants under Section 319 are provided to states,
territories, and tribes to help them implement their EPA approved Nonpoint Source Management
Programs by remediating past nonpoint source pollution and preventing or minimizing new
nonpoint source pollution. Implementation of watershed-based plans helps states achieve load
reductions contained in Total Maximum Daily Loads to achieve water quality standards. These
implementation projects have allowed states to remediate 433 waterbodies as of FY 2012 that
were primarily impaired by nonpoint source pollution so that they now meet water quality
standards. To help reduce nonpoint source pollution, the EPA and the United States Department
of Agriculture (USDA) will enhance coordination to achieve improvements in water quality and
ecosystem health by targeting resources and helping landowners implement voluntary
stewardship practices.
Nonpoint source pollution, caused by runoff that carries excess nutrients, toxics and other
contaminants to waterbodies, is the greatest remaining source of surface and groundwater quality
impairments and threats in the United States. Currently, there are approximately 42,000
waterbodies listed as impaired.14 Nonpoint sources are the primary cause of impairment in over
75 percent of these impaired waters and nonpoint sources figure significantly in all but ten
percent of the other waterbody impairments.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The pervasiveness of nonpoint source pollution requires cooperation and involvement from the
EPA, other federal agencies, the states, local governments, nonprofit organizations, and
concerned citizens to address nonpoint source pollution problems. In FY 2014, the EPA will
13See https://www.cfda.gov for more information.
14 See http://ofmpub.epa.gov/tmdl waters 10/attains nation cy.control?p report type=T for more information.
804
-------
work closely with and support the many efforts of states, interstate agencies, tribes, local
governments and communities, watershed groups, the USDA and other federal agencies, and
others to develop and implement their local watershed-based plans and restore surface water and
ground water nationwide.
In FY 2014, the program will focus on continuing to work with states to implement the Section
319 Program reforms issued in FY 2012 and FY 2013. These include ensuring adherence to new
Section 319 grant guidelines, conducting annual performance and progress reviews, and better
tracking Section 319 funding to program management actions, among others. We will continue a
strong focus on the development and implementation of watershed-based plans to restore
impaired waterbodies to meet water quality standards, as well as to protect unimpaired waters.
These watershed-based plans, a key emphasis of the national Nonpoint Source Control Program,
will support the strategic goal of more waters attaining designated uses and enable states to
determine the most cost-effective means to meet their water quality goals. Plans include an
analysis of sources and relative significance of pollutants of concern; identification of cost-
effective techniques to address those sources; availability of needed resources, authorities, and
community involvement to affect change; along with monitoring to enable states and local
communities to track progress and make changes over time to meet their water quality goals.
The EPA will continue to forge and strengthen strategic partnerships with other federal agency
programs, in particular the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, which implements
Farm Bill conservation programs that control nonpoint source pollution. Agricultural sources of
pollution in the form of animal waste, fertilizer, and sediments have a particularly profound
effect on water quality. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue the partnership with USDA to ensure
that federal resources — including both Section 319 grants and Farm Bill funds — are managed in
a coordinated manner, where feasible, to protect water quality from agricultural pollution
sources. In FY 2012, 154 priority watersheds were selected for targeted conservation
investments. In FY 2013, additional selections will be considered by NRCS which may result in
the addition of a limited number of watersheds. In FY 2014, the EPA will work with states to
provide monitoring support in these watersheds to demonstrate water quality progress from
implemented conservation practices.
This collaboration between the EPA and the USDA will support ready and willing stakeholders
(including agricultural producers, non-governmental organizations, universities, and state and
local water quality, resource, and agricultural leaders) to implement watershed plans in priority
watersheds. The agencies will deliver voluntary conservation systems on the ground, pursue
innovative approaches to conservation, and evaluate results compared to expected outcomes.
The EPA will continue to work closely with a broad set of partners to promote the
implementation of low-impact development practices that can prevent new development
activities from harming water quality as well as assist in the restoration of waterbodies when
previously developed areas are redeveloped. Runoff from developed and developing areas is a
leading source of degradation to urban/suburban streams. Working with states, cities, developers,
watershed associations, and others, the EPA will continue to spread knowledge and adoption of
low-impact development practices.
805
-------
The Clean Water Act provides that Clean Water State Revolving Funds loans can be used to
implement projects pursuant to a state Nonpoint Source Pollution Management Program. The
EPA will continue to track the steady increases in the cumulative dollar value and number of
nonpoint source projects financed with Clean Water State Revolving Fund loans to prevent
polluted runoff. The EPA will encourage state, Tribal, and local governments to use Clean Water
State Revolving Fund loans to finance nonpoint source projects, where appropriate.
Additionally, in calendar year 2011, the EPA completed a detailed evaluation of how states are
using Section 319 resources, including for implementation of Total Maximum Daily Loads and
restoring impaired waters. In 2012, the U.S. Government Accountability Office also conducted a
study of the Nonpoint Source Water Control Program. In FY 2012, the EPA began implementing
program refinements based on these studies with emphasis on improving program accountability
and ensuring that states are using cost-effective approaches to protect and restore their waters.
The EPA has a priority goal that tracks the revision of state Nonpoint Source Management Plans.
The update of state Nonpoint Source Management Programs is important for the setting of state
priorities and strategic targeting of Section 319 funds (along with state match and other funds)
towards the most pressing nonpoint source problems. An up-to-date state Nonpoint Source
Management Program is the roadmap that drives strategic implementation activities to control
and prevent pollution for a state's entire Nonpoint Source Program. It establishes the state's
goals, priorities, and key milestones and actions over time. This program provides the essential
context within which the annual Section 319 funded workplans deliver program and project
results.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(bpf) Estimated annual reduction in millions of pounds of phosphorus from nonpoint sources to
water bodies (Section 319 funded projects only).
FY2007
4.5
7.5
FY2008
4.5
3.5
FY2009
4.5
3.5
FY2010
4.5
2.6
FY2011
4.5
4.8
FY2012
4.5
Data
Avail
3/2013
FY2013
4.5
FY2014
4.5
Units
Pounds
(Million)
Measure
Target
Actual
(bpg) Estimated additional reduction in million pounds of nitrogen from nonpoint sources to
water bodies (Section 319 funded projects only).
FY2007
8.5
19.1
FY2008
8.5
11.3
FY 2009
8.5
9.1
FY 2010
8.5
9.8
FY2011
8.5
12.8
FY 2012
8.5
Data
Avail
3/2013
FY 2013
9.1
FY 2014
9.1
Units
Pounds
(Million)
Measure
Target
Actual
(bph) Estimated additional reduction in thousands of tons of sediment from nonpoint sources to
water bodies (Section 319 funded projects only).
FY2007
700
1,200
FY2008
700
2,100
FY2009
700
2,300
FY2010
700
2,100
FY2011
700
2,007
FY2012
700
Data
Avail
3/2013
FY2013
1,100
FY2014
1,200
Units
Tons
(Thousand)
806
-------
The EPA provides grant funds to states and tribes under Clean Water Act Section 319 to
implement comprehensive programs to control nonpoint source pollution, including reduction in
runoff of nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment. The EPA monitors progress in reducing loadings
of these key pollutants.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act Section 319.
807
-------
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Enforcement
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Enforcing Environmental Laws
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$18,644.0
$18,644.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$19,339.8
$19,339.8
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$18,298.0
$18,298.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$18,644.0
$18,644.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Pesticides Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Cooperative Agreement program
supports pesticide product and user compliance with provisions of the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) through cooperative agreements with states and Tribes.
Areas of focus include inspections and enforcement to reduce chemical risks and protect
vulnerable populations. Additionally, the program provides states the capacity to provide
compliance assistance to the regulated community to foster knowledge of and compliance with
environmental laws pertaining to pesticides.15 The program also sponsors training for state and
Tribal inspectors through the Pesticide Inspector Residential Training Program (PIRT) and for
state and Tribal managers through the Pesticide Regulatory Education Program (PREP).
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to award state and Tribal pesticides cooperative agreements
to assist in the implementation of the compliance monitoring and enforcement provisions of
FIFRA. These cooperative agreements support state and Tribal compliance and enforcement
activities designed to protect the public and the environment from harmful chemicals and
pesticides such as inspections, investigations and formal/informal enforcement actions.
Enforcement and pesticides program cooperative agreement guidance is issued to focus regional,
state and Tribal efforts on the highest priorities. The EPA's support to state and Tribal pesticide
programs emphasizes reducing chemical risks by: conducting targeted inspections of pesticide
use involving six acutely toxic agricultural pesticides with the highest incident rates;
implementing container/containment requirements and conducting targeted inspections of
pesticide producer facilities such as contract manufacturers or fumigant producers. These
cooperative agreements also will help states and Tribes protect vulnerable populations by
conducting compliance monitoring and enforcement activities, involving worker protection, at
pesticide producing establishments located in environmental justice areas.
' For additional information, refer to: www.epa.gov/compliance/state/grants/fifra.html
808
-------
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports the strategic objective to Ensure Chemical Safety. Currently,
there are no performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
809
-------
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Program Implementation
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Ensure Chemical Safety
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$13,119.0
$13,119.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$14,897.1
$14,897.1
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$13,119.0
$13,119.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$13,119.0
$13,119.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
The EPA's mission, as related to pesticides, is to protect human health and the environment from
pesticide risk and to realize the value of pesticide availability by considering the economic,
social, and environmental costs and benefits of the use of pesticides.16 The agency provides
grants to states, tribes and other partners, including universities, non-profit organizations, other
federal agencies, pesticide users, environmental groups, and other entities, as necessary, to assist
in strengthening and implementing the EPA's pesticide programs. The program focuses on areas
such as worker safety activities (including worker protection and certification and training of
pesticide applicators), protection of endangered species,17 protection of water resources from
pesticides, and promotion of environmental stewardship and Integrated Pest Management related
activities. These agency activities are achieved through implementation of its statutes and
regulatory actions.
Pesticides program implementation grants ensure that pesticide regulatory decisions made at the
national level are translated into results at the local level. The EPA provides resources for those
closest to the source of potential risks from pesticides since they are in a position to better
evaluate risks and implement risk reduction measures. Stakeholders at the local level, including
states and tribes, provide essential support in implementing pesticide programs. The agency
engages stakeholders, including states in the regulatory process, and considers their input
regarding effectiveness and soundness of regulatory decisions. The states and tribes also develop
data to measure program performance. Under pesticide statutes, responsibility for ensuring
proper pesticide use is in large part delegated to states and tribes. Grant resources allow states
and tribes to be more effective regulatory partners.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
16 Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, as amended January 23, 2004. Section 3(a), Requirement of Registration
(7U.S.C. 136a). Available online at http://www.epa.gov/opp00001/regulating/laws.htm
17 The Endangered Species Act of 1973 sections 7(a)l and 7 (a)2; Federal Agency Actions and Consultations, as amended (16
U.S.C. 1536(a)). Available at U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered Species Act of 1973 internet site:
http://www.fws.gov/endangered/laws-policies/section-7.html
810
-------
Certification and Training/Worker Protection
Through the Certification and Training/Worker Protection programs, the EPA protects workers,
pesticide applicators/handlers, employers, and the public from the potential risks posed by
pesticides in their homes and work environments. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to provide
assistance and grants to implement the Certification and Training/Worker Protection programs.
Grants fund maintenance and improvements in training networks, safety training to workers and
pesticide handlers, development of Train the Trainer courses, workshops, and development and
distribution of outreach materials. The agency's partnership with states and tribes in educating
workers, farmers, and employers on the safe use of pesticides and worker safety will continue to
be a major focus. See http://www.epa.gov/oppfeadI/safety/applicators/applicators.htm for more
information.
Endangered Species Protection Program (ESPP)
The Endangered Species Protection Program (ESPP) protects federally listed threatened or
endangered animals and plants whose populations are threatened by risks associated with
pesticide use. The EPA complies with Endangered Species Act (ESA) requirements to ensure
that its regulatory decisions will not likely jeopardize the continued existence of species listed as
endangered and threatened, or destroy or adversely modify habitat designated as critical to those
species' survival. The EPA will provide grants to states, tribes, and other partners, as described
above, for projects supporting endangered species protection. Program implementation includes
outreach, communication, education related to use limitations, review and distribution of
endangered species protection bulletins, and mapping and development of endangered species
protection plans. These activities support the agency's mission to protect the environment from
pesticide risk.
Protection of Water Sources from Pesticide Exposure
Protecting the nation's water sources from possible pesticide contamination is another
component of the EPA's environmental protection efforts. The EPA provides funding, through
cooperative agreements, to states, tribes, and other partners to investigate and respond to water
resource contamination by pesticides. Stakeholders and partners, including states and tribes, are
expected to evaluate local pesticide uses that have the potential to contaminate water resources
and take steps to prevent or reduce contamination where pesticide concentrations approach or
exceed levels of concern.
The EPA's Cooperative Agreements for pesticides typically include the following three-tier
approach:
1. Evaluate: Identify pesticides that may have the potential to threaten water quality locally;
2. Manage: If the evaluation identifies that the pesticide may be found at levels locally that
pose water quality concerns, take actions to manage those pesticides and mitigate
exposure; and
811
-------
3. Demonstrate Progress: For pesticides that are actively managed, examine available data
and trends to demonstrate improvement in water quality.
Integrated Pest Management:
The EPA will continue to support risk reduction by providing assistance to promote the use of
safer alternatives to traditional chemical pest control methods including Integrated Pest
Management (TPM) techniques.18 The EPA supports the development and evaluation of new pest
management technologies that contribute to reducing both health and environmental risks from
pesticide use.
The EPA will support implementation of Tribal pesticide programs through grants. Tribal
program outreach activities support Tribal capacity to protect human health by reducing risk
from pesticides in Indian country. This task is challenging given that aspects of Native
Americans' lifestyles, such as subsistence fishing or consumption of plants, that were
specifically grown as food and possibly exposed to pesticides not intended for food use, may
increase exposure to some chemicals or create unique chemical exposure scenarios. For
additional information, please see http://www.epa.gov/oppfeadI/tribes/.
Change in Grant Source
In FY 2014, the program plans to use approximately one percent of STAG resources to fund a
multi-year grant in support of the State FIFRA Issues Research and Evaluation Group, which
provides common services to states and ensures the close coordination of state and EPA
management. This funding was previously provided by EPA's EPM account.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the Protect Human Health from
Pesticide Risk, Protect the Environment from Pesticide Risk, and Realize the Value of Pesticide
Availability program descriptions under the EPM account. It also supports the following
programs through grants to states, tribes, partners, and supporters: Certification and
Training/Worker Protection, Endangered Species Protection Program (ESPP), Field Activities,
Pesticides in Water, Tribal Program, and IPM.
Currently, there are no performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
! For additional information, see http://www.epa.gov/pesp/.
812
-------
Statutory Authority:
Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act (known as PRIA3); Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA); Food
Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996; Endangered Species Act (ESA).
813
-------
Categorical Grant: Pollution Control (Sec. 106)
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$238,403.0
$238,403.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$253,853.0
$253,853.0
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$233,971.0
$233,971.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$258,664.0
$258,664.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$20,261.0
$20,261.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
Section 106 of the Clean Water Act authorizes the EPA to provide federal assistance to states
(including territories and the District of Columbia), tribes qualified under Clean Water Act
Section 518(e), and interstate agencies to establish and maintain adequate measures for the
prevention and control of surface and groundwater pollution from point and nonpoint sources.
Prevention and control activities supported through these grants include providing permits,
ambient water quality monitoring and assessment, water quality standards development, Total
Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) development, surveillance and enforcement, water quality
planning, advice and assistance to local agencies, training, and public information. Section 106
grants also may be used to provide "in-kind" support through an EPA contract, if requested by a
state or tribe.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to work with states, interstate agencies, and tribes to foster a
"watershed approach" as the guiding principle of their clean water programs. This approach
conducts and assesses monitoring efforts, develops TMDLs, and writes National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits with the goal of sustaining and improving the
entire watershed.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The Section 106 Grant Program supports prevention and control measures that improve water
quality. In FY 2014, $15 million of the requested additional $20.3 million in Section 106 funding
will be designated for states that commit to strengthening their nutrient management efforts
consistent with EPA Office of Water guidance issued in March 20II.19 This initiative will work
in conjunction with activities being carried out by states and tribes using Section 319 and U.S.
Department of Agriculture funding and focus on key principles that have guided the agency
technical assistance and collaboration with the states. The Framework will be used for awarding
19 The eight key principles are identified in the March 16,2011, memorandum "Working in Partnership with States to Address
Phosphorus and Nitrogen Pollution through the Use of a Framework for State Nutrient Reductions (Framework)"
814
-------
the additional Section 106 funds to implement nutrient reduction activities. The agency is
requesting an additional $3.4 million for the states and tribes to support E-Enterprise approaches
to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of electronic information and reporting. The
requested increase to the Section 106 grant program also provides a modest increase of
approximately $1.9 million to the base program to support state and Tribal water pollution
control activities.
Monitoring and Assessment:
The EPA's goal is to achieve greater integration of federal, regional, state, and local level
monitoring efforts to connect monitoring and assessment activities across geographic scales and
serve multiple Clean Water Act programs in a cost-efficient and effective manner. Continued
funding will ensure that scientifically defensible monitoring data are available to address issues
and problems at each of these scales.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue working with states and tribes to enhance their water quality
monitoring programs. Monitoring Initiative funds for states and tribes will continue to support
the statistically valid National Aquatic Resource Surveys of national and regional water
conditions and implementation of state and Tribal monitoring strategies. In FY 2014, $18.5
million will be designated for states and tribes under the Initiative: $8.5 million for monitoring as
part of statistically valid reports on the national water condition, and approximately $10 million
to implement program improvements per state monitoring strategies. Through the Monitoring
and Assessment Partnership, the EPA will work with states to develop and apply innovative and
efficient monitoring tools and techniques to optimize availability of high-quality data to support
Clean Water Act program needs. The Partnership also will expand the use of monitoring data and
geo-spatial tools for water resource protection to set priorities and evaluate effectiveness of water
protection. This will allow the EPA, states, and tribes to continue reporting on the condition of
the nation's water and make significant progress toward assessing trends in water condition in a
scientifically defensible manner.
As part of the national surveys, the EPA, states, and tribes will collaborate to conduct field
sampling for the second National Rivers and Streams Assessment to determine changes since
2008/2009. This rivers-and-streams survey will be conducted in FY 2013 and 2014, and the
report will be completed in FY 2016. A portion of the FY 2013 Clean Water Act Section 106
Monitoring Initiative funds will be allocated for the second year of sampling for the National
Rivers and Streams Assessment in 2014. A report for the National Wetland Condition
Assessment will be issued in 2014 (the field work for this report occurred in 2011). The EPA and
states will complete data analysis and peer review of the second National Lakes Assessment to
meet the FY 2015 report target. In FY 2014, the EPA/State Steering Committee for the National
Coastal Assessment will be planning the next survey targeted to be conducted in the field in
calendar year 2015.
Review and Update Water Quality Standards:
States and authorized tribes will continue to review and update their water quality standards as
required by the Clean Water Act. The EPA encourages states to review continually and update
water quality criteria in their standards to reflect the latest scientific information from the EPA
and other sources. The EPA's goal for FY 2014 is that 66.1 percent of states and territories will
815
-------
have updated their standards within the past three years to reflect the latest scientific information.
Additionally, the EPA places a high priority on state adoption of numeric water quality criteria
for nitrogen and phosphorus as part of a partnership with states to address these pollutants
through use of a framework for state nutrient reductions. Finally, the EPA will continue to work
with tribes that want to establish water quality standards.
Develop Total Maximum Daily Loads:
In impaired watersheds, EPA policy advises states to develop TMDLs - critical tools for meeting
water restoration goals - within 8 to 13 years from the time the impairment is identified on a
303(d) list. While the pace of TMDL completion has been affected as states have begun to tackle
more challenging TMDLs, such as broad-scale mercury and nutrient TMDLs, they are still
encouraged by the EPA to develop TMDLs as expeditiously as practicable. Also, the EPA will
continue to work with states to facilitate accurate, comprehensive, and geo-referenced water
quality data made available to the public via the Assessment Total Maximum Daily Load
Tracking and Implementation System. States and the EPA have made significant progress in the
development and approval of TMDLs. As of FY 2012, States have developed more than 43
thousand TMDLs; however, over 54 thousand TMDLs remain to be completed. TMDLs are an
important water quality management tool, as they identify applicable water quality targets for
restoring impaired waters and establishing point and nonpoint source loading limits. States will
continue to use Section 106 funding to address the number of TMDLs that remain to be
completed and develop TMDLs that more readily facilitate implementation of point and nonpoint
source load reductions.
Issue Permits:
The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program requires point source
dischargers to be permitted and pretreatment programs to control discharges from industrial and
other facilities to the nation's wastewater treatment plants. The EPA is working with states to
structure the permit program to better support comprehensive protection of water quality on a
watershed basis, as well as to address recent increases in the permit universe arising from court
orders and environmental concerns. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to work with states to
advance the integrity of the NPDES program and integrate the permit program and enforcement
oversight so the most significant actions affecting water quality are included in program reviews
and addressed. The EPA also will work with states to balance competing priorities, schedules for
action items based on the significance of the action, and program revisions. The EPA will
encourage the states to seek opportunities to incorporate efficiency tools such as electronic
reporting, watershed permitting, and trading.
As updates are made to the NPDES regulations and program requirements, the EPA continues to
work with states to incorporate new requirements into their regulations. For example, the EPA
continues to review and approve State NPDES Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations
(CAFOs) permits, regulations, and technical standards. In FY 2012, the EPA issued a precedent-
setting general permit for the application of pesticides. In FY 2012 and FY 2013, the EPA
continued to work with the 46 authorized states as they developed their NPDES pesticides
general and individual permits and assisted in a national effort to educate the pesticides
application industry regarding compliance with the new permits. In FY 2014, the EPA and the
816
-------
states, as co-regulators, will administer these permits, which are estimated to include 365
thousand pesticide applicators.
Stormwater discharges are a significant cause of water quality impairment, especially in urban
areas where rainwater flows over impervious cover, carrying pollutants and erosive flows into
the nation's water bodies. The EPA intends to propose more protective standards on discharges
from newly developed and redeveloped sites. Through collaboration with states and partner
organizations, green infrastructure management approaches will be used to promote prevention,
reduction, and elimination of water pollution caused by wet weather events. The states will be
implementing the newly revised Stormwater regulations to better protect the nation's waters from
stormwater discharges. They will need to develop programs to control discharges that were
previously unregulated and work with cities to change their codes and ordinances to ensure the
regulations are implemented in the most cost-effective way.
With more than 500 thousand dischargers submitting information to state and EPA NPDES
authorities, the permitting program will benefit from the reduced paperwork burden and
enhancements to data quality achieved through migration to electronic reporting. The EPA will
encourage the states to use Section 106 resources to enhance the effectiveness of electronic
reporting.
Conducting Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement:
Despite significant progress in reducing water pollution from the largest sources, the country still
faces serious regulatory and compliance challenges in attaining the water quality goals of the
Clean Water Act. In October 2009, the agency issued its Clean Water Act Action Plan to target
enforcement on the most important water pollution problems, strengthen oversight of the states,
and improve transparency and accountability. In implementing this plan, the EPA issued the
Interim Guidance to Strengthen Performance in the NPDES Program on June 22, 2010. This
guidance directs the EPA regional offices and states to expand NPDES planning to include
consideration of enforcement and permitting in an integrated way and take action where states
have demonstrated long-standing problems with permit quality or enforcement programs. In
addition, the EPA and state co-regulators have collaboratively researched and debated a wide
range of new approaches for fundamentally changing approaches to the NPDES permitting and
enforcement program. This constructive dialogue between state Clean Water Act agencies and
the EPA has facilitated a long-term, goal-oriented commitment to improving compliance with
the Clean Water Act. These new approaches, which address numerous challenges facing the EPA
and state agencies, are included in the document titled "Clean Water Action Plan Implementation
Priorities: Changes to Improve Water Quality, Increase Compliance, and Expand Transparency"
issued on May 11, 2011. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue working closely with states to
implement the Interim Guidance and begin implementing these new approaches.
The EPA regions and states will work to develop compliance monitoring plans pursuant to the
October, 17, 2007 Compliance Monitoring Strategy. This Strategy allows flexibility for adapting
to state-specific universes and compliance priorities.
Working with Tribal Water Pollution Control Programs:
817
-------
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to work with Tribal programs on activities that address water
quality and pollution problems on Tribal lands. Working with Tribal governments, the EPA will
continue to monitor the implementation of the Clean Water Act Section 106 Tribal Guidance.,
which forms a framework for tribes to establish, implement, and expand their Water Pollution
Control Programs.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(bpk) Number of TMDLs that are established by states and approved by the EPA [state TMDL]
on a schedule consistent with national policy (cumulative). [A TMDL is a technical plan for
reducing pollutants in order to obtain water quality standards. The terms "approved" and
"established" refer to the completion and approval of the TMDL itself]
FY2007
20,232
21,685
FY2008
28,527
30,658
FY 2009
33,540
36,487
FY 2010
39,101
38,749
FY2011
41,235
41,231
FY 2012
43,781
43,933
FY 2013
56,627
FY 2014
58,822
Units
TMDLs
Measure
Target
Actual
(bpl) Percent of high-priority state NPDES permits that are issued in the fiscal year.
FY2007
95
112
FY2008
95
120
FY 2009
95
147
FY 2010
95
142
FY2011
100
135
FY 2012
100
130
FY 2013
80
FY 2014
80
Units
Permits
Measure
Target
Actual
(bpn) Percent of major dischargers in Significant Noncompliance (SNC) at any time during the
fiscal year.
FY2007
22.5
22.6
FY2008
22.5
23.9
FY 2009
22.5
23.3
FY 2010
22.5
23.5
FY2011
22.5
23.2
FY 2012
22.5
Data
Avail
4/2013
FY 2013
22.5
FY 2014
22.5
Units
Dischargers
Measure
Target
Actual
(bpw) Percent of states and territories that, within the preceding 3-year period, submitted new
or revised water quality criteria acceptable to the EPA that reflect new scientific information
from the EPA or sources not considered in previous standards.
FY2007
67
66.1
FY2008
68
62.5
FY 2009
68
62.5
FY 2010
66
67.9
FY2011
64.3
69.6
FY 2012
64.3
69.6
FY 2013
64.3
FY 2014
66.1
Units
States and
Territories
Measure
Target
Actual
(L) Number of water body segments identified by states in 2002 as not attaining standards,
where water quality standards are now fully attained (cumulative).
FY2007
1,166
1,409
FY2008
1,550
2,165
FY 2009
2,270
2,505
FY 2010
2,809
2,909
FY2011
3,073
3,119
FY 2012
3,324
3,527
FY 2013
3,727
FY 2014
3,927
Units
Segments
A key performance measure for the Water Pollution Control Program is the number of water
body segments identified by states in 2002 as not attaining standards, where water quality
standards are now fully attained. State partners play a key role in developing and implementing
plans and documenting progress. The additional funds in FY 2014 will assist in restoring water
bodies that require WQS for nutrients, more complex TMDLs, or where permits need to be
developed.
818
-------
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$15,000.0) This increase is for states that improve their water quality programs relating
to the management of nutrients.
• (+$3,400.0) This increase is for the states and tribes to support e-enterprise approaches to
enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of electronic information and reporting.
• (+$1,861.0) This increase is to the base Section 106 grant program to support state and
Tribal water pollution control activities.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C. 1256 - Section 106.
819
-------
Categorical Grant: Pollution Prevention
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Promote Pollution Prevention
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$4,922.0
$4,922.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$5,292.9
$5,292.9
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$4,834.0
$4,834.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$4,922.0
$4,922.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Pollution Prevention (P2) Categorical Grants Program augments the counterpart P2 Program
under the Environmental Program and Management (EPM) account. The Pollution Prevention
(P2) Program is one of the EPA's primary tools for advancing environmental stewardship by
federal, state and tribal governments; businesses; communities and individuals. The P2 Program
seeks to alleviate environmental problems by achieving significant reductions in the use of
hazardous materials, energy and water; reductions in the generation of greenhouse gases; cost
savings; and increases in the use of safer chemicals and products. This is accomplished by
working with stakeholders to foster the development of P2 innovations and practices and to
promote the adoption, use and market penetration of those innovations and practices through
such activities as providing technical assistance and demonstrating the benefits of P2 solutions.
Focusing efforts on environmental issues in specific sectors, geographic areas or for specific
chemicals, the P2 Program accomplishes its mission by: encouraging cleaner production
processes and technologies; promoting development and use of safer, "greener" materials and
products; and supporting implementation of improved practices, such as conservation techniques
and reuse and remanufacturing of hazardous secondary materials in lieu of their discard,
including offsite reuse/remanufacturing under appropriate conditions. These efforts advance the
agency's priorities to pursue sustainability, take action on climate change, and reduce chemical
risks. For more information about the EPA's Pollution Prevention Program, please see
http ://www. epa.gov/p2/.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the P2 Grant Program will continue supporting states, state entities (i.e., colleges
and universities) and federally-recognized tribes and intertribal consortia in their efforts to help
businesses identify environmental strategies and solutions for reducing or eliminating pollution
at the source. The program supports projects that reflect comprehensive and coordinated
pollution prevention planning and implementation efforts within the state or tribe to ensure that
businesses and industry have ample opportunities to implement pollution prevention as a cost-
effective way of meeting or exceeding federal and state regulatory requirements. The EPA
820
-------
provides grant funding to support technical assistance and it also addresses priority
environmental problems aimed at reducing hazardous materials and hazardous pollution.
P2 grants are awarded by the EPA's Regional Offices. This enables the agency to focus
resources on targeted regional priorities. In addition to supporting traditional P2 technical
assistance programs, many states and tribes use P2 Grants to assist businesses by initiating
regulatory integration projects to implement pollution prevention strategies in core media
programs, train regulatory staff on P2 concepts and best practices and examine opportunities for
incorporating pollution prevention into permits, inspections and enforcement. States and tribes
also have established pollution prevention programs in non-industrial sectors such as hospitality,
agriculture, energy, health and transportation.
The EPA also will continue to support the Pollution Prevention Information Network (PPIN)
grant program. These grants fund the services of a network of regional centers, collectively
called the Pollution Prevention Resource Exchange (P2Rx), that provide high quality, peer-
reviewed information to state and tribal technical assistance centers. In FY 2014, the EPA will
strengthen P2Rx by enhancing the documentation and measurement of results, including
describing outputs and outcomes for all activities. Grantee activities must support Regional P2
priorities and the national P2 information network. Technological advances in information
management and delivery techniques offer opportunities for EPA to achieve cost savings through
consolidation of some technical assistance centers, introduction of an on-line, one-stop
information source on green sports and continued implementation of an on-line directory of
contacts from which information and guidance on "greening" sports facilities can be obtained.
No impact on customer service is anticipated as the goal is to expand the reach and increase the
functionality of the centers to deliver improved services to P2Rx customers.
For more information, please see http://www.epa.gov/p2/pubs/grants/index.htm#p2grant and
http://www.p2rx.org.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results listed in the Pollution Prevention
Program description under the EPM account. Currently, there are no specific performance
measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
Pollution Prevention Act (PPA) of 1990, 42 U.S.C. 13101 et seq. - Sections 6601-6610; Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
821
-------
Categorical Grant: Public Water System Supervision (PWSS)
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect Human Health
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$105,320.0
$105,320.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$108,645.2
$108,645.2
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$103,362.0
$103,362.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$109,700.0
$109,700.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$4,380.0
$4,380.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) program provides grants to states and tribes with
primary enforcement authority (primacy) to implement and enforce National Primary Drinking
Water Regulations. These grants help to ensure the safety of the nation's drinking water
resources and protect public health. The states are the primary implementers of the national
drinking water program and ensure that the systems within their jurisdiction are in compliance
with drinking water rules.
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations set forth monitoring, reporting and recordkeeping,
compliance tracking, and enforcement elements to ensure that the nation's drinking water
supplies are not contaminated at levels that may pose adverse health effects. These grants are a
key implementation tool under the Safe Drinking Water Act and support the states' role in a
federal/state partnership of providing safe drinking water supplies to the public. States use these
grant funds to:
• Provide technical assistance to owners and operators of water systems;
• Maintain compliance data management systems to inform the federal Safe Drinking
Water Information System (SDWIS);
• Compile and analyze sample results and system information;
• Respond to violations;
• Certify laboratories;
• Conduct laboratory analyses;
• Conduct sanitary surveys; and
• Build state capacity.
Some states and tribes do not have primary enforcement authority. Funds allocated to the State of
Wyoming, the District of Columbia, and Indian tribes without primacy are used to support direct
822
-------
implementation activities by the EPA or for developmental grants to Indian tribes to develop
capacity for primacy.20
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to provide PWSS grants to support state and Tribal efforts to
meet existing drinking water regulations and prepare for implementation of new regulations,
including the Revised Total Coliform Rule. States and tribes will work to ensure that systems can
acquire and maintain basic implementation capabilities and a full suite of expertise to provide
public health protection. These resources also will be used by states and tribes as they provide
technical assistance and training to help meet the continued needs of the small water systems.
The grants have been successful in helping public water systems achieve compliance with
standards as well as decreasing the number of small systems that have repeat health-based
violations of standards (see Figure 1). As of the end of FY 2012, 91 percent of community water
systems (CWSs) are meeting all applicable health-based standards, surpassing the performance
target of 90 percent. The program also ensured safe drinking water in FY 2012, as 95 percent of
the population served by community water systems received drinking water that met all
applicable health-based drinking water standards, surpassing the performance target of 91
percent.
Figure 1. Number of Small Public Water Systems by Region with
Repeat Health-based Violations of the Following Drinking Water
Regulations: Nitrate/nitrite, Disinfectants and Disinfectant
Byproducts, Surface Water Treatment, and Total Coliform Rules.
3456789 10
2009 Baseline FY2012
In FY 2014, the EPA is requesting an additional $4.4 million within the PWSS program to
replace the state-operated Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS/State). The SDWIS
Next Generation ("Next-Gen") project is an effort to replace the current drinking water program
information system with a web-based system.
20 For more information see:
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/pws/pwss.html
https://www.cfda.gov/index?s=program&mode=form&tab=stepl&id=cca066b833c552bdGc9ff011e576c7f
823
-------
The system provides the following functions for ensuring the effective management of the PWSS
program and protection of public health:
• Maintains information characterizing water systems, such as source water type and
population served;
• Evaluates sampling schedules and sample results to identify drinking water rule
violations;
• Manages enforcement actions associated with violations; and
• Maintains public water systems engineering data.
There are a number of deficiencies with the current system that produce sub-optimal results. For
example, due to current SDWIS deficiencies, a number of primacy agencies have developed add-
on systems which increases their overall system support cost and diverts resources to IT
technical support and away from the PWSS program itself. To run SDWIS, primacy agencies
must acquire and maintain their own IT infrastructure (servers, network, workstations, database
management system, and such), and due to the costs, many states are using older versions of
SDWIS which do not support the latest drinking water regulations (such as the Ground Water
Rule and the Disinfectant Byproducts Rule). This can result in delayed reporting to the EPA on
these rules.
To improve upon the current SDWIS system, EPA is requesting funds to replace the current
SDWIS with a modern system that will reduce the total cost of data system ownership for States
and EPA. Next-Gen will be a single system supporting all of the drinking water primacy
agencies, and since it will be a central web-based system, it will not need to be installed and
maintained on primacy agency servers. Through Next-Gen's improvements, states will be able to
manage their PWSS programs more efficiently and better target resources (e.g., increase field
presence) to assist public water systems to attain and maintain compliance with the National
Primary Drinking Water Regulations.
SDWIS Next-Gen will:
• Support efficient sharing of drinking water data between states and the agency;
• Ensure timely reporting on drinking water rules and provide tools to ensure consistent
determinations for compliance with drinking water rules; and
• Incorporate a web-based data management portal to enable electronic business
transactions which allows laboratories to enter their samples and sample results directly
into SDWIS for approval by the water system thereby reducing the reporting burden for
laboratories dealing with many water systems located in many states as well as reducing
states' data management burden.
These efficiencies will minimize reporting burdens by reducing or eliminating the staff time
spent on additional "back-end" data checks and file resubmissions and ultimately enable
increased direction of state resources to the drinking water systems.
States and tribes will use their base PWSS funds to ensure that:
824
-------
• Public drinking water systems of all sizes achieve or remain in compliance;
• Public drinking water systems of all sizes are meeting newer health-based standards and are
prepared for recent regulatory requirements (e.g., Long-Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water
Treatment Rule, Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule, and Ground
Water Rule;
• Public water systems of all sizes will be prepared to comply with the Revised Total Coliform
Rule;
• Data are complete, accurate and submitted to the EPA in a timely manner, and that any data
quality issues are identified and addressed; and
• All systems are having sanitary surveys conducted according to the required schedules.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(aa) Percent of population served by CWSs that will receive drinking water that meets all
applicable health-based drinking water standards through approaches including effective
treatment and source water protection.
FY2007
94
91.5
FY2008
90
92
FY 2009
90
92.1
FY 2010
90
92
FY2011
91
93.2
FY 2012
91
94.7
FY 2013
92
FY 2014
92
Units
Population
Measure
Target
Actual
(apm) Perc
through ap
FY2007
89
89
ent of community water systems that meets all applicable health-based standards
>roaches including effective treatment and source water protection.
FY2008
89.5
89
FY2009
90
89.1
FY2010
90
89.6
FY2011
90
90.7
FY2012
90
91
FY2013
90
FY2014
90
Units
Systems
The performance measures that directly relate to the Public Water System Supervision grant
program are the population and the number of community water systems that supply drinking
water meeting all health-based standards.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$4,380.0) This reflects the increase in the PWSS program for replacement of the state
operated Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS/State). These funds will be
used to support efficient sharing of drinking water data between states and the agency;
ensure timely implementation of drinking water rules and provide tools to ensure
consistent determinations for compliance with drinking water rules; and incorporate a
web-based data entry portal for laboratory results. These efficiencies will address state
reporting burdens by reducing or eliminating the staff time spent on additional "back
end" data checks and file resubmissions and ultimately enable increased direction of state
resources to the drinking water systems.
Statutory Authority:
SOW A, 42 U.S.C. §300f-300j-9 as added by Public Law 93-523 and the amendments made by
subsequent enactments, Section 1443.
825
-------
826
-------
Categorical Grant: Radon
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$8,045.0
$8,045.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$8,614.0
$8,614.0
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$7,895.0
$7,895.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($8,045.0)
($8,045.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
Indoor radon is the second-leading cause of lung cancer and the leading cause of lung cancer for
non-smokers. The EPA's non-regulatory radon program promotes public action to reduce the
health risk from indoor radon. The EPA has assisted states and tribes through technical support
and the State Indoor Radon Grants (SIRG) program, which provided categorical grants to
develop, implement, and enhance programs that assess and mitigate radon risk. Section 306 of
the Indoor Radon Abatement Act (IRAA) authorizes radon grant assistance to states, as defined
by TSCA Title III. The EPA targeted this funding to support states with the greatest populations
at highest risk. The average annual award per state has been $160,000. The EPA supplemented
grant dollars with technical support to transfer "best practices" among states that promote
effective program implementation across the nation.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA will eliminate funding for the SIRG program and focus the agency's efforts
toward maintaining public outreach efforts, encouraging action in the marketplace, and driving
progress at the federal level. Exposure to radon gas continues to be an important risk to human
health, and over the 23 years of its existence, EPA's radon program has provided important
guidance and significant funding to help States establish their own programs.
The elimination of the SIRG will transfer responsibility to state and local radon programs for
maintaining the number of homes with high radon levels that are mitigated, the number of new
homes that are built with radon resistant new construction, and the number of schools with high
radon levels that are mitigated or built with radon resistant new construction.
Performance Targets:
There are no performance targets for this program.
827
-------
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$8,045.0) This is a mature program that has achieved significant progress over the 23
years of its existence in mitigating radon exposure and building capacity at the local and
state government level. A few states may be able to sustain their radon programs in the
absence of federal funding. If some states maintain their existing programs, there is the
possibility of sustaining some of the human health benefits being achieved through
implementation at the state or local level.
Statutory Authority:
CAA Amendments of 1990; Radon Gas and Indoor Air Quality Research Act; Title IV of the
SARA of 1986; TSCA, Section 6, Titles II and Title III (15 U.S.C. 2605 and 2641-2671); and
IRAA, Section 306.
828
-------
Categorical Grant: State and Local Air Quality Management
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Address Climate Change; Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$235,729.0
$235,729.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$245,859.2
$245,859.2
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$231,346.0
$231,346.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$257,229.0
$257,229.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$21,500.0
$21,500.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
This program provides funding for state air programs, as implemented by multi-state, state, and
local air pollution control agencies. Section 103 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) provides the EPA
with the authority to award grants to a variety of agencies, institutions, and organizations,
including the air pollution control agencies funded from the STAG appropriation, to conduct and
promote certain types of research, investigations, experiments, demonstrations, surveys, studies,
and training related to air pollution. Section 105 of the CAA provides the EPA with the authority
to award grants to state and local air pollution control agencies to develop and implement
continuing programs for the prevention and control of air pollution and for the implementation of
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) set to protect public health and the
environment. The continuing programs funded under Section 105 include development and
implementation of emission reduction measures, development and operation of air quality
monitoring networks, and a number of other air program areas. Section 106 of the CAA provides
the EPA with the authority to fund interstate air pollution transport commissions to develop or
carry out plans for designated air quality control regions.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
State Implementation Plans (SIPs) provide a blueprint for the programs and activities that states
carry out to achieve and maintain the NAAQS. There are several events that trigger SIP updates.
For example, when the EPA promulgates a new NAAQS, affected states must update their SIPs
within three years. Currently, states are experiencing an increased workload resulting from the
EPA's commitment to review each NAAQS according to CAA deadlines. In FY 2014, states will
make area designation recommendations and develop supporting documentation for the 2012
fine particle (PIVb.s) NAAQS and will focus on implementing the 2008 8-hour ozone, the 2008
lead NAAQS, the 2010 1-hour nitrogen dioxide (NO2) NAAQS, and the 2010 1-hour sulfur
dioxide (802) NAAQS. States will continue implementing the previous PM2.5 and ozone
NAAQS: the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS (through anti-backsliding requirements) and 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The
NAAQS revisions are setting ambitious standards to protect public health and states will need to
develop SIPs that include the use of innovative strategies to meet these standards. SIP
829
-------
preparation for some pollutants is complicated due to the regional nature of air pollution that
requires additional and more complicated modeling, refined emissions inventories, and greater
stakeholder involvement. In FY 2014, the EPA will work with states to develop approvable SIP
submissions and provide technical assistance in implementing their plans for the NAAQS and
regional haze.
In FY 2014, states with approved or delegated permitting programs will continue to implement
GHG, 862, NO2, and PIVb.s permitting requirements as part of their programs. The agency is
working with states to implement common sense permitting requirements on the largest emitters
of GHGs. In particular, under EPA's Tailoring Rule, there are sources that will need state-issued
operating permits for the first time due to their GHG emissions, and there are an increased
number of preconstruction permitting actions triggered by GHG emissions from new and
modified emission sources. These requirements have strained permitting authorities already
dealing with budget shortfalls and personnel retention issues.
On December 14, 2012, the EPA finalized revisions to the PM NAAQS as part of the 5-year
review cycle. The final PM NAAQS revisions also include changes to associated PM2.5
monitoring requirements. While no new monitors will be needed, a small number of monitors
will need to be moved to measure fine particles near heavily traveled roads. The PM2.5
monitoring network transition will span several years, but be completed no later than January 1,
2017. The EPA is implementing a four-year phased transition of the funding mechanism of the
PM2.5 network. The PM2.5 monitoring network has been funded under Section 103 authority of
the CAA, which provides 100 percent federal funding. By FY 2017, the PM2.5 monitoring
network will be completely funded under section 105 authority of the CAA, which provides cost-
sharing between the EPA and the states at 60 percent and 40 percent respectively.
Resources will be required for continued operation of the multi-pollutant monitoring site network
(NCore). This network serves multiple objectives such as measuring long-term trends of air
pollution, validating models, and providing input to health and atmospheric science studies. The
EPA worked closely with the states to implement this network of approximately 80 stations
across the nation. NCore stations provide measurements for particles, including filter-based and
continuous mass for PlV^.s; chemical speciation for PM2.5; and PMio-2.5 mass. Stations also
measure gases such as carbon monoxide (CO), SO2, nitrous oxides, and ozone, and record basic
meteorology.
In 2014, the EPA plans to propose revisions to the Lead NAAQS, if appropriate, as part of the
five-year review schedule. Data collected as part of the 12-month study of lead at 15 general
aviation airports will be used to inform this current review.
In 2014, the EPA plans to finalize its review of the ozone NAAQS and associated monitoring
requirements. Any changes, as a result of the review, will become effective no earlier than 2015,
including expected changes to the ozone monitoring season.
The EPA revised the monitoring requirements for the NO2 NAAQS which require the
establishment of near-road monitoring sites in cities with population of 500,000 or greater.
These revisions to requirements, finalized in 2010, support the EPA's work with states on the
830
-------
NC>2 monitoring network design and implement a phased approach to the monitoring program
that will result in the deployment of near-road sites in 2014-2017. The EPA developed a
comprehensive near-road monitoring Technical Assistance Document in 2012 and States will use
this document to identify and propose candidate near-road NO2 stations by July 2013 as part of
their annual monitoring network plans.
States will be required to establish CO monitors at a subset of the near-road monitoring sites
required by the NC>2 NAAQS in a transition that will span several years, but be completed no
later than January 1, 2017. The EPA expects that this network transition will involve the
relocation of existing CO monitors.
This program also supports state and local efforts to characterize air toxics problems and take
measures to reduce health risks from air toxics, most often through actions to enforce EPA
regulations. New and revised New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and Maximum
Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards have increased the workload for states as
they are the delegated authority to enforce many of these standards that will reduce air toxics and
other pollution from stationary sources. These standards will create important and lasting
improvements in public health and additional support is needed by states to understand and
implement these new standards. This funding also supports characterization work that includes
collection and analysis of emissions data and monitoring of ambient air toxics. In FY 2014,
funds for air toxic ambient monitoring also will support the National Air Toxics Trends Stations
(NATTS), consisting of 27 air toxics monitoring sites operated and maintained by state and local
air pollution control agencies across the country, and the associated quality assurance, data
analysis, and methods support. Finally, this program supports state efforts to monitor compliance
and enforce Maximum Available Control Technology (MACT) standards for major sources and
regulations to control emissions from area sources.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(M92) Cumulative percentage reduction in the number of days with Air Quality Index (AQI)
values over 100 since 2003, weighted by population and AQI value.
FY2007
21
42
FY2008
25
52
FY2009
29
59
FY2010
33
70
FY2011
37
73
FY2012
50
Data
Avail
12/2013
FY2013
80
FY2014
80
Units
Percent
Reduction
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$21,500.0) This reflects an increase to provide funds to states to support the
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule, facilitating states' collection, review, and use of GHG
emissions data. Additionally, funds will support GHG permitting to provide state and
local agencies the resources to review permit applications and issue permits to new and
existing sources of greenhouse gas emissions that trigger permitting requirements as
established in the GHG Tailoring Rule. EPA is committed to working with states to
implement common sense permitting requirements on these sources of
GHGs. Additionally, this increase will support expanded core state workload to
831
-------
implement revised and more stringent NAAQS, monitor industry compliance with EPA
stationary source regulations for air toxics and other pollutants, and to meet revised
NAAQS ambient monitoring requirements. These resources will provide vital assistance
to states and localities to design, implement, and fund plans to meet standards to improve
air quality in communities across the nation and that further build the framework to
produce air quality and climate-change co-benefits wherever possible.
Statutory Authority:
CAA, Sections 103, 105, and 106.
832
-------
Categorical Grant: Toxics Substances Compliance
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Enforcing Environmental Laws
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$5,081.0
$5,081.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$6,036.7
$6,036.7
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$4,986.0
$4,986.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$5,081.0
$5,081.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Toxics Substances Compliance Monitoring Cooperative Agreement program builds
environmental partnerships with states and Tribes to strengthen their ability to address
environmental and public health threats from toxic substances such as Polychlorinated Biphenyls
(PCBs), asbestos, and lead-based paint. State cooperative agreements are used to fund
compliance monitoring programs to prevent or eliminate unreasonable risks to health or the
environment associated with chemical substances such as asbestos, PCBs, and lead-based paint,
and encourage states to establish their own programs for lead-based paint and asbestos (waiver
programs). For states with asbestos waiver or lead-based paint programs, these cooperative
agreements fund enforcement activities. The EPA may provide funding for compliance
monitoring cooperative agreements to states and Tribes under TSCA to conduct inspections to
ensure compliance with the PCB regulations, the Asbestos-in-Schools requirements (inspections
at charter schools, public schools, private, non-profit schools and religious schools), the Model
Accreditation Plan (MAP), Asbestos Ban and Phase Out Rule,21 the TSCA Asbestos Worker
Protection Rule and lead-based paint regulations.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the EPA's Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program will continue to award
state and Tribal cooperative agreements to assist in the implementation of compliance and
enforcement provisions of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). These cooperative
agreements protect the public and the environment from toxic chemicals, such as PCBs, asbestos,
and lead-based paint. States receiving cooperative agreements for the PCB program and for
asbestos programs must contribute 25 percent of the total cost of the program being funded. For
all three programs, funds are used to conduct compliance monitoring activities, and where
appropriate, enforce waiver programs. In addition, these funds may be used to train inspectors
including train-the-trainer courses; to provide inspection equipment including sampling and
personal protective equipment; and to fund travel and salary costs associated with conducting
1 40 CFR part 763, subpart I
833
-------
inspections. The compliance monitoring activities conducted by the states will be a cooperative
endeavor including the priorities of the federal TSCA program and state issues. The EPA also
plans to continue to incorporate technology such as the use of portable personal computers and
inspection software to improve efficiency in the inspection process and support state and Tribal
inspection programs. In the past, these cooperative agreements have funded approximately one
thousand asbestos inspections annually by states; approximately 350 PCB inspections per year;
and approximately six thousand lead-based paint inspections per year.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports the strategic objective to Ensure Chemical Safety. Currently,
there are no performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2014 Change from 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
Toxic Substances Control Act.
834
-------
Categorical Grant: Tribal Air Quality Management
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$13,252.0
$13,252.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$13,870.1
$13,870.1
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$13,005.0
$13,005.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$13,252.0
$13,252.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
This program includes funding for Tribal air pollution control agencies and/or tribes. Through
Clean Air Act (CAA) Section 105 grants, tribes may develop and implement programs for the
prevention and control of air pollution and implementation of national primary and secondary
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Through CAA Section 103 grants, Tribal
air pollution control agencies or tribes, colleges, universities, and multi-tribe jurisdictional air
pollution control agencies may conduct and promote research, investigations, experiments,
demonstrations, surveys, studies, and training related to ambient or indoor air pollution in Indian
country.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Tribes will assess environmental and public health conditions in Indian Country by developing
emission inventories and, where appropriate, siting and operating air quality monitors. Tribes
will continue to develop and implement air pollution control programs for Indian country to
prevent and address air quality concerns. The EPA will continue to fund organizations for the
purpose of providing technical support, tools, and training for tribes to build capacity to develop
and implement programs, as appropriate. A key activity is to work to reduce the number of days
in violation of the Air Quality Index. There will be an emphasis to implement the Tribal New
Source Review (NSR) program. This program supports the agency's priority of building strong
Tribal partnerships with individual tribes and the National Tribal Air Association (NTAA). The
NTAA is extremely concerned about the tribes' ability to collect and provide valuable
monitoring data and the health of their Tribal members.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports the performance results in Federal Support for Air Quality
Management Program under Environmental Programs and Management Tab and can be found in
the Eight-Year Performance Array in Table 11.
835
-------
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
CAA, Sections 103 and 105.
836
-------
Categorical Grant: Tribal General Assistance Program
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Strengthen Human Health and Environmental Protection in Indian Country
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$67,631.0
$67,631.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$71,754.0
$71,754.0
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$66,374.0
$66,374.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$72,631.0
$72,631.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$5,000.0
$5,000.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
In 1992, Congress established the Indian Environmental General Assistance Program (GAP) to
provide a mechanism to assist Tribal governments in assuring environmental protection on
Indian lands. The purpose of GAP is to support the development of Tribal environmental
protection programs. Please see http://www.epa.gov/aieo/gap.htm for more information.
GAP provides general assistance grants to build Tribal capacity to administer environmental
regulatory programs that may be authorized by the EPA in Indian country and provides technical
assistance in the development of programs to address environmental issues on Indian lands.
Funding is provided under GAP for the purposes of planning, developing, and establishing
administrative, technical, legal, enforcement, communication, and outreach infrastructure
consistent with programs and authorities administered by the EPA. The goal of this program is to
assist tribes in developing the capacity to manage their own environmental program and prepare
tribes to apply for and successfully take advantage of media- specific environmental programs.
Some uses of GAP funds include the following:
• Assess the status of a tribe's environmental conditions;
• Develop appropriate environmental programs and ordinances;
• Develop the capacity to administer environmental regulatory programs that may be
delegated by the EPA to a tribe;
• Conduct public education and outreach efforts to ensure that Tribal communities are
informed and able to participate in environmental decision-making; and
• Promote communication and coordination between federal, state, local, and Tribal
environmental officials, including developing the ability to meaningfully participate in
Tribal consultation activities with the EPA on environmental actions and issues.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, GAP grants will assist Tribal governments in building environmental protection
program capacity to assess environmental conditions, utilize available federal, state, local, and
837
-------
other relevant environmental information and build environmental programs tailored to Tribal
needs. This funding request provides a minimum level of funding for tribes to sustain basic
capacity building efforts.
GAP funds are the primary source for tribes to leverage other federal funding and contribute to a
higher overall level of environmental and human health protection per dollar invested. These
GAP grants also will be used to develop environmental outreach programs, develop and
implement integrated solid waste management plans, and alert the EPA to serious conditions that
pose an immediate threat to public health and the environment.
In FY 2013, the EPA will conclude a multi-year effort of responding to the Inspector General
Audit Report, "Framework for Developing Tribal Capacity Needed in the Indian General
Assistance Program" (Report No. 08-P-0083)22 by implementing new guidance for the grant
program, including a "Guidebook for Building Tribal Environmental Capacity." The Guidebook,
which is scheduled to be in place for 2014, establishes the overall framework for tribes and the
EPA to follow in building Tribal environmental capacity.
For the core environmental programs and media-specific programs, the Guidebook identifies
capacity indicators and planning tools that the EPA believes are necessary to track and measure
progress in achieving program capacity. This new Guidebook has been through several iterations
of Tribal consultation in order to ensure the most effective EPA-Tribal partnership.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(5PQ) Percent of Tribes implementing federal regulatory environmental programs in Indian
country (cumulative).
FY2007
FY2008
6
14
FY 2009
7
13
FY 2010
14
14
FY2011
18
17
FY 2012
22
21
FY 2013
24
FY 2014
25
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(5PR) Percent of Tribes conducting EPA approved environmental monitoring and assessment
activities in Indian country (cumulative.)
FY2007
FY2008
21
42
FY2009
23
40
FY2010
42
50
FY2011
52
52
FY2012
54
54
FY2013
57
FY2014
58
Units
Percent
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$5,000.0) This reflects an increase in base funding available for GAP grants, which
will increase the average grant level made to eligible tribes while providing tribes with a
stronger foundation to build Tribal capacity and will further the EPA's partnership and
collaboration with tribes to address a wider set of program responsibilities and
challenges.
22 http://www.epa.gov/oig/reports/2008/20080219-08-P-0083.pdf
838
-------
Statutory Authority:
Indian Environmental General Assistance Program Act, 42 U.S.C. § 4368b (1992), as amended.
839
-------
Categorical Grant: Underground Injection Control (UIC)
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect Human Health
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$10,852.0
$10,852.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$10,655.3
$10,655.3
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$10,650.0
$10,650.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$10,852.0
$10,852.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Underground Injection Control (UIC) grant program is implemented by federal, state, and
Tribal government agencies that oversee underground injection activities in order to prevent
contamination of underground sources of drinking water. Underground injection is the placement
of fluids beneath the earth's surface in porous rock formations through wells or other similar
conveyance systems. Billions of gallons of fluids are injected underground, including the
majority of hazardous wastewater that is land-disposed. In recent years, the use of injection has
expanded to include injection of water for later use, and injection for the long-term storage of
carbon dioxide (CO2).
When wells are properly sited, constructed, and operated, underground injection is an effective
method of managing fluids. The Safe Drinking Water Act established the UIC program to
provide safeguards so that injection wells do not endanger current and future underground
sources of drinking water. The most accessible underground freshwater is stored in shallow
geological formations (i.e., shallow aquifers) and is the most vulnerable to contamination from
improper practices.
The EPA provides financial assistance in the form of grants to states and tribes that have primary
enforcement authority (primacy) to implement and manage Underground Injection Control
programs. Eligible Indian tribes that demonstrate an intent to achieve primacy also may receive
grants for the initial development of UIC programs and be designated for "Treatment as a State"
if their programs are approved. Where a jurisdiction is unable or unwilling to assume primacy,
the EPA uses grant funds for direct implementation of federal UIC requirements. The EPA
directly implements programs in ten states and shares responsibility in seven states. The EPA
also administers the UIC programs for all but two tribes.23
23 For more information, please visit:
https://www.cfda.gov/index?s=program&mode=form&tab=stepl&id=cl307f57fe8bec34fla65660eff495a8&cck=l&au=&ck=
and http://water.epa.gov/type/groundwater/uic/index.cfm
840
-------
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Ensuring safe underground injection of fluids, including waste fluids, is a fundamental
component of a comprehensive source water protection program that, in turn, is a key element in
the agency's multi-barrier approach to providing clean and safe drinking water. The UIC
program continues to manage or close the approximately 500 thousand shallow (Class V)24
injection wells to protect our groundwater resources. The requested funding allows states and
tribes to administer Underground Injection Control permitting programs, provide program
oversight, implementation tools, and public outreach, and ensure that injection wells are safely
operated.
Geologic Sequestration (GS) is the process of injecting CO2 captured from an emission source
(e.g., a power plant or industrial facility) into deep, subsurface rock formations for long-term
storage. It is part of a process known as carbon capture and storage (CCS). The EPA's UIC
program regulates underground injection of CC>2. In December 2010, a rule was finalized which
established a new class of underground injection well—Class VI—with new federal
requirements to allow the injection of CC>2 for the purpose of geologic sequestration. The rule
built on and tailored existing UIC regulatory components including siting, construction,
operation, monitoring and testing, and closure for injection wells that address the pathways
through which underground sources of drinking water (USDWs) may be endangered. In addition
to protecting USDWs, the rule provides a regulatory framework to implement a consistent
approach to permitting geologic sequestration projects across the U.S. and supports the
development of a potentially key climate change mitigation technology.
On September 15, 2011, the EPA published a notice in the Federal Register indicating that the
EPA will implement the Class VI geologic sequestration program, as no states have received
approval for Class VI primacy either through a state UIC program revision or through a new
application from states without any UIC primary enforcement authority. The EPA expects a few
states to receive primacy in FY 2013 and FY 2014. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to carry
out regulatory functions for Class VI geologic sequestration wells in most states, along with
other classes of wells for which the EPA has direct implementation responsibility. The EPA will
continue to process primacy applications and permit applications for carbon sequestration
projects related to Class VI wells. States and the EPA also will process Underground Injection
Control permits for other nontraditional injection streams such as desalination brines and treated
waters injected for storage and recovered at a later time.
The EPA also will work with the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Department of the
Interior (DOI) to support state programs as they oversee hydraulic fracturing activities including
Class II disposal wells. In 2012, DOE, DOI, and the EPA agreed to a multi-agency research
effort to address the highest-priority research questions associated with safely and prudently
developing unconventional shale gas and tight oil resources. This program, primarily managed
by the Research and Development program within the EPA, focuses on timely, policy-relevant
science directed to research topics where collaboration among the three agencies can be most
effectively and efficiently conducted, as well as providing results and identifying technologies
24 As represented in calendar year 2011 annual inventory.
841
-------
that support sound policy decisions to ensure the prudent development of energy sources while
protecting human health and the environment.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(aps) Percent of Classes I, n and HI salt solution mining wells that have lost mechanical
integrity and are returned to compliance within 180 days, thereby reducing the potential to
endanger underground sources of drinking water.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
90
85
FY 2013
85
FY 2014
85
Units
Wells
Measure
Target
Actual
(apt) Number of Class V motor vehicle waste disposal wells (MVWDW) and large capacity
cesspools (LCC) [approximately 23,640 in FY 2010] that are closed or permitted (cumulative).
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
20,840
25,225
FY2013
25,225
FY2014
25,225
Units
Wells
The program has developed an annual performance measure to track the EPA's goal to increase
the percentage of community water systems where risk to public health is minimized through
development and implementation of protection strategies for source water areas (as determined
by states). In FY 2012, 85 percent of Class I, II and III wells that lost mechanical integrity were
returned to compliance within 180 days, thereby reducing the potential to endanger underground
sources of drinking water. The measure serves as an indicator of the program's effectiveness in
preventing contamination of underground sources of drinking water and protecting public health.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
SOW A, 42U.S.C. §300j-2, Section 1443.
842
-------
Categorical Grant: Underground Storage Tanks
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Preserve Land
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,548.0
$1,548.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$1,639.6
$1,639.6
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$1,519.0
$1,519.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$1,490.0
$1,490.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($58.0)
($58.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Underground Storage Tanks (UST) State and Tribal Assistance Grant (STAG) program
provides funding for grants to states25 under Section 2007 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act.
These resources support core program activities as well as the leak prevention activities under
Title XV, Subtitle B of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct). STAG grants to states focus
attention on the need to bring all UST systems into compliance with release detection and release
prevention requirements and assist states to continue to implement the provisions of the EPAct.
States will continue to use the UST categorical grant funding to implement their leak prevention
and detection programs. Specifically, with these UST categorical grants, states will fund such
activities as: seeking state program approval (SPA) to operate the UST program in lieu of the
federal program; approving specific technologies to detect leaks from tanks; ensuring that tank
owners and operators are complying with notification and other requirements; ensuring
equipment compatibility; conducting inspections; and implementing operator training.
Preventing UST releases is more efficient and less costly than cleaning up releases after they
occur. Since the beginning of the UST program, preventing UST releases has been one of our
primary goals. The EPA and our partners have made major progress in reducing the number of
new releases, yet thousands of new releases are discovered each year. Lack of proper UST
system operation and maintenance is a main cause of releases. As a result, the EPA in FY 2012
proposed revisions to the UST regulations that address these and other important issues.26
STAG funds meet a critical need in the UST program, filling a gap left by Leaking Underground
Storage Tank (LUST) prevention grant funding. The EPAct expanded the eligible use of LUST
funds to include certain release prevention/detection activities, but it did not authorize LUST
funds for all prevention/detection activities. These funds provide resources for States that do not
have sufficient state resources to fund the non-EPAct core programs.
25 States as referenced here also include Territories as described in the definition of "State" in the Solid Waste Disposal Act.
26 See http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-1 l-18/pdf/201 l-29293.pdf
843
-------
Twice each year, the EPA collects data from states regarding UST performance measures and
makes the data publicly available. The data includes information such as the number of active
and closed tanks, releases reported, cleanups initiated and completed, percentage of facilities in
compliance with UST requirements, and inspections. The EPA compiles the data and presents it
in table format for all states and territories. See www.epa.gov/oust/cat/camarchv.htm.
Since 2007, the EPA has placed an increased emphasis on monitoring compliance through
increased frequency of inspections and other Energy Policy Act (EPAct) provisions.27 Every
three years, each of the 584 thousand federally regulated UST systems must be inspected.
During this time, compliance rates have increased and there has been a significant decrease in
new confirmed releases. The annual number of confirmed releases from USTs has dropped 25
percent from 7,570 in FY 2007 to 5,674 in FY 2012. Continued rigorous prevention and
detection activities are necessary to maintain our progress in limiting future confirmed releases.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
End of year FY 2012 data shows:
• Releases are continuing to occur, with 5,674 reported for FY 2012.
• Exceeding the FY 2012 performance measure target of 66.5 percent, at the end of FY
2012, 71.4 percent of the approximately 584 thousand federally regulated UST systems
were in significant operational compliance. However, approximately 29 percent still
need to attain and maintain compliance.
In FY 2014, STAG funding will continue to support compliance with release detection and
release prevention requirements, as well as implementing provisions of the EPAct.28 Funding in
the STAG account is primarily intended for states' core UST prevention activities, which are not
LUST eligible. Examples include compliance assistance, state program approvals, and technical
equipment reviews and approvals.
In FY 2014, the EPA anticipates that all states will be in compliance with the provisions of the
EPAct. There are two EPAct provisions, requirements for three-year inspections and operator
training, that will continue to actively draw on EPA and state resources to implement. In FY
2014, providing STAG funding to support state inspection and operator training activities will be
an important priority for the prevention program.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in LUST Prevention and can be
found in the Eight-Year Performance Array in Tab 11.
FY 2014 Change from 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
27Please refer to the "Confirmed Releases" and "Compliance Rate" charts in the LUST Prevention program project description.
For more information please refer to http://www.epa.gov/oust/fedlaws/epact_05.htm
28 For more information on grant guidelines under EPAct see: http://www.epa.gov/OUST/fedlaws/epact 05.htm.
844
-------
* (-$58.0) This reflects a slight reduction in grant resources available to the states to
conduct core UST prevention activities. Since 80% of UST STAG funding is used for
state staff salaries, EPA expects that this reduction will reduce UST inspections by
approximately 90.
Statutory Authority:
Solid Waste Disposal Act of 1976, as amended by the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986 (Subtitle I), Section 2007(f), 42 U.S.C. 6916(f)(2), and the Energy
Policy Act, Section 9011, 42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.
845
-------
Categorical Grant: Wetlands Program Development
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$15,143.0
$15,143.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$17,528.3
$17,528.3
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$14,862.0
$14,862.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$15,143.0
$15,143.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Wetlands Program Development Grants (WPDGs) were authorized by Congress beginning
in FY 1990 to assist states, tribes, and local governments in meeting the national goal of an
overall increase in the acreage and improved condition of wetlands. The program's grants are
used to develop new or refine existing state and Tribal wetland programs in one or more of the
following areas: (1) monitoring and assessment; (2) voluntary restoration and protection; (3)
regulatory programs, including Section 401 certification and Section 404 assumption;29 and (4)
wetland water quality standards.
States and tribes develop program elements based on their goals and resources. Grants support
development of state and Tribal wetland programs that further the goals of the Clean Water Act
and improve water quality in watersheds throughout the country. Grants are awarded on a
competitive basis under the authority of Section 104(b)(3) of the Clean Water Act. Funding is
split among the EPA Regional offices according to the number of states and territories per
Regional office. Each Regional office is required, by regulation, to compete the award of these
funds to states, tribes, local governments, interstate agencies, and intertribal consortia.
30
The goal of the WPDGs is to build substantially or increase the capacity in wetland regulation,
monitoring and assessment, water quality standards, and restoration and protection in
states/tribes. The requested funds assist states, tribes, and local governments to build or refine
their wetlands programs and finance the 5-Star Restoration Challenge Grant program.
29 State and Tribal assumption of Section 404 is an approach that can be useful in streamlining Section 404 permitting in
coordination with other environmental and land use planning regulations. When states or tribes assume administration of the
federal regulatory program, Section 404 permit applicants seek permits from the state or tribe rather than the federal government.
States and tribes are in many cases located closer to the proposed activities and are often more familiar with local resources,
issues, and needs. Even when a state assumes permitting under Section 404, the Corps of Engineers retains jurisdiction under
Section 10 of the River and Harbors Act for permits regarding navigable waters.
30For more information, see http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/initiative/tffinancial and
http://water.epa.gov/grants funding/wetlands/estp.cfm.
846
-------
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Strong state and Tribal wetland programs are an essential complement to the Federal Clean
Water Act Section 404 regulatory program and the WPDGs are the agency's primary resource
for supporting state and Tribal wetland program development. Resources in FY 2014 will
continue to assist states and tribes in strengthening wetland protection through documenting
stresses or improvements to wetland condition, providing incentives for wetland restoration and
protection, and developing regulatory controls to avoid, minimize, and compensate for wetland
impacts. The EPA will now include wetland preservation as part of the WPDGs to encourage
states to integrate wetland preservation into their green infrastructure efforts, which use natural
hydrologic features to manage water and provide environmental and community benefits. Grant
projects are complemented by technical assistance provided under the Enhancing State and
Tribal Programs effort, as described in the Wetlands Protection Program.
Within the WPDGs, the EPA Five-Star Restoration Program provides approximately 30
challenge grants, technical support, and opportunities for information exchange to enable
community-based restoration projects while bringing together students, conservation corps, other
youth groups, citizen groups, corporations, landowners, and government agencies to provide
environmental education and training through projects that restore wetlands, streams, and coasts.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(4G) Number of acres restored and improved under the 5-Star, NEP, 319, and great water body
programs (cumulative).
FY2007
FY2008
75,000
82,875
FY2009
88,000
103,507
FY2010
110,000
130,000
FY2011
150,000
154,000
FY2012
170,000
180,000
FY2013
190,000
FY2014
200,000
Units
Acres
Measure
Target
Actual
(4E) In partnership with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, states, and tribes, achieve no net
loss of wetlands each year under the Clean Water Act Section 404 regulatory program.
FY2007
No Net
Loss
Data
Unavaila
ble
FY2008
No Net
Loss
Data
Unavaila
ble
FY 2009
No Net
Loss
No Net
Loss
FY 2010
No Net
Loss
No Net
Loss
FY2011
No Net
Loss
No Net
Loss
FY 2012
No Net
Loss
No Net
Loss
FY 2013
No Net
Loss
FY 2014
No Net
Loss
Units
Acres
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act; 1990 Great Lakes Critical Programs Act; 2002 Great Lakes and Lake
Champlain Act; Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection, and Restoration Act of 1990; Estuaries
and Clean Waters Act of 2000; North American Wetlands Conservation Act; Water Resources
Development Act; 1909 The Boundary Waters Treaty; 1978 Great Lakes Water Quality
847
-------
Agreement; 1987 GLWQA; 1996 Habitat Agenda; 1997 Canada-U.S. Great Lakes Bi-national
Toxics Strategy; U.S.-Canada Agreements.
848
-------
Program Area: State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
849
-------
Infrastructure Assistance: Clean Water SRF
Program Area: State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$1,466,456.0
$1,466,456.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$1,682,041.2
$1,682,041.2
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$1,465,370.0
$1,465,370.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$1,095,000.0
$1,095,000.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($371,456.0)
($371,456.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) program provides funds to capitalize state
revolving loan funds that finance infrastructure improvements for public wastewater systems and
projects to improve water quality. The CWSRF is the largest source of federal funds for states to
provide loans and other forms of assistance for constructing wastewater treatment facilities,
implementing nonpoint source management plans, and developing and implementing estuary
conservation and management plans. This program also includes a provision for set-aside
funding for tribes to address serious water infrastructure problems and associated health impacts.
This federal investment is designed to be used in concert with other sources of funds to address
water quality needs.31
As of June 2012, the CWSRF has offered nearly 32 thousand assistance agreements to local
communities, providing over $95.4 billion in affordable financing for wastewater infrastructure,
nonpoint source pollution control, and estuary management projects.32 These projects are critical
to the continuation of the public health and water quality gains of the past 30 years. The
revolving nature of the funds and substantial state contributions has greatly multiplied the federal
investment. The EPA estimates that for every federal dollar contributed, more than two dollars
have been provided to municipalities. The CWSRF program measures and tracks the average
national rate at which available funds are loaned, assuring that the fund expeditiously supports
the EPA's water quality goals.
31 See http://www.epa.gov/cleanwatersrf for more information.
3:
Clean Water State Revolving Fund National Information Management System. US EPA, Office of Water, National
Information Management System Reports: Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF). Washington, DC (As of June 30,
2012).
850
-------
Figure 1: 98 Percent of Funds Committed to Projects as of 2012 33
96 97 98 99 2000 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
->-CWSRF Funds Available
•CWSRF Assistance Provided
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The Budget proposes to reduce funding for the EPA's Clean Water and Drinking Water State
Revolving Funds (SRFs), which provide capitalization grants to states. States provide a 20
percent match and then make loans to municipalities for water infrastructure projects, with
repayments returned to each state's own revolving fund, allowing them to finance additional
projects.
The Administration has strongly supported the Clean Water and Drinking Water SRFs, having
requested and/or received approximately $20 billion since 2009; since their inception, over $55
billion has been provided. At the level requested, states will still be able to provide over $6
billion annually in water infrastructure loans to municipalities over the long term. Additionally,
the EPA will work to target assistance to small and underserved communities with limited ability
to repay loans.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to implement a Sustainable Water Infrastructure Policy that
focuses on working with states and communities to promote system-wide planning that helps
33 Clean Water State Revolving Fund National Information Management System. US EPA, Office of Water, National
Information Management System Reports: Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF). Washington, DC (As of June 30,
2012).
851
-------
align water infrastructure system goals for sustainability with other community sustainability
priorities, analyzing a range of infrastructure alternatives, including green and decentralized
alternatives, and ensuring that systems have the financial capacity and rate structures to
construct, operate, maintain, and replace infrastructure over time. As part of that strategy, the
EPA is working to ensure that federal dollars provided through the State Revolving Funds act as
a catalyst for efficient system-wide planning, improvements in technical, financial and
managerial capacity, and the design, construction and ongoing management of sustainable water
infrastructure.
The significant level of federal capitalization, combined with the state match and repayments,
has allowed states to finance tens of thousands of water infrastructure projects that protect human
health and the environment.
Recognizing the historical effectiveness and efficiency of the CWSRF program, the agency's FY
2014 request includes $1.095 billion for the CWSRF. This federal investment, along with other
traditional sources of financing, will continue to enable substantial progress toward the nation's
clean water needs and sustainable infrastructure priorities and will significantly contribute to the
long-term environmental goal of attaining designated uses. The EPA continues to work with
states to meet several key objectives, such as:
• Funding projects designed as part of an integrated watershed approach;
• Linking projects to environmental results; and
• Maintaining the excellent fiduciary condition of CWSRF.
The EPA measures performance by using the CWSRF benefits reporting system, which is
designed to track public health and environmental goals progress under both the base program
and projects funded under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The benefits reporting
system allows the program to more effectively link CWSRF financing to the protection and
restoration of our nation's waters.
In FY 2014, the agency is requesting a Tribal set-aside of up to two percent, and a territories set-
aside of up to 1.5 percent of the funds appropriated from the CWSRF. Resources for the tribes
and territories will provide much needed assistance to these communities and help meet long-
term performance goals and address significant public health concerns. The 2002 Johannesburg
World Summit adopted the goal of reducing the number of people lacking access to safe drinking
water and basic sanitation by 50 percent by calendar year 2015. The EPA will support this goal
through the Clean Water State Revolving Fund Indian Set-Aside, which will provide for the
development of sanitation facilities for tribes.
In FY 2014, the agency requests that not less than 20 percent but not more than 30 percent of the
CWSRF monies made available to each state be used to provide additional subsidy to eligible
recipients in the form of forgiveness of principal, negative interest loans, or grants (or any
combination of these). The additional subsidization would be limited to initial financings for
eligible recipients or to buy, refinance, or restructure the debt obligations of eligible recipients.
852
-------
The Administration strongly supports efforts to expand the use of green infrastructure to meet
Clean Water Act Goals. To further these efforts, the Budget will target 20 percent of the
capitalization grants to green infrastructure projects, which will help communities improve water
quality while creating green space, mitigating flooding, and enhancing air quality. The resulting
projects will enhance community and utility sustainability. The CWSRF program is helping
achieve innovative solutions to wastewater infrastructure needs, achieving economic and
environmental benefits that will continue to accrue for years in the future.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(bpb) Fund utilization rate for the CWSRF.
FY2007
93.4
96.7
FY2008
93.5
98
FY2009
94.5
98
FY2010
92
100
FY2011
94.5
98
FY2012
94.5
98
FY2013
94.5
FY2014
94.5
Units
Dollars
Measure
Target
Actual
(L) Number of water body segments identified by states in 2002 as not attaining standards,
where water quality standards are now fully attained (cumulative).
FY2007
1,166
1,409
FY2008
1,550
2,165
FY2009
2,270
2,505
FY2010
2,809
2,909
FY2011
3,073
3,119
FY2012
3,324
3,527
FY2013
3,727
FY2014
3,927
Units
Segments
Measure
Target
Actual
(bpc) Percent of all major publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) that comply with their
permitted wastewater discharge standards.
FY2007
FY2008
86
86
FY2009
86
Data
Unavaila
ble
FY2010
86
86.9
FY2011
86
86.7
FY2012
86
Data
Avail
4/2013
FY2013
86
FY2014
86
Units
POTWs
Since 2001, fund utilization has remained relatively stable and strong at over 90 percent. This
national ratio is an aggregate of fund activity in the 51 individual CWSRF programs (50 states
and Puerto Rico). Small year-to-year fluctuations in the value of the national ratio are expected
and reflect annual funding decisions made by each state based on its assessment and subsequent
prioritization of state water quality needs and the availability of financial resources. The agency
expects the loan commitment rate to continue to be strong.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$371,456.0) This reduces resources for states, which the agency will apply based on the
Clean Water Act formula. This reduction in resources maintains the balance between the
need for reducing federal spending and ensuring that there is sufficient investment in our
nation's wastewater infrastructure.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act, CWA; 33 U.S.C 1251 et. seq- Title VI.
853
-------
854
-------
Infrastructure Assistance: Drinking Water SRF
Program Area: State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect Human Health
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$917,892.0
$917,892.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$1,199,237.2
$1,199,237.2
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$923,509.0
$923,509.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$817,000.0
$817,000.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($100,892.0)
($100,892.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) is designed to support states in helping
public water systems finance the costs of infrastructure improvements needed to achieve or
maintain compliance with Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) requirements and to protect public
health. The 2007 Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey and Assessment indicated a 20-
year capital investment need of $334.8 billion for public water systems that are eligible to
receive funding from state DWSRF programs - approximately 52 thousand community water
systems and 21,400 not-for-profit non-community water systems (including schools and
churches). The assessment covers costs for repairs and replacement of transmission pipes,
storage and treatment equipment, and other projects required to protect public health and to
ensure compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). To reduce public health risks and
to help ensure safe drinking water nationwide, the EPA makes capitalization grants to states so
that they can provide low-cost loans and other assistance to eligible public water systems. The
program emphasizes that in addition to maintaining the statutory focus on addressing the greatest
public health risks first, states can utilize additional tools to assist small and disadvantaged
communities and fund programs that encourage pollution prevention as a tool for ensuring safe
drinking water. The DWSRF is a key component of the EPA's Sustainable Infrastructure
Initiative.
States have considerable flexibility to tailor their DWSRF program to their unique
circumstances. This flexibility ensures that each state has the opportunity to carefully and
strategically consider how best to achieve the maximum public health protection. For example,
states can:
• Establish programs to provide additional subsidies, including negative interest loans or
principal forgiveness to communities that the state determines to be disadvantaged;
• Determine the proper balance between infrastructure investment and set-aside use for
authorized SDWA program development and implementation (Historically, the states
have set aside an annual average of 15 percent of the funds awarded to them for program
development, of which four percent is used to run the program); and
855
-------
• Set-aside capitalization grant funds to provide other types of assistance to encourage
more efficient and sustainable drinking water system management and to fund programs
to protect source water from contamination.
Beginning in FY 2014, appropriated DWSRF funds will be allocated to the states based on the
new 2011 Needs Survey which will be released in 2013. For FY 2010 to FY 2013, appropriated
funds have been allocated to the states in accordance with each state's proportion of total
drinking water infrastructure need as determined by the 2007 Needs Survey and Assessment.34
Also, there is a statutory requirement that each state and the District of Columbia receive no less
than one percent of the allotment.
The federal investment is designed to be used in concert with other sources of funds to address
drinking water infrastructure needs. States are required to provide a 20 percent match for their
capitalization grant. Some states elect to leverage their capitalization grants through the public
debt markets to enable the state to provide more assistance. These features, coupled with the
revolving fund design of the program, have enabled the states to provide assistance equal to 178
percent of the federal capitalization invested in the program since its inception in 1997. In other
words, for every one dollar the federal government invests in this program, the states, in total,
have been able to deliver $1.78 in assistance to water systems.
Prior to allotting funds to the states, the EPA is required to reserve certain national level
allotments.35 Two million dollars must, by statute, be allocated to small systems monitoring for
unregulated contaminants. The EPA will continue to reserve up to 2 percent (up from 1.5 percent
as outlined in Section 1452(i) of SDWA, as amended) of appropriated funds for Indian tribes and
Alaska Native Villages. These funds are awarded either directly to tribes or, on behalf of tribes,
to the Indian Health Service through interagency agreements. The EPA will continue to set aside
up to 1.5 percent for territories (up from 0.33 percent as outlined in Section 1452 (j) of SDWA,
as amended).36
While most small systems consistently provide safe, reliable drinking water to their customers,
many small systems are facing a number of significant challenges in their ability to achieve and
maintain system sustainability. These challenges include aging infrastructure, increased
regulatory requirements, workforce shortages/high-turnover, increasing costs, and declining rate
bases. The EPA will continue to focus on small systems to help these systems attain and
maintain the technical, managerial and financial capacity to consistently meet regulatory
requirements and achieve long-term sustainability. This approach has resulted in high system
compliance through the end of FY 2012, as 91 percent of community water systems (CWSs) are
meeting all applicable health-based standards, surpassing the performance target of 90 percent.
In addition, the goal of providing drinking water in compliance is currently being achieved, as 95
percent of the population served by CWSs received drinking water that met all applicable health-
based drinking water standards in FY 2012, surpassing the performance target of 91 percent. As
The 2007 Needs Survey was released in 2009.
Safe Drinking Water Act Sections 1452(i)(l), 1
For more information please see:
https://www.cfda.gov/index?s=program&mode=form&tab=stepl&id=d33d92f2df290eOc2365599cb09fD669
35 Safe Drinking Water Act Sections 1452(i)(l), 1452(i)(2), 1452(j), and 1452(o), as amended
36 For more information please see:
856
-------
of the end of FY 2012, this success was realized in the U.S. Pacific Island Territories as well as
87 percent of the population served by CWSs met all applicable health-based drinking water
standards (on a four-quarter rolling average basis), surpassing the performance target of 80
percent.
The EPA and the states will continue extensive and detailed oversight of the DWSRF. The
agency will continue to work with the states to enhance their capacity development and operator
certification programs to ensure effective and ongoing compliance by public water systems with
the SDWA. The EPA will continue to partner with the United States Department of Agriculture's
(USDA) Rural Utilities Service to target funding and promote system sustainability through
sustainable utility management practices (e.g., asset management) and by aligning training and
technical assistance for rural systems, as well as avoiding duplication of effort on funding
projects. The EPA and USDA also will build upon their successful webinar series to further
promote the wide variety water system partnership approaches, including interconnecting
systems unable to provide the necessary technical, managerial, or financial resources to achieve
compliance and long-term sustainability. Finally, the EPA, in concert with the states and other
stakeholders, will continue to focus on rule compliance, operational efficiencies, and system
sustainability to ensure clean and safe water.
The DWSRF program provides access to financing and offers a limited subsidy to help utilities
address long-term needs associated with water infrastructure. Most DWSRF assistance is offered
in the form of loans which water utilities repay from the revenues they generate through the rates
they charge their customers for service. Our nation's water utilities face the need to significantly
increase the rate at which they invest in drinking water infrastructure repair and replacement to
keep pace with their aging infrastructure, much of which is approaching the end of its useful life.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The Administration proposes to reduce funding for the EPA's Clean Water and Drinking Water
State Revolving Funds (SRFs), which provide capitalization grants to states.
The Budget proposes a combined $1.9 billion for federal capitalization of the SRFs, representing
a reduction of $472 million from the FY 2012 enacted level. The Budget also proposes to focus
on communities most in need of assistance, and will still allow the SRFs to finance
approximately $6 billion in wastewater and drinking water infrastructure projects annually. The
Administration has strongly supported the SRFs, having requested and/or received
approximately $20 billion since 2009; since their inception, over $55 billion has been provided.
Going forward, the EPA will work to target SRF assistance to small and underserved
communities with limited ability to repay loans.
In FY 2014, the EPA is requesting a total of $817 million to fund approximately 380 new
infrastructure improvement projects to public drinking water systems. The requested funding for
this program will support critical infrastructure investments to rebuild and enhance America's
drinking water infrastructure.
857
-------
In FY 2014, EPA will work with States to ensure not less than 20 percent and not more than 30
percent of a state's capitalization grant is provided as subsidization. For FY 2014, the EPA will
encourage states to utilize the subsidy to assist small systems with standards compliance.
In FY 2014, the EPA will continue to implement a Sustainable Water Infrastructure Policy that
focuses on working with states and communities to promote system-wide planning that helps
align water infrastructure system goals for sustainability with other community sustainability
priorities, analyzing a range of infrastructure alternatives, including green and decentralized
alternatives, and ensuring that systems have the financial capacity and rate structures to
construct, operate, maintain, and replace infrastructure over time. As part of that strategy, the
EPA is working to ensure that federal dollars provided through the State Revolving Funds act as
a catalyst for efficient system-wide planning, improvements in technical, financial and
managerial capacity; and the design, construction and ongoing management of sustainable water
infrastructure.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(ape) Fund utilization rate for the DWSRF.
FY2007
85
88
FY2008
86
90
FY 2009
89
92
FY 2010
86
91.3
FY2011
89
90
FY 2012
89
90
FY 2013
89
FY 2014
89
Units
Dollars
Measure
Target
Actual
(aa) Percent of population served by CWSs that will receive drinking water that meets all
applicable health-based drinking water standards through approaches including effective
treatment and source water protection.
FY2007
94
91.5
FY2008
90
92
FY2009
90
92.1
FY2010
90
92
FY2011
91
93.2
FY2012
91
94.7
FY2013
92
FY2014
92
Units
Population
Measure
Target
Actual
(apm) Perc
through ap
FY2007
89
89
ent of community water systems that meets all applicable health-based standards
preaches including effective treatment and source water protection.
FY2008
89.5
89
FY 2009
90
89.1
FY 2010
90
89.6
FY2011
90
90.7
FY 2012
90
91
FY 2013
90
FY 2014
90
Units
Systems
Measure
Target
Actual
(pil) Percent of population in each of the U.S. Pacific Island Territories (served by community
water systems) that meets all applicable health-based drinking water standards, measured on a
four-quarter rolling average basis.
FY2007
FY2008
72
79
FY2009
73
80
FY2010
73
82
FY2011
75
87
FY2012
80
87
FY2013
82
FY2014
84
Units
Population
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$100,892.0) This reduction will result in fewer resources available to the states to fund
drinking water infrastructure projects. As part of the Administration's long-term strategy,
the EPA is implementing a Sustainable Water Infrastructure Policy that focuses on
858
-------
working with states and communities to enhance technical, managerial, and financial
capacity. A reduction of $100.9 million along with the required state match results in
approximately 45 fewer drinking water infrastructure projects.
Statutory Authority:
SOW A, 42U.S.C. §300j-12, Section 1452.
859
-------
Infrastructure Assistance: Alaska Native Villages
Program Area: State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$9,984.0
$9,984.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$9,984.0
$9,984.0
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$9,984.0
$9,984.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$10,000.0
$10,000.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$16.0
$16.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Alaska Rural and Native Village (ANV) program reduces disease and health care costs by
addressing the serious lack of basic drinking water and sanitation infrastructure (i.e., flushing
toilets and running water) in vulnerable rural and Native Alaska communities. In many of these
at-risk communities, five-gallon "honey buckets" and pit privies are the sole means of sewage
collection and disposal. Alaskan rural and native water and sewer systems face typical challenges
associated with small system size, along with challenging geographic conditions, such as
permafrost, shortened construction seasons, and remote locations.
The EPA's grant to the State of Alaska funds improvements and construction of drinking water
and wastewater treatment facilities for these underserved communities. Investments in
wastewater and drinking water infrastructure in ANV communities reduce disease and health
care costs because exposure to raw sewage and drinking water contaminants cause acute and
chronic illnesses. In addition, the federal government pays for much of the healthcare costs of
American Indians and Alaska Natives (most recently authorized by the 2010 Indian Health Care
Improvement Act).
The State of Alaska is best positioned to deliver services to the community by coordinating
across federal agencies and using the different programs to achieve a holistic solution with the
communities. The State uses a risk-based prioritization process to fund projects that will have the
greatest public health and environmental benefit. The EPA ANV program funding, in addition to
funding system upgrades and construction, uniquely supports training, technical assistance, and
educational programs to improve the financial management and operation and maintenance of
sanitation systems. This support of training, technical assistance, and educational programs
protects the federal investment in infrastructure in communities that often face significant
economic challenges.
Access to water and sanitation for serviceable Alaskan native village and rural community
populations increased from 60 percent in 1998 to 92 percent in 2012, according to the Indian
Health Service Sanitation Deficiency Tracking and Reporting System. While the gains in the
program have been significant, Alaskan native villages and rural communities still trail behind
860
-------
the 99.3 percent of the non-Tribal/non-native population in the U.S. with access to water and
sanitation (U.S. Census 2000).
16,000
ANV Program Progress
140
Number of Homes Connected (Cumulative)
Number of Projects (Cumulative)
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Number of ANV homes and projects that are increasing access to safe water and
sanitation (in combination with other federal agencies)
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The ANV program is administered by the State of Alaska and funds infrastructure development
for Native Villages and rural Alaskan communities that lack access to basic sanitation. The FY
2014 request of $10 million will fund a portion of the need in rural Alaskan homes and maintain
the existing level of wastewater and drinking water infrastructure that meets public health
standards, given increased regulatory requirements on drinking water systems and the rate of
construction of new homes in rural Alaska. Additionally, the FY 2014 request will continue to
support training, technical assistance, and educational programs that protect existing federal
investments in infrastructure by improving operation and maintenance of the systems. Improved
operation and maintenance improves system performance and extends the life of the asset.
In FY 2014, the agency will continue to work with the State of Alaska to address sanitation
conditions and maximize the value of the federal investment in rural Alaska. The EPA will
continue to implement the Alaska Rural and Native Village "Management Controls Policy,"
adopted in June 2007, to ensure efficient use of funds by allocating them to projects that are
ready to proceed or progressing satisfactorily. The agency has made great strides in
implementing more focused and intensive oversight of the Alaska Rural and Native Village grant
program through cost analyses, post-award monitoring, and timely closeout of projects. The EPA
also has collaborated with the State of Alaska to establish program goals and objectives that
allow the ANV program to be better positioned to meet environmental and public health goals.
861
-------
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(Opb) Percent of serviceable rural Alaska homes with access to drinking water supply and
wastewater disposal.
FY2007
92
92
FY2008
94
91
FY2009
96
91
FY2010
98
92
FY2011
92
92
FY2012
93
Data
Avail
8/2013
FY2013
93
FY2014
93.5
Units
Homes
Measure
Target
Actual
(Opd) Percent of project federal funds expended on time within the anticipated project
construction schedule set forth in the Management Control Policy.
FY2007
FY2008
FY 2009
94
90.5
FY 2010
94.5
85
FY2011
95
92
FY 2012
95.5
84.2
FY 2013
95
FY 2014
95
Units
Dollars
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$16.0) This reflects an increase for infrastructure to Native Villages and rural Alaska
communities that lack access to basic sanitation.
Statutory Authority:
Safe Drinking Water Act (SOWA) Amendments of 1996, Public Law 104-182, Section 303.
33 U.S.C. § 1263a. Public Law 112-74, Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2012.
862
-------
Brownfields Projects
Program Area: State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$94,848.0
$94,848.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$98,783.8
$98,783.8
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$89,848.0
$89,848.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$85,000.0
$85,000.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($9,848.0)
($9,848.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Brownfields program is designed to help states, tribes, local communities, and other
stakeholders involved in environmental revitalization and economic redevelopment to work
together to plan, inventory, assess, safely cleanup, and reuse brownfields. Brownfield sites 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. Brownfields
redevelopment is a key to revitalizing downtown areas, neighborhoods and rural communities,
thereby increasing property values and creating jobs. A 2011 EPA program evaluation concluded
that cleaning up brownfield properties leads to residential property value increases of 5.1 to 12.8
percent.37 According to a 2007 study, an average of 10 jobs is created for every acre of
brownfields redevelopment.38 Revitalizing these once productive properties helps communities
by removing blight, improving environmental conditions and providing public health benefits,
satisfying the growing demand for land, helping to limit urban sprawl, fostering ecologic habitat
enhancements, enabling economic development, and maintaining or improving quality of life.
Under this program, the EPA will provide funding for: 1) assessment cooperative agreements for
recipients to inventory, characterize, assess, and conduct cleanup and redevelopment planning
related to Brownfields sites; 2) targeted Brownfields assessments performed under the EPA
contracts and interagency agreements with federal partners; 3) cleanup cooperative agreements
for recipients to clean up sites they own; 4) capitalization cooperative agreements for Revolving
Loan Funds (RLFs) to provide low interest loans and sub-grants for cleanups; 5) environmental
workforce development and job training cooperative agreements to recruit, train, and place local,
unemployed residents of solid and hazardous waste-affected communities with the skills needed
to secure full-time employment in the environmental field; and 6) financial assistance to
localities, states, tribes, and non-profit organizations for research, training, and technical
assistance for Brownfields-related activities. In addition, the EPA will offer technical assistance,
37 Haninger, Kevin, Ma, Lala, and Timmons, Christopher. 2012. "Estimating the Impacts of Brownfields Remediation on
Housing Property Values." Duke Environmental Economics Working Paper Series. Working Paper EE12-08. The program
evaluation is available at http://sites.nicholasinstitute.duke.edu/environmentaleconomics/files/2013/01AVP-EE-12-08.pdf
38 Rowland, Marie. 2007. "Employment Effects of Brownfields Redevelopment, What Do We Know from the Literature?"
Journal of Planning Literature. 22:91.
863
-------
research, and training assistance to individuals and organizations from the EPA's contractors and
federal partners under interagency agreements to facilitate the inventory, assessment, and
remediation of Brownfields sites, community involvement, and site preparation.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the Brownfields program will continue to foster federal, state, Tribal, local, and
public-private partnerships to return properties to productive economic use in communities. By
removing uncertainty about a property's contamination, Brownfields funding can be a catalyst
for additional investment to revitalize a community. This program will support the following
activities, as described below:
• Funding will support at least 120 assessment cooperative agreements (estimated $26.8
million) that recipients may use to inventory, assess, cleanup and plan reuse at
Brownfields sites, as authorized under CERCLA 104(k)(2). In FY 2014, the EPA expects
to continue the Assessment Coalition option which allows three or more eligible entities
to submit one grant proposal for up to $600 thousand to assess sites and target more
areas. This level of assessment funding will lead to approximately 840 site assessments in
the three years following the awards.
• The EPA will provide funding for Targeted Brownfields Assessments in communities
without access to other assessment resources or those that lack the capacity to manage a
Brownfields assessment grant. There is special emphasis for small and rural communities
to submit requests for this funding to ensure equal access to Brownfields Assessment
resources. These assessments will be performed through contracts and interagency
agreements, as authorized by CERCLA 104(k)(2) and the terms of the EPA's
appropriation act. The FY 2014 funding level includes an estimated $3.8 million to
perform Targeted Brownfields Assessments for 35 communities.
• Funding will support approximately 51 direct cleanup cooperative agreements (estimated
$10.2 million) to enable eligible entities to clean up properties that the recipient owns.
This funding will lead to approximately 51 sites cleaned up. The agency will award direct
cleanup cooperative agreements of up to $200 thousand per site to eligible entities and
non-profits, as authorized under CERCLA 104(k)(3).
• The agency will award approximately eight RLF cooperative agreements (estimated $4.9
million) of up to $1.0 million each. In order to maximize RLF funding to new and
existing RLF applicants, the EPA anticipates typically awarding new recipients of these
cooperative agreements at an amount less than the maximum. The reduction in this initial
amount of funding is a result of a program evaluation that was conducted during 2011
which demonstrated that new RLF awards tend have a lag period in drawing down funds
due to the time it takes to set-up a new RLF and effectively market the program and
process the first loan or subgrant. The EPA defines a "new" RLF recipient as one who
has never received a Brownfields RLF cooperative agreement.
864
-------
Additionally, the EPA anticipates providing supplemental RLF funding (estimated $5.2
million) to existing high performing RLF recipients. The combined RLF and RLF
Supplemental funding will lead to approximately 36 sites cleaned up. The RLF program
enables eligible entities to make loans and subgrants for the cleanup of properties and
encourages communities to leverage other funds into their RLF pools and cleanup
cooperative agreements as authorized under CERCLA 104(k)(3) and (4).
Environmental Workforce Development and Job Training (EWDJT) cooperative
agreements (estimated $2.2 million) will provide funding for approximately 11
cooperative agreements of up to $200 thousand each for a two year period. This funding
will provide job training for community residents to take advantage of new jobs
leveraged by the assessment and cleanup of Brownfields, as authorized under CERCLA
104(k)(6), as well as other "green jobs" opportunities. The cooperative agreements will
allow recipients to recruit, train, and place unemployed individuals in jobs that address
environmental challenges in their communities. From the time the EPA began this
program in 1998 to June 2012, approximately 10,300 individuals had completed training
and approximately 7,300 obtained employment in the environmental field, with an
average starting hourly wage of $14.12. The FY 2014 funding level will lead to
approximately 530 people trained and 360 placed in jobs.
Funding will also support assessment and cleanup of abandoned underground storage
tanks (USTs) and other petroleum contamination found on Brownfields properties
(estimated $21.3 million) for up to approximately 90 Brownfields assessment, RLF and
cleanup cooperative agreements, as authorized under CERCLA 104(k)(2) and CERCLA
104(k)(3).
The agency will provide funding to support 20 area wide planning grants (estimated $4.8
million) through a national competition, and cooperative agreements and/or direct agency
technical assistance awarded under CERCLA Section 104(k)(6). Grant activities will
cover planning assistance, coordination of enforcement, water and air quality programs,
and work with other federal agencies, states, tribes and local governments to target
environmental improvements identified in each community's area-wide plan.
Funding will also support additional training, research, and technical assistance grants
and cooperative agreements and direct services from contractors and under interagency
agreements (estimated $5.7 million), as authorized under CERCLA 104(k)(6).
All estimates of outputs and outcomes are supported by the data that is entered by
Cooperative Agreement Recipients via the Assessment, Cleanup, Redevelopment
Exchange System (ACRES) and analyzed by the EPA. Maintenance of ACRES, focus on
the input of high quality data and robust analysis regarding program outcomes and
performance will continue to be a priority during FY 2014.
865
-------
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(B29) Brownfield properties assessed.
FY2007
1,000
1,371
FY2008
1,000
1,453
FY 2009
1,000
1,295
FY 2010
1,000
1,326
FY2011
1,000
1,784
FY 2012
1,200
1,444
FY 2013
1,200
FY 2014
1,200
Units
Properties
Measure
Target
Actual
(B32) Number of properties cleaned up using Brownfields funding.
FY2007
60
77
FY2008
60
78
FY 2009
60
93
FY 2010
60
109
FY2011
60
130
FY 2012
120
120
FY 2013
120
FY 2014
120
Units
Properties
Measure
Target
Actual
(B34) Jobs leveraged from Brownfields activities.
FY2007
5,000
5,209
FY2008
5,000
5,484
FY 2009
5,000
6,490
FY 2010
5,000
5,177
FY2011
5,000
6,447
FY 2012
5,000
5,593
FY 2013
5,000
FY 2014
5,000
Units
Jobs
Measure
Target
Actual
(B37) Billions of dollars of cleanup and redevelo
FY2007
0.9
1.69
FY2008
0.9
1.48
FY2009
0.9
1.06
FY2010
0.9
1.40
pment funds leveraged at Brownfields sites.
FY2011
0.9
2.14
FY2012
1.2
1.2
FY2013
1.2
FY2014
1.2
Units
Dollars
(Billions)
Measure
Target
Actual
(B33) Acres of Brownfields properties made ready for reuse.
FY2007
No Target
Establish
ed
2,399
FY2008
225
4,404
FY2009
1,000
2,660
FY2010
1,000
3,627
FY2011
1,000
6,667
FY2012
3,000
3,314
FY2013
3,000
FY2014
3,000
Units
Acres
Extensive analysis39 using ACRES data suggests a multi-year time lag in realizing performance
outcomes. For this reason, despite the reduction in funding for FY 2014, EPA expects to meet its
2014 performance targets. The cumulative effect of recent funding reductions, including the
2014 reduction will affect program performance targets and results in future years.
The EPA's performance measures for the Brownfields program are mainly based on outputs and
outcomes of assessment, cleanup and RLF cooperative agreements. These outputs and outcomes
depend on the maturity of each cooperative agreement, which usually has a performance period
range of three to five years. For assessment and cleanup cooperative agreements, the
performance period is three years, and five years for RLF cooperative agreements.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$9,848.0) This change reduces funding for assessment, RLF, cleanup and EWDJT
cooperative agreements as authorized under CERCLA 104(k)(2), 104(k)(3) and
'http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/pdfs/Brownfields-Evaluation-Parts-I-II.pdf
866
-------
104(k)(6). For example, the agency may provide 20 fewer assessment grants, four fewer
RLF grants, nine fewer cleanup grants, and two fewer EWDJT grants.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, as amended by the
Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act, 42 United States Code 9601
et seq. - Sections 101, 104 (k), and 107.
867
-------
Diesel Emissions Reduction Grant Program
Program Area: State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$29,952.0
$29,952.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$32,138.2
$32,138.2
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$24,952.0
$24,952.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$6,000.0
$6,000.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
($23,952.0)
($23,952.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Diesel Emissions Reduction Act (DERA) Grant Program provides immediate, cost-effective
emission reductions from existing diesel engines through engine retrofits, rebuilds, and
replacements; switching to cleaner fuels; idling reduction strategies; and other clean diesel
strategies. The DERA program was initially authorized in Sections 791-797 of the Energy Policy
Act of 2005. On January 4, 2011, the President signed into law the Diesel Emissions Reduction
Act of 2010, which modifies and reauthorizes the EPA's Diesel Emission Reduction Program
through FY 2016.
From goods movement to building construction to public transportation, diesel engines are the
modern-day workhorse of the American economy. Diesel engines are extremely efficient and
they power nearly every major piece of machinery and equipment on farms, construction sites, in
ports, and on highways. As the agency's most stringent emissions standards ever for heavy-duty
highway and nonroad diesel engines came into effect in 2007 and 2008 respectively, new cleaner
diesel engines started to enter the nation's fleet. However, today there are still 11 million pre-
2007/2008 diesel engines in use that will continue to emit large amounts of nitrogen oxides and
particulate matter. The EPA's DERA program promotes strategies to reduce these emissions and
protect public health, by working with manufacturers, fleet operators, air quality professionals,
environmental and community organizations, and state and local officials. While the DERA
grants accelerate the pace at which dirty engines are retired or retrofitted, pollution emissions
from the legacy fleet will be reduced over time without additional DERA funding as portions of
the fleet turnover and are replaced with new engines that meet modern emission standards.
However, even with attrition through fleet turnover, approximately 1.5 million old diesel engines
would still remain in use in 2030. Retrofitting or replacing older diesel engines reduces
particulate matter (PM) emissions up to 95 percent, smog-forming emissions, such as
hydrocarbons (HC) and nitrogen oxide (NOx), up to 90 percent, and greenhouse gases up to 20
percent in the upgraded vehicles with engine replacements.
Through FY 2010, the DERA program reduced the emissions of approximately 55,000 diesel
vehicles, vessels or equipment, reducing NOx by over 200,000 tons and PM by almost 13,000
tons. Approximately 200 million gallons of fuel were saved. In addition, for FY 2011 and 2012,
868
-------
an estimated 4,500 diesel vehicles, vessels or equipment were retrofitted or replaced, reducing
PM by approximately 1,500 tons and NOx by 35,000 tons. Based on the EPA's experience to
date, every $1 million of DERA program grants/loans successfully leveraged at least $2 million
in additional funding assistance. These projects have eliminated or will eliminate tens of
thousands of tons of pollution from the air we breathe. According to these same estimates, every
$1 spent retrofitting or replacing the oldest and most polluting diesel engines can lead to up to
approximately $13 in health benefits.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
The FY 2014 budget continues a new targeted approach designed to transition the DERA
program away from ongoing Federal support while targeting the most polluting diesel engines
where they create the most harm. The modified funding strategy will use rebates and grants,
including grants for revolving loan programs, to concentrate resources on communities in a
limited set of high exposure areas such as near ports and freight distribution hubs.
The federal monies would be split into two categories. The first category would allocate funds to
a rebate program established under DERA's reauthorization. Through the rebate mechanism, the
agency will more efficiently and precisely target the awards toward the dirtiest, most polluting
engines. In addition, this rebate mechanism can be used to provide funding directly to private
fleets. The second category would allocate funds toward national grants, potentially including
grants to establish revolving loan programs that can provide self-sustaining sources of funding as
subsidized loans for clean diesel equipment are repaid. Together, these two funding mechanisms
will reduce diesel emissions in priority areas and the remaining areas of highly concentrated
diesel pollution.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in the Federal Support for Air
Quality Management Program in Environmental Programs and Management and can be found in
the Performance Eight-Year Array in the Program Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$23,952.0) This reduction reflects a continuation of the funding strategy proposed in the
FY 2013 President's Budget, which reduces the amount of funding available but targets
spending on grants and rebates in the limited set of communities most impacted by
harmful diesel emissions.
Statutory Authority:
Energy Policy Act of 2005, Sections 741 and 791-797; P.L. 111-364; H.R. 5809 Diesel
Emissions Reduction Act of 2010.
869
-------
Infrastructure Assistance: Mexico Border
Program Area: State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$4,992.0
$4,992.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$4,992.0
$4,992.0
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$5,000.0
$5,000.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$8.0
$8.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
The EPA works collaboratively with U.S. federal, state, and local partners and the Mexican
water agency - CONAGUA - through the U.S.-Mexico Border Water Infrastructure Program to
fund planning, design, and construction of high-priority water and wastewater treatment facilities
to underserved communities along the border. Investments in wastewater and drinking water
infrastructure in communities on both sides of the U.S.-Mexico Border reduce disease and health
care costs because exposure to raw sewage and drinking water contaminants cause acute and
chronic illnesses. The border region faces high poverty rates; three of the ten poorest counties in
the United States are located in the border area and twenty-one of the border counties have been
designated as economically distressed areas.40 U.S.-Mexico Border Water Infrastructure projects
stimulate local economies through public health-related economic gains, job creation, and
increased demand for goods and services. The United Nations Development Program has
estimated that every one dollar investment in the water sector creates eight dollars in costs
averted and productivity gained.
41
Untreated sewage flowing north into the U.S. from Tijuana, Mexicali, and Nogales pollutes
important water bodies like the Tijuana, New River, and Santa Cruz rivers. Untreated sewage
also pollutes shared waters, such as the Rio Grande, Pacific Ocean, and the Gulf of Mexico. The
close proximity and intermingling of border communities that have poor quality drinking water
and sanitation poses a serious risk of disease transmission. The United States and Mexico share
more than two thousand miles of common border. More than 14 million people live in the border
area, approximately 7.3 million living in the United States.42 Twenty-six U.S. federally
recognized Native American tribes also are located in the U.S.-Mexico border region.
The EPA's Border Water Infrastructure Program is unique among federal funding programs. It is
the only federal program that can fund projects on both sides of the border with all projects
benefiting communities on the U.S. side of the border. Citizens of the United States benefit from
40 U.S.-Mexico Border Health Commission, http://www.borderhealth.org/border_region.php
41 United Nations Development Program, Beyond Scarcity: Power, Poverty and the Global Water Crisis, Human Development
Report, 2006.
42EPA/SEMARNAT, "State of the Border Region: Indicators Report", 1 st edition, 2011.
870
-------
all projects, whether located in the U.S. or Mexico, as all funded projects must demonstrate that
they will provide a positive public health and/or environmental benefit to the United States. For
example, a wastewater project in Mexico can only be funded if that sewage would otherwise
contaminate a U.S. waterbody. Treating these waters after they have been contaminated and have
crossed the border into the United States is neither technically feasible nor financially viable.
Preventing raw sewage discharges to these water resources is especially critical in a region that is
already facing water scarcity challenges. Drinking water projects also provide critically needed
services, some of them incorporating innovative sustainable components. A new drinking water
plant in San Benito, Texas, for example, utilizes solar power and the latest membrane filtration
process to provide over 28 thousand residents with access to safe drinking water.
The close bi-national cooperation in this program has improved public health and water quality.
Improving access to clean and safe water is a key focus of the Border 2020 Plan, the bi-national
agreement that guides efforts to improve environmental conditions in the U.S.-Mexico Border
region.
U.S.-Mexico Border communities are looking to the EPA as a last-resort funding source when
utilities, cities, or states are not able to fully finance needed infrastructure improvements. To
date, the program has funded 104 projects. More than five million people are benefiting from 80
completed projects, and more than eight million people will benefit once the 24 projects that are
funded for construction are completed. The EPA investments in these wastewater projects are
protecting public health from waterborne diseases and have been a key factor in significant water
quality improvements in U.S. waterbodies, such as the Rio Grande (Texas and New Mexico),
Santa Cruz River (Arizona), New River (California), and Tijuana River and Pacific Ocean
(California). In both the New River and the middle Rio Grande, for example, fecal coliform
levels have dropped by over 80 percent (as a result of jointly-funded wastewater treatment plants
built in Mexicali and Ojinaga, Mexico, respectively). California beaches in the border region that
were once closed throughout the year due to wastewater pollution from Mexico now remain open
throughout the summer, resulting in decreased health risks to beachgoers and an economic boon
for local governments. The Santa Cruz River now supports a healthy fish population where a few
years ago, only bloodworms thrived. The program estimates the contribution to water quality
improvement through removal of biochemical oxygen demand, a measure that represents the
impacts of pollution (see graph below).
871
-------
160 M
140 M
U.S. - Mexico Border Water Infrastructure Program
Wastewater Connections and Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) Removed
(Cumulative)
700000
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the U.S.-Mexico Border Water Infrastructure Program will continue to fund high-
priority water and wastewater infrastructure projects. The FY 2014 request of $5 million will
fund a portion of the need in border communities. Projects that receive funding have been
evaluated and ranked using a risk-based prioritization system, which enables the program to
direct grant funding to projects that demonstrate human health benefits, cost-effectiveness,
institutional capacity and sustainability. The EPA coordinates at local, national, and bi-national
levels to assess the environmental needs and make prioritization funding decisions. All program
funding will be invested in projects that, whether located in the United States or Mexico, provide
a positive public health and/or environmental benefit to the United States. U.S. benefits include
improved quality of U.S. water bodies and shared waters and reduced health risk to the U.S.
population. The demonstration of a U.S. benefit is one of the fundamental eligibility criteria for
projects seeking program assistance.
The U.S.-Mexico Border Water Infrastructure Program will continue to work with the ten border
States (four U.S. and six Mexican) and local communities to improve the region's water quality
and public health. The U.S. and Mexican governments will collaborate on water infrastructure
projects to reduce health risks to residents, including sensitive populations of children and elders,
many of whom currently lack access to safe drinking water and sanitation. Additionally, by
providing homes with access to basic sanitation, the EPA and its partners will reduce the
discharge of untreated wastewater into surface water and groundwater. The Border Water
Infrastructure Program will continue to expedite project completions and continue to reduce
unliquidated construction funding.
872
-------
The Border Water Infrastructure Program has a portfolio of high-priority, construction-ready
projects. It is anticipated that nearly all of the requested FY 2014 funding will fund construction.
A significantly smaller portion will go towards the planning and design of new projects, with the
purpose of continuing to build and thus maintain a portfolio of high-priority projects ready for
construction. Final decisions on the use of FY 2014 funding will be based on balancing the
construction needs of fully designed projects with the planning and design needs of prioritized
projects.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(4pg) Loading of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) removed (million pounds/year) from the
U.S. -Mexico border area since 2003.
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
108.2
108.5
FY2012
115
119
FY2013
121.5
FY2014
135.8
Units
Million
Pounds/Yea
r
Measure
Target
Actual
(xb2) Number of additional homes provided safe drinking water in the U.S. -Mexico border area
that lacked access to safe drinking water in 2003.
FY2007
1,200
(Annual)
1,276
(Annual)
FY2008
2,500
(Annual)
5,162
(Annual)
FY 2009
1,500
(Annual)
1,584
(Annual)
FY 2010
28,434
(Cumulati
ve)
52,130
(Cumulati
ve)
FY2011
54,130
(Cumulati
ve)
54,734
(Cumulati
ve)
FY 2012
1,000
(Annual)
5,185
(Annual)
FY 2013
3,000
(Annual)
FY 2014
1,700
(Annual)
Units
Homes
Measure
Target
Actual
(xb3) Number of additional homes provided adequate wastewater sanitation in the U.S. -Mexico
border area that lacked access to wastewater sanitation in 2003.
FY2007
70,750
(Annual)
73,475
(Annual)
FY2008
15,000
(Annual)
31,686
(Annual)
FY2009
105,500
(Annual)
43,594
(Annual)
FY2010
246,175
(Cumulati
ve)
254,125
(Cumulati
ve)
FY2011
461,125
(Cumulati
ve)
513,041
(Cumulati
ve)
FY2012
10,500
(Annual)
31,092
(Annual)
FY2013
27,000
(Annual)
FY2014
39,500
(Annual)
Units
Homes
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$8.0) This reflects an increase in overall funding for infrastructure to provide critical
drinking water and wastewater services to border residents that reduce public health risks
and improve the environment for U.S. citizens.
Statutory Authority:
Treaty entitled "Agreement between the United States of America and the United Mexican States
on Cooperation for the Protection and Improvement of the Environment in the Border Area,
August 14, 1983;" Public Law 112-74, Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2012.
873
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - E-Manifest
Resource Summary Table 875
Program Projects in E-Manifest 875
Program Area: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 876
RCRA: Waste Management 877
874
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION: Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest System Fund
Resource Summary Table
(Dollars in Thousands)
Hazardous Waste Electronic
Manifest System Fund
Budget Authority
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$0.0
0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$0.0
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$0.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$2,000.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$2,000.0
0.0
Bill Language: E-Manifest
In addition to amounts provided under the heading "Environmental Programs and
Management", $2,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2016, shall be available to
carry out section 3024 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6939g), including the
development, operation, maintenance, and upgrading of the hazardous waste electronic manifest
system established by such section.
Program Projects in E-Manifest
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA)
RCRA: Waste Management
Subtotal, RCRA: Waste
Management
TOTAL, EPA
FY 2012
Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$2,000.0
$2,000.0
$2,000.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$2,000.0
$2,000.0
$2,000.0
875
-------
Program Area: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
876
-------
RCRA: Waste Management
Program Area: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Preserve Land
(Dollars in Thousands)
Hazardous Waste Electronic
Manifest System Fund
Environmental Program & Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$0.0
$63,500.0
$63,500.0
368.3
FY 2012
Actuals
$0.0
$62,115.1
$62,115.1
367.5
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$0.0
$63,696.0
$63,696.0
368.3
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$2,000.0
$66,209.0
$68,209.0
371.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2012
Enacted
$2,000.0
$2,709.0
$4,709.0
2.7
Program Project Description:
On October 5, 2012, the President signed the Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest
Establishment Act (Public Law 112-195), requiring the EPA to assemble and maintain the
information contained in the estimated 5 million forms accompanying hazardous waste shipments
across the United States. Prior to this legislation, this information only needed to be co-located
with the hazardous waste shipment and then shared with states. In FY 2013 EPA initiated the
effort to develop a program that provided for the submission of information electronically as well
as in paper form. This investment at the federal level will significantly reduce the time and costs
for regulated entities associated with submitting, maintaining, processing, and publishing data
from hazardous waste manifests. The EPA estimates that, when fully implemented, the E-
Manifest program will reduce the reporting burden for firms regulated under RCRA's hazardous
waste provisions by $77 to $126 million annually, by replacing time consuming paper-based
reporting with an electronic manifesting system. The program will provide better knowledge of
waste generation and final disposition; better oversight and enforcement; and better public
transparency for hazardous waste.
The legislation contains deadlines for rulemaking and system development. Once this system is in
place, the fees collected through the program will be used to fund the operation of the program.
This new appropriation was created by the act to assist in managing resources and user fees for
the development and operation of the system.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2014, the Agency will continue to develop1 an electronic hazardous waste manifest (e-
manifest) program and the associated user-fee rule. The EPA envisions that e-Manifest is also a
key component of the E-Enterprise initiative, and will provide a number of framework
1 For the purpose of the e-manifest system the term 'development' means the appropriate mix of purchasing or enhancing relevant
COTS (commercial off-the-shelf) or GOTS (government off-the-shelf) software and developing new components needed to meet
the requirements specified during the e-manifest planning phase in 2013.
877
-------
components in support of E-Enterprise such as providing a mechanism for mobile and off-line
signatures which could be used by a number of other E-Enterprise activities; tracking and
reporting of shipments; and providing public access to data via a public portal.
The President's Budget includes $2 million in the new E-Manifest appropriation and $2.4 million
in the EPM appropriation, both under the RCRA: Waste Management program, for a total of $4.4
million for system and rule development. This will allow EPA to begin development of this
system and provide limited support for e-manifest rule development.
In FY 2013, EPA will complete the project planning phase. EPA also expects to work on the
regulation that authorizes the electronic transmittal of manifests. In FY 2014, EPA plans to
perform the following key activities:
• Begin the e-manifest system acquisition/development process to meet the requirements
outlined during the project planning phase.
• Begin to develop the economic models to support the development of a user-fee rule,
• Begin analyses to support additional revision to EPA regulations required to implement an
e-Manifest system.
Performance Targets:
There are currently no performance measures in place for e-manifest.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$2,000.0) As part of the agency's E-Enterprise investment, this change reflects an
investment to develop an interactive federal data system that will provide the capability
for the industry to submit their hazardous waste data to EPA electronically rather than on
paper. This shared solution will reduce burden on industry and improve services for the
regulated community. These new resources will provide initial funding to develop an e-
Manifest system, and for activities associated with developing the user-fee rule.
Statutory Authority:
Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and the
Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest Establishment Act, 42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq. - Sections 3004,
3005,3024,8001.
878
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Program Performance and Assessment
Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality 881
Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters 895
Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development 921
Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution 935
Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws 948
NPM: Office of Research and Development 954
NPM: Office of Administration and Resources Management 962
NPM: Office of Environmental Information 964
NPM: Office of the Inspector General 966
Verification/Validation of Performance Data 968
879
-------
880
-------
PERFORMANCE: STRATEGIC GOALS 1-5 EIGHT-YEAR ARRAY
(Boxes shaded gray indicate that a measure has been terminated for FY 2013 and beyond, therefore, data are no longer collected.)
Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Reduce greenhouse gas emissions and develop adaptation strategies to address climate change, and protect and improve air quality
Objective 1 - Address Climate Change: Reduce the threats posed by climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and taking actions
that help communities and ecosystems become more resilient to the effects of climate change
Program Area
(1) Address
Climate
Change
Performance Measures and
Data
Strategic Measure: By 2015, additional programs from across EPA will promote practices to help Americans save energy and
conserve resources, leading to expected greenhouse gas emissions reductions of 740. 1 MMTCO2Eq.From a baseline without
adoption of efficient practices. This reduction compares to 500.4 MMTCO2Eq. Reduced in 2008. (Baseline FY 2008:
ENERGY STAR 140.8 MMTCO2Eq., Industrial Programsl 314.2 MMTCO2Eq., SmartWay Transportation Partnership 5.9
MMTCO2Eq., Pollution Prevention Programs 6.5 MMTCO2Eq., Sustainable Materials Management Programs2 34.3
MMTCO2Eq., WaterSense Program 0.4 MMTCO2Eq., Executive Order 135143 GHG Reduction Program 0.0 MMTCO2Eq.)
(PM G02) Million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTCO2E) of greenhouse gas reductions
Target
Actual
FY 2007
107.8
132.4
FY 2008
118.8
140.8
FY 2009
130.2
143.4
FY 2010
143.0
163.5
FY2011
156.9
189.0
FY 2012
168.7
Data Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
182.6
in the buildings sector.
FY 2014
196.2
Unit
MMTCO2e
Additional Information: The baseline in 2004 is 89.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent reductions. To serve as a basis for comparison in future years, EPA
used the 2004 baseline to project into the future assuming no impact on greenhouse gas emissions from 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 1993 and 1997 in the U.S. Climate
Change Action Report (2002). 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.
(PM G06) Million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTCO2E) of greenhouse gas reductions
sector.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
2.2
2.2
FY 2008
3.3
4.2
FY 2009
5.5
5.9
FY 2010
15.4
16.5
FY2011
23.7
23.6
FY 2012
28.0
Data Avail
FY 2013
33.0
in the transportation
FY 2014
37.0
Unit
MMTCO2e
GOAL 1: TAKING ACTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
881
-------
12/2013
Program Area
(PM G16) Million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTCO2E) of greenhouse gas reductions in the industry sector.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
229.6
267.3
FY 2008
248.3
289.7
FY 2009
267.3
293.7
FY 2010
304.0
362.8
FY2011
346.2
386.4
FY 2012
372.9
Data Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
421.9
FY 2014
461.8
Unit
MMTCO2e
Performance Measures and Data
Additional Information: Starting with FY 20 12, new program tools allow closer alignment with FY cycle and cumulative approach. These tools use real data so variations
between modeled projections and actuals are to be expected. Synchronization applied to prior years. The baseline in 2004 is 0.7 million metric tons of carbon dioxide
equivalent reductions from the SmartWay program. To serve as a basis for comparison in future years, EPA projected from the 2004 baseline into the future assuming no
impact on greenhouse gas emissions from 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 1993 and 1997 in the U.S. Climate Change Action Report (2002). 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.
Additional Information: The baseline in 2004 is 201 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent reductions from ENERGY STAR for the Industrial Sector, Non-
CO2 Partnership Programs, Combined Heat and Power Partnership, Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP), and the Landfill Rule. To serve as a basis for
comparison in future years, EPA projected from the 2004 baseline into the future assuming no impact on greenhouse gas emissions from 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 1993
and 1997 in the U.S. Climate Change Action Report (2002). Baseline data 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.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, EPA will integrate climate change science trend and scenario information into five major
scientific models and/or decision-support tools used in implementing Agency environmental management programs to further
EPA's mission, consistent with existing authorities (preference for one related to air quality, water quality, cleanup programs,
and chemical safety). (Baseline FY 2010: 0 scientific models)
(PM ADI) Cumulative number of major scientific models and decision support tools used in implementing
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
3
3
FY 2013
4
FY 2014
5
Unit
Major
Models and
Tools
Explanation of Results: Integrated Climate and Land Use Scenarios (ICLUS), Robust Decision Making (RDM) tool, and Updated CRWU Toolbox
Additional Information: To ensure EPA's mission, EPA will build resilience to climate change by integrating considerations of climate data into major scientific models
GOAL 1: TAKING ACTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
882
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
and decision support tools. Many of the outcomes EPA is working to attain are sensitive to climate, and every action EPA takes must be resilient to these fluctuations. The
FY 2011 baseline is 0 major scientific models/decision support tools.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, EPA will account for climate change by integrating climate change science trend and scenario
information into five rule-making processes to further EPA's mission, consistent with existing authorities (preference for one
related to air quality, water quality, cleanup programs, and chemical safety). (Baseline FY 2010: 0)
(PM AD2) Cumulative number of major rulemakings with climate sensitive, environmental impacts, and within existing
authorities, that integrate climate change science data.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
l
l
FY 2013
2
FY 2014
3
Unit
Major
Rulemakings
Explanation of Results: Stormwater Rule
Additional Information: To ensure EPA's mission, EPA will build resilience to climate change by integrating considerations of climate data into major rule making
processes. Many of the outcomes EPA is working to attain are sensitive to climate, and every action EPA takes must be resilient to these fluctuations. The FY 2011
baseline is 0 major proposed rules.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, EPA will build resilience to climate change by integrating considerations of climate change
impacts and adaptive measures into five major grant, loan, contract, or technical assistance programs to further EPA's mission,
consistent with existing authorities (preference for one related to air quality, water quality, cleanup programs, and scientific
research). (Baseline FY 2010: 0)
(PM ADS) Cumulative number of major grant, loan, contract, or technical assistance agreement programs that
integrate climate science data into climate sensitive projects that have an environmental outcome.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
l
3
FY 2013
2
FY 2014
3
Unit
Major
Programs
Explanation of Results: Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Grants, Climate Ready Estuaries Program Grants, and EPA/FEMA technical assistance to communities
piloting climate adaptation projects
Additional Information: To ensure EPA's mission, EPA will build resilience to climate change by integrating considerations of climate data into grant, loan, contract, and
technical assistance programs. Many of the outcomes EPA is working to attain are sensitive to climate, and every action EPA takes must be resilient to these fluctuations.
The FY 2011 baseline is 0 programs
(PM G17) Percentage of registered facilities that submit required and complete GHG data by the annual reporting
deadline.
GOAL 1: TAKING ACTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
883
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
Data Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
FY 2014
Unit
Percent of
Facilities
Additional Information: The Greenhouse Gas Reporting Registry tracks the number registered facilities emitting greenhouse gases. Approximately 13,000 reporters will
be required to submit reports by March 31,2011 (the first reporting cycle), but the exact number of required reporters is unknown and may vary each year. Approximately
99% of facilities reported their data on time in 201 1 and a high reporting rate is expected in the future. This measure is being phased out in order to address the reduction
in data reporting errors (see performance measure G18 below).
(PM G18) Percentage of Annual Greenhouse Gas Emission Reports verified by EPA before publication.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
93
FY 2014
95
Unit
Percent of
Reports
Verified
Additional Information: The Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program, established in 2009, has 41 sectors that include approximately 10,000 reporters. Both facilities and
suppliers are required to report their data annually by the reporting deadline of March 3 1 st. After submission of the data, the Agency conducts a verification review that
lasts approximately 150 days. The data verification process includes a combination of electronic checks, staff review, and follow-up with facilities to identify potential
reporting errors and have them corrected before publication. The 1 50-day period includes 60 days for the EPA to review reports and identify potential data quality issues,
75 days for reporters to resolve these issues, and 1 5 days for the EPA to review responses or resubmitted reports. EPA plans to publish all of the data through its online,
interactive publication tool (www.epa.gov/ghgreporting) each year by October 1st. In FY 2014, 95% of the reports published will be verified through the process
described above.
Objective 2 - Improve Air Quality: Achieve and maintain health-based air pollution standards and reduce risk from toxic air pollutants and
indoor air contaminants.
Program Area
(1) Reduce
Criteria
Pollutants and
Regional Haze
Performance Measures and Data
Strategic Measure: By 2015, the population-weighted average concentrations of ozone (smog) in all monitored counties will
decrease to .073 ppm compared to the average of 0.078 ppm in 2009.
(PM A01) Annual emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) from electric power generation sources.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
9,900,000
8,900,000
FY 2008
9,400,000
7,600,000
FY 2009
9,400,000
5,700,000
FY 2010
8,450,000
5,166,000
FY2011
6,000,000
4,544,000
FY 2012
6,000,000
Data Avail
FY 2013
6,000,000
FY 2014
6,000,000
Unit
Tons
Emitted
GOAL 1: TAKING ACTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
884
-------
12/2013
Program Area
Target
Actual
FY 2007
6
6
FY 2008
8
9
FY 2009
10
13
FY 2010
ll
15
FY2011
12
16
FY 2012
13
Data Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
15
FY 2014
17
Unit
Percent
Reduction
Performance Measures and Data
Additional Information: The baseline in 1980 is 17.4 million tons of SO2 emissions from electric utility sources. This inventory was developed by the National Acid
Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP) and is used as the basis for reduction in Title IV of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA). Statutory SO2 emissions
capped in 2010 at 8.95 million tons, approximately 8.5 million tons below 1980 emissions level. The data is contained in EPA's Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), Acid
Rain Program and Former NOx Budget Trading program 2010 Progress Report. Targets for this measure through 2010 are based on implementation of the nationwide
Acid Rain Program alone whereas the (lower) target of 6 million tons for 2011 -2014 recognizes implementation of the CAIR Programs in eastern states in combination
with the Acid Rain Program.
(PM M9) Cumulative percentage reduction in population-weighted ambient concentration of ozone in monitored
counties from 2003 baseline.
Additional Information: The baseline in 2003 is 15,972 million people parts per billion. The ozone concentration measure reflects improvements (reductions) in ambient
ozone concentrations across all monitored counties, weighted by the populations in those areas. To calculate the weighting, pollutant concentrations in monitored counties
are multiplied by the associated county populations.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, the population-weighted average concentrations of inhalable fine particles in all monitored
counties will decrease to 10.5 |ig/m3 compared to the average of 11.7 |ig/m3 2009.
(PM M91) Cumulative percentage reduction in population-weighted ambient concentration of fine particulate matter
(PM-2.5) in all monitored counties from 2003 baseline.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
3
8
FY 2008
4
13
FY 2009
5
17
FY 2010
6
23
FY2011
15
26
FY 2012
16
Data Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
20
FY 2014
25
Unit
Percent
Reduction
Additional Information: The baseline in 2003 is 2,581 million people micrograms per cubic meter. The PM-2.5 concentration reduction annual measure reflects
improvements (reductions) in the ambient concentration of fine particulate matter PM-2.5 pollution across all monitored counties, weighted by the populations in those
areas. To calculate this weighting, pollutant concentrations in monitored counties are multiplied by the associated county populations. The program recalibrated the target
in 2011 based on recent trend data.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) to 14.7 million tons per year compared to the 2009
level of 19.4 million tons emitted.
(PM O34) Cumulative millions of tons of Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) reduced since 2000 from mobile sources.
GOAL 1: TAKING ACTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
885
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
FY 2007
2.37
2.37
FY 2008
2.71
2.71
FY 2009
3.05
3.05
FY 2010
3.39
3.38
FY2011
3.73
3.73
FY 2012
4.07
4.07
FY 2013
4.41
FY 2014
4.74
Unit
Tons
Reduced
Additional Information: The baseline in 2000 for Nitrogen Oxide emissions from mobile sources is 1 1 .8 million tons. The 2000 Mobile6 inventory is used as the baseline
for mobile source emissions.
(PM O40) Percent of small nonroad engines tested in EPA surveillance program that comply with emissions
requirements
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
TBD
Unit
Percent in
Compliance
Additional Information: EPA will initiate a small engine surveillance program in 2013, through which the Agency will monitor in -use compliance of this equipment by
testing a random set of the engines at National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory. The measure will track: 1) whether engines being sold to consumers match the
specifications in the certification application and 2) whether emissions from production engines are within a reasonable range of certified emission levels. The data
collected in 2013 will become the baseline for future years.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, reduce emissions of direct particulate matter (PM) to 3.9 tons per year compared to the 2009
level 4.2 million tons emitted.
(PM P34) Cumulative tons of PM-2.5 reduced since 2000 from mobile sources.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
85,704
85,704
FY 2008
97,947
97,497
FY 2009
110,190
110,190
FY 2010
122,434
122,434
FY2011
136,677
136,677
FY 2012
146,921
146,921
FY 2013
159,164
FY 2014
171,407
Unit
Tons
Reduced
(PM M92) Cumulative percentage reduction in the number of days with Air Quality Index (AQI) values over 100 since
2003, weighted by population and AQI value.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
21
42
FY 2008
25
52
FY 2009
29
59
FY 2010
33
70
FY2011
37
73
FY 2012
50
Data Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
80
FY 2014
80
Unit
Percent
Reduction
Additional Information: The baseline in 2003 for the Air Quality Index (AQI) is zero percent reduction and the 2004 result is a 15.5% reduction. The AQI is an index for
GOAL 1: TAKING ACTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
886
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
reporting daily air quality. An AQI value of 100 generally corresponds to the national air quality standard for the pollutant, which is the level EPA has set to protect public
health. AQI values below 1 00 are generally thought of as satisfactory. When AQI values are above 1 00, air quality is considered to be unhealthy for certain sensitive
groups of people and then for everyone as AQI values get higher. The program recalibrated the target in 2012 based on recent trend data.
(PM M93) Cumulative percentage reduction in the number of days with (AQI) values over 100 since 2003 per grant
dollar allocated to the states in support of the NAAQS.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
21
31
FY 2008
25
34
FY 2009
29
31
FY 2010
33
43
FY2011
37
42
FY 2012
41
Data Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
FY 2014
Unit
Percent
Reduction
Additional Information: This measure is being phased out due to its inability to adequately assess program results. The program will continue to assess progress from
state grants via the outcome measure that tracks the cumulative percentage reduction in the number of days with Air Quality Index (AQI) values over 100 since 2003,
weighted by population and AQI value (see performance measure M92 above).
(PM M94) Percent of major NSR permits issued within one year of receiving a com
Target
Actual
FY 2007
75
83
FY 2008
78
79
FY 2009
78
76
FY 2010
78
46
FY2011
78
73
FY 2012
78
Data Avail
12/2013
plete permit application.
FY 2013
78
FY 2014
78
Unit
Percent
Issued
Explanation of Results: EPA established three new requirements for GHG, short-term permit, NAAQS and short-term permit, and SO2 NAAQS permits, which required
sources to obtain a PSD permit. Guidance from EPA and additional time was needed by permitting authorities to issue the PSD permits.
Additional Information: The baseline in 2004 is 61%. New Source Review (NSR) requires stationary sources of air pollution to get permits before they start construction.
Permits are legal documents that the source must follow, and they specify what construction is allowed, what emission limits must be met, and often how the source must
be operated. Usually NSR permits are issued by state or local air pollution control agencies, and the EPA issues the permit in some cases.
(PM M95) Percent of significant Title V operating permit revisions issued within 18 months of receiving a complete
permit application.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
94
81
FY 2008
97
85
FY 2009
100
87
FY 2010
100
82
FY2011
100
84
FY 2012
100
Data Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Unit
Percent
Issued
Explanation of Results: State, tribal and local permitting authorities issue these permits and the EPA has little control over the pace at which they are processed. EPA
maintains program oversight responsibility and works with state, tribal and local programs to correct program deficiencies.
GOAL 1: TAKING ACTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
887
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Additional Information: The baseline in 2004 is 1 00%. Operating permits are legally enforceable documents that permitting authorities issue to air po llution sources after
the source has begun to operate. Usually Title V permits are issued by state or local air pollution control agencies, and the EPA issues the permit in some cases. Title V
permits must be renewed every five years. When a source (or facility) undergoes a major or "significant" revision to its operations that impacts emissions, a revision to the
Title V operating permit must be sent to the permitting agency for review.
(PM M96) Percent of new Title V operating permits issued within 18 months of receiving a com
Target
Actual
FY 2007
87
51
FY 2008
91
72
FY 2009
95
70
FY 2010
99
67
FY2011
99
72
FY 2012
99
Data Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
99
plete permit application.
FY 2014
99
Unit
Percent
Issued
Explanation of Results: State, tribal and local permitting authorities issue the permits and the EPA regions have little control over the pace at which they are processed.
EPA maintains program oversight responsibility and works with state, tribal and local programs to correct permit program deficiencies.
Additional Information: The baseline in 2004 is 75%. Operating permits are legally enforceable documents that permitting authorities issue to air pollution sources after
the source has begun to operate. Usually Title V permits are issued by state or local air pollution control agencies, and the EPA issues the permit in some cases. Title V
permits must be renewed every five years. When a new source (or facility) begins operations and has the potential to emit air pollution beyond a certain threshold, a new
Title V operating permit must be sent to the permitting agency for review.
(PM MM7) Percent of State Implementation Plans (SIPs) removed from backlog
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
10
FY 2014
10
Unit
Percentage
Removed
Additional Information: The Clean Air Act requires states to develop a general plan to attain and maintain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) in all
areas of the country and a specific plan to attain the standards for each area designated nonattainment for a NAAQS. These plans, known as State Implementation Plans or
SIPs, are developed by state and local air quality management agencies and submitted to EPA for approval. The baseline (SIP backlog count) for FY 2013 reporting is
662. This number will be a static number against which progress will be measured for the fiscal year.
(PM MM8) Cumulative percentage reduction in the number of days to process State Implementation Plan revisions,
weighted by complexity.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
1.2
3.3
FY 2009
2.4
1.8
FY 2010
2.9
14
FY2011
3.1
26.8
FY 2012
3.1
Data Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
FY 2014
Unit
Percent
Reduction
Additional Information: When a State Implementation Plan (SIP) is received by a Regional office for processing, the submittal is assigned a complexity factor. For most
SIP elements, the complexity factor will be 1 .0, which corresponds to the overall processing time of 14 months. Under certain circumstances, in particular for SIP
GOAL 1: TAKING ACTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
elements that are very complex such as attainment demonstrations for metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) and for all redesignation requests, a complexity factor of 1 .28,
corresponding to a review time of 1 8 months will be assigned. This measure is being phased out in order to address the backlog of State Implementation Plans currently
under review (see performance measure MM7 above).
(PM MM9) Cumulative percentage reduction in the average number of days during the ozone season that the ozone
standard is exceeded in non-attainment areas, weighted by population.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
19
37
FY 2009
23
47
FY 2010
26
56
FY2011
29
58
FY 2012
45
Data Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
50
FY 2014
50
Unit
Percent
Reduction
Additional Information: The baseline in 2003 is zero.
(PM N35) Limit the increase of Carbon Monoxide (CO) emissions from mobile sources compared to a 2000 baseline.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
1.18
1.18
FY 2008
1.35
1.35
FY 2009
1.52
1.52
FY 2010
1.69
1.69
FY2011
1.86
1.86
FY 2012
2.02
2.02
FY 2013
2.19
FY 2014
2.36
Unit
Tons
Emitted
Additional Information: The baseline in 2000 for Carbon Monoxide emissions from mobile sources is 79.2 million tons. The 2000 Mobile6 inventory is used as the
baseline for mobile source emissions.
(PM O33) Cumulative millions of tons of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) reduced since 2000 from mobile sources.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
1.20
1.20
FY 2008
1.37
1.37
FY 2009
1.54
1.54
FY 2010
1.71
1.71
FY2011
1.88
1.88
FY 2012
2.05
2.05
FY 2013
2.23
FY 2014
2.4
Unit
Tons
Reduced
Additional Information: The baseline in 2000 for Volatile Organic Compounds emissions from mobile sources is 7.7 million tons. The 2000 Mobile6 inventory is used as
the baseline for mobile source emissions.
(PM O39) Tons of pollutants (VOC, NOX, PM, CO) reduced per total emission reduction dollars spent.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
.011
.011
FY2011
.012
.012
FY 2012
.012
.012
FY 2013
.013
FY 2014
Unit
Tons per
Dollar
Additional Information: This measure is being phased out due to its inability to adequately assess program results. The program will continue to assess progress from
transportation programs via the outcome measures that tracks pollution reductions from mobile sources (see measures N35, O33, O34, P34 above), and beginning in FY
GOAL 1: TAKING ACTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
889
-------
Program Area
(2) Reduce Air
Toxics
(4) Reduce
Exposure to
Indoor
Pollutants
Performance
Measures and
Data
2014, the program will track performance on small, non-road engine testing (see measure O40 above).
Strategic Measure: By 2015, reduce emissions
toxicity-weighted baseline of 7.2 million tons
(PM 001) Cumulative percentage
1993 baseline.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
35
39
FY 2008
35
40
of air toxics (toxicity-weighted for cancer) to 4.2 million tons from the 1993
reduction in tons of toxicity-weighted (for cancer
FY 2009
36
40
FY 2010
36
40
FY2011
36
Data Avail
12/2013
FY 2012
37
Data Avail
12/2013
risk) emissions of air toxics from
FY 2013
42
FY 2014
42
Unit
Percent
Reduction
Additional Information: The baseline in 1993 is 7.24 million tons. The toxicity-weighted emission inventory utilizes the National Emissions Inventory (NEI) for air
toxics along with the Agency's compendium of cancer and non-cancer health risk criteria to develop a risk metric that can be tabulated on an annual basis. Air toxics
emissions data are revised every three years with intervening years (the two years after the inventory year) interpolated utilizing inventory projection models. The FY
201 1 through FY 2014 targets are based on expected estimates made with the rules and 2005 NEI inventory. They also incorporate population growth estimates, which
indirectly project more area source (small source) emissions. As EPA develops newer emission estimates based on the 20 11 inventory due in August of 20 13, the agency
will need to update these targets to reflect more current projections.
(PM 002) Cumulative percentage
1993 baseline.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
58
53
FY 2008
59
53
reduction in tons of toxicity-weighted (for non-cancer risk) emissions of air toxics from
FY 2009
59
53
FY 2010
59
53
FY2011
59
Data Avail
12/2013
FY 2012
59
Data Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
59
FY 2014
59
Unit
Percent
Reduction
Additional Information: The baseline in 1993 is 7.24 million tons. The toxicity-weighted emission inventory utilizes the National Emissions Inventory (NEI) for air
toxics along with the Agency's compendium of cancer and non-cancer health risk criteria to develop a risk metric that can be tabulated on an annual basis. Air toxics
emissions data are revised every three years with intervening years (the two years after the inventory year) interpolated utilizing inventory projection models. The FY
201 1 through FY 2014 targets are based on expected estimates made with the rules and 2005 NEI inventory. They also incorporate population growth estimates, which
indirectly project more area source (small source) emissions. As EPA develops newer emission estimates based on the 20 11 inventory due in August of 20 13, the agency
will need to update these targets to reflect more current projections.
Strategic
exposure
Measure: By 2015, the number of future premature lung cancer deaths prevented annually through lowered radon
will increase to 1,460 from the 2008 baseline of 756 future premature lung cancer deaths prevented.
(PM R50) Percentage of existing homes with an operating
of homes at or above EPA's 4pCi/L action level.
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
radon mitigation system compared to the estimated number
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
Unit
GOAL 1: TAKING ACTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
890
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
No Target
Established
10.3
11.1
11.0
11.5
12.0
12.0
12.3
12.5
12.9
13.3
Data Avail
12/2013
13.9
13.9
Percent of
Homes
Additional Information: The baseline in 2003 is 6.9 percent of homes with radon operating mitigation systems. Radon causes lung cancer, and is a threat to health
because it tends to collect in homes, sometimes to very high concentrations. As a result, radon is the largest source of exposure to naturally occurring radiation.
(PM R51) Percentage of all new single-family homes (SFH) in high radon potential areas built with radon reducing
features.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
No Target
Established
28.6
FY 2008
30.0
31.0
FY 2009
31.5
36.1
FY 2010
33.0
40.1
FY2011
34.5
38.2
FY 2012
36.0
Data Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
37.5
FY 2014
37.5
Unit
Percent of
Homes
Explanation of Results: Data Not Avail
Additional Information: The baseline in 2003 is 20.7 percent of all new single-family homes. Radon causes lung cancer, and is a threat to health because it tends to
collect in homes, sometimes to very high concentrations. As a result, radon is the largest source of exposure to naturally occurring radiation.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, the number of people taking all essential actions to reduce exposure to indoor environmental
asthma triggers will increase to 7.6 million from the 2003 baseline of 3 million. EPA will place special emphasis on children at
home and in schools, and on other disproportionately impacted populations.
(PM R16) Percentage of the public that is aware of the asthma program's media campaign.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
>20
Data Not
Avail
FY 2008
>20
Data Not
Avail
FY 2009
>20
33
FY 2010
>30
Data Not
Avail
FY2011
>30
32
FY 2012
>30
Data Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
>30
FY 2014
>30
Unit
Percent
Aware
Additional Information: The baseline in 2003 is 27%. Public awareness is measured before and after the launch of a new wave of the campaign. "Data not available"
indicates a time point that was not included in the assessment plan.
(PM R17) Additional health care professionals trained annually on the environmental management of asthma triggers.
Target
FY 2007
2,000
FY 2008
2,000
FY 2009
2,000
FY 2010
2,000
FY2011
2,000
FY 2012
3,000
FY 2013
3,000
FY 2014
3,000
Unit
Professionals
GOAL 1: TAKING ACTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
891
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and
Actual
4,582
4,558
4,614
4,153
5,600
Data
4,914
Trained
Additional Information: The baseline in 2003 is 2,360 trained health care professionals. Asthma is a serious, life-threatening respiratory disease that affects millions of
Americans. In response to the growing asthma problem, EPA created a national, multifaceted asthma education and outreach program to share information about
environmental factors that trigger asthma.
(PM R22) Estimated
guidance.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
1,100
1,346
annual number of schools establishing indoor air quality management plans consistent with EPA
FY 2008
1,100
1,614
FY 2009
1,000
1,765
FY 2010
1,000
2,448
FY2011
1,000
1,482
FY 2012
1,000
629
FY 2013
1,000
FY 2014
Unit
Schools
Explanation of Results: Reflects reduced funding at the local school level
Additional Information: The baseline in 2003 is 3,200 schools. Significant progress has been realized as a result of key program investments that drive bottom line
results. The EPA remains concerned about and committed to improving the health of America's children and the staff at the schools they attend. Targets reflect realistic
estimates of the progress that regional/state/local leadership will achieve. This program is being phased out, which reflects the inability of the program to track data on this
metric bey ondFY 201 3.
Objective 3 - Restore the Ozone Layer
radiation.
: Restore the
earth's stratospheric ozone layer and protect the public from the harmful effects of UV
Program Area
(1) Reduce
Consumption
of Ozone-
depleting
Substances
Performance Measures and Data
Strategic Measure: By 2015, U.S. consumption of hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), chemicals that deplete the Earth's
protective ozone layer, will be less than 1,520 tons per year of ozone depletion potential from the 2009 baseline of 9,900 tons
per year. By this time, as a result of worldwide reduction in ozone-depletion substances, the level of "equivalent effective
stratospheric chlorine" (EESC) in the atmosphere will have peaked at 3.185 parts per billion (ppb) of air by volume and begun
its gradual decline to less than 1.8 ppb (1980 level).
(PM SOI) Remaining US Consumption of hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), chemicals that deplete the Earth's
protective ozone layer, measured in tons of Ozone Depleting Potential (ODP).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
<9,900
6,296
FY 2008
<9,900
5,667
FY 2009
<9,900
3,414
FY 2010
<3,811
2,435
FY2011
<3,811
2,339
FY 2012
<3,700
Data Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
<3,700
FY 2014
<3,700
Unit
ODP Tons
GOAL 1: TAKING ACTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
892
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Additional Information: The baseline in 1989 for Ozone Depleting Substances consumed is 15,240 tons. The base of comparison for assessing progress 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 (OOP). 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 ODP -weighted level of HCFCs in 1989. Consumption equals production plus import minus export.
(PM S17) Total federal dollars spent per school joining the SunWise program.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
525
484
FY 2008
485
414
FY 2009
455
385
FY 2010
433
405
FY2011
433
382
FY 2012
433
Data Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
FY 2014
Unit
Dollars per
School
Additional Information: This program is being phased out, which reflects the inability of the program to track data on this metric beyond FY 2012.
Objective 4 - Reduce Unnecessary Exposure to Radiation: Minimize unnecessary releases of radiation and be prepared to minimize impacts
should unwanted releases occur.
Program Area
(1) Prepare for
Radiological
Emergencies
Performance Measures and Data
Strategic Measure: Through 2015, EPA will maintain a 90 percent level of readiness of radiation program personnel and assets
to support federal radiological emergency response and recovery operations, maintaining the 2010 baseline of 90 percent.
(PM R35) Level of readiness of radiation program personnel and assets to support federal radiological emergency
response and recovery operations.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
80
83
FY 2008
85
87
FY 2009
90
90
FY 2010
90
97
FY2011
90
97
FY 2012
90
Data Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
90
FY 2014
93
Unit
Percent
Readiness
Additional Information: The baseline in 2005 is a 50% level of readiness. The level of readiness is measured as the percentage of response team members and assets that
meet scenario-based response criteria.
(PM R36) Average time before availability of quality assured ambient radiation air monitoring data during an
emergency.
Target
FY 2007
1.3
FY 2008
1.0
FY 2009
0.8
FY 2010
0.7
FY2011
0.7
FY 2012
0.5
FY 2013
0.5
FY 2014
0.5
Unit
Davs
GOAL 1: TAKING ACTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
893
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Actual
1.3
0.8
0.8
0.5
0.5
Data Avail
12/2013
Additional Information: The baseline in 2005 is 2.5 days. The average time in availability is measured as time in days between collection and availability of data for
release by EPA during emergency operations.
(PM R37) Time to approve site changes affecting waste characterization at DOE waste generator sites to ensure safe
disposal of transuranic radioactive waste at WIPP.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
90
86
FY 2008
80
75
FY 2009
70
75
FY 2010
70
66
FY2011
70
64
FY 2012
70
Data Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
70
FY 2014
70
Unit
Days
Additional Information: The baseline in 2004 is 150 days.
GOAL 1: TAKING ACTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
894
-------
Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters
Protect and restore our waters to ensure that drinking water is safe, and that aquatic ecosystems sustain fish, plants and wildlife, and economic,
recreational, and subsistence activities.
Objective 1 - Protect Human Health: Reduce human exposure to contaminants in drinking water, fish and shellfish, and recreational waters,
including protecting source waters.
Program Area
(1) Water Safe
to Drink
Performance Measures and Data
Strategic Measure: By 2015, 90 percent of community water systems will provide drinking water that meets all applicable
health-based drinking water standards through approaches including effective treatment and source water protection. (2005
baseline:89 percent. Status as of FY 2009: 89 percent.)
(PM aa) Percent of population served by CWSs that will receive drinking water that meets all applicable health-based
drinking water standards through approaches including effective treatment and source water protection.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
94
91.5
FY 2008
90
92
FY 2009
90
92.1
FY 2010
90
92
FY2011
91
93.2
FY 2012
91
94.7
FY 2013
92
FY 2014
92
Unit
Population
Additional Information: In 2005, 89 percent of the population served by community water systems received drinking water that met applicable drinking water standards.
(PM ape) Fund utilization rate for the DWSRF.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
85
88
FY 2008
86
90
FY 2009
89
92
FY 2010
86
91.3
FY2011
89
90
FY 2012
89
90
FY 2013
89
FY 2014
89
Unit
Dollars
Additional Information: In 2005, the fund utilization rate for the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund was 85 percent.
(PM aph) Percent of community water systems that have undergone a sanitary survey within the past three years (five
years for outstanding performance or those ground water systems approved by the primacy agency to provide 4-log
treatment of viruses).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
95
92
FY 2008
95
87
FY 2009
95
88
FY 2010
95
87
FY2011
95
92
FY 2012
95
89
FY 2013
95
FY 2014
79
Unit
CWSs
Explanation of Results: Performance results are impacted by state resources and budget constraints as well as staff turnover.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
895
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Additional Information: In 2007, 92 percent of community water systems had undergone a sanitary survey. Prior to FY 2007, this measure tracked states rather than
community water systems in compliance with this regulation. Starting in FY 2014, this measure includes ground water systems in addition to surface water systems.
Ground water systems that have been approved by the primacy agency to provide 4-log treatment of viruses or have outstanding performance based on prior sanitary
surveys may have sanitary surveys conducted no less than every five years (per sec. 142.16(o)(2)(iii)). Because the universe is larger, the FY 2014 target has been adjusted
accordingly.
(PM apm) Percent of community water systems that meets all applicable health-based standards through approaches
including effective treatment and source water protection.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
89
89
FY 2008
89.5
89
FY 2009
90
89.1
FY 2010
90
89.6
FY2011
90
90.7
FY 2012
90
91
FY 2013
90
FY 2014
90
Unit
Systems
Additional Information: In 2005, 89 percent of community water systems met all applicable health-based drinking water standards.
(PM aps) Percent of Classes I, II and III salt solution mining wells that have lost mechanical integrity and a
to compliance within 180 days, thereby reducing the potential to endanger underground sources of drinkin
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
90
85
FY 2013
85
FY 2014
85
re returned
g water.
Unit
Wells
Explanation of Results: This measure was a newly reported measure for FY 2012. The target of 90% was established as an estimate of anticipated performance; however,
the measure results did not achieve the FY 2012 target in its initial year of reporting. As the measure evolves and more data is available to develop a performance trend,
the program will revisit the target and adjust as appropriate.
Additional Information: There is no fixed point that can be used as a baseline for this measure, since the activity that we are monitoring - "MI Loss" - has not yet
occurred. The universe of wells losing mechanical integrity is not static.
(PM apt) Number of Class V motor vehicle waste disposal wells (MVWDW) and large capacity cesspools (LCC)
[approximately 23,640 in FY 2010] that are closed or permitted (cumulative).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
20,840
25,225
FY 2013
25,225
FY 2014
25,225
Unit
Wells
Additional Information: FY 2012 is the first year of reporting for the measure. The baseline will be set at the FY 2012 end-of-year result.
(PM dw2) Percent of person months during which community water systems provide drinking water that meets all
applicable health-based standards.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
896
-------
Program Area
(2) Fish and
Shellfish Safe
to Eat
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
95
97
FY 2009
95
97.2
FY 2010
95
97.3
FY2011
95
97.4
FY 2012
95
97.8
FY 2013
95
FY 2014
95
Unit
Person
Months
Additional Information: In 2005, community water systems provided drinking water that met all applicable health-based drinking water standards during 95 percent of
"person months."
(PM pil) Percent of population in each of the U.S. Pacific Island Territories (served by community water systems) that
meets all applicable health-based drinking water standards, measured on a four-quarter rolling average basis.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
72
79
FY 2009
73
80
FY 2010
73
82
FY2011
75
87
FY 2012
80
87
FY 2013
82
FY 2014
84
Unit
Population
Additional Information: In 2005, 95 percent of the population in American Samoa, 10 percent in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) and 80
percent of Guam were served by CWSs that received drinking water that meets all applicable health-based standards. This measure is on a four-quarter rolling average
basis.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, 88 percent of the population in Indian Country served by community water systems will receive
drinking water that meets all applicable health-based drinking water standards. (2005 baseline:86 percent. Status as of FY
2009:81 percent.)
(PM E) Percent of the population in Indian Country served by community water systems that receive drinking water
that meets all applicable health-based drinking water standards.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
87
87
FY 2008
87
83
FY 2009
87
81.2
FY 2010
87
87.2
FY2011
87
81.2
FY 2012
87
84
FY 2013
87
FY 2014
87
Unit
Population
Explanation of Results: The performance of this measure has been impacted several ways in different regions from Arsenic, Total Coliform Rule and Ground Water Rule
violations as well as data corrections to address reporting problems.
Additional Information: In 2005, 86 percent of the population served by community water systems received drinking water that met applicable drinking water standards.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, reduce the percentage of women of childbearing age having mercury levels in blood above the
level of concern to 4.6 percent. (2002 baseline:5.7 percent of women of childbearing age have mercury blood levels above
levels of concern identified by the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES).)
(PM fsl) Percent of women of childbearing age having mercury levels in blood above the level of concern.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
897
-------
Program Area
(3) Water Safe
for Swimming
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
5.5
Data
Unavailable
FY 2009
5.2
2.8
FY 2010
5.1
Data
Unavailable
FY2011
4.9
Data
Unavailable
FY 2012
4.9
2.3
FY 2013
4.9
FY 2014
4.9
Unit
Women of
Childbearing
Age
Additional Information: Baseline is 7.8 percent based on data collected in 1999-2000. Universe is population of women of childbearing age.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, maintain the percentage of days of the beach season that coastal and Great Lakes beaches
monitored by state beach safety programs are open and safe for swimming at 95 percent. (2007 baseline:Beaches open 95
percent of the 679,589 days of the beach season (beach season days are equal to 3,647 beaches multiplied by variable number of
days of beach season at each beach). Status as of FY 2009:95 percent.)
(PM ssl) Number of waterborne disease outbreaks attributable to swimming in or other recreational contact with
coastal and Great Lakes waters measured as a 5-year average.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
2
0
FY 2009
2
0
FY 2010
2
0
FY2011
2
0
FY 2012
2
0
FY 2013
FY 2014
Unit
Outbreaks
(PM ss2) Percent of days of beach season that coastal and Great Lakes beaches monitored by state beach safety
programs are open and safe for swimming.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
92.6
95.2
FY 2008
92.6
95
FY 2009
93
95
FY 2010
95
95
FY2011
95
95
FY 2012
95
95.2
FY 2013
FY 2014
Unit
Days
Additional Information: In 2005, beaches were open 96% of the 743,036 days of the beach season (i.e., beach season days are equal to 4,025 beaches multiplied by
variable number of days of beach season at each beach).
Objective 2 - Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems: Protect the quality of rivers, lakes, streams, and wetlands on a
watershed basis, and protect urban, coastal, and ocean waters.
Program Area
(1) Improve
Performance Measures and Data
Strategic
Measure:
By
2015,
attain water quality standards for all pollutants and
impairments in
more than
3,360
water
bodies
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
898
-------
Program Area
Water Quality
on a
Watershed
Basis
Performance
Measures and
Data
identified in 2002 as not attaining standards (cumulative). (2002 universe: 39,798 water bodies identified by states and tribes as
not meeting water quality standards. Water bodies where mercury is among multiple pollutants causing impairment may be
counted toward this target when all pollutants but mercury attain standards but must be identified as still needing restoration for
mercury; 1,703 impaired water bodies are impaired by multiple pollutants, including mercury, and 6,501 are impaired by
mercury alone. Status as of FY 2009: 2,505 water bodies attained standards.)
(PM L) Number of water body segments identified by states in 2002 as
standards are now fully attained (cumulative).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
1,166
1,409
FY 2008
1,550
2,165
FY 2009
2,270
2,505
FY 2010
2,809
2,909
FY2011
3,073
3,119
not attaining standards, where water quality
FY 2012
3,324
3,527
FY 2013
3,727
FY 2014
3,927
Unit
Segments
Explanation of Results: Overall, the Regional aggregate for this measure exceeded the Budget Target. Reviewing of late lists and audits of lists of impaired waters from
individual states undertaken by several regions are factors contributing to exceeding the target. In the future, EPA anticipates the results for this measure will be lower
than in the past. Some of the challenges EPA is facing are:
o Reduced state budgets are slowing implementation activities that are necessary to improve impaired water bodies.
o Meeting standards in a single water body segment impaired by multiple pollutants is more difficult than if just one or a few pollutants are impairing the single
segment.
Many of the impairments that remain in waters identified in 2002 will require time spans of years before restoration strategies accomplish full recovery of the water body
segments.
Additional Information: 2002 baseline: 39,798 water bodies identified by states and tribes as not meeting water quality standards. Water bodies where mercury is among
multiple pollutants causing impairment may be counted toward this target when all pollutants but mercury attain standards but must be identified as still needing
restoration for mercury; 1,703 impaired water bodies are impaired by multiple pollutants, including mercury, and 6,501 are impaired by mercury alone.
(PM bpb) Fund utilization rate for the CWSRF.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
93.4
96.7
FY 2008
93.5
98
FY 2009
94.5
98
FY 2010
92
100
FY2011
94.5
98
FY 2012
94.5
98
FY 2013
94.5
FY 2014
94.5
Unit
Dollars
Additional Information: In 2002, 91 percent was used as the baseline for this measure. It was calculated using data collected annually from all 51 state CWSRF programs
(50 states and Puerto Rico).
(PM bpc) Percent of all major publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) that comply with their permitted
discharge standards.
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
wastewater
Unit
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
899
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
86
86
86
Data
Unavailable
86
86.9
86
86.7
86
Data Avail
4/2013
86
86
POTWs
Explanation of Results: The FY12 EOY data is not available at this time due to the current Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) reporting cycle. The DMR QA/QC for
the 4th quarter data will not be complete until the second quarter of FY1 3.
(PM bpf) Estimated annual reduction in millions of pounds of phosphorus from nonpoint sources to water bodies
(Section 319 funded projects only).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
4.5
7.5
FY 2008
4.5
3.5
FY 2009
4.5
3.5
FY 2010
4.5
2.6
FY2011
4.5
4.8
FY 2012
4.5
Data Avail
3/2013
FY 2013
4.5
FY 2014
4.5
Unit
Pounds
(Million)
Explanation of Results: EPA collects this information in its Grants Reporting and Tracking System (GRTS) for Section 319-funded on-the-ground implementation
projects that will reduce phosphorus loads to water bodies. States are not required to enter this information into GRTS until after one full year of project implementation,
so that field data can be collected to support the model calculations. Results are reported in GRTS by mid-February for the past 12 months. Therefore, FY 2012 results
will be available March 1,2013.
Additional Information: In 2005, there was a reduction of 558,000 Ibs of phosphorus from nonpoint sources.
(PM bpg) Estimated additional reduction in million pounds of nitrogen from nonpoint sources to water bodies (Section
319 funded projects only).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
8.5
19.1
FY 2008
8.5
11.3
FY 2009
8.5
9.1
FY 2010
8.5
9.8
FY2011
8.5
12.8
FY 2012
8.5
Data Avail
3/2013
FY 2013
9.1
FY 2014
9.1
Unit
Pounds
(Million)
Explanation of Results: EPA collects this information in its Grants Reporting and Tracking System (GRTS) for Section 319-funded on-the-ground implementation
projects that will reduce nitrogen loads to water bodies. States are not required to enter this information into GRTS until after one full year of project implementation, so
that field data can be collected to support the model calculations. Results are reported in GRTS by mid-February for the past 12 months. Therefore, FY 2012 results will
be available March 1, 2013.
Additional Information: In 2005, there was a reduction of 3.7 million Ibs of nitrogen from nonpoint sources.
(PM bph) Estimated additional reduction in thousands of tons of sediment from nonpoint sources to water bodies
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
900
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
(Section 319 funded projects only).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
700
1,200
FY 2008
700
2,100
FY 2009
700
2,300
FY 2010
700
2,100
FY2011
700
2,007
FY 2012
700
Data Avail
3/2013
FY 2013
1,100
FY 2014
1,200
Unit
Tons
(Thousand)
Explanation of Results: EPA collects this information in its Grants Reporting and Tracking System (GRTS) for Section 319-funded on-the-ground implementation
projects that will reduce sediment loads to water bodies. States are not required to enter this information into GRTS until after one full year of project implementation, so
that field data can be collected to support the model calculations. Results are reported in GRTS by mid-February for the past 12 months. Therefore, FY 2012 results will
be available March 1, 2013.
Additional Information: In 2005, there was a reduction of 1 .68 million tons of sediment from nonpoint sources.
(PM bpk) Number of TMDLs that are established by states and approved by the EPA [state TMDL] on a schedule
consistent with national policy (cumulative). [A TMDL is a technical plan for reducing pollutants in order to obtain
water quality standards. The terms "approved" and "established" refer to the completion and approval of the TMDL
itself.]
Target
Actual
FY 2007
20,232
21,685
FY 2008
28,527
30,658
FY 2009
33,540
36,487
FY 2010
39,101
38,749
FY2011
41,235
41,231
FY 2012
43,781
43,933
FY 2013
56,627
FY 2014
58,822
Unit
TMDLs
Explanation of Results: In FY2012, States developed 2,702 TMDLs. Specifically, CT developed 186 bacteria TMDLs and ME completed a state-wide impervious cover
TMDL, which accounted for 30 TMDLs. West Virginia conducts their TMDL process at the watershed scale, and in FY12 completed two watershed TMDL packages
that accounted for more than 600 TMDLs. Kansas also applies a watershed approach to TMDL development, and in FY12 completed and submitted to EPA a watershed
TMDL, which had not been anticipated. Lastly, several Los Angeles consent decree TMDLs were completed, which resulted in substantially more TMDLs than
anticipated.
Additional Information: Cumulatively, more than 43,000 state TMDLs were completed through FY 20 12. A TMDL is a technical plan for reducing pollutants in order to
attain water quality standards. The terms "approved" and "established" refer to the completion and approval of the TMDL itself.
(PM bpl) Percent of high-priority state NPDES permits that are issued in the fiscal year.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
95
112
FY 2008
95
120
FY 2009
95
147
FY 2010
95
142
FY2011
100
135
FY 2012
100
130
FY 2013
80
FY 2014
80
Unit
Permits
Explanation of Results: States have continued their efforts in coordination with the EPA Regions to maintain strong performance in the issuance of their high priority
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
901
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
permits.
When states establish their lists each year, they designate a pool of priority permits and commit to issuing a certain number of these in the fiscal year. If a State is able to
issue permits designated as priority ahead of schedule, they receive credit toward the current fiscal year target, which may result in issuing more permits than originally
targeted. This measure has been revised for FY 2013 so that results over 100% will no longer be possible.
Additional Information: Priority Permits are permits in need of reissuance that have been identified by states as environmentally or programmatically significant. The
annual universe of Priority Permits includes the number of permits selected as priority, from which a subset will be issued in the current fiscal year. In 2005, 104% of the
designated priority permits were issued in the fiscal year. Starting in FY2013, results can no longer exceed 100% issuance due to a refinement of the measure definition,
and the target was revised accordingly. The universe used to calculate percentage results changed from the number of permits committed to issuance in the current fiscal
year to the total number of permits selected as priority.
(PM bpm) Cost per water segment restored.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
615,694
512,735
FY 2008
684,200
547,676
FY 2009
708,276
570,250
FY 2010
771,000
581,281
FY2011
681,445
578,410
FY 2012
721,715
643,958
FY 2013
685,885
Additional Information: The cost per water segment restored was $1,544,998 in 2004.
FY 2014
Unit
Dollars
(PM bpn) Percent of major dischargers in Significant Noncompliance (SNC) at any time during the fiscal year.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
22.5
22.6
FY 2008
22.5
23.9
FY 2009
22.5
23.3
FY 2010
22.5
23.5
FY2011
22.5
23.2
FY 2012
22.5
Data Avail
4/2013
FY 2013
22.5
FY 2014
22.5
Unit
Dischargers
Explanation of Results: The FY 2012 EOY data is not available at this time due to the current Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) reporting cycle. The DMR QA/QC
for the 4th quarter data will not be not complete until the second quarter of FY 2013.
(PM bpp) Percent of submissions of new or revised water quality standards from states and territories that are
approved by the EPA.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
85
85.6
FY 2008
87
92.5
FY 2009
85
93.2
FY 2010
85
90.9
FY2011
85
91.8
FY 2012
85
88.9
FY 2013
87
Additional Information: In 2004, the baseline was 87.6 percent submissions approved.
FY 2014
88
Unit
Submissions
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
902
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
(PM bpr) Loading (pounds) of pollutants removed per program dollar expended.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
285
331
FY 2008
332
332
FY 2009
368
368
FY 2010
371
371
FY2011
377
377
FY 2012
385
385
FY 2013
409
FY 2014
Unit
Pounds
Additional Information: The loading (pounds) of pollutants removed per program dollar expended was 1 22 in 2004 .
(PM bps) Number of TMDLs that are established or approved by the EPA [total TMDL] on a schedule consistent with
national policy (cumulative). [A TMDL is a technical plan for reducing pollutants in order to attain water quality
standards. The terms "approved" and "established" refer to the completion and approval of the TMDL itself.]
Target
Actual
FY 2007
25,274
26,844
FY 2008
33,801
35,979
FY 2009
38,978
41,866
FY 2010
44,560
46,817
FY2011
49,375
49,663
FY 2012
52,218
52,585
FY 2013
65,293
FY 2014
67,494
Unit
TMDLs
Explanation of Results: In FY2012, States and EPA developed 2,922 TMDLs. Specifically, CT developed 1 86 bacteria TMDL and ME completed a state-wide
impervious cover TMDL, which accounted for 30 TMDLs. West Virginia conducts their TMDL process at the watershed scale, and in FY12 completed two watershed
TMDL packages that accounted for more than 600 TMDLs. Kansas also applies a watershed approach to TMDL development, and in F Y12 completed and submitted to
EPA a watershed TMDL, which had not been anticipated. Lastly, several Los Angeles consent decree TMDLs were completed, which resulted in substantially more
TMDLs than anticipated.
Additional Information: Cumulatively, EPA and states completed more than 52,000 TMDLs through FY 2012. A TMDL is a technical plan for reducing pollutants in
order to attain water quality standards. The terms "approved" and "established" refer to the completion and approval of the TMDL itself.
(PM bpv) Percent of high-priority EPA and state NPDES permits (including tribal) that are issued in the fiscal year.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
95
104
FY 2008
95
119
FY 2009
95
144
FY 2010
95
138
FY2011
100
132
FY 2012
100
128
FY 2013
80
FY 2014
80
Unit
Permits
Explanation of Results: States and EPA have continued their efforts to maintain strong performance in the issuance of their high priority permits. When states and EPA
Regions establish their lists each year, they designate a pool of priority permits and commit to issuing a certain number of these in the fiscal year. If a State or EPA
Region is able to issue permits designated as priority ahead of schedule, they receive credit toward the current fiscal year target, which may result in issuing more permits
than originally targeted. This measure has been revised for FY13 so that results over 100% will no longer be possible.
Additional Information: Priority Permits are permits in need of reissuance that have been identified by states or EPA Regions as environmentally or programmatically
significant. The annual universe of Priority Permits includes the number of permits selected as priority, from which a subset will be issued in the current fiscal year. In
2005, 104% of the designated priority permits were issued in the fiscal year. Starting in FY2013, results can no longer exceed 100% issuance due to a refinement of the
measure definition, and the target was revised accordingly. The universe used to calculate percentage results changed from the number of permits committed to issuance in
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
903
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
the current fiscal year to the total number of permits selected as priority.
(PM bpw) Percent of states and territories that, within the preceding 3-year period, submitted new or revised water
quality criteria acceptable to the EPA that reflect new scientific information from the EPA or sources not considered in
previous standards.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
67
66.1
FY 2008
68
62.5
FY 2009
68
62.5
FY 2010
66
67.9
FY2011
64.3
69.6
FY 2012
64.3
69.6
FY 2013
64.3
FY 2014
66.1
Unit
States and
Territories
Additional Information: In 2004, the baseline was 70% of states and territories submitting acceptable water quality criteria reflecting new scientific information.
(PM pi2) Percent of time that sewage treatment plants in the U.S. Pacific Island Territories comply with permit limits
for biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and total suspended solids (TSS).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
67
67
FY 2009
62
65
FY 2010
62
52
FY2011
63
50
FY 2012
64
64
FY 2013
FY 2014
Unit
Time
Additional Information: The sewage treatment plants in the Pacific Island Territories complied 64% of the time with BOD and TSS permit limits.
(PM wq2) Remove the specific causes of water body impairment identified by states in 2002 (cumulative).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
4,607
6,723
FY 2009
6,891
7,530
FY 2010
8,512
8,446
FY2011
9,016
9,527
FY 2012
10,161
11,134
FY 2013
11,634
FY 2014
12,134
Unit
Causes
Additional Information: In 2002, an estimate of 69,677 specific causes of water body impairments were identified by states.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, improve water quality conditions in 330 impaired watersheds nationwide using the watershed
approach (cumulative). (2002 baseline: Zero watersheds improved of an estimated 4,800 impaired watersheds of focus having
one or more water bodies impaired. The watershed boundaries for this measure are those established at the "12-digit" scale by
the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Watersheds at this scale average 22 square miles in size. "Improved" means that one or
more of the impairment causes identified in 2002 are removed for at least 40 percent of the impaired water bodies or impaired
miles/acres or there is significant watershed- wide improvement (as demonstrated by valid scientific information) in one or more
water quality parameters associated with the impairments. Status as of FY 2009: 104 improved watersheds.)
(PM uwl) Number of urban water projects initiated addressing water quality issues in the community.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
904
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
3
46
FY 2013
10
FY 2014
10
Unit
Projects
Explanation of Results: EPA significantly exceeded the FY 2012 target because funds were used to award small grants (instead of larger grants) to support local water
quality improvements. Future targets have been increased to reflect this approach and anticipated funding.
Additional Information: This measure tracks progress in grants that help communities access, improve, and benefit from their urban waters and surrounding land. Projects
addressing water quality will be tracked through grantee reporting and can include the following activities (as authorized under CWA Section 104(b)(3)): planning,
outreach, training, studies, monitoring, and demonstration of innovative approaches to manage water quality. The FY13 target has increased because funds will be used to
award small grants (instead of larger grants) to support local water quality improvements. The period of performance for these grants is the standard 2-3 year duration
reflecting the time required for stakeholder engagement and project planning and execution. FY1 1 & FY12 projects were awarded together in FY12 for program
efficiency and to allow time to adapt the program to a small grants approach. Projects initiated in FY12 are not expected to be completed in FY1 3 & FY14. Project
completions will be tracked in FY15.
(PM uw2) Number of urban water projects completed addressing water quality issues in the community.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
0
0
FY 2013
FY 2014
Unit
Projects
Additional Information: As this is a new measure, it is not anticipated that any projects will be completed in F Y 20 1 3 .
(PM wq3) Improve water quality conditions in impaired watersheds nationwide using the watershed approach
(cumulative).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
40
60
FY 2009
102
104
FY 2010
141
168
FY2011
208
271
FY 2012
312
332
FY 2013
370
FY 2014
408
Unit
Watersheds
Explanation of Results: In FY2012, the Regional aggregate for this measure exceeded the Budget Target. The majority of the increase is due to improvement within the
Tualatin watershed in OR. In the future EPA anticipates the results for this measure will be steady or lower.
Additional Information: In 2002, there were 0 watersheds improved of an estimated 4,800 impaired watershed of focus having 1 or more water bodies impaired. The
watershed boundaries for this measure are those established at the "12-digit" scale by the U.S. Geological Survey. Watersheds at this scale average 22 square miles in size.
"Improved" means that that one or more of the impairment causes identified in 2002 are removed for at least 40 percent of the impaired water bodies or impaired
miles/acres, or there is significant watershed- wide improvement, as demonstrated by valid scientific information, in one or more water quality parameters associated with
the impairments.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, in coordination with other federal agencies, provide access to basic sanitation for 67,900
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
905
-------
Program Area
(2) Improve
Coastal and
Ocean Waters
Performance Measures and Data
American Indian and Alaska Native homes. (FY 2009 baseline: 43,600 homes. Universe: 360,000 homes.)
(PM Opb) Percent of serviceable rural Alaska homes with access to drinking water supply and wastewater disposal.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
92
92
FY 2008
94
91
FY 2009
96
91
FY 2010
98
92
FY2011
92
92
FY 2012
93
Data Avail
8/2013
FY 2013
93
FY 2014
93.5
Unit
Homes
Explanation of Results: End of Year data should be available in the summer each year. Results are only measureable after the yearly count.
Additional Information: In 2003, 77 percent of serviceable rural Alaska homes had access to drinking water supply and wastewater disposal. The manner in which this
number is calculated is scheduled to change in 2013 as the State of Alaska moves from an annual housing survey count to a GIS-based home mapping system.
(PM Opd) Percent of project federal funds expended on time within the anticipated project construction schedule set
forth in the Management Control Policy.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
94
90.5
FY 2010
94.5
85
FY2011
95
92
FY 2012
95.5
84.2
FY 2013
95
FY 2014
95
Unit
Dollars
Explanation of Results: The target short fall is attributable to one, exceptionally large project that is 91% complete. The project was awarded 5 years ago when the ANV
program was funded at a level 150% greater than inFY12. It is anticipated that the remaining funds for this project will be drawn down in FY 201 3.
Additional Information: A baseline had been setin2008of93.5 percent.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, improve regional coastal aquatic ecosystem health, as measured on the "Good/Fair/Poor" scale of
the National Coastal Condition Report. (FY 2009 baseline: National rating of "Fair" or 2.8, where the rating is based on a 4-
point system ranging from 1 to 5, in which "1" is "Poor" and "5" is "Good" using the National Coastal Condition Report
indicators for water and sediment, coastal habitat, benthic index, and fish contamination.)
(PM sf3) At least seventy-five percent of the monitored stations in the near shore and coastal waters of the Florida Keys
National Marine Sanctuary will maintain Chlorophyll a(CHLA) levels at less than or equal to 0.35 ug 1-1 and light
clarity (Kd) levels at less than or equal to 0.20 m-1.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
75
85.4
FY 2012
75
CHLA: 70.9;
KD: 72.5
FY 2013
75
FY 2014
75
Unit
Stations
Explanation of Results: FY 201 1 results should have been reported as CHLA: 75%; KD: 85.4%. There are two parts of this measure and both must reach the target
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
906
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and
Data
percentage (75%) to be considered met.
In FY 2012, the parameters chlorophyll a (CHLA) and light attenuation (KD) failed to meet the 75% target. This is the first failure to meet this measure since the
beginning of this reporting requirement in 2006. The EPA was not able to determine why there was a decline in the water quality. The Water Quality Protection Program
will continue future monitoring to discern if this is a one-time event or the start of emerging trend.
Additional Information: In 2005, total water quality was at chl< 0.2 ug/1, light attenuation < 0.13/meter.
(PM sf4) At least seventy-five percent of the monitored stations in the near shore and coastal waters of the Florida Keys
National Marine Sanctuary will maintain dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN) levels at less than or equal to 0.75 uM and
total phosphorus (TP) levels at less than or equal to 0.25 uM.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
75
73.6
FY 2012
75
DIN: 81;TP:
89.5
FY 2013
75
FY 2014
75
Unit
Stations
Explanation of Results: FY 201 1 results should have been reported as DIN: 84.3%; KD: 73.6%. There are two parts of this measure and both must reach the target
percentage (75%) to be considered met.
Additional Information: The baseline for DIN is <0.75 uM (76.3 percent); TP < 0.25 uM (89.9 percent).
(PM sf5) Improve the water quality of the Everglades ecosystem as measured by total phosphorus, including meeting the
10 ppb total phosphorus criterion throughout the Everglades Protection Area marsh and the effluent limits for
discharges from stormwater treatment areas.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
Maintain
Not
Maintained
FY 2009
Maintain
Not
Maintained
FY 2010
Maintain
Not
Maintained
FY2011
Maintain
Not
Maintained
FY 2012
Maintain
Not
Maintained
FY 2013
Maintain
FY 2014
Maintain P
Baseline
Unit
Parts/Billion
Explanation of Results: Measure not met for FY12. The Water Year 2012 annual geometric mean total phosphorus (TP) concentration throughout the Everglades
Protection Area did not meet the 10 ppb water quality criterion in the impacted portions of the Refuge. Therefore this performance measure was not met. Inflow
phosphorus concentrations to the Everglades continue to exceed the 10 ppb criterion, in spite of significant progress. However, these inflow concentrations have improved
over the last 5 years.
Additional Information: In 2005, the average annual geometric mean phosphorus concentrations were 5 ppb in the Everglades National Park, 10 ppb in Water
Conservation 3A, 1 3 ppb in the Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge, and 1 8 ppb in Water Conservation Area 2A; annual average flow- weighted from total phosphorus
discharges from Stormwater Treatment Areas ranged from 1 3 ppb for area 3/4 and 98 ppb for area 1 W. Effluent limits will be established for all discharges, including
Stormwater Treatment Areas.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
907
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Strategic Measure: By 2015, 95 percent of active dredged material ocean dumping sites, as determined by the 3-year average,
will have achieved environmentally acceptable conditions (as reflected in each site's management plan and measured through
onsite monitoring programs). (2009 baseline: 99 percent. FY 2009 universe is 65.) (Due to variability in the universe of sites,
results vary from year to year (e.g., between 85 percent and 99 percent). While this much variability is not expected every year,
the results are expected to have some change each year.)
(PM co5) Percent of active dredged material ocean dumping sites that will have achieved environmentally acceptable
conditions (as reflected in each site's management plan).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
95
99
FY 2009
98
99
FY 2010
98
90.1
FY2011
98
93
FY 2012
95
97
FY 2013
95
FY 2014
95
Unit
Sites
Additional Information: The baseline was calculated in 2005 at 60 sites.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, working with partners, protect or restore an additional (i.e., measuring from 2009 forward)
600,000 acres of habitat within the study areas for the 28 estuaries that are part of the National Estuary Program. (2009
baseline: 900,956 acres of habitat protected or restored, cumulative from 2002-2009. In FY 2009, 125,437 acres were protected
or restored.)
(PM 202) Acres protected or restored in National Estuary Program study areas.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
50,000
102,462.9
FY 2008
50,000
83,490
FY 2009
100,000
125,410
FY 2010
100,000
89,985
FY2011
100,000
62,213
FY 2012
100,000
114,575
FY 2013
100,000
FY 2014
100,000
Unit
Acres
Explanation of Results: Target was exceeded due to the completion of several large projects. Also, it is often difficult to predict the completion date of protection and
restoration projects because of the many factors, or steps, required for each project such coordinating with numerous partners, negotiating with landowners, obtaining all
the funding from multiple sources, having the necessary permits approved, and weather variability.
Additional Information: 2012 Baseline: 1,167,729 acres of habitat protected or restored; cumulative from 2002-2012.
(3) Increase
Wetlands
Strategic Measure: By 2015, working with partners, achieve a net increase of wetlands nationwide, with additional focus on
coastal wetlands, and biological and functional measures and assessment of wetland condition. (2004 baseline: 32,000 acres
annual net national wetland gain.)
(PM 4E) In partnership with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, states, and tribes, achieve no net loss of wetlands each
year under the Clean Water Act Section 404 regulatory program.
FY2007 FY2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014
Unit
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
908
-------
Program Area
(4) Improve
the Health of
the Great
Lakes
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
No Net Loss
Data
Unavailable
No Net Loss
Data
Unavailable
No Net Loss
No Net Loss
No Net Loss
No Net Loss
No Net Loss
No Net Loss
No Net Loss
No Net Loss
No Net Loss
No Net Loss
Acres
Additional Information: EPA receives data for this measure from the Army Corps of Engineers (ACE). ACE recently finalized its database and was able to collect actual
data for the first time in FY 2009.
(PM 4G) Number of acres restored and improved under the 5-Star, NEP, 319, and great water body programs
(cumulative).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
75,000
82,875
FY 2009
88,000
103,507
FY 2010
110,000
130,000
FY2011
150,000
154,000
FY 2012
170,000
180,000
FY 2013
190,000
FY 2014
200,000
Unit
Acres
Additional Information: This measure describes the wetland acres restored through only EPA programs. Information on the national status of wetland gains and losses
regardless of the cause is provided every five years by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). The most recent report (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Status and
Trends of Wetlands in the Conterminous United States 2004 to 2009: http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Status-And-Trends-2009/index.html) noted an annual net loss of
13,800 acres.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, prevent water pollution and protect aquatic systems so that the overall ecosystem health of the
Great Lakes is at least 24.7 points on a 40-point scale. (2009 baseline: Great Lakes rating of 22.5 (expected) on the 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".)
(PM 433) Improve the overall ecosystem health of the Great Lakes by preventing water pollution and protecting aquatic
systems (using a 40-point scale).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
21
22.7
FY 2008
21
23.7
FY 2009
No Target
Established
FY 2010
No Target
Established
FY2011
23.4
21.9
FY 2012
21.9
23.9
FY 2013
23.4
FY 2014
23.4
Unit
Point on a
40-point
scale
Additional Information: Results from this measure are achieved through GLPJ funding as well as other non-GLPJ federal and/or state funding. The ecosystem health
index for the Great Lakes in 2002 was 20. Index value for 2010 = 22.7. This was previously a long-term measure, so no data is included for FY 2009 or FY 2010. There is
insufficient information to predict increases or decreases to the underlying components of the Index; consequently, no change is proposed in the target from FY 2013 to
FY2014.
(PM 620) Cumulative percentage decline for the long-term trend in concentrations of PCBs in whole lake trout and
walleye samples.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
909
-------
Target
Actual
FY 2007
5
6
FY 2008
5
6
FY 2009
5
6
FY 2010
10
43
FY2011
37
44
FY 2012
40
42.8
FY 2013
43
FY 2014
46
Unit
Percent
Decline
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Additional Information: Results from this measure are achieved through GLRI funding as well as other non-GLRI federal and/or state funding. On average, total PCB
concentrations in whole Great Lakes top predator fish have recently declined 5 percent annually - average concentrations at Lake sites from 2002 were: L Superior-9ug/g;
L Michigan- 1.6ug/g; L Huron- .8ug/g L Erie- 1.8ug/g; and L Ontario- 1.2ug/g.
(PM 625) Number of Beneficial Use Impairments removed within Areas of Concern (cumulative).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
16
11
FY 2009
21
12
FY 2010
20
12
FY2011
26
26
FY 2012
33
33
FY 2013
41
FY 2014
46
Unit
BUIs
Removed
Additional Information: Results from this measure are achieved through GLRI funding as well as other non-GLRI federal and/or state funding. Under the GLRI, EPA
collaborated extensively with state and federal partners to conduct projects supporting the removal of the following beneficial use impairments in FY 2012: 'Restrictions
on Drinking Water' BUI at Grand Calumet River AOC (5/5); 'Aesthetics' BUI at Kalamazoo River AOC (5/15), River Raisin AOC (5/15), and St. Clair River AOC (7/2);
'Eutrophication' BUI at White Lake AOC (4/24); Added Costs to Agriculture or Industry' BUI at St. Clair River AOC (6/5); 'Degradation of Benthos' BUI at White Lake
AOC (6/5).
(PM 626) Number of Areas of Concern in the Great Lakes where all management actions necessary for delisting have
been implemented (cumulative).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
l
2
FY 2012
3
2
FY 2013
4
FY 2014
5
Unit
AOCs
Explanation of Results: The two where all management actions necessary for delisting have been implemented are: Oswego River/Harbor AOC (baseline) and Presque
Isle Bay AOC (FY 2011).
All management actions have since been completed at the White Lake AOC in December 2012 and at the Sheboygan River AOC in January 2013.
The Presque Isle Bay AOC was formally delisted in February, 2013.
Additional Information: Universe of 31; baseline of 1. Results from this measure are achieved through GLRI funding as well as other non-GLRI federal and/or state
funding.
(PM 627) Number of nonnative species newly detected in the Great Lakes ecosystem.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
910
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
1.0
0.83
FY 2012
0.8
0.77
FY 2013
0.8
FY 2014
0.8
Unit
Species
Explanation of Results: During the ten-year period prior to the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (2000-2009), thirteen new invasive species were believed to be
discovered within the Great Lakes. This is a baseline rate of invasion of 1 .3 species per year. NOAA scientists have since reclassified the detection dates of three species
based on a reassessment and categorization of available data. This alters the baseline to 1.0 species per year (10 species from 2000-2009). The FY 2013 and 2014 target of
0.8 is based on this new baseline of 1 .0 species per year. This target also assumes the same rate of detection (one species over the five years of the Action Plan) as the
original targets.
Additional Information: During the ten-year period prior to the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (2000-2009), thirteen new invasive species were believed to be
discovered within the Great Lakes. This is a baseline rate of invasion of 1 .3 species per year. NOAA scientists have since reclassified the detection dates of three species
based on a reassessment and categorization of available data. This alters the baseline to 1.0 species per year (10 species from 2000-2009). The FY 2013 and FY 2014
target of 0.8 is based on this new baseline of 1 .0 species per year. This target also assumes the same rate of detection (one species over the five years of the Action Plan) as
the original targets. Results from this measure are achieved through GLRI funding as well as other non-GLRI federal and/or state funding.
(PM 628) Acres managed for populations of invasive species controlled to a target level (cumulative).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
1,500
13,045
FY 2012
15,500
31,474
FY 2013
34,000
FY 2014
36,000
Unit
Acres
Explanation of Results: This result is higher than anticipated. The unprecedented level of funding for invasive species work capitalized on a backlo g of proj ects and
appears to have achieved economies of scale due to significantly larger projects becoming fully operational this field season. Additionally, management efforts that
involved comprehensive surveillance of large acreages with targeted treatment follow-up came to fruition this field season.
Additional Information: There were zero acres managed for populations of invasive species controlled to a target level in 2005.
(PM 629) Number of multi-agency rapid response plans established, mock exercises to practice responses carried out
under those plans, and/or actual response actions (cumulative).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
4
8
FY 2012
12
23
FY 2013
26
FY 2014
29
Unit
Number
Responses/Pi
ans
Additional Information: There were zero multi-agency rapid response plans established, mock exercises to practice responses carried out under those plans, and/or actual
response actions in 2005.
(PM 630) Five-year average annual loadings of soluble reactive phosphorus (metric tons per year) from tributaries
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
911
-------
Program Area
Performance
Measures and
Data
draining targeted watersheds.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
0
Data
Unavailable
FY 2012
0.5
Data
Unavailable
FY 2013
1.0
FY 2014
1.0
Unit
Metric
Tons/Year
Explanation of Results: Data do not yet exist to determine whether targets are being met, but are being developed now. Under the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative,
improved phosphorus data are now being collected in all five targeted watersheds (Fox, Saginaw, Maumee, St. Louis, and Genessee) to better estimate annual average
loadings of soluble reactive phosphorus (SRP). However, the current measure tracks changes in the five-year average annual loadings of SRP, and sufficient historical
data does not currently exist to allow for calculation of 5 -year averages through the 2010 water year for the Saginaw, Genessee, and St. Louis Rivers. Some historical
data reflecting five years or more of sampling does exist for the Fox and Maumee Rivers, allowing for loads to be estimated. While data is available, the assessment of
these 5-year average annual loadings illustrate the inherent problems with tracking changes to SRP loadings from tributaries, given the yearly variability of rainfall and
other climatic factors; therefore, results of this measure may not indicate a trend from year to year. For example, when comparing the 2003-2007 baseline from the
Maumee River to the 5-year rolling averages from 2005-2009 and 2006-2010, SRP loadings changed from a 3.8% increase to a 3.4% reduction. Similarly, when
comparing the 2003-2007 baseline from the Fox River to the 5-year rolling averages from 2004-2008 and 2005-2009, SRP loadings changed from a 3.6% increase to a
15. 8% reduction.
Because of the reasons identified above, it may be appropriate to track future phosphorus changes using other methods. A revised measure is currently being developed.
Because of the long time lag between implementation of management practices in subwatersheds and ecosystem change in principal watersheds, the revised measure will
likely emphasize outputs achieved in the priority subwatersheds.
Additional Information: This measure is being reported in percent reductions of five-year average annual loadings of soluble reactive phosphorus (metric tons per year).
The existing measure cannot provide technically sound and statistically valid results sufficient to provide long-term trend information. There is insufficient information to
predict changes to the target; consequently, no change is proposed in the target from FY 2013 to FY 2014. The program proposes to develop an output-oriented
replacement for this measure as part of a new GLRI Action Plan. Results from this measure are achieved through GLRI funding as well as other non-GLRI federal and/or
state funding.
(PM 632) Acres in Great Lakes watershed with USDA conservation practices implemented to reduce erosion, nutrients,
and/or pesticide loading.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
2
62
FY 2012
8
70
FY 2013
20
FY 2014
30
Unit
Acres
Explanation of Results: In FY 2012, 279,706 acres in the Great Lakes watershed were put into USDA conservation practices to reduce erosion, nutrients and/or pesticide
loadings under Farm Bill Programs. This represents a 70% increase over the baseline of 165,000 acres (based on FY 2008 data). The significant increase in FY 2012 is a
combined result of greater funding (base USDA programs and GLRI) and increased participation in NRCS programs. It is important to note that the acres tracked in this
measure are not cumulative, rather, this measure tracks new conservation practices implemented in a given fiscal year. Therefore, the percent increase will vary
considerably from year to year due to funding, total acres available for conservation, and the difficulty of implementing conservation practices.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
912
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Additional Information: The baseline is 165,000 acres in the Great Lakes watershed with USDA conservation practices implemented to reduce erosion, nutrients, and/or
pesticide loading. The number reported is the percent increase over the baseline of 165,000 acres. Results from this measure are achieved through GLRI funding as well as
other non-GLRI federal and/or state funding.
(PM 633) Percent of populations of native aquatic non-threatened and non-endangered species self-sustaining in the wild
(cumulative).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
33%; 48/147
31%; 46/147
FY 2012
33%; 48/147
33%; 48/147
FY 2013
34%; 50/147
FY 2014
35%; 52/147
Unit
Species
Additional Information: In 2009, 27 percent of populations of native aquatic non-threatened and non-endangered species were self-sustaining in the wild. Results from
this measure are achieved through GLRI funding as well as other non-GLRI federal and/or state funding.
(PM 634) Number of acres of wetlands and wetland-associated uplands protected, restored and enhanced (cumulative).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
5,000
9,624
FY 2012
11,000
65,639
FY 2013
68,000
FY 2014
70,000
Unit
Acres
Explanation of Results: EPA collaborated with and funded Bureau of Indian Affairs, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service, the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to meet this measure. Acreage was protected, restored, or enhanced across the
Great Lakes basin. Some of the most significant completions received funding from BIA for restoring wild rice and other cultural wetland resources across the basin.
This result is higher than anticipated. The unprecedented level of funding capitalized on a backlog of proj ects and appears to have achieved economies of scale due to
significantly larger projects.
Additional Information: There were zero acres of wetlands and wetland-associated uplands protected, restored and enhanced in 2005 through GLRI.
(PM 635) Number of acres of coastal, upland, and island habitats protected, restored and enhanced (cumulative).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
15,000
12,103
FY 2012
15,000
28,034
FY 2013
33,000
FY 2014
38,000
Unit
Acres
Additional Information: There were zero acres of coastal, upland, and island habitats protected, restored and enhanced in 2005.
(PM 636) Number of species delisted due to recovery.
Target
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
0
FY 2012
l
FY 2013
2
FY 2014
2
Unit
Soecies
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
913
-------
Program Area
(5) Improve
the Health of
the
Performance Measures and Data
Actual
1
1
Additional Information: There were zero species delisted due to recovery in 2005. Achieving the FY2013 and FY2014 targets is primarily dependent on controlling a
recently discovered pest (a weevil, Larinus planus) which feeds on the seeds of the Pitcher's Thistle. Results from this measure are achieved through GLRI funding as well
as other non-GLRI federal and/or state funding.
(PM 637) Percent of days of the beach season that the Great Lakes beaches monitored by state beach safety programs
are open and safe for swimming.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
90
93.5
FY 2013
90
FY 2014
Unit
Days
Additional Information: The measure will be deleted for FY 2014 due to the lack of Beach Act funding that would be necessary to report compatible data. Results from
this measure are achieved through GLRI funding as well as other non-GLRI federal and/or state funding.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, remediate a cumulative total of 10.2 million cubic yards of contaminated sediment in the Great
Lakes. (2009 baseline: Of the 46.5 million cubic yards once estimated to need remediation in the Great Lakes, 6.0 million cubic
yards of contaminated sediments have been remediated from 1997 through 2008.)
(PM 606) Cubic yards of contaminated sediment remediated (cumulative from 1997) in the Great Lakes.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
4.5
4.5
FY 2008
5.0
5.5
FY 2009
5.9
6.0
FY 2010
6.3
7.3
FY2011
8
8.4
FY 2012
9.1
9.7
FY 2013
10.3
FY 2014
ll
Unit
Cubic Yards
(Million)
Additional Information: 9.7 million cubic yards of contaminated sediments were remediated from 1997 through 201 1 of the 46.5 million requiring remediation. Results
from this measure are achieved through GLRI funding as well as other non-GLRI federal and/or state funding.
(PM 623) Cost per cubic yard of contaminated sediments remediated (cumulative).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
200
122
FY 2010
200
125
FY2011
200
144
FY 2012
200
131
FY 2013
200
FY 2014
200
Unit
Dollars/Cubi
cYard
Additional Information: In 2006, the cost per cubic yard of contaminated sediments remediated was $115.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, achieve 50 percent (92,500 acres) of the 185,000 acres of submerged aquatic vegetation
necessary to achieve Chesapeake Bay water quality standards. (2008 baseline: 35 percent, 64,912 acres.)
(PM 233) Total nitrogen reduction practices implementation achieved as a result of agricultural best management
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
914
-------
Program Area
Chesapeake
Bay Ecosystem
Performance Measures and Data
practice implementation per million dollars to implement agricultural BMPs.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
47,031
43,529
FY 2008
48,134
45,533
FY 2009
49,237
49,660
FY 2010
49,237
49,660
FY2011
49,237
Data
Unavailable
FY 2012
49,660
Data
Unavailable
FY 2013
FY 2014
Unit
Pounds/Doll
ars
(Millions)
Explanation of Results: The measure is not reportable because of changes to the watershed model to support the new Chesapeake Bay TMDL.
Additional Information: The 2001 baseline is 43,289. This measure was replaced by PM 234 in FY 2013.
(PM cb6) Percent of goal achieved for implementing nitrogen reduction actions to achieve the final TMDL allocations,
as measured through the phase 5.3 watershed model.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
l
8
FY 2012
15
21
FY 2013
22.5
FY 2014
30
Unit
Percent Goal
Achieved
Additional Information: The FY 2010 baseline is 0 percent. The universe is 100 percent goal achievement by December 31, 2025 (FY 2026).
(PM cb7) Percent of goal achieved for implementing phosphorus reduction actions to achieve final TMDL allocations, as
measured through the phase 5.3 watershed model.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
l
l
FY 2012
15
19
FY 2013
22.5
FY 2014
30
Unit
Percent Goal
Achieved
Additional Information: The FY 2010 baseline is 0 percent. The universe is 100 percent goal achievement by December 31, 2025 (FY 2026).
(PM cb8) Percent of goal achieved for implementing sediment reduction actions to achieve final TMDL allocations, as
measured through the phase 5.3 watershed model.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
l
ll
FY 2012
15
30
FY 2013
22.5
FY 2014
30
Unit
Percent Goal
Achieved
Additional Information: The FY 2010 baseline is 0 percent. The universe is 100 percent goal achievement by December 31, 2025 (FY 2026).
(PM 234) Reduce per capita nitrogen loads (pounds per person per year) to levels necessary to achieve Chesapeake Bay
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
915
-------
Program Area
(6) Restore
and Protect
the Gulf of
Mexico
Performance Measures and Data
Total Maximum Daily Load allocations.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
15.17
FY 2014
15
Unit
Pounds/Pers
on/Year
Additional Information: FY 1986 baseline is 27 pounds of nitrogen/person/year. Universe is 1 1 pounds of nitrogen/person/year by December 31, 2025 (FY 2026). This
measure replaced PM 233 starting in F Y 20 1 3 .
Strategic Measure: By 2015, reduce releases of nutrients throughout the Mississippi River Basin to reduce the size of the
hypoxic zone in the Gulf of Mexico to less than 5,000 km2, as measured by the 5-year running average of the size of the zone.
(Baseline: 2005-2009 running average size is 15,670 km2.)
(PM 22b) Improve the overall health of coastal waters of the Gulf of Mexico on the Good/Fair/Poor scale of the National
Coastal Condition Report.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
2.4
2.4
FY 2008
2.5
2.2
FY 2009
2.5
2.2
FY 2010
2.5
2.4
FY2011
2.5
2.4
FY 2012
2.4
2.4
FY 2013
2.4
FY 2014
2.4
Unit
Scale
Additional Information: In 2008, the Gulf of Mexico rating of Fair/Poor was 2. 2, where the rating is based on a 5 -point system in which 1 is Poor and 5 is Good and is
expressed as an aerially weighted mean of regional scores using the National Coastal Condition Report II indicators: water quality index, sediment quality index, benthic
index, coastal habitat index, and fish tissue contaminants.
(PM xgl) Restore water and habitat quality to meet water quality standards in impaired segments in 13 priority coastal
areas (cumulative starting in FY 2007).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
64
131
FY 2009
96
131
FY 2010
96
170
FY2011
202
286
FY 2012
320
316
FY 2013
360
FY 2014
360
Unit
Impaired
Segments
Explanation of Results: Currently the Gulf of Mexico Program Office (GMPO) is funding 30 active projects from previous Requests for Proposals (RFPs) (going back to
2009). Some of these projects are funded through annual increments, and for some projects the work cannot be completed until all the increments are received by the
awardees. In response to the 201 1 RFP, the GMPO received 98 proposals. However, the GMPO made the decision to make no awards on this RFP but instead use our
remaining funds to fully fund all increments of previous awards that require the funds to complete the work of the project. Therefore there were no new projects that the
GMPO awarded in FY 20 1 2 that would aid in the removal of segments from the impaired water body list and reach our intended goal of 320 . We fully expect that through
our 201 3 RFP process, we will meet our national goals.
Additional Information: In 2008, the Gulf of Mexico coastal wetlands habitats included 3,769,370 acres.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
916
-------
Program Area
(7) Restore
and Protect
the Long
Island Sound
Performance
Measures and
Data
(PM xg2) Restore, enhance, or protect a cumulative number of acres of important coastal and marine habitats.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
18,200
25,215
FY 2009
26,000
29,344
FY 2010
27,500
29,552
FY2011
30,000
30,052
FY 2012
30,600
30,248
FY 2013
30,600
FY 2014
30,600
Unit
Acres
Explanation of Results: Currently the Gulf of Mexico Program Office (GMPO) is funding 30 active projects from previous Requests for Proposals (RFPs) (going back to
2009). Some of these projects are funded through annual increments, and for some projects the work cannot be completed until all the increments are received by the
awardees. In response to the 201 1 RFP, the GMPO received 98 proposals. However, the GMPO made the decision to make no awards on this RFP but instead use our
remaining funds to fully fund all increments of previous awards that require the funds to complete the work of the project. Therefore there were no new projects that the
GMPO awarded in 2012 that would aid in protection, restoration or enhancement of habitat and thus increase our acreage numbers. We fully expect that through our 2013
RFP process, the GMPO will meet our national goals.
Additional Information: In 2008, 25,215 acres were restored, enhanced, or protected in the Gulf of Mexico.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, reduce the maximum area of hypoxia in Long Island Sound by 15 percent from the pre-TMDL
average of 208 square miles as measured by the 5-year running average size of the zone. (Baseline: Pre-total maximum daily
load (TMDL) average conditions based on 1987-1999 data is 208 square miles. Post-TMDL includes years 2000-2014.
Universe: The total surface area of Long Island Sound is approximately 1,268 square miles; the potential for the maximum area
of hypoxia would be 1,268 square miles.)
(PM H5) Percent of goal achieved in reducing trade-equalized (TE) point source nitrogen discharges to Long Island
Sound from the 1999 baseline of 59,146 TE Ibs/day.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
52
70
FY2011
72
69
FY 2012
74
83.3
FY 2013
76
FY 2014
78
Unit
TE
Pounds/Day
Additional Information: The 2000 TMDL baseline is 59,146 Trade -Equalized (TE) pounds/day. The 2014 TMDL target is 22,774 TE pounds/day. The Long Island
Sound Nitrogen Total Maximum Daily Load is an enforceable document with a 1 5-year timetable. There are no annual targets in the TMDL. The 'annual targets' in the
strategic plan are for presentation purposes only and are estimates based on the 15 year total nitrogen reduction target.
(PM H8)
Target
Actual
Restore, protect or enhance acres of
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
coastal habitat from the 2010 baseline of 2,975 acres.
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
218
537
FY 2013
420
FY 2014
410
Unit
Acres
Explanation of Results: More habitat restoration [and riverine corridor] projects were completed in 2012 because Hurricane Irene preempted work on many of these
projects in August 201 1 . Resources were diverted to storm cleanup and recovery.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
917
-------
Program Area
(8) Restore
and Protect
the Puget
Sound Basin
Performance
Measures and
Data
Additional Information: The 2010 baseline is 2,975 acres. The long-term goal of this measure was significantly exceeded in FY 2010. EPA revised this measure in FY
2012 to measure acres instead of percent of goal achieved. EPA establishes annual targets with partners to measure annual progress. Out-year estimates are based on
continued state progress, feasibility, and funding for habitat restoration projects. In October 2012, Hurricane Sandy washed out an earthen berm and culverts that were
scheduled to be removed, which naturally restored 60 acres of tidal wetlands at Sunken Meadow State Park (New York). The removal project, scheduled for completion in
2013, was cancelled as a result of this natural restoration.
(PM 119) Reopen miles of river and stream corridors to diadromous fish passage from the 2010 baseline of 17.7 river
miles by removal of dams and barriers or by installation of bypass structures.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
28
72.3
FY 2013
75
FY 2014
1.5
Unit
Miles
Explanation of Results: More habitat restoration [and riverine corridor] projects were completed in 2012 because Hurricane Irene preempted work on many of these
projects in August 201 1 . Resources were diverted to storm cleanup and recovery.
Additional Information: The long-term goal of this measure was significantly exceeded in FY 2010. The EPA revised this measure in FY 2012 to measure river miles
instead of percent of goal achieved. The EPA will establish annual targets with partners to measure annual progress. Out-year estimates are based on continued state
progress, feasibility, and funding for fish passage and bypass projects. The EPA revised its FY 2012 target for this measure in the FY 2013 submission due to a
miscalculation. It is not a reflection of reduced effort.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, improve water quality and enable the lifting of harvest restrictions in 4,300 acres of shellfish bed
growing areas impacted by degraded or declining water quality in the Puget Sound. (2009 baseline: 1,730 acres of shellfish beds
with harvest restrictions in 2006 had their restrictions lifted. Universe: 30,000 acres of commercial shellfish beds with harvest
restrictions in 2006.)
(PM psl) Improve water quality and enable the lifting of harvest restrictions in acres of shellfish bed growing areas
impacted by degrading or declining water quality.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
450
1,566
FY 2009
600
1,730
FY 2010
1,800
4,453
FY2011
4,953
1,525
FY 2012
3,878
2,489
FY 2013
7,758
FY 2014
7,758
Unit
Acres
Explanation of Results: By missing this FY 2012 target the Puget Sound Program is at risk of not meeting its 5 year (201 1~ 2015) National Water Program Guidance
strategic plan target. The five year target is 4,300 cumulative acres, which presumed an annual net gain of approximately 500 acres. The program had exceeded the five
year target at the end of FY 2010 with a cumulative total of 4,453 acres. Unfortunately, in April 201 1, over 4,000 acres of the Skagit County Samish Bay shellfish
growing area was downgraded, dramatically impacting our ability to meet the 5 -year target.
Efforts by Federal, State, and local agencies in partnership with Puget Sound Tribes have resulted in better water quality on 2,273 acres of commercial and recreational
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
918
-------
Program Area
(9) Sustain and
Restore the
U.S.-Mexico
Border
Environmental
Health
Performance
Measures and
Data
shellfish harvesting area since 2007. In FY 2012, these efforts resulted in an upgrade of 964 acres. Notably, in FY 2012 there were no shellfish growing area
classification downgrades. Maintaining water quality for approved shellfish harvesting is as important as obtaining upgrades for meeting the overall performance measure
targets. Local projects aimed at on-site sewage system maintenance and repair, agricultural BMP implementation, and wastewater treatment plant upgrades have helped
maintain and upgrade shellfish growing areas. With EPA grant assistance, Skagit County continues to lead an aggressive effort to identify and correct pollution sources in
the Samish Bay watershed with aims of upgrading the classification of the growing area. The vast majority of the sources are nonpoint sources, small livestock operations,
failing septic systems, so progress has been slow but steady. The Program expects that the Samish Bay shellfish growing areas will be recovered and upgraded to non-
conditional harvesting. With continued emphasis on pollution identification and correction in this watershed, and other shellfish growing areas, gains will be made in FY
2013 and FY 2014 that should enable the Program to meet its 5 year strategic plan goal.
Additional Information: The universe of potentially recoverable shellfish beds in Puget Sound closed due to nonpoint source pollution is approximately 10,000 acres. In
2010, 4,453 acres (cumulative) of shellfish-bed growing areas had improved water quality, resulting in the lifting of harvest restrictions. In 201 1 , a downgrading of
approximately 4,000 acres in Samish Bay occurred due to non-point pollution exacerbated by La Nina weather conditions. The Puget Sound program is strategically
directing resources in FY 2012 and beyond to address the pathogen pollution problem impacting shellfish harvest in Puget Sound. The program is addressing this both in
the near term - focusing on specific geographical locations (e.g. Samish Bay), and in the long term for the universe of potentially recoverable shellfish acres basin-wide in
Puget Sound.
(PM ps3) Number of
Target
Actual
FY 2007
near shore,
FY 2008
2,310
4,413
riparian, and wetland habitat acres protected or restored.
FY 2009
3,000
5,751
FY 2010
6,500
10,062
FY2011
12,363
14,629
FY 2012
19,063
23,818
FY 2013
31,818
FY 2014
33,818
Unit
Acres
Explanation of Results: In FY 2012 the Puget Sound program was able to report an additional 6,400 acres of restored habitat associated with the removal of the Elwha
dam. This included a diverse assemblage of riverine, riparian, estuarine and nearshore habitats. The Puget Sound Program did not expect to report out on these habitats in
FY 2012 and did not expect clear quantification of habitat outcomes so quickly. Not only were the project leads able to complete the work ahead of the anticipated
schedule, they were also able to document the specific areas that were enhanced through the work and were beginning to document the functional benefits of the actions.
For the habitat measure in FY 201 3 the Program now expects to report an additional 6,500 acres in the Elwha River basin associated with completion of the Glines Dam
removal, a second dam affecting a distinct reach of the river basin. EPA expects a 400 acre delta restoration project in the Snohomish River basin to be implemented.
These projects in conjunction with a 1500-2000 acre cumulative result from the salmon recovery projects should increase the results by another 8000-9000 acres.
Additional Information: In 2008, 4,413 acres (cumulative) of tidally- and seasonally-influenced estuarine wetlands were restored.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, provide safe drinking water or adequate wastewater sanitation to 75 percent of the homes in the
U.S.-Mexico Border area that lacked access to either service in 2003. (2003 Universe: 98,515 homes lacked drinking water, and
690,723 homes lacked adequate wastewater sanitation, based on a 2003 assessment of homes in the U.S.-Mexico Border area.
2015 target: 73,886 homes provided with safe drinking water, and 518,042 homes with adequate wastewater sanitation.)
(PM 4pg) Loading of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD)
area since 2003.
Target
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
removed (million pounds/year) from the U.S.-Mexico border
FY2011
108.2
FY 2012
115
FY 2013
121.5
FY 2014
135.8
Unit
Million
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
919
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Actual
108.5
119
Pounds/Year
Additional Information: The baseline starts in 2003 with zero pounds of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) removed.
(PM xb2) Number of additional homes provided safe drinking water in the U.S.-Mexico border area that lacked access
to safe drinking water in 2003.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
1,200
(Annual)
1,276
(Annual)
FY 2008
2,500
(Annual)
5,162
(Annual)
FY 2009
1,500
(Annual)
1,584
(Annual)
FY 2010
28,434
(Cumulative)
52,130
(Cumulative)
FY2011
54,130
(Cumulative)
54,734
(Cumulative)
FY 2012
1,000
(Annual)
5,185
(Annual)
FY 2013
3,000
(Annual)
FY 2014
1,700
(Annual)
Unit
Homes
Additional Information: Units and Baseline: "Additional homes" represents the number of existing households that are provided access (i.e., connected) to safe drinking
water as a result of Border Environment Infrastructure Fund (BEIF)- supported projects. The program measures from a baseline of zero additional homes since this
measure was developed in 2003. Universe: The known universe is the number of existing households in the U.S.-Mexico border area lacking access to safe drinking water
in 2003 (98,515 homes). The known universe was calculated from U.S. Census and the Mexican National Water Commission (CONAGUA) sources. This measure was
modified from cumulative to annual beginning in FY 2012 to better capture annual program progress.
(PM xb3) Number of additional homes provided adequate wastewater sanitation in the U.S.-Mexico border area that
lacked access to wastewater sanitation in 2003.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
70,750
(Annual)
73,475
(Annual)
FY 2008
15,000
(Annual)
31,686
(Annual)
FY 2009
105,500
(Annual)
43,594
(Annual)
FY 2010
246,175
(Cumulative)
254,125
(Cumulative)
FY2011
461,125
(Cumulative)
513,041
(Cumulative)
FY 2012
10,500
(Annual)
31,092
(Annual)
FY 2013
27,000
(Annual)
FY 2014
39,500
(Annual)
Unit
Homes
Explanation of Results: The discrepancy between the projected and actual household connections for (PM xb3) is associated with the Rio Bravo, Tamaulipas project.
When this project was certified over 5 years ago, the number of connections projected was based on number of households that did not have connection to the existing
wastewater collection system. There were 9,000 households that did not have a connection to the wastewater collection system. The Mexico Border program is focused
on both public health and environmental quality, so wastewater treatment is a critical concern. Although a large percentage of the city did have a collection system, there
was no wastewater treatment plant. Therefore the entire city of 30,355 households should have been counted as new connections. EPA was not aware of the discrepancy
in counting methodology until recently when the project approached completion and the discussion about measures was raised with the grantee.
Additional Information: Units and Baseline: "Additional homes" represents the number of existing households that are provided access (i.e., connected) to adequate
wastewater sanitation as a result of Border Environment Infrastructure Fund (BEIF)- supported projects. The program measures from a baseline of zero additional homes
since this measure was developed in 2003. Universe: The known universe is the number of existing households in the U.S.-Mexico border area lacking access to adequate
wastewater sanitation services in 2003 (690,723). The known universe of unconnected homes was calculated from U.S. Census and the Mexican National Water
Commission (CONAGUA) sources. This measure was modified from cumulative to annual beginning in FY 2012 to better capture annual program progress.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
920
-------
Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Clean up communities, advance sustainable development, and protect disproportionately impacted low-income, minority, and tribal communities.
Prevent releases of harmful substances and clean up and restore contaminated areas.
Objective 1 - Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities: Support sustainable, resilient, and livable communities by working with local,
state, tribal, and federal partners to promote smart growth, emergency preparedness and recovery planning, brownfield redevelopment, and the
equitable distribution of environmental benefits.
Program Area
(2) Assess and
Cleanup
Brownfields
Performance
Measures and Data
Strategic Measure: By 2015, conduct environmental assessments at 20,600 (cumulative) brownfield
of the end of FY 2009, EPA assessed 14,600 properties.)
properties. (Baseline: As
(PM B29) Brownfield properties assessed.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
1,000
1,371
FY 2008
1,000
1,453
FY 2009
1,000
1,295
FY 2010
1,000
1,326
FY2011
1,000
1,784
FY 2012
1,200
1,444
FY 2013
1,200
FY 2014
1,200
Unit
Properties
Explanation of Results: The Brownfields program exceeded its target of 1 ,200 properties assessed by 244 (20%) primarily because the program undertook a review of
properties assessed in an effort to accumulate the leveraged accomplishments (jobs, dollars and acres made ready for reuse) that were associated with those properties.
Additional Information: The program which this measure supports receives funds from ARRA. However, the targets above are not estimated based on these additional
funds. ARRA resources and performance measures for EPA's Brownfields program are tracked separately on EPA's internet site
http://www.epa.gov/recovery/plans.htmWquarterly and the government-wide ARRA site www.recovery.gov.
Strategic
(Baseline
Measure: By 2015, make an additional 17,800 acres of brownfield properties
: As of the end of FY 2009, EPA made 1 1,800 acres ready for reuse.)
ready for reuse from the 2009 baseline.
(PM B33) Acres of Brownfields properties made ready for reuse.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
No Target
Established
2,399
FY 2008
225
4,404
FY 2009
1,000
2,660
FY 2010
1,000
3,627
FY2011
1,000
6,667
FY 2012
3,000
3,314
FY 2013
3,000
FY 2014
3,000
Unit
Acres
Additional Information: The program which this measure supports receives funds from ARRA. However, the targets above are not estimated based on these additional
funds. ARRA resources and performance measures for EPA's Brownfields program are tracked separately on EPA's internet site
http://www.epa.gov/recovery/plans.htmWquarterly and the government-wide ARRA site www.recovery.gov.
(PM B32) Number of properties cleaned up using Brownfields funding.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
921
-------
Program Area
(3) Reduce
Chemical
Risks at
Facilities and
in
Communities
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
FY 2007
60
77
FY 2008
60
78
FY 2009
60
93
FY 2010
60
109
FY2011
60
130
FY 2012
120
120
FY 2013
120
FY 2014
120
Unit
Properties
Additional Information: From program inception through the end of FY 2012, the Brownfields program has funded 794 completed cleanups. The program receives funds
from ARRA, however, the targets above are not estimated based on these additional funds. ARRA resources and performance measures for EPA's Brownfields program
are tracked separately on EPA's internet site http://www.epa.gov/recovery/plans.htmWquarterly and the government-wide ARRA site www.recovery.gov. Targets were
adjusted beginning in FY 2012 as a result of an internal review of the supporting data.
(PM B34) Jobs leveraged from Brownfields activities.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
5,000
5,209
FY 2008
5,000
5,484
FY 2009
5,000
6,490
FY 2010
5,000
5,177
FY2011
5,000
6,447
FY 2012
5,000
5,593
FY 2013
5,000
FY 2014
5,000
Unit
Jobs
Additional Information: The program which this measure supports receives funds from ARRA. However, the targets above are not estimated based on these additional
funds. ARRA resources and performance measures for EPA's Brownfields program are tracked separately on EPA's internet site
http://www.epa.gov/recovery/plans.htmWquarterly and the government-wide ARRA site www.recovery.gov.
(PM B37) Billions of dollars of cleanup and redevelopment funds leveraged at Brownfields sites.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
0.9
1.69
FY 2008
0.9
1.48
FY 2009
0.9
1.06
FY 2010
0.9
1.40
FY2011
0.9
2.14
FY 2012
1.2
1.2
FY 2013
1.2
FY 2014
1.2
Unit
Dollars
(Billions)
Additional Information: The program which this measure supports receives funds from ARRA. However, the targets above are not estimated based on these additional
funds. ARRA resources and performance measures for EPA's Brownfields program are tracked separately on EPA's internet site
http://www.epa.gov/recovery/plans.htmWquarterly and the government-wide ARRA site www.recovery.gov.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, continue to maintain the Risk Management Plan (RMP) prevention program and further reduce
by 10 percent the number of accidents at RMP facilities. (Baseline: There was an annual average of 190 accidents based on
RMP program data between 2005-2009).
(PM CH2) Number of risk management plan inspections conducted.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
400
628
FY 2008
400
628
FY 2009
400
654
FY 2010
400
618
FY2011
560
630
FY 2012
530
652
FY 2013
500
FY 2014
460
Unit
Inspections
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
922
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: EPA's annual target for this measure reflects the RMP program's national focus on conducting inspections at high risk facilities, which are often
more resource intensive than inspections at other facilities. The Agency significantly exceeded its FY 2012 target due to one region substantially exceeding their annual
estimate by focusing on completing as many inspections as possible instead of high risk facilities.
Additional Information: Between F Y 2000 and F Y 2012, more than 7,400 Risk Management Plan (RMP) audits/inspections were completed. The term "audits" has been
removed from the measure's text since the performance measure only targets inspections.
Objective 2 - Preserve Land: Conserve resources and prevent land contamination by reducing waste generation, increasing recycling, and
ensuring proper management of waste and petroleum products.
Program Area
(1) Waste
Generation
and Recycling
Performance Measures and Data
Strategic Measure: By 2015, increase the amount of municipal solid waste reduced, reused, or recycled by 2.5 billion pounds.
(At the end of FY 2008, 22.5 billion pounds of municipal solid waste had been reduced, reused, or recycled.)
(PM MW9) Billions of pounds of municipal solid waste reduced, reused, or recycled.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
19.5
23.7
FY 2010
20.5
22.6
FY2011
21
Data Avail
2/2013
FY 2012
22
Data Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
FY 2014
Unit
Pounds
(Billions)
Additional Information: FY 2012 results will be available in December 2013. EPA is discontinuing this measure in FY 2013, and FY 2012 is the last year results will be
reported. It is being replaced by a new measure: "Tons of materials and products offsetting use of virgin resources through sustainable materials management," which
reflects EPA's national program shift from waste management to sustainable materials management.
(PM SMI) Tons of materials and products offsetting use of virgin resources through sustainable materials management.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
8,549,502
Data Avail
12/2013
FY 2013
8,501,537
FY 2014
8,603,033
Unit
Tons
Additional Information: This measure was established in FY 2012 to reflect EPA's national program shift from waste management to sustainable materials management.
This measure replaces the Agency's waste management measure, "Billions of pounds of municipal solid waste reduced, reused or recycled."
Strategic Measure: By 2015, increase beneficial use of coal combustion ash to 50 percent from 40 percent in 2008.
(PM MW2) Increase in percentage of coal combustion ash that is beneficially used instead of disposed.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
923
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
FY 2007
1.8
-0.7
FY 2008
1.8
1.8
FY 2009
1.8
-3.1
FY 2010
1.4
-0.6
FY2011
1.4
Data Avail
12/2013
FY 2012
1.4
Data Avail
12/2014
FY 2013
1.4
FY 2014
1.4
Unit
Percent
Increase
Additional Information: In F Y 2008, approximately 136 million tons of coal combustion ash was generated, and 40 percent was used rather than landfill ed. Data lag for
FY 201 1 and FY 2012 results is two years, to allow for the use of finalized survey numbers.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, increase by 78 the number of tribes covered by an integrated waste management plan compared
to FY 2009. (At the end of FY 2009, 94 of 572 federally recognized tribes were covered by an integrated waste management
plan.)
(PM MW8) Number of tribes covered by an integrated solid waste management plan.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
27
28
FY 2008
26
35
FY 2009
16
31
FY 2010
23
23
FY2011
14
17
FY 2012
3
13
FY 2013
3
FY 2014
3
Unit
Tribes
Explanation of Results: EPA exceeded its FY 2012 target for this measure because the Agency's RCRA tribal program was able to leverage tribal GAP funds to assist
tribes in developing a greater number of solid waste management plans than anticipated.
Additional Information: Beginning in FY 2012, RCRA Program grant funding supporting the development of integrated waste management plans was no longer
available. However, the performance target is achieved with the assistance of other funding sources, including tribes, other EPA programs, or other federal agencies.
Technical assistance to the tribes, such as that provided through tribal circuit riders, also remains available. At the end of FY 2012, 147 of 574 federally recognized tribes
were covered by an integrated waste management plan.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, close, clean up, or upgrade 281 open dumps in Indian country and on other tribal lands compared
to FY 2009. (At the end of FY 2009, 412 open dumps were closed, cleaned up, or upgraded. As of April 1, 2010, 3,464 open
dumps were listed in the Indian Health Service Operation and Maintenance System Database, which is dynamic because of the
ongoing assessment of open dumps.)
(PM MW5) Number of closed, cleaned up, or upgraded open dumps in Indian country or on other tribal lands.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
30
107
FY 2008
30
166
FY 2009
27
129
FY 2010
22
141
FY2011
45
82
FY 2012
45
74
FY 2013
45
FY 2014
45
Unit
Dumps
Explanation of Results: EPA closed, cleaned up, or upgraded a total of 74 open dumps, far exceeding the FY 2012 target of 45. This success was due to EPA leveraging
available resources and tribal funds to greatly accelerate the expected pace of cleanups and closures of open dumps on tribal lands.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
924
-------
Program Area
(2) Minimize
Releases of
Hazardous
Waste and
Petroleum
Products
Performance
Measures and Data
Strategic Measure: By 2015, prevent releases at 500 hazardous waste management facilities with initial approved controls or
updated controls resulting in the protection of an estimated 3 million people living within a mile of all facilities with controls.
(Baseline: At the end of FY 2009, it was estimated that 789 facilities will require these controls out of the universe of 2,468
facilities with about 10,000 process units. The goal of 500 represents 63 percent of the facilities needing controls.)
(PM HWO) Number of hazardous waste facilities with new or updated controls.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
100
115
FY 2010
100
140
FY2011
100
130
FY 2012
100
117
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Unit
Facilities
Explanation of Results: EPA completed a total of 1 17 facilities with new or updated controls, exceeding the FY 2012 target of 100, largely because of one state receiving
additional permitting authority during the year.
Additional Information: In FY 201 1, 130 facilities received new or updated controls and by the end of the FY 2012, another 117 facilities also received new or updated
controls for a cumulative two-year total of 247 facilities. By FY 20 15, 253 additional facilities need controls put in place to reach EPAs strategic measure target of 500.
(PM HWE) Number
Target
Actual
FY 2007
2.00
3.36
of facilities with new or updated controls per million dollars of program cost.
FY 2008
3.64
3.72
FY 2009
3.68
3.75
FY 2010
3.72
3.91
FY2011
3.75
4.01
FY 2012
3.79
4.09
FY 2013
FY 2014
Unit
Facilities
Additional Information: FY 2012 is the last year results will be reported for this measure. EPA is discontinuing this measure in FY 2013.
Strategic Measure: Each year through 2015, increase the percentage of UST facilities that are in significant operational
compliance (SOC) with both release detection and release prevention requirements by 0.5 percent over the previous year's
target. (Baseline: This means an increase of facilities in SOC from 65.5 percent in 2010 to 68 percent in 2015.)
(PM ST6) Increase the percentage of UST facilities that are in significant operational compliance (SOC) with both
release detection and release prevention requirements by 0.5% over the previous year's target.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
67
63
FY 2008
68
66
FY 2009
65
66
FY 2010
65.5
69
FY2011
66
71
FY 2012
66.5
71.3
FY 2013
67
FY 2014
67.5
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: Approximately 99,235 on-site inspections of underground storage tanks (UST) were conducted in FY 2012 and 71.3 percent of those were found
to be in significant operational compliance with both release detection and release prevention requirements.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
925
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and
Data
Strategic Measure: Each year through 2015, reduce the number of confirmed releases at UST facilities to 5 percent fewer than
the prior year's target. (Baseline: Between FY 1999 and FY 2009, confirmed UST releases averaged 8,1 13.)
(PM ST1) Reduce the number of confirmed releases at UST facilities to five percent (5%) fewer
target.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
<10,000
7,570
FY 2008
<9,000
7,364
FY 2009
<9,000
7,168
FY 2010
<9,000
6,328
FY2011
<8,550
5,998
FY 2012
<8,120
5,674
FY 2013
<7,715
than the prior year's
FY 2014
<7,330
Unit
Releases
Additional Information: Between FY 2007 and FY 2012, confirmed Underground Storage Tank (UST) releases averaged 6,684.
Objective 3 - Restore Land: Prepare for and respond to accidental or intentional releases of contaminants and clean up and restore polluted sites.
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Strategic Measure: By 2015, achieve and maintain at least 80 percent of the maximum score on the Core National Approach to
Response (NAR) evaluation criteria. (Baseline: In FY 2009, the average Core NAR Score was 84 percent for EPA headquarters,
regions, and special teams prepared for responding to emergencies).
(PM Cl) Score on annual Core NAR.
(2) Emergency
Preparedness
and Response
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
No Target
Established
84.3
FY 2010
55
87.9
FY2011
60
77.5
FY 2012
70
75.8
FY 2013
72
FY 2014
75
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: Since FY 2011, the Core NAR score reported for this measure has been based upon the combination of two scores, one which measures day-to-
day response readiness and another that measures national preparedness for chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear incidents.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, complete an additional 1,700 Superfund removals through Agency-financed actions and through
oversight of removals conducted by potentially responsible parties (PRPs). (Baseline: In FY 2009, there were 434 Superfund
removal actions completed including 214 funded by the Agency and 220 overseen by the Agency that were conducted by PRPs
under a voluntary agreement, an administrative order on consent or a unilateral administrative order).
(PM 132) Superfund-lead removal actions completed annually.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
926
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
FY 2007
195
200
FY 2008
195
215
FY 2009
195
214
FY 2010
170
199
FY2011
170
214
FY 2012
170
232
FY 2013
170
FY 2014
170
Unit
Removals
Explanation of Results: The Removal program is designed to respond to threats as they arise. It is difficult to predict how many will occur in a year. However, due to the
experience and expertise of EPA's On-Scene Coordinators, the Agency was able to quickly and effectively respond to those that did occur in F Y 2012.
Additional Information: Between FY 2007 and FY 2012 the EPA completed an average of 212 Superfund-lead removal response actions a year.
(PM 135) PRP removal completions (including voluntary, Administrative Order on Consent, and Unilateral
Administrative Order actions) overseen by EPA.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
120
151
FY 2008
125
157
FY 2009
130
154
FY 2010
170
192
FY2011
170
191
FY 2012
170
196
FY 2013
170
FY 2014
170
Unit
Removals
Explanation of Results: The Removal program is designed to respond to threats as they arise. It is difficult to predict how many will occur in a year. However, due to the
experience and expertise of EPA's On-Scene Coordinators, the Agency was able to quickly and effectively respond to those that did occur in FY 2012.
Additional Information: In FY 2010, EPA began implementing a new measure to track removals undertaken by potentially responsible parties, either voluntarily or
pursuant to an enforcement instrument, where the Agency has overseen the removals. Between FY 2007 and FY 2012, EPA completed an average of 173 PRP-lead
removal response actions a year.
(PM 136) Superfund-lead removal actions completed annually per million dollars.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
0.92
1.04
FY 2008
0.93
1.05
FY 2009
0.94
1.30
FY 2010
0.95
1.97
FY2011
0.96
2.04
FY 2012
0.97
1.75
FY 2013
FY 2014
Unit
Removals
Additional Information: FY 2012 is the last year results will be reported for this measure. EPA is discontinuing this measure in FY 2013.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, no more than 1.5 million gallons will be spilled annually at Facility Response Plan (FRP)
facilities, a 15 percent reduction from the annual average of 1.7 million gallons spilled from 2005-2009.
(PM 337) Percent of all FRP inspected facilities found to be non-compliant which are brought into compliance.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
15
48
FY2011
30
48
FY 2012
35
73
FY 2013
40
FY 2014
50
Unit
Percent
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
927
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: Due to the Agency's short history in tracking these facilities (baseline established in FY 2010), it has been difficult to establish an accurate
estimate of annual results when setting targets. As a result, EPA has exceeded it's measure targets in FY 2011 and FY 2012.
Additional Information: EPA established this measure in FY 2010 to track FRP facilities brought into compliance because if an oil spill occurs at these facilities there is a
greater potential to cause harm to human health and the environment than at other oil facilities.
(PM 338) Percent of all Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) inspected facilities found to be non-
compliant which are brought into compliance.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
15
36
FY2011
30
45
FY 2012
35
63
FY 2013
40
FY 2014
50
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: Due to the Agency's short history in tracking these facilities (baseline established in FY 2010), it has been difficult to establish an accurate
estimate of annual results when setting targets. As a result, EPA has exceeded it's measure targets in FY 2011 and FY 2012.
Additional Information: EPA established this measure in FY 2010 to track SPCC facilities brought into compliance because if an oil spill occurs at certain high-risk
SPCC facilities facilities there is a greater potential to cause harm to human health and the environment than at other oil facilities.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, complete 93,400 assessments at potential hazardous waste sites to determine if they warrant
Comprehensive Emergency Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) remedial response or other cleanup
activities. (Baseline: As of 2010, the cumulative total number of assessments completed was 88,000.)
(PM 115) Number of Superfund remedial site assessments completed.
(3) Cleanup
Contaminated
Land
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
900
1,020
FY 2012
900
1,151
FY 2013
650
FY 2014
700
Unit
Assessments
Explanation of Results: EPA significantly exceeded its FY 2012 target of 900 primarily due to performing low cost assessments at a large number of former lead smelter
locations and other sites.
Additional Information: This measure accounts for all remedial assessments performed at sites addressed under the Superfund program. Through FY 2012, EPA had
completed a cumulative total 91,334 Remedial Site Assessments. FY 2013 and 2014 target reductions reflect balancing overall program goals in light of resource
constraints, and the completion of large scale uranium mine assessment projects in FY 2012.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, increase to 84 percent the number of Superfund final and deleted NPL sites and RCRA facilities
where human exposures to toxins from contaminated sites are under control. (Baseline: As of October 2009, 70 percent
Superfund final and deleted NPL sites and RCRA facilities have human exposures under control out of a universe of 5,330.)
(PM 151) Number of Superfund sites with human exposures under control.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
928
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
FY 2007
10
8
FY 2008
10
24
FY 2009
10
11
FY 2010
10
18
FY2011
10
10
FY 2012
10
13
FY 2013
10
FY 2014
10
Unit
Sites
Explanation of Results: A number of site investigations related to vapor intrusion were completed in FY 2012. These investigations found no unacceptable exposures at
the sites, and resulted in a positive effect on the Human Exposure accomplishment.
Additional Information: Through FY 2012, EPA had controlled human exposures at 1,361 final and deleted National Priority List (NPL) sites. The FY 20 10 through FY
2012 targets represent the expected total from base funding plus ARRA.
(PM CA1) Cumulative percentage of RCRA facilities with human exposures to toxins under control.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
No Target
Established
65
FY 2010
69
72
FY2011
72
77
FY 2012
81
81
FY 2013
85
FY 2014
90
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: Through FY 2012, EPA has achieved a total of 3,041 RCRA corrective action facilities with human exposures under control. There is a universe
of 3,747 low, medium, and high National Corrective Action Prioritization System-ranked facilities.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, increase to 78 percent the number of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) facilities
with migration of contaminated groundwater under control. (Baseline: At the end of FY 2009, the migration of contaminated
groundwater was controlled at 58 percent of all 3,746 facilities needing corrective action.)
(PM CA2) Cumulative percentage of RCRA facilities with migration of contaminated groundwater under control.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
No Target
Established
58
FY 2010
61
63
FY2011
64
67
FY 2012
69
72
FY 2013
73
FY 2014
80
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: Through FY 2012, EPA has achieved a total of 2,691 RCRA corrective action facilities with toxic releases to groundwater controlled. There is a
universe of 3,747 low, medium, and high National Corrective Action Prioritization System-ranked facilities.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, increase to 56 percent the number of RCRA facilities with final remedies constructed. (Baseline:
At the end of FY 2009, all cleanup remedies had been constructed at 32 percent of all 3,746 facilities needing corrective action.)
(PM 117) Percent increase of final remedy components constructed at RCRA corrective action facilities per federal,
state, and private sector dollars per year.
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
Unit
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
929
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
3
6
3
7
3
40
3
-9
3
-11.7
3
-2.9
Percent
Increase
Explanation of Results: Due to decreased federal corrective action spending, the total number of completed remedies declined even though there was a rebound in private
sector spending, thus yielding a small net decrease in cleanup efficiency.
Additional Information: FY 2012 is the last year results will be reported for this measure. EPA is discontinuing this measure in FY 2013.
(PM CAS) Cumulative percentage of RCRA facilities with final remedies constructed.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
No Target
Established
32
FY 2010
35
37
FY2011
38
42
FY 2012
46
47
FY 2013
51
FY 2014
57
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: Through FY 2012, EPA has achieved a total of 1,762 RCRA corrective action facilities with final remedies constructed. There is a universe of
3,747 low, medium and high National Corrective Action Prioritization System-ranked facilities.
Strategic Measure: Each year through 2015, reduce the backlog of LUST cleanups (confirmed releases that have yet to be
cleaned up) that do not meet state risk-based standards for human exposure and groundwater migration by 1 percent. This
means a decrease from 21 percent in 2009 to 14 percent in 2015. (At the end of FY 2009, there were 100,165 releases not yet
cleaned up.)
(PM 111) Percent of confirmed releases awaiting cleanup at UST facilities.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
No Target
Established
23
FY 2008
No Target
Established
21
FY 2009
No Target
Established
21
FY 2010
No Target
Established
19
FY2011
No Target
Established
18
FY 2012
No Target
Established
16
FY 2013
No Target
Established
FY 2014
15
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: This is a long-standing strategic measure in EPA's F Y 20 1 1 -20 1 5 Strategic Plan. EPA has been tracking results under this measure since F Y
2006, however, in FY 2014 this will be a new annual performance measure with annual targets. As of the end of FY 2012, there have been 507,540 releases reported,
424,637 (or 84 percent) of which have been cleaned up, leaving 82,903 remaining to be cleaned up.
(PM 112) Number of LUST cleanups completed that meet risk-based standards for human exposure and groundwater
migration.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
13,000
13,862
FY 2008
13,000
12,768
FY 2009
12,250
12,944
FY 2010
12,250
11,591
FY2011
12,250
11,169
FY 2012
11,250
10,927
FY 2013
10,100
FY 2014
9,000
Unit
Cleanups
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
930
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: EPA did not meet its FY 2012 target for this measure due to a variety of challenges including the complexity of remaining sites, an increased
state workload, a decrease in available state resources, and the increasing cost of cleanups.
Additional Information: Through FY 2012, EPA completed a cumulative total of 424,637 leaking underground storage tank (LUST) cleanups. Results in FY 2010
through FY 2012 included over 2,400 cleanups achieved as a result of funding provided by ARRA. The FY 2014 target reflects a recalibration based on the expiration of
this funding source, as well as an overall decrease in expected cleanups due to increasing costs of cleanups, and the complexity of remaining sites to be cleaned up.
Strategic Measure: Each year through 2015, reduce the backlog of LUST cleanups (confirmed releases that have yet to be
cleaned up) in Indian country that do not meet applicable risk-based standards for human exposure and groundwater migration
by 1 percent. This means a decrease from 28 percent in 2009 to 22 percent in 2015.
(PM 113) Number of LUST cleanups completed that meet risk-based standards for human exposure and groundwater
migration in Indian Country.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
30
54
FY 2008
30
40
FY 2009
30
49
FY 2010
30
62
FY2011
38
42
FY 2012
42
47
FY 2013
42
FY 2014
37
Unit
Cleanups
Additional Information: Through FY 2012, EPA completed a cumulative total of 1,026 leaking underground storage tank cleanups in Indian country, out of a universe of
1,325 confirmed releases. This is a subset of the national total of 424,637 leaking underground storage tanks cleanups completed.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, ensure that 799 Superfund NPL sites are "sitewide ready for anticipated use." (Baseline:-As of
October 2009, 409 final and deleted NPL sites had achieved "sitewide ready for anticipated use.")
(PM FF1) Percent of Superfund federal facility sites construction complete.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
86
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: The Superfund Federal Facilities Response program will be targeting a new percent construction complete measure specifically for federal
Superfund NPL sites designed to demonstrate national incremental construction progress. This new measure is based on the average of three specific factors: 1 ) Operable
Unit (OU) percent complete; 2) Total cleanup actions percent complete; and 3) Duration of cleanup actions percent complete (national cumulative). The FY 2012 baseline
was 82%.
(PM S10) Number of Superfund sites ready for anticipated use site-wide.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
30
64
FY 2008
30
85
FY 2009
65
66
FY 2010
65
66
FY2011
65
65
FY 2012
65
66
FY 2013
60
FY 2014
60
Unit
Sites
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
931
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Additional Information: Through FY 2012, EPA's Superfund program had ensured that 606 final and deleted NPL sites met the criteria to be determined ready for
anticipated use site- wide.
(PM 141) Annual number of Superfund sites with remedy construction completed.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
24
24
FY 2008
30
30
FY 2009
20
20
FY 2010
22
18
FY2011
22
22
FY 2012
22
22
FY 2013
19
FY 2014
15
Unit
Completions
Additional Information: Through FY 2012, EPA had completed construction at 1 ,142 final and deleted National Priority List (NPL) sites. The program which this
measure supports receives funds from ARP%A. The FY 2010 through FY 2012 targets represent the expected total from base funding plus APJRA.
(PM 152) Number of Superfund sites with contaminated groundwater migration under control.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
10
19
FY 2008
15
20
FY 2009
15
16
FY 2010
15
18
FY2011
15
21
FY 2012
15
18
FY 2013
15
FY 2014
15
Unit
Sites
Additional Information: Through FY 2012, EPA had controlled groundwater migration at 1 ,069 final and deleted National Priority List (NPL) sites.
(PM 170) Number of remedial action project completions at Superfund NPL sites.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
103
132
FY 2012
130
142
FY 2013
115
FY 2014
115
Unit
Completions
Additional Information: Through FY 2012, EPA had completed 2,972 remedial action projects at final and deleted NPL sites. The program which this measure supports
receives funds from ARP%A. The FY 2010 through FY 2012 targets represent the expected total from base funding plus APJRA.
Objective 4 - Strengthen Human Health and Environmental Protection in Indian Country: Support federally-recognized tribes to build
environmental management capacity, assess environmental conditions and measure results, and implement environmental programs in Indian
country.
Program Area
(1) Improve
Human Health
Performance Measures and Data
Strategic Measure: By 2015, increase the percent of tribes implementing federal
country to 18 percent. (FY 2009 baseline: 13 percent of 572 tribes).
regulatory environmental programs in Indian
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
932
-------
Program Area
and the
Environment
in Indian
Country
Performance Measures and Data
(PM 5PQ) Percent of Tribes implementing federal regulatory environmental programs in Indian country (cumulative).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
6
14
FY 2009
7
13
FY 2010
14
14
FY2011
18
17
FY 2012
22
21
FY 2013
24
FY 2014
25
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: While the agency made substantial progress in FY 2012, the agency slightly missed the target. The agency uses Treatment in the Same Manner as
State (TAS) as one way to measure progress in Indian County. Obtaining TAS is a lengthy, resource intensive process; therefore, tribes often lack the capacity and
propensity to pursue this option. Additionally, the agency measures the number of tribes that have TAS, not taking into consideration tribes with more robust
environmental program implementing more then one TAS. The agency is working to improve its performance measures in the next Strategic Plan to better capture
environmental progress and capacity building in Indian Country.
Additional Information: There are 572 tribal entities that are eligible for GAP funding. The Strategic Measure refers to the total number of tribes and inter-tribal consortia
that are eligible for GAP funding.
(PM 5PS) Percent of Tribes with an environmental program (cumulative).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
57
57
FY 2009
60
64
FY 2010
65
68
FY2011
70
72
FY 2012
73
72
FY 2013
FY 2014
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: EPA continues to work with tribal partners in developing and implementing environmental programs. The performance target was set at an
approximate level, and the deviation from that level is slight. There was no effect on overall program or activity performance. This measure is discontinued after FY
2012 and the agency is working to improve its annual performance measures in the next Strategic Plan to better capture environmental progress and capacity building in
Indian Country.
Additional Information: There are 572 tribal entities that are eligible for GAP funding. The Strategic Measure refers to the total number of tribes and inter-tribal consortia
that are eligible for GAP funding. During the past four years, significant progress has been made in GAP, adding environmental programs for almost 75 tribes. In efforts to
focus the EPA's suite of annual performance measures on the most important and useful information, the EPA will no longer be collecting this specific data in future
years.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, increase the percent of tribes conducting EPA-approved environmental monitoring and
assessment activities in Indian country to 50 percent. (FY 2009 baseline: 40 percent of 572 tribes).
(PM 5PR) Percent of Tribes conducting EPA approved environmental monitoring and assessment activities in Indian
country (cumulative.)
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
21
42
FY 2009
23
40
FY 2010
42
50
FY2011
52
52
FY 2012
54
54
FY 2013
57
FY 2014
58
Unit
Percent
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
933
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Additional Information:
that are eligible for GAP
There are
funding.
572 tribal entities that are eligible for GAP funding. The Strategic Measure refers to the total number of tribes and
inter-tribal consortia
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
934
-------
Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Reduce the risk and increase the safety of chemicals and prevent pollution at the source.
Objective 1 - Ensure Chemical Safety: Reduce the risk of chemicals that enter our products, our environment, and our bodies.
Program Area
(1) Protect
Human Health
from Chemical
Risks
Performance
Measures and
Data
Strategic Measure: By 2015, reduce by 40 percent the number of moderate to severe exposure incidents associated with
organophosphates and carbamate insecticides in the general population. (Baseline is 316 moderate and severe incidents reported
to the Poison Control Center (PCC) National Poison Data System (NPDS) in 2008 for organophosphate and carbamate
pesticides.)
(PM 111) Reduction in moderate to severe exposure incidents associated with organophosphates and carbamate
insecticides in the general population.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
10
16
FY 2013
15
FY 2014
25
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: This is the first reporting year for this new measure. It is not recommended that future targets be modified because of potentially high year to
year variability in the data. OPP will review the measure in F Y20 1 3 and suggest modifying the targets if it is determined that the targeted goal of a 40% reduction by 20 1 5
will likely be surpassed.
Additional Information: Moderate to severe exposure incidents reported during 2008 is 316 as reported in the American Association of Poison Control Centers' National
Poisoning Data System (NPDS) for organophosphates and carbamate pesticides.
Strategic
(Baseline
Measure: By 2014, reduce the percentage of children with blood
is 3.0 percent in the 2005-2008 sampling period.)
lead levels above 5ug/dl to 1.0 percent or less.
(PM 008) Percent of children (aged 1-5 years) with blood lead levels (>5 ug/dl).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
3.5
2.1
FY2011
No Target
Established
Biennial
FY 2012
1.5
Data Avail
10/2014
FY 2013
No Target
Established
FY 2014
1.0
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: NHANES data is not publically available until 18+ months after the reporting year.
Additional Information: Data released by CDC from the National Health and Nutritional Evaluation Survey (NHANES ) in March of 2009 estimated 4 . 1 % of children
aged 1-5 with lead poisoning (blood lead levels of 5 ug/dl or greater) from 2003/4 sampling data. Data for this measure are reported biennially. This is a revision of the
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
935
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
corresponding baseline for strategic measure 4.1.1.2 which made use of data from the 2005-2008 NHANES sampling period.
Strategic Measure: By 2014, reduce the percent difference in the geometric mean blood lead level in low-income children 1 to
5 years old as compared to the geometric mean for non-low income children 1 to 5 years old to 10.0 percent. (Baseline is 23.4
percent difference in the geometric mean blood lead level in low-income children 1 to 5 years old as compared to the geometric
mean for non-low-income children 1 to 5 years old in 2005-2008.)
(PM 10D) Percent difference in the geometric mean blood level in low-income children 1-5 years old as compared to the
geometric mean for non-low income children 1-5 years old.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
No Target
Established
Biennial
FY 2008
29
23.5
FY 2009
No Target
Established
Biennial
FY 2010
28
28.4
FY2011
No Target
Established
Biennial
FY 2012
13
Data Avail
10/2014
FY 2013
No Target
Established
FY 2014
20
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: Measure is subject to data lag because NHANES data require more than 18 months to process before being reported publicly.
Additional Information: Baseline for percent difference in the geometric mean blood level in low-income children 1-5 years old as compared to the geometric mean for
non-low income children 1-5 years old is 32% in 1999-2002 according to CDC National Health and Nutritional Evaluation Survey (NHANES). Data for this measure is
reported biennially.
Strategic Measure: By 2014, reduce the concentration in the general population for the following chemicals: nonspecific
organophosphate metabolites by 75 percent; chlorpyrifos metabolite (TCPy) by 75 percent; and perfluoro-octanoic acid (PFOA)
in serum by 2 percent. (Baselines are derived from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Health and
Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) concentration data in the general population and results are reported biennially.
Pesticide baselines are based on 2001-2002 95th percentile data for non-specific organophosphate metabolites (0.45 imol/L) and
chlorpyrifos metabolite (TCPy) (12.4 ig/L).PFOA baseline is based on 2005-2006 geometric mean data in serum (3.92 ig/L).)
(PM 266) Reduction in concentration of targeted pesticide analytes in the general population.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
10
5
FY 2008
30
Data Avail
10/2013
FY 2009
No Target
Established
Biennial
FY 2010
50
Data Avail
10/2013
FY2011
No Target
Established
Biennial
FY 2012
50,50
Data Avail
10/2013
FY 2013
No Target
Established
FY 2014
50,50
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: OCSPP AA is currently working with CDC for the release of the data.
Additional Information: Based on 2001 -2002 Centers for Disease Control's National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 95th percentile concentration
of pesticides residues detected in urine samples from the general population for non-specific organophosphate metabolites is 0.45 [imol/L, and chlorpyrifos metabolite
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
936
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
(TCPy) is 12.4 |ig/L. Data for this measure reported biennially. FY2008 and 2010 data were recently received and reviewed. OCSPP is currently working with CDC for
the release of the data.
(PM D6A) Reduction in concentration of PFOA in serum in the general population.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
Data Avail
10/2014
FY 2013
No Target
Established
FY 2014
25
Unit
Percent
Reduction
Explanation of Results: Delay in release of NHANES data.
Additional Information: Derived from 2005-2006 Centers for Disease Control's National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) on PFOA concentration
in the general population, the geometric mean concentration in serum is 3.92 ng/L. Data for this measure are reported biennially.
Strategic Measure: By 2014, reduce concentration for the following chemicals in children: non-specific organophosphate
metabolites by 75 percent and chlorpyrifos metabolite (TCPy) by 75 percent. (Baselines are derived from the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention's National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) metabolite concentration data
in children and results are reported biennially. Pesticide baselines are based on 2001-2002 data for non-specific
organophosphate metabolites (0.55 imol/L) and chlorpyrifos metabolite (TCPy) (16.0 ig/L).)
(PM J15) Reduction in concentration of targeted pesticide analytes in children.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
50,50
FY 2013
No Target
Established
Data Avail
10/2013
FY 2014
50,50
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: OCSPP AA is currently working with CDC for the release of data.
Additional Information: Derived from 2001-2002 Centers for Disease Control's National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) metabolite concentration
data in children for non-specific organophosphate metabolites is 0.55 |imol/L, and Chlorpyrifos metabolite (TCPy) is 16.0 |ig/L, respectively. Data for this measure is
reported biennially.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, complete endocrine disrupter screening program (EDSP) decisions for 100 percent of chemicals
for which complete EDSP information is expected to be available by the end of 2014. (Baseline is no decisions have been
completed through 2009 for any of the chemicals for which complete EDSP information is anticipated to be available by the
end of 2014. EDSP decisions for a chemical can range from determining potential to interact with the estrogen, androgen, or
thyroid hormone systems to otherwise determining whether further endocrine related testing is necessary.)
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
937
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
(PM E01) Number of chemicals for which Endocrine Disrupter Screening Program (EDSP) decisions have been
completed
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
3
3
FY 2012
5
1
FY 2013
20
FY 2014
59
Unit
Chemicals
Explanation of Results: In FY2012, the Endocrine Program continued to review public comments submitted for the second list of EDSP chemicals and did not
accomplish the goal of issuing additional test orders on the subsequent list of EDSP chemicals for screening. This second list includes drinking water contaminants in
addition to pesticide active ingredients. The single decision accomplished in 2012 was the decision to exempt a biopesticide, agrobacterium radiobacter that the agency
determined to have met the requirements under FFDCA 408(p), section 4. This decision was announced on the EDSP website (www.epa.gov/endo) in June of 20 12.
Additional Information: FY 2010 baseline is 1 1 chemicals for which EDSP decisions have been completed. Several factors will impact the schedule for completing
EDSP decisions including, for example, the number of pesticide cancellations and other actions that will remove a chemical from commerce and/or discontinue
manufacture and import, the number of pesticide cancellations involving minor agricultural uses, the number of pre-enforcement challenges to test orders, unforeseen
laboratory capacity limits, and unforeseen technical problems with completing the Tier 1 assays for a particular chemical.
(PM 009) Cumulative number of certified Renovation Repair and Painting firms
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
100,000
59,143
FY2011
100,000
114,834
FY 2012
140,000
126,323
FY 2013
140,000
FY 2014
138,000
Unit
Firms
Explanation of Results: Certification outreach was constrained while EPA was developing additional regulations required by statute addressing public and commercial
buildings.
Additional Information: The baseline is zero in 2009. FY 2010 is the first year that firms submitted applications to EPA to become certified. Over time, firms will either
become certified directly through EPA (tracked through Federal Lead-based Paint Program (FLPP) or through an authorized State program (tracked through grant
reports/internal database).
(PM Oil) Number of Product Reregistration Decisions
Target
Actual
FY 2007
545
962
FY 2008
1,075
1,194
FY 2009
2,000
1,482
FY 2010
1,500
1,712
FY2011
1,500
1,218
FY 2012
1,200
1,255
FY 2013
1,200
FY 2014
1,100
Unit
Decisions
Additional Information: FY 2005 actual is 501 product re-registrations according to internal tracking as part of the product reregistration process.
(PM 012) Percent reduction of children's exposure to rodenticides.
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
Unit
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
938
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
10
0
5
6
5
10
Percent
Additional Information: The total number of confirmed and likely rodenticide exposures to children in 2008 is 1 1,674 based data from the Poison Control Centers'
National Poison Data System.
(PM 091) Percent of decisions completed on time (on or before PRIA or negotiated due date).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
99
99.7
FY2011
99
98.4
FY 2012
99
99.1
FY 2013
99
FY 2014
99.0
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: In 2008, 99.9% of decisions were completed on time according to EPA internal data.
(PM 10A) Annual percentage of lead-based paint certification and refund applications that require less than 20 days of
EPA effort to process.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
90
92
FY 2008
91
91
FY 2009
92
92
FY 2010
92
96
FY2011
92
95
FY 2012
95
97
FY 2013
95
FY 2014
95
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: Baseline is 87% of applications processed in 2008 according to Federal Lead Based Paint Program (FLPP) information system.
(PM 143) Percentage of agricultural acres treated with reduced-risk pesticides.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
18
20
FY 2008
18.5
21
FY 2009
20
21.5
FY 2010
21
21
FY2011
21
22
FY 2012
22
Data Avail
10/2013
FY 2013
22.5
FY 2014
22.5
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: One year data lag expected.
Additional Information: The baseline for acres-treated is 3.6% of total acreage in 1998, when the reduced-risk pesticide acre treatments was 30,332,499 and total (all
pesticides) was 843,063,644 acre-treatments. Each year's total acre -treatments, as reported by USDA National Agricultural Statistic Service and private marketing
research data sources serve as the basis for computing the percentage of acre-treatments using reduced risk pesticides. Acre-treatments count the total number of
pesticides treatments each acre receives each year. Results are reported end of calendar year and are subject to data lag.
(PM 247) Percent of new chemicals or organisms introduced into commerce that do not pose unreasonable risks to
workers, consumers, or the environment.
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
Unit
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
939
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
100
100
100
100
100
97
100
91
100
100
100
Data Avail
10/2013
100
100
Percent
Explanation of Results: Expected one-year data lag.
Additional Information: Baseline is 100 percent from 2004-2008 according to Annual OPPT report, "Study Comparing PMNs/LVEs to Related 8(e) Chemicals." Baseline
is calculated by comparing Section 8(e) notices received in the fiscal year to previously reviewed PMNs. If a risk identified in a new Section 8(e) notice would not have
been identified and mitigated by the review, then the program has not met the performance target. Approximately 30 Section 8(e) notices submitted annually are compared
to previous PMNs for purposes of determining the annual performance result for this measure.
(PM 281) Reduction in the cost per submission of managing Premanufacture Notices (PMNs) through the Focus
meetings as a percentage of baseline year cost per submission.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
61
50
FY2011
63
59
FY 2012
65
65
FY 2013
67
FY 2014
81
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: Baseline is $46. 13 per submission in FY 2009 according to OPPT's Confidential Business Information Tracking System (CBITS) and Manage
Toxic Substances (MTS) database and EPA's Financial Data Warehouse (FDW).
(PM E02) Number of chemicals for which EDSP Tier 1 test orders have been issued
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
40
0
FY 2012
40
0
FY 2013
40
FY 2014
Unit
Chemicals
Explanation of Results: In FY 2012, the Endocrine Program continued to review public comments submitted for the second list of EDSP chemicals and did not
accomplish the goal of issuing additional test orders on the subsequent list of EDSP chemicals for screening. This second list includes drinking water contaminants in
addition to pesticide active ingredients.
Additional Information: FY 2010 baseline is 67 chemicals for which EDSP Tier 1 test orders have been issued. This measure will be replaced by new EDSP measures
E04andE05inFY2014.
(PM EOS) Number of screening and testing assays for which validation decisions have been reached
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
2
2
FY 2012
4
1
FY 2013
6
FY 2014
Unit
Assays
Explanation of Results: The OECD and ICCVAM validated estrogenic receptor transactivation assay BGlLuc assay for both agonist and antagonist was formally
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
940
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
accepted by the agency as being equivalent to the current Tier 1 ERTA assay. Remaining Tier 2 assays, including bird, fish, frog and invertebrate species remain active in
the inter laboratory phase. The agency continues to actively pursue the completion of these critical studies, while addressing unanticipated laboratory issues that identifies
important refinements that need to be made for the development of standardized testing methods. The agency is also continuing to pursue the use of computational
toxicology and high throughput methods for EDSP Chemical prioritization.
Additional Information: FY 2010 baseline is 15 screening and testing assays for which validation decisions have been reached. There are several steps within the
validation process including: preparation of detailed review papers, performance of pre validation studies, validation by multiple labs, and peer reviews. A decision to
discontinue validation efforts for a particular assay could occur during any of these steps while a decision to accept an assay as validated occurs after all the steps are
successfully completed. This measure will be replaced by new EDSP measures E04 and EOS in FY 2014.
(PM E04) Number of chemicals with Tier 1 screening assay results reviewed.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
52
Unit
Chemicals
Additional Information: FY 201 1 baseline is zero List 1 chemicals for which Tier 1 screening assays results will have completed reviews according to EPA internal
tracking. This performance measure accounts for those scientific data evaluation records that have undergone primary and secondary technical reviews for the chemicals
that have screening data submitted to the Agency.
(PM EOS) Number of chemicals for which scientific weight of evidence determinations have been completed.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
52
Unit
Chemicals
Additional Information: F Y 20 1 1 baseline is zero List 1 chemicals for which completed weight of evidence review documents have been completed according to EPA
internal tracking. This measure accounts for the number of scientific weight of evidence and hazard characterizations completed; these hazard characterizations will be
based on the integrated scientific reviews of the 1) Tier 1 data in combination with 2) other scientifically relevant information and 3) existing toxicity information (e.g., 40
CFR part 158).
(PM E06) Number of High Throughput (HTP) assays and Quantitative Structure Activity Relationship (QSAR) tools
validated for use in a chemical prioritization scheme, screening or data replacement for EDSP.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
8
Unit
Assays and
Tools
Additional Information: FY 201 1 baseline is zero assays or tools for which validation decisions have been reached for their use in chemical prioritization according to
EPA internal tracking. There are several steps within the validation process including: preparation of detailed assay descriptions, performance reviews, validation by
comparison to reference compounds, and peer reviews. A decision to discontinue validation efforts for a particular assay and/or tool could occur during any of these steps
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
941
-------
Program Area
(2) Protect
Ecosystems
from Chemical
Risks
Performance Measures and Data
while a decision to accept an assay as validated occurs after all the steps are successfully completed.
(PM HC1) Annual number of hazard characterizations completed for HPV chemicals
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
230
270
FY2011
300
318
FY 2012
300
300
FY 2013
300
FY 2014
Unit
Chemicals
Additional Information: The cumulative baseline through FY 2009 is 1,095. This is made up on US and internationally sponsored Hazard Characterization through 2009.
International HCs started being produced in the early 1990's and US sponsored HCs started to be produced in 2007. Through FY 201 1 1,683 hazard characterizations have
been completed. This measure will be discontinued after FY 2013 and replaced by measure RA1 in FY 2014.
(PM RA1) Annual number of chemicals for which risk assessments are finalized through EPA's TSCA Existing
Chemicals Program.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
3
Unit
Risk
Assessments
Completed
Additional Information: The universe for this measure is the 83 TSCA Work Plan Chemicals identified by EPA on March 1, 2012, plus other chemicals for which EPA's
TSCA Existing Chemicals Program publicly issues final risk assessments after FY 2012. The cumulative baseline through FY 2013 is zero.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, no watersheds will exceed aquatic life benchmarks for targeted pesticides. (Based on FY 1992-
2001 data from the watersheds sampled by the USGS National Water Quality Assessment (NAWQA) program, urban
watersheds that exceed the National Pesticide Program aquatic life benchmarks are 73 percent for diazinon, 37 percent for
chlorpyrifos, and 13 percent for carbaryl. Agricultural watersheds that exceed the National Pesticide Program aquatic life
benchmarks are 18 percent for azinphos-methyl and 18 percent for chlorpyrifos.)
(PM 268) Percent of urban watersheds that do not exceed EPA aquatic life benchmarks for three key pesticides of
concern (diazinon, chlorpyrifos and carbaryl).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
25,25,30
40,0,30
FY 2009
No Target
Established
Biennial
FY 2010
5,0,20
6.7,0,33
FY2011
No Target
Established
Biennial
FY 2012
5,0,10
0,0,9
FY 2013
No Target
Established
FY 2014
0,0,0
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: Diazinon and Carbaryl mitigation efforts have resulted in a more expedited positive result than originally anticipated.
Additional Information: Based on F Y 1 992-200 1 data from the watersheds sampled by the USGS National Water Quality Assessment (NAWQA) program, urban
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
942
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
watersheds sampled that exceeded benchmarks are 73% for diazinon, 37% for chlorpyrifos and 13% for carbaryl. Data for this measure are reported biennially.
(PM 269) Percent of agricultural watersheds that do not exceed EPA aquatic life benchmarks for two key pesticides of
concern (azinphos-methyl and chlorpyrifos).
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
0,10
0,8
FY2011
No Target
Established
Biennial
FY 2012
0,10
7,7
FY 2013
No Target
Established
FY 2014
0,0
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: AZM: The detection limit is below the acute invertebrate and the aquatic life benchmarks, so an exceedance of those benchmarks is an
uncertainty. Chlorpyrifos: Mitigation efforts have resulted in a more expedited positive result then originally anticipated.
Additional Information: Based on F Y 1 992-200 1 data from the watersheds sampled by the USGS National Water Quality Assessment (NAWQA) program, agricultural
watersheds that exceeded aquatic life benchmarks are 18 percent for azinphos-methyl and 18 percent for chlorpyrifos. Data for this measure are reported biennially.
(PM 164) Number of pesticide registration review dockets opened.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
70
75
FY2011
70
81
FY 2012
70
79
FY 2013
72
FY 2014
73
Unit
Dockets
Explanation of Results: The chemical cases in FY 2012 required less effort than average cases reviewed. As registration review advances, future (pending) cases are
expected to be more resource intensive.
Additional Information: In 2008, 71 registration review work dockets were opened according to EPA internal data.
(PM 230) Number of pesticide registration review final work plans completed.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
70
70
FY2011
70
75
FY 2012
70
70
FY 2013
72
FY 2014
73
Unit
Work Plans
Additional Information: In 2008, 47 final work plans for registered pesticides were reviewed according to EPA internal data.
(PM 240) Maintain timeliness of Section 18 Emergency Exemption Decisions
Target
Actual
FY 2007
45
36.60
FY 2008
45
34
FY 2009
45
40
FY 2010
45
50
FY2011
45
52
FY 2012
45
43
FY 2013
45
FY 2014
45
Unit
Days
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
943
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: Unlike prior years, no unusual issues occurred that impacted the programs ability to meet and slightly exceed the target.
Additional Information: Baseline for SI 8 decisions is 45 days in 2005 according to EPA internal data.
(PM 276) Percent of registration review chemicals with identified endangered species concerns, for which EPA obtains
any mitigation of risk prior to consultation with DOC and DPI.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
5
Data Avail
11/2013
FY 2013
5
FY 2014
15
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: Data unavailable for analyses due to lack of consensus among Federal agencies on scientific standards for completing Endangered Species Act
analysis. EPA has initiated a dialogue with stakeholders on the requisite information needed to conduct ESA analyses and is awaiting the results of a National Academy of
Sciences (NAS) peer review in the Spring, 2013 to inform its analysis.
Additional Information: The baseline is 0% for each annual reporting period as percentages are not cumulative. The data is tracked by OPP using internal tracking
numbers. The data is obtained from ecological risk assessments and effects determinations prepared to support a registration review case.
Strategic Measure: Through 2015, make all health and safety studies available to the public for chemicals in commerce, to the
extent allowed by law. (Baseline is 21,994 confidential business information (CBI) cases of Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA) health and safety studies as defined in TSCA Section 3(6) that were submitted for chemicals potentially in commerce
between the enactment of TSCA and January 21, 2010.)
(3) Ensure
Transparency
of Chemical
Health and
Safety
Information
(PM CIS) Percentage of existing CBI claims for chemical identity in health and safety studies reviewed and, as
appropriate, challenged.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
5
5.3
FY 2012
10
59.6
FY 2013
13
FY 2014
22
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: Target exceeded due to large number of TSCA Section 5 Pre-Manufacture Notice and Section 8(e) Chemical Hazard Notification submissions
that were reviewed through an automated system were determined not to have claimed chemical ID as CBI.
Additional Information: Prior to August 2010, zero of 22,483 existing TSCA CBI claims for chemical identity, which potentially contain health and safety studies, had
been reviewed or challenged, where appropriate. This is a revision of the previously stated baseline of January 2010, reflecting an improved understanding of the universe
of existing CBI claims.
(PM C19) Percentage of CBI claims for chemical identity in health and safety studies reviewed and challenged, as
appropriate, as they are submitted.
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
Unit
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
944
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
100
100
100
100
100
100
Percent
Additional Information: Prior to August 20 1 0, 0% of approximately 500 TSCA CBI claims submitted per year for chemical identity, which potentially contain health and
safety studies, had been reviewed or challenged, where appropriate. This is a revision of the corresponding baseline for strategic measure 4.1.3.1, which repeated the
number 22 ,4 8 3 from the baseline for annual budget measure CIS.
Objective 2 - Promote Pollution Prevention: Conserve and protect natural resources by promoting pollution prevention and the adoption of
other stewardship practices by companies, communities, governmental organizations, and individuals.
Program Area
(1) Prevent
Pollution and
Promote
Environmental
Stewardship
Performance Measures and Data
Strategic Measure: By 2015, reduce 15 billion pounds of hazardous materials cumulatively through pollution prevention.
(Baseline is 4.8 billion pounds reduced through 2008.)
(PM 264) Pounds of hazardous materials reduced through pollution prevention.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
414
386.1
FY 2008
429
469.8
FY 2009
494
605.6
FY 2010
1,625
1,383.7
FY2011
1,549
1,589
FY 2012
1,064
Data Avail
10/2013
FY 2013
935
FY 2014
1,459.9
Unit
Pounds
(Millions)
Explanation of Results: Measure has one year data lag.
Additional Information: Baseline is 4.8 billion pounds reduced from 1997 through 2008 according to reports provided by EPA Regional Offices and individual Pollution
Prevention (P2) Programs/Results Centers based on information obtained from program participants/partners or application of results estimation protocols. Commencing
in 2010 targets and results incorporate both new annual results and recurring results for up to 10 prior years for each of the six individual P2 programs.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, reduce 9 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2Eq.) cumulatively through
pollution prevention. (Baseline is 6.5 MMTCO2Eq. reduced through 2008. The data from this measure are also calculated into
the Agency's overall GHG measure under Goal 1.)
(PM 297) Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (MTCO2e) reduced or offset through pollution prevention.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
2
1.618
FY 2010
5.9
3.45
FY2011
5.7
4.6
FY 2012
6.8
Data Avail
10/2013
FY 2013
4.2
FY 2014
3.84
Unit
MTCO2e
(Millions)
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
945
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: Expected one year data lag.
Additional Information: Baseline is 6.5 MMTC02e reduced from 1997 through 2008 according to Reports provided by EPA Regional Offices and individual Pollution
Prevention (P2) Programs/Results Centers based on information obtained from program participants/partners or application of results estimation protocols. Commencing
in 2010 targets and results incorporate both new annual results and recurring results for up to 10 prior years for each of the six individual P2 programs.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, reduce water use by an additional 24 billion gallons cumulatively through pollution prevention.
(Baseline is 51 billion gallons reduced through 2008.)
(PM 262) Gallons of water reduced through pollution prevention.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
1.79
1.75
FY 2008
1.64
21.18
FY 2009
1.79
4.67
FY 2010
26.2
29.8
FY2011
28.6
29.1
FY 2012
27.8
Data Avail
10/2013
FY 2013
24.8
FY 2014
24.1
Unit
Gallons
(Billions)
Explanation of Results: Data has a one year reporting lag.
Additional Information: Baseline is 51.3 billion gallons reduced from 1997 through 2008 according to reports provided by EPA Regional Offices and individual Pollution
Prevention (P2) Programs/Results Centers based on information obtained from program participants/partners or application of results estimation protocols. Commencing
in 2010 targets and results incorporate both new annual results and recurring results for up to 10 prior years for each of the six individual P2 programs.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, save $1.2 billion through pollution prevention improvements in business, institutional, and
government costs cumulatively. (Baseline is $3.1 billion saved through 2008.)
(PM 263) Business, institutional and government costs reduced through pollution prevention.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
44.3
282.7
FY 2008
45.9
227.2
FY 2009
130
276.5
FY 2010
1,060
935.6
FY2011
1,042
1,057
FY 2012
847
Data Avail
10/2013
FY 2013
738
FY 2014
695.8
Unit
Dollars
Saved
(Millions)
Explanation of Results: Data has a one year reporting lag.
Additional Information: Baseline is 3.1 billion dollars saved from 1997 through 2008 according to Reports provided by EPA Regional Offices and individual Pollution
Prevention (P2) Programs/Results Centers based on information obtained from program participants/partners or application of results estimation protocols. Commencing
in 2010 targets and results incorporate both new annual results and recurring results for up to 10 prior years for each of the six individual P2 programs.
Strategic Measure: Through 2015, increase the use of safer chemicals cumulatively by 40 percent. (Baseline: 476 million
pounds of safer chemicals used in 2009 as reported to be in commerce by Design for the Environment program.)
(PM P25) Percent increase in use of safer chemicals
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
946
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
7
62
FY 2013
7
FY 2014
85
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: EOY target vastly exceeded because of continued leveraging of 3rd parties— paid by requesting companies-to conduct product reviews.
Additional Information: In 2009, 476 M Ibs. of safer chemicals were reported to be in commerce by EPA's Design for the Environment (DfE) Program. The FY2014
target has been set much higher than those for previous years due to better than expected performance on this measure in FY 201 1 (60. 1%) and further increase in
performance indicated for FY 20 12. The FY 201 3 target (7%) was set before the FY 20 11 results were available.
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
947
-------
Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws
Protect human health and the environment through vigorous and targeted civil and criminal enforcement. Assure compliance with environmental
laws.
Objective 1 - Enforce Environmental Laws: Pursue vigorous civil and criminal enforcement that targets the most serious water, air, and
chemical hazards in communities. Assure strong, consistent, and effective enforcement of federal environmental laws nationwide.
Program Area
(1) Maintain
Enforcement
Presence
Strategic
baseline:
Performance
Measures and
Data
Measure: By 2015, conduct 105,000 federal inspections and evaluations (5-year cumulative). (FY 2005-2009
21,000 annually)
(PM 409) Number of
Target
Actual
FY 2007
federal inspections and evaluations.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
19,000
20000
FY 2013
17,000
FY 2014
17,000
Unit
Inspections/
Evaluations
Additional Information: FY 2005-2009 baseline: 21,000 annually.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, initiate 19,500 civil judicial and administrative enforcement cases (5-year cumulative). (FY
2005-2009 baseline: 3,900 annually)
(PM 410) Number of
Target
Actual
FY 2007
civil judicial and administrative enforcement cases initiated.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
Explanation of Results: FY 2012 result is close to but slightly lower than target.
fewer enforcement initiations and conclusions.
Additional Information: FY 2005 -2009 baseline: 3,900 annually)
FY2011
FY 2012
3,300
3000
FY 2013
3,200
FY 2014
3,200
Unit
Cases
EPA is pursuing larger, more complex risk-based enforcement cases which has led to
Strategic Measure: By 2015, conclude 19,000 civil judicial and administrative enforcement cases (5-year cumulative). (FY
2005-2009 baseline: 3,800 annually)
(PM 411) Number of
Target
FY 2007
civil judicial and administrative enforcement cases concluded.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
3,200
FY 2013
3,000
FY 2014
2800
Unit
Cases
GOAL 5: ENFORCING ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS
948
-------
Program Area
Performance
Actual
Explanation of Results: FY 2012 result is close to but slightly lower than target.
fewer enforcement initiations and conclusions.
Additional Information: FY 2005 -2009 baseline: 3,800 annually.
Strategic
(Baseline
Measure: By 2015, maintain review of the overall
2009: 100 percent)
(PM 412) Percentage of open consent decrees
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
Measures and Data
3000
EPA is pursuing larger, more complex risk-based enforcement cases which have led to
compliance status of 100 percent of the open consent decrees.
reviewed for overall compliance status.
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
91
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: The total number of CDs to be reviewed annually is small. Therefore, a small number of un reviewed CDs results in a noticeable percentage
shortfall compared to the target.
Additional Information: FY 2012 is the first year of collecting data for this measure.
Strategic Measure: Each year through 2015, support cleanups and save federal dollars for sites where there are no alternatives
by: (1) reaching a settlement or taking an enforcement action before the start of a remedial action at 99 percent of Superfund
sites having viable responsible parties other than the federal government; and (2) addressing all cost recovery statute of
limitation cases with total past costs greater than or equal to $200,000. (Baseline: 99 percent of sites reaching a settlement or
EPA taking an enforcement action (FY 2007-2009 annual average); 100 percent cost recovery statute of limitation cases
addressed (FY 2009))
(PM 418) Percentage of criminal cases having the most significant health, environmental, and deterrence impacts.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
43
45
FY 2013
43
FY 2014
43
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: FY2010 baseline: 36 percent.
Strategic
baseline:
Measure: By 2015, increase the percentage of criminal cases with charges filed to 45 percent. (FY 2006-2010
36 percent)
GOAL 5: ENFORCING ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS
949
-------
Program Area
(2) Support
Taking Action
on Climate
Change and
Improving Air
Quality
Performance Measures and Data
(PM 420) Percentage of criminal cases with charges filed.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
40
44
FY 2013
40
FY 2014
40
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: FY 2006-2010 baseline: 36 percent.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, maintain an 85 percent conviction rate for criminal defendants. (FY 2006-2010 baseline: 85
percent)
(PM 419) Percentage of criminal cases with individual defendants.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
75
70
FY 2013
75
FY 2014
75
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: This result is within the expected annual variability of this measure.
Additional Information: FY 2006-2008 baseline: 78 percent.
(PM 421) Percentage of conviction rate for criminal defendants.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
85
95
FY 2013
85
FY 2014
85
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: FY 2006-2010 baseline: 87 percent.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, reduce, treat, or eliminate 2,400 million estimated pounds of air pollutants as a result of
concluded enforcement actions (5-year cumulative). (FY 2005-2008 baseline: 480 million pounds, annual average over the
period)
(PM 400) Millions of pounds of air pollutants reduced, treated, or eliminated through concluded enforcement actions.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
480
410
FY2011
480
1,100
FY 2012
480
250
FY 2013
450
FY 2014
350
Unit
Million
Pounds
Explanation of Results: Results reflect a shift from completing larger air pollution cases to addressing smaller air pollution cases, such as air toxics, which are expected to
GOAL 5: ENFORCING ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS
950
-------
Program Area
(3) Support
Protecting
America's
Waters
(4) Support
Cleaning Up
Communities
and Advancing
Sustainable
Development
Performance
Measures and
Data
yield significant health benefits.
Additional Information: FY 2005-2008 Average Baseline: 480 million pounds, annual average over the period. As OECA continues to make progress to address large air
pollution cases, such as utilities, OECA's future annual enforcement actions will be comprised of smaller air pollution cases, such as air toxics. Air toxics facilities are
typically much smaller in scale than utilities, so the number of pounds reduced from an air toxics case will typically be smaller, but will yield significant health benefits
given the adverse health effects associated with air toxics.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, reduce, treat, or eliminate 1,600 million estimated pounds of water pollutants as a result of
concluded enforcement actions (5-year cumulative). (FY 2005-2008 baseline: 320 million pounds, annual average over the
period)
(PM 402) Millions of
Target
Actual
FY 2007
pounds of water pollutants reduced,
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
320
1,000
treated, or eliminated through concluded enforcement actions.
FY2011
320
740
FY 2012
320
500
FY 2013
320
FY 2014
280
Unit
Million
Pounds
Additional Information: FY 2005-2008 Average Baseline: 320 million pounds, annual average over the period. For FY 2010, two stormwater home builder actions
contributed to more than half of the one billion pound pollutant reduction result.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, reduce, treat, or eliminate 32,000 million estimated pounds of hazardous waste as a
concluded enforcement actions (5-year cumulative). (FY 2008 baseline: 6,500 million pounds)
(PM 405) Millions of
Target
Actual
FY 2007
pounds of hazardous waste reduced,
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
6,500
11,800
result of
treated, or eliminated through concluded enforcement actions.
FY2011
6,500
3,600
FY 2012
6,500
4400
FY 2013
6,000
FY 2014
5,000
Unit
Million
Pounds
Explanation of Results: Results for this measure are highly variable from year to year because they are driven by a small number of very large cases.
Additional Information: FY 2008 Baseline: 6,500 million pounds. The results for this measure are driven by a small number of very large cases and, therefore, can cause
significant fluctuations in the results from year to year. For example, in FY 2010 over 99% of the total 1 1 .75 billion pounds of hazardous waste reduced, treated, or
eliminated came from two cases - CF Industries Inc. (9.87 billion pounds) and Exxon Mobil Oil Corporation (1 .86 billion pounds). Given the types of cases that are
nearing completion, OECA's shift in focus is expected to result in fewer millions of pounds of pollutions reduced overall.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, obtain commitments to clean up 1,500 million cubic yards of contaminated soil and groundwater
medial as a result of concluded CERCLA and RCRA corrective action enforcement actions (5-year cumulative). (FY 2007-
2009 baseline: 300 million cubic yards of contaminated soil and groundwater media, annual average over the period)
(PM 078) Percentage of all Superfund statute
costs equal to or greater than $500,000.
of limitations cases addressed at sites
with unaddressed past Superfund
GOAL 5: ENFORCING ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS
951
-------
Program Area
(5) Support
Ensuring the
Safety of
Chemicals and
Preventing
Pollution
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
FY 2007
100
98
FY 2008
100
100
FY 2009
100
100
FY 2010
100
100
FY2011
100
100
FY 2012
100
100
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: In F Y 2009, the Agency will have addressed 1 00 percent of Cost Recovery at all NPL and non-NPL sites with total past costs equal to or greater
than $200,000. The threshold for this measure was increased from $200,000 to $500,000 in FY 201 3 to focus prioritization efforts.
(PM 285) Percentage of Superfund sites having viable, liable responsible parties other than the federal government
where EPA reaches a settlement or takes an enforcement action before starting a remedial action.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
95
98
FY 2008
95
95
FY 2009
95
100
FY 2010
95
98
FY2011
95
100
FY 2012
99
100
FY 2013
99
FY 2014
99
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: In F Y 1998 approximately 70 percent of new remedial work at NPL sites (excluding Federal facilities) was initiated by private parties. In F Y
2003, 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.
(PM 417) Millions of cubic yards of contaminated soil and groundwater media EPA has obtained commitments to clean
up as a result of concluded CERCLA and RCRA corrective action enforcement actions.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
300
400
FY 2013
275
FY 2014
225
Unit
Million
Cubic Yards
Additional Information: FY 2007-2009 baseline: 300 million cubic yards of contaminated soil and groundwater media, annual average over the period. The results for
this measure are usually driven by a small number of very large cases which can cause a significant fluctuation in results from year to year depending on the types of cases
entered by the court. For example, in FY 201 1 75% of the 937.4 million cubic yards of contaminated soil and groundwater media to be cleaned up under concluded
CERCLA and RCRA corrective action enforcement actions came from one case. Additionally, the FY 2013 target has been adjusted (from 300 to 275) to reflect
decreases in contributing program project areas in the FY 2013 budget.
Strategic Measure: By 2015, reduce, treat, or eliminate 19.0 million estimated pounds of toxic and pesticide pollutants as a
result of concluded enforcement actions (5-year cumulative). (FY 2005-2008 baseline: 3.8 million pounds, annual average over
the period)
(PM 404) Millions of pounds of toxic and pesticide pollutants reduced, treated, or eliminated through concluded
enforcement actions.
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
Unit
GOAL 5: ENFORCING ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS
952
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
3.8
8.3
3.8
6.1
3.8
1,400
3.0
2.5
Million
Pounds
Explanation of Results: The results for this measure are usually driven by a small number of very large cases which can cause a significant fluctuation in results from
year to year depending on the types of cases entered by the court. For example, in FY 2012, one RCRA case resulted in 1.44 billion pounds of pollutants reduced, treated
or eliminated.
Additional Information: FY 2005-2008 Average Baseline: The program used existing data to estimate results for FY 2005-2008, which yielded an approximate average
baseline of 3.8 million pounds. FY 2010 and FY 2011 results were driven by a small number of enforcement cases, which yielded the majority of the pounds addressed. A
change in focus in this program (more emphasis on the TSCA Lead-Based Paint (LBP) program area) and transition to an automated system for review of pesticide
imports will result in a reduction in the target for the number of pounds of pollutants reduced.
GOAL 5: ENFORCING ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS
953
-------
PERFORMANCE: RESEARCH EIGHT-YEAR ARRAY
(Boxes shaded gray indicate that a measure has been terminated for FY 2013 and beyond, therefore, data are no longer collected.)
NPM: Office of Research and Development
Performance Measures and Data
(PM AC1) Percentage of products completed on time by Air, Climate, and Energy research program.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
100
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: All products met.
Additional Information: A research product is "a deliverable that results from a specific research project or task. Research products may require translation or synthesis before integration into an
output ready for partner use." This secondary performance measure tracks the timely completion of research products. Working with its partners, each program develops a list of planned research
products and their associated outputs. The list reflects all products the program plans to complete by the end of each fiscal year. The estimated completion date is based on when the output is
needed for partner use and when the research products are needed to be transformed into the output. The actual product completion date is self-reported. The program strives to complete 100% of
its planned products each year so that it can best meet EPA and other partners' needs.
(PM AC2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients for use in taking action on climate change or improving air quality.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
77
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: The Air, Climate and Energy Research Program met 77% of its planned outputs. The outputs that were not met are: 1) Analysis and Decision Support Tools for Sources,
Composition, and Health Effects of Coarse Particulate Matter (Coarse PM projects have all requested no-cost extensions due to initial delays in starting the work and the need to find good students
to work on the projects), 2) Studies on innovative approaches to addressing links between particulate matter exposures, composition, sources, and health effects- (The Innovative Approaches
projects have requested no-cost extensions, due to challenges in acquiring some of the data needed for the model fusion, challenges in hiring students, and also difficulties working with the health
data), and 3) Report on methane and VOC emissions from oil and gas production operations using advanced source assessment technologies such as to geospatial mapping, off site remote and direct
fugitive leak measurement, and infrared camera sensing.
*Note: FY 2012 was the first year this measure was in place. The outputs appearing in the program's Strategic Research Action Plan (STRAP) served as the baseline for this measure (meaning, if
ten outputs were cited in the STRAP as planned for completion in FY12, and EPA completed 8 of those outputs in FY12, this measure would show 80% completion). EPA is currently evaluating
the effectiveness of this metric for assessing research progress.
954
-------
Performance Measures and Data
Additional Information: Research outputs result from the translation or synthesis of one or more research products into the format compatible with the partner's decision needs. "Delivery of a
research output" means that the output is transferred to ORD's research partner ready for the intended partner use. EPA identifies and describes the planned outputs in the program's Research
Program Strategic Plan. At the end of the fiscal year, the program reports on its success in meeting its planned annual outputs. The program strives to complete 100% of its planned outputs each
year so that it can best meet EPA and other partners' needs. To ensure the ambitiousness of its annual output measures, ORD has better formalized the process for developing and modifying program
outputs, including requiring that ORD programs engage partners when making modifications. Involving partners in this process helps to ensure the ambitiousness of outputs on the basis of partner
utility.
(PM CS1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Chemical Safety for Sustainability research program.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
100
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: All products met
Additional Information: A research product is "a deliverable that results from a specific research project or task. Research products may require translation or synthesis before integration into an
output ready for partner use." This secondary performance measure tracks the timely completion of research products. Working with its partners, each program develops a list of planned research
products and their associated outputs. The list reflects all products the program plans to complete by the end of each fiscal year. The estimated completion date is based on when the output is
needed for partner use and when the research products are needed to be transformed into the output. The actual product completion date is self-reported. The program strives to complete 100% of
its planned products each year so that it can best meet EPA and other partners' needs.
(PM CS2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients and partners to improve their capability to advance the
environmentally sustainable development, use, and assessment of chemicals.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
50
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: The Chemical Safety and Sustainability Research Program did not meet one of its planned outputs in FY12: Approaches for standardized testing of nanomaterials (The
output will be delivered in the first quarter of FY13).
*Note: FY 2012 was the first year this measure was in place. The outputs appearing in the program's Strategic Research Action Plan (STRAP) served as the baseline for this measure (meaning, if
ten outputs were cited in the STRAP as planned for completion in FY12, and EPA completed 8 of those outputs in FY12, this measure would show 80% completion). EPA is currently evaluating
the effectiveness of this metric for assessing research progress.
Additional Information: Research outputs result from the translation or synthesis of one or more research products into the format compatible with the partner's decision needs. "Delivery of a
research output" means that the output is transferred to ORD's research partner ready for the intended partner use. EPA identifies and describes the planned outputs in the program's Research
955
-------
Performance Measures and Data
Program Strategic Plan. At the end of the fiscal year, the program reports on its success in meeting its planned annual outputs. The program strives to complete 100% of its planned outputs each
year so that it can best meet EPA and other partners' needs. To ensure the ambitiousness of its annual output measures, ORD has better formalized the process for developing and modifying program
outputs, including requiring that ORD programs engage partners when making modifications. Involving partners in this process helps to ensure the ambitiousness of outputs on the basis of partner
utility.
(PM HC1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Sustainable and Healthy Communities research program.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
100
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: All products met.
Additional Information: A research product is "a deliverable that results from a specific research project or task. Research products may require translation or synthesis before integration into an
output ready for partner use." This secondary performance measure tracks the timely completion of research products. Working with its partners, each program develops a list of planned research
products and their associated outputs. The list reflects all products the program plans to complete by the end of each fiscal year. The estimated completion date is based on when the output is
needed for partner use and when the research products are needed to be transformed into the output. The actual product completion date is self-reported. The program strives to complete 100% of
its planned products each year so that it can best meet EPA and other partners' needs.
(PM HC2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients, partners, and stakeholders for use in pursuing their sustainability
goals.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
50
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: The Safe and Healthy Communities Research Program met 50% of its planned FY12 outputs. The outputs that were not completed are: 1) Inventory of relevant community
sustainability tools and peer review evaluation of effectiveness and accessibility of existing tools Phase I of this output was completed; phase II will be completed in FY13. The output was not fully
completed because original FTE participation was far less than expected and funds arrived later than anticipated. 2) Publically available EQI (years 2000-2005) dataset with users' guide so
communities can extract the data and use for their own study questions The scope of the project changed to include current data sets and did not receive full funding requested. Additionally, the
contract to obtain data took longer than anticipated and 3) Critical evaluation of existing tools and state of the practice for community decisions in the buildings and infrastructure sector. The draft
synthesis paper for buildings and infrastructure will be integrated with counterpart white papers for transportation, land use and zoning, and water and materials handling to develop an integrated
approach to sustainability decisions for communities. Anticipate completion in FY2013.
*Note: FY 2012 was the first year this measure was in place. The outputs appearing in the program's Strategic Research Action Plan (STRAP) served as the baseline for this measure (meaning, if
ten outputs were cited in the STRAP as planned for completion in FY12, and EPA completed 8 of those outputs in FY12, this measure would show 80% completion). EPA is currently evaluating
the effectiveness of this metric for assessing research progress.
Additional Information: Research outputs result from the translation or synthesis of one or more research products into the format compatible with the partner's decision needs. "Delivery of a
research output" means that the output is transferred to ORD's research partner ready for the intended partner use. EPA identifies and describes the planned outputs in the program's Research
956
-------
Performance Measures and Data
Program Strategic Plan. At the end of the fiscal year, the program reports on its success in meeting its planned annual outputs. The program strives to complete 100% of its planned outputs each
year so that it can best meet EPA and other partners' needs. To ensure the ambitiousness of its annual output measures, ORD has better formalized the process for developing and modifying program
outputs, including requiring that ORD programs engage partners when making modifications. Involving partners in this process helps to ensure the ambitiousness of outputs on the basis of partner
utility.
(PM HS1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Homeland Security research program.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
100
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: All products met
Additional Information: A research product is "a deliverable that results from a specific research project or task. Research products may require translation or synthesis before integration into an
output ready for partner use." This secondary performance measure tracks the timely completion of research products. Working with its partners, each program develops a list of planned research
products and their associated outputs. The list reflects all products the program plans to complete by the end of each fiscal year. The estimated completion date is based on when the output is
needed for partner use and when the research products are needed to be transformed into the output. The actual product completion date is self-reported. The program strives to complete 100% of
its planned products each year so that it can best meet EPA and other partners' needs.
(PM HS2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients and partners to improve their capabilities to respond to
contamination resulting from homeland security events and related disasters.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
78
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: Two of the Homeland Security Research Program's planned FY12 products were not completed: 1) Performance and Economics of Decontamination Technologies Tested
by Bio-response Operational Testing and Evaluation - (This was completed in FY12, but is not through the extensive multi-agency review required that will be completed in FY13) and 2)
Technology Testing and Evaluation Program Performance Reports (this program did not receive funding in FY12 and therefore no evaluations could be performed)
*Note: FY 2012 was the first year this measure was in place. The outputs appearing in the program's Strategic Research Action Plan (STRAP) served as the baseline for this measure (meaning, if
ten outputs were cited in the STRAP as planned for completion in FY12, and EPA completed 8 of those outputs in FY12, this measure would show 80% completion). EPA is currently evaluating
the effectiveness of this metric for assessing research progress.
Additional Information: Research outputs result from the translation or synthesis of one or more research products into the format compatible with the partner's decision needs. "Delivery of a
research output" means that the output is transferred to ORD's research partner ready for the intended partner use. EPA identifies and describes the planned outputs in the program's Research
Program Strategic Plan. At the end of the fiscal year, the program reports on its success in meeting its planned annual outputs. The program strives to complete 100% of its planned outputs each
year so that it can best meet EPA and other partners' needs. To ensure the ambitiousness of its annual output measures, ORD has better formalized the process for developing and modifying program
outputs, including requiring that ORD programs engage partners when making modifications. Involving partners in this process helps to ensure the ambitiousness of outputs on the basis of partner
utility.
957
-------
Performance Measures and Data
(PM RA1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Human Health Risk Assessment research program.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
100
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: All products met
Additional Information: A research product is "a deliverable that results from a specific research project or task. Research products may require translation or synthesis before integration into an
output ready for partner use." This secondary performance measure tracks the timely completion of research products. Working with its partners, each program develops a list of planned research
products and their associated outputs. The list reflects all products the program plans to complete by the end of each fiscal year. The estimated completion date is based on when the output is
needed for partner use and when the research products are needed to be transformed into the output. The actual product completion date is self-reported. The program strives to complete 100% of
its planned products each year so that it can best meet EPA and other partners' needs.
(PM RA2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients and partners for use in informing human health decisions.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
38
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: Unmet outputs: 1) Halogenated platinum salts IRIS Assessment - EPA began the assessment to address questions focused on the use of platinum fuel additives in some clean
diesel projects under the Diesel Emission Reduction Act. EPA recently removed platinum fuel additives from the list of registered additives for use in on-road diesel vehicles. Because of this, the
Agency no longer needs the assessment. 2) Ethylene oxide IRIS Assessment - EPA is considering conducting a second peer review for this assessment. 3) Methanol (non-cancer) IRIS Assessment -
EPA is considering conducting a second peer review for this assessment. 4) n-butanol IRIS Assessment - Delay in peer review was a consequence of a listening session which identified additional
data that would improve document of several related issues. This additional documentation required the preparation of an addendum to the draft assessment before starting peer review. Completion
is expected in FY13. 5) 1,4-dioxane IRIS Assessment - Delayed because resources were diverted to implement NAS recommendations in several other IRIS assessments before their release for
public comment. 6) Final Ozone ISA - The CASAC requested a third external review draft and review. 7) Workshop on SOx - This deliverable has been moved to FY13 after discussion with the
primary stakeholder about competing priorities (e.g., the request to develop third draft of the ozone and lead ISAs) and 8) Final Lead ISA - The Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee requested a
third external review draft and review. *Note: FY12 was the first year this measure was in place. The outputs appearing in the program's Strategic Research Action Plan (STRAP) served as the
baseline for this measure (meaning, if ten outputs were cited in the STRAP as planned for completion in FY12, and EPA completed 8 of those outputs in FY12, this measure would show 80%
completion). EPA is currently evaluating the effectiveness of this metric for assessing research progress.
Additional Information: Research outputs result from the translation or synthesis of one or more research products into the format compatible with the partner's decision needs. "Delivery of a
research output" means that the output is transferred to ORD's research partner ready for the intended partner use. EPA identifies and describes the planned outputs in the program's Research
Program Strategic Plan. At the end of the fiscal year, the program reports on its success in meeting its planned annual outputs. The program strives to complete 100% of its planned outputs each
year so that it can best meet EPA and other partners' needs. To ensure the ambitiousness of its annual output measures, ORD has better formalized the process for developing and modifying program
outputs, including requiring that ORD programs engage partners when making modifications. Involving partners in this process helps to ensure the ambitiousness of outputs on the basis of partner
utility.
958
-------
Performance Measures and Data
(PM RA6) Number of regulatory decisions in which decision-makers used HHRA peer-reviewed assessments (IRIS, PPRTVs, exposure
assessments and other assessments)
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
no target
established
NA
FY 2013
20
FY 2014
20
Unit
Number
Explanation of Results: FY 2012 data is unavailable for this measure.
Additional Information: The measure calculates the number of Agency regulatory decisions for which clients use HHRA peer-reviewed health assessments. The measure is calculated by reviewing
regulatory decisions and Records of Decision (ROD) made by EPA, determining how many quantitative health assessment values were used in these EPA program decisions, and what percentage of
these values had been developed by the HHRA Program. This measure will be piloted in FY13 & FY14. The pilot of this measure in FY13 will be based on available information for FY10 and is
unlikely to be reproducible. The feasibility of reliably reporting this measure will be piloted in FY14, contingent upon timely completion of the overhaul of the Agency ROD database. This
restructured database will not be available for analysis until approx. 2 years after decisions are recorded and will start with FY11 RODs. We will evaluate the feasibility of this measure over 3 years
with FY12 & 13 data being reported in FY15 & FY16, respectively.
(PM RA7) Annual milestone progress score for completing draft IRIS health assessments.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
50
8
FY 2013
50
FY 2014
40
Unit
Score
Explanation of Results: EPA's continued internal process improvements consistent with phased implementation of the 2011 National Academy of Sciences (NAS) recommendations and in response
to a newly-contracted NAS review directed by Congress. Changes to the interagency review process for IRIS slowed the movement of draft assessments through the IRIS process and limited the
number of points achievable in any given year.
Additional Information: At the end of the fiscal year, the program reports on its success in meeting its planned annual outputs (detailed in the program's Multi-Year Plan). The program strives to
complete 100% of its planned outputs each year so that includes such factors as client interest, complexity of science, and level of effort required. Points are scored by multiplying the weight of each
assessment by the number of milestones completed in the assessment process. The program plans to target an average score of 50 points each year beginning in 2009, representing a steady and
timely completion of draft assessments throughout each fiscal year. Near-term targets are based on the large volume of ongoing assessments that have not been released in draft due to the change in
the process for external review. This measure will be assessed as a rolling average with potential annual excess rolled over to the next target year so as to provide incentives for completion of more
milestones.
(PM RA8) Annual progress score for finalizing IRIS health assessments.
Target
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
20
FY 2013
20
FY 2014
15
Unit
Score
959
-------
Performance Measures and Data
Actual
17
Explanation of Results: EPA's continued internal process improvements consistent with phased implementation of the 2011 National Academy of Sciences (NAS) recommendations and in response
to a newly-contracted NAS review directed by Congress. Changes to the interagency review process for IRIS slowed the movement of draft assessments through the IRIS process and limited the
number of points achievable in any given year.
Additional Information: This measure tracks the program's ability to make progress in finalizing and releasing IRIS assessments under LTG1. The annual score, tracked cumulatively throughout
the year, is based on the relative weighting of each chemical. Chemicals are weighted using a 3-tier system that includes client interest, complexity of science, and level of effort required. Points are
scored by multiplying the weight of each assessment by the number of milestones completed in the assessment process. The program plans to target an average score of 20 points each year
beginning in 2009, representing a steady and timely completion of final assessments throughout each fiscal year. Near-term targets are based on the large volume of ongoing assessments that have
not been finalized due to the change in the process for external review and completion. This measure will be assessed as rolling average.
(PM SW1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Safe and Sustainable Water Resources research program.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
86
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: The Safe and Sustainable Water Resources Research Program completed 86% of its planned products. Two major products were not completed by FY12: 1) Waters of the
United States Technical Support Document (peer review was completed by a contractor and given to EPA in Feb 2012; second review to be completed 11/1/12) and 2) Global to Genome (G2G):
Specification of a Computational Platform for Agency-wide, Seamless Data Flow and Computational Modeling in Support of Health, Ecological, and Climate Risk Characterizations (The system
design and recommendations document will be completed FY13 Quarter 1).
Additional Information: A research product is "a deliverable that results from a specific research project or task. Research products may require translation or synthesis before integration into an
output ready for partner use." This secondary performance measure tracks the timely completion of research products. Working with its partners, each program develops a list of planned research
products and their associated outputs. The list reflects all products the program plans to complete by the end of each fiscal year. The estimated completion date is based on when the output is
needed for partner use and when the research products are needed to be transformed into the output. The actual product completion date is self-reported. The program strives to complete 100% of
its planned products each year so that it can best meet EPA and other partners' needs.
(PM SW2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients and partners to improve the Agency's capability to ensure clean and
adequate supplies of water that support human well-being and resilient aquatic ecosystems.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
50
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
Unit
Percent
960
-------
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: One planned FY12 output was not met: Pathforward Innovation Projects (output delayed because the product Global to Genome: Specification of a Computational
Platform for Agency-wide, Seamless Data Flow and Computational Modeling in Support of Health, Ecological, and Climate Risk Characterizations has been delayed until FY13 Quarter 3. The
anticipated schedule for completion is as follows: System design and recommendations document: FY13 Quarter 1; Manuscript FY13 Quarter 3).
*Note: FY12 was the first year this measure was in place. The outputs appearing in the program's Strategic Research Action Plan (STRAP) served as the baseline for this measure (meaning, if ten
outputs were cited in the STRAP as planned for completion in FY12, and EPA completed 8 of those outputs in FY12, this measure would show 80% completion). EPA is currently evaluating the
effectiveness of this metric for assessing research progress.
Additional Information: Research outputs result from the translation or synthesis of one or more research products into the format compatible with the partner's decision needs. "Delivery of a
research output" means that the output is transferred to ORD's research partner ready for the intended partner use. EPA identifies and describes the planned outputs in the program's Research
Program Strategic Plan. At the end of the fiscal year, the program reports on its success in meeting its planned annual outputs. The program strives to complete 100% of its planned outputs each
year so that it can best meet EPA and other partners' needs. To ensure the ambitiousness of its annual output measures, ORD has better formalized the process for developing and modifying program
outputs, including requiring that ORD programs engage partners when making modifications. Involving partners in this process helps to ensure the ambitiousness of outputs on the basis of partner
utility.
961
-------
PERFORMANCE: ENABLING AND SUPPORT PROGRAMS EIGHT-YEAR ARRAY
(Boxes shaded gray indicate that a measure has been terminated for FY 2013 and beyond, therefore, data are no longer collected.)
NPM: Office of Administration and Resources Management
Performance Measures and Data
(PM 009) Increase in number and percentage of certified acquisition staff (1102)
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
335/80
323/85
FY 2013
323 / 80
FY 2014
323/ 85
Unit
Number/
Percent
Additional Information: There were 304 GS-1 102 staff on board as of July 26, 2010. There were 240 GS-1 102 Staff, 78.9%, certified as of September 2, 2010. The FY
2013 target for the number of certified acquisition staff has been adjusted (from 335 to 323) due to a personnel hiring policy change made in FY 2012 as a result of FY
2012 funding levels. This policy change is expected to impact personnel hiring in FY 2013, resulting in the adjustment to the FY 2013 target.
(PM 010) Cumulative percentage reduction in Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Scopes 1 & 2 emissions.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
1.0
79.5
FY2011
0.4
59
FY 2012
6.4
54.1
FY 2013
12.2
FY 2014
16.3
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: As part of the Agency's 20 12 Sustainable Plan, EPA reset it Greenhouse Gas goal from the FY 20 11 target of 0.4% to FY2012 the target of
7.7%. The substantial increase in the targeted goal occurred because of a conservative initial baseline and because of greater than anticipated savings from on-going
energy conservation projects.
Additional Information: On October 8, 2009, the President signed Executive Order 13514, "Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance,"
requiring all Federal Agencies to reduce their Green House Gas Scope 1 and 2 emissions (EPA committed to a 25% reduction by FY 2020 from a FY 2008 baseline).
EPA's FY 2008 GHG Scope 1 and 2 emissions were 140,720 mTCO2e's. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 requires each federal agency to reduce energy use intensity by
3% annually through FY 2015. For the Agency's 29 reporting facilities, the FY 2003 energy consumption of British Thermal Units (BTUs) per square foot is 346,518
BTUs per square foot. EPA reset its annual/intermediate Scope 1 and 2 GHG reduction goals in its June 201 1 Strategic Sustainability Performance Plan (S2P2). In
accordance to Executive Order 13514 and GHG accounting standards, the purchase of renewable energy reduces reported GHG emissions. EPA uses renewable energy as
one method to achieve its GHG cumulative percent reduction.
(PM 098) Cumulative percentage reduction in energy consumption.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
6
9
FY 2008
9
13
FY 2009
12
18
FY 2010
15
18.3
FY2011
18
18.1
FY 2012
21
23.7
FY 2013
24
FY 2014
27
Unit
Percent
962
-------
Performance
Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: The Agency continues to make progress towards meeting the EO 13423 for reducing Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Intensity and energy use by 3%
annually.
Additional Information: On January 24, 2007, the President signed Executive Order 13423, "Strengthening Federal Environment, Energy, and Transportation
Management," requiring all Federal Agencies to reduce their Green House Gas intensity and energy use by 3% annually through FY 2015. For the Agency's 29 reporting
facilities, the FY 2003 energy consumption of British Thermal Units (BTUs) per square foot is 346,518 BTUs per square foot.
(PM 007) Percent of GS employees (DEU) hired within 80
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
calendar days.
FY2011
15
18
FY2012 FY2013 FY 2014 Unit
20
Percent
0
Explanation of Results: The measure was discontinued as a result of a change in OPM's time to hire reporting requirements
Additional Information: In FY 2009, 10.7 % of GS employees (DEU) were hired on average in 189.2 days.
(PM 008) Percent of GS employees (all hires) hired within
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
80 calendar days
FY2011
23
21
FY2012 FY2013 FY 2014 Unit
25
Percent
0
Explanation of Results: The measure was discontinued as a result of a change in OPM's time to hire reporting requirements..
Additional Information: In FY 2009, 14.6% of GS employees (other than DEU) were hired on average in 163 days.
963
-------
NPM: Office of Environmental Information
Performance Measures and Data
(PM 052) Number of major EPA environmental systems that use the CDX electronic requirements enabling faster
receipt, processing, and quality checking of data.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
36
37
FY 2008
45
48
FY 2009
50
55
FY 2010
60
60
FY2011
60
64
FY 2012
67
68
FY 2013
75
FY 2014
80
Unit
Systems
Additional Information: The Central Data Exchange program began in FY 2001 to enable States, Tribes and others to send environmental data to EPA through a
centralized electronic process.
(PM 053) States, tribes and territories will be able to exchange data with CDX through nodes in real time, using
standards and automated data-quality checking.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
55
57
FY 2008
55
59
FY 2009
60
59
FY 2010
65
69
FY2011
65
72
FY 2012
80
92
FY 2013
95
FY 2014
98
Unit
Users
Additional Information: The Central Data Exchange program began in FY 2001 to enable States, Tribes and others to send environmental data to EPA through a
centralized electronic process.
(PM 998) EPA's TRI program will work with partners to conduct data quality checks to enhance accuracy and
reliability of environmental data.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
500
FY 2014
500
Unit
Quality
Checks
Additional Information: This metric will allow EPA to for the first time report on performance of the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) program. Data checks will improve
the accuracy and reliability of environmental data.
(PM 999) Total number of active unique users from states, tribes, laboratories, regulated facilities and other entities that
electronically report environmental data to EPA through CDX.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
Baseline Year
56,200
FY 2012
58,000
65,238
FY 2013
70,000
FY 2014
75,000
Unit
Users
964
-------
Performance
Measures and
Data
Additional Information: This metric replaces PM 054, which is being discontinued. PM 999 measures the total number of active individual CDX users. This new metric
only includes users who have logged in within the previous two years (active users). Each distinct user is counted only once, regardless of the number of different
accounts, roles, or locations. This new metric will provide a more accurate portrayal of current CDX usage by focusing programmatic assessment on active unique users,
screening out dormant accounts, test accounts, and multiple accounts registered to the same user.
(PM 408) Percent of Federal Information Security Management Act reportable systems that are certified and
accredited.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
100
100
FY 2008
100
100
FY 2009
100
100
FY 2010
100
100
FY2011
100
100
Explanation of Results: Measure retired. Deleted in F Y 20 1 3 .
Additional Information: Measure is being discontinued. As part of Agency measures streamlining,
reported to OMB, Congress and the public through other pathways.
FY 2012
100
100
FY 2013
FY 2014
Unit
Percent
this measure is proposed to be discontinued. FIMSA compliance is
965
-------
NPM: Office of the Inspector General
Performance Measures and Data
(PM 35A) Environmental and business actions taken for improved performance or risk reduction.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
318
464
FY 2008
334
463
FY 2009
318
272
FY 2010
334
391
FY2011
334
315
FY 2012
334
216
FY 2013
307
FY 2014
307
Unit
Actions
Explanation of Results: In FY 2012, the number of business actions was lower than anticipated.
Additional Information: The baseline is a moving average for the three most recent years. For the period concluding with fiscal year 2010, the baseline is 375 actions.
(PM 35B) Environmental and business recommendations or risks identified for corrective action.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
925
949
FY 2008
971
624
FY 2009
903
983
FY 2010
903
945
FY2011
903
2011
FY 2012
903
1242
FY 2013
786
FY 2014
786
Unit
Recommend
ations
Additional Information: In F Y 2009 the OIG established a revised baseline of 865 environmental and business recommendations or risks identified for corrective actions.
The baseline was adjusted to reflect an average of the actual reported results for the period FY 2006-2008. The baseline has generally decreased to reflect the transfer of
DCAA audit oversight from the OIG directly to the EPA, and a significant gap between the OIG ceiling and actual staffing levels.
(PM 35C) Return on the annual dollar investment, as a percentage of the OIG budget, from audits and investigations.
Target
Actual
FY 2007
150
189
FY 2008
150
186
FY 2009
120
150
FY 2010
120
36
FY2011
120
151
FY 2012
110
743
FY 2013
125
FY 2014
125
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: The baseline is a moving average for the three most recent years.
Additional Information: The baseline reflects potential dollar return on investment as a percentage of OIG budget from identified opportunities for savings, questioned
costs, fines, recoveries and settlements. The baseline is a moving average for the three most recent years. For the period concluding with fiscal year 2010, the baseline is
112%.
(PM 35D) Criminal, civil, administrative, and fraud prevention actions.
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
Unit
966
-------
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
80
103
80
84
80
95
75
115
80
160
85
152
90
90
Actions
Additional Information: In F Y 2009 the OIG established a revised baseline of 80 criminal, civil and administrative actions, which has remained constant over time.
967
-------
Verification/Validation of Performance Data
The Agency develops Data Quality Records (DQRs) to present validation/verification
information for selected performance measures and information systems, consistent with
guidance from the Office of Management and Budget. A DQR documents the management
controls, responsibilities, quality procedures, and other metadata associated with the data
lifecycle for individual performance measures, and is intended to enhance the transparency,
objectivity, and usefulness of the performance result. EPA's program offices choose the
measures for which to develop DQRs, consistent with the Agency's goal to provide
documentation of quality procedures associated with each strategic measure. Each DQR can be
considered current as of the most recent date for which the Agency has published results for the
performance measure. All of EPA's current DQRs are available in PDF format at the following
URL: http://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockev=P 100G5DA.txt
Please note, the PDF file includes DQRs that reference supporting documents, which are
available upon request by sending an email with the name of the document and DQR to
OCFOINFO@epa.gov. The email should indicate the measure number and text associated with
the DQR, and the filename shown underneath the icon for the attachment.
968
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Appendix A
Coordination with Other Federal Agencies 971
Environmental Programs 971
Enabling Support Programs 1010
Major Management Challenges 1018
EPA User Fee Program 1030
Working Capital Fund 1032
Acronyms for Statutory Authority 1033
FY 2014 STAG Categorical Program Grants 1038
Program Projects by Program Area 1051
Discontinued Programs 1066
Federal Support for Air Toxics Program 1067
Categorical Grant: Targeted Watersheds 1068
Categorical Grant: Wastewater Operator Training 1069
Expected Benefits of the President's E-Government Initiatives 1072
Physicians' Comparability Allowance (PCA) Worksheet for PY 2014 1081
Proposed FY 2014 Administrative Provisions 1082
Payments of Attorney Fees and/or Litigation Costs made under Equal Access for Justice
Act 1083
Fiscal Year 2014: Consolidations, Realignments, or Other Transfers of Resources 1085
Leveraging Evidence and Enhancing Program Evaluation Capacity in FY 2014 1087
EPA Budget by National Program Manager and Major Office 1092
969
-------
970
-------
Coordination with Other Federal Agencies
Environmental Programs
Goal 1- Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective: Address Climate Change
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 (GHG) emissions. The effort is led by the EPA and the Department of Energy (DOE) with
significant involvement from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Housing and Urban
Development (HUD), and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).
Agencies throughout the government make significant contributions to the climate protection
programs. For example, DOE pursues actions such as promoting the research, development, and
deployment of advanced technologies (for example, renewable energy sources). The Treasury
Department administers tax incentives for specific investments that will reduce emissions. The
EPA responded to the President's directive to work with the National Highway Transportation
Safety Administration (NHTSA) to develop a coordinated national program establishing
standards to improve fuel efficiency and reduce GHG emissions for light-duty vehicles for model
years 2017 and later. As a follow-up of this rulemaking, the two agencies will be working
together on the coordination of a technology review in preparation for the implementation of
these standards. In addition, the EPA and NHTSA are working together in the development of a
proposal for a second phase of GHG and fuel economy standards for heavy-duty vehicles. The
EPA is broadening its public information transportation choices campaign as a joint effort with
the Department of Transportation (DOT). The EPA coordinates with each of the above-
mentioned agencies to ensure that our programs are complementary and in no way duplicative.
The 2009 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on ENERGY STAR, signed by the EPA and
DOE, defines clear lines of responsibility between the Agencies that build upon and leverage
their respective areas of expertise and outlines a number of program enhancements that will drive
greater efficiency for American consumers and greater efficiency in homes and buildings. As
part of the MOU, the EPA and DOE developed an annual work plan detailing key work across
the two agencies and highlighting their cooperative work on energy efficiency in commercial and
residential buildings and the products and equipment that go into these buildings.
The EPA works primarily with the Department of State (DOS), US Agency for International
Development (USAID), and DOE as well as with regional organizations in implementing
climate-related programs and projects. In addition, the EPA partners with others worldwide,
including international organizations such as the United Nations Environment Programme, the
United Nations Development Programme, the United Nations Economic Commission for
Europe, the International Energy Agency, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD), the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, and our colleagues in
Canada, Mexico, Europe, and Japan. The EPA also has created a national workgroup with
representatives of tribal environmental departments and governments to help ensure tribal
971
-------
governments are included in the dialogues with federal agencies on various climate change
adaptation strategies.
In our efforts to address GHG emissions from ocean-going vessels and aircraft, EPA continues to
participate and lead discussions within the International Maritime Organization (EVIO) and the
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to develop GHG standards. In the maritime
area, the EPA collaborates with the Coast Guard (USCG) and other nations, such as Transport
Canada. In the aviation area, the EPA collaborates with the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA).
An example of the EPA's coordination with other federal agencies, as well as international
partners, is the Global Methane Initiative (GMI) (formerly known as the Methane-to-Markets
Partnership). GMI is an international public-private initiative that advances cost-effective, near-
term methane recovery and use as a clean energy source in four sectors: agriculture, coal mines,
landfills, and oil and gas systems. These projects reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the near
term and provide a number of important environmental and economic co-benefits. There are 40
partner countries and over 1,000 members of the Project Network, including private sector,
nongovernmental organizations, and multilateral organizations such as the World Bank, the
Asian Development Bank, and the Inter-American Development Bank. The EPA is the lead
agency from the US Government and coordinates with Department of State, DOE, USDA,
USAID, and the US Trade and Development Agency.
The agency coordinates its global change research with other federal agencies through the U.S.
Global Change Research Program (USGCRP).1 As an example of research coordinated under the
USGCRP, the EPA is working with the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
the U.S. Geological Survey, and the Army Corps of Engineers to study the impacts of climate
change on estuarine ecosystems. The EPA's global change research efforts focus on
understanding the impacts of climate change to air quality, water quality, and aquatic
ecosystems, and include efforts to improve models that address air and water pollution formation
and transport in the context of a changing climate. These modeling efforts require close
coordination with other agencies to use the results of global-scale models as input to more
detailed regional models that describe pollutant formation and transport at levels needed by local
and state resource managers. This work includes research to better understand the emissions,
transport, and impacts to health and climate of black carbon. Additional coordination of global
change research occurs through the National Science and Technology Council's Committee on
Environment and Natural Resources and Sustainability (CENRS) Subcommittee on Water
Availability and Quality.
Objective: Improve Air Quality
The EPA cooperates with other federal, state, tribal, and local agencies to achieve goals related
to ground level ozone and particulate matter (PM) and to ensure the actions of other agencies do
not interfere with state plans for attaining and maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards. The EPA works with the USDA on land use issues. The EPA also continues to work
closely with the USDA, the Department of the Interior (DOI), and the Department of Defense
For more information, see .
972
-------
(DOD) in developing a policy that addresses prescribed burning at silviculture and agricultural
operations. An MOU with USDA is in place to work on issues of mutual concern impacting
agriculture and air quality. In 2012, the EPA and USDA signed Statement of Principles outlining
how the offices would work together to replace agriculture engines and allow state
implementation plan credits. In addition to coordination with other federal agencies through the
interagency regulatory review process, the EPA has consulted with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission about potential impacts of stationary internal combustion engine
regulations on electric grid reliability, the bulk power system, municipal utilities and rural
electric cooperatives. The EPA, DOT, and the Army Corps of Engineers (COE) work with state
and local agencies to integrate transportation and air quality plans, reduce traffic congestion, and
promote livable communities. The Federal Highway Administration, US and State
Transportation Department's also worked with the EPA to provide guidance for deploying a
near-road air monitoring network to protect the health of those working and living near the
nation's major highways. The EPA works with the U.S. Forest Service, Centers for Disease
Control (CDC), and the National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) to reduce
PM emissions from residential wood smoke and to provide health information. In addition, to
promote awareness of ground level ozone and particulate matter, the EPA's School Flag and
EnviroFlash programs are coordinating with the Department of Education (DoEd) on the Green
Ribbon Schools initiative to promote air quality educational resources for students and teachers
K-12. The EPA continues to work with the DOI, National Park Service (NPS), and U.S. Forest
Service in implementing its regional haze program and operating the Interagency Monitoring of
Protected Visual Environments (IMPROVE) visibility monitoring network. The operation and
analysis of data produced by this air monitoring system is an example of the close coordination
of efforts between the EPA and state and Tribal governments. The EPA also consults with the
DOI Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)
on the potential impact of federally permitted actions on endangered species.
For pollution assessments and transport, the EPA is working with the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (NASA) on technology transfer using satellite imagery. The EPA will
work to further distribute NASA satellite products and NOAA air quality forecast products to
states, local agencies, and Tribes to provide a better understanding of air quality on a day-to-day
basis and to assist with air quality forecasting. The EPA works with NASA to develop a better
understanding of PM formation using satellite data. The EPA works with the Department of the
Army on advancing emission measurement technology and with NOAA for meteorological
support for our modeling and monitoring efforts. The EPA collects real-time ozone and
particulate matter (PM) measurements from State and local agencies, which are used by both
NOAA and the EPA to improve and verify Air Quality Forecast models.
The EPA's AIRNow program (the national real-time Air Quality Index reporting and forecasting
system) works with the National Weather Service (NWS) to coordinate NOAA air quality
forecast guidance with state and local agencies for air quality forecasting efforts and to render
the NOAA model output in the EPA Air Quality Index (AQI), which helps people determine
appropriate air quality protective behaviors. In wildfire situations, the EPA and the U.S. Forest
Service (USFS) work closely with states to deploy monitors and report monitoring information
and other conditions on AIRNow. The EPA also is working with the USFS to revise the health
information in the smoke management guide, which is used by burn managers. The AIRNow
973
-------
program also collaborates with the NFS and the USFS in receiving air quality monitoring
observations, in addition to observations from over 130 state, local, and tribal air agencies.
AIRNow also collaborates with NASA in a project to incorporate satellite data with air quality
observations.
To better understand the magnitude, sources, and causes of mobile source pollution, the EPA
works with the DOE and DOT to fund applied research projects. A program to characterize
exhaust emissions from light-duty gasoline vehicles is co-funded by DOE and DOT. Other DOT
mobile source projects include TRANSEVIS (TRansportation ANalysis and SEVIulation System)
and other transportation modeling projects. DOE is funding these projects through the National
Renewable Energy Laboratory. The EPA also works closely with DOE on refinery cost modeling
analyses and the development of clean fuel programs. For mobile sources program outreach, the
agency is participating in a collaborative effort with DOT's Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) 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 CDC. The EPA also works with FHWA to
develop and deliver training on modeling emissions from cars and trucks. In addition, the EPA is
working with DOE to identify opportunities in the Clean Cities program. The EPA also works
with other federal agencies, such as the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), on air emission issues, and
other programs targeted to reduce air toxics from mobile sources are coordinated with DOT.
These partnerships can involve policy assessments and toxic emission reduction strategies in
different regions of the country. The EPA continues to work with DOE, DOT, and other
agencies, as needed, on the requirements of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and the Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007.
To develop air pollutant emission factors and emission estimation algorithms for aircraft, ground
equipment, and military vehicles, the EPA partners with the DOD. This partnership will provide
for the joint undertaking of air-monitoring/emission factor research and regulatory
implementation.
To address criteria pollutant emissions (such as nitrogen oxide (NOx) and PM) from marine and
aircraft sources, the EPA works collaboratively with EVIO and ICAO, as well as with other
federal agencies, such as USCG and the FAA. EPA also has been collaborating with the USCG
in the implementation of Emission Control Area (EGA) around the United States.
The EPA also works closely with other health agencies such as the CDC, NIEHS, and the
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) on health risk characterization
for both toxic and criteria air pollutants.
The EPA also is contributing air quality data to the CDC's Environmental Public Health
Tracking Program, which is made publicly available and used by state and local public health
agencies. To assess atmospheric deposition and characterize ecological effects, the EPA works
with NOAA, FWS, the NFS, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the USD A, and the U.S.
Forest Service (USFS).
974
-------
The EPA 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. The EPA also has worked with DOE on the Fate of Mercury study to characterize
mercury transport and traceability in Lake Superior. The EPA is a partner with the CDC in the
development of the National Environmental Public Health Tracking Network, providing air
quality indicators as well as air pollution health effects expertise.
To improve our understanding of environmental issues related to the agricultural sector, the EPA
is working closely with the USDA and others to reduce emissions and improve air quality while
supporting a sustainable agricultural sector. Our approach to the agriculture sector includes
scientific assessment, outreach and education, and implementation/compliance. The scientific
assessment will ensure that we are all guided by sound science. Because we do not have
adequate emissions estimates for this sector, we need to develop an understanding of emissions
profiles and establish monitoring and measurement protocols, technology transfer, and a research
agenda. Through outreach and education, we will instill a long-term commitment to working
with the agricultural community; build respect and trust; and identify, promote, and quantify
new/existing control technologies. We also will encourage partnerships between the EPA,
USDA, and their established partners and utilize existing USDA infrastructure (e.g., Extension
Service, National Resources Conservation Services, land grant colleges and universities, and
Farm Bill programs). Additionally, we will engage in active dialogue with the agriculture
community. Our implementation/compliance approach will fully institute policies and practices
to ensure that farming and land management communities continue to consider air quality as an
integral part of their resource management. An appropriate mix of voluntary and regulatory
programs will be implemented and we will utilize USDA infrastructure to implement air quality
programs and compliance assistance where practical.
In developing regional and international air quality programs and projects, and in working on
regional agreements, the EPA works with the DOS, NOAA, NASA, DOE, USDA, USAID, and
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), as well as with regional organizations. The
EPA's international air quality management program complements the EPA's programs on
children's health, trade and the environment, climate change, and trans-boundary air pollution.
In addition, the EPA partners with other organizations worldwide, including the United Nations
Environment Programme, the European Union, the OECD, the United Nations Economic
Commission for Europe, the North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation, the
World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, the Clean Air Initiative for Asian Cities, the Global
Air Pollution Forum, and our air quality colleagues in several countries, including Canada,
Mexico, Europe, China, and Japan.
Improving Indoor Air Quality
The EPA works closely, through a variety of mechanisms, with a broad range of federal, state,
Tribal, and local government agencies, industry, non-profit organizations, and individuals, as
well as other nations, to promote more effective approaches to identifying and solving indoor air
quality (IAQ) problems. At the federal level, the EPA works closely with several departments or
agencies on healthy IAQ in homes, schools, other buildings, and on international issues.
Examples include:
975
-------
Improving IAQ in Homes
• HHS to reduce the burden of asthma - by coordinating research, building community
capacity, raising public awareness, and promoting the adoption of reimbursement for
asthma care services, with a special emphasis on controlling indoor environmental
exposures - and to track progress on this objective;
• HUD to improve IAQ in homes;
• Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) to identify and mitigate the health
hazards of consumer products designed for indoor use;
• DOE to address IAQ in home weatherization programs; and
• USD A to encourage USD A extension agents to conduct local projects designed to
improve indoor air quality.
• The 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.
• The EPA is a member of the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program
Coordinating Committee and the Federal Liaison Group on Asthma—the overarching
coordination groups that focus on national asthma control efforts.
Improving IAQ in Schools
• DoEd on a wide range of school related indoor environmental quality initiatives,
including development of voluntary guidelines mandated under the Energy Independence
and Security Act of 2007 for siting of school facilities and state school environmental
health programs, as well as the establishment of a DoEd-led Green Ribbon Schools
initiative; and
• HHS and the CDC to promote healthy, asthma-friendly schools, and track progress on
this objective.
IAQ and the Built Environment
• As a co-chair of the Federal Interagency Committee on Indoor Air Quality (CIAQ), the
EPA coordinates the exchange of information on lAQ-related research and activities. The
co-chair agencies include the CPSC, DOE, NIOSH and the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA), and another 20 federal departments and agencies
participate as members.
International
• U.S. Government-wide Cookstoves Interagency Working Group, whose members
include the DOS, the EPA, US AID, DOE, and HHS, to improve health, livelihood, and
quality of life in developing countries by reducing exposure to indoor air pollution from
household energy use through public-private partnership initiatives such as the
Partnership for Clean Indoor Air and the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves.
Research on Air Quality
976
-------
The EPA coordinates its air quality research with other federal agencies through the
Subcommittee on Air Quality Research2 of the CENRS. The agency and NIEHS co-chaired the
subcommittee's Particulate Matter Research Coordination Working Group, which produced a
strategic plan3 for federal research on the health and environmental effects, exposures,
atmospheric processes, source characterization, and control of fine airborne particulate matter.
The EPA coordinates specific research projects with other federal agencies, where appropriate,
and supports air-related research at universities and nonprofit organizations through its Science
to Achieve Results (STAR) research grants program.
For example, the EPA is working with NASA to examine how to use satellite data to improve air
quality management activities. The EPA works with several federal agencies to coordinate U.S.
participation in the Arctic Mercury Project, a partnership established in 2001 by the eight
member states of the Arctic Council—Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia,
Sweden, and the U.S.
Furthermore, the EPA is working with the Army, as part of the Army's Net Zero Initiative, to
develop and demonstrate innovative energy technologies to accomplish the Army's goal of net
zero energy, water, and waste by 2020.
Objective: Restore the Ozone Layer
The EPA works very closely with the DOS and other federal agencies in international
negotiations among Parties to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer
and in developing the implementing regulations. While the environmental goal of the Montreal
Protocol is to protect the ozone layer, the ozone depleting substances it controls also are
significant greenhouse gases. Therefore, this work also protects the Earth's climate system.
According to a 2007 study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,4
chemical controls implemented under the Montreal Protocol will - by 2010 - have delayed the
onset of serious climate effects by a decade. The EPA works on several multinational
environmental agreements to simultaneously protect the ozone layer and climate system,
including working closely with the Department of State and other federal agencies, including
OMB, Office of Science Technology and Policy, Council on Environmental Quality, USD A, the
Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Department of Commerce, NOAA, and NASA.
The EPA works with other agencies, including the Office of the United States Trade
Representative and the Department of Commerce, to analyze potential trade implications in
stratospheric protection regulations that affect imports and exports. The EPA leads a task force
with the Department of Justice (DOJ), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Department of
Treasury, and other agencies to curb the illegal importation of ozone-depleting substances
(ODS). Illegal import of ODS has the potential to prevent the United States from meeting the
goals of the Montreal Protocol to restore the ozone layer.
2 For more information, see .
3 For more information, see .
4 Guus J. M. Velders, Stephen O. Andersen, John S. Daniel, David W. Fahey, and Mack McFarland;
The Importance of the Montreal Protocol in Protecting Climate; PNAS 2007 104:4814-4819; published online before print
March 8, 2007; doi:10.1073/pnas.0610328104.
977
-------
The EPA has continued discussions with DOD to assist in the effective transition from ODS and
high-GWP substitutes to a suite of substitutes with lower global warming potential (GWPs).
The EPA works with USDA and the DOS to facilitate research, development, and adoption of
alternatives to methyl bromide. The EPA collaborates with these agencies to prepare U.S.
requests for critical use exemptions of methyl bromide. The EPA is providing input to USDA on
rulemakings for methyl bromide-related programs. The EPA also consults with USDA on
domestic methyl bromide needs.
The EPA coordinates closely with DOS and FDA to ensure that sufficient supplies of
chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are available for the production of life-saving metered-dose inhalers
for the treatment of asthma and other lung diseases. This partnership between the EPA and FDA
combines the critical goals of protecting public health and limiting damage to the stratospheric
ozone layer.
The EPA coordinates with NASA and NOAA to monitor the state of the stratospheric ozone
layer and to collect and analyze UV data, including science assessments that help the public
understand what the world may have looked like without the Montreal Protocol and its
amendments.5 The EPA works with NASA on assessing essential uses and other exemptions for
critical rocket needs, as well as effects of direct emissions of high-speed aircraft flying in the
stratosphere.
The EPA works with DOE on GreenChill6 and Responsible Appliance Disposal (RAD)7 efforts.
The GreenChill Advanced Refrigeration Partnership is an EPA cooperative alliance with the
supermarket industry and other stakeholders to promote advanced technologies, strategies, and
practices that reduce refrigerant charges and emissions of ozone-depleting substances and
greenhouse gases. EPA's RAD Program is a partnership program that protects the ozone layer
and reduces emissions of greenhouse gases through the recovery of ozone-depleting chemicals
from old refrigerators, freezers, air conditioners, and dehumidifiers.
The EPA coordinates with the Small Business Administration (SBA) to ensure that proposed
rules are developed in accordance with the Small Business Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Objective: Reduce Unnecessary Exposure to Radiation
The EPA works primarily with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), DOE, and the DHS
on multiple radiation protection issues. The EPA has ongoing planning and guidance discussions
with DHS on Protective Action Guidance and general emergency response activities, including
exercises responding to nuclear related incidents. As the regulator of DOE's Waste Isolation
Pilot Plant (WIPP) facility, the EPA coordinates oversight activities with DOE to keep the
facility operating in compliance with EPA regulations. The EPA is a member of the interagency
Radiation Source Protection and Security Task Force, established in the Energy Policy Act to
The Ozone Layer: Ozone Depletion, Recovery in a Changing Climate, and the "World Avoided;" Findings and Summary of the
U.S. Climate Change Science Program Synthesis and Assessment Product 2.4; November 2008.
6 For more information, see: www.epa.gov/greenchill
7 For more information, see: www.epa.gov/ozone/partnerships/rad
978
-------
improve the security of domestic radioactive sources. The EPA also is a working member of the
interagency Nuclear Government Coordinating Council (NGCC), which coordinates across
government and the private sector on issues related to security, communications, and emergency
management within the nuclear sector.
For emergency preparedness purposes, the EPA coordinates closely with other federal agencies
through the Federal Radiological Preparedness Coordinating Committee and other coordinating
bodies. The EPA participates in planning and implementing table-top and field exercises
including radiological anti-terrorism activities, with the NRC, DOE, DOD, HHS, and DHS.
The EPA works closely with other federal agencies when developing radiation policy guidance
under its federal guidance authority. This authority was transferred to the EPA from the Federal
Radiation Council in 1970 and tasks the Administrator with making radiation protection
recommendations to the President. When signed by the President, Federal Guidance
recommendations are addressed to all federal agencies and are published in the Federal Register.
Risk managers at all levels of government use this information to assess health risks from
radiation exposure and to determine appropriate levels for clean-up of radioactively
contaminated sites. The EPA's radiation science is widely relied on and is the objective
foundation for the EPA, other federal agencies, and states to develop radiation risk management
policy, standards, and guidance.
The EPA is a charter member and co-chairs the Interagency Steering Committee on Radiation
Standards (ISCORS). ISCORS was created at the direction of Congress. Through quarterly
meetings and the activities of its six subcommittees, member agencies are kept informed of
cross-cutting issues related to radiation protection, radioactive waste management, and
emergency preparedness and response. ISCORS also helps coordinate U.S. responses to
radiation-related issues internationally.
Promoting international assistance, the EPA serves as an expert member of the International
Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) Environmental Modeling for Radiation Safety, Naturally-
Occurring Radioactive Materials Working Group. Additionally, the EPA remains an active
contributor to the OECD's Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA). The EPA serves on both the NEA
Radioactive Waste Management Committee (RWMC) and the Committee on Radiation
Protection and Public Health (CRPPH). Through the RWMC, the EPA is able to exchange
information with other NEA member countries on the management and disposal of high-level
and transuranic waste. Through participation on the CRPPH and its working groups, the EPA has
been successful in bringing a U.S. perspective to international radiation protection policy.
Goal 2- Protecting America's Waters
Objective: Protect Human Health
Collaboration with Public and Private Partners on Critical Water Infrastructure Protection
The EPA coordinates with other federal agencies, primarily Department of Homeland Security,
Centers for Disease Control, Food and Drug Administration, and Department of Defense, on
979
-------
biological, chemical, and radiological contaminants of high concern, and how to detect and
respond to their presence in drinking water and wastewater systems. A close linkage with the
FBI and the Intelligence Analysis Directorate in the Department of Homeland Security,
particularly with respect to ensuring the timely dissemination of threat information through
existing communication networks, will be continued. The agency is strengthening its working
relationships with the Water Research Foundation, the Water Environment Research Foundation,
and other research institutions to increase our knowledge on technologies to detect contaminants,
monitoring protocols and techniques, and treatment effectiveness.
EPA will continue to work with the US Army Corps of Engineers to refine coordination
processes among federal partners engaged in providing emergency response support to the water
sector. These efforts will include refining existing standard operating procedures, participating in
cross-agency training opportunities, and planning multi-stakeholder water sector emergency
response exercises. EPA will be determining how US Army Corps of Engineers and the EPA are
to clarify their roles and responsibilities under the new National Disaster Recovery Framework.
Geologic Sequestration
The EPA coordinates with federal agencies to plan and obtain research-related data, to
coordinate regulatory programs, and to coordinate implementation of regulations to protect
underground sources of drinking water during geologic sequestration activities. The EPA works
with the Department of Energy to plan research on monitoring, modeling, verification, public
participation, and other topics related to Department of Energy -sponsored geologic sequestration
partnership programs. The EPA also coordinates with U.S. Geological Survey, Internal Revenue
Service, Department of Interior, and Department of Transportation to ensure that Safe Drinking
Water Act regulations for geologic sequestration sites are appropriately coordinated with efforts
to deploy projects, map geologic sequestration capacity, provide tax incentives for CC>2
sequestration, and manage the movement of CO2 from capture facilities to geologic sequestration
sites.
Collaboration with U.S. Geological Survey
The EPA and U.S. Geological Survey have established an Interagency Agreement to coordinate
activities and information exchange in the areas of unregulated contaminants occurrence, the
environmental relationships affecting contaminant occurrence, protection area delineation
methodology, and analytical methods. 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.
Sustainable Rural Drinking and Wastewater Systems
In 2011, the EPA and U.S. Department of Agriculture-RD-RUS signed a new memorandum of
agreement - Promoting Sustainable Rural Water and Wastewater Systems. The EPA and U.S.
Department of Agriculture have agreed to work together to increase the sustainability of rural
drinking water and wastewater systems to ensure the protection of public health, water quality,
and sustainable communities. The MO A addresses the following four areas. 1) Sustainability of
980
-------
Rural Communities - promote asset management planning, water and energy efficiency
practices, and other sustainable utility management practices; 2) System Partnerships - educate
communities and utilities on the types of partnership opportunities that can lead to increased
compliance and reduced costs, and encourage struggling systems to explore these options; 3)
Water Sector Workforce - work together to promote careers in the water sector to attract a new
generation of water professionals to rural systems; and 4) Compliance of Small Rural Public
Water and Wastewater Systems with Drinking Water and Clean Water Regulations - partner and
provide timely regulation training to water and wastewater systems in rural areas. In addition, the
two agencies will work to address funding for infrastructure projects that aid in the compliance
of national drinking water and clean water regulations.
National Water Sector Workforce Development: Department of Veterans Affairs
The EPA and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Vocational Rehabilitation and
Employment (VR&E) Service are working jointly on promotional activities that will help
advance and improve employment opportunities for Veterans with disabilities while supporting
the development of a trained and competent workforce for the Water Sector.
Tribal Access Coordination
In 2003, the EPA and its federal partners in the Department of Agriculture, Department of
Housing and Urban Development, Department of Health and Human Services, and Department
of Interior set a very ambitious goal to reduce the number of homes without access to safe
drinking water. This goal remains ambitious due to the logistical challenges, capital and
operation, and maintenance costs involved in providing access. The EPA is working with its
federal partners to coordinate spending and address some of the challenges to access on Tribal
lands and expects to make measureable progress on the access issue.
Source Water Protection
The EPA is coordinating with U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Geological Survey as
part of a 3-organization collaborative to support state and local implementation of source water
protection actions. In addition, the EPA works with U.S. Geological Survey on coordinating
mapping of source water areas on a national scale with the National Hydrography Database, as
well as working with the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Department of Education.
Data Availability, Outreach, and Technical Assistance
The EPA coordinates with U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Department of Agriculture (Forest
Service, Natural Resources Conservation Service), Cooperative State Research, Education, and
Extension Service, Rural Utilities Service, Centers for Disease Control, Department of
Transportation, Department of Defense, Department of Energy, Department of the Interior
(National Park Service and Bureau of Indian Affairs, Land Management, and Reclamation),
Department of Health and Human Services (Indian Health Service) and the Tennessee Valley
Authority to make data more available to states and the public. In addition, EPA is working with
the USGS, USDA Forest Service, state agencies, and industry associations through the Advisory
Committee on Water Information (ACWI), chaired by USGS, to develop a framework and data
981
-------
exchange portal for a National Ground Water Monitoring Network, which now includes data
from six states and will expand in 2013 to include data from additional states participating in the
network.
Objective: Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
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
U.S. Department of Agriculture (Natural Resources Conservation Service, Forest Service
Agency, and Agriculture Research Service), Department of the Interior (Bureau of Land
Management, Office of Surface Mining, U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
and the Bureau of Indian Affairs), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
Department of Transportation, and Department of Defense (Navy and US 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 (NPDES) Program
Since inception of the NPDES program under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act, the EPA and
the authorized states have developed expanded relationships with various federal agencies to
implement pollution controls for point sources. The EPA works closely with the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service on consultation for protection of
endangered species through a Memorandum of Agreement. The EPA works with the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation on National Historic Preservation Act implementation. The
EPA and the states rely on monitoring data from U.S. Geological Survey 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 NOAA on efforts to ensure that NPDES
programs support coastal and national estuary efforts and with the Department of the Interior on
mining issues.
Joint Strategy for Animal Feeding Operations
The agency is working closely with the U.S. Department of Agriculture to implement the Unified
National Strategy for Animal Feeding Operations (AFO Strategy) finalized on March 9, 1999.
The Strategy sets forth a framework of actions that U.S. Department of Agriculture and the 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. The EPA's recent revisions to the Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations
Regulations (effluent guidelines and NPDES permit regulations) will be a key element of the
982
-------
EPA and U.S. Department of Agriculture's plan to address water pollution from CAFOs. The
EPA and U.S. Department of Agriculture senior management meet routinely to ensure effective
coordination across the two agencies.
Clean Water State Revolving Fund
The EPA's State Revolving Fund program, Department of Housing and Urban Development's
Community Development Block Grant program, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Rural
Development foster collaboration on jointly funded infrastructure projects through: (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 Clean Water Act,
the 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. The EPA and U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Development
partner to provide coordinated financial and technical assistance to tribes.
Federal Agency Partnerships on Impaired Waters Restoration Planning
The federal government owns about 30 percent of the land in the United States and administers
over 90 percent of these public lands through four agencies: Forest Service, Fish and Wildlife
Service, National Park Service, and Bureau of Land Management. In managing these extensive
public lands, federal agencies have a substantial influence on the protection and restoration of
many waters of the United States. Land management agencies' focus on water issues has
increased significantly, with the Forest Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, and Bureau of Land
Management all initiating new water quality and watershed protection efforts. The EPA has been
conducting joint national assessments with these agencies to enhance watershed protection and
quantify restoration needs on federal lands. EPA's joint national assessments of Fish and
Wildlife Service and Forest Service properties have already documented the extent and type of
impaired waters within and near these agencies' lands, developed GIS databases, reported
national summary statistics, and developed interactive reference products (on any scale, local to
national), accessible to staff throughout the agencies. These assessments have already influenced
the agencies in positive ways. The Forest Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service have
performance measures that involve impaired waters. The Forest Service used their national
assessment data to institute improvements in a national monitoring and Best Management
Practices training program as well as develop a watershed condition framework for proactively
implementing restoration on priority National Forest and Grassland watersheds. Also, under a
Memorandum of Agreement between the EPA and Forest Service, numerous aquatic restoration
projects are being carried out. The Fish and Wildlife Service is using their national assessment
data to inform agency planning on water conservation, quality, and quantity monitoring and
management in the National Wildlife Refuge System, and also is using the assessment in
983
-------
National Fish Hatcheries System planning. Further and their Contaminants Program, the EPA
assessments and datasets are making significant contributions to the government-wide National
Fish Habitat Action Partnership 2010 national assessment of fish habitat condition and the
restoration and protection efforts of 17 regional Fish Habitat Partnerships. Also, EPA has
provided geospatial analysis from the agencies' atmospheric mercury deposition modeling to the
National Park Service for each of the properties they manage. This analysis shows not only the
amount of mercury falling onto a particular watershed but also allocates the deposition among
major contributing U.S. and global sources.
Monitoring and Assessment of Nation's Waters
The EPA works with federal, state, and Tribal partners to strengthen water monitoring programs
to support a range of management needs and to develop tools to improve how we manage and
share water data and report environmental results. The EPA's Monitoring and Assessment
Partnership is a forum for the EPA, states, tribes, and interstate organizations to collaborate on
key program directions for assessing the condition of the nation's waters in a nationally
consistent and representative manner. The EPA is co-chair, along with U.S. Geological Survey,
of the National Water Quality Monitoring Council, a national forum for scientific discussion of
strategies and technologies to improve water quality monitoring and data sharing. The council
membership includes other federal agencies, state, and Tribal agencies, non-governmental
organizations, academic institutions, and the private sector.
The EPA has a Memorandum of Understanding with U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for the
development and operation of the national Water Data Portal, a web portal serving data from the
USGS and the EPA ambient water quality data warehouses in a common format through the
internet. The EPA has an Interagency Agreement with the USGS for the development of
NHDPlus version 2. EPA also collaborates with USGS and National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration on analysis and interpretation of the results of the national Aquatic Resource
Surveys.
Nonpoint Source Pollution Controls
The EPA will continue to work closely with its federal partners to achieve our goals for reducing
pollutant discharges from nonpoint sources, including reduction targets for sediments, nitrogen,
and phosphorous. Most significantly, the EPA will continue to work with the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, which has a key role in reducing sediment loadings through its continued
implementation of the Environmental Quality Incentives Program, Conservation Reserve
Program, and other conservation programs. The EPA will continue its active collaboration with
USD A in joint investments in priority watersheds to reduce nutrient pollution through closer
coordination of the Section 319 program and the Environmental Quality Incentives Program. The
EPA also will continue to work closely with the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management
especially on the vast public lands that comprise 30 percent of all land in the United States. The
EPA will work with these agencies, U.S. Geological Survey, and the states to document
improvements in land management and water quality.
984
-------
Marine Pollution Prevention
The EPA works closely with a number of federal agencies including the U.S. Coast Guard, U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, Department of State, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, and others to prevent pollution from both land-based and ocean-based sources
from entering the marine environment.
Specifically, the EPA will continue to work closely with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on
standards for permit review, as well as site selection/designation and monitoring related to
dredged material management. The EPA will continue to work with the U.S. Coast Guard in the
development of best management practices and discharge standards under the Clean Boating
Act. The EPA also works closely with the U.S. Coast Guard on addressing ballast water
discharges.
In addition, the EPA works closely with a number of other federal agencies to prepare Reports to
Congress as well as review reports from other agencies. For example, the EPA works with a
number of federal agencies on the Interagency Marine Debris Coordinating Committee, which
prepares periodic reports to Congress on the progress of marine debris prevention efforts per the
Marine Debris Research, Prevention, and Reduction Act of 2006.
The EPA also participates with other federal agencies (including: U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Department of State, U.S. Department of the Interior, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, Department of Energy, and U.S. Navy) on a number of
international forums on marine protection programs. The U.S. is a member of the U.S.
Delegation to the Marine Environmental Protection Committee and develops international
standards that address vessel-related transport of aquatic invasive species, harmful antifoulants
and operational discharges from vessels. The EPA is Head of the U.S. Delegation for the London
Convention / London Protocol (LC / LP) Scientific Group and Alternate Head of the U.S.
Delegation for the LC / LP Consultative Meeting of the Parties, which regulates the dumping of
waste and other matter at sea.
National Estuary Program
The National Estuary Program is comprised of 28 place-based watershed management
organizations that restore and protect estuarine watersheds along the coasts of the continental
U.S. and Puerto Rico. Each NEP implements a Comprehensive Conservation Management Plan
(CCMP) that identifies priority actions to address problems unique to the estuarine watershed
and the role NEP partners will play in implementing these actions. The long-term commitment,
collaboration, and involvement of federal, state, regional, private and non-government partners
contributes greatly to effective CCMP implementation. Federal partners include the EPA's Water
Programs; the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Estuarine Research
Reserves, the Sea Grant Program, and Habitat Protection and Restoration Programs; the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service's Coastal Program; and the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Natural
Resource Conservation Service, and U.S. Forest Service. Other NEP partners include state
natural resource and environmental protection agencies; municipal government planning
985
-------
agencies; regional planning agencies; universities; industry; and non-governmental
organizations.
The EPA and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are signatories on a
Memorandum of Agreement to strengthen cooperation, communication, and coordination in a
focused manner, including the sharing of resources, tools and information, to assist regional
government entities, states, tribes, territories, and local governments in becoming sustainable and
resilient coastal and waterfront communities by protecting healthy coastal ecosystems, restoring
degraded coastal ecosystems, and adapting to climate change. Recent collaborative efforts
include working with the National Estuary Programs and the coastal management community to:
assess climate change vulnerabilities, develop and implement adaptation strategies, and engage
and educate stakeholders. Technical guidance and direct technical assistance on climate change
adaptation also is provided.
National Ocean Policy
The EPA will support implementation of the Executive Order that establishes the Nation's first
comprehensive national policy for stewardship of the ocean, U.S. coasts and the Great Lakes.
The Executive Order strengthens ocean governance and coordination, establishes guiding
principles for ocean management, and adopts a flexible framework for effective coastal and
marine spatial planning. The EPA will co-lead interagency work on two of the nine Strategic
Priorities: "Regional Ecosystem Protection and Restoration" with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
and "Water Quality and Sustainable Practices on Land" with U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Wetlands
The EPA, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Department of Agriculture (and
Federal Highway Administration) currently coordinate on a range of wetlands activities. These
activities include: studying and reporting on wetlands trends in the United States, diagnosing
causes of coastal wetland loss, updating and standardizing the digital map of the nation's
wetlands, statistically surveying the condition of the nation's wetlands, and developing methods
for better protecting wetland function. Coastal wetlands remain a focus area of current
interagency wetlands collaboration. The agencies meet monthly and are conducting a series of
coastal wetlands reviews to identify causes and prospective tools and approaches to address the
84,100 acre loss over five years in marine and estuarine wetlands that U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service documented in the 2011 "Status and Trends of Wetlands in the Conterminous United
States: 2004 to 2009" report. Additionally, the EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers work
very closely together in implementing the wetlands regulatory program under Clean Water Act
Section 404. Under the regulatory program, the agencies coordinate closely on overall
implementation of the permitting decisions made annually under Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act, through the headquarters offices as well as the ten EPA Regional Offices and 38 U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers District Offices. The agencies also coordinate closely on policy development,
litigation, and implementing the Executive Order on Infrastructure Permitting. The EPA and U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers are committed to achieving the goal of no net loss of wetlands under
the Clean Water Act Section 404 program.
986
-------
Geographic Programs
The Administration has launched numerous cross-agency efforts to promote collaboration and
coordination among agencies, which include a suite of large aquatic ecosystem restoration
efforts. Three prominent examples for the EPA of cross-agency restoration efforts are the Great
Lakes, the Chesapeake Bay, and the Gulf of Mexico. Working with its partners and stakeholders,
the EPA has established special programs to protect and restore each of these unique natural
resources.
The EPA's ecosystem protection programs encompass a wide range of approaches that address
specific at-risk regional areas and larger categories of threatened systems, such as urban waters,
estuaries, and wetlands. Locally generated pollution, combined with pollution carried by rivers
and streams and through air deposition, can accumulate in these ecosystems and degrade them
over time. The EPA and its federal partners along with states, tribes, municipalities, and private
parties, will continue efforts to restore the integrity of imperiled waters of the United States.
Great Lakes
The Interagency Task Force,8 created by EO 13340, is charged with increasing and improving
collaboration and integration among federal agencies involved in Great Lakes environmental
activities. The Task Force provides overall guidance regarding the Initiative and coordinates
restoration of the Great Lakes, focusing on outcomes such as, e.g., cleaner water and sustainable
fisheries. The EPA is leading the Interagency Task Force to implement the Great Lakes
Restoration Initiative.
Following announcement of the Initiative in 2009, the EPA led development of a FY 2010 - FY
2014 Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Action Plan (Action Plan) which targets the most
significant environmental problems of the Great Lakes ecosystem. Members of the Interagency
Task Force enter into interagency agreements to fund activities intended to achieve the goals,
objectives, and targets in the Action Plan. This effort builds upon previous coordination and
collaboration by the Great Lakes National Program Office 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..." The Great Lakes National Program Office supports the
Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, and other efforts
to improve the Great Lakes and, under the direction of the EPA's Great Lakes National Program
Manager, is leading the implementation of Great Lakes restoration activities by the federal
agencies and their partners. Coordinated activities to implement the Initiative include:
• jointly establishing funding priorities for ecosystem restoration;
• protecting the Great Lakes from invasive species, including Asian carp;
• coordinating habitat protection and restoration with states, tribes, USFWS, NOAA,
USFS, andNRCS;
8 The Interagency Task Force includes eleven agency and cabinet organizations: EPA; Department of State, DOI, USDA,
Department of Commerce, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of Transportation, DHS, Army, Council
on Environmental Quality, and Department of Health and Human Services.
987
-------
• coordinating development and implementation of Lakewide Management Plans for each
of the Great Lakes and for Remedial Action Plans for the 30 remaining U.S./binational
Areas of Concern;
• coordinating programs and funding efforts to accelerate progress in delisting Areas of
Concern and to reduce phosphorus runoff and effects in a targeted group of watersheds;
• coordinating state, federal, and provincial partners, both to implement monitoring
programs and to utilize the results from that monitoring activity to manage environmental
programs; and
• working with Great Lakes states, U.S. Geological Survey, and the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers on dredging issues.
Chesapeake Bay
The Chesapeake Bay Program is a partnership of several federal agencies, the six watershed
states and the District of Columbia, local governments, nongovernmental organizations,
academic institutions, and other interested stakeholders. The EPA is the lead agency representing
the federal government on the Chesapeake Executive Council, which oversees the policy
direction of the Chesapeake Bay Program. In addition to the EPA Administrator, the Chesapeake
Executive Council consists of the governors of the Bay states, the mayor of the District of
Columbia, the chair of the Chesapeake Bay Commission, and the Secretary of Agriculture.
Section 117 of the Clean Water Act directs the EPA to maintain an office and to work with the
EC to coordinate activities of the partnership through implementation of the Chesapeake Bay
Agreements.
Only through the coordinated efforts of all of the Chesapeake Bay Program partner entities will
the preservation and restoration of the Chesapeake Bay be achieved. Recognizing this need for
coordination, partners work together through the Bay Program's governance and advisory
committees, goal teams and workgroups to collaborate, share information and set goals. Office
directors from the federal agencies that are part of the Chesapeake Bay Program also meet on a
regular basis. This group includes representatives of:
• Environmental Protection Agency
• Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
• Department of the Interior, National Park Service
• Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey
• Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
• Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service
• Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service
• Department of Agriculture, Farm Services Agency
• Department of Agriculture, Office of Environmental Markets
• Department of Defense, U.S. Navy
• Department of Defense, U.S. Army
• Department of Defense, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
• Department of Transportation
• Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Coast Guard
• Other agencies, as deemed appropriate
988
-------
President Obama's May 2009 Executive Order on Chesapeake Bay Protection and Restoration
has brought the federal agencies interested in the Bay and its watershed to a new level of
interagency coordination and cooperation. The Executive Order established the Federal
Leadership Committee (FLC) for the Chesapeake Bay, which is chaired by the EPA and includes
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Department of Commerce, Department of Defense, Department
of Homeland Security, Department of the Interior, and Department of Transportation. FLC
members are Secretary and Administrator level executives. FLC members are represented in
more regular meetings of the Federal Leadership Committee Designees, which includes Assistant
Secretary and Assistant Administrator level executives. Daily development of deliverables under
the Executive Order is conducted by the Federal Office Directors' group. Working together, the
FLC agencies released a coordinated implementation strategy on May 12, 2010. These agencies
also coordinate on the development of an annual action plan and annual progress report required
by the Executive Order.
As required by Executive Order 13508, the FLC issues an annual Chesapeake Bay Action Plan to
highlight key work to be accomplished in the coming year. This plan includes a tangible list of
efforts to be undertaken by federal agencies, many in cooperation with state and local partners
and funding associated with those efforts. The plan also contains two-year milestones that
highlight key efforts that are needed for each Executive Order goal and supporting strategy.
In addition to an annual Action Plan, the FLC issues an annual Progress Report to highlight
actions achieved under the annual Action Plan. Many of the actions highlighted in the Progress
Report feature collaboration among federal agencies, eliminating duplication of effort, enabling
best use of federal resources, and allowing each agency to bring its specific skills to bear on a
given project—meaning that the total is more than the sum of its parts.
Gulf of Mexico
The Gulf of Mexico Program was initiated in 1988 by the EPA as a non-regulatory program.
Founded on the threefold principles of partnership, science-based information, and citizen
involvement, the Gulf Program joined the Great Lakes and Chesapeake Bay Programs as
flagships of the nation's efforts to apply an adaptive management approach to large coastal
freshwater and marine ecosystems. The mission of the Program is to facilitate collaborative
actions to protect, maintain, and restore the health and productivity of the Gulf of Mexico in ways
consistent with the economic well-being of the Region.
In the past two years, the federal government has renewed its commitment to the Gulf Coast
region, and in the aftermath of the largest oil spill in the history of the Gulf, the Gulf Program
has played and will continue to play a significant leadership role as a local presence and on-site
liaison in support of the Administrator's lead as the chair of the Gulf Coast Ecosystem
Restoration Task Force established by Executive Order 13554 (October 5, 2010) and the Gulf of
Mexico Citizen Advisory Committee. While the Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Task Force
was dissolved by Executive Order 13626 (September 10, 2012), the EPA will continue to play a
significant role in Gulf Coast restoration as a member of the statutory successor organization, the
Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council. The Gulf Program further helps coordinate the plans
989
-------
of state and local governments, the private sector, tribes, scientists, and citizens to align efforts
that address the long decline of the Gulf Coast by restoring water quality, restoring and
conserving habitat, addressing nutrient impacts, addressing sustainability and resilience of
communities, and engaging the communities to understand their role in the vitality of their
communities and overall quality of life.
Like any natural system that is persistently manipulated to meet the evolving demands of man's
progress and prosperity, the Gulf of Mexico suffers from an extensive array of issues. The Gulfs
challenges are complex and long standing, and correcting the problems requires sustained and
consistent effort over time. The EPA Gulf of Mexico Program is working consistently with
federal agency partners including;
• Department of the Interior - Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service and the
U.S. Geological Survey;
Department of Commerce - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration;
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers;
• U.S. Department of Agriculture; and
• National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
The extensive interagency coordination efforts are advancing sustainable restoration,
enhancement, and conservation of critical Gulf of Mexico ecosystems.
Community Water Priorities/Urban Waters
In response to early stakeholder feedback, the EPA has been working with senior executives
from eleven federal agencies to form an Urban Waters Federal Partnership, with support from
the White House Domestic Policy Council. Since the initial launch, two additional agencies have
joined the partnership to advance their respective missions and goals.
Agencies include:
• Department of the Interior
• Department of Agriculture
• Department of Commerce - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
• Department of Commerce - Economic Development Administration
• Army Corps of Engineers
• Department of Transportation
• Department of Housing and Urban Development
• Department of Health and Human Services - Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
• Department of Health and Human Services - National Institute of Environmental Health
Sciences
• Corporation for National and Community Service
• Department of Education
• Department of Energy
• Environmental Protection Agency
990
-------
This partnership seeks to help communities - especially underserved communities - transform
overlooked urban waters into treasured centerpieces and drivers of urban revival. The
partnerships will advance urban waters goals of: empowering and supporting communities in
revitalizing their urban waters and the surrounding land; helping communities establish and
maintain safe and equitable public access to their urban waterways; and linking urban water
restoration to other community priorities such as employment, education, economic
revitalization, housing, transportation, health, safety, and quality of life. To meet these goals, the
partnership will leverage member agencies' authorities, resources, expertise, and local support.
This federal partnership will advance an action agenda including the selection of Urban Waters
Federal Partnership Pilots for place-based projects, the identification of policy actions needed to
integrate federal support to communities and to remove barriers to local and community action,
and other actions such as sharing information and providing information on urban waters to
communities in the nation.
San Francisco Bay-Delta
The Interim Federal Action Plan for the California Bay-Delta, issued in December 2009,
signaled the federal government's intent to protect and restore this critically important ecosystem
- one that provides water to 25 million residents, sustains one of the most productive agricultural
regions in the country, and until recently supported a commercial and recreational fishing
industry that normally contributed hundreds of millions of dollars annually to the California
economy. EPA's priority is improving Delta water quality and protecting aquatic life. The
federal government is participating with state agencies and stakeholders in the development of
the Bay-Delta Conservation Plan, a long-term plan to improve water supply reliability and to
restore floodplains and wetlands in the Delta. Further, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the EPA, and the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have undertaken a number of other activities to restore habitat,
increase water efficiency, and improve water quality.
Puget Sound Program
The Puget Sound Program works to protect and restore Puget Sound, which has been designated
as an estuary of national significance under the Clean Water Act National Estuary Program. In
addition to working with state agencies, Puget Sound tribes, the government of Canada, local
governments, and non-profit organizations, EPA Region 10 initiated and chairs the Puget Sound
Federal Caucus.
The Puget Sound Federal Caucus is made up of fifteen federal agencies which have entered into
a Memorandum of Understanding9 to better integrate, organize, and focus federal efforts in the
Puget Sound ecosystem. Through the Caucus, EPA and other member agencies are aligning
resources and strengthening federal coordination on Puget Sound protection, science, recovery,
resource management and outreach efforts. By these actions, federal agencies can contribute
significantly to the restoration and protection of Puget Sound.
)http://www.epa.gov/pugetsound/pdf/pugetsound_federalcaucus_mou_l 3signators.pdf
991
-------
The Federal Caucus has been particularly engaged in addressing the 'Treaty Rights at Risk'
concerns raised by Puget Sound Tribes. These tribes have asked the Council on Environmental
Quality to intervene on their behalf with federal agencies in the Northwest to reverse the trends
in habitat loss and protect their Treaty Rights to harvest salmon and shellfish. Puget Sound
Federal Caucus work on this issue includes the development of a comprehensive, cross-agency
assessment of federal authorities and existing actions directed toward the recovery of habitat.
The Caucus members also prepared a list of additional commitments each agency will undertake
to better protect and restore habitat, salmon, and shellfish. For each of these new and existing
activities, roles, timeframes, geographic scope, and output and outcome measures have been
identified to provide for accountability. This matrix will help identify gaps in federal efforts and
authorities, and opportunities for better coordination of federal habitat work. The Caucus also
developed a federal plan to accompany the matrix of habitat activities. The plan focuses on
shorelines, floodplains, and water quality, as well as federal policies, enforcement activities,
funding, science, monitoring, and research. The plan proposes the creation of a federal/Tribal
Forum to address impediments to watershed-specific salmon recovery plan implementation that
are brought forward by individual Tribes.
Additionally, EPA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the U.S. Army
Corp of Engineers all participate in the Washington Shellfish Initiative- an agreement launched
in December 2011 among federal and state government, tribes, and the shellfish industry to
restore and expand Washington's shellfish resources to promote clean water commerce and
create family wage jobs.
The federal agencies that participate in the Puget Sound Federal Caucus are:
• Federal Highway Administration
• Federal Transit Administration
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
• National Park Service
• National Resource Conservation Service
• Navy Region Northwest
• U.S. Army
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
• U.S. Coast Guard
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
• U.S. Geological Survey
• U.S. Forest Service
• Federal Emergency Management Agency
• Bureau of Indian Affairs
992
-------
Goal 3-Cleaning Up Our Communities
Objective: Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities
Brownfields
EPA continues to lead the Brownfields Federal Partnership, which includes more than 20 federal
agencies dedicated to the cleanup and redevelopment of brownfields properties. Partner agencies
work together to prevent, assess, safely clean up, and redevelop brownfields. The Brownfields
Federal Partnership's on-going efforts include promoting the Portfields and Mine-Scarred Lands
projects and looking for additional opportunities to jointly promote community revitalization by
participating in multi-agency collaborative projects, holding regular meetings with federal
partners, and supporting regional efforts to coordinate federal revitalization support to state and
local agencies.
Sustainable Communities
In June 2009, EPA, the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), and the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) formed the Partnership for Sustainable Communities to
help protect the environment by providing communities with more options for public
transportation and better access to green and affordable housing. In FY 2014, EPA, HUD, and
DOT will work to align investments, grant criteria, and planning requirements to better support
community smart growth and sustainable design efforts. Work with the Partnership and other
agencies strengthens coordination and ensures efficient use of federal funds. The EPA also will
work to make our resources and those from other federal agencies easier for communities to
understand and access.
The EPA will continue work with other federal agencies whose decisions, rules, investments and
policies influence where and how development occurs including working with the Department of
Health and Human Services on the citing and location of new health facilities. In addition, EPA
will work with the General Services Administration to assist in the development and inclusion of
metrics into GSA tools for evaluating lease opportunities according to each buildings' level of
transit access and proximity to walkable destinations.
The EPA will continue to provide support to other federal agencies, such as the U.S. Department
of Agriculture and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, for activities
including jointly delivering technical assistance to rural Appalachian communities and proposing
sustainability language to include in grant solicitations and other guidance documents. This
assistance helps these agencies protect the environment through their community development
programs, policies, regulations, and resources, while meeting their core agency objectives.
The EPA also co-sponsors the Governor's Institute on Community Design with HUD and DOT.
The institute works with governors and their cabinets to improve environmental and public
health outcomes of community development.
993
-------
Environmental Justice
The EPA will continue its work in partnership with other federal agencies to address the
environmental and public health issues facing communities with environmental justice concerns.
The agency will continue its efforts to work collaboratively and constructively with all levels of
government, and throughout the public and private sectors. The issues range from lead exposure,
asthma, safe drinking water and sanitation systems to hazardous waste clean-up, renewable
energy/wind power development, and sustainable environmentally-sound economies. The EPA
and its federal partners are utilizing EPA's collaborative problem-solving model, based on the
experiences of federal collaborative partnerships, to improve the federal government's
effectiveness in addressing the environmental and public health concerns facing communities. As
the lead agency for environmental justice pursuant to Executive Order 12898, EPA shares its
knowledge and experience and offers assistance to other federal agencies as they enhance their
strategies to integrate environmental justice into their programs, policies, and activities.
U. S. -Mexico Border
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 Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC) and the North American
Development Bank (NADBank), which manages the Border Environment Infrastructure Fund
(BEIF), to support the financing and construction of much needed environmental infrastructure.
The BECC, with headquarters in Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua, Mexico, assists local communities
and other sponsors in developing and implementing environmental infrastructure projects. 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 States and
Mexico. NADBank provides new financing to supplement existing sources of funds and foster
the expanded participation of private capital.
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 and Mexico's
national water commission, Comision Nacional del Agua (CONAGUA), to further efforts to
improve drinking water and wastewater services to communities within 100 km on the U.S. and
300 km on the Mexico side of the U.S.-Mexico border. The U.S.-Mexico Border 2012 Program
represents a successful joint effort between the U.S. and Mexican governments in working with
the 10 Border States and local communities to improve the region's environmental health,
consistent with the principles of sustainable development. Over the last several years, EPA has
continued to work with the U.S. and Mexican Sections of the International Boundary and Water
Commission and Mexico's national water commission, Comision Nacional del Agua
(CONAGUA), to further efforts to improve drinking water and wastewater services to
994
-------
communities within 100 km on the U.S. and 300 km on the Mexico side of the U.S.-Mexico
border.
Research
Research in ecosystems protection is coordinated government-wide through the Committee on
Environment, Natural Resources, and Sustainability (CENRS). EPA actively participates in the
CENRS and all work is fully consistent with, and complementary to, other Committee member
activities. EPA scientists staff two CENRS Subcommittees: the Subcommittee on Ecological
Systems (SES) and the Subcommittee on Water Availability and Quality (SWAQ). The EPA has
initiated discussions within the SES on the subject of ecosystem services and potential ERP
collaborations are being explored with the U.S. Geological Service (USGS) and with USDA
Forest Service. Within SWAQ, the ERP has contributed to an initiative for a comprehensive
census of water availability and quality, including the use of Environmental Monitoring and
Assessment Program methods and ongoing surveys as data sources. In addition, EPA has taken a
lead role with USGS in preparing a SWAQ document outlining new challenges for integrated
management of water resources, including strategic needs for monitoring and modeling methods,
and identifying water requirements needed to support the ecological integrity of aquatic
ecosystems.
Consistent with the broad scope of the EPA's ecosystem research efforts, EPA has had
complementary and joint programs with FS, USGS, USDA, NOAA, BLM, USFS, NGOs, and
many others specifically to minimize duplication, maximize scope, and maintain a real time
information flow. For example, all of these organizations work together to produce the National
Land Cover Data used by all landscape ecologists nationally. Each contributes funding, services
and research to this uniquely successful effort.
The EPA expends substantial effort coordinating its research with other federal agencies,
including work with DoD in its Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program
(SERDP) and the Environmental Security Technology Certification Program, DOE, and its
Office of Health and Environmental Research. The EPA also conducts collaborative laboratory
research with DoD, DOE, DOT (particularly the USGS), and NASA to improve characterization
and risk management options for dealing with subsurface contamination.
The agency also is working with NIEHS, which manages a large basic research program
focusing on Superfund issues, to advance fundamental Superfund research. The Agency for
Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) also provides critical health-based information
to assist EPA in making effective cleanup decisions. The EPA works with these agencies on
collaborative projects, information exchange, and identification of research issues and has a
MOU with each agency. The EPA, Army Corps of Engineers, and Navy recently signed a MOU
to increase collaboration and coordination in contaminated sediments research. Additionally, the
Interstate Technology Regulatory Council (ITRC) has proved an effective forum for
coordinating federal and state activities and for defining continuing research needs through its
teams on topics including permeable reactive barriers, radionuclides, and Brownfields. The EPA
995
-------
has developed an MOU10 with several other agencies [DOE, DoD, NRC, USGS, NOAA, and
USD A] for multimedia modeling research and development.
Other research efforts involving coordination include the unique controlled-spill field research
facility designed in cooperation with the 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.
The agency coordinates its research fellowship programs with other federal agencies and the
nonprofit sector through the National Academies' Fellowships Roundtable, which meets
biannually.11
The EPA is coordinating with DoD's SERDP in an ongoing partnership, especially in the areas
of sustainability research and of incorporating materials lifecycle analysis into the manufacturing
process for weapons and military equipment. The EPA will continue to collaborate with the
Army as part of their Net Zero Initiative, to develop and demonstrate innovative waste
technologies to accomplish the Army's goal of net zero energy, water, and waste by 2020. The
EPA's People, Prosperity, and Planet (P3) student design competition for sustainability will
partner with NASA, NSF, OFEE, USAID, USD A, CEQ, and OSTP.
Several federal agencies sponsor research on variability and susceptibility in risks from exposure
to environmental contaminants. The EPA collaborates with a number of the Institutes within the
NIH and CDC. For example, 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.
The 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
in children's health and with the National Institute on Child Health and Human Development on
the development and implementation of the National Children's Study.
Objective: Reserve Land
Pollution prevention activities entail coordination with other federal departments and agencies.
For example, the EPA coordinates with the General Services Administration (GSA) on the use of
safer products for indoor painting and cleaning, with the Department of Defense (DoD) on the
use of safer paving materials for parking lots, and with the Defense Logistics Agency on safer
solvents. The program also works with the National Institute of Standards and Technology and
other groups to develop standards for Environmental Management Systems.
In addition to business, industry, and other non-governmental organizations, the EPA works with
federal, state, Tribal, and local governments to encourage reduced generation and safe recycling
10 For more information please go to: Interagency Steering Committee on Multimedia Environmental Models MOU,
http://www.iscmem.org/Memorandum.htm
11 For more information, see .
996
-------
of wastes. Partners in this effort include the Environmental Council of States and the Association
of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials.
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. The EPA works with the
Office of Federal Environmental Executive and 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 13423, and in tracking and reporting purchases of products
made with recycled contents, in promoting electronic stewardship, and achieving waste reduction
and recycling goals.
In addition, the agency is currently engaged with the DoD, the Department of Education, the
Department of Energy (DOE), the U.S. Postal Service, 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, the EPA and the Office of the
Federal Environmental Executive launched the Federal Electronics Challenge which will lead to
increased reuse and recycling of an array of computers and other electronics hardware used by
civilian and military agencies.
Objective: Restore Land
Super fund Remedial Program
As referenced above, the Superfund Remedial program coordinates with several other federal
agencies, such as ATSDR and NIEHS, in providing numerous Superfund related services in
order to accomplish the program's mission.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers also substantially contributes to the cleanup of Superfund
sites by providing technical support for the design and construction of many fund-financed
remediation projects through site-specific interagency agreements. This federal partner has the
technical design and construction expertise and contracting capability needed to assist EPA
regions in implementing a number of Superfund remedial action projects. This agency also
provides technical on-site support to Regions in the enforcement oversight of numerous
construction projects performed by private Potentially Responsible Parties.
Superfund Federal Facilities Program
The Superfund Federal Facilities program coordinates with federal agencies, states, tribes, state
associations, and others to implement its statutory responsibilities to ensure cleanup and property
reuse. The program provides technical and regulatory oversight at federal facilities to ensure
human health and the environment are protected.
A Memorandum of Understanding has been negotiated with DOD to continue the agency's
oversight support through September 30, 2016 for the acceleration of cleanup and property
transfer at specific Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) installations affected by the first four
997
-------
rounds of BRAC. The FY 2014 request does not include additional support for BRAC-related
services to the DoD at those facilities affected by the fifth round of BRAC in 2005.
EPA has signed lAGs with the DOE to expedite the cleanup and to support DOE's efforts of
reducing the footprint at a number of sites, including the Savannah River Site, Oak Ridge
Reservation, Hanford, and the Idaho National Laboratory sites using DOE's ARRA funding.
EPA will continue to provide technical input regarding innovative and flexible regulatory
approaches, streamlining of documentation, integration of projects, deletion of sites from the
National Priorities List, field assessments, and development of management documents and
processes.
In response to the October 2010 and September 2011 Federal Cleanup Dialogue meetings, and to
advance long-term stewardship, the EPA is working collaboratively with DoD, DOE, and
Department of the Interior (DOI) through a Federal Workgroup to improve the technical quality,
timeliness, and cost of the five-year review reports and to ensure that the community is aware of
the protectiveness status. To advance long-term stewardship, in FY 2012, the federal workgroup
produced a community video, a training module, and a template for a site-specific fact sheet once
the reviews are completed. In FY 2013, the workgroup will develop a new training module for
the writers and reviewers of the report with a focus on improving the report's technical quality.
In FY 2014, the workgroup will continue to assess the use of the community tools and will begin
to document best management practices that improve the five-year review process.
Superfund Financial Responsibility Regulations
The EPA currently is conducting an assessment of the scope, viability, and need for regulations
that will require facilities in the hardrock mining and mineral processing, chemical
manufacturing, petroleum refining, and electric power generation industry to provide appropriate
financial responsibility demonstrations for damage to human health and the environment that
may be the result of those manufacturing activities. This effort will require close coordination
with the DOI (BLM) and USDA (Forest Service) related to mining/mineral processing activities
on federal lands, and DoD and DOE regarding the other industrial facilities that will be
potentially impacted.
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
The RCRA Waste Management and Corrective Action programs coordinate closely with other
federal agencies, primarily the DoD and DOE, which have many sites in the corrective action
and permitting universe. Encouraging federal facilities to meet the RCRA Corrective Action and
Waste Management permitting program's goals remains a top priority.
RCRA programs also coordinate with the Department of Commerce, the Department of
Transportation, and the Department of State to ensure the safe movement of domestic and
international shipments of hazardous waste.
998
-------
Emergency Preparedness and Response
The 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. The EPA implements the
Emergency Preparedness program in coordination with the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) and other federal agencies to deliver federal assistance to state, local, and Tribal
governments during natural disasters and other major environmental incidents. This requires
continuous coordination with many federal, state and local agencies. The agency participates
with other federal agencies to develop national planning and implementation policies at the
operational level.
The National Response Framework (NRF), 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. The EPA maintains the lead responsibility for
the NRF's Emergency Support Function covering inland hazardous materials and petroleum
releases and participates in the Federal Emergency Support Function Leaders Group which
addresses NRF planning and implementation at the operational level.
The EPA coordinates its preparedness activities with DHS, FEMA, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, and other federal agencies, states, and local governments. The EPA will continue
to clarify its roles and responsibilities to ensure that agency security programs are consistent with
the national homeland security strategy.
Superfund Enforcement (see Goal 5)
Oil Spills
Under the Oil Spill Program, the EPA works with other federal agencies, such as U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), NOAA, FEMA, DOT, DOT, DOE, 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. In FY 2014, the EPA will have an
active interagency agreement with the USCG providing continued support for the National
Response Center and oil spill response technical assistance. In addition, the EPA executed a
Memorandum of Understanding in June 2012 pledging increased coordination concerning
financial cost documentation. The EPA and the USCG work in coordination with other federal
authorities to implement the National Preparedness for Response Program.
Objective: Strengthen Human Health and the Environment in Indian Country
The EPA works under two important Tribal Infrastructure Memoranda of Understandings
(MOU) amongst five federal agencies. EPA, the Department of the Interior, Department of
Health and Human Services, Department of Agriculture, and the Department of Housing and
Urban Development work as partners to improve infrastructure on Tribal lands and currently
focus efforts on providing access to safe drinking water and basic wastewater facilities to tribes.
999
-------
The first, or umbrella MOU, promotes coordination between federal Tribal infrastructure
programs, including financial services, while allowing federal programs to retain their unique
advantages. It is fully expected that the efficiencies and partnerships resulting from this
collaboration will directly assist tribes with their infrastructure needs. Under the umbrella MOU,
for the first time, five federal departments joined together and agreed to work across traditional
program boundaries on Tribal infrastructure issues. The second MOU, addressing a specific
infrastructure issue, was created under the umbrella authority and addresses the issue of access to
safe drinking water and wastewater facilities on Tribal lands. Currently, the five federal agencies
are working together to develop solutions for specific geographic areas of concern (Alaska,
Southwest), engaging in coordination of ARRA funding, and promoting cross-agency efficiency.
These activities are completed in coordination with federally recognized tribes.
For more information, please see http://www.epa.gov/tribalportal/mous.htm.
Consultation
The EPA continues to work closely with other federal agencies as well as the Domestic Policy
Council to implement President Obama's directive regarding the Tribal consultation process. The
President's November 5, 2009 Memorandum directs each executive department to develop a
detailed plan to implement Executive Order (EO) 13175, "Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments," issued by President Clinton in 2000. Under EO 13175, "all
departments and agencies are charged with engaging in regular and meaningful consultation and
collaboration with Tribal officials in the development of federal policies that have Tribal
implications and are responsible for strengthening the government-to-government relationship
between the United States and Indian tribes."
On May 4, 2011, the EPA released its final policy on consultation and coordination with Indian
tribes. EPA is among the first of the federal agencies to finalize its consultation policy in
response to President Obama's first tribal leaders summit in November 2009, and the issuance of
Executive Order 13175 to establish regular and meaningful consultation and collaboration with
tribal officials in the development of federal policies that have tribal implications.
Americorps Partnership
The EPA recently partnered with the Corporation for National and Community Service to
leverage AmeriCorps grant resources, announcing that Indian General Assistance Program
(GAP) grants may be used as match funding for tribally-sponsored AmeriCorps programs.
The EPA has partnered with AmeriCorps to support tribal communities. Often, tribal
governments face financial challenges that prevent them from providing the required match
funding. AmeriCorps' members help address this key challenge facing Native American
communities, including education, disaster response and environmental preservation. The EPA
manages GAP to assist eligible tribal governments in building environmental programs needed to
regulate and manage their environments. The combination of AmeriCorps grants and EPA
program funding, such as GAP, enable tribal governments to bring in energetic, committed
people to help build an environmental program.
1000
-------
Safe and Responsible Resource Extraction
In FY 2012, the EPA entered into an MO A with the Department of Energy and the Department
of the Interior to ensure appropriate coordination and collaboration on the federal agencies'
research efforts to understand the potential environmental issues and impacts associated with
hydraulic fracturing. Tribal governments are very interested in gaining a better understanding of
hydraulic fracturing as well, and therefore EPA has formed an EPA-Tribal work group to
facilitate that and to identify ways the agency can provide technical assistance and real-time
information to tribal governments about hydraulic fracturing.
Goal 4 - Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective: Chemical and Pesticide Risks
Coordination with state lead agencies and with the 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 and
are involved in numerous special projects and investigations, including emergency response
efforts. The Regional Offices 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 effective implementation of regulatory decisions. In
addition, coordination activities protect workers and endangered species, provide training for
pesticide applicators, promote integrated pest management and environmental stewardship, and
provide support for 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
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 USDA implemented the
Pesticide Data Program (PDF) 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 PDF data to improve dietary
risk assessment to support the registration of pesticides for minor crop uses.
1001
-------
PDF is critical to implementing the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA). 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. PDF 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. PDF
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,
USD A, and FDA work closely together using both a MOU and working committees to deal with
a variety of issues that affect the involved agencies' missions. For example, agencies work
together on residue testing programs and on enforcement actions that involve pesticide residues
on food and agencies coordinate review of antimicrobial pesticides. The agency coordinates with
USDA/ARS in promotion and communication of resistance management strategies.
Additionally, EPA actively participates in the Federal Interagency Committee on Invasive
Animals and Pathogens (ITAP) which includes members from USDA, DOL, DoD, DHS, and
CDC to coordinate planning and technical advice among federal entities involved in invasive
species research, control, and management.
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 HHS/FDA enforces tolerances for most foods and the
USD A/Food Safety and Inspection Service enforces tolerances for meat, poultry, and some egg
products.
EPA's objective is to promote improved health and environmental protection, both domestically
and worldwide. The success of this objective is dependent on successful coordination not only
with other countries, but also with various international organizations such as the
Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety (IFCS), the North American Commission on
Environmental Cooperation (CEC), OECD, the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP)
and the CODEX Alimentarius Commission. NAFTA and cooperation with Canada and Mexico
play an integral part in the harmonization of data requirements. These partnerships 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.
The nexus of environmental protection and international trade has long been a priority for EPA
engagement. EPA has played a key role in ensuring trade-related activities sustain environmental
protection since the 1972 Trade Act mandated interagency consultation by the U.S. Trade
Representative (USTR) on trade policy issues. EPA is a member of the Trade Policy Staff
Committee (TPSC) and the Trade Policy Review Group (TPRG), interagency mechanisms that
are organized and coordinated by USTR to provide advice, guidance, and clearance to the USTR
in the development of U.S. international trade and investment policy.
To effectively participate in the international agreements on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs)
and heavy metals, EPA must continue to coordinate with other federal agencies and external
stakeholders, such as Congressional staff, industry, and environmental groups. Similarly, the
1002
-------
agency typically coordinates with FDA's National Toxicology Program, the CDC/ATSDR,
NIEHS and the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) on matters relating to OECD test
guideline harmonization.
EPA also works closely with the Department of State in leading the technical and policy
engagement for the United States Government at international negotiations on global mercury.
EPA provided the impetus for UNEP's Global Mercury Program, and the agency continues to
work with developing countries and with other developed countries in the context of that
program. In addition to the Department of State, EPA collaborates closely with several federal
agencies including DOE and USGS; and has developed a strong network of domestic private
sector and non-governmental partners interested in working on this issue.
EPA is a leader in global discussions on mercury and was instrumental in the launch of UNEP's
Global Mercury Program and the agency will continue to work with developing countries and
with other developed countries in the context of that program. In addition, we have developed a
strong network of domestic partners interested in working on this issue, including the DOE and
the USGS.
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 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 OSHA worker protection programs,
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 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 continue to coordinate with HUD to clarify how
new rules may affect existing EPA and HUD regulatory programs, and with the FHWA and
OSHA on worker protection issues. EPA will continue to work closely with state and federally
1003
-------
recognized Tribes to ensure that authorized state and Tribal programs continue to comply with
requirements established under TSCA, and that the ongoing federal accreditation and
certification and training program for lead professionals is administered effectively.
EPA has a 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
fourteen other federal agencies including CDC and DoD on the Task Force. HUD and EPA also
maintain the National Lead Information Center and share enforcement of the Disclosure Rule.
Coordination on safe PCB disposal is an area of ongoing emphasis with the DoD, and
particularly with the U.S. Navy, which has special concerns regarding PCBs encountered during
ship scrapping. Mercury storage and safe disposal also are 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.
Research
EPA's Toxicity Forecaster (ToxCast™) is part of an ongoing multi-agency effort called Tox21
and is conducted in collaboration with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Food and
Drug Administration (FDA). ToxCast utilizes existing resources to develop faster, more
thorough predictions of how chemicals will affect human and environmental health. Tox21 and
ToxCast are currently screening nearly 10,000 environmental chemicals for potential toxicity in
high-throughput screening assays at the NIH Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
(NCATS). Under the Tox21 collaboration MOU, one of EPA's contributions is its ToxCast
research project. EPA also has an agreement to provide NCATS funding to support the effort.
ToxCast is currently finishing Phase II of this program, which covers 1,080 chemicals; results of
Phase II will be released and publicly available in FY13. Phase III, which covers data for
additional high priority chemicals essential for computational systems models predicting
chemical toxicity, will be available in FY14. In FY14, Tox21's high-speed robot screening
system will continue testing over 8,000 unique chemicals, to include nanomaterials and other
chemicals found in industrial and consumer products, food additives, and drugs, for potential
toxicity.
The Next Generation (NexGen) of Risk Assessment is a multi-agency project, chaired by EPA,
that builds upon ToxCast research efforts. CDC's ATSDR and the State of California's
Environmental Protection Agency participate in addition to most Tox21 collaborators. Using the
wealth of data currently being generated on molecular systems biology and gene-environment
interactions, NexGen will develop approaches to make these data useful for human health risk
assessment. The goal is to make risk assessments faster, less expensive, and more scientifically
robust. In particular, NexGen is intended to help assess the array of chemicals that are potential
environmental contaminants of concern that are too numerous to address by traditional
approaches.
1004
-------
EPA coordinates its nanotechnology research with other federal agencies through the National
Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI),12 which is managed under the Subcommittee on Nanoscale
Science, Engineering and Technology (NSET) of the NSTC Committee on Technology (CoT).
The agency's Science to Achieve Results (STAR) program, which awards research grants to
universities and non-profit organizations, has issued its recent nanotechnology grants 3 jointly
with NIOSH, NIEHS, and NSF.
EPA coordinates its research on endocrine disrupters with other federal agencies through the
interagency working group on endocrine disrupters under the auspices of the Toxics and Risk
Subcommittee of the CENR. EPA coordinates its biotechnology research through the interagency
biotechnology research working group and the agricultural biotechnology risk analysis working
group of the Biotechnology Subcommittee of NSTC's Committee on Science.
EPA coordinates with ATSDR through a memorandum of understanding on the development of
toxicological reviews and toxicology profiles, respectively. EPA also consults with other federal
agencies about the science of individual IRIS assessments as well as improvements to the IRIS
Program through an interagency working group including public health agencies (e.g., CDC,
ATSDR, NIOHS, and NIEHS). The agency contracts with the National Academy of Sciences
(NAS) on very difficult and complex human health risk assessments through consultation or
review. Most recently, EPA contracted with the NAS to conduct a comprehensive review of the
IRIS assessment development process.
Homeland Security research is conducted in collaboration with numerous agencies, leveraging
funding across multiple programs and producing synergistic results. EPA's National Homeland
Security Research Center (NHSRC) works closely with the DHS to assure that EPA's efforts are
directly supportive of DHS priorities. EPA also is working with DHS to provide support and
guidance to DHS in the startup of their University Centers of Excellence program. Recognizing
that the DoD has significant expertise and facilities related to biological and chemical warfare
agents, EPA works closely with the Edgewood Chemical and Biological Center (ECBC), the
Technical Support Working Group, the Army Corps of Engineers, and other Department of
Defense organizations to address areas of mutual interest and concern. In conducting biological
agent research, EPA also is collaborating with CDC. EPA works with DOE to access and support
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 U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy, FDA, USGS and NIST. 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. In
the water infrastructure arena, the NHSRC is providing information to the Water Information
Sharing Networks program. The NAS also has been engaged to provide advice on the long-term
direction of the water research and technical support program.
12 For more information, see .
13 For an example, see .
1005
-------
Furthermore, HSRP is collaborating with the U.S. Army's Net Zero Initiative to develop and
demonstrate innovative water technologies in efforts to increase resource efficiency and balance
resource use by accomplishing net zero energy, waste, and water on installations by 2020.
Objective: Promote Pollution Prevention
EPA is involved in a broad range of pollution prevention (P2) activities which can yield
reductions in waste generation and energy consumption in the public and private sectors. For
example, the Environmental Performance through Pollution Prevention and Innovation
Environmental Preferable Purchasing (EPP) 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 National Park Service (NPS) (to use Green Purchasing as a tool to achieve
the sustainability goals of the parks), the Department of Defense (DoD) (use of environmentally
preferable construction materials), and Defense Logistics Agency (identification of
environmental attributes for products in its purchasing system). The program also is working
within EPA to "green" its own operations. The program also works with the Department of
Commerce's National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) 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 (GSN), EPA's P2 Program is working closely with NIST and its
Manufacturing Extension Partnership Program to provide technical assistance to the process of
"greening" industry supply chains. The EPA also is working with the Department of Energy's
(DOE) Industrial Technologies Program to provide energy audits and technical assistance to
these supply chains.
The agency is required to review environmental impact statements 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 Section 309 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), to review and
comment on proposed federal actions, neither the National Environmental Policy Act nor Section
309 of the CAA requires 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. 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 the Federal Highway Administration and Federal
Aviation Administration), USAGE, DOI (including Bureau of Land Management, Minerals
Management Service and National Parks Service), Department of Energy (including the Federal
Regulatory Commission), and the Department of Defense.
1006
-------
Goal 5- Enforcing Environmental Laws
Objective: Address pollution problems through vigorous and targeted civil and criminal
enforcement. Assure compliance with environmental laws.
The Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program coordinates closely with the Department
of Justice (DOJ) on all civil and criminal environmental enforcement matters. In addition, the
program coordinates with other agencies on specific environmental issues as described herein.
The Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program coordinates with the Chemical Safety and
Accident Investigation Board, OSHA, and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry in preventing and responding to accidental releases and endangerment situations, with
the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) on Tribal issues relative to compliance with environmental
laws on Tribal lands, and with the Small Business Administration (SBA) on the implementation
of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA). The program also
shares information with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) on cases which require defendants to
pay civil penalties, thereby assisting the IRS in assuring compliance with tax laws. In addition, it
collaborates with the SBA to maintain current environmental compliance information at
Business.gov, a website initiated as an e-government initiative in 2004 to help small businesses
comply with government regulations. Coordination also occurs with the United States Army
Corps of Engineers (USAGE) on wetlands issues.
The United States 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 for purposes of the Food Security Act. Civil Enforcement coordinates with
USDA/NRCS on these issues also. EPA's Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program also
coordinates with USDA on the regulation of animal feeding operations and on food safety issues
arising from the misuse of pesticides and shares joint jurisdiction with the Federal Trade
Commission (FTC) on pesticide labeling and advertising. Coordination also occurs with Customs
and Border Protection on implementing the secure International Trade Data System across all
federal agencies and 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). The agency has entered into an
agreement with Housing and Urban Development (HUD) concerning enforcement of the Toxic
Substance Control Act (TSCA) lead-based paint notification requirements.
The Criminal Enforcement program coordinates with other federal law enforcement agencies
(i.e., Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Customs, DOL, U.S. Treasury, United States Coast
Guard (USCG), Department of the Interior (DOI) and DOJ) and with international, 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
program has an Interagency Agreement with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to
provide specialized criminal environmental training to federal, state, local, and Tribal law
enforcement personnel at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) in Glynco,
GA.
1007
-------
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. EPA also
will continue its efforts to support the FedCenter, the Federal Facilities Environmental
Stewardship and Compliance Assistance Center (www.fedcenter.gov), which is now governed
by a board of more than a dozen contributing federal agencies.
The Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program collaborates 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 efforts 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.
The Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program chairs the Interagency Environmental
Leadership Workgroup established by Executive Order 13148. The Workgroup consists of over
100 representatives from most federal departments and agencies. Its mission is to assist all
federal agencies with meeting the mandates of the Executive Order, including implementation of
environmental management systems and environmental compliance auditing programs, reducing
both releases and uses of toxic chemicals, and compliance with pollution prevention and
pollution reporting requirements. The program also will work with its regions, states and directly
with a number of other federal agencies to improve Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA), Clean Water Act (CWA), and other statutory compliance at federal facilities, which
array the full range of agency tools to promote compliance in an effective and efficient manner.
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
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the DOJ, the
Department of State, and the States of Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas. EPA is the
lead agency and coordinates U.S. participation in the CEC. EPA works with the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the U.S.
Geological Survey on CEC projects to promote biodiversity cooperation and with the Office of
the U.S. Trade Representative to reduce potential trade and environmental impacts such as
invasive species.
The Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program, together with EPA's International
program, provides training and capacity building to foreign governments to improve their
compliance and enforcement programs. This support helps create a level playing field for U.S.
businesses engaged in global competition, helps other countries improve their environmental
conditions, and ensures U.S. compliance with obligations for environmental cooperation as
1008
-------
outlined in various free trade agreements. In support of these activities, EPA works closely with
the Department of State, selected U.S. Embassies, the U.S. Agency for International
Development (US AID), the Office of the United States Trade Representative, the Department of
Justice, the International Law Enforcement Academies, the U.S. Forest Service, and the
Department of the Interior.
Super fund Enforcement
As required by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA) and Executive Order 12580, the Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program
coordinates with other federal agencies in their use of CERCLA enforcement authority. This
includes the coordinated use of CERCLA enforcement authority at individual hazardous waste
sites that are located on both nonfederal land (EPA jurisdiction) and federal lands (other agency
jurisdiction). As required by Executive Order 13016, the agency also coordinates the use of
CERCLA Section 106 administrative order authority by other departments and agencies.
The EPA also coordinates with the Departments of the Interior, Agriculture, and Commerce to
ensure that appropriate and timely notices, required under CERCLA, are sent to the Natural
Resource Trustees to commence the Natural Resource Damage Assessment process. The
Department of Justice also provides assistance to EPA with judicial referrals seeking recovery of
response costs incurred by the U.S., injunctive relief to implement response actions, or
enforcement of other CERCLA requirements.
Under Executive Order 12580, the Superfund Federal Facilities Enforcement program assists
federal agencies in complying with CERCLA. It ensures that: 1) all federal facility sites on the
National Priorities List have interagency agreements, also known as Federal Facility Agreements
or FFAs, which provide enforceable schedules for the progression of the entire cleanup; 2) FFAs
are monitored by EPA for compliance; 3) federal sites that are transferred to new owners are
transferred in an environmentally responsible manner; and 4) assistance is available, to the extent
possible, to assist federal facilities in complying with their cleanup responsibilities. It is this
program's responsibility to ensure that federal agencies, by law, comply with Superfund cleanup
obligations "in the same manner and to the same extent" as private entities. After years of service
and operation, some federal facilities contain environmental contamination, such as hazardous
wastes, unexploded ordnance, radioactive wastes, or other toxic substances. To enable the
cleanup and reuse of such sites, the Federal Facilities Enforcement program coordinates creative
solutions that protect both human health and the environment. These enforcement solutions help
restore facilities so they can once again serve an important role in the economy and welfare of
local communities and the country.
1009
-------
Coordination with Other Federal Agencies
Enabling Support Programs
Office of the Administrator (OA)
The Office of the Administrator (OA) supports the leadership of the Environmental Protection
Agency's (EPA) programs and activities to protect human health and safeguard the air, water,
and land upon which life depends. Several program responsibilities include Congressional and
intergovernmental relations, regulatory management and economic analysis, program evaluation,
homeland security - including intelligence coordination, the Science Advisory Board, children's
health, the small business program, and environmental training and outreach.
The EPA's Office of Policy (OP) interacts with a number of federal agencies during its
rulemaking activities. Per Executive Order 12866 - Regulatory Planning and Review, OP
submits "significant" regulatory actions to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
interagency review prior to signature and publication in the Federal Register. Under the
Congressional Review Act (CRA), rules are submitted to each House of Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United States. Regulatory actions and other information are
published through the Office of the Federal Register. For regulations that may have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, OP collaborates with the Small
Business Administration (SBA) and OMB.
OP collaborates with other federal regulatory and natural resource agencies (e.g., the United
States Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Department of the Interior (DOT), and the
National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)) to collect economic data used in the
conduct of economic cost-benefit analyses of environmental regulations and policies and to
foster improved interdisciplinary research and reporting of economic information. This is
achieved in several ways, including supporting workshops and symposiums on environmental
economics topics (e.g., economic valuation of ecosystem services, adoption of flexible
regulatory mechanisms to achieve environmental goals), and representing the EPA on
interagency workgroups or committees tasked with measuring the economic health and welfare
benefits of federal policies and programs. For example, OP continues to work with the USDA
and the Department of Energy (DOE) to evaluate and improve climate change integrated
assessment models and develop measures of the social damages attributable to Greenhouse Gas
(GHG) emissions. This information is used to generate estimates of the social cost of carbon
(SCC), which enables all federal agencies to better incorporate climate impact assessments and
estimates of associated economic damages into policy and regulatory analyses.
OP partners with other federal agencies to improve the quality of federal program evaluation
studies that gather empirical evidence to assess whether and why programs achieve outcomes
and how programs might be changed to improve results. OP supports forums for experts to share
and improve environmental evaluation methodologies, and represents the EPA on interagency
workgroups geared toward improving federal capacity to conduct or oversee rigorous and
objective evaluation studies.
1010
-------
OP also serves as the EPA's point of contact on interagency, government-wide efforts that do not
fall within the scope of any single program office. For example, it has represented the EPA in a
government-wide effort to streamline environmental review and permitting processes for large
and complex infrastructure projects, and led the EPA's internal response to that initiative. OP
leads an interagency coordinating committee on assistance programs that help manufacturers
improve competitiveness by improving energy and materials efficiency. A major focus of this
effort is to establish a single online portal to make these assistance programs across the federal
government easily accessible to businesses. OP also creates tools that are used by other federal
agencies in efforts of this kind; for example, its toolkits on the integration of environmental and
energy considerations into "lean manufacturing" techniques are widely used by the
Manufacturing Extension Partnership centers under the Department of Commerce (DOC), and in
the "E3" initiative, a multi-agency framework including the EPA, Commerce, DOE, and other
agencies.
OP represents the EPA on the White House Climate Change Adaptation Task Force, which was
established in 2009 in response to Executive Order 13514 and charged with strengthening the
federal government's response to current and anticipated climate change impacts, and to move
toward a national adaptation strategy. OP also chairs the Interagency Adaptation Planning Work
Group on behalf of the task force and the White House Council on Environmental Quality. The
work group is charged with supporting the efforts of all federal departments and agencies to
develop and implement Climate Change Adaptation Plans.
Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO)
OCFO makes active contributions to standing interagency management committees, including
the Chief Financial Officers Council, focusing on improving resource management and
accountability throughout the federal government. OCFO actively participates on the
Performance Improvement Council which advances performance management throughout the
federal government including strategic plans, performance plans, and performance reports as
required by law. In addition, OCFO participates in numerous OMB-led E-Gov initiatives such as
the Financial Management, Budget Formulation and Execution, and Performance Management
Lines of Business and has interagency agreements with the Department of Defense (DoD) for
processing agency payroll. OCFO provides a Relocation Resource Center capable of managing a
"one-stop shop" for domestic and international relocations. The EPA currently provides services
internally to EPA, as well as externally to the Transportation Security Administration, USDA,
OPM, and U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation, Office of
Global Affairs (HHS), and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Service Administration
(HHS). OCFO also coordinates appropriately with Congress and other federal agencies, such as
the Department of Treasury, the OMB, the Government Accountability Office (GAO), and the
General Services Administration (GSA). In addition, throughout FY 2013 and FY 2014, the
OCFO, in collaboration with the EPA's Office of Administration and Resources Management
and Office of Environmental Information, will be working with the Department of the Interior's
Business Center (TBC), which is an OPM and OMB-approved Human Resource Line of Business
shared services center, to implement the Human Resources Line of Business initiative. OCFO
plans to move payroll services from DoD's Defense Finance and Accounting Services (DFAS) to
DOI'S roc.
1011
-------
Office of Administration and Resources Management (OARM)
OARM is committed to working with federal partners that focus on improving management and
accountability throughout the federal government. OARM provides leadership and expertise to
government-wide activities in various areas of human resources, grants management, contracts
management, and homeland security. These activities include specific collaboration efforts with
federal agencies and departments through:
• Chief Human Capital Officers, a group of senior leaders that discuss human capital
initiatives across the federal government.
• The Legislative and Policy Committee, a committee comprised of other federal
agency representatives who assist the Office of Personnel Management in
developing plans and policies for training and development across the government.
• The Chief Acquisition Officers Council, the principal interagency forum for
monitoring and improving the federal acquisition system. The Council also is
focused on promoting the President's specific initiatives and policies in all aspects of
the acquisition system.
• The Interagency Suspension and Debarment Committee (ISDC), which works with
OMB to coordinate and strengthen the government-wide suspension and debarment
system.
OARM is participating in the OMB-approved Financial Management Line of Business
(FMLoB), which has recently been expanded to also encompass the Grants Management Line of
Business. The newly combined FMLoB, with GSA as the managing partner, will more closely
align the financial assistance and financial management communities around effective and
efficient management of funds. OARM also participates in the Grants.gov Users' Group, as well
as the Federal Demonstration Partnership which is designed to reduce the administrative burdens
associated with research grants. Further, OARM is involved in the Partnership for Sustainable
Communities initiative with the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the
Department of Transportation to improve the alignment and delivery of grant resources to
communities under certain environmental programs. In the area of suspension and debarment,
besides actively participating in the ISDC, OARM: 1) co-sponsors and provides instructors for
the National Suspension and Debarment Training Program offered through the Federal Law
Enforcement Training Center and 2) supports the development of coursework on the suspension
and debarment process for the Inspector General Academy.
1012
-------
In addition, throughout FY 2013 and FY 2014, OARM, in collaboration with EPA's Office of
the Chief Financial Officer and the Office of Environmental Information, will be working with
the Department of the Interior's Business Center (IBC), and the Defense Finance and Accounting
Service to migrate the existing EPA HR and payroll processing functions to IBC, which is an
OPM and OMB approved Human Resources Line of Business shared service center. IBC offers
HR transactional processing, compensation management and payroll processing, benefits
administration, time and attendance, HR reporting, talent acquisition systems, and talent
management systems.
OARM also is working with OMB, GSA, DHS, and the DOC's National Institute of Standards
and Technology to continue to implement the Smart Card program.
Office of Environmental Information (OEI)
To support the EPA's overall mission, OEI collaborates with a number of other federal agencies,
states and Tribal governments on a variety of initiatives, including making government more
efficient and transparent, protecting human health and the environment, and assisting in
homeland security. OEI is primarily involved in the information technology (IT), information
management (EVI), and information security aspects of the projects on which it collaborates.
The Chief Information Officer (CIO) Council: The CIO Council is the principal interagency
forum for improving practices in the design, modernization, use, sharing, and performance of
federal information resources. The Council develops recommendations for IT management
policies, procedures, and standards; identifies opportunities to share information resources; and
assesses and addresses the needs of the federal IT workforce.
E-Rulemaking: The EPA serves as the Program Management Office (PMO) for the
eRulemaking Program. The eRulemaking program's mission encompasses two areas: to improve
public access, participation in and understanding of the rulemaking process; and to improve the
efficiency and effectiveness of agency partners in promulgating regulations. The eRulemaking
program maintains a public website, www.Regulations.gov, which enables the general public to
access and make comments on various documents that are published in the Federal Register.,
including proposed regulations and agency-specific notices. The Federal Docket Management
System (FDMS) is the agency side ofRegulations.gov and enables agencies to administer public
submissions regarding regulatory and other documents posted by the agencies on the
Regulations.gov website. The increased public access to the agencies' regulatory process enables
a more informed public to provide supporting technical/legal/economic analyses to strengthen
the agencies' rulemaking vehicles. As the PMO, the EPA coordinates the operations of the
eRulemaking Program through its 38 partner departments and independent agencies (comprising
more than 174 agencies, boards, commissions, and offices). The administrative boards work with
the PMO on day-to-day operations, ongoing enhancements, and long-range planning for program
development. These boards (the Executive Committee and the Advisory Board) have
representative members from each partner agency and deal with contracts, budget, website
improvements, improved public access, records management, and a host of other regulatory
concerns that were formally only agency-specific in nature. Coordination with the partner
agencies allows for a more uniform and consistent rulemaking process across government. This
1013
-------
coordination is further realized by the fact that more than 90 percent of all federal rules
promulgated annually are managed through the eRulemaking Program.
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA): The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) gives you the
right to access information from federal agencies. FOIA online allows the public to submit FOIA
requests to all participating agencies from this website, track the status of requests, search for
requests submitted by others, and generate up-to-the-minute reports on FOIA processing. The
EPA serves as the lead for the FOIA Online, a multi-agency effort that helps enable the EPA and
partner agencies to meet their responsibilities under FOIA while creating a repository of publicly
released FOIA records for reuse. Current federal partners include the EPA, the Department of
Commerce, the National Archive and Records Administration, and the Merit Systems Protection
Board.
The National Environmental Information Exchange Network (EN): The EN is a partnership
among states, tribes, and the EPA. It is revolutionizing the exchange of environmental
information by allowing these partners to share data efficiently and securely over the Internet.
This approach is providing real-time access to higher quality data while saving time and
resources for all of the partners. Leadership for the EN is provided by the Exchange Network
Leadership Council (ENLC), which is co-chaired by OEI and a state partner. The ENLC works
with representatives from the EPA, state environmental agencies, and Tribal organizations to
manage the Exchange Network. FY 2014 will be a critical year for the Exchange Network to
complete its current strategic plan to flow data across the spectrum of the EPA's programs.
Automated Commercial Environment/International Trade Data System (ACE/ITDS): ACE
is the system being built by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to ensure that its customs
officers and other federal agencies have the information they need to decide how to handle goods
and merchandise being shipped into or out of the United States. ITDS is the organizational
framework by which all government agencies with import/export responsibilities participate in
the development of the ACE system. ACE will be a single, electronic point of entry for importers
and exporters to report required information to the appropriate agencies. It also will be the way
those agencies provide CBP with information about potential imports/exports. ACE eliminates
the need, burden, and cost of paper reporting. It also allows importers and exporters to report the
same information to multiple federal agencies with a single submission.
The EPA has the responsibility and legal authority to make sure pesticides, toxic chemicals,
vehicles and engines, ozone-depleting substances and other commodities entering the country
meet our environmental, human health and safety standards. The EPA's ongoing collaboration
with CBP on the ACE/ITDS project will greatly improve the efficiency of processing these
shipments through information exchange between the EPA and CBP. The EPA is one of the
leading agencies working with CBP to automate the current manual paper review process for
admissibility so that importers and brokers (referred to collectively as Trade) can know before
these commodities are loaded onto an airplane, truck, train or ship if their shipment meets the
EPA's reporting requirements. As a result of this automated review, Trade can greatly lower
their cost of doing business and customs officers at our nation's ports will have the information
on which shipments comply with our environmental regulations.
1014
-------
The EPA's work on ACE/ITDS builds on the EPA's technical leadership in using Web services
to exchange data with the Central Data Exchange and Exchange Network (CDX/EN). As a result
of our advocacy and the interest of other participating federal agencies, CBP will be using Web
services to exchange data with the agencies participating in ACE/ITDS. In FY 2014, the EPA
expects to implement pilot data exchanges between five EPA programs and CBP so that full-
scale development of the data exchanges can occur at ports of entry. These pilots will use the
data exchanges to automate and simplify the entry process for shipments, thereby reducing the
reporting burden and time for Trade to file entries for legitimate goods entering the United
States. Each of the EPA's regulatory programs will provide key information that will be moved
to CBP via Web services so the information reported by Trade can be checked against the EPA-
approved importers, commodities and registered products. Redundant data elements that the
EPA, CBP and other agencies collect on the separate forms/fillings can be reported once and
used many times by many agencies. This simplified entry along with automated review of import
filings will greatly facilitate the movement of legitimate goods while minimizing the effort
needed by the Trade community as well as by CBP and the EPA. Automating document review
is absolutely critical for agencies such as the EPA that have limited staff at the ports, providing a
"virtual presence" at the more than 300 ports nation-wide.
Geospatial Information: The EPA works extensively with DOI, NOAA, U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the USDA, and
the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on developing and implementing geospatial
approaches to support various business areas. It also works with 25 additional federal agencies
through the activities of the federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) and the OMB
Geospatial Line of Business (Geo LoB), for which the EPA leads several key initiatives. The
EPA is one of only two agencies (the other being the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency)
that participates in the FGDC Coordinating Committee, Steering Committee, and Executive
Steering Committee, as well as on the Federal Geospatial Advisory Committee, a federal
advisory committee to the DOI. A key component of this work is developing and implementing
the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) and the National GeoPlatform. The key objective
of the NSDI is to make a comprehensive array of national spatial data - data that portray features
associated with a location or are tagged with geographic information and can be attached to and
portrayed on maps - easily accessible to both governmental and public stakeholders. Use of this
data, in tandem with analytical applications, supports several key EPA and government-wide
business areas. These include: ensuring that human health and environmental conditions are
represented in the appropriate contexts for targeting and decision making; enabling the
assessment, protection and remediation of environmental conditions; and aiding emergency first
responders and other homeland security activities. The EPA supports geospatial initiatives
through efforts such as the EPA Geospatial Platform, the EPA Environmental Dataset Gateway,
the National Environmental Information Exchange Network, National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) Assist, EPA Metadata Editor, Facilities Registry System (FRS) Web Services, and My
Environment. The EPA also works closely with its state, Tribal, and international partners in a
collaboration that enables consistent implementation of data acquisition and development,
standards, and technologies supporting the efficient and cost effective sharing and use of
geographically-based data and services.
1015
-------
Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS): GEOSS seeks to connect the
producers of environmental data and decision-support tools with the end users of these products,
with the aim of enhancing the relevance of Earth observations to global issues. The result is to
be a global public infrastructure that generates comprehensive, near-real-time environmental
data, information and analyses for a wide range of users. The EPA works with the Office of the
Science Advisor (OSA) to support the federal GEOSS initiative. Other partners in this initiative
include the U.S. Group on Earth Observations (USGEO) and a significant number of other
federal agencies, including NASA, NOAA, USGS, HHS, DOE, DoD, USD A, the Smithsonian
Institution, the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of State, and the Department
of Transportation. Under the ten-year strategic plan, published by the Office of Science and
Technology Policy (OSTP) in 2005, the EPA is leading the development of the environmental
component of the Integrated Earth Observation System (TEOS), which will be the U.S. federal
contribution to the international GEOSS effort. Earth observation data, models, and decision-
support systems will play an increasingly important role in finding solutions for complex
problems, including adaptation to climate change. The EPA also coordinates with the OMB and
OSTP to connect the interagency GEOSS work with our Open Government and Data.gov
activities.
Chesapeake Bay Program: Operating under Executive Order No. 13508, the EPA is working
to help restore the Chesapeake Bay. Federal partners in this initiative are: NOAA; the Natural
Resources Conservation Service; the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers; the USGS; the U.S. Forest Service; the National Park Service; and the U.S. Navy
(representing the Department of Defense). The States of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania,
Delaware, Maryland, West Virginia, Virginia, and the District of Columbia, also are
participating in the effort. Using the Exchange Network (the EPA's existing network facilitating
data sharing among and with the states and tribes), the EPA will continue to facilitate data
exchange for the agencies working on the Chesapeake Bay. Additionally, the EPA is leading the
design of a comprehensive data management system to be used by all partners in the Chesapeake
Bay Program.
Office of the Inspector General (OIG)
The EPA Inspector General is a member of the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and
Efficiency (CIGIE), an organization comprised of federal Inspectors General (IGs), (GAO), and
the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The CIGIE coordinates and improves the way IGs
conduct audits, investigations, and internal operations. The CIGIE also promotes joint projects of
government-wide interest and reports annually to the President on the collective performance of
the IG community. The EPA OIG coordinates criminal investigative activities with other law
enforcement organizations such as the FBI, Secret Service, and Department of Justice. In
addition, the OIG participates with various inter-governmental audit forums and professional
associations to exchange information, share best practices, and obtain or provide training. The
OIG also promotes collaboration among the EPA's partners and stakeholders in the application
of technology, information, resources, and law enforcement in government-wide environmental
programs through its production of the Catalogue of Environmental Programs
http://www.epa.gov/oig/catalog/ and its outreach activities. Additionally, the EPA OIG initiates
and participates in collaborative audits, program evaluations, and investigations with OIGs of
1016
-------
agencies with an environmental mission such as the DOT and USDA, and with other federal,
state, and local law enforcement agencies as prescribed by the IG Act, as amended. As required
by the IG Act, the EPA OIG coordinates and shares information with the GAO. The EPA OIG
serves as the Inspector General of the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigations Board.
1017
-------
Major Management Challenges
Introduction
The Reports Consolidation Act of 2000 requires the Inspector General to identify the most
serious management challenges facing the EPA, briefly assess the agency's progress in
addressing them, and report annually.
The EPA has established a mechanism for identifying and addressing its key management
challenges. As part of the agency's Federal Management Financial Integrity Act process, EPA
senior managers meet with representatives from the EPA's Office of Inspector General, the
Government Accountability Office, and the Office of Management and Budget to hear their
views on the EPA's key management challenges. EPA managers also use audits, reviews, and
program evaluations conducted internally and by OIG, GAO, and OMB to assess program
effectiveness and identify potential management issues. The EPA recognizes that management
challenges, if not addressed adequately, may prevent the agency from effectively meeting its
mission. The EPA remains committed to addressing all management issues in a timely manner
and to the fullest extent of its authority.
The discussion that follows summarizes each of the management challenges the EPA's OIG and
GAO identified for FY 2012 and presents the agency's response.
1. Addressing Emerging Climate Change Issues
Summary of Challenge: GAO notes that while climate change poses management challenges
for the federal government at large, for the EPA, climate-change-related challenges involve
legal and administrative barriers. These include ongoing efforts to reduce carbon emissions;
difficulties in coordinating activities involving numerous other agencies and other levels of
government; and efforts to account for and manage data on greenhouse gas emissions.
Agency Response: Recognizing that climate change cuts across many programs and offices
within the agency, senior leadership has taken steps to expand and improve communication and
coordination on emerging climate change issues. EPA offices working on climate change have
established coordination mechanisms including daily planning calls, regular meetings at the
Deputy Administrator level, and extensive outreach across offices and with EPA regions. These
processes will ensure that the agency receives information and input, draws effectively on its
resources, and provides useful information to its stakeholders around the country.
Over the past several years, the EPA has taken several important actions to address climate
change. Currently, the EPA plays a key role in developing and implementing President Obama's
ambitious climate change agenda. For instance, the agency is participating in strategic
discussions and providing technical advice and analysis on the full range of domestic climate
policies and technologies. This includes transportation; energy efficiency and renewable energy;
and new technologies, such as carbon capture and storage.
1018
-------
The EPA is taking regulatory actions to address climate change and continuing to implement:
• Ongoing voluntary partnership programs
• The first-ever harmonized Department of Transportation and EPA fuel economy
and greenhouse gas emission standards for light-duty and heavy-duty vehicles
• The ENERGY STAR Program, across the residential, commercial, and industrial
sectors, and
• The GHG Reporting Program. (In FY 2012 the agency released the first set of
GHG data collected by the GHG Reporting program from large facilities and
suppliers across the country.)
Finally, the EPA continues to deliver on all commitments under its ongoing partnership
programs to reduce GHGs, focused on energy efficiency, transportation, and other sectors.
Experience and knowledge gained through these programs are also informing the EPA's input
into the broader climate policy discussion.
2. Reducing Pollution in the Nation's Waters
Summary of Challenge: According to GAO, among the nation's most pressing water quality
problems with which EPA and other stakeholders struggle are the considerations of diffuse, or
"non-point" sources of pollution and the challenges posed by deterioration in the nation's
premier watersheds, such as the Chesapeake Bay and Great Lakes. GAO believes multi-billion
liabilities associated with replacing and upgrading the nation's aging water infrastructure are a
looming issue, that if not sufficiently addressed, will impact water quality.
Agency Response: The challenges of today are not the same as they were a decade ago, and
there is a need for baseline information on the status of water quality on a national level.
Impaired waters are increasing at an alarming rate, and nitrogen and phosphorus pollution are
potentially the costliest and most challenging water quality issues of the 21st century. The EPA
partners with federal, state, and local agencies as well as other key stakeholders to reduce
pollution in the nation's waters, but many pollution sources are difficult to monitor and regulate.
For instance, the universe of information that the agency has in its national data system on
concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) is incomplete. This is because not all CAFOs
are required to apply for a Clean Water Act permit. This makes it challenging for the agency to
identify individual CAFOs that are discharging to water bodies or causing other environmental
impacts.
The EPA believes that having more complete information on CAFOs would improve the
agency's ability to implement its responsibility under the Clean Water Act, ensure that CAFOs
are complying with the requirements of the Act, and better protect the environment and public
health. In July, the EPA signed a memorandum of understanding with the Association of the
Clean Water Administrators (ACWA) to facilitate the exchange of information. This
collaborative effort between the EPA and ACWA will focus on identifying CAFOs and
obtaining pertinent information about CAFOs on a state-by-state basis for use by both ACWA
members and the EPA.
1019
-------
The EPA, through its Regional Offices, provides funding and technical assistance to states and
local governments to help control non-point source pollution. The agency has two major
initiatives underway that focus on non-point source pollution, the Chesapeake Bay Total
Maximum Daily Load or Bay TMDL and the promotion of green infrastructure. The Bay TMDL
is supported by an accountability system to help ensure restoration work, including specific
commitments to reduce non-point source pollution. The system includes Watershed
Implementation Plans submitted by the watershed jurisdictions, two-year milestone check-ins,
and federal action in the event of insufficient progress. Additionally, the agency has been a
leader in supporting green infrastructure (GI) to help control stormwater. GI uses vegetation,
soils, and natural processes to manage stormwater close to its source. GI practices, such as green
streets, green roofs and rain gardens, are helping to create healthier urban environments and
build more resilient communities. The Green Streets, Green Jobs, Green Towns (G3) Initiative is
helping small to mid-sized Chesapeake Bay communities to boost their local economies and
protect water resources using green infrastructure. Furthermore, ongoing regional efforts to
address the deterioration of the Great Lakes watershed include: 1) working with states and tribes
to develop criteria that will reduce nutrient loads and impacts to the Great Lakes, 2) preventing
pollutants from entering the Great Lakes basin from combined sanitary sewer overflows through
enforcement actions, and 3) developing a nutrient modeling tool for permit limits at Great Lakes
non-point sources.
The EPA is leading implementation of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative to restore the Great
Lakes ecosystem through a coordinated interagency process. The agency provides annual reports
to the President and Congress on the overall progress toward attaining the goals and objectives of
the GLRI Action Plan.
3. Providing Assurance that Public Drinking Water is Safe
Summary of Challenge: The GAO believes that limitations in the EPA 's implementation of Safe
Drinking Water Act requirements related to unregulated contaminants and incomplete and
inaccurate data from states on violations and enforcement actions have inhibited the agency's
ability to provide assurance that public drinking water is safe. To improve its ability to oversee
SDWA, the GAO notes that the agency needs to implement all of the recommendations cited in its
May 2011 report, "Safe Drinking Water Act: EPA Should Improve Implementation of
Requirements on Whether to Regulate Additional Contaminants. "
Agency Response: Making sure that Americans have water that is safe to drink is one of the
fundamental elements of the agency's mission. While the EPA has made key strides with the
drinking water program, there is always room for improvement, and the GAO report provides
some critical recommendations with which the agency agrees. The EPA will 1) focus future
Contaminant Candidate Lists on contaminants that present the greatest health concern, 2) utilize
its statutory authority to require unregulated contaminant monitoring for priority contaminants,
and 3) improve the transparency and clarity of our regulatory determinations. Currently, we are
evaluating unregulated contaminants for our third Regulatory Determinations and preparing to
collect occurrence data for the third group of unregulated contaminants, applying lessons learned
1020
-------
from the previous iterations. Our recent actions for UCMR3 and the development of RD3 are
consistent with many of GAO's recommendations for improvement.
The EPA will continue to improve processes to identify contaminants of concern, gather
scientific data, and make risk-based decisions for unregulated drinking water contaminants. Also,
the agency will continue to improve the transparency, clarity and consistency of our regulatory
determinations so the public can better understand how the EPA came to its conclusions. To
better ensure that contaminants on the CCL3 list are of the highest priority for public health
protection, the agency improved the process by using a more rigorous scientific approach.
The agency consulted with an independent panel of scientists on its third Regulatory
Determinations, specifically on the evaluation of the contaminants against the SDWA criteria,
the use of best available science to evaluate these criteria, the integration of the information, and
whether the process focuses on the greatest public health risk. The EPA promulgated monitoring
requirements for 30 contaminants under UCMR 3 and established analytical methods which are
sufficiently sensitive to reliably detect the occurrence of contaminants in public water systems at
levels of public health concern based on available health effects information.
4. Safe Reuse of Contaminated Sites
Summary of Challenge: The EPA places increasing emphasis on the reuse of contaminated or
once-contaminated properties and has a performance measure to define a population of
contaminated sites that are ready for reuse. The OIG acknowledges the improvements and efforts
the EPA has made in ensuring the long-term safety of contaminated sites. However, the OIG
believes that the EPA needs improved oversight and management for long-term stewardship of
contaminated sites, and new strategies that take the agency beyond merely encouraging non-
EPA parties to ensure long-term safety and reused sites.
Agency Response: Cleaning up contaminated sites and ensuring their safe reuse over the long
term is an agency priority and central to the EPA's mission. The EPA and State and Tribal
Response Programs continue to make progress in cleaning sites to protect public health and the
environment and support the safe use of cleaned and stabilized properties. The agency believes
that it is communicating site risks and remedies and information needed to ensure protectiveness.
Whenever waste is left in place at sites on the National Priorities List, the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act requires that the remedy at the site be
reviewed at least once every five years to ensure its continued protectiveness. The EPA's
national Superfund Program reviews Five-Year Reports at all sites and tracks any
recommendations for needed further action to ensure implementation.
The EPA and our state and Tribal co-implementers may select institutional controls to control
land and resource use where residual contamination remains in place. Institutional controls help
minimize the potential for exposure to contamination and/or protect the integrity of engineered
components. As remedial actions, ICs are subject to five-year reviews as well as other periodic
monitoring. The agency has developed cross-program guidance, Institutional Controls: A Guide
1021
-------
to Planning, Implementing, Maintaining and Enforcing Institutional Controls at Contaminated
Waste Sites, which stresses the need for EPA site managers and attorneys to coordinate with
tribes, state and local governments, communities, and other stakeholders to ensure that ICs are
properly implemented, maintained and enforced over their lifetime. The agency will continue to
encourage State and Tribal Response Program funding of tracking and management systems for
land use and institutional controls.
The agency has developed general education and outreach materials about institutional controls
and their importance in supporting safe land reuse. The EPA continues to include training
sessions on institutional controls as part of its national brownfields conference as well as panel
discussions between local government and state programs. The EPA will also continue to
develop and maintain information systems like "Cleanups in My Community"
(http://www.epa.gov/cimc), to educate and inform the public regarding federally funded
contaminated site assessment and cleanup activities.
Promoting reuse involves communities in cleanup and reuse discussions. The EPA will continue
to explore new tools to ensure appropriate reuse and enhance long-term protectiveness,
including:
• Ready for Reuse Determinations (environmental status reports on site reuse)
• Comfort and Status Letters (which convey status of the site remediation and liability
issues)
• EPA Funded Reuse Planning
• Site Reuse Fact Sheets (which highlight critical remedial components in place, long-term
maintenance activities, and institutional controls).
5. Pace of Cleanup at Superfund and other Hazardous Waste Sites
Summary of Challenge: According to the GAO, the EPA continues to make progress in
identifying hazardous waste sites requiring cleanup. However, recent GAO reports indicate that
not only will cleanup costs be substantial, but problems with the accuracy and completeness of
data prevent the agency from estimating future cleanup costs. The GAO recommends that the
agency assess the comprehensiveness and reliability of the data it collects and, if necessary,
improve the data to provide aggregated information.
Agency Response: The EPA recognizes the challenges in describing the multiple facets of the
Superfund Program concisely and realizes that many sites face significant uncertainties regarding
future site cleanup requirements. Due to these significant uncertainties, aggregate estimates of
future costs and performance, especially on an annual basis, are bound by large ranges, which
limit the contribution such information provides to annual appropriation decision makers. The
information that GAO recommends EPA provide to Congress is one among a myriad of data
points which Congress examines to make informed decisions, but it is not determinative in
Congressional decision-making.
Since the inception of the Superfund Program, the EPA has provided a mix of site-specific and
aggregate data to Congress through the annual budget process and other avenues to facilitate
1022
-------
annual Superfund appropriation decisions. The agency recognizes the importance of informing
and educating partners and stakeholders about the EPA's commitment to, and progress toward,
environmental cleanup, and continues to explore options to share information about cleanup
plans and progress at sites. Under the 2010 Integrated Cleanup Initiative, the EPA introduced a
new remedial action project completion measure which responds to GAO's recommendations to
provide more data on site progress. The Superfund Program is currently exploring the possibility
of establishing formal project baselines to better understand and track site progress.
6. EPA's Framework for Assessing and Managing Chemical Risks / Transforming
EPA's Processes for Assessing and Controlling Toxic Chemicals
Summary of Challenge: The OIG and GAO believe that the EPA 's effectiveness in assessing
and managing chemical risks is hampered in part by limitations on the agency's authority to
regulate chemicals under the Toxic Substances Control Act and other statutes. The GAO notes
that the EPA 's Integrated Risk Information System viability is at risk because the agency had
been unable to complete timely and credible chemical assessments. The OIG states that as the
agency implements steps to improve its management of chemical risks, it must have a clear
strategy that formalizes intra-agency coordination and priority.
Agency Response: The GAO continues to identify "Transforming EPA's Processes for
Assessing and Controlling Chemicals" as a high-risk area, and the OIG continues to identify
"EPA's Framework for Assessing and Managing Chemical Risks" as a management challenge.
In October 2009, the EPA acknowledged "Streamlining Chemical Assessments Under IRIS" as
an agency-level weakness under the Federal Financial Managers' Integrity Act and has made
progress in addressing concerns raised by both oversight organizations.
Improving IRIS. In May 2009, the agency released a new IRIS process for completing health
assessments. The goals of the new process are to strengthen program management, increase
transparency and expedite the timeliness of health assessments. Since then, the agency's National
Center for Environmental Assessment has completed over 20 assessments, more than the number
of assessments completed in the previous five years. Key major assessments recently posted
include trichloroethylene and dichloromethane.
The agency is making significant progress on health hazard assessments of numerous high-
priority chemicals (e.g. trichloroethylene, perchloroethylene, dichloromethane, chromium VI,
methanol. benzo[a]pyrene, and Libby asbestos), including the completion of milestones for
interagency science consultation, external review, or posting on the IRIS webpage. Progress on
these assessments and other IRIS assessments is available at http://www.epa.gov/IRlS/. In
addition, EPA's IRIS program is developing assessments of health effects for chemicals found in
environmental mixtures including PAHs, dioxins, phthalates and PCBs. These cumulative
assessments will increase the number of chemicals that are addressed by the IRIS Program and
are based upon the expressed needs of the agency. The Human Health Risk Assessment Program
will continue to lead innovation in risk assessment science based on expanding scientific
knowledge.
1023
-------
The EPA continues to implement the new database that facilitates public access to the scientific
studies that underpin key regulatory decisions. The Health and Environmental Research Online
database contains the key studies that the EPA uses to develop environmental risk assessments
and makes them available to the public. It includes references and data supporting the IRIS
Program, which supports critical agency policymaking for chemical regulation. Draft IRIS
assessments now routinely include HERO links and cited references. The HERO database is
publicly accessible so anyone can review the scientific literature behind the EPA's science
assessments. The HERO database strengthens the transparency of the science supporting agency
decisions.
Assessing and Managing Chemical Risks. The EPA has taken a number of steps over the past
several years to strengthen related programs within existing authorities. The agency has:
announced its principles to strengthen U.S. chemical management laws; initiated a
comprehensive effort to enhance its current chemicals management program within the limits of
existing authorities; proposed an expansion of that effort in the FY 2013 President's Budget; and
is proposing continuation of that effort in the FY 2014 President's Budget. (A listing of the
principles is available at http://www.epa.gov/oppt/existingchemicals/pubs/principles.html.) This
new approach was introduced in the EPA's FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan and further developed
and implemented during FY 2010 and FY 2011. In February 2012, the EPA issued its Existing
Chemicals Program Strategy, explaining that the agency intends to pursue a multi-pronged
approach focusing on risk assessment and risk reduction, data collection, and screening, and
furthering public access to chemical data and information. (See
http://www.epa.gov/oppt/existingchemicals/pubs/Existing Chemicals Strategy Web. 2-23-
12.pdf)
As part of this effort, the EPA identified a group of TSCA Work Plan Chemicals for risk
assessment under TSCA to help focus and direct the activities of the Existing Chemicals
Program over the next several years
(http://www.epa.gov/oppt/existingchemicals/pubs/workplans.html). Significant progress has
already been made on risk assessments for an initial group of seven Work Plan chemicals
identified in March 2012, five of which were released for public and peer review in January
2013, and further progress is expected on additional Work Plan chemicals in both FY 2013 and
FY2014.
In addition, in FY 2014, the EPA will continue preventing the entry into the U.S. market of
chemicals that pose unreasonable risks to human health or the environment. Each year, the EPA's
New Chemicals Program reviews and manages the potential risks from approximately 1,000 new
chemicals, products of biotechnology and new chemical nanoscale materials prior to their entry
into the marketplace.
Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program Comprehensive Management Plan. More recently, in
response to the OIG's May 2011 evaluation report, "EPA's Endocrine Disruptor Screening
Program Should Establish Management Controls to Ensure More Timely Results," on June 28,
2012 the agency issued its EDSP Comprehensive Management Plan (www.epa.gov/endo). The
EDSP management plan describes a 3-part plan for implementing the EDSP: 1) scientific
1024
-------
advancement of Tier 1 data reviews and Tier 2 assay development and validation (including
advancing the state of the science in chemical priority setting and screening); 2) test order
management and implementation, including prioritizing chemicals, developing policies and
procedures, and issuing and managing test orders; and 3) data management by developing an
enhanced and consolidated information infrastructure.
7. Ensuring Consistent Environmental Enforcement Compliance
Summary of Challenge: The GAO reports that while the EPA has improved its oversight of state
enforcement programs by implementing the State Review Framework, the agency still needs to
address significant non-compliance and unacceptable low levels of enforcement activities.
Agency Response: The EPA is responsible for establishing performance expectations and
conducting oversight of federal environmental enforcement programs that have been authorized
or delegated to states. The EPA has utilized a number of different management controls designed
to ensure appropriate enforcement program implementation. The State Review Framework is a
regular and systematic look at enforcement performance covering data, inspections, violations,
enforcement actions and penalties.
The EPA's oversight of state enforcement programs is based on four components, each playing
an important part in building strong performance:
• Clear expectations set in foundational program documents, policy and guidance
• Annual regional/state integrated planning that includes both permitting and enforcement
and results in clear, agreed-on commitments based on foundational documents
• Regular, periodic review of performance that identifies corrective actions to fix problems
and ensures program improvements; and
• Transparent display of performance data to the public, allowing comparison of
performance across states.
These components form the basis for the continuous improvement of state performance and
consistency across states. For example, Region 5 has taken action to address both permitting and
enforcement issues in the State of Illinois that go well beyond the analyses and recommendations
under the State Review Framework. These actions have already yielded significant results and
meaningful improvements to Illinois' program and are a direct result of the region's active
engagement with the state.
In the future, the EPA will be taking a more holistic approach to oversight under the SRF by
including Clean Water Act Memoranda of Agreement and NPDES permit reviews as an integral
part of the performance process. Commensurate with commitments established in the Clean
Water Act Action Plan, the agency is integrating the evaluation of permitting and enforcement to
identify how well permits and enforcement support improving water quality and public health.
1025
-------
8. Oversight of Delegation to States
Summary of Challenge: OIG believes the effectiveness of the EPA's oversight of programs
delegated to states has a number of limitations, mostly due to inadequate oversight and
differences between state and federal policies, interpretations, strategies, and priorities. While
the EPA has improved its oversight, particularly in priority setting and enforcement planning
with states, the agency must address the limitations in the availability, quality, and robustness of
program data and limitations in implementation across environmental statues. Additionally,
GAO notes concerns about the EPA 's oversight of state programs and the implications if states
are unable to fulfill core program requirements given budgetary issues.
Agency Response: The EPA acknowledges that state oversight is a very complex and
changeable arena. Through federal statutes, implementing regulations, and program design,
states are allowed flexibility in how they manage and implement environmental programs.
Within the EPA, national program managers are directly responsible for state oversight of
individual programs. The agency has committees, workgroups, special projects and initiatives to
continuously improve agency programs delegated to states. Below are a few examples of these
programs and the efforts made to enhance oversight or correct issues with state delegation.
In FY2012 the agency identified the oversight of state delegations as a strategic priority and
developed a key performance indicator in the FY 2012 Action Plan for Strengthening State, Tribal, and
International Partnerships. The KPI focuses senior management attention on developing a more strategic
and coordinated approach to address the issue. Specifically, the KPI requires EPA to establish an
agencywide workgroup (National Program Managers, Regions, and HQ support offices) to plan
and implement an agencywide effort to collect available information to define, describe, and
assess the EPA's processes, practices, and tools for overseeing state delegations and
authorizations. The workgroup will report its findings to the Deputy Administrator and propose
options for next steps as needed to ensure the agency is carrying out its oversight responsibilities
in a coordinated, transparent, and accountable manner. The agency believes establishing a KPI
for state oversight will help sustain senior management attention and is a more strategic and
coordinated approach to address the issue.
9. Coordinating with Other Agencies to More Effectively Leverage Limited Resources
Summary of Challenge: According to the GAO, the EPA needs to improve its coordination with
federal and state partners to reduce administrative burdens, redundant activities, and inefficient
use of federal resources. Additionally, the EPA needs to make better use of key practices for
enhancing and sustaining collaboration among federal agencies, such as establishing roles and
responsibilities of collaborating agencies, leveraging resources, and establishing a process for
monitoring, evaluating, and reporting to the public on the results of collaborative efforts.
Agency Response: Despite budgetary and statutory restrictions, the EPA strives to coordinate
with federal and state agencies wherever possible to minimize administrative burdens, redundant
activities, and the inefficient use of federal resources. The agency EPA has established a strategic
framework to improve its coordination with other agencies. The framework includes:
1026
-------
• Adopt" improving coordination" as a strategic priority;
• Integrate coordination into established planning and budgeting processes;
• Provide opportunities for coordination in regulatory and policy actions;
• Establish efficient and effective grant policies; and
• Create and/or participate in intergovernmental coordination activities.
Within this framework, new accomplishments this year include:
• EPA initiated a pilot project with state government representatives to explore, identify,
and test methods and processes to better integrate State implementation planning into
EPA's regulation development. The pilot focuses on two regulations at an early stage of
development, allowing EPA and the states to formulate implementation strategies and
identify fiscal implications so that states may submit timely and adequate budget requests
to their legislative bodies. This pilot builds upon the ongoing efforts to improve State
Implementation Plan in the agency's air program.
• EPA is co-chairing the Interagency Water Resources and Climate Change Adaptation
Work Group.
• EPA and state representatives completed a joint document outlining opportunities for
work sharing.
• EPA convened three Federalism Implication Consultations with state representatives,
including one Consultation that jointly considered Unfunded Mandates concerns.
• EPA established a workgroup with state representatives to gather input and improve
coordination among entities as it moves forward in developing the agency's £-Reporting
Policy and increase the amount and kinds of data collected and managed via electronic
technology.
• All EPA staff completed a mandatory training on working with Tribal governments.
10. Limited Capability to Respond to Cyber Security Attacks
Summary of Challenge. The OIG believes that the EPA has limited capacity to effectively
respond to external network threats and that actions taken by the agency do not demonstrate a
comprehensive or systematic approach to network security. The OIG believes the agency needs
to aggressively enhance its cyber security capabilities and address security weaknesses to
strengthen its ability to detect and respond to network attacks.
Agency Response: The EPA acknowledges that advanced persistent threats pose a significant
challenge for itself and for all federal agencies. Many of the OIG's concerns and assertions are
based on an audit report that has not been released to the agency and proposed legislation that
has cleared neither the Senate nor the House of Representatives.
The EPA continues to make significant progress in enhancing situational awareness across the
agency and increasing visibility into network activities. The EPA continues to build strong
alliances with partners in other agencies, as well as coordinating internally.
1027
-------
11. Effectively Addressing Security Issues
Summary of Challenge: A recent GAO review of the agency's information security controls
identified a number of significant security control issues. While the EPA has established
mechanisms to detect and respond to security breaches and to protect sensitive data, security
control weaknesses continue to place the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of
environmental information at risk. The GAO's report on the security of the EPA 's information
systems will be issued later this year.
Agency Response: The agency has reviewed the draft GAO report, "F7 2072 Information
Security Audit" and is in the process of creating the necessary Plan of Action and Milestones to
address the findings. The agency will update the Plan of Action and Milestones as necessary
upon release and review of the final report.
12. Addressing Workforce Planning
Summary of Challenge. The OIG and GAO continue to raise concerns about agency efforts to
address workload and workforce planning. The GAO believes the EPA continues to face
challenges in identifying its human resource needs, and that it has not comprehensively analyzed
its workload and workforce to determine the optimal workload and staff allocation. The OIG
notes that the EPA does not have controls and a defined methodology for determining workforce
levels based upon the workload of the agency. The OIG maintains that without data on workload
levels, it is difficult for the agency to define and justify resource levels necessary to carry out the
agency's mission.
Agency Response: Examining the EPA's workforce to improve the agency's resource planning
is a broad and lengthy process requiring extensive reporting and analysis. The EPA continually
reviews how to maximize the productivity of its limited staff and other resources. As part of its
annual budget process, the EPA plans and tracks the use of resources at a detailed level in terms
of organization, media and by strategic planning goals. These data are analyzed to inform the
relative allocation of resources, staffing and funding. The EPA complements these management
and planning efforts and data by strengthening both workforce planning (agency-led research
into the type of staff and skills needed) and workload analytics (agency-led efforts to understand
and calculate the level of staffing needed for particular tasks). In both these efforts the lead
program offices worked extensively with program experts in all the agency's programs and
offices.
In FY 2010, the agency surveyed more than 1,000 managers to capture their best estimates of
their unit levels of work required to complete six critical functions (scientific research,
environmental monitoring, regulatory development, permitting, enforcement and financial
management) as well as major tasks within each function, work drivers and products. In FY
2011, the agency benchmarked workload analytical efforts of 23 other federal agencies. In FY
2012, the agency led a collaborative workforce planning initiative that focused on identifying the
critical occupations required to meet current and future mission objectives. Each
program/regional office linked its occupations to Strategic Plan goals and projected occupational
1028
-------
shifts through FY 2015. This information was used to 1) analyze future gaps, 2) plan for
projected growth in scientific and specialized technical occupations and projected reductions in
unspecialized and administrative roles, 3) develop position management options, and 4) design
strategies to recruit for needed skills and develop these skills internally (e.g., training, succession
planning). Additionally, in FY 2012, the agency developed mid-level workload analyses for the
air and water permitting programs and is working to develop one for Superfund Cost Recovery.
This work has created a process and template for EPA to perform additional analyses.
1029
-------
EPA User Fee Program
In FY 2014, the EPA will have several user fee programs in operation. These user fee programs
and proposals are as follows below:
Current Fees: Pesticides
Fees authorized by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act of 1988, as amended
by Public Law 112-177, will expire on September 30,2017.
• Pesticides Maintenance Fee
The Maintenance Fee provides funding for the Reregi strati on and Registration Review programs
and a certain percentage supports the processing of applications involving inert ingredients and
expedited processing of similar applications, i.e., fast track amendments. In FY 2014, the EPA is
authorized to collect $27.8 million from this fee program.
• Enhanced Registration Services
Entities seeking to register pesticides for use in the United States pay a fee at the time the
registration action request is submitted to the EPA specifically for the accelerated pesticide
registration decision service. This process has introduced new pesticides to the market more
quickly. In FY 2014, the EPA expects to collect approximately $11 million from this fee
program.
Current Fees: Other
• Pre-Manufacturing Notification Fee
The Pre-Manufacturing Notification (PMN) Fee is collected for the review and processing of
new chemical pre-manufacturing notifications submitted to the EPA by the chemical industry.
These fees are paid at the time of submission of the PMN for review by the EPA's Toxic
Substances program. 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. The EPA estimates that it will
collect up to $1.8 million in PMN fees in FY 2014 under current law.
• 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 Section
402/404 rule 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. The EPA estimates that $1 million will be deposited in FY 2014.
1030
-------
Current Fees: Other
• Motor Vehicle and Engine Compliance Program Fee
This fee is authorized by the Clean Air Act of 1990 and is administered by the Air and Radiation
Program. Fee collections began in August 1992. Initially, this fee was imposed on manufacturers
of light-duty vehicles, light- and heavy-duty trucks, and motorcycles. The fees cover the EPA's
cost of certifying new engines and vehicles and monitoring compliance of in-use engines and
vehicles. In 2004, the EPA promulgated a rule that updated existing fees and established fees for
newly-regulated vehicles and engines. The fees established for new compliance programs also
are imposed on manufacturers of heavy-duty, in-use, and non-road vehicles and engines,
including large diesel and gas equipment (earthmovers, tractors, forklifts, compressors, etc),
handheld and non-handheld utility engines (chainsaws, weed-whackers, leaf-blowers,
lawnmowers, tillers, etc.), marine (boat motors, watercraft, jet-skis), locomotive, aircraft and
recreational vehicles (off-road motorcycles, all-terrain vehicles, snowmobiles). In 2009, the EPA
added fees for evaporative requirements for non-road engines. The EPA intends to apply
certification fees to additional industry sectors as new programs are developed. In FY 2014, the
EPA expects to collect approximately $21.8 million from this fee program.
In FY 2014, the EPA plans to initiate a rulemaking to update the fees rule. The rulemaking
would seek to update the Motor Vehicle and Engine Compliance (MVEC) fee program to
recover current costs of recoverable activity, including new programs that were not in place in
2004.
Fee Proposals: Other
• Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest
On October 5, 2012, the President signed the Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest
Establishment Act (Public Law 112-195). The Act provided for the electronic submission of
hazardous waste manifests to EPA and established a mechanism for financing the development
and operation of the program through user fees. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA) requires hazardous waste handlers to document information on the waste's generator,
destination, quantity, and route. The current tracking system relies upon paper manifests. An
electronic manifest system will increase transparency and public safety, making information on
hazardous waste movement more accessible to the EPA, states, and the public. As part of the
agency's goal to reduce the burden on regulated entities, where feasible, the EPA is developing a
program to electronically collect manifests to reduce the time and cost associated with
complying with regulations governing the transportation of hazardous waste. When fully
implemented, e-Manifest is estimated to reduce the reporting burden for firms regulated under
RCRA's hazardous waste provisions by more than $77 to $126 million annually.
1031
-------
Working Capital Fund
In FY 2014, the agency will be in its eighteenth 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. The 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 (CFO) 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 twenty-three permanent
members from the program and Regional offices.
Six agency activities, provided in FY 2013, will continue into FY 2014. These are the agency's
information technology and telecommunications operations, managed by the Office of
Environmental Information; agency postage costs and background investigations, managed by
the Office of Administration and Resources Management; and the agency's core accounting
system, relocation services and conference and meeting planning services, which are managed by
the Office of the Chief Financial Officer.
The agency's FY 2014 budget request includes resources for these six activities in each National
Program Manager's submission, totaling approximately $200 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. In FY 2014, the agency will continue to
market its information technology and relocation services to other federal agencies in an effort to
deliver high quality services external to the EPA, which will result in lower costs to EPA
customers.
1032
-------
Acronyms for Statutory Authority
ADA: Americans with Disabilities Act
ADEA: Age Discrimination in Employment Act
AEA: Atomic Energy Act, as amended, and Reorganization Plan #3
AHERA: Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act
AHPA: Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act
APA: Administrative Procedures Act
ARRA: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
ASHAA: Asbestos in Schools Hazard Abatement Act
ASTCA: Antarctic Science, Tourism, and Conservation Act
BEACH Act of 2000: Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health Act
BRERA: Brownfields Revitalization and Environmental Restoration Act
CAA: Clean Air Act
CAAA: Clean Air Act Amendments
CAIR: Clean Air Interstate Rule
CCA: Clinger Cohen Act
CCAA: Canadian Clean Air Act
CEPA: Canadian Environmental Protection Act
CERCLA: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (1980)
CFOA: Chief Financial Officers Act
CFR: Code of Federal Regulations
CICA: Competition in Contracting Act
CRA: Civil Rights Act
CSA: Computer Security Act
1033
-------
CWA: Clean Water Act (1972)
CWAP: Clean Water Action Plan
CWPPR: Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection, and Restoration Act of 1990
CWSRF: Clean Water State Revolving Fund
CZARA: Coastal Zone Management Act Reauthorization Amendments
CZMA: Coastal Zone Management Act
DPA: Deepwater Ports Act
DREAA: Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act
DWSRF: Drinking Water State Revolving Fund
ECRA: Economic Cleanup Responsibility Act
EFOIA: Electronic Freedom of Information Act
EISA: Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
EPAct: Energy Policy Act of 2005
EPAA: Environmental Programs Assistance Act
EPAAR: Environmental Protection Agency Acquisition Regulation
EPCA: Energy Policy and Conservation Act
EPCRA: Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act (1986)
ERD&DAA: Environmental Research, Development and Demonstration Authorization Act
ESA: Endangered Species Act
ESECA: Energy Supply and Environmental Coordination Act
FACA: Federal Advisory Committee Act
FAIR: Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act
FASA: Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act (1994)
FCMA: Fishery Conservation and Management Act
FEPCA: Federal Environmental Pesticide Control Act; enacted as amendments to FIFRA.
1034
-------
FFDCA: Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
FGCAA: Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act
FIFRA: Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (1972)
FLPMA: Federal Land Policy and Management Act
FMFIA: Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act (1982)
FOIA: Freedom of Information Act
FPA: Federal Pesticide Act
FPAS: Federal Property and Administration Services Act
FPPA: Federal Pollution Prevention Act
FPR: Federal Procurement Regulation
FQPA: Food Quality Protection Act (1996)
FRA: Federal Register Act
FSA: Food Security Act
FSMA: Food Safety Modernization Act
FTTA: Federal Technology Transfer Act
FUA: Fuel Use Act
FWCA: Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act
FWPCA: Federal Water Pollution and Control Act (aka CWA)
GISRA: Government Information Security Reform Act
GMRA: Government Management Reform Act
GPRA: Government Performance and Results Act (1993)
HMTA: Hazardous Materials Transportation Act
HSWA: Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984
IGA: Inspector General Act
IPA: Intergovernmental Personnel Act
1035
-------
IPIA: Improper Payments Information Act
ISTEA: Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act
ITMRA: Information Technology Management Reform Act of 1995-aka Clinger/Cohen Act
LPA-US/MX-BR: 1983 La Paz Agreement on US/Mexico Border Region
MPPRCA: Marine Plastic Pollution, Research and Control Act of 1987
MPRSA: Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act
NAAEC: North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation
NAAQS: National Ambient Air Quality Standard
NAWCA: North American Wetlands Conservation Act
NEPA: National Environmental Policy Act
NHPA: National Historic Preservation Act
NIPDWR: National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations
NISA: National Invasive Species Act of 1996
ODA: Ocean Dumping Act
OMTR: Open Market Trading Rule
OPA: Oil Pollution Act of 1990
OWBPA: Older Workers Benefit Protection Act
PBA: Public Building Act
PFCRA: Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act
PHSA: Public Health Service Act
PLIRRA: Pollution Liability Insurance and Risk Retention Act
PR: Privacy Act
PRA: Paperwork Reduction Act
PRIA: Pesticide Registration Improvement Act
PRIEA: Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act of 2012 (known as PRIA 3)
1036
-------
PRIRA: Pesticide Registration Improvement Renewal Act
QCA: Quiet Communities Act
RCRA: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976
RFA: Regulatory Flexibility Act
RICO: Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act
RLBPHRA: Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act
SARA: Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986
SBLRBRERA: Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization and
Environmental Restoration Act
SBREFA: Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
SDWA: Safe Drinking Water Act
SICEA: Steel Industry Compliance Extension Act
SMCRA: Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act
SPA: Shore Protection Act of 1988
SWDA: Solid Waste Disposal Act
SWTR: Surface Water Treatment Rule
TCA: Tribal Cooperative Agreement
TSCA: Toxic Substances Control Act
UMRA: Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
UMTRLWA: Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Land Withdrawal Act
USC: United States Code
USTCA: Underground Storage Tank Compliance Act
WQA: Water Quality Act of 1987
WRDA: Water Resources Development Act
WSRA: Wild and Scenic Rivers Act
WWWQA: Wet Weather Water Quality Act of 2000
1037
-------
FY 2014 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
State and Local
Air Quality
Management
Statutory
Authorities
CAA, Section
103
CAA, Section
103
CAA, Section
103
Eligible
Recipients
Air pollution
control agencies
as defined in
section 302(b)
of the CAA
Air pollution
control agencies
as defined in
section 302(b)
of the CAA
Air pollution
control agencies
as defined in
section 302(b)
of the CAA
Eligible Uses
S/L monitoring
and data
collection
activities in
support of the
PM2.5
monitoring
network and
associated
program costs.
S/L monitoring
and data
collection
activities in
support of the air
toxics
monitoring.
S/L monitoring
procurement
activities in
support of the
NAAQS.
Goal/
Objective
Goal 1,
Obj.2
Goal 1,
Obj.2
Goal 1, Obj.2
FY 2012 Actuals
$41,483.8
$2,200.0
$4,500.0
FY2012
Enacted
Dollars (X1000)
$34,000.0
$2,276.0
$5,250.0
FY2013
Annualized CR
Dollars
(X1000)
$41,875.0
$2,276.0
$5,250.0
FY2014
President's
Request
Dollars (X1000)
$34,000.0
$2,276.0
$5,250.0
1038
-------
Grant Title
State and Local
Air Quality
Management
Statutory
Authorities
CAA, Sections
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.
Eligible Uses
Carrying out the
traditional
prevention and
control programs
required by the
CAA and
associated
program support
costs, including
monitoring
activities (section
105);
Coordinating or
facilitating a
multi-
jurisdiction al
approach to
carrying out the
traditional
prevention and
control programs
required by the
CAA (sections
103 and 106);
Supporting
training for CAA
section 302(b) air
pollution control
agency staff
(sections 103 and
105); Supporting
research,
investigative and
demonstration
projects (section
103).
Goal/
Objective
Goall,Obj.2
Goall,Obj. 1
FY 2012 Actuals
$197,075.4
Section 105
grants
$0.0
$600.0
Section 106
grants
Total:
$245,859.2
FY2012
Enacted
Dollars (X1000)
$193,603.0
Section 105
grants
$0.0
$600.0
Section 106
grants
Total:
$235,729.0
FY2013
Annualized CR
Dollars
(X1000)
$181,345.0
Section 105
grants
$0.0
$600.0
Section 106
grants
Total:
$231,346.0
FY2014
President's
Request
Dollars (X1000)
$210,603.0
Section 105
grants
$4,500.0
$600.0
Section 106
grants
Total:
$257,229.0
1039
-------
Grant Title
Tribal Air
Quality
Management
Radon
Statutory
Authorities
CAA, Sections
103 and 105;
Tribal
Cooperative
Agreements
(TCA) in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
TSCA,
Sections 10
and 306
Eligible
Recipients
Tribes;
Intertribal
Consortia;
State/Tribal
College or
University
State Agencies,
Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
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
CAA training
for Federally-
recognized
Tribes.
Assist in the
development and
implementation
of programs for
the assessment
and mitigation of
radon.
Goal/
Objective
Goal 1,
/~O-i O
UuJ. 2
Goal 1,
/~O-i O
UuJ. 2
FY 2012 Actuals
$13,470.1
Section 103
grants
$400.0
Section 105
grants
Total:
$13,870.1
$8,614.0
FY2012
Enacted
Dollars (X1000)
$12,852.0
Section 103
grants
$400.0
Section 105
grants
Total:
$13,252.0
$8,045.0
FY2013
Annualized CR
Dollars
(X1000)
$12,605.0
Section 103
grants
$400.0
Section 105
grants
Total:
$13,005.0
$7,895.0
FY2014
President's
Request
Dollars (X1000)
$12,852.0
Section 103
grants
$400.0
Section 105
grants
Total:
$13,252.0
$0.0
1040
-------
Grant Title
Water Pollution
Control
(Section 106)
Nonpoint
Source (NPS -
Section 3 19)
Wetlands
Program
Development
Statutory
Authorities
FWPCA, as
amended,
Section 106;
TCA in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
FWPCA, as
amended,
Section
319(h);TCAin
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
FWPCA, as
amended,
Section 104
(b)(3); TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
Eligible
Recipients
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia,
Interstate
Agencies
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
States, Local
Governments,
Tribes,
Interstate
Organizations,
Intertribal
Consortia,
Non-Profit
Organizations
Eligible Uses
Develop and
carry out surface
and ground
water pollution
control
programs,
including
NPDES permits,
TMDLs, WQ
standards,
monitoring, and
NPS control
activities.
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.
FY2012
Goal/
Objective
Goal 2,
/~O-i O
UuJ. 2
Goal 2,
/~O-i O
UuJ. 2
Goal 2,
/~\Vvi 1
Ob). 2
FY 2012 Actuals
$253,853.0
$173,332.4
$17,528.3
FY2012
Enacted
Dollars (X1000)
$238,403.0
$164,493.0
$15,143.0
FY2013
Annualized CR
(X1000)
$233,971.0
$168,738.0
$14,862.0
FY2014
President's
Request
Dollars (X1000)
$258,664.0
$164,493.0
$15,143.0
1041
-------
Grant Title
Public Water
System
Supervision
(PWSS)
Underground
Injection
Control (UIC)
Beaches
Protection
Statutory
Authorities
SDWA,
Section
1443(a); TCA
in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
SDWA,
Section
1443(b); TCA
in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
BEACH Act of
2000; TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
Eligible
Recipients
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia,
Local
Governments
Eligible Uses
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.
Implement and
enforce
regulations that
protect
underground
sources of
drinking water
by controlling
Class I-V
underground
injection wells.
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.
FY2012
Goal/
Objective
Goal 2,
/~O-i 1
UuJ. 1
Goal 2,
/~\Vvi 1
UuJ. 1
Goal 2,
/~\Vvi 1
UuJ. 1
FY 2012 Actuals
$108,645.2
$10,655.3
$10,887.1
FY2012
Enacted
Dollars (X1000)
$105,320.0
$10,852.0
$9,864.0
FY2013
Annualized CR
(X1000)
$103,362.0
$10,650.0
$9,681.0
FY2014
President's
Request
Dollars (X1000)
$109,700.0
$10,852.0
$0.0
1042
-------
Grant Title
Hazardous
Waste Financial
Assistance
Brownfields
Statutory
Authorities
RCRA,
Section 3011;
FY1999
Appropriations
Act (PL 105-
276); TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
CERCLA, as
amended by
the Small
Business
Liability Relief
and
Brownfields
Revitalization
Act, Section
128(a) (42
U.S.C. 9628);
GMRA(1990);
FGCAA.
Eligible
Recipients
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
Eligible Uses
Development &
Implementation
of Hazardous
Waste Programs
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.
FY2012
Goal/
Objective
Goal3, Obj.2
Goal3,0bj.3
Goal 3,
/~\Vvi 1
UuJ. 1
FY 2012 Actuals
$71,904.8
$31,692.0
Total
$103,596.8
$50,147.2
FY2012
Enacted
Dollars (X1000)
$72,711.0
$30,263.0
Total
$102,974.0
$49,317.0
FY2013
Annualized CR
(X1000)
$71,361.0
$29,698.0
Total
$101,059.0
$48,398.0
FY2014
President's
Request
Dollars (X1000)
$73,070.0
$29,904.0
Total
$102,974.0
$47,572.0
1043
-------
Grant Title
Underground
Storage Tanks
(UST)
Statutory
Authorities
SWDA,
Section
2007(1), 42
U.S.C.
6916(1)(2);
EP Act of 2005,
Title XV-
Ethanol and
Motor Fuels,
Subtitle B -
Underground
Storage Tank
Compliance,
Sections 1521 -
1533, P.L.
109-58,42
U.S.C. 15801.
Eligible
Recipients
States
Eligible Uses
Provide funding
for States'
underground
storage tanks
and to support
direct UST
implementation
programs.
FY2012
Goal/
Objective
Goal 3,
Obj.2
FY 2012 Actuals
$1,639.6
FY2012
Enacted
Dollars (X1000)
$1,548.0
FY2013
Annualized CR
(X1000)
$1,519.0
FY2014
President's
Request
Dollars (X1000)
$1,490.0
1044
-------
Grant Title
Pesticides
Program
Implementation
Statutory
Authorities
FIFRA,
Sections 20
and 23; theFY
1999
Appropriations
Act (PL 105-
276); FY 2000
Appropriations
Act(P.L. 106-
74); TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
Eligible
Recipients
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
Eligible Uses
Implement the
following
programs
through grants to
States, Tribes,
partners, and
supporters:
Certification and
Training (C&T)
/Worker
Protection,
Endangered
Species
Protection
Program (ESPP)
Field Activities,
Pesticides in
Water,
Tribal Program,
and
Pesticide
Environmental
Stewardship
Program.
FY2012
Goal/
Objective
Goal 4,
/~O-i 1
UuJ. 1
FY 2012 Actuals
$13,815.4-
States formula
$1,081.7
HQ Programs:
- Tribal
-PREP
-PESP
-EJ
Total: $14,897.1
FY2012
Enacted
Dollars (X1000)
$11,423.0-
States formula
$1,696.0
HQ Programs:
- Tribal
-PREP
-PESP
-EJ
Total: $13,119.0
FY2013
Annualized CR
(X1000)
$11, 423.0- States
formula
$1,696.0
HQ Programs:
- Tribal
-PREP
-PESP
-EJ
Total: $13,119.0
FY2014
President's
Request
Dollars (X1000)
$11, 423.0 -States
formula
$1,696.0
HQ Programs:
- Tribal
-PREP
-PESP
-EJ
Total: $13,119.0
1045
-------
Grant Title
Lead
Statutory
Authorities
TSCA,
Sections 10
and 404 (g);
FY2000
Appropriations
Act(P.L. 106-
74); TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
Eligible
Recipients
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
Eligible Uses
Implement the
lead-based paint
activities in the
Training and
Certification
program through
EPA-authorized
State, territorial
and Tribal
programs and, in
areas without
authorization,
through direct
implementation
by the Agency.
Activities
conducted as
part of this
program include
issuing grants
for the training
and certification
of individuals
and firms
engaged in lead-
based paint
abatement and
inspection
activities and the
accreditation of
qualified
training
providers.
FY2012
Goal/
Objective
Goal 4,
/~\Vvi 1
Ob). 1
FY 2012 Actuals
$13,431.5
404(g) State/
Tribal
Certification
$1,987.0 404(g)
Direct
Implementation
Total:
$15,418.5
FY2012
Enacted
Dollars (X1000)
$9,595.0
404(g) State/
Tribal
Certification
$4,917.0 404(g)
Direct
Implementation
Total:
$14,512.0
FY2013
Annualized CR
(X1000)
$12,944.0
404(g) State/
Tribal
Certification
$1,298.0
404(g) Direct
Implementation
Total:
$14,242.0
FY2014
President's
Request
Dollars (X1000)
$12,944.0
404(g) State/
Tribal
Certification
$1,568.0
404(g) Direct
Implementation
Total:
$14,512.0
1046
-------
Grant Title
Toxic
Substances
Compliance
Pesticide
Enforcement
Statutory
Authorities
TSCA,
Sections 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,
Territories,
Federally
recognized
Indian Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia, and
Territories of
the U.S.
States,
Territories,
Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
Eligible Uses
Assist in
developing,
maintaining
and
implementing
compliance
monitoring
programs for
PCBs,
asbestos, and
Lead Based
Paint. In
addition,
enforcement
actions by : 1)
the Lead Based
Paint program
and 2) States
that obtained a
"waiver" under
the Asbestos
program.
Assist in
implementing
cooperative
pesticide
enforcement
programs.
FY2012
Goal/
Objective
Goal 5,
Obj. 1
Goal 5,
/~\Vvi 1
UuJ. 1
FY 2012 Actuals
Total: $6,036.7
$19,339.8
FY2012
Enacted
Dollars (X1000)
$ 1,783.0
Lead
$ 3,298.0
PCB/Asbestos
Total: $5,081.0
$18,644.0
FY2013
Annualized CR
(X1000)
$1,750.0
Lead
$3,236.0
PCB/Asbestos
Total: $4,986.0
$18,298.0
FY2014
President's
Request
Dollars (X1000)
$1,596.0
Lead
$3,485.0
PCB/Asbestos
Total: $5,081.0
$18,644.0
1047
-------
Grant Title
National
Environmental
Information
Exchange
Network
(NEIEN, aka
"the Exchange
Network")
Statutory
Authorities
As appropriate,
CAA, Section
103; CWA,
Section 104;
RCRA,
Section 8001;
FIFRA,
Section 20;
TSCA,
Sections 10
and 28;
MPRSA,
Section 203;
SDWA,
Section 1442;
Indian
Environmental
General
Assistance
Program Act of
1992, as
amended; FY
2000
Appropriations
Act(P.L. 106-
74); Pollution
Prevention Act
of 1990,
Section 6605;
FY2002
Appropriations
Act and FY
2003
Appropriations
Acts.
Eligible
Recipients
States, Tribes,
Interstate
Agencies,
Tribal
Consortium,
Other Agencies
with Related
Environmental
Information
Activities.
Eligible Uses
Helps States,
territories,
Tribes, and
intertribal
consortia
develop the
information
management and
technology
(IM/IT)
capabilities they
need to
participate in the
Exchange
Network, to
continue and
expand data-
sharing
programs, and to
improve access
to environmental
information.
These grants
supplement the
Exchange
Network
investments
already being
made by States
and Tribes.
FY2012
Goal/
Objective
N/A
FY 2012 Actuals
$11,233.4
FY2012
Enacted
Dollars (X1000)
$9,964.0
FY2013
Annualized CR
(X1000)
$9,779.0
FY2014
President's
Request
Dollars (X1000)
$21,564.0
1048
-------
Grant Title
Pollution
Prevention
Statutory
Authorities
Pollution
Prevention Act
of 1990,
Section 6605;
TSCA Section
10;FY2000
Appropriations
Act(P.L. 106-
74); TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
Eligible
Recipients
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
Eligible Uses
Provides
assistance to
States and State
entities (i.e.,
colleges and
universities) and
Federally-
recognized
Tribes and
intertribal
consortia in
order to deliver
pollution
prevention
technical
assistance to
small and
medium-sized
businesses. A
goal of the
program is to
assist businesses
and industries
with identifying
improved
environmental
strategies and
solutions for
reducing waste
at the source.
FY2012
Goal/
Objective
Goal 4,
Obj.2
FY 2012 Actuals
$5,292.9
FY2012
Enacted
Dollars (X1000)
$4,922.0
FY2013
Annualized CR
(X1000)
$4,834.0
FY2014
President's
Request
Dollars (X1000)
$4,922.0
1049
-------
Grant Title
Tribal General
Assistance
Program
Evidence-Based
Enforcement
and
Compliance
Grants
Statutory
Authorities
Indian
Environmental
General
Assistance
Program Act
(42U.S.C.
4368b); TCA
in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
CAA, CWA,
RCRA,
SDWA,
TSCA, FIFRA
Eligible
Recipients
Tribal
Governments,
Intertribal
Consortia
States
Eligible Uses
Plan and develop
Tribal
environmental
protection
programs.
Assist in
developing and
implementing
innovative
measures and
approaches for
assessing and
improving the
performance of
the enforcement
and compliance
assurance
program.
FY2012
Goal/
Objective
Goal 3,
Obj.4
Goal 5,
/~\Vvi 1
Ob). 1
FY 2012 Actuals
$71,754.0
$0.0
FY2012
Enacted
Dollars (X1000)
$67,631.0
$0.0
FY2013
Annualized CR
(X1000)
$66,374.0
$0.0
FY2014
President's
Request
Dollars (X1000)
$72,631.0
$4,000.0
1050
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Program Projects by Program Area
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
dean Air and Climate
Clean Air Allowance Trading
Programs
Climate Protection Program
Federal Support for Air Quality
Management
Federal Support for Air Toxics
Program
Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards
and Certification
Subtotal, Clean Air and Climate
Indoor Air and Radiation
Indoor Air: Radon Program
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air
Radiation: Protection
Radiation: Response Preparedness
Subtotal, Indoor Air and Radiation
Enforcement
Forensics Support
Homeland Security
Homeland Security: Critical
Infrastructure Protection
Water Security Initiative
Homeland Security:
Critical Infrastructure
Protection (other activities)
Subtotal, Homeland Security:
Critical Infrastructure
Protection
Homeland Security: Preparedness,
Response, and Recovery
Decontamination
FY 2012
Enacted
$9,082.0
$16,319.0
$7,091.0
$0.0
$91,886.0
$124,378.0
$210.0
$370.0
$2,094.0
$4,076.0
$6,750.0
$15,269.0
$8,606.0
$2,755.0
$11,361.0
$17,256.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$10,189.4
$14,063.3
$6,964.6
$218.0
$88,102.3
$119,537.6
$254.3
$351.7
$2,072.6
$3,783.5
$6,462.1
$16,352.8
$8,605.3
$2,757.8
$11,363.1
$16,777.8
FY 2013
Annualized CR
$9,183.0
$16,445.0
$7,137.0
$0.0
$92,398.0
$125,163.0
$210.0
$372.0
$2,102.0
$4,086.0
$6,770.0
$15,302.0
$8,685.0
$2,765.0
$11,450.0
$17,379.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$9,594.0
$8,313.0
$7,690.0
$0.0
$100,374.0
$125,971.0
$0.0
$428.0
$2,133.0
$4,097.0
$6,658.0
$15,874.0
$7,073.0
$2,820.0
$9,893.0
$15,894.0
2014 Pres Budget
vs. 2012 Enacted
$512.0
($8,006.0)
$599.0
$0.0
$8,488.0
$1,593.0
($210.0)
$58.0
$39.0
$21.0
($92.0)
$605.0
($1,533.0)
$65.0
($1,468.0)
($1,362.0)
1051
-------
Homeland Security:
Preparedness, Response,
and Recovery (other
activities)
Subtotal, Homeland Security:
Preparedness, Response, and
Recovery
Homeland Security: Protection of
EPA Personnel and Infrastructure
Subtotal, Homeland Security
IT / Data Management / Security
IT / Data Management
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations
Rent
Utilities
Security
Facilities Infrastructure
and Operations (other
activities)
Subtotal, Facilities Infrastructure
and Operations
Subtotal, Operations and
Administration
Pesticides Licensing
Pesticides: Protect Human Health
from Pesticide Risk
Pesticides: Protect the Environment
from Pesticide Risk
Pesticides: Realize the Value of
Pesticide Availability
Subtotal, Pesticides Licensing
Research: Air, Climate and Energy
Research: Air, Climate and Energy
Human Health
Global Change
Clean Air
Research: Air, Climate and
Energy (other activities)
Subtotal, Research: Air, Climate
and Energy
FY 2012
Enacted
$12,579.0
$29,835.0
$578.0
$41,774.0
$3,652.0
$33,901.0
$20,162.0
$10,696.0
$7,260.0
$72,019.0
$72,019.0
$3,757.0
$2,289.0
$517.0
$6,563.0
$0.0
$18,213.0
$77,841.0
$1,994.0
$98,048.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$10,254.4
$27,032.2
$577.0
$38,972.3
$3,250.7
$33,901.0
$19,522.7
$10,564.3
$8,940.5
$72,928.5
$72,928.5
$3,532.4
$2,249.1
$417.8
$6,199.3
$772.7
$22,198.7
$78,552.4
$2,107.7
$103,631.5
FY 2013
Annualized CR
$12,675.0
$30,054.0
$584.0
$42,088.0
$3,669.0
$33,901.0
$20,162.0
$10,696.0
$7,675.0
$72,434.0
$72,434.0
$3,771.0
$2,296.0
$519.0
$6,586.0
$0.0
$18,346.0
$78,333.0
$2,004.0
$98,683.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$13,650.0
$29,544.0
$579.0
$40,016.0
$4,029.0
$34,489.0
$21,010.0
$11,172.0
$9,019.0
$75,690.0
$75,690.0
$3,425.0
$2,293.0
$510.0
$6,228.0
$0.0
$20,440.0
$83,225.0
$2,059.0
$105,724.0
2014 Pres Budget
vs. 2012 Enacted
$1,071.0
($291.0)
$1.0
($1,758.0)
$377.0
$588.0
$848.0
$476.0
$1,759.0
$3,671.0
$3,671.0
($332.0)
$4.0
($7.0)
($335.0)
$0.0
$2,227.0
$5,384.0
$65.0
$7,676.0
1052
-------
Subtotal, Research: Air, Climate and
Energy
Research: Safe and Sustainable Water
Resources
Research: Safe and Sustainable
Water Resources
Drinking Water
Water Quality
Research: Safe and
Sustainable Water
Resources (other activities)
Subtotal, Research: Safe and
Sustainable Water Resources
Subtotal, Research: Safe and
Sustainable Water Resources
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy
Communities
Human Health
Ecosystems
Research: Sustainable and
Healthy Communities
(other activities)
Subtotal, Research: Sustainable
and Healthy Communities
Subtotal, Research: Sustainable
Communities
Research: Chemical Safety and
Sustainability
Human Health Risk Assessment
Research: Chemical Safety and
Sustainability
Human Health
Endocrine Disruptors
Computational Toxicology
Research: Chemical Safety
and Sustainability (other
activities)
Subtotal, Research: Chemical
Safety and Sustainability
Subtotal, Research: Chemical Safety
and Sustainability
FY 2012
Enacted
$98,048.0
$50,152.0
$62,584.0
$50.0
$112,786.0
$112,786.0
$44,697.0
$60,723.0
$68,105.0
$173,525.0
$173,525.0
$39,336.0
$0.0
$16,861.0
$20,849.0
$53,144.0
$90,854.0
$130,190.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$103,631.5
$10,608.7
$15,098.7
$88,550.2
$114,257.6
$114,257.6
$43,826.9
$59,797.6
$69,899.3
$173,523.8
$173,523.8
$43,342.5
$7,080.2
$16,409.4
$23,045.4
$46,612.9
$93,147.9
$136,490.4
FY 2013
Annualized CR
$98,683.0
$50,454.0
$62,944.0
$51.0
$113,449.0
$113,449.0
$45,028.0
$61,015.0
$68,612.0
$174,655.0
$174,655.0
$39,512.0
$0.0
$16,983.0
$21,028.0
$53,428.0
$91,439.0
$130,951.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$105,724.0
$50,973.0
$66,859.0
$52.0
$117,884.0
$117,884.0
$43,120.0
$59,972.0
$44,280.0
$147,372.0
$147,372.0
$40,219.0
$0.0
$15,896.0
$21,409.0
$57,320.0
$94,625.0
$134,844.0
2014 Pres Budget
vs. 2012 Enacted
$7,676.0
$821.0
$4,275.0
$2.0
$5,098.0
$5,098.0
($1,577.0)
($751.0)
($23,825.0)
($26,153.0)
($26,153.0)
$883.0
$0.0
($965.0)
$560.0
$4,176.0
$3,771.0
$4,654.0
1053
-------
Water: Human Health Protection
Drinking Water Programs
Congressional Priorities
Water Quality Research and Support
Grants
Total, Science & Technology
Environmental Program &
Management
Clean Air and Climate
Clean Air Allowance Trading
Programs
Climate Protection Program
Energy STAR
Methane to markets
Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Registry
Climate Protection
Program (other activities)
Subtotal, Climate Protection
Program
Federal Stationary Source
Regulations
Federal Support for Air Quality
Management
Federal Support for Air Toxics
Program
Stratospheric Ozone: Domestic
Programs
Stratospheric Ozone: Multilateral
Fund
Subtotal, Clean Air and Climate
Indoor Air and Radiation
Indoor Air: Radon Program
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air
Radiation: Protection
Radiation: Response Preparedness
Subtotal, Indoor Air and Radiation
Brownfields
FY 2012
Enacted
$3,782.0
$4,992.0
$793,728.0
$20,680.0
$49,668.0
$5,013.0
$15,757.0
$28,998.0
$99,436.0
$27,298.0
$123,058.0
$0.0
$5,570.0
$9,479.0
$285,521.0
$3,861.0
$17,135.0
$9,540.0
$3,015.0
$33,551.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$3,728.2
$60.0
$795,394.8
$20,266.2
$51,601.5
$3,750.3
$15,233.4
$25,397.6
$95,982.8
$26,766.5
$123,602.0
$784.7
$5,538.2
$9,451.0
$282,391.4
$4,292.9
$17,301.5
$9,454.8
$2,998.0
$34,047.2
FY 2013
Annualized CR
$3,788.0
$5,048.0
$798,586.0
$20,805.0
$50,249.0
$5,068.0
$15,941.0
$29,265.0
$100,523.0
$27,484.0
$123,338.0
$0.0
$5,608.0
$9,627.0
$287,385.0
$3,875.0
$17,288.0
$9,575.0
$3,026.0
$33,764.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$3,636.0
$0.0
$783,926.0
$20,469.0
$52,915.0
$4,803.0
$18,865.0
$29,616.0
$106,199.0
$34,103.0
$132,805.0
$0.0
$5,002.0
$9,690.0
$308,268.0
$2,271.0
$17,204.0
$10,623.0
$3,132.0
$33,230.0
2014 Pres Budget
vs. 2012 Enacted
($146.0)
($4,992.0)
($9,802.0)
($211.0)
$3,247.0
($210.0)
$3,108.0
$618.0
$6,763.0
$6,805.0
$9,747.0
$0.0
($568.0)
$211.0
$22,747.0
($1,590.0)
$69.0
$1,083.0
$117.0
($321.0)
1054
-------
Brownfields
Compliance
Compliance Monitoring
Enforcement
Civil Enforcement
Criminal Enforcement
Environmental Justice
NEPA Implementation
Subtotal, Enforcement
Geographic Programs
Great Lakes Restoration
Geographic Program: Chesapeake
Bay
Geographic Program: San Francisco
Bay
Geographic Program: Puget Sound
Geographic Program: Long Island
Sound
Geographic Program: Gulf of
Mexico
Geographic Program: South Florida
Geographic Program: Lake
Champlain
Geographic Program: Other
Northwest Forest
Lake Pontchartrain
Community Action for a
Renewed Environment
(CARE)
Geographic Program:
Other (other activities)
Subtotal, Geographic Program:
Other
Subtotal, Geographic Programs
Homeland Security
Homeland Security:
Communication and Information
Homeland Security: Critical
Infrastructure Protection
FY 2012
Enacted
$23,642.0
$106,707.0
$177,290.0
$48,123.0
$6,848.0
$17,298.0
$249,559.0
$299,520.0
$57,299.0
$5,838.0
$29,952.0
$3,956.0
$5,455.0
$2,058.0
$2,395.0
$1,294.0
$1,952.0
$0.0
$0.0
$3,246.0
$409,719.0
$4,249.0
$1,063.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$23,824.1
$106,690.9
$177,402.3
$49,545.3
$7,164.8
$16,748.9
$250,861.3
$280,806.1
$62,297.6
$5,901.7
$29,931.6
$3,983.6
$5,434.3
$1,998.0
$2,415.0
$1,271.1
$1,952.0
$16.1
$15.3
$3,254.5
$396,022.4
$3,388.1
$1,191.4
FY 2013
Annualized CR
$23,708.0
$107,102.0
$177,516.0
$48,207.0
$6,895.0
$17,333.0
$249,951.0
$304,025.0
$58,075.0
$5,924.0
$30,404.0
$4,018.0
$5,515.0
$2,082.0
$2,432.0
$1,294.0
$1,982.0
$0.0
$2.0
$3,278.0
$415,753.0
$4,275.0
$1,077.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$26,002.0
$127,540.0
$189,192.0
$53,609.0
$6,954.0
$18,087.0
$267,842.0
$300,000.0
$72,982.0
$4,819.0
$17,150.0
$2,940.0
$4,482.0
$1,704.0
$1,399.0
$1,445.0
$948.0
$1,000.0
$2,000.0
$5,393.0
$410,869.0
$4,000.0
$1,577.0
2014 Pres Budget
vs. 2012 Enacted
$2,360.0
$20,833.0
$11,902.0
$5,486.0
$106.0
$789.0
$18,283.0
$480.0
$15,683.0
($1,019.0)
($12,802.0)
($1,016.0)
($973.0)
($354.0)
($996.0)
$151.0
($1,004.0)
$1,000.0
$2,000.0
$2,147.0
$1,150.0
($249.0)
$514.0
1055
-------
Homeland Security: Preparedness,
Response, and Recovery
Decontamination
Subtotal, Homeland Security:
Preparedness, Response, and
Recovery
Homeland Security: Protection of
EPA Personnel and Infrastructure
Subtotal, Homeland Security
Information Exchange / Outreach
Children and Other Sensitive
Populations: Agency Coordination
Environmental Education
Congressional, Intergovernmental,
External Relations
Exchange Network
Small Business Ombudsman
Small Minority Business Assistance
State and Local Prevention and
Preparedness
TRI/ Right to Know
Tribal - Capacity Building
Subtotal, Information Exchange /
Outreach
International Programs
US Mexico Border
International Sources of Pollution
Trade and Governance
Subtotal, International Programs
IT / Data Management / Security
Information Security
IT / Data Management
Subtotal, IT / Data Management /
Security
Legal / Science / Regulatory /
Economic Review
Administrative Law
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Civil Rights / Title VI Compliance
FY 2012
Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
$5,966.0
$11,278.0
$7,481.0
$9,699.0
$47,638.0
$17,724.0
$2,693.0
$2,079.0
$13,320.0
$16,322.0
$13,736.0
$130,692.0
$4,283.0
$7,591.0
$5,609.0
$17,483.0
$6,786.0
$87,939.0
$94,725.0
$5,198.0
$1,282.0
$11,618.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$300.9
$300.9
$4,309.2
$9,189.6
$7,782.9
$10,082.2
$48,673.0
$16,479.3
$2,756.4
$2,281.1
$12,250.4
$15,605.8
$13,716.6
$129,627.7
$4,410.6
$7,646.0
$6,257.2
$18,313.8
$8,551.9
$86,196.5
$94,748.4
$5,207.7
$1,476.9
$11,639.9
FY 2013
Annualized CR
$0.0
$0.0
$6,053.0
$11,405.0
$7,553.0
$9,810.0
$47,701.0
$17,930.0
$2,714.0
$2,094.0
$13,403.0
$16,469.0
$13,775.0
$131,449.0
$4,305.0
$7,605.0
$5,661.0
$17,571.0
$6,858.0
$88,632.0
$95,490.0
$5,205.0
$1,286.0
$11,657.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$0.0
$0.0
$6,063.0
$11,640.0
$8,486.0
$0.0
$53,208.0
$33,659.0
$3,131.0
$2,289.0
$14,101.0
$16,726.0
$15,196.0
$146,796.0
$4,384.0
$8,543.0
$6,284.0
$19,211.0
$6,939.0
$86,599.0
$93,538.0
$5,397.0
$1,492.0
$14,339.0
2014 Pres Budget
vs. 2012 Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
$97.0
$362.0
$1,005.0
($9,699.0)
$5,570.0
$15,935.0
$438.0
$210.0
$781.0
$404.0
$1,460.0
$16,104.0
$101.0
$952.0
$675.0
$1,728.0
$153.0
($1,340.0)
($1,187.0)
$199.0
$210.0
$2,721.0
1056
-------
Legal Advice: Environmental
Program
Legal Advice: Support Program
Regional Science and Technology
Integrated Environmental Strategies
Regulatory/Economic-Management
and Analysis
Science Advisory Board
Subtotal, Legal / Science / Regulatory /
Economic Review
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations
Rent
Utilities
Security
Facilities Infrastructure
and Operations (other
activities)
Subtotal, Facilities Infrastructure
and Operations
Central Planning, Budgeting, and
Finance
Acquisition Management
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG
Management
Human Resources Management
Subtotal, Operations and
Administration
Pesticides Licensing
Pesticides: Protect Human Health
from Pesticide Risk
Pesticides: Protect the Environment
from Pesticide Risk
Pesticides: Realize the Value of
Pesticide Availability
Science Policy and Biotechnology
Subtotal, Pesticides Licensing
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA)
RCRA: Waste Management
FY 2012
Enacted
$42,606.0
$14,539.0
$2,591.0
$14,754.0
$15,256.0
$5,135.0
$112,979.0
$165,242.0
$10,105.0
$28,916.0
$115,514.0
$319,777.0
$72,290.0
$33,175.0
$24,002.0
$37,839.0
$487,083.0
$57,732.0
$37,704.0
$12,514.0
$1,754.0
$109,704.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$43,393.6
$15,535.4
$2,796.8
$14,619.7
$16,056.6
$4,907.2
$115,633.8
$164,997.6
$9,642.6
$27,655.2
$107,682.4
$309,977.8
$75,138.2
$37,238.9
$24,577.1
$39,628.0
$486,560.0
$56,278.0
$36,969.0
$13,924.9
$1,635.4
$108,807.3
FY 2013
Annualized CR
$42,651.0
$14,550.0
$2,628.0
$14,874.0
$15,292.0
$5,153.0
$113,296.0
$165,242.0
$10,105.0
$28,916.0
$117,003.0
$321,266.0
$72,659.0
$33,289.0
$24,079.0
$37,927.0
$489,220.0
$57,872.0
$37,810.0
$12,554.0
$1,765.0
$110,001.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$44,590.0
$16,413.0
$2,970.0
$16,258.0
$23,258.0
$6,761.0
$131,478.0
$171,099.0
$10,493.0
$32,643.0
$115,681.0
$329,916.0
$78,506.0
$33,893.0
$26,518.0
$40,047.0
$508,880.0
$58,400.0
$39,047.0
$12,350.0
$1,510.0
$111,307.0
2014 Pres Budget
vs. 2012 Enacted
$1,984.0
$1,874.0
$379.0
$1,504.0
$8,002.0
$1,626.0
$18,499.0
$5,857.0
$388.0
$3,727.0
$167.0
$10,139.0
$6,216.0
$718.0
$2,516.0
$2,208.0
$21,797.0
$668.0
$1,343.0
($164.0)
($244.0)
$1,603.0
1057
-------
eManifest
RCRA: Waste Management
(other activities)
Subtotal, RCRA: Waste
Management
RCRA: Corrective Action
RCRA: Waste Minimization &
Recycling
Subtotal, Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA)
Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
Endocrine Disrupters
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk
Review and Reduction
Pollution Prevention Program
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk
Management
Toxic Substances: Lead Risk
Reduction Program
Subtotal, Toxics Risk Review and
Prevention
Underground Storage Tanks (LUST /
UST)
LUST /UST
Water: Ecosystems
National Estuary Program / Coastal
Waterways
Wetlands
Subtotal, Water: Ecosystems
Water: Human Health Protection
Beach / Fish Programs
Drinking Water Programs
Subtotal, Water: Human Health
Protection
Water Quality Protection
Marine Pollution
Surface Water Protection
Subtotal, Water Quality Protection
FY 2012
Enacted
$0.0
$63,500.0
$63,500.0
$39,066.0
$9,468.0
$112,034.0
$8,255.0
$56,497.0
$15,269.0
$5,982.0
$13,798.0
$99,801.0
$12,742.0
$27,014.0
$21,160.0
$48,174.0
$2,552.0
$98,547.0
$101,099.0
$12,898.0
$203,856.0
$216,754.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$0.0
$62,115.1
$62,115.1
$39,160.2
$8,918.4
$110,193.7
$6,807.0
$55,235.8
$14,889.8
$6,417.2
$13,404.8
$96,754.6
$12,925.5
$27,231.5
$22,275.9
$49,507.4
$2,380.8
$97,070.3
$99,451.1
$12,400.5
$207,190.3
$219,590.8
FY 2013
Annualized CR
$0.0
$63,696.0
$63,696.0
$39,159.0
$9,499.0
$112,354.0
$8,358.0
$56,812.0
$15,333.0
$6,004.0
$13,829.0
$100,336.0
$12,791.0
$27,324.0
$21,197.0
$48,521.0
$2,574.0
$98,931.0
$101,505.0
$13,003.0
$204,799.0
$217,802.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$2,376.0
$63,833.0
$66,209.0
$40,210.0
$9,400.0
$115,819.0
$6,891.0
$62,732.0
$15,423.0
$3,596.0
$14,852.0
$103,494.0
$12,345.0
$27,227.0
$27,656.0
$54,883.0
$724.0
$104,033.0
$104,757.0
$11,556.0
$213,302.0
$224,858.0
2014 Pres Budget
vs. 2012 Enacted
$2,376.0
$333.0
$2,709.0
$1,144.0
($68.0)
$3,785.0
($1,364.0)
$6,235.0
$154.0
($2,386.0)
$1,054.0
$3,693.0
($397.0)
$213.0
$6,496.0
$6,709.0
($1,828.0)
$5,486.0
$3,658.0
($1,342.0)
$9,446.0
$8,104.0
1058
-------
Congressional Priorities
Water Quality Research and Support
Grants
Total, Environmental Program &
Management
Inspector General
Audits, Evaluations, and
Investigations
Audits, Evaluations, and
Investigations
Total, Inspector General
Building and Facilities
Homeland Security
Homeland Security: Protection of
EPA Personnel and Infrastructure
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations
Total, Building and Facilities
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Indoor Air and Radiation
Radiation: Protection
Audits, Evaluations, and
Investigations
Audits, Evaluations, and
Investigations
Compliance
Compliance Monitoring
Enforcement
Environmental Justice
Superfund: Enforcement
Superfund: Federal Facilities
Enforcement
Criminal Enforcement
Forensics Support
FY 2012
Enacted
$14,975.0
$2,678,222.0
$41,933.0
$41,933.0
$7,044.0
$29,326.0
$36,370.0
$2,468.0
$9,939.0
$1,221.0
$583.0
$165,534.0
$10,296.0
$7,903.0
$2,419.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$14,975.0
$2,660,116.0
$45,801.9
$45,801.9
$5,726.7
$32,434.3
$38,161.0
$2,247.3
$11,003.9
$1,191.0
$578.5
$171,560.1
$9,674.7
$7,811.9
$2,657.2
FY 2013
Annualized CR
$15,209.0
$2,694,613.0
$42,189.0
$42,189.0
$7,087.0
$29,505.0
$36,592.0
$2,465.0
$10,000.0
$1,226.0
$582.0
$165,229.0
$10,261.0
$7,888.0
$2,415.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$0.0
$2,812,757.0
$45,227.0
$45,227.0
$8,038.0
$46,326.0
$54,364.0
$2,476.0
$11,054.0
$1,182.0
$601.0
$166,947.0
$8,888.0
$7,675.0
$1,169.0
2014 Pres Budget
vs. 2012 Enacted
($14,975.0)
$134,535.0
$3,294.0
$3,294.0
$994.0
$17,000.0
$17,994.0
$8.0
$1,115.0
($39.0)
$18.0
$1,413.0
($1,408.0)
($228.0)
($1,250.0)
1059
-------
Subtotal, Enforcement
Homeland Security
Homeland Security: Preparedness,
Response, and Recovery
Decontamination
Laboratory Preparedness
and Response
Homeland Security:
Preparedness, Response,
and Recovery (other
activities)
Subtotal, Homeland Security:
Preparedness, Response, and
Recovery
Homeland Security: Protection of
EPA Personnel and Infrastructure
Subtotal, Homeland Security
Information Exchange / Outreach
Exchange Network
IT / Data Management / Security
Information Security
IT / Data Management
Subtotal, IT / Data Management /
Security
Legal / Science / Regulatory /
Economic Review
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Legal Advice: Environmental
Program
Subtotal, Legal / Science / Regulatory /
Economic Review
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations
Rent
Utilities
Security
FY 2012
Enacted
$186,735.0
$5,898.0
$5,626.0
$29,021.0
$40,545.0
$1,170.0
$41,715.0
$1,431.0
$728.0
$15,339.0
$16,067.0
$844.0
$682.0
$1,526.0
$46,797.0
$3,760.0
$8,269.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$192,282.4
$5,870.1
$5,427.9
$29,249.7
$40,547.7
$1,671.0
$42,218.7
$1,383.6
$462.2
$14,843.5
$15,305.7
$828.6
$722.3
$1,550.9
$44,948.5
$2,984.7
$7,849.8
FY 2013
Annualized CR
$186,375.0
$5,911.0
$5,653.0
$29,084.0
$40,648.0
$1,176.0
$41,824.0
$1,440.0
$732.0
$15,391.0
$16,123.0
$847.0
$680.0
$1,527.0
$46,595.0
$3,744.0
$8,233.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$185,280.0
$5,896.0
$5,645.0
$29,259.0
$40,800.0
$1,172.0
$41,972.0
$1,433.0
$728.0
$13,865.0
$14,593.0
$792.0
$708.0
$1,500.0
$45,464.0
$3,196.0
$9,130.0
2014 Pres Budget
vs. 2012 Enacted
($1,455.0)
($2.0)
$19.0
$238.0
$255.0
$2.0
$257.0
$2.0
$0.0
($1,474.0)
($1,474.0)
($52.0)
$26.0
($26.0)
($1,333.0)
($564.0)
$861.0
1060
-------
Facilities Infrastructure
and Operations (other
activities)
Subtotal, Facilities Infrastructure
and Operations
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG
Management
Acquisition Management
Human Resources Management
Central Planning, Budgeting, and
Finance
Subtotal, Operations and
Administration
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy
Communities
Research: Chemical Safety and
Sustainability
Human Health Risk Assessment
Superfund Cleanup
Superfimd: Emergency Response
and Removal
Superfund: EPA Emergency
Preparedness
Superfund: Federal Facilities
Superfund: Remedial
Superfund: Support to Other
Federal Agencies
Subtotal, Superfund Cleanup
Total, Hazardous Substance
Superfund
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Enforcement
Civil Enforcement
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations
Rent
Facilities Infrastructure
and Operations (other
activities)
FY 2012
Enacted
$21,715.0
$80,541.0
$3,128.0
$24,111.0
$6,346.0
$21,632.0
$135,758.0
$17,757.0
$3,311.0
$189,590.0
$9,244.0
$26,199.0
$564,998.0
$5,849.0
$795,880.0
$1,213,808.0
$789.0
$695.0
$220.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$19,767.6
$75,550.6
$3,198.9
$24,841.5
$3,938.4
$26,165.5
$133,694.9
$19,395.7
$3,918.2
$200,976.9
$9,919.3
$28,356.6
$639,016.1
$5,849.0
$884,117.9
$1,308,310.2
$678.7
$695.0
$182.0
FY 2013
Annualized CR
$21,899.0
$80,471.0
$3,121.0
$24,067.0
$6,344.0
$21,599.0
$135,602.0
$17,852.0
$3,330.0
$190,248.0
$9,236.0
$26,188.0
$566,889.0
$5,881.0
$798,442.0
$1,216,206.0
$789.0
$695.0
$221.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$20,361.0
$78,151.0
$3,169.0
$24,339.0
$7,585.0
$24,284.0
$137,528.0
$18,243.0
$3,197.0
$187,826.0
$8,150.0
$26,866.0
$539,074.0
$0.0
$761,916.0
$1,180,374.0
$816.0
$636.0
$203.0
2014 Pres Budget
vs. 2012 Enacted
($1,354.0)
($2,390.0)
$41.0
$228.0
$1,239.0
$2,652.0
$1,770.0
$486.0
($114.0)
($1,764.0)
($1,094.0)
$667.0
($25,924.0)
($5,849.0)
($33,964.0)
($33,434.0)
$27.0
($59.0)
($17.0)
1061
-------
Subtotal, Facilities Infrastructure
and Operations
Acquisition Management
Central Planning, Budgeting, and
Finance
Subtotal, Operations and
Administration
Underground Storage Tanks (LUST /
UST)
LUST/UST
LUST Cooperative Agreements
LUST Prevention
Subtotal, Underground Storage Tanks
(LUST / UST)
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy
Communities
Total, Leaking Underground Storage
Tanks
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Compliance
Compliance Monitoring
Enforcement
Civil Enforcement
Oil
Oil Spill: Prevention, Preparedness
and Response
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations
Rent
Facilities Infrastructure
and Operations (other
activities)
Subtotal, Facilities Infrastructure
and Operations
FY 2012
Enacted
$915.0
$163.0
$512.0
$1,590.0
$11,962.0
$58,956.0
$30,449.0
$101,367.0
$396.0
$104,142.0
$138.0
$2,286.0
$14,673.0
$437.0
$98.0
$535.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$877.0
$170.6
$416.3
$1,463.9
$12,542.3
$59,968.0
$31,193.8
$103,704.1
$338.8
$106,185.5
$122.5
$2,514.1
$15,231.7
$436.7
$75.5
$512.2
FY 2013
Annualized CR
$916.0
$164.0
$512.0
$1,592.0
$11,991.0
$59,355.0
$30,655.0
$102,001.0
$397.0
$104,779.0
$138.0
$2,289.0
$14,768.0
$437.0
$98.0
$535.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$839.0
$152.0
$414.0
$1,405.0
$10,195.0
$57,402.0
$28,926.0
$96,523.0
$498.0
$99,242.0
$142.0
$2,955.0
$17,068.0
$426.0
$83.0
$509.0
2014 Pres Budget
vs. 2012 Enacted
($76.0)
($11.0)
($98.0)
($185.0)
($1,767.0)
($1,554.0)
($1,523.0)
($4,844.0)
$102.0
($4,900.0)
$4.0
$669.0
$2,395.0
($11.0)
($15.0)
($26.0)
1062
-------
Subtotal, Operations and
Administration
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy
Communities
Total, Inland Oil Spill Programs
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Infrastructure Assistance
Infrastructure Assistance: Clean
Water SRF
Infrastructure Assistance: Drinking
Water SRF
Infrastructure Assistance: Alaska
Native Villages
Brownfields Projects
Diesel Emissions Reduction Grant
Program
Infrastructure Assistance: Mexico
Border
Subtotal, Infrastructure Assistance
Categorical Grants
Categorical Grant: Beaches
Protection
Categorical Grant: Brownfields
Categorical Grant: Environmental
Information
Categorical Grant: Evidence-Based
Enforcement Grants
Categorical Grant: Hazardous
Waste Financial Assistance
Categorical Grant: Lead
Categorical Grant: Nonpoint Source
(Sec. 319)
Categorical Grant: Pesticides
Enforcement
Categorical Grant: Pesticides
Program Implementation
Categorical Grant: Pollution
Control (Sec. 106)
Monitoring Grants
FY 2012
Enacted
S535.0
$613.0
$18,245.0
$1,466,456.0
$917,892.0
$9,984.0
$94,848.0
$29,952.0
$4,992.0
$2,524,124.0
$9,864.0
$49,317.0
$9,964.0
$0.0
$102,974.0
$14,512.0
$164,493.0
$18,644.0
$13,119.0
$18,433.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$512.2
$1,051.7
$19,432.2
$1,682,041.2
$1,199,237.2
$9,984.0
$98,783.8
$32,138.2
$4,992.0
$3,027,176.4
$10,887.1
$50,147.2
$11,233.4
$0.0
$103,596.8
$15,418.5
$173,332.4
$19,339.8
$14,897.1
$29,050.2
FY 2013
Annualized CR
$535.0
$626.0
$18,356.0
$1,465,370.0
$923,509.0
$9,984.0
$89,848.0
$24,952.0
$0.0
$2,513,663.0
$9,681.0
$48,398.0
$9,779.0
$0.0
$101,059.0
$14,242.0
$168,738.0
$18,298.0
$13,119.0
$18,090.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$509.0
$594.0
$21,268.0
$1,095,000.0
$817,000.0
$10,000.0
$85,000.0
$6,000.0
$5,000.0
$2,018,000.0
$0.0
$47,572.0
$21,564.0
$4,000.0
$102,974.0
$14,512.0
$164,493.0
$18,644.0
$13,119.0
$18,500.0
2014 Pres Budget
vs. 2012 Enacted
($26.0)
($19.0)
$3,023.0
($371,456.0)
($100,892.0)
$16.0
($9,848.0)
($23,952.0)
$8.0
($506,124.0)
($9,864.0)
($1,745.0)
$11,600.0
$4,000.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$67.0
1063
-------
Categorical Grant:
Pollution Control (Sec.
106) (other activities)
Subtotal, Categorical Grant:
Pollution Control (Sec. 106)
Categorical Grant: Pollution
Prevention
Categorical Grant: Public Water
System Supervision (PWSS)
Categorical Grant: Radon
Categorical Grant: State and Local
Air Quality Management
Categorical Grant: Targeted
Watersheds
Categorical Grant: Toxics
Substances Compliance
Categorical Grant: Tribal Air
Quality Management
Categorical Grant: Tribal General
Assistance Program
Categorical Grant: Underground
Injection Control (UIC)
Categorical Grant: Underground
Storage Tanks
Categorical Grant: Wastewater
Operator Training
Categorical Grant: Wetlands
Program Development
Subtotal, Categorical Grants
Congressional Priorities
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Total, State and Tribal Assistance
Grants
Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest
System Fund
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA)
RCRA: Waste Management
Total, Hazardous Waste Electronic
Manifest System Fund
Rescission of Prior Year Funds
SUB-TOTAL, EPA
FY 2012
Enacted
$219,970.0
$238,403.0
$4,922.0
$105,320.0
$8,045.0
$235,729.0
$0.0
$5,081.0
$13,252.0
$67,631.0
$10,852.0
$1,548.0
$0.0
$15,143.0
$1,088,813.0
$0.0
$3,612,937.0
$0.0
$0.0
($50,000.0)
$8,449,385.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$224,802.8
$253,853.0
$5,292.9
$108,645.2
$8,614.0
$245,859.2
$359.9
$6,036.7
$13,870.1
$71,754.0
$10,655.3
$1,639.6
$80.4
$17,528.3
$1,143,040.9
$68,306.4
$4,238,523.7
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$9,211,925.3
FY 2013
Annualized CR
$215,881.0
$233,971.0
$4,834.0
$103,362.0
$7,895.0
$231,346.0
$0.0
$4,986.0
$13,005.0
$66,374.0
$10,650.0
$1,519.0
$0.0
$14,862.0
$1,076,118.0
$0.0
$3,589,781.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0**
$8,501,102.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$240,164.0
$258,664.0
$4,922.0
$109,700.0
$0.0
$257,229.0
$0.0
$5,081.0
$13,252.0
$72,631.0
$10,852.0
$1,490.0
$0.0
$15,143.0
$1,135,842.0
$0.0
$3,153,842.0
$2,000.0
$2,000.0
$0.0
$8,153,000.0
2014 Pres Budget
vs. 2012 Enacted
$18,194.0
$20,261.0
$0.0
$4,380.0
($8,045.0)
$21,500.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$5,000.0
$0.0
($58.0)
$0.0
$0.0
$47,029.0
$0.0
($459,095.0)
$2,000.0
$2,000.0
$50,000.0
($296,385.0)
1064
-------
Recovery Act Resources
Sandy Supplemental
TOTAL, EPA
FY 2012
Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
$8,449,385.0
FY 2012
Actuals
$6,038.0
$0.0
$9,217,963.3
FY 2013
Annualized CR
$0.0
$607,725.0
$9,108,827.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$0.0
$0.0
$8,153,000.0
2014 Pres Budget
vs. 2012 Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
($296,385.0)
*For ease of comparison, Superfimd transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the Superfund account.
"Due to requirements for sequester calculations, under 2013 annualized CR, rescissions of $44,992 have been included in appropriation line
totals.
1065
-------
Discontinued Programs
NOTE: The EPA does not request funding for the Congress!onally directed projects funded in
FY2012.
Congressionally Directed Projects (By Appropriation):
(Dollars in Thousands)
Appropriation
S&T
EPM
Total
FY 2012
ENA
$4,992
$14,975
$19,967
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$5,048
$15,209
$20,257
FY 2014
President's
Budget Request
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
Change:
14PB - 12 ENA
($4,992)
($14,975)
($19,967)
1066
-------
Federal Support for Air Toxics Program
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate
Goal: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY2012
Actuals
$784.7
$218.0
$1,002.7
0.1
FY2013
Annualized
CR
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY2014
Pres Budget
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget vs.
FY 2012
Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Federal Support for Air Toxics Program was eliminated in FY 2012 as part of a conversion
to a sector-based, multi-pollutant approach.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
All activities in this program were assumed by the Federal Support for Air Quality Management
Program and the Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certification Program to support the
conversion to a sector-based, multi-pollutant approach to air quality management. There is no
request for this program in FY 2014.
Performance Targets:
There are no FY 2014 performance targets associated with this program because the funds were
transferred to the Federal Support for Air Quality Management Program and the Federal Vehicle
and Fuels Standards and Certification Program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
CAA (42 U.S.C. 7401-7661f).
1067
-------
Categorical Grant: Targeted Watersheds
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal
Assistance Grants
Total Budget Authority /
Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY2012
Actuals
$359.9
$359.9
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget vs.
FY 2012 Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Targeted Watersheds Grant Program focused on community-based approaches and
management techniques to protect and restore the nation's waters.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
There is no request for this program in FY 2014.
Performance Targets:
There are no performance measures for this program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2006;
Public Law 109-54.
1068
-------
Categorical Grant: Wastewater Operator Training
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal
Assistance Grants
Total Budget Authority /
Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY2012
Actuals
$80.4
$80.4
0.0
FY 2013
Annualized
CR
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY 2014 Pres
Budget vs.
FY 2012 Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
Section 104(g)(l) of the Clean Water Act authorized funding for the Wastewater Treatment Plant
Operator On-site Assistance Training program. This program targeted small publicly-owned
wastewater treatment plants, with a discharge of less than 5 million gallons per day. Federal
funding for this program was administered through grants to states, often in cooperation with
educational institutions or non-profit agencies. In most cases, assistance was administered
through an environmental training center.
This program provided direct on-site assistance to operators at small wastewater treatment
facilities. The assistance focused on issues such as wastewater treatment plant capacity,
operation training, maintenance, administrative management, financial management, trouble-
shooting, and laboratory operations.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
There is no request for this program in FY 2014.
Performance Targets:
There are no performance measures for this program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
CWA.
1069
-------
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and Recovery
Program Area: Homeland Security
Goal: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Objective(s): Ensure Chemical Safety
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Science & Technology
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2012
Enacted
$0.0
$29,835.0
$40,545.0
$70,380.0
176.4
FY 2012
Actuals
$300.9
$27,032.2
$40,547.7
$67,880.8
168.7
FY2013
Annualized
CR
$0.0
$30,054.0
$40,648.0
$70,702.0
176.4
FY 2014
Pres Budget
$0.0
$29,544.0
$40,800.0
$70,344.0
175.9
FY 2014 Pres
Budget vs.
FY 2012
Enacted
$0.0
($291.0)
$255.0
($36.0)
(0.5)
Program Project Description:
EPA plays a lead role in protecting U.S. citizens and the environment from the effects of attacks
that release chemical, biological, and radiological agents. EPA's Homeland Security Emergency
Preparedness and Response program, in the EPM appropriation, developed and maintained an
Agency-wide capability to prepare for and respond to large-scale catastrophic incidents with
emphasis on those that may involve chemical, biological, and radiological (CBR) agents. EPA
continues to increase the state of preparedness for homeland security incidents. The response to
chemical agents is different from the response to biological agents, but for both, the goals are to
facilitate preparedness, guide the appropriate response by first responders, ensure safe re-
occupancy of buildings or other locations, and protect the production of crops, livestock, and
food in the United States.
FY 2014 Activities and Performance Plan:
Consistent with the FY 2012 Enacted Budget, there is no request for this program in FY 2014 out
of the EPM appropriation.
Performance Targets:
There are no performance targets for this program.
FY 2014 Change from FY 2012 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
1070
-------
Statutory Authority:
Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Emergency and Response Act of 2002; CERCLA;
SARA; TSCA; Oil Pollution Act; Pollution Prevention Act; RCRA; EPCRA; SOW A; CWA;
CAA; FIFRA; FFDCA; FQPA; Ocean Dumping Act; Public Health Service Act, as amended; 42
U.S.C. 201 et seq.; Executive Order 10831 (1970); Public Law 86-373; PRIA.
1071
-------
Expected Benefits of the President's E-Government Initiatives
Grants.gov
The Grants.gov initiative benefits the EPA and its grant programs by providing a single location
to publish grant opportunities and application packages, and by providing a single site for the
grants community to apply for grants using common forms, processes and systems. The EPA
believes that the central site raises the visibility of its grants opportunities to a wider diversity of
applicants.
The grants community benefits from savings in postal costs, paper and envelopes. Applicants
save time in searching for agency grant opportunities and in learning the application systems of
various agencies. In order to streamline the application process, the EPA offers Grants.gov
application packages for mandatory State grants (i.e., Continuing Environmental Program
Grants).
Fiscal Year
2013
2014
Account Code
020-00-04-00-04-0 1 60-24
020-00-04-00-04-0 1 60-24
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
$380.0
$373.0
Integrated Acquisition Environment
The Integrated Acquisition Environment (IAE) is currently comprised of nine government-wide
automated applications and/or databases that have contributed to streamlining the acquisition
business process across the government. In FY 2012, GSA began the process of consolidating
the systems into one central repository called the System for Award Management (SAM). Until
the consolidation is complete, the EPA continues to leverage the usefulness of some of these
systems via electronic linkages between the EPA's acquisition system and the IAE shared
systems. Other IAE systems are not linked directly to the EPA's acquisition system, but benefit
the agency's contracting staff and vendor community as stand-alone resources.
The EPA's acquisition system uses data provided by the Central Contractor Registry (CCR) to
replace internally maintained vendor data. Contracting officers can download vendor-provided
representation and certification information electronically, via the Online Representations and
Certifications (ORCA) database, which allows vendors to submit this information once, rather
than separately for every contract proposal. Contracting officers are able to access the Excluded
Parties List System (EPLS), via links in the EPA's acquisition system, to identify vendors that
are debarred from receiving contract awards.
Contracting officers also can link to the Wage Determination Online (WDOL) to obtain
information required under the Service Contract Act and the Davis-Bacon Act. The EPA's
acquisition system links to the Federal Procurement Data System for submission of contract
actions at the time of award. FPDS provides public access to government-wide contract
information. The Electronic Subcontracting Reporting System (eSRS) supports vendor
submission of subcontracting data for contracts identified as requiring this information. The EPA
submits synopses of procurement opportunities over $25,000 to the Federal Business
1072
-------
Opportunities (FBO) website, where the information is accessible to the public. Vendors use this
website to identify business opportunities in federal contracting.
Fiscal Year
2013
2014
Account Code
020-00-01-16-04-0230-24
020-00-01-16-04-0230-24
EPA Service Fee
(in thousands)
$120.0
$149.0
Integrated Acquisition Environment Loans and Grants
The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) requires agencies to
unambiguously identify contract, grant, and loan recipients and determine parent/child
relationship, address information, etc. The FFATA taskforce determined that using both the Dun
and Bradstreet (D&B) DUNS Number (standard identifier for all business lines) and Central
Contractor Registration (CCR) [the single point of entry for data collection and dissemination]
are the most appropriate way to accomplish this. This fee will pay for the EPA's use of this
service in the course of reporting grants and/or loans. Funds may also be used to consolidate
disparate contract and grant systems into the new System for Award Management (SAM).
Fiscal Year
2013
2014
Account Code
020-00-01-16-02-4300-24
020-00-01-16-02-4300-24
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
$90.0
$96.0
Enterprise Human Resource Integration
The Enterprise Human Resource Integration's (EHRI) Electronic Official Personnel Folder
(eOPF) is designed to provide a consolidated repository that digitally documents the employment
actions and history of individuals employed by the federal government. The EPA has completed
migration to the federal eOPF system. This initiative benefits the agency by reducing file room
maintenance costs and improves customer service for employees and productivity for HR
specialists. Employees have 24/7 access to view and print their official personnel documents and
FIR specialists are no longer required to manually file, retrieve or mail personnel actions to
employees thus improved productivity.
Fiscal Year
2013
2014
Account Code
020-00-01-16-03-1219-24
020-00-01-16-03-1219-24
EPA Service Fee
(in thousands)
$407.0
$280.0
Recruitment One-Stop
U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) Recruitment One-Stop (ROS) simplifies the
process of locating and applying for federal jobs. USAJOBS is a standard job announcement and
resume builder website. It is the one-stop for federal job seekers to search for and apply to
positions on-line. This integrated process benefits citizens by providing a more efficient process
to locate and apply for jobs, and assists federal agencies in hiring top talent in a competitive
marketplace. The OPM Recruitment One-Stop initiative has increased job seeker satisfaction
1073
-------
with the federal job application process and is helping the agency to locate highly-qualified
candidates and improve response times to applicants.
The agency is required to integrate with ROS, to eliminate the need for applicants to maintain
multiple user IDs to apply for federal jobs across agencies. The vacancy announcement format
has been improved for easier readability. The system can maintain up to five resumes per
applicant, which allows them to create and store resumes tailored to specific skills. In addition,
ROS has a notification feature that keeps applicants updated on the current status of the
application, and provides a link to the agency website for detailed information. This self-help
ROS feature allows applicants to obtain up-to-date information on the status of their application
upon request.
Fiscal Year
2013
2014
Account Code
020-00-01-16-04-1218-24
020-00-01-16-04-1218-24
EPA Service Fee
(in thousands)
$109.0
$111.0
eTraining
This initiative encourages electronic learning to improve and expand training accessibility,
efficiency and financial performance. The EPA has acquired a contract with SkillSoft
Corporation that provides licenses to online training for employees. The EPA purchased 17,000
licenses. The agency is not required to contribute to this initiative for FY 2014.
Fiscal Year
2013
2014
Account Code
020-00-01-16-03-1217-24
020-00-01-16-03-1217-24
EPA Service Fee
(in thousands)
$125.0
$0.0
Human Resources Line of Business
The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) Human Resources Line of Business (HR
LoB) provides the federal government the infrastructure to support pay-for-performance systems,
modernized HR systems, and the core functionality necessary for the strategic management of
human capital.
The OPM HR LoB offers common solutions that will enable federal departments and agencies to
work more effectively, and provide managers and executives across the federal government an
improved means to meet strategic objectives. The EPA will benefit by supporting an effective
program management activity which evaluates provider performance, customer satisfaction, and
compliance with program goals, on an ongoing basis.
Fiscal Year
2013
2014
Account Code
020-00-01-16-04-1200-24
020-00-01-16-04-1200-24
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
$66.0
$65.0
1074
-------
Grants Management Line of Business
As of FY 2012, the scope of the Financial Management Line of Business (FM LoB) was
expanded to encompass the Grants Management Line of Business (GM LoB). This newly
combined FM LoB will more closely align the financial assistance and financial management
communities, thereby enhancing communication and collaboration between the two. As a result,
the new FM LoB will improve consistency across the EPA locations and throughout the
government and better position the EPA to respond to the Administration's strategy around
effective and efficient management of funds and priorities. EPA's FY 2014 contributions for the
GM LoB are included within the FM LoB.
The EPA manages 106 grant programs that disburse approximately $4 billion annually. The EPA
anticipates the key benefits, to the agency and its customers will include the simplification of
grants business processes, more timely reporting, and delivery of services.
After extensive analysis, the EPA decided in FY 2012 to delay migration under GM LoB to a
new system in light of the need to: 1) complete the upgrades of the agency's financial and human
resource systems; and 2) re-engineer the EPA's grant business processes to bring them more
them in line with the federal model. A delay is also necessary to allow maturation of alternative
grants systems. The EPA will coordinate its evaluation of alternative systems with the new FM
LoB.
Fiscal Year
2013
2014
Account Code
020-00-04-00-04- 1 3 00-24
020-00-04-00-04- 1 3 00-24
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
$59.0
$0.0
Geospatial Line of Business
The Geospatial Line of Business is an intergovernmental project to improve the ability of the
public and government to use geospatial information to support the business of government and
facilitate decision-making. This initiative will reduce EPA costs and improve agency operations
in several areas.
Currently, the EPA's Geo LoB activities include the initiation of an operational Geospatial
Platform, which benefits the EPA by providing opportunities for cost savings and cost
avoidance. By FY 2014, a Managing Partner organization will be established to support the
implementation of two key components of the Geo LoB: the Office of Management and Budget
Circular A-16 Supplemental Guidance and the National Geospatial Platform will move from the
planning into the operational stage. Both efforts will increase access to geospatial data and
analytical services for federal agencies, their partners, and stakeholders. Over time, the EPA
intends to use the Geospatial Platform on an increasing basis to obtain data and services for
internal analytical purposes as well as to publish outward-facing geospatial capabilities to the
public.
The EPA continues to be a leader in developing the vision and operational plans for the
implementation of the A-16 Supplemental Guidance and the National Geospatial Platform. In FY
2013, the EPA provided technology artifacts and lessons learned from our own activities for the
1075
-------
benefit of our partners in the Geo LoB as well as colleagues in state, local and Tribal government
organizations. In FY 2014, the agency expects to continue to play an active role in shaping the
direction of these important efforts. The EPA is expected to contribute to operation of the
National Geospatial Platform in FY 2014 and beyond. The intent is to reduce base costs by
providing an opportunity for the EPA and other agencies to share approaches on procurement
consolidation. In early FY 2010, the first of these acquisitions became available to the federal
community through the SmartBUY program managed by our Geo LoB partners at GSA.
In FY 2014, EPA will benefit from the National Geospatial Platform moving from planning into
the operational stage.
Fiscal Year
2013
2014
Account Code
020-00-01-16-04-3100-24
020-00-01-16-04-3100-24
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
$42.0
$225.0
eRulemaking
The eRulemaking program is designed to enhance public access and participation in the
regulatory process through electronic systems; reduce the burden on citizens and businesses in
finding relevant regulations and commenting on proposed rulemaking actions; consolidate
redundant docket systems; and improve agency regulatory processes and the timeliness of
regulatory decisions.
The eRulemaking program's Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) currently supports
174 federal entities including all Cabinet-level Departments and independent rulemaking
agencies, which collectively promulgate over 90 percent of all federal regulations each year.
FDMS has simplified the public's participation in the rulemaking process and made the EPA's
rulemaking business processes more accessible as well as transparent. FDMS provides the EPA's
approximately 2,200 registered users with a secure, centralized electronic repository for
managing the agency's rulemaking development via distributed management of data and robust
role-based user access. The EPA posts regulatory and non-regulatory documents in
Regulations.gov for public viewing, downloading, bookmarking, email notification and
commenting. As of June 2012, the EPA posted 889 rules and proposed rules, 705 Federal
Register notices, and 40,557 public submissions in Regulations.gov. EPA also posted 11,983
documents that consisted of supporting and related materials associated with other postings.
Overall, EPA provides public access to 670,000 documents in Regulations.gov.
Fiscal Year
2013
2014
Account Code
020-00-01-16-01-0060-24
020-00-01-16-01-0060-24
EPA Service Fee
(in thousands)
$1,000.0
$1,000.0
E-Travel
1076
-------
E-Travel provides the EPA with efficient and effective travel management services, with cost
savings from cross-government purchasing agreements and improved functionality through
streamlined travel policies and processes, strict security and privacy controls, and enhanced
agency oversight and audit capabilities. EPA employees also will benefit from the integrated
travel planning provided through E-Travel.
Fiscal Year
2013
2014
Account Code
020-00-01-01-03-0220-24
020-00-01-01-03-0220-24
EPA Service Fee (in
thousands)
$1,314.0
$1,334.0
Financial Management Line of Business
The Financial Management Line of Business (FM LoB) is a multi-agency effort whose goals
include: achieving process improvements and cost savings in the acquisition, development,
implementation, and operation of financial management systems. By incorporating the same FM
LoB-standard processes as those used by central agency systems, interfaces among financial
systems will be streamlined and the quality of information available for decision-making will be
improved. In addition, the EPA expects to achieve operational savings in future years because of
the use of the shared service provider for operations and maintenance of the new system.
Fiscal Year
2013
2014
Account Code
020-00-01-01-04-1100-24
020-00-01-01-04-1100-24
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
$45.0
$96.0
Budget Formulation and Execution Line of Business
The Budget Formulation and Execution Line of Business (BFELoB) allows the EPA and other
agencies to access budget-related benefits and services. The agency has the option to implement
LoB-sponsored tools, training and services.
The EPA has benefited from the BFELoB by sharing valuable information on how systems and
software being developed by the LoB have enhanced work processes. This effort has created a
government-only capability for electronic collaboration (Wiki) in which the Budget Community
website allows the EPA to share budget information internally, with OMB, and with other
federal agencies. The agency also made contributions to the Human Capital Workgroup,
participating in development of on-line training modules for budget activities - a valuable
resource to all agency budget staff. The LoB has developed the capability to have secure, virtual
on-line meetings where participants can view budget-related presentations from their workspace
and participate in the discussion through a conference line. The LoB provides regularly
scheduled symposia as an additional forum for EPA budget employees. Presentations on systems
such as OMB's MAX budget system, Treasury's FACTS II, and the new Governmentwide
Treasury Account Symbol Adjusted Trial Balance System will be implemented in 2014.
1077
-------
Fiscal Year
2013
2014
Account Code
010-00-01-01-04-3200-24
010-00-01-01-04-3200-24
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
$75.0
$75.0
Performance Management Line of Business
Following the passage of the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) in 1993,
agencies developed a strategic plan, an annual performance plan, and an annual performance
report. While we have improved the content of these plans, reports, and underlying performance
measures over the past twenty years, they are still produced primarily as static printed
documents. This traditional printed format, and even the PDF version of it, limits the usefulness
of the performance information contained in the report, for people both within and outside the
agency. For example, the format does not make it easy to see what other federal agencies sharing
similar objectives or working with the same community are doing, learn from each others'
experience, allow for frequent updates, or support analysis of the data to find relationships and
patterns.
In December 2010, Congress enacted the GPRA Modernization Act, signed into law on January
4, 2011. The GPRA Modernization Act shifts the focus of its predecessor from the production of
plans and reports to the active use of goals and performance data to improve outcomes. Among
other changes, it strengthens leadership engagement in setting ambitious goals, reviewing
progress, and clearly communicating results. The GPRA Modernization Act also requires greater
Congressional consultation as agencies establish their goals. One of the key changes in the law
also included required modernizing the federal government's nearly two-decade old performance
reporting framework.
To meet these requirements, the EPA is participating in the Performance Management Line of
Business (PM LoB), an interagency effort managed by GSA to develop government-wide
performance management capabilities and meet the transparency requirements of the GPRA
Modernization Act. The EPA's performance information will be reported through a federal
website which will include advanced data display and reporting capabilities, the ability to extract
raw data, and, over time, will integrate other government-wide data, such as program, human
capital, and spending information. All information currently provided publicly will be updated
more frequently and will be provided in user-friendly formats that the public can more easily
access and analyze.
The EPA also expects these new capabilities to improve decision-making and transparency to the
public on EPA's performance challenges, results achieved, and areas needing improvement. Just
as important, pursuing this effort through an interagency collaboration will result in government-
wide efficiencies by not requiring each agency to build this capability on its own, but instead by
leveraging shared technologies and those developed on a government-wide basis.
1078
-------
Fiscal Year
2013
2014
Account Code
New E-Gov Initiative14
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
$39.0
$41.0
14 An account code has not yet been established for this new initiative (as of February 27, 2013).
1079
-------
FY 2012-2013 EPA PRIORITY GOALS
Below are EPA's FY 2012-2013 Priority Goals. Additional information on Priority Goals can be
found on Performance.gov
1. Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality Reduce greenhouse
gas emissions from cars and trucks. Through September 30, 2013, EPA in coordination
with DOT's fuel economy standards program will be implementing vehicle and truck
greenhouse gas standards that are projected to reduce GHG emissions by 1.2 billion
metric tons and reduce oil consumption by about 98 billion gallons over the lifetime of
the affected vehicles and trucks.
2. Protecting America's Waters Improve public health protection for persons served by
small drinking water systems by strengthening the technical, managerial, and financial
capacity of those systems. By September 30, 2013, EPA will engage with twenty states
to improve small drinking water system capability through two EPA programs, the
Optimization Program and/or the Capacity Development Program.
3. Protecting America's Waters Improve, restore, or maintain water quality by enhancing
nonpoint source program accountability, incentives, and effectiveness. By September 30,
2013, 50% of the states will revise their nonpoint source program according to new
Section 319 grant guidelines that EPA will release in November 2012.
4 Cleaning up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development Clean up
contaminated sites and make them ready for use. By September 30, 2013, an additional
22,100 sites will be ready for anticipated use.
5. Cross-Programs Increase transparency and reduce burden through e-Reporting. By
September 30, 2013, develop a plan to convert existing paper reports into electronic
reporting, establish electronic reporting in at least four key programs, and adopt a policy
for including electronic reporting in new rules.
1080
-------
Physicians' Comparability Allowance (PCA) Worksheet for PY 2014
Environmental Protection Agency
Table 1
1) Number of Physicians Receiving PCAs
2) Number of Physicians with One- Year PCA Agreements
3) Number of Physicians with Multi-Year PCA Agreements
4) Average Annual PCA Physician Pay (without PCA payment)
5) Average Annual PCA Payment
6) Number of Physicians
Receiving PCAs by Category
(non-add)
Category I Clinical Position
Category II Research Position
Category III Occupational Health
Category IV-A Disability Evaluation
Category IV-B Health and Medical Admin.
PY2012
(Actual)
6
0
6
$137,661
$23,486
6
0
CY 2013
(Estimates)
6
0
6
$137,661
$23,486
6
0
BY 2014*
(Estimates)
6
0
6
$137,661
$23,486
6
0
*FY 2014 data will be approved during Hie FY 2015 Budget cycle.
7) If applicable, list and explain the necessity of any additional physician categories designated by your
agency (for categories other than I through IV-B). Provide the number of PCA agreements per additional
category for the PY, CY and BY.
The EPA expects no additional categories to be applicable in the foreseeable future.
8) Provide the maximum annual PCA amount paid to each category of physician in your agency and explain
the reasoning for these amounts by category.
The maximum allowance being paid to a Category II Research Position is $31,039
9) Explain the recruitment and retention problem(s) for each category of physician in your agency (this should
demonstrate that a current need continues to persist).
(Please include any staffing data to support your explanation, such as number and duration of unfilled positions and number of
accessions and separations per fiscal year.)
Historically, the small number of the EPA Research Physicians varies between five and seven positions. This small
population experiences modest turnover. Therefore, the value of the physicians' comparability allowance to the
EPA is as a retention tool.
10) Explain the degree to which recruitment and retention problems were alleviated in your agency through the
use of PCAs in the prior fiscal year.
(Please include any staffing data to support your explanation, such as number and duration of unfilled positions and number of
accessions and separations per fiscal year.)
We are told regularly that absent the allowance, some EPA research physicians would seek employment at federal agencies that
provided the allowance.
11) Provide any additional information that may be useful in planning PCA staffing levels and amounts in your
agency.
An agency with a very small number of physician positions and a low turn-over rate among them still needs the allowance
authority to maintain the stability of the small population. Those who opt for federal employment in opposition to private sector
employment still want the maximum pay available in the federal sector. Therefore, were it not for the PCA, the EPA would
regularly lose some of its physicians to other federal agencies that offer the allowance, thereby necessitating the refilling of
vacant positions. Therefore, turn-over statistics should be viewed in this light.
1081
-------
Proposed FY 2014 Administrative Provisions
To further clarify proposed Administrative Provisions that involve more than a simple annual
extension, were not included in P.L. 112-74, or propose a modification to an existing provision,
the following information is provided.
Title 42 Hiring Authority
The fourth paragraph under the heading Administrative Provisions of title II of Public Law 109-
54, as amended by the fifth paragraph under such heading of title II of division E of Public Law
111-8 and the third paragraph under such heading of the title II of Public Law 111-88, is further
amended by striking "up to thirty persons at any one time " and inserting "persons".
The current proviso states that the Administrator may, after consultation with the Office of
Personnel Management, employ up to thirty persons at any one time in the Office of Research
and Development under the authority provided in 42 U.S.C. 209. The change proposed in FY
2014 would remove the ceiling of thirty persons at any one time.
Program Funds for Facilities Activities
The Science and Technology, Environmental Programs and Management, Office of Inspector
General, Hazardous Substance Superfund, and Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund
Program Accounts, are available for the construction, alteration, repair, rehabilitation, and
renovation of facilities provided that the cost does not exceed $150,000 per project.
The Building and Facilities threshold was last increased from $75 to $85 thousand in FY 2004.
During the 2004 to 2011 timeframe, costs for construction, material, and labor increased ranging
from 5 to 9 percent per year. EPA is proposing to reflect these cost increases by raising the per
project threshold from $85 to $150 thousand.
The $150 thousand threshold will apply to the S&T, EPM, OIG, Superfund, and LUST
appropriations and will allow the programs to proceed effectively and efficiently to address
immediate, urgent and smaller-scale facility improvements and will enable the Agency to
maintain adequate operations, further mission-critical activities and implement conservation
goals.
Section 319 Grants
For fiscal year 2014, and notwithstanding section 518(f) of the Water Pollution Control
Act, the Administrator is authorized to use the amounts appropriated for any fiscal year
under Section 319 of the Act to make grants to federally recognized Indian tribes pursuant
to sections 319(h) and 518(e) of that Act.
This provision has been relocated from the State and Tribal Assistance Grants appropriation to
Administrative Provisions.
1082
-------
Payments of Attorney Fees and/or Litigation Costs made under Equal Access for Justice Act (EAJA)
from EPA Appropriations as a result of Defensive Litigation under Environmental Statutes
Date of
agreement
or order
9/28/2010
12/2/2010
12/20/2010
12/30/2010
5/18/2011
Case Name
Northwest
Environmental
Advocates v. EPA
Anacostia
Riverkeeper;
Friends of the
Earth v. Lisa
Jackson
Alfred J. Davis and
Cynthia
F. Davis, et al. v.
EPA
Florida Wildlife
Federation, Sierra
Club, Conservancy
of Southwest
Florida,
Environmental
Confederation of
Southwest Florida,
and St. Johns
Riverkeeper v. EPA
Natural Resources
Defense
Council, et al. v.
EPA
Court
D. Or.
D.D.C.
M.D. Fla.
N.D. Fla.
S.D.N.Y.
Case#
09-CV-00017
09-CV-00098
09-CV-01070
OS-cv-00324
09-cv-4317
Name of
Federal
Judges
Paul Papak
John Bates
Elizabeth
Kovachevich
Robert Hinkle
Denise L. Cote
Case Disposition (e.g.,
win, loss, or
settlement)
Dismissed
following
settlement
Decided partly in favor
of EPA and partly in
favor of Plaintiffs
Dismissed
following
settlement
Case settled
Decided in favor of
Plaintiffs
Amount
$43,500.00
$27,660.55
$49,929.00
$198,997.00
$63,000.00
Name of Fee
Recipients
Washington Forest
Law Center
Earthjustice
Thomas W. Reese
Florida Wildlife
Federation, et al.
Natural Resources
Defense Council,
Inc.
Brief Summary of the Case
Challenge to EPA's partial approval of
Oregon coastal nonpoint source
management program
Challenge to 15 Total Maximum Daily
Loads (TMDLs) for failure to have "daily"
loads
Challenges to EPA's "approval" of
Florida's triennial review and impaired
waters rule, approval of Florida's Clean
Water Act (CWA) impaired waters
303(d) list, and failure to exercise its
authority to promulgate water quality
standards for Florida and object to
EPA's failure to promulgate nutrient
water quality criteria for Florida after
alleged CWA 303(c)(4)(B)
determination that numeric nutrient
criteria were necessary.
EPA's registration of Spirotetramat,
which is a pesticide.
1083
-------
Date of
agreement
or order
9/23/2011
11/3/2010
12/9/2011
2/23/2012
Case Name
Friends of the Wild
Swan, et al. v. EPA
Natural Resources
Defense
Council, et al. v.
EPA
Anacostia
Riverkeeper, Inc.,
Friends of the Earth
v. EPA, et al.
Natural Resources
Defense
Council v. EPA
Court
D. Mont.
2nd Cir.
D.D.C.
2nd Cir.
Case#
97-cv-35
06-CV-0820
09-CV-00097
OS-cv-3771
Name of
Federal
Judges
Donald W.
A K 11
Malloy
Jacobs,
Cabranes, and
Leval.
Royce Lamberth
Pooler, Wesley,
and Chin
Case Disposition
(e.g., win, loss, or
settlement)
Dismissed
following
settlement
Dismissed following
settlement
Decided in favor of
Plaintiffs
Decided partly in
favor of EPA and
partly in favor of
Petitioners.
(Because this was an
appellate level case
(in a Circuit Court),
we call the entity
bringing the action a
"petitioner.")
Amount
$3,740.00
$135,000.00
$18,321.00
$28,000.00
Name of Fee
Recipients
Friends of the Wild
Swan
Natural
Resources
Defense
Council,
Earthjustice
Earthjustice
Natural Resources
Defense Council
Brief Summary of the Case
EPA failure to establish CWA impaired
waters
303(d) lists and TMDLs for Montana.
Challenge to EPA's Human Studies Rule.
This rule was published February 6,
2006, in the Federal Register - entitled
'Protections for Subjects in Human
lesearch." See
71 Fed. Reg. 6138]
Challenge to EPA's approval of
TMDLs for sediment and total
suspended solids (TSS) in the
Anacostia River and its tributaries.
Challenge to EPA's final order denying
objections to a denial of a petition
seeking revocation of all tolerances for
the pesticide dichlorvos (or DDVP).
1 . The language in the House Report requests "disposition" of fee "applications. " Because most of these payments come about through negotiation, there is rarely a filing with
specific numbers to provide. In addition, any negative disposition of an application would likely result in no fee being paid, thus such an entry would not be on this chart, which
reflects fees paid. The total amount here reflects the total sum in payment of costs and fees.
1084
-------
Fiscal Year 2014: Consolidations, Realignments, or Other Transfers of Resources
This table shows consolidations, realignments or other transfers of resources and personnel from one program project to another in
order to clearly illustrate a transfer of FY 2014 resources ($ in thousands).
Program Project
EPM: IT/Data
Management
EPM: TRI/Right
to Know
S&T: Safe and
Sustainable
Water Resources
EPM:
Geographic
Program: Other
Total
Funding
Transferred
From:
($567.0)
($1,000.0)
Payroll
Transferred
From:
($547.0)
$0.0
FTE
Transferred
From:
(3.8)
0.0
Funding
Transferred
To:
$567.0
$1,000.0
Payroll
Transferred
To:
$547.0
$0.0
FTE
Transferred
To:
3.8
0.0
Program
Project Total
$86,599.0
$16,726.0
$117,884.0
$5,393.0
Purpose
This change is a
realignment of
resources from the
IT/Data Management
program to the
Toxics Release
Inventory (TRI)
program to support
data access, analysis
and accountability.
This change reflects a
reduction from S&T
Safe and Sustainable
Water Resources to
support the
Southeastern New
England Coastal
Watershed
Restoration program
under EPM
Geographic Program:
Other.
1085
-------
Program Project
EPM: Facilities
Infrastructure
and Resource
Management
EPM: Financial
Assistance
Grants/IAG
Management
EPM: IT/Data
Management
EPM: Exchange
Network
Total
Funding
Transferred
From:
($210.0)
($1,149.0)
Payroll
Transferred
From:
($210.0)
($154.0)
FTE
Transferred
From:
(1.6)
(1.0)
Funding
Transferred
To:
$210.0
$1,149.0
Payroll
Transferred
To:
$210.0
$154.0
FTE
Transferred
To:
1.6
1.0
Program
Project Total
$329,916.0
$26,518.0
$86,599.0
$33,659.0
Purpose
This change reflects a
transfer from the
Facilities Operations
and Resource
Management to
Grants Management
to better support
tribes in grant
oversight activities.
This change is a
realignment of
resources from the
IT/Data Management
program to the
Exchange Network
program to support
the Environmental
Dataset Gateway
service and the
Facilities Registry
Service database.
1086
-------
Leveraging Evidence and Enhancing Program Evaluation Capacity in FY 2014
Throughout the EPA's FY 2014 budget, the agency demonstrates its ongoing commitment to
developing and using evidence in support of its policy, budget, and management decisions. The
agency has a strong tradition of using evidence from health studies, ecological assessments,
environmental monitoring, emissions testing and modeling to inform policy and budget decision-
making, as well as program implementation. The agency is committed to continuous
improvement of its evidence and evaluation capacity, consistent with the memorandum issued by
OMB on May 18, 2012, titled "Use of Evidence and Evaluation in the 2014 Budget." In
particular, for FY 2014 the agency is increasing its focus on how its programs can improve the
accessibility, quality and usefulness of performance data that form essential building blocks for
evaluating and improving program effectiveness. As part of that effort, the EPA will leverage
key partnerships with other federal agencies in FY 2014 to evaluate the effectiveness of ongoing
and alternative strategies and to improve public access to, and understanding of, evidence about
what works. Throughout the budget, the agency uses performance information developed
through process evaluations, program reviews and performance audits to strengthen program
implementation and to enhance effectiveness. The EPA continues its commitment to improving
its program evaluation capacity and to support agency efforts to improve the efficiency and
effectiveness, including the cost-effectiveness, of its environmental protection programs. Below
are several examples of EPA's approaches to address the major focus areas for action as
described in OMB's July 5, 2012 document, titled "Guidance for Responding to OMB's Memo
on Evidence and Evaluation."
FOCUS 1. Building Evidence of What is Working and What is Not
Improvements in the Quality and/or Usefulness of Performance Data,
In FY 2014, the EPA is pursuing a variety of efforts to enhance the quality and usefulness of the
data used by the agency, other governmental decision makers and the public.
Beginning with the FY 2013 President's Budget, the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, the
Office of Environmental Information and the EPA's program offices collaborated to strengthen
the Agency's performance measure verification and validation process though the development
of Data Quality Records (DQRs). Each DQR electronically documents - from original data
generation though reporting - management controls, quality procedures, roles and
responsibilities, and other metadata (including measure term definitions, methodologies,
calculations, geographic scale, and period of coverage) associated with a performance measure.
The DQRs provide transparency, objectivity, and useful performance results for agency decision-
making and public dissemination.
In the Existing Chemicals Program, the EPA issued a new Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) Rule
that will improve required periodic reporting of chemical data by instituting electronic data
submission to achieve greater efficiency and by modifying reporting thresholds, industrial
classifications and definitions to increase data quality and utility. The EPA's development of
systems to support electronic reporting under the CDR Rule and in other contexts (such as new
chemical review) will help make chemical data more readily available for use by the agency and
1087
-------
the public. These improvements also will enhance data quality by creating linkages to existing
systems for facility/site identification and chemical nomenclature. These and other efforts have
enabled the EPA to successfully screen thousands of existing chemicals, leading to the
identification of 83 TSCA Work Plan Chemicals prioritized for detailed assessment beginning in
FY2012.
In addition, the EPA is working to enhance the accessibility of chemical data by taking
advantage of improvements in electronic storage and retrieval. The EPA annually digitizes some
16,000 TSCA documents received under TSCA Sections 4, 5 and 8, making those data available
to the public where appropriate. These efforts are complemented by improvements to the EPA's
website. A wide array of non-confidential chemical data is now available to the public simply by
accessing the EPA's new online Chemical Data Access Tool (CDAT).
In another effort to make more and better use of evidence, the EPA is currently consolidating
Superfund data systems in a way that will link program decisions with program outcomes at
individual Superfund sites to reduce costs and improve program implementation. The
consolidation of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Information System (CERCLIS) into the Superfund Enterprise Management System (SEMS),
which contains key decision documents and information on Institutional Controls at sites, will be
completed by the end of FY 2013. The EPA anticipates that the fully integrated system will
reduce the current costs associated with data collection and analysis across multiple Superfund
data systems. In FY 2014, the new system will allow the agency to improve the planning,
tracking and reporting of key Superfund performance measures to provide valuable evidence of
outcomes and results, such as capturing project baseline information relative to cost and
schedule. New analytical components of the system will provide additional functionality when
performing data analyses. During the consolidation process, the EPA provided the Superfund
stakeholder community with the opportunity to evaluate current program data to ensure that
SEMS efficiently and effectively captures the data that are most valuable in program decision
making. The process of migrating data to SEMS, particularly from CERCLIS, has involved
extensive review of existing data and helped to validate the quality of data that is used to initially
populate the new system.
Finally, the agency's Next Generation Compliance initiative, which complements the agency's
new E-Enterprise initiative, will enable the EPA to broadly implement evidence-based
approaches to evaluate the effectiveness of its enforcement and compliance strategies. In FY
2014, the agency will emphasize electronic reporting, enhance data systems to collect,
synthesize, utilize and disseminate monitoring data, and test and deploy monitoring equipment in
the field to determine the different uses and potential impact on compliance. Next Generation
Compliance will provide more complete data sets for regulated entities, allowing the agency to
evaluate compliance, experiment with new approaches and identify what works. The EPA will
continue its efforts to implement Next Generation Compliance approaches to achieve the EPA's
goals more efficiently and effectively. As part of this approach, the agency will use modern
monitoring technology to detect pollution problems and eliminate paper based reporting to
enhance government efficiency, reduce paperwork burden and ensure accurate and timely
information on compliance and pollutants can be obtained. Next Generation Compliance also
will support transparency so the public is aware of facility and government environmental
1088
-------
performance, implementation of innovative enforcement approaches, and how regulations are
structured to drive compliance.
Leveraging Partnerships to Identify and Fill Evidence Gaps
Under the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI), the EPA is collaborating with other federal
agencies to evaluate the effectiveness of a number of efforts to inform future decision-making.
These efforts are expected to improve understanding the linkages between nearshore
impairments and their causes; enhance or implement practices to reduce the causes, including the
export of nutrients and soils to the nearshore waters; and establish and implement Total
Maximum Daily Loads and Watershed Action Plans for phosphorus and other non-toxic
pollutants. By 2013 GLRI agencies will have developed a Science Plan that establishes an
adaptive management framework that will help direct evaluations studying program
effectiveness and the health of the Great Lakes ecosystem using the best available science.
The Bay Partnership is developing an adaptive management system or decision framework to
develop goals and strategies and periodically assess through monitoring what goals are being met
and not met. The Bay is developing annual and long term goals and once set will be assessing
what progress is being met in reaching their goals. This information will feed into senior
management decisions about resource allocations and monitoring strategies. USGS and NOAA
have played a leading role in partnering their monitoring resources to support the effort. It is
meant to be a feedback-based system that uses environmental and management data to inform
decisions.
FOCUS 2. Acting on Evidence
In 2011, the EPA released preliminary results of the first national program evaluation of the
outcomes, efficiencies and economic benefits produced by Brownfields grants. The evaluation
found a very strong correlation between a brownfields property getting a Phase II assessment
grant and the property reaching the program outcome of ready for reuse and/or redevelopment.
As a result of this finding, the EPA added language in its guidelines for the 2012 grants
competition indicating the importance of and increasing the priority of applications that include
an emphasis on completing Phase II assessments and pushing properties toward redevelopment.
This close tie between redevelopment outcomes and Phase II assessments is producing
actionable policy improvement. Another finding that came as a result of this analysis is the
propensity for new Revolving Loan Fund (RLF) awards to carry high balances of unexpended
funds. The evaluation found that during the first years of RLF activity, recipients tend to spend
their funds slowly. As a result, EPA lowered its funding levels for first time RLF recipients to a
maximum of $600,000 where the previous maximum had been $1 million. A similar result for
Assessment Coalition awards resulted in a similar reduction of the maximum amount for first
time recipients.
Despite the Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Program's considerable success for
more than 25 years in cleaning up UST releases and decreasing the overall UST release backlog,
beginning in 2000 the pace of cleanups began to decline. In FY 2012, the LUST program
completed a study of its cleanup backlog, which provided significant information to characterize
the national inventory of sites awaiting corrective action. The study revealed that for those states
1089
-------
studied, almost half of the releases yet to be addressed were 15 years old or older, and at 75
percent of these releases, groundwater was contaminated. Based on the opportunities identified
in the study, states in FY 2014 will develop and implement specific applicable strategies and
activities, such as expedited site assessment, remedial optimization, integrated funding
opportunities, and leveraging petroleum brownfields opportunities. In addition, the EPA is
planning in FY 2014 to undertake a program review of states' use of third party programs to
meet their UST program inspection and cleanup responsibilities. This review will evaluate the
effectiveness and quality of these programs. It will also look at third party program costs and
benefits the state and tank owners have realized.
FOCUS 3. Building Agency Capacity
The EPA is committed to improving its ability to ensure that evidence and evaluation activities
focus on critical areas of program implementation and policy decision-making by having agency
evaluation staff work with programs to conduct in-house performance management activities
(e.g., logic modeling, strategy mapping, performance measurement) and to build capacity for
evidence-based grant-making, use of evidence in enforcement and compliance, data-mining, and
comparative studies. The agency's centralized evaluation support function in the Office of Policy
(OP) invests in four to six new studies per year to maintain a portfolio of evaluations that
provides useful information about the programs being studied, including how the programs
might be improved and whether alternative approaches might achieve better results. The OP's
evaluations also serve as models for other EPA offices in conducting their own assessments, and
the OP's staff provide expert advice in support of those efforts. As an example of an OP
evaluation, the EPA leveraged OMB's Evaluation Initiative to support a multi-year, rigorous
evaluation of the agency's Environmentally Preferable Purchasing (EPP) Program. This
evaluation is designed to assess evidence of the program's effectiveness and its ability to
produce results of strategic significance. The evaluation will be completed in FY 2013 and is
expected to improve the implementation of the program starting in FY 2014. As a general matter,
the agency has leveraged its centralized evaluation support function to make ongoing
investments in program evaluations of outcomes and impact, using rigorous quasi-experimental
and experimental methodologies. The EPA supports the accessibility of rigorous evaluation
methodologies and the transparency of evaluation studies via http://www.epa.gov/evaluate/.
In FY 2012, the Agency encouraged the development of new studies through greater engagement
of the OP's program evaluation experts with individual EPA offices about strategic ideas for and
key questions to be answered by potential program evaluation studies. This new approach
mirrors a model employed by other federal agencies that have mature program evaluation
functions. In FY 2014, the EPA will continue this vital step in strengthening the agency's culture
of continuous learning, program improvement, and effectiveness. Also in FY 2013 and FY 2014,
the EPA will identify and/or develop evaluation methodologies designed to support comparative
analysis of ongoing and alternative strategies in environmental program implementation and to
assess evidence of their effectiveness. By the end of FY 2013, EPA expects to finalize and
formally endorse key operational components of the agency's E-Enterprise initiative, including
the plan for joint governance by the states and EPA, and the framework for business case
analyses which will guide operations. The initiative is expected to reduce the paperwork and
1090
-------
regulatory reporting burden on regulated entities and provide easier access to and use of
environmental data.
Best Practices in Using Evidence and Evaluation
Use of Evidence and Evaluation to Inform and Implement FY2014 Funding Decisions
The National Academy of Sciences has commended the EPA on its Acid Rain Accountability
Program, which relies on the Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNET) for monitoring
deposition, ambient sulfate and nitrate concentrations, and other air quality indicators. The EPA
uses the Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems (TIME) and Long-Term Monitoring
(LTM) programs for assessing how water bodies and aquatic ecosystems are responding to
reductions in sulfur and nitrogen emissions. The Acid Rain Accountability Program issues
comprehensive annual reports on compliance and environmental results from implementation of
the Acid Rain and related programs. These reports track progress in not only reducing 862 and
NOX emissions from the affected sources, but also assess the impacts of these reductions on acid
deposition, air quality (e.g., ozone levels), surface water acidity, forest health and other
environmental indicators. This data has served as a vital tool in the development of regulations
and subsequent budget requests aimed at further reducing these harmful emissions.
To better address questions about national coastal conditions, the EPA's Office of Water, EPA's
Office of Research and Development, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have partnered in a multi-agency effort with coastal states
to assess the condition of the nation's coastal resources. The agencies chose to assess conditions
using nationally consistent monitoring surveys to minimize the problems created by compiling
data collected using multiple approaches. The results of these assessments are compiled
periodically into a National Coastal Condition Report. Beginning in 2001, this series of reports
contains one of the most comprehensive ecological assessments available of the condition of our
nation's coastal bays and estuaries. The fourth and most recent National Coastal Condition
Report, issued in 2012, is based on data from more than 3,100 coastal sites. The report found that
the overall condition of the nation's coastal waters is fair, showing that the overall condition in
U.S. coastal waters has improved slightly since the 1990s. The National Coastal Condition
Assessment provides the high quality outcome data used to support several of the EPA's long-
term and annual performance measures. The report on the condition of coastal waters will
support more informed decisions concerning protection of this resource and will increase
awareness about the extent and seriousness of pollution in these waters.
(http://water, epa.gov/type/oceb/assessmonitor/nccr/index. cfm)
Lead Agency Contact on Use of Evidence and Evaluation:
Katherine Dawes, Office of Policy, Evaluation Support Division, 202-566-2189,
dawes.katherine@epa.gov
1091
-------
EPA Budget by National Program Manager and Major Office
Dollars in Thousands
NPM Major Office
OA
OAR
OARM
OCFO
Immediate Office
Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations
Office of External Affairs and Environmental Education*
Office of Policy
Administrative Law Judges
Children's Health Protection
Environmental Education
Office of Civil Rights
Office of Federal Advisory Committee Managementand Outreach
Environmental Appeals Board
Executive Secretariat
Executive Services
Homeland Security
Science Advisory Board
Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization
Regional Resources
TOTAL
*OEAEE includes $5M in FY 201 3 for new streamlined Cross-NPM
Environmental Outreach Program managed by the Office of the Administ
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Office of Atmospheric Programs
Office of Transportation and Air Quality
Office of Radiation and Indoor Air
Regional Resources
TOTAL
Immediate Office
Office of Acquisition Management
Office of Administration
Office of Human Resources
Off ice of Grants & Debarment
OARM RTP
OARM Cincinnati Office
Regional Resources
TOTAL
Immediate Office
Center for Environmental Finance
Office of Budget
Office of Planning, Analysis and Accountability
Office of Financial Management
Office of Technology Solutions
Office of Financial Services
Office of Resource and Information Management
Regional Resources
TOTAL
FY 2012 Enacted
Pay($K) Non-Pay ($K) Total ($K) FTE
$2,873.0 $411.0 $3,284.0 21.5
$6,233.0 $304.0 $6,537.0 58.4
$5,364.0 $174.0 $5,538.0 50.6
$21,243.0 $10,473.0 $31,716.0 162.9
$2,618.0 $217.0 $2,835.0 18.1
$2,178.0 $4,103.0 $6,281.0 13.7
$1,271.0 $6,935.0 $8,206.0 9.6
$5,368.0 $2,283.0 $7,651.0 39.1
$1,297.0 $393.0 $1,690.0 12.0
$2,145.0 $168.0 $2,313.0 15.2
$1,558.0 $129.0 $1,687.0 14.5
$3,000.0 $417.0 $3,417.0 27.8
$2,085.0 $503.0 $2,588.0 12.9
$3,955.0 $1,036.0 $4,991.0 26.6
$1,959.0 $1,767.0 $3,726.0 15.6
$29,429.0 $6,167.0 $35,596.0 223.2
$92,576.0 $35,480.0 $128,056.0 721.7
$11,878.0 $11,786.0 $23,664.0 78.2
$46,799.0 $25,657.0 $72,456.0 345.7
$37,595.0 $90,043.0 $127,638.0 270.0
$52,761.0 $59,154.0 $111,915.0 385.7
$22,317.0 $19,008.0 $41,325.0 161.6
$76,666.0 $290,440.0 $367,106.0 601.9
$248,016.0 $496,088.0 $744,104.0 1,843.1
$7,392.0 $11,192.0 $18,584.0 33.0
$32,496.0 $12,569.0 $45,065.0 262.8
$22,169.0 $350,093.0 $372,262.0 125.3
$21,364.0 $6,632.0 $27,996.0 129.3
$11,160.0 $4,786.0 $15,946.0 82.4
$10,433.0 $29,367.0 $39,800.0 95.6
$10,262.0 $16,664.0 $26,926.0 94.5
$51,876.0 $43,674.0 $95,550.0 392.8
$167,152.0 $474,977.0 $642,129.0 1,215.7
$2,405.0 $367.0 $2,772.0 14.0
$1,016.0 $2,253.0 $3,269.0 7.0
$6,905.0 $1,599.0 $8,504.0 51.1
$5,328.0 $1,156.0 $6,484.0 36.6
$6,694.0 $1,287.0 $7,981.0 50.9
$6,249.0 $17,339.0 $23,588.0 40.9
$14,665.0 $5,119.0 $19,784.0 139.9
$1,499.0 $1,812.0 $3,311.0 11.7
$28,477.0 $1,847.0 $30,324.0 235.0
$73,238.0 $32,779.0 $106,017.0 587.1
FY 2014 President's Budget
Pay($K) Non-Pay ($K) Total ($K) FTE
$3,254.0 $621.0 $3,875.0 23.8
$7,661.0 $264.0 $7,925.0 56.6
$6,867.0 $5,359.0 $12,226.0 51.1
$25,838.0 $16,431.0 $42,269.0 161.3
$2,729.0 $193.0 $2,922.0 18.1
$2,428.0 $4,209.0 $6,637.0 15.6
$0.0 $0.0 $0.0 0.0
$6,612.0 $3,576.0 $10,188.0 44.5
$1,613.0 $540.0 $2,153.0 12.0
$2,307.0 $168.0 $2,475.0 15.3
$1,962.0 $124.0 $2,086.0 14.6
$2,942.0 $787.0 $3,729.0 21.9
$2,005.0 $401.0 $2,406.0 11.0
$4,343.0 $2,318.0 $6,661.0 28.3
$2,304.0 $1,900.0 $4,204.0 15.8
$30,705.0 $4,884.0 $35,589.0 218.5
$103,570.0 $41,775.0 $145,345.0 708.4
$11,694.0 $11,114.0 $22,808.0 73.8
$51,603.0 $31,650.0 $83,253.0 370.5
$37,174.0 $94,084.0 $131,258.0 254.6
$56,333.0 $55,877.0 $112,210.0 388.3
$23,074.0 $19,234.0 $42,308.0 158.0
$83,098.0 $280,886.0 $363,984.0 618.2
$262,976.0 $492,845.0 $755,821.0 1,863.4
$5,994.0 $16,453.0 $22,447.0 36.0
$32,997.0 $13,167.0 $46,164.0 251.8
$23,403.0 $373,448.0 $396,851.0 126.8
$19,500.0 $11,281.0 $30,781.0 104.4
$11,319.0 $6,626.0 $17,945.0 82.4
$10,835.0 $30,396.0 $41,231.0 95.6
$10,925.0 $16,871.0 $27,796.0 94.5
$53,696.0 $41,212.0 $94,908.0 385.9
$168,669.0 $509,454.0 $678,123.0 1,177.4
$2,571.0 $255.0 $2,826.0 13.8
$942.0 $1,419.0 $2,361.0 6.0
$7,496.0 $2,617.0 $10,113.0 51.0
$5,458.0 $377.0 $5,835.0 33.3
$7,592.0 $577.0 $8,169.0 54.3
$6,908.0 $25,552.0 $32,460.0 40.2
$16,123.0 $5,642.0 $21,765.0 140.1
$1,721.0 $910.0 $2,631.0 10.5
$29,158.0 $1,621.0 $30,779.0 230.4
$77,969.0 $38,970.0 $116,939.0 579.6
1092
-------
NPM Major Office
OCSPP
OECA
OEI
OGC
OIG
Immediate Office
Office of Pesticide Programs
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
Office of Science Coordination and Policy
Regional Resources
TOTAL
Immediate Office
Office of Civil Enforcement
Office of Criminal Enforcement, Forensics, and Training
Office of Compliance
Office of Environmental Justice
Office of Federal Activities
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
Office of Site Remediation Enforcement
Regional Resources
TOTAL
Immediate Office
EPA Quality Management Program
Office of Planning, Resources, and Outreach
Office of Information Collection
Office of TechnologyOperations and Planning
Office of Information Analysis and Access
Regional Resources
TOTAL
Immediate Office
Air and Radiation Law Office
Pesticides and Toxic Substances Law Office
Solid Waste and Emergency Response Law Office
Water Law Office
Other Legal Support
Regional Resources
TOTAL
Immediate Office
Office of Audit
Office of Congressional, Public Affairs and Management
Office of Counsel
Office of Chief of Staff*
Office of 1 nvestigations
Office of Mission Systems
Office of Program Evaluation
TOTAL
* For the FY 2013 PB, the Office of Chief of Staff was included in
mmediate Office and Office of Congressional, Public Affairs and
Management.
FY 2012 Enacted
Pay($K) Non-Pay ($K) Total ($K) FTE
$7,604.0 $2,040.0 $9,644.0 50.3
$78,675.0 $18,446.0 $97,121.0 553.6
$47,923.0 $30,028.0 $77,951.0 319.9
$4,236.0 $6,536.0 $10,772.0 26.1
$22,316.0 $30,468.0 $52,784.0 176.1
$160,754.0 $87,518.0 $248,272.0 1,126.0
$8,390.0 $2,860.0 $11,250.0 52.7
$22,973.0 $4,185.0 $27,158.0 143.3
$59,698.0 $10,656.0 $70,354.0 372.1
$21,724.0 $20,051.0 $41,775.0 140.2
$2,637.0 $3,037.0 $5,674.0 18.7
$4,056.0 $1,132.0 $5,188.0 31.6
$3,069.0 $704.0 $3,773.0 18.7
$11,560.0 $31,349.0 $42,909.0 78.3
$326,716.0 $47,821.0 $374,537.0 2,438.5
$460,823.0 $121,795.0 $582,618.0 3,294.1
$2,220.0 $6,298.0 $8,518.0 15.5
$1,912.0 $1,148.0 $3,060.0 15.9
$4,213.0 $3,678.0 $7,891.0 29.4
$9,479.0 $32,655.0 $42,134.0 64.6
$11,931.0 $13,528.0 $25,459.0 82.7
$12,614.0 $21,014.0 $33,628.0 89.7
$21,582.0 $21,998.0 $43,580.0 172.5
$63,951.0 $100,319.0 $164,270.0 470.3
$4,567.0 $3,343.0 $7,910.0 27.7
$6,800.0 $40.0 $6,840.0 41.2
$3,585.0 $29.0 $3,614.0 21.8
$2,541.0 $30.0 $2,571.0 14.9
$3,796.0 $26.0 $3,822.0 23.8
$12,296.0 $897.0 $13,193.0 73.5
$22,044.0 $229.0 $22,273.0 141.1
$55,629.0 $4,594.0 $60,223.0 344.0
$917.0 $180.0 $1,097.0 6.0
$10,092.0 $360.0 $10,452.0 94.1
$1,376.0 $180.0 $1,556.0 9.0
$1,376.0 $181.0 $1,557.0 9.0
$3,212.0 $2,100.0 $5,312.0 28.0
$11,926.0 $1,380.0 $13,306.0 74.0
$5,963.0 $1,080.0 $7,043.0 48.0
$11,009.0 $540.0 $11,549.0 90.0
$45,871.0 $6,001.0 $51,872.0 358.1
FY 2014 President's Budget
Pay($K) Non-Pay ($K) Total ($K) FTE
$7,743.0 $1,867.0 $9,610.0 48.0
$80,385.0 $18,669.0 $99,054.0 540.5
$47,646.0 $32,473.0 $80,119.0 311.1
$4,296.0 $5,243.0 $9,539.0 26.2
$22,010.0 $31,718.0 $53,728.0 165.7
$162,080.0 $89,970.0 $252,050.0 1,091.5
$7,335.0 $2,955.0 $10,290.0 47.2
$25,912.0 $13,266.0 $39,178.0 153.5
$61,243.0 $13,026.0 $74,269.0 362.1
$24,059.0 $63,083.0 $87,142.0 148.3
$2,646.0 $2,874.0 $5,520.0 18.7
$4,431.0 $1,957.0 $6,388.0 30.7
$2,928.0 $733.0 $3,661.0 16.6
$11,738.0 $30,493.0 $42,231.0 74.7
$332,238.0 $23,724.0 $355,962.0 2,374.8
$472,530.0 $152,111.0 $624,641.0 3,226.6
$2,731.0 $7,485.0 $10,216.0 15.6
$2,469.0 $934.0 $3,403.0 16.1
$4,347.0 $2,413.0 $6,760.0 28.7
$9,913.0 $61,883.0 $71,796.0 65.3
$12,960.0 $12,029.0 $24,989.0 84.5
$13,605.0 $16,893.0 $30,498.0 90.6
$22,727.0 $19,868.0 $42,595.0 172.6
$68,752.0 $121,505.0 $190,257.0 473.4
$5,275.0 $3,384.0 $8,659.0 29.9
$7,066.0 $40.0 $7,106.0 41.7
$3,524.0 $29.0 $3,553.0 20.8
$2,650.0 $30.0 $2,680.0 15.1
$3,965.0 $26.0 $3,991.0 23.1
$12,866.0 $996.0 $13,862.0 73.2
$24,060.0 $581.0 $24,641.0 141.5
$59,406.0 $5,086.0 $64,492.0 345.3
$965.0 $240.0 $1,205.0 6.0
$10,620.0 $480.0 $11,100.0 97.0
$1,448.0 $240.0 $1,688.0 9.0
$1,449.0 $240.0 $1,689.0 10.0
$3,379.0 $2,803.0 $6,182.0 28.8
$12,551.0 $1,842.0 $14,393.0 75.0
$6,275.0 $1,442.0 $7,717.0 48.0
$11,586.0 $721.0 $12,307.0 92.0
$48,273.0 $8,008.0 $56,281.0 365.8
1093
-------
NPM Major Office
OITA
ORD
OSWER
OW
Immediate Office
Off ice of Regional and Bilateral Affairs
Office of Global Affairs and Policy
Office of Management and International Services
American Indian Environmental Office
Regional Resources
TOTAL
ORD Headquarters
National Center for Environmental Research
National Exposure Research Laboratory
National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory
National Homeland Security Research Center
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Office of the Science Advisor
National Center for Computational Toxicology
National Center for Environmental Assessment
TOTAL
Immediate Office
Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Office
Innovation Partnership & Communication Office
Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation
Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery
Office of Underground Storage Tanks
Office of Brownfields and Land Revitalization
Office of Emergency Management
Regional Resources
TOTAL
Immediate Office
Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
Office of Science and Technology
Office of Wastewater Management
Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds
Regional Resources
TOTAL
Subtotal Agency Resources
Less Rescission of Prior Year Funds
Reimbursable FTE
Total Agency Resources
FY 2012 Enacted
Pay($K) Non-Pay ($K) Total ($K) FTE
$1,435.2 $90.8 $1,526.0 8.8
$3,733.9 $3,501.4 $7,235.3 26.6
$3,171.6 $332.9 $3,504.5 19.2
$2,089.8 $933.3 $3,023.1 14.9
$2,514.5 $1,437.6 $3,952.1 17.1
$10,113.0 $69,496.0 $79,609.0 81.7
$23,058.0 $75,792.0 $98,850.0 168.3
$42,378.0 $70,059.0 $112,437.0 320.1
$7,187.0 $89,132.0 $96,319.0 50.8
$49,909.0 $29,355.0 $79,264.0 373.5
$70,406.0 $45,114.0 $115,520.0 544.4
$6,979.0 $16,160.0 $23,139.0 48.1
$41,578.0 $32,082.0 $73,660.0 330.1
$3,584.0 $5,399.0 $8,983.0 23.1
$2,657.0 $9,701.0 $12,358.0 19.4
$27,355.0 $18,444.0 $45,799.0 194.8
$252,033.0 $315,446.0 $567,479.0 1,904.3
$8,993.0 $6,039.0 $15,032.0 58.4
$2,289.0 $962.0 $3,251.0 14.8
$1,215.0 $1,173.0 $2,388.0 9.1
$25,545.0 $86,624.0 $112,169.0 177.2
$26,079.0 $8,429.0 $34,508.0 175.4
$4,652.0 $4,001.0 $8,653.0 31.1
$2,683.0 $17,405.0 $20,088.0 20.4
$11,297.0 $36,957.0 $48,254.0 75.7
$264,699.0 $850,985.0 $1,115,684.0 2,002.3
$347,452.0 $1,012,575.0 $1,360,027.0 2,564.4
$9,512.0 $8,569.0 $18,081.0 64.8
$26,030.0 $45,544.0 $71,574.0 189.5
$19,134.0 $21,434.0 $40,568.0 130.9
$14,443.0 $12,430.0 $26,873.0 104.7
$18,221.0 $29,429.0 $47,650.0 125.3
$191,405.0 $3,349,317.0 $3,540,722.0 1,506.0
$278,745.0 $3,466,723.0 $3,745,468.0 2,121.2
$2,269,298.0 $6,230,087.0 $8,499,385.0 16,718.3
($50,000.0)
338.8
$2,269,298.0 $6,180,087.0 $8,449,385.0 17,057.1
FY 2014 President's Budget
Pay($K) Non-Pay ($K) Total ($K) FTE
$1,204.6 $125.0 $1,329.6 7.3
$3,872.1 $3,950.0 $7,822.1 24.0
$3,344.5 $600.0 $3,944.5 20.0
$2,201.4 $897.0 $3,098.4 15.4
$2,524.4 $2,250.0 $4,774.4 18.0
$10,892.0 $75,177.0 $86,069.0 81.5
$24,039.0 $82,999.0 $107,038.0 166.2
$46,591.0 $60,319.0 $106,910.0 326.6
$6,742.0 $68,880.0 $75,622.0 49.1
$53,438.0 $33,779.0 $87,217.0 374.6
$72,509.0 $45,625.0 $118,134.0 543.9
$7,433.0 $15,320.0 $22,753.0 49.0
$42,772.0 $33,454.0 $76,226.0 326.7
$3,220.0 $3,395.0 $6,615.0 22.4
$2,951.0 $9,635.0 $12,586.0 19.4
$28,728.0 $19,321.0 $48,049.0 195.5
$264,384.0 $289,728.0 $554,112.0 1,907.2
$9,650.0 $6,085.0 $15,735.0 59.0
$2,348.0 $902.0 $3,250.0 15.0
$1,365.0 $1,461.0 $2,826.0 9.2
$25,909.0 $75,163.0 $101,072.0 171.6
$27,237.0 $11,190.0 $38,427.0 175.2
$4,574.0 $2,699.0 $7,273.0 29.2
$2,929.0 $18,622.0 $21,551.0 20.4
$11,887.0 $33,115.0 $45,002.0 76.5
$276,623.0 $808,033.0 $1,084,656.0 2,002.4
$362,522.0 $957,270.0 $1,319,792.0 2,558.5
$10,466.0 $8,633.0 $19,099.0 68.6
$27,315.0 $35,068.0 $62,383.0 186.7
$19,752.0 $22,582.0 $42,334.0 131.0
$14,850.0 $12,532.0 $27,382.0 101.2
$19,872.0 $29,297.0 $49,169.0 125.1
$199,755.0 $2,887,987.0 $3,087,742.0 1,481.5
$292,010.0 $2,996,099.0 $3,288,109.0 2,094.1
$2,367,180.0 $5,785,820.0 $8,153,000.0 16,557.4
312.9
$2,367,180.0 $5,785,820.0 $8,153,000.0 16,870.3
1094
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Appendix B
Overview of Fiscal Year 2012 Performance for 1099
EPA's Annual Performance Report 1099
Introduction 1100
Performance Management in FY 2012 1101
EPA's FY 2012-2013 Agency Priority Goals 1102
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) 1103
EPA's Human Capital Strategy 1104
Program Evaluations 1104
Summary of FY 2012 Performance Results 1105
Selected FY 2012 Performance Results 1108
Strategic Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality 1109
Goal 1 Overview 1110
EPA Contributing Programs 1111
Strategic Objective 1: Address Climate Change 1112
FY 2012 PERFORMANCE ACCOMPLISHMENTS 1112
Reduce GHG Emissions from Cars and Trucks 1112
GHG Reductions in the Building Sector 1112
EPA's Climate Adaptation Plan 1114
Integration of Climate Adaptation into EPA Grants for the Great Lakes 1115
MARKAL 1115
FY 2012 Performance Challenges 1116
Addressing EPA's Emerging Role in Climate Change 1116
Strategic Objective 2: Improve Air Quality 1117
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments 1117
Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) Standard 1117
Ozone Reductions 1117
Mercury and Air Toxics Standards 1118
Childhood Asthma 1118
Low-Cost, Portable Sensors for Monitoring Air Pollution 1119
Fenceline Monitoring Technique 1119
1095
-------
Key Pollution Control Technology at Power Plants 1119
FY 2012 Performance Challenges 1120
Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) Program 1120
Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) Decision 1120
Strategic Objective 3: Restore the Ozone Layer 1121
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments 1121
FY 2012 Performance Challenges 1122
Strategic Objective 4: Reduce Unnecessary Exposure to Radiation 1123
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments 1123
Amber Waves Exercise and Emergency Response 1123
Standards for Uranium and Thorium Mill Tailings 1124
Draft Addendum on Relative Biological Effectiveness (RBE) 1124
FY 2012 Performance Challenges 1124
Maintaining a Skilled Workforce 1124
Strategic Goal 2: Protecting America's Waterss 1125
Goal 2 Overview 1126
EPA Contributing Programs 1127
Strategic Objective 1: Protect Human Health 1128
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments 1128
Percent of population receiving drinking water that meets all applicable health-based
drinking water standards 1129
FY 2012 Performance Challenges 1130
Strategic Objective 2: Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems 1133
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments 1133
Water Bodies Attaining Water Quality Standards 1135
Total TMDLs Established or Approved by EPA 1136
FY 2012 Performance Challenges 1138
Puget Sound Shellfish Bed Growing Areas Improved 1138
Strategic Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
1139
Goal 3 Overview 1140
EPA Contributing Programs 1142
Strategic Objective 1: Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities 1143
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments 1143
Brownfield Properties Assessed 1143
1096
-------
Brownfield Properties Cleaned Up 1144
Strategic Objective 2: Preserve Land 1145
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments 1145
Moving Toward a More Sustainable Future 1145
Hazardous Waste Facilities 1146
Reducing Confirmed Releases from Underground Storage Tank (UST) Facilities 1147
Strategic Objective 3: Restore Land 1148
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments 1148
Superfund sites andRCRA Corrective Action facilities where human exposures to toxins from
contaminated sites are under control 1149
Percent of all Facility Response Plans (FRPs) inspected facilities found to be noncompliant
brought into compliance 1151
FY 2012 Performance Challenges 1152
Number of LUST cleanups completed that meet risk-based standards for human exposure
and ground water migration 1152
Strategic Objective 4: Strengthen Human Health and Environmental Protection in Indian
Country 1153
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments 1153
EPA's Tribal Consultation Policy 1153
Tribal EcoAmbassadors Program 1154
Percent of Tribes Implementing Federal Regulatory Environmental Program 1154
Strategic Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Pollution Prevention 1156
Goal 4 Overview 1157
EPA Contributing Programs 1158
Strategic Objective 1: Ensure Chemical Safety 1159
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments 1159
Pesticide Registration Review 1159
Existing CBI Claims Reviewed 1160
Computational Toxicology 1161
Reducing Exposures to Polychlorinated Biphenyls in School Buildings 1161
FY 2012 Performance Challenges 1162
Lead Renovation, Repair, and Painting Rule Certified Firms 1162
Strategic Objective 2: Promote Pollution Prevention 1164
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments 1164
DfE Safer Chemicals 1164
1097
-------
FY 2012 Performance Challenges 1165
Greenhouse Gas Targets 1165
Strategic Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws 1166
GoalS Overview 1167
EPA Contributing Programs 1169
Strategic Objective 1: Enforce Environmental Laws 1170
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments 1170
Level of Effort Measures and Reducing, Treating, and Eliminating Pollutants 1170
Estimated Air, Water, and Toxic/Pesticide Pollutants Reduced 1171
National Enforcement Initiatives 1172
Injunctive Relief and Supplemental Environmental Projects from Enforcement Cases. 1173
Superfund Enforcement 1173
Criminal Enforcement 1174
FY 2012 Performance Challenges 1175
Electronic Reporting 1175
Enforcement Program Performance Measures 1175
Enabling and Support Programs 1176
Overview 1177
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments (Office of Environmental Information) 1177
Major Environmental Systems Using Central Data Exchange (CDX) 1177
Exchanging Data with CDX through Nodes in Real Time 1178
CDX Users 1178
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments (Office of the Inspector General) 1179
Recommendations or Risks Identified for Corrective Action 1181
Return on Investment 1182
Investigative Results 1183
Cross -Cutting Fundamental Strategies 1184
1098
-------
OVERVIEW OF FISCAL YEAR 2012 PERFORMANCE FOR
EPA's ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT
(Appendix B of EPA's FY2014 CongressionalJustificatiori)
1099
-------
OVERVIEW OF FY 2012 PERFORMANCE FOR EPA'S FY 2012 ANNUAL
PERFORMANCE REPORT
(Appendix B of EPA's FY 2014 Congressional Justification)
Introduction
EPA's FY 2012 Annual Performance Report (APR), which is integrated throughout EPA's FY
2014 Annual Performance Plan and the Congressional Justification, presents environmental and
program performance results achieved in FY 2012 under the goals established in the Agency's
FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan and against the performance measures and targets established in
the Agency's FY 2012 Annual Performance Plan and the CongressionalJustification.
EPA has incorporated FY 2012 performance results information throughout the FY 2014 Annual
Performance Plan and the CongressionalJustification, as described below:
• The Introduction and Overview section presents EPA's mission statement and
organizational structure.
• The Goal and Objective Overview section includes FY 2012 performance results where
helpful to support discussion of future directions.
• Appropriation Program/Project Fact Sheets include FY 2012 performance results and
trend data to provide context for budget decisions.
• The Program Performance and Assessment section presents a detailed, eight-year array of
performance data—displayed by strategic goal and objective—which provides results for
each measure established in the Agency's FY 2012 Annual Performance Plan and
includes explanations for missed or exceeded targets.
• The Overview of FY 2012 Performance is provided in this section.
This information on FY 2012 program performance results complies with the Government
Performance and Results Modernization Act of 2010 (GPRMA) and Office of Management and
Budget implementing guidance. In addition to the FY 2012 APR, presented throughout the FY
2014 Annual Performance Plan and the Congressional Justification, EPA has also issued an FY
2012 Agency Financial Report (APR), which includes FY 2012 performance highlights, and
created a new FY 2012 Highlights website. The FY 2012 Highlights website presents key
financial and performance information from both the APR and APR and links to additional
information.
1100
-------
Performance Management in FY 2012
To carry out its mission to protect human health and the environment, and to comply with the
GPRMA, EPA develops a five-year Strategic Plan, which establishes the Agency's long-term
strategic goals, supporting objectives, and measures of performance. To promote achievement of
the long-term goals, objectives, and measures, EPA commits to a suite of annual performance
measures and targets in its Annual Performance Plan and the Congressional Justification. EPA
reports its results against these annual budget performance measures/targets and discusses
progress toward the Strategic Plan'?, long-term objectives and strategic measures in its APR.
EPA's Performance Management System
Strategic Planning
FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan
Futures
Results Measurement, Reporting,
and Evaluation (Accountability)
• FY 2012 Annual Performance Report/Highlights
• FY 2012 Agency Financial Report
• Program Evaluation
• Cross-Cutting Fundamental Strategy Annual
Progress Reports
• Management Integrity and Audit Management
Annual Planning
and Budgeting
EPA Annual Plan and Budget
FY 2012-2013 Priority Goals
Cross-Cutting Fundamental Strategy
Annual Action Plans
Operations and Execution
• National Program Manager Guidance
• Regional Performance Commitments/
Annual Commitment System (ACS)
• Regional and State Performance
Partnership Agreements
EPA strives to communicate performance results as the basis for justifying the Agency's
resource requests. In February 2010, EPA began including its APR with its Annual Performance
Plan and the Congressional Justification to strengthen the link between performance and
resources. Over the past two years, EPA has further integrated performance results and trend
information into its Annual Performance Plan and the Congressional Justification, providing
additional context and support for the Agency's resource request.
1101
-------
EPA is committed to using performance information to manage its programs and inform
decision-making. During FY 2012, EPA's Deputy Administrator held quarterly meetings with
senior leadership to discuss progress on Agency priority goals, and at mid- and end-of-year to
examine key accomplishments and challenges for a broader set of annual performance measures
for each of the Agency's strategic goals. Similarly, Agency managers prepare and discuss action
plans for carrying out the cross-cutting fundamental strategies that shape how EPA carries out its
work. These meetings encourage transparency and discussion among national program managers
and EPA regional offices on program results and challenges, best practices, and adjustments to
our programs and strategies to ensure that we are making progress toward our long-term goals.
EPA's FY 2012-2013 Agency Priority Goals
EPA also reports progress on its five FY 2012-2013 Agency Priority Goals (listed in the box
below), which are a key component of the Administration's performance management
framework. EPA's Agency Priority Goals are specific, measurable, near-term (18- to 24-month)
targets, which align with the Agency's long-term and annual performance measures and
communicate the performance improvements the Agency will accomplish using its existing
legislative authority and resources. EPA's FY 2012-2013 Agency Priority Goals include
reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; improving water quality and drinking water;
cleaning up communities; and reducing burden and increasing transparency through electronic
reporting. In FY 2012, EPA also contributed to the achievement of the long-term Cross-Agency
Priority Goal focusing on reducing energy intensity. The Agency's FY 2012 results for its FY
2012-2013 Agency Priority Goals are highlighted in the goal-by-goal discussions that follow.
1102
-------
Taking Action on
Climate Change
and Improving
Air Quality
cv Priority Goal Statement
Reduce greenhouse gas emissions from cars and trucks. Through September 30,
2013, EPA, in coordination with Department of Transportation's fuel economy
standards program, will be implementing vehicle and truck GHG standards that are
projected to reduce GHG emissions by 1.2 billion metric tons and reduce oil
consumption by about 98 billion gallons over the lifetime of the affected vehicles
and trucks.
Protecting
America's
Waters
Improve public health protection for persons served by small drinking water
systems by strengthening the technical, managerial, and financial capacity of
those systems. By September 30, 2013, EPA will engage with 20 states to improve
small drinking water system capability through two EPA programs—the
Optimization Program and/or the Capacity Development Program.
Improve, restore, or maintain water quality by enhancing nonpoint source
program accountability, incentives, and effectiveness. By September 30, 2013,
50 percent of states will revise their nonpoint source program according to new
Section 319 grant guidelines that EPA will release in November 2012.
Cleaning up
Communities and
Advancing
Sustainable
Development
Clean up contaminated sites and make them ready for use. By September 30,
2013, an additional 22,100 sites will be ready for anticipated use.
Cross-Programs
Increase transparency and reduce burden through e-Reporting. By September
30, 2013, develop a plan to convert existing paper reports into electronic reporting,
establish electronic reporting in at least four key programs, and adopt a policy for
including electronic reporting in new rules.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA)
ARRA-funded projects have provided substantial environmental and economic benefits to
communities across the country and have created several thousand jobs. Since the end of FY
2009, EPA has tracked program performance for six key ARRA-funded environmental programs
that invest in clean water and drinking water projects, implement diesel emission reduction
technologies, clean up leaking underground storage tanks, revitalize and reuse brownfields, and
clean up Superfund sites. To date, these ARRA-funded programs have:
Completed construction at 1,336 clean water projects and 915 drinking water projects.
Retrofitted, replaced, or retired 27,700 diesel engines.
Made 963 acres of brownfields properties ready for reuse.
Completed cleanup at 2,449 leaking underground storage tanks.
Completed 32 remedial action projects, advancing the cleanup of 31 Superfund sites.
By the end of FY 2012, EPA met 73 percent (33 of 45) of the Agency's ARRA performance
measure targets. This includes achieving all planned results for the Diesel Emission Reduction
Act and Leaking Understand Storage Tanks programs. EPA published 48 success stories from
local communities across the country, available at www.epa.gov/recovery/plans.htmltfquarterly.
1103
-------
EPA's Human Capital Strategy
A component of EPA's FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan Cross-Cutting Fundamental Strategy 5,
"Strengthening EPA's Workforce and Capabilities," focuses on human capital priorities and
internal business processes. Under this cross-cutting fundamental strategy, the Agency seeks to
continuously improve its internal management, encourage innovation and creativity in all aspects
of its work, and ensure that EPA attracts and retains a topnotch, diverse workforce, positioned to
meet and address the environmental challenges of the 21st century. To achieve this goal, EPA
focused on six areas: 1) recruiting, developing, and retaining a diverse and creative workforce; 2)
cultivating a workplace that values a high quality work life; 3) practicing outstanding resource
stewardship; 4) enhancing communication; 5) integrating energy efficiency and environmental
considerations into our work practices; and 6) improving the effectiveness and efficiency of the
Agency's acquisition function.
During FY 2012, EPA advanced several key human capital priorities included in Cross-Cutting
Fundamental Strategy 5. For example, the Agency issued its new Diversity and Inclusion
Strategic Plan, along with distributing quarterly Diversity Dashboard reports, which provide
extensive demographic information on EPA's workforce. The Agency also reduced hiring time
by an average of 32 days and issued new tools to make developing recruitment packages easier,
faster, and more collaborative. More information on "Strengthening the EPA's Workforce and
Capacities" is described in the Cross-Cutting Fundamental Strategy section that follows.
Program Evaluations
Program evaluations help provide the evidence EPA needs to ensure that its programs are
meeting their intended outcomes and allow the Agency to support more effective and efficient
operations. By assessing how well a program is working and why, a program evaluation can help
EPA identify activities that have the greatest impact on protecting human health and the
environment, provide the road map needed to replicate successes, and identify areas needing
improvement. This is particularly important for informing Agency decisions on program
priorities and resource needs during these challenging fiscal times and for fostering transparency
and accountability. Summaries of program evaluations completed during FY 2012 are available
atwww.epa.gov/planandbudget/results.html.
1104
-------
Summary of FY 2012 Performance Results
Reliability of (he EPA's Performance Data
Data used to report performance results are reliable and as complete as possible. Because improvements in human
hculih and the environment may not become immediately apparent, there might be delays between the actions \\<.
have taken and results we can measure. Additionally, we cannot provide results data tor several of out
performance measures tor this reporting year When possible, however, \vc have portrayed trend daia to illustrate
progress over time. We also report final performance results for prior year-, that became available in I Y 2012.
Acting Administrator
Bob Pcrciasepc
Bob Perciasepe
Acting Administrator
Date-
In its FY 2012 Annual Performance Plan and the CongressionalJustification, EPA committed to
214 annual performance measures/targets. The performance measures targets and results are
listed in the Program Performance and Assessment section of the FY 2014 Congressional
Justification. As of February 1, 2013, data are available
for 163 of these annual budget performance EPA's FY 2012 Performance Results
measures/targets. (Total Measures = 214)
In FY 2012, the Agency met 129 of these performance
measures, 79 percent of the performance measures for
which data were available. Examples of EPA's FY 2012
progress toward its strategic goals and objectives
include:
• Proposed updates to the national air quality
standards for harmful fine particle pollution,
including soot. Findings from extensive scientific
studies suggest that fine particle pollution, known
as PM^s, causes negative health impacts at lower
levels than previously assumed. EPA's proposal
would strengthen the annual health standard for PM2.5 from the current annual standard of
1105
-------
15 micrograms per cubic meter to a level within a range of 12 to 13 micrograms per cubic
meter.
• Strengthened the technical, managerial, and financial capabilities of small drinking water
systems. EPA's performance in FY 2012 ensured that 94 percent of the population has
safe drinking water that meets all applicable health-based standards, an increase of
280,000 people from FY 2011.
• Reclaimed more than 2 million previously contaminated acres of land for ecological,
recreational, commercial, and residential purposes, and returned more than 11,500
previously contaminated sites to communities for reuse. In addition, the Agency worked
closely with other federal agencies and its state partners to make cleanup determinations
for more than 95 percent of the 514 federally owned sites that had not appeared to be
fully assessed.
• Advanced a new Sustainable Materials Management Program and partnered with 120
participants in the Food Recovery Challenge: collaborated with 240 federal facilities in
the Federal Green Challenge: and partnered with 10 national electronic manufacturers
and retailers in the Electronics Challenge Program.
• Along with authorized states, certified 126,323 firms under the Lead Renovation, Repair,
and Painting Rule, a program to protect children from risks associated with the lead-
based paint present in many American homes. As one indication of progress, in FY 2012,
the Centers for Disease Control's National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey
reported that the prevalence of elevated blood lead levels (>5|ig/dL) among children
under 6 years old has decreased from 4.1 percent from 2003-2006 to 2.6 percent from
2007-2010.
• With the Department of Justice and the U.S. Coast Guard, finalized a $90 million
settlement with MOEX Offshore 2007 LLC for alleged Clean Water Act violations
resulting from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. According to the settlement,
approximately $45 million will go directly to Mississippi, Texas, Florida, Louisiana, and
Alabama in the form of penalties or expedited environmental projects, including $20
million to facilitate land acquisition projects in several Gulf states.
• Through EPA's enforcement programs, reduced, treated, or eliminated the amount of
pollution introduced into the environment by 2.2 billion pounds and reduced, treated, or
eliminated 4.4 billion pounds of hazardous waste.
EPA significantly exceeded its targets for several of its FY 2012 performance measures. In some
cases, a new collaborative effort or a new approach to the performance measures allowed EPA to
accomplish more than it had planned. However, despite the Agency's best efforts, we missed 34
performance measures targets. There are a number of reasons for missed targets, including an
unexpected demand for resources or competing priorities; the effect of budget cuts on the
Agency's state, tribal, and local government partners; and other factors, such as impacts in
project plans due to weather, technological challenges, or population growth and land-use
patterns. In quarterly meetings on the Agency priority goals, and the broader mid-year and end-
1106
-------
of-year discussions, managers held frank, collaborative discussions to determine adjustments to
our programs and strategies, and measures of progress, as appropriate.
EPA reviews annual results in terms of long-term performance, and the Agency will carefully
consider its FY 2012 results and adjust its program strategies and approaches accordingly. This
section of the FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and the Congressional Justification highlight
key performance trends and challenges related to specific performance measures under each of
EPA's five programmatic goals and presents actions the Agency is taking in response. The eight-
year array included in the Program Performance and Assessment section of the Congressional
Justification provides more detailed explanations for missed and significantly exceeded targets
and describes the Agency's plans to meet these performance measures in the future.
Data Not Available
Because final end-of-year data for some measures were not available when this report went to
press, EPA is not able to report on 51 of its 2141 performance measures. These data lags are
often due to environmental results that may not become apparent within a fiscal year, and
assessing environmental improvements often requires multiyear information. In some cases,
additional time is needed to understand and assess factors such as exposure and the resulting
impact on human health.
In many cases, reporting cycles—including some that are legislatively mandated—do not
correspond with the federal fiscal year on which this report is based. Data reported biennially, for
example, are not available for this report but will be available in the Agency's FY 2013 and FY
2014 Annual Performance Reports.
In addition, extensive quality assurance/quality control processes to ensure the reliability of
performance data can also delay reporting. EPA relies heavily on performance data obtained
from state, tribal and local agencies, all of which require time to collect and review for quality. If
EPA is unable to obtain complete end-of-year information from all sources in time for this
report, additional FY 2012 results will be available in the FY 2015 Annual Performance Plan and
the Program Performance and Assessment section of Congressional Justification., to be published
in February 2014.
Data Now Available
EPA is currently able to report data from FY 2011 that became available in FY 2012. EPA
reports these prior year results in the Program Performance and Assessment section in the FY
2014 Congressional Justification. In summary, final performance results became available for 43
of the 60 FY 2011 performance measures (out of a total 238 FY 2011 performance measures) for
which data were unavailable at the end of FY 2011. Of these 43 performance measures, EPA met
33 annual performance targets and did not meet 10 of its annual performance targets. The
Agency is still collecting data for 17 FY 2011 performance measures2.
1 This total includes two performance measures for which the Agency will not collect data.
2 As of February 1, 2013, EPA is still collecting data for 17 measures. A breakdown by Strategic Goal includes Goal 1: two
performance measures; Goal 2: six performance measures (one for which the Agency will not collect data); Goal 3: three
1107
-------
Selected FY 2012 Performance Results
The following pages highlight a few selected FY 2012 regional accomplishments and provide
performance results and information on the Agency's progress toward achieving the five
strategic goals and implementing the five cross-cutting fundamental strategies established in its
FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan.
For each of EPA's five strategic goals, this section provides a brief overview; lists key programs
or offices that contribute to the goal; and, for each objective supporting the goal, discusses
results achieved for Agency Priority Goals and analyzes selected performance measures that
show the Agency's highest priorities and represent key initiatives or activities toward achieving
the long-term strategic goal.
For each of EPA's five cross-cutting fundamental strategies, this section summarizes significant
FY 2012 activities and presents bulleted highlights and challenges.
performance measures (one for which the Agency will not collect data, as the measure is discontinued); Goal 4: one performance
measure; the Office of Research and Development: five performance measures (all for which the Agency will not collect data).
1108
-------
Strategic Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
GOAL 1 AT A GLANCE
TAKING ACTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
Reduce greenhouse gas emissions and develop adaptation strategies to address climate
change, and protect and improve air quality.
FY 2012 Performance Measures
Met = 9 Not Met = 1 Data Unavailable = 24 (Total Measures = 34)
How Funds Were Used: Net Program Costs
(Dollars in Thousands)
Taking Action on
Climate Change and
Improving Air Quality
$1,212,245.9
Enforcing 11.12%
Environmental Laws
$822,028.2
7.54%
Ensuring the Safety
of Chemicals and
Preventing Pollution
$778,1 17.5
7.14%
Cleaning Up
Communities and
Advancing Sustainable
Development
Source: FY 2012 Statement of Net Cost by Goal
W
3,564.2
Goal I Performance Measures
(FY20I2)
Objective 2
Objective 3
Objective 4
Goal I Performance Measures
(FY20II)
Objective 2
Objective 3
Objective 4
Goal 1 FY 2012 Performance and Resources
Strategic Objective
FY2012
Obligations
(in thousands)
%of
Goal 1
Funds
Objective 1.1: Address Climate Change. Reduce the threats posed by climate change by
reducing greenhouse gas emissions and taking actions that help communities and eco-
systems become more resilient to the effects of climate change.
$207,749.8
17%
Objective 1.2: Improve Air Quality. Achieve and maintain health-based air pollution stan-
dards and reduce risk from toxic air pollutants and indoor air contaminants.
$933,709.0
77%
Objective 1.3: Restore the Ozone Layer. Restore the earth's stratospheric ozone layer and
protect the public from the harmful effects of ultraviolet radiation.
$25,310.0
2%
Objective 1.4: Reduce Unnecessary Exposure to Radiation. Minimize unnecessary releases
of radiation and be prepared to minimize impacts should unwanted releases occur.
$45,477.1
4%
Goal 1 Total
$1,212,245.9
100%
Due to rounding, some numbers might add up to slightly less or more than 100%.
1109
-------
GOAL 1 OVERVIEW
EPA manages a number of programs related to climate change, indoor and outdoor air quality,
stratospheric ozone, and radiation, each of which plays a vital role in protecting human health
and the environment. Under these programs, the Agency and its partners have made substantial
progress in improving air quality, and they continue to take steps to reduce GHG emissions.
Much work remains, however.
Over the last 21 years, total emissions of the six criteria air pollutants have decreased by more
than 51 percent, while the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has increased by more than 66
percent. This trend demonstrates that improvements in the environment can occur in tandem with
economic growth. As an example of further progress, this year EPA proposed to strengthen the
nation's air quality standards for fine particle pollution to improve public health and visibility.
This will add to significant pollution reductions that have already occurred. The most recent data
(2011) show a 26-percent reduction in population-weighted ambient concentrations of fine
particle emissions in monitored counties across the nation since 2003. Despite the Clean Air
Act's progress, EPA estimates that levels of air pollution are still responsible for a national
public health burden of more than 130,000 premature deaths and 180,000 nonfatal heart attacks
each year.
The Agency and its partners continue to face challenges in addressing climate change. EPA
maintains both voluntary and regulatory programs to reduce GHGs. For example, through the
Agency Priority Goals, EPA, in partnership with the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA), finalized groundbreaking standards that will increase fuel economy
and reduce GHGs from cars and trucks by half by 2025. Meanwhile, voluntary programs have
made progress in raising awareness of climate change and in reducing energy consumption,
which in turn has helped curb some emissions of GHGs. The climate continues to warm,
however, posing serious concerns for public health and the environment. To this end, the Agency
must adapt its programs to warmer temperatures, rising sea levels, and changing weather
patterns. One example of progress in this area is the Agency integrating adaptation into grants for
the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative.
To further its objectives under Goal 1, EPA committed to 34 performance measures for FY 2012.
The Agency met or exceeded 90 percent and did not meet 10 percent of the measures for which
data were available at the time of publication. The Agency collects the majority of air and
climate data on a calendar year basis, which has a yearlong data lag. Consequently, data are not
yet available for 24 measures. This data will be available in December 2013, and the Agency will
report its results in the FY 2013 APR.
In FY 2011, EPA committed to 30 performance measures to further its objectives. The Agency
met or exceeded 89 percent and did not meet 11 percent of the measures for which data were
available. Data is not yet available for two of the FY 2011 measures.
The full suite of EPA's FY 2012 performance measures, including targets, results, and detailed
explanations for variances in targets and results, is available in the FY 2014 Annual Performance
Plan and the Program Performance and Assessment section of the CongressionalJustification.
1110
-------
EPA CONTRIBUTING PROGRAMS
Acid Rain Program
AirNow
Air Toxics
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs
Clean Air Research
Indoor Air Quality and Radon Programs
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
Development and Implementation
Mobile Sources
New Source Performance Standards
New Source Review
Regional Haze
Stratospheric Ozone Layer Protection
Program
Radiation Programs
Voluntary Climate Programs
1111
-------
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 1: ADDRESS CLIMATE CHANGE
Reduce the threats posed by climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and taking
actions that help communities and ecosystems become more resilient to the effects of climate
change.
EPA implements both voluntary and regulatory programs to reduce GHGs that contribute to the
warming of the planet's climate. Businesses and other organizations have collaborated with EPA
through voluntary climate protection programs to pursue common sense approaches to reducing
GHGs. To complement its voluntary programs, EPA has pursued regulatory action to curb
emissions from mobile and stationary sources.
FY 2012 PERFORMANCE ACCOMPLISHMENTS
EPA established the following FY 2012-2013 Agency Priority Goal to advance its FY 2011-
2015 Strategic Plan objective to address climate change and reduce greenhouse emissions:
REDUCE GHG EMISSIONS FROM CARS AND TRUCKS
EPA, in partnership with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
finalized groundbreaking standards that will increase fuel economy to the equivalent of 54.5 mpg
for cars and light-duty trucks by model year 2025. When combined with previous standards
covering model years 2012-2016, this action will nearly double the fuel efficiency of those
vehicles compared to new vehicles presently on the road. Achieving the new fuel-efficiency
standards will encourage innovation and investment in advanced technologies that increase our
economic competitiveness and support high-quality domestic jobs in the auto industry. EPA and
NHTSA developed the final standards following engagement with automakers, the United Auto
Workers, consumer groups, environmental and energy experts, states, and the public. The
standards also represent historic progress in reducing carbon pollution and addressing climate
change. Combined, these standards will cut GHGs from cars and light trucks in half by 2025 (6
billion metric tons over the life of the program), more than the total amount of carbon dioxide
emitted by the United States in 2010.
At the end of 2012, EPA had issued slightly more than 425 light-duty certificates for model year
2013 vehicles. Additionally, the Agency spot-checked 35 manufacturer pre-production
certification vehicles (primarily model year 2013) to confirm their GHG emission values and
conducted surveillance tests of 13 production vehicles at test tracks to determine the accuracy of
the manufacturers' road load calculations.
GHG Reductions in the Building Sector
The ENERGY STAR program rolled out new and significantly more rigorous requirements for
homes to earn the ENERGY STAR label, which represents a substantial change for the
ENERGY STAR Certified Homes program. These new home specifications represent a
multiyear development process that redefined nearly every aspect of the program, which had
1112
-------
already labeled more than 1.3 million homes and achieved a 26-percent national market share in
2011.
EPA continued to implement more than 20 climate change programs that work with the private
sector to reduce GHGs and facilitate energy-efficiency improvements. Both the buildings and
industry sectors have performance measures to track the amount of GHGs that are reduced
because of the program's efforts.
Performance Measure: Million metric tons of carbon
equivalent (MMTCO2e) of greenhouse gas reductions in the
buildings sector.
0)
CM
o
200
150
100
50
0
2007-2014 Performance Trends
189.0
140.8 143.4
132.4 . i-
196.2
182.6
I. I I
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
EPA exceeded its 2011 target by helping the business and industry sectors avoid 549.7
MMTCO2e. The Agency met part of this goal through the more than 130,000 ENERGY STAR
certified new homes—representing 26 percent of new home starts. Nearly 16,500 commercial
buildings earned the ENERGY STAR label in 2011, with the energy use of close to 40 percent of
commercial building square footage benchmarked using EPA's Portfolio Manager Tool. The
ENERGY STAR label is placed on more than 40,000 product models, with about 280 million
ENERGY STAR products sold in 2011 alone.
1113
-------
GHG Reductions in the Transportation Sector
Performance Measure: Million metric tons of carbon
equivalent (MMTCO2e) of greenhouse gas reductions in the
transportation sector.
2007-2014 Performance Trends
40
35
30
<§ 25
H 20
1 5
10
5
0
37.0
33.0
28.0 m
23.6
•
16.5
I
- • I II
JS
'5
TO
Q
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
In 2011, EPA began its multiyear effort to enhance, automate, and improve the efficiency of data
management and partner service processes for the SmartWay program. In 2012, EPA made
improvements to its truck carrier and shipper tools to improve ease of use. The Agency also
undertook a project to gather information on data quality management practices at partner
companies and is developing guidance on data quality management best practices for partners.
As of FY 2011, SmartWay had reduced CO2 emissions by 23.6 million metric tons. Data on
SmartWay's emission reductions for FY 2012 will be available in December 2013.
GHG Reporting Program
EPA made the first year of GHG Reporting Program data available to the public through its
interactive Data Publication Tool. The tool provides transparency to the public and
policymakers, with information on facilities emitting GHGs and ways to develop smart policies
to combat the impacts of climate change. EPA will continue to update the tool and release
additional data with each reporting year.
EPA's Climate Adaptation Plan
EPA completed the first-ever Agencywide Climate Change Adaptation Plan. Developing the
plan helps ensure that the Agency can continue to fulfill its mission as the climate changes. As
stated in the EPA "Policy Statement on Climate Change Adaptation," signed by Administrator
Lisa P. Jackson in June 2011, climate change can pose significant challenges to EPA in its ability
to fulfill its mission. The Agency must therefore adapt to climate change if it is to continue
1114
-------
fulfilling its statutory, regulatory, and programmatic requirements. The plan provides a roadmap
(including priority actions) for how the Agency will anticipate and plan for future changes in the
climate and incorporate considerations of climate change into its programs, policies, rules, and
operations to ensure that they are effective under
future climatic conditions.
Integration of Climate Adaptation into EPA
Grants for the Great Lakes
EPA has a goal of integrating considerations of
climate change impacts and adaptive measures into
major grant, loan, contract, and technical
assistance programs, consistent with existing
authorities. To support this effort, EPA issued
guidance to all EPA offices for incorporating
climate adaptation criteria into announcements of
competitive funding opportunities for assistance
agreements. The guidance is in the implementation
stage. One major example is the solicitation issued
for applications as part of the Great Lakes
Restoration Initiative (GLRI). One category of
applications on which the Request for Application
solicitation focused was "increasing climate
change resiliency in Great Lakes Communities."
MARKAL
PARTNERING FOR OZONE
MITIGATION IN UTAH
EPA collaborated with the Federal
Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
in Utah's Uintah Basin to implement
mitigation measures that ensure that
federal oil and gas projects do not
cause or contribute to exceedances of
the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards for ozone—a contributor to
smog. This partnership allowed BLM
to announce two agreements that add
nearly 5,000 new wells to the Uintah
Basin as part of Anadarko's Greater
Natural Buttes project and Gascos
Uinta Basin Natural Gas Development
project. These agreements
demonstrate the positive relationship
between the economy and
environmental protection. More
information is available at
www .blm. gov/ut/st/en/info/newsroom
/2012/april/blm releases greater.html
The MARKet ALlocation (MARKAL) model is a data-driven, energy system optimization
model used in more than 40 countries. EPA developed a unique database for use in the
MARKAL model. This database represents the major sectors in the U.S. energy system,
including commercial, industrial, residential, transportation, and electricity generation. The
database also includes emissions associated with various sources of energy. In 2012, EPA made
several enhancements to the MARKAL database, including a system-wide update in conjunction
with the release of the Department of Energy's Annual Energy Outlook (AEO), which is the
major data source for the database. In addition, the electric sector component now includes data
on coal-fired plant retirement as well as updated regional Renewable Portfolio Standards. These
MARKAL updates will help EPA and local and state governments to understand the emission
projections associated with different scenarios. Additionally, the revisions to MARKAL will
help EPA and local and state governments respond better to National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS).
1115
-------
FY 2012 Performance Challenges
Addressing EPA's Emerging Role in Climate Change
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) notes that, while climate change poses
management challenges for the federal government at large, particular challenges relate to EPA's
ongoing efforts to reduce GHGs, coordinate activities with other agencies, and manage data on
GHG emissions. Recognizing that climate change cuts across many programs within the Agency,
senior leadership has taken steps to expand and improve communication and coordination on
emerging climate change issues. Specific program offices working on climate change have
established coordination mechanisms such as daily planning calls, regular meetings with senior
leadership, and extensive outreach across regional offices.
1116
-------
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 2: IMPROVE AIR QUALITY
Achieve and maintain health-based air pollution standards and reduce risk from
toxic air pollutants and indoor air contaminants.
EPA's key clean air programs, including those addressing indoor air and outdoor air (six
common criteria pollutants, acid rain, and air toxics) focus on some of the highest health and
environmental risks faced by the country. EPA estimates that federal, state, local, and tribal
outdoor air quality programs established under the Clean Air Act are responsible every year for
preventing many thousands of premature mortalities, millions of incidences of chronic and acute
illness, tens of thousands of hospitalizations and emergency room visits, and millions of lost
work and schools days. EPA helps reduce risks of indoor air pollutions by characterizing the
risks to human health, developing techniques for reducing those risks, and educating the public
and key sectors about actions they can take to reduce risks from indoor air.
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments
Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.s) Standard
On June 14, 2012, EPA proposed to strengthen the nation's air quality standards for fine particle
pollution to improve public health and visibility. Exposure to particle pollution causes premature
death and is linked to a variety of significant health problems. Particle pollution also harms
public welfare, including causing haze in cities and some of our nation's most treasured national
parks. EPA has issued a number of rules that will help states meet the proposed revised standards
by making significant strides toward reducing fine particle pollution.
Ozone Reductions
The ozone measure reflects improvement (reductions) in ambient ozone concentrations across all
monitored counties, weighted by the populations in those areas. To calculate the weighting,
pollutant concentrations in monitored counties are multiplied by the associated county
populations.
Performance Measure: Cumulative percentage reduction in
population-weighted ambient concentration of ozone in
monitored counties from 2003 baseline.
2007-2014 Performance Trends
c
g
'•*-•
o
•o
0)
EC
-t->
C
tu
I
Q)
D-
20 r
15
10
15
16
13
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12* FY13 FY14
•Data available 12/2013
1117
-------
The ozone reduction reflects the increasing implementation efforts of state and local
governments. Additional analysis is not possible until reporting is complete in late 2013.
Mercury and Air Toxics Standards
EPA issued the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards, the first national standards to protect people
from power plant emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollution like arsenic, acid gas, nickel,
selenium, and cyanide. The standards will slash emissions of these dangerous pollutants by
relying on widely available, proven pollution controls that are already in use at more than half
the nation's coal-fired power plants. EPA estimates that the new safeguards will also result in
PM reductions that prevent as many as 11,000 premature deaths and 4,700 heart attacks a year.
The standards will also help America's children grow up healthier, as they are expected to
prevent 130,000 cases of childhood asthma symptoms and about 6,300 fewer cases of acute
bronchitis among children each year.
Childhood Asthma
EPA co-led the development and launch of the Coordinated Federal Action Plan to Reduce
Racial and Ethnic Asthma Disparities. This plan presents a roadmap for four key issue areas:
reducing barriers to the implementation of guidelines-based asthma management; enhancing
capacity to deliver integrated, comprehensive asthma care of children in communities with racial
and ethnic asthma disparities; improving our capacity to identify the children most impacted by
asthma disparities; and accelerating efforts to identify and test interventions that may prevent the
onset of asthma among ethnic and racial minority children. Programs, resources, and expertise
from across EPA are contributing to the implementation of this plan by increasing public action
to reduce asthma triggers and are equipping community-based programs to implement
sustainable interventions that reduce environmental exposures. As demonstrated in the graphic
below, EPA tracks the number of medical professionals (e.g., doctors, nurses, physicians'
assistants) trained on managing asthma triggers (e.g., tobacco smoke, allergens).
Performance Measure: Additional health care professionals
trained annually on the environmental management of
asthma triggers.
6,000
gj 5,000
t= 4.000
en
c 3.OOO
g
« 2,000
£ 1,000
O
2007-201 4 Performance Trends
CNi
FY07
FY08
FY09
FY1O
FY1 1
FY12
FY13 FY14
Additional tnformation:~[\-\e baseline in 2OO3 is 2,36Otrained health care professionals. Asthma is a serious, life-threatening
respiratory disease that affects millions of Americans. In response to the growing asthma problem, EPA created a national,
multifaceted asthma education and outreach program to share information about environmental factors that trigger asthma.
1118
-------
Low-Cost, Portable Sensors for Monitoring Air Pollution
EPA launched the Next Generation Air Monitoring (NGAM) webinar and workshop series to
catalyze a revolution in air pollution measurement. Specifically, these workshops are enabling
rapid advances in air pollution sensors, communications, data integration, and geospatial
modeling strategies. This effort examines the spectrum of applications, from industrial fencelines
to personal air monitoring. The goal of the collaborative NGAM meeting series is to inform and
stimulate concepts in low-cost, highly portable sensors for use by citizens, community groups,
schools, researchers, government agencies, and industries interested in issues such as science
education, air pollution exposure, and improved industrial work practices.
Fenceline Monitoring Technique
EPA completed a yearlong demonstration study of fenceline monitoring techniques at a refinery
to collect emissions data. EPA scientists used this study, in combination with additional available
information on passive samplers, analyses of meteorological conditions, coupled emissions
estimates, and risk levels at other U.S. refineries to demonstrate how the technology could
collect emissions information as a basis for rulemaking. EPA expects that the fenceline
monitoring approach can result in a more flexible compliance framework and potentially provide
cost savings for refineries. Specifically, fenceline monitoring can serve as an alternative to
individual standards for a number of ground-level emission points and allows each individual
facility to determine what ground-level sources to control in order to stay in compliance in a
more cost-effective manner. By eliminating the individual standards, industry will incur lower
compliance and reporting costs. Furthermore, the fenceline standard allows each individual
facility to identify leaks and understand other ground-level emissions so that they can more
effectively maintain compliance.
Key Pollution Control Technology at Power Plants
Dry sorbent injection (DSI) is a pollution control technology that may help the electric power
sector comply with the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS). EPA finalized the MATS
rule in December 2011. The rule requires that all U.S. coal- and oil-fired power plants greater
than 25 megawatts meet emission limits consistent with the average performance of the top 12
percent of existing units—known as the maximum achievable control technology (MACT).
These MACT standards allow for a number of flexibilities that facilities can use in meeting the
emission standards. The MACT standards were based on EPA science that tested the
effectiveness of "dry sorbent injection" in removing acidic gases (e.g., sulfur oxides, hydrogen
chloride, hydrogen fluoride) during electricity generation. DSI is less expensive than traditional
scrubbers. The process involves injecting a powdered alkaline substance (such as the mineral
trona) into the exhaust gas that exits a power plant, where it reacts with hydrogen chloride. A
filter then removes particulate compound, reducing the hydrogen chloride and other acidic
emissions associated with electricity generation. The results of EPA's DSI tests were
corroborated with other available data and provided confidence for the economic analysis used in
1119
-------
developing the utility MACT rule. As industry moves toward implementing this rule, several
orders of the DSI equipment will have been used to meet the acidic gas limit.
FY 2012 Performance Challenges
Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) fragrant
Congress established the RFS program to reduce the nation's reliance on imported petroleum by
requiring that transportation fuel sold in the United States contain a minimum volume of
renewable fuel. The use of invalid Renewable Identification Numbers (RINs) would undermine
the volume requirements established by Congress, which is why EPA is working together to
address issues regarding fraudulent RINs. By enforcing the RFS, EPA is curtailing fraud and
abuse, maintaining a level playing field, and protecting legitimate renewable fuel producers and
an important program that benefits all Americans.
EPA is committed to improving certainty and reducing fraud in the RFS program and has taken
steps to further that goal over the past year. Throughout 2012, EPA has met with industry
stakeholders to discuss various approaches to reducing the likelihood of RIN fraud and
stabilizing the marketplace. One outgrowth of the ongoing dialogue is that a number of
independent private companies have started to provide RIN verification services to market
participants. EPA is continuing its dialogue with representatives from the affected and interested
industry sectors to discuss options currently under consideration, including, but not limited to,
the concepts of a good faith purchaser affirmative defense and a third-party RIN quality
assurance process. In addition, EPA has provided a significant amount of data in the Federal
Register on the life cycle of GHGs of new feedstocks, such as palm oil, camelina, energy
grasses, and grain sorghum, and has solicited public comment on these analyses.
Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) Decision
On August 21, 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit vacated CSAPR and ordered
EPA to continue administering the Clean Air Interstate Rule (temporarily), pending the
promulgation of a valid replacement. The court stated it "expect(s) that EPA will proceed
expeditiously on remand." In light of the U.S. Court of Appeal's decision to vacate CSAPR,
EPA is exploring how to reduce SO2 and NOX pollutants that cross state lines and significantly
contribute to nonattainment or maintenance of health-based NAAQS in downwind states. This
rule is the Agency's most recent proposal to address the problem that has vexed the air pollution
control system for three decades.
1120
-------
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 3: RESTORE THE OZONE LAYER
Restore the Earth's stratospheric ozone layer and protect the public from the
harmful effects of ultraviolet (UV) radiation.
EPA's Stratospheric Ozone Protection Program implements the provisions of the Clean Air Act
and the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal Protocol), and
contributes to the reduction and control of ozone-depleting substances (ODSs) in the United
States.
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments
In FY 2012, the program ensured compliance with the Montreal Protocol by restricting U.S.
consumption of hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) through interim final rulemakings, no action
assurances, and other means. In addition to restricting quantities of ODSs to protect the ozone
layer, the program, through several key rulemakings under the Significant New Alternatives
Policy (SNAP) Program, expanded the menu of acceptable, environmentally safer alternatives
that consumers and businesses could choose. These rulemakings allowed low-global-warming
alternatives into new areas, such as consumer household appliances and cooling cases for small
businesses.
Performance Measure: Remaining U.S. consumption of
hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), chemicals that deplete the
Earth's protective ozone layer, measured in tons of ozone
depleting potential (OOP).
10,000
8,000
,0 6,000
Q_
§ 4,000
2,000
0
2007-2014 Performance Trends
°j
<
CO
a
M 1
rr s. r-
03
Q
8
r~
oi
v
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
As a party to the Montreal Protocol, the United States must incrementally decrease HCFC
consumption and production, culminating in a complete HCFC phase out in 2030. The major
1121
-------
milestones for the United States and other developed countries are a reduction in 2010 to at least
75 percent below baseline HCFC levels and a reduction in 2015 to at least 90 percent below the
2009 baseline of 9,990 tons per year.
FY 2012 Performance Challenges
EPA must ensure that ODS production and import caps under the Montreal Protocol are met by
continuing to implement the domestic rulemaking agenda for reduction and control of ODS. As
the amount produced continues decline, the demands for flexibility and specific, tailored
solutions to key problems grow. For example, EPA manages ongoing exemption programs to
allow high social value, low-quantity continued production of ODSs in areas of critical need
(e.g., in developing annual, critical-use nominations for methyl bromide, and associated annual
rulemakings to effectuate the exemption).
1122
-------
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 4: REDUCE UNNECESSARY EXPOSURE TO RADIATION
Minimize unnecessary releases of radiation and be prepared to minimize impacts
should unwanted releases occur.
EPA works with local, national, and international stakeholders to develop and use voluntary and
regulatory programs, public information, and training to reduce public exposure to radiation.
EPA conducts radiation risk assessments, including updating its scientific methodology,
modeling, and technical tools for generating radionuclide-specific cancer risk coefficients to
address sensitive population groups. Risk managers across the country use this information to
assess health risks from radiation exposure and determine appropriate levels for cleanup of
radioactively contaminated sites.
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments
Amber Waves Exercise and Emergency Response
Amber Waves was a national-level emergency response exercise designed to evaluate
interagency performance and collaboration among federal, state, and local organizations during a
radiological dispersal device incident. More than 20 EPA staff participated in the exercise,
including the Agency's Radiological Emergency Response Team (RERT). In all, the exercise
involved 10 federal agencies along with 23 state and local organizations from Missouri, Iowa,
and Kansas. These training exercises help ensure that EPA and state and local staffs develop the
necessary skills to respond to a radiological emergency. Members of EPA's RERT and
representatives from EPA's radiation laboratories and the regions routinely develop, conduct,
and participate in radiological emergency planning and training activities. EPA's participation in
the 2012 Amber Waves Exercise will directly support this measure and the Agency's emergency
response mission.
Performance Measure: Level of readiness of radiation program
personnel and assets to support federal radiological
emergency response and recovery operations.
100
80
60
40
20
0
T3
03
0>
CC
83
2007-2014 Performance Trends
m
87 _
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11
1123
FY12 FY13
FY14
-------
Standards for Uranium and Thorium Mill Tailings
Staff prepared a response to the Science Advisory Board review on ground-water-related issues
for in-situ leach operations and completed the Options Selection process for the regulation
update proposal. In addition, staff drafted a number of technical support documents for this
action, including the risk assessment, the background information document, and the economic
impact analysis.
Draft Addendum on Relative Biological Effectiveness (RBE)
The Agency completed a draft addendum to EPA 's Radiogenic Cancer Risk Models and
Projections for the U.S. Population (the Blue Book) with the technical support of Oak Ridge
National Laboratory (ORNL). The RBE addendum addresses the higher risk-per-unit dose
associated with low-energy photons and electrons. This information will factor into the
upcoming revision of EPA's radiogenic cancer risk coefficients.
FY 2012 Performance Challenges
Maintaining a Skilled Workforce
Maintaining programmatic, scientific, technical, and policy expertise in the radiation field is a
major challenge for the Agency. Unlike many other science, technology, and mathematics fields
that are growing, health physics is a unique expertise that previously was associated with the
Atomic Age in the 1940s. Today's radiation protection, nuclear power, and radiobiology fields
are suffering as that workforce ages. Targeted recruiting and special programs to retain entry and
mid-level staff in this area must be a top priority for EPA. Experts from engineering, medical,
and industrial hygiene fields need the right professional development and educational
opportunities to become tomorrow's radiation protection professionals.
1124
-------
Strategic Goal 2: Protecting America's Waterss
GOAL 2 AT A GLANCE
PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
Protect and restore our waters to ensure that drinking water is safe, and that aquatic ecosystems
sustain fish, plants and wildlife, and economic, recreational, and subsistence activities.
FY 2012 Performance Measures
Met = 53 Not Met = 9 Data Unavailable = 10 (Total Measures = 72)
How Funds Were Used: Net Program Costs
(Dollars in Thousands)
Taking Action on
Climate Change and
improving Air Quality
$1,212.245.9
Enforcing I 1.12%
Environmental Laws
$822,028.2
7.54% A
Ensuring the Safety
of Chemicals and
Preventing Pollution
$778.117.5
7.14%
Cleaning Up
Communities and
Advancing Sustainable
Development
Source: FY 2012 Statement of Net Cost by Goal
Goal 2 Performance Measures
50
Objective I
Objective 2
* This total includes 2 performance measures under Objective 2 for
which the Agency will not collect data.
Goal 2 FY 2012 Performance and Resources
Strategic Objective
FY2012
Obligations
(in thousands)
%of
Goal 2
Funds
Objective 2.1: Protect Human Health. Reduce human exposure to contaminants in
drinking water, fish and shellfish, and recreational waters, including protecting source
waters.
$1,816,437.2
33%
Objective 2.2: Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems. Protect the quality
of rivers, lakes, streams, and wetlands on a watershed basis, and protect urban, coastal,
and ocean waters.
$3,742,127.0
67%
Goal 2 Total
$5,558,564.2
100%
Due to rounding, some numbers might add up to slightly less or more than 100%.
1125
-------
GOAL 2 OVERVIEW
While the agency has made much progress since passing the Clean Water Act in 1972,
America's waters remain imperiled. Increased demands, land-use practices, population growth,
aging infrastructure, and climate variability continue to pose challenges to our nation's water
resources. The latest national assessments3 confirm that America's waters are stressed by
nutrient pollution, excess sedimentation, and degradation of shoreline vegetation, all of which
affect more than 50 percent of our lakes and streams. The rate at which new waters are listed for
water quality impairments exceeds the pace at which restored waters are removed from the list.
For many years, nonpoint source pollution—principally nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediments—
has been recognized as the largest remaining impediment to improving water quality.
In this section, EPA discusses accomplishments in and challenges to addressing water quality
issues—strengthening and improving drinking water standards, maintaining safe water quality in
Indian Country, restoring impaired water bodies, developing Total Maximum Daily Loads
(TMDLs) to reduce pollutants, and protecting wetlands and National Estuary Program habitat
acres. While EPA is making progress toward clean and safe water, it continues to face
challenges, such as improving drinking water systems in Indian Country and meeting water
quality standards in systems increasingly stressed by aging infrastructure.
To further its objectives under Goal 2, EPA committed to 72 performance measures for FY 2012.
The Agency met or exceeded 85 percent and did not meet 15 percent of the measures for which
data were available for this report. Data were not yet available for 10 measures under Goal 2.4
The full suite of EPA's FY 2012 Goal 2 measures, including targets, results, and detailed
explanations for variances in targets and results, is available in the FY 2014 Annual Performance
Plan and the Program Performance and Assessment section of the CongressionalJustification.
In FY 2012, Goal 2 established two Agency Priority Goals:
1) Improve public health protection for persons served by small drinking water systems by
strengthening the technical, managerial, and financial capacity of those systems. By
September 30, 2013, EPA will engage with 20 states to improve small drinking water
system capability through two EPA programs, the Optimization Program and/or the
Capacity Development Program.
2) Improve, restore, or maintain water quality by enhancing nonpoint source program
accountability, incentives, and effectiveness. By September 30, 2013, 50 percent of the
states will revise their nonpoint source program according to new Section 319 grant
guidelines that EPA will release in November 2012.
3U.S. EPA, 2006. Wadeable Streams Assessment: A Collaborative Survey ofthe Nation's Streams. EPA 841-B-06-002.
Available at www.epa.gov/owow/streamsurvev. See also EPA, 2010. National Lakes Assessment: A Collaborative Survey ofthe
Nation's Lakes. EPA 841-R-09-001. Available at www.epa.gov/lakessurvey/pdf/nla chapter0.pdf.
4 This includes two performance measures under Goal 2, Objective 2 for which the Agency will not collect data.
1126
-------
EPA CONTRIBUTING PROGRAMS
Analytical Methods
Beach Program
Coastal and Ocean Programs
Chesapeake Bay
Children's Health Protection
Clean Water State Revolving Fund
Columbia River Estuary Partnership
Commission for Environmental Cooperation
Cooling Water Intakes
Drinking Water and Ground Water Protection
Programs
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund
Drinking Water Research
Effluent Guidelines
Fish Consumption Advisories
National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System
Nonpoint Source Pollution Control
Pollutant Load Allocation
Surface Water Protection Program
Sustainable Infrastructure Program
Total Maximum Daily Loads
Underground Injection Control Program
Wastewater Management
Water Efficiency
Water Quality Standards and Criteria
Watershed Management
Water Monitoring
Water Quality Research
Wetlands Marine Pollution
National Estuary Program/Coastal Waterways
Great Lakes
Gulf of Mexico
Puget Sound
Human Health and Ecosystem Protection
Research
Human Health Risk Assessment
Long Island Sound
Mercury Research
National Environmental Monitoring Initiative
Other Geographic Programs (including Lake
Pontchartrain and Northwest Forest), Lake
Champlain, San Francisco Bay Delta
Estuary, South Florida
Persistent Organic Pollutants
Trade and Governance
U.S.-Mexico Border
1127
-------
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 1: PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH
Reduce human exposure to contaminants in drinking water, fish and shellfish, and
recreational waters, including protecting source waters.
To ensure that tap water is safe to drink, the Agency sets limits for drinking water contaminants,
helps to sustain and finance the network of pipes and treatment facilities that constitute the
nation's water infrastructure, and works with community water systems (CWSs) to comply with
and implement health-based drinking water standards. EPA works with state and local partners to
implement source water protection plans for the areas surrounding drinking water sources.
Throughout FY 2012, EPA made significant accomplishments under this objective, including
working to strengthen the technical, managerial, and financial capabilities of small drinking
water systems, thus helping improve drinking water quality.
In addition, the Agency signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Department of
Veterans Affairs to promote recruitment and training of veterans for water sector careers. EPA also
signed an MOU with USDA-Rural Utilities Services to assist rural communities with drinking
water and wastewater compliance by strengthening technical, managerial, and financial
sustainability.
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments
EPA established the following FY 2012-2013 Agency Priority Goal to advance its FY 2011-
2015 Strategic Plan objective to protect and restore watersheds and aquatic ecosystems:
Improve public health protection for persons served by small drinking water systems by
strengthening the technical, managerial, and financial capacity of those systems. By September
30, 2013, EPA will engage with 20 states to improve small drinking water system capability
through two EPA programs, the Optimization Program and/or the Capacity Development
Program.5
Overcoming the challenges faced by small systems to providing clean and safe drinking water to
their customers requires many partners and many different approaches. EPA is working with
state co-regulators, other federal agencies, third-party technical assistance providers, and utility
associations through existing agreements, workshops, webinars, stakeholder meetings, and onsite
visits to pursue this goal.
EPA has achieved a number of accomplishments under this goal over the past year, including:
hosting a federal partnership panel with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)/Department
of Veterans Affairs on coordinating and leveraging resources to help small public water systems
nationwide; hosting three webinars to showcase state/EPA efforts to share best practices to help
small systems; and convening participants from 14 states and EPA's Regional Optimization
5 More information is available at www.epa.gov/ogwdw/dwsrf/pdfs/fs dwsrf awopsforcapacitydevelopmentusingsrf.pdf and
http://water.epa.gov/type/drink/pws/smallsvstems/index.cfm.
" 1128
-------
Program for optimization training sessions. Because of these trainings, participating states are
providing technical and compliance assistance to small water systems.
While the Agency has made significant progress, it still confronted several barriers and challenges to
implementing this goal over the past year. For example, states face resource limitations that could
limit their involvement with this goal and impact their abilities to provide targeted assistance to small
water systems. In addition, information needed to track progress comes through informal or
undocumented mechanisms, including conversations or phone calls between EPA regions and states.
Informal sharing of information may not capture all activities to support this goal. Finally, given the
different challenges facing each small system, it can be difficult to identify the right combination of
tools and/or programs that best fits the needs of a particular system.
Percent of population receiving drinking water that meets all applicable health-based drinking
water standards
Performance Measure: Percent of population served by CWSs
that will receive drinking water that meets all applicable
health-based drinking water standards through approaches
including effective treatment and source water protection.
2007-2014 Performance Trends
100
.1 90
i
Q.
O
°- 80
70
I
92 92.1 92
93.2
94.7
192
_L
Target
Actual
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
The percent of population metric is described as the percent of the U.S. population served by
CWSs that receive drinking water that meets all health-based drinking water standards in the
most recent four-quarter period. This measure includes federally regulated contaminants of the
following violation types: maximum contaminant level (MCL), maximum residual disinfection
limit (MRDL), and treatment technique. It includes any CWS violations that overlap with any
part of the most recent four quarters.
The measure achieved the 2012 goal of 91 percent as well as met the goal for the previous four
years. This performance improvement is attributed to a national decrease in treatment technique
1129
-------
violations that occurred at the largest water systems, as well as to how states are addressing
background drinking water contaminants (e.g., arsenic) that chronically challenge water systems.
This success reflects the long-term efforts of the states and EPA to minimize any health-based
violations, while building appropriate technical, managerial, and financial system capability
utilizing necessary infrastructure such that resources are available and appropriately applied to
protect public health while delivering drinking water to consumers.
FY 2012 Performance Challenges
Percent of population in Indian Country receiving drinking water that meets all applicable
health-based drinking water standards
Performance Measure: Percent of the population in Indian
Country served by community water systems that receive
drinking water that meets all applicable health-based drinking
water standards.
2007-2014 Performance Trends
100
c 90
fi
~ 80
1 70
o 60
i 50
£ 40
§ 30
0- 20
10
r\
—
-87 87 87 , 87 87.2 87
81.2 81.2
—
—
—
i
i
II
Target
• Actual
I
i
i
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY1 1 FY12 FY13 FY14
This performance measure reflects the percent of the population in Indian Country served by
CWSs that receives drinking water that meets all health-based drinking water standards. This
measure mirrors the general population metric, in that it includes federally regulated
contaminants of the following violation types: MCL, MRDL, and treatment technique.6 It
includes any violations from currently open and closed CWSs in Indian Country that overlap
with any part of the most recent four quarters.
Challenges associated with tribal public water systems maintaining compliance with National
Primary Drinking Water Regulations7 continue, as reflected in the FY 2012 end-of-year result of
84 percent (FY 2012 target was 87 percent). Tribes face challenges, including those common to
6 More information is available at http://water.epa.gov/drink/contaminants/index.cfm.
7 More information is available at http://water.epa.gov/drink/contaminants/index.cfm.
1130
-------
small systems, such as infrastructure needs, increased regulatory requirements, workforce
shortages/high turnover, increasing operations and maintenance costs, and limited rate bases. The
performance of this measure is greatly impacted by systems in one EPA region—Region 9—
which accounts for about half of the total tribal population governed by this measure. In addition,
EPA's Region 9 tribes have struggled to meet the arsenic and Total Coliform Rule MCL
standards. Although these challenges remain, the region is working with affected tribes, the
Indian Health Service, and USDA to better use funds to support infrastructure and address
violations.
Percent ofCWSs that have undergone a sanitary survey within the past three years (five years
for outstanding performers) as required under the Interim Enhanced and Long-Term 1
Surface Water Treatment Rules. 8
The Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (IESWTR) requires states to conduct
sanitary surveys once every three years for CWSs that draw their water primarily from surface
water or ground water that is under direct influence of surface water systems (i.e., not for all
CWSs). Sanitary surveys are important for assessing the managerial, technical, and financial
capacity of CWSs. These surveys provide valuable information on the capability of systems to
maintain compliance with drinking water standards and support the overall strategic measure for
the National Drinking Water Program.9 The Ground Water Rule (GWR)10 established the
requirement to conduct sanitary surveys for ground water systems beginning in December 2009.
For CWSs determined by the state to have outstanding performance based on prior sanitary
surveys, subsequent sanitary surveys may be conducted no less than every five years [per 40
CFR142.16(b)(3)(ii)].
Performance Measure: Percent of community water systems
that have undergone a sanitary survey within the past three
years (five years for outstanding performance).
100
90
80
70
2007-2014 Performance Trends
95 95
92 92
87
87
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
8 More information is available at http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/mdbp/ltl/ltleswtr.cfm.
9 By 2015, 90 percent of community water systems will provide drinking water that meets all applicable health-based drinking
water standards through approaches such as effective treatment and source water protection. (2005 baseline: 89 percent. Status as
of FY 2009: 89 percent.)
10 More information is available at http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/gwr/index.cfm.
1131
-------
Sanitary surveys represent a key component of state oversight of public water systems, as they
allow the state to assess the condition of the treatment plant, source, distribution system and
records. For FY 2012, the measure achieved 89 percent of CWSs but fell short of its target of 95
percent. States continue to view sanitary surveys as a priority activity, but as they face declining
resources, they struggle to keep pace with the requirement to conduct surveys on a three-year
schedule. It is important to note that the IESWTR does allow for sanitary surveys to be
conducted on a five-year cycle for systems that have been deemed outstanding performers. This
is not captured currently in the calculation of this measure, which could lead to an underestimate
of state compliance with this requirement. In addition, since the effective date of the GWR in
2009, states also must conduct sanitary surveys of these ground-water-based public water
systems, which further strains state resources. EPA intends to revise this measure to capture
ground water systems and better reflect Agency responsibilities.
1132
-------
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 2: PROTECT AND RESTORE WATERSHEDS AND AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS
Protect the quality of rivers, lakes, streams, and wetlands on a watershed basis,
and protect urban, coastal, and ocean waters.
EPA is addressing water quality issues. It maintains safe water quality in Indian Country,
restoring impaired water bodies, developing TMDLs to reduce pollutants, implementing TMDLs
and other watershed-related plans, strengthening the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit program, implementing practices to reduce pollution from agricultural
and urban runoff (e.g., nonpoint sources), and protecting wetlands and National Estuary Program
habitat acres. While EPA is making progress toward restoring clean water to impaired lakes and
streams, it continues to face challenges such as meeting water quality standards in aquatic
ecosystems increasingly stressed by aging infrastructure.
Throughout FY 2012, EPA worked closely with USD A to ensure that federal resources—
including both Section 319 grants and Farm Bill funds—are managed in a coordinated manner to
protect water quality from agricultural pollution sources. EPA is currently revising the 319 grant
guidelines to ensure that states have updated nonpoint source management programs, which are
important for setting state priorities.11
The Agency also issued the Integrated Municipal Stormwater and Wastewater Planning
Approach Framework in June 2012.12 The framework assists states and local governments in
implementing effective integrated approaches to protecting public health and outlines new
flexibility for pursuing innovative, cost-saving solutions, such as green infrastructure.
Additionally, EPA awarded $2.7 million in Urban Waters Small Grants13 to 46 organizations in
32 states and Puerto Rico. The funds support community-based projects to advance urban water
quality goals and strengthen community revitalization.
WaterSense14 achieved cumulative savings of 287 billion gallons of water and more than $4.7
billion in water and energy bills.
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments
EPA established the following FY 2012-2013 Agency Priority Goal to advance its FY 2011-
2015 Strategic Plan objective to protect and restore watersheds and aquatic ecosystems:
By September 30, 2013, 50 percent of the states will revise their nonpoint source program
according to new Section 319 state program guidelines that EPA will release in November 2012.
Recent national surveys have found that the nation's waters are stressed by nutrient pollution,
excess sedimentation, and shoreline vegetation degradation, which affect close to 50 percent of
1' More information is available at: http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/cwact.cfm.
12 More information is available at: http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/integratedplans.cfm.
13 More information is available at www. epa. gov/urbanwaters/funding/.
14 More information is available at www. epa. gov/watersense/.
1133
-------
our lakes and streams. EPA employs a suite of programs to protect and improve water quality in
the nation's watersheds—rivers, lakes, wetlands, and streams—as well as in estuarine, coastal,
and ocean waters. Complex issues, such as nonpoint source and nutrient pollution, require
holistic, integrated solutions that emphasize accountability for both public and private sectors.
To help address these challenges, EPA has set a goal to improve, restore, or maintain water
quality by enhancing nonpoint source program (NPS) accountability, incentives, and
effectiveness.15 In FY 2012, EPA established an EPA/state workgroup to develop the key
components of the new 319 grant guidelines. The workgroup held 28 sessions to address specific
issues, including satisfactory progress determinations, the elements of state NPS management
programs, states' use of 319 funds, improving state processes/approaches for prioritizing
watersheds, and state tracking and reporting mechanisms. EPA considered the extensive input
from the workgroup, developed options and
briefed senior management, and began PROTECTING AND RESTORING
writing revised Section 319 grant guidelines. THE CHESAPEAKE BAY
In addition, EPA revised the guidance m FY 2012> the Federal Leadership
document Key Components of an Effective Committee for the Chesapeake Bay, chaired
NPSManagemenlPr0gram:- distributed the j^eSS^S
draft for state comment; and in the fourth „ ,., „, — , ,., , 7 r~
„ ' . Quality 1 wo-Year Milestones tor water
quarter of FY 2012, worked on incorporating qualhy restoratlon m the Bay ^
state comments into the final draft. milestones, which represent the collective
Additionally, during the fourth quarter of FY commitments of six federal agencies
2012, EPA drafted section 319 state program providing leadership in the protection and
guidelines to be released to the states and restoration of the Chesapeake Bay, are near-
other stakeholders for public comment. term targets that ensure accountability and
highlight progress toward meeting the 2025
A goal to update 50 percent of state implementation goals. Each jurisdiction's
programs by September 2013 is extremely Watershed Implementation Plans are
ambitious. A meaningful state NPS program supported by these milestones.
plan is the roadmap for a state's entire NPS
program.17 It reflects the state's goals,
priorities, and key annual milestones and actions over time. The plan describes how multiple
agencies and offices will operate, coordinate, and contribute resources to meeting the NPS goals.
These written program documents create public policy and direct how significant federal and
state funds are spent. As such, many states can have lengthy internal and public review processes
involving formal public comment periods and public notice published in state registers. In short,
these updates may require many months not just to develop, but also to be adopted procedurally.
Thus, achieving this goal will require EPA to work closely and efficiently with its state partners.
15 More information is available at www.epa.gov/owow_keep/NPS/index.html.
16 More information is available at http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/upload/key components 2012.pdf.
17 More information is available at http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/cwact.cfm .
1134
-------
Water Bodies Attaining Water Quality Standards
Performance Measure: Number of water body segments
identified by states in 2002 as not attaining standards, where
water quality standards are now fully attained (cumulative).
4,000
3,500
*± 3,000
-------
This measure of water body impairment is one of the many key measures of the National Water
Program. It is based on a multitude of EPA and state actions, including water quality standards
development18 monitoring strategies, TMDL and watershed plan development,19 wastewater
90 _^ ai
infrastructure funding, NPDES permit issuance, and numerous other actions. Continuous
progress in all of these areas will lead to positive results in reducing the number of impaired
water body segments throughout the nation.
Total TMDLs Established or Approved by EPA
22
Performance Measure: Number of TMDLs that are established
or approved by the EPA [total TMDL] on a schedule consistent
with national policy (cumulative).*
60,000 r
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
2007-2014 Performance Trends
52,£
46,817
49,663
'65,293
67,494
41,866
35,979
44,560
49,375
52, 218
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
•Note: A TMDL is a technical plan for reducing pollutants in order to attain water quality standards.
The terms "approved" and "established" refer to the completion and approval of the TMDL itself.
18 See Performance Measures code: bpp, located in the Performance and Assessment section of the FY 2014 Congressional
Justification.
19 See Performance Measures code: bps, located in the Performance and Assessment section of the FY 2014 Congressional
Justification.
20 See Performance Measures code: bpb, located in the Performance and Assessment section of the FY 2014 Congressional
Justification.
21 See Performance Measures code: bpl, located in the Performance and Assessment section of the FY 2014 Congressional
Justification.
22 A TMDL is a technical plan for reducing pollutants in order to attain water quality standards. The terms "approved" and
"established" refer to the completion and approval of the TMDL itself.
1136
-------
States and EPA have made significant
progress in developing TMDLs. By the
end of FY 2012, more than 50,000
TMDLs had been developed, and all
but a few consent decrees (which were
a historical driver) had been satisfied.
States have begun to place more
emphasis on implementing TMDLs. In
addition, the CWA 303(d) listing and
TMDL program developed a new 10-
year vision in FY 2012. As part of this
effort, the program has begun to
evaluate the measure and alternative
measures to determine how to evaluate
the success of the program better.
TAPPING GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE TO
CURB SEWER OVERFLOWS
With technical guidance from EPA, the cities of
Cincinnati and Cleveland, Ohio, plan to implement
more environmentally friendly and sustainable
stormwater management projects, commonly
referred to as green infrastructure. This
infrastructure includes cisterns, green roofs.
permeable pavement, wetland-like retention
basins, and rain gardens. The goal is to retain or
redirect excess water runoff into the ground where
plants and soil will naturally detain and filter the
water, thus keeping it out of the sewers.
EPA scientists monitor the green infrastructure
demonstration projects to further increase
understanding of how these systems work, and to
determine how reliable and effective they are in
reducing combined sewer overflows.
1137
-------
FY 2012 Performance Challenges
Puget Sound Shellfish Bed Growing Areas Improved
Performance Measure: Improve water quality and enable the
lifting of harvest restrictions in acres of shellfish bed growing
areas impacted by degrading or declining water quality.
2007-2014 Performance Trends
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
7,758 7,758
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
'Measure introduced in FY 2008
By missing its FY 2012 target, the Puget Sound Program is at risk of missing its five-year (2011-
2015) National Water Program Guidance (NWPG) FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan target. The
five-year target is 4,300 cumulative acres, which presumes an annual net gain of approximately
500 acres. The program had exceeded the previous five-year target at the end of FY 2010, with a
cumulative total of 4,453 acres. Unfortunately, in April 2011, over 4,000 acres of the Skagit
County Samish Bay shellfish growing area were downgraded due to nutrient runoff, dramatically
impacting EPA's ability to meet the 2012 annual target.
Local projects aimed at onsite sewage system maintenance and repair, agricultural best
management practices implementation, and wastewater treatment plant upgrades have helped
maintain and upgrade shellfish growing areas. With EPA grant assistance, Skagit County
continues to lead an aggressive effort to identify and correct pollution sources in the Samish Bay
watershed, with the aim of upgrading the quality of the growing area. The vast majority of the
sources are nonpoint sources, small livestock operations, and failing septic systems, so progress
has been slow but steady. The Puget Sound Program expects that the Samish Bay shellfish
growing areas will be recovered and upgraded to nonconditional harvesting without health
restrictions. With continued emphasis on pollution identification and correction in this watershed
and other shellfish growing areas, gains will be made in FY 2013 and FY 2014 that should
enable the Puget Sound Program to meet its five-year FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan goal by FY
2015.
1138
-------
Strategic Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
GOAL 3 AT A GLANCE
CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Clean up communities, advance sustainable development, and protect disproportionately im-
pacted low-income, minority, and tribal communities. Prevent releases of harmful substances
and clean up and restore contaminated areas.
FY 2012 Performance Measures
Met = 28 Not Met = 4 Data Unavailable = 4 (Total Measures = 36)
How Funds Were Used: Net Program Costs
(Dollars in Thousands)
Taking Action on
Climate Change and
Improving Air Quality
$1.212,245.9
Enforcing
Environmental Laws
$822,028.2
7.54% A
Ensuring the Safety
of Chemicals and
Preventing Pollution
$778.117.5
7.14%
Cleaning Up
Communities and
Advancing Sustainable
Development
Source: FY 201 2 Statement of Net Cost by Goal
Goal 3 FY2012 Perforr
Strategic Objective
Goal 3 Performance Measures
Objective I Objective 2 Objective 3 Objective 4
FY2012 %of
Obligations Goal 3
(in thousands) Funds
Objective 3.1: Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities. Support sustainable, resil-
ient, and livable communities by working with local, state, tribal, and federal partners
to promote smart growth, emergency preparedness and recovery planning, brownfield
redevelopment, and the equitable distribution of environmental benefits.
$530,964.0
21%
Objective 3.2: Preserve Land. Conserve resources and prevent land contamination by
reducing waste generation, increasing recycling, and ensuring proper management of
waste and petroleum products.
$247,093.5
10%
Objective 3.3: Restore Land. Prepare for and respond to accidental or intentional releases
of contaminants and clean up and restore polluted sites.
$1,673,324.3
66%
Objective 3.4: Strengthen Human Health and Environmental Protection in Indian Country.
Support federally recognized tribes to build environmental management capacity, assess
environmental conditions and measure results, and implement environmental programs
in Indian country.
$82,935.0
3%
Goal 3 Total
$2,534,316.8
100%
Due to rounding, some numbers might add up to slightly less or more than 100%.
1139
-------
GOAL 3 OVERVIEW
EPA is committed to making communities across the country safer places to live. The presence
of uncontrolled hazardous substances in soil and sediment can cause human health concerns,
threaten healthy ecosystems, and potentially inhibit economic opportunities on and adjacent to
contaminated properties. Waste on the land can also migrate to ground water and surface water,
contaminating drinking water supplies. EPA leads efforts to conserve resources and prevent
future land contamination by reducing waste generation, increasing recycling, and ensuring
proper management of waste and petroleum products. EPA prepares for and responds to
environmental emergencies and assesses and cleans up contaminated lands to support thriving
communities. EPA works collaboratively with state and tribal governments and with
communities to achieve these goals and ensure that they have a voice in environmental decisions
that affect them. Through its Indian General Assistance Program, EPA provides funds to
federally recognized tribes to assist them in planning, developing, and establishing tribal
environmental protection programs.
The Agency's efforts support achievement of four main objectives established in EPA's FY
2011-2015 Strategic Plan: promote sustainable and livable communities, preserve land, restore
land, and strengthen human health and environmental protection in Indian Country. In FY 2012,
EPA made substantial progress toward one of its FY 2012-2013 Priority Goals, making more
than 11,500 formerly contaminated sites available for reuse. To date, more than 2.4 million
previously contaminated acres are available for communities to reclaim for ecological,
recreational, commercial, residential, and other purposes.
In this section, EPA discusses key performance results, including the number of brownfield
properties assessed for which the annual target has consistently been met or exceeded, as well as
the sustainable materials management (SMM) measure. Although SMM performance results are
not available at the time of publication of this report, the agency is making substantial progress
in this area. In addition, EPA completed or oversaw the completion of hundreds of removal
actions and eliminated unacceptable human exposure to contaminants at Superfund sites while
completing cleanups at thousands of underground storage tanks. These efforts highlight just a
few of the strategic measures outlined in Goal 3.
EPA works with more than 500 federally recognized tribes located across the United States to
improve environmental and human health outcomes. Difficult environmental and health
challenges, including access to safe drinking water, adequate waste facilities, and other
environmental safeguards typically taken for granted, remain in many of these areas. The
Agency continues to acknowledge many of the environmental and financial hardships that tribal
governments face and is working closely with them to identify environmental priorities and
develop plans to address them. In addition, EPA is leveraging resources and partnerships with
tribal governments and tribal colleges and universities.
To further its objectives under Goal 3, EPA committed to 37 performance measures in FY 2012.
The Agency met or exceeded 88 percent and did not meet 12 percent of the measures for which
data were available at the time of publication. Data were not yet available for four measures
under Goal 3, so the Agency will report these results in the FY 2013 and FY 2014 Annual
1140
-------
Performance Reports. The full suite of EPA's FY 2012 Goal 3 measures, including targets,
results, and detailed explanations for variances in targets and results, is available in the FY 2014
Annual Performance Plan and the Program Performance and Assessment section of the
Congressional Justification.
1141
-------
EPA CONTRIBUTING PROGRAMS
RCRA Waste Management
RCRA Corrective Action
RCRA Waste Minimization and Recycling
Superfund Emergency Preparedness
Superfund Remedial
Superfund Enforcement
Superfund Emergency Response and
Removal
Environmental Response Laboratory
Network
Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse
Oil Spill Prevention Preparedness and
Response
Leaking USTs
UST Prevention and Compliance
Homeland Security
Brownfields and Land Revitalization
Commission for Environmental Cooperation
Community Action for a Renewed
Environment
Global Change Research
Homeland Security Research
Human Health and Ecosystem Protection
Research
Human Health Risk Assessment
National Environmental Monitoring
Initiative
Smart Growth
Research Fellowships
State and Local Prevention and
Preparedness
U.S.-Mexico Border
Sector Grant Program
State and Tribal Pollution Prevention Grants
Tribal Capacity-Building
Tribal General Assistance Program
1142
-------
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 1: PROMOTE SUSTAINABLE AND LIVABLE COMMUNITIES
Support sustainable, resilient, and livable communities by working with local, state, tribal, and
federal partners to promote smart growth, emergency preparedness and recovery planning,
brownfield redevelopment, and the equitable distribution of environmental benefits.
In FY 2012, EPA continued to promote sustainable and livable communities through its
brownfields cleanup activities, providing grants and technical assistance to communities, states,
and tribes for the assessment, cleanup, and redevelopment of formerly contaminated properties,
and leveraging thousands of jobs. In addition, EPA continues to reduce chemical risks at
facilities and communities through the risk management plan prevention program.
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments
Brownfield Properties Assessed
EPA's Brownfields Program provides grant funding and technical assistance to communities,
states, and tribes to help them assess, clean up, and redevelop brownfields properties. The term
brownfields means 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. EPA continues to make progress toward its long-term strategic objective of assessing
brownfields. The graph below illustrates the positive trend of EPA's work in the area of
environmental assessments at brownfield properties. The assessment helps resolve the degree of
uncertainty regarding contamination and determine the need for additional environmental work.
Assessment represents an important milestone in the overall cleanup process and can lead to a
reuse/redevelopment outcome that will leverage local development sources to drive employment
and enhance the livability of the locality in which the property exists.
Performance Measure: Brownfield properties assessed.
OT
2,000
1,500
CD
0- 1,000
8
a.
500
2007-2014 Performance Trends
§ 1 8 I 8
o I o I o
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY1 1 FY12 FY13 FY14
*FY09 baseline = 14,600 properties assessed; FY15 target = 20,600 (cumulative) properties assessed.
1143
-------
The Brownfields Program has consistently met or exceeded the target for this measure.
Cumulatively, the Brownfields Program has reported more than 19,000 brownfield properties
assessed since 1995 and is on track to meet its strategic target of 20,600 properties assessed by
2015. In addition, the FY 2010 and FY 2011 data collection and data quality review required for
the Brownfields Program Evaluation showed a relative increase in the number of brownfield
properties reported as assessed. This effect suggests that an emphasis on reporting and oversight
actually increases the number of properties that are reported to EPA.
Brownfield Properties Cleaned Up
A fundamental purpose of the Brownfields Program is to provide funding and resources to clean
up properties that pose a health risk due to contamination and present an impediment to property
reuse and economic redevelopment. The graph below depicts the trend of EPA's work to clean
up properties using brownfields funding.
Performance Measure: Number of properties cleaned up using
brownfields funding.
150
120
90
60
30
0
2007-2014 Performance Trends
130
109
93
78
60 I 60 I 60 I 60 | 60
1 I I I I
120
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
Over the past several budget cycles and grant competitions, a relative shift in resources has
occurred toward aspects of the program that fund cleanup activities; the measure highlighted in
the graph above begins to demonstrate the outcomes associated with this shift in resources. Part
III of the recent results of the Brownfields Program Evaluation that focused on brownfields
cleanup grants demonstrated that a property that is cleaned up using a brownfields cleanup award
leads to a 5.8 to 12.3 percent increase in property values within 1 kilometer of the property.
Additional benefits of brownfield assessment and cleanup activities are the jobs and dollars
leveraged as part of the greater redevelopment efforts to reuse these properties. Over the course
of the program's history, nearly $18 of public and private investment has been put toward
brownfields redevelopment projects for every $1 of EPA funds provided for the project. More
information on leveraged jobs and leveraged dollars is available at www.epa.gov/brownfields/.
1144
-------
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 2: PRESERVE LAND
Conserve resources and prevent land contamination by reducing waste generation, increasing
recycling, and ensuring proper management of waste and petroleum products.
EPA refocused this strategic objective to reflect the transition from waste management to a full
life cycle, SMM program, with an emphasis on sustainability. EPA continues to work with its
state partners on managing hazardous wastes and preventing petroleum releases to protect our
land and water bodies from contamination.
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments
Moving Toward a More Sustainable Future
Through an SMM approach, EPA is helping to change the way our society protects the
environment and conserves resources for future generations. Building on the familiar concept of
reduce, reuse, recycle, SMM aims to reduce negative environmental impacts across the life cycle
of materials, from resource extraction and manufacturing to use, reuse, recycling, and disposal.
SMM approaches can result in lower energy use, more efficient use of materials, more efficient
movement of goods and services, water conservation, and reduced volume and toxicity of waste.
In FY 2012, EPA transitioned to a new measure to reflect the performance goals and results
associated with the national program shift to SMM. This new measure captures the tons of
materials and products offsetting the use of virgin resources through SMM.
Performance Measure: Tons of materials and products
offsetting use of virgin resources through sustainable
materials management.
2007-2014 Performance Trends
9,000,000 i—
t/j
i2 8,000,000
7,000,000
1
I
FY08
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13 FY14
Although FY 2012 results for the new measure will not be available until December 2013, EPA
made significant progress in developing and implementing a strategically targeted SMM
program centered on four focus areas: responsible management of used electronics; sustainable
1145
-------
food management; reducing the environmental footprint of the federal government by leading by
example; and strengthening partnerships with state and local governments.
EPA implemented three SMM challenge programs related to three of the four focus areas: the
Electronics Challenge, the Food Recovery Challenge, and the Federal Green Challenge. By the
end of FY 2012, 240 federal entities enrolled in the Federal Green Challenge. One of the federal
participants, the U.S. Postal Service, signed up every one of its 33,000 facilities for the Federal
Green Challenge. In addition, by the end of FY 2012, 120 participants (i.e., grocers, universities,
stadiums, and other venues) joined the Food Recovery Challenge and are rethinking business as
usual by working to sustainably manage surplus food through source reduction, donation, and
composting. Finally, at the end of FY 2012, 10 national electronics manufacturers and retail
companies representing thousands of retail facilities across the United States as well as online,
enrolled in the SMM Electronics Challenge, showing their commitment to sending 100 percent
of used electronics collected for reuse and recycling.
Hazardous Waste Facilities
EPA continues to work toward its hazardous waste management goals, which focus on
controlling transportation of hazardous waste; ensuring the safe treatment, storage, and disposal
of hazardous wastes by establishing specific requirements/permits that must be followed when
managing those wastes; and inspecting facilities to ensure compliance with regulations.
Performance Measure: Number of hazardous waste facilities
with new or updated controls.
150
120
S 90
60
30
2007-2014 Performance Trends
140
115
100
130
100
117
100
100 100
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) permitting program is a core
programmatic effort for protecting human health and the environment in those communities that
host RCRA facilities, and for ensuring compliance with waste management standards consistent
with the proper handling and disposal of hazardous wastes. Preventing releases from RCRA
1146
-------
facilities by issuing and maintaining permits also provides cost savings, as a typical RCRA
corrective action to address a release into the environment from mismanaged wastes can easily
cost $100,000 or more. EPA measures program progress by reporting the number of RCRA
hazardous waste facilities with new or updated controls completed each fiscal year, as seen in the
graph above. This annual measure contributes to the long-term goal of 500 facilities described in
the Agency's FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan. In FY 2012, EPA completed 117 accomplishments,
surpassing the target by 17 percent and setting EPA on track to meet the strategic goal by 2015.
Reducing Confirmed Releases from Underground Storage Tank (VST) Facilities
UST releases can be a significant source of ground water contamination. Given that ground
water provides the source of drinking water for nearly half of all Americans, preventing UST
releases continues to be a critical priority for EPA, with a goal of reducing the number of
confirmed releases each year. In the FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan, EPA commits to the long-
term goal of decreasing the percentage of confirmed releases at UST facilities to 5 percent fewer
than the prior year's target. Preventing UST releases also provides considerable cost savings, as
the average cleanup cost exceeds $125,000 per release.
Performance Measure: Reduce the number of confirmed
releases at UST facilities to five percent (5%) fewer than the
prior year's target.
2007-2014 Performance Trends
10,000
8,000
8
% 6,000
CD
0
01 4,000
2,000
i"i
8
• • •
o"
—
-
8
tf
of
8 8
of in CM w
!' _ <5
E5j
m
Target
• Actual
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY1 1 FY12 FY13 FY14
As illustrated in the graph above, EPA reported 5,674 confirmed releases in FY 2012. The UST
program has shown a steady decline in the number of confirmed releases over the past six years.
Since 2007, EPA has placed an increased emphasis on monitoring compliance through increased
frequency of inspections and other Energy Policy Act (EPAct) provisions.23 During this time,
compliance rates have increased and there has been a significant decrease in new confirmed
releases.
More information is available at www.epa.gov/oust/fedlaws/epact 05.htm.
1147
-------
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 3: RESTORE LAND
Prepare for and respond to accidental or intentional releases of contaminants and clean up
and restore polluted sites.
EPA's Superfund, RCRA Corrective Action, Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST), and
Brownfields Program reduce risks to human health and the environment by assessing and
cleaning up contaminated sites and returning these sites to the community for economic or
recreational use. In addition, EPA's Emergency Response and Removal Program deploys
resources to contain and respond to emergencies and stabilize hundreds of sites across the
country.
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments
The FY 2012-2013 Agency Priority Goal to clean up an additional 22,100 contaminated sites
and make them ready for anticipated use (RAU) by September 30, 2013, represents EPA's long-
term goal of returning previously contaminated Superfund, RCRA Corrective Action, LUST, and
brownfields sites to communities for reuse. Independent research indicates that cleaning up land
so that it can be put to productive use provides many benefits to the community, including
reduced morbidity and mortality risks,24 land preservation, and increased property values.25'26'27
By the end of FY 2012, more than 11,500 sites were made RAU, achieving 99.3 percent of the
FY 2012 interim milestone of 11,633 sites RAU. Cumulatively, 428,825 sites have been made
RAU, representing approximately 82 percent of all cleanup sites. Despite significant progress in
FY 2012, the FY 2012 interim milestone was not met due to challenges that have impacted the
Agency's ability to meet the annual LUST cleanup target. These challenges are discussed in the
"Performance Challenges" section below.
24 Currie, Janet, Michael Greenstone, and Enrico Moretti. 2011. "Superfund Cleanups and Infant Health." American Economic
Review, 101(3): 435-41.
25Howland, Marie. 2007. "Employment Effects of Brownfields Redevelopment, What Do We Know from the Literature?"
Journal of Planning Literature, 22:91.
26 S. Gamper-Rabindran, C. Timmins. 2012. "Does cleanup of hazardous waste sites raise housing values? Evidence of spatially
localized benefits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, http://dx.doi.Org/10.1016/i.ieem.2012.12.001.
27 Hanninger, Kevin, Lala Ma, Christopher Timmins. 2012. "Estimating the Impacts of Brownfield Remediation on Housing
Property Values," Duke Environmental Economics Working Paper Series, Working Paper EE 12-08.
1148
-------
REVITALIZING COMMUNITIES THROUGH CONTAMINATED SITE CLEANUPS
IN THE NORTHEAST
In FY 2012, EPA collaborated with a number of local and state partners to clean up
contaminated lands and spur economic redevelopment throughout the Northeast. For example:
• As part of the New Bedford Harbor Superfund cleanup, EPA has approved the state of
Massachusetts to construct a deep water shipping terminal, which will bring economic
activity to the region and jobs turbines.
• As part of the Superfund Jobs Training Initiative. EPA worked with local nongovernmental
organizations in the cities of Newark, New Jersey, and Syracuse, New York, to train 30
local residents in Superfund cleanup skills. Graduates were hired to assist EPA and the
potentially responsible parties in cleaning up portions of the polluted Passaic River and
OnondagaLake.
• This year, 41,000 cubic yards of the most highly concentrated dioxin-contaminated
sediment and 580 tons of contaminated debris were removed from the Passaic River
adjacent to the former Diamond Alkali facility in downtown Newark. The Passaic River
Community Advisory Group worked closely with EPA and the potentially responsible
party in developing the project Community Health and Safety Plan; community updates;
and a website and hotline in English, Spanish, and Portuguese.
SUPERFUND SITES AND RCRA CORRECTIVE ACTION FACILITIES WHERE HUMAN EXPOSURES TO
TOXINS FROM CONTAMINATED SITES ARE UNDER CONTROL
Many of the nation's Superfund and RCRA Corrective Action sites are highly contaminated,
technically challenging, and take a significant amount of time to clean up. Therefore, during the
cleanup process, the Superfund and RCRA Corrective Action Programs take interim actions to
eliminate or control unacceptable human exposures at contaminated sites. These actions protect
people and the environment from the acute threats posed by uncontrolled hazardous waste or
contaminated ground water while cleanup is ongoing. The following measures track the number
of Superfund and RCRA Corrective Action sites where human exposure to toxins is under
control.
1149
-------
Performance Measure: Cumulative percentage of RCRA
facilities with human exposures to toxins under control.
100
80
§3 60
E
o>
°- 40
20
0
2007-2014 Performance Trends
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
Performance Measure: Number of Superfund sites with human
exposures under control.
0)
•^
CO
25
20
-IK
10
5
0
2007-2014 Performance Trends
24
18
10
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
In FY 2012, EPA eliminated unacceptable human exposure to contaminants at 13 Superfund
sites. Actions taken to achieve human exposure under control include reducing exposure to
unsafe drinking water by providing alternate water supply to affected communities; protecting
children from lead-contaminated soil around homes through soil removal; or reducing exposure
to indoor air contaminated by harmful vapors by installing mitigation systems in homes. In FY
1150
-------
2012, the RCRA Corrective Action Program achieved its goal of 81 percent of its sites reaching
human exposures under control and is currently on track to meet the Corrective Action
Program's goal of 95 percent complete by 2020. EPA places a high priority on this measure and
will continue to focus resources on those sites that present the highest risk.
Percent of all Facility Response Plans (FRPs) inspected facilities found to be noncompliant
brought into compliance
EPA's Oil Spill Prevention Program is intended to prevent certain non-transportation-related
facilities from discharging oil into navigable waters of the United States, and it also requires
countermeasures to control, contain, clean up, and mitigate the effects of an oil spill. Under this
program, the largest oil storage facilities and refineries must prepare FRPs addressing response
actions for discharges of oil that could cause extensive environmental damage. This measure
tracks the number of FRP inspected facilities found to be noncompliant that are subsequently
brought into compliance with EPA regulations. EPA's regulated universe includes approximately
4,500 FRP facilities.
In FY 2012, 73 percent of all FRP inspected facilities found to be noncompliant were brought
into compliance, exceeding the FY 2012 target. FRP facilities represent a higher potential risk to
the environment and human health than other oil facilities, and EPA will continue to conduct
inspections to ensure appropriate and effective prevention measures. The Agency is developing
tools and procedures to help fine-tune reporting and data tracking for inspections.
ADVANCING SCIENCE, RESEARCH, AND
TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATION
Radiological Dispersal Device (ROD) Waste Estimation Support Tool:
EPA's RDD Waste Estimation Support Tool (WEST) is a planning tool for
estimating the potential volume and radioactivity levels of waste generated by
a radiological incident and subsequent decontamination efforts. WEST
supports decision-makers by generating a first-order estimate of the quantity
and characteristics of waste resulting from a radiological incident, and allows
the user to evaluate various decontamination/demolition strategies to examine
the impact of those strategies on waste generation. Managing waste from an
RDD incident would likely constitute a significant fraction of the total
remediation cost and effort.
1151
-------
FY 2012 PERFORMANCE CHALLENGES
Number of LUST cleanups completed that meet risk-based standards for human exposure and
ground water migration
The federal LUST program supports the oversight and implementation of LUST cleanup
programs in states. Under this program, EPA aims to reduce the backlog of LUST needing
cleanup. This measure tracks the number of annual LUST cleanups completed.
Performance Measure: Number of LUST cleanups completed
that meet risk-based standards for human exposure and
groundwater migration.
15,000
12,000
§" 9,000
CO
o>
6,000
3,000
0
2007-2014 Performance Trends
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
Despite the LUST program's considerable success for more than 25 years in cleaning up UST
releases and decreasing the overall release backlog, over the past few years, the pace of cleanups
has begun to decline. In FY 2012, EPA's LUST program achieved 97 percent of its goal of
11,250 cleanups completed. The major challenges to meeting this goal are the complexity of the
remaining sites, increased state staff workload, a decrease in available state resources, and the
increasing cost of cleanups.
In FY 2012, the LUST program completed a study of its cleanup backlog, which provided
significant information to characterize the national inventory of sites awaiting corrective action.
The study revealed that for those states studied, almost half the releases yet to be addressed were
15 years old or older, and ground water was contaminated at more than 75 percent of releases.
Remediation of ground water is often more technically complex and takes longer. Based on the
opportunities identified in the study, states are developing and implementing specific strategies
and activities—such as expedited site assessment, remedial optimization, integrated funding
opportunities, and leveraging petroleum brownfield opportunities—where applicable. EPA is
1152
-------
working proactively with states to identify and implement best practices and innovative
strategies to complete more cleanups in the future.
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 4: STRENGTHEN HUMAN HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
IN INDIAN COUNTRY.
Support federally recognized tribes to build environmental management capacity,
assess environmental conditions and measure results, and implement
environmental programs in Indian Country
Under federal environmental statutes, EPA is responsible for protecting human health and the
environment in Indian Country. EPA's commitment to tribal environmental and human health
protection, through the recognition of tribal sovereignty and self-determination, has been
steadfast for more than 25 years, as formally established in the Agency's 1984 Indian Policy.
EPA provides technical assistance and grants to federally recognized tribes to help them plan,
develop, and establish environmental protection programs. The Agency's Indian General
Assistance Program is its largest grant program available to federally recognized tribes and is
dedicated to assisting tribes with building capacity for implementing environmental protection
programs. EPA works closely with tribes on a government-to-government basis to ensure that
environmental protection is being achieved across the country, and that we work in true
partnership with tribal leaders to fulfill the mission of the Agency.
FY 2012 PERFORMANCE ACCOMPLISHMENTS
EPA's Tribal Consultation Policy
EPA finalized the EPA Policy on Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribes on May 4,
2011. The Consultation Policy establishes a broader standard regarding the type of Agency
actions and activities that may warrant consultation. Therefore, a significant change in practice
has occurred across the Agency with regard to the number of consultation opportunities EPA has
been identifying. Since issuing the Policy, EPA initiated more than 120 consultations with tribal
governments on topics such as regulations, policies, and permitting.
FY 2012's focus was on developing important implementation tools to help ensure that the
Agency implemented the Consultation Policy consistently, with transparency, and in a manner
wherein tribes were offered opportunities to engage early and meaningfully in Agency actions
and decisions that might affect them.
Following issuance of the policy, EPA developed and launched a national Tribal Consultation
Opportunities Tracking System, accessible by all tribal governments and the public. This website
publicizes upcoming and current EPA consultation opportunities and allows users to submit
comments on all tribal consultation activities. This early notification tool promotes transparency
and enhances EPA's consultations with tribal governments on key common environmental and
health policy implementation opportunities.
1153
-------
Tribal EcoAmbassadors Program
EPA's inaugural Tribal EcoAmbassadors Program
successfully concluded in FY 2012 by providing
support to professors from eight different Tribal College
Universities across the country to develop yearlong
research initiatives that solve environmental or public
health challenges for their students or larger tribal
community. Sixty-three tribal students engaged in
projects ranging from monitoring indoor air quality
using mobile devices to creating a local business using
recycled, carbon-negative building materials. Each
project culminated in a published report that outlined
the student's community engagement and research
process, conclusions, and proposed solutions to the
chosen challenge.
STUDENTS MONITOR
INDOOR AIR QUALITY AT
DINE COLLEGE
At Dine College near Shiprock,
New Mexico, a professor
designed a program where
students wear personal air
monitors over the course of
several weeks to record levels of
air pollutants in their immediate
environment. The students then
upload this data to the research
database and present the
findings to their communities to
strengthen awareness of indoor
and outdoor air pollution due to
coal-burning stoves.
Through this program, EPA supports developing
capacity among tribal youth and community members
on issues that affect their environment. Expanding this knowledge base will help educate and
inspire future tribal environmental leaders. In some cases, new environmental data were
generated; in others, new broad-reaching training tools have been created. This type of leverage-
building program not only strengthens the relationships the Agency has with tribes and tribal
educational institutions, but also expands the conversation with tribal youth and communities.
Due to the success of the pilot program, EPA is continuing the program for a second year,
engaging additional professors and students in Indian Country.
FY 2012 Performance Challenges
Percent of Tribes Implementing Federal Regulatory Environmental Program
Performance Measure: Percent of Tribes implementing federal
regulatory environmental programs in Indian country (cumulative).
30
25
~ 20
CD
Q.
10
5
0
2007-2014 Performance Trends
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
'Measure introduced in FY 2008
1154
-------
While the Agency has met the overall strategic
target of an 18-percent increase in the number of
tribes implementing federal regulatory
environmental programs in Indian Country,
meeting future annual targets may be a challenge.
EPA expects that the performance
measure—percent of tribes implementing federal
regulatory environmental programs in Indian
Country—will likely plateau at around 21 to 22
percent. It is becoming increasingly more difficult
to anticipate how many more tribes may be able to
implement federal statutes. For example, many
federally recognized tribes face certain obstacles
to obtaining federal approval for program
implementation.
NEZ PERCE LEVERAGE GENERAL
ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (GAP)
SUPPORT FOR WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT
The GAP has allowed the Nez Perce
Tribe Water Resources Division to
coordinate with internal tribal programs
and federal agencies to oversee the
success of a much needed wastewater
treatment plant project. The treatment
plant has cutting-edge technology,
including a membrane bioreactor that will
provide clean, Grade A reusable water for
the local community. The new Lapwai
Valley Regional Wastewater Treatment
Plant has created a lasting infrastructure
for wastewater treatment and collection,
which will result in cleaner ground water
and surface water.
Finally, this measure does not reflect increasing
capacities of individual tribes (e.g., when a tribe
takes over more than one regulatory program).
This is significant in that, as a tribal
environmental department establishes itself, it can take on more environmental programs. To
better measure and assess capacity building in Indian Country, the Agency is finalizing the
General Assistance Program Guidebook for Tribes and Intertribal Consortia. When completed
in FY 2013, the Guidebook will strengthen fiscal
management; improve pre-award General
Assistant Program grant work plan negotiations
with tribes; and clearly identify the environmental
program capacities each tribe intends to develop,
consistent with long-term tribal environmental
priorities and EPA authorities. The Guidebook
will also help EPA achieve the necessary
foundation for effective program implementation
in Indian Country and help tribes identify the
capacity development pathways appropriate for
their environmental programs. With this process,
and as part of the development of the Agency's
FY 2014-2018 Strategic Plan, EPA will explore
other possible annual and long-term measures for
assessing the level of environmental protection in
Indian Country and implementing tribal environmental programs.
CAPACITY BUILDING IN INDIAN
COUNTRY
Resulting from more than four years of
increased technical assistance, EPA,
federal partners, and the Oglala Sioux and
Rosebud Sioux tribes made significant
improvements in grants and financial
management capacity that led to each
tribe's removal from the high-risk grantee
designation. Specifically, EPA helped the
tribes revise and change internal policies
and procedures to comply with federal
requirements.
1155
-------
Strategic Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Pollution Prevention
GOAL 4 AT A GLANCE
ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
Reduce the risk, increase the safety of chemicals, and prevent pollution at the source.
FY 2012 Performance Measures
Met = 15 Not Met = 4 Data Unavailable = 12 (Total Measures = 31)
How Funds Were Used: Net Program Costs
(Dollars in Thousands)
Taking Action on
Climate Change and
Improving Air Quality
$1,212,245.9
Enforcing
Environmental Laws
$822,028.2
7.54%
Ensuring the Safety
of Chemicals and
Preventing Pollution
$778,1 17.5
7.14%
Cleaning Up
Communities and
Advancing Sustainable
Development
Source: FY 2012 Statement of Net Cost by Goal
Goal 4 Performance Measures
Objective I
Goal 4 FY 2012 Performance and Resources
Strategic Objective
Objective 2
FY 2012
Obligations
(in thousands)
%of
Goal 4
Funds
Objective 4.1: Ensure Chemical Safety. Reduce the risk of chemicals that enter our prod-
ucts, our environment, and our bodies.
$721,746.5
93%
Objective 4.2: Promote Pollution Prevention. Conserve and protect natural
resources by promoting pollution prevention and the adoption of other stewardship prac-
tices by companies, communities, governmental organizations, and individuals.
$56,371.0
7%
Goal 4 Total
$778,117.5
100%
Due to rounding, some numbers might add up to slightly less or more than 100%.
1156
-------
GOAL 4 OVERVIEW
EPA is committed to ensuring chemical safety and promoting pollution prevention. Through
collaboration with other countries, federal agencies, states, tribes, and the public, the Agency
leverages expertise, information, and resources to improve chemical safety. Children and other
disproportionately exposed and affected groups, including low-income, minority, and indigenous
populations, receive explicit consideration in the Agency's chemical risk assessments and
management actions in accordance with executive orders and guidance on children's health and
environmental justice.
EPA's FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan articulates two objectives under Goal 4. The first advances
EPA's work to ensure the safety of chemicals, and the second promotes pollution prevention
strategies. In addition, the Strategic Plan establishes cross-cutting fundamental strategies, which
are operationalized in relevant aspects of Goal 4 work. In particular, Goal 4 supports "Working
for Environmental Justice and Children's Health." To achieve our domestic environmental
objectives, it is important that we keep abreast of emerging environmental issues and collaborate
with domestic and foreign partners to address foreign sources of pollution that impact the United
States and common global resources, such as the open ocean and the atmosphere. EPA works
with international partners to address the impacts of pollution from the United States on other
countries and the global environment.
Throughout FY 2012, EPA continued to devote significant effort to putting in place its Enhanced
Chemical Management approach. This approach will improve data collection on existing
chemicals and enhance the accessibility and usefulness of data to assess chemical hazards,
identify potential risks to human health and the environment, and take appropriate risk
management action. EPA developed and implemented criteria to screen the thousands of
chemicals currently in use to identify those requiring most of the Agency's attention in the near
term. In addition, EPA has focused on reducing the continued risk from chemical substances that
were used widely in the past and persist in some environmental settings, despite strict restrictions
on new use. A prime example is lead-based paint, which is banned for use in new residential
construction but remains a major contributor to childhood lead poisoning due to its prevalence in
pre-1978 homes. While EPA continues to make major strides in guarding against exposure to
chemicals that pose potential risks to human health and the environment, challenges remain for
completing pesticide registration reviews and within the Endocrine Disrupter Screening
Program.
Under Objective 2, EPA implements the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990, which established a
national pollution prevention policy. Pollution prevention is central to EPA's sustainability
strategies, and the Agency will continue to incorporate pollution prevention principles into its
policies, regulations, and actions.
To further its objectives under Goal 4, EPA committed to 31 performance measures in FY 2012.
The Agency met or exceeded 78 percent and did not meet 12 percent of the measures for which
data were available at the time of publication. Data were not yet available for 12 measures under
Goal 4, so the Agency will report these results in the FY 2013 and FY 2014 Annual Performance
Reports. The full suite of EPA's FY 2012 Goal 4 measures, including targets, results, and
detailed explanations for variances in targets and results, is available in the FY 2014 Annual
Performance Plan and the Program Performance and Assessment section of the Congressional
Justification.
1157
-------
EPA CONTRIBUTING PROGRAMS
Chemical Risk Review and Reduction
Chemical Risk Management
Endocrine Disrupter Program
Science Policy Biotechnology
Protect Human Health from Pesticide Risk
Protect the Environment from Pesticide Risk
Realize the Value of Pesticide Availability
Lead Risk Reduction and Lead Categorical Grant Programs
Pesticides Program Implementation Categorical Grant Program
Pollution Prevention
Pollution Prevention Categorical Grant Programs
1158
-------
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 1: ENSURE CHEMICAL SAFETY.
Reduce the risk of chemicals that enter our products, our environment, and our bodies.
EPA's Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention administers several programs for
achieving this objective that are designed to ensure that chemicals used in commerce do not pose
unreasonable risks to humans or the environment and, in the case of pesticides, to ensure that
they serve their intended purposes.
EPA's Pesticide Registration Review Program ensures that, as science and the ability to assess
risk evolves and polices change, all registered pesticides continue to meet the statutory standard
of no unreasonable adverse effects. In FY 2012, the pesticide program exceeded its target of
opened dockets for the third year and met the target for final workplans completed. Meeting or
exceeding targets is critical to achieving the statutory deadline of October 1, 2022, for the first
round of pesticide registration reviews.
EPA achieved a major milestone in its efforts to ensure chemical safety in FY 2012 by
developing and implementing a process and criteria for screening the thousands of chemicals
currently in use, and it will focus attention on 83 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Work
Plan chemicals identified though the process. The Agency initiated risk assessments on seven of
those chemicals and identified an additional subset of 18 for assessment in FY 2013 and FY
2014.
In its efforts to increase transparency and public access to chemical safety data, EPA increased
the availability of TSCA 8(e) chemical hazard filings through the Chemical Data Access Tool,
which now includes 18,410 submissions, including 612 Confidential Business Information (CBI)
documents that were newly declassified as part of the existing CBI claims measure. In addition,
EPA conducted heavily attended stakeholder meetings designed to improve the usefulness of
chemical data available to governments and the public.
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments
Pesticide Registration Review
EPA initiates a registration review by establishing a docket for a pesticide registration review
case and opening the docket for public review. The Agency publishes a Federal Register notice
to announce the availability of the docket and provides a comment period of at least 60 days.
After the closure of the public comment period for the preliminary work plan, EPA reviews those
comments, makes necessary revisions, and issues the final work plan.
1159
-------
Performance Measure: Number of pesticide registration review
dockets opened.
2007-2014 Performance Trends
o
o
100
80
60
40
20
75
70
81
79
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10*
FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
"Measure introduced in FY 2010
The program exceeded its FY 2012 target for opened pesticide registration review dockets (target
70, actual 79) and met the target for final work plans completed (70). Meeting or exceeding
targets is critical to achieving the statutory deadline of October 1, 2022, for the first round of
pesticide registration reviews.
Existing CBI Claims Reviewed
To increase transparency, EPA is reviewing CBI claims for TSCA chemical information and,
where appropriate, challenging those claims to make health and safety studies on TSCA
chemicals more publicly available. All claims received since August 2010 are reviewed on an
ongoing basis, and the backlog of claims received prior to August 2010 is processed and tracked
as a performance measure, with all such claims targeted to be addressed by the end of FY 2015.
Performance Measure: Percentage of existing CBI claims for
chemical identity in health and safety studies reviewed and, as
appropriate, challenged.
2007-201 4 Performance Trends
60
50
•g 40
O>
% 30
Q.
20
10
—
—
—
—
1 Target
• Actual
FY07 FY08 FY09
5?
10
5.3
.6
22
1 1
FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
"Measure introduced in FY 2O1 1
1160
-------
In FY 2012, EPA exceeded its target for reviewing and, where appropriate, challenging and
declassifying confidential data claims under TSCA. To date, more than 13,000 of the 22,483
existing CBI cases have been addressed. The Agency is proposing to accelerate completing the
review of existing CBI claims by one year, accomplishing the strategic measure by the end of FY
2014.
Computational Toxicology
EPA's Computational Toxicology (CompTox) research program identifies and prioritizes
potentially toxic chemicals using rapid, automated tests called high-throughput screening (HTS)
assays, which can be used for prioritizing chemicals for further screening. This reduces the need
for traditional expensive and time-consuming animal-based testing. In 2012, EPA's Toxicity
Forecaster (ToxCast), a product of CompTox research, screened over 2,000 chemicals in more
than 650 assays. By comparison, testing the same number of chemicals using traditional animal
toxicity tests took 30 years and $2 billion.
Using ToxCast data, EPA researchers published first-generation predictive models. These
models show how ToxCast data can be used to predict the potential for certain chemicals to be
toxic to embryonic development, male and female reproductive function, and vascular
development. More information on ToxCast modeling is available at
www.epa.gov/ncct/download_files/factsheets/ToxCast%20Models%20Fact%20Sheet-
Nov%2010%202011 .pdf
EPA is a also a collaborator in Toxicity Testing in the 21st century (Tox21), along with the Food
and Drug Administration, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and National Institute of
Environmental Health Science's National Toxicology Program. Tox21 pools federal resources
and expertise to screen more than 8,000 chemicals using innovative robotic technology at the
NIH facility in Rockville, Maryland. ToxCast is designed to increase the capacity to prioritize,
screen, and evaluate chemicals by enhancing EPA's ability to predict chemical toxicity and
exposure.
Reducing Exposures to Poly chlorinated Biphenyls in School Buildings
One of EPA's top priorities is protecting children from harmful chemical exposures where they
live, learn, and play. School buildings built or renovated between 1950 and the 1970s may
contain polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in certain building materials, especially caulk and
other sealants, and in older fluorescent light ballasts. PCBs are a class of organic chemicals,
banned from manufacture in 1979, that can cause negative health effects.
In response to concerns raised by the public about PCBs in schools, in fall 2009, EPA announced
a series of steps that building owners and school administrators should take to reduce exposure to
PCBs in buildings constructed during the 1950-1970s timeframe. EPA calls these series of steps
"Guidance for School Administrators and Building Managers."
At this time, EPA scientists also began researching PCB sources, evaluating potential routes and
pathways of exposure, and studying mitigation and remediation methods. EPA's Stochastic
Human Exposure and Dose Simulation (SHEDS) model was used to predict the potential levels
1161
-------
of exposure of children in school environments. The research also evaluated engineering
methods for reducing exposures to PCBs in schools containing caulk and other PCB sources.
In total, EPA has released five studies and the Literature Review of Remediation Methods for
PCBs in Buildings, which compiled and categorized the various studies and reports about
methods to remediate PCB contamination in buildings. In November 2012, EPA released
research results from three of the studies and the literature review and then released two
additional studies in January 2013. A summary of these research results is available at
www.epa.gov/pcbsincaulk/caulkresearch.htm.
EPA used the findings from the research to update its PCB guidance. In summary, EPA made the
following updates to its PCB guidance as a result of the research.
Ventilation: EPA has indicated that minimizing PCBs in indoor air is an important first step in
reducing exposure. EPA's specific guidance indicates to do so by "ensuring the ventilation
system is operating as designed and repair or improve the system if it is not."
Ballasts: EPA strengthened its recommendation to replace PCB-containing ballasts even if they
are not leaking because they can still emit PCBs during use, and ruptures and leaks cause high
PCB emissions that can result in exposure and larger cleanup costs.
Secondary Sources: EPA explained that research has shown that there are primary (e.g. caulk,
ballasts) and secondary (e.g. dust, paint, ceiling and floor tiles) sources of PCBs.
Deteriorating Caulk: EPA removed statements suggesting that there is a greater concern for
deteriorating caulk and adding language indicating that old caulk that is still flexible or in visibly
good condition could be a source of PCBs in the air.
Testing Caulk: EPA added language stating that the only way to know if caulk has PCBs is to
have a professional test the caulk.
Encapsulation: EPA added language explaining that encapsulants may be an effective way to
reduce exposure to PCBs in surrounding contaminated areas after the caulk has been removed.
More information about EPA research is available at
www.epa.gov/pcbsincaulk/caulkresearch.htm and
www.epa.gov/pcbsincaulk/pdf/PCBs_Comprehensive_Overvi ew_l-8-2013.pdf
More information about EPA's SHEDS model is available at
www.epa.gov/heasd/products/sheds multimedia/sheds mm.html.
FY 2012 Performance Challenges
Lead Renovation, Repair, and Painting Rule Certified Firms
The current focus of EPA's strategy to reduce risks from lead-based paint is the promulgation
and implementation of the Lead Renovation, Repair, and Painting (RRP) Rule. The Lead RRP
1162
-------
Rule requires that firms performing paint-disturbing activities in pre-1978 homes and child-
occupied facilities be trained and EPA-certified and follow lead-safe work practice standards.
Performance Measure: Cumulative number of certified
Renovation Repair and Painting firms.
2007-2014 Performance Trends
150,000
120,000
90,000
60,000
30,000
140,000 140,000 138,000
126,323
100,000
9,143
FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
In support of these results, through the end of FY 2012, the Agency has accredited more than
626 training providers and EPA and authorized states have certified 126,323 renovation firms.
Performance in FY 2012 did not meet expectations due to curtailed efforts to educate
homeowners about the importance of using certified firms, while the Agency continued work on
additional regulations required by statute to address lead-based paint in public and commercial
buildings. The most recently reported data show success in reducing blood lead levels in
children. The Centers for Disease Control's National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey
reported that the prevalence of elevated blood lead levels (>5|ig/dL) among children under 6 has
decreased from 4.1 percent between 2003-2006 to 2.6 percent between 2007-2010, exceeding
the target for FY 2010.
1163
-------
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 2: PROMOTE POLLUTION PREVENTION.
Conserve and protect natural resources by promoting pollution prevention and the adoption of
other stewardship practices by companies, communities, governmental organizations, and
individuals.
EPA's Pollution Prevention (P2) Program employs technical assistance, information, and
assessments to encourage the use of greener chemicals, technologies, processes, and products.
EPA will continue to support programs with proven records of success, including
Environmentally Preferable Purchasing, Design for the Environment (DfE), Green Suppliers
Network, Pollution Prevention Technical Assistance, Partnership for Sustainable Healthcare,
Green Chemistry, and Green Engineering. Within this framework, the P2 Program will support
the Economy, Energy, and Environment (E3) Partnership among federal agencies, local
governments, and manufacturers to promote energy efficiency, job creation, and environmental
improvement. Work under these programs also supports the energy reduction goals under
Executive Order 13514.
In FY 2012, the P2 Program issued a list of 494 chemicals that qualify for use in products that
bear EPA's Design for the Environment (DfE) logo. The list will serve as a resource for product
manufacturers in identifying chemicals that the DfE program has already evaluated and
identified as safer.
In FY 2012, EPA expanded E3 program partnerships, which enable communities to work with
their manufacturing base to adapt and thrive in a new business era focused on sustainability. E3
provides manufacturers with customized, hands-on assessment of production processes to reduce
energy consumption, minimize their carbon footprint, prevent pollution, increase productivity,
and drive innovation. E3 partnerships are actively in place in 18 states, and organizations in an
additional 15 states and territories have begun the E3 process. These partnerships have resulted
in 288 completed facility assessments.
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments
DfE Safer Chemicals
EPA is working to promote transparency through its DfE program by posting an online list of
494 chemicals that qualify for use in specific products that bear EPA's DfE logo.
Performance Measure: Percent increase in use of safer chemicals.
100
80
60
40
20
0
2007-2014 Performance Trends
62
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
1164
-------
In FY 2012, EPA began tracking the percent increase in the use of safer chemicals from the 2009
baseline of 476 million gallons. EPA expects to achieve an 85-percent increase in FY 2014,
contributing to achievement of the P2 Program's commitment in EPA's new Strategic Plan to
increase the use of safer chemicals cumulatively by 40 percent by 2015. The FY 2014 target has
been set much higher than previous years due to better than expected performance on this
measure in FY 2011 (60.1 percent) and a further increase in performance indicated for FY 2012.
The FY 2013 target (7 percent) was set before the FY 2011 results were available.
FY 2012 Performance Challenges
Greenhouse Gas Targets
Since establishing the performance measure, metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent reduced or
offset through pollution prevention in the FY 2008 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional
Justification, the P2 Program missed its GHG reduction target in FY 2009, FY 2010, and FY
2011.
Targets for this performance measure are well beyond what has become reasonably achievable.
These targets were set in FY 2008, based on the most recently available data from previous years
and before the long-range consequences of the economic recession and federal budget reductions
were fully appreciated. Although the program was able to modify the targets for FY 2013 and
future years, it could not do so for earlier years, resulting in missed targets from FY 2009
through FY 2012. Despite shortfalls in meeting targets since FY 2009, performance has been
improving. With FY 2011 results, the Agency has met the strategic measure of reducing carbon
dioxide equivalent by 9 million metric tons; future performance will help the Agency exceed this
measure.
1165
-------
Strategic Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws
GOAL 5 AT A GLANCE
ENFORCING ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS
Protect human health and the environment through vigorous and targeted civil and criminal
enforcement. Assure compliance with environmental laws.
FY 2012 Performance Measures
Met = 9 Not Met = 6 Data Unavailable = 0 (Total Measures = 15}
How Funds Were Used: Net Program Costs
(Dollars in Thousands)
Taking Action on
Climate Change and
Improving Air Quality
$1,212,245.9
Enforcing
Environmental Laws
$822,028.2
7.54%
Ensuring the Safety
of Chemicals and
Preventing Pollution
$778,117.5
7.14%
Cleaning Up
Communities and
Advancing Sustainable
Development
Source: FY 2012 Statement of Net Cost by Goal
Goal 5 Performance Measures
Objective I
Goal 5 FY 2012 Performance and Resources
Strategic Objective
FY2012
Obligations
(in thousands)
%of
GoalS
Funds
Objective 5.1: Enforce Environmental Laws. Pursue vigorous civil and criminal enforcement
that targets the most serious water, air, and chemical hazards in communities. Assure
strong, consistent, and effective enforcement of federal environmental laws nationwide.
$822,028.2
100%
Goal 5 Total
$822,028.2
100%
Due to rounding, some numbers might add up to slightly less or more than 100%.
1166
-------
GOAL 5 OVERVIEW
Vigorous enforcement is critical to EPA's work to protect human health and the environment.
That is why enforcing environmental laws is both a goal and an objective in the Agency's FY
2011-2015 Strategic Plan. Achieving EPA's goals for clean drinking water, lakes and streams
that are fishable and swimmable, clean air to breathe, and communities and neighborhoods that
are free from chemical contamination requires both new strategies and compliance with rules
already in place.
Through enforcement actions, EPA identifies and focuses on priority environmental risks and
noncompliance problems by tackling the largest sources of air, water, and waste pollution. Each
year, this strategy results in enforcement actions that produce commitments to reduce, treat, or
eliminate significant amounts of pollution, leading to greater protection of public and
environmental health. For FY 2012, EPA enforcement cases resulted in commitments to reduce,
treat, or eliminate an estimated 2.2 billion pounds of pollution in the nation's air, water, and land,
and 4.4 billion pounds of hazardous waste.
EPA's civil and criminal enforcement cases directly reduce pollution and risk and deter others
from violating the law by addressing noncompliance swiftly and effectively. One successful tool
is to assess penalties. In FY 2012, EPA assessed a record $252 million in civil and criminal
penalties to punish misconduct, deter other violators, and help remedy the harm caused by the
criminal conduct.
In conducting its enforcement program, EPA targets the most serious water, air, and chemical
hazards and advances environmental justice by focusing on low-income, minority, and tribal
communities that are disproportionately impacted by such hazards. In FY 2012, EPA
enforcement actions resulted in companies committing to invest more than $43 million in
supplemental environmental projects (SEPs). These SEPs, negotiated as part of EPA
enforcement settlements, are environmentally beneficial projects that a violator agrees to
undertake.
EPA has also made strides in advancing its priority goal to develop a plan to convert existing
paper reports into electronic reporting, establish electronic reporting in at least four key
programs, and adopt a policy for including electronic reporting in new rules.
As the Agency continues making progress in addressing pollution, the enforcement program has
begun a new initiative called Next Generation Compliance, to improve compliance with
environmental laws in a more cost-effective manner. The key principles of this initiative are to
build compliance drivers (e.g., designing rules with compliance incentives built in) into the
regulatory process; make greater use of transparency tools (such as making compliance data
more accessible to the public) to drive better compliance; move the Agency toward electronic
reporting, which will allow it to identify the biggest pollution problems faster and more
accurately; and build a shared electronic reporting system with states that will allow the Agency
access to compliance data. This sharing of information will give the Agency access to state
efforts to improve compliance and will allow EPA and states to work together to develop
innovative approaches to conducting enforcement programs. EPA's enforcement program has
1167
-------
also been employing innovations in monitoring and transparency to reduce violations and
improve communities' knowledge about nearby violations. These important activities and results
are not reflected in the FY 2012 performance measures but will be reported on in FY 2013.
To further its objectives under Goal 5, EPA committed to 15 performance measures in FY 2012,
an increase from the seven performance measures reported in FY 2011. The Agency met or
exceeded 60 percent and did not meet 40 percent of the annual measures.
The performance measures under Goal 5 report data that are traditionally used to evaluate
progress, such as pounds of pollution reduced, treated, or eliminated. The results of several of
these traditional measures reflect the outcomes of one or two large cases each year and therefore,
are highly variable from year to year. The full suite of EPA's FY 2012 Goal 5 measures,
including targets, results, and detailed explanations for variances in targets and results, is
available in the FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and the Program Performance and
Assessment section of the CongressionalJustification.
Additional information about EPA's FY 2012 enforcement results is available at
www. epa. gov/enforcement/data/eoy2012/index. html.
1168
-------
EPA CONTRIBUTING PROGRAMS
Environmental Justice
Compliance Assistance Program
Compliance Incentives Program
Environmental Technology Verification Program, Monitoring and Enforcement Program
National Center for Environmental Innovation
National Partnership for Environmental Priorities
Economic Decision Sciences Research
Pesticide Enforcement Grant Program
Sector Grant Program
Sustainable Materials Management
Toxic Substances Compliance Grant Program
Sustainability Research
Superfund Enforcement
RCRA Corrective Action
1169
-------
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 1: ENFORCE ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS.
Pursue vigorous civil and criminal enforcement that targets the most serious water, air, and
chemical hazards in communities. Assure strong, consistent, and effective enforcement of
federal environmental laws nationwide.
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments
EPA established the following FY 2012-FY 2013 Cross-Program Agency Priority Goal to
advance its FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan objective to increase transparency and reduce burden:
By September 30, 2013, develop a plan to convert existing paper reports into electronic
reporting, establish electronic reporting in at least four key programs, and adopt a policy for
including electronic reporting in new rules.
The Agency established a task force to recommend important reports to convert to electronic
reporting, streamline, consolidate, or delete. The task force began developing an Agency policy
to encourage electronic reporting as a default for new rules and established a working group with
Environmental Council of the States (ECOS) commissioners to develop a framework and vision
for e-reporting. As part of this initiative, the Agency has proposed two rules that would make
electronic reporting mandatory (under the Toxics Release Inventory and TSCA) and
implemented provisions for making electronic reporting mandatory for two rules (e.g., Chemical
Data Reporting and TSCA section 5).
Level of Effort Measures and Reducing, Treating,
and Eliminating Pollutants
EPA secures commitments for future pollution
controls to reduce, treat, or eliminate millions of
pounds of pollution through enforcement actions.
These commitments are a direct result of our level of
effort measures, such as inspections, case initiations,
and case conclusions. As part of
FY 2012 actions, EPA secured commitments for
pollution controls that will reduce, treat, or eliminate
illegal release of pollutants in the first year after
pollution controls are installed. Overall, the Agency
experienced a very strong enforcement year
evaluated against these traditional measures.
In FY 2012 EPA achieved an
estimated total of 2.2 billion pounds
of pollution reduced, treated, or
eliminated, including:
• 250 million pounds of air
pollutants
• 500 million pounds of water
pollutants
• 1.45 billion pounds of toxic and
pesticide pollutants
• 4.4 billion pounds of hazardous
waste
1170
-------
Typically, the results for each of these performance
measures are driven by a few large cases. The results
for water and toxic and pesticide pollutants reduced
are significantly greater than the FY 2012 targets
because a few large cases were concluded in FY
2012. The results for air and hazardous waste
pollutants reduced are lower than the target. The
hazardous waste result demonstrates the variability
of the results when there is not a large case in a given
year. For air pollutants, a couple factors affected the
final result: 1) as the enforcement program has
completed the largest electric utility cases and is
shifting focus to smaller air toxics cases, the quantity of air pollutants reduced will necessarily
decrease (although there is an expectation to achieve significant health improvements from
reducing air toxics emissions), and 2) some large air cases were close to being concluded but
were not completed in FY 2012.
Estimated Air, Water, and Toxic/Pesticide Pollutants Reduced
In FY 2012, sustained and focused
attention on drinking water
violations resulted in a 15-percent
reduction of in the number of
serious violators, a designation of
drinking water systems based on
severity and type of violations. A
portion of this improvement is a
result of more complete data entry
by primacy agencies.
Performance Measure: Millions of pounds of air pollutants,
water pollutants, toxic and pesticide pollutants, and hazardous
waste reduced, treated, or eliminated through concluded
enforcement actions.
4,000
3,500
3,000
•0 2,500
c
g 2,000
°~ 1 ,500
1,000
500
0
20
r- 3,£
- 890 890
1
07-201 4 Performance Trends
00
Target
• Actual
2,150
,,„ T 1
890 8041 8041 8041 773 773
If Ml] i
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
In FY 2012, 4.4 billion pounds of
hazardous waste were reduced,
eliminated, properly disposed of, or
treated.
EPA conducted 20,000 inspections and evaluations,
initiated 3,000 cases, and concluded 3,000 cases. The
initiation and conclusion numbers resulted from our
efforts to balance concluding new cases with the
1171
-------
management and tracking of previously concluded consent decrees. More information is
available at
www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/reports/endofyear/eoy2012/index.html.
National Enforcement Initiatives
EPA takes aggressive enforcement action against pollution problems, making a difference in
communities. As part of this effort, EPA's enforcement and compliance program identifies and
focuses on priority environmental risks and noncompliance problems through the National
Enforcement Initiatives. EPA developed six National Enforcement Initiatives to address some of
the more complex pollution problems in our nation:
Keeping raw sewage and contaminated storm water runoff out of waters.
Decreasing animal waste to protect surface and ground waters.
Reducing widespread air pollution from the largest sources, especially the coal-fired
utilities, cement, glass, and acid sectors.
Cutting toxic air pollution that affects communities' health.
Ensuring energy extraction sector compliance with environmental laws.
Reducing pollution from mineral processing operations.
CLEANING UP RAW SEWAGE
AND STORMWATER
Sixty-seven percent of large
municipalities with combined
sewer overflows are now on track
to address their local water issues,
many using innovations like green
infrastructure to help reduce
stormwater flows.
In 2012, EPA took action under the National
Enforcement Initiatives by targeting large
municipalities to reduce pollution and the volume of
stormwater runoff as well as unlawful discharges of
raw sewage that degrade water quality in
communities. In addition, the Agency took action by
using an integrated approach to provide flexibility to
communities. By promoting green infrastructure,
EPA is helping to make significant progress in
cleaning up raw sewage and stormwater in the most
cost-effective way. Currently, 67 percent of large
combined sewer systems and 71 percent of sanitary
sewer systems are on track to address their pollution problems.
Under these initiatives, the Agency is taking action to reduce animal waste pollution that impairs
our nation's waters, threatens drinking water sources, and adversely impacts communities near
livestock and poultry operations. In FY 2012, the Agency conducted 55 enforcement actions
under this initiative. Additionally, the Agency is continuing New Source Review initiatives in
the coal-fired plant, cement kiln, glass, and acid manufacturing sectors and is securing major
reductions in emissions that adversely affect community health. EPA continued to focus on the
largest cases—more than 85 percent of sources have been investigated or are currently under
investigation.
1172
-------
The Agency is improving its enforcement activities to control air toxics that pose significant
risks to communities located near large sources of toxic air emissions. The initiative is
employing innovative emissions monitoring technology to identify pollution problems and is
making this information available to the public so that communities can know about pollution
that affects them.
Additionally, the Agency is taking actions, such as imposing civil penalties and requiring
restoration of land and stream beds, to address the highest-risk mineral processing sites across
the nation. The initiative is on track to meet its goal of addressing 100 percent of the highest-risk
facilities by 2016.
Lastly, the Agency is working to protect communities from adverse health and environmental
impacts posed by burgeoning natural gas extraction activities across the nation. Under this
initiative, 96 enforcement actions have been concluded.
Injunctive Relief and Supplemental Environmental Projects from Enforcement Cases
In FY 2012, EPA enforcement actions resulted in companies investing an estimated $9 billion in
actions and equipment to control pollution (also known as injunctive relief). Also in FY 2012,
companies invested an estimated $43 million in projects that benefit the environment and public
health (i.e., SEPs) as a result of the Agency's enforcement actions. For example, MOEX
Offshore 2007 LLC agreed to settle the Deepwater Horizon oil spill litigation.
In addition to paying $70 million in penalties, MOEX agreed to spend $20 million to ensure that
properties within the states of Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi, and Florida are transferred to or
acquired by state governmental entities, nonprofit groups, land trusts, or other appropriate
entities to protect those properties in perpetuity from development by encumbering them with
conservation easements, deed restrictions, covenants, or other institutional controls.
Superfund Enforcement
EPA's Superfund Program continues to pursue two strategies for obtaining site cleanup and
conserving federal funds: "Enforcement First" and cost recovery. EPA takes enforcement actions
at sites where viable, liable potentially responsible parties (PRPs) exist, requiring them to pay for
or perform site cleanups. Superfund provides EPA with the authority to compel private parties to
pay back federal money spent to conduct cleanup activities. Enforcement First and cost recovery
allow EPA to focus appropriated funds on sites where PRPs either do not exist or lack the funds
or capability to conduct site cleanups. The following table depicts EPA Enforcement First and
cost recovery policies:
1173
-------
FY 2012 ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE SUPERFUND ANNUAL RESULTS
(Inflation/Deflation Adjusted to FY 2011 Dollars)
Cost
Recovery
Oversight
Site Study
and Cleanup*
BJ008 FY2009 FY 2010 FY2011 FY 2012
lion $) (Million $) (Million $) (Million $) (Million $)
241
79
1638
387
82
2082
158
84
1448
300
74
3000
172
67
657
Data source for Cleanup and Cost Recovery: Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation & Liability Information System (CERCLIS); FY 2012 data source for Oversight:
COMPASS; data source for Oversight for previous fiscal years: Integrated Financial
Management System (IFMS).
*The Site Study and Cleanup line represents the costs incurred by PRPs to address contamination at particular
sites. The Oversight line represents costs incurred by EPA to ensure that the PRP properly conducts the site study
and cleanup. PRP then reimburses these costs. Finally, the Cost Recovery line represents the amount of federal
dollars spent by EPA (and later recovered from PRPs) to perform the site study and cleanup.
Criminal Enforcement
EPA's criminal enforcement program enforces the nation's
environmental laws by investigating cases, collecting evidence,
conducting forensic analyses, and providing legal guidance to
assist in the prosecution of criminal conduct that threatens
people's health and the environment.
In FY 2012, $252 million
in criminal fines and civil
penalties was assessed to
deter pollution.
In FY 2012, 320 environmental crime cases were opened. This 14-percent decrease from FY
2011 is due to EPA's criminal enforcement program's increased focus on pursuing bigger and
more complex cases. EPA brought criminal charges against 231 defendants, which is a 9-percent
decrease from F Y 2011. Of the 231 defendants, 74 percent were individuals and 26 percent were
companies. The total amount of fines and restitution was $44 million, which is a 29-percent
increase over FY 2011. Convicted defendants
were assessed a total of 79 years in prison,
which is a 12-percent decrease from FY 2011.
The percentage of criminal cases having the
most significant health, environmental, and
EPA is taking criminal enforcement action
against companies or individuals who fail
to use required pollution control
equipment; knowingly violate pollution
rules, thereby resulting in death or serious
harm; or falsify pollution information. See
a case example in Louisiana.
deterrence impacts exceeded the FY 2012
target of 43 percent, with an end-of-year result
equal to 45 percent. This matches the result
that the agency obtained in FY 2011.
1174
-------
FY 2012 Performance Challenges
Electronic Reporting
Agency reporting requirements are still largely paper-
based, which is inefficient and unnecessarily resource-
intensive for reporting entities and states, and ineffective
for compliance monitoring and assurance. Paper-based
compliance reporting information is often not readily
accessible to EPA, states, or the public to identify
noncompliance and drive performance improvements at
both regulated facilities and within the government.
INCREASING
TRANSPARENCY
EPA's enforcement and
compliance online history
tools, including the map of
enforcement cases in 2012,
state dashboards, and Clean
Water Act pollutant loadings
tool, provide the public with
critical access to environmental
information.
To reduce both reporting burden and pollution over the
long term, and to improve both compliance and the information available to the public about
pollution that affects them, the Agency has begun developing a comprehensive plan to convert to
21st century electronic reporting technology. This effort will require some short-term
investments but is expected to provide substantial long-term benefits for industry, states, EPA,
and the public. More specifically, electronic reporting allows for much better targeting, promotes
evidence-based approaches and experimentation, and even lays out a foundation for greater
transparency.
Enforcement Program Performance Measures
ADVANCING ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
EPA incorporated fence line monitoring into
settlements, ensuring that local residents have
access to critical information about pollution
that may be affecting their community. See an
oil refinery case example.
EPA has been adopting a new strategic
approach to address the challenges faced by
states. For example, the Agency needs to
expand the universe of regulated sources so
that enforcement and compliance do not
solely depend on traditional, in-person
inspections and enforcement to address
serious violations.
EPA is continuing to develop performance measures that provide more contextual information,
such as the performance measures for the National Enforcement Initiatives. The measures for the
National Enforcement Initiatives strive to show progress toward a goal; show data on the
universe of facilities; and describe the whole problem, not just provide data on federal
enforcement actions. Additionally, EPA is working to develop performance measures related to
the Next Generation Compliance Initiative.
1175
-------
ENABLING AND SUPPORT PROGRAMS
1176
-------
OVERVIEW
In addition to the major program offices, EPA has six support offices to assist in meeting its
overall mission. These offices are referred to as Enabling Support Programs (ESPs) and include
the Office of the Administrator (OA), the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO), the
Office of the Inspector General (OIG), the Office of Environmental Information (OEI), the
Office of Administration and Resource Management (OARM), and the Office of General
Counsel (OGC).
The Agency's ESPs are essential to the functioning of the Agency's media programs and
contribute substantially in varying capacities to assist them in meeting Agency objectives.
Support work includes complying with congressionally mandated statutes, auditing Agency
programs for improved efficiencies, interpreting and advising on legal issues, hiring, processing
payroll, and providing all aspects of internal IT support.
In FY 2012, the ESPs collectively reported 13 performance measures. The Agency met or
exceeded 77 percent of the measures and did not meet 23 percent. The full suite of EPA's FY
2012 support program measures, including targets, results, and detailed explanations for
variances in targets and results, is available in the FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and the
Program Performance and Assessment section of the CongressionalJustification.
FY 2012 PERFORMANCE ACCOMPLISHMENTS (OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION)
Major Environmental Systems Using Central Data Exchange (CDX)
Performance Measure: Number of major EPA environmental
systems that use the CDX electronic requirements enabling
faster receipt, processing, and quality checking of data.
2007-2014 Performance Trends
80
70
60
to 50
.1
40
30
20
60
64
68
I I
I I I I
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
CDX is the electronic gateway through which environmental data enter the Agency. It enables
fast, efficient and more accurate environmental data submissions to EPA from state and local
1177
-------
governments, industry, and tribes. It also provides a set of core services for the entire Agency
rather than each Agency program building its own duplicative services. In FY 2012, 68 EPA
systems were using CDX (an increase from 64 in FY 2011).
Exchanging Data with CDX through Nodes in Real Time
States, tribes, and territories will be able to exchange data with CDX through nodes in real time
using standards and automated data-quality checking.
Performance Measure: States, tribes and territories will be able
to exchange data with CDX through nodes in real time, using
standards and automated data-quality checking.
2007-2014 Performance Trends
(/)
cu
100
80
60
40
92
59 59
— =7 O» O»
111
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
EPA continues to leverage the Exchange Network (EN) to achieve Agency information goals
while increasing efficiency. In collaboration with EPA, the Environmental Council of the States
(ECOS) accepts the EN as the standard approach for EPA, state, tribal, and territory data sharing.
In FY 2012, 92 states, tribes, and/or territories exchanged data with the CDX through nodes in
real time rather than through periodic uploads of data, an improvement of more than 20 users
over FY 2011.
CDX Users
This measure tracks the total number of active unique users from states, tribes, laboratories,
regulated facilities, and other entities that electronically report environmental data to EPA
through CDX.
1178
-------
Performance Measure: Total number of active unique users from
states, tribes, laboratories, regulated facilities and other entities
that electronically report environmental data to EPA through CDX.
2007-2014 Performance Trends
£>
80,000
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
Progress continues, with 65,238 users in FY 2012, a 16-percent increase from 56,200 registered
users in FY 2011. CDX and the EN activities continue to expand as the demand for more
electronic exchanges increases. As CDX remains at pace with new technology and economies of
scale, the Agency met its goal of reducing costs for reporting data exchange solutions. This has
enabled smaller EPA programs to convert to and enhance their own data exchange programs.
FY 2012 Performance Accomplishments (Office of the Inspector General)
EPA's OIG contributes to the Agency's mission to improve human health and environmental
protection by assessing the efficiency and effectiveness of EPA's program management
capabilities, ensuring that Agency resources are used as intended, developing recommendations
for improvements and cost savings, and providing oversight and advisory assistance in helping
EPA carry out its ARRA objectives.
In FY 2012, OIG identified key management challenges and internal control weaknesses and
provided 1,242 recommendations, accounting for nearly $424.8 million in potential savings and
recoveries and 216 actions taken for improvement by the Agency (based on OIG
recommendations). For example, the Agency agreed to:
• Establish and enforce expectations for Radiation Network (RadNet) operations readiness,
improve planning and management of parts availability, and monitor the installation of
the remaining RadNet monitors.
• Develop and implement policies and procedures for the Great Lakes National Program
Office that address the establishment of accounts receivable, recording of in-kind
1179
-------
contributions, completion of final accounting, and review of the financial capability of
nonfederal sponsors.
• Issue guidance requiring that the results of all grant improper payment determinations
and recaptures be reported.
• Correct the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) financial
statements to reflect the proper payroll and benefits payable amounts, and closely
monitor the payroll and benefit accruals for FIFRA at year end.
• Include in the annual regional review of the states checklist an assessment of the
coordination between state Drinking Water State Revolving Funds (DWSRF) and
enforcement programs.
• Create a national intended use plan review checklist that includes a requirement to assess
coordination between state DWSRF and enforcement programs.
• Identify and implement actions to enhance coordination among regional and state
DWSRF and Public Water System Supervision programs.
• Establish a process to resolve disagreements with regions on protectiveness
determinations; improve the consistency, thoroughness, and communication of Office of
Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation reviews; and better define
protectiveness determinations.
OIG also contributes to the integrity of and public confidence in the Agency's programs and the
security of its resources by preventing and detecting possible fraud, waste, and abuse and
pursuing judicial and administrative remedies. OIG investigations accounted for 152 criminal,
civil, or administrative enforcement actions or allegations disproved during FY 2012.
Additionally, OIG Recovery Act work accounted for cost savings, questioned costs, and
recoveries and forfeitures of $16.8 million during FY 2012 and more than $28.3 million
cumulatively since FY 2009.
1180
-------
Recommendations or Risks Identified for Corrective Action
Performance Measure: Environmental and business
recommendations or risks identified for corrective action.
2,500
2,000
"c 1,500
CD
E
E 1 ,000
o
o
CD
DC 500
2006-2013 Performance Trends
2011
1242
90S945 9031
.925949 90S983 903 9*
ILlLJ
786 786
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
In FY 2012, OIG achieved 1,242 environmental and business recommendations or risks
identified for corrective action. The number of OIG results in terms of recommendations and
risks identified has generally reflected a larger number of OIG audits, single audit reports, and
OIG investigations concentrating on accountability for and application of ARRA funds by
grantees in FY 2012. The focus of OIG's work changes each year based on different areas of risk
requiring the review and attention of the Agency and its stakeholders. The number of
recommendations dramatically increased in both FY 2011 and FY 2012 as OIG created an
ARRA fraud taskforce and reported the findings from single audit reviews of ARRA grant
recipients as well as its own internal forensic audit results.
1181
-------
Return on Investment
Performance Measure : Return on the annual dollar
investment, as a percentage of the OIG budget, from audits
and investigations.
800
700
600
500
400
300
2007-2014 Performance Trends
743
_ 189
186
110
120
120
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
In FY 2012, OIG achieved $424.8 million in questioned costs, cost efficiencies, fines
settlements, or recoveries, for a 743-percent return as a percentage of the OIG budget. While the
level of return on investment has been fairly consistent with regard to the dollar level of
questioned costs, for some years, the cost efficiencies identified from audits and evaluations and
fines, penalties, and settlements from investigations have differed greatly from the usual level.
Such differences often depend on an extraordinary result from an audit or evaluation of a
criminal case. For example, the OIG results for FY 2012 included a recommended efficiency that
could make more effective use of the Agency's $372 million in regional enforcement full-time
equivalents by directing a single national workforce instead of 10 inconsistent regional
enforcement programs (Report No. 12-P-0113). The monetary return on investment in any
particular year is largely related to perceived risks and opportunity for public benefit.
1182
-------
Investigative Results
Performance Measure: Criminal, civil, administrative, and fraud
prevention actions.
2006-2013 Performance Trends
200
150
50
160
103
115
84
95
152
90 90
I I
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
In FY 2012, OIG achieved 152 criminal, civil, or administrative and fraud prevention actions.
Results from investigative work are extremely unpredictable, as the nature of the work itself is
response oriented (to indicators of fraud, wrongdoing, or allegations received) and dependent on
the subsequent actions of the Department of Justice. However, OIG investigative results have
generally correlated to the levels of investigative staffing; as investigative staffing has increased
since FY 2008, so too have the results. In addition, creating an OIG Recovery Act Fraud Task
Force has contributed to the increased level of investigative results.
1183
-------
CROSS -CUTTING FUNDAMENTAL STRATEGIES
1184
-------
Introduction
The Agency's FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan described five Cross-Cutting Fundamental
Strategies for transforming the way we deliver environmental and human health protection.
Annually, the Agency develops Action Plans to implement these strategies as part of a deliberate
and focused effort to take tangible, measurable actions toward the vision laid out in the
strategies.
FY 2012 is the second year the Agency has developed Action Plans that lay out specific
commitments and Annual Progress Reports that detail our accomplishments. Selected highlights
from the Annual Progress Reports are included in this section.
Strategy 1: Expanding the Conversation on Environmentalism: Engage and empower
communities and partners, including those which have been historically under-represented, in
order to support and advance environmental protection and human health nationwide.
The Agency is continuing its outreach and conversation to include a broader range of people and
communities in its day-to-day work and to expand its engagement with communities that have
been historically under-represented in our decision-making processes. In FY 2012, the Agency's
actions centered on public access to multi-lingual communication, interaction with media outlets
that reach historically under-represented groups, improved access to and transparency of
environmental data to support community and citizen involvement in decision-making, and
expanding public awareness and opportunities for involvement during all phases of the
rulemaking process.
Highlights:
EPA launched 12 new websites with the One EPA Web Content Development Strategy to
expand engagement with historically under-represented groups on such topics as
reduce/reuse/recycle, enforcement, and Puget Sound. Forty additional websites are under
development. These websites are based on a user-friendly platform, draw on existing content,
and represent a collaborative approach for strategically organizing topics.
EPA redesigned its Spanish-language website and launched a new Spanish-language blog to
make environmental information more accessible to non-English speakers. EPA's Hispanic
Facebook followers have increased by 30 percent, to more than 2,500 fans, and its Hispanic
Twitter followers have expanded by 33 percent, to more than 7,000 people.
The Agency expanded tools to assist in the identification and development of new applications
("apps") and the associated data that the public would find useful. One example is a new data
access and outreach tool called "How's My Waterway," released in mid-October for the 40th
anniversary of the Clean Water Act. This is a multi-platform website application that helps users
quickly find plain-English information on the condition of their local waters via smart phone,
tablet, or desktop/laptop computer.
1185
-------
EPA developed educational resources on fuel economy, how to conduct a chemical survey, lead
blockers, mold, mercury, and bioaccumulation for use by Hispanic and English-speaking
audiences.
The Agency expanded enrollment in an EPA-sponsored summer environmental law program for
law students from a historically black college/university at the University of Vermont Law
School and supplemented this academic study with internship opportunities at EPA headquarters
and three EPA regional offices.
Challenges:
The EPA Tribal ecoAmbassadors Program was initiated at 25 colleges and universities during
the academic year from September 2011 to May 2012 but did not meet the goal of reaching 50
institutions. The Agency acknowledges that many environment-oriented programs sponsored by
major environmental organizations already exist on the college level, so partnering with these
organizations may be a good way to leverage resources.
The Agency's outreach to non-English speakers is hampered by limited ability to sustain high-
caliber Spanish translations of content on a regular basis. Similarly, resources for Asian language
translations are not available in-house and must be leveraged from other sources.
Strategy 2: Working for Environmental Justice and Children's Health: Work to reduce and
prevent harmful exposures and health risks to children and underserved, disproportionately
impacted, low-income minority and tribal communities, and support community efforts to
build healthy, sustainable green neighborhoods.
Since beginning her tenure as EPA Administrator, Lisa Jackson has made working for
environmental justice (EJ) and children's health one of her key priorities. This priority
challenges EPA to address the needs of communities that are under-represented in environmental
decision-making and unduly burdened by environmental pollution. Children are often most
acutely affected by environmental pollutants because of higher exposures in places where they
live and play and/or lowered abilities to withstand, cope, and recover from environmental
hazards.
Highlights:
The Agency included commitments and program initiatives in the FY 2013 National Program
Managers' Guidance to promote and capture advancements in environmental justice and
children's health.
Based on an assessment of promising practices culled from regional experience with community-
based programs, the Agency developed eight recommendations for aligning and harmonizing
future Agency community-based work. Each EPA region has identified a community in which to
pilot these recommendations in FY 2013 in order to enhance EPA support and improve results.
EPA's Region 1 led the development of the concept of Environmental Justice and Permitting
Regional Implementation Plans under the Plan EJ 2014 Permitting Initiative. These plans
establish a process for prioritizing enhanced public involvement opportunities for EPA-issued
1186
-------
permits where a regional office may find a disproportionate impact on overburdened
communities. Region 1 will pilot its plan in FY 2013 as an example for other regions.
Additionally, the Office of Air and Radiation, the Office of General Counsel, and Region 1 have
drafted and released for public comment an environmental justice and permitting "Good
Practices" document.
The Agency developed the EJSCREEN tool, which is now available to every EPA employee via
the GeoPlatform. This tool will increase consistency in the data and methods used for EJ
screening and reduce the cost of screening activities across the Agency.
• The Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention launched the School Integrated
Pest Management program (IPM). The launch coordinated EPA intra- and extramural
components and integrated multiple efforts across the country to protect schools and
schoolchildren from the hazards carried by rodents and other pests. The program also
integrated IPM efforts across the federal government, including the Department of
Agriculture and the Centers for Disease Control of the Department of Health and Human
Services.
The Office of Children's Health Protection participated in 32 regulatory workgroups in support
of important actions for protecting children's health, including the mercury air toxics rule and the
proposed rule for perchlorate.
Through grants awarded in 2011, as part of the School Chemical Cleanout Campaign program,
EPA's Region 8 developed and printed for national distribution more than 11,000 booklets on
"Sensible Steps to Healthier School Environments." The booklet provides information about
some of the most common environmental health concerns in schools and identifies low-cost or
no-cost measures, programs, and resources to prevent, reduce, or resolve these problems.
• EPA consulted with the Children's Health Protection Advisory Committee on priority
actions for EPA to protect children's health from chemical hazards, including lead
exposure.
Challenges:
The Agency will rely on commitments in National Program Managers' Guidance documents to
plan for and track progress on environmental justice and children's health program activities.
Efforts to establish implementation plans for the Office of Children's Health Protection and lead
Regional School Coordinators as part of the Clean Green and Healthy Schools initiative were
delayed due to funding constraints.
Strategy 3: Advancing Science, Research, and Technological Innovation: Advance a
rigorous basic and applied science research and development agenda that informs, enables,
empowers, and delivers innovative and sustainable solutions to environmental problems.
Provide relevant and robust scientific data and findings to support the Agency's policy and
decision-making needs.
1187
-------
Science is the backbone of EPA programs and decisions. In FY 2012, EPA demonstrated key
scientific and technical achievements to support the challenges our nation faces. As a key
priority, the Agency is trying to determine how to effectively integrate "sustainability" into its
programs.
Highlights:
EPA and American University jointly sponsored the 2012 Technology Market Summit in May,
bringing together government leaders, industry, academia, and private investment decision-
makers. The Summit set the stage for significant conversations on how to accelerate the
development and adoption of technologies to spur economic growth through environmental
protection. Through a series of case studies centered on fence-line air quality monitoring, the
automotive supply chain, and biodigesters and biogas, and through "market talks" from an
investor perspective, meeting speakers and participants explored and discussed barriers and
solutions related to technology, policy, and finance.
EPA had a successful first year operating under the sustainability and trans-disciplinary focused
research programs. In FY 2012, EPA adopted Research Action Plans (RAPs) for 1) air, climate,
and energy; 2) safe and sustainable water; 3) chemical safety and sustainability; and 4) safe and
healthy communities. These RAPs were developed with extensive feedback from cross-agency
partners, helping to ensure that EPA's research is focused on the Agency's highest-priority
needs.
EPA issued a new research communication strategy designed to increase awareness of EPA's
research among the public and the scientific community. The strategy will help EPA to more
effectively and consistently communicate the research tools, models, and data that is
fundamental to protecting human health and the environment.
EPA's Region 9 provided funding for projects to help spur early-stage, innovative air emission
reduction technologies that need further testing. One project tested heavy-duty battery electric
"Class 8" trucks in environmental justice areas around the San Pedro ports that achieve 100-
percent tailpipe emission reductions of nitrogen oxides, paniculate matter, and GHGs.
Demonstration projects funded in the San Joaquin Valley included 1) near-zero nitrogen oxide
emission control on a dairy digester, which captures and converts methane into onsite electricity;
and 2) the world's first fully autonomous zero-emission, all electric agricultural sprayer, which
provided 100-percent emission reductions of all pollutants.
Challenges:
The National Academy of Sciences Report, "Sustainability and the USEPA," recommends that
the Agency develop new strategies and approaches to achieve sustainable outcomes. Some of the
Academy's recommendations extend beyond the scope of EPA's current expertise. Along with
the need to achieve a culture change across the Agency, many of these recommendations provide
an important opportunity and challenge to the Agency in moving forward.
New Framework for Conducting Competitions and Challenges: Challenges and competitions
are rapidly gaining support across federal agencies as a way to promote innovation and
1188
-------
collaboration and accelerate problem solving. The America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of
2010 provided EPA with expanded authority to conduct challenges and award prizes. One
difficulty EPA encountered in FY 2012 was implementing existing challenges and competitions,
while simultaneously developing and implementing the legal and policy framework associated
with the new law. Through a cross-Agency effort, EPA has developed a set of guidance and
policy documents that will ensure that challenges are conducted in a more effective and efficient
manner in the future (http://challenge.gov/epa).
Strategy 4: Strengthening State, Tribal, and International Partnerships: Deliver on our
commitment to a clean and healthy environment through consultation and shared
accountability with states, tribes, and the global community for addressing the highest-priority
problems.
Throughout FY 2012, EPA strengthened its state, tribal, and international partnerships to achieve
mutual environmental and human health goals. As we work together, the relationship must
continue to be based on integrity, trust, and shared accountability to make the most effective use
of our respective bodies of knowledge, existing authorities, resources, and talents. Successful
partnerships are based on four working principles: consultation, collaboration, cooperation, and
accountability.
Highlights:
• EPA continued to build on successful efforts to improve communication and dialogue
with states and tribes on the EPA National Program Managers' (NPM) Annual
Guidance, which communicates program priorities, strategies, and operational measures
for the upcoming fiscal year. EPA conducted the first-ever tribal consultation and
coordination process on the FY 2013 NPM guidances and held conference calls with
states and tribes to discuss the draft documents. During the calls, EPA reviewed the key
changes from the prior year based on the president's FY 2013 budget request and
answered the states' and tribes' questions on policy and programmatic matters impacting
the EPA partnership.
In addition to consulting with our partners on regulatory actions that have federalism impacts,
EPA conducted numerous additional outreach meetings with key associations that represent
state, tribal, and local elected officials. These meetings provided a unique opportunity for
Agency officials to discuss EPA's program and policy priorities and to facilitate dialogue on the
environmental priorities of state and local governments. In 2012, outreach meetings covered
topics such as 1) EJ and EPA's Plan EJ 2014, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act; 2) the
Urban Waters Federal Partnership; 3) EPA's Integrated Municipal Stormwater and Wastewater
Planning Framework; 4) the National Academy of Sciences Green Book Report on incorporating
sustainability into the Agency's principles and decision-making; 5) EPA's FY 2013 budget
priorities; and 6) hydraulic fracturing, which also included two additional briefings to 130 state
and local government officials via conference call.
EPA established a new partnership with states to ensure that Title VI of the Civil Rights Act is
consistently and effectively implemented for state programs receiving federal financial
assistance.
1189
-------
In FY 2012, EPA reinvigorated the National Tribal Operations Council (NTOC), an EPA-tribal
leadership body that provides advice and guidance to EPA management on national policy and
budget issues affecting tribes by establishing workgroups to develop strategic action plans for
tribal involvement in energy extraction, hydraulic fracturing, climate change adaptation, and
reducing administrative burdens of the tribal grant application process.
EPA's Office of Water led the multiagency tribal Infrastructure Task Force (ITF) through
quarterly meetings with representatives from tribes, the Indian Health Service, USDA-Rural
Development, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and Bureau of Indian
Affairs. The ITF is addressing the disparate drinking water, sanitation, and solid waste needs in
Indian Country. With EPA as a member, the ITF has developed tools, reports, and analyses,
including a best practices commonalities document that tribal utilities can use to ensure the
sustainability of their systems and federal partners can promote to ensure the public's investment
in these systems.
EPA's Region 8 provided technical assistance to improve tribal grants and financial
management, resulting in the removal of two tribes (Oglala Sioux and Rosebud Sioux) from the
high-risk grantee designation. This marks the culmination of more than four years of efforts with
each tribe. These significant improvements were made through the combined efforts of the
environmental program offices, the finance offices, and the tribal leadership of both tribes.
EPA's Region 4 successfully reinstituted the Regional Tribal Advisory Workgroup, which meets
monthly to discuss and collaboratively address tribal issues and concerns. In addition, in
consultation with Region 4 tribes and consistent with EPA's "Policy on Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribes," a uniform approach was developed to identify regional
program activities appropriate for consultation, define the consultation process and roles, and
establish a regional reporting process to ensure accountability and transparency.
In May 2012, EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson, joined by the Secretary of Commerce, the
Secretary of Agriculture, and the U.S. Trade Representative, along with representatives from
industry, the environmental community, academia, and finance, announced EPA's new export
promotion strategy. The strategy is designed to promote, through Web portals and in
international venues, environmental solutions developed and manufactured by U.S. companies.
The export promotion strategy also serves to demonstrate that environmental standards stimulate
new technologies, manufacturing, and jobs.
Challenges:
• Ongoing state and tribal and potential future federal budget constraints pose practical
challenges for EPA, tribes, and the states in implementing the nation's environmental
programs.
• The oversight of the delegation of environmental programs to states and improving
coordination with federal and state agencies have been identified as Agency management
challenges in 2008 and 2011, respectively, by the Office of the Inspector General and the
Government Accountability Office. EPA is taking actions on multiple fronts, such as
1190
-------
identifying the oversight of state delegated permitting programs as a strategic priority and
Coordinating with federal and state agencies wherever possible to minimize
administrative burdens, redundant activities, and the inefficient use of federal resources,
to enhance its collaborations with intergovernmental partners and to ensure sustained
attention by senior Agency leadership.
Implementing changes and improvements to the GAP, starting with developing and issuing a
draft GAP Guidebook in FY 2012, has been of significant interest to tribal governments across
the country. EPA has made substantial revisions based on the feedback it has received and is
providing a second round of tribal consultations on the revised guidebook in early FY 2013.
Strategy 5: Strengthening EPA's Workforce and Capabilities: Continuously improve EPA's
internal management, encourage innovation and creativity in all aspects of our work, and
ensure that EPA is an excellent workplace that attracts and retains a topnotch, diverse
workforce, positioned to meet and address the environmental challenges of the 21st century.
In FY 2012, the Agency focused on supporting the president's pledge to make the government
"smarter, leaner, and more effective." Guided by the overarching application of strong resource
stewardship, our efforts were directed at improving EPA's ability to attract and maintain a
talented and diverse workforce and equipping employees with the tools to work effectively in
today's business environment. Our goal is to help EPA employees work collaboratively to
protect human health and the environment, while at the same time operating with fiscal
responsibility, maximizing the use of limited resources, and demonstrating results.
Highlights:
EPA increased the average number of hours teleworked in FY 2012 by 35 percent, well above
the 10-percent target.
In FY 2012, EPA totaled more than 96,000 videoconference occurrences, a 73-percent increase
over the FY 2011 baseline of more than 55,000 occurrences.
EPA's new email and collaboration suite, My Workplace, is poised to enable communication that
is more effective, coordination, and information snaring; provide secure access to information,
anytime and anywhere; and help improve productivity. The transition to My Workplace will take
place during the first half of FY 2013, with employee training focused on email, calendar, and
contacts.
To build workplaces that promote collaboration and improve efficiency, the Agency initiated
workplace analysis planning in Regions 7, 9, and 10 and in three headquarters offices. Regions 7
and 9 and three headquarters offices completed space consolidation plans in FY 2012, and
consolidation plans for Region 10 are expected to be complete by the second quarter of FY 2013.
Execution of the new space plan will be completed in Region 7 during the first quarter of FY
2013.
1191
-------
EPA's Region 9 decreased its overall waste generation by 12 percent and achieved a 97-percent
diversion rate for composting and recycling in lieu of landfills, saving nearly $46,000. "Clear
Your Clutter" efforts produced more than 30 tons of recycled paper and 8,000 pounds of e-waste
and removed 450 file cabinets and other pieces of office furniture.
EPA streamlined tools that make the hiring process easier and faster for Agency hiring
managers, including:
> Released 13 standard recruitment packages - twenty-three occupations now have
standardized recruitment packages Seven percent of successful recruit actions in
FY 2012 utilized a standard package, a 4-percent increase over FY 2011. When
used, standardized recruitment packages decreased end-to-end hiring time by an
average of 32 days.
> Instituted the use of Adobe Connect during the hiring process—saving time and
fostering a more collaborative process between subject matter experts and human
resources specialists.
> Issued standard operating procedures (SOPs) for shared certificates, allowing an
office to make multiple selections across organizational components for like
positions from a single certificate of qualified candidates when using standardized
recruitment packages.
> Readied the Human Resources Fast Track System for testing. This online solution
will provide managers with one-stop shopping for assembling their standard
recruitment packages.
The Agency issued an EPA Diversity and Inclusion Strategic Plan and distributed quarterly
Diversity Dashboard reports providing extensive demographic information on EPA's workforce.
During FY 2012, EPA continued to reduce unliquidated obligations on expired grants and
expired contracts. Tracking and lowering unliquidated obligations is an important internal
control to ensure that the Agency is using government funds more efficiently and in a timely
manner.
Challenges:
EPA's FY 2012 average time-to-hire was 94 days for all General Schedule (GS) and Senior
Executive Service (SES) positions. Factors that challenged the Agency's efforts to reach its FY
2012 goal of 86 days include a hiring pause instituted to help manage the Agency's budget; the
inclusion of SES hiring in the calculation, as required by the Office of Personnel Management
(OPM); and the Agency's exceedance of the interview and selection timeframe reflected in the
OPM model. In addition, many EPA scientific/specialist occupations require longer hiring times,
and EPA is unable to limit many vacancy openings to 13 days—a key part of the OPM
model—due to collective bargaining agreements. The Agency will continue to focus the
attention of senior management and hiring officials on the need to make selections within 20 to
30 days by increasing communication and providing feedback on progress regarding hiring
targets and expectations.
1192
-------
A challenge for the future will be the need to shift occupational series for a number of positions
over the next four years to secure the scientific/technical skills and competencies to meet future
mission requirements.
Space consolidation is an ambitious, multiyear, cross-agency effort requiring continued
leadership and commitment. Challenges faced by the Agency in FY 2012 included the
adjustment of plans due to funding uncertainties and the need to resolve union concerns.
1193
-------
Acquisition Management 207,438,439, 605, 668, 669, 728,735,1057,1061,1062,1092
Addressing EPA's Emerging Role in Climate Change 1116
Administrative Law 206,398,1056,1092
Agency Financial Report 1100
Air Toxics 229,234,261,831
Air Toxics Monitoring 234
Alaska Native Villages 852,856,861
Alternative Dispute Resolution 206,399,400,403,604,656,1056,1060
Amber Waves Exercise and Emergency Response 1123
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 42, 443,667, 852, 1033, 1103
Analytical Methods 118, 1127
Annual Performance Report 1099, 1100, 1107, 1141, 1157
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations 582,584,603,611,614,1059
B
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) 701, 997
Beach / Fish Programs 208, 536,1058
BRAC 701,998
Brownfield Properties Assessed 1143
Brownfield Properties Cleaned Up 1144
Brownfields ...38, 40, 41, 43, 45, 46, 204, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 265, 312, 418, 521, 690, 707, 782, 787,
788, 789, 863, 864, 865, 866, 867, 921, 922, 993, 995, 1033, 1037, 1043, 1054, 1055, 1063, 1089, 1094, 1142,
1143,1144,1148
Brownfields Projects 40, 782, 788, 863, 1063
C
CASTNET 80,82,212,1091
Categorical Grant
Beaches Protection 782,785,1063
Brownfields 782,787,1063
Environmental Information 782, 793,1063
Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance 782, 799,1063
Lead 782,790, 1063
Nonpoint Source (Sec. 319) 782, 804,1063
Pesticides Enforcement 782,808,1063
Pesticides Program Implementation 783, 810,1063
Pollution Control (Sec. 106) 783, 814,1063,1064
Pollution Prevention 783,820,1064
Public Water System Supervision 783, 822,1064
Radon 783,827,1064
State and Local Air Quality Management 783, 829,1064
Targeted Watersheds 783,1064
Toxics Substances Compliance 783, 833,1064
Tribal Air Quality Management 783, 835,1064
Tribal General Assistance Program 783, 837,1064
Underground Injection Control 783, 840,1064
Underground Storage Tanks 783,843,1064
Wastewater Operator Training 783,1064
Wetlands Program Development 783,846,1064
Categorical GrantslS, 503, 507, 509, 782, 783, 784, 785, 787, 790, 791, 793, 797, 799, 804, 808, 810, 814, 820, 822,
827, 829, 833, 835, 837, 840, 843, 846, 1063, 1064, 1068, 1069
-------
CDX Users 1178
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance 206,434,605, 674, 728,737,1057,1061,1062
Chemical and Pesticide Risks 1001
Chesapeake Bay 24, 26, 31, 32, 33, 66, 69, 262, 289, 290, 291, 292, 293, 294, 526, 556, 914, 915, 987, 988, 989,
1016, 1019, 1020, 1127
Childhood Asthma 1118
Children and other Sensitive Populations 341
Children/Other Sensitive Populations
Agency Coordination 205,339,1056
Civil Enforcement67, 108, 204, 260, 262, 263, 267, 629, 631, 727, 730, 731, 758, 764, 765, 1007, 1055, 1061, 1062,
1093
Civil Rights / Title VI Compliance 206, 402,1056
Clean Air 261,1006
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs 74,79,82,203,210, 1051, 1054, 1111
Clean Air and Climate 74, 78, 79, 84, 86, 88, 203, 204, 209, 210, 214, 223, 228, 238, 242, 1051, 1054, 1067
Clean Water 261, 303, 525, 528, 553, 554, 557, 561, 806, 814, 847, 850, 851, 852
Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development 7, 9, 37, 167, 178, 245, 270, 320, 343, 362,
370, 375, 407, 410, 417, 473, 480, 484, 519, 619, 634, 658, 678, 689, 693, 696, 703, 717, 740, 745, 749, 754,
767, 776, 787, 799, 837, 843, 863, 877, 951
Climate Change and Improving Air Quality 1109
Climate Protection Program 74,84,85,203,214, 1051, 1054
Commission for Environmental Cooperation 135, 140,382,975, 1008, 1127, 1142
Communities.. 18, 37, 42, 43, 44, 66, 134, 150, 166, 167, 169, 171, 174, 178, 245, 246, 248, 249, 250, 270, 272, 320,
321, 341, 343, 362, 371, 375, 408, 412, 417, 418, 562, 570, 605, 619, 659, 677, 678, 685, 728, 753, 754, 759,
775, 776, 787, 863, 921, 922, 956, 981, 993, 1012, 1037, 1061, 1062, 1063, 1080, 1103, 1115, 1139, 1143
Community Action for a Renewed Environment (CARE) 205,320,1055
Compliance..48, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 70, 71, 84, 95, 204, 251, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, 260, 261, 263,
267, 270, 274, 304, 368, 388, 395, 427, 520, 604, 615, 616, 617, 696, 697, 730, 751, 758, 760, 761, 762, 797,
798, 808, 817, 833, 844, 886, 981, 1007, 1008, 1009, 1025, 1031, 1037, 1044, 1047, 1050, 1055, 1059, 1062,
1088, 1093, 1142, 1167, 1169, 1174, 1175
Compliance Incentives 1169
Compliance Monitoring 66, 204, 252, 253, 254, 604, 616, 617, 758, 761, 762, 808, 817, 833, 1055, 1059, 1062
Computational Toxicology 77, 181,491,498, 1053, 1094, 1161
Congressional Priorities 77, 198, 208, 579, 783, 1054, 1059, 1064
Congressional, Intergovernmental, External Relation 205, 345,1056
Congressionally Mandated Projects 783,1064
Criminal Enforcement 69, 204, 266, 267, 604, 628, 629, 630, 1007, 1055, 1059, 1093, 1174
Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) Decision 1120
D
Decontamination 75, 115, 117, 205, 604, 636, 957, 1051, 1056, 1060
DfE Safer Chemicals 1164
Diesel Emissions Reduction Grant Program 782, 868,1063
Draft Addendum on Relative Biological Effectiveness (RBE) 1124
Drinking Water 195,822,855
Drinking Water Programs 77, 194,208,538, 1054, 1058
E
Ecosystem Protection 986, 1127, 1142
Ecosystems 23, 77, 81, 157, 198, 208, 212, 277, 289, 295, 297, 299, 303, 308, 310, 312, 316, 319, 320, 327, 524,
526, 529, 548, 553, 579, 704, 804, 814, 846, 850, 860, 870, 898, 942, 982, 1053, 1058, 1068, 1069, 1091, 1133
El Paso 376
Electronic Reporting 1175
eManifest 207,1058
E-Manifest 48,874,875,877,878
Enabling and Support Programs Eight Year Array 962
-------
Endocrine Disrupters 77,207,470,490,494, 1053, 1058
Energy STAR 203,1054
Enforcement ..62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 69, 70, 71, 75, 107, 108, 204, 253, 254, 255, 256, 259, 260, 261, 262, 263, 266,
267, 268, 270, 273, 356, 357, 358, 368, 395, 422, 585, 604, 616, 617, 618, 619, 621, 622, 623, 624, 626, 627,
628, 629, 631, 698, 706, 727, 729, 730, 743, 758, 761, 763, 764, 776, 782, 797, 798, 808, 817, 833, 948, 999,
1007, 1008, 1009, 1012, 1025, 1037, 1047, 1050, 1051, 1055, 1059, 1060, 1061, 1062, 1063, 1093, 1142, 1169,
1172,1173,1174, 1175
Enforcement Training 255,266,629,1007,1012
Enforcing Environmental Laws.8, 10, 60, 108, 252, 260, 266, 407, 410, 616, 621, 626, 628, 631, 658, 730, 761, 764,
797,808,833, 1007, 1166
Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution.... 8, 10, 53, 116, 133, 138, 142, 178, 186, 273, 339, 356,
367, 378, 381, 407, 410, 448, 456, 464, 469, 490, 495, 503, 510, 513, 634, 658, 678, 683, 790, 810, 820, 952,
1001, 1070
Environmental Education 176, 198,205,302,310,343,344,345,348, 1056, 1092
Environmental Justice 44, 54, 61, 69, 170, 171, 204, 263, 270, 271, 272, 400, 408, 411, 604, 619, 656, 994, 1055,
1059, 1093, 1157, 1169, 1186
EPA Contributing Programs 1111, 1127, 1142, 1158, 1169
EPA User Fee Program 1030
Estimated Air, Water, and Toxic/Pesticide Pollutants Reduced 1171
Exchange Network 205, 350, 351, 352, 354, 355, 388, 390, 395, 604, 642, 644, 645, 649, 793, 794, 796, 1014,
1015, 1016, 1048, 1056, 1060, 1086, 1178
Exchanging Data with CDX through Nodes in Real Time 1178
Existing CBI Claims Reviewed 1160
F
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations.75, 76, 129, 131, 206, 389, 430, 432, 433, 442, 592, 597, 599, 605, 661, 663,
727, 733, 758, 773, 1052, 1057, 1059, 1060, 1061, 1062
Federal Stationary Source Regulations 95,203,223,224, 1054
Federal Support for Air Quality Management 74, 86, 87, 204,228, 835, 869, 1051, 1054, 1067
Federal Support for Air Toxics Program 74, 204, 1051, 1054, 1067
Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certification 74,84,88, 1051, 1067
Fenceline Monitoring Technique 1119
Fine Paniculate Matter (PM2.5) Standard 1117
Fiscal Year 2014
Consolidations, Realignments, or Other Transfers of Resources 1085
Forensics Support 69, 75, 108, 604, 631, 1051, 1059
FY 2012 Annual Performance Report 1100
FY2012 Performance Accomplishments. ..1112, 1117, 1121, 1123, 1128, 1133, 1143, 1145, 1148, 1153, 1159, 1164,
1170,1177,1179
FY 2012 Performance Challenges 1116,1120,1122,1124,1130,1138,1152,1162,1165,1175
FY 2014 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification. 3, 4,7, 9,11, 23, 37, 53, 60,74, 203, 582,
592, 603, 727, 758, 780, 875, 1051
General Counsel 122, 125, 129, 330, 336, 345, 350, 359, 385, 388, 398, 400, 402, 406, 410, 414, 422, 427, 430, 434,
438, 441, 444, 584, 594, 597, 611, 639, 642, 647, 649, 656, 658, 661, 665, 668, 671, 674, 733, 735, 737, 773,
793, 1177, 1187
Geographic Program
Chesapeake Bay 204,289,1055
Gulf Of Mexico 204,308,1055
Lake Champlain 205,316,1055
Long Island Sound 204, 303,1055
Geographic Programs 204, 205, 276, 277, 289, 295, 299, 303, 308, 312, 316, 320, 987, 1055, 1127
GHG Reductions in the Building Sector 1112
Goal 1 407, 410, 658, 881, 945, 971, 1038, 1039, 1040, 1107, 1109, 1110
Goal 1 Overview 1110
-------
Goal 2 25, 407, 408, 410, 658, 895, 979, 1041, 1042, 1107, 1125, 1126
Goal 2 Overview 1126
Goal 3 42, 44, 371, 407, 408, 410, 412, 658, 659, 695, 701, 717, 921, 993, 1043, 1044, 1050, 1107, 1139, 1140
Goal 3 Overview 1140
Goal 4 407, 408, 410, 658, 1001, 1045, 1046, 1049, 1108, 1156, 1157
Goal 4 Overview 1157
Goal 5 64, 407, 410, 632, 658, 948, 999, 1007, 1047, 1050, 1166, 1167, 1168
Goal 5 Overview 1167
Great Lakes 528,847
Great Lakes Legacy Act 280
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Registry 203, 884,1054
Greenhouse Gas Targets 1165
Gulf of Mexico 527
H
Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest System Fund 3, 7,473, 875, 877,1064
Hazardous Waste Facilities 1146
Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance 799, 800
Homeland Security ..32, 34, 45, 50, 58, 59, 75, 106, 110, 111, 112, 114, 116, 117, 120, 122, 182, 205, 277, 329, 330,
331, 332, 333, 336, 364, 386, 477, 576, 577, 592, 593, 594, 600, 604, 633, 634, 635, 636, 637, 638, 639, 648,
690, 693, 734, 957, 977, 979, 988, 989, 999, 1005, 1007, 1015, 1051, 1052, 1055, 1056, 1059, 1060, 1070, 1092,
1094,1142
Communication and Information 205, 330,1055
Critical Infrastructure Protection 75, 111,205,333, 1051, 1055
Preparedness, Response, and Recovery 75, 116,205,604,634,638, 1051, 1052, 1056, 1060
Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure 75, 122, 205, 336, 592, 594, 604, 639, 1052, 1056, 1059, 1060
Human Health 37, 42, 58, 59, 76, 77, 148, 171, 182, 186, 190, 194, 370, 554, 605, 683, 837, 932, 958, 999, 1023,
1052, 1053, 1054, 1061, 1127, 1128, 1142, 1153, 1158
Human Health Risk Assessment 58, 59, 77, 148, 171, 182, 186, 190, 605, 683, 958, 1023, 1053, 1061, 1127, 1142
Human Resources Management 207, 444,445, 446, 605, 671, 672,1057,1061
/
Improve Human Health and the Environment in Indian Country 50, 932
Indoor Air.... 18, 74, 75, 98, 99, 100, 101, 103, 105, 204, 566, 567, 568, 569, 570, 572, 575, 603, 607, 608, 828, 975,
976, 1051, 1054, 1059, 1092, 1111
RadonProgram 75, 99, 204, 567, 1051, 1054
Indoor Air and Radiation 74, 75, 98, 99, 101, 103, 105, 204, 566, 567, 569, 572, 575, 603, 607, 608, 1051, 1054,
1059
Information Exchange / Outreach 205, 338, 339, 343, 345, 350, 356, 359, 362, 367, 370,604,641, 642,1056,
1060
Information Security 127, 206, 330, 355, 385, 386, 387, 396, 584, 585, 589, 604, 644, 647, 648, 654, 965, 1028,
1035, 1056, 1060
Infrastructure Assistance 376,782,850,855,860,870,1063
Alaska Native Villages 782,860,1063
Clean Water SRF 782, 850,1063
Drinking Water SRF 782,855,1063
Mexico Border 782,870,1063
Injunctive Relief and Supplemental Environmental Projects from Enforcement 1173
Inspector General .3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 122, 125, 129, 133, 330, 336, 345, 350, 359, 385, 388, 398, 400, 402, 406, 410,
414, 422, 427, 430, 434, 435, 437, 438, 441, 444, 580, 582, 584, 585, 589, 594, 597, 611, 612, 614, 625, 639,
642, 647, 649, 656, 658, 661, 665, 668, 671, 674, 675, 676, 733, 735, 737, 773, 793, 838, 1012, 1016, 1018,
1035, 1059, 1082, 1177, 1179, 1190
Integrated Environmental Strategies 206,417,418,1057
Integration of Climate Adaptation into EPA Grants for the Great Lakes 1115
International Programs 206, 374, 375, 378, 381,1056
International Sources of Pollution 206, 378,1056
-------
Investigative Results 1183
IT / Data Management 75, 124, 125,206,384,385,388,604,646,647,649, 1052, 1056, 1060
IT / Data Management / Security 75, 124, 125, 206, 384, 385, 388, 604, 646, 647, 649, 1052, 1056, 1060
K
Key Pollution Control Technology at Power Plants 1119
L
Laboratory Preparedness and Response 604,1060
Lake Champlain 528,847
Lake Pontchartrain 205, 322, 326, 327, 328,1055,1127
Lead Renovation, Repair, and Painting Rule Certified Firms 1162
Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review 206, 397, 398, 400,402,406,410, 414,417, 422,427, 604,
605, 655, 656, 658, 1056, 1057, 1060
Legal Advice
Environmental Program 206, 406, 604, 658,1057,1060
Support Program 206,410,1057
Level of Effort Measures and Reducing, Treating, and Eliminating Pollutants 1170
Libraries 125
Long Island Sound 303,307
Low-Cost, Portable Sensors for Monitoring Air Pollution 1119
LUST/ UST 208, 519, 728, 740, 1058, 1062
LUST Cooperative Agreements 728,740,745,1062
LUST Prevention 519,520,522,728,749,752,844, 1062
M
Maintaining a Skilled Workforce 1124
Major Environmental Systems Using Central Data Exchange (CDX) 1177
Marine Pollution 208, 548, 549, 985,1058,1127
Mercury and Air Toxics Standards 407,1118,1119
Methane to markets 203,1054
Mexico Border 44, 258, 265, 349, 376, 477, 562, 617, 870, 871, 872, 919, 920, 994, 1036, 1127, 1142
Mississippi River Basin 309,527,916
Monitoring Grants 783,1063
Moving Toward a More Sustainable Future 1145
TV
NAAQS 228,234
Nanotechnology 183, 185, 1005
National Estuary Program / Coastal Waterways 208, 524,1058
NEPA Implementation 204,273,274,1055
O
OECA 256,950,951, 1093
Office of Administration and Resource Management 109, 122, 125, 129, 330, 336, 345, 350, 359, 385, 388, 398,
400, 402, 406, 410, 414, 422, 427, 430, 434, 438, 441, 444, 584, 594, 597, 611, 632, 639, 642, 647, 649, 656,
658, 661, 665, 668, 671, 674, 733, 735, 737, 773, 793, 1012, 1013, 1092, 1177
Office of Air and Radiation 1092
Office of Environmental Information 122, 125, 129, 330, 336, 345, 350, 359, 385, 388, 392, 398, 400, 402, 406, 410,
414, 422, 427, 430, 434, 438, 441, 444, 584, 594, 597, 611, 639, 642, 647, 649, 651, 656, 658, 661, 665, 668,
671, 674, 733, 735, 737, 773, 793, 1011, 1013, 1014, 1032, 1087, 1093, 1177
Office of General Counsel. 122, 125, 129, 330, 336, 345, 350, 359, 385, 388, 398, 400, 402, 406, 407, 410, 411, 412,
414, 422, 427, 430, 434, 438, 441, 444, 584, 594, 597, 611, 639, 642, 647, 649, 656, 657, 658, 659, 661, 665,
668, 671, 674, 733, 735, 737, 773, 793, 1093, 1177
Office of Research and Development 117, 154, 171, 599, 954, 955, 956, 957, 958, 961, 1094
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response 484,485,698,1094
-------
Office of the Chief Financial Officer. 122, 125, 129, 330, 336, 345, 350, 359, 385, 388, 398, 400, 402, 406, 410, 414,
422, 427, 430, 434, 438, 441, 444, 584, 594, 597, 611, 623, 639, 642, 647, 649, 656, 658, 661, 665, 668, 671,
674, 733, 735, 737, 773, 793, 1011, 1013, 1032, 1087, 1092, 1177
Office of Water 1094
Oil....3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 20, 40, 45, 49, 104, 105, 106, 117, 129, 167, 252, 260, 310, 332, 406, 409, 413, 430, 433, 555,
575, 577, 597, 600, 616, 638, 661, 664, 678, 693, 717, 730, 733, 754, 756, 758, 761, 762, 764, 765, 766, 767,
768, 769, 770, 771, 773, 776, 777, 951, 999, 1036, 1062, 1063, 1071, 1142, 1151
Oil Spill
Prevention, Preparedness and Response 40, 758, 767, 1062
OP 1010,1011,1090
Operations and Administration 75, 76, 128, 129, 206, 207, 429, 430, 434, 438, 441, 444, 592, 596, 597, 605, 660,
661, 665, 668, 671, 674, 727, 728, 732, 733, 735, 737, 758, 759, 772, 773, 1052, 1057, 1059, 1060, 1061, 1062,
1063
Overview of Fiscal Year 2012 Performance 1099
Ozone Reductions 1117
P
Percent of Tribes Implementing Federal Regulatory Environmental Program 1154
Performance
Research Eight Year Array 954
Strategic Goals 1-5 Eight-Year Array 881
Performance Management in FY2012 1101
Pesticides
Realize the Value of Pesticide Availability 76, 142, 143,207,464, 1052, 1057
Pesticides Licensing 76, 132, 133, 138, 142, 207, 447, 448, 456, 464, 469, 1052, 1057
Pollution Prevention 85
Pollution Prevention Program 57, 133, 139, 207, 503, 507, 820, 821, 881, 1058
Preserve Land 37, 42, 473, 484, 519, 749, 799, 843, 877, 923, 996, 1145
Proposed FY 2014 Administrative Provisions 1082
Protect Human Health ...23, 76, 111, 115, 133, 137, 157, 194, 207, 333, 448, 536, 538, 579, 785, 812, 822, 840, 855,
895, 935, 979, 1052, 1057, 1128, 1158
Protecting America's Waters 65,407,410,658,979, 1080, 1103, 1125
Puerto Rico 853
Puget Sound 32, 204, 299, 300, 301, 302, 526, 918, 919, 991, 992, 1055, 1127, 1138, 1185
R
Radiation.... 11, 19, 75, 99, 103, 104, 105, 106, 116, 119, 158, 171, 172, 204, 265, 407, 572, 573, 574, 575, 599, 603,
608, 609, 624, 731, 893, 978, 979, 1031, 1037, 1051, 1054, 1059, 1092, 1093, 1111, 1123, 1179, 1187
Protection 75, 103, 204, 572, 603, 608, 1051, 1054, 1059
Response Preparedness 75, 105,204,575, 1051, 1054
Radon 100
RCRA
Corrective Action 207,480,1058
Waste Management 207,473,875, 877,1057,1058,1064
Waste Minimization & Recycling 207, 484,1058
Recommendations or Risks Identified for Corrective Action 1181
Recovery Act ...3, 8, 109, 250, 258, 261, 265, 269, 272, 302, 395, 414, 416, 426, 436, 437, 473, 479, 480, 483, 488,
507, 552, 584, 585, 589, 611, 617, 627, 675, 676, 702, 731, 738, 746, 755, 798, 799, 803, 878, 998, 1037, 1065,
1146, 1180, 1183
Recovery Act Resources 3,1065
Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions 484
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air 75, 101,204,569, 1051, 1054
Reducing Confirmed Releases from Underground Storage Tank (LIST) Facilities 1147
Reducing Exposures to Polychlorinated Biphenyls in School Buildings 1161
Regional Science and Technology 206, 414,1057
Regions 116, 117, 136, 595, 637, 692, 769, 901, 903, 997, 1026, 1191
-------
Regulatory/Economic-Management and Analysis 206, 422,1057
Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) Program 1120
Rent 75, 206, 605, 727, 758, 1052, 1057, 1060, 1061, 1062
Research
Air, Climate and Energy 76, 146, 1052, 1053
Chemical Safety and Sustainability 77, 178, 186,605,683, 1053, 1061
Safe and Sustainable Water Resources 76, 157, 1053
Sustainable Communities 76, 77, 167, 1053
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 38, 63, 109, 127, 207, 252, 261, 294, 332, 355, 396, 399, 406,
409, 472, 473, 480, 484, 645, 654, 686, 799, 875, 876, 877, 929, 1008, 1031, 1057, 1058, 1064, 1146
Restore Land 37, 42, 45, 480, 519, 634, 689, 693, 695, 696, 703, 717, 740, 745, 767, 799, 926, 997, 1148
Return on Investment 1182
S
Safe and Sustainable Water Resources 22,31,35,76, 156, 157, 163, 170,960, 1053, 1085
San FranciSCO Bay 204,295,296,297,298,526,991, 1055, 1127
Sandy Supplemental 3,8,1065
Science Advisory Board55, 154, 158, 162, 175, 184, 188, 206, 283, 427, 428, 509, 685, 686, 1010, 1057, 1092, 1124
Science Policy and Biotechnology 207,469,470,1057
Security 17,75,85,90, 111, 112, 113, 115, 116, 118, 119, 120, 131, 154,206,219,263,330,331,332,333, 334,
335, 336, 337, 339, 341, 342, 355, 366, 385, 386, 436, 477, 585, 594, 595, 597, 605, 634, 645, 647, 648, 676,
738, 974, 976, 978, 980, 995, 1005, 1007, 1011, 1027, 1028, 1033, 1034, 1035, 1051, 1052, 1057, 1060, 1071,
1142
Sign Language 446
Small Business Ombudsman 205, 356, 357,1056
Small Minority Business Assistance 205, 359,1056
Smart Growth 43,248,417,418,559, 1142
Special Accounts 622,722
Standards for Uranium and Thorium Mill Tailings 1124
State and Local Prevention and Preparedness 205, 362,1056,1142
State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG) 376, 503, 514, 849, 850, 855, 860, 863, 868, 870
Stratospheric Ozone
Domestic Programs 204,238,1054
Multilateral Fund 204,242,1054
Superfund
Emergency Response and Removal 605, 689,1061
Enforcement 604,621,1059
EPA Emergency Preparedness 605, 693,1061
Federal Facilities 605,696,1061
Federal Facilities Enforcement 604, 626,1059
Remedial 605,703,1061
Support to Other Federal Agencies 605, 717,1061
Superfund Cleanup 605, 688, 689, 693, 696, 703, 704, 717, 1061, 1148
Surface Water Protection 26,208,527,553,818,1058, 1127
Sustainable and Healthy Communities....51, 76, 77, 120, 146, 158, 167, 174, 179, 182, 184, 605, 638, 678, 680, 683,
686, 728, 754, 759, 776, 956, 1053, 1061, 1062, 1063
Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality.... 7, 9, 11, 79, 84, 86, 88, 99, 101, 103, 105, 116, 146,
210, 214, 223, 228, 238, 242, 407, 410, 567, 569, 572, 575, 608, 658, 827, 829, 835, 868, 950, 971, 1067, 1080,
1103
Total TMDLs Established or Approved by EPA 1136
Toxic Substances
Chemical Risk Management 207,510,1058
Chemical Risk Review and Reduction 207, 495,1058
Lead Risk Reduction Program 207, 513,1058
-------
Toxics Risk Review and Prevention 207,489,490, 495, 503, 510, 513,1058
Trade and Governance 206, 381,1056,1127
TRI/Right to Know 205,367,1056
Tribal-Capacity Building 205,370,1056
Tribal EcoAmbassadors Program 1154
u
Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST) 208, 518, 519, 728,739, 740,745, 749,1058,1062
US Mexico Border.44, 206, 258, 265, 349, 375, 376, 477, 562, 617, 870, 871, 872, 919, 920, 994, 1036, 1056, 1127,
1142
Utilities 31, 75, 114, 206, 539, 605, 857, 981, 1052, 1057, 1060, 1128
V
Verification/Validation of Performance Data 968
w
Water
Ecosystems 523
Human Health Protection 193, 208, 535, 536, 538, 1058
Water Bodies Attaining Water Quality Standards 1135
Water Quality 312,313,552
Water Quality Monitoring 297, 312, 313, 984
Water Quality Protection 208, 312, 313, 314, 547, 548, 553, 906, 1058
Water Quality Research and Support Grants 77, 198,208,579, 1054, 1059
Wetlands 30, 35, 159, 162, 208, 287, 295, 312, 313, 319, 528, 529, 847, 908, 909, 986, 1034, 1036, 1041, 1058,
1094, 1127
Working Capital Fund 434, 585,737,1032
------- |