For Official Use Only
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
FISCAL YEAR 2015
Justification of Appropriation
Estimates for the Committee
on Appropriations
EPA-190-R-14-002 March 2014
www.epa.gov/ocfo
Recycled/Recyclable Printed on paper that contains at least 50% recycled fiber
-------
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. We achieve this by keeping pollution out of the air we breathe, 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 2015 budget supports implementation of the
EPA's priorities through focused efforts to develop and implement creative, flexible, cost-
effective, common sense and sustainable actions to fight climate change, to protect public health,
and to safeguard the environment. Today's environmental problems require critical thinking
about the complex interactions of environmental pollutants and new tools that promote
innovation, incentives and partnerships. To this end, the EPA's FY 2015 budget focuses on
reinforcing that our work effects people's lives and wellbeing at the community level, advancing
environmental justice and ensuring fair and effective enforcement of environmental laws,
improving how the EPA's work is communicated to the public, and achieving transparency in
agency decision making.
The FY 2015 budget reflects the EPA's commitment to increase our engagement with local
communities and address what really matters to people, to make a visible difference with new
approaches and tools to accelerate environmental progress. The EPA works to enhance the
livability and economic vitality of neighborhoods; strengthen our relationship with America's
agricultural community; support green infrastructure; reduce air pollution along roadways,
railways and at ports; and take into consideration the impacts of our decisions on
disproportionately disadvantaged communities through increased analysis, better science, and
enhanced community engagement. Central to our strategy is modernizing and streamlining how
we work and effectively leveraging 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. The EPA's work is guided by the best possible scientific information and a
commitment to transparency and accountability.
The 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, please visit:
http ://www. epa.gov/aboutepa/.
FY 2015 Annual Performance Plan
The EPA's FY 2015 Annual Performance Plan budget of $7.89 billion is almost $310 million, or
nearly 4%, below the FY 2014 Enacted budget of $8.2 billion. Very difficult decisions impacting
-------
the agency workforce and water infrastructure funding were made in developing this budget, but
they are necessary to keep the EPA relevant and sustainable for the future. An essential aspect of
the FY 2015 budget is our investment in maintaining a high performing environmental protection
organization. We are redesigning the way we do business and focusing on achieving the greatest
environmental benefits for our efforts. Making the greatest difference to communities, adapting
and embracing opportunities for innovation and reinvention and ensuring our state and tribal
partners are well positioned to adapt to the changes are important principles as we move forward.
Throughout this budget we have identified activities where resources have been realigned to
focus our efforts on the highest priorities of the Administration. These realignments recognize
the need for the Agency to increase certain program areas while reducing others within our
overall total. Common to all of these realignments is the need to achieve more efficiencies in the
ways in which we deliver environmental protection to the nation. Implementing this strategy will
involve all the business lines of the agency, and each individual aspect of the plan is integral to
the success of the whole.
As we redefine how we do our work, the agency requests 15,000 appropriated FTE in FY 2015
to support our highest priorities and our critical mission. This budget highlights actions to reduce
costs through implementing approaches such as strategic sourcing, redesigning long-standing
processes to capture technological advances, and accelerating the pace of employee facilities
reduction. Successfully implementing these changes to our facilities and our business processes
requires a commitment in time and resources.
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 FY 2015 President's Budget is
presented following the anticipated structure of the FY 2014 - FY 2018 Strategic Plan. The
EPA's FY 2013 performance information is highlighted throughout the budget.
FY 2014 - 2015 Agency Priority Goals
This budget highlights EPA's six FY 2014-2015 Agency Priority Goals that advance the
Administrator's Priorities and the agency's Strategic Plan. Additional information on the EPA's
Agency Priority Goals can be found at www.performance.gov and in subsequent chapters in this
document.
Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Cars and Trucks
Through September 30, 2015, the EPA, in coordination with the U.S. Department of
Transportation's fuel economy standards program, will be implementing vehicle and truck
greenhouse gas standards that are projected to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 6
billion metric tons and reduce oil consumption by about 12 billion barrels over the lifetime of
those vehicles and trucks.
Clean Up Contaminated Sites to Enhance the Livability and Economic Vitality of Communities
By September 30, 2015, an additional 18,970 sites will be made ready for anticipated use,
protecting Americans and the environment one community at a time.
11
-------
Assess and Reduce Risks Posed by Chemicals and Promote the Use of Safer Chemicals in
Commerce
By September 30, 2015, EPA will have completed more than 250 assessments of pesticides and
other commercially available chemicals to evaluate risks they may pose to human health and the
environment, including the potential for some of these chemicals to disrupt endocrine systems.
These assessments are essential in determining whether products containing these chemicals can
be used safely for commercial, agricultural and/or industrial uses.
Improve Environmental Outcomes and Enhance Service to the Regulated Community and the
Public
By September 30, 2015 reduce EPA reporting requirements by one million hours through
streamlined regulations, providing real-time environmental data to at least two communities, and
establish a new portal to service the regulated community and public.
Improve, Restore, and Maintain Water Quality by Enhancing Nonpoint Source Program
Leveraging, Accountability, and On-the-ground Effectiveness to Address the Nation's Largest
Sources of Pollution
By September 30, 2015, 100 percent of the states will have updated nonpoint source
management programs that comport with the new Clean Water Act Section 319 grant guidelines
that will result in better targeting of resources through prioritization and increased coordination
with the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Improve Public Health Protection for Persons Served by Small Drinking Water Systems, Which
Account for More than 97% of Public Water Systems in the U.S., by Strengthening the
Technical, Managerial, and Financial Capacity of those Systems
By September 30, 2015, EPA will engage with an additional ten states (for a total of 30 states)
and three tribes to improve small drinking water system capability to provide safe drinking
water, an invaluable resource.
FY 2015 Funding Priorities
Support for Core Mission and Priorities
The FY 2015 Annual Performance Plan and Budget of $7.89 billion invests in maintaining and
strengthening a high performing environmental protection organization to better serve
Americans. Our FY 2015 budget will advance our work to make a visible difference in
communities across the country; address climate change and improve air quality; take action on
toxics and chemical safety; protect the nation's waters; advance efforts to maintain and
strengthen a high performing environmental organization; and work toward a sustainable future.
Additional details and supporting information can be found in the program descriptions.
Making a Visible Difference in Communities Across the Country
Community, as an organizing principle for our work, is well established, but resources to
strengthen this integrated approach are essential. Within our budget proposal, we are realigning
$7.5 million and 64 FTEs toward efforts that will make a difference in people's everyday lives
and make a visible difference in their communities. Resources will build on current work by
providing green infrastructure technical assistance to up to 100 communities to help them more
easily implement cost-effective and sustainable approaches to water management. This includes
iii
-------
modeling and design assistance to demonstrate how green infrastructure can help to cost-
effectively make progress on multiple water and combined sewer overflows goals. The resources
also will allow the agency to obtain and disseminate information about successful approaches for
adopting green programs. Research under this focus area will contribute to the development and
application of new and enhanced technologies for large-scale green infrastructure in pilot
communities. Finally, the agency will focus efforts on considering the impacts of our decisions
on environmental justice communities through increased analysis, better science, and increased
transparency of data and information to enhance community engagement.
Through realignments and existing core work, the EPA will continue to lead efforts to preserve,
restore, and protect our land for both current and future generations. 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. Local land use and infrastructure investments also can generate unanticipated
environmental consequences, such as increased stormwater runoff, loss of open space, and
increased greenhouse gas emissions. We will continue our work to prevent and reduce exposure
to contaminants, accelerate the pace of cleanups, and reduce the environmental impacts
associated with land use across the country. We also will partner with other federal, state and
local governments to better coordinate and leverage resources to support community efforts.
Addressing Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
One of the most significant challenges of this and future generations is the threat from a
changing climate. Building on existing efforts, the agency is realigning $10 million and 24 FTE
within our budget proposal to support implementation of the President's Climate Action Plan, to
enhance education and outreach, and to foster state engagement and partnership. The Climate
Action Plan tasks the EPA with setting carbon dioxide (CO2) standards for power plants and
applying its authorities and other tools to address hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and methane.
Realigned resources will support the development of GHG standards, regulations, or guidelines,
as appropriate, for modified, reconstructed, and existing power plants. This will require extensive
engagement with the states as they develop and implement their plans. This realignment will also
support developing and implementing the President's interagency methane strategy, which
requires the assessment and collection of emissions and control technology data to inform our
reduction programs and measures. In addition, Heavy Duty Vehicle GHG Phase 2 standards will
require the development of new testing cycles and methods, and upgrades to the testing
equipment and software at the National Vehicle and Fuel Emission Laboratory (NVFEL). The
EPA also is implementing a range of activities in support of the President's call to cut energy
waste in homes, businesses, and factories, including ENERGY STAR's efforts to increase
energy efficiency in multifamily housing. Finally, resources are realigned to provide technical
assistance and support tools to address adaptation planning. This includes technical assistance for
water utilities at greatest risk from storm surge with emphasis on using the Climate Resilience
Evaluation Awareness Tool (GREAT), which helps utilities scope potential climate impacts and
risks. Research and development efforts will focus on decision support tools for at-risk
communities/tribes in preparing for the effects of climate change.
Taking Action on Toxics and Chemical Safety
Realignment of $23 million and 24 FTE will support activities under the President's Executive
IV
-------
Order on Chemical Safety1, as well as agency efforts on chemical prioritization, air toxics, radon,
and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in drinking water. Chemicals and toxic substances 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. Keeping communities
safe and healthy requires action to reduce risks associated with exposure to chemicals in
commerce, our indoor and outdoor environments, and products and food. Continuing to oversee
the introduction and use of pesticides, improve our Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS)
program, screen chemicals already in commerce for potential risk, reduce radon risks, identify
and address children's health risks in schools and homes, and improve chemical management
practices will remain of central relevance to the EPA's mission, including maintaining incentive-
based efforts and research to promote green chemistry. Chemicals often are released into the
environment as a result of their manufacture, processing, use, and disposal.
The Executive Order on Chemical Safety seeks to expand tools, information and materials for
State Emergency Response Commissions and Local Emergency Planning Committees.
Realigned resources will be used to fund technical support, EPA/interagency data system
enhancements, and outreach in the State and Local Prevention and Preparedness program.
Computer Aided Management of Emergency Operations (CAMEO) enhancements will build
more mobile device accessibility for easy use by first responders and provide hands-on technical
assistance in the riskiest areas including towns and cities at risk due to local infrastructure and
presence of high risk facilities.
Realigned resources for air toxics work will enhance the analytical capabilities required to
develop effective regulations, to continue the progress in developing the National Air Toxics
Assessment (NATA), to update methods for estimating area and mobile source emissions, and to
update air dispersion modeling based on recent advances in the science. In the agency's chemical
safety program, realignments will be used to develop and release 19 draft chemical risk
assessments and complete 10 final chemical risk assessments. These actions are critical in
achieving the agency's long-term chemical safety goals.
Also included in this realignment are resources in support of the Federal Radon Action Plan and
work on the drinking water VOC rule. Regulating groups of drinking water contaminants,
including volatile organic compounds (VOCs), more effectively addresses potential risks and
demonstrates a predictable strategy for regulating similar contaminants and/or groups in the
future. This group regulation requires more scientific input, complex analyses, and supporting
documentation than a regulation for a single contaminant.
Protecting Water: A Precious, Limited Resource
The EPA and its federal partners along with states, tribes, municipalities, and private parties, will
continue efforts to restore the integrity of the imperiled waters of the United States as part of the
Agency's mission. We are reminded almost daily of the importance of clean water through
natural disasters, industrial spills and outbreaks of illnesses. The nation's water resources are the
lifeblood of our communities, supporting our economy and way of life. Our FY 2015 budget
reflects this recognition of the expected long-term benefits of healthy aquatic systems as
economic cornerstones vital to property values, tourism, recreational and commercial fishing,
' Executive Order on Improving Chemical Facility and Security #13650
-------
and hunting. We will need to build resiliency to deal with impacts from climate change and build
new approaches for water quality management.
The agency is realigning $8 million and 10 FTE to advance Clean Water. As we look to protect
the nation's water, new approaches are needed to make progress. A centerpiece of this strategy is
a water quality framework to improve return on investment, accountability and environmental
results. Improvements in permitting in the stormwater energy sectors are also elements of the
strategy.
Resources also are being realigned for the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4)
program for technical support to select communities with newly regulated MS4s that must
develop effective stormwater permits for the first time. Resources will strengthen green
infrastructure activities and make a visible difference at the local level with an emphasis on
sustainability. Realignments of resources also will help the agency to continue providing
technical expertise for states and tribes as they manage their response to new requirements for
hydraulic fracturing activities. Funding will also be used to conduct inspections of permitted
wells to ensure ongoing compliance. Implementation support will ensure that authorized
agencies are effectively managing and overseeing the rapidly growing energy sector while
preventing endangerment of underground sources of drinking water.
Launching a New Era of State, Tribal and Local 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 in the EPA's budget request, and
prioritizes funding to state categorical grants.
The Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds are provided $1.775 billion in FY
2015, a nearly $581 million reduction from the FY 2014 enacted budget. 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
$757 million for the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund and public water treatment systems
are supported by $1.018 billion under the Clean Water State Revolving Fund.
For Categorical Grants, a total of $1.13 billion is provided, which is an increase of $76 million
from the FY 2014 enacted budget. Increases above FY 2014 levels are included for tribal grants
and environmental information grants. Tribal environmental and health needs far outstrip
available funding, and environmental information grants directly support the agency's E-
Enterprise business model. Requested increases over enacted levels recognize the importance of
state partners in the progress made to provide air that is safe to breathe, water that is safe to
drink, cleaner land and safer chemicals.
VI
-------
Maintaining and Strengthening a High Performing Environmental Protection Organization
An integral component of the agency's FY 2015 strategy is the work to become a high
performing organization. We are undertaking efforts to attract and retrain the workforce of the
future, modernize our business practices and more fully employ new tools and technologies. We
are implementing or accelerating a number of key efforts, including realigning our workspace,
launching new collaboration tools, and leaning our business processes to bring about change and
efficiency at the EPA, We are realigning resources and staff to ensure the success of these
efforts. This is not an effort to just save money; the EPA is looking toward the future at ways to
better serve the American people.
This complements our work in E-Enterprise, a major joint EPA and state initiative to modernize
our business practices to increase accessibility, efficiency, and responsiveness. The agency is
expanding efforts in the second year of the multi-year E-Enterprise business model including
realigning people and resources to accelerate development of the E-Manifest system and
associated rule-making work. Benefits of implementing the E-Manifest system include annual
savings estimated at $75 million for over 160,000 waste handlers.
In addition, we are making changes to long-standing business practices such as contracts and
grants management and the regulation development process. One area of emphasis is in Freedom
of Information Act (FOIA) and records management, where existing processes are not effective
or efficient, and EPA is pursuing new approaches. Achieving the full potential of these new
approaches and tools we are developing is only possible when the workforce has the skills to use
them.
The EPA also has been focusing, as has most of the federal government, on reducing its physical
footprint and achieving greater energy efficiency. Since 2006, the EPA has released
approximately 428 thousand square feet of space at headquarters and facilities nationwide,
resulting in a cumulative annual rent avoidance of over $14.6 million. But space reconfiguration
takes both time and resources. The agency will realign resources to accelerate the timeline to
achieve long-term rent avoidance through reducing and reconfiguring our space. These achieved
savings and potential savings partially offset the EPA's escalating rent and security costs.
Working Toward a Sustainable Future
Sustainability is not a new program, but we are building it in to our day-to-day operations in
partnership with businesses, government and other stakeholders. We must move beyond the
traditional foundation of environmental protection that the EPA has built with our state, tribal,
and community partners. As problems become more complicated we need new tools and
approaches to meet the challenges. We need new ways to deal with threats to human health and
the environment that cannot be effectively managed through regulations alone, or for which there
are no existing regulations. Examples include household disposal of pharmaceuticals and other
chemicals. Wherever possible, the agency is seeking to grow its capacity for local partnerships
and engagement with local organizations, and for regionally-focused outreach to cities, towns,
and businesses. These efforts will build on where we are and promote greater cross media
collaboration and innovation to allow us to continue to move forward to a more sustainable
future for all of us.
vn
-------
Maintaining Core Enforcement Strength
In FY 2015, the EPA seeks to maintain the strength of its core national enforcement and
compliance assurance program. Our objective is to pursue civil and criminal enforcement that
targets the most serious water, air, and chemical hazards in communities; assuring strong,
consistent, and effective enforcement of federal environmental laws nationwide. Recognizing the
tight fiscal climate at both the federal and state level, EPA will continue to focus federal
enforcement on the most important environmental problems where noncompliance is a
significant contributing factor and where federal enforcement attention can have a significant
impact. EPA's top enforcement priorities will be pursuing large, complex cases that require
significant investment and long term commitment.
As an important supplement to a strong enforcement program, EPA is investing in Next
Generation Compliance strategies and tools to increase 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. Next Generation
Compliance is part of the agency's E-Enterprise business model and promotes advanced
monitoring, electronic reporting and transparency. Next Generation Compliance incorporates
multiple components using state-of-the-art monitoring technology to detect pollution problems,
leverage electronic reporting, expand transparency, develop and implement innovative
enforcement approaches, and structure regulations and permits to be easier to implement.
Priority Science and Research
Science and research continue to be the foundation of 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-
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
2015, 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. Realignments include efforts to minimize the impacts of climate change,
and developing effective, systems-based watershed management approaches and forward-
looking national, regional and community level strategies for green infrastructure, chemical
safety and other innovative alternative practices.
Environmental Education
The EPA is committed to environmental education, a core part of our efforts to safeguard public
health and the environment. Environmental education provides communities with the necessary
skills and knowledge to make informed choices and take responsible action. The primary goals
of the EPA's educational activities are to share information about how to protect the
environment, and particularly how the EPA protects the water we drink and the air we breathe.
Environmental education activities also aim to improve participation in advanced programs in
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields and thereby foster the next generation
Vlll
-------
of scientists and engineers to tackle current and future environmental challenges. The EPA
fulfills its environmental education mission by connecting educators with the most up-to-date,
science-based information and research. Our programs also provide public funding for projects
and activities that enable environmental education in communities across the nation. Moving
forward, the EPA will ensure that there is an environmental education presence in every
Regional Office so that our agency has voices for environmental education across the country,
supported by a core staff at headquarters. These individuals will help develop and disseminate
environmental education publications, curriculum, and training opportunities, and also manage
related award programs and federal grant assistance. To assure that all EPA programs are
participating and focused on environmental education, funds for the agency-wide effort are
distributed, and a chart has been included in the appendix of this document. This distribution
brings broader engagement both inside and outside the Agency.
FY 2015 Opportunity, Growth, and Security Initiative
Recognizing the importance of the two-year budget agreement Congress reached in December,
which the President's Budget adheres to, levels are not sufficient to expand opportunity to all
Americans or to drive the growth our economy needs. For that reason, the Budget also includes a
separate, fully paid for $56 billion Opportunity, Growth, and Security Initiative. The
Opportunity, Growth, and Security Initiative, which will be split evenly between defense and
non-defense funding, shows how additional discretionary investments in FY 2015 can spur
economic progress, promote opportunity, and strengthen national security.
The Opportunity, Growth, and Security Initiative will support the efforts of the Climate
Resilience Fund, through which the Budget will invest in research and unlock data to better
understand the projected impacts of a changing climate, help communities plan and prepare for
impacts, and fund breakthrough technologies and resilient infrastructure. Funding at EPA will
support a nation that is better prepared for the impacts of climate change by protecting and
enhancing coastal wetlands and supporting urban forest enhancement and protection.
Eliminated Programs
The EPA continues to examine its programs to find those that have served their purpose and
accomplished their mission. The FY 2015 President's Budget eliminates a number of programs
totaling nearly $56 million including Beaches Protection categorical grants; State Indoor Radon
Grants; and Diesel Emissions Reductions Assistance grants. Details are found in the appendix to
the EPA FY 2015 Congressional Justification.
IX
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2015 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 2015 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)
Hurricane Sandy Supplemental
TOTAL, EPA
FY 2013
Actuals
$740,520.0
$2,473,536.8
$44,003.9
$33,538.3
$16,593.7
$1,123,847.7
$10,088.9
$21,429.1
$1,155,365.7
$100,816.9
$3,534,513.9
$0.0
$8,098,889.2
$0.0
$8,098,889.2
$6,379.3
$8,105,268.5
FY 2014
Enacted
$759,156.0
$2,624,149.0
$41,849.0
$34,467.0
$18,209.0
$1,059,614.0
$9,939.0
$19,216.0
$1,088,769.0
$94,566.0
$3,535,161.0
$3,674.0
$8,200,000.0
$0.0
$8,200,000.0
$0.0
$8,200,000.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$763,772.0
$2,737,156.0
$46,130.0
$53,507.0
$24,133.0
$1,126,689.0
$11,064.0
$18,850.0
$1,156,603.0
$97,922.0
$3,005,374.0
$10,423.0
$7,895,020.0
($5,000.0)
$7,890,020.0
$0.0
$7,890,020.0
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the
Superfund account.
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2015 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION SUMMARY
Full-time Equivalents (FTE)
Science & Technology
Science and Tech. - Reim
Environmental Program & Management
Envir. Program & Mgmt - Reim
Inspector General
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Oil Spill Response - Reim
Super fund Program
IG Transfer
S&T Transfer
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Superfund Reimbursables
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
WCF-Reimbursable
FIFRA
Pesticide Registration Fund
Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest
System Fund
UIC Injection Well Permit BLM
Deepwater Horizon Natural Resource
Damage Assessment
Hurricane Sandy Supplemental
TOTAL, EPA
FY 2013
Actuals
2,272.2
0.1
9,924.6
36.4
271.5
87.0
10.1
2,697.0
62.8
99.2
2,859.0
109.7
60.5
147.5
112.3
18.3
0.0
2.9
0.3
1.0
15,913.4
FY 2014
Enacted
2,233.9
1.5
9,782.4
0.0
271.4
87.9
0.0
2,621.2
60.1
79.0
2,760.3
22.8
54.5
153.1
145.0
0.0
8.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
15,520.8
FY 2015
Pres Budget
2,243.1
1.5
9,663.2
0.0
263.0
100.5
0.0
2,534.5
58.5
74.7
2,667.7
17.5
54.5
160.6
145.0
0.0
8.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
15,324.6
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the
Superfund account.
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2015 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: Addressing Climate Change and Improving Air Quality 11
Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters 24
Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development 40
Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution 56
Goal 5: Protecting Human Health and the Environment by Enforcing Laws and Assuring
Compliance 65
-------
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2015 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
GOAL, APPROPRIATION SUMMARY
Budget Authority
(Dollars in Thousands)
Addressing Climate Change and Improving Air
Quality
Science & Technology
Environmental Program & Management
Inspector General
Building and Facilities
Hazardous Substance Superfund
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Protecting America's Waters
Science & Technology
Environmental Program & Management
Inspector General
Building and Facilities
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing
Sustainable Development
Science & Technology
Environmental Program & Management
Inspector General
Building and Facilities
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest
System Fund
Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and
Preventing Pollution
FY 2013
Actuals*
$939,619.1
$238,410.5
$426,951.0
$5,537.1
$7,972.8
$3,314.9
$257,432.7
$3,966,511.1
$142,843.4
$884,320.7
$27,115.1
$5,512.1
$2,906,719.7
$1,845,368.0
$171,754.0
$314,433.8
$5,648.4
$6,648.0
$14,107.8
$918,576.9
$100,055.5
$314,143.5
$0.0
$605,409.9
FY 2014
Enacted
$985,053.3
$250,558.3
$446,901.9
$5,410.6
$8,300.5
$3,077.2
$270,804.8
$4,044,767.7
$144,572.5
$968,753.5
$25,742.8
$5,694.6
$2,900,004.2
$1,787,901.7
$169,755.7
$331,704.6
$5,247.2
$6,566.4
$15,560.8
$855,816.8
$93,757.7
$305,818.6
$3,674.0
$630,388.5
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$1,031,179.1
$257,425.7
$490,342.5
$6,635.0
$12,865.8
$3,366.0
$260,544.1
$3,489,406.7
$146,171.1
$962,702.9
$26,097.0
$8,867.9
$2,345,567.9
$1,908,837.8
$159,773.1
$346,198.3
$6,553.4
$10,160.1
$21,401.2
$923,065.2
$97,232.4
$334,031.1
$10,423.0
$672,918.3
-------
Science & Technology
Environmental Program & Management
Inspector General
Building and Facilities
Hazardous Substance Superfund
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Protecting Human Health and the Environment
by Enforcing Laws and Assuring Compliance
Science & Technology
Environmental Program & Management
Inspector General
Building and Facilities
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Sub- Total
Rescission of Prior Year Funds
Total
FY 2013
Actuals*
$170,486.8
$385,890.7
$3,116.5
$9,260.3
$4,980.5
$31,675.1
$741,981.1
$17,025.3
$461,940.6
$2,586.8
$4,145.1
$2,485.9
$228,493.3
$761.4
$24,542.9
$8,098,889.2
$0.0
$8,098,889.2
FY 2014
Enacted
$177,635.5
$400,592.9
$2,984.2
$9,625.5
$6,455.1
$33,095.2
$751,888.8
$16,634.0
$476,196.0
$2,464.2
$4,280.0
$2,648.2
$223,419.9
$808.3
$25,438.2
$8,200,000.0
$0.0
$8,200,000.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$183,585.9
$427,954.7
$3,697.7
$14,998.3
$6,936.1
$35,745.5
$792,678.1
$16,816.3
$509,957.6
$3,146.9
$6,614.9
$2,731.8
$223,235.7
$689.6
$29,485.3
$7,895,020.0
($5,000.0)
$7,890,020.0
"2013 Actuals do not include Sandy Supplemental
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2015 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
GOAL, APPROPRIATION SUMMARY
Authorized Full-time Equivalents (FTE)
Addressing Climate Change and Improving Air
Quality
Science & Technology
Science and Tech. - Reim
Environmental Program & Management
Envir. Program & Mgmt - Reim
Inspector General
Hazardous Substance Superfund
WCF-REIMB
Inspector General - Reim
Protecting America's Waters
Science & Technology
Environmental Program & Management
Envir. Program & Mgmt - Reim
Inspector General
WCF-REIMB
UIC Injection Well Permit BLM
Inspector General - Reim
Deepwater Horizon Natural Resource
Damage Assessment
Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing
Sustainable Development
Science & Technology
Science and Tech. - Reim
Environmental Program & Management
Envir. Program & Mgmt - Reim
Inspector General
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Oil Spill Response - Reim
Hazardous Substance Superfund
FY 2013
Actuals*
2,552.4
705.2
0.0
1,761.1
2.2
33.9
15.7
34.1
0.3
3,217.4
460.8
2,549.2
8.2
166.1
28.7
2.9
1.2
0.2
4,125.3
496.0
0.1
1,526.6
14.3
34.6
71.5
10.1
1,789.5
FY 2014
Enacted
2,525.8
695.6
1.5
1,745.1
0.0
35.1
13.6
35.0
0.0
3,189.6
461.4
2,530.8
0.0
166.9
30.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
3,889.9
447.0
0.0
1,515.1
0.0
34.0
73.6
0.0
1,709.5
FY 2015
Pres Budget
2,509.1
703.0
1.5
1,717.5
0.0
37.8
12.5
36.7
0.0
3,138.4
462.0
2,495.1
0.0
148.8
32.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
3,865.3
444.6
0.0
1,515.6
0.0
37.4
86.2
0.0
1,675.2
-------
Superfund Reimbursables
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
WCF-REIMB
Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest
System Fund
Inspector General - Reim
Deepwater Horizon Natural Resource
Damage Assessment
Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and
Preventing Pollution
Science & Technology
Environmental Program & Management
Envir. Program & Mgmt - Reim
Inspector General
Hazardous Substance Superfund
WCF-REIMB
Pesticide Registration Fund
Rereg. & Exped. Proc. Rev Fund
Inspector General - Reim
Protecting Human Health and the Environment
by Enforcing Laws and Assuring Compliance
Science & Technology
Environmental Program & Management
Envir. Program & Mgmt - Reim
Inspector General
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Superfund Reimbursables
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
WCF-REIMB
Inspector General - Reim
Total
FY 2013
Actuals*
97.7
56.6
28.1
0.0
0.3
0.1
2,455.7
533.4
1,704.9
9.6
19.1
20.3
37.7
18.3
112.3
0.1
3,561.5
76.8
2,382.8
2.1
15.8
15.5
1,033.5
12.0
3.9
18.9
0.1
15,912.4
FY 2014
Enacted
22.8
51.1
28.7
8.0
0.0
0.0
2,412.3
553.9
1,635.8
0.0
19.4
19.9
38.3
0.0
145.0
0.0
3,503.2
75.9
2,355.5
0.0
16.0
14.3
1,017.3
0.0
3.4
20.8
0.0
15,520.8
FY 2015
Pres Budget
17.5
51.1
29.8
8.0
0.0
0.0
2,412.0
557.8
1,628.6
0.0
21.1
19.9
39.7
0.0
145.0
0.0
3,399.8
75.9
2,306.4
0.0
17.9
14.3
960.1
0.0
3.4
21.8
0.0
15,324.6
"2013 Actuals do not include Sandy Supplemental
10
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2015 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Goal 1: Addressing 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:
• Minimize the threats posed by climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions
and taking actions that help to protect human health and help communities and
ecosystems become more sustainable and resilient to the effects of climate change.
• Achieve and maintain health and welfare based air pollution standards and reduce risk
from toxic air pollutants and indoor air contaminants.
• Restore and protect the earth's stratospheric ozone layer and protect the public from
the harmful effects of ultraviolet (UV) radiation.
• Minimize releases of radioactive material and be prepared to minimize exposure
through response and recovery actions should unavoidable releases occur.
GOAL, OBJECTIVE SUMMARY
Budget Authority
Full-time Equivalents
(Dollars in Thousands)
Addressing Climate Change and
Improving Air Quality
Address Climate Change
Improve Air Quality
Restore and Protect the Ozone Layer
Minimize Exposure to Radiation
Total Authorized Workyears
FY2013
Actuals*
$939,619.1
$179,974.0
$708,376.0
$16,382.6
$34,886.5
2,552.4
FY2014
Enacted
$985,053.3
$189,469.7
$744,419.4
$16,799.3
$34,364.9
2,525.8
FY2015
Pres Budget
$1,031,179.1
$234,677.5
$741,931.2
$17,318.6
$37,251.7
2,509.1
FY 2015 Pres Budget
V.
FY 2014 Enacted
$46,125.8
$45,207.8
($2,488.2)
$519.3
$2,886.8
-16.7
*2013 Actuals do not include Sandy Supplemental
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, tribes, and local
governments to implement programs and standards. Air pollution concerns are diverse and
significant, and include: the changing climate, outdoor and indoor air quality, stratospheric ozone
depletion, and radiation exposure.
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 2012, population-weighted ambient concentrations of fine particulate
matter and ozone have decreased 26 percent and 13 percent, respectively. Even with this
progress, in 2012, approximately 45 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 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, 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 that 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 adoption of cost-effective technologies and practices.
EPA's strategies to address climate change reflect the President's 2013 Climate Action Plan,
which, among other initiatives, tasks the EPA with setting carbon pollution standards for power
plants and applying its authorities and other tools to address hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and
methane. Specifically, using authority under section lll(b) of the Clean Air Act, on September
20, 2013, the EPA issued a new proposal for carbon pollution from new power plants and will
finalize that rule after consideration of public comment as appropriate. Using authority under
sections lll(d) of the Act, the EPA will propose carbon pollution standards, regulations, or
guidelines, as appropriate, for modified, reconstructed, and existing power plants by June 1,
2014, and finalize these standards, regulations, or guidelines by June 1, 2015.
The EPA also will promote the use of low global warming potential (GWP) alternatives to FIFCs
through application of the Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program. Specifically,
the EPA will use authority under section 612 of the Act to list more environmentally friendly
alternatives with lower GWPs, and review existing SNAP listings to consider whether any
change to the status of currently acceptable higher-GWP alternatives is appropriate.
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
12
-------
and consumers to limit unnecessary greenhouse gas emissions. The EPA will continue to
implement its draft Climate Change Adaptation Plan, released to the public in February 2013, to
meet the agency-wide priorities on climate adaptation.
Scientific consensus shows that as a result of human activities, GHG concentrations in the
atmosphere are at record high levels and data shows that the Earth has been warming over the
past 100 years, with the steepest increase in warming in recent decades. The evidence of human-
induced climate change goes beyond observed increases in average surface temperatures; it
includes melting ice in the Arctic, melting glaciers around the world, increasing ocean
temperatures, rising sea levels, acidification of the oceans due to excess carbon dioxide,
changing precipitation patterns, and changing patterns of ecosystems and wildlife.
As the number of days with extremely hot temperatures increases, severe heat waves are
projected to intensify and lead to increased heat-related mortality and sickness. The increase in
frequency and intensity of extreme weather events also has contributed to 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 climate change associated
impacts include increased hospital visits, respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, and even
premature death - especially for certain vulnerable populations like the elderly, and children.
The EPA continues to implement climate change programs that work with key industry sectors to
reduce greenhouse gases and facilitate energy-efficiency improvements. As an example, the
ENERGY STAR program introduced 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 diversity of biofuels in America grows 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. 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 2012 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. Under the Climate Action Plan, EPA and NHTSA will
develop Phase 2 GHG and fuel efficiency standards for Heavy Duty Vehicles. A proposal will be
issued in March 2015, and a final rule is expected to be issued in March 2016. The EPA will
13
-------
continue to implement the Renewable Fuels program, which requires a percentage of vehicle fuel
sold in the country to be from renewable sources.
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
(NATA), often have greater cumulative exposure to air toxics than non-industrial areas. In 2014
and 2015, approximately 21 stationary source air toxics rules are on court-ordered deadlines and
are in some stage of development. The EPA will focus its efforts on rules under section 112 of
the CAA under court orders. 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.
Major FY 2015 Changes
While continuing EPA's ongoing commitment to science, the rule of law and transparency, we
have updated and refined our current direction to maximize our effectiveness and guide our
agenda in the months and years ahead. Goal 1 resources includes extramural resources and FTE
that have been realigned to enhance our core work in targeted areas and build on progress to date
to advance priorities in FY 2015. In implementing these changes, we will seek to increase
effectiveness and efficiency without undermining vital environmental protection activities or
quality and financial management.
Address Climate Change
The FY 2015 budget addresses climate change and reflects the President's 2013 Climate Action
Plan. The broad based plan will cut carbon pollution that causes climate change and affects
public health. The EPA's Climate Protection Program promotes efforts to reduce greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions and will implement the President's Climate Action Plan through programs
such as regulatory support for state programs, encouraging energy efficiency and renewable
energy policies in the carbon pollution standards, voluntary partnerships with key industries,
technical assistance and reporting, verification and publication of GHG data, and strengthening
communities' ability and capacity to anticipate, prepare for, respond to, and recover from the
impacts of climate change. $19.8million is requested for state capacity development and
implementation of the key work under the President's Climate Action Plan.
14
-------
These programs complement and support the agency's implementation efforts across all
elements of the President's Climate Action Plan. Key Climate Action Plan elements supported
include:
• Cutting carbon pollution from power plants
• Cutting energy waste in homes, businesses, and factories
• Reducing methane and HFCs emissions
• Reducing GHG emissions from the transportation sector
• Protecting our country from the impacts of climate change
• Leading international efforts to address climate change, including supporting efforts to
control HFCs under the Montreal Protocol
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to consider the results of scientific assessments to address the
climate impacts of short-lived climate pollutants. These air pollutants, including black carbon,
HFCs and ozone are having an immediate effect on climate, particularly in the Arctic region.
Reducing emissions of these pollutants can reap near-term 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. The EPA will continue its collaboration with CCAC partners to
develop a rapid assessment tool to enable countries to determine the benefits, particularly to
human health, of mitigating short lived climate pollutants.
Improve Air Quality
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. Realigned
resources will provide additional capabilities to enhance the analytical components required to
develop effective regulations, to continue progress in developing the National Air Toxics
Assessment (NATA), to update methods for estimating area and mobile source emissions, and to
incorporate recent advances in the science into updated air dispersion modeling. The funding will
allow the EPA to continue to coordinate actions to meet multiple CAAA objectives for
controlling both criteria and toxic air pollutants while considering their cost effectiveness and
technical feasibility, as well as providing greater certainty for the regulated industry.
In FY 2011, the EPA launched the Federal Radon Action Plan (FRAP). The Action Plan is
designed to catalyze industry and nonprofit action to build on, leverage and amplify the impact
that federal agencies make to reduce radon risk. During the next phase of the Action Plan, federal
partners are focused on maintaining momentum, increasing impacts, and fostering relationships
that will advance the ultimate goal of the Federal Radon Action Plan - the elimination of
preventable, radon-induced cancer through increased testing and mitigation of high radon levels
in existing homes and schools and construction of radon-resistant new homes. In FY 2015, the
EPA will continue to lead and drive action on radon in collaboration with other federal agencies.
Realigned resources will be targeted towards updating radon risk assessment and cost-benefit
analyses, beginning work to improve radon data management, and providing support to drive
15
-------
sustainable changes in radon policy and action in health, medical, real estate, construction, and
finance sectors.
Building a High Performing Environmental Protection Enterprise
E-Enterprise is part of an agency-wide effort to modernize our business processes and systems to
reduce reporting burden on states and regulated facilities. In FY 2015, the agency will enhance
its ability to collect electronic submissions of emissions data directly from sources subject to the
Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA). By requiring facilities to report emissions data
electronically, over time, reporting burden and costs for industry, states, and tribes will be
minimized. Electronic submissions also will reduce the need to develop information collection
requests that are otherwise a part of the rule development process, and to expedite the
development and revision of emissions factors and improve the quality of the data the agency
uses for rulemakings. As part of the EPA's broad E-Enterprise business model, the agency is
building a public portal for improved access to environmental data. As part of that effort, the
EPA will upgrade its AirNow air quality data and system to provide the public with improved
access and higher quality information for real-time air quality data and forecasts nationwide.l
Agency Priority Goals
As part of the formulation of the FY 2015 budget, the EPA has developed FY 2014-2015
Agency Priority Goals that advance the Administrator's Priorities and the agency's Strategic
Plan.
Through September 30, 2015, the EPA, in coordination with the Department of Transportation's
fuel economy standards program, will be implementing vehicle and truck greenhouse gas
standards that are projected to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 6 billion metric tons
and reduce oil consumption by about 12 billion barrels over the lifetime of the affected vehicles
and trucks.
Additional information on the EPA's Agency Priority Goals can be found at
www.performance.gov.
' For more information about AirNow, visit www.aimow.gov
16
-------
FY 2015 Activities
Objective 1: Address Climate Change. Minimize the threats posed by climate change by
reducing greenhouse gas emissions and taking actions that help to protect human health and
help communities and ecosystems become more sustainable and resilient to the effects of 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
country. This adversely affects public health if areas cannot attain or maintain clean air and could
increase costs to local communities.
The agency's budget includes nearly $200 million that 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 2015, the agency will
focus on core program activities including:
• Implementing the ENERGY STAR program across the residential, commercial and industrial
sectors.
• Overseeing 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.
• Implementing 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 plans to propose a second phase of heavy-duty GHG regulations that
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.
• Supporting implementation and compliance with GHG emission standards for light-duty and
heavy-duty vehicles and the National Highway and Transportation Safety Administration's
(NHTSA) Corporate Average Fuel Economy (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.
• Finalizing standards for carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from existing power plants and
evaluating petitions seeking the establishment of GHG emissions standards for a variety of
industrial sectors and mobile source categories.
• Supporting reporting and verification in the GHG Reporting Program of emissions across 41
industry sectors and emission sources and approximately 8,000 reporters. Work in FY 2015
includes continued support for users on how to comply with the rule and how to report
17
-------
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.
Prioritizing and reviewing low GWP options for use in key consumer and industrial use
sectors under SNAP, while carefully considering existing listings that may require
reassessment based on the advent of new, more environmentally friendly options. Work in
FY 2015 will involve continued SNAP listings, rulemakings and technical support for
stakeholders and innovative firms with new alternatives.
Leading the Global Methane Initiative (GMI) and enhancing public-private sector
cooperation to reduce global methane emissions and deliver clean energy to markets.
Objective 2: Improve Air Quality. Achieve and maintain health and welfare based air pollution
standards and reduce risk from toxic air pollutants and indoor air contaminants.
Clean Air
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue its CAA prescribed responsibilities to administer the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The NAAQS improve air quality and reduce related
health and welfare impacts and their costs to the nation. 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 requirements for ozone, lead, sulfur dioxide (862),
nitrogen dioxide (NC>2), carbon monoxide (CO), and Particulate Matter (PM). 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 SC>2 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.
In FY 2015, the EPA will be continuing its reviews of several NAAQS, including NO2, SO2,
and CO 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 review of
the lead standards by mid-2015. The EPA also will be working on the completion of the ozone
NAAQS review. Implementation of the PM NAAQS, including the 2012 PM NAAQS revisions,
is among the agency's highest priorities for FY 2015. The EPA will provide technical and policy
assistance to states and tribes developing or revising attainment State Implementation Plans
(SIPs) and Tribal Implementation Plans (TIPs) and will designate areas as attainment or
nonattainment, as appropriate. EPA will work with states to implement the 2010 1-hour SO2
NAAQS, including finalizing the data requirements rule. The agency will continue consulting
with states and tribes to determine additional methods to improve the SIP/TIP development and
implementation process that are within current statutory limitations. The agency will also
continue efforts to reduce the number of SIPs that the agency has not taken action upon within
the CAAA mandated timeframe.
18
-------
The EPA will 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 $223.4 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 2015, the EPA will continue its work with states, tribes, and
communities to implement the existing 2008 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. The EPA also
will work with the states to address the interstate transport of pollution that contributes to
nonattainment or interferes with maintaining ozone and/or PM NAAQS in other areas. The
agency is awaiting the outcome of the Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) litigation and
will be working with states to implement obligations to address the transportation of air pollution
across state lines.
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 2015, 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 2015, the EPA anticipates reviewing and
approving more than 5,000 vehicle and engine emissions certification requests 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 2015 resources will support increased oversight of credit trading under RFS2 and
engine regulations and to manage critical data reporting systems.
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 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 2015, the EPA will continue to conduct risk assessments to
19
-------
determine whether the technology-based rules appropriately protect public health to comply with
legal deadlines.
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, tribal, and local
governments, and the public, using analytical tools such as the NATA, enhancing quantitative
assessment tools such as BenMAP, and improving emission inventory estimates for toxic air
pollutants. 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 air
toxics program.
Indoor Air
The EPA will continue to build the capacity of community-based organizations to promote
comprehensive asthma care that integrates management of environmental asthma triggers and
health care services. 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. The EPA will continue to co-lead the implementation of the Coordinated
Federal Action Plan to Reduce Racial and Ethnic Asthma Disparities, an initiative under the
auspices of the President's Taskforce on Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks to
Children.
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 2015 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.
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to lead on radon activities in collaboration with other federal
agencies, as well as continue to implement the agency's own multi-pronged 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, public outreach, and education
activities. The agency will encourage radon risk reduction as a normal part of doing business in
20
-------
the real estate marketplace, will promote local and state adoption of radon prevention standards
in building codes, and will participate in the development of national voluntary standards (e.g.,
mitigation and construction protocols) for adoption by states and the radon industry.
Objective 3: Restore and Protect the Ozone Layer. Restore and protect the earth's stratospheric
ozone layer and protect the public from the harmful effects of ultraviolet (UV) radiation.
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 2015, 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.
Objective 4: Minimize Exposure to Radiation. Minimize releases of radioactive material and be
prepared to minimize exposure through response and recovery actions should unavoidable
releases occur.
In FY 2015, 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. In FY 2015 the EPA will complete its revisions to the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation
Control Act, Health and Environmental Protection Standards for Uranium and Thorium Mill
Tailings (40 CFR 192), last reviewed in 1995, and the related Hazardous Air Pollutants, Subpart
W Standard for Radon Emissions from Operating Uranium Mill Tailings (40 CFR 61). The
Agency plans to 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's Radiological Emergency Response Team will maintain and improve the level of
readiness to support federal radiological emergency response and recovery operations under the
National Response Framework and the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan in FY 2015. The agency's national ambient radiation air monitoring system,
RadNet, which includes the country's 100 most populous cities, will continue to provide data to
assist in protective action determinations. The EPA will continue to support waste site
21
-------
characterization and clean-up by providing field and fixed laboratory environmental
radioanalytical data and technical support, radioanalytical training to state and Federal partners,
and developing improved radioanalytical methods.
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. 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 - that rely on the EPA's research.
The Air, Climate and Energy (ACE) program, funded at $101.9 million for FY 2015, conducts
high priority research on environmental and human health impacts related to air pollution,
climate change, and biofuels. This work directly supports the EPA's goal of addressing climate
change and improving air quality.
Human 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.
The ACE research program will continue to address critical science questions under three major
research themes.
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.
Theme 2: Prevent and Reduce Emissions - Provide the science needed to develop and evaluate
approaches to preventing and reducing harmful air emissions. Decision makers and other
stakeholders need such data and methods to 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.
In addition, in 2012, the EPA signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with DOE and DOI,
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. Additional goals include
minimizing potential risks in developing these resources, maximizing each agency's particular
strength, and reducing interagency overlap. In particular the EPA's ACE and the Safe and
22
-------
Sustainable Water (SSWR) research programs, will undertake a coordinated effort to study the
potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on air, water quality, and ecosystems.
23
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2015 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters
Protect and restore waters to ensure that drinking water is safe and sustainably managed, and
that aquatic ecosystems sustain fish, plants, wildlife, and other biota, as well as economic,
recreational, and subsistence activities.
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES:
• Achieve and maintain standards and guidelines protective of human health in
drinking water supplies, fish, shellfish, and recreational waters, and protect and
sustainably manage drinking water resources.
• Protect, restore, and sustain the quality of rivers, lakes, streams, and wetlands on a
watershed basis, and sustainably manage and protect coastal and ocean resources and
ecosystems.
GOAL, OBJECTIVE SUMMARY
Budget Authority
Full-time Equivalents
(Dollars in Thousands)
Protecting America's Waters
Protect Human Health
Protect and Restore Watersheds and
Aquatic Ecosystems
Total Authorized Workyears
FY2013
Actuals*
$3,966,511.1
$1,277,115.2
$2,689,395.9
3,217.3
FY2014
Enacted
$4,044,767.7
$1,273,076.0
$2,771,691.7
3,189.6
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$3,489,406.7
$1,117,695.7
$2,371,711.0
3,138.4
FY 2015 Pres Budget
V.
FY 2014 Enacted
($555,361.0)
($155,380.3)
($399,980.7)
-51.2
*2013 Actuals do not include Sandy Supplemental
24
-------
Introduction
As we work to protect the nation's water, new approaches and new partnerships are needed to
make and sustain progress. 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 the impacts of climate change 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 rated fair2. In addition, the latest national assessments3 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).
We can no longer rely on traditional tools and approaches to protect our waters in urban and
rural settings. We are focusing on developing new targeting tools, promoting green infrastructure
and sustainable solutions and building resiliency to deal with the impacts from climate change,
and strengthening our partnerships with federal agencies, non-government organizations and
private companies committed to supporting local efforts to improve and protect waterways. 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 urban and rural
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 Policy4 that focuses on working with states and communities to promote more
effective management and enhance technical, managerial and financial capacity within the
2 U.S. EPA. 2012. National Coastal Condition Report IV. EPA-842-R-10-003. Available at
http://water.epa.gov/type/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's Lakes. EPA 841-R-09-001. Available at http://www.epa.gov/lakessurvev/pdf/nla_chapter0.pdf.
4 http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/sustain/upload/Sustainability-Policy.pdf
25
-------
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.
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 2015 Changes
The FY 2015 Congressional Justification builds from our core programs and identifies
realignments to support our top priority work in six areas. In Goal 2, resources have been
realigned to focus on Communities; Addressing Climate Change; Protecting Waters; Taking
Action on Toxics and Chemical Safety; and Building a High Performing Environmental
Protection Enterprise. Goal 2 resources include over $2.9 billion in extramural resources and
1,868.3 FTE. Resources and FTE have been realigned to focus in these targeted areas, building
on progress to date and advancing these priorities in FY 2015. The total increase to the
categorical grant funding for states in support of core environmental programs in Goal 2 is
approximately $22.2 million5. In FY 2015, the agency is requesting $1.8 billion for the Clean
Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds (SRFs), a reduction of approximately $581
million from the FY 2014 operating level.
Making a Visible Difference in Communities across the Country
The agency's budget realigns $5.0 million extramural resources and 30 FTE to strengthen green
infrastructure activities to further sustainability goals, particularly in urban, underserved and
economically distressed communities. Incorporating green infrastructure and enhancing
stormwater management helps to create livable urban communities and improve the quality of
urban waters. Green Infrastructure is a cost-effective and resilient approach to our stormwater
infrastructure needs that provides many community benefits: improving water and air quality;
reducing energy use and mitigating climate change; improving habitat for wildlife; reducing a
community's infrastructure cost and promoting economic growth.6 More information is available
at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/greeninfrastructure/gi costbenefits.cfm.
Protecting Waters
Most waters take years to recover fully, and although incremental improvements represent
progress, these improvements are often difficult to measure. In FY 2015, the EPA will redirect
$4.5 million and 10 FTE in a new approach for measuring local improvements in water quality.
This new tool builds upon efforts that the EPA has already made in coordinating with USGS on
5 $7.7 MPWSS categorical grant dollar increase, $18.4 Pollution Control (Sectionl06) categorical grant dollar increase, $5.7
Nonpoint Source grants increase for a total of $31.8 million, minus Beaches categorical grant dollar decrease, $9.9million.
6http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/greeninfrastructure/gi_why.cfm#Community
26
-------
the National Hydrography Dataset Plus (NHDPlus), water quality monitoring, and providing
information in a common format via the Water Quality Data Portal. This approach will provide
data on water quality priority areas that will integrate with national and state-scale statistical
surveys to provide a complete picture on water quality.
The agency's budget realigns $2.5 million extramural resources for efforts directed toward
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s). These efforts will assist MS4s, particularly
newly regulated MS4s, and support clean water goals of protecting the Nation's waterbodies
from the harmful effects of storm water discharges.
In FY 2015, resources will be used to develop tools to identify priorities in support of the TMDL
10-year vision. The CWA 303(d) Listing and TMDL program has engaged with states to
implement the new 10-year vision for the program. As part of this effort, the EPA will continue
to encourage states to identify priority waters for assessment, development of TMDLs and other
restoration plans for impaired segments and watersheds, and pursuit of protection approaches for
unimpaired waters. The EPA will work with states and other partners to develop and implement
activities and watershed plans to restore and protect these waters. This integrated approach will
promote transparency, sharing of data and reduce reporting burden.
In FY 2015, the EPA is proposing a realignment of $1 million to support states and tribes in
making sound permitting decisions and providing oversight related to implementation of EPA's
guidance on hydraulic fracturing with diesel fuels. On February 12, 2014, the EPA released an
interpretive memorandum and technical recommendations for EPA regions and state and tribal
Directors responsible for implementing the Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program Class
II requirements under the Safe Drinking Water Act for oil and gas hydraulic fracturing activities
using diesel fuels. This work supports the agency's priorities of safeguarding public health and
environmental justice, while recognizing the important role that energy extraction, including
natural gas development, plays in our energy future. These funds will help states and tribes
review complex data. Funding will also be used to conduct inspections of permitted wells to
ensure ongoing compliance. Implementation support will ensure that authorized agencies are
effectively managing and overseeing the rapidly growing energy sector while preventing
endangerment of underground sources of drinking water. In addition, this also will help address
the increased volume of wastewater and produced water that comes from hydraulic fracturing
activities.
Addressing Climate Change
In FY 2015, in support for the President's Climate Action Plan, the EPA is realigning $2 million
to advance the long-term sustainability of water sector infrastructure and supplies by
incorporating climate change and resiliency considerations into effective utility management
practices. Climate change and other extreme events, in the absence of adequate planning, directly
threaten water systems' ability to fulfill their public health and environmental missions as is
evident from the devastation from Superstorm Sandy. We will continue working to ensure that
water sector utilities have tools and information to prevent, detect, respond to, and recover from
serious hazards including terrorist attacks, and extreme weather events. The EPA will promote
more robust drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater (water sector) system adaptation by
increasing the national prominence of the Climate Ready Water Utilities (CRWU) initiative and
27
-------
our emergency response (ER) and preparedness efforts. These redirected resources will improve
the ability of drinking water and wastewater systems to continue to fulfill their public health and
environmental missions despite unprecedented extreme weather events.
Taking Action on Toxics and Chemical Safety
As part of the Drinking Water Strategy, the agency is realigning $1 million and 2 FTE to
increase its focus on regulating groups of drinking water contaminants, including volatile organic
compounds (VOCs). Grouping contaminants can more effectively addresses potential risks and
demonstrates a predictable strategy for regulating similar contaminants and/or groups in the
future. This group regulation requires more scientific input, complex analyses, and supporting
documentation than a regulation for a single contaminant. The innovative nature of the group
regulation also dictates the need for increased public/scientific outreach and comment in the
form of webinars and/or public meetings.
Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds
The Administration has strongly supported the SRFs. Including the FY 2015 request, federal
capitalization totals over $22 billion since 2009. Since their inception, the SRFs have been
funded (including the FY 2015 request) at over $59 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 targets 20 percent of the CWSRF capitalization grants to green infrastructure projects
including those to manage stormwater, which helps communities improve water quality while
creating green space, mitigating flooding, and enhancing air quality. The CWSRFs have
provided over $2.6 billion for water and energy efficiency, green infrastructure, and
environmentally innovative projects.
Agency Priority Goals
The EPA has developed new FY 2014-2015 Agency Priority Goals that advance the
Administrator's Priorities and the agency's Strategic Plan. The EPA's two proposed goals to
improve water quality are:
Improve, restore, and maintain water quality by enhancing nonpoint source program leveraging,
accountability, and on-the-ground effectiveness to address the nation's largest sources of
pollution. By September 30, 2015, 100 percent of the states will have updated nonpoint source
management programs that comport with the new Section 319 grant guidelines that will result in
better targeting of resources through prioritization and increased coordination with USDA.
Improve public health protection for persons served by small drinking water systems, which
account for more than 97% of public water systems in the U.S., by strengthening the technical,
managerial, and financial capacity of those systems. By September 30, 2015, the EPA will
engage with an additional ten states (for a total of 30 states) and three tribes to improve small
drinking water system capability to provide safe drinking water, an invaluable resource.
28
-------
Additional information on the EPA's Agency Priority Goals can be found at
www.performance.gov.
FY 2015 Activities
The EPA will continue to emphasize watershed stewardship, watershed-based approaches, water
efficiencies, and best practices. In addition to the realignments highlighted above, the EPA will
continue to implement its core water programs to maximize efficiencies and environmental
results.
Objective 1: Protect Human Health. Achieve and maintain standards and guidelines protective
of human health in drinking water supplies, fish, shellfish, and recreational waters and protect
and sustainably manage drinking water resources.
Drinking Water
To help achieve the agency's priority to protect America's waters, in FY 2015 the EPA will
continue to implement its Drinking Water Strategy, an approach to expanding public health
protection for drinking water. The EPA's goal is to 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 urban and rural communities. As part of the strategy, the
agency is investing an additional $1 million to increase its focus on regulating groups of drinking
water contaminants which more effectively addresses potential risks and creates a framework for
regulating similar contaminants and/or groups in the future.
In FY 2015, the EPA will invest an additional $7.7 million in PWSS grants to augment state and
tribal efforts in meeting 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 2013, 92 percent of the population
served by community water systems (CWSs) received drinking water that met all applicable
health-based drinking water standards. This result equaled the performance target.
To help ensure water is safe to drink and to address the nation's aging drinking water
infrastructure, $757 million for the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund will support new
infrastructure improvement projects for public drinking water systems in FY 2015 and beyond.
Getting these funds to where they are most needed in a timely manner is important. In FY 2015,
appropriated DWSRF funds will again be allocated to the states in accordance with each state's
proportion of total drinking water infrastructure need based on the new 2011 Needs Survey
29
-------
which was reported to Congress in April 2013. 7 The EPA also published data concerning the
drinking water infrastructure needs of water systems serving tribes and Alaskan Native Villages
as a special focus of this survey.
o
These funds have been utilized effectively by the states. Since FY 2006, the fund utilization rate
for the DWSRF has surpassed its target, and most recently in FY 2013, the DWSRF utilization
rate of 91 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 requests a funding floor for assistance provided to Tribes,
and will reserve the greater of $20 million or 2% of appropriated funds for the Indian Tribes and
Alaska Native Villages. 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.
The responsibility for communities and public water systems to continuously provide safe
drinking water is a key component of the nation's health and well being. The delivery of safe
drinking water is often taken for granted and is extremely undervalued. More than 156,000
public water systems provide drinking water to the approximately 320 million persons in the
U.S. More than 97% of these public water systems serve fewer than 10,000 persons. 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 is emphasizing attention to the needs of these small communities/systems while
balancing current fiscal realities as the state grant and state assistance programs are implemented.
In FY 2012, the EPA re-energized its small systems focus by working more closely with state
programs to improve public water system sustainability and public health protection for persons
served by small water systems as part of an Agency Priority Goal. Again in 2014 and 2015, by
continuing the Priority Goal, the EPA is building on its successful efforts to strengthen small
system technical, managerial and financial capability through the implementation of the Capacity
Development Program, the Public Water System Supervision state grant program and the
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund. The Capacity Development Program establishes a
framework within which states and water systems can work together to help these small systems
achieve the SDWA's public health protection objectives. The state Capacity Development
programs are supported federally by the Public Water System Supervision state grant funds and
the set-asides established in the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund. Since the 1996 SDWA
Amendments, states have implemented a variety of activities to assist small systems with their
compliance challenges and enhance their technical, managerial, and financial capacity.
The EPA continues to increase public awareness of the risks to human health associated with the
consumption of fish contaminated with mercury, an effort directly linked to the agency mission
7 Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey and Assessment. April 2013.
http://water.epa. go v/grants_funding/dwsrf/upload/epa816rl3006.pdf
8 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.).
30
-------
to protect human health. EPA analysis of data from the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention's (CDC's) National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) ), show
that the geometric mean of blood mercury levels decreased by 34 percent in women of
childbearing age between the first survey cycle (1999 - 2000) and second survey cycle (2001-
2002), and then remained fairly constant between 2003 and 2010.The study also found that there
was a 65 percent decrease in the number of women of childbearing age with blood levels of
mercury above the level of concern between the first and second survey cycles of NHANES.
While the data do not indicate that women are consuming less fish, the analysis suggests that
women have reduced their consumption of the types of fish that have higher mercury
concentrations. Further information is available in the EPA study published in June 2013 entitled
Trends in Blood Mercury Concentrations and Fish Consumption among U.S. Women of
Childbearing Age;
http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/fishshellfish/fishadvisories/upload/Trends-in-Blood-
Mercurv-Concentrations-and-Fish-Consumption-Among-U-S-Women-of-Childbearing-Age-
NHANES-1999-2010.pdf
Objective 2: Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems: Protect, restore, and
sustain the quality of rivers, lakes, streams, and wetlands on a watershed basis, and sustainably
manage and protect coastal and ocean resources and ecosystems.
Clean Water
In FY 2015, 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 a key to
reducing the number of impaired waters nationwide. The programs provide a multi-faceted
approach to the problem, using 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. Working
with states to more fully utilize the revolving fund capitalization grants will help build, revive,
and "green" our aging infrastructure. In FY 2015, funding 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 2015, the EPA will continue to forge and strengthen strategic partnerships with other
federal agency programs, in particular with the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service,
which implements Farm Bill conservation programs that can help 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 2015, the EPA will partner with USDA
to focus federal resources on watersheds in every state. As part of our joint work, in FY 2014,
173 priority watersheds were selected in 51 states and areas for targeted USDA conservation
investments. In FY 2014, the EPA worked with states as they stood up in-stream monitoring
support in impaired watersheds to assess water quality progress from implemented conservation
practices in 68 of the NWQI watersheds; this monitoring will continue in FY2015. Tackling
nonpoint source pollution is an FY 2014-2015 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 Loads9 (TMDLs) and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permits, built upon scientifically sound water quality standards and technology-based
pollutant discharge limits. In FY 2015, the CWA 303(d) Listing and TMDL Program will
continue to engage with states to implement the new 10-year vision for the program. As part of
this effort, the EPA will continue to encourage states to identify priority waters for assessment
and for completing TMDLs and other restoration plans to address impaired segments. The EPA
will work with states and other partners to develop and implement activities and watershed plans
to restore these waters.
The EPA also will work with states and other partners to improve our ability to identify and
protect healthy waters/watersheds, and to pursue integration and application of core program
tools. As part of an agency-wide effort to make regulations easier to implement, resources have
been realigned to accelerate implementation of e-reporting, which will minimize burden for data
entry and error resolution, reduce effort in responding to public requests for data, establish
consistent requirements for electronic reporting across all states, and allow more timely access to
NPDES program data in an electronic format for the EPA, states, regulated entities, and the
public.
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. Reductions in nutrient
levels in sources of drinking water reduce treatment costs while strengthening public health
protection. In 2008 there were only 60 watersheds that experienced improved water quality
conditions, as identified by removal of one or more causes of impairment. By FY 2013, this
number had risen to 376, exceeding the target of 370. Water quality conditions remain a
significant challenge, with approximately 41,000 known impaired water bodies nationwide in
2013. In FY 2015, the EPA will focus on: promoting the use of green infrastructure and water
quality-based effluent limits in stormwater permits; controlling discharges from concentrated
animal feeding operations; 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 the EPA is the NPDES permitting
authority.
The EPA requests $1.018 billion in capitalization to the Clean Water State Revolving Fund
(CWSRF). As of June 2012, the CWSRF has offered over 33,000 assistance agreements to local
communities, providing approximately $100 billion in affordable financing for wastewater
infrastructure, nonpoint source pollution control, and estuary management projects. In FY 2015,
the Agency continues to provide an important tool for reaching underserved and disadvantaged
communities by allowing the CWSRF to provide a portion of the federal funds as additional
9 For more information, visit: http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/lawsguidance/cwa/tmdl/index.cfm.
32
-------
subsidy in the form of principal forgiveness, negative interest, or grants. In 2015, the Agency is
requesting that not less than 10 percent but not more than 20 percent of the CWSRF
appropriation 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 subsidy would apply to the entire CWSRF appropriation.
In FY 2015, the agency is requesting a Tribal set-aside of two percent, or $30 million, whichever
is greatest, of the funds appropriated from the CWSRF. The agency requests the establishment
of a funding floor for the Tribes due to overall declining funding levels that have negatively
impacted the Tribes. Resources for the tribes will provide much needed assistance to these
communities whose sanitation infrastructure lags behind the rest of the country causing
significant public health concerns.
The Section 106 Categorical State Grant Program supports prevention and control measures that
improve water quality. In FY 2015, the agency is requesting an additional $18.4 million in
Section 106 funding for states and tribes to implement water pollution control programs and
support state and tribal nutrient management efforts consistent with EPA guidance issued in
March 2011. Nitrogen and phosphorus pollution is one of the costliest and most challenging
environmental problems, but there are solutions for both point and nonpoint sources that can
yield progress.
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. The EPA, states, and tribes will collaborate to plan and
mobilize to conduct field sampling for the 2015 National Coastal Condition Assessment. In FY
2015, the EPA and states will release the 2012 National Lakes Assessment following partner and
external peer review. The EPA and states will initiate data analysis and peer review of the second
National Rivers and Streams Assessment, and the report will be completed in FY 2016. In FY
2015, the EPA/State Steering Committee for the National Wetlands Assessment will be planning
the next survey targeted to be conducted in the field in calendar year 2016.10
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 FY 2015, the agency is providing $14.7
million for Wetlands Program Development Grants. In addition, in FY 2015, the EPA will be
working with other federal and state partners to maximize the effectiveness of resources
provided through the Resources and Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist Opportunities, and
Revived Economies of the Gulf Coast States Act (RESTORE Act) and supporting the Natural
Resource Damage Assessment associated with the Deepwater Horizon oil spill to restore the
Gulf of Mexico.
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 2015 budget requests $26.7 million for
10 National Water Quality Assessment Report. http://www.epa.gov/waters/ir/about_integrated.html
33
-------
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 2015 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. 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. This work supports the President's American's Great Outdoors (AGO) initiative.
In FY 2015 the EPA will continue to co-lead the Urban Waters Federal Partnership to deliver
technical assistance to 18 Federal Partnership locations to help advance their water restoration
and community revitalization goals. In FY 2015 the Partnership will continue to align federal
resources to meet local needs more effectively and to advance shared multi-agency priorities. For
example, the partnership will help address storm water management and promote green
infrastructure through identification and transfer of best practices and successful local
approaches. Also in FY 2015, the Partnership will continue to support public-private partnerships
that leverage additional resources to support local efforts to restore watersheds.
Climate Change- Management of Sustainable Resources
Climate change 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 both 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 2072
Strategy is intended to be a roadmap to guide future programmatic planning.
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 2015. 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. The Opportunity, Growth, and Security
Initiative would support additional preparation for the impacts of climate change by protecting
and enhancing coastal wetlands.
34
-------
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. Four prominent examples of the EPA of cross-agency restoration efforts are
the Puget Sound, 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 these waters.
Puget Sound:
The Puget Sound program's FY 2015 budget request of $25 million will allow the EPA to
continue supporting 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 2013 the Puget Sound was able to report 30,128
acres of near shore, riparian, and wetland habitat acres protected or restored, an increase of over
6,000 since 2012.
The EPA provides leadership for the Puget Sound Federal Caucus and co-chairs the overall
federal effort to address Treaty Rights at Risk11. The EPA addresses its obligations under federal
Tribal treaties by funding Puget Sound projects that support treaty-protected resources such as
indigenous populations of shellfish, fish and other wildlife. By emphasizing these areas, the
agency's implementation of the EPA actions in the Federal Habitat Plan and its participation in
the Tribal-Federal Habitat Forum further demonstrate its commitment to Tribal concerns in
Puget Sound. In FY 2015, the EPA proposes to provide twenty-five 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.
Great Lakes:
In FY 2015, $275 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
1 'For more information, visit: http://nwifc.Org/w/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2011/08/whitepaper628finalpdf.pdf
35
-------
Department of Transportation and begins efforts under a new action plan beginning in 2015. This
effort has contributed to the removal of 29 Beneficial Use Impairments at 13 different Great
Lakes Areas of Concern through FY 2013, meeting the EPA's FY 2013 cumulative target of 41
for this measure.
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. The EPA expects to continue remediating
and restoring Areas of Concern, preventing and controlling invasive species, protecting
nearshore areas and addressing nonpoint sources of pollution, protecting and restoring habitats
and species, and addressing other crosscutting issues.
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. Expected
outcomes include remediation of over 400 thousand cubic yards of contaminated sediment;
completing management actions at additional Areas of Concern and 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:
The Chesapeake Bay program is funded in FY 2015 at approximately $73 million which will
allow the EPA-led inter-agency Federal Leadership Committee to continue to implement the
President's Executive Order (EO) on Chesapeake Bay Protection and Restoration, to meet the
EPA's broad responsibilities under Clean Water Act Section 117. Key initiatives include:
completing and implementing a new partnership agreement to establish management strategies
and outcomes for fisheries, water quality, habitat, and other key areas that are consistent with the
EO; continuing to assist states in implementing their Phase II Watershed Implementation Plans
(WIPs); preparing for a mid-point assessment of progress made under the Bay TMDL; assisting
Bay jurisdictions in developing effective offset and trading programs; conducting assessments of
jurisdictions' agricultural, stormwater and trading and offset programs; conducting permit
reviews; continuing compliance and enforcement in accordance with the EO strategy; providing
financial support and technical guidance for innovative environmental technologies, market
mechanisms, and alternative financing approaches to more effectively achieve the goals of the
TMDL; developing strategies to implement the goals to address toxics; improving the Bay
monitoring system; implementing a basin-wide Best Management Practice verification
framework; and improving the publicly available web-based accountability tools ChesapeakeStat
and the Bay Tracking and Accountability System (BayTAS).
FY 2015 funding will help the Chesapeake Bay Program continue to implement pollution
controls necessary to restore Bay water quality. The program met or exceeded its FY 2013
targets for pollution controls. Several of the Bay watershed jurisdictions have established or
expanded water quality trading programs to support the goals of their WIPs and other milestones.
By FY 2015, the program expects to achieve 37.5 percent of its goals for implementing nitrogen,
36
-------
phosphorus and sediment reduction actions to achieve final TMDL allocations (the FY 2010
baseline is 0 percent, and the long term goal is 100 percent goal achievement by 2025).
The Chesapeake Bay Program's grant programs are important tools for ensuring progress on the
seven Bay jurisdictions' WIPs, 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. The EPA also will direct investments toward local governments and
watershed organizations based on their ability to reduce nutrient and sediment loads under such
key sectors as development and agriculture. In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to provide
resources to Bay watershed jurisdictions working to improve the viability and integrity of their
water quality offset and trading programs.
Gulf of Mexico Program:
The Gulf of Mexico program's FY 2015 budget request of $3.8 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 Resources and
Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist Opportunities, and Revived Economies of the Gulf Coast
States Act (RESTORE Act) 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. During FY 2015,
funding will support (through the competitive federal process) the development and
implementation of comprehensive, stakeholder-informed coastal improvement projects and tools.
The focus will be efforts that directly enhance community planning, risk assessment, green
infrastructure and smart growth implementation. The Gulf Program works extensively and
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.
Homeland Security
In FY 2015, the EPA will focus on conducting extensive training and outreach on the recently
completed electronic deployment tool, the Surveillance and Response System, that guides water
systems though the process of designing and deploying drinking water contamination warning
systems. The EPA also will continue to support the Water Alliance for Threat Reduction to
protect the nation's critical water infrastructure and oversee the national laboratory network that
forms 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.
In FY 2015, the EPA will invest $500 thousand in cybersecurity in order to fulfill its obligations
under Executive Order (EO) 13636 - Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity - which
designates the EPA as the lead agency responsible for cybersecurity in the water sector. Recent
assessments by the Department of Homeland Security have supported the widespread concern
that the primary threat to the nation's critical infrastructure is cyber-attack on Industrial Control
Systems (ICS). Both drinking water and wastewater systems rely heavily on ICS that were
37
-------
designed in many cases decades ago with little or no consideration of cyber security. Any
interruption of a clean and safe water supply would erode public confidence and could produce
significant public health and economic consequences. As such, the EPA will increase its efforts
in cybersecurity as consistent with the President's direction.
In FY 2015, 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.
Research
The Safe and Sustainable Water Resources (SSWR) research program, funded at $114.2 million
in FY 2015, conducts research and provides the information and tools to EPA, water resource
managers, and other decision makers at all levels of government. Research integrates social,
economic, and environmental sciences to support the nation's range of growing water-use and
ecological requirements.
The SSWR research program conducts research around two inter-related themes:
Theme 1: Sustainable Water Resources - Integrates environmental, economic, social, and
sciences to provide effective and efficient tools to ensure safe and sustainable water quality and
availability. Research focuses on protecting and restoring water resources for designated uses
(e.g., drinking water, aquatic life, recreation, agriculture, industrial processes).
Theme 2: Sustainable Water Infrastructure Systems - Focuses on developing innovative water
infrastructure management approaches and techniques for reducing barriers to improved water-
resources management. Research encompasses system design, treatment alternatives and
potential negative/positive health effects, life-cycle analysis, best management practices (BMP),
resiliency and viability. SSWR is increasingly focusing on unique needs for small water systems.
In FY 2015, the EPA will shift the emphasis of its Green Infrastructure research efforts away
from performance monitoring of best management practices (BMP) at individual sites to work
with communities and to expand research efforts with constructed and natural green
infrastructure to a more holistic, watershed approach. This will include reinvesting $2.3 million
for the pilot-testing of approaches for:
• Integrating the use and placement of natural green infrastructure (wetlands, riparian
buffers) and constructed green infrastructure (permeable pavement, green roofs, etc.)
within the watershed for maximum stormwater interception and mitigation;
• Mitigating flood events and "heat-island" effects that have associated public health and
economic consequences, especially during extreme weather events and a warming
climate; and
• Reducing sediment and nutrients in source water watersheds used for drinking water.
38
-------
• Research on long-term performance monitoring and new BMP development will continue
through support for extramural research at academic institutions.
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 at the local, state, and federal levels, in creating an
environmentally responsible energy policy. In particular, in FY 2015 hydraulic fracturing (HF)
research will focus on understanding any potential impacts of energy-associated activities on
water resources. In conjunction with this, in 2012, the EPA signed a Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA) with DOE and DOI, 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.
Additional goals include minimizing potential risks in developing these resources, maximizing
each agency's particular strength, and reducing interagency overlap. 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, and
ecosystems. The EPA expects to publish the Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water
Resources draft synthesis report for peer review in December 2014. This synthesis 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.
39
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2015 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 and minority communities. Prevent releases of harmful substances and
clean up and restore contaminated areas
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES:
• 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.
• Conserve resources and prevent land contamination by reducing waste generation and
toxicity, promoting proper management of waste and petroleum products, and
increasing sustainable materials management.
• Prepare for and respond to accidental or intentional releases of contaminants and
clean up and restore polluted sites for reuse.
• Directly implement federal environmental programs in Indian country and support
federal program delegation to tribes. Provide tribes with technical assistance and
support capacity development for the establishment and implementation of
sustainable environmental programs in Indian country.
GOAL, OBJECTIVE SUMMARY
Budget Authority
Full-time Equivalents
(Dollars in Thousands)
Cleaning Up Communities and
Advancing Sustainable
Development
Promote Sustainable and Livable
Communities.
Preserve Land
Restore Land
Strengthen Human Health and
Environmental Protection in Indian
Country
Total Authorized Workyears
FY2013
Actuals*
$1,845,368.0
$460,859.1
$218,089.7
$1,079,428.6
$86,990.7
4,124.5
FY 2014
Enacted
$1,787,901.7
$455,793.8
$226,931.8
$1,018,489.1
$86,687.0
3,889.9
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$1,908,837.8
$457,466.3
$236,298.2
$1,094,800.6
$120,272.7
3,865.3
FY 2015 Pres Budget
V.
FY 2014 Enacted
$120,936.1
$1,672.5
$9,366.4
$76,311.5
$33,585.7
-24.6
*2013 Actuals do not include Sandy Supplemental
40
-------
Introduction
The EPA has made it a priority to work with other federal agencies, states, tribes and local
communities to improve the health of American families and protect the environment one
community at a time, all across the country. Resources in Goal 3 will: expand the work we do to
enhance the livability and economic vitality of neighborhoods in and around brownfields sites
and take into consideration the impacts of our decisions on environmental justice communities.
Increased resources will support improvements to oversight of chemical storage and
manufacturing, carried out by EPA in coordination with our interagency partners. These efforts
will remain a key focus of attention. The EPA will continue to enhance the tracking and
management of hazardous waste through modern e-Manifest tracking systems.
The EPA strives to protect and restore land, 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. Local land use and infrastructure
investments also can generate unanticipated environmental consequences, such as increased
stormwater runoff, loss of open space, and increased greenhouse gas emissions. By cleaning up
contaminated sites and returning them to communities for reuse, assisting communities to use
existing infrastructure and plan for more efficient and livable communities, and encouraging the
minimization of environmental impacts throughout the full life cycle of materials, EPA programs
promote sustainability. The EPA leads efforts to preserve, restore, and protect our land, for both
current and future generations. We will continue our work to prevent and reduce exposure to
contaminants, accelerate the pace of cleanups, and reduce the environmental impacts associated
with land use across the country. The EPA works collaboratively with international, state, tribal,
and local partners to achieve these aims. In addition, we will continue to work with communities
to address risks posed by intentional and accidental releases of hazardous substances into the
environment and ensure that communities have an opportunity to participate in environmental
decisions that affect them. Our efforts are guided by scientific data, tools, and research that alert
us to emerging issues and inform decisions on managing materials and addressing contaminated
properties.
In FY 2015, the EPA will partner with state and tribes to prevent and reduce exposure to
contaminants. For example, 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 Integrated Cleanup Initiative (ICI) has moved into an
implementation phase. This initiatve integrates and leverages 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. The agency will continue to apply lessons learned from conducting a series of
project management pilots under the ICI which include practices that better integrate the
remedial design and remedial action phases of site cleanup.
41
-------
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA, or
Superfund) and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (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 processes that generates, recycles, transports, treats, stores, or disposes of
waste.
It is estimated that 27 million people in the U.S. live within a mile of hazardous waste
management facilities.12 In FY 2015, the agency is providing over $1.1 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, Leaking Underground
Storage Tanks (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. Many communities across the country regularly face risks posed by intentional and
accidental releases of hazardous substances into the environment.
In FY 2015, improvements to land cleanup programs (e.g., Superfund, Brownfields, RCRA
Corrective Action, and Leaking Underground Storage Tanks) to address the cleanup needs at
individual sites will be supported by scientific data, research, and cost-effective tools. The EPA
is making significant progress in assuring that in advance of the full cleanup process,
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 moves forward. Across all cleanup programs, the EPA will
continue to take action to address any unacceptable exposures and eliminate acute risks while
also pursuing long-term, permanent cleanups. This approach is exemplified by the EPA's goal to
control contaminated groundwater migration at 1,133 final and deleted NPL sites and non-NPL
sites through Superfund Alternative Approach (SAA) agreements; and to control human
exposures to contamination at 1,421 final and deleted NPL sites and non-NPL sites through SAA
agreements by the end of FY 2015.
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.
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
12 Estimate drawn from OSWER Near Site Population Database, an internal EPA database that merges facility size and location
information from RCRAInfo with population data, at the block and block group levels, from the U.S. Census Bureau's 2000
Census. The demographics were captured around the total number of facilities that have approved controls in place that result in
the protection of this population (20 million people).
42
-------
parties for setting standards, making environmental policy decisions, and managing programs for
reservations consistent with agency standards and regulations."
Major FY 2015 Changes
The FY 2015 request funds for our top priority work in six areas. In Goal 3, resources are
focused on Making a Visible Difference in Communities Across the Country; Taking Action on
Toxics and Chemical Safety; Working Toward a Sustainable Future; and Building a High
Performing Environmental Protection Enterprise. While continuing EPA's ongoing commitment
to science, the rule of law and transparency, we have updated and refined our current direction to
maximize our effectiveness and guide our agenda in the months and years ahead. Goal 3
resources include extramural resources and FTE will be focused to enhance our core work in
these targeted areas and build on progress to date to advance these priorities in FY 2015. Further
details are organized below by the Administrator's themes and found in the specific program
project narratives.
Making a Visible Difference in Communities across the Country
Resources to strengthen an integrated approach to communities and tribes across multiple
programs are essential. We are realigning and focusing resources and substantial FTE for the
regional offices to further implement and coordinate activities and also to provide support to
enhance program design, build new tools, and leverage the work of other partners. Redirected
FTE will build on current efforts and support increased focus on enhancing the livability and
economic vitality of neighborhoods in and around brownfields sites by furthering on-the ground
implementation and coordination activities. The focus will be enhancing program design by
including considerations of resiliency, adaptation, equitable development, and environmental
justice, and leveraging the work of other partners.
Taking Action on Toxics and Chemical Safety
Protecting communities and improving safety is a key responsibility of the EPA. The President's
Executive Order on Chemical Safety13 (August 1, 2013) recognized the need to take some
common sense steps now to improve safety and security and build on ongoing work across
federal agencies to reduce the risks associated with hazardous chemicals. In FY 2015, resources
aligned to this priority area will support activities to expand tools, information and materials for
State Emergency Response Commissions and Local Emergency Planning Committees. Nearly
$12 million and 12 FTE in additional resources will be used to fund technical support,
EPA/interagency data system enhancements, and outreach in the State and Local Prevention and
Preparedness program.
Working Toward a Sustainable Future
We need to move beyond the foundation of environmental protection that the EPA has built with
our state, tribal, and community partners. The EPA's budget proposal provides resources to
multiple programs and regional offices to support integrated cross-program approaches, which
13 Executive Order on Improving Chemical Facility and Security #13650
43
-------
focus on increasing sustainability. A redirection of 5 FTE for Sustainable Materials Management
will improve regionally-focused outreach to cities, towns, and businesses.
Building a High Performing Environmental Protection Enterprise
Necessary to our strategic approach to the FY 2015 budget and constrained resources is
redesigning the way we do business. Resources have been realigned to focus on the building
blocks of a modern, more efficient EPA, in order to support and even accelerate the pace of
better integrating technology, enhancing internal programmatic leveraging, and updating or
implementing new approaches to core business processes. As part of the E-Enterprise business
model, resources and FTE have been realigned to E-Manifest for system development and for
support of on-going efforts to incorporate e-reporting and provide greater efficiency in
implementation across the full range of the agency's of rules updates and targeting tools.
To meet the FY 2015 target and provide support to our top priorities, we will make fundamental
changes to our long-standing business practices in contracts, grants and oversight of delegated
programs, among others. Implementing these changes requires realigning resources and people
to ensure that we increase effectiveness without undermining vital protections or quality and
financial management.
Agency Priority Goals
As part of the formulation of the FY 2015 budget, the EPA has developed FY 2014-2015
Agency Priority Goals that advance the Administrator's Priorities and the agency's Strategic
Plan.
Clean up contaminated sites to enhance the livability and economic vitality of communities. By
2015, an additional 18,970 sites will be made ready for anticipated use, protecting Americans
and the environment one community at a time. All of OSWER 's cleanup programs (Superfund,
RCRA Corrective Action, Brownfields, and LUST) contribute to this goal and take positive
action to protect human health and the environment through the cleanup and revitalization of
contaminated properties.
Additional information on the EPA's Agency Priority Goals can be found at
www.performance.gov.
FY 2015 Activities
In FY 2015, 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. 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.
44
-------
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, redevelopment and reuse of
contaminated and formerly contaminated sites, and the equitable distribution of environmental
benefits.
The EPA supports the goals of urban, suburban and rural communities to grow in ways that
improve the environment, human health and quality of life for their residents. With the support
of partners across all levels of government, communities can grow in ways that also strengthen
the economy, help them adapt to climate change, improve their resiliency to disasters, use public
resources more efficiently, revitalize neighborhoods, and improve access to jobs and amenities.
By making sustainable infrastructure investments, communities can successfully build innovative
and functional systems on neighborhood streets and sidewalks to deal with the run-off from
stormwater and still provide easy access for pedestrians, bicyclists, on-street parking and other
beneficial uses. Under local planning and zoning codes that account for the environmental
impacts of development, the private sector can more easily construct market-ready "green"
buildings serving a range of housing needs. Communities also can benefit from tools, technology
and research that better engage citizens and inform local decision making to support smart and
sustainable growth.
In FY 2015, 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.
Brownfields:
The EPA's Brownfields program is funded at nearly $161 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. The Brownfields program also helps address climate change by ensuring that
potential climate change impacts are taken fully into account when brownfield cleanups are
planned and implemented.
The EPA plans to award approximately 119 assessment grants, 52 cleanup grants, 17
Environmental Workforce Development and Job Training grants, 20 area wide planning grants,
and a variety of technical assistance, targeted assessment, and petroleum brownfields grants.
Beginning in FY 2015, the agency plans to alternate the grant competition cycle and award
Revolving Loan Fund (RLF) cooperative agreements to eligible recipients every other year. By
holding this competition every other year, the program will be able to reduce the costs of the
grant competition and will utilize the grant funds in off years to fund eligible high performing
existing RLF grantees. Additionally, this alternating schedule will allow regional staff to provide
more assistance and attention to managing existing grants and maximizing results and promoting
timely implementation. This would have the additional benefit of reducing unliquidated
obligations in existing RLF grants. The next RLF grant competition will occur in FY 2016.
45
-------
In addition, the Brownfields program, in collaboration with the EPA's Smart Growth program,
will address critical issues for brownfields redevelopment, including financing, coordination with
local government efforts to improve land use planning, and other factors that influence the
economic viability of brownfields redevelopment. In FY 2015, the Brownfields program will
continue to foster federal, state, local, and public-private partnerships to return 2,800 acres of
brownfields properties to productive economic use in communities. The Brownfields program
generally, and area-wide planning specifically, will continue to be a component of the Investing
in Manufacturing Communities Partnership (IMCP) to advance manufacturing uses on
redeveloped brownfield sites.
Chemical Safety:
In FY 2015, the EPA is providing $27.5 million for the State and Local Prevention and
Preparedness program, which includes an increase of over $12 million to support additional
high-risk chemical facility inspections, and activities related to the President's Executive Order
on Chemical Safety.14 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 and training
personnel. 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, including recent high profile incidents. States and communities
often lack the strong infrastructure needed to prepare for and/or respond to these emergencies or
to prevent them from happening in the first place.
Smart Growth:
The Smart Growth program helps community and government leaders protect the environment
and public health, build the economy, and improve the quality of people's everyday lives by
making smart growth and sustainable design practices commonplace. Also, through the
Partnership for Sustainable Communities, in its fifth year, EPA's Smart Growth program works
with the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) to align housing, transportation, and infrastructure investments and
policies, and build capacity in communities to grow in a more sustainable and resilient manner.
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, resilient, 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, and offer protection against the impacts of climate change.
In FY 2015, the Smart Growth program, under the Integrated Environmental Strategies and the
Brownfields program projects, will continue 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
^Executive Order on Improving Chemical Facility and Security #13650
46
-------
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
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.
Environmental Justice:
The EPA is committed to fostering public health in communities disproportionately burdened by
pollution by 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 201415.
The EJ Program facilities 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. In FY
2015, the EPA is providing $8.5 million for the EJ program to continue its efforts to facilitate the
integration of environmental justice considerations into planning and performance measurement
processes. The agency will implement environmental justice activities consistent with the vision
and commitments outlined in the agency's FY 2014-2018 Strategic Plan, the FY 2014 annual
action plan for the Cross-Cutting Fundamental Strategy for EJ and Children's Health, and Plan
EJ2014.
Objective 2: Reserve Land. Conserve resources and prevent land contamination by reducing
waste generation and toxicity, promoting proper management of waste and petroleum products,
and increasing sustainable materials management.
RCRA Waste Management
The FY 2015 budget provides $70.5 million to the RCRA Waste Management program. The
RCRA program is critical to comprehensive and protective management of solid and hazardous
materials for the entire lifecycle. In FY 2015, RCRA permits for approximately 20,000
hazardous waste units (such as incinerators and landfills) at 6,600 treatment, storage, and
disposal facilities in the permitting universe will be issued, need to be updated or maintained.
The EPA provides leadership, work-sharing, and support to the 50 states and territories
authorized to implement the permitting program and directly implements the entire RCRA
program in Iowa and Alaska. 6. 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 for this type of support are expected to continue through
FY2015.
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
15 Plan EJ 2014 can be found at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/environmentaljustice/plan-ej/index.html
16 http://www.epa.gov/wastes/hazard/tsd/permit/pgprarpt.htm
47
-------
wastes against the criteria specified in TSCA. This effort will be tracked by a new performance
measure that will track all approvals issued by the EPA under TSCA. Beginning in FY 2014, the
Agency will have annual targets to authorize approvals for cleanup, storage, and disposal
activities. The EPA estimates approximately 20 disposal and storage approvals and 130 cleanup
approvals are issued per year. The annual target for both FY 2014 and 2015 for the
comprehensive measure for cleanups, disposal, and storage activities is 150.
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
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
approximately $75 million annually. The legislation contains aggressive deadlines for
rulemaking and system development. In 2014, EPA completed the regulation that authorizes the
electronic transmittal of manifest, began work under a new contract for development of the
technical architecture of the system, and began work on the user fee rule. 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 and reimburse system development costs.
In FY 2015, the EPA is providing a total of $10.4 million within the RCRA Waste Management
program, to continue work on the e-Manifest system. This funding will be used for system
acquisition/development; development of the economic models to support the user-fee rule; and
analyses to support further revision of EPA regulations needed to implement an e-Manifest
system. E-Manifest remains a key component of the E-Enterprise business model.
Sustainable Materials Management (SMM)
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to advance 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 2015, the EPA will utilize SMM to offset the use of virgin resources by 8,603,033 tons of
materials and products. In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to promote the SMM approach in
high priority areas (e.g., Sustainable Food Management, Used Electronics, and Federal
Government), which are selected based on an analysis of opportunities for reducing
environmental impacts in Sustainable Materials Management: The Road Ahead11 In FY 2015,
the EPA will continue to lead by example, and will help other federal agencies adopt SMM
approaches and promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, which furthers the goals of
Executive Order 13514 ("Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic
17 U.S. EPA OSWER ORCR. Sustainable Materials Management: The Road Ahead. June 2009
http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/conserve/smm/pdf/vision2.pdf.
48
-------
Performance"), and also save money. For example, 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 will also explore the application of the SMM approach into other
high priority sectors, based on lessons learned from the first two years of the national SMM
program and re-evaluation of The Road Ahead.
LUST Prevention
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.
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to assist states in complying with release prevention activities
authorized by the EPAct. States rely primarily on federally funded assistance agreements to
maintain inspection frequency and ensure compliance which will help prevent future confirmed
releases. States may use money from LUST assistance agreements for inspections, other release
prevention and compliance assurance activities for federally-regulated USTs, and enforcement
activities related to release prevention.
Objective 3: Restore Land. Prepare for and respond to accidental or intentional releases of
contaminants and clean up and restore polluted sites for reuse.
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, the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
Polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) Cleanup and Disposal, and LUST Cooperative Agreements) and
its partners are taking proactive steps to facilitate the cleanup and revitalization of contaminated
properties. To support the Land Revitalization Initiative, the EPA created the Land Revitalization
Agenda18 to integrate reuse into EPA's cleanup programs, establish partnerships, and help make
land revitalization part of EPA's organizational culture.
In FY 2015, 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. There are multiple benefits
associated with cleaning up contaminated sites: reducing mortality and morbidity risk;
preventing and reducing human exposure to contaminants; making land available for
commercial, residential, industrial, or recreational reuse; and promoting community economic
development. A 2011 study suggests that Superfund cleanups reduce the incidence of congenital
18 Additional information on this agenda can be found on http://www.epa.gov/landrevitalization/agenda_full.htm
49
-------
anomalies in infants by roughly 20-25 percent to mothers living within 2,000 meters of a site.19
In another case, the EPA contracted with researchers at Duke University and the University of
Pittsburgh to conduct a study to determine the effects of Superfund site status on housing values.
The study found that when sites are cleaned up and deleted from the National Priorities List
(NPL), properties within three miles of the sites experience an 18.6 to 24.5 percent increase in
value.20
A cummulative total of 1,694 sites have been listed on the Superfund National Priorities List
(NPL), 366 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. In FY 2015, the agency plans to achieve control of all
identified unacceptable human exposures at 9 additional sites, bringing the program's cumulative
total of Human Exposure Under Control (HEUC) sites to 1,408. Additionally, the agency expects
to achieve Groundwater Migration Under Control (GMUC) at 13 additional sites, bringing the
program's cumulative total to 1,119 sites.
The FY 2015 budget provides $187 million for the Superfund Emergency Response and
Removal program. The agency will continue to support all emergency actions and focus on
encouraging viable Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs), when available, to conduct removal
actions. In FY 2015, the EPA will oversee 275 removal actions for both Superfund-lead and PRP
removals.
The Superfund Remedial program is funded at $543 million in FY 2015. 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 help support
community revitalization and economic redevelopment and will provide funding to initiate
cleanup construction work at several construction projects. The program estimates
accomplishing 105 remedial action project completions in FY 2015.
RCRA Corrective Action
The FY 2015 budget provides $36 million for the RCRA Corrective Action program. The EPA
works in partnership with states, having authorized 44 states and territories to directly implement
91
the corrective action program. Resources for state implementation are provided through the
Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance categorical grant. This program is responsible for
overseeing and managing cleanups that protect human health and the environment at active
RCRA sites. The agency provides leadership and support to its state partners and serves as lead
regulator at a significant, and increasing, number of facilities. States have been challenged in the
cleanup area due to downsizing and are looking to the federal program for assistance. As a result
19 Currie, Janet; Michael Greenstone, and Enrico Moretti. 2011. "Superfund Cleanups and Infant Health." American Economic
Review, 101(3): 435-41.
20 S. Gamper-Rabindran, C. Timmins. 2013. "Does cleanup of hazardous waste sites raise housing values? Evidence of spatially
localized benefits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management.
21 State implementation of the CA Program is funded through the STAG (Program Project 11) and matching State contributions.
50
-------
and at the request of states, the EPA has resumed work previously agreed to by states under
work-sharing agreements and this trend has been increasing, particularly for sites that have
complex issues22 or for more specialty components such as ecological risk assessments.
Through its RCRA Corrective Action program, the EPA and its state partners will issue, update,
or maintain RCRA permits for 3,779 hazardous waste facilities. The facilities are a subset of
approximately 6,000 sites with corrective action obligations and include some of the most highly
contaminated, technically challenging, and potentially threatening sites the EPA confronts in any
of its cleanup programs.23 As of the end of FY 2013, a total of 3,212 RCRA facilities are
designated as having with human exposures to toxins under control.
In FY 2015, 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 EPA will
also place additional focus on identifying facilities where the corrective action process can be
considered completed (i.e., where cleanup performance standards have been met, or no further
cleanup action is necessary). These activities will be consistent with the programmatic response
developed by the agency after a 2011 GAO report on the RCRA corrective action program,
which also is reflected in revisions to targets for 3 RCRA Corrective Action performance
measures.24 In FY 2015, the EPA has also developed a new performance measure to account for
the last step in the cleanup process and will increase the number of RCRA facilities with
corrective action performance standards attained to 22 percent.25
LUST Cleanup
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 annual confirmed releases from Underground Storage Tanks (USTs)
has dropped 25 percent, from 7,570 in FY 2007 to 5,674 in FY 2012. The number of active tanks
over that period dropped 6 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
424,637) 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 due to the complexity of remaining sites, an
increased state workload, a decrease in available state resources and the increasing costs of
cleanups. 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
For example, vapor intrusion, wetlands contamination or extensive ground-water issues.
23 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.
24 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.
25 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.
51
-------
r\r ^^ _^
releases remaining . The 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.
Oil Spills Prevention
The discharge of oil into U.S. waters can threaten human health, cause severe environmental
damage, and create 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 2015, 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 (FRP) in order to create
reporting efficiencies for the agency, states, local government and industry.
In FY 2015, the EPA is providing a total of $20.5 million for the Oil Spill Prevention,
Preparedness and Response program which include a $2 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 60 percent of SPCC and FRP inspected facilities found to be non-
compliant during the FY 2010 through FY 2015 inspection cycle into compliance.
Homeland Security
The EPA's Homeland Security work is an important component of the agency's prevention,
protection, and response activities. The FY 2015 President's Budget includes $33.8 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.
26 For more information, please see The National LUST Cleanup Backlog: A Study of Opportunities at
http://www.epa.gov/swerustl/cat/backlog.html
52
-------
Objective 4: Strengthen Human Health and Environmental Protection in Indian Country.
Directly implement federal environmental programs in Indian country and support federal
program delegation to tribes. Provide tribes with technical assistance and support capacity
development for the establishment and implementation of sustainable environmental programs in
Indian country.
The EPA works under two important Tribal infrastructure Memoranda of Understandings
(MOU) amongst five federal agencies27. The EPA, the Department of the Interior, the
Department of Health and Human Services, the 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.
The first, or umbrella MOU, promotes coordination between federal Tribal infrastructure
programs, including financial services, while allowing federal programs to retain their unique
advantages. 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
efficiencies and partnerships resulting from this collaboration will directly assist tribes with their
infrastructure needs. 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 and the Southwest), engaging
in coordination of funding, and promoting cross-agency efficiency. These activities are
completed in coordination with federally recognized tribes. For more information, please see the
web link: http://www.epa.gov/tribalportal/mous.htm.
The EPA continues to work closely with other federal agencies as well as the Domestic Policy
Council to implement the President'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 Governments28." 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. The 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,
following 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.
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. More
http://www.epa.gov/tribal/trprograms/2013-itf-memorandum-of-understanding.pdf
28 http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/memoranda/2010/ml 0-33.pdf
53
-------
than $3 million worth of AmeriCorps funding is dedicated to support tribal communities every
year, but often, tribal governments face financial challenges that prevent them from providing
the required matched funding. 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. Examples of activities eligible for funding include conducting
environmental education, performing assessments of indoor air quality or household pesticide
usage, and assessing baseline environmental conditions. Additionally, the EPA has entered into a
MOU 29 with the Department of Energy and the Department of the Interior and formed an inter-
agency work group to understand the implications of hydraulic fracturing on tribal lands.
Research
In FY 2015, the Sustainable and Healthy Communities (SHC) research program, funded at
$158.6 million, will continue to support the EPA's program offices, state, and Tribal partners in
protecting and restoring land, and providing community decision makers with decision tools to
support community health. The work of the SHC research program falls into four inter-related
themes:
• Decision Support and Innovation will use decision science, interactive social media,
spatial analyses, and sustainability assessment methods to provide communities with
tools to frame their decision options, outcomes and potential costs and benefits.
• Community Well-being: Public Health and Ecosystem Goods and Services will utilize 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.
This research will address impacts in all communities including communities and tribes
that are at risk for disproportionate environmental and health impacts;
• Sustainable Approaches for Contaminated Sites and Materials Management will build
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 also will 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 develop methods and data
that will allow communities to consider the full costs and benefits of their decisions. For
example, SHC 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,
29 http://unconventional.energy.gov/pdf/oil and gas research mou.pdf
54
-------
o Transportation options, and
o Provision of infrastructure, including water and energy.
The SHC research program will invest $7.8 million in ongoing research to develop models, data
bases, metrics and other decision-support tools that will empower communities to make
decisions regarding sustainable approaches to environmental protection. These additional funds
will allow EPA to increase its capacity to provide community based decision support tools which
consider ecosystem goods and services, contaminated sites, multimedia pollutants within
environmental justice communities, and the beneficial use of sustainable materials. In addition,
the SHC program will realign $1.3 million to develop tools for at risk communities and tribes to
examine the impacts of climate change adaptation on ecosystems goods and services to support
the agency's goal of working with communities to address climate change.
Consistant with Administration priorities, EPA's Science to Achieve Results (STAR) and the
Greater Research Opportunities (GRO) fellowship programs, and all funds, will be consolidated
across the government 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 SHC research program will continue to 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. This science
will be used to develop guidance on site assessment, remedial investigations, and to provide
technical support resources to agency programs and regional offices.
The SHC research program 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. Additional research outcomes include
improved characterization and remediation methods for fuels released from leaking underground
storage tanks.
55
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2015 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:
• Reduce the risk and increase the safety of chemicals that enter our products, our
environment and our bodies.
• Conserve and protect natural resources by promoting pollution prevention and the
adoption of other sustainability practices by companies, communities, governmental
organizations, and individuals
GOAL, OBJECTIVE SUMMARY
Budget Authority
Full-time Equivalents
(Dollars in Thousands)
Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals
and Preventing Pollution
Ensure Chemical Safety
Promote Pollution Prevention
Total Authorized Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals*
$605,409.9
$552,681.0
$52,728.9
2,455.7
FY2014
Enacted
$630,388.5
$578,591.5
$51,796.9
2,412.3
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$672,918.3
$618,877.2
$54,041.1
2,412.0
FY 2015 Pres Budget
V.
FY 2014 Enacted
$42,529.8
$40,285.7
$2,244.2
-0.3
*2013 Actuals do not include Sandy Supplemental
56
-------
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. Vulnerable populations, including low-income, minority, and indigenous populations,
may be disproportionately impacted by, and thus particularly at risk from, exposure to
chemicals30' 1>32. In addition, research shows that children receive greater relative exposures to
chemicals because they inhale or ingest more air, food, and water on a body-weight basis than
adults do.33'34'35'36 The agency's FY 2015 funding level for Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and
Preventing Pollution is $672.9 million, an increase of $42.5 million over the FY 2014 enacted
operating plan.
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
they pose significant risks to human health or the environment. The $62.7 million provided in
FY 2015 for the Chemical Risk Review and Reduction Program 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 2015, 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 assessments of priority chemicals to determine whether risk
management action is warranted and, if so, what type of action.
In FY 2015, the EPA's pesticide licensing program will continue to evaluate new pesticides
before they reach the market and 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.
30 Holistic Risk-based Environmental Decision Making: a Native Perspective
(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1241171)
31 Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income
Populations
32 Interim Guidance on Considering Environmental Justice During the Development of an Action
(http://www.epa.gov/compliance/ej/resources/policv/considering-ej-in-rulemaking-guide-07-2010.pdf)
33 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/EP A_ADP_Guide_508.pdf)
5 Holistic Risk-based Environmental Decision Making: A native Perspective
(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1241171)
35 Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
36 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/EP A_ADP_Guide_508.pdf)
57
-------
The EPA has a long history of collaboration to address 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.
Examples include, 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, enhancing opportunities through effective consultation and collaboration
related to environmental 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.
Pollution prevention is central to the EPA's sustainability strategies. In FY 2015, 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 2015 Changes
To meet the FY 2015 target and provide support to our top priorities we will make fundamental
changes to our long-standing business practices in contracts, grants and oversight of delegated
programs, among others. Implementing these changes requires realigning resources and
personnel to ensure that we increase effectiveness without undermining vital protections or
quality and financial management. The FY 2015 President's Budget funds our top priority work
in six areas. In Goal 4 resources are focused on Taking Action on Toxics and Chemical Safety;
Sustainability; and Building a High Performing Environmental Protection Enterprise. While
continuing EPA's ongoing commitment to science, the rule of law and transparency, we have
updated and refined our current direction to maximize our effectiveness and guide our agenda in
the months and years ahead.
Taking Action on Toxics and Chemical Safety
The EPA has evaluated its priorities and made necessary adjustments to focus FY 2015 resources
on the most significant efforts that help protect health and the environment from chemical risks.
The EPA's budget represents an increase in FY 2015 of approximately $4 million above the FY
2014 Enacted Budget for critical work in the objective of Ensuring Chemical Safety under the
Chemical Risk Review and Reduction program. In FY 2015, EPA will be following up on its
projected early-achievement in FY 2014 of its FY 2015 goal to complete reviews and, where
appropriate, challenge all of the more than 22,000 TSCA CBI claims in health and safety studies
in existence as of August 2010. The agency has been simultaneously reviewing and, where
appropriate, challenging all new TSCA CBI claims for chemical identity in health and safety
studies as they are submitted, consistent with the EPA's 2015 Strategic Plan goal of making all
health and safety studies available to the public for chemicals in commerce, to the extent allowed
by law. The EPA will continue this important work in FY 2015. In recent years, hundreds of
such claims have been submitted annually.
58
-------
Agency Priority Goals
The EPA has developed FY 2014-2015 Agency Priority Goals that advance the Administrator's
Priorities and the agency's Strategic Plan.
By September 30, 2015, the EPA will have completed more than 250 assessments of pesticides
and other commercially available chemicals to evaluate risks they may pose to human health and
the environment, including the potential for certain of these chemicals to disrupt endocrine
systems. These assessments are essential in determining whether products containing these
chemicals can be used safely for commercial, agricultural and/or industrial uses.
Additional information on the EPA's Agency Priority Goals can be found at
www.performance.gov.
FY 2015 Activities
Objective 1: Ensure Chemical Safety. Reduce the risk and increase the safety of chemicals that
enter our products, our environment and our bodies.
The TSCA chemical management 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 U.S. marketplace. In FY 2015, EPA's toxics program will maintain
its 'zero tolerance' goal for 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 categories: 1) obtaining,
managing, and making chemical information public; 2) screening and assessing chemical risks;
and 3) taking action to manage chemical risks. Progress will be made to address existing
chemicals already in commerce under the EPA's comprehensive approach to enhance the
agency's existing chemicals management program, giving particular emphasis to assessing the
83 TSCA Work Plan Chemicals identified by the agency in March 2012.
In FY 2015, the agency will continue to implement the chemicals risk management program to
further eliminate risks from high-risk "legacy" chemicals, albeit at a substantially reduced level.
The EPA will continue to maintain a base resource level to enable the agency to meet any
continuing obligations under statutes associated with PCBs and other long-standing chemical
risks. The budget request sustains the lead program at historic levels. As illustrated in the figure
below, the EPA will build on the successful national effort to reduce childhood blood lead levels
and continue ongoing implementation of the Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) Rule
through outreach efforts and targeted activities to support renovator certifications.
59
-------
30.0%
Children's Risk
Blood Lead Levels for Children aged 1-5
•>10ug/dL
Elevated
Lead Levels
->5 ug/dL
New
Concern
Lead Levels
25 ug/dL
TARGET
Lead Levels
For near
future
* Values are not CDC data; interpolated for graphical display only
** >10 ug/dL estimate is considered unreliable (relative standard error greater than 40
percent).
Note: 2007-2010 data is the most currently available data.
During FY 2015, the agency will fulfill several key milestones in the Endocrine Disrupter
Screening Program including:
• 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 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, (subject
to obtaining an approved Information Collection Request; without an approved ICR, test
orders cannot be issued to registrants, manufacturers or importers for Tier 1 assay data
for chemical screening);
• Continuation of 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.
60
-------
• 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 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.
• 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.
• 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.
The agency 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.
Identifying, assessing, and reducing the risks presented by the pesticides on which our society
and economy depend are integral to ensuring environmental and human 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 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 2015, $128.8 million is provided to support the EPA pesticide applications review and
registration program. The EPA will focus this funding on improving pesticide registrations'
compliance with the Endangered Species Act. A portion of the funding will ensure that
pesticides are correctly registered and applied in a manner that protects 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 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.
Objective 2: Promote Pollution Prevention. Conserve and protect natural resources by
promoting pollution prevention and the adoption of other sustainability practices by companies,
communities, governmental organizations, and individuals.
61
-------
In FY 2015, the funding level of $18.3 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 P2 program's efforts advance the agency's
priorities to pursue sustainability, take action on climate change and reduce chemical risks. The
interplay between different media and different statutes requires renewed attention to improve
"synergy" to achieve long-term solutions.
The Pollution Prevention Program accomplishes its mission by fostering the development of P2
solutions to environmental problems that eliminate or reduce pollution, waste and risks at the
source, such as: cleaner production processes and technologies; safer, "greener" materials and
products; and 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. The program promotes the adoption, use and market penetration
of those solutions through such activities as providing technical assistance and demonstrating the
benefits of P2 solutions. The EPA will continue to support the Green Suppliers Network and the
Economy, Energy, and Environment (E3) Partnership among federal agencies, local
governments, and manufacturers to promote energy efficiency, job creation, and environmental
improvement. In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to work with its federal partners and state
pollution prevention programs to conduct facility-specific assessments for small and medium-
sized suppliers and increase the implementation rate of E3 final report recommendations to help
suppliers reduce business costs, improve productivity and efficiency, and measure greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions. The E3 Initiative and GSN have conducted more than 600 assessments, by
leveraging existing resources across the E3 federal agency partners. In FY 2015, the EPA will
leverage expertise from other EPA programs to enhance new sustainability and pollution
prevention education and outreach resources. Through an intra-agency working group, each
program office will disseminate educational resources and information to the public.
International Priorities
To achieve our domestic environmental and human health goals, international partnerships,
including those with the business community and entrepreneurs, are essential. Pollution is often
carried by winds and water across national boundaries, posing risks to human health and
ecosystems many hundreds and thousands of miles away.
Through these partnerships, the EPA will maintain focus on several priorities. In FY 2015, the
EPA will work with other nations to build strong environmental institutions and legal structures
with the goal of combating climate change by limiting pollutants and improving air quality in the
U.S. and around the world. The EPA will work to expand access to clean water, and protect
vulnerable communities from toxic pollution that impacts North America and nations worldwide.
Through joint 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. The agency's international priorities will guide collaboration with
Commission on Environmental Cooperation (CEC) and all international partners.
In FY 2015, the EPA will enhance sustainability principles through expanded partnership efforts
in multilateral forums and in key bilateral relationships. In addition, we will strengthen existing
62
-------
and build new international partnerships to encourage increased international commitment to
sustainability goals and to promote a new era of global environmental stewardship based on
common interests, shared values, and mutual respect. And finally, the EPA will continue to focus
on technical and policy support for global and regional efforts such as strengthening the EPA
leadership in the Arctic Council and with other governments to improve policies and implement
cooperative projects that address climate change and reduce contamination of the arctic.
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 2015, the EPA will further strengthen its planning and delivery of
science by continuing an integrated research approach that tackles problems systematically
instead of individually.
In FY 2015, 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
2015, 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 2015, EPA will accelerate EPA's expansion of the risk-based prioritization effort for
application to TSCA chemicals, across toxicological endpoints and exposure scenarios beyond
those used with endocrine disrupters. Specifically, these funds would be used to: (1) model and
generate exposure data; (2) evaluate background exposure levels and biological relevance of
environmental exposures; and (3) translate for fit-for-purpose risk-based prioritization. This
effort supports the agency's priority of taking action on toxics and chemical safety. This will
complement efforts of the Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention program to apply high
throughput and other 21st Century exposure information to TSCA chemical prioritization. This
directly supports the EPA's efforts to take action on toxics and chemical safety.
In FY 2015, the Agency's Human Health Risk Assessment Research Program will continue to
develop assessments and scientific products that are used extensively by EPA program and
regional offices and the risk management community to estimate the potential risk to public
health from exposure to environmental contaminants. These include:
• 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 for the 21st Century.
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 by providing stakeholders and partners with valuable detection and response analytics
63
-------
for incidents involving chemical, biological, or radiological agents. The program will continue to
emphasize the 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 $162.6 million to the Chemical Safety and Sustainability, Human Health
Risk Assessment, and Homeland Security Research programs in FY 2015.
64
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2015 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Goal 5: Protecting Human Health and the Environment by Enforcing Laws and
Assuring Compliance
Protect human health and the environment through vigorous and targeted civil and criminal
enforcement. Use Next Generation Compliance strategies and tools to improve compliance
with environmental laws.
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES:
• Pursue vigorous civil and criminal enforcement that targets the most serious water,
air, and chemical hazards in communities to achieve compliance. Assure strong,
consistent, and effective enforcement of federal environmental laws nationwide. Use
Next Generation Compliance strategies and tools to improve compliance and reduce
pollution.
GOAL, OBJECTIVE SUMMARY
Budget Authority
Full-time Equivalents
(Dollars in Thousands)
Protecting Human Health and the
Environment by Enforcing Laws
and Assuring Compliance
Enforce Environmental Laws to
Achieve Compliance
Total Authorized Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals*
$741,981.1
$741,981.1
3,561.5
FY2014
Enacted
$751,888.8
$751,888.8
3,503.2
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$792,678.1
$792,678.1
3,399.8
FY 2015 Pres Budget
V.
FY 2014 Enacted
$40,789.3
$40,789.3
-103.4
*2013 Actuals do not include Sandy Supplemental
65
-------
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 to 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 supporting public health in communities disproportionately
burdened by pollution by 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"37 which reaffirms the importance of effective enforcement and compliance with
regulations. It states "[s]ound 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 2015, 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. Our
objective is to 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; and use modern, streamlined and data-rich techniques,
strategies and tools to improve targeting and transparency and increase compliance with
environmental laws. The EPA will continue to focus resources on the most important
environmental problems where noncompliance is having a significant impact. This strategy
means EPA's top enforcement priority will be pursuing large, complex cases that require
significant investment and a long-term commitment.
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 find ways 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 reduce pollution
and increase compliance over the long-term. The EPA is developing and implementing new
methods based on advances in both monitoring and information technology benefitting
government and business alike 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.
37 Please see: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/01/18/presidential-memoranda-regulatorv-compliance
66
-------
This initiative, Next Generation Compliance, incorporates multiple components: using state-of-
the-art monitoring technology to detect pollution problems; leveraging electronic reporting to
enhance government efficiency, reducing paperwork reporting burden and having more accurate,
complete and timely information on pollution sources, pollution, and compliance; expanding
transparency so the public is aware of facility and government environmental performance;
developing and implementing innovative enforcement approaches; and structuring regulations
and permits to be easier to implement with a goal of improved compliance and environmental
outcomes.38 Implementation of the Next Generation Compliance effort will enable the EPA to
better evaluate the effectiveness of its enforcement and compliance strategies using evidence-
based performance approaches. The agency is working to develop tools that will help collect data
to establish a baseline level of environmental compliance information. More complete, timely
information will allow the agency to evaluate compliance, experiment with new approaches and
to identify what works. This more complete data can be made publicly available, with
transparency itself serving as a compliance driver.
In FY 2015, the agency proposes to accelerate its Next Generation Compliance approaches to
harness state-of-the-art technology making this program more efficient and effective. In
particular, the burden 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 more effectively
deploy its inspection resources. In July 2013, the EPA proposed a new rule to convert the
NPDES paper based reporting systems to a more effective and efficient national electronic based
system. The final rule, expected in FY 2015, will benefit the public regulated facilities, states,
and the EPA by providing high quality, complete, and timely data for the NPDES program.
Efforts already being implemented have shown that these approaches will have meaningful
benefits. For example, the EPA's Region 6 implemented the first federal General Permit in the
nation that required electronic submission of data through EPA's electronic reporting tools.
Implemented for the Offshore Oil & Gas NPDES General Permit program, the effort uses
electronic reporting to reduce reporting burden on permitted entities and the EPA, while allowing
for automated tracking of permit limits and reporting requirements, enhancing data quality, and
increasing transparency for regulators and the public. The agency estimates that without
deployment of the electronic reporting tools, data entry alone would have cost the EPA's Region
6 approximately $2.6 million over a five year permit cycle. This demonstrates that the benefits
from requiring electronic reporting in other programs (such as Ohio's NPDES program and the
EPA's TRI program) are likely to be expanded as electronic reporting becomes the norm. The
EPA also is developing an exporter interface to enable exporters of hazardous waste to submit
notification data electronically to the EPA, in order to avoid the expense and errors associated
with manual entry and to facilitate more effective compliance monitoring.
Next Generation Compliance is part of the agency's E-Enterprise business model which
promotes advanced monitoring, electronic reporting and transparency. E-Enterprise supports all
of the agency's goals and programs, and will make Next Generation Compliance easier to
38 See September/October 2013 article in the Environmental Forum on Next Generation Compliance.
http://www.eli.org/pdf/forum/30-5/30-5nextgenerationcompliance.pdf
67
-------
implement and should result in higher compliance. E-Enterprise resources in the Enforcement
and Compliance Assurance program will support a variety of projects, including: 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; 3) supporting e-reporting rule development and
program evaluation; 4) purchasing advanced monitoring equipment; and 5) supporting
transparency through modernization of Integrated Data and Enforcement Analysis
(IDEA)/Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO).
Data transparency is a key foundation of ECHO and the EPA believes making compliance
information publicly available to better serve the American people and provide an incentive to
promote greater compliance with environmental laws. ECHO 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. ECHO
usage has grown to more than 2 million queries in FY 2013.
ECHO Use By Fiscal Year
3,000,000
2,500,000
2,000,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
500,000
i Data Mart
I Loadings
I Mainframe
NOTES: Includes public and gov't use. ECHO Data Mart is gradually replacing mainframe, Data
Mart now includes State Comparative Maps, Dashboards, and SRF Round 3.
Major FY 2015 Changes
In FY 201539, the key changes to the enforcement and compliance budget reflect efforts to
reshape and realign the workforce to support the Administrator's themes and priorities and to
reflect changes in programmatic direction and efficiencies gained from modernizing our business
processes. The EPA is accelerating our efforts under both E-Enterprise and Next Generation
39 EPA is providing a total of $552 million for the National Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program. There are
additional resources for the program under Goals 2, 3 and 4.
68
-------
Compliance to reflect advances in pollutant monitoring and information technology. These
advances, combined with a focus on designing rules and permits that are easier to implement,
will result in reduced pollution and improved environmental results. In addition to the realigned
resources supporting the EPA as a High Performing Environmental Protection Enterprise,
resources across Goal 5 will be focused on advancing efforts in the Administrator's priorities:
Addressing Climate Change and Improving Air Quality; Cleaning Up Our Communities and
Advancing Sustainable Development; and Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing
Pollution.
Addressing Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
In FY 2015, the EPA will help improve air quality in communities by targeting large pollution
sources, especially in the coal-fired 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 which cut toxic air pollution in communities will improve the health of
residents, particularly those overburdened by pollution. In FY 2015 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. The EPA also will work to ensure compliance with
climate change standards, including greenhouse gas rules effective in FY 2015.
Protecting America's Waters
In FY 2015, the EPA will work with states to use compliance and enforcement approaches which
more effectively and efficiently address the most important water pollution problems. Our focus
will include getting raw sewage out of water, cutting pollution related to animal waste, and
reducing pollution from stormwater runoff. The EPA 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 and incorporation of green infrastructure in enforcement
remedies where appropriate. 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.
These options are proving attractive to communities that need to make changes to their CSO
programs. Enforcement efforts also will support the goal of assuring clean drinking water for all
communities, including small systems and in Indian country, and improving the quality of Safe
Drinking Water Act data reported by states to ensure compliance.
Cleaning Up Our Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
In FY 2015, 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 (EJ) considerations into the site remediation enforcement
program by using EJ criteria when enforcing RCRA corrective action requirements to meet
69
-------
RCRA 2020 goals and ensuring that institutional controls are implemented at sites with potential
environmental justice concerns.
Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
In FY 2015, 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
that accumulates on the floors and window sills of homes that were painted with pre-1970's lead-
based paint.
Agency Priority Goal
The EPA has developed FY 2014-2015 Agency Priority Goals that advance the Administrator's
Priorities and the agency's Strategic Plan. E-Enterprise is a state-EPA joint approach to
environmental management across the agency, including regional offices. The State-EPA E-
Enterprise leadership council has been convened and is actively working to prioritize and
consolidate projects to maximize the benefits. The priority goal is housed in Goal 5, but E-
Enterprise work will occur in agency programs that interact with states, tribes, and industry. The
FY 2014-2015 Priority Goal is:
E-Enterprise: Use advanced monitoring, information technologies, optimized business processes,
and increased transparency to improve environmental outcomes and enhance service to the
regulated community and the public. By September 30, 2015 reduce reporting burdens to EPA
by one million hours through streamlined regulations, provide real-time environmental data to at
least two communities, and establish a new portal to service the regulated community and public.
Additional information on the EPA's Agency Priority Goals can be found at
www.performance.gov
70
-------
FY 2015 Activities
Objective 1: Enforce Environmental Laws. Pursue vigorous civil and criminal enforcement that
targets the most serious water, air, and chemical hazards in communities to achieve compliance.
Assure strong, consistent, and effective enforcement of federal environmental laws nationwide.
Use Next Generation Compliance strategies and tools to increase compliance with
environmental 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 2015
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 carefully evaluated program activities and directed 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. 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.
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 2015 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.
Furthermore, in designing and implementing Compliance Monitoring program activities, the
EPA tracks and assesses recent studies and evaluations regarding the effectiveness and limits of
compliance monitoring and enforcement in promoting compliance and deterrence. The evidence
in the literature consistently demonstrates that strong and active compliance monitoring and
enforcement increases compliance and reduces pollution.[1] EPA's Compliance Research
Literature web page references many of these studies and reports.^ In addition, the EPA has
commissioned its own studies of compliance and enforcement interventions, compliance,
deterrence, and recidivism to better understand their relationship and to support measures
development.
40 For example: R. Hanna & P. Oliva; The Impact of Inspections on Plant-Level Air Emissions under the Clean Air Act; 10 B.E
Journal of Economic Analysis and Policy 1 (2010). And J. Shimshack & M. Ward, Enforcement and Over-Compliance, J.
Environ. Econ. 55(1): 90-105 (2008)
PIFor more information, refer to: http://www.epa.gov/Compliance/resources/reports/compliance/research/index.html
71
-------
Compliance Monitoring - Targeting the Most Serious Hazards in Communities
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. The program also determines whether conditions at facilities present
imminent and substantial endangerment exist.
In FY 2015, 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 to better leverage resources and enhance collaboration. In FY 2013, the
EPA conducted nearly 18,000 federal inspections and evaluations.
In FY 2015, 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. 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 2015, 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 addition, the EPA plans to work toward
modernization of Integrated Data and Enforcement Analysis (IDEA)/Enforcement and
Compliance History Online (ECHO). 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.
72
-------
In FY 2015, the proposed compliance monitoring budget is $120.1 million.
Assuring Strong, Consistent and Effective Enforcement
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 2013, the EPA's enforcement
actions required regulated entities to invest more than $7 billion in actions and equipment to
control pollution (injunctive relief). Also in FY 2013, the enforcement program obtained a total
of $1.1 billion in federal administrative and civil judicial penalties primarily due to a record
settlement of $1 billion reached with Transocean for its liability for the Deepwater Horizon Gulf
of Mexico oil spill. The EPA's enforcement actions required regulated entities to reduce
pollution by an estimated 1.3 billion pounds per year. Sustained and focused enforcement
attention to the Safe Drinking Water Act (SOWA) resulted in a 75 percent reduction in the
number of public water systems with serious unresolved violations in the past three years; this
was the result of combined federal and state actions and enforcement work.
In FY 2015, the EPA's civil enforcement program will focus on the national enforcement
initiatives, especially in communities that may be disproportionately exposed to risks and harm
from pollutants in their environment, including minority and/or low-income areas. The National
Enforcement Initiatives were selected for FY 2014-2016 through a collaborative selection
process completed in FY 2013. These national initiatives address problems that remain complex
and challenging. Current initiatives keep raw sewage and contaminated stormwater out of our
nation's waters, prevent animal waste from contaminating surface and ground waters, and
address 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. Information on
initiatives, regulatory requirements, enforcement alerts and EPA results will be made available to
the public and the regulated community through websites.40
As with the compliance monitoring program, the 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 business model. The EPA and states will be able to better prioritize enforcement
41 For more information, refer to http://www.epa.gov/compliance/monitoring/index.html
73
-------
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 fence line monitoring can
be applied in enforcement settlements, such as in the 2013 CAA settlement with Shell Deer Park,
in order to make more data available, as well as using independent third parties to monitor
compliance with the settlement (e.g., the 2013 CWA settlement with Transocean). Fence line
monitoring can be used to monitor the environment immediately surrounding a regulated entity,
thereby providing the community with information about local emissions.
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, and making data on government and facility performance in
the Bay watershed accessible and understandable to the public.
In FY 2015, the proposed budget for civil enforcement is $183.8 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 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 2013, the conviction rate for criminal defendants was 94 percent.
To maximize efficient use of resources, in FY 2015 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 2015, the proposed budget for Criminal Enforcement is $58.3 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
74
-------
(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 environmental scientific expertise. In FY 2015, NEIC will
continue to function under rigorous International Standards Organization 17025 requirements for
environmental data measurements to maintain its accreditation.
In FY 2015, the proposed budget for Forensics Support is $15.3 million.
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 take action to ensure that federal agencies actively and appropriately manage their own
cleanup efforts with the legally-required EPA oversight. 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.41 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 $21.8 million to the Department of Justice through an
Interagency Agreement. This partnership to ensure polluters pay has been very effective. In FY
2013, the Superfund Enforcement program secured private party commitments exceeding $1.6
billion. This amount includes three components: PRPs who committed to perform future
response work with an estimated value of more than $1.2 billion; who agreed to reimburse the
agency for $292.3 million in past costs; and who were billed by the EPA for approximately $92.8
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 2015 the proposed budget for Superfund enforcement is
$154.3 million.
42 For more information regarding the EPA's enforcement program and its various components, please refer to
http://www.epa.gov/compliance/cleanup/superfund/
75
-------
Partnering with States and Tribes
In FY 2015, 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 2015, the Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance program will provide $23.0 million in grants to the states and Tribes 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 human health and 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. The Toxic Substances Compliance Grants
protect the public and the environment from PCBs, asbestos, and lead-based paint.
76
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2015 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Science and Technology
Resource Summary Table 79
Program Projects in Science & Technology 79
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate 82
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs 83
Climate Protection Program 88
Federal Support for Air Quality Management 90
Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certification 92
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation 100
Indoor Air: Radon Program 101
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air 103
Radiation: Protection 105
Radiation: Response Preparedness 107
Program Area: Enforcement 109
Forensics Support 110
Program Area: Homeland Security 112
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection 113
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and Recovery 119
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure 125
Program Area: IT / Data Management / Security 127
IT / Data Management 128
Program Area: Operations and Administration 131
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 132
Program Area: Pesticides Licensing 135
Pesticides: Protect Human Health from Pesticide Risk 136
Pesticides: Protect the Environment from Pesticide Risk 140
Pesticides: Realize the Value of Pesticide Availability 144
Program Area: Research: Air, Climate and Energy 147
Research: Air, Climate and Energy 148
Program Area: Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources 154
Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources 155
77
-------
Program Area: Research: Sustainable Communities 162
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities 163
Program Area: Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability 169
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability 170
Human Health Risk Assessment 176
Program Area: Water: Human Health Protection 182
Drinking Water Programs 183
Program Area: Climate Protection 186
Water Quality Research and Support Grants 187
78
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2015 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION: Science & Technology
Resource Summary Table
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
Budget Authority
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$740,520.0
2,272.3
FY 2014
Enacted
$759,156.0
2,235.4
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$763,772.0
2,244.6
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$4,616.0
9.2
*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; necessary expenses for personnel and related costs
and travel expenses; procurement of laboratory equipment and supplies; and other operating
expenses in support of research and development, $763,772,000, to remain available until
September 30, 2016.
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 Vehicle and Fuels Standards and
Certification
Subtotal, Clean Air and Climate
Indoor Air and Radiation
Indoor Air: Radon Program
Radiation: Protection
Radiation: Response Preparedness
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air
Subtotal, Indoor Air and Radiation
FY 2013
Actuals
$8,206.1
$13,008.9
$6,883.7
$86,858.1
$114,956.8
$56.7
$1,931.4
$4,040.2
$361.3
$6,389.6
FY 2014
Enacted
$8,596.0
$8,313.0
$7,020.0
$96,500.0
$120,429.0
$198.0
$2,133.0
$3,807.0
$311.0
$6,449.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$8,447.0
$8,018.0
$7,047.0
$94,974.0
$118,486.0
$0.0
$2,019.0
$3,667.0
$412.0
$6,098.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($149.0)
($295.0)
$27.0
($1,526.0)
($1,943.0)
($198.0)
($114.0)
($140.0)
$101.0
($351.0)
79
-------
Program Project
Enforcement
Forensics Support
Homeland Security
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure
Protection
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
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
Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
Research: Safe and Sustainable Water
Resources
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy
Communities
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Human Health Risk Assessment
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Endocrine Disrupters
Computational Toxicology
Research: Chemical Safety and
FY 2013
Actuals
$14,389.0
$10,382.8
$27,961.7
$540.0
$38,884.5
$3,676.0
$74,351.2
$3,647.8
$2,257.4
$392.3
$6,297.5
$87,126.1
$106,240.9
$154,720.2
$34,226.1
$18,069.1
$20,130.8
$50,667.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$14,125.0
$10,431.0
$27,381.0
$548.0
$38,360.0
$3,525.0
$70,370.0
$3,585.0
$2,056.0
$587.0
$6,228.0
$94,972.0
$111,018.0
$154,978.0
$40,010.0
$16,253.0
$21,409.0
$53,160.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$14,149.0
$12,067.0
$26,800.0
$576.0
$39,443.0
$3,089.0
$75,824.0
$3,430.0
$2,293.0
$502.0
$6,225.0
$101,942.0
$114,175.0
$144,144.0
$37,870.0
$15,677.0
$28,626.0
$54,336.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$24.0
$1,636.0
($581.0)
$28.0
$1,083.0
($436.0)
$5,454.0
($155.0)
$237.0
($85.0)
($3.0)
$6,970.0
$3,157.0
($10,834.0)
($2,140.0)
($576.0)
$7,217.0
$1,176.0
80
-------
Program Project
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 2013
Actuals
$88,866.9
$123,093.0
$3,610.8
$6,784.4
$6,784.4
$740,520.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$90,822.0
$130,832.0
$3,636.0
$4,234.0
$4,234.0
$759,156.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$98,639.0
$136,509.0
$3,688.0
$0.0
$0.0
$763,772.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$7,817.0
$5,677.0
$52.0
($4,234.0)
($4,234.0)
$4,616.0
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the
Superfund account.
81
-------
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate
82
-------
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate
Goal: Addressing 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 2013
Actuals
$20,330.2
$8,206.1
$28,536.3
77.3
FY 2014
Enacted
$19,626.0
$8,596.0
$28,222.0
73.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$18,349.0
$8,447.0
$26,796.0
72.8
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($1,277.0)
($149.0)
($1,426.0)
-0.2
Program Project Description:
This program develops, implements, assesses, and provides regulatory, modeling, and emissions
monitoring support for programs that address major regional and national air issues from the
power sector and other large stationary sources. Clean air allowance trading programs help
implement the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and reduce toxic emissions
and regional haze. Pollutants reduced include sulfur dioxide (802), nitrogen oxides (NOX),
ground-level ozone, fine particulate matter (PM^.s), and, as a co-benefit of SO2 and NOX
emission reductions, mercury.
Carried long distances by wind and weather, power plant emissions of SC>2 and NOX travel
across state lines. As the pollution is transported, it reacts in the atmosphere and contributes to
ground-level ozone (smog) and fine particles,1 which are associated with significant human
health effects including mortality and morbidity. Researchers have associated fine particle and
smog exposure with adverse health effects in numerous lexicological, clinical, and
epidemiological studies.2'3 Transported SO2 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),4 upwind states must share responsibility for achieving air
quality goals.
Operating programs in FY 2015 will include the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) or a
replacement program for regional control of transported ozone and fine particle pollution. The
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 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 . Also, U.S. EPA. Provisional Assessment of recent
Studies on the Health Effects of Particulate Matter Exposure. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.
EPA/600R-12/056,2012. Available on the Internet at .
3 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 2013. Integrated Science Assessment for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants. EPA/600/R-10/076F. Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S. EPA. February. Available on the Internet at
.
4 Clean Air Act § 110(a)(2)(D), 40 U.S.C. § 7410(a)(2)(D).
83
-------
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. The EPA administers CAIR
pursuant to a 2008 decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit remanding CAIR
for replacement, but allowing the rule to remain in force in the interim in order to preserve the
rule's environmental values.5
In 2011, the EPA finalized the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) to replace CAIR, but the
newer rule has not been implemented. After first staying CSAPR, on August 21, 2012, the D.C.
Circuit vacated the rule and ordered the EPA to continue administering CAIR pending the
promulgation of a valid replacement rule. The agency successfully petitioned the U.S. Supreme
Court to hear an appeal of the D.C. Circuit's decision, and the Supreme Court is expected to
issue its opinion on the merits by June 2014.6 Regardless of the outcome of remaining litigation,
the EPA and the states are still responsible, under the CAA, for addressing interstate transport of
air pollution.
Annual SC>2 emissions from sources subject to the CAIR PM2.5 program in 2012 were less than
2.77 million tons, a 70 percent drop from the program baseline (2005) and 28 percent (1.10
million tons) lower than the previous year (2011). Each year, 862 emissions have made steady
progress toward 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 2012 were 1.17 million tons, a 57 percent drop from the baseline
and 14 percent (184 thousand tons) lower than the previous year. During the 2012 ozone season,
NOX emissions from sources subject to the CAIR ozone program were 514 thousand tons, a drop
of 37% from the baseline and 9 percent (53 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.7 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 ambient and deposition monitoring network, established in 1987, which serves as the
nation's primary source for atmospheric data on the dry 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 continues to be critical for assessing the Acid
Rain Program and regional programs that control transported emissions (thereby reducing
secondary pollutant formation of ozone and fine particles). In FY 2015, CASTNET's rural ozone
monitoring will contribute to implementation of the ozone NAAQS and the agency's
reconsideration of current ozone standards.
5 North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176,1178 (D.C. Cir. 2008).
6 Please see http://epa.gov/crossstaterule/ for updates on CSAPR.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) 2013. Integrated Science Assessment for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants (Final Report). Washington, DC, EPA/600/R-10/076F. 2013.
84
-------
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. Surface water chemistry also is indicative of how water bodies
and ecosystems are responding 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 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 2015, the TEVIE/LTM surface water chemistry monitoring program will 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 as well as for the emerging area of climate change detection and ecological
response. The TIME/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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
Reducing emissions of SC>2 and NOX remains a crucial component of the EPA's strategy for
improving air quality. Emissions of SC>2 and NOX can be chemically transformed into sulfate
and nitrates that are very tiny particles which, 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 oxides emissions also contribute substantially to the formation of
ground-level ozone which, when inhaled in sufficient concentrations, can cause serious
respiratory problems.
In FY 2015, the EPA will:
• Assure the continuation of ongoing NOX and 862 emission reductions from power plants
in the eastern half of the U.S. by implementing CAIR or a replacement program for
regional 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,
emissions monitoring, monitor certification, reporting, and permitting as desired by the
affected states.
85
-------
• Modify, expand, and improve, the EPA-administered emissions monitoring and reporting
system supporting required continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS)8 to
incorporate, process, and quality assure additional data for power plants pursuant to the
Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) Rule9 (e.g., mercury monitor certification,
mercury emissions, pertinent operating data, etc.) and for the New Source Performance
Standards (NSPS) Greenhouse Gas Emissions Rule10 while operating and maintaining the
system for emissions monitoring and reporting by clean air allowance trading programs.
• Operate and maintain the EPA-administered clean air allowance trading systems.
Conduct annual/seasonal reconciliation of facility emissions against allowances for
compliance.
• Maintain and modify, as needed, the operating infrastructure for implementation of clean
air allowance trading and other programs (e.g., MATS) using the EPA-administered
emissions monitoring and reporting system for source compliance with CEMS
requirements and/or the EPA-administered allowance trading and accounting systems.
• Ensure effective and efficient operation of multi-state programs for controlling interstate
emissions transport through ongoing maintenance and continuous improvement of the e-
GOV infrastructure supporting the electronic emissions reporting, monitor certification,
and compliance determination systems.
• Ensure accurate and consistent results for the program. Successful air pollution control
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 TEVIE/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.
• Assist states with considering regional programs for electric generating units (EGUs) and
other large stationary sources (e.g.., industrial boilers) to comply with CAA Section 110
requirements. This will include the development and proposal of implementing
regulations for reducing the interstate transport of NOX emissions contributing to the
formation of ozone and the nonattainment and interference of maintenance of the 2008
ozone NAAQS. The EPA will work with states to create flexible approaches, such as
emissions averaging and trading programs, where they potentially could be more cost-
40 C.F.R. pt. 75 (Continuous Emission Monitoring).
9 40 C.F.R. pt. 63, subpt. UUUUU (National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Coal- and Oil-Fired Electric
Utility Steam Generating Units).
10 Standards of Performance for Greenhouse Gas Emissions for New Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units
(proposed), available at http://www.epa.gov/carbon-pollution-standards/2013-proposed-carbon-pollution-standard-new-power-
plants.
86
-------
effective than application of source-specific emission standards as well as to assess the
feasibility of air pollution emission controls.
In FY 2015, 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 assessment
of the costs and benefits of Title IV.
In FY 2015, 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 2015 request level for CASTNET is $4.89 million
and $0.95 million for TIME/LTM.n
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in the Clean Air Allowance Trading
Program under the Environmental Program and Management Tab and can be found in the Eight
Year Performance Array in the Program Performance and Assessment section.
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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$149.0) This reduction will be absorbed through programmatic efficiencies from
improved effectiveness in updating the economic power sector forecasting model that the
EPA uses to evaluate pollution control options and to perform regulatory impact analyses
assessing the likely economic impacts associated with various options. These analyses
include impacts on electricity prices, overall cost to industry, impact on fuel markets, and
likely investments in pollution control technologies.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7401-7671q.
1' For additional information on CASTNET, please visit http://epa.gov/castnet/javaweb/index.html. For additional information
on TIME/LTM, please visit http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/assessments/TIMELTM.html.
87
-------
Climate Protection Program
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate
Goal: Addressing 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 2013
Actuals
$90,161.4
$13,008.9
$103,170.3
226.9
FY 2014
Enacted
$95,436.0
$8,313.0
$103,749.0
224.2
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$103,996.0
$8,018.0
$112,014.0
222.1
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$8,560.0
($295.0)
$8,265.0
-2.1
Program Project Description:
The Climate Protection Program supports implementation and compliance with greenhouse gas
(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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources under this program will support implementation and compliance activities associated
with the EPA's GHG and NHTSA's fuel economy standards for light-duty and heavy-duty
vehicles and engines. Resources will support the following activities:
Certification and Compliance - Implementation of the first-ever GHG emission standards for
light-duty and heavy-duty vehicles and engines is significantly increasing the 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. These features include new and more comprehensive trading programs, credits for
off-cycle emission reductions, and new federal test procedures that the EPA and the
manufacturers must deploy. Heavy-duty vehicle and engine certifications alone are expected to
increase by 170 percent with the inclusion of this entirely new industry segment. Information
technology systems (which provide an efficient means for manufacturers to apply for and receive
certificates of conformity) also will need to be updated to reflect the revised compliance and
certification requirements of the new light-duty and heavy-duty GHG standards.
88
-------
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. In FY
2015, staff will conduct and run testing operations and develop new test procedures in these new
test cells. Because this testing can reveal instances of non-compliant design, it can spur
American innovation that corrects these deficiencies and reduces mobile source emissions. This
testing also helps 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 Eight-Year
Performance Array in the Program Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$54.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$349.0) This reduction reflects savings that will be achieved through the use of strategic
sourcing and the use of more efficient contract mechanisms in the procurement of
laboratory services. Efficiencies will include volume discounts on purchases made with
other federal facilities in the Ann Arbor and Detroit, MI area and the use of bulk
purchasing for laboratory supplies.
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.
89
-------
Federal Support for Air Quality Management
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate
Goal: Addressing 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 2013
Actuals
$117,475.0
$6,883.7
$124,358.7
794.5
FY 2014
Enacted
$121,757.0
$7,020.0
$128,777.0
803.3
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$136,365.0
$7,047.0
$143,412.0
786.1
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$14,608.0
$27.0
$14,635.0
-17.2
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, training, 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 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 2015 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 2015. 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 2015, 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, and 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. At a reduced level, EPA laboratories will
90
-------
continue to provide Quality Assurance proficiency testing for federal and commercial
laboratories that produce data from PM2.s air monitoring systems to ensure quality data for use in
determining air quality.
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 Eight-Year Performance Array in the Program Performance and Assessment
section.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$61.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$34.0 7+2.5 FTE) This is the net result of increased agency analytic support for states
in developing clean air strategies and realized efficiencies through improved business
practices. The realigned resources include an increase of 2.5 FTE and associated payroll
of $389.0.
Statutory Authority:
CAA (42 U.S.C. 7401-7661f).
91
-------
Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certification
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate
Goal: Addressing 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 2013
Actuals
$86,858.1
$86,858.1
303.5
FY 2014
Enacted
$96,500.0
$96,500.0
300.5
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$94,974.0
$94,974.0
300.5
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($1,526.0)
($1,526.0)
0.0
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, 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.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
Climate Change
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to take action related to mobile sources to address climate
change by targeting the transportation sector's largest contributors to greenhouse gas (GHG)
92
-------
emissions. These efforts will include implementing the harmonized fuel economy and GHG
emission standards for light-duty (LD) vehicles (Model Years 2012-2016 and 2017-2025) and
heavy-duty vehicles (Model Years 2014-2018). These efforts were finalized by the EPA 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 reduce 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.
Consistent with the President's Climate Action Plan, the agency plans to propose in March 2015
a second phase of heavy-duty greenhouse gas standards for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles
model year 2018 and beyond and plans to finalize the standards in March 2016. This second
phase of regulations will build upon the success of the first phase and offer further opportunities
to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, decrease the nation's oil use, and benefit consumers and
business by reducing the cost of transporting goods while spurring job growth and innovation in
the clean energy technology sector. In FY 2015, the EPA will be ensuring that new engines are
in compliance with the HD Phase 1 GHG emissions standards and the EPA will be generating
engine and vehicle test data to support a rule proposal for HD phase two GHG standards.
A comprehensive evaluation of advanced technologies will support the EPA's Technology
Review for the second phase of light-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. In support of the review, the EPA will document the
progress of ongoing testing of conventional engines and hybrid technologies in the form of a
joint EPA/NHTSA Technical Assessment Report.
The EPA also will continue work to assess GHG emissions from nonroad sources. The EPA is
participating in the international forums for ocean-going vessels (International Maritime
Organization-EVIO) 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 2015, 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.
93
-------
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 requires that the EPA set an annual volume standard for renewable fuels and the 2016 RFS
volume requirements will be promulgated in FY 2015. EISA also required the EPA to develop a
comprehensive lifecycle GHG methodology to implement the Act's GHG threshold requirements
for the RFS. 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 2015, 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 2015, the EPA will continue the implementation and commissioning of laboratory
expansions made specifically to implement the Heavy-Duty 2010 engine emissions standards,
the Renewable Fuels Standards, MSAT, 5-cycle fuel economy testing, and the Model Years
2012-2016 LD GHG standards. The laboratory modernization initiative begun in FY 2010 has
provided facility expansions and new equipment necessary for the EPA to conduct confirmatory
testing of manufacturer's engines and vehicles and ensure the veracity of manufacturer submitted
certification data.
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to 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. The Fuel and Fuel Additive Registration Reporting System is one of a handful
of systems that is being 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. The Electronic
Fuels Unified Reporting project is reducing 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 data entered in other data systems (EPA Moderated
Transaction System (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, the 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 also will save through reduced costs in
the preparation of the reports and the elimination of paper, ink, and delivery costs.
94
-------
Criteria Pollutants and Mobile Source Air Toxics
In FY 2015, 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, resulted in new cars, SUVs, and pickup trucks that are 77 to 95 percent cleaner than
2003 models. The Clean Trucks and Buses program, which began in 2007, resulted in new
highway diesel engines that are as much as 95 percent cleaner than previous models. For non-
road diesels, new fuel standards will reduce sulfur in off-highway diesel fuel by more than 99
percent facilitating more stringent engine standards. Implementation of the Locomotive and
Marine Engines Rule's new fuel and engine requirements will reduce dangerous fine particle
(PM) emissions by 90 percent and NOx by 80 percent for newly-built locomotives and marine
diesel engines. Combined, these measures are estimated to 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)
PM25 (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
129,000
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 are projected to prevent an additional
13,000 premature deaths annually (40 CFR Parts 80, 85, et al).
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
(NO2) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and to reducing exposure to toxics for
the millions of people living, working, or going to school near major roads. In FY 2015, the EPA
will begin implementation of the Tier 3 standards for light-duty vehicles (completed in March
2014), which will include lower sulfur limits for gasoline, and improved exhaust and evaporative
standards for vehicles, including hydrocarbon, NOx, and PM standards. To prepare for certifying
95
-------
manufacturers' fleets in 2016 (vehicle Model Year 2017), the EPA will implement new test
procedures and equipment to meet the requirements of the light-duty Tier 3 standards. Because
the EPA is responsible for establishing the test procedures needed to measure tailpipe emissions
and for verifying manufacturers' vehicle fuel economy data, the agency will deploy its laboratory
testing resources to ensure that new cars and trucks are in compliance with the more stringent
Tier 3 emissions standards.
With regard to nonroad engines, the agency is planning to develop standards establishing
onboard diagnostics (OBD) requirements to ensure that engines are properly maintained and
compliant. The agency will continue working with the International Maritime Organization
(IMO) and the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to develop further programs to
control conventional pollutant emissions from marine and aircraft engines, respectively. The
EPA will work with ICAO on its program to develop international action plans to reduce CO2
emissions from international civil aviation. 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, with plans to issue a
final endangerment finding in the 2015/2016 timeframe.
The EPA has achieved major improvements in the area of emissions modeling with the
implementation of its new emission model called the Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator
(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 2015, the EPA will continue its upgrades to
the MOVES modeling platform, incorporating new data gathered from emission testing
programs and expanding the application of the model to include additional nonroad sources and
toxic emissions. In FY 2015, the EPA will continue work on future MOVES upgrades, including
the integration of nonroad sources into the MOVES architecture. A critical part of the EPA's
support of states' emissions modeling efforts includes full disclosure of modeling information on
our website and comprehensive materials providing training to stakeholders. This supports states
in remaining current 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 2015, 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.
96
-------
In FY 2015, 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 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. 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.
As part of implementing the eight-hour ozone and fine particulate matter (PM2.5) 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 2015, 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 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 some measure of consistency exists 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 standards. The EPA will assist
in identifying control options available and provide guidance, as needed, for areas that
implement conformity.
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 2015, 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
97
-------
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
innovative energy-efficient, emissions reducing 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
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
No Target
Established
FY2015
Units
Percent in
Compliance
Measure
Target
Actual
(N35) Limit the increase of Carbon Monoxide (CO) emissions from mobile sources compared to
a 2000 baseline.
FY2008
1.35
1.35
FY2009
1.52
1.52
FY2010
1.69
1.69
FY2011
1.86
1.86
FY2012
2.02
2.02
FY2013
2.19
2.19
FY2014
2.36
FY2015
2.53
Units
Tons
Emitted
Measure
Target
Actual
(O33) Cumulative millions of tons of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) reduced since 2000
from mobile sources.
FY2008
1.37
1.37
FY2009
1.54
1.54
FY2010
1.71
1.71
FY2011
1.88
1.88
FY2012
2.05
2.05
FY2013
2.23
2.23
FY2014
2.4
FY2015
2.57
Units
Tons
Reduced
Measure
Target
Actual
(O34) Cumulative millions of tons of Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) reduced since 2000 from mobile
sources.
FY2008
2.71
2.71
FY2009
3.05
3.05
FY2010
3.39
3.38
FY2011
3.73
3.73
FY2012
4.07
4.07
FY2013
4.41
4.41
FY2014
4.74
FY2015
5.08
Units
Tons
Reduced
Measure
Target
Actual
(P34) Cumulative tons of PM-2.5 reduced since 2000 from mobile sources.
FY2008
97,947
97,497
FY2009
110,190
110,190
FY2010
122,434
122,434
FY2011
136,677
136,677
FY2012
146,921
146,921
FY2013
159,164
159,164
FY2014
171,407
FY2015
183,651
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
Management and can be found in the Performance Eight-Year Array in the Program
Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$496.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$2,223.0 / +1.5 FTE) This realignment of resources will support work that builds on
the program's success in attaining GHG reductions within the transportation sector and
work to meet GHG reduction and fuel efficiency improvement targets established in the
98
-------
President's Climate Action Plan. Resources will be directed towards testing to support
the development of the post 2018 GHG and fuel efficiency standards for heavy duty
vehicles and engine test procedures including baseline GHG emission testing,
aerodynamic testing, and vehicle modeling/simulation. These resources include 1.5 FTE
and associated payroll of $223.0.
• (-$4,491.0) This reduction reflects savings that will be achieved through strategic
sourcing and the use of more efficient contract mechanisms in procuring laboratory
services. Efficiencies will include volume discounts on purchases with other federal
facilities in the Ann Arbor and Detroit, MI area and use of bulk purchasing programs for
laboratory supplies.
• (+$400.0) This reflects a realignment of resources for the implementation of the agency's
E-Enterprise initiative as it pertains to the Fuel and Fuel Additive Registration Reporting
System.
• (-$221.0 / -1.5 FTE) This reflects a realignment of 1.5 FTE from lower priority activities
to support work under the President's Climate Action Plan. This includes 1.5 FTE and
associated payroll of $221.0.
• (+$67.0) This realignment of resources will cover required increases in fixed costs to
operate and maintain the agency's vehicle and fuel emissions testing laboratory in Ann
Arbor, Michigan.
Statutory Authority:
CAA (42 U.S.C. 7401-7661f); 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).
99
-------
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
100
-------
Indoor Air: Radon Program
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Addressing 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 2013
Actuals
$3,563.1
$56.7
$3,619.8
18.1
FY 2014
Enacted
$2,366.0
$198.0
$2,564.0
9.1
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$3,369.0
$0.0
$3,369.0
10.6
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$1,003.0
($198.0)
$805.0
1.5
Program Project Description:
Title HI 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, Nevada. NCRFO is the only federal radon
laboratory that maintains NIST-traceable standards.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
There is no request for this program in FY 2015. Over the 26 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. Because exposure to radon gas continues to be an important risk to
human health, the EPA will continue its headquarters program at the federal level, 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 Eight-Year Performance
Array in the Program Performance and Assessment section.
101
-------
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$198.0) The EPA will eliminate S & T funding support for radon testing.
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.
102
-------
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Addressing 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 2013
Actuals
$13,327.6
$361.3
$13,688.9
54.7
FY 2014
Enacted
$14,508.0
$311.0
$14,819.0
45.7
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$14,565.0
$412.0
$14,977.0
39.4
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$57.0
$101.0
$158.0
-6.3
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.
The 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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 Eight
Year Performance Array in the Program Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$3.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$98.0 / +0.6 FTE) This increases technical support to Tribal communities for indoor air
field measurements and assessments. The increased resources include 0.6 FTE and
associated payroll of $82.0.
103
-------
Statutory Authority:
CAA Amendments of 1990; Title IV of the SARA of 1986.
104
-------
Radiation: Protection
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Addressing Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Minimize Exposure to Radiation
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$9,033.1
$1,931.4
$2,223.5
$13,188.0
65.6
FY 2014
Enacted
$8,714.0
$2,133.0
$1,991.0
$12,838.0
62.1
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$9,138.0
$2,019.0
$2,044.0
$13,201.0
59.1
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$424.0
($114.0)
$53.0
$363.0
-3.0
Program Project Description:
The EPA will continue to support waste site characterization and cleanup by providing field and
fixed laboratory environmental radioanalytical data and technical support, radioanalytical
training to state and federal partners, and by developing new and improved radioanalytical
methods. 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 analytical and field operations provide radioanalytical and mixed waste testing,
quality assurance, analysis of environmental samples, field radiological support, and field
measurement systems and equipment to support site assessment, cleanup, and response activities
in the event of a radiological accident or 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the EPA, in cooperation with states, tribes, and other federal agencies, will provide
limited 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 limited 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.
105
-------
NAREL and NCRFO will continue to support regional Superfund Remedial Project Managers
and On-Scene Coordinators, providing laboratory and field-based 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 Eight-Year
Performance Array in the Program Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$58.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$251.0 / +2.1 FTE) This increases personnel for providing laboratory and field-based
radiological technical assistance, including quality assurance oversight. This includes 2.1
FTE and associated payroll of $251.0.
• (-$423.0) This decreases support for conducting site-specific radiological
characterizations and instrument loan.
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.
106
-------
Radiation: Response Preparedness
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Addressing Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Minimize Exposure to Radiation
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$2,508.6
$4,040.2
$6,548.8
37.4
FY 2014
Enacted
$2,493.0
$3,807.0
$6,300.0
34.7
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$3,121.0
$3,667.0
$6,788.0
37.5
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$628.0
($140.0)
$488.0
2.8
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 laboratory analyses, field sampling and analyses, and direct scientific support to
respond to radiological and nuclear incidents. 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the EPA's RERT will continue to provide support for federal radiological
emergency response and recovery operations under the National Response Framework (NRF)
and the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). They also
will support field operations with fixed laboratory and limited mobile laboratory analyses to
provide rapid and accurate radionuclide analyses of environmental samples.12
In FY 2015, 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 limited readiness for radiological emergency responses; participate in the most
critical 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.
• Additional information can be accessed at: http://www.epa.gov/radiation/rert/
107
-------
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 Eight-Year Performance Array in the Program Performance and Assessment
section.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$58.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$198.0 / -0.2 FTE) This reduction will narrow the scope of EPA's national level
preparedness and response activities, including exercise planning. To accommodate this
reduction, the EPA will continue its work to increase collaboration and leveraging with
other federal and state efforts to achieve efficiencies and savings. The reduced resources
include 0.2 FTE and associated payroll of $27.0.
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).
108
-------
Program Area: Enforcement
109
-------
Forensics Support
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Protecting Human Health and the Environment by Enforcing Laws and Assuring
Compliance
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws to Achieve Compliance
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$14,389.0
$2,382.2
$16,771.2
89.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$14,125.0
$2,344.0
$16,469.0
80.3
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$14,149.0
$1,112.0
$15,261.0
80.3
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$24.0
($1,232.0)
($1,208.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
The EPA's 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 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 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 that generate environmental data for law enforcement purposes. It is fully accredited
under International Standards Organization (ISO) 17025, the main standard used by testing and
calibration laboratories, as recommended by the National Academy of Sciences.13 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.
FY 2015 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. Initiatives to stay at the forefront of environmental
enforcement in FY 2015 will include improvements in inspection methods used at Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act regulated facilities; exploring new technologies for on-site air
13 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.
110
-------
and water sampling for toxic and non-conventional pollutants using advanced remote sensing
and DNA technologies; and developing methods of evaluating electronic, self-monitoring
databases.
The NEIC will continue to deploy its Geospatial Measurement of Air Pollution (GMAP)
monitoring capabilities by field testing its mobile monitoring vehicle and verifying on-site, real-
time results with laboratory measurements. NEIC also will continue to deploy fence-line passive
air sampling techniques. Additionally, NEIC will work with our partners in the agency's research
and development programs to field test other advanced monitoring equipment. Another focus
will be to work with various agency offices to develop more enforceable regulations. 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.
In FY 2015, the NEIC will continue to function under rigorous ISO requirements for
environmental data measurements to maintain its laboratory and field accreditation. NEIC also
will continue to participate in the agency's efforts 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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$204.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$180.0) This change reflects expected savings from improved business process
streamlining and strategic sourcing of contracts that support the forensic investigation
activities at 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.
Ill
-------
Program Area: Homeland Security
112
-------
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection
Program Area: Homeland Security
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect Human Health
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
Environmental Program & Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$10,382.8
$875.1
$11,257.9
27.6
FY 2014
Enacted
$10,431.0
$980.0
$11,411.0
23.9
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$12,067.0
$1,004.0
$13,071.0
23.1
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$1,636.0
$24.0
$1,660.0
-0.8
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.14 This program also
provides the tools and technical assistance to advance the long-term sustainability of water sector
infrastructure and supplies by incorporating climate change and resiliency considerations into
effective utility management practices.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
Since the events of 9/11, the EPA has been designated as the sector-specific agency responsible
for protecting the critical infrastructure of 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 reduce the risks to water systems from all-hazard events such as terrorism
and extreme weather 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 enhancing the preparedness and resiliency
of water systems through exercises and technical assistance.
In FY 2015, the EPA will focus on conducting extensive training and outreach on the recently
completed electronic deployment tool, the Surveillance and Response System, that guides water
systems though the process of designing and deploying drinking water contamination warning
systems. The EPA also will continue to support the Water Alliance for Threat Reduction to
protect the nation's critical water infrastructure and oversee the national laboratory network that
14 Please see http://www.epa.gov/safewater/watersecuritv.
113
-------
forms 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.
In FY 2015, the EPA will invest $500 thousand in cybersecurity in order to fulfill its obligations
under Executive Order (EO) 13636 - Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity - which
designates EPA as the lead agency responsible for cybersecurity in the water sector. Recent
assessments by the Department of Homeland Security have supported the widespread concern
that the primary threat to the nation's critical infrastructure is cyber-attack on Industrial Control
Systems (ICS). Both drinking water and wastewater systems rely heavily on ICS that were
designed, in many cases decades ago, with little or no consideration of cyber security. Any
interruption of a clean and safe water supply would erode public confidence and could produce
significant public health and economic consequences. As such, EPA will increase its efforts in
cybersecurity as consistent with the President's direction.
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue working to ensure that water sector utilities have tools and
information to prevent, detect, respond to, and recover from all hazards including terrorist attacks
and extreme weather events. The EPA is realigning $2 million ($1.2 million in new investment
and $800 thousand in redirection from within the water security base program) to promote more
robust drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater (water sector) system adaptation by
increasing the national prominence of the Climate Ready Water Utilities (CRWU) initiative in
conjunction with our emergency response and preparedness efforts. The mission of our CRWU
initiative is to assist water sector utility owners and operators in tackling climate change and
extreme weather impacts, through the provision of innovative but readily accessible electronic
tools that enable water systems to adapt to climate change and thereby enhance their resiliency.
Funding will support the development and dissemination of a more robust Climate Resilience
Evaluation and Awareness Tool (GREAT) that incorporates sea-level rise and storm surge
components via GIS, allows for mapping of assets, and leverages conventional asset
management practices. The EPA will work with its stakeholders to promote the use and
adoption of effective, implementable, and sustainable climate adaptation practices in the water
sector. With this tool and EPA's support, utilities will have access to additional information in
order to better fulfill their public health and environmental missions despite unprecedented
climatic impacts. Climate change and extreme events, in the absence of adequate planning,
directly threaten water systems' ability to fulfill their public health and environmental missions
as evident from the devastation borne by Superstorm Sandy. This realignment also will advance
the long-term sustainability of water sector infrastructure and supplies by encouraging
incorporation of climate change and resiliency considerations into effective utility management
practices.
Water Security Initiative and Water Laboratory Alliance
The EPA's goal is to develop a "robust, comprehensive, and fully-coordinated surveillance and
monitoring system"15 for drinking water and a water laboratory network that would support
water surveillance and emergency response activities. The objective of the initiative is to design
and demonstrate an effective system for timely detection and appropriate response to drinking
15 Homeland Security Presidential Directive 9 (HSPD-9).
114
-------
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. Peer
reviewed 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." EPA awarded a total of five drinking water security
pilots for the Water Security Initiative.
With the conclusion of these pilots in FY 2013, EPA conducted a meta-analysis of the data to
assess the efficacy and dual use benefits from operating a contamination warning system. EPA
supplemented these actual performance data with data based on modeled simulations of
contamination events at the pilot utilities.
The FY 2015 request includes $5.7 million for necessary Water Security Initiative activities to
conduct outreach and training to disseminate knowledge from the water security pilots, while
continuing to improve the design and implementability of such warning systems, and $1.2
million for the Water Alliance for Threat Reduction.
In FY 2014, the EPA will complete development of a software tool that will provide practical,
actionable information for water systems to design and deploy contamination warning systems.
The EPA also will begin to develop a national outreach and training program, in cooperation
with stakeholder groups, to promote the use of these tools for the adoption of effective,
implementable, and sustainable contamination warning systems in the water sector.
Funding in FY 2015 will enable the EPA to conduct the outreach and training efforts necessary
to promote the adoption of contamination warning systems within the water sector. This phase of
the Water Security Initiative is absolutely critical as the success of this initiative ultimately
hinges on whether water systems begin to implement the guidance materials. The EPA will
target training for water systems serving large populations or serving customers with either
regional or national security significance. The EPA also will continue to refine the design of
contamination warning systems to improve their effectiveness and implementability, and
therefore their appeal to water systems. For example, as part of work in FY 2013, EPA found
that advanced event detection algorithms, which can be dauntingly complicated for water
systems, need not be included as part of an effective contamination warning system. Instead, a
water system can use simple set points based on historical water quality levels to detect
anomalies in drinking water. Such preliminary findings render contamination warning systems
much more accessible to water systems of all sizes. EPA also will develop an online technology
clearing house that will assist water systems in selecting the most appropriate water quality
monitoring systems for that individual system's specific needs.
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 Water Laboratory Alliance comprised of laboratories
115
-------
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). 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, which focuses 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 2015, EPA will continue to refine, through
exercises and expert workshops, the Water Laboratory Alliance 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 and continue efforts to expand the membership of the Water Laboratory Alliance with
the intention of achieving nationwide coverage. 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. Activities in 2014 and 2015 will target
laboratories located in areas where the Water Laboratory Alliance has both inadequate
membership levels and gaps in laboratory analytical capabilities. In FY 2015, EPA also will seek
to dramatically expand the membership of the laboratory network by reaching out to laboratories
at water systems that do not meet the capability criteria for membership in the broader
Environmental Response Laboratory network. This phase will increase the membership of the
lab alliance and bring water utility labs into the fold of the network, enabling access to a wide
range of chemical, biological, and radiological analyses, which will serve both homeland
security and public health purposes.
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. EPA's role as the federal lead for enhancing the
preparedness and resiliency of the water sector against all hazards was reaffirmed through
Presidential Decision Directive 21 (February 2013).
In addition, under the February 12, 2013, Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity
Executive Order, EPA, in FY 2015, will build on work initiated in FY 2013 by investing $500
thousand to coordinate water sector specific cybersecurity risks with DHS and the sector, and
conduct outreach and training to the sector. Funding also will allow the agency to supplement
ongoing work including its responsibilities to annually report on the progress of the water sector
participating in cybersecurity risk reduction, coordinate with the sector to develop a voluntary
critical infrastructure cybersecurity program, and develop an implementation guidance to address
sector specific risks, identify high priority water systems, and promote voluntary cybersecurity
116
-------
practices across the industry. EPA also will assess whether changes or updates are required in its
current regulatory framework to support cybersecurity and resiliency practices.
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 effectiveness of mutual aid agreements among utilities to
improve recovery times;
• Complete development of an electronic tool that consolidates all of the preparedness and
resiliency products that EPA has released over the last decade into one comprehensive,
coherent, and compelling framework, and conduct training and outreach on this tool for
water systems and state officials;
• 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;
• 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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$62.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
117
-------
• (-$112.0 / -0.7 FTE) The agency is reviewing and redesigning many core business
processes to be more efficient. The reduced resources include 0.7 FTE and associated
payroll of $112.0.
• (+$1,186.0) Funding will support the development and dissemination of a more robust
Climate Resilience Evaluation and Awareness Tool (GREAT) that incorporates sea-level
rise and storm surge components via GIS, allows for mapping of assets, and leverages
conventional asset management practices. This funding for the Climate Ready Water
Utilities Initiative will allow the agency to improve the ability of drinking water and
wastewater systems in continuing to fulfill their public health and environmental
missions despite unprecedented climatic impacts and enhance abilities to identify specific
needs for water system adaption investments for local, state, and federal decision-makers.
These resources, combined with a redirection in base resources in this program, provide
for a total of $1,986.0 for this climate work.
• (+$500.0) This funding will support cybersecurity activities within the water
infrastructure sector pursuant to Executive Order (EO) 13636. EPA will coordinate water
sector specific cybersecurity risks with DHS and the sector, and conduct outreach and
training to the sector. Funding also will allow the agency to supplement ongoing work
including its responsibilities to annually report on the progress of the water sector
participating in cybersecurity risk reduction, coordinate with the sector to develop a
voluntary critical infrastructure cybersecurity program, and develop an implementation
guidance to address sector specific risks, identify high priority water systems, and
promote voluntary cybersecurity practices across the industry.
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; CWA33 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.
118
-------
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and Recovery
Program Area: Homeland Security
Goal: Addressing Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Minimize Exposure to Radiation
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$27,961.7
$39,468.4
$67,430.1
153.8
FY 2014
Enacted
$27,381.0
$36,802.0
$64,183.0
140.7
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$26,800.0
$35,754.0
$62,554.0
137.2
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($581.0)
($1,048.0)
($1,629.0)
-3.5
Program Project Description:
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
unintentionally as a result of industrial accidents or natural disasters. 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 Homeland Security Research Program (HSRP) enhances the
nation's preparedness, response, and recovery capabilities for large-scale catastrophic incidents
by 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 resilience applicability to other natural and manmade disasters. Recent examples of
critical support provided by HSRP's emergency response experts include: (1) the Deepwater
Horizon Oil Spill cleanup, (2) the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear reactor meltdown recovery, and (3)
the 2013 Ricin contamination incidents' response.
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. 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) and using a
cradle-to-grave approach, HSRP efficiently and effectively delivers timely products to its
internal partners and the aforementioned federal stakeholders while simultaneously preventing
duplication of scientific and technical work conducted by other agencies.
Recent Accomplishments Include:
• Bio-Response Operational Testing and Evaluation (BOTE): The results of this project,
conducted with several federal partners, provide state and local leaders with tested and
119
-------
effective decontamination techniques in the event of a biological incident. In the Ricin
attacks of 2013, both the results of this study and the NHSRC project leaders' expertise were
invaluable in the decontamination decision process.
• Water Security Toolkit: This toolkit is comprised of a suite of modeling, simulation, and
optimization tools that will assist water utilities in planning to respond to a drinking water
distribution system contamination event. The tools include: source inversion, flushing
optimization, and booster optimization.
• Protocol for Detection of Bacillus anthracis in Environmental Samples During the
Remediation Phase of an Anthrax Event: This protocol is the first ever detailed procedure
available to all government departments and agencies, and their contractors, to
detect Bacillus anthracis from multiple environmental sample types. The protocol includes
adaptations of many procedures of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC's)
Laboratory Response Network (LRN) protocols.
FY 2015 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 Regional Offices, is
focusing on reacting to terrorism-related issues to better provide products with multiple benefits
that are applicable to a broader set of disasters. HSRP will prioritize 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 guided by information from the DOD and the DHS. New agency responsibilities also
were recently outlined in Executive Order (EO) 13636: "Improving Critical Infrastructure
Cybersecurity" and Presidential Policy Directive (PPD)-21: "Critical Infrastructure Security and
Resilience," and the HSRP is determining the most cost-effective way to address the new needs
resulting from these additional responsibilities.
Decontamination Research
As outlined in the HSPDs-7,-9,-10, and 2216 as well as the National Response Framework, EPA
is tasked with remediating contaminated environments due to either terrorist attacks or
inadvertent disasters and with developing a nationwide laboratory network with the capability
and capacity to analyze for CBR agents during routine monitoring and in response to terrorist
attacks and other disasters.
16 HSPD-7: Homeland Security Presidential Directive 7: Critical Infrastructure Identification, Prioritization, and Protection,
HSPD- 9: Defense of U.S. Agriculture and Food, HSPD-10: Biodefense for the 21st Century, HSPD-22: Domestic Chemical
Defense.
120
-------
In FY 2015, decontamination research will continue to address existing scientific knowledge
gaps in responding to and recovering from wide-area CBR attacks on urban centers and public
areas. Sampling and analytical methods will be developed by the HSRP and compiled in their
widely-accepted and regularly-updated Selected Analytical Methods for Environmental
Remediation and Recovery (SAM)17 in support of post-incident decisions regarding exposure
assessment, remediation, and re-occupancy.
The EPA's HSRP's "systems" view of cleanup and the resultant products help decision-makers:
• determine holistic clean-up approaches,
• develop solutions that optimize cleanup efficacy, and
• minimize cost and recovery time as well as unintended consequences.
This allows the consideration of how a choice in clean up method might place requirements on
the analytical method used and the amount and character of the resulting waste stream.
The EPA's HSRP's decontamination research also will focus on developing methods and
strategies for remediation after a wide area contamination event, particularly for B. anthracis and
radiological contamination. This will include testing widely available cleanup technologies,
developing methodologies for decontamination of outdoor areas, developing strategies for
scaling up effective technologies for wide-area use, and developing scalable approaches to
manage the contaminated waste.
Water Infrastructure Protection Research
The Water Infrastructure Protection Research Program is directly responsive to the water sector
specific needs of the agency. Specifically, the HSRP is conducting research directly related to
needs identified by the Water Sector Coordinating Council and the Water Government
Coordinating Council's 1? Critical Infrastructure Partnership Advisory Council, organized by the
Department of Homeland Security. The new White House priority, outlined in PPD-21 and EO-
13636, will result in new HSRP research efforts to support best practices for cybersecurity in the
water sector.
In FY 2015, high priority needs that the HSRP will focus on include:
• increasing knowledge and understanding of Contamination Warning Systems' practices
and opportunities, containing and/or disposing of large amounts of contaminated water,
and
• developing decontamination procedures for infrastructure in treatment plants,
distribution, and collection systems.
17Please see http: //www. epa. gov/nhsrc/aboutconrisk.html# samana for additional information.
18
The Water Sector Coordinating Council is a "self-organized, self-run, and self-governed council" composed of water utilities.
This council facilitates the development of policy impacting the water sector. The Water Government Coordinating Council was
formed as the government counterpart to the Water Sector Coordinating Council and is responsible for interagency coordination
of efforts related to the water sector.
121
-------
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. The HSRP also will look to expand the application
of rapid B. anthracis analysis methods developed for environmental samples to drinking water
samples. HSRP also will investigate 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.
Modeling tools will be developed and applied to both idealized and real systems to support
decisions, designs of new networks of pipes, and the retrofitting of existing networks. To support
all of the water research efforts outlined above, the HSRP also will set up a test bed to conduct
field scale evaluations of water contamination sensors, decontamination methodologies, and the
tools that support response actions.
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 near real-time stationary monitors and deployable monitors. This network is identified
as an EPA Critical Infrastructure/Key Resource (CI/KR) asset.
Through FY 2014, the EPA expects to install 6 additional RadNet fixed monitors bringing the
national total to 140. All 140 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
2015, 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.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(HS1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Homeland Security
research program.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
100
100
FY2013
100
100
FY2014
100
FY2015
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.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
100
78
FY2013
100
100
FY2014
100
FY2015
100
Units
Percent
122
-------
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).
Also, beginning in 2014, EPA is establishing a standing subcommittee of the Board of Scientific
Councilors for the HSRP program which will evaluate its performance and provide expert
feedback to the agency.
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,
National Science Foundation, Department of Energy, and Department of Agriculture. 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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$142.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$785.0) This reduction in funding will decrease the agency's ability to rapidly
characterize water contamination and perform remediation after the release of a
radiological agent as well as delay the development of long-term water contamination
detection methods for agents potentially retained by surfaces and released after an initial
contamination incident.
• (-$363.0 / -1.5 FTE) This includes realignment of infrastructure support resources. This
also reflects overall efficiencies gained through projected workforce attrition and core
business process examination aimed at increased efficiency as the agency works to
implement strategic sourcing across the wide range of contracts. The reduced resources
include 1.5 FTE and associated payroll of $230.0.
• (+$425.0 / +0.7 FTE) This provides support for providing critical maintenance and
updates to fixed and deployable radiation monitoring systems including communications
capability. These resources include 0.7 FTE and associated payroll of $97.0.
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
123
-------
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; OP A, 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).
124
-------
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)
Science & Technology
Environmental Program & Management
Building and Facilities
Hazardous Substance SuperrUnd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$540.0
$7,328.9
$5,861.9
$683.5
$14,414.3
3.8
FY 2014
Enacted
$548.0
$5,724.0
$6,676.0
$1,265.0
$14,213.0
4.7
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$576.0
$5,716.0
$7,875.0
$1,113.0
$15,280.0
4.7
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$28.0
($8.0)
$1,199.0
($152.0)
$1,067.0
0.0
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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$28.0) This reflects funding for security needs at the NVFEL.
125
-------
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.
126
-------
Program Area: IT / Data Management / Security
127
-------
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
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Hazardous Substance SuperrUnd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$77,765.7
$3,676.0
$0.1
$13,667.4
$95,109.2
476.7
FY 2014
Enacted
$85,579.0
$3,525.0
$0.0
$13,911.0
$103,015.0
476.6
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$86,793.0
$3,089.0
$0.0
$14,234.0
$104,116.0
466.1
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$1,214.0
($436.0)
$0.0
$323.0
$1,101.0
-10.5
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Information Technology/Data Management (IT/DM) program promotes the use of
quality environmental information for informing decisions, improving management,
documenting performance, and measuring success, which supports the agency's mission to
protect public health and the environment. Science and Technology (S&T) resources for EPA's
IT/DM program fund the following activities: Quality Program (QP),18 EPA libraries, and One
EPA Web.
The Quality Program ensures that all environmentally-related data activities performed by or for
the agency will result in the production of data that is of adequate quality to support specific
decisions or actions. In order for this data to be used with a high degree of certainty by its
intended users, its quality must be known and documented. The Quality Program ensures that
appropriate resources are made available and proper procedures followed throughout each phase
of environmental projects: planning, implementation and evaluation phases. Specifically, the
Quality Program provides Quality Assurance (QA) policies, training, oversight and technical
support to assist EPA programs in the implementation of their quality management systems
which are required by EPA Quality Policy CIO 2105.0 for all environmental data operations. The
Quality Program also oversees the implementation of the EPA Information Quality Guidelines.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the agency will continue to maintain EPA libraries and the One EPA Web, which
supports hosting for all agency websites and Web pages. Also, the agency will support
3 More information about the EPA Quality Program can be found at http://www.epa.gov/qualitv.
128
-------
development and use of high quality environmental decision-making data, ensuring that the data
is documented, defensible, and of appropriate quality for its intended use. The program will
revise the EPA Quality Policy (CIO 2106.0) and Procedures to reflect the current scope of
environmental data operations. The program will provide technical support to all EPA programs
and laboratories for implementation of EPA Quality Policies, Procedures and Standards. The
Quality Program also will develop QA training courses for EPA personnel and make core QA
courses available through the agency's online training portal.
In FY 2015, the Quality Program will complete at least five Quality Management Plan reviews
and conduct Quality System Assessments of at least four EPA programs. In addition, the
program will provide technical support to EPA organizations conducting internal audits of their
conformance with the Field Operations Group Guidelines. These oversight activities ensure the
data used to support environmental decision-making is appropriate for its intended use and
enhances the reliability of the data. Additionally, the Quality Program will provide oversight of
EPA Information Quality Guidelines and facilitate the development of agency responses to the
public's request for correction of EPA disseminated information.
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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$100.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$536.0 / -0.8 FTE) This reflects a reduction in the number of Quality System
Assessments and Quality Management Plan reviews that EPA's Quality Program will
conduct annually. This reduction includes 0.8 FTE and associated payroll of $119.0.
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
129
-------
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).
130
-------
Program Area: Operations and Administration
131
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$547.4
$293,188.6
$74,351.2
$27,676.4
$933.4
$80,960.5
$477,657.5
382.8
FY 2014
Enacted
$584.0
$310,057.0
$70,370.0
$27,791.0
$823.0
$67,470.0
$477,095.0
367.2
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$498.0
$325,138.0
$75,824.0
$45,632.0
$836.0
$78,905.0
$526,833.0
361.6
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($86.0)
$15,081.0
$5,454.0
$17,841.0
$13.0
$11,435.0
$49,738.0
-5.6
Program Project Description:
Science & Technology (S&T) resources in the Facilities Infrastructure and Operations program
fund rent, utilities, and security. This program also supports centralized administrative activities
and support services, including health and safety, environmental compliance and management,
facilities maintenance and operations, energy conservation, sustainable buildings programs, and
space planning. Funding is allocated for such services among the major appropriations for the
agency.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
As part of the EPA's efforts toward becoming a High Performing Organization (HPO), the
agency reviews space needs, and has implemented a long-term space consolidation plan that will
reduce the number of occupied facilities, consolidate space within the remaining facilities, and
reduce the square footage wherever practical. In FY 2015, the agency will continue to invest to
reconfigure the EPA's workspaces with the goal of reducing long-term rent needs. This work
will enable the agency to release office space in support of the President's June 2012
memorandum on "Disposing of Unneeded Federal Real Estate". Since 2006, the EPA has
released approximately 428 thousand square feet of space at headquarters and facilities
nationwide, resulting in a cumulative annual rent avoidance of over $14.6 million. These
achieved savings and potential savings partially offset the EPA's escalating rent and security
costs.
132
-------
In August 2014, the EPA will end its lease at 1310 L Street and will begin to move over 500
employees into the EPA's Federal Triangle and Potomac Yard space and save the agency
approximately $7.5 million annually in rent. In FY 2015, the EPA will complete the
consolidation of 1310 L Street as well as consolidations in Regions 1, 2 and 4, which will further
reduce the agency's space footprint. For FY 2015, the agency is requesting $34.80 million for
rent, $21.41 million for utilities, and $11.28 million for security in the S&T appropriation.
In FY 2015, 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) 13423,19 Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and
Transportation Management. The agency will attain the EO's environmental performance goals
related to buildings through several initiatives, including: comprehensive facility energy audits;
re-commissioning; and sustainable building design.
EO 13514, Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance, expands
upon EO 13423 and requires additional reductions to greenhouse gas (GHG) 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, and
optimize real property and portfolio performance. In FY 2015, the agency is targeting to reduce
energy utilization (or improve energy efficiency) by approximately 37 billion British Thermal
Units or three percent. This ongoing effort to become more efficient has yielded impressive
results - approximately 27 percent less energy used than in FY 2003, and annual cost savings of
$5.9 million.
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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$18.0) This reflects an increase in transit subsidy costs based on projected needs.
• (+$1,768.0) This change reflects the net effect of restoring rent funded from
congressional reprogramming in the prior year, projected contractual rent increases and
the rent reduction realized from space consolidation efforts.
• (+$620.0) This reflects the net effect of an increase in utility costs and a reduction in
utility consumption realized from energy conservation initiatives.
• (+$369.0) This reflects an increase in security guard contractual costs.
19 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
133
-------
• (+$1,566.0) This realignment provides resources to begin a regional move in Dallas
(Region 6) and to complete 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.
These efforts will contribute to the agency becoming a HPO.
• (+$1,113.0) This change restores funding required for basic facility operations at EPA's
facilities in Research Triangle Park, NC and Cincinnati, OH. This funding will allow the
agency to meet basic operations including custodial services 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.
134
-------
Program Area: Pesticides Licensing
135
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$52,854.4
$3,647.8
$56,502.2
388.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$58,070.0
$3,585.0
$61,655.0
401.8
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$59,931.0
$3,430.0
$63,361.0
405.8
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$1,861.0
($155.0)
$1,706.0
4.0
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Pesticide 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), as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996 as well
as the Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act of 2012 (known as PRIA3), 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,(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's Chemical Safety, Pollution Prevention, and
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 will include limited testing of the efficacy of antimicrobial
pesticides used to combat infections due to human pathogenic microorganisms and the
development of methods for new and emerging pathogens.
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.20 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
'http://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2012/p0306_cdiff.html
136
-------
pathogen (H1N1, Clostridium difficile, MRS A, etc.) represents a new method development
challenge for evaluating disinfectants.
The laboratory 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. Multi-residue methods 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 the EPA in determining
potential buffer zone credit for 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
EPA and other federal, state, and tribal laboratories involved in pesticide use 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 people and their
reproductive systems. Data generated by the laboratory were successfully used in the September
2010 SAP for atrazine.21
EPA 's Environmental Chemistry Laboratory
The Environmental Chemistry laboratory, located in Bay St. Louis, Mississippi, 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
21 http://www.epa. gov/scipolv/sap/meetings/2010/september/09141 Ominutes.pdf
137
-------
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, similar to the EPA's National Dioxin Air Monitoring Network. 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, and in accordance with the North American Agreement on Environmental
Cooperation. 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.
EPA 's Microarray Research Laboratory
The Microarray Research Laboratory (MARL) is located at Fort Meade, Maryland. 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.
For more information on the laboratories, please visit:
http://www.epa.gov/opp00001/labs/index.htm.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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 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
138
-------
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.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results listed in EPM Pesticides: Protect
Human Health from Pesticide Risk and can be found in the Eight-Year Performance 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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$26.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$181.0) This decrease implements strategic sourcing across the wide range of contracts,
with a goal of at least five percent savings for goods and services. The EPA is reducing
funding needed to support the pesticides registration program 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).
139
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$37,911.9
$2,257.4
$40,169.3
294.5
FY 2014
Enacted
$34,162.0
$2,056.0
$36,218.0
256.6
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$39,035.0
$2,293.0
$41,328.0
261.9
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$4,873.0
$237.0
$5,110.0
5.3
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."22
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 that 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 avoid unreasonable risks, 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).23 Under ESA, the EPA must ensure that pesticide regulatory decisions will
22 Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act. Sections 2 and 3, Definitions, Registration of Pesticides (7 U.S.C. §§ 136,
136a). Available online at http://www.epa.gov/opp00001/regulating/laws.htm.
23 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
140
-------
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 risks 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 EPA Chemical Safety, Pollution Prevention, and
Pesticide Programs 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 assist 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. 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 ecological
risks that pesticides pose to 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 Program's risk assessments and for Section 18 emergency exemptions, and to
perform studies for use in risk mitigation. Additionally, the Analytical Chemistry Laboratory
provides the Pesticide Program analytical assistance and technical advice to all EPA Regional
141
-------
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, 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. The Environmental Chemistry
Laboratory also assisted the EPA Research and Development program by 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the EPA will realize the benefits of pesticides by operating the National Pesticide
Standard Repository 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 is working with the EPA's Emergency Management and the
Research and Development program to evaluate and refine a Rapid Viability Polymerase Chain
Reaction method (detects DNA) for Bacillus anthracis in environmental samples. The method
will be used to evaluate samples from remediation sites.
The laboratory is working with the Edgewood Chemical and Biological Center under an
Interagency Agreement to evaluate various materials (wood, concrete, fabric, tile, etc.) for
recovery of bio-threat agents and treatment with standard decontamination technologies such as
chlorine dioxide and bleach. These types of materials are found in sites requiring remediation
due to contamination with non-spore forming bio-threat agents.
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 USDA's
various minor crop projects (under the cooperative IR-4) that benefit specialty crop growers,
globally and in the U.S.
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.
142
-------
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
toward 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 from dietary and non-
occupational exposure. While program outputs are not the best measures of risk reduction, they
do provide a means for reducing risk, in that the program's safety reviews prevent dangerous
pesticides from entering the marketplace.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$16.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$221.0) This realignment represents funds to support laboratory fixed costs for the
pesticides 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).
143
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$12,120.3
$392.3
$12,512.6
81.3
FY 2014
Enacted
$10,249.0
$587.0
$10,836.0
72.2
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$10,525.0
$502.0
$11,027.0
69.5
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$276.0
($85.0)
$191.0
-2.7
Program Project Description:
The Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention program'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 to
combat emerging or novel pathogens such as prions, new use sites, such as those colonized by
biofilms and conducts applied research on new analytical methods for novel antimicrobials. In
many cases of new claims or pathogens, there is no standard method available for determining
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 is necessary in order to make
pesticides available in the marketplace for these unusual or emergency situations. Examples
include the H1N1 virus, prions, foot and mouth disease, and SARs (Severe Acute Respiratory
infections). The Microbiological Laboratory also evaluates the efficacy of antimicrobials to
allow the EPA to remove ineffective products from the market. In addition, the Microbiology
Laboratory 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 Analytical Chemistry Laboratory conducts work to benefit specialty crop growers by
developing more cost-effective and efficient ways to establish tolerances (maximum residue
levels). This is accomplished through the USDA's Inter-Regional Research Project No. 4 (IR-
4)24, Crop Group Validation, which focuses on the development of analytical methods and
http://www.csrees.usda.gov/nea/pest/in focus/pesticides if minor.html
144
-------
analysis of crop samples to determine if, when applied at the same rate, pesticide residues found
in crops from same crop groups are similar. The data will be used to determine whether a
representative crop from a crop group can be used as a model to establish tolerances for all the
members of the crop group. Such a validation would support the concept of crop grouping being
accepted in the Codex (the international food standards organization established by the World
Health Organization and the UN's Food and Agriculture Organization) and by the Organization
for Economic Co-operation and Development. Over 500 samples have been analyzed to date in
support of this project. The laboratory also is providing analytical support to the IR-4 Global
Study to evaluate the influence of spatial 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 analytical method
reviews in support of pesticide registration and emergency exemption activities. Results from the
laboratory's method validations 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 2015 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 Performance 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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$3.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
145
-------
• (-$88.0) This decrease reflects a realignment of resources to statutorily mandated
activities.
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).
146
-------
Program Area: Research: Air, Climate and Energy
147
-------
Research: Air, Climate and Energy
Program Area: Research: Air, Climate and Energy
Goal: Addressing 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 2013
Actuals
$87,126.1
$87,126.1
298.2
FY 2014
Enacted
$94,972.0
$94,972.0
296.9
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$101,942.0
$101,942.0
298.8
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$6,970.0
$6,970.0
1.9
Program Project Description:
American communities face serious health and environmental challenges from air pollution and
the effects of climate change. The EPA's Air, Climate, and Energy (ACE) research program
engages with the EPA's partners and a wide range of stakeholders to provide 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.
With ACE research, the EPA can effectively meet Clean Air Act (CAA) and other statutory and
regulatory obligations. The ACE research program is organized around three interlinked themes,
which support the EPA Administrator's priority of addressing climate change and improving air
quality and the President's call to action on climate change:
• Assessing Air Quality and Climate Impacts
• Preventing and Reducing Emissions
• Responding to Changes in Climate and Air Quality
The ACE research program is integrated with other EPA research programs. For example, ACE
collaborates on nutrient management and global change impacts research with the Safe and
Sustainable Water Resources (SSWR) and the Sustainable and Healthy Communities (SHC)
research programs, and this research is reflected in the data synthesis of the Human Health Risk
Assessment (HHRA) program's integrated science assessments (ISA) and multi-pollutant
science documents (MSD).
Recent accomplishments include:
Next Generation Air Monitoring
• EPA scientists developed a prototype solar-powered air quality measurement system housed
in a park bench called "The Village Green project".25 The system: 1) promotes community
air pollution awareness; 2) increases pollution monitoring coverage; and 3) advances the
EPA's ability to measure and communicate air pollution information in real-time at lower
cost.
' For more information: http://www.epa.gov/research/priorities/docs/village-green-proiect-fact-sheet.pdf
148
-------
• EPA scientists developed an innovative mobile emissions monitoring tool that has been
effectively applied to characterize emissions in near source environments (e.g. roadways,
refineries, and oil/gas production pads) in various states (Colorado, Texas, and Wyoming).
• My Air, My Health - The EPA and Health and Human Services issued an open challenge for
a personal, integrated system for monitoring and reporting air pollutants and potentially
related physiological measures. The winner developed wearable fabric (e.g. a T-shirt) with
sensors for air pollution and breathing rate and volume.
Air Quality Modeling improvements
• The EPA has incorporated the use of computational chemistry in its Community Multi-Scale
Air Quality Model as an alternative to lengthy and costly laboratory measurements.
• The EPA developed a more efficient approach for analyzing emissions scenarios, which was
used by the EPA's Air program in the Ozone Risk and Exposure Assessment to determine
off-peak ozone concentrations in urban areas.
Health Implications of Multi-pollutants
• The EPA research shows simultaneous human exposure to diesel and ozone reduces lung
function to a greater extent than ozone exposure alone.
• Two different EPA funded studies found associations between air pollution exposure (fine
particulate matter and black carbon) and intima-medial (innermost two layers of the arterial
wall) thickness, an indicator of atherosclerosis. This supports the biological plausibility for
air pollution as a cause for cardiovascular mortality and morbidity.
Climate Change Results
• The EPA assessed and modeled the sensitivity of waterbody health measures (e.g. nutrient
and sediment loading) to climate change across a range of climate and urban development
scenarios in 20 large watersheds in different regions of the nation. The models are used to
assess the benefits of green infrastructure for stormwater management.26
• Research funded by the EPA has shown that global greenhouse gas mitigation may
potentially avoid millions of deaths by the years 2030, 2050, and 2100. Additionally, global
average marginal co-benefits of avoided mortality are $50-$380 per ton of carbon dioxide.27
Better Burning, Better Breathing:
• EPA researchers tested several household cook stoves for performance and air pollution
emissions. Results are providing better information to guide decisions about which stove
designs best protect the health of women and children who spend the most time using cook
stoves, while reducing emissions of black carbon, a climate forcing pollutant.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
Below are examples of several major ACE research efforts planned for FY 2015.
26For more information, http://epa.gov/sciencematters/climatechange/ccwatershed.htm
27For more information, http://www.nature.com/nclimate/ioumal/v3/nlO/full/nclimate2009.html
149
-------
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. In FY 2015, 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.28
The EPA also will examine the effects from exposures to air pollutant mixtures rather than single
contaminants to reflect real-life exposure to better protect the public and the environment.
Research will study exposures and health impacts of pollutant mixtures found in urban settings
(e.g., mixtures of automobile exhaust and industrial emissions) and relevant settings (e.g., near
ports and rails). This and other air pollutant research will inform the EPA on the causes of air
pollution related health effects. For example, the EPA will study the cardiovascular and
respiratory effects associated with exposures to pollutant mixtures and will investigate what
factors, such as disease and genetics factors, impact susceptibility to these health impacts.
Modeling and Decision Support Tools to Support Air Quality Management:
In FY 2015, the ACE research program will continue to develop models to support effective air
quality management. State and local agencies rely on such tools to implement NAAQS.
Improvements to the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system29 will
increase users' (over 2,500 users worldwide) capabilities to evaluate strategies for reducing air
pollution. Improvements also will help determine what approach best fits their situation by
accurately modeling how levels of ozone, particulate matter, and hazardous air pollutant
concentrations change when different emission reduction alternatives are used. ACE also is
developing CMAQ's capabilities to evaluate the impacts of a changing climate on air quality and
to more effectively model community-scale air quality.
ACE also is working to integrate air, water, and land-use modeling to understand and estimate
integrated, multimedia impacts on air quality, water quality, and other ecological endpoints. The
research, integrated across EPA's ACE, SSWR, and SHC programs and applied in the HHRA
program, allows policymakers to design more effective management practices for nitrogen,
supporting decision-making at the community, state, and national levels.
Improving Air Pollution Measurements:
Air monitoring is crucial to effective compliance and enforcement of air regulations. In FY 2015,
the ACE program will continue to develop and evaluate source and ambient air monitoring
methods required to support implementation of regulations. Demand for improved air monitoring
data is growing while budgets for state and local air monitoring organizations are shrinking. To
respond to this, the EPA will evaluate and demonstrate innovative, low cost sensor technologies
and mobile monitoring approaches that measure emissions and air pollution exposures. These
new technologies and approaches will enhance community monitoring, inform health research,
and enhance compliance and enforcement of air pollution regulations. The EPA also is working
with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to examine how satellites may
be used to improve air quality management activities.
28For more information, http://www.epa.gov/ncea/isa/
29 For more information, http://www. cmaq-model.ore./
150
-------
Assessing the Impacts of Climate Change and Developing Effective Responses:
In alignment with the President's Climate Action Plan,30 the EPA will continue to coordinate
research with other agencies through the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) and
support USGCRP priority research topics, with particular emphasis on developing actionable
science to inform decisions on how to respond to our changing climate. ACE research on models
and observations of environmental changes related to climate change are critical to the EPA's
ability to improve and maintain clean air and water and healthy ecosystems. This research allows
EPA to understand and prepare for climate change impacts, informing decisions at local, state,
and national levels through ACE-developed information and tools for communities, states, and
businesses to use to build resilience to climate change. For example, ACE research will inform
possible revisions to design guidelines for new, and modifications to existing, water treatment
systems to enable them to better adapt to climate-driven events that overwhelm treatment
systems and degrade water quality.
In coordination with other EPA research programs and federal agencies, ACE will focus on
understanding how climate change is affecting vulnerable human populations and ecosystems.
For example, 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 provides information for watershed and
coastal resource managers to protect productive fisheries and habitats. The EPA also will
develop tools to inform and support analyses of potential co-benefits and trade-offs of air quality
management practices in a changing climate.
Understanding the Environmental Impacts of Energy Production and Use:
In FY 2015, the EPA is collaborating with the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Department
of the Interior (DOI), under a Memorandum of Agreement, to evaluate the potential impacts of
unconventional oil and gas operations, including those related to air quality. This complements
efforts in the SSWR research program to study the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on
water quality and drinking water resources.
In addition, the ACE research program will develop and apply models to evaluate how future
changes in energy technology may affect air pollutants and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and
other environmental and human health endpoints. These analyses will consider the
environmental impacts of energy production and use across the full life cycle, such as the links
between energy and water related to possible future energy production scenarios. The results
will guide policy makers at federal, state, and local levels to build an economically and
environmentally sustainable energy system for the United States.
Research Partnerships:
ACE will continue its successful research partnerships with academia and private sector research
organizations, through the EPA's ACE Research Centers and the Health Effects Institute. In
order to approach air pollution and climate change sustainably, the EPA is strengthening
interactions with other agencies, including the NOAA, the DOE, the USDA, the National
Institutes of Health, the Federal Highway Administration, and the National Association of Clean
30For more information, http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/image/president27sclimateactionplan.pdf
151
-------
Air Agencies. These and other partnerships have made the ACE research program more useful to
decision makers and have helped achieve multiple goals in less time with fewer resources.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(AC1) Percentage of products completed on time by Air, Climate, and Energy research
program.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
100
100
FY2013
100
92
FY2014
100
FY2015
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.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
100
77
FY2013
100
83
FY2014
100
FY2015
100
Units
Percent
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 July 2012, both the Science Advisory Board and the
Board of Scientific Counselors acknowledged ACE's research progress and ambitiousness.
Beginning in 2014, EPA is establishing a standing subcommittee of the Board of Scientific
Councilors for the ACE program which will evaluate its performance and provide expert
feedback to the agency.
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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$813.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$3,793.0 / +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 $650.0.
152
-------
• (+$1,175.0) This increase will allow EPA to move forward with planned activities to
assess the impacts of climate change to provide data and tools necessary for EPA, state,
and local governments to effectively respond to the human health and environmental
impacts. Activities include enabling the EPA to investigate the impact of a changing
climate on air pollution emissions at a reduced level. This supports the agency's priority
of addressing climate change.
• (+$1,053.0) This increase will allow EPA to perform innovative multipollutant research
that supports more effective air quality management decisions aimed at protecting public
health and the environment.
• (+$1,030.0) This increase will enable the EPA to conduct research to better understand
the environmental and human health impacts of the production of biofuels.
• (-$894.0 / -2.6 FTE) This reduction includes a realignment of infrastructure support
resources. The agency is working to implement strategic sourcing across the wide range
of contracts, with a goal of at least five percent savings for goods and services. This also
reflects overall efficiencies gained through business process examination and projected
workforce attrition. The reduced resources include 2.6 FTE and associated payroll of
$377.0.
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.
153
-------
Program Area: Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
154
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$106,240.9
$106,240.9
406.7
FY 2014
Enacted
$111,018.0
$111,018.0
411.2
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$114,175.0
$114,175.0
411.9
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$3,157.0
$3,157.0
0.7
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 (SDWA) and the Clean Water Act (CWA) as
well as supporting the agency's goal of protecting the nation's water 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.
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 communities, cities, states, and other federal agencies in this effort.
Recent Accomplishments include:
Stormwater Calculator
• The National Stormwater Calculator (SWC) is phase I of the Stormwater Calculator and
Climate Assessment Tool package announced in the President's Climate Action Plan.
The SWC is a desktop application that estimates the annual amount of Stormwater runoff
from a specific site based on local soil conditions, slope, land cover, and historical
rainfall records. The enhanced version of the Stormwater Calculator, Phase II, that is
linked with the existing Climate Assessment Tool was released early 2014.
155
-------
Waters of the U.S. Connectivity Report
• The draft report, "Connectivity of Streams and Wetlands to Downstream Waters: A
Review and Synthesis of the Scientific Evidence" has undergone scientific peer review
and will undergo an SAB Panel review in FY 2014. As part of this process, the
assessment will be released through the SAB for public review and comment. The draft
science report explores the available scientific evidence on the connection between
smaller and larger water bodies, and the effects that smaller water bodies might have on
larger downstream waters. The draft report is based on a well-established scientific
understanding of stream systems.
The Future of Water Quality Monitoring
• EPA researchers developed ways to use satellite remote sensing technology to monitor
water quality. This research includes deriving water quality parameters in coastal areas,
estuaries, and lakes using satellites. Currently, the EPA is developing a proposed satellite
remote sensing approach to monitor coastal waters for numeric nutrient criteria in the
State of Florida. A mobile application using this tool is in development.
Hydraulic Fracturing
• The EPA is conducting a study to better understand any potential impacts of hydraulic
fracturing_on drinking water resources. The progress report was released in December
2012 and a draft report is expected to be released for peer review in December 2014.
Bristol Bay Assessment
• The EPA has released the final report in January of 2014, "Assessment of Potential
Mining Impacts on Salmon Ecosystems of Bristol Bay, Alaska". The assessment
examined the potential impacts of large-scale mining development on fisheries and
wildlife and on Alaska Native cultures of the region. For more information:
http://www2.epa.gov/bristolbay
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
SSWR is organized around two interrelated themes: Sustainable Water Resources and
Sustainable Water Infrastructure Systems.
Sustainable Water Resources
This integrates environmental, economic, and social sciences to provide effective and efficient
tools to ensure safe and sustainable water quality and availability. Research focuses on protecting
and restoring water resources for designated uses (e.g., drinking water, aquatic life, recreation,
agriculture, industrial processes).
Watersheds, and associated aquatic resources, provide essential goods and services that support
our economy and society. Stressors (e.g., extreme weather events (flooding, drought), climate
change and variability, land-use practices that alter habitat and increase pollutant loading and
runoff, invasive species, etc.) have degraded a large number of watersheds across the nation. The
SSWR program is developing needed water resource management tools that allow decision
156
-------
makers to systematically consider complex tradeoffs occurring within a watershed on a regional
or national scale. 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 2015, 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 and
availability in watersheds;
• Continuing to study the environmental, economic, human health and social impacts of
water quality degradation, which also increases demand for clean water resources; and
• Evaluating cost-effective watershed management strategies.
The EPA's researchers will continue to develop tools for better detection and assessment of
individual and groups of harmful waterborne chemicals (including natural cyanotoxins) and
microbial contaminants. These assessments and tools allow decision makers to more effectively
reduce risks, improve cost-effective treatment options, and develop guidance for less hazardous
options.
The EPA is conducting research on systems-based approaches to identify and manage water
resources degraded by nutrients, and to promote protection and recovery of those resources. The
EPA's Nitrogen Research Strategy will produce interoperable tools that address nitrogen and co-
pollutant (e.g., phosphorous, sulfur, sediment) management across multiple scales and multiple
media (water and air) to inform policy decisions. This program will continue developing
integrated nutrient management methods for freshwater and estuarine ecosystems and watersheds
to develop solutions that can be broadly applied nationally.
Energy (and mineral) resource extraction and processing have the potential to impact surface and
subsurface water resources. The EPA's research will assist decision makers (Federal and state,
industry and energy sectors, and the public) in making environmentally-responsible energy
extraction and processing decisions. In particular, research devoted to mountaintop mining and
valley fill and unconventional oil and gas activities, including hydraulic fracturing, will focus on
understanding, preventing, and mitigating potential impacts on aquatic communities' water
resources (including drinking water).
To achieve this goal, the EPA will continue its Study of Potential Impacts of Hydraulic
Fracturing on Drinking Water Resources, including a draft report to be released for peer review
in December 2014. This report will provide a synthesis of the state of the science, including the
results of research focused on whether hydraulic fracturing impacts drinking water resources,
and if so, what are the driving factors.
157
-------
Based on recommendations from the SAB31, complementing the knowledge gained in the above
noted study on hydraulic fracturing, and in coordination with federal partners DOE and USGS,
the EPA will study potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on air, water quality, water
resources, ecosystems, and health. This research will assist decision makers (federal, state, and
local; the industry and energy sectors, and the public) in making environmentally responsible
decisions that support sustainable approaches to oil and natural gas extraction.
Sustainable Water Infrastructure Systems
This research focuses on developing innovative water infrastructure management approaches and
techniques for reducing barriers to improved water-resources management. A systems-based
approach to water management considers a paradigm shift from 'treating wastewater' to
'recovering resources' (e.g., water, nutrients, energy, metals) from municipal treatment facilities.
Research also focuses on disinfection by-products generated post-treatment, pathogen
occurrence, groundwater recharge and groundwater quality, and incorporation of Green
Infrastructure, among others. Research encompasses system design, treatment alternatives and
potential negative/positive health effects, life-cycle analysis, best management practices (BMP),
resiliency, and viability. SSWR is increasingly focusing on unique needs for small water
systems.
In addition, the EPA will continue developing complete life-cycle assessments of several types
of water systems 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.
Researchers will continue working with metropolitan partners to demonstrate treatment
technologies for drinking water and wastewater treatment at the Water Technology Innovation
Cluster in Cincinnati and elsewhere. These technologies will improve the cost-effectiveness and
efficiency in water systems. 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 can represent a
significant source of adverse waterborne health impacts. In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to
conduct research to develop innovative approaches to monitor and improve water quality within
aging water distribution and collection systems.
Another area of focus is combined sewer systems that collect municipal sewage and stormwater
into a single pipe system, and can often overflow during storm events, resulting in combined
sewer overflows (CSO) of sewage and other pollutants into nearby waterways. Excessive
stormwater discharges and CSO may cause negative environmental impacts and pose health
risks. Green Infrastructure projects (e.g., rain gardens, rain barrels, cisterns and natural areas,
such as wetlands and riparian buffers that absorb or reduce runoff) may offer a more cost-
effective solution for managing these storm-related flows. Green Infrastructure BMPs retain and
31 http://vosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/CC09DE2B8B4755718525774D0044F929/SFile/EPA-SAB-10-009-unsigned.pdf
158
-------
infiltrate stormwater and provide co-benefits such as new jobs, recreational opportunities,
community revitalization, increased property values, flood control, mitigation of the urban heat-
island effect, and habitat.
Green Infrastructure research will provide guidance to select and implement appropriate
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 traditional grey
infrastructure into plans to better control water pollution during storm events.
In FY 2015, the EPA will shift the emphasis of its Green Infrastructure research efforts away
from performance monitoring of best management practices (BMP) at individual sites to expand
work with communities and research on constructed and natural Green Infrastructure on a more
holistic, watershed approach. This will include the pilot-testing of approaches for:
• Integrating the use and placement of natural Green Infrastructure (wetlands, riparian
buffers) and constructed Green Infrastructure (permeable pavement, green roofs, etc.)
within the watershed for maximum stormwater interception and mitigation;
• Mitigating flood events and "heat-island" effects that have associated public health and
economic consequences, especially during extreme weather events and due to a warming
climate; and
• Reducing sediment and nutrients in source water used for drinking water.
These efforts will support the agency's goal of delivering innovative solutions to communities
across the country.
Research on long-term performance monitoring and new BMP development will continue
through support for extramural research at academic institutions.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(SW1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Safe and Sustainable
Water Resources research program.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
100
86
FY2013
100
70
FY2014
100
FY2015
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.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
100
50
FY2013
100
100
FY2014
100
FY2015
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).
159
-------
Also, beginning in 2014, the EPA is establishing an SSWR standing subcommittee of the Board
of Scientific Councilors, which will evaluate the SSWR research program performance and
provide expert feedback to the agency.
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,
National Science Foundation, Department of Energy, and Department of Agriculture. 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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$993.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$4,299.0 / +5.5 FTE) This change will address the potential impacts of hydraulic
fracturing on water quality and aquatic ecosystems, as part of the interagency effort with
DOE and DOI. This study is separate and distinct from current research to study the
potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water. The additional resources
include 5.5 FTE and associated payroll of $776.0.
• (+$1,200.0) This realignment represents a refocus of emphasis in EPA's Green
Infrastructure research efforts away from performance monitoring of best management
practices (BMP) at individual sites toward expanded work with communities and
research on Green Infrastructure and a more integrated, watershed approach in pilot
communities. These resources will expand Green Infrastructure research work with states
and communities on local solutions that will have national significance and will support
the EPA's goal of making a visible difference in communities across the country. These
pilot testing approaches include: integrating the use and placement of natural and
constructed Green Infrastructure for maximum stormwater interception and mitigation;
mitigating flood events and "heat-island" effects; and reducing sediment and nutrients in
source water.
• (-$1,731.0) This reduction may limit the agency's ability to provide water quality
research for future use by decision makers in areas such as Combined Sewer Overflows
and wastewater systems.
• (-$1,098.0 / -1.5 FTE) This reduction reflects the completion of work to develop real-
time optical sensors for measurement of E. coli at freshwater beaches. The reduced
resources include 1.5 FTE and associated payroll of $212.0.
160
-------
• (-$506.0 / -3.3 FTE) This reflects the net result of a realignment in infrastructure support
resources. The agency is working to implement strategic sourcing across the wide range
of contracts, with a goal of at least five percent savings for goods and services. This also
reflects overall efficiencies gained through business process examination and projected
workforce attrition. The reduced resources include 3.3 FTE and associated payroll of
$465.0.
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;FIFRA7U.S.C. 135 et seq; TSCA U.S.C. 136etseq.
161
-------
Program Area: Research: Sustainable Communities
162
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$597.6
$154,720.2
$382.1
$17,885.7
$173,585.6
578.6
FY 2014
Enacted
$664.0
$154,978.0
$320.0
$14,380.0
$170,342.0
510.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$485.0
$144,144.0
$405.0
$14,032.0
$159,066.0
503.5
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($179.0)
($10,834.0)
$85.0
($348.0)
($11,276.0)
-6.5
Program Project Description:
The Sustainable and Healthy Communities (SHC) research program conducts research and
develops decision- support tools to serve two primary customers: 1) federal decision-makers at
the U.S. EPA including the Solid Waste and Emergency Response program, the regional offices,
and other EPA program offices; and 2) community decision makers across the country. SHC's
research products inform and empower decision-makers to equitably integrate human health,
socio-economic, and environmental factors into their decisions. SHC's research products also
provide the EPA's regional and program offices with tools to help develop regulations that are
more cost effective to implement. Where possible, SHC helps avoid the need for regulation by
providing research on innovative and effective non-regulatory approaches to protecting human
and environmental health. This program directly supports the agency's priority of making a
visible difference in communities across the country. It also supports the agency's priority of
enhancing state, Tribal, and local partnerships.
The EPA's research and decision support tools are important because communities rarely focus
on social, economic, health, and ecological outcomes when making critical decisions about
transportation, materials management and solid waste, land use, and the built environment.
SHC's products provide an opportunity for decision-makers to utilize an integrated systems
approach to simultaneously address all of these objectives while avoiding unanticipated
consequences. As a result, communities have an improved 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.
These research products are important to agency because they support critical regulatory and
policy needs. These include managing waste and materials, remediating contaminated sites,
protecting children's health, ensuring environmental justice, and linking environmental quality,
including ecosystem goods and services, to community health and economic outcomes.
163
-------
Recent accomplishments include:
• Introduced the "EnviroAtlas" - a mapping tool which provides information that
community decision-makers need to make strategic choices about development and
environmental policy from the perspective of ecosystem goods and services (e.g., clean
air, water quality and quantity, recreation, biodiversity). This atlas is being combined
with the USGS BISON tool to respond to the 2011 PC AST report calling for the
development of ecological information for the U.S. (Ecolnforma). It also has been
referenced by groups such as the Ecosystems Services Partnership.32
• Developed the Community and Tribal-Focused Environmental Risk and
Sustainability Tools (C-FERST/ T-FERST) - which access web tools and geographic
information systems (GIS) to assist communities as they identify and prioritize issues,
and make decisions about exposures and risks. 33
• Prepared a nitrogen mapping tool - which will allow communities to examine nitrogen
sinks and sources within the landscape, thus enabling them to make better nitrogen
management decisions.
• The Final Ecosystem Goods and Services Classification System (FEGS-CS) -
provides a foundation for measuring, quantifying, mapping, modeling, and valuing
ecosystem services. Appropriately defining and classifying ecosystem services- benefits
supplied by nature- to minimize double-counting and to relate them directly to human
users is a fundamental challenge. The system can be applied at multiple special scales,
promotes interdisciplinary communication about the nature of ecosystem services, and
facilitates development of measures to link ecosystem goods and services to human well-
being.
• Developed Two Health Impact Assessments (HIAs) - which provide information to: 1)
help the City of Springfield, MA narrow down school renovation options to those that
best address environmental problems and improve health and well-being in the school
community; and 2) help the Proctor Creek communities of Atlanta, GA assess green
infrastructure options to address pervasive flooding, impaired water quality, poverty, and
aging infrastructure.34
• Released the Eco-Health Relationship Browser - which illustrates the linkages between
human health and ecosystem services (benefits supplied by nature), and how those
services, or their degradation and loss, may affect human health and well-being.35
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, research in this area is organized into four inter-related themes:
32 http://www.es-partnership.org/esp/81288/970/50
33 http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2010.300087
34 http://www.healthimpactproject.org/hia/us/gerena-elementary-school-hia
35http://www.epa.gov/research/healthscience^owser/introduction.html
164
-------
• Decision Support and Innovation will use decision science, interactive social media,
spatial analyses, and sustainability assessment methods to provide communities with
tools to frame their decision options, outcomes, and potential costs and benefits. These
tools, developed in conjunction with EPA's program offices/states/local governments,
will increase the capacity for community stakeholders to examine the impacts of climate
change and local, regional, and state planning decisions on ecosystems and human health
and well being;
• Community Weil-Being: Public Health and Ecosystem Goods and Services will utilize
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.
This research will address impacts in all communities including overburdened
communities and tribes that are at risk for disproportionate environmental and health
impacts;
• Sustainable Approaches for Contaminated Sites and Materials Management will build
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 also will 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,
o Enable brownfields sites to be put to new, economically productive uses that
benefit communities; and
o Apply waste management and contaminated sediments remediation technologies
in specific geographic locations.
• Integrated Solutions for Sustainable Outcomes research will develop methods and data
that will allow communities to consider the full costs and benefits of their decisions. For
example, SHC 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.
As an integrated demonstration of these themes, the EPA is working with community decision-
makers in Durham, NC to provide them 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 SHC research program
to:
• Inform a proof of concept pilot study in Durham, NC to incorporate the tools described
above; and
165
-------
• Create a framework to assist communities in their efforts to achieve a more socio-
economically and environmentally responsible state.
In FY 2015, the SHC research program also will invest resources in ongoing research to develop
models, data bases, metrics, and other decision-support tools that will empower communities to
make decisions regarding sustainable approaches to environmental protection. These additional
funds will allow EPA to increase its capacity to provide community- based decision- support
tools which consider ecosystem goods and services, contaminated sites, multimedia pollutants
within environmental justice communities, and the beneficial use of sustainable materials. In
addition, the SHC program will realign resources to develop tools for at risk communities and
tribes to examine the impacts of climate change adaptation on ecosystems goods and services to
support the agency's goal of working with communities to address climate change.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(HC1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Sustainable and
Healthy Communities research program.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
100
100
FY2013
100
83
FY2014
100
FY2015
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.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
100
50
FY2013
100
68
FY2014
100
FY2015
100
Units
Percent
The table reflects SHC'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).
Also, beginning in 2014, EPA is establishing a standing subcommittee of the Board of Scientific
Councilors for the SHC program which will evaluate its performance and provide expert
feedback to the agency.
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,
National Science Foundation, Department of Energy, and Department of Agriculture. 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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$l,094.0)This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
166
-------
• (+$7,780.0) In FY 2015, the EPA will realign additional resources in ongoing research to
develop models, data bases, metrics and other decision-support tools that will empower
communities to make decisions regarding sustainable approaches to environmental
protection. These additional funds will allow EPA to improve its scientific understanding
of ecosystem goods and services, contaminated sites, multimedia pollutants within
environmental justice communities, and the beneficial use of sustainable materials. This
improved understanding will allow the agency to increase its capacity to provide
community based decision support tools.
• (+$1,290.0 / +2.0 FTE) The EPA will invest in tools for at risk communities and tribes to
examine the impacts of climate change adaptation on ecosystems goods and services to
support the agency's goal of working with communities and to address climate
change. The resources include an increase of 2.0 FTE and associated payroll of $290.0.
• (-$11,107.0 / -2.0 FTE) Funding for the EPA's Science to Achieve Results (STAR) and
the Greater Research Opportunities (GRO) fellowship programs 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 resources include a decrease of 2.0 FTE and associated payroll of $290.0.
• (-$4,397.0 / -2.3 FTE) This reduction includes realignment of infrastructure support
resources. The agency is working to implement strategic sourcing across the wide range
of contracts with a goal of at least 5 percent savings for goods and services. This also
reflects overall efficiencies gained through business process examination and projected
workforce attrition. The resources include a decrease of 2.3 FTE and associated payroll
of $334.0.
• (-$2,620.0) This realignment will reduce agency support for research focused on the
impact of environmental exposures on children's health and well-being. This includes
the elimination of a planned research center focused on the potential impacts of
exposures that occur in day-care facilities on children's health. Additionally, research
related to applying and evaluating new methods and models for assessing cumulative
exposures and risks, and assess the environmental factors related to key health outcomes
will be reduced.
• (-$1,436.0) This realignment 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 Budget Request.
• (-$1,037.0) The realignment will limit EPA research related to multi-sector systems
approaches for fostering innovation for sustainability.
167
-------
• (-$401.0) This reduction will decrease the number of awards possible for the People,
Prosperity, and the Planet (P3) Program which will decrease the number of awards
possible for the P3 Program. The P3 program is part of EPA's support for Science,
Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) programs.
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.
168
-------
Program Area: Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
169
-------
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Program Area: Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$88,866.9
$0.4
$88,867.3
276.3
FY 2014
Enacted
$90,822.0
$0.0
$90,822.0
299.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$98,639.0
$0.0
$98,639.0
304.1
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$7,817.0
$0.0
$7,817.0
5.1
Program Project Description:
Chemicals are a lynchpin of innovation in the American economy, and moving toward
sustainable innovation requires designing, producing, and using chemicals in safer ways.
Information and methods are needed to make better-informed, more-timely decisions about
chemicals, many of which have not been thoroughly evaluated for potential risks to human
health and the environment. The EPA's Chemical Safety and Sustainability Research Program
(CSS) is designed to meet this challenge and supports the agency priority of reducing risks
associated with exposure to chemicals in commerce, the environment, and products.
The CSS research program will lead development of innovative science to support safe,
sustainable design and use of chemicals and materials required to promote human and
environmental health, as well as to protect vulnerable species and populations. CSS research
program outputs will enable the agency to address impacts of existing chemicals and materials
across the lifecycle as well as to anticipate impacts of new chemicals and emerging materials.
The CSS research program also provides the scientific basis for evaluating complex interactions
of chemical and biological systems to support agency decisions.
The CSS research program generates purposeful and impactful scientific results:
Accelerating the Pace of Chemical Screening36 - EPA's chemical safety researchers have used
rapid, automated (high-throughput) chemical screening technology to evaluate over 1,800 high
priority chemicals for potential toxicity. To complement the toxicity data, EPA researchers also
developed automated predictive models for chemical exposures that provide the EPA with the
means for efficient risk-based prioritization of chemicals.
Protecting Vulnerable Species and Groups - CSS researchers have completed five high profile
chemical studies to better understand the sources and exposures to Polychlorinated Biphenyls
36 (http://wwwepa.gov/ncct/'l.
37 http://www.epa.gov/ncct/publications.html
170
-------
(PCBs) in schools. These studies provide information that supports decisions pertaining to
mitigating exposure risks to children. CSS researchers also have developed models to estimate
the wildlife survival probability when influenced by chemical and non-chemical risk factors
(age, habitat quality, etc). One model is the Markov chain nest productivity model (MCnest38),
which integrates bird toxicity data with information on species life history and the timing of
pesticide applications to estimate the relative impact of a pesticide-use scenario on the annual
reproductive success of bird species of interest.
Fostering Sustainable Solutions: Emerging Materials (Nanomaterials39) - As part of a large
U.S. and international research collaboration, the CSS research program is leading research to
understand the unique and novel properties of nanomaterials. CSS researchers have developed a
method for rapidly estimating how a variety of nanomaterials are released in the environment
and how they move in soils and sediments. The EPA also released a case study comparing nano-
enabled flame retardant coatings being applied to upholstery versus conventional ones. The case
study evaluated the risk related trade-offs between nano and non-nano products. (More
information on this case study, see:
http://cfpub. epa.gov/ncea/nano/recordisplay. cfm?deid=253010)
Integrating Risk Based Decisions - CSS researchers translate and deliver targeted solutions to
key partners across the agency, and other state and federal environmental programs. This
research also provides important input into other EPA signature research programs that advance
community-level decisions through Sustainable and Healthy Communities (SHC), Human Health
Risk Assessment (HHRA), and Safe and Sustainable Waters (SSWR) research programs. (More
information about the CSS program can be found at:
http://www.epa.gov/research/chemicalscience/).
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the CSS program will continue to place overarching emphasis on the areas of
computational toxicology, endocrine disrupting chemicals, and emerging materials including
engineered nanomaterials.
Computational Toxicology - Computational toxicology (CompTox) uses mathematical and
computer models to assess chemical associated hazardous effects while simultaneously reducing
the use of animals for testing. The CSS program will conduct CompTox research to provide the
fundamental knowledge infrastructure and complex systems understanding required to predict
potential impacts from use of manufactured chemicals, as well as to advance tools for rapid
chemical evaluation and sustainable decisions. The EPA's approach to computational toxicology
has been endorsed by the National Academy of Sciences in its report, Toxicity Pathway-Based
Risk Assessment: Preparing for Paradigm Change40. In FY 2015, CSS's CompTox research will
include a strategy that:
38http://www.epa.gov/medatwrk/Prods Pubs/mcnest.htm
39 http://www.epa.gov/nanoscience/
40 http://www.nap. edu/catalog.php?record_id=12913
171
-------
• Engages stakeholder and partner communities to develop a framework for providing
confidence in the use of high-throughput screening data to address the broad range of
EPA risk assessment needs.
• Expands the coverage of the Toxicity Forecaster (ToxCast™) - a state-of-the-art
chemical screening tool that tests thousands of chemical using hundreds of high
throughput and high content approaches - by increasing the toxicity pathways and the
types of chemicals that can be screened.
• Focuses on interpreting how environmental chemicals, individually and in mixed
exposures can cause adverse health effects to humans and ecological systems. Advanced
computational tools will be developed to quantitatively model complex systems dynamics
that incorporate innovations in data, informatics, chemistry, and biology to predict
cumulative risks.
• Develops a modular dashboard that can be efficiently customized to provide access to
ToxCast data and CSS computational toxicology tools to support agency program- and
decision-specific needs for chemical evaluation.
EPA works with the NIH and the FDA in the Tox21 collaboration to develop innovative testing
methods that characterize chemical toxicity. One of EPA's main contributions to Tox21
collaboration is CSS's ToxCast research effort.
A realignment in FY 2015 will use the program's computational capacity to build and integrate
21st-century exposure research with ToxCast and Tox21 data to advance risk-based decision
making in support of the agency's goal of keeping communities safe and healthy. Specific
applications of these funds will be to:
• Model and generate exposure data through ExpoCast, a state of the art chemical
screening tool that provides rapid and cost efficient high throughput exposure
information;
• Evaluate background exposure levels and biological relevance of environmental
exposures
• Translate for fit-for-purpose risk-based prioritization through the CSS Dashboard
These will complement efforts of the agency's Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
program to apply high throughput and other 21st-Century exposure information to TSCA
chemical prioritization.
Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals - In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to apply and demonstrate
newer computational toxicology approaches that will hasten the pace and efficiency of the
Endocrine Disrupter Screening Program (EDSP), enabling vastly improved capabilities to assess
and manage risks that endocrine disrupting chemicals pose to the health of Americans, especially
children. EPA's Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) will continually
consider the results of this research for incorporation into its EDSP21 program as recommended
by the FIFRA Science Advisory Panel (Jan 2013).41
41 http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap/
172
-------
In combination with ToxCast-based hazard models, ExpoCast models will support high-
throughput risk-characterizations and develop cost-efficient and rapid-risk assessments that
prioritize thousands of chemicals for further study. Ecological modeling research will advance
tools to increase efficiencies and maximize available information to characterize the ecological
impacts of chemical use. Research will be conducted to improve methods for assessing
environmental disposition of new and/or methodologically challenging chemicals.
Emerging Materials (Including Nanotechnology) - In FY 2015, CSS will continue to apply
computational and knowledge driven approaches to amplify the impact of its research on
engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) and on evaluation of emerging safer chemical alternatives.
Results of this research will provide guidelines for evaluating potential impacts of emerging
materials from the molecular design phase throughout their lifecycle in their applications to
goods and products in commerce. These research directions are in keeping with the
environmental health and safety research needs identified by the National Nanotechnology
Initiative42 in October of 2011.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(CS1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Chemical Safety for
Sustainability research program.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
100
100
FY2013
100
100
FY2014
100
FY2015
100
Units
Percent
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.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
100
50
FY2013
100
100
FY2014
100
FY2015
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 and
ambitiousness. Beginning in 2014, the EPA is establishing a standing subcommittee of the Board
of Scientific Councilors for the CSS program which will evaluate its performance and provide
expert feedback to the agency.
The EPA collaborates with several science agencies and the research community to leverage
common efforts and assess our research performance. For instance, the EPA is partnering with
the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy,
2 http://www.nano.gov/node/! 38
173
-------
the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the U.S. Department of Agriculture. EPA also
works with the White House's Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). The EPA has
collaborated with many Federal Agencies to develop a government-wide approach to
nanotechnology research through the Committee on Environment, Natural Resources, and
Sustainability Charter (CENRS) at OSTP. EPA also has collaborated with FDA on the Tox21
program that is led by EPA. 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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$807.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$3,284.0 / +2.0 FTE) This will accelerate the EPA's expansion of the risk-based
prioritization effort for application to TSCA chemicals, across toxicological endpoints
and exposure scenarios beyond those used with endocrine disrupters. Specifically, these
funds would be used to: (1) model and generate exposure data; (2) evaluate background
exposure levels and biological relevance of environmental exposures; and (3) translate
for fit-for-purpose risk-based prioritization. This effort supports the agency's priority of
taking action on toxics and chemical safety. The increased resources include 2.0 FTE and
associated payroll of $284.0.
• (+$2,473.0) The EPA will use this increase to: apply novel methods to monitor chemical
stressors in the Great Lakes; increase research on the environmental fate and transport of
engineered nanomaterials; increase research on health impacts of engineered
nanomaterials across the material and product life cycle; and provide translational
research and targeted solutions for chemical evaluation to agency partners.
• (+$1,798.0) This increase supports the EPA's research to: enhance its high throughput
chemical testing schemes by developing biology based approaches to evaluate human and
ecological health effects of emerging contaminants and engineered nanomaterials; and
improve efficiency of models for evaluation of chemicals with little extant data.
• ( +$653.0 / +3.1 FTE) This includes a realignment of infrastructure support resources.
The agency is working to implement strategic sourcing across the wide range of
contracts, with a goal of at least five percent savings for goods and services. This also
reflects overall efficiencies gained through business process examination and projected
workforce attrition. This increase includes 3.1 FTE and associated payroll of $440.0.
• (-$1,198.0) This will delay planned activities to develop innovative biological systems
that allow scientists to predict the effect of chemicals on human health without using
animal models within the EDCs program.
174
-------
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.
175
-------
Human Health Risk Assessment
Program Area: Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Goal: Addressing Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Address Climate Change
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$34,226.1
$2,425.1
$36,651.2
178.6
FY 2014
Enacted
$40,010.0
$3,040.0
$43,050.0
183.2
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$37,870.0
$2,843.0
$40,713.0
183.5
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($2,140.0)
($197.0)
($2,337.0)
0.3
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) research program meets EPA's risk
assessment needs by synthesizing scientific information on individual chemicals and chemical
mixtures in the environment43. These assessments span the range from state-of-the-science
human health assessments which are independently peer-reviewed, to screening level values that
help to focus monitoring and future evaluations. All provide a sound scientific basis for the
myriad of daily agency risk management decisions (e.g., regulations, site-specific cleanups).
HHRA's assessment work supports EPA's efforts to take action on toxics and chemical safety in
communities by providing a sound scientific understanding of the possible implications of
environmental exposure and by providing tools that help the agency predict and reduce risk. The
HHRA research program is comprised of:
• Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS): Prepares health-hazard and dose-response
assessments on environmental pollutants of major relevance to the EPA's regulatory
mandates. IRIS provides qualitative and quantitative assessments of both cancer and non-
cancer risks developed with many opportunities for public involvement and rigorous peer
review by the Chemical Assessment Advisory Committee (CAAC) of the agency's
Science Advisory Board (SAB). These assessments provide the scientific foundation for
the agency's risk assessment and risk management decisions.44 The IRIS database has
hazard identifications and dose-response evaluations on about 550 chemicals. These
values will help HHRA move to assess cumulative risk and mixtures of related chemicals
to better characterize potential "real-world" exposures and risks.
• Integrated Science Assessments (ISAs): Provides periodic review of the scientific
evidence supporting the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for six
43 http://www.epa.gov/nceawwwl/hhra/index.htm
44 http://arasp.americanchemis1rv.com/Resources/White-Paper-Earlv-Scientific-Peer-Consultation-and-Stakeholder-Engagement-
in-EPAs-IRIS-Assessment.pdf
176
-------
criteria air pollutants (particulate matter, ozone, lead, sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, and
carbon monoxide). ISAs provide a concise evaluation and synthesis of science necessary
to inform decision-making and inform the cost-benefit analyses that support the
regulations designed to allow states and local areas to meet the NAAQS.45 ISAs undergo
rigorous external peer review by the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee
(CASAC).46 HHRA also develops Multi-pollutant Science Documents (MSDs) as the
first step toward assessing mixtures of air pollutants. The MSDs reflect the fact that
people and environments are not exposed to pollutants in isolation and serve as a
companion to and reference for the individual pollutant ISAs. Lessons learned from
these endeavors will help support characterization of sustainable approaches to air
pollution and climate change.
• Community and Site-specific Risk: HHRA develops Provisional Peer Reviewed Toxicity
Values (PPRTVs) and exposure assessment tools supporting EPA's clean-up decisions at
contaminated Superfund and hazardous waste sites. HHRA scientists also provide
technical support and tools to enhance the EPA's ability to make risk-based decisions on
a case-specific basis, thereby reducing risks for sensitive and susceptible populations in
specific communities. The cumulative risk assessment (CRA) methods are being
extended to explicitly incorporate general ecological risk assessment endpoints (GEAE)
to characterize ecological risk, adverse outcome pathways across (AOP) species, and to
begin to consider human wellness indices. HHRA also is determining and characterizing
how to apply high throughput screening data to support risk screening and assessments.
• Research to Advance Analyses and Applications: HHRA provides leadership in
developing and applying analytic innovations to inform IRIS, ISA, PPRTV, and other
assessment activities. This ensures the translation and targeting of new data, models, and
methods to increase the accuracy, efficiency, and effectiveness of a range of EPA risk
assessments. Such characterization also informs the Chemical Safety for Sustainability
(CSS) research program's development and evaluation of its tools and knowledge bases.
HHRA also develops, evaluates, and/or applies new benchmark dose and other dose-
response methods, new approaches to identify and systematically review relevant
research for hazard evaluation, and risk assessment training materials.
Recent accomplishments include:
• Enhanced the process for developing IRIS assessments and initiated a new effort for
stakeholder and public engagement in the IRIS process and to modernize and refocus
HHRA research;47
• Completed final IRIS assessments for biphenyl, methanol (non-cancer), and 1,4-dioxane
(inhalation)48;
45 http: //epa. go v/ttn/naaq s/standards/pb/data/20110331 pbirpdraftcasac .pdf
46 http://vosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsfAVebReportsbyYearCASAC!OpenView&Start=l&Count=800&Collapse=l#l
47 http://www.epa.gov/ncea/iris/process.htm
48http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/iris/index.cfm?fuseaction=iris.showSubstanceList&list type=date
177
-------
• Posted the final ISAs for ozone49 and lead50 and began developing an MSD for the effects
of criteria air pollutants on the radiation balance of the atmosphere;
• Released EPA Expo-Box, a web-based compendium of tools providing easy access to
data bases, models, guidance documents, and other resources used by exposure assessors;
• Published new approaches and methods for evaluating cumulative risk and a Bayesian
approach to model for benchmark dose analysis of continuous data.
• Formed the Chemical Assessment Advisory Committee 51 (CAAC) to improve the
review of IRIS and other assessments.
• Convened scientific workshops on critical issues and challenges in risk assessment
including: cost-benefit analysis for noncancer endpoints, factors influencing oral uptake
of ingested chromium, and the relevance of mouse lung tumors for specific volatile
organic chemicals.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
HHRA will continue to engage important stakeholders and the scientific community to identify
and develop health hazard assessments for the highest priority chemicals. In FY 2015, HHRA
will develop these assessments through the following activities:
• Additional streamlining of the process for developing IRIS chemical assessments52 in
response to the recommendations made by the National Academy of Sciences' National
Research Council in their April 2011 report.53
• Completing draft assessments for agency, interagency, and external peer review and
posting them on the IRIS website, www.epa.gov/iris/, making state-of-the-science, IRIS
documents accessible and useful to other government agencies, industry, and the public.
• Convening scientific workshops on critical issues and challenges in risk assessment.
Creating state-of-the-science methods for continuous evaluation of assessments of new
scientific information on criteria air pollutants.
• Releasing an external peer review draft of the ISA evaluating the health effects of
nitrogen oxides.
• Developing MSDs to evaluate air pollution-induced health and welfare effects and
provide support to sustainability characterization of air pollution and climate change.
• Developing PPRTV and advance exposure assessment tools to support EPA's clean-up
decisions at contaminated Superfund and hazardous waste sites.
49http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/isa/recordisplav.cfm?deid=247492
50http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/isa/recordisplav.cfm?deid=255721
51 http://vosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabpeople.nsfAVebCommitteesSubcommittees/Chemical%20Assessment%20Advisorv%20Committee
52 http://www.epa.gov/iris/process.htm
53 http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=13142
178
-------
Developing rapid health hazard assessments to support agency responses to emergency
events such as Hurricane Katrina and the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, if needed.
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.
54
• Advancing CRA methods to ecological endpoints, incorporating new mechanistic data
such as adverse outcome pathways (AOP) across species, and factoring in human
wellness indices to better support "place-based" assessments, addressing community
concerns, and characterize sustainability.
• Publishing manuscripts and case studies on methods to combine chemical and non-
chemical stressors in risk assessment, including completion of a position paper on the use
of dose additivity in risk assessment.
• Improving the Health and Environmental Research Online database which lends
transparency to the assessment development process by allowing access to the data used
for scientific decisions. This benefits not only the EPA, but also state and local
governments, environmental and public health organizations, industry, communities, and
individual citizens.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(RA1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Human Health Risk
Assessment research program.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
100
100
FY2013
100
88
FY2014
100
FY2015
100
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(RA2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients and partners for use in
informing human health decisions.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
38
FY 2013
100
100
FY 2014
100
FY 2015
100
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(RA7) Annual milestone progress score for completing draft IRIS health assessments.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
50
8
FY 2013
50
17
FY 2014
40
FY 2015
40
Units
Score
Measure
Target
Actual
(RA8) Annual progress score for finalizing IRIS health assessments.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
20
17
FY 2013
20
8
FY 2014
15
FY 2015
15
Units
Score
http://www.epa.gov/osp/bosc/pdf/hhral007rpt.pdf
179
-------
Measure
Target
Actual
(RA6) Number of regulatory decisions in which decision-makers used HHRA peer-reviewed
assessments (IRIS, PPRTVs, exposure assessments and other assessments)
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
no target
established
NA
FY2013
20
140
FY2014
20
FY2015
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).
To assess research performance and provide strategic direction, two federal advisory Committees
reviewed the EPA's research programs. In their joint review of the HHRA program, the EPA's
Science Advisory Board and 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."55 Beginning in 2014, EPA is establishing a
standing subcommittee of the Board of Scientific Counselors for the non-IRIS portion of HHRA
program which will evaluate its performance and provide expert feedback to the agency. The
IRIS portion of the HHRA Program will be reviewed by the Chemical Assessment Advisory
Committee of the SAB.
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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$357.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$1,553.0) This reduction is a resource realignment due to agency priorities and may
delay the start, review, and completion of IRIS assessments, reducing the number of
regulatory decisions which use these peer-reviewed assessments.
• (-$491.0) This reduction may delay completion of the ISAs and ecological assessments
for particulate matter, sulfur oxides, carbon monoxide, and other pollutants, reducing
support for NAAQS decisions and limiting the EPA's ability to extract and evaluate
study data for HERO, part of the open government directive.
'http://vosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/36EBF661CA14106185257A380048FEAE/$File/HHRA+Overview final.pdf
180
-------
• (-$351.0) This reduction will slow the development of methods, models, and approaches
to modernize risk assessment, including the release of Expo-box updates used by EPA
programs and States, several PPRTVs developed in support of EPA's hazardous waste
programs and states; and cumulative risk assessment methods used by EPA program
offices and States.
• (-$102.0 / +0.4 FTE) This change includes a realignment of infrastructure support
resources. The agency is working to implement strategic sourcing across a wide range of
contracts, with a goal of at least 5 percent savings for goods and services. This change
also reflects overall efficiencies gained through business process examination and
projected workforce attrition. The net realignment includes 0.4 FTE and associated
payroll of $61.0.
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).
181
-------
Program Area: Water: Human Health Protection
182
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$94,244.6
$3,610.8
$97,855.4
527.9
FY 2014
Enacted
$98,161.0
$3,636.0
$101,797.0
528.9
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$100,931.0
$3,688.0
$104,619.0
523.3
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$2,770.0
$52.0
$2,822.0
-5.6
Program Project Description:
This program supports drinking water programs through the Technical Support Center, which
utilizes the latest engineering and scientific data (including treatment technology information) to
strengthen the nation's drinking water program. 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
56
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
183
-------
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the EPA's Drinking Water Technical Support Center will carry out the following
activities:
• Lead the development, revision, evaluation, and approval of chemical and
microbiological analytical methods for compliance monitoring and for occurrence data
gathering;
• Respond to technical 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 2015. 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
(1) chemistry, (2) microbiology, and (3) cryptosporidium certification officer training
courses for state and regional representatives to help ensure the quality of the analytical
results;
• Support small drinking water systems' efforts to optimize their treatment technology
under the drinking water 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
2015, the EPA will continue to work with four regional offices and 21 states and tribes to
facilitate the transfer of specific skills and build upon other drinking water
implementation program efforts to reduce health based compliance challenges;
• Continue to lead the implementation of the third Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring
Rule (UCMR3). UCMR3 was promulgated in 2012 and the EPA initiated monitoring in
January 2013. Sampling will continue through December 2015 and reporting of results
will conclude in approximately mid-2016. 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 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 (SOWA), 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
• Propose the fourth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR4), addressing the
collection of occurrence and exposure data for up to 30 unregulated, suspected drinking
water contaminants. The data collected through the five-year UCMR cycles are used in
184
-------
the analysis and review of contaminant occurrence and public exposure to support the
Administrator's determination of whether to establish a health-based standard to protect
public health. Monitoring for UCMR4 will occur from 2018-2020. The final UCMR4
will be promulgated within 18 months of the publication of the proposed rule.
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.
FY2008
90
92
FY2009
90
92.1
FY2010
90
92
FY2011
91
93.2
FY2012
91
94.7
FY2013
92
92
FY2014
92
FY2015
92
Units
Population
Measure
Target
Actual
(apm) Perc
through ap
FY2008
89.5
89
ent of community water systems that meets all applicable health-based standards
preaches including effective treatment and source water protection.
FY2009
90
89.1
FY2010
90
89.6
FY2011
90
90.7
FY2012
90
91
FY2013
90
91
FY2014
90
FY2015
90
Units
Systems
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$112.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$94.0 / +0.7 FTE) Additional FTE are needed to support the implementation of
UCMR3 and proposal of the UCMR4. The increased resources include 0.7 FTE and
associated payroll of $94.0.
• (-$154.0) This reduction reflects anticipated administrative efficiencies and cost savings
associated with process modernization and the use of innovative tools and practices.
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.
185
-------
Program Area: Climate Protection
186
-------
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)
Science & Technology
Environmental Program & Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$6,784.4
$0.0
$6,784.4
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$4,234.0
$12,700.0
$16,934.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($4,234.0)
($12,700.0)
($16,934.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
In FY 2014, Congress appropriated $4.234 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, independent of the STAR
program, and give priority to not-for-profit organizations that: conduct activities that are national
in scope; can provide a twenty-five percent match, including in-kind contributions; and often
partner with the agency.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA is not requesting funds to support this grant program in FY 2015.
Performance Targets:
There are no performance targets for this program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$4,234.0) The EPA is not requesting funds to support this grant program in FY 2015.
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;
187
-------
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.
188
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2015 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Environmental Programs and Management
Resource Summary Table 192
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate 197
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs 198
Climate Protection Program 203
Federal Stationary Source Regulations 212
Federal Support for Air Quality Management 217
Stratospheric Ozone: Domestic Programs 227
Stratospheric Ozone: Multilateral Fund 231
Program Area: Brownfields 235
Brownfields 236
Program Area: Compliance 242
Compliance Monitoring 243
Program Area: Enforcement 249
Civil Enforcement 250
Criminal Enforcement 255
Environmental Justice 259
NEPA Implementation 262
Program Area: Geographic Programs 265
Great Lakes Restoration 266
Geographic Program: Chesapeake Bay 276
Geographic Program: San Francisco Bay 280
Geographic Program: Puget Sound 283
Geographic Program: Long Island Sound 288
Geographic Program: Gulf of Mexico 293
Geographic Program: South Florida 296
Geographic Program: Lake Champlain 300
Geographic Program: Other 304
Program Area: Homeland Security 311
Homeland Security: Communication and Information 312
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection 315
189
-------
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure 317
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach 319
Children and Other Sensitive Populations: Agency Coordination 320
Environmental Education 323
Executive Management and Operations 325
Exchange Network 330
Small Business Ombudsman 335
Small Minority Business Assistance 338
State and Local Prevention and Preparedness 341
TRI / Right to Know 346
Tribal - Capacity Building 348
Program Area: International Programs 351
US Mexico Border 352
International Sources of Pollution 355
Trade and Governance 358
Program Area: IT / Data Management / Security 362
Information Security 363
IT / Data Management 366
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review 371
Administrative Law 372
Alternative Dispute Resolution 374
Civil Rights / Title VI Compliance 376
Legal Advice: Environmental Program 380
Legal Advice: Support Program 384
Regional Science and Technology 387
Integrated Environmental Strategies 390
Regulatory/Economic-Management and Analysis 396
Science Advisory Board 400
Program Area: Operations and Administration 402
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 403
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance 406
Acquisition Management 409
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management 411
Human Resources Management 413
190
-------
Program Area: Pesticides Licensing 416
Pesticides: Protect Human Health from Pesticide Risk 417
Pesticides: Protect the Environment from Pesticide Risk 424
Pesticides: Realize the Value of Pesticide Availability 433
Science Policy and Biotechnology 438
Program Area: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 440
RCRA: Waste Management 441
RCRA: Corrective Action 449
RCRA: Waste Minimization & Recycling 455
Program Area: Toxics Risk Review and Prevention 459
Endocrine Disrupters 460
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Review and Reduction 465
Pollution Prevention Program 473
Toxic Substances: Lead Risk Reduction Program 479
Program Area: Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST) 484
LUST/UST 485
Program Area: Water: Ecosystems 489
National Estuary Program / Coastal Waterways 490
Wetlands 493
Program Area: Water: Human Health Protection 498
Beach / Fish Programs 499
Drinking Water Programs 501
Program Area: Water Quality Protection 510
Marine Pollution 511
Surface Water Protection 515
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation 530
Indoor Air: Radon Program 531
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air 533
Radiation: Protection 536
Radiation: Response Preparedness 538
Program Area: Climate Protection 541
Water Quality Research and Support Grants 542
191
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2015 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION: Environmental Program & Management
Resource Summary Table
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program &
Management
Budget Authority
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals*
$2,473,536.8
9,961.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$2,624,149.0
9,782.4
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$2,737,156.0
9,663.2
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$113,007.0
-119.2
*2013 Actuals do not include Sandy Supplemental
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 $19,000 for official reception and representation expenses,
$2,737,156,000, to remain available until September 30, 2016.
Program Projects in EPM
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
Clean Air and Climate
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs
Climate Protection Program
Federal Stationary Source Regulations
Federal Support for Air Quality Management
Stratospheric Ozone: Domestic Programs
Stratospheric Ozone: Multilateral Fund
Subtotal, Clean Air and Climate
Indoor Air and Radiation
Indoor Air: Radon Program
Radiation: Protection
Radiation: Response Preparedness
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air
FY 2013
Actuals*
$20,330.2
$90,161.4
$24,931.6
$117,475.0
$5,052.6
$8,792.0
$266,742.8
$3,563.1
$9,033.1
$2,508.6
$13,327.6
FY 2014
Enacted
$19,626.0
$95,436.0
$26,544.0
$121,757.0
$5,149.0
$8,979.0
$277,491.0
$2,366.0
$8,714.0
$2,493.0
$14,508.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$18,349.0
$103,996.0
$32,914.0
$136,365.0
$5,037.0
$9,057.0
$305,718.0
$3,369.0
$9,138.0
$3,121.0
$14,565.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($1,277.0)
$8,560.0
$6,370.0
$14,608.0
($112.0)
$78.0
$28,227.0
$1,003.0
$424.0
$628.0
$57.0
192
-------
Program Project
Subtotal, Indoor Air and Radiation
Brownfields
Brownfields
Compliance
Compliance Monitoring
Enforcement
Civil Enforcement
Criminal Enforcement
Environmental Justice
NEPA Implementation
Subtotal, Enforcement
Geographic Programs
Geographic Program: Chesapeake Bay
Geographic Program: Gulf of Mexico
Geographic Program: Lake Champlain
Geographic Program: Long Island Sound
Geographic Program: Other
Lake Pontchartrain
Southern New England Estuary
(SNEE)
Geographic Program: Other (other
activities)
Subtotal, Geographic Program: Other
Great Lakes Restoration
Geographic Program: South Florida
Geographic Program: San Francisco Bay
Geographic Program: Puget Sound
Subtotal, Geographic Programs
Homeland Security
Homeland Security: Communication and
Information
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure
Protection
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA
Personnel and Infrastructure
FY 2013
Actuals*
$28,432.4
$21,826.5
$101,820.1
$167,924.2
$47,912.5
$6,376.1
$16,184.2
$238,397.0
$53,443.5
$3,842.3
$2,268.0
$3,754.6
$1,829.0
$0.0
$1,246.4
$3,075.4
$269,549.6
$1,334.9
$1,517.2
$28,359.2
$367,144.7
$4,066.5
$875.1
$7,328.9
FY 2014
Enacted
$28,081.0
$26,002.0
$103,297.0
$173,573.0
$47,829.0
$6,737.0
$16,360.0
$244,499.0
$70,000.0
$4,482.0
$1,399.0
$3,940.0
$948.0
$2,000.0
$1,445.0
$4,393.0
$300,000.0
$1,704.0
$4,819.0
$25,000.0
$415,737.0
$3,655.0
$980.0
$5,724.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$30,193.0
$28,280.0
$118,892.0
$180,641.0
$50,885.0
$7,936.0
$17,841.0
$257,303.0
$73,098.0
$3,804.0
$1,399.0
$2,893.0
$948.0
$5,000.0
$962.0
$6,910.0
$275,000.0
$1,402.0
$4,763.0
$25,011.0
$394,280.0
$4,102.0
$1,004.0
$5,716.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$2,112.0
$2,278.0
$15,595.0
$7,068.0
$3,056.0
$1,199.0
$1,481.0
$12,804.0
$3,098.0
($678.0)
$0.0
($1,047.0)
$0.0
$3,000.0
($483.0)
$2,517.0
($25,000.0)
($302.0)
($56.0)
$11.0
($21,457.0)
$447.0
$24.0
($8.0)
193
-------
Program Project
Subtotal, Homeland Security
Information Exchange / Outreach
State and Local Prevention and Preparedness
TRI / Right to Know
Tribal - Capacity Building
Executive Management and Operations
Environmental Education
Exchange Network
Small Minority Business Assistance
Small Business Ombudsman
Children and Other Sensitive Populations:
Agency Coordination
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
Integrated Environmental Strategies
Administrative Law
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Civil Rights / Title VI Compliance
Legal Advice: Environmental Program
Legal Advice: Support Program
Regional Science and Technology
Science Advisory Board
Regulatory/Economic-Management and
Analysis
Subtotal, Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic
Review
FY 2013
Actuals*
$12,270.5
$12,553.5
$15,221.0
$13,396.6
$46,812.8
$6,991.1
$17,670.9
$1,483.1
$1,737.0
$5,733.4
$121,599.4
$3,471.1
$7,256.2
$5,294.6
$16,021.9
$6,707.3
$77,765.7
$84,473.0
$13,189.0
$5,099.7
$1,256.4
$9,756.3
$40,441.7
$14,456.5
$2,065.9
$3,817.4
$14,738.3
$104,821.2
FY 2014
Enacted
$10,359.0
$14,956.0
$15,956.0
$13,811.0
$47,168.0
$8,702.0
$17,206.0
$1,834.0
$2,388.0
$6,548.0
$128,569.0
$3,433.0
$7,323.0
$4,891.0
$15,647.0
$6,410.0
$85,579.0
$91,989.0
$12,929.0
$5,202.0
$1,297.0
$11,248.0
$43,136.0
$17,374.0
$2,211.0
$5,090.0
$14,715.0
$113,202.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$10,822.0
$27,489.0
$14,927.0
$14,942.0
$50,448.0
$0.0
$32,588.0
$2,107.0
$2,252.0
$8,077.0
$152,830.0
$3,225.0
$7,513.0
$5,939.0
$16,677.0
$6,604.0
$86,793.0
$93,397.0
$14,203.0
$4,750.0
$1,370.0
$11,857.0
$43,948.0
$18,305.0
$2,991.0
$6,179.0
$18,493.0
$122,096.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$463.0
$12,533.0
($1,029.0)
$1,131.0
$3,280.0
($8,702.0)
$15,382.0
$273.0
($136.0)
$1,529.0
$24,261.0
($208.0)
$190.0
$1,048.0
$1,030.0
$194.0
$1,214.0
$1,408.0
$1,274.0
($452.0)
$73.0
$609.0
$812.0
$931.0
$780.0
$1,089.0
$3,778.0
$8,894.0
194
-------
Program Project
Operations and Administration
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Acquisition Management
Human Resources Management
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
Pesticides Licensing
Science Policy and Biotechnology
Pesticides: Protect Human Health from
Pesticide Risk
Pesticides: Protect the Environment from
Pesticide Risk
Pesticides: Realize the Value of Pesticide
Availability
Subtotal, Pesticides Licensing
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
RCRA: Corrective Action
RCRA: Waste Management
eManifest
RCRA: Waste Management (other
activities)
Subtotal, RCRA: Waste Management
RCRA: Waste Minimization & Recycling
Subtotal, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA)
Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
Endocrine Disrupters
Pollution Prevention Program
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Management
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Review and
Reduction
Toxic Substances: Lead Risk Reduction
Program
Subtotal, Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST)
FY 2013
Actuals*
$69,366.3
$293,188.6
$28,381.3
$35,752.6
$24,186.0
$450,874.8
$1,543.3
$52,854.4
$37,911.9
$12,120.3
$104,429.9
$37,250.6
$970.0
$59,303.9
$60,273.9
$8,771.2
$106,295.7
$5,734.2
$14,634.1
$4,902.5
$54,695.2
$12,317.8
$92,283.8
FY 2014
Enacted
$71,875.0
$310,057.0
$31,866.0
$42,013.0
$24,671.0
$480,482.0
$1,525.0
$58,070.0
$34,162.0
$10,249.0
$104,006.0
$37,198.0
$92.0
$62,284.0
$62,376.0
$8,164.0
$107,738.0
$7,553.0
$13,904.0
$0.0
$58,624.0
$13,745.0
$93,826.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$75,572.0
$325,138.0
$31,779.0
$48,445.0
$25,359.0
$506,293.0
$1,504.0
$59,931.0
$39,035.0
$10,525.0
$110,995.0
$36,305.0
$0.0
$60,121.0
$60,121.0
$8,451.0
$104,877.0
$6,365.0
$13,486.0
$0.0
$62,709.0
$13,644.0
$96,204.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$3,697.0
$15,081.0
($87.0)
$6,432.0
$688.0
$25,811.0
($21.0)
$1,861.0
$4,873.0
$276.0
$6,989.0
($893.0)
($92.0)
($2,163.0)
($2,255.0)
$287.0
($2,861.0)
($1,188.0)
($418.0)
$0.0
$4,085.0
($101.0)
$2,378.0
195
-------
Program Project
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 2013
Actuals*
$11,535.3
$23,940.2
$19,881.9
$43,822.1
$2,109.1
$94,244.6
$96,353.7
$10,692.6
$193,699.4
$204,392.0
$0.0
$0.0
$2,473,536.8
FY 2014
Enacted
$12,714.0
$25,098.0
$21,065.0
$46,163.0
$1,927.0
$98,161.0
$100,088.0
$11,850.0
$199,709.0
$211,559.0
$12,700.0
$12,700.0
$2,624,149.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$11,295.0
$26,723.0
$24,220.0
$50,943.0
$722.0
$100,931.0
$101,653.0
$10,628.0
$213,780.0
$224,408.0
$0.0
$0.0
$2,737,156.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($1,419.0)
$1,625.0
$3,155.0
$4,780.0
($1,205.0)
$2,770.0
$1,565.0
($1,222.0)
$14,071.0
$12,849.0
($12,700.0)
($12,700.0)
$113,007.0
*2013 Actuals do not include Sandy Supplemental
196
-------
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate
197
-------
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate
Goal: Addressing 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 2013
Actuals
$20,330.2
$8,206.1
$28,536.3
77.3
FY 2014
Enacted
$19,626.0
$8,596.0
$28,222.0
73.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$18,349.0
$8,447.0
$26,796.0
72.8
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($1,277.0)
($149.0)
($1,426.0)
-0.2
Program Project Description:
The Acid Rain Program, established under Title IV of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments
(CAAA),1 requires major reductions in sulfur dioxide (802) and nitrogen oxides (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 SC>2 program uses a market-based approach with tradable units called "allowances"
(one allowance authorizes the emission of one ton of SO2 in a given or later year). The
authorizing legislation sets a permanent cap on the total amount of 862 that may be emitted
annually by affected electric generating units (EGUs) in the contiguous United States. The
program was phased in, with the final SC>2 cap beginning in 2010 set at 8.95 million tons, a level
approximately one-half of the amount that these sources emitted in 1980.
Reducing emissions of 862 and NOX continues to be an important component of the EPA's
strategy for improving air quality. SC>2 and NOX are 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. The EPA's health studies and ecological
assessments, analyses by the Interagency National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program
(NAPAP), and data from long-term monitoring networks all indicate that further reductions in
SC>2 and NOX emissions are necessary to allow sensitive forests and aquatic ecosystems to
recover from acidification.
SC>2 also is a precursor for fine particulate matter (PM^.s) formation while NOX is a precursor for
PM2.5 and ground-level ozone formation. Lowered exposure to PM2.5 and ozone contributes to
significant human health benefits including avoided mortality and morbidity. Researchers have
associated PM2.5 and ozone exposure with adverse health effects in numerous lexicological,
clinical, and epidemiological studies.3'4 In addition, reducing SC>2 and NOX emissions also
401-416, 104 Stat. 2399, 2584-2631 (codified at 42
An Integrated Assessment. 2011.
1 Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Pub. L. No. 101-549, sec. 401,
U.S.C. §§ 7651-7651o) (Acid Deposition Control).
2 National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program Report to Congress 2011:
http://nv.water.usgs.gov.
3 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.
198
-------
results in welfare improvements, including surface water quality benefits through lower
deposition of nutrients, increased visibility, and reduced climate impacts.3'5
The program measures, quality assures, and tracks SC>2, NOX, and, pursuant to Title VIII, Section
821 of the 1990 CAAA,6 carbon dioxide (CC>2) emissions from over 3,650 affected electric -
generating units (EGUs). (Curtailing power plant CC>2 emissions figures prominently in the
President's Climate Action Plan, announced in June 2013.7) The implementing regulation
requires that highly accurate continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS), equivalent
direct measurement, or approved alternate methods be used for measuring and electronic
reporting of source emissions. The program conducts electronic and field audits and certifies and
periodically recertifies emission monitors. Allowance transfers are recorded in electronic
tracking systems and the allowances held are reconciled against the emissions reported to
determine compliance for every affected facility. The Acid Rain Program has maintained near-
perfect (e.g., over 99%) compliance every year and had perfect compliance for 2012.
The EPA's Acid Rain Program allows the owners and operators of affected sources to select
among different methods of compliance so the required emission reductions are achieved at the
lowest cost (both to industry and government). To achieve this goal, the program employs
results-oriented, market-based, and traditional approaches for controlling emissions, providing
flexibility in the methods available to achieve the required performance standards and emission
reductions. As one example of the program's flexible approach, owners and operators can
purchase allowances, install scrubbers, or switch the coal they are using to reduce 862 emissions
at affected units. For additional information on the Acid Rain Program, please visit
http ://www. epa.gov/airmarkets.
In 2012, total SC>2 emissions from EGUs subject to the Acid Rain Program were 3.3 million
tons, or approximately one-third of the statutory nationwide emissions cap. Total NOX emissions
were 1.7 million tons in 2012, which also is triple the program's target of a 2 million ton
reduction from projected 2000 NOX levels, absent the Acid Rain Program. Despite these
achievements, recent assessments show that the program's environmental objective to improve
ecosystems in acid-sensitive regions of the United States cannot be attained without further
reductions in SC>2 and NOX, the key pollutants involved in the formation of acid rain.8 These
assessments also show that additional reductions in these emissions are needed for many areas to
achieve and maintain health-based air quality standards for ozone and PM2.5.
Available on the Internet at . Also, U.S. EPA. Provisional
Assessment of recent Studies on the Health Effects of Particulate Matter Exposure. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, B.C. EPA/600R-12/056, 2012. Available on the Internet at
.
4 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 2013. Integrated Science Assessment for Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants. EPA/600/R-10/076F. Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S. EPA. February. Available on the Internet at
.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 2008. Integrated Science Assessment for Oxides of Nitrogen and Sulfur
-Ecological Criteria National (Final Report). National Center for Environmental Assessment, Research Triangle Park, NC.
EPA/600/R-08/139. December. Available on the Internet at .
6 Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Pub. L. No. 101-549, sec. 821, 104 Stat. 2399, 2699 (reprinted at 42 U.S.C. § 7651k
note) (Information Gathering on Greenhouse Gases Contributing to Global Climate Change).
Presidential Memorandum - Power Sector Carbon Pollution Standards. Available on the Internet at
8 National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program Report to Congress 2011: An Integrated Assessment, op cit.
199
-------
To help attain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone, at the request of
the affected states, in 1998, the EPA began administering the Ozone Transport Commission NOX
Budget Program (NBP), a regional cap-and-trade program established by nine states and the
District of Columbia for reducing NOX emissions and transported ozone in the eastern United
States. These jurisdictions initiated their own regional NOX allowance trading program in order
to extend the compliance flexibility and control cost-effectiveness achieved under the Title IV
862 Acid Rain Program into their state implementation plans (SIPs) for meeting their Title I
NAAQS compliance obligations. Subsequently, the EPA issued the NOX SIP Call and
established the NOX Budget Trading Program (NBTP), which replaced the NBP starting in 2003.
The NBTP added 12 new states to the NBP and doubled the number of sources covered. The
EPA then issued the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) under which the NBTP transitioned into
the CAIR seasonal NOX program for control of transported ozone pollution and summer NOX
emissions starting in 2009. (The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has remanded CAIR
to the EPA for replacement, but has allowed the rule to be implemented in the interim.9)
The National Academy of Sciences10 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 Program and related programs. These reports not only track progress in reducing
SC>2 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015; the program will measure, quality assure, and track emissions for 862, NOx, CC>2,
and other pollutants, including air toxics, discharged to the atmosphere by approximately 4,000
fossil fuel-fired EGUs.11 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 will be recorded in electronic tracking systems and the
allowances held will be reconciled against emissions to ensure compliance for all affected
sources in the Acid Rain Program and CAIR programs, including the CAAA Title VIII, Sec. 821
program.
In FY 2015, the program will support the President's Climate Action Plan through emissions
monitoring, data analysis, and regulatory support. The program's emissions monitoring
9 North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (remanding CAIR without vacatur); see also EME Homer City
Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696 F.3d 7, 38 (D.C. Cir. 2012) (vacating CAIR replacement rule and ordering EPA to continue
administering CAIR), cert, granted, 133 S. Ct. 2857 (2013) (No. 12-1182).
10 National Academy of Sciences Report: Air Qualify Management in the United States. 2004. www.nap.edu/catalog/10728.html
11 40 C.F.R. pt. 63, subpt. UUUUU (National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Coal- and Oil-Fired Electric
Utility Steam Generating Units).
200
-------
information will be used to inform analyses related to the power sector for use by policymakers
and stakeholders. Economic modeling tools and emissions projections data will be used to
analyze, inform, and forecast effects of potential future policy scenarios. In addition, technical
expertise and data from the program will be used in support of regulatory development and
assistance to stakeholders, particularly states, related to state plans.
In FY 2015 the program will modify, expand, and improve the EPA-administered emissions
monitoring and reporting system supporting required continuous emissions monitoring systems
(CEMS)12 to incorporate, process, and quality assure additional data for power plants pursuant
to the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) Rule13 (e.g., mercury monitor certification,
mercury emissions, pertinent operating data, etc.) and for the New Source Performance
Standards (NSPS) Greenhouse Gas Emissions Rule14 while operating and maintaining the system
for emissions monitoring and reporting by clean air allowance trading programs.
The program also will assist states with considering regional programs for electric generating
units (EGUs) and other large stationary sources (e.g., industrial boilers) to comply with CAA
Section 110 requirements. This will include the development and proposal of implementing
regulations for reducing the interstate transport of NOX emissions contributing to the formation
of ozone and the nonattainment and interference of maintenance of the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The
EPA will work with states to create flexible approaches, such as emissions averaging and trading
programs, where they potentially could be more cost-effective than application of source-specific
emission standards as well as to assess the feasibility of air pollution emission controls.
The program also is responsible for implementing U.S. commitments under the U.S.-Canada Air
Quality Agreement (Acid Rain Annex) of 1991 and the Ozone Annex of 2000 to reduce and
maintain lower SC>2 and NOX emissions to improve air quality and reduce acid deposition in the
transboundary region.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(A01) Annual emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) from electric power generation sources.
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
3,319,000
FY2013
6,000,000
Data Avail
12/2014
FY2014
6,000,000
FY2015
6,000,000
Units
Tons
Emitted
The EPA tracks changes 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 with
a performance target set for 2030. For additional information, please visit
http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progress/index.html.
12 40 C.F.R. pt. 75 (Continuous Emission Monitoring).
13 40 C.F.R. pt. 63, subpt. UUUUU (National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Coal- and Oil-Fired Electric
Utility Steam Generating Units).
14 Standards of Performance for Greenhouse Gas Emissions for New Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units
(proposed), available at http://www.epa.gov/carbon-pollution-standards/2013-proposed-carbon-pollution-standard-new-power-
plants.
201
-------
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$341.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$1,618.0 / -0.2 FTE) This reflects a realignment that will be realized through
efficiencies in improved business practices, including 0.2 FTE and associated payroll of
$31.0, in the following areas:
o Streamlining of technical assistance to the states' field audit program. Fewer field
audits and associated state staff training activities will be conducted;
o Consolidation and reduction in the detail and scope of the annual reports on
compliance and environmental results from implementation of the Acid Rain Program
and related programs;
o Collaborative efforts for outreach and technical assistance provided to states and
sources on monitor certification, electronic emissions reporting, allowance transfers,
and the process for reconciling allowances held versus emissions for determining
program compliance; and
o Improved processes and reduced footprint for web-based public access databases,
queries, and quick reports on allowance transactions and source emissions data, thus
realizing efficiencies in our public outreach and open government efforts.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7401-7671q.
202
-------
Climate Protection Program
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate
Goal: Addressing 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 2013
Actuals
$90,161.4
$13,008.9
$103,170.3
226.9
FY 2014
Enacted
$95,436.0
$8,313.0
$103,749.0
224.2
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$103,996.0
$8,018.0
$112,014.0
222.1
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$8,560.0
($295.0)
$8,265.0
-2.1
Program Project Description:
Working across the EPA and in partnership with other agencies, the Climate Protection program
will heed the President's call to action on climate change. The EPA's Climate Protection
Program promotes efforts to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and the President's
Climate Action Plan through programs such as regulatory support for state programs, energy
efficiency and renewable energy policies in carbon pollution standards, voluntary partnerships
with key industries, technical assistance and reporting, and verification and publication of GHG
data. These programs complement and support the agency's implementation across all elements
of the President's Climate Action Plan. Key Climate Action Plan elements directly supported
include:
• Cutting carbon pollution from power plants;
• Cutting energy waste in homes, businesses, and factories;
• Reducing methane and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) emissions;
• Leading at the federal level;
• Protecting our country from the impacts of climate change; and
• Leading international efforts to address climate change.
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 (CCh) and other greenhouse gases, such as methane, nitrous oxide and
fluorinated greenhouse gases - including 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 often years or more. In 2012 alone, the Office of Atmospheric
Protection Program Climate Protection Partnerships reduced greenhouse gas emissions by more
203
-------
than 365 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCC^E)—providing over $13
billion in benefits to society by reducing damages from climate change.15
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
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 removing market barriers preventing the adoption of cost-
effective, energy-efficient technologies and practices in the residential, commercial, and
industrial sectors. The U.S. Department of Energy supports the ENERGY STAR program,
consistent with its areas of expertise. The EPA is the overall ENERGY STAR brand manager
and is responsible for the specification process for more than 70 product categories and the Most
Efficient program. The EPA continues to implement the ENERGY STAR Certified Homes
program for both single family homes and multifamily buildings. The EPA is the brand manager
for ENERGY STAR in the commercial and industrial markets. This includes leading marketing,
outreach, monitoring and verification, performance levels and EPA's ENERGY STAR Portfolio
Manager.
The ENERGY STAR program continues to yield significant environmental and economic results
through its 18,000 partners. In the U.S., the ENERGY STAR program helped prevent more than
an estimated 254 MMTCC^E, resulting in savings of more than $26 billion on Americans'
annual utility bills in 2012 alone.16
The EPA operates several voluntary programs that promote cost-effective reductions of methane
and fluorinated gases by working collaboratively with industry. Methane is an especially potent
greenhouse gas when released into the atmosphere. 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.
15 Societal benefits are based on the social cost of carbon which monetizes the damages associated with an incremental increase
in carbon emissions in a given year. The non-CO2 emissions were converted to CO2-equivalents assuming global warming
potentials from the IPCC Second Annual Report before applying the social cost of CO2. For more information on program
benefits, please see Office of Atmospheric Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2013. "Climate Protection
Partnerships 2012 Annual Report," Publication Number 430R13012.
16 Office of Atmospheric Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2013. "Climate Protection Partnerships 2012 Annual
Report," Publication Number 430R13012.
204
-------
The EPA also manages the implementation of the Global Methane Initiative (GMI), 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
methane as a clean energy source. GMI builds on the success of the EPA's domestic methane
programs and focuses on advancing project development from agricultural 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 2013, the U.S. has supported several
hundred 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 22 MMTCO2E in 2012, with an additional 50 MMTCO2E in potential reductions
anticipated from projects that have not yet been fully implemented.1?
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. Collectively, SmartWay partners
have reduced 51.6 MMTCC^E, 738 thousand tons of NOx emissions, and 37 thousand tons of
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. 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 3,000 U.S. corporations and organizations, including many Fortune 500®
companies, have registered with SmartWay, and they rely upon SmartWay's supply chain
accounting tools and methods to assess, track, and reduce transportation-related carbon, energy
use, and air emissions. To date, these businesses have saved $8.1 billion dollars by cutting their
fuel use by 65 million barrels of oil. This is equivalent to annual emissions from about five
million cars.
7 Additional information at: www.epa.gov/globalmethane and www.globalmethane.org
205
-------
The EPA manages a number of other partnership programs that advance cleaner energy solutions
to reduce GHG emissions. Having worked for many years helping state and local governments
design and implement cost-effective energy efficiency, renewable energy, and combined heat
and power programs, the State and Local Climate and Energy Program is contributing analytical
and policy expertise to state and local efforts to meet the Carbon Pollution Standards. 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 colleges and universities.
FY 2015 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 cut energy
waste in homes, businesses, and factories 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 the EPA to participate in the program; and
o Response and follow-up to verification testing failures across more than 65
product categories.
• Maintaining integrity and confidence in the ENERGY STAR label on buildings and
plants through effective certification of ENERGY STAR applications through
Professional Engineers. In order to earn the label, state licensed professionals must certify
program requirements.
• 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 should be updated about every two years.
For all other product categories, the EPA has committed to consistently monitor market
share and consider revisions, when market share of labeled products reaches 35 percent
or at least every 3 years. The program will increase the use of the ENERGY STAR label
on products by adding products to the program, with a particular focus on products in the
206
-------
rapidly evolving electronics market. The EPA also is managing the ENERGY STAR
Most Efficient recognition.
• Updating existing building ratings as data becomes available. If resources become
available, the agency will expand efforts to measure energy use by adding new ENERGY
STAR energy performance scales for additional commercial building types.
• Engaging regional, state and utility energy efficiency programs, trade associations and
local governments to integrate ENERGY STAR as an educational platform to reduce
energy use in commercial and industrial buildings. The EPA provides technical assistance
and Portfolio Manager enhancements to the approximately 10 jurisdictions that have
adopted energy benchmarking and disclosure policies that require use of EPA's
ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager programs.
• Focusing on reporting functionality and data exchange for the redesigned Portfolio
Manager, EPA's ENERGY STAR measuring and tracking tool. This work will take
precedent over other enhancements to assist users in benchmarking and reducing
greenhouse gas emissions from buildings.
• Continuing to support the ENERGY STAR Certified Homes program to ensure the
technical rigor of the ENERGY STAR specifications, and working with participating
builders, Home Energy Raters, and utility partners to develop technical solutions and
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.
• 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 2015. The CHP Partnership will focus its expertise on
implementing Executive Order 13624 ("Accelerating Investment in Industrial Energy
Efficiency") which promotes the installation of CHP systems and the inclusion of output-based
limits in air regulations and permits. The Green Power Partnership will focus on 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 2015, the EPA will 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.
In FY 2015, the State and Local Climate and Energy Program will be contributing energy and
emissions expertise to the carbon pollution regulations for existing power plants and working
with states to help them design their plans to meet the emissions guidelines. The State and Local
Climate and Energy Program will provide policy guidance, analytical tools, peer exchange, and
training webinars to foster cross-cutting, multi-agency cooperation. At the community level, the
207
-------
program will help states integrate local measures that are proven to reduce carbon dioxide to
meet their requirements under the carbon pollution regulations.
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
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 a 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.
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to work to reduce emissions of methane and fluorinated
greenhouse gases through domestic partnerships with industry. The EPA also will work with
other agencies to implement the Interagency Methane Strategy directed by the President's
Climate Action Plan. As part of this effort, the EPA will be looking to maximize efficiencies by
leveraging the efforts of both voluntary and regulatory programs. 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. The EPA will be targeting its
resources to 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. Support will involve identifying and addressing
technical, institutional, legal, regulatory, and other barriers to project development based on
strategic planning and coordination with partner countries' methane action plans. The EPA's
work will leverage investments and assistance provided by the private sector and other partners
and with other multilateral initiatives such as the Climate and Clean Air Coalition.
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. In FY
2015, the EPA will focus its efforts on priority countries and on monitoring, reporting, and
verifying greenhouse gas emissions and carbon sequestration through cost-effective measures.
208
-------
The EPA will continue to develop and implement the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program, and,
as appropriate, support the activities under the President's Climate Action Plan, including the
Climate Data Initiative. Established in October 2009, the GHG Reporting Program has a total of
41 sectors, with approximately 8,000 reporters. Focus areas for the program will include:
• Finalizing regulatory revisions across multiple sectors to address stakeholder concerns
associated with collection and potential release of data elements considered to be
sensitive business information;
• Making other regulatory revisions in response to stakeholder feedback to improve the
scope and accuracy of GHG data, while reducing burden;
• Updating 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;
• Streamlining and targeting 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 and sector-level analysis with the public in a timely manner, within the
federal government, with state and local governments, and with reporting entities to
support improved understanding of both emission levels and opportunities for GHG
reductions.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(G02) Million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTCO2E) of greenhouse gas reductions in
the buildings sector.
FY2008
118.8
140.8
FY2009
130.2
143.4
FY2010
143.0
163.5
FY2011
156.9
189.0
FY2012
168.7
221.9
FY2013
182.6
Data
Avail
12/2014
FY2014
196.2
FY2015
188.0
Units
MMTC02e
Measure
Target
Actual
(G06) Million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTCO2E) of greenhouse gas reductions in
the transportation sector.
FY 2008
3.3
4.2
FY 2009
5.5
5.9
FY 2010
15.4
17.3
FY2011
23.7
27.9
FY 2012
28.0
38.9
FY 2013
33.0
51.6
FY 2014
61
FY 2015
70
Units
MMTCO2e
Measure
Target
Actual
(G16) Million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTCO2E) of greenhouse gas reductions in
the industry sector.
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
378.1
FY 2013
421.9
Data
Avail
12/2014
FY 2014
461.8
FY 2015
540.3
Units
MMTC02e
209
-------
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$294.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$5,297.0 / +7.2 FTE) This reflects a realignment of resources to support the President's
Climate Action Plan, including 7.2 FTE and associated payroll of $1,097.0 in the
following areas:
o Development of power plant regulations will require updates to power sector
models, adaptation of atmospheric models to address climate change-air quality
interactions and implementation of multipollutant/GHG source monitoring
techniques;
o Development of a suite of resources to assist states as they develop their state
implementation plans including quantification tools and best practices;
o Development and implementation of the President's interagency methane
strategy, including assessing current emissions data, addressing data gaps, and
identifying technologies and best practices for reducing emissions to inform our
programs and measures;
o Reduction of FIFCs under the Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP)
program in key sectors, such as refrigeration and air conditioning, will require
upgrades to data systems and models needed for the various interagency and
international efforts that the EPA has been asked to lead; and
o Implementation of a range of activities in support of the President's call to cut
energy waste in homes, businesses, and factories.
• (+$985.0 / +1.8 FTE) These funds will be used to support the ongoing Global Methane
Initiative to enhance public-private sector cooperation to reduce global methane
emissions and deliver clean energy to markets. These resources include 1.8 FTE and
associated payroll of $274.0.
• (+$2,612.0 / +1.3 FTE) This reflects an increase for the Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Program. Resources will be used to finalize regulatory revisions across multiple sectors
to address stakeholder concerns associated with the collection and potential release of
data elements considered to be sensitive business information, as well as making other
regulatory revisions in response to stakeholder feedback to improve the scope and
accuracy of GHG data, while reducing burden. These resources include 1.3 FTE and
associated payroll of $198.0.
• (+$2,227.0 / -3.6 FTE) This reflects additional resources to maintain consumer
confidence in the ENERGY STAR label through effective third-party certification of
qualifying products and the implementation of the EPA's verification process for
residential, commercial, and industrial buildings. These resources include a decrease of
3.6 FTE and associated payroll of $543.0.
210
-------
• (-$2,862.07 -8.8 FTE) This reflects a reduction that will be realized through efficiencies in
improved business practices, including 8.8 FTE and associated payroll of $1,326.0 in the
following areas:
o Streamlining regulatory processes;
o Improving business process changes in FOIA responses;
o Improving effectiveness at community outreach;
o Leveraging cross agency and other federal/state efforts;
o Increasing the use of automation;
o Using process experts to prepare the non-programmatic portions of grants
documentation; and
o Using strategic sourcing to reduce the number of contracts managed.
• (-$298.0) This reflects a decrease in basic and mandatory IT and telecommunications
support costs for the on board workforce, including support for desktop services,
telephone and Local Area Network (LAN).
• (+$51.0) This reflects a realignment of resources for web tools and technology
infrastructure to support activities across the program. This supports core IT functions.
• (+$254.0) This reflects a realignment of resources to support the Agency's efforts to
reduce travel by utilizing green conferencing. These funds support more cost-efficient
Agency communications.
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.
211
-------
Federal Stationary Source Regulations
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate
Goal: Addressing 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 2013
Actuals
$24,931.6
$24,931.6
115.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$26,544.0
$26,544.0
120.2
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$32,914.0
$32,914.0
115.4
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$6,3 70. 0
$6,370.0
-4.8
Program Project Description:
Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), the EPA is required to set National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) for six ambient pollutants considered harmful to public health and the
environment. The six "criteria" pollutants for which the EPA has established NAAQS are:
particulate matter (PM), ozone, sulfur dioxide (862), nitrogen dioxide (NC^), carbon monoxide
(CO), and lead. 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.
Section 109 of the CAA Amendments of 1990 established two types of NAAQS. Primary
standards are set at a level requisite 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.18 Secondary standards are set at a
level requisite to protect public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects, including
protection against decreased visibility and damage to animals, crops, vegetation, and buildings.
This program also includes activities, mandated by the CAA, directed toward reducing air
emissions of toxic, criteria, and other pollutants from stationary sources. Specifically, to address
air toxics, this program provides for the development of National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) 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, as necessary,
regulation of residual risk remaining after implementation of the NESHAP, the periodic review
and revision of the NESHAP, and associated national guidance and outreach. In addition to
existing CAA and court-ordered mandates, the EPA is required to periodically review, and where
appropriate, revise both the list of air toxics subject to regulation and the list of source categories
for which standards must be developed. The program also includes issuing, reviewing, and
18 The legislative history of section 109 indicates that a primary standard is to be set at "the maximum permissible ambient air
level which will protect the health of any [sensitive] group of the population," and that for this purpose "reference should be
made to a representative sample of persons comprising the sensitive group rather than to a single person in such a group" [S.
Rep. No. 91-1196, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. 10 (1970)].
212
-------
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).
The CAA also requires protection of air quality related values (AQRV) for 156 Congress!onally
mandated national parks and wilderness areas, known as Class I areas. Visibility is one such
AQRV, and Congress established a national goal of returning visibility in the Class I areas to
natural conditions, or the visibility conditions which existed without manmade air pollution. The
EPA developed the Regional Haze Rule which sets forth the requirements that state plans must
satisfy to meet the national goal by 2064.
Finally, the President unveiled his Climate Action Plan in June 2013. This broad-based plan will
cut carbon pollution that causes climate change and affects public health. This program supports
the Plan's goal to develop carbon pollution standards for new and existing power plants.
FY 2015 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. In FY 2015, consistent with CAA section 111 requirements and with the June 25,
2013, "Presidential Memorandum - Power Sector Carbon Pollution Standards19," the EPA will
continue work toward final section lll(d) emission guidelines for states to use in developing
plans to lower the carbon intensity of power generation. The EPA also will continue work toward
final section 11 l(d) standards for modified and reconstructed power plants.
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 2015, will perform analyses and plans to make determinations to address
whether regulation of GHG emissions from such listed source categories is warranted as
resources allow, including continuation of activities involving the electricity generating sector.
Using emission inventory data and information on available systems for emission reductions, 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, available inventory data, and other available information the EPA
has received to date, the agency expects to undertake consideration of such actions for the
19 http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/06/25/presidential-memorandum-power-sector-carbon-pollution-standards
213
-------
following sectors: petroleum refining; pulp and paper facilities; municipal solid waste landfills;
iron and steel production; animal feeding operations; and Portland cement manufacturing.
Improving Air Quality
In FY 2015, the EPA will be continuing its reviews of several NAAQS, including NO2, SO2, and
CO 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 review of the
lead standards by mid-2015. The EPA also will be working on the completion of the ozone
NAAQS review. Conducting multiple concurrent reviews requires a substantial investment in
highly trained staff and the allocation of significant analytical resources. Each review involves a
comprehensive reexamination, 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.
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 the U.S. population at the time of the assessment20 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 NATA estimated 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 associated with a cancer risk of 100 in a million or greater. Populations most likely to
experience higher risks live mainly in urban locations where they are exposed to a combination
of sources. To reduce or eliminate the health risks and exposures to air toxics 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 2015. 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, oil and natural gas production, and petroleum
refining.
D The 2005 NATA used the 2000 census, which estimated the U.S. population to be 285 million.
214
-------
Eleven standards are currently under court ordered deadlines and EPA is in negotiation with
litigants regarding a notice of intent to sue on 46 additional standards.21 The EPA cannot address
all regulatory reviews statutorily mandated by the CAA so the agency will prioritize its work,
according to resources, to meet court-ordered deadlines. 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. There are over 80 stationary
source (air toxics) rules due for review under Section 112 of the CAA, and the agency is
expecting litigation over already-missed deadlines. 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, and Coatings and Portland cement
MACT and NSPS. To address standards that are part of the residual risk litigation settlement22,
the EPA also will make significant progress in issuing standards for the following categories:
Phosphoric Acid and Phosphate Fertilizer; Off-Site Waste and Recovery Operation; and
Aerospace, Ferroalloys, Primary Aluminum, and Secondary Aluminum.
The EPA will address programmatic elements, including court-vacated rules that apply across
many industrial sources (such as exemptions for start-up and shutdown, 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 2015,
the agency will continue to 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.
Finally, the EPA will continue to devote resources to evaluating State Implementation Plans for
regional haze to ensure that states are making reasonable progress toward their visibility
improvement goals. States are required to report on their progress every five years and make
comprehensive plan revisions every 10 years. The CAA requires the EPA to assess and approve
the plans and correct any deficiencies. Ongoing litigation related to state regional haze plans as
well as litigation associated with other CAA programs that the regional haze program relies upon
for its regulatory construct are expected to require regional haze rulemaking changes to align
with forthcoming court decisions.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(001) Cumulative percentage reduction in tons of toxicity-weighted (for cancer risk) emissions
of air toxics from 1993 baseline.
FY 2008
35
40
FY 2009
36
40
FY 2010
36
40
FY2011
36
Data Avail
4/2014
FY 2012
37
Data Avail
4/2014
FY 2013
42
Data Avail
4/2015
FY 2014
42
FY 2015
42
Units
Percent
Reduction
21http://www.epa.gov/ogc/NOIdocuments/CA%20Communities%20Against%20ToxicsNOI_08232013.pdf
22 http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/secondaryleadsmelterconsentdecree.pdf
215
-------
Measure
Target
Actual
(002) Cumulative percentage reduction in tons of toxicity-weighted (for non-cancer risk)
emissions of air toxics from 1993 baseline.
FY2008
59
53
FY2009
59
53
FY2010
59
53
FY2011
59
Data Avail
4/2014
FY2012
59
Data Avail
4/2014
FY2013
59
Data Avail
4/2015
FY2014
59
FY2015
58
Units
Percent
Reduction
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$366.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$6,004.0 / -4.8 FTE) This reflects a realignment of resources that will be realized
through expected efficiencies gained by improving business practices and streamlining
the regulatory process. Through the use of electronic emissions reporting, which is part
of the agency's E-Enterprise business model, efficiencies will be gained compared to the
current manual method of collecting emissions data prior to regulatory development.
Additional resources are needed to conduct rigorous analysis to incorporate the best
available science into the regulatory process. The resources include 4.8 FTE and
associated payroll of $685.0.
Statutory Authority:
CAA (42 U.S.C. 7401-7661f).
216
-------
Federal Support for Air Quality Management
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate
Goal: Addressing 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 2013
Actuals
$117,475.0
$6,883.7
$124,358.7
794.5
FY 2014
Enacted
$121,757.0
$7,020.0
$128,777.0
803.3
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$136,365.0
$7,047.0
$143,412.0
786.1
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$14,608.0
$27.0
$14,635.0
-17.2
Program Project Description:
Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), the EPA is required to set National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) for six ambient pollutants considered harmful to public health and the
environment. The six "criteria" pollutants for which the EPA has established NAAQS are:
particulate matter (PM), ozone, sulfur dioxide (862), nitrogen dioxide (NCh), carbon monoxide
(CO), and lead. 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.
Section 109 of the CAA Amendments of 1990 established two types of NAAQS. Primary
standards are set at a level requisite 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.23 Secondary standards are set at a
level requisite to protect public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects, including
protection against decreased visibility and damage to animals, crops, vegetation, and buildings.
Fine particulate Matter (PM^.s) is associated with premature deaths as well as aggravation of
cardiovascular and respiratory disease (as indicated by increased hospital and emergency
department visits, and development of chronic respiratory disease). EPA estimates that PM2.5
contributes to tens of thousands of deaths each year. Exposure to ozone is associated with a wide
range of adverse health effects, from decreased lung function and increased respiratory
symptoms to serious indicators of respiratory morbidity such as 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 (802) can result in
adverse respiratory effects, including narrowing of the airways, which can cause difficulty
23 The legislative history of section 109 indicates that a primary standard is to be set at "the maximum permissible ambient air
level which will protect the health of any [sensitive] group of the population," and that for this purpose ' 'reference should be
made to a representative sample of persons comprising the sensitive group rather than to a single person in such a group" [S.
Rep. No. 91-1196, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. 10 (1970)].
217
-------
breathing, particularly in at-risk populations, including people with asthma who are active
outdoors, and children and older adults. Exposure to nitrogen dioxide (NO2) has been associated
with a variety of health effects, including increased respiratory symptoms, especially among
asthmatic children, and respiratory-related emergency department visits and hospital admissions,
particularly for children and older adults.
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
air quality management 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. This program also supports
enforcement case development, as appropriate.
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 environmental education activities that are designed to educate the public
about improving air quality. The EPA also will be engaged with states, tribes, and local
governments to implement the Ozone and PM Advance. The goal of this program is 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 CAA also requires protection of air quality related values (AQRV) for 156 congress!onally
mandated national parks and wilderness areas, known as Class I areas. Visibility is one such
AQRV and Congress established a national goal of returning visibility in the Class I areas to
natural conditions, or the visibility conditions that existed without manmade air pollution. The
EPA developed the Regional Haze Rule which sets forth the requirements that state plans must
satisfy to meet the national goal by 2064.
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
218
-------
toxics emissions through modeling, inventories, monitoring, assessments, and strategies. The
EPA also supports programs that reduce inhalation risk and multi-pathway risk posed by
deposition of air toxics to water bodies and ecosystems, facilitates international cooperation to
reduce transboundary and intercontinental air toxics pollution, develops and updates the National
Emissions Inventory (NEI), develops risk assessment methodologies for toxic air pollutants, and
provides 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 from state, Tribal, and local air pollution control agencies, both in the
implementation of federal air toxics standards and in reviewing the triennial NATA.
The President unveiled his Climate Action Plan in June 2013. The broad-based plan calls for cuts
in carbon pollution to reduce the contribution of human activities to climate change and its
impacts on public health. The Federal Support Program assists states, tribes, and local air
pollution control agencies in the development, implementation, and evaluation of programs to
reduce carbon pollution. The program also supports the agency's work with international
partners to combat short-lived greenhouse gases.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
Addressing Climate Change
During FY 2015, the EPA will continue to take steps in partnership with other agencies to
implement the President's Climate Action Plan. In FY 2015, the EPA will finalize emission
standards to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the power sector. The EPA will
actively engage with states as they develop and implement plans that will be required by the
emission standards. The agency will issue additional policy and guidance on addressing
greenhouse gases (GHGs) in 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
provide oversight of the activities of state and local permitting programs as they review GHG
permit applications. As economic activity continues to accelerate, the EPA expects applications
to increase in 2015 due to increases in GHG emissions from new and modified emission sources.
The EPA also expects that some applications will originate from sources that need to obtain Title
V permits for the first time due to GHG emissions.24 The majority of these newly permitted
sources will likely be large solid waste landfills and industrial manufacturers. The EPA also will
review the scope-limiting Tailoring Rule to evaluate the ongoing appropriateness of the
permitting thresholds. In FY 2015, 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 (e.g. New Source Performance Standard for Electric Generating Units) and
new requirements for permitting minor sources in Indian country. Additionally, the regional
offices will issue GHG PSD permits in states where the EPA has issued Federal Implementation
Plans (FIPs). The EPA will continue to address complex national policy questions that arise and
ensure national consistency as new GHG requirements are implemented.
24 Fact sheet for Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Final Rule
http://www.epa.gov/nsr/documents/20100413fs.pdf
219
-------
As stated in the President's Climate Action Plan, the EPA will work with other countries to take
action to address climate change. The EPA will consider the results of a range of international
assessments to address the climate impacts of short-lived climate pollutants. These air pollutants,
including black carbon, a component of particulate matter (PM), and ozone, are contributing to
and accelerating the impacts of climate change. Reducing emissions of these pollutants can
create near-term 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 with the multilateral Climate and Clean Air Coalition (CCAC), the Arctic Council, 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. The EPA will continue its collaboration 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 2015, 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 pre-existing and new
standards. The EPA will provide technical and policy assistance to states and tribes developing
or revising attainment SIPs/TIPs, 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.
To improve the NAAQS federal program, the EPA will continue, within current statutory and
resource limitations, to address deficiencies in area designations and implementation. For
example, the EPA has been working to synchronize the issuance of area designations guidance
with the final revised NAAQS and the issuance of implementation guidance with finalizing
initial area designations. The agency's goal is to provide guidance as early as possible 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 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. The EPA also 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
requirements for ozone, lead, SC>2, nitrogen dioxide (NC^), carbon monoxide (CO), and PM.
The EPA will continue development of emissions measurement methods for condensable PM2.5
220
-------
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 devote resources to evaluating state implementation plans for regional
haze to ensure that states are making reasonable progress towards their visibility improvement
goals. States are required to report on their progress every five years and make comprehensive
plan revisions every 10 years. The CAA requires the EPA to assess and approve the plans and
correct any deficiencies.
The EPA will continue to support permitting authorities on the timely issuance of renewal
permits and to respond to citizen 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. The RBLC includes data submitted by several U.S. territories
and all 50 states on over 200 different air pollutants and 1,000 industrial processes. Please see
http://cfpub.epa.gov/RBLC/ for more information.
In FY 2015, the EPA will undertake analyses aimed at developing New Source Review (NSR)
regulations to more effectively address sources of air pollution 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 to 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.
As part of the Agency's efforts to modernize its businesses processes for greater effectiveness
and efficiency consistent with a high-performing organization, the EPA will undertake activities
to accelerate implementation progress under its CAA preconstruction and operating permitting
programs.
Through a combination of rulemaking, guidance, and technical tools, the EPA will provide
greater clarity and certainty for sources while eliminating unnecessarily time-consuming process
steps, resulting in expedited decision-making that fully assures public health and environmental
protection. Areas of focus will include pending greenhouse gas permits, updates of key models
and emissions factors, and communication of available flexibilities to enhance permit durability
and avoid the need for frequent permit revisions.
221
-------
These activities will accelerate progress on sources emitting criteria pollutants and greenhouse
gases, especially sources using natural gas. Modernization of permitting processes will help
facilitate the significant investments in modern plants anticipated over the next decade.
In FY 2015, 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 Global Minamata Convention on mercury 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, other
Asian nations, and Mexico) to reduce transboundary air pollution.
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
intra agency workgroup to create environmental education resources to disseminate information
about new air toxics and mercury standards available specifically to teachers, informal educators,
and parents. The purpose of these activities will be to ensure that the American public is
educated about air quality issues and standards.
One of the EPA's top priorities is to fulfill its CAA and court-ordered obligations. The CAA
requires that the emissions control bases for all Maximum Achievable Control Technology
(MACT) standards be reviewed and updated, as necessary, every eight years. In FY 2015, the
EPA will continue to conduct risk assessments to determine whether the MACT rules
appropriately protect public health. Eleven standards are currently under court ordered deadlines
and the EPA is in negotiation with litigants regarding a notice of intent to sue on 46 additional
standards25. The agency will prioritize its work as resources allow with an emphasis on meeting
court ordered deadlines. To develop effective standards, the EPA needs accurate information
about actual emissions, their composition, specific emission points, and transport into
communities.
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 continue, as resources allow, 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 (NSPS)
and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) 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.
5http://www.epa.gov/ogc/NOIdocuments/CA%20Communities%20Against%20ToxicsNOI_08232013.pdf
222
-------
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to implement the Urban Air Toxics Strategy which helps
provide information and assistance to states and communities through documents, websites,
webinars and training sessions on tools to help them in conducting assessments and identifying
risk reduction strategies for air toxics. The agency will continue to work with environmental
justice communities to address air toxics concerns.
The E-Enterprise business model is an integral part of an agency-wide effort to provide Next
Generation environmental protection and is part of the agency's focus on becoming a High
Performing Organization (HPO). Under this program, the agency will modernize its 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. In FY
2015, the EPA will begin revising regulations to 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 business model. The EPA's goals in requiring facilities to report
emissions data electronically are to reduce reporting burden and costs for industry, states, and
federal activities; to reduce the need to develop information collection requests that are otherwise
a part of the rule development process; to expedite the development and revision of emissions
factors; and to improve the quality of the data underpinning the stationary source regulations.
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 AQS.26 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 (NEI). 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
multi-pollutant analysis covering air toxics, criteria pollutants, and GHGs. The EPA will
continue to operate and maintain AirNow, which provides real-time air quality data and forecasts
nationwide.27 As part of the EPA's E-Enterprise business model, public access to air quality
information will be improved in FY 2015. To support forthcoming agency public data portals,
the EPA also will upgrade its AirNow air quality data and system to provide the public with
improved access and higher quality information.
In FY 2015, the EPA will provide assistance to state, Tribal, and local agencies in implementing
national programs and assessing their effectiveness in a streamlined way. 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.
26 For more information about AQS, visit http://epa.gov/ttn/airs/airsaqs/, and for the AQS Data Mart,
http: //www. epa. go v/ttn/airs/aqsdatamart/basic_info. htm
27 For more information about AirNow, visit www.airnow. gov
223
-------
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 will maintain the analytical capabilities required 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. Resources
from the Science and Technology appropriation component of this program support 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.
The EPA also is working to improve its analytical tools. Depending on resources available in
2014, the EPA intends to complete 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. In FY 2015, the EPA will work with its state partners to review the final NATA results
and help them understand and communicate the information presented in the 2011 NATA.
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.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(M94) Percent of major NSR permits issued within one year of receiving a complete permit
application.
FY2008
78
79
FY2009
78
76
FY2010
78
46
FY2011
78
73
FY2012
78
80
FY2013
78
Data Avail
12/2014
FY2014
78
FY2015
78
Units
Percent
Issued
224
-------
Measure
Target
Actual
(M95) Percent of significant Title V operating permit revisions issued within 18 months of
receiving a complete permit application.
FY2008
97
85
FY 2009
100
87
FY2010
100
82
FY2011
100
84
FY2012
100
86
FY2013
100
Data Avail
12/2014
FY2014
88
FY2015
88
Units
Percent
Issued
Measure
Target
Actual
(M96) Percent of new Title V operating permits issued within 18 months of receiving a complete
permit application.
FY2008
91
72
FY2009
95
70
FY2010
99
67
FY2011
99
72
FY2012
99
76
FY2013
99
Data Avail
12/2014
FY2014
75
FY2015
75
Units
Percent
Issued
Measure
Target
Actual
(MM7) Percent of State Implementation Plans (SIPs) removed from backlog
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
10
41
FY 2014
10
FY 2015
10
Units
Percentage
Removed
Measure
Target
Actual
(M9) Cumulative percentage reduction in population-weighted ambient concentration of ozone
in monitored counties from 2003 baseline.
FY 2008
8
9
FY 2009
10
13
FY 2010
11
15
FY2011
12
16
FY 2012
13
13
FY 2013
15
Data Avail
12/2014
FY 2014
16
FY 2015
16
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.
FY 2008
4
13
FY 2009
5
17
FY 2010
6
23
FY2011
15
26
FY 2012
16
26
FY 2013
20
Data Avail
12/2014
FY 2014
28
FY 2015
29
Units
Percent
Reduction
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.
FY 2008
19
37
FY 2009
23
47
FY 2010
26
56
FY2011
29
58
FY 2012
45
54
FY 2013
50
Data Avail
12/2014
FY 2014
50
FY 2015
50
Units
Percent
Reduction
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$2,801.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$2,986.0 / -42.5 FTE) This reflects an FTE reduction that will be realized through
efficiencies in improved business practices and streamlining regulatory processes. For
example, regional offices will benefit from greater usage of electronic submissions of
State Implementation Plans and emissions inventories. Headquarters offices will benefit
225
-------
from efficiencies created through use of enhanced data systems, including electronic
emissions reporting by sources, streamlining of the National Emission Inventory through
utilization of the Emission Inventory System, and automated business practices.
Additional extramural resources will be utilized to support and enhance data systems
including the electronic emission reporting system that is a component of the agency's E-
enterprise initiative. This net change includes 42.5 FTE and $5,899.0 of associated
payroll.
• (+$5,716.0 / +5.0 FTE) This reflects realignment for air toxics work as part of the
agency's focus on toxics. This increase will provide additional resources to enhance the
analytical capabilities required to develop effective regulations, to continue to progress in
developing the National Air Toxics Assessment (NATA), to update methods for
estimating area and mobile source emissions, and to update air dispersion modeling based
on recent advances in the science. These resources include 5.0 FTE and associated
payroll of $716.0.
• (+$2,705.0 / +13.3 FTE) This reflects a realignment to support the President's Climate
Action Plan. This change will provide support to promote extensive engagement with
states as they develop and implement plans to reduce carbon pollution standards from the
power sector. These resources include 13.3 FTE and associated payroll of $1,905.0.
• (+$1,244.0 / +4.5 FTE) This reflects a realignment to support the agency's focus on
becoming a High Performing Organization (HPO), including updating primary emission
reporting regulations under Next Generation environmental protection. These resources
will support enhancing the public's access to air quality information through the AirNow
website and to support LEAN efforts to make processes more efficient. These resources
include 4.5 FTE and associated payroll of $644.0.
• (+$3,000.0) This reflects an increase to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of both
CAA preconstruction and operating permitting programs for sources emitting criteria
pollutants and greenhouse gases.
• (+$1,500.0) This realignment is to provide resources to environmental education
activities. This funding will support an intra-agency workgroup which will disseminate
educational resources to the public and increase transparency about new air toxics and
mercury standards and other critical environmental issues. These environmental
education activities will support EPA's core mission to expand the conversation on
environmentali sm.
• (+$628.0) This reflects realignment for web tools and technology infrastructure to
support activities across the program. This supports core IT functions.
Statutory Authority:
CAA Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7401-7661f).
226
-------
Stratospheric Ozone: Domestic Programs
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate
Goal: Addressing Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Restore and Protect the Ozone Layer
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$5,052.6
$5,052.6
22.6
FY 2014
Enacted
$5,149.0
$5,149.0
21.1
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$5,037.0
$5,037.0
22.5
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($112.0)
($112.0)
1.4
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.28 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.29 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.30 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 cataract cases.31 Cataracts are the leading
cause of blindness worldwide. 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.32 Most ODS also are potent greenhouse
gases with high global warming potentials (GWPs). Therefore, the ODS phase-out has already
resulted in significant climate benefits with a reported drop between 1988 and 2010 of about 8.0
gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year.3
28 World Meteorological Organization (WMO). Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2010. Global Ozone Research and
Monitoring Project-Report No. 52, 516 pp., Geneva, Switzerland. 2011.
29 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.
30 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.
31 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.
32 WMO, 2011.
33HFCs: A Critical Link in Protecting Climate and the Ozone Layer, UNEP 2011
227
-------
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
Layer (Montreal Protocol), continuing the control and reduction of ODS in the U.S. and lowering
health risks to the American public. A combination of regulatory and partnership programs are
used to maximize the ozone layer and climate benefits. 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).
Partnership programs are calibrated to increase benefits by focusing on specific areas where the
agency has identified significant opportunities. The Responsible Appliance Disposal (RAD)
Program34 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 prior to disposal. RAD has more than 50 partners, including manufacturers,
retailers, utilities, and state governments. The GreenChill Partnership35 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, over 20 percent of the United States supermarkets. In 2011, partners reduced leak rates
to 50 percent below the national average and established plans to reduce leaks even more.
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.36 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 2007 adjustment also calls on Parties to promote the selection of alternatives to HCFCs that
minimize environmental impacts, in particular impacts on climate.37
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In carrying out the requirements of the Act and the Montreal Protocol in FY 2015, the EPA will
continue to implement the domestic rulemaking agenda for control and reduction of ODS.
Ongoing work of the Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program to evaluate and
regulate ODS substitutes will continue and, consistent with the Climate Action Plan announced
34 For more information, see: http: 7/www2. epa. gov/rad
35 For more information, see: www.epa.gov/greenchill
36 See: http://ozone.unep.org/Publications/MP_Key_Achievements-E.pdf,
http://www.eoearth.org/article/Montreal_Protocol_on_Substances_that_Deplete_the_Ozone_Layer,
http://ozone.unep.org/highlights.shtml (Nov 2, 2009, entry)
37 Montreal Protocol Decision XIX/6: Adjustments to the Montreal Protocol -with regard to Annex C, Group I, substances
(hydrochlorofluorocarbons)
228
-------
June 25, 2013, the EPA will "encourage private-sector investment in low-emissions technology
by identifying and approving climate-friendly chemicals while prohibiting certain uses of the
most harmful chemical alternatives."38 The EPA will continue to identify efficiencies in
integrating partnerships and regulatory programs to maximize opportunities to protect the ozone
layer and climate system. The EPA will provide compliance assistance for rules controlling ODS
production, import, and emission; with particular attention to those HCFCs with deadlines
occurring in FY 2015, such as the statutory HCFC labeling provisions and the production and
consumption reduction step.
In FY 2015, 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. Each ODS is weighted based on its ozone depleting potential. As of January
1, 2015, ODS production and imports will be capped at 1,524 OOP-weighted metric tons, which
is 10 percent of the U.S. baseline under the Montreal Protocol. In 2020, U.S. production and
import will be reduced further, to 0.5 percent of the U.S. baseline, and in 2030, all ODS
production and import will be phased out, except for any potential exempted amounts.
With the decline in allowable HCFC production, a significant stock of air conditioning and
refrigeration equipment that continues to use HCFCs will need access to recovered and
recycled/reclaimed HCFCs to ensure proper servicing. The EPA carefully monitors market data
to ensure that the phase-out is leading to robust HCFC recycling/reclamation and that future
demand for virgin HCFCs can be satisfied under production and import caps. The EPA also will
implement other provisions of the Montreal Protocol, including exemption programs to allow for
a continued smooth transition from ODS to alternatives.
Given the 2015 and 2020 milestones under the Montreal Protocol and CAA as well as the global
interest in enabling climate-friendly alternatives to ODS and high-GWP HFCs, the EPA is
receiving and responding to an increased number of SNAP applications, many of which
represent options with lower GWPs. Under the SNAP program,39 the EPA reviews alternatives
to assist the market's transition to alternatives that are safer, including for the climate. The
purpose of the program is to allow a smooth transition 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 2015, the EPA will consider the suite of available substitutes for each of approximately 50
end uses (e.g., appliance foam-blowing agents, commercial 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. A
robust list of climate-friendly options also will assist the Administration "to purchase cleaner
38 The President's Climate Action Plan, June 2013
39 For more information, see: www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/
229
-------
alternatives to HFCs whenever feasible and transition over time to equipment that uses safer and
more sustainable alternatives"40 consistent with the Climate Action Plan.
With the decrease in allowable HCFC production in 2015, the EPA will continue to work with
federal and international agencies to stem illegal imports of ODS. The EPA will continue data
exchange with U.S. Customs and Border Protection and Homeland Security Investigations on
ODS importers and exporters for Customs to determine admissibility and target illegal ODS
shipments entering the U.S. In 2015, the EPA will continue education and outreach to
manufacturers and importers of HCFC labeling requirements. These 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).
FY2008
<9,900
5,667
FY2009
<9,900
3,414
FY2010
<3,811
2,435
FY2011
<3,811
2,339
FY2012
<3,700
1,450
FY2013
<3,700
Data
Avail
12/2014
FY2014
<3,700
FY2015
<1,520
Units
ODP Tons
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$89.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$795.0 / + 1.4 FTE) This realignment of resources will support the Significant New
Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program to evaluate and regulate ODS substitutes consistent
with the Climate Action Plan announced June 25, 2013. The increased resources include
1.4 FTE and associated payroll of $214.0.
• (-$996.0) This reduction eliminates funding for the SunWise program, reflecting the hard
choices of realigning resources to support Agency priorities.
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.
1 The President's Climate Action Plan, June 2013
230
-------
Stratospheric Ozone: Multilateral Fund
Program Area: Clean Air and Climate
Goal: Addressing Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Restore and Protect the Ozone Layer
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$8,792.0
$8,792.0
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$8,979.0
$8,979.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$9,057.0
$9,057.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$78.0
$78.0
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
stratospheric ozone layer and contribute to climate change.41 Increased levels of UV radiation,
due to ozone depletion, contribute to increased incidence of skin cancer, cataracts, and other
49
health effects. Skin cancer is the most common cancer, accounting for nearly half of all
cancers.43 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.44
The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal Protocol) is the
international treaty designed to protect the ozone layer by facilitating a global phaseout of ODS.
The United States implements its treaty obligations primarily through Title VI of the Clean Air
Act. The EPA estimates that in the United States alone, the worldwide phase-out of ODS will
avert millions of non-fatal and fatal skin cancers45 and millions of cataracts.46 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.47 These estimates of ozone layer recovery
assume full implementation of the Protocol by all industrialized and developing countries. If
developing countries were to go back to using ODS, at even 70 percent of historic rates, within
41 World Meteorological Organization (WMO). Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2010. Geneva, Switzerland. 2011.
42 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.
43American Cancer Society. "Skin Cancer Facts." Accessed August 9, 2010. Available on the Internet at
http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/CancerCauses/SunandUVExposure/skin-cancer-facts.
44 United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Environmental Effects of Ozone Depletion and Its Interactions with Climate
Change: 2010 Assessment. Nairobi, Kenya, 2011.
45 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.
46 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
47 WMO, 2011.
231
-------
twenty years the environmental and health gains to date would be negated, as would billions of
dollars spent.
To support the efforts of developing countries to comply with the Montreal Protocol, the Parties
to the Protocol created the Multilateral Fund for the Implementation of the Montreal Protocol
(Multilateral Fund). The United States 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, and the Multilateral Fund has
provided assistance to developing countries to reduce and eliminate their consumption of ODS.
As ODS also are powerful greenhouse gases,48 the assistance provided by the Fund from 1990 to
2010 has served to eliminate more than 189,000 Tg carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2eq).49
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. In addition, the permanent
seat of the United States on the Fund's Executive Committee can help focus efforts on cost-
effective assistance and encourage climate-friendly transitions.
The Parties to the Montreal Protocol agreed, in 2007, to adjust and accelerate the phase-out
required for ozone-depleting hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs). This adjustment involves
dramatic HCFC reductions on the order of 47% during the period from 2010-2040. Most of these
reductions will occur in developing countries. As HCFCs are strong greenhouse gases, this faster
phase-out also will result in large reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. The negotiated text
supporting the 2007 HCFC adjustment to the Protocol committed donor countries, including the
United States, to provide "stable and sufficient" funding to the Multilateral Fund to enable
developing country compliance with the new requirements.50
In addition to supporting the phaseout of ODS, the Parties to the Protocol have been discussing
using the Protocol to phase down Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), a class of chemicals that are
predominantly used as alternatives to the ODS being phased out under the Montreal Protocol.
While they do not deplete the ozone layer, many HFCs are highly potent greenhouse gases
whose use is growing rapidly as replacements for phased out ODS used in refrigerators, air
conditioners, and industrial applications. Left unabated, HFC emissions could grow to nearly 20
percent of carbon dioxide emissions by 2050, making them a serious climate mitigation
concern.51
48 Velders, Guus J.M, et. al, "Preserving Montreal Protocol Climate Benefits by Limiting HFCs," Science, 24
February 2012.
49 United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), The Montreal Protocol and the Green Economy: Assessing the
contributions and co-benefits of a Multilateral Environmental Agreement. Nairobi. Kenya. 2012. Also the website
of the Multilateral Fund http://www.multilateralfund.org/default.aspx
50 Decision XIX/6, from the 19th Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the
Ozone Layer
51 http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/09/06/united-states-china-and-leaders-g-20-countries-
announce-historic-progres
232
-------
Over the past four years, the United States, Canada, and Mexico have been pursuing an
amendment to the Montreal Protocol to phase down the production and consumption of HFCs.
The proposed amendment would reduce consumption and production and control byproduct
emissions of HFCs in all countries, and would enable countries that can already access the
S9
Protocol's Multilateral Fund to receive financial assistance to facilitate their HFC phase down.
Adoption of an amendment similar to what was proposed in 2013 would result in a global
reduction of more than 90,000 Tg CC^eq cumulative by 2050.53This effort is in keeping with
President Obama's Climate Action Plan54 in June 2013 which called on the United States to lead
through international diplomacy and domestic action to reduce emissions of HFCs. It also is
consistent with his directive to "work to use the expertise and institutions of the Montreal
Protocol to phase down consumption and production of HFCs".
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA's contributions to the Multilateral Fund in FY 2015 will help continue support for cost-
effective projects designed to build capacity and eliminate ODS production and consumption in
over 148 developing countries. Today, the Multilateral Fund supports over 6,800 activities in 148
countries that, when fully implemented, will have phased out more than 460,000 ODS tons.
Additional projects will be submitted, considered, and approved in accordance with Multilateral
Fund guidelines.
In 2015, the United States will continue to promote developing country transitions from ODS
directly into low-global warming potential (GWP) alternatives. This work will support
developing country compliance with the Protocol while also supporting the development and
deployment of low-GWP technologies and the potential phase down of HFCs.
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 Eight-Year Performance Array in the Program Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$78.0) This increase will help fund capacity building projects in developing countries
intended to eliminate ODS production and consumption.
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.
http://conf.montreal-protocol.org/meeting/mop/mop-25/presession/default.aspx,
53 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Benefits of Addressing HFCs under the Montreal Protocol, June 2013, accessible at:
http://www.epa. go v/ozone/downloads/Benefits_o f_Addressing_HFCs_Under_the_Montreal_Protocol_6-21-2013.pdf
54 Executive Office of the President, The President's Climate Action Plan, June 2013, The White House, Washington, 2013.
233
-------
234
-------
Program Area: Brownfields
235
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$21,826.5
$21,826.5
132.3
FY 2014
Enacted
$26,002.0
$26,002.0
136.4
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$28,280.0
$28,280.0
157.9
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$2,278.0
$2,278.0
21.5
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Brownfields and Land Revitalization 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
study completed in 2012 concluded that cleaning up brownfield properties lead to residential
property value increases of 5.1 to 12.8 percent.55 According to a 2007 study, an average of 10
jobs are created for every acre of brownfields redevelopment.56 Based on historical data provided
by the Assessment Cleanup and Redevelopment Exchanges System (ACRES) database, $1 of
EPA Brownfields funding leverages between $17 and $18 in other public and private funding.
To help describe who benefits from the EPA-funded brownfield grants and technical assistance,
the EPA collected data on the populations within three miles of these sites. The three mile area
surrounding sites was used because it represents the geographic area where people in a
community live most of their lives - where they shop, work, go to school, go out to restaurants,
and participate in outdoor activities. In looking at the census data, the agency found that
approximately 91 million people live within 3 miles of a brownfields site that received EPA
assistance; this equates to roughly 30 percent of the U.S. population.57 This population is more
55 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
56 Rowland, Marie. 2007. "Employment Effects of Brownfields Redevelopment, What Do We Know from the Literature?"
Journal of Planning Literature. 22:91.
57 U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response Estimate. 2014. Data collected includes: (1) site information as of
the end of FY 2011 from ACRES; and (2) census data from the 2007-2011 American Community Survey (ACS). Site data from
FY 2011 was chosen to correspond most closely to the census data in the 2007-2011 ACS. In FY 2011 this included 11,568
Brownfields Program sites in the 50 U.S. states with accurate location data. A circular site boundary, equal to the site acreage,
236
-------
minority, low income, linguistically isolated, and less likely to have a high school education than
the U.S. population as a whole. Investment from EPA and other federal agencies remains critical
in helping to address the environmental, economic and social issues that affect the populations
surrounding brownfield sites.
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 program 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 education 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 to ensure successful performance
by the recipient and that applicable grant management requirements are being met by the
recipient
This program supports agency staff that oversees and manages 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. 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 and create stronger and more resilient local economies.
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's assistance provides crucial help in
addressing important redevelopment details.
was modeled around the latitude/longitude for each site and then a 3 mile buffer ring was placed around the site boundary.
Census data was then collected for each block group whose centroid fell within the 3 mile area.
237
-------
The program staff 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, deconstruction and sustainable materials management
and encouraging energy efficient reconstruction. This program will continue to identify
opportunities to support communities whose vision includes the revitalization of brownfields and
other contaminated properties for historic property and habitat preservation 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, private sector 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; and (3) ensuring improved water and air
quality in brownfields redevelopment.
One of the key benefits of redeveloping brownfields is that it can often lead to a reduced need for
green space development. According to one 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
CO
would have required 5.6 acres, and commercial projects 2.4 acres. In addition, fewer resources
are often required to develop a project on brownfield 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
58 Deason, J.P., 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 Area! Differentials. Submitted to U.S.
EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response by Deason et al., George Washington University, Washington, D.C.
238
-------
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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
Throughout FY 2015, 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. As part of the agency's focus on
making a visible difference in communities, the EPA requests additional resources to work hand-
in-hand with communities to enhance the livability and economic vitality of neighborhoods in
and around brownfields sites.
In FY 2015, the EPA's Brownfields program will manage a significant workload of assessment,
cleanup, revolving loan fund (RLF), area-wide planning, 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 2015 Budget focuses on the agency's capability to
provide administrative and technical support to the EPA regional offices and the necessary
contractual support to manage the program's numerous grant funding competitions,59 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 ACRES database).
These efforts will enable the program to effectively manage the considerable and time-intensive
cooperative agreement workload.
The EPA will continue to support a total of 20 area wide planning grants (program is funded in
STAG) and provide technical assistance through Targeted Brownfield Assessments, interagency
agreements, and/or contracts to support area wide planning activities. The Agency plans to focus
its efforts on strengthening an integrated approach to communities and tribes to further on-the
ground implementation and coordination activities, enhance the program design, build new tools,
and leverage work of other partners.
In addition to supporting the operations and management of the Brownfields program, funds in
FY 2015 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
59 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, the EPA awards approximately 275 grants a year (ranging from
$65 to $705 million total) and provides supplemental funding to another 30-40 high performing RLFs (ranging from $10 to $15
million total).
239
-------
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 2015, the EPA will continue to work with other programs through an intra-agency
workgroup to carry out environmental educational 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 2015, the EPA's Brownfields program request includes funding 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 reuse. 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.
In FY 2015, 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 began 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 continue
to be reduced by the amount of revenue collected through registration fees. For the 2013
National Brownfields Training Conference, the EPA charged a modest registration fee to off-set
total costs without discouraging participation on the part of community leaders and
representatives from non-profits and environmental justice organizations. As a result of the fee,
combined with overall constrained resources for most participants, approximately 2,800
participants attended the 2013 conference, half the number of attendees at the 2011 Brownfields
Conference. The EPA collected about $400 thousand, or one third of the total cost of presenting
the conference through the collection of registration fees. Given the significant benefits of the
conference to brownfields communities and stakeholders, the EPA is exploring options for
holding another National Brownfields Training Conference in 2015. The EPA will carefully
examine the registration fee structure, and may have to raise the fees above the levels charged in
2013, as well as find other approaches to reduce or offset the remaining costs for this training
event.
240
-------
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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$528.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$1,625.0 / +21.5 FTE) This net change realigns resources from anticipated business
process savings as well as leveraging efforts across federal partners to support the
Agency's focus on making a visible difference in communities across the country. This
change will allow the Agency to work hand-in-hand with other federal agencies, states,
tribes, and local communities to improve the livability and economic vitality of
neighborhoods in and around brownfields sites. In focusing on intensive community
involvement, the program may see reductions in work supported by non-pay resources.
This change includes a net realignment of 21.5 FTE and associated payroll of $3,160.0.
• (+$125.0) This realignment is to provide resources to integrate environmental education
resources and training to the public and increase transparency about the Brownfields
program, environmental justice and other environmental issues. Environmental education
is a core part of the agency's efforts to safeguard public health and the environment and
provides communities with the necessary skills and knowledge to make informed choices
and take responsible action.
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.
241
-------
Program Area: Compliance
242
-------
Compliance Monitoring
Program Area: Compliance
Goal: Protecting Human Health and the Environment by Enforcing Laws and Assuring
Compliance
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws to Achieve Compliance
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Environmental Program & Management
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$131.8
$101,820.1
$1,060.4
$103,012.3
559.2
FY 2014
Enacted
$139.0
$103,297.0
$998.0
$104,434.0
557.3
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$147.0
$118,892.0
$1,083.0
$120,122.0
535.1
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$8.0
$15,595.0
$85.0
$15,688.0
-22.2
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. 60
The EPA's Compliance Monitoring efforts complement state and Tribal programs to ensure
compliance with laws through the United States. The EPA coordinates, supports, and oversees
the performance of states, local agencies, and Tribal governments that conduct compliance
monitoring activities. The agency's Compliance Monitoring program also provides technical
assistance and training to federal, state, and Tribal inspectors. 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 2015 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
For more information, refer to http://www.epa.gov/compliance/monitoring/index.html
243
-------
ensure widespread compliance.61 In FY 2015, the agency will continue to examine new and
innovative methods, and begin implementing the most promising in order to reduce pollution and
increase compliance over the long term.
Recognizing that traditional enforcement approaches will not be enough to address
noncompliance problems, the EPA is focusing efforts on moving to the "next generation" of
compliance. This approach, which will be formalized in the agency's 2014-2018 Strategic Plan,
aims to increase compliance with environmental regulations by capitalizing on advances in
information technology and advanced pollutant detection technology. These technologies
combined with a focus on designing rules and permits that are easier to implement will improve
compliance, expand transparency, and protect communities while reducing costs for states, tribes
and regulated facilities.6 There are five main components to this initiative: 1) structuring our
regulations to be easier to implement and achieve higher compliance; 2) using advanced
pollutant detection technology to find out about pollution as it happens 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.
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 as part of the agency's focus on becoming a High Performing Organization
(HPO). Next Generation Compliance is key to the agency's E-Enterprise business model as both
initiatives promote advanced monitoring, electronic reporting and transparency. 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 a variety of
projects, including: 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 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) information; 3) supporting e-reporting rule development and program
evaluation; 4) purchasing advanced monitoring equipment; and 5) supporting transparency
through modernization of the data systems Integrated Data for Enforcement Analysis (IDEA)
and Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO).
The program proposes to realign resources to reflect anticipated savings from leveraging
technology and modernizing business processes internally and in how we interact with our
partners, the regulated community and the public. In FY 2015, the realigned resources will
support the following areas:
61 www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/civil/cwa/actionplanl01409.pdf
62 See September/October 2013 article in the Environmental Forum on Next Generation Compliance.
http://www.eli.org/pdf/forum/30-5/30-5nextgenerationcompliance.pdf
244
-------
Expand Full Electronic Interaction. In FY 2015, 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 also improve the
efficiency of the EPA and state partners. In July 2013, the EPA proposed a new rule to convert
the NPDES paper based reporting systems to a more effective and efficient electronic based
system. The comment period for the proposed rule closed in December 2013. EPA has
established a workgroup with states to discuss the significant comments that were received from
the proposal, and expects to issue the final rule in FY2015. The EPA also is developing an
exporter interface to enable exporters of hazardous waste to submit notification data
electronically to the EPA, in order to avoid the expense and errors associated with manual entry
and to facilitate more effective compliance monitoring.
Design Regulations to Improve Compliance. As part of the process of developing new rules, in
FY 2015 the EPA will consider Next Generation Compliance principles and tools. This includes
approaches such as self-monitoring and/or self-certification, third party certification, and public
accountability. Next Generation Compliance also will structure our regulations 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. In FY 2015, as part of the E-Enterprise business
model, 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 business model, in FY 2015 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 analyzed data and consulted with
stakeholders to consider candidates for the National Enforcement Initiatives for FY 2014 - 2016.
This process allows the program to incorporate new information, evidence, and results to date in
establishing national priorities for the enforcement program. The agency has determined the best
course of action is to continue the existing National Enforcement Initiatives into FY 2014-2016.
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 - protecting communities by cutting toxic air pollution;
245
-------
• Reducing Air Pollution from the Largest Sources - 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 location, census, and environmental data. This use of data will
help 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 including information about goals for addressing these sectors, progress
made to date, and locations of facilities that have been addressed.63
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. 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 training to federal, state, local, and Tribal environmental
enforcement personnel, while reducing training and related travel costs.
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 2016. Release 1 of ICIS Phase III, ICIS-
Air, will be deployed in October 2014 (FY 2015). At that time, the AFS legacy mainframe
system will be decommissioned. Future releases of ICIS-Air are planned to be implemented in
FY 2015 and FY 2016 to provide new functionality to support the Agency's NextGen and E-
Enterprise goals (i.e., electronic reporting, shared services). Phase I of ICIS established the
multimedia 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. 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 2013,
the EPA completed the development of the detailed design for the new system, and began system
development and initial testing on the modernized AFS system. The ICIS Phase III, AFS
Modernization, is targeted for completion in FY 2016.
63 For more information on EPA's National Enforcement Initiatives, please visit:
http://www.epa.gov/compliance/data/planning/initiatives/index.html
246
-------
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 the interactive public web site Enforcement and Compliance History Online
(ECHO)64, 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 EPA is committed to making facility compliance information more available and accessible
to the public. In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to increase the transparency of its monitoring
and enforcement program. In FY 2013, the EPA developed State Dashboard and Comparative
Maps that provide the public with information about the performance of state and EPA
enforcement and compliance programs across the country. In FY 2014-2015, these dashboards
will be developed for other programs, increasing public transparency. ECHO has been
recognized as an example for other federal agencies to use in making access to compliance data
more transparent65. 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, currently averaging about -175,000 queries per
month. Modernization of ECHO and OTIS will be completed in FY 2015.
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. The agency ensures that these wastes are
properly handled in accordance with international agreements and Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act regulations.66 EPA utilizes electronic data exchange on a government-to-
government basis with Environment Canada and with the Mexican environmental agency,
SEMARNAT, to assure more timely and accurate transmission of notice information for
compliance monitoring purposes. While the vast majority of the hazardous waste trade occurs
with Canada,67 the United States also has international hazardous waste trade agreements with
Mexico, Malaysia, Costa Rica, and the Philippines. Furthermore, the United States is a member
of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which issued a Council
Decision controlling trans-boundary movements of hazardous waste among member countries.
In FY 2013, the EPA responded to 1,833 notices representing 694 import notices and 1,139
export notices.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(409) Number of federal inspections and evaluations.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
19,000
20,000
FY2013
17,000
18,000
FY2014
17,000
FY2015
15,500
Units
Inspections/
Evaluations
64 http://www.epa-echo.gov/echo/
65 See White House Press Release January 11,2011, "Presidential Memoranda - Regulatory Compliance" at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/01/18/presidential-memoranda-regulatory-compliance
66 For more information about the Import/Export program, refer to: www.epa.gov/compliance/international/importexport.html
67 See http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/international/imp-exp.htm
247
-------
Measure
Target
Actual
(412) Percentage of open consent decrees reviewed for overall compliance status.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
100
91
FY2013
100
91
FY2014
100
FY2015
100
Units
Percent
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
» (+$2,809.0) The increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
» (+$12,786.0 / -22.2 FTE) This change reflects a redirection of resources from other
enforcement and agency 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. This change also realigns staff resources to
incorporate efficiencies from: e-reporting and targeting tools under Next Generation
Compliance; the increased use of transparency and automation tools to streamline FOIA
related work; and state oversight under State Review Framework. The base resources
include 1.0 FTE and $144.3 in associated payroll to support Next Generation Compliance
efforts under the agency focus on becoming a High Performing Organization (HPO).
Finally, the realignment also reflects reductions in compliance assistance support,
enforcement training and the formation of centers of excellence for smaller enforcement
programs to support this effort. The resources reflect a net reduction of 22.2 FTE and
associated payroll of $3,086.0.
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.
248
-------
Program Area: Enforcement
249
-------
Civil Enforcement
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Protecting Human Health and the Environment by Enforcing Laws and Assuring
Compliance
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws to Achieve Compliance
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Environmental Program & Management
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$2,266.9
$167,924.2
$691.9
$170,883.0
1,123.1
FY 2014
Enacted
$2,413.0
$173,573.0
$746.0
$176,732.0
1,100.6
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$2,514.0
$180,641.0
$639.0
$183,794.0
1,084.6
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$101.0
$7,068.0
($107.0)
$7,062.0
-16.0
Program Project Description:
The EPA's 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 determined that significant work remained in the current national enforcement
initiatives, and will retain the current initiatives 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.
250
-------
FY 2015 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.68 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" and 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.69 Next Generation Compliance is also key to
the agency's E-Enterprise business model. Advanced monitoring, electronic reporting, and
transparency help the agency to become a High Performing Organization (HPO). The wider E-
Enterprise business model 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.
In FY 2015, 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.70
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 storm water, RCRA waste requirements, vulnerable populations and other
priority areas. The EPA hopes to continue its partnership in FedCenter, 1 the federal facility
environmental stewardship and compliance assistance center cosponsored and voluntarily funded
by more than a dozen federal agencies.
68 For more information, visit: www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/civil/cwa/actionplanl01409.pdf
69 See September/October 2013 article in the Environmental Forum on Next Generation Compliance.
http://www.eli.org/pdf/forum/30-5/30-5nextgenerationcompliance.pdf
70 For more information, visit: http://www.epa.gov/enforcement/
71 For more information, visit: http://www. fedcenter. gov/
251
-------
In FY 2013, through its efforts in the core program and national initiatives, the EPA achieved
reduction commitments totaling 1.3 billion pounds of pollution and hazardous waste from
enforcement cases. EPA enforcement actions required companies to invest an estimated $7.3
billion in actions and equipment to control pollution (injunctive relief) in FY 2013. The EPA also
obtained a total of $1.1 billion in FY 2013 in federal administrative and civil judicial penalties
primarily due to a record settlement of $1 billion reached with Transocean for its liability for the
Deepwater Horizon Gulf of Mexico oil spill. 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 storm water 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.
Air Toxics continue to be a major focus of EPA enforcement efforts. Improperly operated flares,
leaking production facilities, and certain operational practices or events at industrial facilities
may result in substantial releases into the air of Hazardous Air Pollutants and other compounds
of concern. The EPA will reduce illegal emissions of toxic air pollutants from these sources
through targeted investigations involving on-site inspections, record reviews and sophisticated
monitoring and detection devices such as thermal imaging cameras, hand-held detection devices,
mobile real-time monitoring equipment and other tools that enable investigators to identify
significant sources of illegal emissions of air toxics. The EPA will coordinate its investigations
and enforcement actions with state and tribal partners.
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 3,779 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 each of the
fiscal years 2010 through 2013, 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.72 In FY 2015, 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.
In FY 2015, reliable information on compliance and program performance remains critical. The
EPA's Civil Enforcement program relies 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
72 For more information, visit: http://www. epa. gov/compliance/resources/publications/cleanup/rcra/nesca-assessment-2012 .pdf
252
-------
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 NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule proposed in July 2013 will have several benefits to the
public, regulated facilities, states, and EPA. One of the benefits of this proposed rulemaking is
that it would provide high quality, complete, and timely data for the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) program. With the final rule expected in FY 2015, this should
allow NPDES-authorized programs in states, tribes, territories, and EPA to shift precious
resources from data management activities to those more targeted to solving water quality issues.
EPA has developed NetDMR, the electronic reporting tool for reporting Discharge Monitoring
Reports, to support implementation of the proposed rule. Also, EPA is developing the NPDES
Electronic Reporting Tool (NeT) to support the remaining data flows that will be required by the
proposed rule (e.g., Notices of Intent to be covered under a general permit). Both of these tools
will be available for states to use to support the implementation of the proposed rule; however,
some states are currently using NetDMR.
The Civil Enforcement program also supports the Environmental Justice program by taking
actions 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 2015
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.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(400) Millions of pounds of air pollutants reduced, treated, or eliminated through concluded
enforcement actions.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
480
410
FY2011
480
1,100
FY 2012
480
250
FY 2013
450
610
FY 2014
350
FY 2015
310
Units
Million
Pounds
Measure
Target
Actual
(402) Millions of pounds of water pollutants reduced, treated, or eliminated through concluded
enforcement actions.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
320
1,000
FY2011
320
740
FY 2012
320
500
FY 2013
320
660
FY 2014
280
FY 2015
250
Units
Million
Pounds
253
-------
Measure
Target
Actual
(404) Millions of pounds of toxic and pesticide pollutants reduced, treated, or eliminated
through concluded enforcement actions.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
3.8
8.3
FY2011
3.8
6.1
FY2012
3.8
1,400
FY2013
3.0
4.6
FY2014
2.5
FY2015
2.3
Units
Million
Pounds
Measure
Target
Actual
(405) Millions of pounds of hazardous waste reduced, treated, or eliminated through concluded
enforcement actions.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
6,500
11,800
FY2011
6,500
3,600
FY2012
6,500
4,400
FY2013
6,000
150
FY2014
5,000
FY2015
2,400
Units
Million
Pounds
Measure
Target
Actual
(410) Number of civil judicial and administrative enforcement cases initiated.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
3,300
3,000
FY2013
3,200
2,400
FY2014
3,200
FY2015
2,700
Units
Cases
Measure
Target
Actual
(411) Number of civil judicial and administrative enforcement cases concluded.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
3,200
3,000
FY2013
3,000
2,500
FY2014
2,800
FY2015
2,400
Units
Cases
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$3,194.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$3,874.0 / -16.0 FTE) This change reflects a realignment of staff resources within
enforcement programs for implementation of Next Generation Compliance as part of the
agency's E-Enterprise initiative that transforms the way environmental protection work is
done. This change also redirects resources to maintain the capacity and support for case
development, negotiation and litigation for high priority enforcement actions. The
reduced resources reflect anticipated business process savings and improvements for
Federal oversight and evaluation of state enforcement programs and implementing
strategic sourcing for our case support contracts. The resources include a net reduction of
16.0 FTE and associated payroll of $2,353.0.
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.
254
-------
Criminal Enforcement
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Protecting Human Health and the Environment by Enforcing Laws and Assuring
Compliance
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws to Achieve Compliance
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$47,912.5
$6,964.0
$54,876.5
279.4
FY 2014
Enacted
$47,829.0
$7,488.0
$55,317.0
270.7
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$50,885.0
$7,438.0
$58,323.0
268.9
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$3,056.0
($50.0)
$3,006.0
-1.8
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 experts.
Special Agents provide prosecutorial support, evaluate leads, interview witnesses, serve and
support search warrants, and review documentary evidence, including data from prior
inspections and enforcement actions. 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 state and local task forces and attend specialized
training courses at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center along with other federal, state,
and local law officials. These trainings help build state, local, and Tribal environmental
expertise, which helps them protect their communities. Along with other joint efforts, these
events offer valuable opportunities to exchange information that can inform future efforts.73
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. In FY 2013, the conviction
rate for criminal defendants was 94%.
http://www.epa.gov/enforcement/criminal/
255
-------
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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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 2013, criminal charges were brought against 278
defendants, and criminal defendants were assessed a total of $4.5 billion in fines and restitution
and court ordered projects, much of which was associated with the Deepwater Horizon case.
Defendants in criminal proceedings were sentenced to 161 years of incarceration, a significant
increase over FY 2012 levels, reflecting our focus on the most serious violations.
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 2015, 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.
Successful prosecutions are the result of careful collection and expert evidence analysis. In FY
2015, 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.
The Criminal Enforcement program is implementing an enhanced targeting and investigations
strategy. 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.
256
-------
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
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 2015, 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.74 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.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
43
45
FY2013
43
44
FY 2014
43
FY2015
45
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(419) Percentage of criminal cases with individual defendants.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
75
70
FY2013
75
80
FY2014
75
FY2015
75
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(420) Percentage of criminal cases with charges filed.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
40
44
FY 2013
40
38
FY 2014
40
FY 2015
45
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(421) Percentage of conviction rate for criminal defendants.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
85
95
FY 2013
85
94
FY 2014
85
FY 2015
85
Units
Percent
For more information visit: http: //www.epa. go v/fugitives/
257
-------
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,110.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$1,946.0 / -1.8 FTE) This change reflects a realignment of resources to maintain
support for targeted, analytically-driven enforcement activities and to effectively
investigate complex cases. This realignment reflects some expected savings from
improved business processes and streamlining operations including plans to consolidate
program activities (forensics evidence collection and sampling) and administrative
functions within the criminal enforcement program. The resources include a reduction of
1.8 FTE and associated payroll of $321.0.
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).
258
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$6,376.1
$603.8
$6,979.9
34.5
FY 2014
Enacted
$6,737.0
$604.0
$7,341.0
32.8
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$7,936.0
$597.0
$8,533.0
40.6
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$1,199.0
($7.0)
$1,192.0
7.8
Program Project Description:
The EPA is committed to fostering public health in communities disproportionately burdened by
pollution by 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 2014.75
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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the EJ program will place greater emphasis on collaboration between national
programs and regional offices regarding environmental justice considerations to make a visible
difference in communities. The program will work on the integration of EJ in the following
ways:
• Implementation of technical guidance in rulemaking and other analyses that inform the
EPA's decisions and actions;
' Plan EJ 2014 can be found at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/environmentaliustice/plan-ei/index.html
259
-------
• Developing rules that implement existing statutory authority while working to reduce
disproportionate pollutant burdens and cumulative impacts from multiple sources on low
income and minority communities;
• Enhancing the ability of overburdened communities to participate fully and meaningfully
in permitting processes and decisions;
• Maintaining an inventory of successful efforts that track and report progress in achieving
results in communities disproportionately burdened by environmental pollution.
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to facilitate the integration of environmental justice
considerations into planning and performance measurement processes. The agency will
implement environmental justice activities consistent with the vision and commitments outlined
in the agency's FY 2014-2018 Strategic Plan, Plan EJ 2014, and the annual action plan for the
Cross-Cutting Fundamental Strategy for EJ and Children's Health.
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to manage EJ grants programs to provide federal assistance to
overburdened and vulnerable communities to enhance local capacity to address environmental
challenges in their communities in a more holistic approach. Since its inception in 1994, the EJ
program has awarded over $28 million through its grants program to more than 1,400
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.76 The EJ small grants program and the collaborative problem solving (CPS) grants
program, which was reintroduced in 2014, will be offered alternately every other year to assist
community-based organizations and other groups in developing solutions to local environmental
issues. The EJ small grants program provides funding in the form of grants in amounts up to $30
thousand for one year projects while the EJ collaborative problem solving grants program
provide funding through cooperative agreements in amounts of up to $120 thousand for two year
projects. In FY 2014, an evaluation of the EJ small grants program is being done to identify best
practices, strategies for performance improvements, and more effective and efficient ways of
implementing the grant program.
The National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) is the agency's Federal
Advisory Committee Act (FACA) committee on environmental justice issues. The NEJAC
provides advice and recommendations on 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
other priorities and initiatives of the EPA. During FY 2015, the EJ program will convene
meetings of the NEJAC. These meetings will be augmented by work groups which will focus on
providing advice and recommendation reports to the agency on key topics of concern.
In FY 2015, the EPA's 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, in conjunction with the White House Council on Environmental Quality,
will continue to convene the Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice (EJIWG).
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
260
-------
The EJIWG will be a 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
and policies. The EJ program will work with other federal agencies to advance consideration of
environmental justice through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) reviews, as well
as through the work of various committees of the EJ IWG. Additionally, the EPA will work with
federal agency partners to build key relationships at the regional and local levels that will foster
increased awareness and implementation of environmental justice principles by regional and
state staff.
The EPA's EJ program will continue to assist program offices and other environmental
organizations and government agencies in delivering customized training that increases the
capacity of their personnel to effectively address issues of environmental justice. The EJ program
will coordinate with the EJIWG, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the
Department of Transportation, 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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$468.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$731.0 / +7.8 FTE) This change reflects a realignment of resources to strengthen and
integrate environmental justice activities into the agency's efforts in communities and
tribes in order to improve environmental conditions in minority and low-income
communities across the country. This change also reflects the leveraging of resources
available for grants and administrative support for meetings. The net resources change
includes 7.8 FTE and associated payroll of $1,147.0. Of the realigned resources, 5.0 FTE
will be located in the regional offices for implementation and coordination of EJ
activities.
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.
261
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$16,184.2
$16,184.2
116.1
FY 2014
Enacted
$16,360.0
$16,360.0
104.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$17,841.0
$17,841.0
106.6
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$1,481.0
$1,481.0
2.6
Program Project Description:
As required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Section 309 of the Clean Air
Act, the EPA NEPA Implementation program reviews Environmental Impact Statements (EISs).
Under NEPA, an EIS is required for major federal actions significantly affecting the human
environment. The review of each EIS includes assessing options for avoiding or mitigating
environmental impacts, while making agency comments available to the public and allowing for
public input. The NEPA Implementation program also guides the EPA's compliance with NEPA
and other relevant statutes and Executive Orders for its own actions. 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 among federal agencies to ensure
compliance with applicable environmental statutes, promotes better integration of pollution
prevention and ecological risk assessment elements into federal 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).
77
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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
and promoting approaches for working collaboratively with federal, state, local and Tribal
partners on project proposals. The agency will continue to participate in the effort to implement
For more information, refer to: www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa
262
-------
Executive Order 13604 Improving Performance of Federal Permitting and Review of
Infrastructure Project and the Presidential Memorandum on Modernizing Infrastructure
Permitting to meet the goal of reducing permitting and review timelines, while improving
environmental and community outcomes. This will include participating in coordinated reviews,
developing innovative mitigation approaches and promoting the use of IT tools. As a component
of this effort, 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.78 The EPA will continue to build out NEPAssist, which was released to
the public in 2012 and 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 2015, at least 70 percent of the significant impacts identified in EPA's comment letters on
Draft EISs are expected to be mitigated by the Lead Agencies in the Final EISs. In FY 2015, the
EPA will continue to review NEPA documents related to Appalachian 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.
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 2015, 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 supports performance results in multiple strategic objectives.
Currently, there are no performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$347.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$1,134.0 / +2.6 FTE) This change supports the agency's review responsibilities under
NEPA, including additional work to implement Administration efforts to improve
permitting and review of infrastructure projects, and restores funding for tools and
analysis that will assist EPA in its review of EISs prepared by other federal agencies and
78 For more information, refer to: www.epa.gov/oecaerth/nepa/nepassist-mapping.html
263
-------
accessed by the public. Funding will ensure that EPA's actions comply with NEPA
requirements and support the NEPAssist and e-NEPA tools to better serve the public and
improve transparency. The resources reflect a net increase of 2.6 FTE and associated
payroll of $372.0.
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.
264
-------
Program Area: Geographic Programs
265
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$269,549. 6
$269,549.6
79.2
FY 2014
Enacted
$300,000.0
$300,000.0
77.9
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$275,000.0
$275,000.0
71.7
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($25,000.0)
($25,000.0)
-6.2
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 two nations, eight U.S. states, two Canadian provinces, and more than 40
tribes.
Through a coordinated interagency process79 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 protection of public health 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
xfl 81
Water Quality Agreement and the Clean Water Act. As outlined in the GLRI Action Plan
(Action Plan), the GLRI targets restoration work in five Focus Areas. The EPA and its partners
have achieved significant results in all five Focus Areas during the first four years of the GLRI,
including:
Focus Area
Highlights
Toxic Substances
and Areas of
Concern
o In February 2013, the Presque Isle, PA Area of Concern (AOC) was delisted. In
January 2013, all management actions necessary for delisting were completed at
the Sheboygan, WI AOC. By accelerating work, we expect to complete
management actions at five more AOCs by the end of FY 201582;
o From GLRI's inception through 2013, 29 Beneficial Use Impairments (BUIs)
have been removed at 13 AOCs in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, New York,
Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin - more than tripling the total number of BUIs
79 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.
80 For more information see: http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/glwqa/
81The 2010-2014 Action Plan is available at: http://www.epa.gov/greatlakes/gki/ . A 2015-2019 Action Plan is being developed;
activities proposed for F Y 2015 may be adjusted pursuant to the new Action Plan.
82 Highlights footnoted with "4" were achieved through a combination of GLRI funding and other non-GLRI federal and/or state
funding.
266
-------
removed in the preceding 22 years. Eight were removed in FY20134; and
o Over 4 million cubic yards of contaminated sediment has been remediated since
GLRFs inception.4
Invasive Species
o Since GLRI's inception, over 35,000 acres were managed to keep populations of
invasive species controlled to a target level; and
o GLRI has been central to the Administration's coordinated efforts to keep self-
sustaining Asian carp populations out of the Great Lakes.4
Nearshore Health
and Nonpoint
Source Pollution
o Over 800,000 acres of agricultural land in the Great Lakes watershed were put
into USDA conservation contracts to reduce erosion, nutrients and/or pesticide
loading under Farm Bill Programs4; and
o GLRI state and local partners have assessed approximately 95 percent of the
most frequently used Great Lakes beaches to identify sources of contamination.
Actions have been taken at many of those beaches to reduce or eliminate sources
of beach contamination.4
Habitat and
Wildlife
Protection and
Restoration
o Over 1,900 river-miles have been cleared for fish passage by removing or
bypassing over 250 barriers;
o Over 115,000 acres of wetland, coastal, upland, and island habitat have been
protected, restored, or enhanced;
o The federally listed Lake Erie water snake was delisted4; and
o Native aquatic non-threatened and non-endangered species are showing progress
under most population metrics.4
Accountability,
Education,
Monitoring,
Evaluation, Com-
munication and
Partnerships
o The Great Lakes Sea Grant Network, through the 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; and
o Over 570 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 supplement (but do
not supplant) agencies' base funding for Great Lakes activities. Agencies undertake projects
and/or fund projects performed by states, tribes, municipalities, counties, universities and non-
governmental organizations. The 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. In FY 2014, GLRI agencies will reduce the cumulative amount
of unliquidated obligations from FY 2010- FY 2013 by 25%.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015 the GLRI will continue to support programs and projects which target the most
significant environmental problems in the Great Lakes. While the $25 million reduction from the
FY 2014 enacted budget will require delaying or scaling back important restoration work across
the Great Lakes basin, special priority will continue to be placed on: 1) cleaning up and delisting
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. FY 2015 will be the first year under the new Action Plan and the activities described
267
-------
below may be adjusted upon finalization of that Plan. 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.
Twenty-nine U.S. and binational Great Lakes AOCs remain degraded with an estimated 35
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. Chemicals of emerging concern, which may pose additional threats,
have also been detected. Principal actions proposed to prevent or reduce toxic substances
include:
Great Lakes Areas of Concern
Areas of Concern Restoration.
The GLRI is accelerating the pace
of U.S. AOC delistings through the
efforts of the EPA, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS), U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE), U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA), and other partners. New
AOC delistings are expected in FY
2015 — following the delisting of
the Presque Isle, PA AOC in FY
2013, the first U.S. delisting since
2006. The EPA and its federal
partners will work with and fund stakeholders to remove BUIs (indicators of poor
environmental health) in the remaining 29 U.S. AOCs. The removal of the 51st BUI is
expected by the end of FY 2015. We also expect to have completed all required management
actions at additional AOCs in Illinois, Michigan, and Ohio.
Through the Great Lakes Legacy Act
(part of the GLRI), a number of sediment
remediation projects will begin and may be
supplemented with navigational channel
dredging and habitat enhancements. GLRI
funding of Legacy Act projects in FY 2015
is expected to ultimately result in
remediation of approximately 400 thousand
cubic yards of contaminated sediment and
contribute to the delisting of one or more Areas
of Concern.
Cumulative Volume of Sediment Remediated
via the Great Lakes Legacy Act Program
(As of August 2013f
268
-------
Invasive Species
The Great Lakes have been significantly affected by non-native invasive species. More than 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:
• GLRI Invasive Species Priorities. In addition to the multi-agency priority of keeping
self-sustaining populations of Asian carp out of the Great Lakes, GLRI agencies will
initiate and lead multi-stakeholder priority initiatives to evaluate and control Phragmites
and Hydrilla (two invasive aquatic plants).
• Prevention and Early Detection. The Department of Transportation's Maritime
Administration, the U.S. Coast Guard, and the EPA will support advances in ballast water
treatment systems for use in freshwater ecosystems. USFWS and the EPA will fund up
to 15 projects that prevent new introductions of invasive species by evaluating species
and pathway r/'sk assessments, by conducting interventions, and by promoting safe
recreation and resource use. The EPA and USFWS will also continue monitoring to
detect new invaders. USFWS and the Bureau of Indian Affairs will support on-the-
ground implementation of Aquatic Nuisance Species Management Plans for Great Lakes
states and tribes. Implementation will include conducting eight rapid response exercises
to demonstrate and refine multi-agency response capabilities.
• Control. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Forest Service
(USFS), and National Park Service (NFS) 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 USAGE will enhance the use of barriers to further
reduce sea lamprey populations. USFWS and the Bureau of Indian Affairs will support
on-the-ground and in-the-water control through implementation of the Aquatic Nuisance
Species Management Plans mentioned above. The EPA will issue competitive grants to
communities and organizations to reduce or control terrestrial invasive species on
approximately 1,000 acres.
269
-------
Nearshore Health and Nonpoint Source Pollution
Nearshore Waters and Priority Impaired Watersheds
Legend
| Nearshore waters
•k Priority Watersheds
0 100 200 Km
The aquatic nearshore begins ai the shoreline and generally extends offshore to a depth of 20-30 meters
Terrestrial nearshore areas range from narrow beaches to inland features influenced by Great Lakes processes.
Great Lakes nearshore water
quality has become degraded, as
evidenced by eutrophication;
harmful algal blooms; thick
odorous mats of the green algae
Cladophora that can wash onto
beaches; outbreaks of avian
botulism; and "no-swim"
advisories. 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. Nonpoint sources are now
the primary contributors of many Great Lakes pollutants because control strategies implemented
thus far have not been sufficient, due to the scale of the problem in such a large watershed.
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, NRCS, USFS,
USAGE, NFS, USGS, NOAA, and the EPA will collaborate to identify the causes of
nearshore impairment; to implement practices to reduce the causes of impairment; and to
establish and implement Total Maximum Daily Loads and Watershed Action Plans for
phosphorus, nitrogen, and other pollutants. The agencies will continue to target the
watersheds highlighted in the 2010-2014 Action Plan: the western basin of Lake Erie,
Saginaw Bay on Lake Huron, and Green Bay on Lake Michigan.
• Assess Effectiveness of Reduction Efforts. USFS, USAGE, NFS, USGS, NOAA, and
the EPA will regularly evaluate the effectiveness of GLRI-funded projects designed to
reduce nutrient loading and will assess the impact of these projects on nearshore
conditions.
Habitat and Species
The Great Lakes do not currently contain the full array of safe and healthy natural habitats
required to meet the growth and reproductive needs of fish and wildlife. Habitat and species
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:
270
-------
• Protection and Restoration of Native Species and Habitats. Federal agencies,
including Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), Bureau of Indian Affairs
(BIA), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Great Lakes Fishery Commission,
NPS, NOAA, USAGE, the EPA, USFWS, USFS, and USGS will implement protection
and restoration actions to improve habitat and restore wildlife. The agencies will
continue to implement projects to reconnect habitats through corridors to enhance
biological diversity, reduce sediment and nutrient inputs, restore natural hydrological
processes, and improve water quality. By 2015, a cumulative total of 135,000 acres of
important habitats, including wetlands and coastal, upland and island habitats, will be
protected, restored, and/or enhanced.
• Maintain, improve or enhance populations of native species. Agencies will continue
to implement projects to maintain, improve or enhance populations of native species such
as lake sturgeon and piping plover, protect and restore culturally significant species, and
implement recovery actions for listed species. Long term results will include the
protection and restoration of important species including wild rice, piping plover and lake
sturgeon.
• Assess, evaluate and adapt management actions based on science and monitoring.
Agencies will identify priority actions for habitat and species restoration as described in
the Lake Biodiversity Conservation Strategies; identify, evaluate and recommend new
approaches for baseline surveys; target population monitoring to assess and improve
conservation effectiveness consistent with climate change predictions; and, evaluate the
results of conservation actions. Between 2010 and 2015, all Great Lakes coastal
wetlands will have baseline data established for invertebrates, plants, marsh birds,
amphibians, fish and water quality.
Integrated Solutions to Cross-Cutting Issues
EPA anticipates the creation of this new Focus Area in FY 2015. (The previous Focus Area was
called "Accountability, Education, Monitoring, Evaluation, Communication and Partnerships".)
This Focus Area will likely be redesigned to incorporate changes recommended by the
Government Accountability Office, the Great Lakes Advisory Board, and others to include the
following three principal initiatives:
• Science-Based Adaptive Management. The GLRI agencies will continue to update and
refine decisions to target resources, using the best available science to assess the
effectiveness of past projects and to prioritize future restoration/protection efforts. To
facilitate this process the agencies will work to expand the GLRI accountability system to
incorporate more well-defined metrics to track progress. They also will release a final
Science-Based Adaptive Management Framework in FY 2014.
The EPA, USGS, and NOAA will continue to assess the physical, biological, and
chemical integrity of the Great Lakes and will report on indicators of ecosystem health.
EPA will also continue to implement the Coordinated Science and Monitoring Initiative
with other federal agencies, state agencies, and Environment Canada to address lake-
271
-------
specific science and monitoring needs in Lake Michigan in 2015 (to be followed by
Lakes Superior, Huron, Ontario, and Erie in consecutive years). The EPA and USGS will
continue to develop infrastructure for uniform data quality management and timely
access to data and information.
• Education and Outreach. Education institutions and the EPA will work to improve
Great Lakes literacy and increase environmental stewardship through training, mentoring,
community-building, and place-based stewardship opportunities for educators, 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, EPA and
the other federal agencies will seek advice and recommendations on annual priorities of
the GLRI. Resources and capabilities will be leveraged through existing collaborative
efforts, such as the Great Lakes Interagency Task Force and its Regional Working Group,
the U.S.-Canada Binational Great Lakes Executive Committee, the State of the Lakes
Ecosystem Conference, Lakewide Action and 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.
• Increase Resiliency of Great Lakes Communities to Climate Change. As
recommended by GAO and the Great Lakes Advisory Board, GLRI agencies will
incorporate climate change resiliency into GLRI projects by adopting resiliency criteria
into their project selection processes. Agencies will require that project design and
implementation for GLRI projects take anticipated climate change impacts into account
before funding decisions are made in order to ensure sound investment of GLRI
resources and continued project success in the face of those impacts.
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. The following allocations for
2015 are draft pending the fmalization of the 2015-2019 Action Plan.
Summary of FY 2010 - 2015 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
FY 2010
$146,946
$60,265
$97,331
$105,262
$65,196
$475,000
FY2011
$100,400
$57,500
$49,250
$63,000
$29,250
$299,400
FY 2012
$107,500
$56,900
$54,300
$57,200
$23,500
$299,500
FY 2013
$110,000
$47,000
$45,000
$64,000
$18,000
$284,000
FY 2014
$108,000
$57,000
$56,000
$58,000
$21,000
$300,000
FY 201583
$108,000
$47,900
$50,000
$50,600
$18,500
$275,000
' Based on nominal allocations approved by the Interagency Task Force.
272
-------
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 Carp85
TOTAL
FY 2010
$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
FY 2012
$2,710
$16,243
$35,647
$4,719
$3,527
$45,700
$13,052
$1,221
$2,447
$2,200
$1,134
$27,185
$6,718
$137,017
$299,500
FY 2013
$2,451
$25,505
$32,747
$3,985
$3,013
$40,001
$12,662
$973
$2,311
$1,416
$904
$20,529
$6,029
$131,173
$283,698
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
FY2015
84
$1,600
$26,500
$22,1000
$3,400
$2,700
$33,700
$8,500
$800
$2,000
$1,500
$1,100
$21,000
$5,400
$128,700
$16,000
$275,000
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).
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
1
2
FY 2012
3
2
FY2013
4
3
FY2014
5
FY2015
8
Units
AOCs
Measure
Target
Actual
(628) Acres managed for populations of invasive species controlled to a target level
(cumulative).
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
1,500
13,045
FY2012
15,500
31,474
FY2013
34,000
35,924
FY2014
38,000
FY2015
50,000
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).
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
4
8
FY 2012
12
23
FY 2013
26
30
FY 2014
35
FY 2015
40
Units
Number
Responses/
Plans
Measure
Target
Actual
(632) Percent increase in acreage in Great Lakes watershed with USDA conservation practices
implemented to reduce erosion, nutrients, and/or pesticide loading.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
2
62
FY 2012
8
70
FY 2013
20
60
FY 2014
30
FY 2015
35
(225,800)
Units
Acres
4 Based on nominal allocations approved by the Interagency Task Force.
5 GLRI Asian carp funding is included in agency totals through F Y 2013, but has not yet been finalized for F Y 2014 or F Y 2015.
273
-------
Measure
Target
Actual
(634) Number of acres of wetlands and wetland-associated uplands protected, restored and
enhanced (cumulative).
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
5,000
9,624
FY2012
11,000
65,639
FY2013
68,000
83,702
FY2014
88,000
FY2015
95,000
Units
Acres
Measure
Target
Actual
(635) Number of acres of coastal, upland, and island habitats protected, restored and enhanced
(cumulative).
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
15,000
12,103
FY 2012
15,000
28,034
FY 2013
33,000
33,250
FY 2014
38,000
FY 2015
40,000
Units
Acres
Measure
Target
Actual
(636) Number of species delisted due to recovery.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
0
1
FY2012
1
1
FY2013
2
1
FY2014
2
FY2015
1
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).
FY 2008
21
23.7
FY 2009
No Target
Establish
ed
FY 2010
No Target
Establish
ed
FY2011
23.4
21.9
FY 2012
21.9
23.9
FY 2013
23.4
24.7
FY 2014
23.4
FY 2015
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.
FY2008
5.0
5.5
FY2009
5.9
6.0
FY2010
6.3
7.3
FY2011
8
8.4
FY2012
9.1
9.7
FY2013
10.3
11.5
FY2014
12
FY2015
12.4
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.
FY2008
5
6
FY2009
5
6
FY2010
10
43
FY2011
37
44
FY2012
40
43
FY2013
43
46
FY2014
46
FY2015
49
Units
Percent
Decline
Measure
Target
Actual
(625) Number of Beneficial Use Impairments removed within Areas of Concern (cumulative).
FY2008
16
11
FY2009
21
12
FY2010
20
12
FY2011
26
26
FY 2012
33
33
FY2013
41
41
FY2014
46
FY2015
51
Units
BUIs
Removed
Measure
Target
Actual
(627) Rate of aquatic nonnative species newly detected in the Great Lakes ecosystem.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
1.0
0.83
FY 2012
0.8
0.77
FY 2013
0.8
.71
FY 2014
0.8
FY 2015
0.8
Units
Species
274
-------
Measure
Target
Actual
(633) Percent of populations of native aquatic non-threatened and non-endangered species self-
sustaining in the wild (cumulative).
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
33%;
48/147
31%;
46/147
FY2012
33%;
48/147
33%;
48/147
FY2013
34%;
50/147
34%;
50/147
FY2014
35%;
52/147
FY2015
36%;
53/147
Units
Species
Measure
Target
Actual
(623) Cost per cubic yard of contaminated sediments remediated (cumulative).
FY2008
FY2009
200
122
FY2010
200
125
FY2011
200
144
FY2012
200
131
FY2013
200
142
FY2014
200
FY2015
200
Units
Dollars/Cub
ic Yard
EPA anticipates changes to performance measures and targets in FY 2015 due to the new Action
Plan. The revised measures and targets will establish performance goals and targets through FY
2019. A number of the following targets and measures are likely to be eliminated or modified
under the revised Action Plan.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$888.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$888.0/ -6.2 FTE) This reflects a reduction to program oversight and implementation as
a result of greater efficiencies in business processes. The reduced resources include 6.2
FTE and associated payroll of $831.0.
• (-$25,000.0) This overall decrease to interagency agreements, grants, and contracts will
necessitate an even greater focus on the three GLRI priorities: clean-up of Areas of
Concern; preventing and controlling the spread of invasive species, and taking steps to
address the causes of harmful algal blooms in priority watersheds.
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
Agencies Appropriations Act. Among other things, the language provides the 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.
275
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$53,443.5
$53,443.5
51.6
FY 2014
Enacted
$70,000.0
$70,000.0
42.2
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$73,098.0
$73,098.0
39.9
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$3,098.0
$3,098.0
-2.3
Program Project Description:
The Chesapeake Bay Program is a voluntary partnership initiated in 1983 by the Chesapeake Bay
watershed states (Delaware, Maryland, New York, Virginia, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia),
the District of Columbia, the Chesapeake Bay Commission, and the federal government. The
EPA represents the federal government on the partnership's Chesapeake Executive Council (EC)
and, under the authority of Section 117 of the Clean Water Act, maintains a program office and
works with the EC to coordinate activities of the partnership. In May 2009, President Obama
signed Executive Order (EO) 13508, which tasked a Federal Leadership Committee to draft a
path forward for protection and restoration of the Chesapeake Bay watershed.86 Beginning in
2012, the EPA, the watershed jurisdictions, and other key federal agencies set two-year
milestones for outcomes outlined in the EO strategy, the Bay Total Maximum Daily Load
r-M-, Q'J
(TMDL), and the jurisdictions' Watershed Implementation Plans (WIPs). Chesapeake Bay
Program partners are developing a new partnership agreement to establish management
strategies and outcomes for fisheries, water quality, habitat, and other key areas that are
consistent with the EO.
The TMDL satisfies a requirement of the Clean Water Act as well as EPA commitments under
Court-approved consent decrees for Virginia and Washington, D.C. dating to the late 1990s
(http://www.epa.gov/chesapeakebaytmdl). The TMDL is designed to ensure 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. The Bay jurisdictions developed and are implementing WIPs that
define how they will achieve their TMDL allocations, including the impact of local efforts.
Starting in FY 2017, the EPA will assess the jurisdictions' progress toward their TMDL goals by
using evidence from its Chesapeake Bay monitoring network to determine how much progress is
being made and what efforts need to be made to continue such progress.
86 This plan, the Strategy for Protecting and Restoring the Chesapeake Bay Watershed [EPA-903-R-10-003], is available at
http://executiveorder.chesapeakebay.net/page/Reports-Documents.aspx.
87 The federal milestones related to water quality in the Chesapeake Bay watershed are available at http://executiveorder.
chesapeakebav.net/EO_l3508_Water_Oualitv_Milestones-2012-01-06.pdf The jurisdictional milestones are available at
http://www.epa.gov/reg3wapd/tmdl/ChesapeakeBav/EnsuringResults.html.
276
-------
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the EPA is requesting $73 million for the Chesapeake Bay Program. Most of the
EPA's direct efforts will focus on implementation of the new Bay partnership agreement,
oversight of the Chesapeake Bay TMDL and support for the Bay watershed jurisdictions as they
implement their WIPs. 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.
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue its close work with the jurisdictions and thousands of local
governments by providing financial support and technical guidance to efficiently implement the
TMDL. The EPA will continue its broad range of grant programs and will prioritize funding for
jurisdictions, local governments, and watershed organizations based on their proven ability to
reduce nutrient and sediment loads from key sectors such as development and agriculture. The
EPA will continue to assist the jurisdictions' use of empirical data in WIP implementation.
Mot significant
Decreased a-EO percent
Deaesea ?SI percent
A Increased 0-50 pe-icent
Flow-adjusted trends for total nitrogen for 31 sites
in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed, 1985-2011.
The program met or exceeded its FY 2013 targets for pollution controls. By FY 2015, the program expects to
achieve 37.5 percent of its goals for implementing nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment reduction actions to achieve
final TMDL allocations, as measured through the phase 5.3.2 watershed model.
Til
-------
The EPA will continue to support innovative environmental technologies, market mechanisms,
and alternative financing to achieve the goals of the TMDL. In addition to addressing nutrient
and sediment loadings, the EPA expects to develop control strategies for addressing toxic
contaminant reduction goals developed in FY 2013. The Agency will continue refining and
improving Chesapeake^fatf, a web-based tool for performance-based decision-making for all Bay
partners, and the Bay Tracking and Accounting System. The EPA will continue implementation
of a basin-wide Best Management Practice verification framework, working with jurisdictions to
enhance their verification of pollutant reduction practices, treatments, and technologies.
In FY 2015, 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
strategy combines the EPA's water, air and waste enforcement authorities to address violations
of federal environmental laws resulting in nutrient, sediment, and other pollution in the Bay. The
EPA will continue to use an evidence-based approach to its oversight of Bay jurisdictions
through assessment and review of two-year milestones, agricultural programs, stormwater
programs, trading and offset programs, and permits and associated management plans.
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.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
1
8
FY 2012
15
21
FY 2013
22.5
25
FY 2014
30
FY 2015
37.5
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.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
1
1
FY 2012
15
19
FY 2013
22.5
27
FY 2014
30
FY 2015
37.5
Units
Percent
Goal
Achieved
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.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
1
11
FY2012
15
30
FY2013
22.5
32
FY2014
30
FY2015
37.5
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.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
15.17
14.92
FY2014
15
FY2015
14.5
Units
Pounds/Pers
on/Year
For FY 2015, the EPA, along with the other agencies involved in responding to the President's
EO, will be working toward the 12 outcomes articulated in the EO strategy document. Shorter-
term goals will continue to be identified in the EO action plan and federal two-year milestones.
278
-------
The following strategic measure is included in the Agency's new Strategic Plan from FY 2014 to
2018: By 2018, achieve 45 percent attainment of applicable water quality standards for dissolved
oxygen, water clarity/underwater grasses, and chlorophyll in the Chesapeake Bay and its tidal
tributaries.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$90.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$347.0 / -2.3 FTE) This decrease reflects FTE reductions that may result in fewer
resources to support program oversight and achievement of the goals of the Chesapeake
Bay EO strategy and the new Bay partnership agreement. The reduced resources include
2.3 FTE and associated payroll of $347.0.
• (+$4,684.0) This increase reflects additional funding for non-STAG discretionary grants
that have been essential to the Bay jurisdictions in implementing the TMDL and their
Phase II WIPs, particularly at a local scale.
• (-$1,243.0) This decrease reflects a reduction in contracts for the support of oversight
and assistance to jurisdictions' programs to identify innovative and economically
efficient means of meeting TMDL goals.
• (-$781.0) This decrease reflects a reduction in contracts support in Region 3 and EPA
headquarters for enforcement and compliance assurance activities.
• (+$671.0) This realignment reflects additional contract support for ongoing development
of ChesapeakeStat and related accountability and transparency tools.
• (+$24.0) This reflects realignment for legal and administrative support for the program.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C. 26 et seq. - Sections 1267 and 1313; Clean Air Act (CAA),
42 U.S.C. 85 etseq.
279
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$1,517.2
$1,517.2
2.1
FY 2014
Enacted
$4,819.0
$4,819.0
1.4
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$4, 763.0
$4,763.0
1.9
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($56.0)
($56.0)
0.5
Program Project Description:
In August 2012, the EPA released an Action Plan for protecting and restoring the San Francisco
Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuary (Bay Delta). The Action Plan commits the EPA to
collaborate with other agencies and stakeholders to revise and strengthen the Water Quality
Control Plan (WQCP) for the Delta, implement Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for
selected contaminants across the Bay Area and Central Valley regions, establish a regional
monitoring program (RMP) for the Delta that could be linked with the existing RMP for San
Francisco Bay, and restore floodplains and wetlands while controlling the formation and
transport of methylmercury.
Economic and environmental services provided by the Bay Delta include:
89
• Drinking water for 25 million residents ;
• Irrigation water that underpins an agricultural sector worth $37.5 billionc' 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)90;
• Wetlands to support at least 50 percent of the migratory water birds on the Pacific
Flyway; and
• Recreational assets such as 6.4 million boating-related visitor days/year (2000)91.
The Action Plan addresses the issues and opportunities identified by the agency and stakeholders
through EPA's Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for Water Quality Challenges in the
San Francisco Bay/ Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuary (ANPR, 2011). The ANPR
documented the adverse effects of pollutants such as ammonia, selenium, pesticides, and
contaminants of emerging concern on aquatic life and evaluated factors that are degrading
88 Sustainable Water and Environmental Management in the California Bay-Delta. 2012. National Academies Press
http://www.nap. edu/openbook.php?record_id=13394&page=l
89 Agricultural Statistical Overview. 2011-2012. California Department of Food and Agriculture.
http://www.cdfa.ca. gov/statistics/pdfs/AgStatOverview2011 -12 .pdf
90 UOP Business Forecasting Center. 2010. Employment Impacts of California Salmon Fishery Closures in 2008 and 2009 .
http://forecast.pacific.edu/BFC%20salmon%20iobs.pdf
91 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
280
-------
estuarine habitat and impeding fish migration (e.g., freshwater diversion, salinity intrusion, and
high surface water temperatures).
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA will focus on the following activities consistent with our Action Plan:
• Support the State Water Board in implementing their Strategic Workplan for the Bay-
Delta, which includes advancing the Bay-Delta WQCP, implementing TMDLs, and
establishing a Delta RMP;
• Continue administration of the San Francisco Bay Area Water Quality Improvement
Fund to achieve on-the-ground environmental results;
• Participate in key forums focused on restoring the San Joaquin River and improving
floodwater management in the San Joaquin Valley including the San Joaquin River
Restoration Program, the San Joaquin Tributaries Settlement Process, and the Central
Valley Flood Management Planning Program:
• Create a healthier and more resilient Bay Delta ecosystem by leveraging our work with
the San Francisco Estuary Partnership, the San Francisco Estuary Institute: and
stakeholders involved with the Climate Change Handbook for Regional Water Planning:
and
• Participate in the process for reviewing and regulating the Bay-Delta Conservation Plan
(BDCP).
Performance Targets:
The EPA performs this work under the Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
objective, and measures its progress toward meeting Clean Water Act goals through assessment
and monitoring efforts supported by EPA funds. Our performance, and the performance of the
communities we regulate, are documented both in the ANPR mentioned above, and the Pulse
reports cited below92. Collectively, these reports conclude that water quality and aquatic
resources in the Bay Delta ecosystem are still impaired and are not being adequately protected by
the way federal and State agencies are administering CWA programs. In FY 2015, our priority
will be to collaborate intensively with the State Water Board to formulate an approvable Bay
Delta WQCP.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$3.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
92 2012 Pulse of the Delta: Linking Science & Management through Regional Monitoring
http://www.sfei.org/documents/pulse-delta-linking-science-management-through-regional-monitoring
2011 Pulse of the Estuary: Pollutant Effects on Aquatic Life
http://www.sfei.org/node/4002
2011 State of San Francisco Bay Report (Summary of Bay Health, page V).
http://www.bav.org/assets/The%20State%20of%20San%20Francisco%20Bav.%202011 .pdf
281
-------
• (+$73.0 / +0.5 FTE) This change reflects a realignment of support for implementing
projects in the San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary. These resources include 0.5 FTE and
associated payroll of $73.0.
• (-$132.0) This reduces support for 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.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act (CWA).
282
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$28,359.2
$28,359.2
7.4
FY 2014
Enacted
$25,000.0
$25,000.0
7.5
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$25,011.0
$25,011.0
6.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$11.0
$11.0
-1.5
Program Project Description:
The Puget Sound is a designated estuary of national significance under the Clean Water Act
National Estuary Program. The health and productivity of Puget Sound has been a cornerstone
of the region's vibrant economy and quality of life, attracting a skilled workforce for high tech
and emerging businesses as well as tourism and sport fishing / recreational users. Nearly 71
percent of all jobs and 77 percent of total income in Washington State are found in the Puget
Sound Basin. 93
The beneficial uses of the Puget Sound ecosystem have been degraded and continue to be
threatened by a growing regional population expected to increase from approximately 3.5 million
to 5 million by 2025 (a 40 percent increase). Development and land use conversion have
decreased the functioning aquatic habitat to such a degree that the 22 populations of Chinook
salmon that use Puget Sound classified as threatened in 2005 under the Endangered Species Act
remain threatened with extinction and only one of the remaining populations has shown any
increase in abundance since 2006.94 Among marine mammals, Puget Sound Orca whales carry
some of the world's highest levels of persistent bioaccumaltive toxics (PBT) chemicals in their
bodies.95 Stormwater pollution and agricultural runoff threaten the safe harvest and consumption
of shellfish across 143,000 acres of shellfish beds and is responsible for the closure of hundreds
of popular swimming beaches and recreational sites annually. Tribal nations are unable to
sustain their culture and way of life, because the beneficial uses of Puget Sound—upon which
they depend and which are guaranteed by treaties—are increasingly imperiled.
The EPA addresses its obligations under federal Tribal treaties by funding Puget Sound projects
that support indigenous populations of shellfish, fish and other wildlife. There are 19 federally
recognized Tribes in Puget Sound, three Tribal consortia, and the NW Indian Fisheries
Commission, all with significant partnerships with the EPA Puget Sound program- including
multi-year Puget Sound assistance agreements with each of these tribal entities. Additionally,
the EPA provides leadership for the Puget Sound Federal Caucus to facilitate coordination of
93http://www.psp.wa.gov/downloads/AA2012 Julv/July3ActionAgendaBookl .pdf
94 http://www.psp.wa.gov/vitalsigns/salmon.php
95,
'Source: Issuance of Incidental Take Permit, ESA Section 7 Formal Consultation for Reissuance of the Fort Lewis (Joint Base
Lewis McChord) Wastewater Treatment Facility NPDES Permit
283
-------
Puget Sound work among federal agencies and co-chairs the overall federal effort to address
Tribal Treaty Rights at Risk,96 consistent with the roles assigned by the Council on
Environmental Quality.
The waters in this basin have provided a significant source of seafood for Tribal, as well as
commercial and recreational, harvesters. In 2010, over 23 million pounds of salmon were
harvested commercially by treaty Tribal and non-treaty fishers.97 Puget Sound's commercial
shellfish harvest totaled over 156 million pounds with economic values of $57.8 million in
201098 making Washington State's shellfish industry the most valuable in the nation.99
However, runoff from stormwater pollution and agricultural activities constantly threaten these
valuable resources.
Despite a burgeoning regional population, rapid economic growth, and increasingly expansive
urban development, as of FY 2013, the EPA's Puget Sound program work has resulted in over
30,000 acres of habitat protected and/or restored (cumulative from 2006), and just over 3,200
acres of shellfish harvest
beds upgraded
(cumulative from 2006).
The program has also
advanced Puget Sound
stormwater permit and
retrofit programs utilizing
Low Impact Development
techniques. The Puget
Sound program continues
to fund and build upon
water quality work that
has resulted in a
substantial reduction in
the fecal pollution index
in some of the most
polluted areas of Puget
Sound.
Puget Sound - Acres of Shellfish Protected with
Context Measures (2000 - 2012)
1 » 1.10
- s
100
^
**M
^c£
*•
••J-J
»•••
4
£.-•
•• •
* • •
s
s
t
-*-•--"
„ '
^^^™
" "
„ -
^
^
^ ^f '
.. ~
m-~^—>
•
v
,
+
*
„--
--^
• *•
s
^ ^ —
.. ""
— -PS Real GDP
— — -PS Population
PS Acres of Urban
Development
— ^— PS Shellfish Bed Net
Acres (Cumulative)
^— PS Fecal Pollution
Index
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Calendar Year
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Bureau of Economt: Analysis. U.S. Forestry Service, Washington State Dept, of Health
To achieve these positive ecosystem results, the Puget Sound Program has leveraged its
appropriations to target three strategic areas:
1. Preventing pollution from urban stormwater runoff;
2. Protecting and restoring habitat; and
3. Keeping open shellfish areas safe for harvesting and upgrading additional shellfish
harvest areas.
96http://nwifc.org/w/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2011/08/whitepaper628fmalpdf.pdf
97http://www.psp.wa.gov/vitalsigns/commercial_fisheries_harvest.php
98
Source: WA Dept of Fish & Wildlife catch records summarized by the Pacific Shellfish Institute;
http://www.pacshell.org/pdf/Economic_Impact_of_Shellfish_Aquaculture_2013.pdf
99 Washington State's overall shellfish industry includes the Pacific coast of Washington where approximately 21 million pounds
of shellfish were harvested in 2010, worth approximately $68 million.
284
-------
EPA's Puget Sound program leverages federal funds with significant additional funding from
state partners and other non-governmental sources. From 2011 to 2013, over $149 million of
non-federal funding, cash and in-kind services were directed to Puget Sound restoration and
protection priorities.100 These contributions by non-federal sources highlight the importance and
success of the partnership between federal, state, Tribal and nongovernmental stakeholders,
working together to restore and preserve the Puget Sound.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the Puget Sound Program will focus support to three areas of strategic initiative:
address stormwater pollution through retrofits and low impact development projects; protect and
restore aquatic and nearshore habitat, especially for endangered salmon species; and protect and
upgrade shellfish growing beds by identifying and correcting sources of pathogen pollution. The
program will use the Puget Sound Action Agenda to identify near term actions that target
achievable results in these three strategic initiatives.
Program Evaluations by the EPA's National Estuary Program are an important feedback tool for
program improvement. A Program Evaluation in 2014 will provide the state's NEP lead agency,
the Puget Sound Partnership (PSP), with feedback that highlights the Partnership's strengths and
identifies where improvements can be made and realized. Together, the EPA and the PSP have
forged a strong science-based Puget Sound Action Agenda and adaptive management practices
to guide annual funding priorities. In FY 2015 the Puget Sound program will work even closer
with its state and tribal partners to target NEP funds to the most effective areas of work.
Consistent with past years, EPA proposes to provide twenty-five 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. The EPA and its Puget Sound partners have put mechanisms in place to
quickly obligate federal funding and reduce unliquidated obligations. The EPA has taken
concrete steps to accelerate the expenditure of these funds.
Puget Sound funding is awarded competitively and through direct awards. In FY 2015 the
program will build upon work that has shown successful outcomes in the following areas:
• Restoring and protecting watershed and nearshore marine habitat funding projects
identified as priorities in consultation with federal, Tribal, state, and local partners. The
EPA's target is to restore and protect an additional 2,000 acres in FY 2015.
• Protecting existing approved shellfish harvesting areas by ensuring surrounding water
quality and supporting local efforts to identify and correct sources of pathogen pollution.
At the end of 2011, the Washington State Department of Health (WADOH) reported
240,000 acres with Approved classifications, and nearly 12,500 acres with Conditionally
Approved classifications for commercial shellfish harvesting in Washington State marine
100 Puget Sound NEP leveraging data as reported in NEPORT
285
-------
waters. Approximately 60 percent of the approved harvest areas and 85 percent of the
conditionally approved areas are in the Puget Sound basin.101
Upgrading restricted and closed shellfish beds to an approved status by implementing
local actions that lead to sufficiently improved water quality for safe harvest. The
universe of potentially recoverable shellfish beds in Puget Sound closed due to nonpoint
source pollution is approximately 10,000 acres. The Puget Sound program's goal is to
protect human health by upgrading the harvest classifications of 4,700 acres (cumulative
since 2006) of commercial shellfish beds in FY 2015. For a detailed map of Puget Sound
Shellfish growing areas please see:
http://www.epa.gov/regionlO/images/puget_sound_shellfish
growing areas map 072012.JPG
Stormwater is the leading stressor on watershed health as identified in the 2020 Action
Agenda. Stormwater runoff pollution associated with increased development and
population growth increasingly threatens the safety of shellfish harvest areas, alters the
ecological functions of aquatic habitats, and reduces the overall water quality and health
of the Puget Sound. The EPA Puget Sound program is committed to working effectively
with its state and Tribal partners to combat the negative impacts of Stormwater pollution.
In FY 2015, the Puget Sound Program will continue supporting ten county-level
Pollution Identification and Correction (PIC) programs and work with local entities to
develop the necessary sustaining funding to keep these PIC programs operational into
future years, to stem pollution from Stormwater non-point sources.
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.
FY2008
450
1,566
FY2009
600
1,730
FY2010
1,800
4,453
FY2011
4,953
1,525
FY2012
3,878
2,489
FY2013
7,758
3,203
FY2014
4,000
FY2015
4,700
Units
Acres
Measure
Target
Actual
(ps3) Number of near shore, riparian, and wetland habitat acres protected or restored.
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
30,128
FY2014
33,818
FY2015
35,818
Units
Acres
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$22.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$189.0 / -1.5 FTE) This change reflects a continued shift of grants management work to
Puget Sound lead organization partners, state agencies, and Tribal organizations. The
reduced resources include 1.5 FTE and associated payroll of $189.0.
101 http://www.doh.wa.gov/Portals/l/Documents/4400/annual-inventory.pdf - Page 7 (Puget Sound harvest areas classified as
approved for approximately 143,500 acres and conditionally approved for approximately 10,600 acres)
286
-------
• (+$178.0) This increase reflects support for state agency and tribal Lead Organizations
making sub-awards to local governments and tribes implementing the Puget Sound
Action Agenda.
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.
287
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$3,754.6
$3,754.6
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$3,940.0
$3,940.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$2,893.0
$2,893.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($1,047.0)
($1,047.0)
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 $10 billion per year in 2013 dollars from commercial and sport fishing,
swimming, beach-going, and sight-seeing alone.102 The EPA assists the states in implementing
the Sound's 1994 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP). The EPA and
the 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. Most recently, the Long Island Sound Study, with the EPA's assistance, revised
its 1994 CCMP to incorporate the most recent science and data on coastal planning, resiliency
and marine spatial planning. The new CCMP will guide partner actions through 2034.103 Please
see http://www.longislandsoundstudy.net for further information.104
102 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.
103 The Action Agenda is available at http://longislandsoundstudy.net/about/our-mission/sound-agreements/action-agenda-2011-
20137
104 For more information:
https://www.cfda.gov/index?s=program&mode=form&tab=stepl&id=6504cc92476f05523fc836b5dc099c2f
288
-------
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA will continue to oversee implementation of the Long Island Sound Study CCMP by
coordinating the cleanup and restoration actions of the Long Island Sound Study Management
Conference.
In FY 2015, 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 2001; 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;
• Coordinating priority watershed protection programs through the Long Island Sound
Management Conference partners to ensure that efforts are directed toward priority river
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;
• Assisting state and local partners in protecting and restoring critical coastal habitats to
improve the productivity of tidal wetlands, inter-tidal zones, and other key habitats that
have been adversely affected by unplanned development, overuse, land use-related
pollution effects, and climate change, e.g., sea level rise, warming temperatures, changes
in salinity and other ecological effects;
• Promoting management of the 33 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;
289
-------
• 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 implement the updated CCMP for Long Island Sound.
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.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
52
70
FY2011
72
69
FY2012
74
83
FY2013
76
Data Avail
03/2014
FY2014
85
FY2015
91.5
Units
TE
Pounds/Day
Measure
Target
Actual
(Ii8) Restore, protect or enhance acres of coastal habitat from the 2010 baseline of 2,975 acres.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
218
537
FY 2013
420
336
FY 2014
410
FY 2015
186
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.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
28
72.3
FY 2013
75
56
FY 2014
1.5
FY 2015
27
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 28,838 trade-equalized pounds
per day of nitrogen to Long Island Sound, a significant decrease in loads (see figure 1). This
represents 27 million fewer pounds of nitrogen per year from the circa 1990s baseline from
entering the Sound from treatment plants.
290
-------
LONG ISLAND SOUND STUDY
A PARTNERSHIP TO RESTORE AND PROTECT THE SOUND
Point Source Nitrogen Trade-Equalized Loads
1995-2012
106NY/CTSTPS
Figure 1
In 2013, the maximum area of hypoxia in the Sound was estimated to be 80 square miles, tied for
the second lowest recorded in 27 years. The 5-year running average area of hypoxia is shown to
be measured at 153.6 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 the ecosystem's response.
In FY 2013, with financial assistance from the EPA, the states restored or protected 336 acres of
critical coastal habitat, and reopened 56 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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$47.0) This reduces support for restoration and cleanup efforts in the Long Island
Sound.
• (-$1,000.0) This eliminates the congressionally directed increase from the FY 2014
budget.
291
-------
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.
292
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$3,842.3
$3,842.3
13.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$4,482.0
$4,482.0
11.3
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$3,804.0
$3,804.0
11.3
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($678.0)
($678.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
The efforts of the EPA's Gulf of Mexico Program (Gulf Program) are dedicated to the
protection, restoration and enhancement of the water bodies and coastal environments associated
with the greater Gulf of Mexico region. The Gulf Program 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the EPA continues the commitment to a regional ecosystem-based approach to
restoration efforts. Work in this program project will be closely coordinated and complementary
with ongoing Restore Council and Natural Resources Damages Assessment activities related to
the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill. Specifically, all technical staff directly support these efforts by
providing scientific and technical expertise serving on workgroups and committees. The Gulf
Program will continually seek broad participation and input from the diverse stakeholders who
live, work and play in the Gulf Coast region. There is a strong sense of partnership due to the
coordination with the working waterfront communities, academia, local and state agencies, non-
profit organizations and many other partners who coordinate to improve decision-making based
on the best available science.
The EPA also will provide competitive funding opportunities and in-kind scientific and
partnership support to the following performance measures and associated activities in the Gulf
of Mexico region:
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. The Gulf
293
-------
Program will enhance cooperative planning and programs across the Gulf states and federal
agencies to protect wetland and estuarine habitat.
During FY 2015, there will be continued funding support (through the competitive federal
process) for the development and implementation of comprehensive, stakeholder-informed
coastal improvement projects and tools. The focus will be efforts that directly enhance
community planning, risk assessment, green infrastructure, and smart growth implementation.
This is directly aligned with Agency priorities.
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 During FY 2015, the
EPA regional offices and the Gulf Program will work on two specific efforts: improved
monitoring and implementation of projects which directly improve water quality. Now more than
ever, coordination is critical to keep all partners informed, reduce duplicate monitoring efforts
and make the scientific data more readily available. The Gulf of Mexico Program partners with
the U. S. Department of Commerce, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the U.S. Department
of Agriculture in support of this performance measure.
The EPA will continue working with the Hypoxia Task Force, and the eleven states within the
Mississippi/Atchafalaya River Basins to support the development and implementation of nutrient
reduction strategies. The EPA will continue to coordinate with the U.S. Department of
Agriculture and with all federal and state partners to implement best management practices and
water quality improvement pilot and demonstration projects which improve water quality.
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 poor 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 2015, the Gulf Program will provide
significant technical, scientific and management assistance for the development of information
and processes; and with the implementation of tools and technologies which are easy for coastal
communities to use and therefore increase their resilience to natural coastal hazards including sea
level rise and storm events.
Environmental Education and Outreach
Education and outreach are essential to accomplish the Gulf Program's goal of healthy and
resilient coastal habitats. More than ever before, Gulf residents and decision-makers understand
and appreciate the connection between the health of the Gulf of Mexico, the economic vitality of
294
-------
their communities, and their overall quality of life. The EPA's long-term goal is to increase
awareness and stewardship of Gulf coastal resources and promote action among Gulf citizens.
In FY 2015, there is a targeted focus on the small and large scale education and outreach
activities that are included as fundable projects during the annual competitive funding process.
Education and outreach are essential to accomplish the overall goals of improved water quality,
habitat restoration, community resilience and other critical live sustaining issues in and among
the local communities. Targeted education, specifically to the underserved communities along
the Gulf Coast, is one of the Gulf Program's priorities.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(22V) Improve the overall health of coastal waters of the Gulf of Mexico on the Good/Fair/Poor
scale of the National Coastal Condition Report.
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
2.4
FY 2014
2.4
FY 2015
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).
FY2008
64
131
FY2009
96
131
FY2010
96
170
FY2011
202
286
FY2012
320
316
FY2013
360
Data Avail
02/2014
FY2014
360
FY2015
360
Units
Impaired
Segments
Measure
Target
Actual
(xg2) Restore, enhance, or protect a cumulative number of acres of important coastal and
marine habitats.
FY2008
18,200
25,215
FY2009
26,000
29,344
FY2010
27,500
29,552
FY2011
30,000
30,052
FY2012
30,600
30,248
FY2013
30,600
30,306
FY2014
30,600
FY2015
30,800
Units
Acres
For FY 2015, the Gulf 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 partnerships and competitively funding projects which have significant and direct
environmental outputs.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$25.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$703.0) This reduction will decrease support to partner agencies and organizations and
environmental education and outreach activities along the Gulf Coast.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act (CWA)
295
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$1,334.9
$1,334.9
1.7
FY 2014
Enacted
$1,704.0
$1,704.0
1.4
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$1,402.0
$1,402.0
1.4
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($302.0)
($302.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
The backbone of the South Florida economy is tourism and clean, clear oceans, lakes, and rivers
related 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.105 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 estuaries, 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 2015 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 2015, the EPA will focus on the
following activities:
• Continue coordinating and facilitating the ongoing implementation of the Water Quality
Protection Program for the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary, including
105 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
296
-------
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. Data collection was initiated in September 21, 2013 but was halted with 55
stations completed due to the government shutdown. A year of planning went into
designing the large-scale study that required field training, securing two helicopters (all
125 stations accessed by air), obtaining required permits, and navigating the logistics of
mobilizing twenty-five field staff to South Florida during the Everglades rainy season
monitoring window that ended in November. Planning efforts are underway to restart
field operations in September 2014. The final assessment report is scheduled to be
completed in FY 2016.
• 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;
• Implement the 2013 Monroe County Canal Management Master Plan (CMMP) funded by
the EPA in FY 2013. Monroe County and Islamorada have secured $5.1 million to
restore eight residential canals utilizing remedial actions such a seaweed gates, air
curtains, restoration of hydrology (culverts), circulation pumps, backfilling and removal
of organics;
• Develop and implement a water quality / benthic habitat monitoring methodology to
document water quality improvements to residential canals from remediation efforts.
Pre-implementation data will be collected from impaired canals in FY 2014 prior to
remedial activities. Post-implementation monitoring data will be gathered through FY
2015.
• 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;
297
-------
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
Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Water Quality Protection Program Steering
Committee;
• Complete a special study project by Mote Marine Laboratory: assess the effects of
mosquito control pesticides on non-targeted organisms in the Florida Keys National
Marine Sanctuary, and
• Continue the tracking of Everglades Restoration Strategies to address phosphorus
pollution and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits within the
Everglades, including discharge limits for phosphorus that are consistent with state and
federal law and federal court consent decree requirements.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(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.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
75
85.4
FY2012
75
CHLA:
70.9;
KD: 72.5
FY2013
75
>75
(CHLA:
84.5;
KD:
80.4)
FY2014
75
FY2015
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.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
75
73.6
FY 2012
75
DIN: 81;
TP: 89.5
FY 2013
75
<75
(DIN:
60.0; TP:
82.3)
FY 2014
75
FY 2015
75
Units
Stations
298
-------
Measure
Target
Actual
(sf6) The number of Everglades Stormwater Treatment Areas (STAs) with the annual total
phosphorus (TP) outflow less than or the same as the five-year annual average TP outflow,
working towards the long-term goal of meeting the 10 parts per billion annual geometric mean.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
3
Units
Stormwater
Treatment
Areas
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
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 53,315 of the 77,642 (68 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. The
EPA will also institute a revised measure of progress for tracking the status of total phosphorus
in outflows from Everglades Stormwater Treatment Areas.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$6.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$308.0) This realignment 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.
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.
299
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$2,268.0
$2,268.0
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$1,399.0
$1,399.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$1,399.0
$1,399.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
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
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.106 The goals of Opportunities for Action
include, but are not limited to:
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 posing risks 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;
and
Promote healthy and diverse economic activity and sustainable development principles
while improving water quality and conserving natural and cultural heritage resources.
106 For additional information see:
http://www.epa.gov/NE/eco/lakechamplain/index.html
http: //www. Icbp. org
http://nh.water.usgs.gov/champlain_feds
http://www.cfda.gov
300
-------
A Healthy Lake Contributes to a Healthy Economy in Vermont and New York
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 percent 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 98 fishing-related businesses near Lake Champlain estimated
that $5.6 million of their total income was from anglers using Lake Champlain.107 Bird and
1 OR
other wildlife viewing activities generated more than $122 million in 2006.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
Federal, state, provincial, and local partners will continue addressing high levels of phosphorus
by implementing priority actions identified in Opportunities for Action to reduce phosphorus
loads from point, urban, and agricultural nonpoint sources.109 Additionally, the Vermont
Phosphorus Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for Lake Champlain and associated reasonable
assurance package will be completed in the summer of 2014. The Vermont TMDL and
reasonable assurance package will set the framework for FY 2015 activities needed to reduce
nonpoint sources of phosphorus to meet the load allocations specified in the TMDL. Similarly,
the waste load allocations in the TMDL will be instrumental in guiding FY 2015 activities for
point sources. Although Vermont continues to make progress in reducing phosphorus inputs to
Lake Champlain, there is more work to be done to meet Water Quality Standards. Specifically,
Vermont must reduce its current phosphorus load by 190 metric tons per year. This will require
continued efforts in FY 2015 and beyond.
Reducing Point Source Phosphorus Inputs to Lake Champlain
Despite an 85 percent decline in phosphorus
loads from wastewater treatment facilities'
discharge since 1991 (Figure 1), priority
actions to reduce phosphorus loads from
point sources must continue. These actions
include, but are not limited to ensuring that
facilities' permits remain consistent with
the Clean Water Act and necessary
upgrades to treatment facilities are
completed.
Fig. 1: Wastewater Treatment Facilities Phosphorus Loads
-VERMONT
(iOWWTFi
in Ml I)
NEWYORK
(30WWTFs
.2011)
— QUEBEC
(9WWTF:
in MM)
I
VTTMDL
QC TARGET
7S 71
VI TO 'Dl TD IB 'M "OS W W US TO 'ID
107 People and Economy Lake Champlain Atlas, Economics of the Basin - http://lcbp.org/Atlas/html/so_econ.htm
108 Lake Champlain Basin Program, Opportunities for Action Database, http://plan.lcbp.org/ofa-database/chapters/introduction
109 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.
301
-------
Fig. 2: Nonpoint & Point Source Phosphorus Loads vs Flow
Reducing Nonpoint Source Phosphorus Inputs to Lake Champlain
Substantial reductions in nonpoint phosphorus runoff are required in both agricultural and
developed lands in order to meet targets for a clean Lake Champlain (Figure 2). Developed lands
contributed about 46 percent of the phosphorus runoff Basin-wide in 2001, and agricultural lands
contributed about 38 percent.110
Figure 2 illustrates the significant
challenges faced with nonpoint
source contributions of phosphorus
from developed and agricultural
lands, and increasing flows,
especially those occurring during
extreme storm events. Priority actions
to be implemented in 2015 addressing
nonpoint source contributions of
phosphorus from developed lands
include, but are not limited to: 1)
assessing the effectiveness of
I
-IZOOO
-10.000
-a,ocw
4,000
1991 - 1993- 1995-1997- 1999-1001 - 1MB- 2005-1007- 2D09-
1991 1994 1996 1996 100D 1001 2DO4 1006 200B 1010
Notipcint Source Load
Load
Gaged RJWT Inflow
stormwater ordinances; 2) ensuring
that phosphorus loads associated with
new development are minimized
through practices such as Low Impact
Development, retrofit strategies, and
innovative stormwater controls; and
3) assessing the effectiveness of local
stormwater utilities. Priority actions
addressing agricultural nonpoint source contributions of phosphorus include continued research
to determine the efficiency of agricultural Best Management Practices. Results from this work
will help direct resources to the most effective practices that reduce runoff and associated
nutrient and sediment losses. Additionally, through small grants, phosphorus loads from
agricultural nonpoint sources can continue to be reduced through the implementation of Best
Management Practices and Nutrient Management Plans.
Tracking Implementation and Adaptive Management Framework: Federal, state, and provincial
partners will develop and implement an adaptive management framework to evaluate 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. A
continued priority will be to prevent the introduction, limit the spread, and control the impact of
aquatic invasive species. Work with partners will continue in FY 2015 to contain the spread of
1 Troy et al. 2007 in Lake Champlain Basin Program 2012, State of the Lake Report
302
-------
the Spiny Water Flea and continue to monitor water chestnut and reduce its density and
distribution.
Toxic Cyanobacteria: Ongoing work will continue to develop new ways 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.
Additional Activities Planned for FY 2015
• Continue the Long-Term Water Quality and Biological Monitoring Program;
• Develop new approaches for urban and agricultural stormwater control with state
partners; and
• Implement recommendations from climate change studies to reduce impacts on water
quality.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports the Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
objective. There are no performance targets for this program. However, the goals and tasks in the
"Opportunities for Action111" plan provide a framework for the Lake Champlain Basin
Program's performance targets. Particular targets include reducing phosphorus 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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
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.
111 See http://plan.lcbp.org/
303
-------
Geographic Program: Other
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 2013
Actuals
$3,075.4
$3,075.4
6.9
FY 2014
Enacted
$4,393.0
$4,393.0
6.5
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$6,910.0
$6,910.0
5.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$2,517.0
$2,517.0
-1.5
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 approaches
to mitigate diffuse sources of pollution and cumulative risk for geographic areas.
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 seven112 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 working with the Forest Service and the State of Washington to
develop a TMDL implementation strategy for all temperature-impaired waters on the Olympic,
Mount Baker-Snoqualmie, and Gifford Pinchot National Forests. In Oregon, the EPA is working
with local, state and other federal agencies to develop TMDLs along Oregon's coast which
include management measures that will address forestry related water quality impairments and
support the state's Coastal Non-Point Pollution Control Program. In Idaho, the EPA is providing
technical support to state agencies engaged in updating riparian rules for forestry. These
revisions will result in long term benefits to water quality and fisheries. Northwest Forest
Program dollars also support the 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.
304
-------
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 the EPA
to provide critical support to the Aquatic Riparian Effectiveness Monitoring Program and the
Pacfish/Infish Biological Opinion Monitoring Program. 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. The 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, which flows into Lake Pontchartrain, is known for its slow-flowing
rivers and bayous, tranquil swamps, and lush hardwood forests, and 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.113
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.114 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.
1132010 U.S. Census Bureau, http://www.census.gov/popfinder/
114 Louisiana Ag Center Research and Extension. http://www.lsuagcenter.com/agsummarv/archive/2011/Parish-
Totals/201 lParishTotals.pdf
305
-------
Southeastern New England Coastal Watershed Restoration Program:
Southeastern New England (from Westerly, RI to Pleasant Bay, MA) faces environmental
challenges that are both unique and representative of broader national issues. The region's
coastal watershed problems include rivers hydrologically disconnected by dams and restrictions,
drained and filled wetlands, urbanization struggling with centuries-old infrastructure, 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, especially the likelihood of extreme weather events and increased
precipitation, 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' economies115. Travel and tourism in
Rhode Island generate more than $2 billion for the state's economy.116 In Cape Cod, tourism
represents the largest segment of their economic base (accounting for 43 percent).11?
The Southeastern New England Coastal Watershed Restoration Program will draw upon
stakeholders and their networks to strategically direct resources to visible, high-impact projects
focused on resiliency 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
fostering watershed resiliency; and
• improve technology transfer and delivery of restoration programs across the region.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the EPA and partner agencies will protect and restore communities and ecosystems
impacted by sources of pollution. These collaborative and transparent approaches will decrease
the cumulative ecological risk for geographic areas. The EPA's FY 2015 efforts will focus on
the following:
115 The Economic and Market Value of Coasts and Estuaries: What's At Stake? by Linwood Pendleton, Page 44; Restore
America's Estuaries I The Economic Value of Coasts & Estuaries
116 The 2012 Briefing Book from Grow Smari Rhode Island, page 10 http: //www. gro wsmartri. org/wp-
content/uploads/2012/08/gsri-2012-briefing-book.pdf
117 The Cape Cod Chamber of Commerce website Cape Cod Chamber of Commerce - Cape Cod News and Events
306
-------
Northwest Forest
In FY 2015, the EPA will request $962 thousand, including 5.0 FTE, 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 sixth field watersheds118 in Oregon, Washington,
Northern California, Montana, Idaho, Nevada, and Utah;
• 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 maintain 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 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 ongoing development of Total Maximum Daily Loads
and Best Management Practices for forestry practices in five Oregon coastal basins.
• Provide technical support to the State of Idaho and to Indian Tribes as they move forward
with implementation of forest practice rule revisions related to stream shading;
• 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 California119. Shellfish growers contribute $110 million
1 90
a 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
treatment and chemical costs by 20 percent121;
118 A sixth field watershed is a hydrological 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.
119 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.
120 Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers Association http://www.pcsga.net/farming-science/economic-benefits/
121 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.
307
-------
• Engage in an interagency forum at the executive and management levels for Washington,
Oregon, and California and a similar forum for the interior Columbia Basin122. These
two broad-scale collaborative efforts address policy, management, and technical natural
resource issues that are key to water quality and drinking water protection; and
• Engage in collaborative efforts including the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board and
Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Projects. These collaborative efforts are at
the forefront of efforts to conserve and restore water quality using alternatives to
traditional regulatory and enforcement-related approaches.
Lake Pontchartrain
The program will work to restore the ecological health of the Lake Pontchartrain Basin. In FY
2015, 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 Plan123 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 continue serving as
the hub of a collaborative strategy to protect, enhance, restore, and improve the resilience of the
coastal watersheds of Southeastern New England to withstand and/or recover from harmful
environmental impacts, and sustain its health and the provision of ecosystem services into the
future.
In FY 2015, the EPA will request $5 million in technical assistance, grants, and/or contracts
under the Southeastern New England Coastal Watershed Restoration Program for the following
activities:
122 Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Utah, Eastern Oregon/Washington
123 http://www. saveourlake.org/management-plan.php
308
-------
• Investment in regionally significant and/or landscape-scale restoration opportunities that
address habitat restoration, water quality (nutrients, stormwater, nonpoint source
pollution, etc.), climate change, and management of cumulative impacts;
• Collaboration with the Narragansett Bay and Buzzards Bay National Estuary Programs as
well as the Cape Cod Commission and other Cape organizations to identify and promote
approaches that can be replicated across Southeastern New England, with an initial focus
on nutrients and stormwater;
• Funding and oversight of pilot projects to demonstrate successful restoration or promote
innovative technology to accelerate ecosystem restoration;
• Leveraging for efficiency and effectiveness by coordinating operations, resources, and
funding principles among restoration partners, including federal and state agencies;
• Capacity-building of small or emerging organizations to actively participate in
implementing large scale restoration projects;
• Promotion of regional and/or partnership arrangements among municipalities for
addressing stormwater and nutrient issues;
• Technical assistance to all organizations for project planning and design; and
• Incorporation of assessment and adaptive management feedback and mechanisms to
improve the next generation of projects.
Community Action for a Renewed Environment
The Agency is not requesting funding for the CARE program in FY 2015.
Performance Targets:
Work under these programs supports the Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic
Ecosystems objective. Currently, there are no performance measures for these specific
programs.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$15.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$498.07 -1.5 FTE) This reflects a decrease in collaborative efforts that conserve and
restore water quality on forest and range lands in seven western states, including
interagency and intergovernmental efforts that coordinate and leverage resources for
water quality and drinking water efforts. The reduced resources include 1.5 FTE and
associated payroll of $228.0.
• (+$3,000.0) This reflects a realignment of resources for restoration opportunities in
Southeastern New England that address habitat restoration and water quality. For FY
2015, the EPA has requested language to allow this program the authority to award
implementation grants.
309
-------
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).
110
-------
Program Area: Homeland Security
ill
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$4,066.5
$4,066.5
14.2
FY 2014
Enacted
$3,655.0
$3,655.0
11.3
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$4,102.0
$4,102.0
11.7
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$447.0
$447.0
0.4
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 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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.
• 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.
112
-------
• 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.
• Continue the implementation of Executive Order 13587 (Structural Reforms to Improve
the Security of Classified Networks and the Responsible Sharing and Safeguarding of
Classified Information) by implementing requirements to meet the multiple pillars of
classified information protection, and the development of an Insider Threat program to
address and mitigate threats to national security. Insider Threat program implementation
will begin with agency-wide training; and the design, development, and maintenance of
internet based secure data capture and reporting capabilities (web pages/homepages) and
other computer-based data repositories.
• 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 2015 resources 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.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$84.0) This is the net effect of the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$500.0) This reflects funding for agency-wide training and the design, development,
and maintenance of internet based secure data capture and reporting capabilities (web
pages/homepages) and other computer-based data repositories to address Insider Threat
program requirements.
• (+$96.0) This reflects resources for use in document and training development support.
• (+$65.0 / + 0.4 FTE) This reflects a shift in workforce strategy to support the Agency's
security reporting process. These resources include 0.4 FTE and associated payroll of
$65.0.
• (-$130.0) This reflects efficiencies gained through enhanced coordination of agencywide
homeland security IT efforts.
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).
114
-------
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection
Program Area: Homeland Security
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect Human Health
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
Environmental Program & Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$10,382.8
$875.1
$11,257.9
27.6
FY 2014
Enacted
$10,431.0
$980.0
$11,411.0
23.9
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$12,067.0
$1,004.0
$13,071.0
23.1
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$1,636.0
$24.0
$1,660.0
-0.8
Program Project Description:
This program includes EPA's efforts to coordinate and support the protection of the nation's
critical water infrastructure from terrorist threats and all-hazard events through effective
information sharing and dissemination.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
Information Sharing Networks & Water Security
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to build capacity to identify and respond to threats to critical
national water infrastructure 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;
• Continuing to develop materials under the Community Based Water Resiliency initiative
which aims to elevate the recognition of the importance of water infrastructure in the
response and recovery efforts of a community, one of the principal lessons learned from
Hurricane Sandy;
• Supporting effective communication conduits to disseminate threat and incident
information and to serve as a clearinghouse for sensitive information;
• Promoting information sharing between the water sector and environmental
professionals, 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;
115
-------
• Providing water utilities, of all sizes, access to a comprehensive range of important
materials, including the most updated information, tools, training, and protocols designed
to enhance the security, preparedness, and resiliency of the water sector; and
• Ensuring 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, the 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 2015 request level for
the information sharing networks is $1.0 million.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$3.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$65.0 / -0.1 FTE) The agency is reviewing and redesigning many core business
processes to be more efficient. The reduced resources include 0.1 FTE and associated
payroll of $15.0.
• (+$86.0) This realignment will allow the EPA to provide additional training to very small
water systems so that they can be prepared and resilient in the event of an emergency.
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.
116
-------
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)
Science & Technology
Environmental Program & Management
Building and Facilities
Hazardous Substance SuperrUnd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$540.0
$7,328.9
$5,861.9
$683.5
$14,414.3
3.8
FY 2014
Enacted
$548.0
$5,724.0
$6,676.0
$1,265.0
$14,213.0
4.7
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$576.0
$5,716.0
$7,875.0
$1,113.0
$15,280.0
4.7
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$28.0
($8.0)
$1,199.0
($152.0)
$1,067.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
This EPA Homeland Security Program, in the EPM appropriation, supports management and
operations for: the EPA Personnel Access and Security System (EPASS) which is designed to
enroll, print, and issue an EPASS badge for nearly 25,000 EPA employees and contractors; the
National Security Information (NSI) program, which manages and safeguards the agency's
classified information; and mitigating security vulnerabilities at agency facilities.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
As part of nationwide protection of buildings and critical infrastructure, the EPA performs
vulnerability assessments at approximately 24 facilities. Through this program, the Agency also
recommends security risk mitigations, oversees access control measures, determines physical
security measures for new construction and leases, and manages security equipment lifecycle.
In this Homeland Security program, the EPA also designates position risk levels, initiates
approximately 2,900 background investigations, adjudicates approximately 3,700 investigations,
determines eligibility to classified NSI, and maintains approximately 25,000 personnel security
records.
Further, the EPA safeguards NSI, provides mandatory NSI security education and training,
conducts on-site NSI inspections and vulnerability assessments, oversees the EPA's Sensitive
Compartmented Information Program and Industrial Security Program, and manages NSI-related
databases.
117
-------
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$5.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$13.0) This reflects efficiencies achieved in the Homeland Security program. This
reflects a reduction found from agencywide efforts to develop more effective business
processes. The agency is reviewing and redesigning many core business processes to
further leverage technology.
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;
Design Basis Threat, Interagency Security Committee, March 2013.
118
-------
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach
119
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$5,733.4
$5,733.4
22.9
FY 2014
Enacted
$6,548.0
$6,548.0
22.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$8,077.0
$8,077.0
21.8
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$1,529.0
$1,529.0
-0.2
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
to protect children and other vulnerable life stages.124'125
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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. The Children's Health Protection program 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, in FY 2015, the program will
work 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 methods and data for protecting children from heightened public health risks.
124 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.
125 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.
320
-------
• The program 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. As part of this effort, the program will coordinate with
other related agencies to improve federal government-wide support in implementing
children's health legislative mandates and children's health outreach, including providing
children's environmental health expertise on interagency activities and coordinate
expertise from program offices. Through the Task Force, the EPA will work to advance
agency contributions to federal initiatives - including the Coordinated Federal Action
Plan to Reduce Racial and Ethnic Asthma Disparities1 6 and Advancing Healthy Housing
- A Strategy for Action (a report from the Federal Healthy Homes Work Group).12?
• The program will continue to serve as the lead program in the implementation and
coordination of programs that protect children where they live, learn and play by:
o Promoting and offering technical assistance for the adoption of the agency's
Schools Guidelines and other programmatic school environmental health tools. 28
o Providing training, curriculum and assessment resources regarding children's
environmental health to child care providers and government agencies that
oversee centers.
o Establishing relationships with national youth organizations to educate and
empower children about environmental health in extracurricular and after school
settings
o Promoting healthy homes for children by incorporating a strong message into
related training (e.g. training for energy auditors, weatherization workers, code
inspectors, and community health workers).
• The program 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.
• The program 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 Research and
Development program, Children's Environmental Health and Disease Prevention
Research Centers and others on many activities including: research planning,
126 The Asthma Disparities Action Plan can be found at
http://www.epa.gov/childrenstaskforce/federal asthma disparities action plan.pdf.
127 The Healthy Housing Strategy for Action can be found at
http://portal.hud. gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program offices/healthy homes/advhh.
128 The EPA's Voluntary Guidelines for States: Development and Implementation of a School Environmental Health Program
and Voluntary School Siting Guidelines can be found at
http://www.epa.gov/schools/
321
-------
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 those for multiple environmental hazards and stressors.
• The program will 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;
• The program will 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
• The program will continue to work on the established targets of agency and office goals.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports the multiple goals and strategic objectives. Currently, there
are no performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$255.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$1,274.0 / -0.2 FTE) This funding will be used to support the Agency's emphasis on
healthy communities and coordinate expertise and efforts across programs in order to
provide technical assistance to states and communities. These resources include the
reduction of 0.2 FTE and $30.0 in associated payroll, reflecting the agency-wide efforts
to improve efficiency.
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.
322
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$6,991.1
$6,991.1
11.4
FY 2014
Enacted
$8,702.0
$8,702.0
12.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($8,702.0)
($8,702.0)
-12.0
Program Project Description:
The EPA is committed to environmental education, a core part of our efforts to safeguard public
health and the environment. Environmental education provides communities with the necessary
skills and knowledge to make informed choices and take responsible action. The primary goals
of the EPA's educational programs are to share information about how to protect the
environment, and particularly how the EPA protects the water we drink and the air we breathe.
Environmental education programs also aim to improve participation in advanced programs in
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields and thereby foster the next generation
of scientists and engineers to tackle current and future environmental challenges. The EPA
fulfills its environmental education mission by connecting educators with the most up-to-date,
science-based information and research. Our programs also provide public funding for projects
and activities that enable environmental education in communities across the nation. Moving
forward, the EPA's program offices will assist in the implementation of the Agency's
environmental education activities across the country. These individuals will help develop and
disseminate environmental education publications, curriculum, and training opportunities, and
also manage related award programs and federal grant assistance. To assure that all EPA
programs are participating and focused on environmental education, funds for the agency-wide
effort are distributed. This distribution brings broader engagement both inside and outside the
Agency.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the Agency is decentralizing the Environmental Education program in order to focus
limited resources on 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 decentralizing environmental education activities within the
appropriate national programs, the EPA is improving the accountability and outcomes of these
activities. Integrating environmental education activities with a new commitment to innovation
will allow the EPA to better leverage its resources for these activities, thus building momentum
to better serve the public while promoting environmental literacy. The agency will enhance
323
-------
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.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$8,702.0 / -12.0 FTE) This realignment integrates the Environmental Education
program into agency efforts and selectively targets the resources across key agency
programs. In addition, this also reflects agencywide efforts to develop more effective
business practices to find efficiencies. These resources include $1,508.0 in associated
payroll for 12.0 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.
324
-------
Executive Management and Operations
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 2013
Actuals
$46,812.8
$46,812.8
327.6
FY 2014
Enacted
$47,168.0
$47,168.0
323.8
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$50,448.0
$50,448.0
325.3
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$3,280.0
$3,280.0
1.5
Program/Project Description:
This program has been retitled from "Congressional, Intergovernmental, and External
Relations". 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 four headquarters
offices that help the agency protect human health and the environment, including the Office of
Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations (OCIR), the Office of Executive Services (OES),
the Office of the Executive Secretariat (OEX), and the Office of External Affairs and
Environmental Education (OEAEE). The Office of Federal Advisory Committee Management
and Outreach (OFACMO) was previously funded under this program but is now funded from the
Human Resources Management program as a result of the OA/OARM reorganization effective in
FY2014.
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. These
activities include management, coordination and setting policy.
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 and liaison to state and local governments, agricultural and rural communities
and maintaining public relations and communication with the press. 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
325
-------
more efficient management practices and provide greater accountability and transparency to our
stakeholders.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the Immediate Office of the Administrator (IO) will continue to 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 2015, resources in IO will primarily support critical workforce and telecommunications
needs for staff. As an example, in FY 2013, 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; managed scheduling (i.e., the Administrator has
approximately 8-10 meetings per day); coordinated travel and facilitated advance work. 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 2015, the
Headquarters IO will be funded at a level of $4.11 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, Water and Pesticides)
as well as on intergovernmental issues. OCIR and its regional counterparts serve as a direct
contact for Congress and state and local government officials during a crisis and for the
numerous EPA program activities that directly impact elected and other senior state and local
officials. In FY 2015, OCIR's Office of Congressional Affairs (OCA) will continue to prepare
the EPA's officials for hearings and meetings with members of Congress, oversee responses to
written inquiries (in FY 2013, the Office received over 1,000 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, OCA
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 (LGAC)
and the Small Community Advisory Subcommittee. LGAC is the EPA's only federal advisory
committee made up exclusively of locally elected and appointed officials from municipalities,
326
-------
tribes and states. The Office of Intergovernmental Relations also coordinates the interactions of
senior agency officials (including the Administrator and Deputy Administrator) with governors,
mayors, and other state and local officials and their associations. These activities help inform and
educate state and local officials on EPA actions and help ensure that the agencies' policies and
regulations consider impacts on state and local governments. The Office also manages EPA's
implementation of the Federalism Executive Order, ensuring proper and formal consultation with
state and local governments, and that significant agency regulations and policies reflect their
concerns.
The Office will continue to work closely with program offices, regions and states to modernize
and expand the use of the National Environmental Performance Partnership System (NEPPS) as
a platform to improve EPA's working relationship with states. NEPPS is a performance-based
system of environmental protection designed to drive performance, efficiency, and resource
flexibility into the EPA-state partnerships that implement the nation's environmental programs.
OCIR's efforts will support the EPA's strategic plan and the Administrator's priority to establish
a new era of state and local partnerships. In FY 2015, OCIR will be funded at a level of $7.8
million and 52.6 FTE.
The Office of External Affairs and Environmental Education (OEAEE) facilitates the exchange
of information between the EPA and the public, media, 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 education and training; and solicits stakeholder commitment to environmental
stewardship and environmental protection.
In FY 2015, OEAEE headquarters and regional offices will work together to ensure that the
media is informed of agency initiatives and receives timely, accurate information on how the
EPA protects human health and the environment. The Office will continue its One EPA web
initiative to ensure the agency's web pages are consistent with web guidelines and provide all
stakeholders with transparent, accurate and comprehensive information on the EPA's activities
and policies. In addition, OEAEE will continue its outreach activities to stakeholders, including
faith-based, neighborhood, multilingual, educational, and health groups and underserved
populations to solicit feedback and ensure stakeholders 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, and both standard and innovative channels such as the website,
webinars, social media, virtual town halls, public service announcements, photo projects, and
videos to reach students, communities, and multilingual populations. Finally, OEAEE will
continue the EPA's environmental outreach and education efforts to ensure teachers, students,
and other members of the public have accurate, science-based information. In FY 2015, the
Headquarters OEAEE will be funded at a level of $13.4 million and 56.0 FTE.
In FY 2015, EPA is requesting resources for its Representation Fund to host the triennial
Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) conference, which is an international
organization, created by Canada, Mexico and the United States. The CEC was established to
address regional environmental concerns, help prevent potential trade and environmental
327
-------
conflicts, and to promote the effective enforcement of environmental law. This is a weeklong
session that includes participation by each government delegation and by the public. The US
hosts the event every three years. In FY 2015, the agency is requesting $19.0 thousand to support
the important work of the representation fund.
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 2015, the
Headquarters OES will be funded at a level of $4.1 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 (e.g., 155 FOIA requests were processed in FY
2013), 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 2013, OEX processed 8,639 pieces of executive correspondence and more
than 1 million emails addressed to the Administrator or Deputy Administrator. In FY 2015, 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
and other costs, improve accountability and ensure faster responses to the public, stakeholders
and members of Congress. In FY 2015, OEX will be funded at a level of $2.2 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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$670.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$588.0 / +4.1 FTE) This increase supports the work of managing Agency-wide
environmental education activities. These resources include 4.1 FTE and $588.0 in
associated payroll.
• (+$2,012.0 / -2.6 FTE) This net change in FTE and associated payroll reflects efficiencies
to be realized in business process changes within Headquarters and regional offices.
These resources will support 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 include a reduction of 2.6 FTE and $373.0
in associated payroll.
328
-------
• (+$10.0) This reflects an increase for the Administrator's Representation Fund to host the
Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC), which takes place every three years.
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.
329
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$17,670.9
$1,329.4
$19,000.3
33.9
FY 2014
Enacted
$17,206.0
$1,340.0
$18,546.0
29.6
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$32,588.0
$1,466.0
$34,054.0
31.2
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$15,382.0
$126.0
$15,508.0
1.6
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Environmental Information 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 over the Internet. As it employs new technology and data standards, open-
source software, shared and portal services for the E-Enterprise business model, 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.
r-*-, -*—, 19Q -^^
The Central Data Exchange (CDX) is the largest component of the EN program and serves as
the point of entry on the Exchange Network for environmental data submissions to the agency.
CDX provides a set of core services that promote a leaner and more cost-effective enterprise
architecture for the agency by avoiding the creation of duplicative services. It also provides a set
of value-added features and services that enable faster and more efficient transactions for internal
and external clients of the EPA. Through CDX, a stakeholder can submit data through one
centralized point of access, exchange data with target systems using Web services, and utilize
publishing services to share information collected by the EPA and other stakeholders (including
states and Tribes). CDX also provides central support for virtual signature service and reporting,
and support for the Automated Commercial Environment, a system for import and export
services for the U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
The agency's EN program also supports other tools and services, such as the Facility Registry
Service (FRS), the Substance Registry System, the Reusable Component Services and other
registries within EPA's System of Registries. FRS serves as a key point of entry for the public
interested in the EPA's data stores, such as Envirofacts, the Geoplatform, MyEnvironment,
1 For more information on the Central Data Exchange, please visit: http://www.epa.gov/cdx/.
330
-------
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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the Exchange Network program will continue to be a pivotal component of the
Agency's E-Enterprise model. Within the E-Enterprise business model context, will continue to
pilot projects 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 less expensive. In
addition, the EN program will work across EPA offices to integrate additional reporting systems
into CDX, such as Clean Air Act State Implementation Plan reporting and updates, the high
volume-reporting National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System program, and reporting for
the Toxic Substances Control Act.
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to develop and support the E-Enterprise business model. E-
Enterprise facilitates two-way electronic transactions with the regulated community and external
partners who routinely conduct environmental business with the EPA. It will enable customers
and co-regulators of the EPA (states, tribes and territories) to conduct environmental business
electronically and in a dynamically customizable way based on who they are and what they need.
Facilities 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. With E-Enterprise, the EPA
will be able to replace outdated paper reporting with integrated e-reporting systems using
advanced technology and shared IT services. The paperwork and regulatory reporting burden
will be reduced by more efficient collection, reporting, and use of data, plus regulatory revisions
to eliminate redundant or obsolete information requests.
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to support the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) program
by continuing to implement new tools that enhance the use of digital documents and streamlining
the document search processes that are inherent to FOIA. These new tools will improve the
efficiency and effectiveness of the EPA's FOIA program.
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to build out EPA's information technology services and make
them available for state, tribe and territory system implementations that will reduce resource
requirements and streamline compliance with the Cross-Media Electronic Reporting Regulation
(CROMERR). EPA will:
• Conduct robust outreach activities to increase awareness of virtual node web services
interfaces and CROMERR services and the benefits of using these services;
• Approve CROMERR applications from authorized programs that propose to use the
EPA's virtual CROMERR services and assist co-regulators with integrating these
services into their systems; and
331
-------
• Provide virtual services to three new Tribal partners and to three existing partners who
are replacing local nodes to better integrate services.
These activities are intended to assist states and tribes in the development activities associated
with establishing a point of presence and exchanging data on the Network and supporting local
electronic reporting programs in a more cost effective way.
In FY 2015, the System of Registries will continue efforts to allow greater sharing and better
understanding of the EPA's data. This includes:
• Continued enhancement of the EPA's inventory of systems and computational models,
the Registry of EPA Applications and Databases (READ), to meet agency federal
reporting and information management needs;
• Continuing to update the EPA's dataset registry, the Environmental Data Gateway, to
meet EPA's priority of improving data accessibility; and
• Continued development of data dictionaries for systems catalogued in READ,
encouraging re-use of data elements in existing systems, thereby improving standards and
reducing burden.
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.
In FY 2015, FRS will continue to identify and geospatially locate facilities, sites or places of
environmental interest that are subject to regulation. Using rigorous verification and data
management procedures, FRS will continue to integrate facility data from EPA's national
program systems, other federal agencies and state and Tribal master facility records. The EPA
will work with its' programs to design a new directory that incorporates the information in the
Substance Registry Services (SRS) and that helps industry, the public, and other users discover
where there is information about chemicals and other substances within the agency.
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to work with the Department of Homeland Security's
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to improve the importation process of products that are of
dual interest to EPA and CBP. The EPA will conduct pilot tests for electronic reporting and
processing of EPA-regulated imports for vehicles and engines, pesticides and toxic substances.
This electronic reporting will aid regional enforcement coordinators by automating what is
currently a manual review process and allow them to focus on key high-value monitoring and
targeting activities for noncompliant imports.
In FY 2015, this program will support the Agency's LEAN efforts to move toward a high
performance organization (HPO) to support business process changes agencywide.
332
-------
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(052) Number of major
enabling faster receipt,
FY2008
45
48
FY2009
50
55
EPA environmental systems that use the CDX electronic requirements
processing, and quality checking of data.
FY2010
60
60
FY2011
60
64
FY2012
67
68
FY2013
75
73
FY2014
80
FY2015
85
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.
FY 2008
55
59
FY 2009
60
59
FY 2010
65
69
FY2011
65
72
FY 2012
80
92
FY 2013
95
97
FY 2014
98
FY 2015
103
Units
Users
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.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
Baseline
Year
56,200
FY 2012
58,000
65,238
FY 2013
70,000
79,818
FY 2014
75,000
FY 2015
84,000
Units
Users
Work under this program supports the performance results in the Exchange Network Program
Project under the EPM appropriation and can be found in the Eight Year Performance Array and
Assessment Tab.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$90.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$16,095.0 / +0.5 FTE) Realignment of resources to support the agency's E-Enterprise
initiative, which 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. Users will be able to 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 incorporate federal open data standards. This realignment includes 0.5 FTE
and associated payroll of $95.0.
• (-$1,383.0) This reduction will delay the program's ability to support data integration and
analysis capabilities.
• (+$580.0 / +1.1 FTE) This realignment of resources supports the build out of information
technology services that will reduce the resource requirements for state, Tribal, and
territory system implementation to comply with the Cross-Media Electronic Reporting
Regulation (CROMERR) and make it a more efficient paperless reporting process. These
efforts will help move the agency to a high performance organization for benefit of the
workforce and the public. This realignment includes 1.1 FTE and associated payroll of
$180.0.
333
-------
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)
334
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$1,737.0
$1,737.0
5.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$2,388.0
$2,388.0
4.9
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$2,252.0
$2,252.0
4.9
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($136.0)
($136.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
The EPA's 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.130 The program
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/SBREFA, 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
335
-------
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the Small Business Ombudsman program will:
• Assist the EPA's programs, regions and state partners in carrying out the EPA's
compliance assistance to small businesses given the disinvestment in wholesale
compliance assistance offered by the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance.
• Assist in carrying out the EPA's implementation of the RFA including 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. 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 in FY 2015, resources of $1.3 million and 2.5 FTE support the Office of Small
Business Programs. The remaining $944 thousand and 2.6 FTE support activities related to the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act in the Office of Policy, Office of
Regulatory Policy and Management.
336
-------
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple goals and strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$25.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$161.0) This reduction in resources reflects efficiencies realized in the design of
outreach materials and dissemination.
Statutory Authority:
1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA), section 507.
337
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$1,483.1
$1,483.1
10.2
FY 2014
Enacted
$1,834.0
$1,834.0
9.2
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$2,107.0
$2,107.0
8.2
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$273.0
$273.0
-1.0
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Office of Small Business Programs (OSBP) manages the agency's Small and
Minority Business Assistance Programs, which include the Direct Procurement Program, and the
Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) 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), and service-disabled
veteran-owned small businesses (SDVOSBs) 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. In FY 13 the Minority Academic Institutions
program was moved from OSBP to the Office of Diversity and Advisory Committee
Management and Outreach.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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 2015, the funding for the Small Minority Business
Assistance Program is $2.107 million and 8.2 FTE).
338
-------
In FY 2015, 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
regulation131 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 the EPA grant personnel on the
scope and utilization of the DBE Program; providing technical assistance and counseling to the
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.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple goals and strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$19.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
Please see: http://frwebgatel.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/PDFgate.cgi?WAISdocID=DHurqp/0/2/0&WAISaction=retrieve for
further information.
339
-------
• (-$140.0 / -1.0 FTE) This reduction reflects greater efficiencies realized form
improvements in outreach and dissemination technology. This decrease includes 1.0 FTE
and $140.0 in associated payroll.
• (+$394.0) This increase in extramural resources will be used to support enhanced
technical assistance to small businesses to ensure that small and historically
disadvantaged businesses receive a fair share of EPA procurement dollars.
Statutory Authority:
Small Business Act, sections 8 and 15, as amended; Small Business Jobs Act; Executive Orders
12073, 12432, 12138, 13360 and 13216; P.L. 106-50; Clean Air Act.
340
-------
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 2013
Actuals
572,553.5
$12,553.5
54.1
FY 2014
Enacted
$14,956.0
$14,956.0
63.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$27,489.0
$27,489.0
74.5
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$12,533.0
$12,533.0
11.5
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. Domestic chemical accidents include
those in Pasadena and Texas City, Texas, which resulted in hundreds of injuries and dozens of
deaths, and more recent accidents, such as the explosion in West, Texas that resulted in the death
of 12 firefighters, 2 members of the public, and more than 300 injuries.
Accidents at chemical facilities have resulted in injury and death, severe environmental damage,
and great financial loss. Accidents reported to the EPA since the beginning of 2005 by Risk
Management program facilities have resulted in approximately 64 worker and public deaths,
over 1,700 injuries, nearly 350 thousand people sheltered in place, and more than $2.5 billion in
on-site and off-site damages. States and communities often lack the strong infrastructure needed
to prepare for and/or respond to these emergencies or to prevent them from happening in the first
place.
The EPA's 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:
341
-------
• 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
11'?
chart below). 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.
Reported Accidents by Year as of March 2O13
1996 1997 199S 1999 20OO 20O1 2OO2 2OO3 20O4 2OO5 20O6 2OO7 ZOOS 2OO9 2O1O 2O11 2012
Year
' Data are current as of March 2013. The FY 2011 and 2012 numbers may be artificially low due to lag in reporting.
342
-------
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.
Under EPCRA, State Emergency Response Commissions (SERCs), Tribal Emergency Response
Commissions (TERCs), 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 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to conduct 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 1,900 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.
In FY2015, as part of agency priorities, EPA will expand its assistance to state and local partners
to prevent, prepare and respond to risks at chemical facilities in fulfilling the 2013 Executive
Order to improve the safety and security of chemical facilities. Ongoing RMP efforts will
continue to work in concert with state and local governments to provide grants, technical
support, outreach, and training and to build more efficient and cost-effective partnerships. 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.
In coordination with programmatic enhancements supporting the Executive Order, 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
343
-------
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.
The EPA will coordinate with the Department of Homeland Security to analyze the RMP and
Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS) data in order to identify chemical facilities
that may not have provided all required information or may be non-compliant with Federal
requirements to ensure chemical facility safety. This analysis will help the agency identify RMP
non-filers and focus efforts on compliance inspections, regulatory enforcement actions, and
outreach toward those facilities that potentially pose risk to communities, and gain knowledge on
the effectiveness of risk management measures.
In FY 2015, 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.
On August 1, 2013, the White House issued an Executive Order on Improving Chemical Facility
Safety and Security. This Executive Order was issued in response to the disaster in West, Texas.
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue coordination with DHS, FEMA, OSHA, and other
interagency partners on activities associated with the 2013 Executive Order to improve the safety
and security of chemical facilities by implementing the following:
• Expand support for local communities through the development of tools and technical
support. This includes enhancing the CAMEO system to include development of a web
app that provides easy accessibility for SERCs and LEPCs. This effort can also include
developing, as appropriate: updates, alerts, advisory and other materials for regulated
facilities, states, LEPCs, and emergency responders to assist them in preventing,
preparing for and responding to chemical accidents and reducing chemical risks;
344
-------
• Initiate a grant program for local responders. This program would assist local planners
and first responders on how to use the risk information available to them to plan for all
potential chemical risks from the facility, to work and maintain a dialogue with the
facilities to reduce the risks, and to communicate to the public what to do if an accident
occurs;
• Establish a mechanism for data sharing with other Federal agencies, including identifying
and implementing a process for comparing and analyzing various federal databases of
regulated chemical facilities in order to identify those facilities that have not complied
with the federal regulations; and
• Consider mechanisms to strengthen agency RMP and EPCRA programs, and the Agency
is public and interagency input on how best to proceed.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(CH2) Number of risk management plan inspections conducted.
FY2008
400
628
FY2009
400
654
FY2010
400
618
FY2011
560
630
FY2012
530
652
FY2013
500
539
FY2014
460
FY2015
460
Units
Inspections
The funding requested will enable EPA to conduct 460 RMP facility inspections in FY 2015. Of
these inspections, 36 percent will be conducted at high-risk facilities.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$97.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$12,436.0 / +11.5 FTE) These realigned resources will improve chemical facility
safety and security and support implementation of the chemical facilities Executive Order
and for risk management. This increase enhances overall program capabilities and
includes 1) $5 million to enhance the CAMEO system to include the development of a
web based CAMEO that provides easy accessibility for SERCs and LEPCs, 2) $1.5
million for a grant program to support initial responders, 3) 11.5 FTE and $1,707.0 in
associated payroll to aid with outreach, planning and grants management for local
communities, planners and responders. The increased effort will assist local communities
in planning and working with facilities to improve the safety and security of chemical
facilities and reduce the risks of hazardous chemicals to workers and communities. The
EPA is also considering options to strengthen its RMP and EPCRA programs and is
seeking public and interagency input on how to proceed.
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).
345
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$15,221.0
$15,221.0
45.6
FY 2014
Enacted
$15,956.0
$15,956.0
45.2
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$14,927.0
$14,927.0
44.7
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($1,029.0)
($1,029.0)
-0.5
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) program133 supports the EPA's mission by annually releasing to the public
waste management and pollution prevention data on over 650 toxic chemicals from
approximately 20,000 industrial and federal facilities. 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 premiere
source of toxic chemical release data for communities, non-governmental organizations,
industrial facilities and government agencies.
With the implementation of the rule on "Electronic Reporting of Toxics Release Inventory
Data,"134 effective January 21, 2014, facilities are required to report non-trade secret TRI forms
to the EPA using electronic software provided by the agency. Electronic reporting of TRI forms
provides numerous benefits for the EPA, the regulated community and the public in delivering
transparent, readily available and understandable data while decreasing the cost to EPA of
processing forms.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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 the sharing of pollution
prevention approaches.
http://www.epa.gov/tri/
'http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-08-27/pdf/2013-20744.pdf
346
-------
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
TRI facilities. Facilities located in states that 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 at least 600 data quality checks in FY 2015 to help
ensure the accuracy and completeness of the reported data. The TRI program also will provide
compliance assistance and enforcement support to the EPA's Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance programs. In FY 2015, the TRI program will continue to make the data available to
the public within weeks after the July 1st reporting deadline. The data will be 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 foster stakeholder discussions and
collaboration in analyzing and using the TRI data. In FY 2015, the stakeholders will be expanded
to include industry, government, academia, non-governmental organizations, and the public.
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.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
500
600
FY 2014
500
FY 2015
600
Units
Quality
Checks
Work under this program also supports performance results in TRI/Right to Know Program
Project and can be found in the Eight-Year Performance Array in the Program Performance and
Assessment tab.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$139.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$1,168.0 / -0.5 FTE) This reduction reflects a decrease in work related to the
enhancement of TRI IT systems and anticipated process efficiencies due to
implementation of the TRI electronic reporting rule, which became effective January 21,
2014. This reduction includes 0.5 FTE with an associated payroll of $74.0.
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).
347
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$13,396.6
$13,396.6
85.8
FY 2014
Enacted
$13,811.0
$13,811.0
88.6
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$14,942.0
$14,942.0
85.9
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$1,131.0
$1,131.0
-2.7
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 2015 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 2015.
Capacity Building: The EPA continues to provide technical assistance to encourage
development of Tribal capacity to implement federal environmental programs through several
means, including the use of the Direct Implementation Tribal Cooperative Agreement (DITCA)
authority and the "treatment in a manner similar to a state" (TAS) process. In FY 2015, 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 Agency has begun to review how it measures and reports on the progress tribes
have made in developing and implementing environmental protection programs in Indian
country. This effort will build on the new Indian General Assistance Program (GAP) guidance
designed to improve tribal capacity development milestones beyond the current indicators. In
FY 2015, the EPA plans to have an improved measurement scheme for assessing and reporting
on tribal environmental program capacity. This new scheme will require modifications to
existing data collection systems.
348
-------
Tribal EcoAmbassadors: In FY 2015, 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
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 published the new "Guidance on the Award and Management of
General Assistance Agreements for Tribes and Intertribal Consortia." In FY 2015, 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 Tribal capacity.
GAP Online: In addition to the improved measurement scheme noted above, the EPA will
continue to use GAP Online, an internet-based database, that assists tribes and the EPA to
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. GAP Online will have new features in FY 2015 to align with
the GAP Guidance and new measures for the tribal program. GAP Online will provide enhanced
capabilities for EPA to assess and understand the levels of tribal capacity development that will
align with specific media program development indicators.
Tribal Program Management System: The Tribal Program Management System (TPMS)
tracks progress in the status of key indicators of Tribal capacity, which contribute to achieving
the performance targets under the EPA's FY 2014-2018 Strategic Plan. Based on an internal
review of existing tribal databases including TPMS, as noted above, in FY 2015, EPA will
substantially modify this database, implement efficiencies in maintenance costs, and reduce data
entry burden for collection of existing data points.
Tribal Consultation: In May 2011, the EPA released its Policy on Consultation and
Coordination Policy with Indian Tribes, consistent with the President's 2009 Memorandum on
implementing 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, which promote consistency and coordination. In FY
349
-------
2015, the EPA will continue to support the Agency's web-based 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), are a subset of the NTOC,
provide recommendations and feedback to the Agency on environmental issues of national
significance affecting tribes. In FY 2015, NTC members and the EPA staff will continue the
work to propose new ways of doing business so that we streamline processes, increase
availability of existing resources for the most important environmental work, leverage resources,
enhance government-to-government partnerships, and reduce administrative burdens.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$313.0) This reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$818.0 / -2.7 FTE) This funding 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 agency is
reviewing and redesigning many core business processes to be more efficient. For tribal
capacity programs, there is a reduction of 2.7 FTE and associated payroll of $382.0.
Statutory Authority:
Annual Appropriation Acts; Indian Environmental General Assistance Program Act; PPA;
FIFRA; CAA; TSCA; NEPA; CWA; SOW A; RCRA; CERCLA; NAFTA; MPRSA; Indoor
Radon Abatement Act; OP A; 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.
350
-------
Program Area: International Programs
351
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$3,471.1
$3,471.1
18.2
FY 2014
Enacted
$3,433.0
$3,433.0
16.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$3,225.0
$3,225.0
15.3
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($208.0)
($208.0)
-0.7
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.135 In
addition, over 430 thousand of the 14 million people in the region live in 1,200 colonias136 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.
The EPA and the Mexican Environment Secretariat (SEMARNAT) will continue to closely
collaborate with the ten borderstates (four U.S. / six Mexican), twenty-six U.S. federally-
' http://www.nmsu.edu/~bec/BEC/Readings/10.USMBHC-TheBorderAtAGlance.pdf
' http://www.borderhealth.org/border region.php
352
-------
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 2015 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 2015, 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
353
-------
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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$54.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$262.0 / -0.7 FTE) The agency is reviewing and redesigning many core business
processes to be more efficient. Depending on the extent of changes, there may be
impacts to the EPA's staffing of programmatic bi-national outreach efforts. For example,
EPA will focus on smaller scale projects designed to improve the environment and
protect the health of the nearly 14 million people living along the U.S.-Mexico border.
Resource reductions are feasible because of increased efficiencies in local bi-national
outreach efforts - addressing air pollution; watershed protection efforts focused on
streams entering the US, and improved emergency preparedness along the U.S.-Mexico
border. Projects are identified with input from the citizens and implemented at the local
level. The decreased resources include 0.7 FTE and associated payroll of $102.0.
Statutory Authority:
In conjunction with NEPA section 102(2)(F): 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.
354
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$7,256.2
$7,256.2
41.2
FY 2014
Enacted
$7,323.0
$7,323.0
40.3
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$7,513.0
$7,513.0
40.2
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$190.0
$190.0
-0.1
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. EPA's work with international organizations such
as the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD), and the Arctic Council are essential to successfully
addressing EPA's six priority areas for international action: Building Strong Environmental
Institutions and Legal Structures; Combating Climate Change by Limiting Pollutants; Improving
Air Quality; Expanding Access to Clean Water; Reducing Exposure to Toxic Chemicals; and
Cleaning Up Electronic (E-Waste).
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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 regional air quality monitoring, planning and control strategies with advice and
lessons learned from the United States. In addition, the EPA will facilitate partnerships among
smaller emerging economies where implementation of air quality management programs can
avoid increased contribution to transboundary pollutants.
In FY 2015, 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 grow significantly by 2050, with the fleet in
the developing world growing faster than any other region, tripling from 2010 levels137, reducing
137 OECD International Transport Forum: Transport Outlook 2012,
http://www.intemationaltransportforum.org/Pub/pdf/12Outlook.pdf
355
-------
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. Freight traffic levels and emissions will increase in the
1~Q Q
future - absent intervention - as global trade increases and global climate change increases
access to Arctic shipping lanes and resources.
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 pollution139. In November 2013, the U.S. signed and joined the
Convention, meaning that it will become a Party when the Convention enters into force. In 2015,
the EPA expects to continue a focus on ratification and full implementation 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 2015, 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. The EPA will lead United States Government efforts to advance the new Green
Growth Strategy in the OECD and through U.S. interagency processes, promoting green jobs and
sustainable development worldwide. For example, the EPA will implement the Export
Promotion Strategy, developed in FY 2014, as part of the Department of Commerce's overall
effort to expand the reach of the U.S. environmental technologies industry which generates
approximately $319 billion in revenue and supports 1.7 million domestic jobs. The EPA also
will continue its work with OECD and the UNEP to promote U.S. approaches to labels,
standards, and best practices for sustainable public procurement.
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to strengthen our activities in the Arctic, particularly with an
eye toward the U.S. government assuming the 2015-2017 Chairmanship of the Arctic Council.
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 mercury and short-lived climate forcers such as black carbon,
tropospheric ozone, and methane. These actions help lay the groundwork for the U.S.
Chairmanship of the Arctic Council starting in May 2015 and are in support of the National
Strategy for the Arctic Region. 14° Beyond the Arctic region, the EPA will continue to work with
the State Department, 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 2015, 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.
138 ibid.
139
http://www.epa.gov/intemational/toxics/mercurv/nmegotiations.html: http://www. state.gov/e/oes/rls/pr/2013/203651 .htm
140 http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/nat arctic strategy.pdf
356
-------
In FY 2015, the EPA will strengthen implementation of global, regional, and country programs
to address electronic waste (e-waste) and promote sound reuse and recycling of discarded used
electronics. By partnering with international organizations, such as the UN University Solving
the E-waste Problem Initiative, better information on the e-waste problem, demonstrations of
sustainable recycling programs, and stronger collaboration with countries, 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
report141 released in July 2011.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$127.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$63.0 / -0.1 FTE) Realigned resources will provide funds for anticipated work related
to the U.S. assumption of the Arctic Council Chairmanship in 2015. Also, this will
augment work on implementation of the Minamata Convention, which was signed by the
U.S. in November 2013. In addition, the agency is reviewing and redesigning many core
business processes to be more efficient. These resources combined with base resources
in this program provide a total of 0.5 FTE under the Agency focus on becoming a High
Performing Organization (HPO). This includes a reduction of 0.1 FTE and associated
payroll of $16.0.
Statutory Authority:
In conjunction with NEPA section 102(2)(F)142: 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. 43,
Annual Appropriation Acts.
141 http://www.epa.gov/osw/conserve/materials/ecycling/taskforce/docs/strategy.pdf
142 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.
357
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$5,294.6
$5,294.6
17.6
FY 2014
Enacted
$4,891.0
$4,891.0
16.2
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$5,939.0
$5,939.0
18.1
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$1,048.0
$1,048.0
1.9
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.143 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
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
http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/historical/goods.pdf.
358
-------
information in connection with the development, implementation, and administration of U.S.
trade policy.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
During FY 2015, 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 ongoing /
existing governance and capacity building under previously negotiated U.S. free trade
agreements. In FY 2015, the EPA also will participate in the negotiations of a comprehensive
trade agreement with the European Union. This negotiation, known as the Transatlantic Trade
and Investment Partnership (TTIP), was launched by President Obama during his State of the
Union Address in February 2013.
With negotiated agreements with South Korea, Panama, and Colombia, that have recently
entered into force, 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 2015, 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 Committee to
continue to raise the awareness among various stakeholder groups regarding the CEC and its
goals and objectives.
359
-------
Beginning in July 2014, the EPA will lead the CEC Council, which also includes the
environment ministers of Canada and Mexico, towards incremental trilateral collaboration,
consistent with each countries' national circumstances and capacities. This collaboration will
bring added value to our respective efforts to address climate change and support a transition to a
low-carbon economy. The CEC's 2014-15 trilateral work plan will focus on, for example,
measuring carbon emissions and continuing to improve the comparability of data collection,
analysis, reporting, and dissemination across North America.
The Rio+20 Conference (June 2012) provided support for several global efforts related to
developing sustainable economies and strengthening good environmental governance. In FY
2015, the EPA will play a lead role in advancing U.S. engagement under the 10-Year Framework
of Programmes on Sustainable Consumption and Production (10YFP), adopted by governments
at the Rio+20 Conference. As the U.S. National Focal Point for the 10YFP, the EPA will
promote a "whole of government" engagement through convening a 10YFP interagency working
group, and will advance international cooperation in key U.S. interest areas, including:
sustainable public procurement; life cycle assessment; and exchanging best practices and
building professional networking through the "Global SCP Clearinghouse," recently launched by
the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP.)
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$326.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$722.0 / +1.9 FTE) This increase augments international trade environmental efforts
through providing technical and policy capacity assistance under anticipated FTAs
including work on the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement and the Transatlantic Trade
and Investment Partnership. This leads to strengthening legal and regulatory frameworks
and promotes health, environment, and the green economy. The increased resources
include 1.9 FTE and associated payroll of $296.0.
Statutory Authority:
In conjunction with NEPA section 102(2)(F)144: 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);
144 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.
360
-------
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).
361
-------
Program Area: IT / Data Management / Security
362
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$6,707.3
$544.0
$7,251.3
12.3
FY 2014
Enacted
$6,410.0
$664.0
$7,074.0
12.4
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$6,604.0
$704.0
$7,308.0
14.3
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$194.0
$40.0
$234.0
1.9
Program Project Description:
Information is a valuable national resource and a strategic asset to the EPA. It enables the agency
to fulfill its mission to protect 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 information protection strategy 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
Effective information security requires vigilance and the ability to adapt to new challenges every
day. The EPA will continue to protect, defend and sustain its information assets through
continued improvements to policy and procedures; oversight and compliance; training and
awareness; information assurance; and incident response. This program leads the agency in
redesigning IT Security business processes to improve efficiency and effectiveness. In FY 2015,
the EPA will build on progress made to automate and advance the information security program
by:
• Increasing use of continuous monitoring tools and processes;
• Focusing on protecting information;
• Measuring performance;
• Advancing risk management processes;
• Continuing to update and implement the information security architecture; and
• Refining incident management capabilities.
363
-------
The Information Security program also will continue to build on progress made from continuous
monitoring to detect and remediate effects of Advanced Persistent Threats to the agency's
information and information systems. Furthermore, the agency will continue to focus on training
and user-awareness to foster desired behavior, asset definition and management, compliance,
incident management, knowledge and information management, risk management and
technology management. These efforts will strengthen the agency's ability to adequately protect
information assets. The final result is an information security program that can rely on effective
and efficient controls and processes to counter cybersecurity threats.
In FY 2015, the agency will continue Phase II of the implementation of the Homeland Security
Presidential Directive 12 (HSPD-12) requirements for logical and physical access as identified in
the Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) 201, Personal Identity Verification (PIV) of
Federal Employees and Contractors. This effort ensures only authorized employees have access
to federal and federal-controlled facilities and information systems by requiring a higher level of
identity assurance. Phase II will incorporate: physical access control management and
interoperability with other federal agencies and partners.
The agency efforts to implement the cross-agency priority goal on cybersecurity will focus on
achieving 95 percent automated capability to provide enterprise-level visibility into asset
inventory for all hardware assets; 95 percent automated capability to identify deviations from the
approved configuration baselines and to provide visibility at the organization's enterprise level;
and 95 percent hardware assets evaluated using an automated capability that scans for
vulnerabilities on computing devices using the NIST National Vulnerability Database
vulnerabilities (CVEs) as a baseline. Aggregated data will be visible at the organization's
enterprise level.
The EPA will continue to enhance the internal Computer Security Incident Response Capability
(CSIRC) to ensure rapid identification, response, alerting and reporting of suspicious activity.
CSIRC's mission is to protect the EPA information assets and respond to security incidents -
actual and potential. This includes the ability to detect unauthorized attempts to access, destroy,
or alter EPA data and information resources. CSIRC also continues to establish new, and build
existing, relationships with other federal agencies and law enforcement entities to support the
agency's mission. 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.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no specific
performance measures for this program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$17.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to adjustments
in salary and benefit costs.
364
-------
• (+$177.0 / +1.9 FTE) This net change reflects a realignment of resources from IT efficiencies
and consolidation of reporting requirements to provide staffing needs to implement Phase II
of HSPD-12 and collaboration with other agencies on information security. This net change
reflects 1.9 FTE and associated payroll of $301.0.
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).
365
-------
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
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Hazardous Substance SuperrUnd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
577,765.7
$3,676.0
$0.1
$13,667.4
$95,109.2
476.7
FY 2014
Enacted
$85,579.0
$3,525.0
$0.0
$13,911.0
$103,015.0
476.6
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$86,793.0
$3,089.0
$0.0
$14,234.0
$104,116.0
466.1
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$1,214.0
($436.0)
$0.0
$323.0
$1,101.0
-10.5
Program Project Description:
The work performed under the EPA's Information Technology/Data Management (IT/DM)
program supports agency priorities by providing critical IT infrastructure and data management
needed for: 1) access to scientific, regulatory, policy and guidance information needed by agency
staff, the regulated community and the public; 2) analytical support for interpreting and
understanding environmental information; 3) exchange and storage of data, analysis and
computation; and 4) rapid, secure and efficient communication. These are organized by the
following functional areas: information analysis and access; data management and collection;
information technology and infrastructure; and geospatial information and analysis.
IT/DM program activities support the Administration's goals of transparency, participation,
engagement and collaboration to expand the conversation on environmentalism, e.g., Exec.
Order No. 13642 - Making Open and Machine Readable the Default for Government
Information. IT/DM also supports the maintenance of the EPA'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 support to other agency IT
development projects and essential technology to agency staff, enabling them to conduct their
work effectively and efficiently.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA's IT/DM functions have progressively integrated new and transformative approaches to
the way IT is managed across the agency. FY 2015 activities will proceed with significant
366
-------
components of the agency's work to transform its digital services as part of EPA's efforts in
becoming a High Performance Organization.
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to implement the E-Enterprise business model, which
facilitates two-way electronic transactions with the regulated community and external partners
who routinely conduct environmental business with the EPA. It will enable customers and the
EPA's co-regulators (states, tribes and territories) to conduct environmental business
electronically and in a dynamically customizable way, based on who they are and what they
need. Facilities will be able to apply for permits online, check compliance status, report their
emissions and learn about new regulations that may apply to them. With E-Enterprise, the EPA
will be able to replace outdated paper-reporting with integrated e-reporting systems using
advanced technology and shared IT services. The paperwork and regulatory reporting burden
will be reduced by more efficient collection, reporting and use of data, plus regulatory revisions
to eliminate redundant or obsolete information requests. To support the E-Enterprise approach,
IT application and infrastructure will need to be enhanced to enable greater electronic exchange
of information of information between EPA, states and tribes.
In FY 2015, the following IT/DM activities will continue:
• Data Management and Collection: In FY 2015, the agency will continue to identify and
establish processes to capture electronic versions of records and eliminate, wherever
possible, receiving or printing paper copies. These efforts will increase accountability,
improve accuracy and offer cost savings associated with information requests. The
program also supports the privacy of the agency's environmental data and personally
identifiable information (PII). In FY 2015, the agency will continue to assess how to
support the expanding responsibilities associated with controlled unclassified information
(GUI). The agency is implementing a comprehensive information management strategy
to deliver more consistent content services to agency staff. This includes governance
(policy, procedures and standards), outreach and training, and a multi-project effort to
improve records and eDiscovery. In addition, the EPA continues to operate a shared
service docket processing center providing support to the agency's rulemakings and
administer the Paperwork Reduction Act to minimize information collection burden on
the public. (In FY 2015, the Data Management and Collection activities will be funded,
under the EPM appropriation, at $5.48 million in payroll funding and $13.72 million in
non-payroll funding.)
• Geospatial: 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
ongoing program needs. Throughout FY 2015, the agency will continue to enhance the
capabilities of the GeoPlatform, its shared technology enterprise for geospatial
information and analysis. By implementing geospatial data, applications and services, the
agency is able to integrate and interpret multiple data sets and information sources to
support environmental decisions. Also in FY 2015, the EPA will use the Geoplatform to
publish internal and public mapping tools, increasing by at least 30 percent the number of
shareable maps, geodata services, and applications available for use. The EPA will
continue to play a leadership role in both the Federal Geographic Data Committee and the
367
-------
National Geospatial Platform, working with partner agencies to share geospatial
technology capabilities across government. (In FY 2015, the Geospatial activities will be
funded, under the EPM appropriation, at $2.26 million in payroll funding and $2.76
million in non-payroll funding.)
• Information Access and Analysis: In FY 2015, the program will continue to provide
analysis of environmental information to the public and EPA staff through My
Environment, Envirofacts, OneEPA Web, EPA National Library Network and the EPA
Intranet. Through support of My Environment and Envirofacts, the EPA will continue to
offer online tools and applications that enable the public to understand and utilize
environmental information about their community and respond to emergencies. The
program will continue to develop and enhance OneEPA Web, EPA National Library
Network and the EPA Intranet to ensure secure access to information for environmental
decision making. (In FY 2015, the Information Access and Analysis activities will be
funded, under the EPM appropriation, at $7.26 million in payroll funding and $7.80
million in non-payroll funding.)
• Information Technology and Infrastructure: In FY 2015, the agency will continue to
support information technology and infrastructure, which is the foundation from which
all EPA business is conducted. The EPA will maintain and provision: desktop computing
equipment, network connectivity, e-mail and collaboration tools, application hosting,
remote access, telephone services, and Web and network services, and other IT-related
equipment. Moreover, the EPA will continue to conduct structured portfolio reviews for
all major IT investments following the Federal PortfolioStat investment review model to
control costs, identify efficiencies, and enable better-informed decisions on IT/EVI
investments and resource allocation in coordination with the agency's Capital Planning
and Investment Control process. Also in FY 2015, the agency will continue consolidating
small data centers and computer rooms to gain more efficiency across the National
Computer Center, the EPA's primary data center. The EPA is committed to using cloud
computing technologies and has in place an enterprise-wide cloud hosting service. (In FY
2015, the Information Technology and Infrastructure activities will be funded, under the
EPM appropriation, at $30.06 million in payroll funding and $17.45 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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
» (+$849.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
368
-------
• (-$980.0 / -0.3 FTE) This reduction reflects a shift in technology that supports managing
EPA Wikis and Blogs and also process consolidation. This reduction includes 0.3 FTE
and associated payroll of $45.0.
• (-$3,354.0 / -8.5 FTE) The agency is reviewing and redesigning many core business
processes to be more efficient. This reduction will impact analysis to support IT
investment reviews. This reduction includes 8.5 FTE and associated payroll of $1,261.0.
• (-$950.0) This reduction reflects the efficiencies gained through the consolidation of IT
contracts through strategic sourcing and the use of streamlined enterprise wide
acquisition practices.
• (+$3,151.0 / +1.0 FTE) This realignment of resources supports agencywide employee
training and implementation of an integrated and coordinated approach for the content
and records management activities to streamline the business processes and create more
efficient, paperless processes. These efforts will help move the agency to a High
Performance Organization for benefit of the workforce and the public. This realignment
includes 1.0 FTE and associated payroll of $151.0.
• (+$2,315.0) As part of the agency's E-Enterprise initiative, this change reflects an increase in
investment for IT application and infrastructure development to support exchange of
information between EPA, states and tribes.
• (+$183.0 / +0.5 FTE) This reflects a shift in Agency workforce strategy in support of the
Agency's LEAN efforts to assist business process changes in IT and Data management
programs. This increase will also support Agency's Enterprise Architecture and Planning
reviews and analysis. This increase includes 0.5 FTE and associated payroll of $76.0
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
369
-------
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).
370
-------
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
371
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$5,099.7
$5,099.7
27.8
FY 2014
Enacted
$5,202.0
$5,202.0
26.8
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$4,750.0
$4,750.0
26.8
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($452.0)
($452.0)
0.0
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 an opportunity for
alternative dispute resolution.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the ALJ will convene formal hearings in the location of the alleged violator or
violation, as required by statute. In FY 2015, ALJ will evaluate the electronic filing system
implemented in FY 2013 to determine the extent of reductions in: mailing delays for all parties,
mailing costs for alleged violators, and requests for paper documents from the ALJ. Upon
372
-------
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 2015, 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 2015, 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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$46.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$498.0) This change reflects a reduction anticipated from agencywide efforts to develop
more effective business processes that will achieve efficiencies in the ALJ and EAB
program.
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.
373
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$1,256. 4
$663.9
$1,920.3
6.9
FY 2014
Enacted
$1,297.0
$792.0
$2,089.0
7.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$1,370.0
$753.0
$2,123.0
7.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$73.0
($39.0)
$34.0
0.0
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. This program offers cost-effective
processes to resolve disputes and improve agency decision making.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the agency will continue to provide conflict prevention and ADR services to the
EPA 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 54 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 112 non-Superfund cases where headquarters and
regional offices are working with stakeholders to improve environmental results. The agency
expects to provide at least 24 training events, reaching at least 335 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
Policy Memorandum on Environmental Collaboration and Conflict Resolution,145 the agency
' See http://www.epa.gov/adr/omb_ceq_eccr.pdf.
374
-------
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. For example, in a
small pilot study of Superfund and non-Superfund ADR cases, the EPA estimated 25 percent
better environmental outcomes and an average of more than $50,000 in FTE savings per case.
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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$15.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
(+$58.0) These resources will allow the program to provide ADR services and training
more widely. Allowing the Agency to utilize more cost-effective processes to resolve
disputes and improve decision makine.
more widely. Allowing me Agency ti
disputes and improve decision making.
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.
375
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$9,756.3
$9,756.3
59.9
FY 2014
Enacted
$11,248.0
$11,248.0
63.9
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$11,857.0
$11,857.0
65.1
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$609.0
$609.0
1.2
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Office of Civil Rights (OCR) provides policy direction and guidance on equal
employment opportunity (EEO), civil rights, affirmative employment 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;
• Identifying and eliminating systemic and attitudinal barriers to equal employment by
promoting advancement opportunities for women, minorities, and persons with disability;
• Implementation of processes and programs in support of reasonable accommodation; and
• Oversight and coordination of the agency's Reasonable Accommodations Program and
reasonable accommodations training for managers and staff.
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.
376
-------
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, OCR will continue implementing recommendations noted in Developing a Model
Civil Rights Program at the EPA (Executive Committee Report)146 to strengthen the Title VI and
Title VII programs and support the multiple goals and strategic objectives identified in the
Executive Committee Report. Issued in April 2012, this report provides a blueprint for
implementing Civil Rights work across the EPA, including approaches for Title VI case
management as noted below.
Title VI
• Continue use of the Title VI Case Management Protocol - As noted in the Executive
Committee Report, this protocol brings organizations across the EPA into a consensus
process for committing adequate analytical resources and technical support for Title VI
investigations. OCR will lead the protocol 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 of this work will require: 1) staff development and training,
project management, facilitation, investigations, etc., 2) incorporating internal
communications; 3) updating/maintenance of the Title VI tracking system, i.e., the
External Case Tracking System (EXCATS); and 4) technical support and analysis as
defined within the developed case management plans.
• 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 2015, the agency will continue its investigative and compliance efforts by:
• Effectively processing Title VI complaints. As of March 2014, the EPA currently has 22
open Title VI complaints that are either in process or backlogged. The EPA will reduce
the number of open Title VI complaints by 50 percent by the end of FY 2015.
• Develop a comprehensive Title VI Compliance Strategy. The purpose of the strategy will
provide Title VI recipients and stakeholders with clear contours and expectations for
compliance with Title VI regulations and policies.
• 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.
' Please refer to: http://www.epa.gov/epahome/pdf/executive committee final report.pdf for further information.
377
-------
• Promoting the increased use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) for Title VI
complaints and recipients. In FY 2015, OCR will increase extramural funding used for
mediating Title VI cases to cover approximately 20 percent of the existing case load.
Title VII
In FY 2015, 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 17 backlogged cases pending investigation. The EPA will reduce the
number of open Title VII complaints by 50 percent by the end of FY 2015.
• In FY 2013, OCR received 22 complaints indicating harassment discrimination claims. In
FY 2015, OCR will monitor and evaluate the implementation of the EPA's policy on
harassment/discrimination in the workplace by examining the number and bases of these
complaints filed in the agency.
• Update the on-line mandatory training for the Notification and Federal Employee
Antidiscrimination and Retaliation (No FEAR) Act to address employee feedback
received during the 2012 cycle; and
• 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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$393.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$216.0 / +1.2 FTE) This increase supports agency efforts to build capacity to improve
compliance processes and address the timely processing of Title VI and VII cases. These
resources support Title VI and Title VII efforts to meet statutory requirements for the
timely processing of cases; reducing the number of Title VI complaints; raising the
awareness of Title VI complaints; and improving management of Title VII complaints.
These resources include 1.2 FTE and $164.0 in associated payroll.
378
-------
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).
379
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$40,441.7
$652.0
$41,093.7
232.7
FY 2014
Enacted
$43,136.0
$503.0
$43,639.0
233.1
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$43,948.0
$516.0
$44,464.0
234.1
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$812.0
$13.0
$825.0
1.0
Program Project Description:
This program provides legal representational services, legal counseling and legal support for all
of the agency's environmental activities.147 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.
This program provides legal counsel on issues arising under all the EPA's environmental statutes
including: 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 pollutants or health-threatening 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.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, this program will continue to provide support to program clients as they work to
develop more effective business practices to improve performance and find efficiencies. These
47 Resources for legal services to support agency operations are included in the Legal Advice: Support program.
380
-------
efforts to find new approaches to better accomplish the agency's mission often require the
agency to think innovatively, to explore new partnering opportunities, and to rethink how best to
accomplish environmental protection in the future. Legal counsel is essential to ensuring our
programs develop in accordance with our authorities.
In FY 2015, EPA's Office of General Counsel (OGC) also will continue to provide 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 2015, we expect increased demand for legal
services as the agency develops new actions and defends prior actions under all of its
environmental statutes. For example, OGC will provide necessary legal support to carry out the
President's direction to regulate carbon pollution from power plants under the Clean Air Act.
Another focus will be on legal services to support the agency's effort to appropriately define the
scope of the Clean Water Act and to craft each action under the Clean Water Act to be consistent
with that scope.
In FY 2015, the EPA is beginning an ambitious transformation to become a High Performing
Organization (HPO), efficiently accomplishing its mission with reduced resources. The EPA's
OGC plays an important role in that transformation. The 2015 President's Budget provides OGC
the resources necessary to play that role. One significant focus will be modifying the regulatory
structure for reporting to incorporate electronic systems requirements. Additionally, it reflects
the need for legal support for each of the agency's program offices to ensure continued
compliance with the environmental and administrative laws through the Agency's organizational
transformation.
The following examples illustrate the activities of this program.
Goal
Goal 1 : Taking Action
on Climate Change and
Improving Air Quality
Goal 1 : Taking Action
on Climate Change and
Improving Air Quality
Goal 1 : Taking Action
on Climate Change and
Improving Air Quality
Goal 1 : Taking Action
on Climate Change and
Improving Air Quality
Goal 2: Protecting
America's Waters
Specific EPA OGC Activities
OGC was integral to the continuing development and defense of EPA's
initial actions to limit emissions of greenhouse gases and to require limits
on greenhouse gases in construction permits issued to stationary sources.
Provided essential litigation support in several cases challenging decisions
to revise or retain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
for SO 2, NO 2, Carbon Monoxide, and Ozone.
Provided essential legal counsel and rulemaking support for the Tier 3
rulemaking, finalized in March 2014, which will reduce emissions from
passenger cars, light-duty trucks, medium-duty passenger vehicles, and
some heavy-duty vehicles. The standards will significantly reduce levels of
multiple air pollutants (such as ozone, PM, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and
mobile source air toxics across the country.
Successfully defended litigation challenging the Primary and Secondary
Lead Residual Risk and Technology Review rules, which will improve
public health protections and result in a reduced risk of cancer.
Successfully defended the EPA's authority to take action under Clean
Water Act § 404 when the Administrator finds certain discharges will have
unacceptable adverse effects on water resources.
381
-------
Goal 3: Protecting
America's Waters
Advised the EPA, the State Department, and other federal partners on the
United States' authority (particularly under Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act, Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Act and the Mercury Export Ban Act) to join as a party to the
Minamata Convention, a comprehensive global agreement on mercury that
will achieve historic progress in reducing the prevalence of mercury in
global commerce and the global environment.
Goal 3: Protecting
America's Waters
Provided key legal support to the Department of Justice in defending
aggressive and complex challenges to the EPA rules protecting air quality
in Indian country.
Goal 4: Ensuring the
Safety of Chemicals
and Preventing
Pollution
OGC developed, with assistance from the Pesticides program, the first
formal Notice of Intent to Cancel pesticide registrations in more than 20
years. The EPA believes that this action will enable the EPA to remove
from the market certain rodenticide products that pose unreasonable risks to
children, pets, and non-target wildlife.
Goal 4: Ensuring the
Safety of Chemicals
and Preventing
Pollution
Developed and provided training to the pesticide licensing program on the
appropriate use of "conditional registration" authority - the ability to issue
pesticide registrations when conditions are deemed necessary.
Goal 4: Ensuring the
Safety of Chemicals
and Preventing
Pollution
Provided extensive legal support and analysis to the EPA's Pesticide
program in connection with the consideration of an application for
registration of a pesticide product containing nanosilver as an active
ingredient. This is only the second registration application for a nanoscale
active ingredient that the EPA has knowingly handled. As such, it presents
a challenging array of novel scientific and legal issues, and OGC's close
involvement has been critical in the consideration and handling of this
particular registration application.
Goal 4: Ensuring the
Safety of Chemicals
and Preventing
Pollution
Provided essential support to the EPA's Environmental Information
program in the development and promulgation of several rules that further
solidify and expand the coverage of the EPCRA Toxic Release Inventory
(TRI) Program, including the Rule to Adopt North American Classification
System (NAICS) Codes for TRI Reporting, the Rule to Add Nitrotoluene to
TRI, and the TRI Electronic Reporting Rule.
Goal 4: Ensuring the
Safety of Chemicals
and Preventing
Pollution
Provided extensive counsel on efforts to reform the Toxic Substances
Control Act.
All Goals
Provided legal advice on a wide variety of issues associated with the EPA's
use of science in administrative decision-making, including peer reviews,
risk assessments, information disclosure and scientific integrity.
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.
382
-------
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$766.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base costs due to adjustments in
salary and benefits and other costs.
• (+$46.0 / +1.0 FTE) This net change supports LEAN efforts in addition to working with
NPMs/Regions on new business practices and processes under the Agency focus on
becoming a HPO. This change includes a reduction to contracts for training activities.
The resources include a net increase for 1.0 FTE and $178.0 in associated payroll.
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.
383
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$14,456.5
$14,456.5
79.8
FY 2014
Enacted
$17,374.0
$17,374.0
91.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$18,305.0
$18,305.0
87.8
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$931.0
$931.0
-3.2
Program Project Description:
This program provides legal representational services, legal counseling and legal support for all
activities necessary for the EPA's operations.148 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, this program will continue to provide legal support for all of the EPA's programs in
support of the agency's mission and Strategic Plan Goals. In FY 2015, increased legal support
will be needed in a number of areas. For example, the EPA expects continued growth in demands
for legal support for work under the Civil Rights Act, and an ongoing need for a high level of
OGC involvement in questions related to finance, appropriations, ethics and employment.
Funding within this program goes to support the staff necessary to address these needs, including
salaries, legal research tools, basic computer and telephone needs, and other minor overhead
costs.
The most significant increase in demand for legal support from this program has been in
information law. Each fiscal year since FY 2011 when OGC began its current effort to track
these metrics, the legal and policy issues related to records management, document production,
! Resources for legal services to support Environmental Programs are included in the Legal Advice: Environmental program.
384
-------
and FOIA responses have increased in quantity, visibility and resource requirements. The EPA
expects this demand to continue to rise, especially with the agency's increased focus on
improving processes and performance in this area. Each client office will require counseling on
complex and high-profile FOIA requests as the agency strives to meet its record management
obligations, and agency leadership will require legal counsel as improved business practices are
put in place throughout the agency. In addition, the EPA will need to maintain adequate
resources dedicated to processing FOIA appeals, and staffing FOIA litigation, both areas the
agency continues to focus on.
In FY 2015, the EPA is beginning an ambitious transformation to a High Performing
Organization (HPO), efficiently accomplishing its mission with reduced resources. The EPA's
Office of General Counsel (OGC) plays an important role in that transformation. The 2015
President's Budget provides the resources necessary to play that role. Additionally, it reflects a
recognition of the increased demand for legal counsel on financial and personnel matters during
times of organizational transformation.
The increase in resources for this program reflected in the President's Budget would support the
Agency's effort to develop a more effective infrastructure for addressing information requests
and to establish the institutional capacity and business practices required for the agency to
operate effectively in response to these demands. This program will work to provide direct
training and develop training materials and institutional understanding on the nature of
discovery, records, and FOIA obligations, and on the means to meet those obligations. For
example, extensive training will be required to facilitate the use of EPA's new eDiscovery tools.
The following examples illustrate this program's important role in implementing the Agency's
core priorities and mission.
Goal
Goal 2 - Protecting
America's Water
Goal 3 - Cleaning up
Communities and
Advancing Sustainable
Development
Goal 3 - Cleaning up
Communities and
Advancing Sustainable
Development
All Goals
All Goals
Specific EPA OGC Activities in FY 2013
Assisted OW, OCFO, and DA in addressing OIG concerns related to ARRA
SRF funding and compliance with Buy American provision.
Successfully defended the Agency in three GAO contract award protests: (1)
Guardian Environmental Services protest of Region 2's Emergency and Rapid
Response Services contract, (2) Coastal Environmental protest of Region 7's
remediation contract for the Omaha Lead Superfund site, and (3) Prudent
Technologies, Inc. protest of Region 7's remediation contract for the Omaha
Lead Superfund site
Provided legal counsel on the establishment of the hazardous waste electronic
manifest system.
Provided critical counsel to the agency's Records Program to meet
accelerated timelines for updating the Agency's records practices, including
revising the Records Policy and providing agency-wide training to address
challenges posed by evolving technology and increasingly mobile work force.
Provided 1 1 training sessions throughout the agency on FOIA, eDiscovery,
personal privacy, and confidential business information.
385
-------
All Goals
Provided legal analysis and review on over 15 agency-wide policies and
procedures on the management of Agency records, including the Agency's
Personally Identifiable Information Breach Notification Procedures, transition
to Microsoft 365 cloud environment and Windows 7 operating system, and an
EPA Office of Research and Development 2014 Hydrofracking Study.
All Goals
Provided essential legal counsel on updating the agency's FOIA regulations,
including the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rules, Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA) Sunset Rule, and Renewable Fuel Standards Rule.
All Goals
Worked to resolve a union grievance filed against the agency in 2008 related
to employee compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
(Settlement was ultimately reached in February 2014).
All Goals
Secured an agreement from a company licensing an EPA patent for $130,000
in delinquent royalty payments, which will be shared by the National Fuel
Vehicle Emissions Laboratory and the inventor.
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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$428.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$503.0 / -3.2 FTE) This net change provides essential resources for eDiscovery, FOIA,
Records Management activities under the Agency focus on becoming a FIFO. This
change includes a reduction in FTE as part of an agencywide effort to streamline our
business practices. The resources include a net reduction of $533.0 in associated payroll
for 3.2 FTE.
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; Section 311 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.
386
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$2,065.9
$2,065.9
1.2
FY 2014
Enacted
$2,211.0
$2,211.0
2.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$2,991.0
$2,991.0
2.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$780.0
$780.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Regional Science and Technology (RS&T) program provides assistance to 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&T program supports 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&T
program assists 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 regional laboratories, field investigations and mobile laboratory units.
The RS&T program provides 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. It supports special or non-routine
analytical requests that cannot be readily obtained from other sources and which meet the
required timeframe and objectives to address complex environmental issues. It provides expertise
in areas such as environmental biology, microbiology, chemistry, field sampling, enforcement
and criminal investigations, and quality assurance. The program's 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 program responds to emergencies and emerging environmental issues, and is always
387
-------
seeking to improve efficiencies in analysis, field investigations, and data collection. Newer,
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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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. Resources will also 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.) or natural disasters like Hurricane Sandy.
In FY 2015, 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 2015, the program will also support more efficient analytical support for identifying and
assessing risks associated with pesticides, organic chemicals 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; high resolution equipment, hand held equipment for screening of high hazard
samples; 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, personal care products,
388
-------
endocrine disrupting chemicals, flame retardants, etc.) and support methods development
and applied science.
• 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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$97.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$683.0) This increase reflects additional resources available for new equipment
purchases and technological upgrades of such items as sample concentrators; mass
spectrometry systems; air toxics sampling equipment; high resolution equipment, hand
held equipment for screening of high hazard samples and various soil and water
analyzers.
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.
389
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$13,189.0
$13,189.0
62.3
FY 2014
Enacted
$12,929.0
$12,929.0
53.3
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$14,203.0
$14,203.0
53.3
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$1,274.0
$1,274.0
0.0
Program Project Description
This program fosters increased integration, coordination, and streamlining across headquarters
and regional offices. The Integrated Environmental Strategies program supports two key agency
priority work areas: (1) smart growth and sustainable design; and (2) strategic environmental
management.
The Smart Growth program helps community and government leaders protect the environment
and public health, build the economy, and improve the quality of people's everyday lives by
making smart growth and sustainable design practices commonplace. Also, through the
Partnership for Sustainable Communities, the EPA's Smart Growth program works with the U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT) and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) to align housing, transportation, and infrastructure investments and
policies, and build capacity in communities to grow in a more sustainable and resilient manner.
These efforts enable the agency to meet its core mission goals by ensuring that growth and
development yields better environmental and public health benefits.
The strategic environmental management program ensures strategic and visible progress on
transformational cross-agency priorities. In FY 2015, specific priorities include guiding the
EPA's cross-agency strategy management objectives, improving the EPA's operations through
business process improvements and program evaluation tools, and examining how EPA can
better integrate across programs to achieve environmental results. The EPA's draft Strategic
Plan FY 2014-2018 includes four cross-agency strategies: Working to Make a Visible Difference
in Communities; Working Toward a Sustainable Future; A New Era of State, Local, Tribal and
International Partnerships; and Embracing EPA as a High Performing Organization.
These four cross-agency strategies are designed to fundamentally change how the EPA works,
both internally and externally, to achieve the mission outcomes articulated under the Strategic
Plan. Better integration across programs offers the potential to achieve broader environmental
results than a single media focused approach. The program project will strengthen senior
leadership engagement in developing and implementing annual action plans designed to make
strategic progress for each of the four cross-agency strategies. Additionally, improved program
390
-------
efficiencies resulting from business process improvements and program evaluation tools will
enable the Agency to more strategically and effectively utilize resources.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan
Program activities planned for FY 2015 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:
• 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.
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, create jobs, and become more resilient. Since 2005, the EPA has received more
than 1,350 technical assistance applications and has assisted more than 380 communities. The
EPA has reorganized its assistance programs to meet growing demand. Between FY 2011 and
2013 the EPA reached an average of 98 communities per year.149 At the proposed funding level,
the Smart Growth program will be able to maintain and improve that pace, delivering assistance
to nearly 100 communities in FY 2015 and training experts to assist many more. This technical
assistance work is the cornerstone of the EPA's smart growth approach to development-related
environmental challenges in communities.
In FY 2015, the EPA will expand efforts to deliver targeted assistance to communities as they
seek to integrate sustainability strategies into their recovery from natural disasters. The EPA will
also use this line of work to support the President's Climate Action Plan by collaborating with
Federal Emergency and Management Agency (FEMA) and National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) on climate change adaptation planning in communities. This work will
support long term recovery efforts underway in the wake of previous natural disasters (such as
Superstorm Sandy in New York and New Jersey), as well as create capacity to help newly
impacted areas. This work will also help communities that are at risk to natural disasters and sea
level rise, implementing land use and community design solutions before disasters occur that
reduce their vulnerability to hazards and adapt to climate change.
149 The lead time required to establish technical assistance grants and develop new tools to be delivered through technical
assistance contract mechanisms result in a situation in which the year a community is served and the fiscal year funds that
facilitated the assistance are not always in alignment. Therefore, a three year average presents a more accurate picture of the
program trajectory.
391
-------
Conducting research and developing tools. The EPA's research on emerging trends, innovative
practices, and land use applications for new place-based data serves as the foundation for
developing tools that will be useful to communities and all levels of government. In FY 2015, the
EPA will develop tools to help interested communities incorporate innovative approaches in a
way that improves land use, delivers multiple community and quality of life benefits
(neighborhood revitalization, climate adaptation, community walkability, economic growth, etc),
while also managing stormwater, reducing combined sewer overflows, and improving
neighborhood air quality. The smart growth program's unique role is to help communities
connect the dots between site-level design considerations (such as green infrastructure), regional
siting decisions (such as public facilities), and the potential to generate co-benefits from
development and infrastructure decisions made at the state and local level.
• In FY 2015, the Smart Growth program will work with the Office of Water (OW), the
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER), the Office of Research and
Development (ORD), and EPA regional staff to provide guidance and policy suggestions
for how communities can retool infrastructure investment, land use and community
design practices, and the development approval process to support implementation of
green infrastructure. Additional efforts with ORD will focus on piloting a tool which
ensures that compact development does not increase the exposure of vulnerable
populations to near-road emissions associated with development.
• The EPA will deliver tools that support public and private investments in more
sustainable locations. With the Government Services Administration (GSA), the EPA
will pilot a tool that helps federal and state agencies evaluate building lease opportunities
for public facilities based on the level of transit access and proximity to walkable
destinations. Improved siting of public facilities not only generates cost efficiencies for
the public sector, but also can anchor subsequent private investment in sustainable
locations within communities. The EPA will also refine a tool specifically designed to
catalyze infill development in distressed economies, for which early public and private
investment in sustainable locations is critical to their economic recovery. It also puts
struggling communities on the path to deliver better environmental results from their
economic growth than those that do not actively direct investments to sustainable
locations.
• The EPA will expand the reach of smart growth and sustainable design tools by training
staff from other organizations to deliver tools previously developed by the EPA. For
instance in FY 2015, the EPA will focus delivery of training modules under the Building
Blocks Training Academy to metropolitan and regional planning organizations. Through
the Academy, the EPA will train third-party providers to deliver established and accepted
smart growth tools to communities that they support. By packaging the tools for delivery
by other organizations and training their staff, the EPA can effectively multiply the reach
of its tools and ensure that hundreds of additional state, Tribal, regional, and local
governments receive assistance.
Engaging federal partners. In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to partner with other federal
agencies to align investments, grant criteria, and planning requirements to better support
392
-------
community smart growth and sustainable design efforts. The cornerstone of this work remains
the HUD-DOT-EPA Partnership for Sustainable Communities, formed in June 2009. The
Partnership helps protect the environment by providing communities with more options for
public transportation and better access to sustainable, affordable housing. Other efforts include
the White House's Strong Cities, Strong Communities initiative (SC2), implementation of a joint
MOA with FEMA, and expanded collaboration with USDA and Appalachian Regional
Commission (ARC).
Since it was formed in 2009, this HUD-DOT-EPA Partnership has received more than 7,700
applications for assistance and has funded approximately 750 projects in communities in all 50
states plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico with approximately $4 billion. Through the
Partnership, headquarters and regional staff at all three agencies are able to work collaboratively
and closely to address key Administration priorities and support the efforts of communities
across the country to shape land use and development patterns to protect the environment, grow
the economy, and improve quality of life. Coordination through the Partnership ensures efficient
use of federal funds, and often makes the EPA's resources, and those from other federal
agencies, easier for communities to access, understand, and leverage. 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. The EPA
remains a critical technical resource for the Partnership on issues related to smart growth and
sustainable design.
In FY 2015, the EPA and the Partnership will help support a broader Administration
commitment to help communities improve their ability to adapt to climate change (particularly
through disaster recovery efforts) and increase use of green infrastructure techniques to protect
waterways and enhance communities' quality of life. The Partnership will continue to provide
direct technical assistance, useful data and tools, and support for planning. Regions and
communities that have previously been funded by the Partnership will remain a focus of the
Partnership as it seeks to disseminate the successes that these communities have seen, and
support them as they face challenges with implementation.
The EPA will work with other federal agencies whose decisions, rules, investments and policies
influence where and how development occurs. The EPA will work with GSA to deliver technical
assistance to communities in conjunction with planning for a new Federal building or improving
other public buildings. Assistance will help communities adopt sustainable community
development and design approaches in the neighborhoods surrounding the new or existing
federal facility. In addition the EPA will continue to work with ARC, USDA, and the Delta
Regional Authority (DRA) to deliver technical assistance on sustainable communities
approaches in small town and rural areas. In addition to assisting at least 10 communities in
2015 (using funding from all four agencies), the EPA expects that these partner agencies will
begin to incorporate this expertise into their existing programs and policies. Through the White
House SC2 initiative, the EPA will deliver technical assistance on sustainable community
approaches to the most economically distressed of our communities and cities across the country.
SC2 will allow the EPA to work on these issues side-by-side with up to 12 other federal agencies
also working in distressed cities with the idea that this assistance may also be incorporated into
these agencies' day-to-day work.
393
-------
Strategic Environmental Management
The strategic environmental management program provides the Agency with management
processes, technical expertise, and tools to improve results and program efficiency and
effectiveness. The program provides focus on agency priorities and collaborates across the
EPA's programs and regions and to deliver visible results.
Areas of emphasis in FY 2015 are integrating sustainability principles into Agency activities and
expanding the use of LEAN government approaches. In terms of sustainability, four areas of
learning will be targeted: green infrastructure, sustainable materials management, sustainable
purchasing and energy efficiency. These areas will be explored to see how additional integration,
goal setting, indicators or sustainable principles result in additional environmental benefits. The
EPA will engage with its staff as well as internal and external partners and stakeholders to
inform and identify opportunities for progress on these priority areas. In terms of lean
government, the program will advance business process improvements through mentoring and
coaching EPA staff, providing access to process improvement experts, summarizing the results
(e.g., time savings) of process improvement events, and sharing success across programs and
regions.
The program guides efforts related to the EPA cross-agency strategies as articulated in the
Strategic Plan. In FY 2015, these strategies will be advanced through a coordinated approach
across programs and regions though the development and implementation of annual action plans.
An action plan will be created for each of the cross-agency strategies (i.e., communities,
sustainability, partnerships and the EPA as a high performing organization). The program will
rely on standing and/or temporary internal leadership teams to lead these efforts and support
timely and strategic decisions. The program will convene regularly scheduled meetings of
Agency leadership (e.g., the Executive Management Committee) to drive progress on monitor
results.
The program will champion reliance on evidence and analytic tools to foster a culture of learning
and program improvement using evidence and evaluation to foster a high performing
organization. In FY 2015, the program will deploy and rely on the use of analytic tools such as
logic modeling, strategy mapping, performance measurement and program evaluation to improve
the effectiveness and efficiency of agency programs and operations.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple goals and strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$372.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
394
-------
• (+$902.0) This net change reflects a realignment of resources from anticipated business
process savings and improvements realized as a result of progress made on the actions
identified in each of the cross-agency strategies. The program will use the resources to
conduct the following activities: (1) improve strategic focus and integration of
community level efforts across programs for the Agency's focus on Communities/Tribes;
(2) provide ongoing training, guidance and support across program LEAN efforts under
the Agency focus on becoming a High Performing Organization (HPO); (3) enhance
agency capacity for local partnerships, engagement with local organizations; and (4)
support an integrated approach to implementing sustainability principles at the local level
across programs. The base resources in this program include 2.5 FTE for the LEAN
efforts.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act (CWA), Section 104(b)(3); Clean Air Act (CAA), Section 104(b)(3).
395
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$14,738.3
$14,738.3
85.8
FY 2014
Enacted
$14,715.0
$14,715.0
80.3
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$18,493.0
$18,493.0
81.3
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$3,778.0
$3,778.0
1.0
Program Project Description:
The Regulatory/Economic, Management and Analysis program resources are used to ensure that
agency regulations comply with statutory and Executive Order (EO) requirements, such as the
Congressional Review Act, and the Regulatory Flexibility Act (as amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act), and EOs 12866 and 13563 regarding regulatory
review. The program is responsible for the routine review of agency regulations and also
coordinates the Agency's review of its existing regulations in order to identify ways to modify or
address overly burdensome regulations or those that need strengthening. As part of these
responsibilities, resources are used to assess and consider impacts of EPA's regulations on
businesses (particularly small businesses), government entities, and the economy more broadly.
Transparency, outreach, improving underlying business processes, incorporating electronic
reporting 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 and employment impact
analyses) 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.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, activities will be driven by specific regulatory actions; however, key program
activities planned include:
396
-------
• 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. 15°
• Actively participating in the development of agency regulatory actions to ensure that
regulations address statutory and EO 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.
• Launching a new initiative to explore how best to use economy-wide economic models to
assess environmental regulatory options. While economists have used macroeconomic
models successfully to examine economy-wide climate policies, there is little research on
how to assess the macroeconomic impacts of environmental regulations of a specific
industry sector. Current regulatory analysis focuses on the particular regulated sector, but
does not explore how the benefits and costs of a regulation affect the overall economy.
The EPA's Science Advisory Board has formed a new committee to advise the agency on
how best to do this type of modeling. This program will assist the Science Advisory
Board and implement its recommendations. Specifically, the program will develop
appropriate models and data needed to successfully implement the recommendations of
the expert committee.
• 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.
• Maintaining and upgrading regulatory planning and tracking tools to facilitate timely
decisions and coordination across programs. Starting in FY 2015, these planning tools
will have to be transit!oned to an IT infrastructure that conforms with the agency's IT
architecture.
• 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 EO 12866, and leading the EPA's review of regulatory actions from
other agencies and Departments and draft Executive Orders and Presidential Memoranda.
150 Please refer to: http://vosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/eed.nsf/webpages/Guidelines.html for additional information.
397
-------
• Transforming the Action Develop Process using SharePoint and "Next Generation" tools
and processes to increase collaboration and transparency. Modern IT tools, such as
SharePoint, can provide collaborative workspaces to increase efficiency and reduce costs
while retaining or enhancing environmental benefits.
• 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 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 Research and Development program,
improved analytical tools to advance EPA's risk assessment methods used in quantifying
human health benefits, particularly to children.
• Supporting the development of analytical tools and methods to use in quantifying the
economic costs and benefits of the EPA's regulations. High priority 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.
• Advancing whole economy modeling by providing support to redesign and modernize the
regulatory development process under the agency's goal of becoming a High
Performance Organization.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple goals and strategic objectives. Currently, there are
no performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$221.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$1,004.0 / +3.0 FTE) This change reflects the realignment of resources to
increase the use of whole economy modeling to support the redesign and
modernization of regulatory development under the Agency focus on becoming a High
Performing Organization. This increase also will realign efforts to improve upon
economic analyses produced in support of Agency regulations and policies. These
resources include 3.0 FTE and $504.0 in associated payroll.
• (+$2,553.0 / -2.0 FTE) This change reflects a realignment of staff resources based on the
Agency's efforts for business process redesigns and reduction of centralized regulatory
review assessment. The realigned resources will support the following: development,
398
-------
refinement and peer review of methodologies used to improve agencywide regulatory
impact analysis, including better estimates of economic impacts of regulations;
developing new and more accurate methods, incorporating recommendations from the
National Academy of Sciences, for assessing cancer and non-cancer risks from toxic
chemicals and to address uncertainties in risk and economic analysis. The net resource
change includes 2.0 FTE and associated payroll of $330.0.
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.
399
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$3,817.4
$3,817.4
20.3
FY 2014
Enacted
$5,090.0
$5,090.0
21.2
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$6,179.0
$6,179.0
22.2
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$1,089.0
$1,089.0
1.0
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 that provide the EPA's Administrator with
independent advice and peer review on scientific and technical aspects of environmental
problems, regulations, and research planning.
151
FY 2015 Activities and Performance:
In FY 2015, the SAB plans to conduct approximately 22 reviews and produce approximately 22
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; 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.
Please refer to: http://www.epa.gov/sab/ for further information.
400
-------
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple goals and strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$84.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$1,005.0 / +1.0 FTE) This increase in resources will be used to conduct peer reviews
and to host meetings to assess IRIS chemicals. The increase will assure that logistical
support is provided to help SAB adhere to basic Federal Advisory Committee Act
guidelines. These resources include 1.0 FTE and $175.0 in associated payroll.
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.
401
-------
Program Area: Operations and Administration
402
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$547.4
$293,188.6
$74,351.2
$27,676.4
$933.4
$80,960.5
$477,657.5
382.8
FY 2014
Enacted
$584.0
$310,057.0
$70,370.0
$27,791.0
$823.0
$67,470.0
$477,095.0
367.2
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$498.0
$325,138.0
$75,824.0
$45,632.0
$836.0
$78,905.0
$526,833.0
361.6
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($86.0)
$15,081.0
$5,454.0
$17,841.0
$13.0
$11,435.0
$49,738.0
-5.6
Program Project Description:
Environmental Program and Management (EPM) resources in the Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations program fund the rent, utilities, and security. This program also supports centralized
administrative activities and support services, including health and safety, environmental
compliance and management, facilities maintenance and operations, space planning, property
management, printing, mail 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
As part of the EPA's efforts toward becoming a High Performing Organization (HPO), the
agency reviews space needs, and has implemented a long-term space consolidation plan that will
reduce the number of occupied facilities, consolidate space within the remaining facilities, and
reduce the square footage wherever practical. In FY 2015, the agency will continue to invest to
reconfigure the EPA's workspaces with the goal of reducing long-term rent needs. This work
will enable the agency to release office space in support of the President's June 2012
memorandum on "Disposing of Unneeded Federal Real Estate." Since 2006, the EPA has
released approximately 428 thousand square feet of space at headquarters and facilities
403
-------
nationwide, resulting in a cumulative annual rent avoidance of over $14.6 million. These
achieved savings and potential savings partially offset the EPA's escalating rent and security
costs.
In August 2014, the EPA will end its lease at 1310 L Street and will begin to move over 500
employees into the EPA's Federal Triangle and Potomac Yard space and save the agency
approximately $7.5 million annually in rent. In FY 2015, the EPA will complete the
consolidation of 1310 L Street as well as consolidations in Regions 1, 2 and 4, which will further
reduce the agency's space footprint. For FY 2015, the agency is requesting $169.72 million for
rent, $10.37 million for utilities, and $31.97 million for security in the EPM appropriation.
In FY 2015, 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) 13423,152 Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and
Transportation Management. The agency will attain the EO's environmental performance goals
related to buildings through several initiatives, including: comprehensive facility energy audits;
re-commissioning; and sustainable building design.
EO 13514, Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance, expands
upon EO 13423 and requires additional reductions to greenhouse gas (GHG) 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, and
optimize real property and portfolio performance. In FY 2015, the agency is targeting to reduce
energy utilization (or improve energy efficiency) by approximately 37 billion British Thermal
Units or three percent. This ongoing effort to become more efficient has yielded impressive
results - approximately 27 percent less energy used than in FY 2003, and annual cost savings of
$5.9 million.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(010) Cumulative percentage reduction in Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Scopes 1 & 2 emissions.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
1.0
79.5
FY2011
0.4
59
FY2012
6.4
54.1
FY2013
12.2
Data Avail
2/2014
FY2014
16.3
FY2015
16.3
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(098) Cumulative percentage reduction in energy consumption.
FY2008
9
13
FY2009
12
18
FY2010
15
18.3
FY2011
18
18.1
FY2012
21
23.7
FY2013
24
Data Avail
02/2014
FY2014
27
FY2015
27
Units
Percent
152 Information is available at http://www.fedcenter.gov/programs/eol3514/. Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and
Economic Performance', and http://www.fedcenter. gov/programs/eo 13423A Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and
Transportation Management.
404
-------
The EPA has surpassed its initial targets for 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/greeningepa/documents/sspp2012_508.pdf.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$4,593.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$6,192.0 / -2.5 FTE) This change reduces resources for facilities management activities
and reflects business process changes and efficiencies achieved from implementing
operational changes at EPA facilities. The reduced resources include 2.5 FTE and
associated payroll of $314.0.
• (+$58.0) This reflects an increase in transit subsidy costs based on projected needs.
• (+$9,832.0) This change reflects the net effect of restoring rent funded through
Congressional reprogramming in prior year, projected contractual rent increases and the
rent reduction realized from space consolidation efforts.
• (+$1,474.0) This change reflects a net effect of increases in utility costs offset by
reductions in utility consumption.
• (+$1,216.0) This reflects an increase in security guard contractual costs.
• (+$4,100.0) This realignment provides resources to begin a regional move in Dallas
(Region 6) and to complete 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.
These efforts will contribute to the agency becoming a HPO.
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).
405
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$69,366.3
$602.9
$21,791.6
$91,760.8
502.3
FY 2014
Enacted
$71,875.0
$572.0
$21,797.0
$94,244.0
494.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$75,572.0
$403.0
$24,155.0
$100,130.0
492.8
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$3,697.0
($169.0)
$2,358.0
$5,886.0
-1.2
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 financial 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 2015 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, are efficiently and
consistently delivered nationwide, and demonstrate results. The EPA also will continue to
improve accessibility to data to support accountability, cost accounting, budget and performance
integration, and management decision-making. The program will also support the Agency's
LEAN efforts to move toward a high performance organization (HPO) to support business
process changes agencywide.
406
-------
FY 2015 will be the second year of the EPA implementing its FY 2014-2018 Strategic Plan
which sets the long term direction and key implementation strategies for the agency. Also in FY
2015 the EPA will continue to implement Agency Priority Goals and initiate strategic reviews to
assess annual results and progress toward strategic objectives. EPA will continue to assess
progress and focus on evidence based data to support budget and strategic decisions.
In FY 2015, the systems emphasis will be on operations and maintenance. The request for
operations and maintenance includes funding for implementing technology refreshments and
minor enhancements, renewing software licenses, as well as providing refresher and new user
training. It will be the third year of the Compass implementation and the HRLoB will be in
operation starting late FY 2014.
The EPA will continue development of its Budget Formulation System in FY 2015 to replace the
current Budget Automation System. The new system will create efficiencies through automating
a number of manual, time-intensive processes and by providing new enterprise tools for agency
resource management, and reduce the need for local systems. The new system will have a more
streamlined performance module that is aligned with new OMB and agency requirements, as
well as a flexible structure that can be easily modified to support a Common Account Code
Structure, constantly changing OMB/Hill budget reporting and tracking requirements as well as
other agencies budget structures. The plan is for the system to be deployed as a cloud service
within EPA and potentially as a shared service for other agencies.
In FY 2015, the EPA also will continue 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 significant programming and implementation efficiencies.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$2,878.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$730.0 / -5.3 FTE) This decrease reflects the agency's efforts to streamline business
processes and find efficiencies across headquarters and regional offices. The base
resources include 0.5 FTE to support LEAN efforts under the Agency focus on becoming
a High Performing Organization (HPO). The net reduction includes 5.3 FTE and
associated payroll of $730.0.
407
-------
• (+$1,361.0) This realignment will support the continued development of the Budget
Formulation System. It includes development and the operations and maintenance of the
current Budget Automation System.
• (-$791.0) This reflects a decrease to the financial systems, non-system contracts and
working capital fund. This also includes an increase to support implementation of the
new Account Code Structure by providing resources for adaptive maintenance of system
interfaces and reports.
• (+$979.0) This increase provides resources for fees to the Department of Interior for
payroll services to support HRLoB.
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
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.
408
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$28,381.3
$151.9
$21,617.7
$50,150.9
327.2
FY 2014
Enacted
$31,866.0
$155.0
$22,388.0
$54,409.0
312.4
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$31,779.0
$138.0
$23,762.0
$55,679.0
308.7
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($87.0)
($17.0)
$1,374.0
$1,270.0
-3.7
Program Project Description:
Environmental Program and Management (EPM) resources in the Acquisition Management
program support the agency's contract activities, which foster efficiency and benefit the entire
agency.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
As part of the EPA's efforts toward becoming a High Performing Organization and in
accordance with Acquisition Workforce Development Strategic Plan, in FY 2015 the EPA will
use EPM resources to strengthen its contract management training program, improve the EPA
Acquisition System's user interface, and to recruit, retain, and hire 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. In FY 2014, the EPA formally
commenced its SSP to improve efficiencies and economies in the agency's acquisition programs,
and to guarantee that acquisition programs deliver the best value for American taxpayer and the
EPA. This included improved efficiencies in lab and office supplies, and cellular services. In
FY 2015, EPA will continue to create efficiencies by enhancing purchase coordination across the
agency to improve price uniformity; executing collaborative acquisitions among organizations;
standardizing the acquisition process to deliver supplies and services more quickly to end users;
improving knowledge-sharing across the EPA; and, leveraging small business capabilities to
meet the EPA's acquisition goals. The long-term SSP plan will transform the agency's acquisition
process from a tactical and reactive one to a strategically driven function that ensures maximum
409
-------
value for every acquisition dollar spent. The agency has established a goal of obtaining at least
five percent savings for goods and services.
In FY 2015, the agency expects to achieve the following from adopting a Centers of Expertise
for contracting 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.
The EPA also plans to reinforce its contract oversight responsibilities through OMB Circular A-
123 - internal control assessments, increased targeted oversight training for acquisition
management personnel, and Simplified Acquisition Contracting Officer (SACO) reviews. These
measures will strengthen the EPA's acquisition management business processes and enhance
contract oversight. The EPA also will achieve acquisition savings through eliminating contracts
that are redundant in scope, or may be combined with other acquisitions to achieve greater
buying power via economies of scale; and through the use of government-wide procurement
sources to reduce the need for new contracts.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(009) Increase in number and percentage of certified acquisition staff (1102)
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
335/80
323/85
FY 2013
323 / 80
285/85
FY 2014
323/ 85
FY 2015
290/ 85
Units
Number/
Percent
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. Note that in FY 2014 and FY 2015, the EPA will focus its
efforts on the percentage of certified acquisition staff (1102) instead of the percentage and
number of certified acquisition staff in order to accommodate fluctuations in staffing that may
occur as the result of efficiencies or other workforce efforts.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$544.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$631.0 / -3.0 FTE) This reduction reflects the agencywide efforts to develop more
effective business processes and implementing efficiencies in acquisition management.
The reduced resources include 3.0 FTE and $401.0 in associated payroll.
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.).
410
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$24,186.0
$3,053.4
$27,239.4
164.2
FY 2014
Enacted
$24,671.0
$2,990.0
$27,661.0
169.2
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$25,359.0
$2,945.0
$28,304.0
162.4
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$688.0
($45.0)
$643.0
-6.8
Program Project Description:
Grants and Interagency Agreements (lAs) comprise over half of the agency's budget.
Environmental Program and Management (EPM) resources in the Financial Assistance Grants
and Interagency Agreement (IA) Management program support the management of grants and
lAs, and suspension and debarment activities. Resources in this program ensure that the EPA's
management of grants and lAs meet the highest fiduciary standards, that grant/IA funding
produces measurable results for environmental programs, and that the suspension and debarment
program effectively protects the government's business interest.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
As part of the EPA's efforts toward becoming a High Performing Organization (HPO), the
agency will continue to focus on key objectives under its Grants Management Transformation
Initiative (GMTI). The GMTI is designed to achieve efficiencies while enhancing quality and
accountability. Major focus areas include: 1) implementing business process improvements
identified through a LEAN-oriented Business Process Reengineering project conducted in FY
2013 and FY 2014; 2) implementing a new policy on Grants.gov as the standard electronic
option for the initial submission of grant applications; 3) expanding the use of electronic
grant/IA records; 4) implementing a streamlined approach for administrative advanced
monitoring; 5) leveraging resources to address Project Officer and Grant and IA Specialist
workload issues; and 6) reducing burden on applicants and recipients. As a supplement to the
GMTI, EPA will implement new government-wide grant requirements developed by OMB and
the Council on Financial Assistance Reform.
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 administer training programs to maintain a skilled
411
-------
grants/IA management workforce. This will include classroom and on-line training for the
agency's grant and IA Project Officers, a certification and training program for the EPA's Grant
and IA specialists, and mandatory training for managers and supervisors involved in grants and
IA management. In FY 2015, EPA will analyze available grants data to assess whether the
streamlining reforms in existing State and Tribal categorical grant policies have achieved the
intended outcomes of improving the timeliness of awards and reducing the accumulation of
unliquidated obligations in active grants.
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 to protect the Government's business interest.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, agencywide
performance measures for this specific program are outlined in the EPA's 2009-2013 Grants
Management Plan. EPA will issue a new Grants Management Plan, with associated performance
measures, in FY 2015 incorporating GMTI themes.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$527.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$794.0 / -6.1 FTE) This decrease in the Financial Assistance Grants program for grant
oversight activities reflects efficiencies anticipated to be achieved in grants management
as a result of implementing the LEAN business re-engineering project. The reduced
resources include $794.0 in associated payroll for 6.1 FTE.
• (+$955.0) This increase reflects the EPA fully supporting the operations and maintenance
for the Integrated Grants Management System.
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, 33, 35, 40, 45, 46, and
47; American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
412
-------
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 2013
Actuals
535,752.6
$5,091.4
$40,844.0
229.9
FY 2014
Enacted
$42,013.0
$5,880.0
$47,893.0
238.9
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$48,445.0
$7,547.0
$55,992.0
236.1
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$6,432.0
$1,667.0
$8,099.0
-2.8
Program Project Description:
Environmental Programs and Management (EPM) resources for the Human Resources
Management program support 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, recruitment, hiring, workforce
development, and diversity and inclusion to help the agency achieve its mission and ensure
management and employee satisfaction. EPM resources also support advisory committee work
aimed at managing programs that address scientific and environmental issues.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
As part of the EPA's efforts toward becoming a High Performing Organization (HPO), 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
key facets of the hiring reform are: ease the hiring process while raising the bar on candidate
quality; increase engagement of agency leaders in the recruitment and selection process; and
monitor agency efforts to increase the speed and quality of hiring.
In FY 2015, the agency will realign resources to invest in the EPA University, a central
repository for all EPA learning and development. The purpose of the EPA University is to share
learning opportunities with employees, encourage shared resources and services across the
agency, and increase agency wide collaboration, resulting in greater efficiencies for the agency
and better availability of development resources for all staff. It also will support flexibility as
workforce realignments occur and new skills are needed. This process will continue to support
the agency's focus on maintaining a HPO while actively marketing internal technical and core
competency learning events.
413
-------
In FY 2015, the Human Resources Management program will continue supporting work that
ensures diversity in leadership development training to enhance workforce retention and
strengthen the agency's succession management. The EPA will employ a vibrant and well-
trained cadre of Special Emphasis Program Managers that assist in outreach efforts to promote
diversity, inclusion and equal employment opportunities throughout the EPA. In addition, the
agency will focus on sustained senior leadership accountability for a diverse and integrated One
EPA workplace.
The EPA's advisory committees, which operate as a catalyst for public participation in policy
development, implementation, and decision making, have proven effective in building consensus
among the agency's diverse external partners and stakeholders. The agency will continue to
manage participation and collaboration to maximize the value these committees add to important
policy considerations.
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 HR and payroll system, and seamless data transfer from the recruitment process. The
Department of Interior's Business Center (TBC) will manage the EPA's HR LoB.
The HR LoB will be used for human resource transaction and payroll processing, and for data
reporting. In FY 2015, EPA will be completing the clean-up and migration of human resource
data from the legacy system to HR LoB, an activity initiated after HR LoB implementation in FY
2014. During migration EPA must maintain legacy data because the migration occurs at a point
in time and resets all transaction history from the migration forward.
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. 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.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$631.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$764.0 / -6.3 FTE) This net change reflects a realignment of staff resources within the
Human Resources Management Program for expected business process changes and
efficiencies achieved from implementing operational changes in HR functions and from
streamlining the recruitment process as part of the agency's effort toward becoming a
High Performing Organization. This change also redirects resources to maintain basic
414
-------
human resource operations in HQ and regional offices. The reduced resources include a
net reduction of 6.3 FTE and associated payroll of $826.0.
• (+$2,862.0 / +3.0 FTE) This realigns resources for the EPA University, a central
repository for all EPA learning and development initiatives that will use technology to
engage a wider audience of employees in learning and development opportunities. This
realignment will contribute to the agency becoming a FIFO by applying software that
allows more efficient access to information and learning events for all employees and
reduces the number of redundant learning management systems. The realigned resources
include 3.0 FTE, associated payroll of $402.0.
• (+$67.0 / +0.5 FTE) This change supports personnel costs to make business process
changes in the administrative and resources management programs as part of the agency's
LEAN efforts and focus on becoming a UPO. The increased resources include 0.5 FTE
and associated payroll of $67.0.
• (+$1,804.0) This change reflects a full year of fees the agency must pay to DOT for EPA
to transition its FIR and payroll services to align with the IBC system.
• (+$304.0) This change increases contractual services for the EPA's sign language
program based on increased demand for sign language translation.
Statutory Authority:
Title V USC, Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act of 1998 (FAIR Act).
415
-------
Program Area: Pesticides Licensing
416
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$52,854.4
$3,647.8
$56,502.2
388.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$58,070.0
$3,585.0
$61,655.0
401.8
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$59,931.0
$3,430.0
$63,361.0
405.8
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$1,861.0
($155.0)
$1,706.0
4.0
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
aggregate exposure to the pesticide residue in food and from all other exposures except
occupational exposures.
417
-------
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.153 In the interest of efficiency and fairness and to facilitate the
assessment of cumulative exposures, the agency reviews certain related pesticides (such as the
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.
153http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrdl/registration_review/highlights.htm
418
-------
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 (TPM).154 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 Pesticides' 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) is a key part of the EPA's strategy for reducing
occupational exposures to agricultural pesticides. It requires employers to ensure that their
154 See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Pesticides: Health and Safety, Reducing Pesticide Risk internet site:
http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/health/reducing.htm.
419
-------
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 "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.
EPA proposed revisions to the Worker Protection Standard rule in February 2014. The rule,
covering farms, forests, nurseries and greenhouse, has not been updated since 1992. EPA's
revised WPS will afford farm workers similar health protections to those already enjoyed by
others workers in other jobs. Protecting our nation's farm workers from harmful pesticide
exposure is at the core of EPA's work to ensure environmental justice for all Americans.
The proposed changes are the result of more than a decade of extensive input from federal, state,
and local partners, the farm worker community, farmers, and growers.
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, the EPA is required to ensure that
antimicrobials maintain their effectiveness.155 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 also is important for the people using pesticides to be well informed, to understand the
importance of reading and following labels and the importance of proper disposal, and they also
need to understand how to protect themselves from pests that can transmit disease. The Pesticide
Program must, therefore, invest in environmental education 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 education, and training programs.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the EPA will review and register new pesticides, new uses for existing pesticides,
and other registration requests in accordance with statutory requirements. Additional funding is
155FIFRA section 3(h)(3), 7 U.S.C. 136a(h)(3).
420
-------
requested to provide support in risk assessments for Registration and Registration Review in
order to meet PRIA and FIFRA 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 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.156 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
2015, 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. The EPA will continue to support biotechnology efforts. In FY 2015,
EPA will leverage expertise from other programs to teach the public about the Clean Water Act
and pollution runoff. Through an intra-agency working group, each program office will
disseminate educational resources and information to the public. The purpose of these activities
will be to ensure that the American public is educated about air quality issues and standards.
During FY 2015, the EPA will continue to implement registration review of existing pesticides
and develop work plans for pesticides entering the review pipeline. The priority will be towards
reviewing those pesticides that need review in order to mitigate risk. 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 to address concerns
identified after the original registration.157 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 ensuring the safety of chemicals and protecting America's waters.
In FY 2015, the agency will continue to work toward our commitment to 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
156 See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Pesticides: Topical & Chemical Fact Sheets, Pesticide Registration Program
Internet site: http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/registration.htm.
157 See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Registration Review Internet site:
http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrdl/registration review/index.htm
421
-------
and use of lower risk pesticides. The EPA will leverage expertise from other programs to teach
the public and pesticide users about new, safer products and methods of using existing products.
Through an intra-agency working group, program offices will disseminate environmental
educational resources and information to the public.
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
have been registered using the latest available scientific information. To address the fiscal
climate in FY 2015, the EPA will focus limited resources on core statutory activities, specifically
those activities associated with registration and registration review. Some of the outreach
activities affected include stewardship activities such as IPM, incident reporting analysis support
and training.
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 2015, the EPA will continue implementing improvements to the Pesticide Registration
Information System (PRISM), to create an interactive system that is fully integrated with the
EPA's new E-Enterprise project. Work within PRISM and other areas will include streamlining
operations and merging compatible and related work areas in order to maximize resources
through management efficiencies. 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 Pesticide 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.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(143) Percentage of agricultural acres treated with reduced-risk pesticides.
FY 2008
18.5
21
FY 2009
20
21.5
FY 2010
21
21
FY2011
21
22
FY 2012
22
22.5
FY 2013
22.5
Data Avail
10/2014
FY 2014
22.5
FY 2015
22.5
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(012) Percent reduction of children's exposure to rodenticides.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
10
0
FY 2012
5
5
FY 2013
5
12
FY 2014
10
FY 2015
25
Units
Percent
422
-------
Measure
Target
Actual
(Jll) Reduction in moderate to severe exposure incidents associated with organophosphates
and carbamate insecticides in the general population.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
10
16
FY2013
15
20
FY2014
25
FY2015
30
Units
Percent
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue the implementation of FIFRA, FFDCA, PRIA-3, FQPA, and
ESA, 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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$685.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$612.0 / +4.0 FTE) These resources will support Registration and Registration Review
statutory activities; and efforts to redesign core business processes to become more
efficient. In addition, realigned resources will be used to fund E-Enterprise work to move
direct reports for pesticides, chemicals, to the regulatory portal; an agency-wide effort to
make regulations easier to implement and to incorporate e-reporting. This increase
includes 4.0 FTE and associated payroll of $612.0, of which 1.0 FTE is to provide
support for the agency's High Performing Organization (HPO) efforts.
• (+$1,000.0) This realignment is to enhance environmental education and training to the
public about learning about new, safer products and methods of using existing products.
These resources will be available to educate the public, specifically teachers, informal
educators, and parents. Environmental education is a core part of the agency's efforts to
safeguard public health and the environment and provides communities with the
necessary skills and knowledge to make informed choices and take responsible action.
• (-$436.0) The Agency plans to implement strategic sourcing across the wide range of
contracts, with a goal of at least five percent savings for goods and services. This is
reducing funding for pesticides stewardship implementation and IPM in schools.
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).
423
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$37,911.9
$2,257.4
$40,169.3
294.5
FY 2014
Enacted
$34,162.0
$2,056.0
$36,218.0
256.6
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$39,035.0
$2,293.0
$41,328.0
261.9
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$4,873.0
$237.0
$5,110.0
5.3
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's Pesticide
Program's Registration Review Program.
In addition to FIFRA responsibilities, the agency is required by the Endangered Species Act
(ESA)158 to ensure that pesticide regulatory decisions will not destroy or adversely modify
designated critical habitat or jeopardize 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
To accomplish the goals set out in the statutes, the EPA conducts ecological risk assessments159
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. These studies examine the ecological effects or
toxicity of a pesticide and its breakdown products on 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 water resources). The EPA uses these and other data to prepare an environmental
fate assessment and a hazard, or ecological effects, assessment that interprets the relevant
' http://www.fws.gov/endangered/laws-policies/section-7.html
'http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/ecosvstem/ecorisk.htm
424
-------
toxicity information for the pesticide and its degradation products. Using environmental fate data
and exposure models, EPA 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 or otherwise control). 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, EPA 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. 16° 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. EPA 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.
160 http://www.epa.gov/raf/publications/guidelines-ecological-risk-assessment.htm
425
-------
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 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 (restricted use), or decide
not to allow its use. In addition, the 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 stakeholders are engaged in decisions that 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 have 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. Other examples are changing
the application method, or rate, or timing of applications when pollinators are not present to
prevent risks to pollinators such as bees.
426
-------
Reducing Risk Through the Use of Safer Pesticides and Methods
To further protect the environment, this program161 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 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 1,200
active ingredients in more than 17,000 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, the agency continues to encourage the use of Integrated Pest
Management (IPM) and other practices to maximize the benefits pesticides can yield while
minimizing the impacts on the environment. The agency continues these efforts, including
development and dissemination of brochures, education on potential benefits of IPM, and
outreach on the successes of IPM to encourage its use.162 To encourage responsible pesticide use
that does not endanger the environment, the EPA reaches out to the public through the Internet
and to workers and professional pesticide applicators through worker training programs.
FY 2015 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
161 Reducing Pesticide Risk (http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/health/reducing.htm)
162 http://www.epa.gov/pesp/ipminschools/implementation.html
427
-------
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 with available resources. The EPA will
continue to assist pesticide users in learning about new, safer products and methods of using
existing products. The agency will continue encouraging the use of IPM tools.
The agency will continue to carry out 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 completion of the EPA's consultations
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 2015, 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.
In FY 2015, in cooperation with the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), the agency will
continue to work toward improving compliance with the ESA. To this end, the agency will
consider available recommendations from the committee of the National Academy of Sciences'
National Research Council regarding scientific and technical issues related to the methods and
assumptions used by the EPA, FWS, and NMFS to carry out their joint responsibilities under the
ESA and FIFRA. The four agencies jointly asked the National Academies of Science (NAS) to:
identify approaches to collect the best available scientific data and information; consider sub-
lethal, indirect, and cumulative effects; assess the effects of chemical mixtures and inert
ingredients; use models to assist in analyzing the effects of pesticide use; effectively incorporate
uncertainties into the evaluations; and use geospatial information and datasets in the course of
these assessments. Since receiving the NAS report, the agencies have developed shared scientific
approaches and presented those approaches to stakeholders at a virtual nationwide meeting.
During FY 2015, EPA, FWS, and NMFS will jointly apply these approaches to some pesticide
risk assessments and, if necessary, to consultations with the Services. These initial assessments
will apply and improve the shared scientific approaches.
In FY 2015, in cooperation with FWS and NMFS, the agency will continue to work toward
improving compliance with the ESA. To this end, the agency will consider available
recommendations from the committee of the National Academy of Sciences' National Research
Council 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.
428
-------
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!163 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
2015, the EPA will continue revising and updating 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 2015, 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.
Pollinator Protection
Bees play an important role in assuring continued production of food. The U.S. Department of
Agriculture is leading the federal government's effort to understand the causes of declining
pollinator health and identify actions that will improve pollinator health. The EPA is part of this
effort and is focusing on the potential role of pesticides. The EPA's emphasis is to assure that
pesticides used represent acceptable risks to pollinators and that products are available for
commercial bee keepers to manage pests that impact pollinator health. The EPA is working with
pesticide registrants to change pesticide labels to reduce acute exposure and assure that
pollinators are protected.
The EPA is jointly implementing, with Canada, California Department of Pesticide Regulation, a
new pollinator risk assessment framework to assure that pesticides being considered for
registration protect honey bees. The EPA is reviewing a technical "dust standard" as part of
pesticide registration requirements for products that are applied as a seed coating. The EPA also
is working with state lead agencies to develop Pollinator Action Plans (management solutions)
that provide tools and information that are customized at the state level. Other efforts include
working with stakeholders to identify and consolidate BMPs for honey bee health and
developing a web page of these BMPs with cooperation from the National Integrated Pest
Management Centers and USDA. The EPA also is providing funds to land grant universities to
conduct research on alternative pest control methods and BMPs that lower risks to bees while
effectively controlling pests.
In addition, the EPA implemented changes to pesticide labels for four neonicitinoid insecticides
to limit applications to protect bees as well as be more clear and precise. In FY 2015, EPA
163 http://www.epa.gov/espp/bulletins.htm
429
-------
intends to require the new pollinator protection labeling for outdoor foliar products that are
acutely toxic to bees. In addition, EPA will continue to re-evaluate the neonicitinoids as part of
the registration review program using the agency's new pesticide risk assessment process for
pollinators.
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.164 In
FY 2015, 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 of these four
organophosphate insecticides that most consistently exceeded the EPA's aquatic life benchmarks
for aquatic ecosystems165 during the last ten 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
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
709
FY 2014
900
FY 2015
100
Units
Decisions
Measure
Target
Actual
(091) Percent of decisions completed on time (on or before PRIA or negotiated due date).
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
99
99.7
FY2011
99
98.4
FY 2012
99
99.1
FY 2013
99
98.8
FY 2014
97.0
FY 2015
96
Units
Percent
164Gilliom, 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/.
165
http://www.epa.gov/oppefedl/ecorisk ders/aquatic life benchmark.htm
430
-------
Measure
Target
Actual
(164) Number of pesticide registration review dockets opened.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
70
75
FY2011
70
81
FY 2012
70
79
FY 2013
72
77
FY 2014
73
FY 2015
73
Units
Dockets
Measure
Target
Actual
(230) Number of pesticide registration review final work plans completed.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
70
70
FY2011
70
75
FY 2012
70
70
FY 2013
72
79
FY 2014
73
FY 2015
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
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
5
0
FY2013
5
Data
Avail
10/2014
FY2014
15
FY2015
5
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).
FY2008
25, 25, 30
40, 0, 30
FY2009
No Target
Established
Biennial
FY 2010
5, 0, 20
6.7, 0, 33
FY2011
No Target
Established
Biennial
FY2012
5, 0, 10
0,0,9
FY2013
No Target
Established
Biennial
FY2014
0,0,0
FY2015
No Target
Established
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(269) Percent of agricultural watersheds that do not exceed EPA aquatic life benchmarks for
two key pesticides of concern (azinphos-methyl and chlorpyrifos).
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
0, 10
0,8
FY2011
No Target
Established
Biennial
FY2012
0,10
7,7
FY2013
No Target
Established
Biennial
FY2014
0,0
FY2015
No Target
Established
Units
Percent
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue the implementation of FIFRA, FFDCA, ESA, and the
Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act of 2012 (known as PRIA 3)166 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 progress in these areas through the
measures above.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$558.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$4,315.0 / +5.3 FTE) This increase represents funding for Registration and Registration
Review statutory activities and includes 5.3 FTE and associated payroll of $800.0.
' http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-l 12publl77.pdf
431
-------
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).
432
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$12,120.3
$392.3
$12,512.6
81.3
FY 2014
Enacted
$10,249.0
$587.0
$10,836.0
72.2
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$10,525.0
$502.0
$11,027.0
69.5
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$276.0
($85.0)
$191.0
-2.7
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, 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 public 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 the EPA's implementing regulations provide states with the 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 (maximum legal residue
levels) or other clearances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
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.
433
-------
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.167
Emergency, Quarantine, and Crisis Exemptions
FIFRA Section 18, and the 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.168
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 also must establish any
necessary tolerances 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 allowed 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, following communication with
and clearance by the EPA, a state 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 FIFRA 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 defines a reduced risk
pesticide as one that "may reasonably be expected to accomplish one or more of the following:
(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 Management169 or makes it more effective." The EPA developed
http://www.epa.gov/opprd001/24c/
168 http://www.epa.gov/opprd001/sectionl8/
169 http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/ipm. htm)
434
-------
procedures and guidelines for 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 to 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. "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. 17°
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)171 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 also is 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.
http://www.epa. go v/pesticides/regulating/laws/fqpa/fqpa_accomplishments.htm
171 http://www.csrees.usda.gov/nea/pest/in_focus/pesticides_if_minor.html'l
435
-------
Outreach and Education
The Agency will continue to encourage IPM efforts, which emphasize 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. It is not enough to have pesticide
products registered to control pest infestations. Pesticide users need to know which pesticides to
use, how to use them, and how to maintain the site, so pests do not return. The Pesticide Program
is invested in outreach and training efforts for people who use pesticides and the public in
general.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA's statutory and regulatory functions for the pesticides program include registration,
product reregi strati on, registration review, risk reduction implementation, rulemaking, and
program management. During FY 2015, the EPA will review and register new pesticides, new
uses for existing pesticides, and act on other registration requests in accordance with FIFRA and
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 2015, due to prioritization of statutory activities, the EPA will reduce funding to support
the IPM efforts in schools. By leveraging work of previous grants to enhance the adoption of
IPM in schools, the EPA will continue to support implementation of other 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 2015, 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 submission. The economic benefit of the Section 18 Program to growers is the
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
FY2008
45
34
FY2009
45
40
FY2010
45
50
FY2011
45
52
FY2012
45
43
FY2013
45
27
FY2014
45
FY2015
45
Units
Days
436
-------
There are currently no performance measures associated with this specific program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$235.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$392.0 / -2.7 FTE) The agency is reviewing and redesigning many core business
processes to better leverage resources and increase efficiency. This decrease includes 2.7
FTE and associated payroll of $392.0.
• (+$433.0) This increase represents realignment of resources to accommodate emerging
priority statutory requirements.
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).
437
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$1,543.3
$1,543.3
7.4
FY 2014
Enacted
$1,525.0
$1,525.0
6.4
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$1,504.0
$1,504.0
5.4
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($21.0)
($21.0)
-1.0
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 and toxic
chemicals. Many offices within the EPA regularly address cutting edge scientific issues
including endocrine disrupters and products of biotechnology. Coordination among affected
offices allows for coherent and consistent scientific policy from a broad agency perspective. 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
The Science Policy and Biotechnology Program will continue to have a peer review role, when
needed, to evaluate the scientific and technical issues associated with chemical safety and
biotechnology, including plant incorporated protectants (PIPs). In addition, other biotechnology
issues will continue to be supported by the Program when complex decisions require expert
scientific advice from an independent scientific peer review panel or guidance is needed to
support science policy.
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 six to eight reviews each year on a variety of scientific topics
including endocrine disrupters and products of biotechnology. Specific topics to be placed on
the SAP agenda are usually confirmed a few months in advance of each session and include
438
-------
difficult, new, or controversial scientific issues identified in the course of the EPA's Pesticide
Program activities.
Performance Targets:
The Science Policy 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 (EDSP). EDSP and other program measures can be found in the Eight-Year
Performance Array in the Program Performance and Assessment section. Currently, there are no
specific performance measures for the Science Policy and Biotechnology program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$78.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$203.0 / -1.0 FTE) The agency is reviewing and redesigning many core business
processes to be more efficient but, depending on the extent and effectiveness of the
changes, there may be impacts to FIFRA SAP activities. This reflects a reduction in
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act Scientific Advisory Panel (FIFRA
SAP) activities. In particular, this may reduce the number of FIFRA SAP meetings by 1.
This decrease includes 1.0 FTE and associated payroll of $172.0.
• (+$104.0) This increase represents realignment of resources to accommodate emerging
priority statutory requirements.
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 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) 5a U.S.C. 9,10,11,12,
&14.
439
-------
Program Area: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
440
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$0.0
$60,273.9
$60,273.9
344.1
FY 2014
Enacted
$3,674.0
$62,376.0
$66,050.0
352.7
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$10,423.0
$60,121.0
$70,544.0
341.5
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$6,749.0
($2,255.0)
$4,494.0
-11.2
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Waste Management program implements the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA), the critical basis for the comprehensive system of regulations and the resulting
federal/state waste management infrastructure which protects soil, ground water, surface waters,
wildlife and vegetation, as well as human health. The national regulations ensure proper
management of waste by defining solid and hazardous waste, and imposing 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 provides the protective endpoint for the environmental and human
health improvements begun by other EPA programs. For example, RCRA manages the
hazardous waste generated by air pollution control devices and wastewater treatment systems
that have removed organic and inorganic contaminants from our air and water. The RCRA
program facilitates 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
environment through enforceable controls, including enforcement case development and permits
that provide for safe management of hazardous wastes and prevent the release of hazardous
constituents from hazardous waste facilities.
441
-------
The RCRA hazardous waste program covers all aspects of hazardous waste management, from
the point that waste is generated until its final destination at a RCRA permitted facility.
Generators of waste are the first link in the chain of ensuring safe management of hazardous
wastes thereby protecting the health of the surrounding communities. The RCRA program
requires that generators properly identify their hazardous wastes, manage them in a way that is
protective of public health, and send them to appropriate RCRA facilities for safe treatment,
disposal, and/or recycling. Ensuring that generators have the information they need to effectively
manage their wastes in a way that will not lead to future abandoned clean-up sites is a top
priority in the RCRA program. Generators comprise the largest universe of RCRA regulated
facilities, with approximately 14,000 Large Quantity Generators (LQGs), 50,000 Small Quantity
Generators (SQGs), and 500,000 Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators
(CESQGs).172
With permits and other enforceable controls, the RCRA program also protects the environment
and the health of communities near hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal (TSD)
facilities, including the estimated 13.4 million people living within a mile and 62.5 million
people living within three miles of these facilities173. In addition, adherence to permit
requirements prevents 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
TSDs174, 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 40 proposed sites primarily occurred before
the RCRA permitting program was established, and that the RCRA regulations worked as
intended.
The RCRA financial assurance requirements are one of the key mechanisms for preventing
RCRA facilities from becoming future Superfund sites, by requiring owners and operators of
TSD facilities to demonstrate that they have financial mechanisms in place to address 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.
Finally, recognizing the benefits of recycling, the EPA provides guidance designed to encourage
solid and hazardous materials recycling with adequate safeguards. The agency must ensure that
materials are destined for legitimate recycling, or else that they will be discarded properly in
order to protect human health and the environment. The EPA also is working to educate the
public about recycling and solid waste reduction through environmental education and training
activities.
172 LQGs generate greater than 1,000 kg of hazardous waste per month, SQGs generate between 100 kg and 1,000 kg per month
and CESQGs generate less than 100 kg per month.
173 U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response Estimate, 2014. Data collected includes: (1) site information as of
the end of FY 2011 from RCRA Info; and (2) census data from the 2007-2011 American Community Survey (ACS).
174 http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/tsd/td/ldu/financial/documents/fortv.pdf
442
-------
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
Pursuant to the passage of the FY 2014 Consolidated Appropriation Act, which placed all EPA's
e-Manifest resources within the new e-Manifest appropriation, EPA is realigning $2.15 million
designated for e-Manifest activities in FY 2015 out of the EPM appropriation and into the new
appropriation. Transferring those resources will reduce the Waste Management program's
flexibility and limit the agency's ability to balance both core program activities and the e-
Manifest project. This change will necessitate some program transitions, allowing only critical
waste management program infrastructure support to continue and requiring the program to
manage through a hiatus to several rulemakings and other projects which require expert and
complex analysis in FY 2015. Work which can be done in-house will be continued, but most
Waste Management projects requiring extramural support will be impacted.
The Waste Management program will focus on the following in FY 2015:
• 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;175
• 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;
• implementing the conditional exemption for carbon dioxide sequestration, pursuant to
recommendations from the President's Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) Task Force
report;176
• working with other EPA offices, States, other federal agencies, and stakeholders on waste
management issues associated with unconventional oil and gas production
(hydrofracking); and
• ensuring that environmental education resources continue to be disseminated to the
public about recycling through an intra-agency workgroup and increasing transparency
about America's solid waste reduction activities. These activities include community
training through issuance of grants, innovative awards, and collaboration with national
environmental organizations will be reduced, impacting the support to EPA's core
mission to make a visible difference in communities across the country.
FY 2015 funding constraints may slow down the EPA's ability to provide quality and timely
technical assistance to states on permitting issues, assessment of financial assurance
demonstrations, regulatory interpretation, data management, and other core hazardous waste
program implementation issues. Combined with ongoing state budget shortfalls there may be
impacts to statutory deadlines for permit renewals177 and the agency's ability to making facilities
175 Of the 574 federally recognized tribes, as of September 2013, 173 have an integrated waste management plan. This is an
increase of 26 tribes from FY 2012.
176 http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/policy/ccs task force.html.
177 Section 3005(c)(3) of Solid Waste Disposal Act states that permits shall be for a fixed term, not to exceed 10 years for any
land disposal facility, storage facility, or incinerator or other treatment facility.
443
-------
information available to the states, the EPA and the public through national data systems like
RCRAInfo and the Biennial Report.
The Agency's ability to meet international commitments such as those under the U.S.-Mexico
Border program are likely to be impacted by the transference of Waste Management resources to
the e-Manifest effort, potentially requiring renegotiation of agreements and adversely impacting
or delaying measures to protect the environment along the border. Also, additional analysis to
support non-hazardous secondary materials (NHSM) categorical rulemakings, regulatory
backlog petition responses, updates to the hazardous waste combustor Maximum Achievable
Control Technology (MACT) regulations to respond to a judicial remand, and review and
revisions to e-regulations to safely address new and emerging issues will be delayed,
significantly impacting the program's ability to protect communities and be responsive to all
stakeholders.
The Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials (ASTSWMO) grant
was in prior years an effective mechanism to seek the input of states on rulemakings, set program
priorities, promote program advances such as SMM, share knowledge with and among states on
RCRA implementation issues, develop mutually agreeable guidance and policies, and support
the states in RCRA implementation. Alternative options for funding ASTSWMO and otherwise
supporting the needs of the States will need to be explored more fully in FY 2015 as the agency
transitions from being able to provide direct grant support, due to the transference of Waste
Management resources to the e-Manifest effort.
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue work on making the generator regulations more efficient and
easier with which to understand and comply. In FY 2013, the EPA completed a third party
program evaluation which revealed a 34 percent non-compliance rate in generators properly
identifying their hazardous waste.178 The report discusses many of the underlying causes for this
high rate, which includes issues related to the clarity and flexibility of EPA's generator
regulations. Improving the generator regulations is an investment that will make them more
efficient, reducing future demand on the EPA's enforcement and compliance assistance
resources and the burden on states and the regulated community, while improving the overall
environmental outcome.
In addition, in FY 2015, the EPA will focus staff resources to continue its work specific to the
retail industry, which presents unique issues in regards to hazardous waste generator regulation.
In response to EO 13563179 ("Retrospective Review of Regulations"), EPA identified making the
hazardous waste requirements for retail products more effective as one of the 35 priority topics
included in the "Improving Our Regulations: Final Plan for Periodic Retrospective Reviews of
Existing Regulations." 18°
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.
178 Hazardous Waste Determination Program Evaluation, lEc, April 2013. http://www.epa.Kav/evaluate/pdfAvaste/haz-waste-
determination.pdf
1/9 http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-01-21/pdf/201 l-1385.pdf
180 http://www.epa.gov/regdarrt/retrospective/documents/eparetroreviewplan-aug2011 .pdf
444
-------
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
• monitor facility performance to ensure that permits continue to protect people and
ecosystems from harmful exposures to hazardous pollutants.
Implementation support provided in these areas will be limited to minimal technical support that
can be done with existing staff, rather than development of guidance, training and resource
materials geared toward states and the regulated community.
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. Timely permit actions in response to
rapidly changing waste streams benefit industry by enabling them to implement state-of-the-art
design and management practices that improve the efficiency and effectiveness of their
operations, and to respond to economic opportunity by making timely product changes. Efforts
to assess and streamline the modification process will be discontinued until the e-Manifest
program is in place.
To prevent future contamination and to protect the health of millions of Americans who live
within one mile of a hazardous waste management facility, the EPA and its state partners issue,
update, or maintain RCRA permits for approximately 20,000 hazardous waste units (such as
incinerators and landfills) at 6,600 treatment, storage and disposal facilities in the permitting
universe. The EPA directly implements the entire RCRA program in Iowa and Alaska and
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 with a backlog of approximately 631 facilities
still needing initial permits or permit renewals that are past due, and 80-117 additional permit
renewals that come due each year. In FY 2015, the EPA will need to recalibrate its efforts to
101
streamline the RCRA permitting program in accordance with Executive Order 13604 to
facilitate efficient and appropriate permit updates to ensure they remain protective. The pace at
which the agency is able to address this workload and provide technical support to the states will
be impacted by available resources. Efforts will be focused on keeping the backlog from
increasing.
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
181 http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-03-28/pdf/2012-7636.pdf
445
-------
of this type of support are expected to continue through FY 2015. The EPA will work with states
to meet the FY 2015 target of implementing permits, initial approved controls, and updated
controls at 110 RCRA hazardous waste management facilities. At the regional level, this work
will be impacted in areas that are not managed by RCRA authorized state programs, specifically
in Indian country and in unauthorized States, and is likely to result in less timely processing of
these controls. This also applies to EPA-led permits for portions of RCRA where states are not
yet authorized (e.g., MACT EEE regulations for incinerators). While EPA and its state partners
will seek improved efficiencies to compensate, it is possible that this target will not be met,
especially given the complex situations at some facilities. The EPA expects that the existing
backlog of permits and program implementation support requests will remain, and recent trends
upward suggest they will remain constant or increase in the foreseeable future. EPA resource
shortfalls also will compromise the agency's ability to make facilities information available to
the states, the EPA and the public through national data systems like RCRAInfo and the Biennial
Report.
An important objective in FY 2015 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.182 By reviewing information submitted by the permitted community, the EPA evaluates
the adequacy of financial assurance instruments as well as current cost estimates for closure,
post-closure care, and corrective action at hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal
facilities.
The agency will continue to pursue only high priority regulatory actions under RCRA. In FY
2015, this includes promulgating and implementing final regulations governing the proper
management of coal combustion residuals; finalizing regulations to improve the management of
pharmaceutical wastes; and finalizing updates to the hazardous waste generator regulations.
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
activities. PCB approvals are issued by EPA regional offices and EPA headquarters, and not
delegated to the states. The EPA has established a new strategic goal for FY 2018, with annual
targets beginning in FY 2014, to authorize approvals for cleanup, storage, and disposal activities.
The agency estimates approximately 20 disposal and storage approvals and 130 cleanup
approvals are issued per year. The annual target for the comprehensive measure for cleanups,
disposal, and storage activities is 150. Anticipated resources constraints in FY 2015 are expected
to result in less timely PCB disposal and storage approvals than previously, and could impact the
182 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
446
-------
EPA's ability to meet the PCB approval goal. The agency is currently developing a database for
tracking PCB approvals and also is developing standard language that may be applied to
individual approvals, in order to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the approval
process.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(PCB) Number of approvals issued for polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) cleanup, storage and
disposal activities.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
150
FY 2015
150
Units
Approvals
Measure
Target
Actual
(HWO) Number of hazardous waste facilities with new or updated controls.
FY2008
FY2009
100
115
FY2010
100
140
FY2011
100
130
FY2012
100
117
FY2013
100
114
FY2014
100
FY 2015
110
Units
Facilities
Measure
Target
Actual
(MW8) Number of tribes covered by an integrated solid waste management plan.
FY2008
26
35
FY2009
16
31
FY2010
23
23
FY2011
14
17
FY2012
3
13
FY2013
3
26
FY2014
10
FY2015
10
Units
Tribes
The EPA has begun implementing a new measure tracking the number of approvals issued for
PCB cleanup, storage and disposal activities. In addition, the measure tracking the number of
closed, cleaned-up or upgraded open dumps will be discontinued at the end of FY 2014.
Additional information about these performance measures can be found in the Eight-Year
Performance Array.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,123.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$2,150.0) The change reflects the realignment of resources from the EPM appropriation
into the e-Manifest appropriation. While the e-Manifest program will significantly
contribute to the EPA and state initiative to modernize business practices under the E-
Enterprise approach, the effect of separating the two funding streams will reduce the
program's flexibility and limit the agency's ability to balance both core program
activities and the e-Manifest project. This change is likely to necessitate some program
transitions, allowing only critical waste management program infrastructure support to
continue and a likely hiatus in rulemakings and other projects which require expert and
complex analysis in FY 2015. Work which can be done in-house will be continued, but
most projects requiring extramural support may be impacted while the e-manifest system
is launched and until fees can be collected. Alternative options for funding ASTSWMO
447
-------
and otherwise supporting the needs of the States will need to be explored more fully in
FY2015.
• (-$1,603.0 / -11.2 FTE) This reflects a net realignment in resources to support program
specific Lean183 business process changes, updating rules and developing targeting tools
as part of the agency's focus on becoming a High Performing Organization (HPO) and to
support the E-Enterprise management and priority project requirements. The base
resources for this program project include 0.8 FTE for FIFO efforts. This net change will
reduce leadership and technical support to our state partners on RCRA waste
management activities and may slow down the EPA's ability to provide quality and
timely technical assistance to states on permitting issues, regulatory interpretation, data
management, and other core hazardous waste program implementation issues. This
change includes a net reduction of 11.2 FTE and associated payroll of $1,726.0.
• (+$375.0) This realignment is to provide resources to integrate environmental education
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. Environmental education is a
core part of the agency's efforts to safeguard public health and the environment and
provides communities with the necessary skills and knowledge to make informed choices
and take responsible action.
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 Substances Control Act, 15 U.S.C.
2605 et seq. - Section 6.
183 Principles of Lean. The Lean Enterprise Institute, Inc. http://www.lean.org/WhatsLean/Prmciples.cfm
448
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$37,250.6
$37,250.6
220.4
FY 2014
Enacted
$37,198.0
$37,198.0
218.8
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$36,305.0
$36,305.0
208.6
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($893.0)
($893.0)
-10.2
Program Project Description:
An essential element of the EPA's hazardous waste management program under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 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 3,779
operating hazardous waste facilities that are a subset of approximately six thousand sites with
potential corrective action obligations.184 The total area covered by these corrective action sites
IOC ^^
is approximately 18 million acres. 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.
RCRA Corrective Action sites exist in thousands of communities across the United States
ranging from remote to large urban settings. Many of them are located in economically
distressed communities. To help describe who benefits from RCRA cleanup work, EPA collected
data on the population within three miles of its RCRA Corrective Action sites. The three mile
area surrounding sites was used because it is a good representation of the geographic area where
people in a community live most of their lives - where they shop, work, go to school, go out to
restaurants, and participate in outdoor activities. In looking at the census data, the Agency found
that approximately 106 million people live within 3 miles of a RCRA Corrective Action site
(roughly 35% of the U.S. population). While there is no single way to characterize communities
located near these sites, the population is more minority, low income, linguistically isolated, and
less likely to have a high school education than the U.S. population as a whole.186 As a result,
these communities may have fewer resources with which to address concerns about their health
and environment.
184 The EPA tracks corrective action obligations for RCRA-permitted facilities. There are additional non-permitted facilities that
may have corrective action obligations not tracked by the EPA. The EPA recognizes that the total universe of such facilities or
sites "subject to" corrective action is between five and six thousand facilities or sites, and is evaluating this universe to determine
if cleanup work is needed. EPA recently reassessed the baseline of corrective action facilities to include 3,779 facilities for
EPA's FY 2014-2018 Strategic Plan (up from 3,746 facilities in EPA's previous plan).
185 As compiled by RCRA Info.
186 U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response Estimate. 2014. Data collected includes: (1) site information as of
the end of FY 2011 from RCRAInfo; and (2) census data from the 2007-2011 American Community Survey (ACS).
449
-------
The EPA works in partnership with states, having authorized 44 states and territories to directly
implement the corrective action program.187 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 challenged in the cleanup area due to downsizing and are looking
to the federal program for assistance. As a result and at the request of states, the EPA has
resumed work previously agreed to by states under work-sharing agreements and this trend has
been increasing, particularly for sites that have complex issues188 or for more specialty
components such as ecological risk assessments.
In conjunction with the states, the EPA established a long-term aspirational 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 conduct long-term stewardship (i.e., maintaining protective engineering
and 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, and also provides the RCRA data which supports the EPA's site information interfaces for
e-Reporting and public access.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
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 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 208 percent.
187 State implementation of the CA Program is funded through the STAG Categorical Grant: Hazardous Waste Financial
Assistance and matching State contributions.
188 For example, vapor intrusion, wetlands contamination or extensive groundwater issues.
450
-------
3500
2000
1000
Cumulative Number of RCRA CA Sites with
Human Exposure to Contaminants Under Control
FY2002-FY2014
FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13* FY14*
FY 2013 numbers reflect final data and estimated achievements for FY14 are based on current goals.
The RCRA corrective action universe contains hundreds of very large, highly contaminated sites,
in addition to many small, but equally contaminated sites. 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. In FY 2015, the EPA will employ an
added performance metric for corrective action facilities with performance standards attained.
189
In FY 2015, 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. The EPA will also place additional focus on
identifying facilities where the corrective action process can be considered completed (i.e.,
cleanup performance standards have been attained, or no further action is necessary). These
activities will be consistent with the programmatic response developed by the agency after a
2011 GAO report on the RCRA corrective action program. 19°
To improve the accountability, transparency, and effectiveness of cleanup programs, the agency
initiated a pilot program in 2012 under the LEAN191 process for facility investigations in two
regions. The efficiencies gained from these pilots (e.g., better planning, reduced review time
frames, reductions in rework, and better conflict resolution) will be shared with other regions and
will allow the agency to effectively focus resources on critical sites, accelerate cleanups, and put
sites back into safe, productive use. States and Regions continue to implement process and
189 Performance standards attained means that remedies selected for the protection of human health and the environment standard
have been fully implemented and associated performance standards have been attained at the entire facility or specific areas
within the facility.
190 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.
191 Principles of Lean. The Lean Enterprise Institute, Inc. http://www.lean.org/WhatsLean/Principles.cfm
451
-------
administrative improvements in efforts to preserve resources. Additionally, the benefits of
streamlining are leading to faster cleanups (e.g., reduced time frames for facility investigations
lead to faster remedy response and prevention of exposures) in both authorized States and
unauthorized States.
In FY 2015, the EPA will reduce funding and staff support for the RCRA Corrective Action
program. Therefore, it is possible that the agency may not achieve its FY 2015 corrective action
performance targets. At the regional level, the reduced funding to the program will reduce the
pace of cleanups including site-wide 'RCRA remedy construction' determinations. However, the
agency will continue to prioritize the worst environmental threats, which are measured by site-
wide 'human exposures under control' determinations and related activities (e.g., interim
measures). EPA regional cuts combined with state program cuts also may jeopardize
achievement of the aspirational 2020 goals. The EPA will reduce support for expanded
community engagement activities (i.e., beyond core program functions for both RCRA and PCB
cleanup sites), but will prioritize such activities in affected environmental justice communities.
In addition, as part of the FY 2014-FY 2018 Strategic Planning process, the Agency identified
aggressive but achievable goals for the corrective action program. Using the FY 2018 goals as a
guide, FY 2015 annual targets were identified. These targets take into account the significant
impact of the multi-year economic downturn on state programs (44 states implement the federal
RCRA corrective action program), the impact of the ongoing historic reductions to EPA's
cleanup program resources, and the negative economic impact on the regulated entities paying
for RCRA cleanups. Combined, these impacts have led to a slower pace for cleanups than
originally anticipated when the aspirational 2020 goals were set in 2002. The Agency is in the
process of reevaluating the existing goals and setting new long-term aspirational goals for 2020
and beyond, and assessing how this may impact corrective action targets for FY 2015 and
beyond.
Ensuring sustainable future uses for RCRA corrective action facilities is considered as part of
remedy selections and in the construction of those remedies, and is consistent with the EPA's
emphasis on land restoration in its FY 2014-2018 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
caulk192 in such places as elementary schools, office buildings, airport runways, and drinking
water basins. The EPA has established a new long-term goal for FY 2018 and an associated
annual measure to authorize approvals for cleanups, disposal, and storage activities. Annually,
the EPA approves over 100 cleanup applications by site owners and operators. The annual target
192 PCB contamination in caulk can be upwards of 100 thousand ppm (i.e., 10%).
452
-------
for the comprehensive measure for cleanups, disposal, and storage activities is 150. 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.
Reduced funding under this program project may impact the quality and timeliness of PCB clean
up approvals and therefore potentially affect redevelopment efforts. PCB cleanups are an EPA-
only activity and resource reductions will limit the agency's ability to provide qualitative reviews
and technical support to affected landowners and developers who seek the EPA's help in
preparing their cleanup work plans.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(CA6) Cumulative percentage of RCRA facilities with corrective action performance standards
attained.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
21
FY2015
22
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(CA1) Cumulative percentage of RCRA facilities with human exposures to toxins under control.
FY2008
FY2009
No Target
Established
65
FY2010
69
72
FY2011
72
77
FY2012
81
81
FY2013
85
85
FY2014
87
FY2015
90
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(CA2) Cumulative percentage of RCRA facilities with migration of contaminated groundwater
under control.
FY2008
FY2009
No Target
Established
58
FY2010
61
63
FY2011
64
67
FY2012
69
72
FY2013
73
76
FY2014
77
FY2015
79
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(CAS) Cumulative percentage of RCRA facilities with final remedies constructed.
FY 2008
FY 2009
No Target
Established
32
FY 2010
35
37
FY2011
38
42
FY 2012
46
47
FY 2013
51
51
FY 2014
55
FY 2015
60
Units
Percent
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$701.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefits.
• (-$1,462.0 / -10.2 FTE) This decrease reflects a reduction in FTE for leadership and
technical support to state partners on RCRA corrective action activities, while
acknowledging agencywide efforts to enhance coordination with our state partners and
streamline internal business practices to lead to faster cleanups. Depending on the speed
and extent of the changes, the program may reduce the pace of cleanups including site-
wide 'RCRA remedy construction' determinations. This decrease includes $1,462.0 in
associated payroll for 10.2 FTE.
453
-------
• (-$132.0) This decrease will reduce contractual support for corrective action cleanups and
PCB disposal reviews, potentially delaying the pace of cleanups.
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, 8001 and the Toxic Substance
Control Act, 15 U.S.C. 2605 et seq. - Section 6.
454
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$8,771.2
$8,771.2
54.5
FY 2014
Enacted
$8,164.0
$8,164.0
47.8
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$8,451.0
$8,451.0
46.4
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$287.0
$287.0
-1.4
Program Project Description:
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) establishes the EPA's role to promote
and encourage the conservation of materials and energy resources to protect human health and
the environment in Section 6902 of the law. The EPA is investing in Sustainable Materials
Management (SMM) in order to efficiently and effectively minimize environmental impacts
throughout 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 reducing waste throughout the life-cycle and utilizing waste
materials as commodities can grow industries and associated jobs193 by making the industries
more efficient, as well as allowing the U.S. to conserve virgin resources, including natural
resources, fossil fuels, minerals, and precious metals. The program performs a unique
coordinating role, bringing together various public and private organizations and providing
guidance for redirecting materials away from disposal and towards beneficial uses.
Strong federal leadership and action is needed in this area due to the U.S. economy's impact on
global materials usage. U.S. raw material use rose 5.1 times faster than the population in the last
century.194 The generation, processing, and disposal of materials is associated with 42 percent of
U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.
195
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
An effective SMM strategy integrates analysis and information to create a national focus,
implements appropriate policies and programs, measures results, and adjusts programs and
policies as appropriate. In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to focus on a small set of clearly-
articulated, results-driven priorities that emphasize the principles of SMM, moving beyond the
foundation of environmental protection and toward sustainability. The agency will advance the
SMM framework by:
193 There are many articles and reports written on this subject. For example, see More Jobs, Less Pollution (2011) Growing the
Recycling Economy in the U.S., http://www.nrdc.org/business/guides/recyclingreport.asp
194 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.
195 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.
455
-------
• Providing national leadership and direction on approaches to reduce environmental
impacts through SMM, including source reduction and safe and effective reuse/recycling
of materials.
• Partnering with a wide range of stakeholders (industry, governments, non-profits, and
others) to implement efficient and innovative SMM solutions that help protect human
health and the environment through improved materials management, reduced waste
generation, and improved waste utilization.
• Improving metrics and developing and maintaining measurement tools to prioritize work,
identify critical data gaps, gather data, and measure performance in areas such as
greenhouse gas reduction and energy savings.
• Providing credible scientific information and data.
• Implementing targeted challenges (food recovery, electronics, and federal government) to
encourage participants to modify business practices to increase resource efficiency with
demonstrable results. Activities will continue to focus on measurable results.
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to promote the SMM approach in high priority areas, which
are selected based on an analysis of opportunities for reducing environmental impacts in
Sustainable Materials Management: The Road Ahead.1% The agency will continue to support the
advancement of sustainable materials management programs at the state and community levels,
as part of the agency's cross-program sustainability effort. Representative activities include:
• Sustainable Food Management - The EPA continues to focus on preventing food waste
through improved purchasing practices and increasing food donation and composting.
The Food Recovery Challenge797 encourages participants to reduce as much of their food
waste as possible.198 The largest generators of food waste - universities, events/sports
venues, and grocery stores are targeted. In FY 2015, the EPA will target additional
sectors selected in FY 2014 and continue to increase public education and outreach
efforts.
• Used Electronics -The EPA is implementing commitments under the National Strategy
for Electronics Stewardship,199 including working to increase the amount of used
electronics managed by third-party certified electronics recyclers through the EPA's
Electronics Challenge.200 In FY 2015, the EPA will continue implementation of the
Electronics Challenge, building on FY 2014 achievements in the number of participating
organizations and overall tonnage of electronics in the U.S. recycled by third-party
certified electronics recyclers.
• Federal Government - The federal government occupies nearly 500,000 buildings,
operates more than 600,000 vehicles, employs more than 1.8 million civilians, and
196 U.S. EPA OSWER ORCR. Sustainable Materials Management: The Road Ahead. June 2009
http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/conserve/smm/pdf/vision2.pdf.
197 http://www.epa.gov/wastes/conserve/smm/foodrecovery/index.htm.
198 http://www.epa.gov/waste/conserve/foodwaste/
199 In July 2011, the National Strategy for Electronics Stewardship established a framework for responsible electronics design,
purchasing, management, and recycling. See http://www.wpa.gov/osw/conserve/materials/ecvcling/taskforce/.
200 http://epa. gov/smm/electronics/index.htm.
456
-------
901 -^^
purchases more than $500 billion per year in goods and services. In FY 2015, the EPA
will continue to lead by example through its Federal Green Challenge202 and will help
other federal agencies adopt SMM approaches to reduce their environmental footprint,
including the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.203 The EPA also will explore the
application of the SMM approach into other high priority sectors, based on lessons
learned from the first two years of the national SMM program and re-evaluation of The
Road Ahead.
Resources provided under this program also support the EPA's Municipal Solid Waste (MSW)
Characterization Report, the national source of data and analysis about the generation,
composition, use, and disposition of municipal solid waste (e.g., steel, glass, aluminum, and
plastics) in the U.S., since 1960. In FY 2013, the EPA began making improvements to align the
report more effectively with SMM, efforts that continue in FY 2015. Improvements will include
enhanced data in key SMM focus areas, such as food, electronics, federal government, and
construction and demolition. Additional enhancements will include state level data, lifecycle
materials data, and improved recycling data.
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to work toward developing more effective business practices
to improve performance, and find efficiencies through program outreach and integrating
activities. SMM activities funded in FY 2015 will achieve substantial, tangible results in coming
years, including money savings for the federal government. As an example, through the Federal
Green Challenge in FY 2012, federal facilities participating in the Challenge reported diverting
more than 360,000 tons of waste from landfills; saving 52.7 million kilowatt-hours of electricity,
454 million cubic feet of natural gas, and 488,000 gallons of fuel oil; reducing potable water
usage by 133 million gallons, reducing fleet distance traveled by 128,280 miles, and recycling
2,467 tons of end-of-life electronics. Combined, these efforts resulted in an estimated savings of
$31 million.204
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(SMI) Tons of materials and products offsetting use of virgin resources through sustainable
materials management.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
8,549,502
Data
Avail
3/2014
FY2013
8,501,537
Data
Avail
2/2015
FY2014
8,603,033
FY2015
8,603,033
Units
Tons
Through SMM, the EPA is seeking to decrease the amount of virgin materials consumed in the
U.S. for the generation of materials, products, and services. The EPA's SMM
performance estimates are largely based on national recycling efforts and on the Food Recovery,
Electronics and Federal Green Challenges described above.
201 Please see: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the press office/President-Obama-signs-an-Executive-Order-Focused-on-Federal-
Leadership-in-Environmental-Energy-and-Economic-Performance.
202 http://www.epa.gov/federalgreenchallenge/.
203 Please see: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsvs/pkg/FR-2009-10-08/pdf/E9-24518.pdf.
204 These figures were reported to EPA by federal facilities participating in the Federal Green Challenge during FY 2012.
457
-------
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$278.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$201.0 / -1.4 FTE) This net realignment reflects a reduction of outreach to cities, towns,
and businesses to support integrated cross-program approaches to sustainability.
• (+$210.0) These realigned resources will support planned enhancements to the MSW
Characterization Report.
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.
458
-------
Program Area: Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
459
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$5,734.2
$5,734.2
15.5
FY 2014
Enacted
$7,553.0
$7,553.0
10.6
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$6,365.0
$6,365.0
9.1
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($1,188.0)
($1,188.0)
-1.5
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).205 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 test method 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
eleven Tier 1 assays that constitute the Tier 1 screening battery and one Tier 2 assay206 is
considered valid for use. EDSP has made significant progress toward validating four additional
Tier 2 assays with completion of the external peer review and submission of the final FIFRA
SAP report on recommendations for the four ecological toxicity Tier 2 test methods.
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
-^^ 907 r^-,
continuation of the program with the release of the EDSP21 Work Plan. 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
205 http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/index.cfm
206
EPA accepts the mammalian 2-generation reproduction study performed according to the 1998 guidelines (or the Extended 1-
generation reproduction study), as valid.
207 http://www.epa.gov/endo/pubs/edsp21 work plan summarv%20 overview final.pdf
460
-------
higher throughput in vitro methods to screen for the potential for endocrine disruption. The
EDSP21 Work Plan will serve as the road map for future assay development/validation and
priority setting efforts for the EDSP.
In response to the May 2011 OIG evaluation report, "EPA's Endocrine Disrupter Screening
-^^ -^^ r-*-, 90R
Program Should Establish Management Controls to Ensure More Timely Results," the agency
had issued its EDSP Comprehensive Management Plan209 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 (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
(information technology or IT). As part of that comprehensive management plan, the agency had
agreed to provide an annual update of the plan in accordance with the end of the fiscal year; the
updated version was released on February 14, 2014. This updated version describes the goals of
the program for FY 2014 to 2019 and highlights the need to improve the scientific methods used
to evaluate chemicals that may affect the endocrine system in humans and its environment. The
plan is available on the agency's EDSP website at www.epa.gov/endo.
The Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention program is working collaboratively with the
National Center for Computational Toxicology and the EPA's Research and Development
program to identify the group of ToxCast tools that would 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 in early 2013. The final
report was issued in May of 2013, and the agency will begin to incorporate new computational
models in the EDSP prioritization process.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
During FY 2015, the Endocrine Disrupter Screening Program (EDSP) will fulfill several key
milestones including:
• Continued collaboration with the EPA's Research and Development program on
computational toxicology-based approaches to support more refined chemical
prioritization and continued efforts to 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.
• Coordination and collaboration with the Research and Development program to
determine the applicability of computational toxicology-based approaches for developing
208 http://www.epa. gov/oig/reports/2011/20110503-11 -P-0215 .pdf
209 http://www.epa.gov/endo/pubs/EDSP-comprehensive-management-plan.pdf
461
-------
more targeted testing approaches that better assess a chemical's potential to interact with
the estrogen, androgen, and thyroid systems.
• 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 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, (subject
to obtaining an approved Information Collection Request; without an approved ICR, test
orders cannot be issued to registrants, manufacturers or importers for Tier 1 assay data
for chemical screening);
• Continuing 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.
• Continuing 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
resources 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
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
3
3
FY 2012
5
1
FY 2013
20
0
FY 2014
59
FY 2015
0
Units
Chemicals
Measure
Target
Actual
Measure
(E04) Number of chemicals with Tier 1 screenin
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
g assay results reviewed.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
52
FY 2015
0
(EOS) Number of chemicals for which scientific weight of evidence determinations have been
completed.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
FY2015
Units
Chemicals
Units
462
-------
Target
Actual
52
0
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.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
8
FY 2015
18
Units
Assays and
Tools
Overall, the changes made in FY 2014 will continue to reflect the progressive transition in FY
2015 that moves the program from a focus on test order issuance to implementation of state-of-
the science, risk assessment and data review.
This program measures performance by tracking the number of chemicals with Tier 1 screening
assay results reviewed, as well as the number of chemicals for which weight of evidence
determinations or hazard characterizations have been completed. Weight of evidence
determinations are based on integrated scientific reviews of: 1) Tier 1 assays and 2) other
scientifically relevant information (e.g., 40 CFR part 158 data, published literature, predictive
toxicity information.) Risk 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). The performance targets in FY 2015 for both of
these measures are zero due to delays in issuing test orders to gather data which provide the basis
for these reviews and decisions. These delays mean that while data review may occur in FY
2015, depending on ICR approval timeframes, no decisions will be made or reviews will be
completed under these measures until FY 2016 or later.
While specific performance measures will not be quantifiable, the program will be actively
engaging our scientific and public stakeholder communities to bring the state of the science,
computational methods to the program, demonstrating confidence in the regulatory application
for chemical prioritization and potential replacement of EDSP screening level data.
To this end, the program also will track 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, more efficient Tox21 computational tools, as recommended by the NAS 2007 report.
463
-------
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$113.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$254.0 / -1.5 FTE) This reduction represents the agency efforts in reviewing and
redesigning many core business processes to be more efficient. This decrease includes
1.5 FTE and associated payroll of $254.0.
• (-$1,082.0) This reduction is to implement strategic sourcing across the wide range of
contracts, with a goal of at least five percent savings for goods and services but,
depending on the extent and effectiveness of the changes, there may be impacts to EDSP,
resulting in reduced activities related to additional applications of computational
toxicology within the program. In particular, the EDSP program may not complete
application of a risk-based prioritization approach for the androgen and thyroid pathways.
• (+$35.0) This increase for discretionary grants will advance the state of the science in
computational methods and their application to risk based approaches for prioritizing and
screening chemicals. This increase will focus the agency on funding priority statutory
activities.
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.
464
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$54,695.2
$54,695.2
231.9
FY 2014
Enacted
$58,624.0
$58,624.0
252.8
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$62,709.0
$62,709.0
245.9
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$4,085.0
$4,085.0
-6.9
Program Project Description:
EPA's chemical safety programs are at the forefront of its efforts to advance a sustainable future.
Chemicals are often released into the environment as a result of their manufacture, processing,
use, and disposal, and people are exposed to chemicals in their homes, where they work and
play, and in their use of products. 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 (those chemicals already in use when TSCA was implemented in
1978)210, 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 strengthen its program to ensure chemical safety, giving particular
emphasis to addressing risks from exposure to existing chemicals that have not been tested for
adverse health or environmental effects. This program will enable the agency to reach timely and
effective chemical safety decisions — supported by sound information, tools, and systems — that
can potentially bring about significant risk reduction. Further benefit will be gained by
enhancing public access to non-confidential chemical data that will enable everyday citizens to
make better-informed decisions related to chemical safety.
210 These include certain prevalent, high-risk chemicals known generally as "legacy chemicals"(e.g., PCBs, mercury), which
were previously covered in a separate Chemical Risk Management (CRM) budget justification. The CRM program area has been
combined with Chemical Risk Review and Reduction beginning in FY 2015.
465
-------
This enhanced approach to achieving chemical safety, as reflected in the Fiscal Year 2014-2018
EPA Strategic Plan, has several key components:
• Filling information gaps on existing chemicals by pursuing a range of information
gathering actions under TSCA, as appropriate; expanding electronic reporting, with the
aim of ensuring the adequacy and quality of chemical data needed to support chemical
risk assessments and risk management actions; and increasing transparency by making
TSCA data on existing (and new) chemicals more readily available to and usable by
external decision-makers;
• Assessing the human health and environmental risks of existing chemicals, using data
from all available sources; and
• Eliminating, reducing, or managing identified unreasonable existing chemical risks using,
as necessary, available authorities under TSCA and other statutes as well as employing
non-regulatory approaches such as conducting alternatives assessments.
The EPA recognizes that there is a need to modernize and strengthen TSCA, and in 2010, issued
a statement of legislative reform principles intended to increase confidence that chemicals used
in commerce and vital to the U.S. economy are safe. 211 As the Congress continues to consider
legislative proposals, the EPA will continue to work vigorously under current authorities to
ensure chemical safety, as described more fully below.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, EPA will continue to implement its Enhanced Chemicals Management approach.
This approach expands and enhances the amount, accessibility, and usefulness of chemical safety
information, improving EPA's, other regulators' and the public's ability to assess chemical
hazards and potential exposures, identify potential risks to human health and the environment,
and take appropriate risk management action. EPA initiated this improved approach in FY 2012
when it screened the thousands of chemicals currently in use to create the TSCA Work Plan,
which identifies 83 chemicals for near- term assessment and potential risk management. EPA in
FY 2013 released for public and peer review draft risk assessments for the first five of those
chemicals and initiated work on several more. The first set of final risk assessments will be
released in FY 2014. With respect to expanding and enhancing the amount, accessibility, and
usefulness of chemical safety information, EPA, in FY 2013, released ChemView, a new
database that greatly improves access to health and safety data on chemicals regulated under
TSCA and continued its accelerated pace in reviewing and, where appropriate, challenging and
declassifying Confidential Business Information (CBI) Claims, enabling one-year-early
achievement of the agency's strategic goal for review by FY 2015 of the more than 22,000
claims submitted prior to April 2010.
The FY 2015 budget request will enable EPA to sustain this significant progress in implementing
its Enhanced Chemicals Management approach, as detailed below.
211 Essential Principles for Reform of Chemicals Management Legislation
466
-------
Existing Chemicals Program:
In FY 2015, EPA will continue to ensure the safety of existing chemicals already in commerce
by obtaining and making public chemical health and safety information and by using such
information to assess chemical risks, taking action where necessary to eliminate, reduce, or
manage identified risks.
1) Obtaining, Managing, and Making Chemical Information Public:
In FY 2015, 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 and expand the availability and usefulness of chemical safety information to
the public. The EPA will use both regulatory and non-regulatory approaches to fill gaps in
exposure and effects 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:
• Obtaining and processing data required by three 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, physical/chemical
property, and environmental fate data voluntarily from companies for the HPV chemicals
known in the late 1990s;
• Developing additional testing rules and implementing additional testing actions as
needed;
• Increasing transparency by continuing to review all new submissions to the EPA under
TSCA where chemical identity is claimed as CBI in health and safety studies submitted
for both existing and new chemicals; and where appropriate, challenging CBI claims and
making health and safety studies publicly available;
• Digitizing approximately 16 thousand documents received under TSCA Sections 4, 5 and
8 and, where appropriate, making those data available to the public;
• Enhancing the agency's electronic filing systems for TSCA submissions to reduce
manual data steps and expedite scientific review of chemicals; while improving the
online ChemView tool to further broaden public access to non-confidential chemical
data;
• Developing new information management capabilities to facilitate chemical
prioritization, including enhancements to the TSCA Chemical Dashboard, within the
ChemView Portal construct, to enable processing and display of 21st century exposure
information and concurrent adaptations to existing tools and models to accommodate the
receipt and use of this information; and
467
-------
• More fully integrating TSCA information management systems with the agency's new E-
Enterprise business model, which will simplify required reporting for both large and
small businesses.
The EPA is planning to allocate $14,557.0 and 53.2 FTE to this work area in FY 2015.
2) Screening and Assessing Chemical Risks:
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue work to assess the risks of its Work Plan Chemicals and to
determine whether management actions are needed for those chemicals. The TSCA Work Plan
Chemicals were selected in FY 2012 for detailed assessment through a two-step process that
919
identified a set of chemicals subject to TSCA with targeted risk-related characteristics and
prioritized those chemicals for detailed assessment by applying specific factors set out in the
EPA's "TSCA Work Plan Chemicals: Methods Document" (February 2012).213 The EPA will
periodically update the initial list of 83 Work Plan Chemicals in response to new information.
EPA achieved a key milestone in January 2013 with the release of its first five TSCA Work Plan
Chemical risk assessments for public and peer review. Work also commenced in FY 2013 on
additional Work Plan chemicals, including a number of chemicals widely used as flame
retardants. Draft assessments for 19 Work Plan Chemicals will be released for public comment
and peer review by the end of FY 2015 and all current Work Plan Chemicals will be addressed
by the end of FY 2018.
Specific steps planned for FY 2015 include:
• Initiating risk assessments for additional Work Plan Chemicals;
• Completing draft risk assessments for several additional TSCA Work Plan Chemicals,
bringing the cumulative total of draft risk assessments released for public comment and
peer review to 19 (achieving a component of EPA's Chemical Safety FY 2015 Priority
Goal toward the EPA's strategic target to complete draft assessments for all of the current
Work Plan Chemicals by the end of FY 2018);
• Completing final risk assessments in FY 2015 for seven Work Plan and other chemicals,
after incorporating input from public comment and peer reviews (bringing cumulative
completion of final risk assessments to ten);
• Updating, as appropriate, EPA's list of TSCA Work Plan Chemicals and the schedule for
assessing those chemicals in future years; and
• Developing new tools while at the same time improving existing hazard and exposure
identification and characterization tools to better assess risks from existing chemicals.
This work is done using data for both existing and new chemicals.
! U.S. EPA, "TSCA Work Plan Chemicals: Methods Document" (February 2012), pp. 2 et seq.
213 Ibid, page 16
468
-------
The EPA is planning to allocate $19,153.0 and 68.6 FTE to this work area in FY 2015.
3) Reducing Chemical Risks:
In FY 2015, the resources requested will support the agency's portfolio of risk management
actions, including:
• Advancing, as appropriate, risk management actions initiated in response to Action Plans
posted on the EPA's Existing Chemicals Program website and/or in response to
completed risk assessments for TSCA Work Plan chemicals;
• Considering initiating, as appropriate, new risk management actions in FY 2015;
• Continuing development of implementing regulations for the TSCA Title VI
Formaldehyde Standards for Composite Wood Products Act (Public Law 111-199),
which are anticipated to be finalized in FY 2014. 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 previously completed assessments (decaBDE and BPA finalized in
January 2014) and NP/NPEs finalized in May 2012);
• Developing a proposed rule revising certain use authorizations for Polychlorinated
Biphenyls (PCBs) and continuing efforts to provide information to school administrators
and building managers for effectively managing PCBs in caulk214 and replacing PCB-
containing fluorescent light ballasts215;
• Continuing to encourage reductions in the use of mercury in various products such as
non-fever thermometers; providing information regarding mercury in products, such as
information on proper storage of mercury waste216; continuing to implement the Mercury
-^^ -^^ 917
Export Ban Act (MEBA) ; and providing responses to any requests for exemption from
applicable export prohibitions;
• Continuing 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 13045.218
For more information on the EPA's efforts to assess and act on existing chemicals, please see
http://www.epa.gov/oppt/existingchemicals/.
214 See http://www.epa.gov/pcbsincaulk/
215 See http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/hazard/tsd/pcbs/pubs/ballasts.htm.
216 See http://www.epa.gov/mercury/.
217 MEBA prohibits the export of elemental mercury as of January 1, 2013, among other requirements for EPA, DOE, and other
federal agencies.
218 http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-1997-04-23/pdf/97-10695.pdf
469
-------
The EPA is planning to allocate $11,894.0 and 42.9 FTE to this work area in FY 2015.
New Chemicals Program:
In FY 2015, 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 steps, where needed, to prevent such risks. Each year, the EPA
assesses and manages, as necessary, the potential risks from approximately 1,000 new chemicals,
including nanoscale materials, and products of biotechnology prior to their entry into the
marketplace. As part of this process, work will proceed on updating test methods and guidelines
for nanomaterials and biotechnology products, and on updating new chemicals categories which
facilitate expedited assessment and testing of new chemicals. Development of analog
identification systems, Mode of Action (MOA) tools, and Quantitative Structure Activity
Relationships (QSARs), as noted above, will incorporate data on both new and existing
chemicals.
For more information, please see www.epa.gov/opptintr/newchems.
The EPA is planning to allocate $17,105.Oand 81.2 FTE to this work area in FY 2015.
Performance Targets:
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.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
100
100
FY2012
100
100
FY2013
100
100
FY2014
100
FY2015
100
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(RA1) Annual number of chemicals for which risk assessments are finalized through EPA's
TSCA Existing Chemicals Program.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
o
J
FY 2015
7
Units
Risk
Assessments
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.
FY 2008
100
100
FY 2009
100
97
FY 2010
100
91
FY2011
100
100
FY 2012
100
100
FY 2013
100
100
FY 2014
100
FY 2015
100
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(D6A) Reduction in concentration of PFOA in serum in the general population.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
1
Data
Avail
10/2014
FY 2013
No Target
Established
Biennial
FY 2014
25
FY 2015
No Target
Established
Units
Percent
Reduction
The EPA is using the measures described above to evaluate program performance.
470
-------
In FY 2015, 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. This is
consistent with the EPA's 2015 Strategic Plan goal 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. EPA also has been reviewing the more
than 22,000 CBI cases existing as of April 2010 and, where appropriate, challenging those CBI
claims found to be invalid. By the close of FY 2014, subject to resource availability, the EPA
will have reviewed and, where appropriate, challenged all CBI claims within that initial universe
for review.
Existing CBI Claims Reviewed (Cumulative)
100%
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
Results
Original Targets
FY2014
Revised Targets
FY2015
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 that it represents an efficient approach
for using available information to assess and improve the effectiveness of the 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 addition, the EPA will continue working toward its FY 2018 Strategic Target of completing
draft assessments for all currently identified TSCA Work Plan Chemicals. Through FY 2015,
the EPA will have released draft risk assessments for 19 of the original 83 Work Plan Chemicals,
471
-------
and will have finalized assessments for ten of those chemicals after incorporating public and peer
review comments. Once the risk assessments are finalized, EPA will pursue risk management
actions for chemicals found to present risks to human health or the environment. The specific
chemicals prioritized for risk assessment will be announced periodically as new information
becomes available.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$968.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$2,524.0) This increase will advance the agency's efforts to achieve the challenging
goals, set out above, to have released 19 draft chemical risk assessments for public
comment and peer review and completed 10 final risk assessments (cumulatively) by the
end of FY 2015. These accomplishments also will support the agency's longer-range
strategic planning commitment to address all currently identified TSCA Work Plan
Chemicals by FY 2018 Base resources include 4 FTE which supports this initiative.
• (+$683.0) This increase will advance the agency's efforts to ensure the adequacy, quality,
and efficient management of the chemical data needed to support chemical assessments
and risk management actions, and increase transparency by making TSCA chemical
safety information more readily available to and usable by the public and external
decision makers.
• (+$1,000.0) This increase will enable the agency to develop new information
management capabilities to facilitate chemical prioritization, including enhancements to
the TSCA Chemical Dashboard, within the ChemView Portal construct, to enable
processing and display of 21st century exposure information and concurrent adaptations
to existing tools and models to accommodate the receipt and use of this information.
Additional resources in support of this investment can also be found in the Chemical
Safety for Sustainability (CSS) research program in the Science and Technology (S&T)
appropriation.
• (-$1,090.0 7-6.9 FTE) This realignment reflects a decrease in FTE and associated payroll
as the agency works to redesign business processes to become a High Performing
Organization; this will result in efficiencies gained and projected workforce attrition. The
reduced resources include 6.9 FTE and associated payroll of $1,090.0.
Statutory Authority:
Toxic Substances Control Act, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq. - Sections 1-31. Pollution Prevention Act
of 1990, 42 U.S.C. et seq. -- Sections 6601-6610.
472
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$14,634.1
$14,634.1
71.1
FY 2014
Enacted
$13,904.0
$13,904.0
63.7
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$13,486.0
$13,486.0
58.9
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($418.0)
($418.0)
-4.8
Program Project Description:
The Pollution Prevention (P2) Program is one of the EPA's primary tools for advancing
environmental stewardship and sustainability 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. The P2 program's efforts advance the agency's priorities to pursue
sustainability, take action on climate change, and reduce chemical risks. The P2 program also is
working to enhance pollution prevention educational resources and ensuring that these resources
are effectively disseminated to the public. The P2 Program is augmented by a counterpart P2
Categorical Grants Program in the State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG) account.
The P2 Program accomplishes its mission by:
• Fostering the development of P2 solutions to environmental problems that eliminate or
reduce pollution, waste and risks at the source, such as: cleaner production processes and
technologies; safer, "greener" materials and products; and 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); and
• Promoting the adoption, use, and market penetration of those solutions through such
activities as providing technical assistance and demonstrating the benefits of P2 solutions.
For more information about the EPA's Pollution Prevention Program, please see
http ://www. epa.gov/p2/.
473
-------
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
Foster the Development ofP2 Solutions
The P2 Program fosters the development of P2 solutions by developing and applying criteria and
assessment tools to drive P2 innovation and by developing and applying practices that prevent
pollution.
P2 Program activities fostering the development of P2 solutions proposed for FY 2015 include:
• Work conducted by the Design for the Environment (DfE) Program, which provides
hazard information on potential substitutes for priority chemicals; assists companies in
making product design improvements to help reduce risks; and develops associated
technical tools and methodologies. In FY 2015, the DfE Program will follow-up on
recently finalized enhancements to its Standard for Safer Products - the criteria for
determining which products can bear the DfE logo - by implementing the requirements
for ingredient disclosure, sustainable packaging and limits on volatile organic
compounds, in addition to the stringent previous requirements that address a wide range
of toxicological and environmental endpoints.219 In addition, DfE will explore additional
product categories for the Safer Product Labeling Program.
• Work conducted by the Environmentally Preferable Purchasing (EPP) Program220 which
participates in processes to develop or revise voluntary consensus standards for a variety
of product categories including flooring, roofing, carpets, and textiles. In FY 2015, the
program will focus on electronics products, such as servers and computers. In FY 2015,
the EPP Program will work towards the fmalization and implementation of guidelines
intended to provide a transparent, fair, and consistent approach to using non-
governmental product environmental performance standards and eco-labels in federal
purchasing. In addition, in FY 2015, final guidelines for purchasing of green products by
the federal government will be made available.
• Work conducted by the Green Chemistry Program,221 which fosters the design of
chemical products and processes that help to reduce the generation and use of hazardous
substances by administering the Presidential Green Chemistry Challenge. The 93 award
winning technologies to date are responsible for reducing the estimated use or generation
of more than 826 million pounds of hazardous chemicals, saving over 21 billion gallons
of water, and eliminating 7.8 billion pounds of carbon dioxide equivalent releases to air.
• The Green Engineering Program will continue to work with the pharmaceutical and other
industrial sectors to extend the life of used solvents.
219 http://www.epa.gov/dfe/pubs/projects/gfcp/
220 http://www.epa.gov/epp/
221 http://www.epa.gov/greenchemistrv/index.html
474
-------
• Customization, development, and delivery of training to state P2 technical assistance
providers as a conduit to identify and deploy green chemistry and engineering through a
range of incentive, regulatory, and other approaches.
The EPA is planning to allocate $4,549.0 and 18.8 FTE to this strategy in FY 2015.
Promote the Adoption, Use, and Market Penetration ofP2 Solutions
The Pollution Prevention Program promotes increased adoption, use, and market penetration of
P2 solutions, the development of many of which is described above, by providing and promoting
technical assistance, increasing market penetration of established P2 solutions by demonstrating
benefits of P2 solutions, and creating and communicating incentives for their adoption.
P2 Program activities promoting increased use of P2 solutions proposed for FY 2015 include:
• Work conducted by the Economy, Energy and Environment (E3) Initiative and the Green
Suppliers Network (GSN), which collaborates with five other federal agencies to provide
technical assistance to identify environmental improvements and cost savings and to help
manufacturers identify resources with which to implement sustainable changes to their
business practices while reducing business costs and increasing job growth and
competiveness. In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to work with its federal partners and
state pollution prevention programs to conduct facility-specific assessments for small and
medium-sized suppliers and increase the implementation rate of E3 final report
recommendations to help suppliers 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, by leveraging existing resources
across the E3 federal agency partners. In FY 2015, E3 and GSN will work with the
Department of Energy to strengthen technical assistance offerings in the energy
efficiency and environmental areas and will continue to work with the USDA to expand
the E3 framework into agriculturally-based manufacturing. EPA also will continue to
encourage increasing the percentage of E3 assessments that are funded by local
community resources and private financial support and investment, including non-profits,
foundations, impact investors, social bonds, and in-kind service funding.
• Continued work, initiated in FY 2014, by the Green Chemistry Program to analyze green
chemistry innovations (particularly those nominated for awards) and work with federal
partners and external stakeholders to facilitate market adoption and penetration of new
commercially successful chemistries and technologies. With several hundred Presidential
Green Chemistry Challenge awardees and nominees from recent years, there are
substantial opportunities to pursue the goal of market-oriented environmental and
economic progress through increased adoption of these P2 innovations.
• Allowing companies making products that are safer for the environment to communicate
their safer chemical leadership to customers through the use of the 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 2,500 cleaning and other products
475
-------
that are safer than similar products currently on the market. To enhance transparency,
DfE has listed the non-confidential 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 more than 600 safer chemicals, and for the first time
includes 119 fragrances. EPA expects to continue updating this list in FY 2015 as the
DfE Program evaluates chemical ingredients and approves products for the DfE label.
• Leadership provided by the Green Engineering Program in the development of
sustainability engineering education materials, including life-cycle and risk-based
assessment tools. In FY 2015, the textbook, Green Engineering: Environmentally
Conscious Design of Chemical Processes, will be published.
• Technical assistance provided 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. In FY 2015,
the EPA will leverage expertise from across its programs to enhance new pollution
prevention education and outreach resources and will conduct community training
through issuance of grants, innovative awards, and collaboration with national
environmental organizations.
The EPA is planning to allocate $8,937.0 and 40.1 FTE to this strategy in FY 2015.
The EPA supports state and tribal P2 programs and the Pollution Prevention Information
Network (PPIN) under the companion Categorical Grants: Pollution Prevention Program.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(262) Gallons of water reduced through pollution prevention.
FY 2008
1,640
22,179
FY 2009
1,790
650
FY 2010
781
1,472
FY2011
783
1,397
FY 2012
785
1,175
FY 2013
771
Data
Avail
10/2014
FY 2014
932
FY 2015
1,156
Units
Gallons
(Millions)
Measure
Target
Actual
(263) Business, institutional and government costs reduced through pollution prevention.
FY 2008
45.9
234.4
FY 2009
130
272.2
FY 2010
253.9
190.8
FY2011
268.5
232.9
FY 2012
196.9
626
FY 2013
195.6
Data
Avail
11/2014
FY 2014
133.3
FY 2015
197
Units
Dollars
Saved
(Millions)
Measure
Target
Actual
(264) Pounds of hazardous materials reduced through pollution prevention.
FY2008
190
272.4
FY2009
192
129.5
FY2010
188.1
110.3
FY2011
199.6
35.1
FY2012
88.7
1,711
FY2013
71.6
Data
Avail
11/2014
FY2014
23.4
FY2015
30
Units
Pounds
(Millions)
476
-------
Measure
Target
Actual
(297) Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (MTCO2Eq) reduced or offset through
pollution prevention.
FY2008
FY2009
1.8
1.4
FY2010
2.11
1.68
FY2011
2.19
1.38
FY2012
1.74
5.26
FY2013
1.46
Data
Avail
11/2014
FY2014
1.0
FY2015
1.2
Units
MMTCO2Eq
The P2 Program aggregates results from all of the activities 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
• Increase in Safer Chemicals and Safer Chemical Products
In the case of the first four measures, performance targets and results reflect only new annual
results, which are results produced with the support of each year's appropriation. The P2
Program also achieves "recurring results" that are results produced in prior years that continue to
deliver environmental benefits over multiple years, which highlights the ongoing benefits of
program activities. The EPA highlights recurring results, as appropriate, in the Annual
Performance Report.
The performance measure addressing the reduced use of hazardous materials has been re-
baselined to more accurately reflect results attributable to the P2 program.
In FY 2015, the EPA will introduce a new performance measure that will replace the former
"Increase the Use of Safer Chemicals" measure, while still continuing to be dedicated to the
availability and use of safer chemicals. The measure will track the number of Safer Chemicals
listed on the Safer Chemicals Ingredients List and Safer Chemical Products that are recognized
by the Design for the Environment's Safer Products Labeling Program. Through FY 2013, the
Pollution Prevention Program has recognized over 2,500 Safer Chemical Products and over 600
Safer Chemical Ingredients.
Work under this program also supports performance in the P2 Categorical Grants Program under
the STAG account.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$243.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$250.0) This increase is to provide resources to integrate environmental education
activities through an intra-agency workgroup to create educational resources and training
to disseminate information to the public about pollution prevention and other critical
477
-------
environmental issues. These environmental education activities will support EPA's core
mission to expand the conversation on environmentalism.
• (-$911.0 / -4.8 FTE) This decision reflects a decrease that will terminate EPA's support
for the Federal Electronics Challenge and result in other reductions in EPA's work to
develop and increase the use of P2 solutions. The reduced resources include 4.8 FTE and
associated payroll of $754.0.
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.
478
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$12,317.8
$12,317.8
73.1
FY 2014
Enacted
$13,745.0
$13,745.0
79.8
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$13,644.0
$13,644.0
75.1
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($101.0)
($101.0)
-4.7
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, studies have
indicated that children's health may be adversely affected even at extremely low blood levels,
below 10 micrograms per deciliter.222 In response to this new information and the fact that
approximately 38 million homes in the U.S. still have lead-based paint,223 the EPA is now
targeting reductions in the number of children with blood lead levels of five 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 percent in the Centers for Disease Control's (CDC's) most recent data through 2010.224
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
222 U.S.EPA. Air Quality Criteria for Lead (September 29,2006)
http://cfpub.epa. go v/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.nejm.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.gov/articlerender.fcgi?doi=10.1289/ehp.7688
223 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
224 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/
479
-------
• 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) Rules: Implementation & Development
In FY 2015, 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.225 Through FY 2013, thirteen 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 FY
2013, the EPA and its authorized programs have accredited more than 620 training providers,
and more than 130,000 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.226 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.227
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
proposal.
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
225 http://www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/faq2.htm
226 "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
227 http://epa.gov/lead/pubs/regulation.htm
480
-------
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.228
In October 2012, HUD published a Notice of Submission in the Federal Register informing the
public that HUD proposes to conduct an Information Collection Request (ICR) of HUD Lead
Hazard Control Grantees to obtain information about their work practices. This ICR will inform
EPA's decision-making regarding any potential revisions to the lead dust hazard standards.
Provided that data are available through an approved ICR, EPA plans in FY 2015 to make use of
that information in its deliberations on potential changes to the Lead Dust Standard.
Implement the Lead-based Paint Activities (Abatement, Risk Assessment, and Inspection) Rule
In FY 2015, 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 FY 2013, 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 2015, 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.
228 http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/chemtest/pubs/petitions.html
481
-------
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(008) Percent of children (aged 1-5 years) with blood lead levels (>5 ug/dl).
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
Biennial
FY 2014
1.0
FY 2015
No Target
Established
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(009) Cumulative number of certified Renovation Repair and Painting firms
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
133,587
FY 2014
138,000
FY 2015
145,000
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.
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
Biennial
FY 2014
20
FY 2015
No Target
Established
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.
FY 2008
91
91
FY 2009
92
92
FY 2010
92
96
FY2011
92
95
FY 2012
95
97
FY 2013
95
99
FY 2014
95
FY 2015
95
Units
Percent
In FY 2015, the EPA will work to ensure that the percentage of children with blood lead levels
above 5 micrograms per deciliter does not rise above 1.0 percent, the level set as the FY 2014
target. The agency intends to sustain this level of performance through FY 2018. 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 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 28.4 percent (as calculated from 2007-2010 NHANES sampling data) to
a difference of 10 percent by FY 2018.
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 145,000 in FY 2015.
The Lead Program's annual efficiency measure tracks improvements in processing time for
certification applications for lead-based paint professionals and for refund applications.
482
-------
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 2015 target sustains this high level of
achievement.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$372.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$705.0 7-4.7 FTE) This decision reflects a decrease in FTE and associated payroll. The
agency is reviewing and redesigning many core business processes to be more efficient;
depending on the extent and effectiveness of the changes, there may be impacts to the
program's efforts to work with states that are seeking authorization to administer the
Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) Rule in their states and to provide continuing
oversight of existing authorized states for both Lead RRP and Lead Abatement. This
decrease includes 4.7 FTE and associated payroll of $705.0.
• (+$232.0) This increase 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.
Statutory Authority:
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq. - Sections 401-412.
483
-------
Program Area: Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST)
484
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$11,535.3
$11,771.3
$23,306.6
113.6
FY 2014
Enacted
$12,714.0
$10,195.0
$22,909.0
106.5
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$11,295.0
$9,240.0
$20,535.0
108.5
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($1,419.0)
($955.0)
($2,374.0)
2.0
Program Project Description:
These resources 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).
Additionally, these resources support the Administrator's priority towards making a visible
difference in communities across the country to protect precious water resources by working
with state, tribal and local partners to prevent releases from underground storage tanks. Staff and
program activities provide technical support and oversight for LUST Prevention and UST
(STAG) 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 state,229 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.
230
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. Thousands of new releases
are discovered each year, yet the EPA and our partners have made major progress in reducing the
number of new releases. Preventing UST releases is more efficient and less costly than cleaning
up releases after they occur. Over the duration of the program, the EPA has also found that lack
9^1 9^9
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.233
229 States as referenced here also include the District of Columbia and the five Territories as described in the definition of "State"
in the Solid Waste Disposal Act.
230 See Statutory Authority section.
231 Petroleum Releases at Underground Storage Tank Facilities in Florida, Peer Review Draft, US EPA/OUST, March 2005.
232 Evaluation of Releases from New and Upgraded Underground Storage Tanks, Peer Review Draft, US EPA/OUST, August
2004.
233 See http://www.gpo.gov/fdsvs/pkg/FR-2011-11-18/pdf/201 l-29293.pdf
485
-------
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
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.234 Every
three years inspections must occur at each of the 578 thousand federally regulated UST systems.
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 18 percent
from 7,570 in FY 2007 to 6,218 in FY 2013. Confirmed releases remain low due to significant
release prevention efforts such as frequent inspections. A slight increase in FY 2013 was likely
due to increased property transfers as the economy improved, and better leak detection efforts
because of effective operator's training. Continued rigorous prevention and detection activities
are necessary to maintain our progress limiting future confirmed releases.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
End of year FY 2013 data shows:
• Releases are continuing to occur, with 6,218 reported for FY 2013.
• Exceeding the FY 2013 performance measure target of 67 percent, at the end of FY 2013,
71.6 percent of the approximately 213 thousand federally regulated UST facilities were in
significant operational compliance. However, approximately 28 percent still need to
attain and maintain compliance.
In FY 2015, 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.235
In FY 2015, the EPA anticipates that several states may no longer be in compliance with the
provision of the EPAct requiring each tank to be inspected at least once every three years but
will use available funding to strive to as closely as possible comply with this requirement.
Implementing operator training is another provision of the EPAct that will draw heavily on EPA
and state resources. In FY 2015, providing LUST Prevention funding to support these activities
will be an important priority for the prevention program.
234 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
235 For more information on these and other activities, please refer to www.epa.gov/oust/fedlaws/epact_05.htm.
486
-------
In FY 2015, 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;
• 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 mechanisms236 are
effective and create incentives for improved compliance by tank owners and operators. In FY
2015, the EPA will continue to better ensure compliance with financial assurance requirements
through a workgroup of the EPA, state, and other interested stakeholders. They will strive 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. 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.
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 2015, the EPA will respond to the increased use of biofuels by assessing biofuel
compatibility.
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 2015, the EPA will
continue implementing our Petroleum Brownfields Action Plan.237
236 See compatibility requirement at 40 CFR 280.32.
237 www.epa.gov/oust/pubs/petrobfactionplan2013 .pdf
487
-------
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in LUST Prevention and can be
found in the Eight-Year Performance Array.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$187.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$1,606.0 / +2.0 FTE) This net change reflects a reduction to streamline internal business
practices to manage agency contracts and grants and a decrease in extramural funding
that provides grants to organizations who support states and tribes with training and other
technical assistance and development. This change realigns FTE to work with states to
develop and implement new and effective release prevention implementation strategies.
This change includes an increase for 2.0 FTE and $289.0 in associated payroll.
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.
488
-------
Program Area: Water: Ecosystems
489
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$23,940.2
$23,940.2
44.6
FY 2014
Enacted
$25,098.0
$25,098.0
46.5
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$26,723.0
$26,723.0
44.3
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$1,625.0
$1,625.0
-2.2
Program Project Description:
The National Estuary (NEP) Program/Coastal Waterways Program works 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.
238
The water quality and ecological integrity of estuarine and coastal areas is critical to the
economic vitality of the United States. 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 output2 9. The economic value of coastal recreation in the United States -
for beach going, angling, bird watching, and snorkeling/diving - has been conservatively
estimated by NOAA to be in the order of $20 billion to $60 billion annually.240 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.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
• In FY 2015, the EPA will provide $16.8 million in Clean Water Act Section 320 grants
for 28 National Estuary Programs (NEPs) ($600 thousand per NEP). This funding
continues the EPA support for implementation of the NEP Comprehensive Conservation
and Management Plans.
• The EPA will continue to strengthen the capacity of coastal communities to adapt to the
impacts of climate change and increase their resilience. The agency will provide technical
assistance and tools for local organizations, including NEPs, to: (1) develop and
implement "Climate-Ready Estuary" models assessing watersheds' vulnerabilities to
climate change; (2) develop and implement climate adaptation strategies; and (3) engage
and educate coastal stakeholders about climate change impacts to water quality, habitat,
and human well-being in their communities. The agency encourages and supports
238 For more information, visit http ://www. epa. gov/owow/estuaries.
239 A 2007 Restore America's Estuaries study, "The Economic and Market Value of Coasts and Estuaries
240 Pendleton, Lindwood. The Economic and market Value of Coasts and Estuaries: What's at Stake. Available at:
https://www.estuaries.org/the-economic-value-of-coasts-a-estuaries.html
490
-------
demonstration projects and widely shares examples and lessons learned about climate
change adaptation.
• The EPA will research/collect data for/prepare the National Coastal Condition Report, the
only statistically significant measure of coastal water quality that covers both national
and regional scales. Information on coastal ecological conditions generated by the
National Coastal Condition Report will be used by resource managers to efficiently and
effectively target water quality actions and manage those actions to maximize benefits.
For example, the California State Water Resources Control Board drew upon data from
the National Coastal Condition Assessment and other sources to develop statewide
estuarine sediment quality objectives for the State of California. Results from the 2010
National Coastal Condition Assessment (NCCA) will be presented in the National
Coastal Condition Report V, expected to be released in late FY 2014. Preparations are
underway to implement the next NCCA in summer of 2015.
• The EPA, as the federal chair of the Gulf Hypoxia Task Force, will work with the other
federal agencies and the states Task Force members to continue implementation of the
2008 Gulf Hypoxia Action Plan. This activity complements other coordination and
implementation resources in the Geographic Program: Gulf of Mexico and Surface Water
Protection Program. A key goal of the Gulf Hypoxia Action Plan is to improve water
quality in the Mississippi River Basin and the Gulf of Mexico by implementing existing
and innovative program approaches to reduce nitrogen and phosphorus pollution into the
Basin and to the Gulf. Excessive nutrients can have both ecological and human health
effects - high nitrate levels in drinking water have been linked to serious illness.241 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, such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the U.S.
Geological Survey, in high-priority watersheds.
Performance Measures:
Resources support efforts to achieve the EPA's goal of protecting and restoring 100 thousand
additional acres of habitat in FY 2015 and promoting alignment of National Estuary Program
restoration goals with those of Tribal, state, regional, and local agencies. Since 2002, almost 1.3
million acres of habitat have been protected or restored within NEP study areas.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(202) Acres protected or restored in National Estuary Program study areas.
FY2008
50,000
83,490
FY2009
100,000
125,410
FY2010
100,000
89,985
FY2011
100,000
62,213
FY2012
100,000
114,575
FY2013
100,000
127,594
FY2014
100,000
FY2015
100,000
Units
Acres
241 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
491
-------
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$148.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$344.0 / -2.2 FTE) This reflects reduced technical support, guidance, and oversight of
NEP CCMP implementation of projects that protect and enhance water quality and living
resources in estuaries and coastal watersheds. The reduced resources include 2.2 FTE and
associated payroll of $344.0.
• (+$1,821.0) This realignment of resources reflects the EPA's increased support for the
NEP Section 320 grants (providing a total of $600 thousand/NEP), as well as national
support for protecting and enhancing water quality and living resources in estuaries and
coastal watersheds.
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.
492
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$19,881.9
$19,881.9
140.5
FY 2014
Enacted
$21,065.0
$21,065.0
138.4
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$24,220.0
$24,220.0
138.9
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$3,155.0
$3,155.0
0.5
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Wetlands Protection Program has two primary areas: the Clean Water Act Section
404 regulatory program and the state and Tribal development program, both of which use
authorities established under the CWA to ensure effective, scientifically based, and coordinated
efforts to protect the nation's water resources. The Wetlands Protection Program operates under
the broad national goal of "no net loss" of wetlands for the Section 404 permit policy and review
functions, and strives 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 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. According to one assessment of natural ecosystems, the dollar value of
wetlands worldwide was estimated to be $14.9 trillion.242 Wetlands improve water quality;
recharge water supplies, including public drinking water sources; provide many recreational
opportunities, including hunting and fishing; reduce flood risks and storm damage; 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.243
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
Implement Clean Water Act Section 404:
The Army Corps of Engineers has responsibility for managing the day-to-day permit processes
under Section 404 of the CWA across the nation, and the EPA has a statutory role to provide
242 Costanza, et. al. (1997) The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital." Nature 387:253-260
243 Costanza et al. (2008) The Value of Coastal Wetlands for Hurricane Protection. Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences Ambio
Vol. 37, No. 4, June 2008
493
-------
input to the Corps as it develops proposed permits. Also, 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. In its 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 EPA tracks its performance and Agency actions regarding Section 404 permit review using a
tracking system known as Data on Aquatic Resources Tracking for Effective Regulation
(DARTER). In FY 2013, the EPA tracked 2,975 Section 404 notices for proposed projects in
DARTER. Of the standard permit applications reviewed by the EPA, 79 percent of the final
permits showed environmental improvements following coordination with the Corps. The
Agency plans to begin tracking additional information regarding the EPA's comments and
environmental improvements related to Section 404 permitting, such as mitigation success.
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, using
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, 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. 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.
In FY 2015, the EPA will conduct activities pursuant to responsibilities as a member of the Gulf
Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council authorized under the RESTORE Act. Activities will
include coordinating with the Army Corps of Engineers and other federal, state, and local
partners to design and implement RESTORE Act projects, and reviewing proposed activities that
require authorization by the Corps under CWA Section 404.
Improve Clean Water Act Review of Surface Coal Mining:
Consistent with the CWA and existing regulation and memoranda, the EPA will collaborate with
the Corps, as appropriate, to review proposed discharges of dredged or fill material pursuant to
CWA Section 404. It is through this interaction that both the EPA and the Corps work together
most effectively to share information, identify issues of concern, and reach environmentally
responsible permit outcomes. These actions have resulted in more timely reviews and allowed
projects that meet the requirements of the law to proceed under Section 404 permits. The EPA
also will continue to coordinate with other EPA, state, and federal programs, including the
494
-------
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 enable the Agency to assist the Corps in reviewing proposed
projects, identifying environmental concerns, minimizing impacts, and working together toward
timely and defensible permit decisions that meet the requirements of the law.
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. The
Agency will continue to work with 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.
Build State and Tribal Wetlands Program:
The EPA will continue to 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 integrated
monitoring and assessment programs that improve wetland data for decision-making on wetlands
within watersheds. In addition, the EPA will continue to work with states and tribes interested in
assuming administration of the CWA Section 404 program. In support of state and Tribal
wetland programs, the EPA will continue to administer Wetland Program Development Grants
with a focus on working more efficiently with states and tribes to achieve specific program
development outcomes.2 4
Continue the National Wetland Condition Assessment:
The EPA's 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. Taken together, the National Wetland Condition
Assessment and the USFWS Wetland Status and Trends results will 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 2015, the EPA will start planning and mobilizing for the second National Wetland Condition
Assessment.
244 For more information, visit http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/ or http://www.cfda.gov.
495
-------
Clarify Scope of Clean Water Act Protections for Waters of the U.S.:
Another key activity 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.2 5 Over the past
decade, interpretations of Supreme Court rulings have caused confusion about which waters and
wetlands are protected from pollution. The EPA and the Corps are undertaking a rulemaking
process to help provide greater consistency, certainty, and predictability nationwide by clarifying
where the Clean Water Act applies - and where it doesn't. These improvements are necessary to
reduce costs and minimize delays in the permit process, and protect waters that are vital to public
health, the environment, and the economy. In the interim, 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 wetland.246 The EPA will
use the agency's wetland program resources and authorities to improve coastal wetland natural
resource protection and to collaborate with other agencies on coastal wetland restoration,
including following through on the Agency's designated actions for the Regional Ecosystem
Restoration and Protection Objective 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. ("No net
loss" of wetlands is based on requirements for mitigation in CWA 404 permits and not the
actual mitigation attained.)
FY 2008
No Net
Loss
Data
Unavailable
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
No Net
Loss
FY 2014
No Net
Loss
FY 2015
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).
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
207,000
FY 2014
220,000
FY 2015
230,000
Units
Acres
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$508.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
245 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
246 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
496
-------
• (+$281.0 / +2.0 FTE) This increase supports the EPA's activities associated with
implementation of the RESTORE Act. The increased resources include 2.0 FTE and
associated payroll of $281.0.
• (-$211.0 / -1.5 FTE) The agency is reviewing and redesigning many core business
processes to be more efficient. The reduced resources include 1.5 FTE and associated
payroll of $211.0.
• (+$2,577.0) Realigned resources will support the EPA's implementation of core Clean
Water Act responsibilities under Section 404, including increasing the quality and
quantity of wetlands via timely technical review of Section 404 permits, and support for
state and Tribal efforts to establish and implement effective wetland restoration and
protection programs.
Statutory Authority:
CWA; 1990 Great Lakes Critical Programs Act; Great Lakes and Lake Champlain Act; Wetlands
Planning and Restoration Act of 2002; Estuaries and Clean Waters Act of 2000; North American
Wetlands Conservation Act; Wetlands Resources Development Act; 1909 The 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.
497
-------
Program Area: Water: Human Health Protection
498
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$2,109.1
$2,109.1
7.1
FY 2014
Enacted
$1,927.0
$1,927.0
3.3
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$722.0
$722.0
3.8
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($1,205.0)
($1,205.0)
0.5
Program Project Description:
The 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) developing and disseminating 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; 2) developing and disseminating
guidance that states and tribes can use to conduct local fish consumption surveys; 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.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to:
• Update science and public policy to assess and manage the risks and benefits of fish
consumption; and
• Provide technical support to states in the operation of their fish advisory programs.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(fsl) Percent of women of childbearing age having mercury levels in blood above the level of
concern.
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
2.3
FY 2014
4.9
FY 2015
2.3
Units
Women of
Childbearing
Age
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$6.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
499
-------
• (+$82.0 / +0.5 FTE) This increase in resources is for the fish advisory program to
complete analyses of National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHNAES)
data for mercury, arsenic, and Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS). The additional
resources include 0.5 FTE and associated payroll of $82.0.
• (-$1,293.0) 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).
500
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$94,244.6
$3,610.8
$97,855.4
527.9
FY 2014
Enacted
$98,161.0
$3,636.0
$101,797.0
528.9
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$100,931.0
$3,688.0
$104,619.0
523.3
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$2,770.0
$52.0
$2,822.0
-5.6
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 education, and financial assistance
programs to enhance public water systems' capacity to comply with existing and new
regulations; (4) underground injection control programs; (5) supporting 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.
247
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
Safe drinking water is critical to protecting human health. Approximately 300 million Americans
rely on the safety of tap water provided by public water systems that are subject to national
drinking water standards.248 In FY 2015, 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 systems; and (4) implementing the
underground injection control program. For FY 2015, 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 2013, 92 percent of the population served by community
water systems (CWSs) received drinking water that met all applicable health-based drinking
water standards, achieving the performance target of 92 percent. In addition, in FY 2013, CWSs
provided safe drinking water during 97 percent of total person months (all persons served by
247 For more information, please see http://www.epa.gov/safewater and https: //www.cfda. go v for more information.
248 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS/FED),
http://water.epa.gov/scitech/datait/databases/drink/sdwisfed/index.cfm.
501
-------
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 2015249 to expand
public health protection for drinking water. The program focuses on: 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 2015, 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 continue to focus on working with states with newer requirements to protect against
Cryptosporidium, to control disinfection byproducts, and to prepare to implement the Revised
Total Coliform 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. As a
result, performance for small and Tribal systems (which are often small) was below targets. In
FY 2013, small system violations made up 93 percent of the overall violations from all size
systems, and as of the end of FY 2013, only 77 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) target assistance to small systems that are most in need; and (3) use a
variety of strategies to address the full spectrum of needs in order to promote the long-term
sustainability of small systems.
Key to addressing the most pressing water system issues is being able to identify which systems
have the greatest need. Since FY 2013, the EPA has been working to replace obsolete and
expensive-to-maintain drinking water system information technology. The new system (SDWIS
Primacy Agency, formerly known as SDWIS NextGen) will focus on the following:
1) Providing tools to states that automate preliminary compliance determinations for ease
and consistency in determining whether systems are in compliance with drinking water
rules;
2) Automating processes for verifying the accuracy of data through 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 through a central system.
249 For more information, please see http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/dwstrategv/index.cfm for additional
information.
502
-------
The transition to the new system will enable states to save resources currently used to maintain
individual data systems allowing funds to be used for other public health protection activities
including providing additional technical assistance to systems in non-compliance and most in
need. They will be able to use a new system that will improve the overall accuracy and
availability of data on drinking water quality.
To advance the E-Enterprise initiative to modernize environmental systems and reduce reporting
burden, the agency will invest in additional personnel to begin the transition to all-electronic
reporting in the drinking water program in FY 2015. In order to require public water systems to
submit compliance monitoring data electronically to primacy agencies, the agency may need to
develop a rulemaking. Analyses are currently being done to determine what data would be
reported electronically, what technology should be constructed to transmit the data, and what
support states, water systems, and laboratories will need once the future SDWIS Prime Drinking
Water Gateway is built. The agency will coordinate with states, water systems, and laboratories
at the appropriate stages of the transition, including the scoping and development of any
potential rulemaking. Benefits of this mandated transition to all-electronic reporting of
compliance monitoring data include improvements in program efficiency and data quality,
reductions in reporting burdens on laboratories, water utilities, and states, and ultimately
reduction in public health risk.
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 by establishing
state drinking water program priorities, reviewing state programs, 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
environmental educational resources to disseminate information to the public and increase
transparency about America's drinking water standards, pollution runoff, and improving
water quality. Other education engagement activities include: training the public through
issuance of grants and innovative awards, collaboration with stakeholders and national
environmental and non-profit organizations. These resources will be available to educate
503
-------
the public about water quality issues and support EPA's core mission to protect public
health; and
• Complete remaining guidance and compliance assistance materials 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, when public health is at risk. As part of the Drinking
Water Strategy, the EPA is investing an additional $1 million in non-payroll resources to
increase its focus on regulating groups of drinking water contaminants, which may more
effectively address potential risks and could create a framework for regulating similar
contaminants and/or groups in the future. This group regulation requires more scientific input,
complex analyses, and supporting documentation than a regulation for a single contaminant. The
innovative nature of the group regulation also dictates the need for increased public/scientific
outreach and comment in the form of webinars and/or public meetings. The EPA will continue
its communication with states, tribes, and communities, thereby maintaining confidence in the
quality of drinking water.
The agency will continue to evaluate and address drinking water risks in 2015, including:
• Publishing the final regulatory determinations for the third Contaminant Candidate List
(CCL 3). A "regulatory determination" is a formal decision on whether the EPA should
initiate a rulemaking process to develop a regulation for a specific contaminant or group
of contaminants. These final regulatory determinations are based on the evaluation of the
116 chemical and microbial contaminants listed on CCL 3.
• Analyzing public comments submitted in response to the proposed fourth Contaminant
Candidate List (CCL 4), which will be published in FY 2014, and draft the final CCL 4
for publication in FY 2015. The SDWA requires the EPA to publish a list of unregulated
contaminants every five years (CCL), which may require regulation and are known or
anticipated to occur in public water systems. CCL 3 was published in October 2009.
• Proposing a regulation to address a group of up to 16 carcinogenic volatile organic
compounds (cVOCs) as part of the Drinking Water Strategy. The EPA is proposing to
regulate these contaminants as a group rather than individually to provide public health
protection more quickly and allow utilities to more effectively and efficiently plan for
improvements. This group of cVOCs 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 EPA is conducting substantial scientific analysis to inform the derivation of a
perchlorate Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) in response to the
recommendations of the Science Advisory Board (SAB). The EPA also is collaborating
504
-------
with Food and Drug Administration scientists to implement the SAB's recommendations
and is committed to using the best available science to develop the proposed perchlorate
MCLG and regulation. The Agency expects to publish a proposed Perchlorate regulation
inFY16.
• Completing the review of the Lead and Copper Rule in accordance with the EPA's Final
Plan for Periodic Retrospective Review of Existing Regulations. The Retrospective
Review sought ways to simplify and clarify requirements imposed on drinking water
systems to maintain safe levels of lead and copper in drinking water. As part of this
process, the EPA solicited input from a working group of stakeholders who will inform
recommendations from the National Drinking Water Advisory Council. The EPA will
propose revisions to the Lead and Copper Rule in FY 2015. The final revisions will be
promulgated within 18 months of publication of the proposal.
• Continuing work on the third Six-Year Review of more than 80 existing regulations for
chemical, microbial, and radiological contaminants. As part of the third Six-Year
Review and in accordance with the EPA's Final Plan for Periodic Retrospective Review
of Existing Regulations, the Agency has been reviewing the Long-Term 2 Enhanced
Surface Water Treatment Rule (LT2) by assessing and analyzing scientific
data/information regarding occurrence, treatment, analytical methods, and health effects
to evaluate whether there are new or additional ways to manage risk while assuring
equivalent or improved public health protection.
• Subsequent to publication of the final regulatory determinations for CCL 3, initiating the
necessary rulemaking process to develop an NPDWR (or NPDWRs) for a specific
contaminant, contaminants, or group of contaminants receiving a determination that a
regulation is needed. SDWA requires that the agency publish the proposed NPDWR
(regulation) within 24 months of the corresponding positive final determination and
promulgate the final NPDWR within 18 months following the publication of the
proposal.
• Collaborating with stakeholders to better understand water quality issues in distribution
systems.
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
systems in order to continuously improve their performance and achieve long-term sustainability.
The EPA will continue to encourage drinking water systems to adopt sustainable management
practices by providing funding, technical assistance, and training including the following:
505
-------
• 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 and to support utility compliance with SDWA standards;
• Working with states, tribes, water systems, and other stakeholders to enhance technical,
financial, and managerial capacity to address infrastructure needs, and enhance system
performance and efficiency;
• Providing effective oversight of the DWSRF funds;
• Continuing 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.
• Partnering with states and utility associations as part of the EPA'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
• Working with states, other federal agencies, and utility associations to identify options for
utilities in response to climate change impacts and water resource limitations.
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 91 percent of CWSs met all
applicable health-based standards through approaches that included source water protection in
FY 2013, surpassing the performance target of 90 percent. In FY 2015, the agency will:
• Continue to work with national, state, local stakeholder organizations, and the Source
Water Collaborative to promote a unified approach in protecting drinking water sources
and to update source water assessments and plans as information becomes available. The
EPA also will work with other federal agencies to support state and local source water
protection actions; and
• Continue 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
506
-------
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 2015, the EPA is investing $1 million to provide technical support to states and tribes in
making sound permitting decisions and providing oversight related to implementation of EPA's
guidance on hydraulic fracturing with diesel fuels. This investment supports the agency's
priorities of safeguarding public health and environmental justice, while recognizing the
important role that energy extraction, including natural gas development, plays in our energy
future. On February 12, 2014, the EPA released guidance on hydraulic fracturing to help ensure
the benefit of energy development while not jeopardizing precious drinking water resources and
environmental quality. The FY 2015 funds will help states and tribes review complex data
typically contained in UIC applications for hydraulic fracturing using diesel fuels. Funding also
will be used to support locating and inspecting injection wells. In addition, funds will support
public meetings and follow up actions during permitting. This implementation support will
ensure that authorized state and Tribal agencies are effectively managing and overseeing the
rapidly growing energy sector while preventing endangerment of underground sources of
drinking water.
The increase in oil and gas production wells has resulted in the need for additional oil and gas
wastewater disposal wells. In FY 2015, the EPA also will work to support state programs as
they safely manage UIC Class II disposal wells that may be receiving higher volumes of
wastewater and that may need to be situated closer in proximity to production wells and other
disposal wells.
In FY 2015, the EPA will meet growing demands for technical assistance to states and tribes in a
variety of other areas including:
• Water quality and supply through injection of fluids for aquifer storage and recovery,
consideration of groundwater as part of stormwater management and water reuse;
• Aquifer exemptions related to uranium solution mining and other mineral extraction
including development of a national aquifer exemption data set;
• 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;
• Class VI Geologic Sequestration (GS):
1) Reviewing and processing (by rulemaking) Class VI primacy applications from
states and tribes;
2) Directly implementing the regulation, where states have not yet obtained
primacy, and work directly with permit applicants, and
3) Providing technical assistance to states to analyze complex modeling,
monitoring, siting, and financial assurance data for new GS projects.
Performance Targets:
Measure
(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.
FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015
507
Units
-------
Target
Actual
87
83
87
81.2
87
87.2
87
81.2
87
84
87
77
87
87
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.
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
92
FY 2014
92
FY 2015
92
Units
Population
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).
FY2008
95
87
FY2009
95
88
FY2010
95
87
FY2011
95
92
FY2012
95
89
FY2013
95
93
FY 2014
83
FY2015
79
Units
CWSs
Measure
Target
Actual
(apm) Perc
through ap
FY 2008
89.5
89
snt of community water systems that meets all applicable health-based standards
preaches including effective treatment and source water protection.
FY 2009
90
89.1
FY 2010
90
89.6
FY2011
90
90.7
FY 2012
90
91
FY 2013
90
91
FY 2014
90
FY 2015
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.
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
96.9
FY 2014
95
FY 2015
95
Units
Person
Months
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,122.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$1,404.0 / -9.7 FTE) The agency is reviewing and redesigning many core business
processes to be more efficient. For drinking water programs, there is a reduction of 9.7
FTE and associated payroll of $1,404.0.
• (+$1,294.0 / +2.0 FTE) Realigned resources will support increased focus on regulating
groups of drinking water contaminants resulting in effectively addressing potential risks
and demonstrating a predictable strategy for regulating similar contaminants and/or
groups in the future. This group regulation requires more scientific input, complex
analyses, and supporting documentation than a regulation for a single contaminant. The
innovative nature of the group regulation also dictates the need for increased
public/scientific outreach and comment in the form of webinars and/or public meetings.
These resources include 2.0 FTE and associated payroll of $294.0.
508
-------
• (+$147.0 / +1.0 FTE) An additional FTE is needed to support coordination with states,
water systems, and laboratories at the appropriate stages of transition to electronic
reporting of drinking water compliance monitoring data. These resources include 1.0 FTE
and associated payroll of $147.0.
• (+$59.0 / +0.4 FTE) This reflects realignment in support of enhanced management to
increase the use of LEAN. The increased resources include 0.4 FTE and associated
payroll of $59.0.
• (+$1,000.0) This realignment of funds will support states and tribes in making sound
permitting decisions and providing oversight related to implementation of EPA's
guidance on hydraulic fracturing with diesel fuels.
• (-$188.0) This reduction in travel reflects EPA's continued efforts to reduce its travel
footprint through green alternatives such as video conferencing.
• (-$135.0) The agency is reviewing and redesigning many core business processes to be
more efficient and to reduce costs. The EPA expects these actions, as well as improved
IT systems and processes, will provide cost savings.
• (+$875.0) This increase is to provide resources to support environmental education
activities through an intra-agency workgroup to increase transparency about America's
drinking water standards, pollution runoff, improving water quality, and other critical
environmental issues. These environmental education activities will support EPA's core
mission to expand the conversation on environmentalism.
Statutory Authority:
SOW A; CWA.
509
-------
Program Area: Water Quality Protection
510
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$10,692.6
$10,692.6
41.4
FY 2014
Enacted
$11,850.0
$11,850.0
38.3
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$10,628.0
$10,628.0
38.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($1,222.0)
($1,222.0)
-0.3
Program Project Description:
Ocean and coastal waters are environmentally and economically valuable to the nation. Healthy
ocean and coastal waters support fishing, recreation, tourism, and industry. The Environmental
Protection Agency works to integrate its management of the oceans and coasts across federal
agencies and with state, Tribal, and local governments.250 The goals of the EPA's Marine
Pollution Program are to: 1) ensure marine ecosystem protection by controlling point source and
vessel discharges, 2) manage ocean dumping of dredged material, 3) develop regional and
international collaborations, 4) monitor ocean and coastal waters, and 5) manage other marine
issues, such as marine debris, invasive species, ocean acidification, and the marine transportation
system.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
Key FY 2015 activities for the Marine Pollution Program include:
Controlling Vessel Operational Discharges
• Developing regulations for the joint EPA and Department of Defense Uniform National
Discharge Standards (UNDS) rulemaking;
• Developing management practices and associated performance standards under the Clean
Boating Act for discharges incidental to the normal operation of recreational vessels;
• Participating 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
See http://water.epa.gov/type/oceb/index.cfm for more information.
511
-------
• Supporting a nationally consistent policy for the designation of no-discharge zones for
vessel sewage.
Managing the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act / Ocean Dumping Management
Program (including Dredged Material)
In order to ensure 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 2015 include:
• Monitoring active dredged material ocean dump sites to ensure achievement of
environmentally acceptable conditions, as reflected in each site's Management and
Monitoring Plan.
• Continuing to co-chair with the Army Corps of Engineers of the National Dredging Team
and support implementation of a tracking system for beneficial use of dredged materials
(as an alternative to dumping in ocean and coastal waters).
• Addressing any requests for carbon sequestration in the sub-seabed or by ocean
fertilization, including any required permitting under Marine Protection, Research, and
Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA).
• Ensuring that U.S. policy and procedures regarding ocean dumping are consistent with
the 1972 London Convention and 1996 London Protocol. The EPA is Head of the U.S.
Delegation for the annual London Convention/London Protocol Scientific Groups
Meetings and Alternate Head of the U.S. Delegation for the annual London
Convention/London Protocol Consultative Meeting of the Parties.
• Continuing work with other federal agencies to draft proposed amendments to Title I of
the MPRSA, 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, and site designation requests and supporting
implementation of general and other permits issued under the MPRSA.
512
-------
Ocean and Coastal Acidification
Recent research is showing that, in addition to the contribution of atmospheric carbon dioxide to
ocean and coastal acidification, local land-based anthropogenic sources of nutrients and organic
carbon can significantly change the biogeochemistry of coastal waters, resulting in increased
acidification. Because ocean and coastal acidification has the potential to affect key species at
the base of marine food webs, it has the potential to affect fishery species of interest. Further,
decreases in the rate of calcium carbonate production may alter benthic ecosystems; thereby
affecting marine organisms that depend on the complex habitat provided by corals and other
associated organisms.
Major areas of effort for FY 2015 include:
Convene a technical workgroup to assess water quality parameters relevant to ocean and coastal
acidification. The near-term tasks of this workgroup will be:
• Assessing existing and emerging information applicable to the development of indicators
of ocean acidification in coastal waters;
• Determining if available information is sufficient to provide a scientifically defensible
basis for developing new water quality criteria for ocean and coastal acidification; and
• If possible, identifying the best potential parameters for developing water quality criteria
for ocean and coastal acidification.
Reducing Marine Debris
Major areas of effort for FY 2015 include:
• Implementing and continuing to build the EPA's new Trash Free Waters Program.
• Making the cost-benefit case that aquatic trash requires priority action.
• Determining human health effects of plastic trash in the food chain.
• Defining and enhancing the public engagement of the next generation in trash prevention.
• Creating a sustainable materials management program for plastics packaging.
• Building from an existing model to develop new regional trash free waters strategies.
• Continuing to 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.
513
-------
Interagency Collaborations for Ocean and Coastal Protection
Major areas of effort for FY 2015 include:
• Continuing 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.
• Participating 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.
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).
FY 2008
95
99
FY 2009
98
99
FY 2010
98
90.1
FY2011
98
93
FY 2012
95
97
FY 2013
95
96
FY 2014
95
FY 2015
95
Units
Sites
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$154.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$47.0 / -0.3 FTE) The agency is reviewing and redesigning many core business
processes to be more efficient. The reduced resources include 0.3 FTE and associated
payroll of $47.0.
• (-$1,329.0) This reflects reduced ocean monitoring and assessment activities through
strategic targeting of ocean dumpsites.
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; NISA
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.
514
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$193,699.4
$193,699.4
1,026.7
FY 2014
Enacted
$199,709.0
$199,709.0
1,009.6
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$213,780.0
$213,780.0
1,006.9
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$14,071.0
$14,071.0
-2.7
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. It also supports
enforcement case development, as appropriate. The program also integrates environmental
outreach and training activities to educate the public on improving water quality.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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 ($44.8 million); National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) ($47.7 million); water monitoring ($24.5 million); TMDLs ($25.8
million); watershed and nonpoint source management ($28.7 million); sustainable infrastructure
management ($24.7 million); water infrastructure grants management ($11.6 million); and Clean
Water Act Section 106 program management ($6.2 million).
The FY 2015 President's Budget builds from our core programs and identifies realignments to
support our top priority work in four of the six Administrator priority areas. Resources have been
realigned to focused on Communities; Protecting Waters; Taking Action on Toxics and
Chemical Safety; and Embracing EPA as a High Performing Organization. Resources are
realigned to provide increased support for green infrastructure ($2.5 million non-payroll
resources) and MS4 activities ($5 million non-payroll resources) to further the Agency's
sustainability goals. The EPA will expand Green Infrastructure technical assistance efforts to
include more communities. The Agency also will assist newly regulated MS4s develop effective
stormwater plans. A third realignment provides $4.5 million (non-payroll resources) to support a
new approach for measuring improvements in water quality. It will aid in the development of
tools needed to automate the linking of state assessment data, make updates and necessary
improvements to incorporate data into EPA data systems, and begin efforts to assist states in
implementing the new approach.
515
-------
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.251
In FY 2015, 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
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.
• Ensure methodologies for developing Ambient Water Quality Criteria for aquatic life 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
251 For more information, visit http ://www. epa. gov/waterscience/.
516
-------
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 2015, 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.
The number of entities required to obtain NPDES permits has increased three-fold over the past
15 years, from 372 thousand in 1999 to nearly one million regulated entities in 2013. 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's key strategic objectives for the NPDES programs include a diverse array of program
initiatives, including:
• Ongoing efforts to work with states and Regional offices to ensure the integrity of the
NPDES program in the 47 states that are authorized to issue NPDES permits. The EPA
will continue to improve management systems and look for program efficiencies to
ensure the optimal balance of flexibility and national consistency. In addition, the EPA
will continue efforts to ensure that program assessments are publicly available and result
in meaningful program improvements.
• Outreach, training, and technical assistance to states and permittees in the development of
water quality-based permit limits for nutrient pollution, which is one of the largest
remaining causes of water body impairment nationwide.
• The development of national technology-based standards for discharges from Steam
Electric power plants and related cooling water intake structures, and support for states in
developing site-specific permit conditions for such facilities' wastestreams, such as those
from flue gas desulfurization.
• Active engagement with communities and States to implement the EPA's Integrated
Municipal Stormwater and Wastewater Planning Approach by providing timely technical
assistance on permitting issues and by clarifying how a communities' financial capability
impacts schedules for complying with Clean Water Act obligations;
• Assistance to 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, and
517
-------
development of effluent guidelines to address such discharges on a consistent, national
basis.
• Efforts to control pollutant discharges from Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations
(CAFOs). The EPA will continue to work with states and tribes to implement fully its
2008 CAFO rule to ensure that all CAFOs that discharge pollutants obtain NPDES permit
coverage.
• Collaborative efforts to increase water quality protection from livestock operations using
non-regulatory techniques, such as conducting industry partnership demonstration
projects and partnering with other federal agencies and stakeholders to hold workshops
on best conservation practices to educate farmers on most effective BMPs.
• Enhanced implementation of regulatory and permitting processing to strengthen the
stormwater program. 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.
• Actions to promote the use of green infrastructure to improve and protect urban waters
and to make communities more resilient. The EPA is strengthening its partnership with
other federal agencies to direct greater focus and funding for green infrastructure,
providing technical assistance to communities, and developing tools that communities
can use to evaluate green infrastructure.
• Ongoing efforts 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.
• In response to the Chesapeake Bay Executive Order 13508, the EPA will conduct
significant efforts to protect and restore the water quality in the Chesapeake Bay
watershed. In addition, the EPA will continue to support states in effectively
implementing the NPDES program to improve the health of the watershed.
• EPA issued the most recent Vessel General Permit (VGP) in 2013 and intends to issue
the small Vessel General Permit (sVGP) in 2014. The permits reduce the risk of invasive
species introduction and reduce the discharge of pollutants from vessels. Together, the
permits provide NPDES permit coverage to approximately 200,000 vessel operators. In
FY 2015, the EPA will be responsible for implementing the permits, conducting outreach
to the domestic and international shipping communities, developing tools and training,
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 the next 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
518
-------
environmental protection from international actors operating in our nation's waters, and
prepare for issuance of the 2018 VGP.
• As part of an agency-wide effort to make regulations easier to implement and incorporate
e-reporting, resources have been realigned to accelerate implementation of e-reporting in
order to reap the benefits of reduced burden for data entry and error resolution, reduced
effort in responding to public requests for data, consistent requirements for electronic
reporting across all states, and more timely access to NPDES program data in an
electronic format for EPA, states, regulated entities, and the public.
Monitoring and Assessment
In FY 2015, 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, to expand the use of monitoring data and geo-spatial tools for water resource protection,
and 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 surveys, the EPA, states, and tribes will collaborate to conduct field
sampling for the 2015 National Coastal Condition Assessment. In FY 2015, the EPA and states
will release the 2012 National Lakes Assessment following partner and external peer review. The
EPA and states will initiate data analysis and peer review of the second National Rivers and
Streams Assessment, and the report will be completed in FY 2016. In FY 2015, the EPA/State
Steering Committee for the National Wetlands Assessment will be planning the next survey
targeted to be conducted in the field in calendar year 2016.
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.
Total Maximum Daily Loads
Development and implementation of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for CWA 303(d)
listed impaired waterbodies is a critical tool for meeting water quality restoration goals. TMDLs
519
-------
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. In FY 2015, the CWA 303(d) Listing and TMDL Program will continue to engage
with states to implement the new 10-year vision for the program 52. As part of this effort, the
EPA will continue to encourage states to identify priority waters for assessment and for
completing TMDLs and other restoration plans to address impaired segments. The EPA will
work with states and other partners to develop and implement activities and watershed plans to
restore these waters. Additionally, EPA will work with states and other partners to improve our
ability to identify and protect healthy waters/watersheds, and will work with states to pursue
integration of protection priorities with priorities identified under the CWA 303(d) program.
Cumulatively, states and the EPA have made significant progress in the development and
approval of Total Maximum Daily Loads and have completed more than 70 thousand TMDLs
through FY 2013. The EPA also will work with states to implement a new measure that looks
more comprehensively at the 303(d) program by measuring the extent of state priority waters
addressed by TMDLs, alternative approaches, or protection approaches.
Accountability in Water Quality Protection and Restoration
Most impaired waters take years to recover fully, and incremental improvements are currently
not well represented. In FY 2015, the EPA will realign resources to support a new approach for
measuring local improvements in water quality, resulting in a more transparent and efficient
measure of progress and better allowing cross-program integration. This new approach will use
the National Hydrography Dataset Plus (NHDPlus) to calculate watershed area for priority areas
to describe previously impaired waters that are now attaining water quality standards. This
approach will provide a tier of data on water quality in state defined priority areas that will
integrate with national and state-scale statistical surveys to provide a complete picture on water
quality. It will build upon efforts that EPA has already made in coordinating with USGS on the
NHDPlus, water quality monitoring, and providing information in a common format via the
Water Quality Data Portal.
This tiered, evidence-based approach to tracking environmental outcomes integrates data from
the national, state, and local scales and enables the agency to transition to tracking environmental
outcomes rather than program outputs as strategic measures of the effectiveness of the Nation's
investments in water quality. It will provide greater accountability and transparency while
supporting more flexibility in how the EPA and states achieve the CWA goal to restore and
maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation's waters.
In FY 2015, the EPA will develop the tools needed to automate the linking of state assessment
data to the NHDPlus catchments, make updates to incorporate these new data into the EPA data
systems, and to make the data available via the EPA's GeoPlatform, and make necessary data
improvements to the NHDPlus to accommodate the new approach. The EPA also will begin
efforts to assist states in the following areas:
• Developing or implementing tools (e.g. the Recovery Potential tool) to identify priorities
in support of the 303(d) Program 10-year vision and this new approach;
' For more information see: http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/lawsguidance/cwa/tmdl/programvision.cfm
520
-------
• Developing GIS data for assessed and impaired waters;
• Developing assessment methods and tracking abilities for healthy/unimpaired waters;
• Developing data management capabilities to track and report water quality assessments;
• Developing methods to automate the screening of monitoring data against water quality
criteria;
• Developing approaches to integrate state-scale statistical surveys with local-scale
assessments; and
• Integrating water quality data across the various water quality programs.
This assistance will be coordinated through the EPA regional offices to identify state needs and
to align those investments in support of this improved approach for accountability.
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 2015, 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 2015, 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 focus
federal resources on agricultural sources of pollution in select watersheds in every state.
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;253
• Continuing to work closely with a broad set of partners to promote the implementation of
low-impact development practices; and focusing on the development and dissemination
253 For more information, visit www.epa.gov/nps/success.
521
-------
of new tools to promote Low-Impact Development (LID), thereby preventing new
nonpoint sources of pollution254. 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 protecting 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 FY 2011, the EPA conducted an evaluation of the Clean Water Act Section 319 program to
get a detailed understanding of the ways states utilize their Section 319 funding to achieve
program goals and to implement successful Nonpoint Source Management Programs. In calendar
year 2012, the GAO also conducted a study of the Nonpoint Source Water Control Program. In
2012 and 2013, the EPA undertook a comprehensive set of reforms to the Section 319 program
and revised the national grant guidelines to reflect a strong focus on accountability, strengthened
planning, and environmental outcomes. EPA will continue efforts to implement these reforms in
2015.
• One of the foundational changes in the grant guidelines is the renewed expectation that
all states will maintain current NFS management programs, revising them at least every
five years.
• The EPA has a priority goal that tracks the updates of nonpoint source management
plans that will result in better targeting of resources through prioritization and
increased coordination with USDA. The EPA's goal is that 100 percent of State Plans
will be up-to-date by September 2015.
• 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.
254 For more information, visit www.epa.gov/owow/nps/lid/lidlit.html
522
-------
• 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 meaningful state Nonpoint Source Management Program is the roadmap for a
state's entire NFS management program. It reflects the state's goals, priorities, and key annual
milestones and action over time. The Plan describes how multiple state agencies and offices will
operate, coordinate, and contribute resources to meeting the state's articulated NFS goal. In FY
2015, 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.
Nonpoint Source activities support efforts toward achieving the agency's priority goal:
Improve, restore, and maintain water quality by enhancing nonpoint source program leveraging,
accountability, and on-the-ground effectiveness to address the Nation's largest sources of
pollution. By September 30, 2015, 100 percent of the states will have updated nonpoint source
management programs that comport with the new Section 319 grant guidelines that will result in
better targeting of resources through prioritization and increased coordination with USDA.
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. In
FY 2014 and beyond, the EPA, along with its partners, will continue to recognize and enhance
efforts to more effectively manage water and wastewater utilities, especially in small and
disadvantaged communities, through promotion of Best Practices for Sustainability, effective
utility management workshops, and improved access to information.
Another key component of the Agency's efforts to ensure long-term sustainable water
infrastructure is the WaterSense program. WaterSense provides consumers with a reference tool
to identify and select water-efficient products to help reduce water demand and wastewater
flows. Through February 2014, 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 six product categories (residential toilets,
bathroom faucets and accessories, showerheads, flushing urinals, pre-rinse spray valves, 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 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
523
-------
every day. As of February 2014, more than 2,000 different models of high-efficiency toilets,
6,700 faucet models and accessories, 275 models of flushing urinals, 1,700 models of
showerheads, and 150 models of weather-based irrigation controllers had earned the WaterSense
label. More than 300 homes also have earned the WaterSense label. Cumulative savings in the
program due to products shipped through the end of 2012 (the most recent year for which there is
data) exceeds 487 billion gallons and $8.9 billion in water, sewer, and energy bill savings -
enough water to supply all the homes in Colorado and Arizona for an entire year.
WaterSense has more than 2,900 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. In FY 2014, the agency expects to release a draft specification for commercial
flushometer valve toilets and finalize revisions to its program to label professional certifying
organizations. In FY 2015, the agency plans to release a final 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.
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 2015, 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.
524
-------
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
community training through issuance of grants, innovative awards, and collaboration with
national environmental organizations. These environmental education 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
The agency's request realigns resources to strengthen green infrastructure activities and efforts
directed toward Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) to further sustainability goals
and to make a visible difference at the local level with an emphasis on sustainability. Green
Infrastructure is a cost-effective and resilient approach to our stormwater water infrastructure
needs that provides many community benefits: improving water and air quality; reducing energy
use and mitigating climate change; improving habitat for wildlife; and reducing a community's
infrastructure cost and promoting economic growth.255 Incorporating green infrastructure and
enhancing stormwater management helps to create livable urban communities and improve the
quality of urban waters. Efforts directed toward MS4s, particularly newly regulated MS4s, will
support clean water goals of protecting the Nation's waterbodies from the harmful effects of
stormwater discharges. In FY15, the EPA will expand work to strengthen the MS4 program in
communities across the country, by redirecting resources toward a focused effort to support
MS4s to address a full range of stormwater management issues.
In FY 2015, the EPA will assist and support communities in a number of areas, including:
Green Infrastructure
• Expand technical assistance to help communities more easily implement green
infrastructure programs, while disseminating information about successful approaches for
adopting green programs.
• Initiate a pilot technical assistance program to work with one community in each EPA
region to demonstrate how green infrastructure can be a component of an integrated plan
for permitting purposes.
• Collaborate with community partners to identify green infrastructure approaches that will
provide climate change adaptation and mitigation and increase community resiliency.
Approaches will focus on reducing local flooding, decreasing energy use, increasing
water supplies, and creating networks of green space to enhance community
'httpV/water.epa.gov/infrastructure/greeninfrastructure/g^why.cfmSCommunity
525
-------
sustainability. Opportunities to coordinate with other EPA initiatives (e.g., Urban Waters,
Sustainable Communities) and federal programs will be explored.
• Develop strategies, practices, and examples of private and public funding mechanisms
through work with parks advocates, federal partners, and municipalities to promote the
use of parks as green infrastructure and stormwater management systems.
• Promote the design and construction of complete streets that incorporate green
infrastructure practices that enhance the ecological functions of transportation systems.
Work with Environmental Finance Centers (EFCs) and federal partners to identify
approaches to leverage federal and private sources of funding and innovative programs to
both install and maintain green infrastructure practices.
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems
• Provide technical assistance to help MS4s evaluate and change their codes and
ordinances, develop pollution prevention and illicit discharge detection programs, and
develop programs to oversee active and post construction discharges. Funds would be
used to assist newly regulated MS4s to develop stormwater programs.
• Develop training and mentoring relationships between the new MS4s and nearby
seasoned MS4s that could provide guidance and advice. The funds will assist new MS4s
to develop proactive programs to prevent water quality impairment and result in the
issuance of better permits.
Urban Waters
In FY 2015, 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 and will continue to co-lead the Urban Waters
Federal Partnership. 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 and aquatic health and
impact local economic growth. The EPA will assist communities, particularly underserved
communities, in restoring and revitalizing 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. In FY 2015, EPA will support place-
based work by:
526
-------
• Provide small grants and targeted technical assistance to support, innovative community-
driven solutions that accelerate measurable improvements in water quality. Resources
will go to projects that advance program priorities, which may include: community
greening and green infrastructure, community-driven water quality monitoring and data
collection, and community planning and visioning.
• Continue to provide technical assistance and networking support to EPA's Urban Waters
Learning Network, a network of urban waters practitioners across the country. This peer-
to-peer network is designed to increase sustainability of local efforts by providing support
such as: one-on-one technical support, webinars on topics identified by Network
members, and by providing a venue for training and resource announcements.
EPA will continue to co-lead the Urban Water Federal Partnership to advance urban water goals
at the 18 Partnership locations. At these locations, urban waters partnerships implement policy
actions and on-the-ground projects that integrate federal support with local stakeholder actions in
those communities to remove barriers to achieving local workplans consistent with national
action principles and existing authorities. The partnership will continue to align federal resources
from the EPA, DOT, USDA, and other partners to meet local needs more effectively and to
advance shared multi-agency priorities. For example, the partnership will help address storm
water management and promote green infrastructure to improve water quality through
identification and transfer of best practices and successful local approaches. The partnership
will continue to identify and champion innovative approaches to making the delivery of Federal
resources to communities more effective and integrated. To that end, EPA and other Partnership
members will continue to develop and support many local partners by providing the following:
• EPA will continue supporting the Five-Star Urban Waters Restoration Program, a public-
private partnership that leverages private funding to support local water quality projects.
This fund is directly responsive to a long-standing need at the local level for access to
private funds enabling communities to both design and implement important local
projects.
• EPA will work with the Partnership to support an Urban Waters Ambassador in each of
its 18 designated Partnership locations. These individuals coordinate with local partners
and leverage resources for on-the-ground results. They play a critical role in technical
assistance transfer across communities. Ambassadors develop and disseminate models
for inter-agency coordination on key issues such as green infrastructure implementation
and funding.
• EPA will continue to support development of Urban Waters mapping. This tool helps
local communities to identify existing and planned projects in the watershed in order to
leverage efficiencies and identify opportunities to collaborate for more effective and
integrated local action.
527
-------
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(bpv) Percent of high-priority EPA and state NPDES permits (including tribal) that are issued
in the fiscal year.
FY2008
95
119
FY2009
95
144
FY2010
95
138
FY2011
100
132
FY2012
100
128
FY2013
80
55
FY2014
80
FY2015
80
Units
Permits
Measure
Target
Actual
(uwl) Number of urban water projects initiated addressing water quality issues in the
community.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
o
J
46
FY 2013
10
9
FY 2014
30
FY 2015
22
Units
Projects
Measure
Target
Actual
(uw2) Number of urban water projects completed addressing water quality issues in the
community.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
61
Units
Projects
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).
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
3,679
FY2014
3,829
FY2015
3,979
Units
Segments
Measure
Target
Actual
(bpx) Extent of priority areas identified by each state that are addressed by EPA-approved
TMDLs or alternative restoration approaches for impaired waters that will achieve water
quality standards. These areas may also include protection approaches for unimpaired waters
to maintain water quality standards.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
FY2015
8
Units
Priority
Watershed
Areas
Measure
Target
Actual
(wq2) Remove the specific causes of water body impairment identified by states in 2002
(cumulative).
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
11,754
FY 2014
12,134
FY 2015
12,514
Units
Causes
Measure
Target
Actual
(wq3) Improve water quality conditions in impaired watersheds nationwide using the watershed
approach (cumulative).
FY 2008
40
60
FY 2009
102
104
FY 2010
141
168
FY2011
208
271
FY 2012
312
332
FY 2013
370
376
FY 2014
408
FY 2015
446
Units
Watersheds
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$2,142.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
528
-------
• (+$9,338.0 / +30.0 FTE) This realignment provides increased support for MS4 activities
to further the Agency's sustainability goals. The Agency will assist newly regulated
MS4s to develop effective stormwater plans. The increased resources include 30 FTE
(25 regional and 5 headquarters) and associated payroll of $4,338.0.
• (+$2,500.0) This realignment provides increased support for green infrastructure
activities to further the Agency's sustainability goals. The EPA will expand Green
Infrastructure technical assistance efforts to include more communities.
• (+$5,946.0 / +10.0 FTE) This realignment supports an investment in a new approach for
measuring improvements in water quality. It will aid in the development of tools needed
to automate the linking of state assessment data, make updates and necessary
improvements to incorporate data into EPA data systems, and begin efforts to assist states
in implementing the new approach. The increased resources include 10.0 FTE and
associated payroll of $1,446.0.
• (-$6,962.0 / -44.3 FTE) The agency is reviewing and redesigning many core business
processes to be more efficient. Depending on the extent of changes, there may be impacts
on surface water protection programs. The decreased resources include 44.3 FTE and
associated payroll of $6,300.0.
• (+$145.0 / +1.0 FTE) This reflects a realignment of FTE and associated payroll dollars to
advance the EPA's High Performing Organization initiative. This headquarters FTE will
work to achieve benefits from e-reporting of NPDES program data. The increased
resources include 1.0 FTE and associated payroll of $145.0.
• (+$875.0) This realignment 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 education activities will
support the EPA's core mission to expand the conversation on environmentalism.
• (+$87.0 / +0.6 FTE) This reflects a realignment of resources in support of enhanced
management to increase the use of LEAN. The increased resources include 0.6 FTE and
associated payroll of $87.0.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. - Various Sections 1251 to 1387.
529
-------
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
530
-------
Indoor Air: Radon Program
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Addressing 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 2013
Actuals
$3,563.1
$56.7
$3,619.8
18.1
FY 2014
Enacted
$2,366.0
$198.0
$2,564.0
9.1
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$3,369.0
$0.0
$3,369.0
10.6
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$1,003.0
($198.0)
$805.0
1.5
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 2015 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 number of
the risk reduction activities in the Federal Radon Action Plan are targeted toward low income
households. In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to lead and drive action on radon in collaboration
with other federal agencies, as well as continue to implement the agency's own multi-pronged
radon program. The EPA will drive action at the national level to reduce radon risk in homes and
schools through partnerships with the private sector and public health groups, public outreach
and education activities. The agency will encourage radon risk reduction as a normal part of
doing business in the real estate marketplace, will promote local and state adoption of radon
prevention standards in building codes, and will participate in the development of national
531
-------
voluntary standards (e.g., mitigation and construction protocols) for adoption by states and the
radon industry.256
Performance Targets:
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.
FY2008
11.1
11.0
FY2009
11.5
12.0
FY2010
12.0
12.3
FY2011
12.5
12.9
FY2012
13.3
16.0
FY2013
13.9
12/2014
FY2014
13.9
FY2015
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.
FY2008
30.0
31.0
FY2009
31.5
36.1
FY2010
33.0
40.1
FY2011
34.5
38.2
FY2012
36.0
44.6
FY2013
37.5
Data
Avail
12/2014
FY2014
37.5
FY2015
37.5
Units
Percent of
Homes
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$17.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$744.0 / +1.5 FTE) These resources are to carry out important radon activities that will
support increased action on radon as part of the agency's focus on Toxics and Chemical
Safety. This effort will update radon risk assessment and cost-benefit analyses, begin
work to improve radon data management, and provide support to drive sustainable
changes in radon policy and action in health, medical, real estate, construction, and
finance sectors. These resources include 1.5 FTE and associated payroll of $244.0.
(+$242.0) This reflects an increase in community outreach support, through realignments
and existing core work. Combined with base resources in the program, there is a total of
$500.0 for the agency's focus on community work. The agency will continue work to
prevent and reduce exposure to toxics.
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.
' http://www.epa.gov/radon
532
-------
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Addressing 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 2013
Actuals
$13,327.6
$361.3
$13,688.9
54.7
FY 2014
Enacted
$14,508.0
$311.0
$14,819.0
45.7
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$14,565.0
$412.0
$14,977.0
39.4
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$57.0
$101.0
$158.0
-6.3
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 partnership 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. The air inside homes, schools, and offices can be more
polluted than outdoor air even in the largest and most industrialized cities.257 People typically
spend close to 90 percent of their time indoors - where concentrations of certain volatile organic
compounds and air toxic pollutants are often two to five times higher than outdoors.258 Exposure
to radon poses long term cancer risks and secondhand tobacco smoke is both a cancer risk in
adults and a major contributor to childhood illnesses, including asthma attacks. People also are
exposed indoors to unhealthy levels of combustion by-products such as carbon monoxide and
asthma triggers, including mold, pests, and dust mites. These conditions can impact everyone,
but there is a disproportionate burden for children, the elderly, low-income families, and people
with respiratory conditions, including asthma.
Approximately 7 million children in the U.S. have asthma resulting in 151 thousand
9SQ 9^0 9^1
hospitalizations and nearly 10.5 million school days lost annually. ' ' Asthma persists into
adulthood and the costs to society are high with medical and lost productivity costs estimated to
U.S. EPA. 1987. The Total Exposure Assessment Methodology (TEAM) Study: Summary and Analysis Volume I. EPA 600-6-
87-002a. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
258 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.
259National Health Interview Survey (NfflS) Data, 2011 http://www.cdc.gov/asthma/nhis/2011/data.htm;
260Hall MJ, DeFrances CJ, Williams SN, Golosinskiy A, Schwartzman A. National Hospital Discharge Survey: 2007 summary.
National health statistics reports; no 29. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. 2010.
261 National Surveillance of Asthma: United States, 2001-2010 http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_03/sr03_035.pdf
533
-------
9^9
be $56 billion annually . Reducing racial and ethnic asthma disparities is a priority given that
the prevalence of asthma in non-Hispanic Blacks and Puerto-Rican children is twice that of white
children. Compared to white children with asthma, black children are twice as likely to have an
emergency department visit and to require hospitalization, and four times more likely to die due
to asthma. According to the Centers for Disease Control, more than 3,400 people die
unnecessarily from asthma each year in the U.S263.
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. The EPA provides important technical expertise to projects addressing these risks.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the EPA's Indoor Air Program will continue to promote and assist the improvement
of the design, operation, and maintenance of buildings, including homes and schools, to promote
healthier indoor air and protect children and other vulnerable populations. The EPA will continue
to build the capacity of community-based organizations to provide comprehensive asthma care
that integrates management of environmental asthma triggers and health care services. The EPA
will place a particular emphasis on serving 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 President's Taskforce on Environmental Health Risks and
Safety Risks to Children.
Additionally, the EPA will continue to develop and provide technical guidance and assistance
that directly supports states, tribes, local governments, the general public, and a wide range of
non-governmental organizations and networks, such as those representing public health
professionals, business officials, residential and commercial building designers and managers,
school administrators, energy managers, and indoor air quality service providers. 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 2015 activities will include equipping the affordable
housing sector with 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 support the efforts of the Global Alliance for Clean
Cookstoves, a public-private initiative dedicated to developing a global market for clean and
efficient cookstoves, to achieve adoption of clean cookstoves and fuels in 100 million
262 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, (May 2011) Asthma in the U.S. Vital Signs
http://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/asthma/
263
Centers for Disease Control. 2013. National Vital Statistics Report, Vol. 61, No. 4, May 8, 2013.
534
-------
households by 2020. 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, 18 million households
worldwide have been documented to have adopted clean and efficient cooking practices through
the EPA's and the Alliance'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.
FY2008
2,000
4,558
FY2009
2,000
4,614
FY2010
2,000
4,153
FY2011
2,000
5,600
FY2012
3,000
4,914
FY2013
3,000
Data Avail
12/2014
FY2014
3,000
FY2015
3,000
Units
Professionals
Trained
Measure
Target
Actual
(R16) Percentage of the public that is aware of the asthma program's media campaign.
FY 2008
>20
Data Not
Avail
FY 2009
>20
33
FY 2010
>30
Data Not
Avail
FY2011
>30
32
FY 2012
>30
Data Not
Avail
FY 2013
>30
38
FY 2014
>30
FY 2015
>30
Units
Percent
Aware
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$423.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$996.0 / -6.9 FTE) These reductions may impact the Agency's effort to promote the
construction of new homes with improved indoor air quality. The EPA will leverage
cross-agency and private sector efforts to sustain the program's momentum. The reduced
resources include 6.9 FTE and associated payroll of $996.0, which are being realigned to
support other Agency priorities.
• (+$630.0) This realignment of resources will support equipping the affordable housing
sector and other entities that impact this sector with guidance, and other technical
assistance to accelerate the adoption of best practices for creating healthier and more
energy efficient homes for low income families.
Statutory Authority:
CAA Amendments of 1990: Title IV of the SARA of 1986.
535
-------
Radiation: Protection
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Addressing Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Minimize Exposure to Radiation
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$9,033.1
$1,931.4
$2,223.5
$13,188.0
65.6
FY 2014
Enacted
$8,714.0
$2,133.0
$1,991.0
$12,838.0
62.1
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$9,138.0
$2,019.0
$2,044.0
$13,201.0
59.1
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$424.0
($114.0)
$53.0
$363.0
-3.0
Program Project Description:
Congress has 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 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 measure radioactive releases and exposures under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act,
which governs the EPA's authority to regulate hazardous air pollutants.
Other agency responsibilities include: radiation cleanup and waste management guidance,
radiation pollution prevention, and guidance to federal agencies on radiation protection standards
and practices. 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to implement its regulatory oversight responsibilities for
Department of Energy (DOE) activities at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) facility, as
mandated by Congress in the WIPP Land Withdrawal Act of 1992. This includes conducting
inspections of waste generator facilities and evaluating DOE's compliance with EPA's
536
-------
9^4
standards and applicable environmental laws and regulations every five years to ensure the
permanent and safe disposal of all radioactive waste shipped to WIPP.
The EPA will complete its revisions to the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act, Health
and Environmental Protection Standards for Uranium and Thorium Mill Tailings (40 CFR 192),
last reviewed in 1995, and the related Hazardous Air Pollutants, Subpart W Standard for Radon
Emissions from Operating Uranium Mill Tailings (40 CFR 61). The agency 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.
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.
FY 2008
80
75
FY 2009
70
75
FY 2010
70
66
FY2011
70
64
FY 2012
70
73
FY 2013
70
Data Avail
12/2014
FY 2014
70
FY 2015
70
Units
Days
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$201.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$773.0 / -4.7 FTE) This reflects a realignment of personnel resources to address the
nation's risks of radiation exposure, necessary in this time of fiscal constraint. To
accommodate these reductions, the EPA will narrow its focus to a limited number of key
guidances or rulemakings and rely on streamlined regulatory processes to advance
rulemakings. These resources include 4.7 FTE and associated payroll of $773.0.
• (+$782.0) This increase will be used to begin initial 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.
• (+$214.0 / +0.5 FTE) This reflects an increase to support the agency's LEAN efforts to
make processes more efficient as part of the agency's focus on becoming a High
Performing Organization (HPO). These resources include 0.5 FTE and associated payroll
of $82.0.
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 of 1992.
Additional information at: http://www.epa.gov/radiation/wipp/background.html
537
-------
Radiation: Response Preparedness
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Addressing Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Minimize Exposure to Radiation
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$2,508.6
$4,040.2
$6,548.8
37.4
FY 2014
Enacted
$2,493.0
$3,807.0
$6,300.0
34.7
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$3,121.0
$3,667.0
$6,788.0
37.5
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$628.0
($140.0)
$488.0
2.8
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 agency 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the EPA's RERT, a component of the agency's emergency response structure, will
maintain and improve its 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 and use them to improve overall
radiation response preparedness.265
The EPA will continue to coordinate with 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,
state, and local responders. Additionally, the EPA will provide training on the use of 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
' Additional information can be accessed at: http://www.epa. gov/radiation/rert/
538
-------
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 the development of their own preparedness programs.
The EPA will continue to develop and use both laboratory and field 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 the development of cleanup strategies.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(R35) Level of readiness of radiation program personnel and assets to support federal
radiological emergency response and recovery operations.
FY2008
85
87
FY2009
90
90
FY2010
90
97
FY2011
90
97
FY2012
90
92
FY2013
90
Data Avail
12/2014
FY2014
93
FY2015
93
Units
Percent
Readiness
Measure
Target
Actual
(R36) Average time before availability of quality assured ambient radiation air monitoring data
during an emergency.
FY2008
1.0
0.8
FY2009
0.8
0.8
FY2010
0.7
0.5
FY2011
0.7
0.5
FY2012
0.5
0.4
FY2013
0.5
Data Avail
12/2014
FY2014
0.5
FY2015
0.5
Units
Days
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$354.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$274.0 / +3.0 FTE) This reflects a net realignment of resources and personnel to
maintain and update federal radiation emergency response plans, develop radiological
emergency response guidance and standards, and support radiological emergency
response planning and training, while streamlining the scope of EPA's national level
preparedness and response activities. These resources include 3.0 FTE and associated
payroll of $406.0.
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
539
-------
(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).
540
-------
Program Area: Climate Protection
541
-------
Water Quality Research and Support Grants
Program Area: Congressional Priorities
Goal: Protecting America's Waters
Objective(s): Protect Human Health
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
Environmental Program & Management
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$6,784.4
$0.0
$6,784.4
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$4,234.0
$12,700.0
$16,934.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($4,234.0)
($12,700.0)
($16,934.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
In FY 2014, Congress appropriated $12.7 million for an Environmental Protection: National
Priority competitive grant program to provide technical assistance for improved water quality or
safe drinking water to rural and urban communities or individual private well owners. The EPA
will provide $11,000,000 for grants to qualified not-for-profit organizations, on a national or
multi-State regional basis, for on-site training and technical assistance for water systems in rural
or urban communities. The EPA also will provide $1,700,000 for grants to qualified not-for-
profit organizations for technical assistance for individual private well owners, with priority
given to organizations that currently provide technical and education assistance to individual
private well owners. Each grantee is required to provide a minimum 10 percent match, including
in-kind contributions.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA is not requesting funds to support this grant program in FY 2015.
Performance Targets:
There are no performance targets for this specific program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$12,700.0) This eliminates congressionally directed funding provided in FY 2014. The
EPA is not requesting funds to support this grant program in FY 2015.
Statutory Authority:
SOW A, 42U.S.C. §300j-lc, Section 1442. CWA.104(b)(3)
542
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2015 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Inspector General
Resource Summary Table 544
Program Projects in IG 544
Program Area: Audits, Evaluations and Investigations 545
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations 546
543
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2015 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION: Inspector General
Resource Summary Table
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inspector General
Budget Authority
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$44,003.9
271.5
FY 2014
Enacted
$41,849.0
271.4
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$46,130.0
263.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$4,281.0
-8.4
*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, $46,130,000, to remain available until September 30, 2016.
Program Projects in IG
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Subtotal, Audits, Evaluations, and
Investigations
TOTAL, EPA
FY 2013
Actuals
$44,003.9
$44,003.9
$44,003.9
FY 2014
Enacted
$41,849.0
$41,849.0
$41,849.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$46,130.0
$46,130.0
$46,130.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$4,281.0
$4,281.0
$4,281.0
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the
Superfund account.
544
-------
Program Area: Audits, Evaluations and Investigations
545
-------
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
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$44,003.9
$10,088.9
$54,092.8
334.3
FY 2014
Enacted
$41,849.0
$9,939.0
$51,788.0
331.5
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$46,130.0
$11,064.0
$57,194.0
321.5
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$4,281.0
$1,125.0
$5,406.0
-10.0
Program/Project Description:
The EPA's Office of Inspector General provides audit, program evaluation, inspection, 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 providing the full range of audit, evaluation, and investigative services
specified by the Inspector General Act, as amended.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA OIG will 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 2015, the OIG will continue focusing on areas associated with risk, fraud,
waste, and cyber intrusions, and will expand its attention to making recommendations that
546
-------
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, inspections, 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) toxics, chemical
management and pollution prevention, (4) risk assessment and inspections; and (5) 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, cyber crimes, 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. OIG will continue to provide 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 or
place based issues. The OIG will inspect facilities that present a risk to public health, in response
to stakeholder concerns. The OIG will also continue to provide audit and investigative oversight
on the application of, and accountability for Recovery Act funds.
The OIG recognizes that keeping up with current workload priorities will become increasingly
challenging. As staffing levels decrease, a balance must be achieved. We must continue to meet
our mandates and statutory requirements. In FY 2015, OIG will continue to focus on top
priorities and proceed with diligence and excellence, ensuring that all requirements are met.
The OIG bases its strategic themes and prospective assignment areas on prior work, cross-agency
risk assessment, agency challenges, including those associated with the Chemical Safety Board,
future priorities, and extensive stakeholder input. In FY 2015, the OIG will concentrate its
resources on efforts in the following strategic themes and prospective assignment areas during
FY2015:
547
-------
Sound and Economical Financial Management
• improper payments
• internal controls
• annual financial statements
• audits of costs claimed by grantees and contractors
• grant and contract administration
• information technology capital investments
• EPA's contract management assessment program
• strategic sourcing of contracts
• EPA's Licensing Fees and Royalties Internal Controls
• Government Cost Estimates and Indirect Costs for EPA's Interagency Agreements
• EPA Accounting for Reimbursable Expenses
• Hurricane Sandy funding
• annual financial statements for CSB
Efficient Processes and Use of Resources
• management of the EPA's process improvement activities
• 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
• impact of CSB's safety recommendations
• opportunities to reduce duplication, overlap and fragmentation within EPA's Energy Star
Program
• controls for travel of CSB employees, travel and purchase card
• CSB's Incident Screening, Deployment and Investigation Selection Processes
• Reliability of EPA Personal and Real Property Information
• Fixed Asset Inventory for Office of Research and Development
• Equipment Utilization Within Office of Research and Development
• evaluation of CSB' s programmatic and management activities
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
• cyber security/infrastructure development and assessment of processes to ensure
protection and security of information systems from fraud, waste and abuse.
• progress toward creating non-cancer toxicity value for chrysotile asbestos in IRIS
• effectiveness of ORD's Quality Assurance Officers
• EPA Research and the Technology Transfer Act
548
-------
Addressing At-Risk Populations, Chronic and Emerging Environmental Health
Challenges
• energy and natural resources (exploration/extraction of oil, natural gas, and coal)
• inspection of High-Risk Management Program Facilities
• incorporating Environmental Justice into CAA Inspections for Air Toxics
• review of the EPA's Process for Verifying Reported Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• assessment of EPA Efforts to Reduce Ambient PM2.5 Levels in Non-Attainment Areas
• ambient Air Quality Monitoring Network Reviews
• environmental Justice for Lower-Income/Minority Communities
• EPA's Antimicrobial Testing Program
• Municipal Separate Stormwater Sewers: Consent Decree Progress and Challenges
Assessing Risk Management and Performance Measurement
• implementation of Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act, Federal Information
Security Management Act and Government Performance and Results Act
• disaster response; and homeland security and emergency preparedness and response,
including the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board
• Brownfields Revolving Loan Fund Assistance Agreements
• Environmental Science and Engineering Fellowship Program Assistance Agreements
• Post ARRA Diesel Emission Recovery Act (DERA) Grants
• Construction Grants Awarded to the District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority
• EPA's Original Classification Procedures and Risk of Over-Classification
Reviewing Effectiveness of Stewardship, Sustainability and Prevention
• Sustainability importance in relation to agency decision-making processes, including
Tribal programs
• Renewable Energy on Potentially Contaminated Land and Mine Sites
• Green Project Reserve with the State Revolving Fund
• design for Environment Partnership Program
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
• EPA's relationships with regions and states
• adequacy of EPA's Oversight of State FIFRA Programs
• oversight of Hydraulic Fracturing
• Municipal Separate Stormwater Sewers: Consent Decree Progress and Challenges
• Region 2 Oversight of US Virgin Islands Authorized Environmental Programs
549
-------
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; 4) alleged criminal conduct or serious administrative
misconduct by EPA employees; and 5) 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 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 programs.
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.
FY2008
971
624
FY 2009
903
983
FY2010
903
945
FY2011
903
2011
FY2012
903
1242
FY2013
786
1003
FY2014
687
FY 2015
721
Units
Recommendations
Measure
Target
Actual
(35D) Criminal, civil, administrative, and fraud
FY2008
80
84
FY 2009
80
95
FY2010
75
115
FY2011
80
160
prevention actions.
FY2012
85
152
FY2013
90
256
FY2014
125
FY 2015
131
Units
Actions
550
-------
Measure
Target
Actual
(35A) Environmental and business actions taken for improved performance or risk reduction.
FY 2008
334
463
FY 2009
318
272
FY 2010
334
391
FY2011
334
315
FY 2012
334
216
FY 2013
307
215
FY 2014
248
FY 2015
260
Units
Actions
Measure
Target
Actual
(35C) Return on the annual dollar investment, as a percentage of the OIG budget, from audits
and investigations.
FY 2008
150
186
FY 2009
120
150
FY 2010
120
36
FY2011
120
151
FY 2012
110
743
FY 2013
125
248
FY 2014
132
FY 2015
139
Units
Percent
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$2,814.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$1,467.0 / -8.4 FTE) This reflects a net change from the realignment of resources to
provide basic workforce support in carrying out audit functions and acknowledging the
constrained fiscal environment. Staff resources are reduced in anticipation of savings
from business process changes and the use of strategic sourcing for support required for
the work of the OIG. The net change includes a reduction of $1,198.0 in payroll for 8.4
FTE.
Statutory Authority:
Inspector General Act, as amended; Inspector General Reform Act; Reports Consolidation Act;
Single Audit Act; CFO Act; Accountability of Tax Dollars Act of 2002, GMRA; PRIA; RCRA;
FFMIA; FISMA; FQPA; TSCA.
Inspector General Reform Act:
The following information is provided pursuant to the requirements of the Inspector General
Reform Act:
• the aggregate budget request from the Inspector General for the operations of the OIG is
$56.2 million ($45.2 million Inspector General; $11.0 million Superfund Transfer); the
aggregate request in the President's Budget for the operations of the OIG is $57.2 million
($46.1 million Inspector General; $11.1 million Superfund Transfer);
• the portion of the aggregate request in the President's Budget needed for training is $700
thousand ($574 thousand Inspector General; $126 thousand Superfund Transfer); the
portion of the aggregate request in the President's Budget needed to support the Council
of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE) is $100 thousand ($82
thousand Inspector General; $18 thousand 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 2015".
551
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2015 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Buildings and Facilities
Resource Summary Table 553
Program Projects in B&F 553
Program Area: Homeland Security 554
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure 555
Program Area: Operations and Administration 557
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 558
552
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2015 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION: Building and Facilities
Resource Summary Table
(Dollars in Thousands)
Building and Facilities
Budget Authority
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$33,538.3
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$34,467.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$53,507.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$19,040.0
0.0
Bill Language: Buildings and Facilities
For construction, repair, improvement, extension, alteration, and pur chase of fixed equipment or
facilities of, or for use by, the Environmental Protection Agency, $53,507,000, 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 2013
Actuals
$5,861.9
$27,676.4
$27,676.4
$33,538.3
FY 2014
Enacted
$6,676.0
$27,791.0
$27,791.0
$34,467.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$7,875.0
$45,632.0
$45,632.0
$53,507.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$1,199.0
$17,841.0
$17,841.0
$19,040.0
553
-------
Program Area: Homeland Security
554
-------
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)
Science & Technology
Environmental Program & Management
Building and Facilities
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$540.0
$7,328.9
$5,861.9
$683.5
$14,414.3
3.8
FY 2014
Enacted
$548.0
$5,724.0
$6,676.0
$1,265.0
$14,213.0
4.7
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$576.0
$5,716.0
$7,875.0
$1,113.0
$15,280.0
4.7
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$28.0
($8.0)
$1,199.0
($152.0)
$1,067.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
This program supports physical security efforts and safeguards the agency's workforce, facilities,
assets, and mission based on federally mandated priorities focusing on physical access control
measures that protect critical infrastructure. The program aims to protect classified national
security information through the 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to mitigate physical vulnerabilities in its facilities, and
incorporate physical security measures in new construction, new leases, and major renovations.
In accordance with the Interagency Security Committee Physical Security Criteria for federal
facilities, the agency provides a full range of security improvements. The EPA also will continue
to install upgraded Physical Access Control Systems as mandated by Homeland Security
Presidential Directive 12 and its implementing standards, and will expand or realign existing
laboratories for homeland security support activities that 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. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
555
-------
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,199.0) This reflects funding to incorporate physical security measures in new
construction, leases, and major renovations.
Statutory Authority:
Executive Order 13526; 32 CFR 2001; Interagency Security Committee Physical Security
Criteria for Federal Facilities; Design Basis Threat, Interagency Security Committee, March
2013.
556
-------
Program Area: Operations and Administration
557
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$547.4
$293,188.6
$74,351.2
$27,676.4
$933.4
$80,960.5
$477,657.5
382.8
FY 2014
Enacted
$584.0
$310,057.0
$70,370.0
$27,791.0
$823.0
$67,470.0
$477,095.0
367.2
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$498.0
$325,138.0
$75,824.0
$45, 632.0
$836.0
$78,905.0
$526,833.0
361.6
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($86.0)
$15,081.0
$5,454.0
$17,841.0
$13.0
$11,435.0
$49,738.0
-5.6
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Buildings and Facilities (B&F) appropriation supports the design, construction,
repairs, and improvement of the EPA's federally owned and leased buildings. Construction
renovation and alteration projects costing more than $150 thousand must use B&F funding.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
As part of the EPA's efforts toward becoming a High Performing Organization, B&F resources
support 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 projects are critical to the overall agency's efforts to consolidate space, increase energy
efficiency, and achieve federal facility environmental targets. These resources enable the EPA to
meet the recommendations of the on-going Laboratory Study which is expected to identify
opportunities to consolidate laboratory functions across the agency. Further, delaying essential
repairs allows the EPA's facilities to deteriorate, which exponentially increases long-term repair
costs.
558
-------
B&F resources ensure that the agency complies with various mandates and goals including: the
Energy Policy Act of 2005, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA),
Executive Orders (EO) 13514 and 13423,l new alternative fuel regulatory requirements, and
regulatory mandates associated with soil and water pesticides testing. B&F also enables the EPA
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 2015, the agency will continue to invest to reconfigure the EPA's workplaces, with the
goal of reducing long-term rent needs. 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 428 thousand square feet of space at headquarters and
facilities nationwide, resulting in a cumulative annual rent avoidance of over $14.6 million. In
FY 2015, the EPA will complete the consolidation of 1310 L Street, which will begin to move
over 500 employees into the EPA's Federal Triangle and Potomac Yard space and save the
agency approximately $7.5 million annually in rent. 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 2015, the EPA also is investing $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, NV, several of which 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 B&F projects for FY 2015
including those highlighted below.
• Replacement of fume hoods and air handlers at the Air and Radiation Lab,
Montgomery, AL., Phase 2. 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.
1 Information is available at http: //www. fedcenter. gov/programs/eo 135147, Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and
Economic Performance; and http://www.fedcenter.gov/programs/eol3423/. Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and
Transportation Management.
559
-------
• Implementation of Phase 2 of the Infrastructure Replacement Project at the
Research and Development laboratory in Corvallis, OR. This project will replace the
ductwork, reduce the number of fume hoods by more than 40 percent and energy usage
will be reduced by about 20 percent. While fume hoods are a central component in most
laboratories, the traditional ducted fume hood is no longer central to many research and
laboratory procedures. New energy efficient equipment, procedures and methods will
incorporate reliability, sustainability and safety while meeting mission requirements.
• Retrofit laboratory spaces in the National Enforcement Investigations laboratory in
Lakewood, CO to accommodate the Region 8 laboratory currently located in
Golden, CO. The lease at the Region 8 lab expires in 2018, and by utilizing excess
capacity in the NEIC lab, the two functions can be co-located in a federal building, which
will save rent and utility costs.
• Complete Phase 3 of the retrofit of the air handling and infrastructure at the
Research and Development laboratory in Athens, GA. This project will complete the
conversion of this laboratory to a variable air volume system which will reduce energy
usage and greenhouse gas emissions.
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.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 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. A modest upfront investment will allow the agency
to accelerate and expand the consolidation efforts.
• (+$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.
• (+$841.0) This increase supports repair and improvement of the EPA's real estate
inventory and facility-related construction that was delayed due to insufficient resources
in FY 2013.
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
560
-------
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).
561
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2015 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Superfund
Resource Summary Table 564
Program Projects in Superfund 564
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation 567
Radiation: Protection 568
Program Area: Audits, Evaluations and Investigations 570
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations 571
Program Area: Compliance 575
Compliance Monitoring 576
Program Area: Enforcement 578
Environmental Justice 579
Superfund: Enforcement 581
Superfund: Federal Facilities Enforcement 586
Criminal Enforcement 588
Forensics Support 591
Program Area: Homeland Security 593
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and Recovery 594
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure 599
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach 601
Exchange Network 602
Program Area: IT / Data Management / Security 606
Information Security 607
IT / Data Management 610
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review 614
Alternative Dispute Resolution 615
Legal Advice: Environmental Program 617
Program Area: Operations and Administration 620
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 621
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management 624
Acquisition Management 626
Human Resources Management 628
562
-------
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance 630
Program Area: Research: Sustainable Communities 633
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities 634
Program Area: Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability 637
Human Health Risk Assessment 638
Program Area: Superfund Cleanup 641
Superfund: Emergency Response and Removal 642
Superfund: EPA Emergency Preparedness 647
Superfund: Federal Facilities 650
Superfund: Remedial 657
Superfund Special Accounts 673
Superfund Special Accounts 674
563
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2015 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION: Hazardous Substance Superfund
Resource Summary Table
(Dollars in Thousands)
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Budget Authority
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals**
$1,155,365.7
2,968.7
FY 2014
Enacted
$1,088,769.0
2,783.1
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$1,156,603.0
2,685.2
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$67,834.0
-97.9
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the
Superfund account.
**2013 Actuals do not include Sandy Supplemental
Bill Language: Superfund
For necessary expenses to carry out the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), including sections lll(c)(3), (c)(5), (c)(6),
and (e)(4) (42 U.S.C. 9611) $1,156,603,000, to remain available until expended, consisting of
such sums as are available in the Trust Fund on September 30, [2013] 2014, as authorized by
section 517(a) of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) and up to
$1,156,603,000 as a payment from general revenues to the Hazardous Substance Superfund for
purposes as authorized by section 517(b) of SARA: 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, $11,064,000
shall be paid to the "Office of Inspector General" appropriation to remain available until
September 30, 2016, and $18,850,000 shall be paid to the "Science and Technology"
appropriation to remain available until September 30, 2016.
Program Projects in Superfund
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
Indoor Air and Radiation
Radiation: Protection
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Compliance
Compliance Monitoring
FY 2013
Actuals**
$2,223.5
$10,088.9
$1,060.4
FY 2014
Enacted
$1,991.0
$9,939.0
$998.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$2,044.0
$11,064.0
$1,083.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$53.0
$1,125.0
$85.0
564
-------
Program Project
Enforcement
Criminal Enforcement
Environmental Justice
Forensics Support
Superfund: Enforcement
Superfund: Federal Facilities Enforcement
Subtotal, Enforcement
Homeland Security
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
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Acquisition Management
Human Resources Management
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy
FY 2013
Actuals**
$6,964.0
$603.8
$2,382.2
$160,229.3
$7,829.2
$178,008.5
$39,468.4
$683.5
$40,151.9
$1,329.4
$544.0
$13,667.4
$14,211.4
$663.9
$652.0
$1,315.9
$21,791.6
$80,960.5
$21,617.7
$5,091.4
$3,053.4
$132,514.6
$17,885.7
FY 2014
Enacted
$7,488.0
$604.0
$2,344.0
$157,592.0
$7,490.0
$175,518.0
$36,802.0
$1,265.0
$38,067.0
$1,340.0
$664.0
$13,911.0
$14,575.0
$792.0
$503.0
$1,295.0
$21,797.0
$67,470.0
$22,388.0
$5,880.0
$2,990.0
$120,525.0
$14,380.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$7,438.0
$597.0
$1,112.0
$154,303.0
$7,405.0
$170,855.0
$35,754.0
$1,113.0
$36,867.0
$1,466.0
$704.0
$14,234.0
$14,938.0
$753.0
$516.0
$1,269.0
$24,155.0
$78,905.0
$23,762.0
$7,547.0
$2,945.0
$137,314.0
$14,032.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($50.0)
($7.0)
($1,232.0)
($3,289.0)
($85.0)
($4,663.0)
($1,048.0)
($152.0)
($1,200.0)
$126.0
$40.0
$323.0
$363.0
($39.0)
$13.0
($26.0)
$2,358.0
$11,435.0
$1,374.0
$1,667.0
($45.0)
$16,789.0
($348.0)
565
-------
Program Project
Communities
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Human Health Risk Assessment
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Subtotal, Research: Chemical Safety and
Sustainability
Superfund Cleanup
Superfund: Emergency Response and Removal
Superfund: EPA Emergency Preparedness
Superfund: Federal Facilities
Superfund: Remedial
Subtotal, Superfund: Remedial
Subtotal, Superfund Cleanup
TOTAL, EPA
FY 2013
Actuals**
$2,425.1
$0.4
$2,425.5
$183,331.1
$8,777.2
$25,099.4
$536,942.3
$536,942.3
$754,150.0
$1,155,365.7
FY 2014
Enacted
$3,040.0
$0.0
$3,040.0
$177,826.0
$8,150.0
$21,125.0
$500,000.0
$500,000.0
$707,101.0
$1,088,769.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$2,843.0
$0.0
$2,843.0
$186,987.0
$7,636.0
$24,805.0
$543,400.0
$543,400.0
$762,828.0
$1,156,603.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($197.0)
$0.0
($197.0)
$9,161.0
($514.0)
$3,680.0
$43,400.0
$43,400.0
$55,727.0
$67,834.0
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the
Superfund account.
**2013 Actuals do not include Sandy Supplemental
566
-------
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
567
-------
Radiation: Protection
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Addressing Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective(s): Minimize Exposure to Radiation
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Science & Technology
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$9,033.1
$1,931.4
$2,223.5
$13,188.0
65.6
FY 2014
Enacted
$8,714.0
$2,133.0
$1,991.0
$12,838.0
62.1
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$9,138.0
$2,019.0
$2,044.0
$13,201.0
59.1
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$424.0
($114.0)
$53.0
$363.0
-3.0
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 cleanup activities reduce and/or
mitigate the health and environmental risk of radiation to safe levels. In addition, the program
makes certain that appropriate cleanup 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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 limited analytical and field support to manage and
mitigate radioactive releases and exposures. These two organizations 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.
568
-------
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 Eight
Year Performance Array in the Program Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$100.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$65.0) This increases extramural funding for providing necessary updates to analytical
and field equipment used at Superfund and Federal Facility sites.
• (-$112.0 / -0.9 FTE) This decreases analytical and field personnel to support cleanup at
Superfund and Federal Facility sites. These resources include 0.9 FTE and associated
payroll of $112.0.
Statutory Authority:
CERCLA, as amended by the SARA of 1986.
569
-------
Program Area: Audits, Evaluations and Investigations
570
-------
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
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$44,003.9
$10,088.9
$54,092.8
334.3
FY 2014
Enacted
$41,849.0
$9,939.0
$51,788.0
331.5
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$46,130.0
$11,064.0
$57,194.0
321.5
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$4,281.0
$1,125.0
$5,406.0
-10.0
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Office of Inspector General 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA's OIG will 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 2015, 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 related to
the Superfund program.
571
-------
OIG plans will be implemented through audits, evaluations, inspections 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. For EPA's Superfund Program, the OIG will conduct investigations of any activities
that undermine agency integrity, the public trust, and create imminent environmental risks.
Where applicable, the OIG will seek prosecution of criminal activity or serious misconduct. The
OIG will also 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.
The OIG recognizes that keeping up with current workload priorities will become increasingly
challenging. As staffing levels decrease, a balance must be achieved. We must continue to meet
our mandates and statutory requirements. In FY 2015, OIG will continue to focus on top
priorities and proceed with diligence and excellence, ensuring that all requirements are met.
Audits and Evaluations
OIG audits and program evaluations and inspections 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:
• environmental risks from hazardous waste post-closure landfills
• EPA oversight of the import/export of hazardous waste
• sitting renewable energy on potentially contaminated land and mine sites
• effectiveness of third party certifications in state-led superfund cleanups
• aggregate financial assurance for Superfund and RCRA Sites
• climate change adaptation for Superfund sites
572
-------
• Superfund sites with human exposure or groundwater migration not under control
• Superfund portion of EPA's financial statement and FISMA audit
The OIG also will evaluate ways to minimize fraud, waste, and abuse, with emphasis on
identifying opportunities for cost savings and reducing risk of resource loss, while maximizing
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; 4)
alleged criminal conduct or serious administrative misconduct by EPA employees, and 5)
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.
573
-------
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 Four Year Array.
FY 2015 Change from the FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$622.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$503.0/ -1.6 FTE) This reflects a net change from the realignment of resources to
provide basic workforce support in carrying out audit functions and acknowledging the
constrained fiscal environment. Staff resources are reduced in anticipation of savings
from business process changes and the use of strategic sourcing for support required for
the work of the OIG. The net change includes a reduction of $228.0 in payroll for 1.6
FTE.
Statutory Authority:
Inspector General Act, as amended; Inspector General Reform Act; Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act; Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act.
Inspector General Reform Act:
The following information is provided pursuant to the requirements of the Inspector General
Reform Act:
• the aggregate budget request from the Inspector General for the operations of the OIG is
$56.2 million ($45.2 million Inspector General; $11.0 million Superfund Transfer);
• the aggregate request in the President's Budget for the operations of the OIG is $57.2
million ($46.1 million Inspector General; $11.1 million Superfund Transfer);
• the portion of the aggregate request in the President's Budget needed for training is $700
thousand ($574 thousand Inspector General; $126 thousand Superfund Transfer);
• the portion of the aggregate request in the President's Budget needed to support the
Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE) is $100 thousand
($82 thousand Inspector General; $18 thousand 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 2015".
574
-------
Program Area: Compliance
575
-------
Compliance Monitoring
Program Area: Compliance
Goal: Protecting Human Health and the Environment by Enforcing Laws and Assuring
Compliance
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws to Achieve Compliance
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Environmental Program & Management
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$131.8
$101,820.1
$1,060.4
$103,012.3
559.2
FY 2014
Enacted
$139.0
$103,297.0
$998.0
$104,434.0
557.3
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$147.0
$118,892.0
$1,083.0
$120,122.0
535.1
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$8.0
$15,595.0
$85.0
$15,688.0
-22.2
Program Project Description:
The EPA's 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. 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 2015 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 2015, 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 2015, the Compliance Monitoring program is scheduled to
complete ongoing enhancements to ICIS for continued support of the federal Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance program, and improve reporting to the public on government and facility
compliance. The EPA will continue to ensure the security and integrity of these systems, and will
576
-------
use ICIS data to support Superfund-related regulatory enforcement program activities. In FY
2015, the Superfund portion of this program for ICIS-related work is $190 thousand.
In FY 2015, 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 the Environmental Programs and Management appropriation and can be found in
the Eight-Year Performance Array in the Program Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$14.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$71.0) This represents a realignment of support for information and data systems for
monitoring compliance.
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/.
577
-------
Program Area: Enforcement
578
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$6,376.1
$603.8
$6,979.9
34.5
FY 2014
Enacted
$6,737.0
$604.0
$7,341.0
32.8
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$7,936.0
$597.0
$8,533.0
40.6
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$1,199.0
($7.0)
$1,192.0
7.8
Program Project Description:
The EPA is committed to fostering public health and sustainability in communities
disproportionately burdened by pollution by integrating and addressing issues of environmental
justice (EJ) in our programs and policies as part of our 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 EPA's 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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
2014-2018 Strategic Plan Cross-Cutting Fundamental Strategy for Environmental Justice and
Children's Health and Plan EJ 2014.
In FY 2015, 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
at or near Superfund sites. The EJ program will guide the EPA's efforts to empower
579
-------
communities to protect themselves from environmental harms. These efforts build healthy and
sustainable communities through technical assistance, enabling overburdened and disadvantaged
groups to participate in the new green economy. Together, these plans guide the agency's EJ
efforts across the full spectrum of activities.
In FY 2015, 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.
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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$6.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$13.0) This change reflects a realignment of resources reducing support to the agency's
environmental justice activities under superfund.
Statutory Authority:
Executive Order 12898; Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act, as amended.
580
-------
Superfund: Enforcement
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Protecting Human Health and the Environment by Enforcing Laws and Assuring
Compliance
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws to Achieve Compliance
(Dollars in Thousands)
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$160,229.3
$160,229.3
831.5
FY 2014
Enacted
$157,592.0
$157,592.0
818.5
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$154,303.0
$154,303.0
771.3
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($3,289.0)
($3,289.0)
-47.2
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 clean up 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.
581
-------
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 clean up is over $38 billion ($32.4 billion for cleanup work and $6.3 billion in
cost recovery).
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
Throughout FY 2015, 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 2013. 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 2015, in an effort to
maximize the efficient use of Superfund enforcement appropriated resources, the EPA will
continue to focus cost recovery efforts on those cases with unresolved past costs greater than
$500 thousand. We plan to prioritize those larger cases in light of reduced budgets, and while
this will not eliminate cost recovery efforts on cases below $500 thousand, the number of cases
may be significantly reduced.
In FY 2015, 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 2013, the EPA created 33 Special
Accounts, collected $175.8 million for response work and accrued $12.3 million in interest for a
total of $188.2 million. The agency disbursed or obligated $259.1 million for response work. The
EPA also closed 51 Special Accounts and transferred $1.8 million from Special Accounts into
the general part of the Superfund Trust Fund for future appropriation by Congress.
Since 1989, the EPA has created 1,208 Special Accounts, collected $4.1 billion for response
work and accrued $412.9 million in interest for a total of $4.5 billion. The agency has disbursed
or obligated $2.7 billion for response work. The EPA has closed 215 Special Accounts and
transferred $23.7 million from Special Accounts into the general part of the Superfund Trust
Fund.
582
-------
In FY 2015, the agency will provide the Department of Justice with $21.8 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
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 2013, the Superfund Enforcement program secured private party commitments exceeding
$1.6 billion. Of this amount, PRPs committed to perform future response work with an estimated
value of more than $1.2 billion; agreed to reimburse the agency for $292.3 million in past costs;
and were billed by the EPA for approximately $92.8 million in oversight costs. In a landmark
settlement, AVX Corporation committed to pay over $366 million to clean up contamination in
Massachusetts's New Bedford Harbor, the largest single-site cash settlement in Superfund
history. The New Bedford Harbor was placed on the National Priorities List in 1982 and is one
of the agency's largest Superfund cleanup sites. 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 $15 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 largely maintaining external contract support for these activities. The
agency will review applicable processes for streamlining and enhancing efficiencies while
supporting the agency's LEAN efforts to move toward a high performance organization (HPO) to
support business process changes agencywide.
During FY 2015, the agency will continue to perform the financial management aspects of
Superfund cost recovery and the collection of related debt to the federal government. The EPA
will continue to calculate indirect cost and annual allocation rates to be applied to direct costs
incurred by the EPA for site cleanup. These efforts include tracking and managing Superfund
delinquent debt, maintaining the Superfund Cost Recovery Package Imaging and On-Line
System (SCORPIOS), and using SCORPIOS Paperless Image and Document Enabled Reports
(SPIDERs) to prepare cost documentation packages. The EPA's Enforcement program will
continue to refine and streamline the cost documentation process to gain further efficiencies, and
provide the Department of Justice case support for Superfund sites via SPIDER packages. The
583
-------
EPA's financial, programmatic, and legal offices 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. In FY 2013, the agency collected $185.7 million in cost
recoveries, of which $35.0 million were returned to the Superfund Trust Fund and $150.7 million
were deposited in site-specific, interest bearing special accounts.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(078) Percentage of all Superfund statute of limitations cases addressed at sites with
unaddressed past Superfund costs equal to or greater than $500,000.
FY2008
100
100
FY2009
100
100
FY2010
100
100
FY2011
100
100
FY2012
100
100
FY2013
100
100
FY2014
100
FY2015
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.
FY2008
95
95
FY2009
95
100
FY2010
95
98
FY2011
95
100
FY2012
99
100
FY2013
99
100
FY2014
99
FY2015
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.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
300
400
FY2013
275
750
FY2014
225
FY2015
200
Units
Million
Cubic
Yards
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$4,109.0) This reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE due
to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$7,398.0 / -47.2 FTE) This change reflects a realignment of resources to other agency
priorities and anticipated business process changes such as limiting cost recovery efforts
under $500 thousand, shortening the RD/RA negotiation timeline, streamlining cost
documentation and case support, and maximizing strategic sourcing in support work.
This change also realigns resources to support the overall management of the E-
Enterprise business process as part of the agency's efforts on becoming a High
Performing Organization. The reduced resources may impact the initiation of some civil,
judicial and administrative cases, as well as legal and technical enforcement support of
Superfund enforcement actions. The resources reflect a net reduction of 47.2 FTE and
associated payroll of $6,955.0.
584
-------
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
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; National Historic Preservation
Act.
585
-------
Superfund: Federal Facilities Enforcement
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Protecting Human Health and the Environment by Enforcing Laws and Assuring
Compliance
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws to Achieve Compliance
(Dollars in Thousands)
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$7,829.2
$7,829.2
48.1
FY 2014
Enacted
$7,490.0
$7,490.0
45.2
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$7,405.0
$7,405.0
41.7
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($85.0)
($85.0)
-3.5
Program Project Description:
The EPA's 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 2015 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 of their National Priorities List (NPL)
sites at a timely pace. The agreements provide that the EPA oversee the cleanups to ensure they
protect public health and the environment. The agreements govern cleanup at approximately 170
Federal Facility Superfund sites, which include many of the Nation's largest and most complex
cleanup projects with total annual costs between $6 and $8 billion.
Priority areas for FY 2015 include ensuring that: 1) all federal facility sites on the NPL 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
586
-------
policy issues relating to the cleanup of federal facilities. Where EPA is unable to negotiate
acceptable lAs with responsible federal entities, the EPA evaluates other enforcement authorities
to use to ensure the federal entities undertake necessary cleanup work at their contaminated sites.
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 light of scarce
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 in
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 Eight-Year Performance Array in the Program Performance and
Assessment section.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$279.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$364.0 / -3.5 FTE) This change reflects a realignment of resources reducing support for
federal compliance assistance and cleanup oversight activities at Federal Facilities. The
EPA will no longer review all process and milestone changes to clean up work being
done by federal agencies. Currently, there are approximately 170 National Priority List
sites with agreements in place. The reduced resources may affect some of these
agreements. The resources reflect a net reduction of 3.5 FTE and associated payroll of
$540.0.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act as amended;
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and Safe Drinking Water Act.
587
-------
Criminal Enforcement
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Protecting Human Health and the Environment by Enforcing Laws and Assuring
Compliance
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws to Achieve Compliance
(Dollars in Thousands)
Environmental Program & Management
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$47,912.5
$6,964.0
$54,876.5
279.4
FY 2014
Enacted
$47,829.0
$7,488.0
$55,317.0
270.7
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$50,885.0
$7,438.0
$58,323.0
268.9
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$3,056.0
($50.0)
$3,006.0
-1.8
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.
In FY 2013, the conviction rate for criminal defendants was 94%.
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 experts. Special
Agents provide prosecutorial support, evaluate leads, interview witnesses, serve and support
search warrants, and review documentary evidence, including data from prior inspections and
enforcement actions. 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
588
-------
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 state and local task forces, and attend specialized
training courses 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.2
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
Successful prosecutions are the result of careful collection and expert analysis of evidence. In FY
2015, 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 2015, 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 2015, 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 2015, 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/.
589
-------
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 light of scarce 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 appropriation and can be found in the
Program Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$79.0) The increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$129.0) This change reflects a modest reduction to contractor support for current
criminal investigations and enforcement actions. This may result in a decrease in the
number of criminal investigations the EPA will conduct in 2015.
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).
590
-------
Forensics Support
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Protecting Human Health and the Environment by Enforcing Laws and Assuring
Compliance
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws to Achieve Compliance
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$14,389.0
$2,382.2
$16,771.2
89.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$14,125.0
$2,344.0
$16,469.0
80.3
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$14,149.0
$1,112.0
$15,261.0
80.3
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$24.0
($1,232.0)
($1,208.0)
0.0
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
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 that generate environmental data for law enforcement purposes. It is fully accredited
under International Standards Organization 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. It 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.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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
environmental enforcement, the NEIC will continue using customized laboratory methods to
identify sources of pollution and potentially responsible parties at Superfund and other waste
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.
591
-------
sites. In response to Superfund case needs, the NEIC will conduct applied research and
development to identify and deploy new capabilities, and to test and/or enhance existing methods
and techniques involving environmental measurement as part of forensic investigations. In
addition, the NEIC will provide 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 techniques to analyze potential sources of toxic metals and attributing pollutants to
their sources.
The NEIC also will continue to develop innovative monitoring techniques. One focus will be on
the use of our Geospatial Measurement of Air Pollution vehicle to measure the release of
CERCLA Reportable Quantities of pollutants in environmental justice communities.
In FY 2015, the NEIC will continue to function under the rigorous ISO 17025 requirements for
environmental data measurements to maintain its laboratory and field accreditation. The NEIC
will continue to work with Region 8 and the agency's administration and resources management
program 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 Goals and Objectives. Currently, there are
no performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$7.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$1,239.0) This change reflects a realignment of agency resources which support
mandatory utility costs from NEIC laboratory operations. The change may reduce support
for civil and criminal cases.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act; Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act.
592
-------
Program Area: Homeland Security
593
-------
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and Recovery
Program Area: Homeland Security
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Restore Land
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$27,961.7
$39,468.4
$67,430.1
153.8
FY 2014
Enacted
$27,381.0
$36,802.0
$64,183.0
140.7
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$26,800.0
$35,754.0
$62,554.0
137.2
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($581.0)
($1,048.0)
($1,629.0)
-3.5
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Homeland Security Preparedness, Response, and Recovery program develops and
maintains an agency-wide 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 the EPA's long standing emergency response and removal program, which
is responsible for responding to and cleaning up both oil and hazardous substance releases. The
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
CBRN 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 the EPA's unique and critical environmental response
capability and expertise for CBRN agents, and look to the 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 CBRN agent;
• provide technical support and expertise during a response in evaluating environmental
and human health risks including health risks associated with the release of CBRN
agents; and
594
-------
• maintain 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 a federal technical resource for all
environmental consequence management activities including decontamination of building
infrastructures and environmental media, site characterization, clearance, and waste
management. 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 (ERLN) 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 the
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, the 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 evaluates environmental sampling, analysis, and human health risk assessment methods.
These methods address known and emerging biological, chemical, and radiological threat agents.
NHSRC also develops and assesses decontamination and waste management technologies and
methods.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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
the EPA's emergency response assets during large-scale activations.
595
-------
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 2015, the 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 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 the EPA's Homeland Security program is a member, and through the National
Coordinating Group (NCG), of which the ERLN is a participating member.
• 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 the 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
delivery. ASPECT is especially needed when other assets cannot be deployed to a release
(road and/or infrastructure damage, personnel concerns, etc.).
• Maintain the Emergency Management Portal (EMP) modules. EMP ties together
prevention, preparedness, and response information to allow the EPA's emergency
596
-------
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 ERT and CBRN Consequence Management Advisory Team (CMAT) 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. As the agency lead for CBRN preparedness, CMAT
will continue to develop and maintain training, plans, and assets for national response to a
significant incident.
• Continue to focus on assessing the persistence and transport of harmful materials and the
effectiveness of decontamination options for sites contaminated with biological or
chemical agents.
• Continue updates of the Selected Analytical Methods for Environmental Remediation and
Recovery (SAM). The SAM methods are a repository for pre-selected methods to use in
a response and all ERLN labs are directed to use these methods.
• Continue development and assessment of: a) methods for treating water generated during
remediation activities, b) waste minimization methods for radiological contamination,
and c) low risk waste handling methods for biological contaminants. These methods are
expected to reduce both the timeline and cost of the response by reducing the volume of
waste that requires final disposal and by developing effective procedures for staging and
transporting waste.
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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$505.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$1,730.0 / -2.7 FTE) This reduction reflects agency realignment on how the EPA
preparedness program supports interagency programs at the federal, state, and local levels
in conjunction with the National Response Framework. The agency is reviewing and
redesigning core business processes to be more efficient and is working to implement
strategic sourcing across the wide range of contracts. These reduced resources include 2.7
FTE and associated payroll of $413.0.
597
-------
• (+$190.0) These resources will enhance the agency's ability to assess the potential health
impact of residual contamination by eliminating the development of Provisional Advisory
Levels (PALs) that address dermal toxicity for currently assessed chemical agents.
• (-$13.0) This reflects the net realignment of infrastructure support resources.
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.
598
-------
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)
Science & Technology
Environmental Program & Management
Building and Facilities
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$540.0
$7,328.9
$5,861.9
$683.5
$14,414.3
3.8
FY 2014
Enacted
$548.0
$5,724.0
$6,676.0
$1,265.0
$14,213.0
4.7
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$576.0
$5,716.0
$7,875.0
$1,113.0
$15,280.0
4.7
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$28.0
($8.0)
$1,199.0
($152.0)
$1,067.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
This program's activities ensure that the 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.
The 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), the EPA is
required to designate an agency Continuity Coordinator charged with ensuring that the 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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 the 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:
599
-------
• 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 2015, 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, the 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. The COOP program will be reviewed in March 2014.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$152.0) This reflects a reduction in resources related to agency COOP efforts such as
secure communications and COOP exercises.
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.
600
-------
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach
601
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$17,670.9
$1,329.4
$19,000.3
33.9
FY 2014
Enacted
$17,206.0
$1,340.0
$18,546.0
29.6
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$32,588.0
$1,466.0
$34,054.0
31.2
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$15,382.0
$126.0
$15,508.0
1.6
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Environmental Information 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 over the Internet. As it employs new technology and data standards, open-
source software, shared and portal 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)5 is the largest component of the EN program and serves as
the point of entry on the Exchange Network for environmental data submissions to the agency.
CDX provides a set of core services that promote leaner and more cost-effective enterprise
architecture for the agency by avoiding the creation of duplicative services. It also provides a set
of value-added features and services that enable faster and more efficient transactions for those
doing business with the EPA. Through CDX, stakeholders can submit data via one centralized
point of access, exchange data with target systems using Web services, and utilize publishing
services to share information collected by the EPA with other stakeholders, including states and
tribes.
The agency's EN program also supports other tools and services, such as the Facility Registry
Service (FRS), the Substance Registry System, the Reusable Component Services and other
registries within EPA's System of Registries. 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
' For more information on the Central Data Exchange, please visit: http://www.epa. gov/cdx/.
602
-------
key integrators that promote discovery, access, sharing and understanding of the EPA's
information and assets.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the Exchange Network program will continue to pilot projects 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 less expensive. In addition, the EN program will work
across EPA offices to integrate additional reporting systems into CDX, such as Clean Air Act
State Implementation Plan reporting and updates, the high volume-reporting National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System program, and reporting for the Toxic Substances Control Act.
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to support the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) program
through enhancing the use of digital documents and streamlining the document search processes
that are inherent to FOIA. Through the FOIAonline repository, agency records released in
response to FOIA requests are searchable in digital format by both the public and agency staff
who prepare agency responses. The FOIA repository allows EPA to gain efficiencies by
streamlining the document search process in responding to future requests for the same materials
through better access, categorization and repository management. These new tools will improve
the efficiency and effectiveness of the EPA's FOIA program.
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to build out EPA's information technology services and make
them available for state, tribe and territory system implementations that will reduce resource
requirements and streamline compliance with the Cross-Media Electronic Reporting Regulation
(CROMERR). The EPA will:
• Conduct robust outreach activities to increase awareness of virtual node Web services
interfaces and CROMERR services and the benefits of using these services;
• Approve CROMERR applications from authorized programs that propose to use the
EPA's virtual CROMERR services and assist co-regulators with integrating these
services into their systems; and
• Provide virtual services to three new Tribal partners and to three existing partners who
are replacing local nodes to better integrate services.
These activities will assist states and tribes in the development activities associated with
establishing a point of presence and exchanging data on the Network and supporting local
electronic reporting programs in a more cost effective way.
In FY 2015, the System of Registries will continue efforts to allow greater sharing and better
understanding of the EPA's data. This includes:
• Continued enhancement of the EPA's inventory of systems and computational models,
the Registry of EPA Applications and Databases (READ), to meet agency federal
reporting and information management needs;
603
-------
• Continuing to update the EPA's dataset registry, the Environmental Data Gateway, to
meet the EPA's priority of improving data accessibility; and
• Continued development of data dictionaries for systems catalogued in READ,
encouraging re-use of data elements in existing systems, thereby improving standards and
reducing burden.
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 the EPA programs to reuse standard system functions in
whole or in part, thus saving the EPA, states and Tribal governments' money and time.
In FY 2015, FRS will continue to identify and geospatially locate facilities, sites or places of
environmental interest that are subject to regulation. Using rigorous verification and data
management procedures, FRS will continue to integrate facility data from the EPA's national
program systems, other federal agencies and state and Tribal master facility records. The EPA
will work with the EPA's programs to design a new EPA directory that incorporates the
information in EPA's Substance Registry Services (SRS) and helps the customers that the EPA
serves find information available in the agency on chemicals and substances.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports the performance results in the Exchange Network Program
Project under the EPM appropriation and can be found in the Eight Year Performance Array and
Assessment Tab.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$126.0) Resources are realigned to support the build out of information technology
services that will reduce the resource requirements for state, Tribal, and territory system
implementation to comply with the Cross-Media Electronic Reporting Regulation
(CROMERR) and make it a more efficient paperless reporting process. These efforts will
help move the agency to a high performing organization for the benefit of the workforce
and the public.
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
604
-------
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)
605
-------
Program Area: IT / Data Management / Security
606
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$6,707.3
$544.0
$7,251.3
12.3
FY 2014
Enacted
$6,410.0
$664.0
$7,074.0
12.4
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$6,604.0
$704.0
$7,308.0
14.3
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$194.0
$40.0
$234.0
1.9
Program Project Description:
Information is a valuable national resource and a strategic asset to the EPA. It enables each
program office to fulfill its mission to protect human health and the environment. The agency's
Information Security program funded from Superfund appropriation is designed to protect the
confidentiality, availability and integrity of the EPA's information assets. The information
protection strategy for the Superfund 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
Effective information security requires vigilance and the ability to adapt to new challenges every
day. The EPA will continue to protect, defend and sustain its information assets through
continued improvements to policy and procedures; oversight and compliance; training and
awareness; information assurance; and incident response.
This program leads the agency in redesigning IT Security business processes to improve
efficiency and effectiveness. In FY 2015, the EPA will build on progress made in advancing the
information security program by:
• Increasing use of continuous monitoring tools and processes;
• Focusing on protecting information;
• Measuring performance;
• Advancing risk management processes;
• Continuing to update and implement the information security architecture; and
• Refining incident management capabilities.
607
-------
The Information Security program also will continue to build on progress from supporting
continuous monitoring to detect and remediate Advanced Persistent Threats to the agency's
Information Technology (IT) networks. Furthermore, the agency will continue to focus on
training and user-awareness to foster desired behavior, asset definition and management,
compliance, incident management, knowledge and information management, risk management
and technology management. These efforts will strengthen the agency's ability to adequately
protect information assets. The final result is an information security program that can rely on
effective and efficient controls and processes to counter cybersecurity threats.
In FY 2015, the agency will continue Phase II of the implementation of the Homeland Security
Presidential Directive 12 (HSPD-12) requirements for logical and physical access as identified in
the Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) 201, Personal Identity Verification (PIV) of
Federal Employees and Contractor?,. This effort ensures only authorized employees have access
to federal and federal-controlled facilities and information systems by requiring a higher level of
identity assurance. Phase II will incorporate: physical access control management and
interoperability with other federal agencies and partners.
The agency efforts to implement the cross-agency priority goal on cybersecurity will focus on
achieving 95 percent automated capability to provide enterprise-level visibility into asset
inventory for all hardware assets; 95 percent automated capability to identify deviations from the
approved configuration baselines and to provide visibility at the organization's enterprise level;
and 95 percent hardware assets evaluated using an automated capability that scans for
vulnerabilities on computing devices using the NIST National Vulnerability Database
vulnerabilities (CVEs) as a baseline. Aggregated data will be visible at the organization's
enterprise level.
The EPA will continue to enhance the internal Computer Security Incident Response Capability
(CSIRC) to ensure rapid identification, response, alerting and reporting of suspicious activity.
CSIRC's mission is to protect EPA information assets and respond to security incidents - actual
and potential. This includes the ability to detect unauthorized attempts to access, destroy, or alter
EPA data and information resources. CSIRC also continues to establish new, and build existing,
relationships with other federal agencies and law enforcement entities to support the agency's
mission. 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.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no specific
performance measures for this program.
608
-------
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$40.0) The realigned resources provide basic workforce support for monitoring
potential threats to the agency's IT networks.
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).
609
-------
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
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$77,765.7
$3,676.0
$0.1
$13,667.4
$95,109.2
476.7
FY 2014
Enacted
$85,579.0
$3,525.0
$0.0
$13,911.0
$103,015.0
476.6
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$86,793.0
$3,089.0
$0.0
$14,234.0
$104,116.0
466.1
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$1,214.0
($436.0)
$0.0
$323.0
$1,101.0
-10.5
Program Project Description:
The work performed under the EPA's Superfund appropriated Information Technology/Data
Management (IT/DM) program supports agency priorities by providing critical IT infrastructure
and data management needed for: 1) access to scientific, regulatory and best practice information
needed by agency staff, the regulated community and the public; 2) analytical support for
interpreting and understanding environmental information; 3) exchange and storage of data,
analysis and computation; and 4) rapid, secure and efficient communication. These are organized
by the following functional areas: information analysis and access; data management and
collection; information technology and infrastructure; and geospatial information and analysis.
IT/DM program activities support the Administration's goals of transparency, participation,
engagement and collaboration to expand the conversation on environmentalism, e.g. Exec. Order
No. 13642 - Making Open and Machine Readable the Default for Government Information.
IT/DM also supports the maintenance 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 in support of Superfund programs.
FY 2015 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. These activities represent
significant components of the agency's work to transform its digital services within base
resources and become a high performance organization (HPO).
610
-------
In FY 2015, the following IT/DM activities will continue to be provided for the Superfund
program:
• Data Management and Collection: In FY 2015, the agency will continue to identify and
establish processes to capture "electronic" versions of records and eliminate, wherever
possible, receiving or printing paper copies. These efforts will increase accountability,
improve accuracy and offer cost savings associated with information requests. The
program also supports the privacy of the agency's environmental data and personally
identifiable information (PII). In FY 2015, the agency will continue to assess how to
support the expanding responsibilities associated with controlled unclassified information
(GUI). The agency is implementing a comprehensive information management strategy
to deliver more consistent content services to the agency. This includes governance
(policy, procedures and standards), outreach and training, and a multi-project effort to
improve records and eDiscovery. These efforts and activities support the EPA's move
towards becoming an HPO through business process changes agencywide. In addition,
EPA continues to operate a shared service docket processing center providing support to
the agency's rulemakings and administering the Paperwork Reduction Act to minimize
information collection burden on the public. (In FY 2015, the Data Management and
Collection activities will be funded, under the Superfund appropriation, at $2.37 million
in non-payroll funding.)
• Geospatial: 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. Throughout FY 2015, the agency
will continue to enhance the capabilities of the EPA GeoPlatform, its shared technology
enterprise for geospatial information and analysis. 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. Also in FY 2015, the EPA will continue to use the
Geoplatform to publish internal and public mapping tools, thereby increasing by at least
30 percent the number of shareable maps, geodata services, and applications available for
use. The EPA will continue to play a leadership role in both the Federal Geographic Data
Committee and the National Geospatial Platform, working with partner agencies to share
geospatial technology capabilities across government. (In FY 2015, the Geospatial
activities will be funded, under the Superfund appropriation, at $85 thousand in payroll
funding and $630 thousand in non-payroll funding.)
• Information Access and Analysis: In FY 2015, the program will continue to provide
access to and analysis of environmental information to the public and EPA personnel
through My Environment, Envirofacts, OneEPA Web, Libraries and the EPA Intranet.
Through support of My Environment and Envirofacts, the EPA will continue to offer
online tools and applications that enable the public to understand and utilize
environmental information about their community and respond to emergencies. The
program also will continue to improve the delivery of vital information to the public and
ensure people are able to find the right information to accomplish their tasks online
611
-------
through OneEPA Web services and the EPA National Library Network. (In FY 2015, the
Information Access and Analysis activities will be funded, under the Superfund
appropriation, at $845 thousand in non-payroll funding.)
• Information Technology and Infrastructure: In FY 2015, the agency will continue to
support information technology and infrastructure, which is the foundation from which
all EPA employees conduct agency business. The EPA will continue maintaining and
provisioning desktop computing equipment, network connectivity, e-mail and
collaboration tools, application hosting, remote access, telephone services and
maintenance, Web and network services, and IT-related maintenance. Moreover, the
EPA will continue to conduct structured portfolio reviews for all major IT investments
following the Federal PortfolioStat investment review model to control costs, identify
efficiencies, and enable better-informed decisions on IT/IM investments and resource
allocation in coordination with the agency's Capital Planning and Investment Control
process. Also in FY 2015, the agency will continue consolidating small data centers and
computer rooms to gain more efficiency across the National Computer Center, the EPA's
primary data center. The EPA is also committed to using cloud computing technologies
and has in place an enterprise-wide cloud hosting service. (In FY 2015, the Information
Technology and Infrastructure activities will be funded, under the Superfund
appropriation, at $4.35 million in payroll funding and $8.12 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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
» (+$299.0) The decrease reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$576.0 / -2.4 FTE) This reduction reflects the consolidation of IT support contracts
through strategic sourcing and use of streamlined enterprise wide acquisition. This
reduction includes 2.4 FTE and associated payroll of $324.0.
• (+$600.0) This realignment supports agencywide implementation of an integrated and
coordinated approach for e-Discovery, FOIA records management activities and
employee training to streamline business processes and create more efficient, paperless
processes. These efforts will help move the agency to a high performance organization
for the benefit of the workforce and the public.
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
612
-------
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).
613
-------
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
614
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$1,256.4
$663.9
$1,920.3
6.9
FY 2014
Enacted
$1,297.0
$792.0
$2,089.0
7.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$1,370.0
$753.0
$2,123.0
7.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$73.0
($39.0)
$34.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
The EPA's 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 program offers cost-effective processes to resolve disputes and
improve agency decision making without costly, protracted litigation.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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 2015, the agency plans to support 30 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 63 Superfund cases where headquarters programs and regional offices are working
with stakeholders to improve environmental results. The agency also expects to provide at least
24 training events, reaching at least 335 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
615
-------
memorandum on Environmental Collaboration and Conflict Resolution,6 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, the EPA estimated 25 percent better environmental
outcomes and an average of more than $50,000 in FTE savings per case.
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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$3.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$42.0) This reduces resources in the Alternative Dispute Resolution program as the
agency works to implement strategic sourcing across the full range of contracts.
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.
' See- http://www.ecr.gov/pdf/OMB_CEQ_Env_Collab_Conflict_Resolution_20120907.pdf. Issued 9/7/12 by OMB and CEQ
616
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$40,441.7
$652.0
$41,093.7
232.7
FY 2014
Enacted
$43,136.0
$503.0
$43,639.0
233.1
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$43,948.0
$516.0
$44,464.0
234.1
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$812.0
$13.0
$825.0
1.0
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 the EPA's decisions regarding the assessment of certain
contaminants at a given Superfund site under Federal law, and a party's potential liability under
CERCLA.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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. In addition, OGC
expects to see an increased demand across its legal counseling offices as a result of the agency
transformation to a higher performing organization. All legal counseling offices will need to
provide legal support for the transition to electronic reporting and the program's regulatory
structure as part of E-Enterprise and information management initiatives and activities, as well as
working to ensure continued compliance with the environmental and administrative laws through
the agency's organizational transformation.
7 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
617
-------
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 2015, 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.
Goal
Goal 3: Cleaning Up
Communities and
Advancing
Sustainable
Development
Goal 3: Cleaning Up
Communities and
Advancing
Sustainable
Development
Goal 2: Protecting
America's Waters
and
Goal 3: Cleaning Up
Communities and
Advancing
Sustainable
Development
Goal 5 : Enforcing
Environmental Laws
Specific EPA OGC Activities
Provided legal advice and counseling resulting in the agency's
development and promulgation of final rules adding 18 Superfund
Sites to the National Priorities List.
Counseled the Brownfields Office on their grant program, which made
240 grants with a total value of $62 million in FY 2013.
Provided legal support in the establishment of a first ever Natural
Resource Damages Trust Fund for the EPA.
• This Trust Fund will allow the agency to receive funds from the
Deepwater Horizon Responsible Parties and undertake critical
damage assessments and restoration work.
• This work has greatly reduced the burden on the American
taxpayer, holds the responsible parties accountable and allows
advances critical assessment and restoration work.
Supported cross-office efforts to analyze the impacts of the Sackett
decision on RCRA and CERCLA administrative order authority.
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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$8.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base costs due to adjustments in salary
and benefits and other costs.
• (+$5.0) This increase supports basic and mandatory IT and telecommunications support
costs for the on board workforce, including support for desktop services, telephone and
Local Area Network (LAN).
618
-------
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.
619
-------
Program Area: Operations and Administration
620
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$547.4
$293,188.6
$74,351.2
$27,676.4
$933.4
$80,960.5
$477,657.5
382.8
FY 2014
Enacted
$584.0
$310,057.0
$70,370.0
$27,791.0
$823.0
$67,470.0
$477,095.0
367.2
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$498.0
$325,138.0
$75,824.0
$45,632.0
$836.0
$78,905.0
$526,833.0
361.6
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($86.0)
$15,081.0
$5,454.0
$17,841.0
$13.0
$11,435.0
$49,738.0
-5.6
Program Project Description:
Superfund resources in the Facilities Infrastructure and Operations Program fund rent, utilities,
security. This program also supports centralized administrative activities and support services,
including health and safety, environmental compliance and management, facilities maintenance
and operations, space planning, property management, printing, mail and transportation services.
Funding is allocated for such services among the major appropriations for the agency.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
As part of the EPA's efforts toward becoming a High Performing Organization (HPO), the
agency reviews space needs, and has implemented a long-term space consolidation plan that will
reduce the number of occupied facilities, consolidate space within the remaining facilities, and
reduce the square footage wherever practical. In FY 2015, the agency will continue to invest to
reconfigure the EPA's workspaces with the goal of reducing long-term rent needs. This work
will enable the agency to release office space in support of the President's June 2012
memorandum on "Disposing of Unneeded Federal Real Estate." Since 2006, the EPA has
released approximately 428 thousand square feet of space at headquarters and facilities
nationwide, resulting in a cumulative annual rent avoidance of over $14.6 million. These
achieved savings and potential savings partially offset the EPA's escalating rent and security
costs.
In August 2014, the EPA will end its lease at 1310 L Street and will begin to move over 500
employees into the EPA's Federal Triangle and Potomac Yard space and save the agency
621
-------
approximately $7.5 million annually in rent. In FY 2015, the EPA will complete the
consolidation of 1310 L Street as well as consolidations in Regions 1, 2 and 4, which will further
reduce the agency's space footprint. For FY 2015, the agency is requesting $45.90 million for
rent, $3.38 million for utilities, and $8.50 million for security in the Superfund appropriation to
continue funding lab and office space, utilities, security, and administrative services.
In FY 2015, 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) 13423,8 Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and
Transportation Management. The agency will attain the EO's environmental performance goals
related to buildings through several initiatives, including: comprehensive facility energy audits;
re-commissioning; and, sustainable building design.
EO 13514, Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance, expands
upon EO 13423 and requires additional reductions to greenhouse gas (GHG) 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, and
optimize real property and portfolio performance. In FY 2015, the agency is targeting to reduce
energy utilization (or improve energy efficiency) by approximately 37 billion British Thermal
Units or three percent. This ongoing effort to become more efficient has yielded impressive
results - approximately 27 percent less energy used than in FY 2003, and annual cost savings of
$5.9 million.
Performance Targets:
The EPA 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/greeningepa/documents/sspp2012 508.pdf.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$747.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$291.0 / -3.1 FTE) This reduces resources for facilities management activities and
reflects expected business process changes and efficiencies achieved from implementing
operational changes at EPA facilities. The reduced resources include 3.1 FTE and
associated payroll of $291.0.
8 Information is available at http://www. fedcenter. gov/programs/eo 135147, 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
622
-------
• (+$7.0) This reflects an increase in transit subsidy costs based on projected needs.
• (+$8,891.0) This change reflects the net effect of restoring rent funded through
Congressional reprogramming in prior year, projected contractual rent increases and the
rent reduction realized from space consolidation efforts.
• (+$620.0) This change reflects an increase in utility costs.
• (+$141.0) This reflects an increase in security guard contractual costs.
• (+$84.0) This realignment provides resources to begin a regional move in Dallas (Region
6) and to complete 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. This will
contribute to the agency becoming a HPO.
• (+$1,236.0) This realignment funds required basic facility operations at EPA's regional
offices and laboratories, and at facilities in Research Triangle Park, NC and Cincinnati,
OH. This funding will allow the agency to meet basic operations including custodial
services, ground maintenance, and laboratory operations and maintenance.
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; Presidential Decision Directive 63 (Critical
Infrastructure).
623
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$24,186.0
$3,053.4
$27,239.4
164.2
FY 2014
Enacted
$24,671.0
$2,990.0
$27,661.0
169.2
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$25,359.0
$2,945.0
$28,304.0
162.4
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$688.0
($45.0)
$643.0
-6.8
Program Project Description:
Grants and Interagency Agreements (lAs) comprise more than half of the agency's budget.
Superfund resources in the Financial Assistance Grants and Interagency Agreement (IA)
Management program support the management of grants and lAs, and suspension and debarment
activities. Resources in this program ensure that the EPA's management of grants and lAs meets
the highest fiduciary standards, that grant/IA 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
As part of the EPA's efforts toward becoming a High Performing Organization (HPO), the
agency will continue to focus on key objectives under its Grants Management Transformation
Initiative (GMTI). The GMTI is designed to achieve efficiencies while enhancing quality and
accountability. Major focus areas include: 1) implementing business process improvements
identified through a LEAN-oriented Business Process Re-engineering project conducted in FY
2013 and FY 2014; 2) implementing a new policy on Grants.gov as the standard electronic
option for the initial submission of grant applications; 3) expanding the use of electronic
grant/IA records; 4) implementing a streamlined approach for administrative advanced
monitoring; 5) leveraging resources to address Project Officer and Grant and IA Specialist
workload issues; and 6) reducing burden on applicants and recipients. As a supplement to the
GMTI, EPA will implement new government-wide grant requirements developed by OMB and
the Council on Financial Assistance Reform.
624
-------
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 EPA also will continue to implement an agency-wide training program for Project
Officers, Grant and IA Specialists, and managers. In FY 2015, particular emphasis will be placed
on the timely award of grants and lAs, and on monitoring awarded agreements to ensure
sufficient progress and proper management of unliquidated obligations.
The EPA is a recognized leader in suspension and debarment and will continue to make
aggressive use of discretionary suspensions and debarments to protect the Government's
business interest.
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. EPA expects to issue a new Grants Management Plan, with associated
performance measures, in FY 2015 incorporating GMTI themes.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$99.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$144.0 / -0.7 FTE) This decrease reflects efficiencies anticipated to be achieved in
grants and IA management as a result of implementing the LEAN business process re-
engineering project. The reduced resources include $89.0 in associated payroll for 0.7
FTE.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act; EPA's
Environmental Statutes; Annual Appropriations Acts; Disaster Relief Appropriations Act, 2013;
Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act; the Economy Act; Title 2 Code of Federal
Regulations; Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations, Parts: 30, 31, 33, 35, 40, 45, 46, and 47;
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
625
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$28,381.3
$151.9
$21,617.7
$50,150.9
327.2
FY 2014
Enacted
$31,866.0
$155.0
$22,388.0
$54,409.0
312.4
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$31,779.0
$138.0
$23,762.0
$55,679.0
308.7
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($87.0)
($17.0)
$1,374.0
$1,270.0
-3.7
Program Project Description:
Superfund resources in the Acquisition Management program support the agency's contracts
activities 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
As part of the EPA's efforts toward becoming a High Performing Organization (HPO) and in
accordance with Acquisition Workforce Development Strategic Plan, in FY 2015 the EPA will
use EPM resources to strengthen its contract management training program, improve the EPA
Acquisition System's user interface, and to recruit, retain, and hire 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. In FY 2014, the EPA formally
commenced its SSP to improve efficiencies and economies in the agency's acquisition programs,
and to guarantee that acquisition programs deliver the best value for American taxpayer and the
EPA. This included improved efficiencies in lab and office supplies, and cellular services. In
FY 2015, EPA will continue to create efficiencies by enhancing purchase coordination across the
agency to improve price uniformity; executing collaborative acquisitions among organizations;
standardizing the acquisition process to deliver supplies and services more quickly to end users;
626
-------
improving knowledge-sharing across the EPA; and, leveraging small business capabilities to
meet the EPA's acquisition goals. The long-term SSP plan will transform the agency's acquisition
process from a tactical and reactive one to a strategically driven function that ensures maximum
value for every acquisition dollar spent. The agency has established a goal of obtaining at least
five percent savings for goods and services.
In FY 2015, the agency expects to achieve the following from adopting a Centers of Expertise
for contracting 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.
The EPA also plans to reinforce its contract oversight responsibilities through OMB Circular A-
123 - internal control assessments, increased targeted oversight training for acquisition
management personnel, and Simplified Acquisition Contracting Officer (SACO) reviews. These
measures will strengthen the EPA's acquisition management business processes and enhance
contract oversight. The EPA also will achieve acquisition savings through eliminating contracts
that are redundant in scope, or may be combined with other acquisitions to achieve greater
buying power via economies of scale; and through the use of government-wide procurement
sources to reduce the need for new contracts.
Performance Targets:
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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$563.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$97.0 / -0.7 FTE) This reduces resources in the Acquisition Management program as
the agency works to implement strategic sourcing across the full range of contracts. The
agency has established a goal of obtaining at least five percent savings for goods and
services. The reduced resources include 0.7 FTE and associated payroll of $97.0.
• (+$908.0) This change reflects an increase under Superfund account for fully supporting
the operations and maintenance costs for the EPA Acquisition System.
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.).
627
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$35,752.6
$5,091.4
$40,844.0
229.9
FY 2014
Enacted
$42,013.0
$5,880.0
$47,893.0
238.9
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$48,445.0
$7,547.0
$55,992.0
236.1
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$6,432.0
$1,667.0
$8,099.0
-2.8
Program Project Description:
Superfund resources for the Human Resources Management program support 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, recruitment, hiring, and workforce development to help the
agency achieve its mission and ensure management and employee satisfaction.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
As part of the EPA's efforts toward becoming a High Performing Organization (HPO), the
agency will continue to support the Superfund program 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 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 2015, the agency will realign resources to invest in the EPA University, a central
repository for all EPA learning and development. The purpose of the EPA University is to share
learning opportunities with employees, encourage snared resources and services across the
agency, and increase agency wide collaboration, resulting in greater efficiencies for the agency
and better availability of development resources for all staff. It also will support flexibility as
workforce realignments occur and new skills are needed. This process will continue to support
the agency's focus on maintaining a HPO while actively marketing internal technical and core
competency learning events.
628
-------
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 HR and payroll system, and seamless data transfer from the recruitment process. The
Department of Interior's Business Center (TBC) will manage the EPA's HR LoB.
The HR LoB will be used for human resource transaction and payroll processing, and for data
reporting. In FY 2015, the EPA will be completing the clean-up and migration of human
resource data from the legacy system to HR LoB, an activity initiated after HR LoB
implementation in FY 2014. During migration EPA must maintain legacy data because the
migration occurs at a point in time and resets all transaction history from the migration forward.
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. 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.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$172.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$955.0) This change reflects a full year of fees the agency must pay to DOI for EPA to
transition its HR and payroll services to align with the IBC system.
• (+$540.0) This realigns resources to support the EPA University, a central repository for
all EPA learning and development initiatives that will use technology to engage a wider
audience of employees in learning and development opportunities. This realignment will
contribute to the agency becoming a HPO by applying software that allows more efficient
access of information and learning events for all employees and reduces the number of
redundant learning management systems.
Statutory Authority:
Title V USC, Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act of 1998 (FAIR Act)
629
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$69,366.3
$602.9
$21,791.6
$91,760.8
502.3
FY 2014
Enacted
$71,875.0
$572.0
$21,797.0
$94,244.0
494.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$75,572.0
$403.0
$24,155.0
$100,130.0
492.8
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$3,697.0
($169.0)
$2,358.0
$5,886.0
-1.2
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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to provide high-quality resource stewardship to ensure that all
agency programs operate with fiscal responsibility and management integrity, 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. The EPA also will continue to improve
accessibility to data to support accountability, cost accounting, budget and performance
integration, and management decision-making. The program will also support the agency's
LEAN efforts to move toward a high performance organization (HPO) to support business
process changes agencywide.
FY 2015 will be the second year of the EPA implementing its FY 2014-2018 Strategic Plan,
which sets the long term direction and key implementation strategies for the agency. Also in FY
2015, the EPA will continue to implement agency Priority Goals and initiate strategic reviews to
630
-------
assess annual results and progress toward strategic objectives. The EPA will continue to assess
progress and focus on evidence based data to support budget and strategic decisions.
In FY 2015, the systems emphasis will be on operations and maintenance. The request for
operations and maintenance includes funding for implementing approved technology
refreshments and minor enhancements, renewing software licenses, as well as providing
refresher and new user training. It will be the third year of the Compass implementation and the
HRLoB will be in operation starting late FY 2014.
The EPA will continue development of its Budget Formulation System in FY 2015 to replace the
current Budget Automation System. The new system will create efficiencies through automating
a number of manual, time-intensive processes and by providing new enterprise tools for agency
resource management, and reduce the need for local systems. The new system will have a more
streamlined performance module that is aligned with new OMB and agency requirements, as
well as a flexible structure that can be easily modified to support a common Account Code
Structure, constantly changing OMB/Hill budget reporting and tracking requirements as well as
other agencies budget structures. The plan is for the system to be deployed as a cloud service
within EPA and potentially as a shared service for other agencies.
In FY 2015, the EPA also will continue to modernize and modify the Account Code Structure to
improve tracking and reporting capabilities, maximizing the benefits within the new Compass
accounting 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 significant programming and implementation efficiencies.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$414.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefits.
• (-$446.0 / -3.4 FTE) This decrease reflects the agency's efforts to streamline business
processes and find efficiencies across headquarters and regional offices. This reduction
includes 3.4 FTEs and associated payroll of $446.0.
• (+$108.0) This realignment will support the continued development of the Budget
Formulation System. It includes development and the operations and maintenance of the
current Budget Automation System.
• (+$2,099.0) This realignment will support the implementation of the new Account Code
Structure by providing resources for the adaptive maintenance of system interfaces and
631
-------
reports. This funding will also support the cost of maintenance operations for financial
systems.
• (+$183.0) This increase provides resources to cover the Department of Interior's fees for
payroll services to support HRLoB.
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.
632
-------
Program Area: Research: Sustainable Communities
633
-------
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 Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$597.6
$154,720.2
$382.1
$17,885.7
$173,585.6
578.6
FY 2014
Enacted
$664.0
$154,978.0
$320.0
$14,380.0
$170,342.0
510.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$485.0
$144,144.0
$405.0
$14,032.0
$159,066.0
503.5
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($179.0)
($10,834.0)
$85.0
($348.0)
($11,276.0)
-6.5
Program Project Description:
The Sustainable and Healthy Communities (SHC) research program, under the Superfund
appropriation, conducts integrated, trans-disciplinary research which results in decision-makers
having:
• Tools, methods, and information to assess current conditions at Superfund sites;
• Decision support tools to evaluate the implications of alternative remediation
approaches and technologies, and reuse of sites; and
• The latest science to support policy development and implementation.
In doing so, the SHC research program is responsive to the Superfund law requirements9 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 and making a visible
difference in those communities.
Recent accomplishments include:
• Publishing a study which demonstrates that communities can save costs by using radon
as a proxy for monitoring cancer-causing volatile organic compounds. The study
determined that radon, being much cheaper to measure than volatile organic chemicals
(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.
• Publishing a study on contaminated sediments that demonstrates that for many benthic
organisms in waterways, the primary cause of sediment toxicity in many cases is actually
Section 209 (a) of Pub. L. 99-499
634
-------
the non-polyaromatic hydrocarbon fraction of the oils. This is comprised of aliphatic
hydrocarbons that have been historically considered to be non-toxic. This is key
information in assessing the recovery of contaminated waterways.
• Developing improved ground water transport models for chlorinated solvents and their
byproducts in ground water. This includes the biotic and abiotic transformation of
solvents to better inform conceptual and predictive models. This information will better
inform site decisions, examining the temporal and spatial impacts of chlorinated solvents
and potential effects on community drinking water supplies.
• Developing rapid, reliable, and inexpensive tools for guiding remediation of lead. This
research is developing methods to reduce clean up costs in the remediation of
contaminated lead sites. Developing rapid, reliable, and inexpensive tools to better assess
the public health impacts will reduce the costs for managing these sites.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
The SHC research program will provide the EPA's scientific and remedial project managers and
site managers in EPA's regional offices, as well as community decision-makers with research
which improves their ability to weigh alternatives, and make decisions on cleaning up
contaminated ground water. 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 control and plume
management, which will reduce drinking water contamination and vapor intrusion. Adoptions
of technologies from this research program have resulted in documented cost- and time-savings
associated with cleaning up contaminated sites.'
Site-specific and general technical support will be provided to EPA's program and regional
offices that remediate Superfund sites. This support has enabled regional decision-makers to set
science-based cleanup levels that are protective of human health while reducing costs and
communities and their resources. 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.
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.
Beginning in 2014, the EPA is establishing a standing subcommittee of the Board of Scientific
Councilors for the SHC program which will evaluate its performance and provide expert
feedback to the agency.
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,
National Science Foundation, Department of Energy, and Department of Agriculture. The EPA
635
-------
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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$433.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$14.0) This includes a net realignment of infrastructure support resources. The agency
is working to implement strategic sourcing across the wide range of contracts, with a goal
of at least 5 percent savings for goods and services. This also reflects overall efficiencies
gained through business process examination and projected workforce attrition.
• (-$693.0 / -4.2 FTE) This realignment will reduce funding for projects related to vapor
intrusion and contaminated sediments. However, EPA will continue its commitment to
providing technical support resources to agency programs and regions. The reduced
resources include 4.2 FTE and associated payroll of $613.0.
• (-$102.0) 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 Budget Request.
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).
636
-------
Program Area: Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
637
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$34,226.1
$2,425.1
$36,651.2
178.6
FY 2014
Enacted
$40,010.0
$3,040.0
$43,050.0
183.2
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$37,870.0
$2,843.0
$40,713.0
183.5
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($2,140.0)
($197.0)
($2,337.0)
0.3
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) research program supports the risk
assessments needed by the agency's Superfund programs by synthesizing scientific information
on individual chemicals and chemical mixtures that are in the environment to assist in the
agency's goal of taking action on toxic and chemical safety. These assessments support the
agency's priority to make a visible difference in communities and span the range from state-of-
the-science human health assessments to screening level values that help to focus monitoring and
future evaluations. All provide a sound scientific basis for the myriad of risk management
decisions facing our communities (e.g., regulations, site-specific cleanups). HHRA's assessment
work allows the EPA to better understand the possible implications of exposure and predict and
reduce risk.
HHRA develops Provisional Peer Reviewed Toxicity Values (PPRTVs) and other risk and
exposure assessment tools supporting EPA's clean-up decisions at contaminated Superfund and
hazardous waste sites. HHRA scientists also provide technical support and tools to enhance the
EPA's ability to make risk-based decisions on a case-specific basis, thereby reducing risks for
sensitive and susceptible populations. HHRA provides this support by:
• Advancing exposure assessment and cumulative risk assessment (CRA) approaches to
assess ecological risk, better support "place-based" assessments, address community
concerns, and characterize sustainability;
• Incorporating high throughput screening (HTS) and other emerging data streams to
support prioritization, risk screening, and assessment;
• Working with the Sustainable and Healthy Communities research program to support the
EPA's Superfund Technical Support Centers; and
• Providing technical support and exposure assessment tools that enhance the EPA's ability
to quickly make sound, risk-based decisions on a case-specific basis, thereby reducing
risks for sensitive and susceptible populations.
638
-------
Recent accomplishments include:
• Released the draft Libby Amphibole Asbestos10 assessment for public comment and peer
review, receiving praise for the report.
• Completed numerous PPRTV documents based on needs and priorities of the EPA's
Superfund program; and
• Released EPA Expo-Box, a web-based compendium of tools that provides easy access to
data bases, models, guidance documents, and other resources used by exposure assessors.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
HHRA will continue to engage important stakeholders and the scientific community to identify
and develop health hazard assessments for the highest priority chemicals of relevance to
Superfund site assessments and remediation. In FY 2015, HHRA will develop and support these
assessments through the following activities:
• Continuing essential technical assistance across the EPA to provide rapid risk
assessments, combining problem formulation and state-of-the-art exposure information
and tools with hazard information, chiefly through the continued development of
PPRTVs for evaluating chemical specific exposures at Superfund sites.
• Incorporate and characterize the utility of new data streams as applied to prioritization,
rapid risk screening, and assessment.
• Continuing to provide some consultative support through the Superfund Technical
Support Centers for the derivation of toxicity values 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.
• Advance exposure assessment and cumulative risk assessment methods to assess
ecological risk, better support "place-based" assessments, address community concerns,
and characterize sustainability.
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 SAB and 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." 1 Beginning in
10 http://vosemite.epa.gOV/sab/sabproduct.nsf/0/7639Cl 1 lCC33A48A8525762E007A431A?OpenDocument
11http://vosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/36EBF661CA14106185257A380048FEAE/$File/HHRA+Overview final.pdf
639
-------
2014, EPA is establishing a standing subcommittee of the Board of Scientific Counselors for the
non-IRIS HHRA program which will evaluate its performance and provide expert feedback to
the agency. The IRIS portion of the HHRA Program will be reviewed by the Chemical
Assessment Advisory Committee of the SAB.
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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$25.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$222.0 / -0.1 FTE) This reduction will reduce resources to support work on rapid risk
assessment due to new adverse events and reduce the number of PPRTVs developed to
support EPA's hazardous waste programs and states. This also includes a minor
realignment of infrastructure support resources. The reduced resources include 0.1 FTE
and associated payroll of $16.0.
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).
640
-------
Program Area: Superfund Cleanup
641
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$183,331.1
$183,331.1
284.5
FY 2014
Enacted
$177,826.0
$177,826.0
251.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$186,987.0
$186,987.0
243.7
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$9,161.0
$9,161.0
-7.3
Program Project Description:
The EPA's 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;
accidents; and acts of terror. Responses are needed in order to contain and remove hazardous
substances but also may be undertaken to address chemical, biological, and/or radiological agent
contamination. In all these cases, the Federal response involves the SF Removal program. From
FY 2008 to FY 2013, the EPA completed or oversaw more than 2,200 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. The figure below shows common
contaminants at removal actions from FY 2010 to FY 2013.
Commonly Occuring Removal Contaminants
FYs 2010 - 2013
I2O10
12011
I2O12
12013
Contaminant
642
-------
The EPA's On-Scene Coordinators (OSCs) respond to 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 are 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. If left unaddressed, these contaminants will 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). Specifically, the EPA's only 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.12 SF Removal
resources address releases that pose an imminent threat to public health or welfare and the
environment while the Superfund Remedial program addresses more long-term cleanup
activities. SF Removal therefore partners with the SF 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. These parties will often turn to 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, 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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,
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.
643
-------
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 2013, the agency completed 179 Superfund-lead removal actions and oversaw 125 PRP
removal completions. The program's PRP completion target of 170 was not met because removal
completions are difficult to predict due to the nature of emergency response and declining
removal starts. In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to work to meet environmental challenges by
working in concert with the states to build strategies that enhance coordination and to adequately
manage contamination and protect American communities. In FY 2015, 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 while acknowledging
that fewer non-time critical removal cleanups will be completed.
The SF Removal program acts as a supporting partner for removal responses in states. Budget
constraints at the state and local level have led to an even greater reliance on the SF Removal
program as a safety net for addressing contaminated sites requiring immediate attention,
including abandoned or orphaned sites. Recognizing the reality of scarcer federal and state
resources compounded with inflation, in FY 2015, the EPA requests additional resources to
maintain our current level of capability to respond to emergencies and keep our communities
safe and healthy.
The EPA's federal OSCs manage and/or provide support for emergency responses, removal
assessments, 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 direct the
response to threats that endanger the environment and present public health risks. The EPA will
continue to conduct 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, which include specialized technical skills in chemistry, biology, hydrology,
geology, etc., has been utilized increasingly in national responses (e.g., Deepwater Horizon and
Superstorm Sandy).
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 2015, the ERT will continue to provide support for the full range of
emergency response actions, including unusual or complex emergency incidents. In such cases,
644
-------
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
(137) Number of Superfund removals completed.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
FY2015
275
Units
Removals
Measure
Target
Actual
(Cl) Score on annual Core NAR.
FY2008
FY2009
No Target
Established
84.3
FY2010
55
87.9
FY2011
60
77.5
FY2012
70
75.8
FY2013
72
82.2
FY2014
75
FY2015
80
Units
Percent
In FY 2015, the EPA will complete or oversee a total of 275 Superfund-lead and PRP-lead
removal actions (including voluntary, Administrative Order on Consent, and Unilateral
Administrative Order actions). This will be tracked by a new performance measure that
combines the Superfund-lead and PRP removal measures.
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 (CBRN) incidents.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$850.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$9,381.0) This change realigns critical resources to maintain the agency's current level
of capability to respond to emergencies and keep our communities safe and healthy.
• (-$1,070.07 -7.3 FTE) The agency is reviewing and redesigning many core business
practices to be more efficient. This change includes a reduction in FTE as part of an
agencywide effort to streamline our business practices, to work with states to build
strategies to enhance coordination, and to manage resources effectively. Depending on
the speed and extent of the business process changes, this may reduce non-time critical
fund-lead action removals. These resources include a reduction of 7.3 FTE and $1,070.0
in associated payroll.
645
-------
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, as amended, 42
United States Code SC 9601 et seq. - Sections 104, 105 and 106.
646
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$8,777.2
$8,777.2
40.1
FY 2014
Enacted
$8,150.0
$8,150.0
42.1
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$7,636.0
$7,636.0
37.9
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($514.0)
($514.0)
-4.2
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 15-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
Emergency Preparedness program supports the agency's priorities of building more efficient and
647
-------
cost-effective state, Tribal and local 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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 with scarcer resources. The agency is reviewing and
redesigning many core business practices to be more efficient. Depending on the extent of
changes, there may be impacts on some activities related to coordination with other agencies,
including potentially scaling back its technical support for guidance documents and projects on
NRT committees and subcommittees and convening fewer RRT planning meetings and less
frequent updates for the Regional Contingency Plans.
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/Superstorm Sandy 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 Area Contingency 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
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 2015 through information obtained from application of the agency's National
Approach to Response (NAR). The EPA's NAR ensures efficient use of emergency response
648
-------
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.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$501.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$1,015.0 / -4.2 FTE) The agency is reviewing and redesigning many core business
practices to be more efficient. Depending on the extent of changes, there may be impacts
on some activities related to coordination with other agencies, including technical support
to national and local committees and subcommittees and convening fewer RRT meetings.
The reduced resources include 4.2 FTE and $597.0 in associated payroll.
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.
649
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$25,099.4
$25,099.4
123.4
FY 2014
Enacted
$21,125.0
$21,125.0
113.6
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$24,805.0
$24,805.0
111.7
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$3,680.0
$3,680.0
-1.9
Program Project Description:
The EPA's 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 work also protects our nation's
precious resources, such as water, by addressing releases of hazardous substances and restoring
those resources to beneficial uses. Superfund cleanup activities also make a visible difference in
communities across the nation. Specifically, Superfund cleanup actions increase a community'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
650
-------
the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), is
responsible for activities such as: 1) reviewing and approving site cleanup documents; 2)
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/.
The Federal Facilities program continues to develop and implement innovative technologies,
processes, and collaboration efforts. By working in concert with sister federal agencies, the EPA
continues to promote the advancement of cleanup technologies, expansion of contaminated land
reuse to support renewable energy projects, and multiple initiatives to support sustainability.
These demonstration projects not only help support the agency's goal to cleanup communities
and advance sustainable development but they also facilitate the introduction of innovative
solutions to both the public and private sector.
FY 2015 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. The last
update of the Federal Facility Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket in January, 2014, listed
2,382 facilities 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 EPA, in coordination with other federal agencies, has developed an Electronic Docket (E-
Docket) to streamline and modernize the process for producing the Docket to realize savings for
both the EPA and other federal agencies. The E-Docket, which will be finalized in FY 2014, will
651
-------
allow EPA 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 under
OSWER's 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 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.
The first phase of the FFSEP evaluated 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.
Phase 2 of the FFSEP is a multiyear effort which commenced in FY 2013. This phase focuses on
the documentation and evaluation of Not Valid Sites (NVS), No Further Remedial Action
Planned (NFRAP) and Other Cleanup Authority (OCA) sites. FFRRO has estimated that there
are approximately 2,000 sites on the Docket categorized as NVS, NFRAP, or OCA. Many of
these sites do not have supporting documentation regarding that determination. The intent of
phase 2 is not to re-evaluate these decisions, but to ensure that the decision making process that
is necessary to corroborate the determination is properly documented. While the intent of this
phase is not to re-evaluate prior decisions, further action on the part of the EPA may be
necessary in cases where the NFRAP decision is no longer valid or where progress under an
OCA has been insufficient.
The FFSEP has highlighted deficiencies in federal facility compliance with CERCLA section
120(d). A majority of the facilities which may not have conducted the statutorily required PA
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 2015, the EPA will continue to work in concert 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
652
-------
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 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. The EPA has been working collaboratively with DoD,
DOE, and Department of the Interior (DOT) 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. In FY 2015, the workgroup will continue to
assess the use of best management practices and evaluate trend data to improve the five-year
review process. The EPA will review approximately 33 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. The EPA expects this will result in reducing the cost and time of the
five-year review and ensuring effective communication with the public.
In FY 2015, 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 2013, there were 174 federal
sites on the NPL. Despite the smaller 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 2013, the Superfund
Federal Facilities Response program signed 34 of the 59 (58 percent) Records of Decisions at all
Superfund NPL sites; started 40 of the 95 (42 percent) Remedial Action Projects; and completed
51 of the 122 (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.
653
-------
Superfund Federal Facilities Response Site Activity
2.359 Federal Facility Universe
BActivE Docket Kon
IS'PL (63 7]
QDActive Kan Docket
KonKPL[230]
DNPL Docket (143]
BN PL Non Docket
[26]
•Archived Docket
(1,110]
PArchived Kan
Docket (2 OS]
1,041 Ac rive Federal Facilities
DActive Docket Kon NFL
[637]
•Active Kan Do cket Kan, '
K PL [2 30]
D K PL Do cket [148] I
m K PL K on Docket (26] \
S67Acrive>"onXPLFederalFacilides
174 XPLFederal Facilities
D Study Pending
[301]
D Study
Underway [34] \
D Remedy
Selected (3]
• Design
Underway [1]
• Construction
Underway [2 3]
D Study Pending (1]
• Study UndETway [3] ,
HRemedy Selected [5] !\x
DDesign Underway [1]
D Construction Underway
[92]
* Construction
Completed/Deleted (72]
72 Construction Completed Federal Facilities
nCC and Deleted [17]
D CC and not Deleted
(55]
Progress is determined by most advanced operable unit Chart results generated from CERCLIS data, EOY 2013.
In FY 2015, 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
654
-------
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 2015 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.
In FY 2015, the EPA requests to realign $3.29 million 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. This funding is essential to fulfill
EPA's statutory and regulatory obligations at federal facilities for the protective and efficient
cleanup and reuse of federal facility sites.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(FF1) Percent of Superfund federal facility sites construction complete.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
86
FY2015
87
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. In FY
2015, the program will continue targeting its percent construction complete measure for federal
NPL sites. This measure demonstrates 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 percent and the target for FY 2015 is 87 percent.
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 Tab under Goal 3, Objective 3.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$381.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
655
-------
• (+$3,299.0 / -1.9 FTE) This net change represents the restoration of essential funding 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. This change includes a reduction in FTE as part of an agencywide effort to
streamline our business practices, to enhance coordination with states and other federal
agencies, and to manage resources effectively. Depending on the speed and extent of the
changes, reprioritization of EPA's oversight efforts for certain CERCLA pipeline
activities may be required. The resources include a reduction of 1.9 FTE and $277.0 in
associated payroll.
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.
656
-------
Superfund: Remedial
Program Area: Superfund Cleanup
Goal: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Objective(s): Restore Land; Preserve Land
(Dollars in Thousands)
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$536,942.3
$536,942.3
947.9
FY 2014
Enacted
$500,000.0
$500,000.0
872.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$543,400.0
$543,400.0
863.3
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$43,400.0
$43,400.0
-8.7
Program Project Description:
The EPA's 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 precious and limited 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 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 of
contaminants to the environment, developing cleanup strategies, designing and constructing
remedies, conducting long-term operation, and monitoring of certain remedies. The Superfund
Remedial program, by actively implementing its "Green Remediation Strategy," minimizes the
environmental footprint of its cleanup activities. In addition, the EPA partners with state, local,
and Tribal governments to cleanup Superfund sites and provides funding through state and Tribal
cleanup programs, which support site assessment work, provide payroll for staff, and document
review activities. Finally, the program provides resources to communities through Technical
Assistance Grants (TAGs) to facilitate their engagement on National Priority List (NPL)
Superfund sites.
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
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
cost more than $100 million by the time they are completed. A few sites, such as the Bunker Hill
and Libby Asbestos Sites, have the potential to exceed $500 million. Cleanup actions can take
from a few months for a relatively straight-forward soil excavation or capping remedy to
multiple decades for complex, area-wide groundwater, sediment, or mining remedies.
657
-------
While there is no single way to characterize communities that are located near Superfund NPL
sites, the EPA analyzed the latest census data and found that approximately 49 million people
live within 3 miles of Superfund final and proposed NPL sites, as well as non-NPL Superfund
Alternative Agreement sites (roughly 16 percent of the U.S. population).13 This population is
predominantly minority, low income, linguistically isolated, and less likely to have a high school
education than the U.S. population as a whole. As a result, these communities may have fewer
resources with which to address concerns about their health and environment.
Superfund cleanup actions increase the nation's welfare 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, Columbia University, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology (MIT), and UC Berkeley researchers found that Superfund cleanups correlate with
reduced incidence of congenital anomalies by approximately 20 to 25 percent for those living
within 5,000 meters of a site.14
The human health threats addressed by Superfund cleanups include lead contamination of
residential soil, which can cause elevated blood levels in children. Research shows that blood
lead levels above 5 |ig/dL can result in irreversible neurological deficits in young children,
(including lowered intelligence, attention-related behavioral problems, and poor academic
achievement) as well as adverse effects in other organ systems.15 Blood lead studies at five
Superfund sites have shown a reduction in the average blood lead levels in children from above 5
|ig/dL16 to below 5 |ig/dL following Superfund cleanup and environmental education efforts. For
example, in 1999, the EPA began excavating and replacing soil at child-care facilities and
residential properties in eastern Omaha that were contaminated with lead through airborne
emissions from historic lead smelting and refining operations in the area.17 Efforts at the Omaha
site to reduce exposure to lead contaminated soil had a significant result on blood lead levels in
that community. In 1994, approximately 33 percent of all children tested in Douglas County had
a blood lead level of 10 |ig/dL or higher. In 2006, the percentage of children tested with elevated
blood lead levels (10 |ig/dL or higher) had decreased to about 4 percent.
Ecosystems also are improved by addressing pollutants from contaminated sites and protecting
drinking water supplies or fishery habitats. For example, at the Anaconda Smelter site in
Montana, the Superfund program has reconstructed wetlands and re-vegetated slopes to reduce
13 U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response Estimate. 2014. Data collected includes: (1) CERCLIS site
information as of the end of FY 2011; and (2) 2007-2011 American Community Survey (ACS) census data. Site data from FY
2011 was chosen to correspond most closely to the census data in the 2007-2011 ACS. In FY 2011 this included 1,408 Superfund
Remedial Program sites in the 50 U.S. states with accurate locational data. A circular site boundary, equal to the site acreage, was
modeled around the latitude/longitude for each site and then a 3 mile buffer ring was placed around the site boundary. Census
data was then collected for each block group whose centroid fell within the 3 mile area.
Currie, J., M. Greenstone and E. Moretti. 2011. "Superfund Cleanups and Infant Health." NBER Working Paper 16844.
2012 National Toxicology Program Monograph Health Effects of Low-Level Lead.
http://ntp.niehs.nih.gOV/NTP/ohat/Lead/F inal/MonographHealthEffectsLowLevelLead_NewISSN_508.pdf
2012, Advisory Committee on Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Recommendations in "Low Level Lead Exposure Harms
Children: A Renewed Call of Primary Prevention", http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6120a6.htm
17 http://www.epa.gov/region07/factsheets/2009/final record decision omaha lead superfund omaha ne 200905.htm
658
-------
exposure to windblown dust and lower 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.
Promoting a sustainable future for communities is a major element of redevelopment activities at
Superfund sites. This is accomplished by engaging communities in site cleanup decisions,
turning contaminated sites into community assets, fostering employment opportunities in
communities where sites are cleaned up, protecting green infrastructure, redeveloping blighted
areas, and protecting human health and the environment. By working with communities and
partners across the country to make sure sites are safe for use, the EPA is making a visible
difference helping transform sites into community assets. Some claim that being near a
Superfund site jeopardizes development, reduces property values, and costs jobs. However, more
than 680 NPL sites have new, continued or planned reuse, meaning that communities receive the
benefits of job creation, increased property values, enhanced local tax bases, and improved
quality of life. According to a recent study18 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. For
example, three sites that gathered national attention in the early history of the program have
become community assets. The Times Beach site outside of St. Louis, Missouri is now an active
state park.19 The Industri-Plex and Wells G&H sites in Woburn, Massachusetts, which were the
90
basis of the book and movie "A Civil Action," have been transformed into an urban
transportation center, and a home for several large and small businesses.21 Based on 2012 data at
319 Superfund sites with some kind of reuse occurring, approximately 1,040 businesses were
operating and generating annual sales of $20 billion and employing over 44,000 people earning a
combined income of $3.4 billion.22
Recent examples of the economic value that can be generated by reusing Superfund sites include
the redevelopment that has occurred at the Universal Oil Products (Chemical Division)
Superfund site in Bergen County, New Jersey and at the Del Amo Superfund site in Los Angeles,
California. The Universal Oil Products site is now home to local shopping amenities and the
Sports Line, a commuter rail line extension that connects the site and available parking with a
local sports stadium. Onsite businesses support about 254 jobs and contribute more than $8
million in annual employment income to the local community. The Del Amo Superfund site is
now a dynamic industrial and commercial area home to many businesses. The onsite land uses at
the Del Amo site support nearly 7,000 jobs and contribute nearly $400 million in annual
employment income to the local community. In 2012, more than 300 businesses were operating
at the site and they generated $8.6 million in local property tax revenues. The total market value
of the land and onsite improvements was over $590 million in 2012.
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.
http://www. epa.gov/superfund/programs/recy cle/live/region7_mo.html
20 A Civil Action, dir. by Steven Zaillian (1998; Touchstone, 1999 dvd)
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/recycle/pdf/wellsgh-success.pdf
The economic data provided for the 319 Superfund sites known to be in revenue-generating reuse was collected during the
months of July and August 2012. Economic data, including annual sales, number of employees and annual employment income,
were collected from the Hoovers Dun & Bradstreet database and from Manta.com.
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/recycle/impacts.htmWnational
659
-------
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)
5tte Assessment Accomplishments (51,658)
• Meeds itoi-NPL Besxnse -
• irte AssEssnienrt "Jeeded -
Z9B
EPA- & PRP-Lead Site Activity
(Excludes Federal Facilities)
Srte Assessment Accomplishments
(49,124)
• '-e-S-reeied from Acme
• SVre AiSMSTKt* >*=K1M -
am
1,685 NPL Sites (1,313 Final, 372 Deleted)
• Study Pending - 20
• Study Design -19!
ilfl
1,156 Construction Completed S'rtes
1,511 NPL Sites (1,156 Final, 355 Deleted)
I Stj»r PeirfjE -19
I =-jaf Design -155
33S
IBM
• Oeieiea D**--ed - i
1,084 Construction Completed Sites
• CC srvd TO: deleted - 7S3
• Study Pending-Sites that have been listed to the NPL where no RI/FS work has begun
• Study or Design-NPL sites where the most advanced action at the site has, at a minimum, started RI/FS work but where no
construction has begun.
• Construction Underway-NPL sites where the most advanced action at the site has, at a minimum, started RA work and where the site
is not yet construction complete.
• Construction Completed-Sites where construction is complete; in some instances RA projects may continue after construction
completion has been achieved.
• Data in CERCLIS as of 11/8/13
For more information about the Superfund Remedial program, please refer to
http ://www. epa.gov/superfund.
660
-------
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
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). While continuing to rely on the
agency's Enforcement First approach to encourage PRPs to conduct and/or pay for cleanups, the
Remedial program focuses on completing ongoing projects and maximizing the use of site-
specific special account resources.23 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 addition, the agency is
instituting changes to contracting practices (such as the strategic sourcing effort) that aim to
achieve a minimum of a five percent reduction in contracting costs and to create efficiencies that
will be applied toward increasing the pace of cleanups. The agency will continue in FY 2015 to
apply lessons learned from conducting a series of project management pilots under the Integrated
Cleanup Initiative (ICI) and the Superfund Program Review. Finally, as part of the FY 2015
agencywide effort to become a higher performing organization, the Superfund Remedial program
will support LEAN efforts in addition to working with agency programs on new business
practices and processes to increase efficiency and reduce costs while retaining or enhancing
environmental benefits.
The FY 2015 Superfund Remedial program request represents an increase of over $43.4 million
and a reduction of 8.7 FTE from the FY 2014 Enacted budget. The agency will apply the
resources across the remedial site cleanup pipeline to advance site work that has been delayed
due to previous budget reductions. Funding will be provided to conduct remedial site
assessments at sites in the existing site assessment backlog, reducing the backlog by an
additional 100 sites. In addition, the EPA estimates it will be able to start three more remedial
investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS) and remedial design (RD) projects. Funding also will be
provided to initiate cleanup construction work at four to six construction projects, leaving a
backlog of new EPA-financed construction projects of more than 30 by the end of FY 2015. The
Remedial program is working to balance funding site work with effective federal oversight.
In FY 2015, the Remedial program's site cleanup outputs may rise slightly, but achieving several
performance measure targets will remain a challenge due to the lagging effects of resource
reductions. Accordingly, the Remedial program is slightly reducing projected accomplishments
for four out of six of its performance measure targets (e.g., Construction Completions, HEUC,
GMUC1, and Site-Wide Ready for Anticipated Use (SWRAU) from FY 2014 levels.
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
23 Special account resources are funds EPA receives from PRPs through settlements and must be used site-specifically.
661
-------
cleanup. In FY 2015, the Remedial program expects to perform 850 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 types of assessment activities will range from pre-
screening readily available information at new sites to collecting sample and other data at
existing sites to determine whether remedial cleanup attention may be needed. As necessary,
these activities include preparing documentation records for sites being proposed to the NPL.
Since its inception in December 1980, the Superfund Remedial program and its state, Tribal, and
federal partners have screened or assessed more than 51,000 federal and non-federal potentially
contaminated sites. 82 percent of these sites have been pre-screened or assessed and determined
to not need Superfund cleanup. Approximately 10 percent of these sites need cleanup attention
and have been referred to other state, Tribal, and federal cleanup programs. Only 3 percent
(1,694)24 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 NPL. The
remaining sites require initial or additional assessment to determine if cleanup may be necessary.
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 the following: 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.25
Therefore, limited federal site assessment resources leverage state and other resources in order to
achieve protective cleanups.
At the beginning of FY 2015, the EPA expects that approximately 2,050 sites will need initial or
additional assessment and, based on recent trends, the EPA expects 300 new sites will be
submitted to the Remedial Assessment program by citizens, states, Tribes, other federal agencies,
and other sources over the course of the year. Based on historical evidence, the EPA expects the
following results from its expected completion of 850 remedial assessments in FY 2015. The
NPL, including current sites on the NPL and sites that have been deleted, totals 1,694 sites. The
agency estimates that it will add between 10 and 20 sites to the NPL in FY 2015.
24 Please refer to http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/index.htm for additional information.
25 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.
662
-------
Remedial Assessment Results
Site needs more complex assessment
Site needs remedial study/cleanup via the NPL or other cleanup
approach
Estimated Distribution of
FY 2015
Accomplishments26
26%
10%
Building on the work from the ICI, the EPA also will continue to increase public access to
assessment information in FY 2015. 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. In addition, an EPA, state, and Tribal site assessment workload
coordination cost savings guide is being developed to prevent duplication of efforts.
In order to reflect the science that has evolved over the past two decades to help protect public
health, in FY 2015 the EPA will continue to pursue 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 will be properly addressed.
For more information on the Superfund remedial assessment process, please refer to
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/npl hrs/siteasmt.htm
2) Site Characterization and Remedy Selection
After a site is placed on the NPL, it must be investigated, risks evaluated, and a remedy selected
to address the threats and risks posed by the site. Remedy selection decisions are documented in
Records of Decision (RODs) and amended RODs.
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to maintain focus on completing existing work and expects to
use the additional funds in FY 2015 to increase the number of new EPA-lead RI/FS actions from
FY 2014 projected levels. The RI/FS ongoing project estimates have continued to decrease due
to focus on project completions. Over the longer term, there will be fewer projects ready for the
RD phase discussed in the next section.
Under the ICI, there have been several productive efforts that will contribute significantly to
improved site characterization, documentation of remedy selection, and pace of cleanups. For
example, in FY 2012 the program 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
26 Percentages based on FY2013 accomplishment results as of November 8,2013
663
-------
input and the transparency of board findings. This improvement will lead to finalizing and
signing RODs more efficiently. In FY 2013, detailed training specific to improving decision
documents, was developed and conducted. 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 Ongoing Projects
RI/FS Starts (EPA)
RI/FS Starts (PRP)
Total RI/FS Starts
RODs/ROD Amendments -
EPA/PRP-Lead
Fiscal Year Actuals/Estimates
FY 2013 Actual
Accomps
241
279
520
19
13
32
41
FY 2014 Est.
(CJ)
220
260
480
15
15-20
30-35
50-55
FY 2015 Est.
210
250
460
18
15-20
32-38
35-40
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 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 also
may include sampling, pilot tests, and treatability studies.
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to maintain focus on completing existing work and expects to
use the additional funds in FY 2015 to increase the number of new EPA-lead RD actions from
FY 2014 projected levels.
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 2013 Actual
Accomps
101
142
243
25
31
56
28
33
61
FY 2014 Est.
(CJ)
80
120
200
15
25
40
30
30
60
FY 2015 Est.
65
115
180
18
25
43
30
30
60
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
664
-------
9*7
state oversight. A given remedy may contain multiple actions or projects 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.
The Remedial program's budget cannot support funding all the construction projects that are
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 2015. The cumulative effect of funding reductions in recent years, combined with funding
needs for new projects, will potentially delay the initiation of construction work at more than
thirty projects by the end of FY 2015.
Of the sites that will make up the universe of potential unfunded construction projects by the end
of FY 2015, the program estimates that almost half of the sites will have potential environmental
justice concerns. In general these communities have fewer resources with which to address
concerns about their health, well-being, and environment. The delay in risk reduction and
restoration of contaminated sites in their communities from unfunded NPL construction projects
adds to that burden.
The Remedial program estimates that the EPA will accomplish 105 (including federal facility-
lead) RA project completions in FY 2015, a reduction of 10 from the FY 2014 target. The RA
completion measure augments the long-standing site-wide construction completion measure as
an interim measure of progress toward making sites ready for reuse and achieving long term
cleanup goals. In FY 2015, the EPA will work to achieve site-wide construction completion at 13
sites, including federal facility-lead sites. As of end of FY 2013, the cumulative total of sites that
have achieved construction complete is 1,156.
Remedial Action (RA) and
Construction Completion (CC)
RA Ongoing Projects (EPA)
RA Ongoing Projects (PRP)
Total RA Ongoing Projects
RA Starts (EPA)
RA Starts (PRP)
Total RA Starts
RA Completions (EPA)
RA Completions (PRP)
Total RA Completions
Construction Completions (CC)
Fiscal Year Actuals/Estimates
FY 2013 Actual
Accomps
138
321
459
16
41
57
26
48
74
14
FY 2014 Est.
(CJ)
100
315
415
TBD
40
TBD
30
40
70
15
FY 2015 Est.
90
305
395
TBD
40
TBD
30
40
70
13
Figure does not include Federal Facilities
27 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.
665
-------
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
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.
In FY 2015, 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 Fund-lead remedial actions in FY 2014 as remedial actions continue to
complete and the EPA takes on responsibility for new LTRAs.
During FY 2015, the EPA plans to conduct more than 200 Five-Year Reviews (FYRs) at sites
with waste left in place above levels that allow for unlimited use. FYRs 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 regional offices 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 SWRAU determinations and
promote reuse.
Post-Construction
Total Ongoing Long Term
Response Actions
Five Year Review Completions
(EPA and PRP Lead)
NPL Partial Deletions
NPL Final Deletions
Fiscal Year Actuals/Estimates
FY 2013 Actual
Accomps
368
236
3
7
FY 2014 Est.
(CJ)
340
207
3
13
FY 2015 Est.
340
207
3
13
5) Environmental Indicators
The FIEUC performance measure documents the number of NPL sites at which the agency has
brought human exposures to harmful chemicals under control, while the GMUC performance
measure documents whether contamination in groundwater is within safe levels, or whether there
is no movement of groundwater contamination.
In FY 2015, the agency plans to achieve control of all identified unacceptable human exposures
at 9 additional sites, bringing the program's cumulative total of HEUC sites to 1,408.
Additionally, the agency expects to achieve GMUC at 13 additional sites, bringing the program's
cumulative total to 1,119 sites.
666
-------
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; and reducing exposure to
indoor air contaminated by harmful vapors by installing mitigation systems in homes. As can be
seen in the graph below, the Superfund Remedial program is making significant progress at
controlling unacceptable human exposures while longer-term cleanup progresses. Between FY
2002 and FY 2013, the number of Superfund remedial sites designated as having human
exposure under control has increased by 190 sites. Based on current targets, by FY 2015 the
number of Superfund sites achieving human exposure under control will total 1,408 sites. In
earlier years, the program routinely exceeded the annual HEUC target. Recently, it has become
more challenging. The universe of sites from which accomplishments can be drawn is smaller
because the program has been making progress at moving sites into the Under Control category.
Further, the size and complexity of the remaining sites often necessitate years of cleanup. In
addition, factors such as vapor intrusion can slow the pace at which sites move into the Under
Control category.
Cumulative Number of Superfund Sites with Human Exposure
Under Control from FY2002 to FY2015
1,450
1,400
1,350
1,300
1,250
1,200
1,150
1,100
1,050
• I I I
• • • • I. ,36, '
I I II2
-------
Cumulative Number of Superfund Sites with Groundwater
Migration Under Control from FY 2002 to FY 2015
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
II I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I
I II., I - I •» I •» I" l'°'t« >«f «f °'t»l"°f
II I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY12 FY13 FY14* FY15*
*Estimated Achievements for FY 2014 and FY 2015 based on current targets.
6) Site Reuse
In FY 2015, the EPA expects 55 additional sites will qualify as SWRAU, bringing the program's
cumulative total to 781 sites that are ready for reuse. To be eligible for the SWRAU performance
measure, a site must be construction complete, all cleanup goals that impact future use must be
achieved, and all required institutional controls must be put in place.
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, to implement institutional controls that protect current and future users, and to ensure
long-term stewardship of remedies.
Actions to Improve Program Effectiveness
1) Superfund Program Review
In November 2012, the Superfund Remedial program initiated a comprehensive review of its
operations to identify options to maintain its effectiveness in achieving its core mission of
protecting human health and the environment in the face of diminishing funding availability. The
review builds on recommendations from the 2010 ICI, incorporates actions from ongoing efforts,
and includes newly developed ideas. Several areas are being considered in this Program Review
to capture important technical developments in the cleanup process, as well as innovations in
remedial project management. The Superfund Program Review action plan was finalized on
November 24, 2013 and EPA is now in the process of developing and implementing many of the
r\Q
49 actions included in the plan.
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/cleanup/pdfs/Final SPR Action Plan-11 26 2013 (2).pdf
668
-------
2) Optimizing Site Cleanups
During FY 2015, the agency will continue to emphasize the use of optimization reviews of
cleanups at Superfund sites. In 2012, the program issued its "National Strategy to Expand
Superfund Optimization Practices from Site Assessment to Site Completion" (the "Optimization
Strategy") and has subsequently increased optimization work from 5-10 sites per year to well
over 30 (the agency conducted optimization work at 34 Superfund sites in 2013). The goals of
optimization include the following: 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.
The "Ground Water Remedy Optimization Progress Report: 2010-2011"29 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 thousand per year
to $124 thousand per year and project management and engineering support costs from
approximately $275 thousand per year to $190 thousand per year. At the Pemaco Superfund Site
in California, the EPA reduced monitoring costs from approximately $443 thousand per year to
$230 thousand per year. As implementation of optimization recommendations progresses at sites,
the program will continue to benefit from more effective, protective and technically efficient
remedial strategies.
3) Contracts Improvement Efforts
The agency is instituting changes to contracting practices (such as the strategic sourcing effort)
that aim to achieve a minimum of a five percent reduction in contracting costs in FY 2015. The
agency also is developing a contracting strategy to guide the acquisition of services in the
Superfund program. The strategy, known as the "Remedial Acquisition Framework," outlines the
acquisition approach for the next round of remedial contracts and includes contracts at the
national level and in each regional office. Key components of the new strategy are developing
strategic sourcing contracts that will incorporate fair opportunity requirements. It is anticipated
that the inclusion of fair opportunity processes will encourage innovation and competitive
pricing. In addition, opportunities for small businesses will be maintained at the regional office
contracting level.
The EPA will begin implementing the Remedial Acquisition Framework in FY 2015. In
addition, the program will build on the lessons learned from the Superfund Remedial program's
ICI, such as early constructor involvement, increased communication, partnering and planning,
or phased tasking of remedial investigation projects. These changes will improve performance,
29 http://www.epa.gov/superfund/cleanup/postconstruction/pdfs/1011 optimization report.pdf
669
-------
increase opportunities for optimization, and enhance contract award opportunities for small and
socio-economically disadvantaged businesses, thus helping to meet agency socio-economic
goals.
4) Community Involvement
The Superfund community involvement efforts support the agency's commitment to expand the
conversation on environmentalism. Superfund sites are located in communities across
America. At each of these sites, community involvement efforts are engaging community
members in discussions about harmful emissions, leaking landfills, contaminated properties, and
toxic chemicals in their environment. Through the program's efforts, communities that have not
traditionally been active in environmental issues are becoming aware, and adding their voices
and efforts to strengthen the protection of human health and the environment.
5) Contract Laboratory Program
In FY 2015, the Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) will seek to reduce the extramural cost per
laboratory analysis and administrative workload on EPA staff by 3 percent from FY 2012 levels.
To realize these savings the program will focus on five key priority areas. These are: 1) fully
implement and complete the Combined Analytical Services Contracts (CASC) effort which
streamlines and consolidates current CLP contracts; 2) complete implementation efforts for
nearly paperless operations and enhanced electronic data transmission and evaluation; 3)
continue the use of regional office CLP allocation strategies; 4) increase the use of special
account resources for analytical services; and 5) evaluate all aspects of contract support to find
efficiencies, reduce non-essential services and create more efficient business processes.
The CLP is a proven, reliable resource for providing high volume, cost effective analytical
services that produce data of known and documented quality for EPA Superfund site managers.
This national approach leverages the economies of scale to deliver routine analyses at a cost that
is less expensive than our regional offices could independently obtain contracting for similar
services. By focusing on the five key areas described above, the program estimates that savings
will be realized across a broad spectrum of activities. These include reduced contract
management workload associated with the administration of multiple analytical laboratory
contracts, reduced costs for analytical result deliverables, greatly reduced/eliminated costs
associated with hard-copy records retention, and reduced data validation and verification costs
due to enhanced data assessment capabilities.
6) Superfund Enterprise Management System (SEMS)
The deployment of the new Superfund Enterprise Management System (SEMS), in FY 2014,
will complete a multi-year effort to consolidate several standalone information systems and
reporting tools. By the start of FY 2015, the legacy systems will be fully decommissioned, and
the program expects to see efficiencies and administrative cost reductions as a direct result.
SEMS 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. Expanded
670
-------
analytical components of the system also will provide additional functionality when performing
data analyses.
The newly integrated system will establish a direct link between program accomplishments and
relevant supporting documentation, thereby achieving substantial improvements in the program's
records management approach. SEMS will be a certified records management system, which will
ultimately allow the Superfund program to move to electronic recordkeeping consistent with the
November 2011 Presidential Memorandum "Managing Government Records." SEMS also will
enhance access to program records through an improved web-based interface that efficiently
stores information in a central repository for on-demand display through public web sites. These
new capabilities 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.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
900
1,020
FY2012
900
1,151
FY2013
650
772
FY2014
700
FY2015
850
Units
Assessments
Measure
Target
Actual
(141) Annual number of Superfund sites with remedy construction completed.
FY2008
30
30
FY2009
20
20
FY2010
22
18
FY2011
22
22
FY2012
22
22
FY2013
19
14
FY2014
15
FY2015
13
Units
Completions
Measure
Target
Actual
(151) Number of Superfund sites with human exposures under control.
FY2008
10
24
FY2009
10
11
FY2010
10
18
FY2011
10
10
FY2012
10
13
FY2013
10
14
FY2014
10
FY2015
9
Units
Sites
Measure
Target
Actual
(152) Number of Superfund sites with contaminated groundwater migration under control.
FY2008
15
20
FY2009
15
16
FY2010
15
18
FY2011
15
21
FY2012
15
18
FY2013
15
18
FY2014
15
FY2015
13
Units
Sites
Measure
Target
Actual
(170) Number of remedial action projects completed at Superfund NPL sites.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
103
132
FY2012
130
142
FY2013
115
121
FY2014
115
FY2015
105
Units
Completions
Measure
Target
Actual
(S10) Number of Superfund sites ready for anticipated use site-wide.
FY2008
30
85
FY2009
65
66
FY2010
65
66
FY2011
65
65
FY2012
65
66
FY2013
60
56
FY2014
55
FY2015
55
Units
Sites
671
-------
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. In FY 2015, the program is reducing targets for four of its six performance
measures from FY 2014 levels. The target for remedial action completions is being reduced to
105 (from 115 in FY 2014), construction completions are reduced to 13 (from 15 in 2014),
human exposure under control to 9 (from 10 in 2014) and ground water migration under control
to 13 (from 15 in 2014). The remedial site assessment completions target will increase to 850
while the site-wide ready for anticipated use target will remain the same as in FY 2014 at 55.
Note: Performance goals for the Superfund Federal Facilities Response program are a component
of the Superfund Remedial program's measures.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$4,830.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$39,780.0) This realignment requests critical resources to apply across the remedial site
cleanup pipeline to advance site work that has been delayed due to previous budget
reductions. These resources will be provided to conduct remedial site assessments from
the existing site assessment backlog, reducing the backlog by an additional 100 sites. In
addition, EPA estimates it will be able to start three more RI/FS and RD projects. Finally,
EPA plans to initiate cleanup construction work at four to six construction projects that
have been on hold.
• (-$1,210.0 / -8.7 FTE) The agency is reviewing and redesigning many core business
practices to be more efficient. This change includes a net reduction in FTE as part of an
agencywide effort to streamline our business practices. The base resources include 0.2
FTE to support LEAN efforts under the agency focus on becoming a High Performing
Organization (HPO). The net reduction includes 8.7 FTE and $1,210.0 in associated
payroll.
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).
672
-------
Superfund Special Accounts
673
-------
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 2013 Special Account Activity
Since the inception of special accounts through the end of FY 2013, the EPA has collected
approximately $4.1 billion from PRPs and earned approximately $412.9 million in interest. In
addition, the EPA has transferred over $23.7 million to the Superfund Trust Fund. As of the end
of FY 2013, approximately $2.5 billion has been disbursed for site response actions and $270.1
million has been obligated but not yet disbursed. The EPA has spent more than 62 percent ($2.8
billion) of all special account funds, an increase of 4 percent since the end of FY 2012.
In FY 2013, EPA disbursed approximately $220 million from special accounts for response work
at more than 650 sites. The cumulative amount available in special accounts declined for the
second year in a row, from $1.76 billion available at the end of FY 2012 to $1.69 billion
available at the end of FY 2013. The EPA is carefully managing those funds that remain
available for site response work as of October 1, 2013.
674
-------
The remaining balance of $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 2013, 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 43 percent of the remaining available special account resources over the
next five years for site-specific response work.
The vast majority of open accounts (77 percent) have an available balance of less than $1 million
and collectively represent only 10 percent of the total resources available, while 3 percent of
open accounts have approximately 56 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 2013 the
cumulative amount available in special accounts decreased by approximately $73 million
compared to the cumulative amount available in special accounts as of the end of FY 2012 due to
more funds being obligated and disbursed than were collected in special accounts. In FY 2012
and FY 2013, the EPA received approximately $221 million and $176 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 2013 three particular special accounts received deposits
totaling more than $15 million each as a result of Superfund enforcement efforts. More than $21
million was deposited in an account for the Gilt Edge Mine site in South Dakota, $17.3 million
was deposited in an account for the Onondaga Lake site in New York, and $15.9 million was
deposited in an account for the Clark Fork River Basin site in Montana. These funds allow work
to continue at these sites for investigations and remedial construction to protect human health
and the environment for communities affected by these sites, while at the same time freeing up
appropriated dollars for use at other sites without viable or liable PRPs. 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 2013 program
activity, and planned multi-year uses of the available balance. Exhibit 2 provides the prior year
(FY 2013), current year (FY 2014), and estimated future budget year (FY 2015) activity for
special accounts. Exhibit 3 provides prior year data (FY 2013) by EPA region to exhibit the
geographic use of the funds.
675
-------
Exhibit 1: Summary of FY 2013 Special Account Transactions
and Cumulative Multi-Year Plans for Using Available Special Account Funds
Account Status1
Cumulative Open
Cumulative Closed
FY 2013 Special Account Activity
Beginning Available Balance
FY 20 13 Activities
+ Receipts
- Transfers to Superfund 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 2013 Available Balance3
2013 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 201 4-20 166
- Estimates for Transfers to Trust Fund for FYs 201 4-20 166
- Available Balance to be Planned for Site-Specific Response7
Number of
Accounts
993
215
$ in Thousands
$1,763,097.1
$175,810.5
($1,785.4)
$12,345.3
($401.3)
($207,569.5)
($11,952.7)
($39,208.5)
$1,690,335.6
$ in Thousands
$1,690,335.6
$1,527,920.2
$57,556.4
$86,212.6
$10,586.6
$8,059.8
1 FY 2013 data is as of 10/01/2013. The Beginning Available Balance is as of 10/01/2012.
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 11/12/2013 in reference to special account available balances as of 10/01/2013.
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.
676
-------
Exhibit 2: Actual and Estimated Special Account Transactions FY 2013 - FY 2015
(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 2013
actual
$1,763,097.1
$175,810.5
($1,785.4)
$12,345.3
($219,923.5)
r$39.208.51
$1,690,335.6
FY 2014
estimate
$1,690,335.6
$212,000.0
($4,300.0)
$25,000.0
($237,000.0)
($41.000.01
$1,645,035.6
FY 2015
estimate
$1,645,035.6
$212,000.0
($4,300.0)
$32,000.0
($237,000.0)
($41.000.01
$1,606,735.6
:The estimates for Transfers to Trust Fund, Net Obligations, and Reclassifications are based on a 5 year
historical average.
2This is an estimate utilizing current economic assumptions.
3Net Obligations reflect special account funds no longer available for obligation, excluding reclassifications
and receipts transferred to the Trust Fund.
4Numbers may not add due to rounding.
Exhibit 3: FY 2013 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
Balance
$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
Receipts
$6,804.3
$43,117.9
$18,754.4
$3,906.6
$22,659.8
$4,743.1
($10,712.8)
$28,073.6
$24,823.6
$33,640.0
$175,810.5
Transfers to
Trust Fund
(Receipt
Adjustment)
$0.0
$542.9
$586.4
$0.0
$533.9
$0.0
$91.4
$1.8
$0.0
$28.8
$1,785.4
Net
Interest
Earned
$1,022.4
$86.8
$670.7
$519.6
$1,677.2
$463.7
$1,992.9
$1,713.2
$2,494.8
$1,704.0
$12,345.3
Net
Obligations
$9,730.2
$30,784.0
$6,172.7
$3,185.2
$30,228.3
$2,457.1
$32,300.3
$36,424.7
$32,051.4
$36,589.5
$219,923.4
Reclassifications
$5,173.1
$3,601.6
$878.5
$0.0
$2,668.7
$4,498.1
$14,740.2
$679.6
$0.0
$6,968.7
$39,208.5
End of Year
Available
Balance2
$124,846.0
$204,690.1
$100,524.4
$69,414.3
$227,434.9
$54,938.3
$222,385.4
$188,046.6
$309,373.8
$188,681.7
$1,690,335.6
1 FY 2013 data is as of 10/01/2013. The Beginning Available Balance is as of 10/01/2012.
2 Numbers may not add due to rounding.
677
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2015 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Resource Summary Table 679
Program Projects in LUST 679
Program Area: Enforcement 681
Civil Enforcement 682
Program Area: Operations and Administration 684
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 685
Acquisition Management 687
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance 688
Program Area: Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST) 690
LUST/UST 691
LUST Cooperative Agreements 696
LUST Prevention 700
Program Area: Research: Sustainable Communities 705
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities 706
678
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2015 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 2013
Actuals*
$100,816.9
60.5
FY 2014
Enacted
$94,566.0
54.5
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$97,922.0
54.5
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$3,356.0
0.0
*2013 Actuals do not include Sandy Supplemental
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, $97,922,000, to remain available until
expended, of which $69,063,000 shall be for carrying out leaking underground storage tank
cleanup activities authorized by section 9003(h) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act; $28,859,000
shall be for carrying out the other provisions of the Solid Waste Disposal Act specified in section
9508(c) of the Internal Revenue Code: 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
IT / Data Management / Security
IT / Data Management
Operations and Administration
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Acquisition Management
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
FY 2013
Actuals*
$691.9
$0.1
$602.9
$933.4
$151.9
$1,688.2
FY 2014
Enacted
$746.0
$0.0
$572.0
$823.0
$155.0
$1,550.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$639.0
$0.0
$403.0
$836.0
$138.0
$1,377.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($107.0)
$0.0
($169.0)
$13.0
($17.0)
($173.0)
679
-------
Program Project
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 2013
Actuals*
$11,771.3
$57,085.1
$29,198.2
$98,054.6
$382.1
$382.1
$100,816.9
FY 2014
Enacted
$10,195.0
$56,126.0
$25,629.0
$91,950.0
$320.0
$320.0
$94,566.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$9,240.0
$57,402.0
$28,859.0
$95,501.0
$405.0
$405.0
$97,922.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($955.0)
$1,276.0
$3,230.0
$3,551.0
$85.0
$85.0
$3,356.0
2013 Actuals do not include Sandy Supplemental
680
-------
Program Area: Enforcement
681
-------
Civil Enforcement
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Protecting Human Health and the Environment by Enforcing Laws and Assuring
Compliance
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws to Achieve Compliance
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Environmental Program & Management
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$2,266.9
$167,924.2
$691.9
$170,883.0
1,123.1
FY 2014
Enacted
$2,413.0
$173,573.0
$746.0
$176,732.0
1,100.6
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$2,514.0
$180,641.0
$639.0
$183,794.0
1,084.6
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$101.0
$7,068.0
($107.0)
$7,062.0
-16.0
Program Project Description:
The EPA's 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.
To protect our nation's groundwater and drinking water from petroleum releases from
Underground Storage Tanks (UST), the Civil Enforcement program provides guidance, technical
assistance, and training to promote and enforce cleanups at sites with UST systems.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. 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.
For more information refer to: www.epa.gov/swerust 1 /cat/index.htm.
682
-------
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to work with states to prioritize their state-specific LUST
enforcement goals for cleanup. The agency and states also will use innovative approaches, along
with outreach and education tools, to help achieve LUST cleanups.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in the Civil Enforcement Program
under the Environmental Programs and Management (EPM) appropriation and can be found in
the Program Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$19.0) The increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$126.0) This change reflects a realignment of resources reducing support to efforts such
as guidance, technical assistance, and training to promote and enforce cleanups at sites
with Underground Storage Tank systems.
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.
683
-------
Program Area: Operations and Administration
684
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$547.4
$293,188.6
$74,351.2
$27,676.4
$933.4
$80,960.5
$477,657.5
382.8
FY 2014
Enacted
$584.0
$310,057.0
$70,370.0
$27,791.0
$823.0
$67,470.0
$477,095.0
367.2
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$498.0
$325,138.0
$75,824.0
$45,632.0
$836.0
$78,905.0
$526,833.0
361.6
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($86.0)
$15,081.0
$5,454.0
$17,841.0
$13.0
$11,435.0
$49,738.0
-5.6
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Facilities Infrastructure and Operations program in the Leaking Underground Storage
Tank (LUST) appropriation supports rent and transit subsidy accounts as well as regional
facilities' management services. Funding is allocated among major appropriations for the
agency.
FY 2015 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
2015, 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.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$10.0) This reflects an increase in transit subsidy costs based on projected needs.
685
-------
• (+$8.0) This change is the net effect of projected contractual rent increases and the rent
reduction realized from space consolidation efforts.
• (-$5.0) This reduction recognizes efficiencies from implementing agencywide 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).
686
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$28,381.3
$151.9
$21,617.7
$50,150.9
327.2
FY 2014
Enacted
$31,866.0
$155.0
$22,388.0
$54,409.0
312.4
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$31,779.0
$138.0
$23,762.0
$55,679.0
308.7
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($87.0)
($17.0)
$1,374.0
$1,270.0
-3.7
Program Project Description:
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) resources in the Acquisition Management program
support the agency's contract activities.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
Acquisition Management resources in LUST support the training and development of the EPA's
acquisition workforce and information technology needs.
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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$17.0) This change reflects a reduction in contracts and grants oversight activities. This
reduction reflects efficiencies from agencywide efforts to develop more effective
business practices in acquisition management.
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.)
687
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$69,366.3
$602.9
$21,791.6
$91,760.8
502.3
FY 2014
Enacted
$71,875.0
$572.0
$21,797.0
$94,244.0
494.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$75,572.0
$403.0
$24,155.0
$100,130.0
492.8
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$3,697.0
($169.0)
$2,358.0
$5,886.0
-1.2
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 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 2015 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 the program's performance measures
has led to a better understanding of program impacts as well as opportunities for improvement to
increase effectiveness.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives. Currently, there are no
performance measures for this specific program.
688
-------
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$7.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$176.0) This decrease reflects a reduction of resources from lower priority non-system
contracts for the LUST program.
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.
689
-------
Program Area: Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST)
690
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$11,535.3
$11,771.3
$23,306.6
113.6
FY 2014
Enacted
$12,714.0
$10,195.0
$22,909.0
106.5
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$11,295.0
$9,240.0
$20,535.0
108.5
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($1,419.0)
($955.0)
($2,374.0)
2.0
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. These resources support the Administrator's priority towards making a visible
difference in communities across the country to protect precious water resources by working
with state, tribal and local partners to clean-up releases from underground storage tanks. 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. EPA's funding is
critical to protecting Indian country lands from leaking underground storage tanks, and is the
primary 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.
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 that work. 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
2 States as referenced here also include Territories as described in the definition of "State" in the Solid Waste Disposal Act.
691
-------
it in table format for all states, territories, and Indian country. See
www. epa. gov/oust/cat/camarchv. htm.
End of year FY 2013 data shows that, of the approximately 514 thousand releases reported since
the beginning of the UST program, about 436 thousand (or 85 percent) have been cleaned up.
Almost 78 thousand releases remain.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA's LUST 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.3 Potential adverse effects from chemicals such as benzene, methyl-tertiary-butyl-
ether, alcohols, or lead scavengers in gasoline contribute to the cost to clean up these
contaminants. Even a small amount of petroleum released from an underground storage tank can
contaminate groundwater, the drinking water source for many Americans.
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 the EPA has implemented improvements (increased frequency
of inspections and other prevention efforts) there has also been a decrease in new confirmed
releases. 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. Such actions include optimizing cleanup remedies, better
identifying viable responsible parties, and ensuring soundness of state funding mechanisms.
In FY 2015, 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 study4 helped identify
potential strategies to address the approximately 78 thousand UST releases remaining to be
cleaned up.
The EPA provides national guidance on technical issues facing the LUST program. In FY 2015,
the EPA will continue improving ways to characterize UST releases still requiring remediation
by providing guidance and technical support regarding cleanup approaches and technologies.
The EPA will implement 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) monitoring and other
corrective action courses.
3 See The National LUST Cleanup Backlog: A Study Of Opportunities, September 2011, www. epa. go v/oust/cat/backlog .html
4 See The National LUST Cleanup Backlog: A Study Of Opportunities, September 2011,
http: //www. epa. go v/OUS T/cal/backlo g. html.
692
-------
The EPA will monitor the soundness of financial mechanisms, in particular insurance and state
cleanup funds that serve as financial assurance for LUST releases. In FY 2012, the EPA issued
guidance5 for overseeing state funds, and in FY 2013 began a more rigorous analysis of state
fund soundness. To ensure money is available for cleanups when needed, the EPA will continue
regular 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 liabilities.
In FY 2015, 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 program,6
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.
5 See Guidance for Regional Office Review Of State Underground Storage Tanks Financial Assurance Funds, January 2012
http://www.epa.gov/oust/states/state-fund-soundness-guidancel-26-2012.pdf
6 See http://www.epa.gov/oust/communitvengagement/index.htm.
693
-------
LUST Cleanups Completed in Indian Country
70 -
60 -
50 -
40 -
30 -
20 -
10 -
62
47
30
42
Target
Completed
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
In FY 2013, EPA completed 18 cleanups in Indian Country, which is a substantial decrease from
previous years and a far reach from meeting EPA's strategic planning target of 42 cleanups
completed. This substantial decrease reflects fewer EPA resources and the EPA's strategic
targeting to address more complex sites. In FY 2013, the EPA's budget to clean up LUST sites
in Indian Country decreased by 17 percent. While there are a number of difficult and costly
LUST sites with substantial releases in Indian Country, the EPA has become more vigilant about
ensuring remediation plans are optimized. This increased scrutiny adds time and more steps to
the process, but will lead to more cost effective and efficient cleanups in the future.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(113) Number of LUST cleanups completed that meet risk-based standards for human exposure
and groundwater migration in Indian country.
FY 2008
30
40
FY 2009
30
49
FY 2010
30
62
FY2011
38
42
FY 2012
42
47
FY 2013
42
18
FY 2014
37
FY 2015
30
Units
Cleanups
Work under this program also supports performance results in the LUST Cleanup Cooperative
Agreements program and can be found in the Eight-Year Performance Array.
In FY 2015, a reduction in Tribal clean up funding will lead to approximately seven fewer
cleanups completed, from 37 in FY 2014 to 30 in FY 2015.
694
-------
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$230.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$1,185.0) This reduces contractual and grant resources which may result in fewer
cleanups completed.
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.
695
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$57,085.1
$57,085.1
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$56,126.0
$56,126.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$57,402.0
$57,402.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$1,276.0
$1,276.0
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
These resources support the Administrator's priority towards making a visible difference in
communities across the country to protect precious water resources by working with state, tribal
and local partners to clean-up releases from underground storage tanks. LUST cleanup funding
awarded under Section 9003(h) (7) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act is subject to an annual,
formula-based allocation process.
Twice each year, the EPA collects data from states regarding LUST performance measures and
makes the data publicly available. 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.
During FY 2012, the EPA worked in partnership with states to review and ultimately modify the
existing state grant allocation formula, which had been in place since the late 1990s. 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 the state grant allocation formula for FY
2013 and beyond. These changes were partially phased in during FY 2013. The FY14 omnibus
7 States as referenced here also include the District of Columbia and five Territories as described in the definition of "State" in the
Solid Waste Disposal Act.
8 See the Energy Policy Act of 2005, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsvs/pkg/PLAW-109publ58/html/PLAW-109publ58.htm.
696
-------
appropriation report language directed EPA to use the previous formula in FY 20149, EPA will
fully implement the new formula in FY 2015.
FY 2015 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
release reduction efforts will target high priority sites and examine potential economies-of-scale
savings from commonly owned or geographically proximate sites.
End of year FY 2013 data shows that, of the approximately 514 thousand releases reported since
the beginning of the UST program in 1988, approximately 436 thousand (or 85 percent) have
been cleaned up. This means approximately 78 thousand releases remain.
Remediation costs average between $100 thousand and $400 thousand per UST release, the cost
increasing with 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.10 Potential adverse effects from chemicals such as benzene, methyl-tertiary-
butyl-ether, alcohols, or lead scavengers in gasoline contribute to the cost to clean up these
contaminants. Even a small amount of petroleum released from an underground storage tank can
contaminate groundwater, the drinking water source for many Americans.
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.
9 See the FY 2014 omnibus appropriation report page 37 , http://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20140113/113-HR3547-JSOM-G-
I.pdf
10 See The National LUST Cleanup Backlog: A Study Of Opportunities, September 2011, www. epa. go v/oust/cat/backlo g. html
697
-------
UST National Backlog:
FY 2003 Through End of Year
IL^L FY2013
_a;
E 160,000
o
U
§•
re 140,000
_a;
u
o
2
o
B
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
s
2008
Years
In FY 2015, 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 78 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:
Measure
Target
Actual
(111) Percent of confirmed releases awaiting cleanup at UST facilities.
FY 2008
No Target
Established
21
FY2009
No Target
Established
21
FY2010
No Target
Established
19
FY2011
No Target
Established
18
FY 2012
No Target
Established
16
FY2013
No Target
Established
15
FY 2014
15
FY 2015
14
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(112) Number of LUST cleanups completed that meet risk-based standards for human exposure
and groundwater migration.
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
11,582
FY2014
9,000
FY2015
8,600
Units
Cleanups
698
-------
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.
The EPA counts the number of completed cleanups meeting risk-based standards for human
exposure and groundwater migration. For FY 2015, the EPA is setting a goal of 8.6 thousand
cleanups achieving these standards; this is a decrease of 400 from the FY 2014 target. The FY
2015 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 set a goal of decreasing the percentage to 15
percent, a decrease of one percent from the FY 2013 level of 16 percent. For FY 2015, the EPA
is setting a goal of decreasing the percentage to 14 percent. This decrease is in line with the
percent decrease experienced over each of the last four years.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,276.0) This increase will assist the states in completing over 120 additional LUST
cleanups in FY 2015.
Statutory Authority:
SWDA of 1976, as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986
(Subtitle I), Section 9003 (h)(7).
699
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$29,198.2
$29,198.2
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$25,629.0
$25,629.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$28,859.0
$28,859.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$3,230.0
$3,230.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
11
This program provides resources to state and Tribal partners to protect human health and the
environment by preventing releases from underground storage tanks (USTs). This work supports
the Administrator's priority of making a visible difference in communities across the country by
protecting precious water resources from potential contamination. 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. Thousands of new releases are discovered each year,
yet the EPA and our partners have made major progress in reducing the number of new releases.
Preventing UST releases is more efficient and costs less than cleaning up releases after they
occur. Over the duration of the program, the EPA also has found that lack of proper UST system
operation and maintenance is a main cause of releases.12 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.13 Funding for LUST assistance agreements is
subject to an annual, formula-based allocation process.
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
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.14 Every
three years inspections must occur at each of the 578 thousand15 federally regulated UST
11 States as referenced here also include the District of Columbia and the five Territories as described in the definition of "State"
in the Solid Waste Disposal Act.
12 See http://www.gpo.gov/fdsvs/pkg/FR-2011-1 l-18/pdf/201 l-29293.pdf
13 See Title XV, Subtitle B of the Energy Policy Act of 2005.
14 For more information please refer to http://www.epa.gov/oust/fedlaws/epact_05.htm
15 http://www.epa.gov/swerustl/cat/ca-13-34.pdf
700
-------
systems. During this time, compliance rates have increased and there has been a significant
decrease in new confirmed releases. Confirmed releases remain low due to significant release
prevention efforts such as frequent inspections. A slight increase from 5,674 releases in 2012
was likely due to increased property transfers as the economy improved, and better leak
detection efforts because of effective operator training. As indicated in the chart below, the
annual number of confirmed releases from USTs has dropped 18 percent from 7,570 in FY 2007
to 6,128 in FY 2013. Continued rigorous prevention and detection activities are necessary to
maintain our progress in limiting future confirmed releases. Since about 80 percent of funding
for LUST prevention assistance agreements is used for state staff salaries, this funding is critical
to helping states meet the inspection and other implementation responsibilities.
During FY 2012, the EPA worked in partnership with states to review and ultimately modify the
existing state LUST Prevention 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, and state program authorization status. Based on the review,
EPA made minor changes to the formula. The new formula was fully implemented in FY 2013.
The FY 2014 omnibus appropriation report language directed EPA to use the previous formula in
FY 2014, but EPA will return to using the new formula in FY 2015.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan
End of year FY 2013 data shows:
• Releases are continuing to occur, with 6,218 reported for FY 2013.
• Results exceed the FY 2013 performance measure target of 67 percent, at the end of FY
2013, 71.6 percent of the approximately 213 thousand federally regulated UST facilities
were in significant operational compliance. However, approximately 28 percent still need
to attain and maintain compliance.
Because of the increased emphasis on inspections and release prevention requirements, EPA
since FY 2005 has consistently met our yearly goal to minimize the number of confirmed
releases. This has resulted in a general downward trend in the number of confirmed releases, as
shown below.
UST Confirmed Releases
10000
ro
01
8000
6000
£ 4000
2000
FY05
FY06
FY07
FY08
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
701
-------
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.
UST Compliance Rate
mn°/
-------
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 support 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.
FY2008
<9,000
7,364
FY2009
<9,000
7,168
FY2010
<9,000
6,328
FY2011
<8,550
5,998
FY2012
<8,120
5,674
FY2013
<7,715
6,218
FY2014
<7,330
FY2015
<6,965
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.
FY2008
68
66
FY2009
65
66
FY2010
65.5
69
FY2011
66
71
FY2012
66.5
71.3
FY2013
67
71.6
FY2014
70
FY2015
70.5
Units
Percent
Work under this program can be found in the Eight-Year Performance Array.
The UST program has made great progress in ensuring compliance and reducing releases. Both
of these measures have improved significantly since implementation of the Energy Policy Act
provisions, including regular inspections. As an indication of this progress, EPA has increased
the baseline for its significant operational compliance (SOC) measure from 67.5 percent to 70
percent in FY 2014, increasing 0.5 percent thereafter.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$3,230.0) Increased resources will help to maintain success achieved in recent years,
which is critical to sustaining the success achieved in recent years. The agency is
reviewing and redesigning many core business processes to be more efficient, but it is
expected that sufficient funding in future years will be key to avoiding backsliding.
703
-------
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.
704
-------
Program Area: Research: Sustainable Communities
705
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$597.6
$154,720.2
$382.1
$17,885.7
$173,585.6
578.6
FY 2014
Enacted
$664.0
$154,978.0
$320.0
$14,380.0
$170,342.0
510.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$485.0
$144,144.0
$405.0
$14,032.0
$159,066.0
503.5
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($179.0)
($10,834.0)
$85.0
($348.0)
($11,276.0)
-6.5
Program Project Description:
The Sustainable and Healthy Communities (SHC) research program under the Leaking
Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) appropriation provides decision-makers with tools,
methods, and information to prevent and control pollution at LUST sites. Specifically, this
research enables decision-makers to better:
• Assess sites and evaluate the implications of alternative remediation techniques,
policies, and management actions to assess and cleanup leaks at fueling stations;
• Identify the environmental impacts and unintended consequences of existing and new
biofuels available in the marketplace; and
• Protect America's land and groundwater resources and drinking water supplies that
could be impacted by the nation's approximately 600 thousand underground fuel
storage tanks.
Recent accomplishments include:
• Developed a series of maps demonstrating which groundwater sources are more
vulnerable to contamination from underground storage tank releases, depicting those
areas that are more vulnerable to drinking water contamination throughout the 48
contiguous states. This information will help state regulatory authorities prioritize
assessments and respond to the backlog of more than 80 thousand leaking underground
storage tanks, some near a drinking water supply.
• Developing software to make the Solid Waste and Emergency Response Program's
guide for petroleum vapor intrusion economical and practical for site managers to
address this in their site cleanup plans.
706
-------
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA will conduct research on contaminated sites to assist the agency and the States in
addressing the backlog of sites to be cleaned up. 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 supporting the agency priority of enhancing
communities.
The EPA's scientists work with its Underground Storage Tanks program to deliver improved
characterization and remediation methods for fuels released from leaking underground
storage tanks. EPA'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 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 and reduce the potential for vapor
intrusion into buildings. This tool will ultimately reduce costs to communities while better
protecting future drinking water resources and preventing vapor intrusion.
Performance Targets:
Refer to the S&T narrative for a list of SHC's performance measures.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$34.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$51.0) This increase reflects the continuation of research in vapor intrusion of
petroleum hydrocarbons in communities.
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.
707
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2015 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Inland Oil Spill
Resource Summary Table 709
Program Projects in Inland Oil Spill 709
Program Area: Compliance 710
Compliance Monitoring 711
Program Area: Enforcement 713
Civil Enforcement 714
Program Area: Oil 717
Oil Spill: Prevention, Preparedness and Response 718
Program Area: Operations and Administration 723
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 724
Program Area: Research: Sustainable Communities 726
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities 727
708
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2015 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 2013
Actuals
$16,593.7
97.1
FY 2014
Enacted
$18,209.0
87.9
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$24,133.0
100.5
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$5,924.0
12.6
Bill Language: Inland Oil Spill Program
For expenses necessary to carry out the Environmental Protection Agency's responsibilities
under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, $24,133,000, to be derived from the Oil Spill Liability trust
fund, to remain available until expended.
Program Projects in Inland Oil Spills
(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
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy
Communities
Subtotal, Research: Sustainable and Healthy
Communities
TOTAL, EPA
FY 2013
Actuals
$131.8
$2,266.9
$13,050.0
$547.4
$597.6
$597.6
$16,593.7
FY 2014
Enacted
$139.0
$2,413.0
$14,409.0
$584.0
$664.0
$664.0
$18,209.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$147.0
$2,514.0
$20,489.0
$498.0
$485.0
$485.0
$24,133.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$8.0
$101.0
$6,080.0
($86.0)
($179.0)
($179.0)
$5,924.0
709
-------
Program Area: Compliance
710
-------
Compliance Monitoring
Program Area: Compliance
Goal: Protecting Human Health and the Environment by Enforcing Laws and Assuring
Compliance
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws to Achieve Compliance
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Environmental Program & Management
Hazardous Substance Superfimd
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$131.8
$101,820.1
$1,060.4
$103,012.3
559.2
FY 2014
Enacted
$139.0
$103,297.0
$998.0
$104,434.0
557.3
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$147.0
$118,892.0
$1,083.0
$120,122.0
535.1
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$8.0
$15,595.0
$85.0
$15,688.0
-22.2
Program Project Description:
The EPA's 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
that determine whether regulated entities are in compliance with applicable laws, regulations,
permit conditions, and settlement agreements. In addition, the EPA conducts compliance
monitoring activities 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 reports.
The Clean Water Act Section 311 Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure Compliance
Monitoring program is designed to prevent oil spills. The Section 311 Facility Response Program
(FRP) 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
The agency will continue in FY 2015 to conduct inspections, investigations and other core
activities to determine regulated entities compliance with Section 311 of the CWA. There is
currently a universe of over 600,000 SPCC-regulated facilities under the EPA's jurisdiction,
including a subset of roughly 4,300 facilities that are subject to FRP requirements. The EPA
ensures that the management and oversight of the Enforcement and Compliance program is
enhanced by the exchange of information from the FRP and SPCC data systems to the EPA's
Integrated Compliance Information System. This exchange provides the EPA the opportunity to
focus enforcement and compliance resources on areas of highest risk, and increase transparency
to the public of this enforcement and compliance data. In addition, submitting this information
into ICIS electronically improves data coverage and quality. The EPA completed the Section 311
711
-------
data integration in FY 2013. In FY 2015, having access to a complete universe of information in
ICIS will support a more comprehensive analysis and better management of the FRP and SPCC
programs.
Performance Targets:
This program's efforts support performance results in the Compliance Monitoring program
project in the Environmental Programs and Management (EPM) appropriation and can be found
in the Eight-Year Performance Array in the Program Performance and Assessment section. Work
under this program project supports the agency's Priority Goal, addressing water quality. A list
of the agency's Priority Goals can be found in Appendix A.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$6.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$2.0) This increase supports the Compliance Monitoring program's core activities
which focus on increasing public transparency of enforcement and compliance data.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act: Oil Pollution Act.
712
-------
Program Area: Enforcement
713
-------
Civil Enforcement
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Protecting Human Health and the Environment by Enforcing Laws and Assuring
Compliance
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws to Achieve Compliance
(Dollars in Thousands)
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Environmental Program & Management
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$2,266.9
$167,924.2
$691.9
$170,883.0
1,123.1
FY 2014
Enacted
$2,413.0
$173,573.0
$746.0
$176,732.0
1,100.6
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$2,514.0
$180,641.0
$639.0
$183,794.0
1,084.6
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$101.0
$7,068.0
($107.0)
$7,062.0
-16.0
Program Project Description:
The EPA's 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 Civil Enforcement program's enforcement of Section 311 of the Clean Water Act (CWA),
as amended by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA) is designed to ensure compliance with the
prohibition against oil and hazardous substance, spills as well as the oil spill prevention, response
planning, and other regulatory requirements. The program uses civil enforcement approaches to
prepare for and respond to oil spills affecting the inland waters of the United States. The EPA's
Civil Enforcement program will develop policies, issue administrative orders or penalty actions,
and/or refer civil judicial actions to the Department of Justice to address spills, violations of spill
prevention and response planning regulations, and other violations (e.g., improper dispersant use
or noncompliance with orders). The program will also assist in the recovery of cleanup costs
expended by the government. The program provides support for field investigations of spills, as
well as assistance with Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC), Facility
Response Plan (FRP), and other requirements.
714
-------
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the Civil Enforcement program will continue efforts to ensure regulatory
compliance, address oil or hazardous substance spills in violation of the statute, and prevent
future spills. These efforts are particularly critical given the number of SPCC-regulated facilities
(over 600,000 facilities) and the comparatively modest number of inspection and enforcement
personnel. The EPA's inspection efforts will be focused on high-risk facilities, many offshore or
over water, with the greatest potential to impact public health and the environment. Civil
enforcement efforts will focus on facilities where enforcement will promote deterrence, require
action to address spill causes, and confirm that spills are cleaned up and mitigated. These efforts
require a large investment of enforcement resources to follow up on violations discovered during
complex inspections or enforcement investigations, and can require coordination with other
regulatory agencies (e.g., U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service).
The EPA's response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill will continue in FY 2015 as we provide
primary support for the U.S. Department of Justice's civil action against BP, Anadarko, and
other Deepwater Horizon oil spill responsible parties. The Department of Justice filed a
complaint in December 2010 in United States District Court on behalf of the EPA, the U.S.
Coast Guard and other federal plaintiffs. The EPA is actively participating in this lawsuit by
responding to discovery requests, document production, requests for admission, and other
litigation-related activities. When the civil trial began in February 2013, the EPA's role
expanded to include direct support in the courtroom (witness preparation, reviewing depositions
for cross-examination, etc.). This litigation is expected to continue into FY 2015 with the
"penalty phase" of the Deepwater trial, which is expected to begin in the fourth quarter of FY
2014. Some examples of Deepwater related successes in FY 2013 include:
• EPA obtained a record settlement of $1 billion with Transocean for its liability for the
Deepwater Horizon Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
• Pursuant to the JAESTOJAE Act, $800 million of the Transocean penalty went to the Gulf
Coast Restoration Trust Fund to fund programs, projects, and activities that restore and
protect the environment and economy of the Gulf Coast region.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports the performance measures in the Civil Enforcement program
under the Environmental Programs and Management appropriation. These measures can also be
found in the Eight-Year Performance 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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$56.0) The increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
715
-------
• (+$45.0) This change reflects additional resources to support the Deepwater Horizon oil
spill enforcement case.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act; Oil Pollution Act.
716
-------
Program Area: Oil
717
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$13,050.0
$13,050.0
80.7
FY 2014
Enacted
$14,409.0
$14,409.0
72.7
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$20,489.0
$20,489.0
85.3
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$6,080.0
$6,080.0
12.6
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Oil program protects U.S. waters by preventing, preparing for, and responding to oil
spills. The Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasures (SPCC) regulation and the Facility
Response Plan (FRP) regulation establish the Oil Spill program prevention regulatory
framework. 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 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 procedures,
address security and evacuation procedures, identify an individual with authority to implement
response actions, and describe training and testing drills at the facility. The EPA's Oil program
also provides resources to support response readiness. The EPA is responsible for responding to
and maintaining the capability to respond to oil spills in the inland zone. The National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) establish 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. For example,
EPA provided support to the Deepwater Horizon (DWH) oil spill response. The spill resulted in
11 deaths, over 200 million gallons of spilled oil, and untold economic and environmental
damage. The EPA was the lead Federal inland responder for the recent large Enbridge Pipeline
discharge in Marshall, Michigan. 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 Oil funds for site-specific oil spill response activities. However, the EPA
718
-------
utilizes congressionally appropriated Oil funding to support oil spill response readiness in the
inland zone and conduct compliance monitoring through inspections. More than 30,000 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 responds
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/.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to conduct inspections to ensure appropriate and effective
prevention measures. The EPA also will review and approve FRPs which document facilities'
plans and ability to respond to spills, conduct exercises to maintain a coordinated level of
preparedness, and work to revise and update existing guidance to stakeholders. EPA inspectors
target a portion of inspections at high-risk facilities.
Ensuring compliance by oil storage facilities subject to the EPA's SPCC and FRP rules is a
crucial part of oil spill prevention and preparedness. Appropriated resources are increasingly
important as the rate of facilities found compliant during initial inspection is decreasing for
SPCC and FRP facilities (see chart below).l In FY 2015, the EPA request reflects an investment
in oil accident prevention and preparedness activities, as well as an increase in inspectors aimed
at enhancing safety at regulated facilities.
Oil Facility Compliance
90%
I Found Initially Compliant
Brought Into Compliance
2010 2011 2012 2013 2010 2011 2012 2013
SPCC
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
1 Chart presents data as of September 2013. Data represent percentage of facilities found initially compliant and facilities brought
into compliance out of respective sets of facilities inspected. Therefore, the numbers do not total to 100%.
719
-------
oil spills. EPA has implemented guidance on both high risk facility targeting and procedures to
streamline inspections, both of which were developed to ensure national consistency for
compliance inspections.
As a result of DWH lessons learned, the EPA is focusing on revisions to Subpart J 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 EPA will continue to analyze potential
revisions to Subpart J and comments from stakeholders in order to:
• 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 ACPs
and Regional Contingency Plans. 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. 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 and
• Further discussion and coordination at National Response Team (NRT) and Regional
Response Teams (RRTs) meetings.
The ACPs also provide key information to responders and all stakeholders regarding potential
impacts and potential options available to On-Scene Coordinators (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
USCG 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.
Comprehensive FRP and SPCC data maintained in the National Oil Database serve as the data of
record and is an important component for day-to-day management of plans, inspections/drills,
and related activities. This database has streamlined the process for assisting facilities with
compliance, to better equip inspectors for more efficient inspection processes, and inform
program management and measurement activities. The database also manages 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 and burdensome
registration requirement.
720
-------
The EPA will continue to develop guidance for SPCC/FRP inspectors on how to properly utilize
and manage this database and ensure consistent data entry. In FY 2015, the agency plans to
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.
In fulfilling the Administrator's priorities, agency Oil Spill program actions work toward
improving the chances than an oil discharge in U.S. waters from a non-compliant facility to
waters of the U.S. or adjoining shoreline may not result in an environmental disaster.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(337) Percent of all FRP inspected facilities found to be non-compliant which are brought into
compliance.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
15
48
FY2011
30
48
FY 2012
35
73
FY 2013
40
78
FY 2014
50
FY 2015
60
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.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
15
36
FY2011
30
45
FY 2012
35
63
FY 2013
40
69
FY 2014
50
FY 2015
60
Units
Percent
The EPA's regulated universe includes approximately 4,400 FRP facilities and over 600
thousand SPCC facilities. In FY 2015, the EPA's goal is that 60 percent of FRP facilities found
to be non-compliant during FY 2010 through FY 2014 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
60 percent of SPCC facilities found to be non-compliant during FY 2010 through FY 2014 will
be brought into compliance by the end of FY 2015.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$369.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing
FTE due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$5,711.0 / +12.6 FTE) This increase will be utilized for oil accident prevention,
preparedness, and response activities, which include new FRP checklists and guidelines
for inspectors, additional specialized technical training opportunities to expand and
enhance agency inspector skills, ongoing enhancements, and implementation of the oil
database. This change also will support high risk inspections. This increase includes 12.6
FTE and associated payroll of $1,911.0.
Statutory Authority:
Section 311 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) as amended by section 4202
of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA). The regulatory framework includes the NCP under 40
721
-------
CFR Part 300. Subpart J is a section of the 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 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.
722
-------
Program Area: Operations and Administration
723
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$547.4
$293,188.6
$74,351.2
$27,676.4
$933.4
$80,960.5
$477,657.5
382.8
FY 2014
Enacted
$584.0
$310,057.0
$70,370.0
$27,791.0
$823.0
$67,470.0
$477,095.0
367.2
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$498.0
$325,138.0
$75,824.0
$45,632.0
$836.0
$78,905.0
$526,833.0
361.6
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($86.0)
$15,081.0
$5,454.0
$17,841.0
$13.0
$11,435.0
$49,738.0
-5.6
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Facilities Infrastructure and Operations Program in the 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 2015 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
2015, the agency is requesting $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
Performance Array in the Program Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$6.0) This change is the net effect of projected contractual rent increases and the rent
reduction realized from space consolidation efforts.
724
-------
• (-$92.0) This reduces resources for facilities management activities and reflects business
process changes and efficiencies achieved from implementing operational changes at
EPA facilities.
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).
725
-------
Program Area: Research: Sustainable Communities
726
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$597.6
$154,720.2
$382.1
$17,885.7
$173,585.6
578.6
FY 2014
Enacted
$664.0
$154,978.0
$320.0
$14,380.0
$170,342.0
510.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$485.0
$144,144.0
$405.0
$14,032.0
$159,066.0
503.5
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($179.0)
($10,834.0)
$85.0
($348.0)
($11,276.0)
-6.5
Program Project Description:
The Sustainable and Healthy Communities (SHC) research program for inland oil spills, funded
through the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund2, provides decision-makers with analysis and tools to
protect human and ecosystem health from the negative impacts of oil spills. These decision-
makers include Federal partner agencies, EPA Program and Regional offices, as well as State
and local officials. Supporting local officials in their response to a spill is another way the
EPA is making a visible difference in communities. As a result of this research, oil spill
responders will be able to make better decisions on approaches and methods to reduce the
spread, and the impact of coastal spills, inland oil spills, including pipeline and railway
spills. The EPA is the lead Federal on-scene coordinator for inland spills and provides technical
assistance, when needed, for coastal spills. The EPA is therefore charged with responsibilities
for oil spill preparedness and response and associated research. EPA's research, planned in
concert with our partner agencies (U.S. Coast Guard, Department of the Interior, Department of
Transportation, and Department of Treasury) supports 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, other additives, and assessing
impacts to surface water and ground water, especially as they affect drinking water supplies.
Other agencies address booms, skimmers, and other engineering responses.
Recent accomplishments include:
EPA research aids officials in developing protocols to combat oil spills on navigable waters.
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
2 http://www.useg.mil/ccs/npfc/About NPFC/osltf.asp
727
-------
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. 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, thus supporting the agency's goal of enhancing communities.
FY 2015 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 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 EPA 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 BP oil spill
response. Additionally, remediation approaches will address pipeline and railway spills.
Performance Targets:
Resources in this program support the performance measures included in the Science and
Technology Sustainable and Healthy Communities narrative.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$2.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs for existing FTE
due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$181.0) This reflects a reduction to research on biodegradability and toxicity of
biodiesel blends.
Statutory Authority:
Oil Pollution Act, 33 U.S.C. §2701, et seq.; Clean Water Act (CWA), §311, 33 U.S.C. §1321.
728
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2015 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Resource Summary Table 730
Program Projects in STAG 730
Program Area: Categorical Grants 734
Categorical Grant: Beaches Protection 735
Categorical Grant: Brownfields 736
Categorical Grant: Lead 739
Categorical Grant: Environmental Information 742
Categorical Grant: Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance 745
Categorical Grant: Nonpoint Source (Sec. 319) 750
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Enforcement 754
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Program Implementation 756
Categorical Grant: Pollution Control (Sec. 106) 759
Categorical Grant: Pollution Prevention 764
Categorical Grant: Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) 766
Categorical Grant: Radon 769
Categorical Grant: State and Local Air Quality Management 771
Categorical Grant: Toxics Substances Compliance 775
Categorical Grant: Tribal Air Quality Management 777
Categorical Grant: Tribal General Assistance Program 779
Categorical Grant: Underground Injection Control (UIC) 782
Categorical Grant: Underground Storage Tanks 785
Program Area: State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG) 791
Infrastructure Assistance: Clean Water SRF 792
Infrastructure Assistance: Drinking Water SRF 796
Infrastructure Assistance: Alaska Native Villages 801
Brownfields Projects 805
Diesel Emissions Reduction Grant Program 810
Infrastructure Assistance: Mexico Border 812
729
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2015 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 2013
Actuals*
$3,534,513.9
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$3,535,161.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$3,005,374.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($529,787.0)
0.0
*2013 Actuals do not include Sandy Supplemental
Bill Language: STAG
For environmental programs and infrastructure assistance, including capitalization grants for
State revolving funds and performance partnership grants,$3,005,374,000, to remain available
until expended, of which:
(1) $1,018,000,000 shall be for making capitalization grants for the Clean Water State Revolving
Funds under title VI of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act; and of which $757,000,000
shall be for making capitalization grants for the Drinking Water State Revolving Funds under
section 1452 of the Safe Drinking Water Act: Provided, That for fiscal year 2015, to the extent
there are sufficient eligible 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 projects to address green infrastructure, water or energy
efficiency improvements, or other environmentally innovative activities: Provided further, That
for fiscal year 2015, funds made available under this title to each State for Drinking Water State
Revolving Fund capitalization grants may, at the discretion of each State, 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 Federal
Water Pollution Control 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 2015 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 2015, notwithstanding the limitation on amounts in section 518(c) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act up to a total of 2 percent of the funds appropriated, or
$30,000,000, whichever is greater, and notwithstanding the limitation on amounts in section
1452(1) of the Safe Drinking Water Act, up to a total of 2 percent of the funds appropriated, or
$20,000,000, whichever is greater, for State Revolving Funds under such Acts may be reserved
by the Administrator for grants under section 518(c) and section 1452(i) of such Acts: Provided
further, That for fiscal year 2015, notwithstanding the amounts specified in section 205 (c) of the
Federal Water Pollution Control 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
730
-------
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 Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas,
and United States Virgin Islands: Provided further, That for fiscal year 2015, 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 10 percent but not
more than 20 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: (A) the State of Alaska shall provide a match of 25 percent; (B) no more than 5 percent of
the funds may be used for administrative and overhead expenses; and (C) the State of Alaska
shall make awards consistent with the Statewide priority list established in conjunction with the
Agency and the U.S. Department of Agriculture for all water, sewer, waste disposal, and similar
projects carried out by the State of Alaska that are funded under section 221 of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1301) or the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development
Act (7 U.S.C. 1921 et seq.) which shall allocate not less than 25 percent of the funds provided for
projects in regional hub communities;
(4) $85,000,000 shall be to carry out section 104(k) of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), including grants, interagency
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; and
(5) $1,130,374,000 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
731
-------
Public Law 104-134, and for making grants under section 103 of the Clean Air Act for
particulate matter monitoring and data collection activities subject to terms and conditions
specified by the Administrator, of which: $47,745,000 shall be for carrying out section 128 of
CERCLA; $25,664,000 shall be for Environmental Information Exchange Network grants,
including associated program support costs; $1,498,000 shall be for grants to States under
section 2007(f)(2) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, which shall be in addition 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; $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.
Program Projects in STAG
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
Infrastructure Assistance: Alaska Native
Villages
Brownfields Projects
Infrastructure Assistance: Clean Water SRF
Infrastructure Assistance: Drinking Water SRF
Infrastructure Assistance: Mexico Border
Diesel Emissions Reduction Grant Program
Subtotal, State and Tribal Assistance Grants
(STAG)
Categorical Grants
Categorical Grant: Nonpoint Source (Sec. 319)
Categorical Grant: Public Water System
Supervision (PWSS)
Categorical Grant: State and Local Air Quality
Management
Categorical Grant: Radon
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: Wetlands Program
Development
Categorical Grant: Underground Injection
FY 2013
Actuals*
$9,414.7
$100,775.2
$1,422,285.8
$926,663.0
$5,098.0
$11,706.9
$2,475,943.6
$157,766.7
$99,680.9
$224,384.2
$7,322.0
$16,883.7
$209,453.6
$226,337.3
$14,252.5
$10,059.5
FY 2014
Enacted
$10,000.0
$90,000.0
$1,448,887.0
$906,896.0
$5,000.0
$20,000.0
$2,480,783.0
$159,252.0
$101,963.0
$228,219.0
$8,051.0
$17,848.0
$212,958.0
$230,806.0
$14,661.0
$10,506.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$10,000.0
$85,000.0
$1,018,000.0
$757,000.0
$5,000.0
$0.0
$1,875,000.0
$164,915.0
$109,700.0
$243,229.0
$0.0
$18,500.0
$230,664.0
$249,164.0
$14,661.0
$10,506.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$0.0
($5,000.0)
($430,887.0)
($149,896.0)
$0.0
($20,000.0)
($605,783.0)
$5,663.0
$7,737.0
$15,010.0
($8,051.0)
$652.0
$17,706.0
$18,358.0
$0.0
$0.0
732
-------
Program Project
Control (UIC)
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Program
Implementation
Categorical Grant: Lead
Categorical Grant: Hazardous Waste Financial
Assistance
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Enforcement
Categorical Grant: Pollution Prevention
Categorical Grant: Toxics Substances
Compliance
Categorical Grant: Tribal General Assistance
Program
Categorical Grant: Underground Storage Tanks
Categorical Grant: Tribal Air Quality
Management
Categorical Grant: Environmental Information
Categorical Grant: Beaches Protection
Categorical Grant: Brownfields
Subtotal, Categorical Grants
Congressional Priorities
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Subtotal, Congressionally Mandated Projects
TOTAL, EPA
FY 2013
Actuals*
$11,576.9
$13,514.7
$98,076.5
$17,369.5
$4,894.2
$4,655.2
$66,493.8
$1,489.0
$12,285.4
$9,924.0
$9,451.5
$45,870.5
$1,035,404.3
$23,166.0
$23,166.0
$3,534,513.9
FY 2014
Enacted
$12,701.0
$14,049.0
$99,693.0
$18,050.0
$4,765.0
$4,919.0
$65,476.0
$1,498.0
$12,829.0
$9,646.0
$9,549.0
$47,745.0
$1,054,378.0
$0.0
$0.0
$3,535,161.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$12,701.0
$14,049.0
$99,604.0
$18,050.0
$4,765.0
$4,919.0
$96,375.0
$1,498.0
$12,829.0
$25,664.0
$0.0
$47,745.0
$1,130,374.0
$0.0
$0.0
$3,005,374.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
($89.0)
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$30,899.0
$0.0
$0.0
$16,018.0
($9,549.0)
$0.0
$75,996.0
$0.0
$0.0
($529,787.0)
*2013 Actuals do not include Sandy Supplemental
733
-------
Program Area: Categorical Grants
734
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$9,451.5
$9,451.5
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$9,549.0
$9,549.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($9,549.0)
($9,549.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Beaches Protection 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 coastal recreational water.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA is not requesting funds to support this grant program in FY 2015. The EPA has
proposed that this grant program be terminated at the end of FY 2013. While beach monitoring
continues to be important to protect human health, 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. EPA will continue to assist state and local governments to implement new recreational
water quality criteria for pathogens even without this funding to the extent resources allow.
Performance Targets:
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$9,549.0) This reduction reflects the elimination of the Beach Grants 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.
735
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$45,870.5
$45,870.5
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$47,745.0
$47,745.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$47,745.0
$47,745.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
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. A study completed in 2012, which was initiated by a 2011 EPA program
evaluation, concluded that cleaning up brownfield properties leads to residential property value
increases of 5.1 to 12.8 percent.l According to a 2007 study, an average of 10 jobs is created for
every acre of brownfields redevelopment. 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.
The Brownfields program is a successful model of working cooperatively with states, tribes,
local governments and sister agencies to help communities oversee, plan, and assess and cleanup
brownfield properties. The program will continue to work with relevant governmental agencies
to build new tools and strategies that enhance coordination to help communities prioritize sites
for assessment, cleanup, and sustainable reuse.
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 to be considered ready for reuse. States and tribes may
use grant funding provided under this program in the following ways:
1 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.
2 Rowland, Marie. 2007. "Employment Effects of Brownfields Redevelopment, What Do We Know from the Literature?"
Journal of Planning Literature. 22:91.
736
-------
• 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;
• Developing mechanisms for approval of cleanup plans, and verification and certification
that 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 activities, such as assessments and cleanups at brownfields
sites.3
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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 2015, the EPA will continue
its focused outreach to small and rural communities regarding the Brownfields program and will
expect State and Tribal recipients of 128(a) funds to do the same. 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 toward environmental revitalization and economic
redevelopment for communities across the country. Specifically, the State and Tribal Response
Program grants will continue to place a greater emphasis on tracking institutional and
engineering controls at brownfield sites to ensure that long-term stewardship activities continue
to protect human health and the environment.
Since 2003, the EPA has provided funding in at least one funding cycle to 161 states, tribes, or
territories. In FY 2013, the EPA provided funding to 147 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.
3 Refer to http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/state tribal/index.html.
737
-------
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in State and Tribal Assistance
Grants: Brownfields Projects, which can be found in the Eight-Year Performance Array.
Currently, there are no specific performance measures for this program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
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.
738
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$13,514.7
$13,514.7
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$14,049.0
$14,049.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$14,049.0
$14,049.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 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, studies have
indicated that children's health may be adversely affected even at extremely low blood levels,
below 10 micrograms per deciliter.4 In response to this new information and the fact that
approximately 38 million homes in the U.S. still have lead-based paint,5 the EPA is now
targeting reductions in the number of children with blood lead levels of five 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 percent in the Centers for Disease Control's (CDC's) most recent data through 2010.6
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
4 U.S.EPA. Air Quality Criteria for Lead (September 29, 2006)
http://cfpub.epa. go v/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.nejm.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.gov/articlerender.fcgi?doi=10.1289/ehp.7688
5 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
6 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/
739
-------
• 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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 FY 2013, 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,
thirteen states have become authorized to administer the RRP program. Through FY 2013, the
EPA and its authorized programs have accredited more than 620 training providers, and more
than 130,000 renovation firms have been certified. In FY 2015, 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 2015, the EPA will fully deploy the improved Federal Lead-based Paint Program Database
(FLPP) 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.
In FY 2015, 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
740
-------
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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq. - Sections 401-412.
741
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$9,924.0
$9,924.0
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$9,646.0
$9,646.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$25,664.0
$25,664.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$16,018.0
$16,018.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
Strengthening state, Tribal, and international partnerships, is a priority for the EPA and the
Environmental Information Exchange Network (EN) is a critical component of the agency's
strategy. The EN is a standards-based, secure approach for the EPA and its state, Tribal and
territorial partners to exchange and share environmental data over the Internet. Through its use of
technology and data standards, open-source software, shared services and reusable tools and
applications, the EN, in tandem with the agency's E-Enterprise efforts, offers its partners
tremendous potential for managing, accessing and analyzing environmental data more effectively
and efficiently. This will lead to improved decision making and reduced regulatory burden by
making data more accessible, eliminating redundant data collection, resolving issues with data
validation, streamlining processes, and avoiding development and operational costs for
redundant IT systems and components.
The 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 Network; use the EN to collect,
report and access the data they need with greater efficiency; and integrate environmental data
across programs. In collaboration with the EPA, the Environmental Council of the States accepts
the EN as the standard approach for the EPA, state, tribe and territory data sharing. The grant
program has provided the funding to make this approach a reality.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, OEI will continue to develop and support the E-Enterprise business model. E-
Enterprise facilitates two-way electronic transactions with the regulated community and external
partners who routinely conduct environmental business with the EPA. It will enable stakeholders
and co-regulators of the EPA (states, tribes and territories) to conduct environmental business
electronically and in a dynamically customizable way, based on who they are and what they
742
-------
need. Facilities will be able to apply for permits online, check compliance status, report their
emissions and learn about new regulations that may apply to them. With E-Enterprise, the EPA
will be able to replace outdated paper reporting with integrated e-reporting systems using
advanced technology and shared IT services. The paperwork and regulatory reporting burden
will be reduced by collection that is more efficient, enables streamlined reporting and better use
of data, while incorporating regulatory revisions to eliminate redundant or obsolete data
collection requirements.
The E-Enterprise initiative will allow the EPA to achieve a performance standard that supports a
minimum often states and tribes that will leverage centralized information technology services
for electronically signing reports and providing other services that assist co-regulators with the
non-repudiation of submissions from the regulated community. In addition, EPA will have the
infrastructure in place to support a minimum often states and tribes with data quality services
that include facility look-up and substance information.
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to award EN grants to assist states and tribes in realizing
proposals that emphasize the following activities:
• 24/7 Data Publishing: These activities create services that make a state's or tribe'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 among agencies. Emphasis will be placed on projects that support
mobile and desktop applications, executive and program dashboards and publishing
environmental information sources for access.
• New Priority Data Systems: These are new or modernized data systems of national
significance including the air component of the Integrated Compliance Information
Systems (ICIS-Air), Safe Drinking Water Act compliance (monitoring) data and the
electronic Notice of Intent (to discharge). Grants will fund the automated flow of data
from partners to the EPA.
• Partner Data Sharing: These activities support the partners' ability 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).
• Development and infrastructure necessary for modernizing data flows across the EPA
state and Tribal systems. This includes Virtual Node Implementation Support for states,
tribes and territories, which 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 Cross-Media Electronic Reporting Rule (CROMERR) services: This supports the
development of CROMERR compliant e-reporting systems using shared services (e.g., e-
signature) hosted by the EPA instead of using local developed and deployed solutions.
The use of shared services will reduce the time to prepare and review applications and
develop systems, and the cost to develop, operate and maintain these systems.
743
-------
• Support for the E-Enterprise Leadership Council and joint governance between the EPA
and state and Tribal organizations.
The "National Environmental Information Exchange Network Grant Program Solicitation
Notice" sets forth the process for awarding grant funding to states, tribes and territories.7 It is an
annual guidance document that describes eligibility requirements, the process for application
preparation and submission, evaluation criteria, award administration information and post-
award monitoring procedures.
In FY 2015, this program will support the agency's E-Enterprise initiative to move toward a high
performance organization (HPO) to support business process changes agencywide.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports multiple strategic objectives.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$15,700.0) This increase reflects funds for states and tribes to build tools, services and
capabilities that will provide E-Enterprise services for delegated programs. The EPA
anticipates that these grants will allow a minimum of ten states and tribes to
leverage centralized information technology services for electronically signing reports
and provide other services that assist co-regulators with legal, compliant submissions.
• (+$318.0) This reflects an increase to support states and tribes in building partner data
sharing programs.
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).
7 http://www.epa.gov/exchangenetwork/grants
744
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$98,076.5
$98,076.5
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$99,693.0
$99,693.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$99,604.0
$99,604.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($89.0)
($89.0)
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.8
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 of the direct implementation of permitting,
corrective action, and enforcement components of the RCRA hazardous waste management
program. Twenty seven million Americans live within one mile of RCRA corrective action
facilities, most of which are subject to RCRA permitting requirements.9
Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance Grants help the states fulfill their RCRA obligations;
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.10 The regulations define solid and hazardous waste, and also impose
standards on anyone who generates, recycles, transports, treats, stores, or disposes of waste.
8 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
9 U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response Estimate. 2014. Data collected includes: (1) site information as of
the end of FY 2011 from RCRAInfo; and (2) census data from the 2007-2011 American Community Survey (ACS). Site data
from FY 2011 was chosen to correspond most closely to the census data in the 2007-2011 ACS.
10 For matching fund requirements, see 40 C.F.R. § 35.215 for states and 40 C.F.R. § 35.725 for tribes.
745
-------
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 hazardous waste
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
2012.11
The grant resources in this program project also assist states in ensuring the safe cleanup of past
and continuing releases through the RCRA corrective action program. The EPA and states focus
their corrective action resources on 3,779 operating hazardous waste facilities. These facilities
include some of the most highly contaminated, technically challenging, and potentially
-^^ 19
threatening sites the EPA and states confront in any of their cleanup programs. 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.
To help describe who benefits from RCRA cleanup work, EPA collected data on the population
within three miles of RCRA Corrective Action sites. The three-mile area surrounding sites was
used because it is a good representation of the geographic area where people in a community live
most of their lives - where they shop, work, go to school, go out to restaurants, and participate in
outdoor activities. In looking at the census data, the agency found that approximately 106 million
people live within three miles of a RCRA corrective action site (roughly 35 percent of the U.S.
population). While there is no single way to characterize communities located near the sites, this
population is more minority, low income, linguistically isolated, and less likely to have a high
school education than the U.S. population as a whole.13 As a result, these communities may have
fewer resources with which to address concerns about their health and environment.
FY 2013 results for the corrective action program show that 85 percent of these facilities had
human exposures to toxins under control, 73 percent had migration of contaminated ground
water under control and 51 percent had final remedies constructed (as compared with
achievements in FY 2012 of reaching 81 percent for human health, 72 percent for ground water,
and 47 percent 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.
11 Data extracted from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, February 2013. http://www.bls.gov/iag/tgs/iag562.htmtfworkforce.
12 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.
13 U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response Estimate. 2014. Data collected includes: (1) site information as of
the end of FY 2011 from RCRAInfo; and (2) census data from the 2007-2011 American Community Survey (ACS).
746
-------
The STAG program applies to all 50 states and 6 territories. Currently, 48 states and 2 territories
are authorized to implement the RCRA program 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
The Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance Grants include funding for the following:
• Issuing and renewing permits to hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal (TSD)
facilities that are part of the permitting universe of 6,600 facilities;
• Overseeing clean-ups of releases at facilities that are among the 3,779 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 an aspirational 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 44 states and territories to directly
implement the RCRA corrective action program at the majority of the sites with leadership and
support from the EPA. In FY 2015, the agency and states continue to face a significant workload
to implement protective cleanups for our nation's most significant operational cleanup sites.
A small percentage (<1 percent) of STAG resources may 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 continue to evaluate the remaining workload for the corrective
action program by taking into consideration the progress to date and available resources, as
747
-------
recommended by GAO's 2011 report.14 This analysis focuses on the resources needed to reach
the EPA's long-term goals for completing cleanups at 3,779 corrective action facilities.
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.
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. Timely permit actions benefit
industry by enabling them to implement state-of-the-art design and management practices that
improve the efficiency and effectiveness of their operations, and to respond to economic
opportunity by making timely product changes.
The RCRA permitting program faces a significant workload to ensure controls remain protective.
In FY 2015, the EPA and authorized states will oversee and manage RCRA permits for
approximately 20,000 hazardous waste units at 6,600 facilities in the permitting universe. 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 FY 2015 target of implementing permits, initial
approved controls, and updated controls at 110 RCRA hazardous waste management facilities
(increased from 100 in prior years). 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. The EPA
will aim to achieve this more aggressive target.
An important objective in FY 2015 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. The 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
14 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.
748
-------
knowledge and experience, and is a key activity that protects 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 2015 the EPA plans to start a multi-year implementation transition to an updated
approach for distributing Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance Grants to the states. The new
approach developed in FY 2014, which replaces the methodology instituted in FY 1996, will
better align cooperative agreement funding to state needs, and maximize the environmental
benefits and program performance of this funding. The EPA has been working in consultation
with the states during the development of the new approach. The agency will present the new
allocation formula to Congress before its final implementation.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the RCRA Waste Management and
RCRA Corrective Action programs, which can be found in the Performance Eight Year Array in
the Program Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$89.0) This maintains resources available to the states and tribes to implement their
hazardous waste management programs at a slight decrease below the FY 2014 enacted
level. Maintaining a nearly flat level of funding does not take into account the effect of
inflation on STAG purchasing power, which will work against state efforts to fulfill their
grant obligations. In FY 2015, 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.
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).
749
-------
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 2013
Actuals
5757,766.7
$157,766.7
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$159,252.0
$159,252.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$164,915.0
$164,915.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$5,663.0
$5,663.0
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 Programs, including: regulatory and non-regulatory
programs, technical assistance, financial assistance, education, training, technology transfers, and
demonstration projects.15 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 help states achieve load reductions
contained in Total Maximum Daily Loads to achieve water quality standards. As of FY 2013,
these implementation projects have allowed states to remediate over 504 waterbodies that were
primarily impaired by nonpoint source pollution so that they now meet water quality standards.
In FY 2011, the EPA completed a detailed evaluation of how states are managing their nonpoint
source programs using Section 319 resources. In addition, the U.S. Government Accountability
Office conducted a study of the Nonpoint Source Water Control Program in FY 2012. As a
result of the internal evaluation and the GAO study, in FY 2013 and FY 2014, the EPA enhanced
the Section 319 program in a number of ways through revisions to the Section 319 grant
guidelines. To further accelerate the reduction of nonpoint source pollution, the EPA and the
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) are enhancing coordination to achieve improvements in
water quality 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 41,500
waterbodies listed as impaired.16 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.
15See https: //www.cfda. go v for more information.
16 See http://ofmpub.epa.gov/tmdl waters 10/attains nation cv.control?p report type=T for more information.
750
-------
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
The pervasiveness and widely distributed nature of nonpoint source pollution requires
cooperation and involvement from a wide range of stakeholders to address it, including the EPA,
other federal agencies, the states, local governments, nonprofit organizations, conservation
districts, and private landowners. The EPA will 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 programs and local
watershed projects to restore surface water and groundwater nationwide.
In FY 2015, the program will focus on continuing to work with states to implement the revised
Section 319 grant guidelines issued in FY 2013. These reforms include a robust focus on
watershed project implementation; requiring states to develop and maintain current Nonpoint
Source Management Programs to focus priorities funded through Section 319; and providing
incentives for additional leveraging of state and local funding for nonpoint source projects. The
EPA 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. It has been demonstrated repeatedly that achieving water quality results
requires targeting, with the right practices, the primary sources of NFS pollution in a watershed.
Watershed-based plans enable this by providing 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 request also eliminates, for FY 2015, the statutory
one-third of one percent cap on Clean Water Act Section 319 Nonpoint Source Pollution grants
that may be awarded to tribes.
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 can help 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 2015, the EPA will continue the partnership with USDA to
focus federal resources on agricultural sources of pollution in select watersheds in every state. In
FY 2013, 165 priority watersheds were selected in 51 states and areas, representing a net
increase of 11 watersheds from FY 2012. In FY 2015, the EPA will work with states to provide
instream monitoring support in focus watersheds to assess water quality progress from
implemented conservation practices.
To address urban and suburban sources of nonpoint source pollution, the EPA will continue to
work closely with a broad set of partners to promote the implementation of low-impact
development practices (also called green infrastructure). Low-impact development practices,
such as rain gardens and permeable pavement, reduce harm to water quality by reducing peak
flows during storms, filtering pollutants, and recharging groundwater. Low-impact development
practices also may help reduce flood damages. Working with states, cities, developers, watershed
associations, and federal agencies with an interest in flood protection and floodplain
751
-------
management, the EPA will continue to spread knowledge and adoption of low-impact
development practices.
The Clean Water Act provides that Clean Water State Revolving Funds loans can be used to
implement projects pursuant to a state Nonpoint Source 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 continue to encourage states to use Clean Water State Revolving Fund
loans to finance nonpoint source projects, where appropriate. The EPA also will track leveraged
funding from state and local sources in support of nonpoint source pollution control projects in
connection with the Section 319 program.
The EPA has a priority goal that tracks the revision of state Nonpoint Source Management
Program Plans reflecting the important role the plans have in driving programs. 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).
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
4.4
FY 2013
4.5
Data
Avail
03/2014
FY 2014
4.5
FY 2015
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).
FY2008
8.5
11.3
FY2009
8.5
9.1
FY2010
8.5
9.8
FY2011
8.5
12.8
FY2012
8.5
9
FY2013
9.1
Data
Avail
03/2014
FY2014
9.1
FY2015
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).
FY2008
700
2,100
FY2009
700
2,300
FY2010
700
2,100
FY2011
700
2,007
FY2012
700
1,100
FY2013
1,100
Data
Avail
03/2014
FY2014
1,200
FY2015
1,200
Units
Tons
(Thousand)
752
-------
The EPA provides grant funds to states and tribes under Clean Water Act Section 319 to
implement comprehensive programs to control nonpoint pollution, including reduction in runoff
of nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment. The EPA monitors progress in reducing loadings of these
key pollutants.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$5,663.0) This reflects an increase for state nonpoint source programs, including
implementation of nonpoint source projects and statewide nonpoint source protection
activities. With this increase, states will implement approximately 30 additional
watershed restoration projects than were planned in FY 2014.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act Section 319.
753
-------
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Enforcement
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Protecting Human Health and the Environment by Enforcing Laws and Assuring
Compliance
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws to Achieve Compliance
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$17,369.5
$17,369.5
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$18,050.0
$18,050.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$18,050.0
$18,050.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 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 through cooperative agreements with states and tribes. Areas of
focus include:
• Inspections and enforcement to reduce chemical risks and protect vulnerable populations;
• Compliance assistance to the regulated community to foster knowledge of and
compliance with environmental laws pertaining to pesticides;1? and
• Training for state and Tribal inspectors through the Pesticide Inspector Residential
Training Program and for state and Tribal managers through the Pesticide Regulatory
Education Program.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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 the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. These cooperative agreements support state
and Tribal compliance and enforcement activities designed to protect the public and the
environment from harmful chemicals and pesticides. These activities include 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 ensuring compliance with:
• Worker protection standards;
• Pesticide applicator certification and training requirements;
• Requirements for management of pesticide containers;
• Soil fumigation label requirements; and
• Pesticide use requirements designed to protect water quality.
For additional information, refer to: www.epa.gov/compliance/state/grants/fifra.html
754
-------
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports the strategic objective Enforce Environmental Laws.
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
755
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$11,576.9
$11,576.9
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$12,701.0
$12,701.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$12,701.0
$12,701.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 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,
1 & ^-,
social, and environmental costs and benefits of the use of pesticides. 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. This STAG program focuses
on areas such as worker safety activities (including worker protection and certification and
training of pesticide applicators), protection of endangered species,19 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.
Pesticide 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.
18 Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, as amended January 23, 2004. Section 3(a), Requirement of Registration
(7 U.S.C. 136a). Available online at http://www.epa.gov/oppOOOO 1 /regulating/laws.htm
19 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
756
-------
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
Certification and Training/Worker Protection
Through the Certification and Training/Worker Protection programs, the EPA protects workers,
pesticide applicators and handlers, employers, and the public from the potential risks posed by
pesticides in their homes and work environments. In FY 2015, 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 for workers and
pesticide handlers, creation of Train-the-Trainer courses, workshops, and development and
distribution of outreach materials. The agency's partnership with states and tribes to educate
workers, farmers, and employers about the safe use of pesticides and worker safety will continue
to be a major focus. See http://www.epa.gov/oppfeadl/safety/applicators/applicators.htm for
more information.
Endangered Species Protection Program
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.20 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 indicates that the pesticide may be found at levels locally that
raise water quality concerns, take action to manage those pesticides and mitigate
exposure.
'http://www.epa.gov/oppfeadl/endanger/species-info.htm
757
-------
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.21 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 certain aspects of Native
Americans' lifestyles, such as subsistence fishing or consumption of plants that were 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/oppfead I/tribes/.
The agency will continue 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 the EPA on pesticide issues.
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. Currently, there are no specific
performance measures for this program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
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).
21 For additional information, see http://www.epa.gov/pesp/.
758
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$226,337.3
$226,337.3
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$230,806.0
$230,806.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$249,164.0
$249,164.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$18,358.0
$18,358.0
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 programs 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 2015, 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
The Section 106 Grant Program supports prevention and control measures that improve water
quality. In FY 2015, the agency is requesting an additional $18.4 million in Section 106 funding
for states and tribes to implement water pollution control programs and support state and tribal
nutrient management efforts. State and tribal activities will be consistent with the Framework
provided in EPA guidance issued in March 201122. Nitrogen and phosphorus pollution has the
potential to become one of the costliest and most challenging environmental problems. The
nutrient reduction activities outlined in the Framework will work in conjunction with those being
carried out by states and tribes using Section 319 and U.S. Department of Agriculture funding
and focus on a set of key principles that guide the agency's technical assistance and collaboration
22 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)"
759
-------
with the states. The EPA will work with states and tribes as they develop work plans to ensure
these additional funds are used for tasks consistent with the Framework and support the
implementation of nutrient reduction activities.
Monitoring and Assessment:
The EPA is working to achieve greater integration of national, regional, state, and local level
monitoring efforts, to connect monitoring and assessment activities and to develop data that can
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 state, national, regional, and local levels.
In FY 2015, 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 2015, $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 $10.0 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 plan and mobilize
for the 2015 National Coastal Condition Assessment. In FY 2015, the EPA and states will
release the 2012 National Lakes Assessment following partner and external peer review. The
EPA and states will initiate data analysis and peer review of the second National Rivers and
Streams Assessment and the report will be completed in FY 2016. In FY 2015, the EPA/State
Steering Committee for the National Wetlands Assessment will be planning the next survey
targeted to be conducted in the field in calendar year 2016.
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 2015 is that 67.9 percent of states and territories will
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 under
the Framework for state nutrient reductions. Finally, the EPA will continue to work with tribes
that want to establish water quality standards.
760
-------
Develop Total Maximum Daily Loads:
In impaired watersheds, the 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. 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. The CWA 303(d) Listing and TMDL Program will continue to engage
with states to implement the new 10-year vision for the program.23 The new Vision encourages
states to identify priority waters and to address impairments with TMDLs and other appropriate
tools 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
2013, states had developed more than 59,000 TMDLs; however, over 48,000 TMDLs remain to
be completed. States will continue to use Section 106 funding to develop TMDLs that remain to
be completed and that more readily facilitate implementation of point and nonpoint source load
reductions. The EPA also will work with states to implement a new measure that looks more
comprehensively at the 303(d) program by measuring the extent of state priority waters
addressed by TMDLs, alternative approaches, or protection approaches.
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. Improvements to the structure of the
permit program will 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. The EPA will work with states to balance competing priorities, to
identify opportunities to enhance the integrity and effectiveness of NPDES permits, to start
schedules for action items based on the significance of the action, and to map out 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, states
continue to work on NPDES Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) permits,
regulations, and technical standards. In FY 2015, the EPA, and the states as co-regulators, will
continue to administer general and individual pesticide 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 will be working with states as they revise and reissue their
general permits for stormwater discharges from construction activities and from industrial
activities. EPA also will continue to work with states as they implement permitting programs for
municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s).Green infrastructure management approaches
are an effective means to promote prevention, reduction, and elimination of water pollution
23 For more information see: http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/lawsguidance/cwa/tmdl/programvision.cfm
761
-------
caused by wet weather events. The states will be implementing Green Infrastructure and other
innovative stormwater measures 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 NPDES regulations are
implemented in the most cost-effective way.
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 states are following
the Interim Guidance to Strengthen Performance in the NPDES Program issued on June 22,
2010. This guidance expands NPDES planning to include consideration of enforcement and
permitting in an integrated way and take action where long-standing problems with permit
quality or enforcement programs exist. 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
2015, states will implement the Interim Guidance and begin implementing these new approaches.
Working with Tribal Water Pollution Control Programs:
In FY 2015, 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
Percent of high-priority state NPDES permits that are issued in the fiscal year.
FY2008
95
120
FY2009
95
147
FY2010
95
142
FY2011
100
135
FY2012
100
130
FY2013
80
55
FY2014
80
FY2015
80
Units
Permits
Measure
Target
Actual
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.
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
58.9
FY 2014
66.1
FY 2015
67.9
Units
States and
Territories
762
-------
Measure
Target
Actual
Number of water body segments identified by states in 2002 as not attaining standards, where
water quality standards are now fully attained (cumulative).
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
3,679
FY2014
3,829
FY2015
3,979
Units
Segments
Measure
Target
Actual
Extent of priority areas identified by each state that are addressed by EPA-approved TMDLs
or alternative restoration approaches for impaired waters that will achieve water quality
standards. These areas may also include protection approaches for unimpaired waters to
maintain water quality standards.
FY 2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
FY2015
8%
Units
Priority
Watershed
Areas
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.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$18,358.0) This increase is for states and tribes to implement water pollution control
programs and strengthen their nutrient management efforts consistent with the EPA's
2011 Framework for state nutrient reduction.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C. 1256 - Section 106.
763
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$4,894.2
$4,894.2
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$4,765.0
$4,765.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$4, 765.0
$4,765.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 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. The P2 program's efforts advance the Administrator's priorities to pursue
sustainability, take action on climate change, and reduce chemical risks.
The P2 Program accomplishes its mission by:
• Fostering the development of P2 solutions to environmental problems that eliminate or
reduce pollution, waste and risks at the source, such as: cleaner production processes and
technologies, safer, "greener" materials and products, and 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); and
• Promoting the adoption, use, and market penetration of those solutions through such
activities as providing technical assistance and demonstrating the benefits of P2 solutions.
For more information about the EPA's Pollution Prevention Program, please see
http ://www. epa.gov/p2/.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the P2 Categorical Grants 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
764
-------
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 provides grant funding to support technical assistance, and 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 (PPEST)
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 2015, the EPA will
continue to strengthen P2Rx through enhanced documentation and measurement of results,
including describing outputs and outcomes for all activities. EPA will continue to seek increased
functionality of the centers to deliver improved services to P2Rx customers. Grantee activities
must support Regional P2 priorities and the national P2 information network.
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 program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 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.
765
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$99,680.9
$99,680.9
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$101,963.0
$101,963.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$109,700.0
$109,700.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$7,737.0
$7,737.0
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 the National Primary
Drinking Water Regulations. These grants help to ensure the safety of the nation's drinking
water resources while protecting 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.
The National Primary Drinking Water Regulations set forth monitoring, reporting and
recordkeeping, sanitary survey, 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;
• Manage public water system data and submit that data into the new Safe Drinking Water
Information System (SDWIS) Prime (formerly SDWIS Next Gen);
• Share sampling results with the public;
• 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
implementation activities by the EPA or for developmental grants to Indian tribes to develop
capacity for primacy.24
24 For more information see:
http: //www. epa. go v/safewater/pws/pwss .html
https://www.cfda.gov/index?s=program&mode=form&tab=stepl&id=cca066b833c552bdGc9ffDlle576c7f
766
-------
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the EPA will invest an additional $7.7 million in PWSS grants to augment state and
Tribal efforts in meeting existing drinking water regulations and preparing 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 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 by 29 percent since 2009 (see Figure 1). In FY 2013, 91
percent of community water systems (CWSs) met all applicable health-based standards,
surpassing the performance target of 90 percent. The program also ensured safe drinking water,
as 92 percent of the population served by CWSs received drinking water that met all applicable
health-based drinking water standards, achieving the FY 2013 performance target of 92 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.
500
4567
EPA Region
12009 Baseline FY2013
10
States and tribes will use their PWSS funds to ensure that:
• Public drinking water systems of all sizes achieve or remain in compliance;
• Public drinking water systems of all sizes are meeting 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 in 2016;
• Data are complete, accurate, and submitted to the EPA in a timely manner, and that primacy
agencies are transitioning to SDWIS Prime; and
• All systems are having sanitary surveys conducted according to the required schedules.
767
-------
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.
FY2008
90
92
FY2009
90
92.1
FY2010
90
92
FY2011
91
93.2
FY2012
91
94.7
FY2013
92
92
FY2014
92
FY2015
92
Units
Population
Measure
Target
Actual
(apm) Perc
through ap
FY2008
89.5
89
snt of community water systems that meets all applicable health-based standards
preaches including effective treatment and source water protection.
FY2009
90
89.1
FY2010
90
89.6
FY2011
90
90.7
FY2012
90
91
FY2013
90
91
FY2014
90
FY 2015
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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$7,737.0) This increase will provide much needed resources to help states, territories,
and tribes comply with the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWRs) set
forth in the Safe Drinking Water Act. Primacy agencies will be able to provide additional
monitoring for contaminants, more sanitary surveys and compliance tracking, and enforce
NPDWRs.
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.
768
-------
Categorical Grant: Radon
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Addressing 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 2013
Actuals
$7,322.0
$7,322.0
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$8,051.0
$8,051.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($8,051.0)
($8,051.0)
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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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 26 years of its existence, EPA's radon program has provided important
guidance and significant funding to help states establish their own programs.
Performance Targets:
There are no performance targets for this specific program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$8,051.0) This eliminates funding for the State Indoor Radon Grants (SIRG) program.
State and local radon programs will continue efforts to raise awareness and mitigate the
risk of radon. Over the 26 years of the program, the grants have worked to promote the
mitigation of radon in homes with high levels, building homes with radon resistant new
construction, and mitigating schools with high levels or using radon resistant new
construction.
769
-------
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.
770
-------
Categorical Grant: State and Local Air Quality Management
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Addressing 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 2013
Actuals
$224,384.2
$224,384.2
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$228,219.0
$228,219.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$243,229.0
$243,229.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$15,010.0
$15,010.0
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 for the implementation of
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) set to protect public health and the
environment, and for improving visibility in our national parks and wilderness areas (Class I
areas). 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, states with approved or delegated permitting programs will continue to implement
GHG, SC>2, NC>2, and PM2.5 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. Additionally, in FY 2015, the
agency will work with states to increase their capacity to more effectively implement their
obligations under section lll(d) of the Clean Air Act, with regard to GHG emissions from
electric utility generating units.
771
-------
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 2015, EPA's
initial area designation for the 2012 fine particle (PM25) NAAQS will become effective, and
affected states will begin developing attainment SIPs. Together, the NAAQS form a framework
for cleaner air and each has requirements that must be implemented.
States also will focus on implementing the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the 2008 lead NAAQS,
the 2010 1-hour nitrogen dioxide (NO2) NAAQS, and the 2010 1-hour sulfur dioxide (SO2)
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 the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. SIP 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 2015, 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.
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.s
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.s
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
PM25 network. The PM25 monitoring network has been funded under Section 103 authority of
the CAA, which provides 100 percent federal funding. By FY 2019, the PM2.s 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.
The multi-pollutant monitoring site network (NCore) 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 PM2.s; chemical speciation for PM2.5;
and PMio-2.s 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 complete the review of the Lead NAAQS as part of the five-year
review schedule. Data collected as part of a 12-month study of lead at 15 general aviation
airports will be used to inform this current review.
In 2014, the EPA plans to continue its review of the ozone NAAQS and associated monitoring
requirements. The review and subsequent rulemaking process will determine whether changes in
the standard are necessary, and if so, the nature of those changes.
772
-------
The EPA revised the monitoring requirements for the NC>2 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
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. States used this
document to identify and propose candidate near-road NO2 stations in 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.
The development of a complete emission inventory is an important step in an air quality
management process. Emission inventories are used to help determine significant sources of air
pollutants, establish emission trends over time, target regulatory actions, and estimate air quality
through computer dispersion modeling. An emission inventory includes estimates of the
emissions from various pollution sources in a specific geographical area. This program enables
states to develop these inventories and submit data to the EPA. The EPA works with its state
partners to quality assure the data and to prepare for the release of the National Emission
Inventory.
This program also supports state and local agencies' capabilities to provide air quality forecasts
that provide the public with information with which they can make daily lifestyle decisions to
protect their health. This information allows people to take precautionary measures to avoid or
limit their exposure to unhealthy levels of air quality. In addition, many communities use
forecasts for initiating air quality "action" or "awareness" days, which seek voluntary
participation from the public to reduce pollution and improve local air quality. Current air quality
forecasting efforts focus on predicting ozone and PM2.5.
This program also supports state and local efforts to characterize air toxic 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 2015,
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 MACT standards for major sources and regulations to control emissions from area
sources.
773
-------
Under the regional haze program, states will be implementing control measures required from
their initial visibility improvement SIPs and submitting plans to meet the five-year reporting
requirements to ensure that they are making progress toward their visibility improvement goals.
Also, comprehensive regional haze SIP revisions are due in 2018, and states will be planning the
extensive engineering, modeling, and cost analyses necessary to make continued progress toward
the goal of natural conditions in 2064.
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.
FY2008
25
52
FY2009
29
59
FY2010
33
70
FY2011
37
73
FY2012
50
72
FY2013
80
Data Avail
12/2014
FY2014
80
FY2015
80
Units
Percent
Reduction
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$19,792.0) This reflects increased funding for states to lay the groundwork to develop
approvable state plans to meet Section lll(d) emission guidelines for reducing CC>2. The
EPA anticipates that state plans will take several years to complete.
• (+$4,500.0) This reflects an increase to provide funds to states to support collection,
review, and use of GHG emission data as well as to support state and local GHG
permitting activities to new and existing sources of greenhouse gas emissions that trigger
permitting requirements as established in the GHG Tailoring Rule. These activities are
part of continuing environmental state programs.
• (-$9,282.0) Funding will be reduced for continuing environmental state programs
responsible for carrying out air quality implementation activities. While impacts by state
may vary, it is anticipated that states may be delayed in completing monitoring networks
in support of revised NAAQS and in compiling updated emissions inventories to use in
developing updated SIPs.
Statutory Authority:
CAA, Sections 103, 105, and 106.
774
-------
Categorical Grant: Toxics Substances Compliance
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Protecting Human Health and the Environment by Enforcing Laws and Assuring
Compliance
Objective(s): Enforce Environmental Laws to Achieve Compliance
(Dollars in Thousands)
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Total Budget Authority / Obligations
Total Workyears
FY 2013
Actuals
$4,655.2
$4,655.2
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$4,919.0
$4,919.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$4,919.0
$4,919.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Toxic 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. These chemicals have been identified as harmful to
human health and the environment. Exposure to these chemicals can present long term adverse
health effects to humans, if they are exposed. For example,
* Asbestos in schools - children and long-term employees exposed to friable fibers may be
impacted with respiratory health and cancer diseases 15 years after exposure.
» PCBs are bioaccumulative and are never released from the human body. Accumulation
over time can cause cancer.
• Lead-based paint can cause high blood levels which can affect neurological development
in young children.
Cooperative agreements are used to fund inspections, compliance monitoring activities, and
enforcement capabilities to prevent or eliminate unreasonable risks to health or the environment.
These funds are used to:
» Encourage states to establish their own programs for lead-based paint and asbestos
(waiver) programs. These states use the funds for inspections, compliance monitoring,
and enforcement activities.
» Provide cooperative agreements to states and tribes to conduct inspections and
compliance monitoring activities 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,
Asbestos Ban and Phase Out Rule,25 the Toxic Substances Control Act Asbestos Worker
5 40 CFR part 763, subpart I
775
-------
Protection Rule, and lead-based paint regulations. States receiving a cooperative
agreement for the PCB and/or asbestos programs must contribute 25 percent of the total
cost of the program being funded.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, 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. For all three programs, funds are
used to conduct inspections and compliance monitoring activities, and where appropriate,
enforce waiver and lead-based paint programs. In addition, these funds may be used to train
inspectors; to provide inspection equipment including sampling and personal protective
equipment; and to fund travel and salary costs associated with conducting inspections. The
compliance monitoring activities conducted by the states will be a cooperative endeavor
addressing the priorities of the federal Toxic Substances Control Act program and state issues.
Annually, these cooperative agreements have funded approximately 750 asbestos inspections;
approximately 350 PCB inspections; and approximately 6,000 lead-based paint compliance
monitoring activities, including inspections.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports the strategic objective Enforce Environmental Laws.
Currently, there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2015 Change from 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
Toxic Substances Control Act.
776
-------
Categorical Grant: Tribal Air Quality Management
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Addressing 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 2013
Actuals
$12,285.4
$12,285.4
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$12,829.0
$12,829.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$12,829.0
$12,829.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 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 2015 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. 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.
In FY 2015, continued implementation of the Tribal New Source Review (NSR) rule will require
significant and focused resources for tribes. The EPA has the primary responsibility for
implementing the rule. The tribes may opt to take an active role in implementation by
development of a Tribal Implementation Plan (TIP), by management of the program under the
EPA's authority, or by active participation in the permit review and outreach process.
777
-------
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports the performance results in Federal Support for Air Quality
Management Program under the Environmental Programs and Management Tab and can be
found in the Eight-Year Performance Array in the Program Performance and Assessment
section.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
CAA, Sections 103 and 105.
778
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$66,493.8
$66,493.8
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$65,476.0
$65,476.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$96,375.0
$96,375.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$30,899.0
$30,899.0
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 that may be delegated by the EPA. 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 capacities that are
consistent with the 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 federal authorization, primacy, or
delegations to successfully administer media-specific environmental protection 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.
779
-------
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, EPA's GAP grants will assist Tribal governments in building environmental
protection program capacity to assess environmental conditions, utilize available federal, state,
local, and other relevant environmental information and build environmental programs tailored
to Tribal needs. This funding request provides a stronger foundation of base funding for tribes to
assist in their building of environmental program capacity. The additional support will improve
recruitment and retention of qualified environmental professionals tribes need to establish
applicable environmental programs.
In FY 2013, the EPA concluded 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)26 by implementing new guidance for the grant program,
including a "Guidebook for Building Tribal Environmental Capacity." The Guidance, which will
be used to guide work funded in FY 2015, 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 Guidance identifies capacity indicators and planning tools that
the EPA believes are necessary to track and measure progress in achieving program capacity.
In FY 2015, EPA will continue to engage with tribes to develop joint EPA-Tribal Environmental
Plans (ETEPs) that reflect intermediate and long-term goals for developing, establishing, and
implementing environmental protection programs.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(5PQ) Percent of Tribes implementing federal regulatory environmental programs in Indian
country (cumulative).
FY2008
6
14
FY2009
7
13
FY2010
14
14
FY2011
18
17
FY2012
22
21
FY2013
24
22
FY2014
25
FY2015
25
Units
Percent
Measure
Target
Actual
(5PR) Percent of Tribes conducting EPA approved environmental monitoring and assessment
activities in Indian country (cumulative.)
FY 2008
21
42
FY 2009
23
40
FY 2010
42
50
FY2011
52
52
FY 2012
54
54
FY 2013
57
56.5
FY 2014
58
FY 2015
58
Units
Percent
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$30,899.0) This increase will augment base funding for individual GAP grants,
providing tribes with a stronger foundation for building their environmental program
capacity. This increase is necessary to improve recruitment and retention of qualified
environmental professionals that tribes need to establish applicable environmental
programs. In addition, this support will improve transition from capacity development to
program implementation; and to ensure adequate resources for grantees to successfully
5 http://www.epa.gov/oig/reports/2008/20080219-08-P-0083.pdf
780
-------
implement grant program conditions, such as the development of EPA-Tribal
Environmental Plans.
Statutory Authority:
Indian Environmental General Assistance Program Act, 42 U.S.C. § 4368b (1992), as amended.
781
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$10,059.5
$10,059.5
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$10,506.0
$10,506.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$10,506.0
$10,506.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
The EPA's 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 each year, including
the majority of hazardous wastewater that is land-disposed. In recent years, the use of
underground injection has expanded to include injection of water for later use, and injection for
the long-term storage of carbon dioxide
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.27
27 For more information, please visit:
https://www.cfda. gov/index?s=program&mode=form&tab=stepl &id=c 1307f57fe8bec34fl a65660eff495a8&cck= 1 &au=&ck=
and http://water.epa.gov/type/groundwater/uic/index.cfm
782
-------
FY 2015 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 500,000 shallow (Class V)28 injection
wells to protect our groundwater resources. The requested funding allows for the implementation
of the UIC program including for 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.
In addition, 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. Geologic
Sequestration (GS) is the process of injecting CC>2 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 while
ensuring USDW protection. The Class VI rule also 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 anticipates
that it is likely North Dakota will be approved for primacy in FY 2014. Additionally, in FY 2014
and FY 2015, the EPA will work with several other states interested in applying for Class VI
primacy, and 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.
On February 12, 2014, the EPA released guidance on hydraulic fracturing to help ensure the
benefit of energy development while not jeopardizing precious drinking water resources and
environmental quality. The EPA will work to help states and tribes review complex data
typically contained in UIC applications for hydraulic fracturing using diesel fuels. Funding also
will be used to support locating and inspecting injection wells. In addition, the agency will
support public meetings and follow up actions during permitting. This implementation support
will ensure that authorized state and Tribal agencies are effectively managing and overseeing the
rapidly growing energy sector while preventing endangerment of underground sources of
drinking water.
28 As represented in calendar year 2011 annual inventory.
783
-------
The EPA also will work with the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Department of the
Interior (DOT) 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
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, II 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.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
90
85
FY 2013
85
89
FY 2014
85
FY 2015
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).
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
20,840
25,225
FY 2013
25,225
26,027
FY 2014
25,225
FY 2015
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 2013, 89 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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
SOW A, 42U.S.C. §300j-2, Section 1443.
784
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$1,489.0
$1,489.0
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$1,498.0
$1,498.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$1,498.0
$1,498.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
The EPA's Underground Storage Tanks (UST) State and Tribal Assistance Grant (STAG)
program provides funding for grants to states29 under Section 2007 of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act. These resources support the Administrator's priority towards making a visible difference in
communities across the country to protect precious water resources by working with state, Tribal
and local partners to prevent releases from underground storage tanks. Additionally, 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 in continuing 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 the
program's primary goals. Thousands of new releases are discovered each year, yet the EPA and
the agency's partners have made major progress in reducing the number of new releases. Lack of
proper UST system operation and maintenance is a main cause of releases. 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.30 Even a small amount of petroleum
released from an underground storage tank can contaminate groundwater, the drinking water
source for many Americans. As a result, the EPA in FY 2012 proposed revisions to the UST
regulations that address these and other important issues.31 The agency expects to finalize the
regulations in FY 2015.
29 States as referenced here also include the District of Columbia and five Territories as described in the definition of "State" in
the Solid Waste Disposal Act.
30 See Title XV, Subtitle B of the Energy Policy Act of 2005.
31 See http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-1 l-18/pdf/201 l-29293.pdf.
785
-------
STAG funds meet a critical need in the UST program, filling a gap left by Leaking Underground
Storage Tank (LUST) prevention assistance agreement 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. STAG funds provide resources
for states that do not have sufficient state resources to fund the non-EPAct core programs.
Twice each year, the EPA collects data from states regarding UST performance measures and
makes the data publicly available. The data include 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 EPAct provisions.32 Every three years inspections
must occur at each of the 578 thousand federally regulated UST systems. 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 18 percent from
7,570 in FY 2007 to 6,218 in FY 2013. Confirmed releases remain low due to significant release
prevention efforts such as frequent inspections. An increase from 5,674 releases in 2012 was
likely due to leaks discovered during an increase in property transfers as the economy improved,
and better leak detection efforts because of effective operator training. Continued rigorous
prevention and detection activities are necessary to maintain our progress in limiting future
confirmed releases.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
End of year FY 2013 data shows:
• Releases are continuing to occur, with 6,218 reported for FY 2013.
• The program exceeded the FY 2013 performance measure target of 67 percent; at the end
of FY 2013, 71.6 percent of the approximately 213 thousand federally regulated UST
facilities were in significant operational compliance. However, approximately 28 percent
still need to attain and maintain compliance.
In FY 2015, STAG funding will continue to support compliance with release detection and
release prevention requirements, as well as implementing provisions of the EPAct.33 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.
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.
33 For more information on grant guidelines under EPAct, see: http://www.epa. gov/OUST/fedlaws/epact 05 .htm..
786
-------
Performance Targets:
Work under this program also supports performance results in LUST Prevention, which can be
found in the Eight-Year Performance Array.
FY 2015 Change from 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
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.
787
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$14,252.5
$14,252.5
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$14,661.0
$14,661.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$14,661.0
$14,661.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Wetland 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;
water quality standards.
34
and (4) wetland
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.
35
The goal of the WPDGs is to build or substantially increase state and Tribal programs, including
capacity building, monitoring and assessment, water quality standards, and restoration and
protection. 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.
34 State and Tribal assumption of Section 404 is an approach that can be useful in streamlining 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.
35For more information, see http://www. epa. gov/owow/wetlands/initiative/#financial and
http: //water. epa. go v/grants funding/wetlands/estp. cfm.
788
-------
FY 2015 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 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. Such efforts 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.
Within the WPDGs, the EPA Five-Star Restoration Program provides approximately 30
challenge grants, which provide 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.
The Opportunity, Growth, and Security Initiative would support additional preparation for the
impacts of climate change by protecting and enhancing coastal wetlands.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(4G) Number of acres restored and improved under the 5-Star, NEP, 319, and great water body
programs (cumulative).
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
207,000
FY2014
220,000
FY2015
230,000
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. ("No net
loss" of wetlands is based on requirements for mitigation in CWA 404 permits and not the
actual mitigation attained.)
FY 2008
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
No Net
Loss
FY 2014
No Net
Loss
FY 2015
No Net
Loss
Units
Acres
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
789
-------
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
Agreement; 1987 GLWQA; 1996 Habitat Agenda; 1997 Canada-U.S. Great Lakes Bi-national
Toxics Strategy; U.S.-Canada Agreements.
790
-------
Program Area: State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
791
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$1,422,285.8
$1,422,285.8
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$1,448,887.0
$1,448,887.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$1,018,000.0
$1,018,000.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($430,887.0)
($430,887.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) program capitalizes state revolving loan funds
in all 50 states and Puerto Rico 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 needs and associated health impacts and
also provides direct grant funding for the District of Columbia and territories. This federal
investment is designed to be used in concert with other sources of funds to address water quality
needs.36 States can utilize additional tools to assist small and disadvantaged communities. The
CWSRF program is a key component of the EPA's Sustainable Infrastructure Initiative helping
achieve innovative solutions to wastewater infrastructure needs, achieving economic and
environmental benefits that will continue to accrue for years in the future.
As of June 2013, the CWSRF has offered over 33 thousand assistance agreements to local
communities, providing approximately $100 billion in affordable financing for wastewater
infrastructure, nonpoint source pollution control, and estuary management projects.37 These
projects are critical to the continuation of the public health and water quality gains of the past
several decades. 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.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
The Administration proposes to reduce funding for the EPA's Clean Water and Drinking Water
36 See http://www.epa.gov/cleanwatersrf for more information.
37
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,
2013).
792
-------
State Revolving Funds (SRFs), which provide capitalization grants to states. The Administration
has strongly supported the SRFs, having requested and/or received over $22 billion in federal
capitalization since 2009. Since their inception (CWSRF in 1988, DWSRF in 1997), over $59
billion has been requested and/or provided. Going forward, the EPA will work to target SRF
assistance to small and underserved communities with limited ability to repay loans.
The agency's FY 2015 request includes $1.018 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.
An important part of the federal investment in the CWSRF is ensuring that small and
underserved communities have ready access to funding that helps address their pressing
wastewater infrastructure and other water quality needs. EPA is emphasizing attention to the
needs of these small communities/systems while balancing current fiscal realities as the state
grant and state assistance programs are implemented. Cumulatively since 1988, the CWSRF has
offered over 22,000 assistance agreements to communities serving a population less than 10,000,
providing over $23 billion in affordable funding. In addition, the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act ushered in an important new tool for reaching underserved and disadvantaged
communities by allowing the CWSRF to provide a portion of the federal funds as additional
subsidy in the form of principal forgiveness, negative interest, or grants. This authority has been
continued in each annual CWSRF appropriation since FY 2010, and approximately $3.9 billion
of this type of assistance has been offered to various communities. Though not a requirement,
EPA continues to work with states to encourage that the additional subsidy be prioritized for
disadvantaged communities.
The additional subsidy plays an important role in allowing the CWSRF to reach communities
that could not otherwise afford other forms of financing for wastewater infrastructure
improvements and other water quality projects. Therefore, in FY 2015, the agency continues to
make this option available to the CWSRF by requesting that not less than 10 percent but not
more than 20 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 subsidy would be limited to initial financings
for eligible recipients or to buy, refinance, or restructure the debt obligations of eligible
recipients. The established ceiling of 20% will protect the financial longevity of the CWSRF by
guaranteeing that a significant portion of the CWSRF monies will recycle back into the program
to fund future projects.
In FY 2015, the agency is requesting a Tribal set-aside of two percent, or $30 million, whichever
is greatest, of the funds appropriated from the CWSRF. The agency requests the establishment
of a funding floor for the tribes due to overall declining funding levels to sustain progress in
793
-------
Tribal communities. The agency continues to request a territories set-aside of 1.5 percent of the
funds appropriated from the CWSRF (for American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of
Northern Marianas, and the United States Virgin Islands). Resources for the tribes and territories
will provide much needed assistance to these communities whose sanitation infrastructure lags
behind the rest of the country causing significant public health concerns.
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to implement its Clean Water and Drinking Water
Sustainability Policy by working with states and communities to promote system-wide planning
and adoption of management practices by utilities that result in infrastructure investments that
also support other relevant community goals. The Sustainability Policy encourages a robust
analysis of various infrastructure options, including green and decentralized approaches, and
ensures utilities implement management strategies and rate structures that support systems'
necessary water infrastructure investments and operations and maintenance. As part of this
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 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.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(bpb) Fund utilization rate for the CWSRF.
FY2008
93.5
98
FY2009
94.5
98
FY2010
92
100
FY2011
94.5
98
FY2012
94.5
98
FY2013
94.5
97
FY2014
94.5
FY2015
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).
FY2008
1,550
2,165
FY 2009
2,270
2,505
FY2010
2,809
2,909
FY2011
3,073
3,119
FY2012
3,324
3,527
FY2013
3,727
3,679
FY2014
3,829
FY2015
3,979
Units
Segments
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.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$430,887.0) 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 continuing investment in our nation's wastewater
794
-------
infrastructure. This reduction results in approximately 180 fewer wastewater
infrastructure projects.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act, CWA; 33 U.S.C. 1251 et. seq.- Title VI.
795
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$926,663.0
$926,663.0
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$906,896.0
$906,896.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$757,000.0
$757,000.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($149,896.0)
($149,896.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
The EPA's 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 2011 Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey and Assessment indicated
a 20-year capital investment need of $384.2 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 and
maintain robust drinking water protection programs through set-aside funds. 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.
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.
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:
796
-------
• 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 16 percent of the funds awarded to them for program
development, of which 4 percent is used to run the program); and
• 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.
In FY 2015, appropriated DWSRF funds will again be allocated to the states in accordance with
each state's proportion of total drinking water infrastructure need based on the new 2011 Needs
Survey which was released in April 2013. The EPA also published 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 uses the results of the survey to
set the state DWSRF allocations. 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 175
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 $1.75 in assistance to water systems.
Prior to allotting funds to the states, the EPA is required to reserve certain national level
allotments.38 Two million dollars must, by statute, be allocated to small systems monitoring for
unregulated contaminants. The EPA will reserve up to 2 percent, or $20 million, whichever is
greater, 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.39
In addition to financing infrastructure through loans, the DWSRF affords states the flexibility to
set aside and award funds for targeted activities that can help states implement and expand their
drinking water programs. The four DWSRF set-asides are: Small System Technical Assistance
(2 percent), Administrative and Technical Assistance (4 percent), State Program Management
(10 percent), and Local Assistance and Other State Programs (15 percent). Taken together, up to
31 percent of a state's DWSRF capitalization grant can be set aside for activities other than
infrastructure construction. These set-asides enable states to improve water system operation and
38 Safe Drinking Water Act Sections 1452(i)(l), 1452(i)(2), 1452(j), and 1452(o), as amended
39 For more information please see:
https://www.cfda.gov/index?s=program&mode=form&tab=stepl&id=d33d92f2df290eOc2365599cb09f0669
797
-------
management, emphasizing institutional capacity as a means of achieving sustainable water
system operations.
The responsibility for communities and public water systems to continuously provide safe
drinking water is a key component of the nation's health and well-being. The delivery of safe
drinking water is often taken for granted and is extremely undervalued. More than 156,000
public water systems provide drinking water to the approximately 320 million persons in the
U.S. More than 97 percent of these public water systems serve fewer than 10,000 persons. 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. EPA is emphasizing attention to the needs of these small communities/systems while
retaining State flexibility in the management of their funds. In FY 2012, EPA re-energized its
small systems focus by working more closely with state programs to improve public water
system sustainability and public health protection for persons served by small water systems as
part of an agency Priority Goal. Again in FY 2014 and FY 2015, EPA is continuing this
emphasis through efforts to strengthen small system technical, managerial and financial
capability through the implementation of the Capacity Development Program, the Public Water
System Supervision state grant program and the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund. The
Capacity Development Program establishes a framework within which states and water systems
can work together to help these small systems achieve the SDWA's public health protection
objectives. The state Capacity Development programs are supported federally by the Public
Water System Supervision state grant funds and the set-asides established in the Drinking Water
State Revolving Fund. Since the 1996 Amendments, states have implemented a variety of
activities to assist small systems with their compliance challenges and enhance their technical,
managerial, and financial capacity.
These approaches have resulted in high system compliance as 91 percent of community water
systems (CWSs) met all applicable health-based standards, surpassing the FY 2013 target of 90
percent. In addition, the goal of providing drinking water in compliance is currently being
achieved, as 92 percent of the population served by CWSs received drinking water that met all
applicable health-based drinking water standards, achieving the FY 2013 target of 92 percent.
The EPA and the states will continue extensive and detailed oversight of the DWSRF and partner
with the United States Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Rural Utilities Service to target
funding and promote system sustainability. 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.
FY 2015 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.
In FY 2015, the EPA is requesting a total of $757 million for the DWSRF to help finance
infrastructure improvement projects to public drinking water systems. The requested funding for
798
-------
this program will support critical infrastructure investments to rebuild and enhance America's
drinking water infrastructure.
The Budget proposes a combined $1.775 billion for federal capitalization of the SRFs,
representing a reduction of $580.8 million from the FY 2014 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
over $22 billion in federal capitalization since 2009. Since their inception (CWSRF in 1988,
DWSRF in 1997), over $59 billion has been requested and/or provided. Going forward, the EPA
will work to target SRF assistance to small and underserved communities with limited ability to
repay loans.
In FY 2015, EPA will work with states to ensure not less than 20 and not more than 30 percent
of a state's capitalization grant is provided as subsidization. For FY 2015, the EPA will
encourage states to utilize the subsidy to assist small systems with standards compliance. The
EPA has made considerable progress in reducing unliquidated obligations (ULOs) of the
DWSRF in states, tribes, and territories by promoting efficient, timely, and expeditious
expenditure of funds for drinking water projects. In FY 2015, EPA will continue to work with
states with higher ULOs to address institutional obstacles that cause those states to maintain high
ULOs in order to eliminate or minimize their ULO amounts.
In FY 2015, the DWSRF program will continue to implement a Sustainable Water Infrastructure
Policy that focuses on: promoting system-wide planning that helps align water infrastructure
system goals; 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 federal dollars provided through the State Revolving Funds also will 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.
FY2008
86
90
FY2009
89
92
FY2010
86
91.3
FY2011
89
90
FY2012
89
90
FY2013
89
91
FY2014
89
FY2015
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.
FY2008
90
92
FY2009
90
92.1
FY2010
90
92
FY2011
91
93.2
FY2012
91
94.7
FY2013
92
92
FY2014
92
FY2015
92
Units
Population
799
-------
Measure
Target
Actual
(apm) Perc
through ap
FY2008
89.5
89
ent of community water systems that meets all applicable health-based standards
preaches including effective treatment and source water protection.
FY2009
90
89.1
FY2010
90
89.6
FY2011
90
90.7
FY2012
90
91
FY2013
90
91
FY2014
90
FY2015
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.
FY2008
72
79
FY2009
73
80
FY2010
73
82
FY2011
75
87
FY2012
80
80
FY2013
82
81
FY2014
80
FY2015
80
Units
Population
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$149,896.0) 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
working with states and communities to enhance technical, managerial, and financial
capacity. A reduction of $149.9 million along with the required state match results in
approximately 68 fewer drinking water infrastructure projects.
Statutory Authority:
SOW A, 42U.S.C. §300j-12, Section 1452.
800
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$9,414. 7
$9,414.7
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$10,000.0
$10,000.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$10,000.0
$10,000.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Alaska Rural and Native Village (ANV) program reduces disease and health care costs by
providing critical basic drinking water and sanitation infrastructure (i.e., flushing toilets and
running water) in vulnerable rural and Native Alaska communities that lack such services
disproportionately when compared to the rest of the country. 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 not only the typical
challenges associated with small system size, but also the 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 contributed to an increase of
access to water and sewer service from 60 percent in the late 1990s to a current level of 91
percent.40 Both water borne disease rates and health care costs have decreased through the
reduction of exposure to raw sewage and drinking water contaminants.41'42 According to IHS
data, from 1998 to 2006, the annual infectious disease age adjusted hospitalization rate for Tribal
and ANV people have decreased by 18 percent. Reducing exposure to raw sewage and drinking
water contaminants significantly contributes to reduced health care costs in Native Alaskan
communities, which are covered by the federal government (most recently authorized by the
2010 Indian Health Care Improvement Act).
40 Based on data from the Indian Health Service (IHS) and the US Public Health Service.
41 Robert C. Holman, Anianne M Folkema, Rosalyn J. Singleton, John T. Redd, Krista Y. Christensen, Claudia A Steiner,
Lawrence B Schonberger, Thomas W. Hennessy, James E. Cheek (2011), Disparities in Infectious Disease Hospitalizations for
American Indian/Alaska Native People, Public Health Rep. 2011 Jul-Aug; 126(4): 508-521,
http://www.ncbi.nhn.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3115210/
42 Thomas W. Hennessy, Troy Ritter, Robert C. Holman, Dana L. Bruden, Krista L. Yorita, Lisa Bulkow, James E. Cheek,
Rosalyn J. Singleton, Jeff Smith, The Relationship Between In-Home Water Service and the Risk of Respiratory Tract, Skin, and
Gastrointestinal Tract Infections Among Rural Alaska Natives, Am J Public Health. 2008 November; 98(11): 2072-
2078. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2007.115618
801
-------
The State of Alaska is best positioned to deliver these services to the ANV communities by
coordinating across federal agencies and using the different programs to achieve a holistic series
of solutions. Alaska 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. The ANV technical assistance program helps to improve the long-term
sustainability of the rural utilities, creating transferable job skills in construction, operation, and
maintenance activities. The program also has helped to nearly double the number of properly
certified operators in Alaskan rural villages since FY 1992, and the number of non compliant
systems has decreased by close to 80 percent since FY 2006.43
While the gains in the program have been significant, ANV communities continue to trail behind
the non-Tribal/non-native population in the U.S. with access to water and sanitation. In the
ANVs, 13 percent of households44 are without complete indoor plumbing, a much higher figure
than the national average of 0.4 percent (US Census Survey 2012) of occupied homes lacked
complete indoor plumbing. As a result and based on data from 2008, age adjusted infectious
disease hospitalization rate for Alaska natives was 28 percent higher than the national average,
with a higher disparity observed for infants.45 Infectious disease hospitalizations account for
approximately 22 percent of all tribal and ANV hospitalizations, where lower respiratory tract
infections, skin and soft tissue infections, and infections of the kidney, urinary tract, and bladder
contribute to most of these health disparities.46
The ANV program has shown significant progress (see chart below) documenting, since 2005,
the number of ANV homes and projects that have increased access to safe water and sanitation
(in combination with other federal agencies). Over this period of time, the ANV program
contributed 31 percent (including the required State match) of all available funding available
from Federal Agencies:
Based on the Indian Health Service Sanitation Tracking and Reporting System.
43 As reported by the State of Alaska, Department of Environmental Conservation, Remote Maintenance Worker program
outcome reports
44
45 Robert C. Holman, Anianne M Folkema, Rosalyn J. Singleton, John T. Redd, Krista Y. Christensen, Claudia A Steiner,
Lawrence B Schonberger, Thomas W. Hennessy, James E. Cheek (2011), Disparities in Infectious Disease Hospitalizations for
American Indian/Alaska Native People, Public Health Rep. 2011 Jul-Aug; 126(4): 508-521,
http://www.ncbi.nhn.nih. gov/pmc/articles/PMC31152107
46 Hennessy
802
-------
Access to Drinking Waterand Sanitation in Alaska Native Villages
By Year Due to Federal Investment
(EPA, IMS, USDARD, H UD, & BIA)
16,000
140
120
100 J2
u
Ol
'o
80 £
- 60 -
O
a-
Ol
- 40
20
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
*Data Source: Indian Health Service Sanitation Tracking and Reporting System
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
The ANV program is administered by the State of Alaska and funds infrastructure development
for ANV communities that lack access to drinking water and basic sanitation. The FY 2015
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 2015 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 2015, 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 ANV 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.
803
-------
New Innovative Arctic Technologies Research and Development Effort
The State of Alaska's FY 2013 capital State budget included $1 million to investigate the
development and use of innovative and cost effective technologies to deliver water and
wastewater services in rural Alaska47. Proposals were received from 18 different organizations.
Many Alaska Native Villages cannot afford the high operation and maintenance costs associated
with piped or haul systems. The monthly user cost for operating these systems is often more than
five percent monthly household income in many villages (versus 1 to 2 percent in most urban US
areas). In order to provide people in rural communities with adequate water for sanitation needs
and to provide needed improvements in public health, the State of Alaska believes that a
different approach to delivering these services is needed. The State funds will be used to
encourage and accelerate private sector research and development of technologies that show
promise for significantly reducing capital and operating costs associated with existing
approaches. The ANV program will work in cooperation with the State in this effort in
evaluating proposed alternative approaches, their feasibility, and potential impact on public
health.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(Opb) Percent of serviceable rural Alaska homes with access to drinking water supply and
wastewater disposal.
FY 2008
94
91
FY 2009
96
91
FY 2010
98
92
FY2011
92
92
FY 2012
93
91
FY 2013
93
91
FY 2014
93.5
FY 2015
92.5
Units
Homes
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
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.
47 The EPA Alaska Native Villages grants program neither currently funds this R&D effort nor does the program currently have
the authority to fund R&D.
804
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$100,775.2
$100,775.2
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$90,000.0
$90,000.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$85,000.0
$85,000.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($5,000.0)
($5,000.0)
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 study completed in 2012concluded that
cleaning up brownfield properties lead to residential property value increases of 5.1 to 12.8
percent.48 According to a 2007 study, an average of 10 jobs are created for every acre of
brownfields redevelopment.49 Based on historical data provided by the Assessment Cleanup and
Redevelopment Exchanges System (ACRES) database, $1 of EPA Brownfields funding
leverages between $17 and $18 in other public and private funding. 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.
Under this program, the EPA will provide cooperative agreement funding for: 1) assessments 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 resources for recipients to
clean up sites they own; 3) capitalization for Revolving Loan Funds (RLFs) to provide low
interest loans and sub-grants for cleanups; 4) environmental workforce development and job
training 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 5) support for localities, states, tribes, and non-profit organizations for research,
training, and technical assistance for brownfields-related activities. In addition, the EPA will
48 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
49 Rowland, Marie. 2007. "Employment Effects of Brownfields Redevelopment, What Do We Know from the Literature?"
Journal of Planning Literature. 22:91.
805
-------
offer technical assistance, 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.
The Brownfields program is a successful model of working cooperatively with states, tribes,
local governments, and other federal agencies to help communities oversee, plan, assess, and
cleanup brownfield properties. The program will continue to work with relevant governmental
agencies to build new tools and strategies that enhance coordination to help communities
prioritize sites for assessment, cleanup, and sustainable reuse.
The EPA also will use resources to maintain the Area Wide Planning (AWP) program and
strengthen our integrated approach to communities and tribes across multiple program offices,
and work to leverage resources and activities to maximize environmental benefits for
communities. The AWP grants will continue to incorporate principles of sustainability,
adaptation and resiliency, cross program planning and integration.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the EPA will build on our current work to make a visible difference in communities
across the country by providing communities financial and technical assistance to assess,
cleanup, and plan reuse at brownfield sites. 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 119 assessment cooperative agreements (estimated $29.8
million) that recipients may use to inventory, assess, cleanup, and plan reuse at
brownfields sites, as authorized under CERCLA 104(k)(2). In FY 2015, 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 within the assessment
coalition members' areas. This level of assessment funding will lead to approximately
700 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 2015 funding level includes an estimated $4.4 million to
perform Targeted Brownfields Assessments for 40 communities.
• Funding will support approximately 52 direct cleanup cooperative agreements (estimated
$10.4 million) to enable eligible entities to clean up properties that the recipient owns.
806
-------
This funding will lead to approximately 52 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 plans to alternate the grant competition cycle and award RLF cooperative
agreements to eligible recipients every other year beginning in FY 2015 to focus efforts
on supporting and building the existing RLF grantee's programs. By alternating this
competition to every other year, the Brownfields program will be able to reduce the costs
of the Assessment, Revolving Loan Fund, and Cleanup (ARC) Grants competition and
will utilize the grant funds in off years to fund eligible high performing existing RLF
grantees. Additionally, this alternating schedule will allow regional staff to provide more
assistance and attention to managing existing grants and to maximize results and promote
timely implementation. This would have the additional benefit of reducing unliquidated
obligations in existing RLF grants. The next RLF grant competition will occur in FY
2016.
• The agency will provide supplemental RLF funding (estimated $5.8 million) to existing
high performing RLF recipients. The RLF Supplemental funding will lead to
approximately 20 sites being 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 $3.4 million) will provide funding for approximately 17
cooperative agreements of up to $200 thousand each for a three year project period. This
funding will provide environmental job training for community residents to take
advantage of new jobs created as result of the assessment and cleanup of brownfields, as
authorized under CERCLA 104(k)(6), as well as other jobs created through EPA funds,
such as wastewater treatment facilities, emergency response activities, solid waste
remediation and recycling centers, and Superfund cleanup projects. 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 December 2013, approximately 12,100 individuals have
completed training and approximately 8,600 of those obtained employment in the
environmental field with an average starting hourly wage of $14.00. This equates to a
cumulative placement rate of 71 percent since the program was created. The FY 2015
funding level will lead to approximately 850 people trained and 600 placed in jobs.
• Funding also will 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 Brownfields Law requires the program to select the highest ranking
proposals. In order to award funding to the highest ranked proposals, the EPA is
requesting the flexibility to use up to 25 percent of its CERCLA104 (k) funding to
807
-------
address petroleum contaminated sites versus an exact 25 percent identified by statute.
The current 25 percent set-aside restricts the brownfields program from selecting higher-
ranked applicants who requested hazardous substances funding. Replacing the 25 percent
set-aside requirement with a 25 percent ceiling would provide the EPA with the
flexibility to select the highest ranked project, regardless of the type of money requested
and therefore meet the demand of the communities applying for the various brownfields
grants. For example, hazardous substances funding requests account for approximately 68
percent of all brownfields funding requests in the past three years, while the demand for
petroleum funding hovers around 32 percent of brownfields funds requested.
• The agency will provide funding to support 20 area wide planning grants (estimated $4.5
million) awarded under CERCLA Section 104(k)(6) and provide technical assistance
through Targeted Brownfield Assessments, interagency agreements, and/or contracts to
support area wide planning activities. 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. These grants resources will
work to enhance the livability and economic vitality of neighborhoods in and around
brownfields sites by furthering on the ground implementation and coordination activities,
enhancing program design, and leveraging work of other partners.
• Funding also will support additional training, research, technical assistance grants,
cooperative agreements, and direct services from contractors and under interagency
agreements (estimated $5.4 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 ACRES database 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
2015.
Performance Targets:
Measure
Target
Actual
(B29) Brownfield properties assessed.
FY2008
1,000
1,453
FY2009
1,000
1,295
FY2010
1,000
1,326
FY2011
1,000
1,784
FY2012
1,200
1,444
FY2013
1,200
1,528
FY2014
1,200
FY2015
1,200
Units
Properties
Measure
Target
Actual
(B32) Number of properties cleaned up using Brownfields funding.
FY2008
60
78
FY2009
60
93
FY2010
60
109
FY2011
60
130
FY2012
120
120
FY2013
120
122
FY2014
120
FY2015
115
Units
Properties
Measure
Target
Actual
(B34) Jobs leveraged from Brownfields activities.
FY2008
5,000
5,484
FY2009
5,000
6,490
FY2010
5,000
5,177
FY2011
5,000
6,447
FY2012
5,000
5,593
FY2013
5,000
10,141
FY2014
5,000
FY2015
4,750
Units
Jobs
808
-------
Measure
Target
Actual
(B37) Billions of dollars of cleanup and redevelopment funds leveraged at Brownfields sites.
FY2008
0.9
1.48
FY2009
0.9
1.06
FY2010
0.9
1.40
FY2011
0.9
2.14
FY2012
1.2
1.2
FY2013
1.2
1.54
FY2014
1.2
FY2015
1.1
Units
Dollars
(Billions)
Measure
Target
Actual
(B33) Acres of Brownfields properties made ready for reuse.
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
4,644
FY 2014
3,000
FY 2015
2,800
Units
Acres
Extensive analysis50 using ACRES data suggests a multi-year time lag in realizing performance
outcomes. Since the EPA Brownfields program budget has been declining for several years,
several performance targets for FY 2015 have been reduced. The cumulative effect of recent
funding reductions will continue to affect program performance targets and results in future
years.
The EPA's performance measures for the Brownfields program are strongly influenced by
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 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$5,000.0) This change reduces funding for assessment, RLF, cleanup and EWDJT
cooperative agreements as authorized under CERCLA 104(k)(2), 104(k)(3) and
104(k)(6). The reductions may include 10 fewer assessment grants, two fewer RLF
grants, four fewer cleanup grants, and one fewer EWDJT grant.
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.
'httpV/www.epa.gov^ownfields/pdfs/Brownfields-E valuation-Parts-I-II.pdf
809
-------
Diesel Emissions Reduction Grant Program
Program Area: State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
Goal: Addressing 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 2013
Actuals
$11,706.9
$11,706.9
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$20,000.0
$20,000.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
($20,000.0)
($20,000.0)
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Diesel Emissions Reduction Act (DERA) Grant Program has provided 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 and reauthorized by the Diesel Emission Reduction Act of 2010 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 also 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, the agency estimates that
approximately 1.5 million old diesel engines would still remain in use in 2030.
Through FY 2012, the DERA program reduced the emissions of approximately 60,000 diesel
vehicles, vessels or equipment, reducing NOx by almost 250,000 tons and PM by 16,000 tons.
Over 230 million gallons of fuel were saved. 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. 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. These projects have eliminated or will eliminate tens of thousands of
tons of pollution from the air we breathe, and are targeted in areas that are disproportionately
810
-------
impacted by diesel emissions. 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, improving the health of our most vulnerable citizens. However, as the program
begins to retrofit or replace engines that are not as old and polluting, the cost effectiveness of the
program decreases.
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA is not requesting DERA grant funds for FY 2015.
In FY 2015, the EPA will continue to manage DERA grants, rebates and loans issued in prior
years. The EPA also will track, assess, and report the results of the DERA grants, such as
numbers of engines, emissions benefits, and cost-benefit information. Finally, the EPA will
continue to provide diesel emission reduction technology verification and evaluation and provide
that information to the public.
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 Eight-Year Performance Array in the Program Performance and Assessment section.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$20,000.0) This reduction reflects elimination of DERA grant funding due to tough
budget choices in a constrained federal budget context. In addition, 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 emissions standards.
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.
811
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$5,098.0
$5,098.0
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$5,000.0
$5,000.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$5,000.0
$5,000.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
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
for 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.51 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 economic productivity gained.
52
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.53 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
all projects since all funded projects must demonstrate that they will provide a positive public
51 U.S.-Mexico Border Health Commission, http://www.borderhealth.org/border_region.php
52 United Nations Development Program, Beyond Scarcity: Power, Poverty and the Global Water Crisis, Human Development
Report, 2006.
53EPA/SEMARNAT, "State of the Border Region: Indicators Report", 1 st edition, 2011.
812
-------
health and/or environmental benefit to the United States, whether the project is located in the
U.S. or Mexico. 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. EPA's investments in the Mexican side projects represent only a third of
the total project construction costs, while leveraging two thirds of the remaining total costs from
the Mexican government and other funding sources, and preventing contamination from raw
sewage discharges in shared waters. EPA's investment leverages Mexican funds for the benefit
of the U.S. If not for the EPA's investment, Mexican funds would likely be invested in other
parts of Mexico that do not directly benefit the U.S. Preventing raw sewage discharges to shared
water resources is especially critical in a region that is already facing water scarcity challenges.
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.
The U.S.-Mexico Border Program is one of the few federal programs that assists communities in
the planning and design of water and sanitation infrastructure projects. Planning and design is
essential to advance projects to a construction ready stage, create sustainable communities and
access public and private funding. Currently, the program is assisting 26 communities in
planning and design of projects to address their needs, including first time access to safe drinking
water and sanitation of 81,870 homes. The estimated Border Infrastructure Program construction
need for these projects is $14 million. The bulk of FY 2015 funding will be allocated to the
construction of construction ready projects. A significantly smaller portion will go towards the
planning and design of new projects. This assistance helps border communities advance their
projects to a construction-ready stage, allowing them to successfully apply for a variety of
construction grants. Final decisions on the use of FY 2015 funding will be based on balancing
the construction needs of fully designed projects with the planning and design needs of
prioritized projects.
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 107 projects. More than eight million people are benefiting from 84
completed projects, and more than half a million additional people are expected to benefit once
the 23 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.
813
-------
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
In FY 2015, the U.S.-Mexico Border Water Infrastructure Program will continue to fund high-
priority water and wastewater infrastructure projects. The FY 2015 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 prioritized 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.
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.
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
108.2
108.5
FY2012
115
119
FY2013
121.5
128.3
FY2014
137.3
FY2015
142
Units
Million
Pounds/
Year
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.
FY2008
2,500
(Annual)
5,162
(Annual)
FY2009
1,500
(Annual)
1,584
(Annual)
FY2010
28,434
(Cumulative)
52,130
(Cumulative)
FY2011
54,130
(Cumulative)
54,734
(Cumulative)
FY2012
1,000
(Annual)
5,185
(Annual)
FY2013
3,000
(Annual)
3,400
(Annual)
FY2014
1,700
(Annual)
FY2015
520
(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.
FY2008
15,000
(Annual)
31,686
(Annual)
FY2009
105,500
(Annual)
43,594
(Annual)
FY2010
246,175
(Cumulative)
254,125
(Cumulative)
FY2011
461,125
(Cumulative)
513,041
(Cumulative)
FY2012
10,500
(Annual)
31,092
(Annual)
FY2013
27,000
(Annual)
25,695
(Annual)
FY2014
39,500
(Annual)
FY2015
44,700
(Annual)
Units
Homes
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
814
-------
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.
815
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2015 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - E-Manifest
Resource Summary Table 817
Program Projects in E-Manifest 817
Program Area: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 818
RCRA: Waste Management 819
816
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2015 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 2013
Actuals
$0.0
0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$3,674.0
8.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$10,423.0
8.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$6,749.0
0.0
Bill Language: Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest System Fund
For necessary expenses 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, $10,423,000, to remain available
until September 30, 2017.
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 2013
Actuals
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
FY 2014
Enacted
$3,674.0
$3,674.0
$3,674.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$10,423.0
$10,423.0
$10,423.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$6,749.0
$6,749.0
$6,749.0
817
-------
Program Area: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
818
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$0.0
$60,273.9
$60,273.9
344.1
FY 2014
Enacted
$3,674.0
$62,376.0
$66,050.0
352.7
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$10,423.0
$60,121.0
$70,544.0
341.5
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$6,749.0
($2,255.0)
$4,494.0
-11.2
Program Project Description:
On October 5, 2012, the President signed the Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest
Establishment Act (e-Manifest Act, Public Law 112-195), or the e-Manifest Act, requiring the
EPA to assemble and maintain the information contained in the estimated five 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, 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 regulated entities to submit, maintain,
process, and publish 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 more than $75 million annually,1 by replacing time
consuming paper-based reporting with an electronic manifest system. The program will provide
better knowledge of waste generation and final disposition; enhanced manifest inspection and
enforcement; and greater transparency for the public about hazardous waste shipments.
In FY 2014, Congress established a new appropriation, the "Hazardous Waste Electronic
Manifest System Fund" (or e-Manifest Fund) to carry out the activities necessary to implement
the e-Manifest program. The Fund covers all aspects of the e-Manifest program, including
system development, rulemaking, and advisory committee establishment. Once this system is in
place, the fees collected through the program will be used to fund the operation and development
of the program. This appropriation was created by the e-Manifest Act to assist in managing
resources and user fees for the development and operation of the system.
1 From a 2009 programmatic estimate, cited in Hazardous Waste Management System; Modification of the Hazardous Waste
Manifest System; Electronic Manifests; Final Rule. 40 CFR § 260, 262, 263, 264, 265, and 271.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014-02-07/pdf/2014-01352.pdf
819
-------
FY 2015 Activities and Performance Plan
The e-Manifest program requires significant funds for FY 2015 in order to procure appropriate
contractor support to begin developing the IT system. In this system development phase the
agency will actually begin to build the e-Manifest system, which entails activities such as major
software development/modification, database development, and establishing appropriate IT
server hosting capabilities. The EPA's FY 2015 budget, in accordance with the direction set by
the FY 2014 omnibus report language, redirects $2.15 million of e-Manifest contract funds out of
the EPM appropriation and into the new appropriation. This will move all funding, including
payroll, into the e-Manifest Fund as desired by Congress to support system development and all
other e-manifest program related activities, including rulemaking, and establishing the e-
Manifest advisory Board required by the e-Manifest Act.
In FY 2014, the EPA completed the regulation that authorizes the electronic transmittal of
manifests;2 and began IT system technical architecture planning work, which entails activities
such as completing plans and strategies for state and industry system integration and data
sharing, and developing a mobile strategy. In FY 2014, the agency also began work on the user
fee rule. With the additional resources in FY 2015, the EPA anticipates completing the
procurement process and award of the contract to build the system itself. The EPA plans to
perform the following key activities:
• Begin the development of the e-Manifest IT system;
• Work to complete the proposed User Fee Rule in early FY 2016, including economic
models to support this rule;
• Analyze and determine what accounting and financial reporting structures need to be
implemented to collect and manage user fees;
• Conduct essential resource planning and other activities necessary to establish the e-
Manifest Advisory Board consisting of state and industry stakeholders and IT experts, as
required by the e-Manifest Act, in order to provide input on system performance and user
fee adjustments; and
• Continue to collaborate with the agency's E-Enterprise effort to ensure the e-Manifest
project incorporates E-Enterprise concepts, approaches, and tools that are relevant and
available during system development.
Performance Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the RCRA Waste Management
program and supports strategic objective Preserve Land under Goal 3.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$13.0) This increase reflects the recalculation of base workforce costs due to
adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
2 The agency recently completed a rulemaking, known as the "one year rule," that provides the legal framework for use of
electronic manifests. See http://www.gpo.gov/fdsvs/pkg/FR-2014-02-07/pdf/2014-01352.pdf
820
-------
• (+$6,736.0) These realigned resources provide funding needed to continue developing the
e-Manifest system. These resources also support the preparation of the user-fee rule as
well as initiation of an Advisory Board. Consistent with the FY 2014 Consolidated
Appropriation Act, all resources required for e-Manifest program are included under the
e-Manifest appropriation only.
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.
821
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2015 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Program Performance and Assessment
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY.... 824
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS 837
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT 864
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING
POLLUTION 878
GOAL 5: PROTECTING HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT BY
ENFORCING LAWS AND ASSURING COMPLIANCE 892
NPM: OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 898
NPM: OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION AND RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 905
NPM: OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION 906
NPM: OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL 907
822
-------
823
-------
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: ADDRESSING 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: Minimize the threats posed by climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and taking actions
that help to protect human health and help communities and ecosystems become more sustainable and resilient to the effects of climate change.
Program Area
(1) Address
Climate
Change
Performance
Measures and
Data
Strategic Measure: By 2018, additional programs from across EPA will promote practices to help Americans save energy and
conserve resources, leading to expected greenhouse gas emissions reductions of 1,147.5 MMTCO2Eq. from a baseline without
adoption of efficient practices. Building Programs 215.5 MMTCO2Eq., Industrial Programs 651.4 MMTCO2Eq., SmartWay
Transportation Partnership 100 MMTCO2Eq., Pollution Prevention Programs 40 MMTCO2Eq., Sustainable Materials
Management Programsl 17.4 MMTCO2Eq., WaterSense Program 23 MMTCO2Eq., Executive Order 135 14[3] GHG Reduction
Program 0.21 MMTCO2Eq., This reduction compares to 621.08 MMTCO2Eq. reduced in 201 1. Baseline FY 201 1: Building
Programs 189.0 MMTCO2Eq., Industrial Programs 357.9 MMTCO2Eq., SmartWay Transportation Partnership 27.9
MMTCO2Eq., Pollution Prevention Programs 7 MMTCO2Eq., Sustainable Materials Management Programs 22.1
MMTCO2Eq., WaterSense Program 7 MMTCO2Eq., Executive Order 13514[3] GHG Reduction Program 0.18 MMTCO2Eq.
(PM G02) Million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTCO2E) of greenhouse gas reductions
Target
Actual
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
221.9
FY 2013
182.6
Data Avail
12/2014
FY 2014
196.2
in the buildings sector.
FY 2015
188.0
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.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
in the transportation
FY 2015
Unit
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
824
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
3.3
4.2
5.5
5.9
15.4
17.3
23.7
27.9
28.0
38.9
33.0
51.6
61
70
MMTCO2e
Additional Information: Starting with FY 2012, 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. EPA adjusted the
actuals for FY 2010-2012 and targets for FY 2014 and FY 201 5 in order to reflect updated methodology that incorporates the impact of EPA's Heavy Duty vehicle rules.
(PM G16) Million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTCO2E) of greenhouse gas reductions in the industry sector.
Target
Actual
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
378.1
FY 2013
421.9
Data Avail
12/2014
FY 2014
461.8
FY 2015
540.3
Unit
MMTCO2e
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 2018, an additional 240 state, tribal, and community partners will integrate climate change data,
models, information, and other decision support tools developed by EPA for climate change adaptation into their planning
processes. (Baseline: 0.)
(PM ADI) Cumulative number of major scientific models and decision support tools used in implementing
environmental management programs that integrate climate change science data.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
3
3
FY 2013
4
4
FY 2014
5
FY 2015
5
Unit
Major
Models and
Tools
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
825
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: Integrated Climate and Land Use Scenarios (ICLUS), Robust Decision Making (RDM) tool, and Updated CRWU Toolbox, Climate Ready
Estuaries Coastal Toolkit
Additional Information: To ensure EPA's mission, EPA will build resilience to climate change by integrating considerations of climate data into major scientific models
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 201 1 baseline is 0 major scientific models/decision support tools.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, 240 state, tribal, and community partners will incorporate climate change adaptation into the
implementation of their environmental programs supported by major EPA financial mechanisms (grants, loans, contracts, and
technical assistance agreements). (Baseline: 5.)
(PM ADS) Cumulative number of major grant, loan, contract, or technical assistance agreement programs
integrate climate science data into climate sensitive projects that have an environmental outcome.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
l
3
FY 2013
2
5
FY 2014
3
FY 2015
3
that
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, EPA Brownfield's cleanup grants, Institute for Tribal Environment Professionals (ITEP) grant
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 201 1 baseline is 0 programs
(PM G18) Percentage of Annual Greenhouse Gas Emission Reports verified by EPA before publication.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
93
96
FY 2014
95
FY 2015
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, 95percent of the reports published will be verified through the process
described above.
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
826
-------
Objective 2 - Improve Air Quality: Achieve and maintain health- and welfare-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 2018, the population-weighted average concentrations of ozone (smog) in all monitored counties will
decrease to 0.072 ppm compared to the average of 0.076 ppm in 201 1, a reduction of 5 percent.
(PM A01) Annual emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) from electric power generation sources.
Target
Actual
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
3,319,000
FY 2013
6,000,000
Data Avail
12/2014
FY 2014
6,000,000
FY 2015
6,000,000
Unit
Tons
Emitted
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 1 990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA). Statutory SO2 emissions
capped in 20 10 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 201 1-2014 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.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
8
9
FY 2009
10
13
FY 2010
ll
15
FY2011
12
16
FY 2012
13
13
FY 2013
15
Data Avail
12/2014
FY 2014
16
FY 2015
16
Unit
Percent
Reduction
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 2018, the population-weighted average concentrations of inhalable fine particles in all monitored
counties will decrease to 9.5 |ig/m3 compared to the average of 10.4 |ig/m3 in 201 1, a reduction of 9 percent.
(PM M91) Cumulative percentage reduction in population-weighted ambient concentration of fine particulate matter
(PM-2.5) in all monitored counties from 2003 baseline.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
Unit
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
827
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
4
13
5
17
6
23
15
26
16
26
20
Data Avail
12/2014
28
29
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 201 1 based on recent trend data.
(PM P34) Cumulative tons of PM-2.5 reduced since 2000 from mobile sources.
Target
Actual
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
159,164
FY 2014
171,407
FY 2015
183,651
Unit
Tons
Reduced
Additional Information: The baseline for 2000 for PM-2.5 emissions from mobile sources is 510,550 tons. The 2000 Mobile6 inventory is used as the baseline for mobile
source emissions.
Strategic Measure: Through 2018, maintain emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) from electric power generation sources to 5.0
million tons per year compared to the 2009 level of 5.7 million tons emitted. (In 201 1, these sources emitted 4.5 million tons.)
(Rationale for baseline year: 2009 is the year immediately proceeding the first year of SO2 compliance under the Clean Air
Interstate Rule [CAIR] and full implementation of Acid Rain's permanent cap on utility SO2 emissions.)
(PM O34) Cumulative millions of tons of Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) reduced since 2000 from mobile sources.
Target
Actual
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
4.41
FY 2014
4.74
FY 2015
5.08
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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
No Target
Established
FY 2015
Unit
Percent in
Compliance
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
828
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Additional Information: EPA is eliminating this measure for both FY 2014 and FY 2015. The original intent for the measure does not accurately reflect current program
scope and performance.
(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 2008
25
52
FY 2009
29
59
FY 2010
33
70
FY2011
37
73
FY 2012
50
72
FY 2013
80
Data Avail
12/2014
FY 2014
80
FY 2015
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 1 5 .Spercent reduction. The AQI is an
index for 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 M94) Percent of major NSR permits issued within one year of receiving a com
Target
Actual
FY 2008
78
79
FY 2009
78
76
FY 2010
78
46
FY2011
78
73
FY 2012
78
80
FY 2013
78
Data Avail
12/2014
plete permit application.
FY 2014
78
FY 2015
78
Unit
Percent
Issued
Additional Information: The baseline in 2004 is 6 1 percent. 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 M9f
permit a
Target
Actual
5) Percent of significant Title V operating permit revisions issued within 18 months of receiving a complete
pplication.
FY 2008
97
85
FY 2009
100
87
FY 2010
100
82
FY2011
100
84
FY 2012
100
86
FY 2013
100
Data Avail
12/2014
FY 2014
88
FY 2015
88
Unit
Percent
Issued
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
829
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: EPA did not meet its target inFY2012asa result of increased workload and reduced resources for state, tribal and local air pollution control
agencies, who issue the vast majority of air permits in the United States. The Agency continues to make progress towards Goal 1 Strategic Objectives and will continue to
work with its regulatory partners and as necessary, adjust targets to reflect implementation realities.
Additional Information: The baseline in 2004 is lOOpercent. 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 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 complete permit application.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
91
72
FY 2009
95
70
FY 2010
99
67
FY2011
99
72
FY 2012
99
76
FY 2013
99
Data Avail
12/2014
FY 2014
75
FY 2015
75
Unit
Percent
Issued
Explanation of Results: EPA did not meet its target inFY2012asa result of increased workload and reduced resources for state, tribal and local air pollution control
agencies, who issue the vast majority of air permits in the United States. The Agency continues to make progress towards Goal 1 Strategic Objectives and will continue to
work with its regulatory partners and as necessary, adjust targets to reflect implementation realities.
Additional Information: The baseline in 2004 is 75percent. 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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
10
41
FY 2014
10
FY 2015
10
Unit
Percentage
Removed
Explanation of Results: Continued progress at the FY 13 levels may not be possible. Regions acted on SIPs that were easier to remove from the backlog. The remaining
SIP backlog may require greater efforts which would reduce the overall percentage removed in future years. The regions have made reducing the SIP backlog a high
priority and focused additional efforts in FY 13 to reducing the backlog. These additional resources may not be available in FY 14 and beyond.
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
667. This number will be a static number against which progress will be measured for the fiscal year.
(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.
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
830
-------
Program Area
(2) Reduce Air
Toxics
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
FY 2008
19
37
FY 2009
23
47
FY 2010
26
56
FY2011
29
58
FY 2012
45
54
FY 2013
50
Data Avail
12/2014
FY 2014
50
FY 2015
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 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
2.19
FY 2014
2.36
FY 2015
2.53
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 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
2.23
FY 2014
2.4
FY 2015
2.57
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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
.011
.011
FY2011
.012
.012
FY 2012
.012
.012
FY 2013
.013
.013
FY 2014
FY 2015
Unit
Tons per
Dollar
Additional Information: This measure is being phased out and 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).
Strategic Measure: Through 2018, maintain air toxics (toxi city- weighted for cancer) emissions reductions to 4.2 million tons
from the 1993 toxicity-weighted baseline of 7.2 million tons
(PM 001) Cumulative percentage reduction in tons of toxicity-weighted (for cancer risk) emissions of air toxics from
1993 baseline.
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
831
-------
Program Area
(4) Reduce
Exposure to
Indoor Air
Pollutants
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
FY 2008
35
40
FY 2009
36
40
FY 2010
36
40
FY2011
36
Data Avail
4/2014
FY 2012
37
Data Avail
4/2014
FY 2013
42
Data Avail
4/2015
FY 2014
42
FY 2015
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 201 1 inventory due in August of 2013, the agency
will need to update these targets to reflect more current projections.
(PM 002) Cumulative percentage reduction in tons of toxicity-weighted (for non-cancer risk) emissions of air toxics from
1993 baseline.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
59
53
FY 2009
59
53
FY 2010
59
53
FY2011
59
Data Avail
4/2014
FY 2012
59
Data Avail
4/2014
FY 2013
59
Data Avail
4/2015
FY 2014
59
FY 2015
58
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 2013, the agency
will need to update these targets to reflect more current projections.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, the number of future premature lung cancer deaths prevented annually through lowered radon
exposure will increase to 1,056 from the 2008 baseline of 756 future premature lung cancer deaths prevented. The 201 1
benchmark is 905 future premature lung cancer deaths prevented.
(PM 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.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
ll.l
11.0
FY 2009
11.5
12.0
FY 2010
12.0
12.3
FY2011
12.5
12.9
FY 2012
13.3
16.0
FY 2013
13.9
Data Avail
12/2014
FY 2014
13.9
FY 2015
13.9
Unit
Percent of
Homes
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
832
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
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 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
44.6
FY 2013
37.5
Data Avail
12/2014
FY 2014
37.5
FY 2015
37.5
Unit
Percent of
Homes
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 2018, the number of people taking all essential actions to reduce exposure to indoor environmental
asthma triggers in homes and schools will increase to 9 million from the 2003 baseline of 3.0 million. EPA will place special
emphasis on reducing racial and ethnic asthma disparities among children. The 2012 benchmark is 6.5 million people taking all
essential actions to reduce exposure to indoor environmental asthma triggers.
(PM R16) Percentage of the public that is aware of the asthma program's media campaign.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
>20
Data Not
Avail
FY 2009
>20
33
FY 2010
>30
Data Not
Avail
FY2011
>30
32
FY 2012
>30
Data Not Avail
FY 2013
>30
38
FY 2014
>30
FY 2015
>30
Unit
Percent
Aware
Additional Information: The baseline in 2003 is 27percent. 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
Actual
FY 2008
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
Data Avail
12/2014
FY 2014
3,000
FY 2015
3,000
Unit
Professionals
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.
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
833
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
(PM R22) Estimated annual number of schools establishing indoor air quality management plans consistent with EPA
guidance.
Target
Actual
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
Data Avail
12/2014
FY 2014
FY 2015
Unit
Schools
Explanation of Results: EPA did not meet its target in FY 2012 as a result of reduced funding, especially at the local 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. With limited program funding, EPA is unable to track annual progress on this metric beyond FY
2013.
Objective 3 - Restore and Protect the Ozone Layer: Restore and protect the earth's stratospheric ozone layer and protect the public from the
harmful effects of ultraviolet (UV) radiation.
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-depleting 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 1.800 ppb (1980 level). [Note: This strategic measure will not be adjusted at this time because
the baseline dates and milestones are set through the international treaty, the Montreal Protocol.]
(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 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
1,450
FY 2013
<3,700
Data Avail
12/2014
FY 2014
<3,700
FY 2015
<1,520
Unit
ODP Tons
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
834
-------
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.
Objective 4 - Minimize Exposure to Radiation: Minimize releases of radioactive material and be prepared to minimize exposure through
response and recovery actions should unavoidable releases occur.
Program Area
(1) Prepare for
Radiological
Emergencies
Performance Measures and
Data
Strategic Measure: Through 2018, EPA will maintain a 93 percent level of readiness of radiation emergency response program
personnel and assets that meet functional requirements necessary to support federal radiological emergency response and
recovery operations. (The 2012 readiness baseline is 91.5 percent. The level of readiness measure is based on the Agency's
Core National Approach to Response assessment process.
(PM R35) Level of readiness of radiation program personnel and assets to support federal radiological emergency
response and recovery operations.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
85
87
FY 2009
90
90
FY 2010
90
97
FY2011
90
97
FY 2012
90
92
FY 2013
90
Data Avail
12/2014
FY 2014
93
FY 2015
93
Unit
Percent
Readiness
Additional Information: The baseline in 2005 is a SOpercent 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
emergency.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
1.0
0.8
FY 2009
0.8
0.8
FY 2010
0.7
0.5
FY2011
0.7
0.5
FY 2012
0.5
0.4
FY 2013
0.5
Data Avail
12/2014
monitoring
FY 2014
0.5
data during an
FY 2015
0.5
Unit
Days
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
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
835
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
disposal of transuranic radioactive waste at WIPP.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
80
75
FY 2009
70
75
FY 2010
70
66
FY2011
70
64
FY 2012
70
73
FY 2013
70
Data Avail
12/2014
FY 2014
70
FY 2015
70
Unit
Days
Explanation of Results: EPA did not meet its target in FY 20 1 2 due to an increase in the number of Tier 1 inspections at its waste sites resulting in an increase in days to
approve site changes.
Additional Information: The baseline in 2004 is 150 days.
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
836
-------
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
Protect and restore waters to ensure that drinking water is safe and sustainably managed, and that aquatic ecosystems sustain fish, plants, wildlife,
and other biota, as well as economic, recreational, and subsistence activities.
Objective 1 - Protect Human Health: Achieve and maintain standards and guidelines protective of human health in drinking water supplies, fish,
shellfish, and recreational waters, and protect and sustainably manage drinking water resources.
Program Area
(1) Water Safe
to Drink
Performance Measures and Data
Strategic Measure: By 2018, 92 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. FY 2012 universe: 300.7 million people served by community water systems. Status as of FY 2012: 91
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 2008
90
92
FY 2009
90
92.1
FY 2010
90
92
FY2011
91
93.2
FY 2012
91
94.7
FY 2013
92
92
FY 2014
92
FY 2015
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 2008
86
90
FY 2009
89
92
FY 2010
86
91.3
FY2011
89
90
FY 2012
89
90
FY 2013
89
91
FY 2014
89
FY 2015
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 2008
95
87
FY 2009
95
88
FY 2010
95
87
FY2011
95
92
FY 2012
95
89
FY 2013
95
93
FY 2014
83
FY 2015
79
Unit
CWSs
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
837
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: Budget costs, staff shortages, furloughs have impacted the performance of this measure.
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 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
91
FY 2014
90
FY 2015
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 are returned
to compliance within 180 days, thereby reducing the potential to endanger underground sources of drinking water.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
90
85
FY 2013
85
89
FY 2014
85
FY 2015
85
Unit
Wells
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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
20,840
25,225
FY 2013
25,225
26,027
FY 2014
25,225
FY 2015
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.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
Unit
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
838
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
95
97
95
97.2
95
97.3
95
97.4
95
97.8
95
96.9
95
95
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 2008
72
79
FY 2009
73
80
FY 2010
73
82
FY2011
75
87
FY 2012
80
80
FY 2013
82
81
FY 2014
80
FY 2015
80
Unit
Population
Explanation of Results: Boil Water Order for systems in America Samoa, in combination with the small universe, significantly impacts the overall results. Improved
reporting over the next year will likely impact future results as well.
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 2018, 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. FY 2012 universe:
984,236 people in Indian county served by community water systems. Status as of FY 2012: 84 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 2008
87
83
FY 2009
87
81.2
FY 2010
87
87.2
FY2011
87
81.2
FY 2012
87
84
FY 2013
87
77
FY 2014
87
FY 2015
87
Unit
Population
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
839
-------
Program Area
(2) Fish and
Shellfish Safe
to Eat
Performance
Measures and
Data
Explanation of Results: This measure remains a challenge. Some regions have seen performance results impacted by Ground Water Rule requirements. Some of the most
significant challenges faced by EPA and tribes, as well as all drinking water facilities, in FY 2013 include:
Aging infrastructure;
Lacking adequate revenue to maintain existing systems or access to financing;
Retiring experienced system operators and inability to recruit new operators to replace them;
Increasing regulatory requirements; and
Understanding existing or new regulatory requirements is difficult.
It should be noted that there can be a great deal of fluctuation in results for this measure since tribal population tend to be small and that a single compliance issue heavily
impacts the performance results. For example, one violation at a utility that has SOpercent of an EPA Region's tribal population is significant.
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 2018, reduce the percentage of women of childbearing age having mercury levels in blood above the
level of concern to 2.1 percent. (2012 baseline (2009-2010 data): 2.3 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)
Target
Actual
Percent of women of childbearing age having mercury levels in blood above the level of concern.
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
2.3
FY 2014
4.9
FY 2015
2.3
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.
Objective 2 - Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems: Protect, restore, and sustain the quality of rivers, lakes, streams, and
wetlands on a watershed basis, and sustainably manage and protect coastal and ocean resources and ecosystems.
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
(1) Improve
Water Quality
on a
Watershed
Basis
Strategic Measure: By 2018, attain water quality standards for all pollutants and impairments in more than 4,430 water bodies
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 2013: 3,679 water bodies attained standards.)
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
840
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
(PM L) Number of water body segments identified by states in 2002 as not attaining standards, where water quality
standards are now fully attained (cumulative).
Target
Actual
FY 2008
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
3,679
FY 2014
3,829
FY 2015
3,979
Unit
Segments
Explanation of Results: The Budget Target was not met. EPA anticipated that beginning in 2013 the results for this measure would be lower than in the past due to a
number of challenges:
• Reduced state budgets are slowing implementation activities which are necessary to improve impaired waterbodies.
• Meeting standards in a single waterbody 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 which remain in waters identified in 2002 require many years before restoration strategies accomplish full recovery of the
waterbody segments.
For future reporting, the EPA is evaluating a new approach for measuring local improvements in water quality. The goal is to provide a consistent method for measuring
progress. This new approach will enable the EPA to more effectively track water quality outcomes from investments in protection and restoration.
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 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
97
FY 2014
94.5
FY 2015
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 wastewater
discharge standards.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
86
86
FY 2009
86
Data
Unavailable
FY 2010
86
86.9
FY2011
86
86.7
FY 2012
86
88.3
FY 2013
86
88.3
FY 2014
86
FY 2015
Unit
POTWs
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
841
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
(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 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
4.4
FY 2013
4.5
Data Avail
03/2014
FY 2014
4.5
FY 2015
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 waterbodies. 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 2013 results will
be available March 1, 2014.
Additional Information: In 2005, there was a reduction of 558,000 pounds 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 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
9
FY 2013
9.1
Data Avail
03/2014
FY 2014
9.1
FY 2015
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 waterbodies. 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 2013 results will
be available March 1, 2014.
Additional Information: In 2005, there was a reduction of 3.7 million pounds of nitrogen from nonpoint sources.
(PM bph) Estimated
(Section 319 funded
Target
Actual
FY 2008
700
2,100
additional reduction in thousands of tons of sediment from nonpoint sources to water bodies
projects only).
FY 2009
700
2,300
FY 2010
700
2,100
FY2011
700
2,007
FY 2012
700
1,100
FY 2013
1,100
Data Avail
03/2014
FY 2014
1,200
FY 2015
1,200
Unit
Tons
(Thousand)
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
842
-------
Program Area
Performance
Measures and
Data
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 waterbodies. 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 2013 results will
be available March 1, 2014.
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 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
59,210
FY 2014
61,390
FY 2015
Unit
TMDLs
Explanation of Results: In FY 201 3, over 1 3,000 TMDLs were due to a State- wide mercury TMDL in North Carolina. There were fewer Consent Decree TMDLs for
EPA and States to develop, so the majority of TMDLs were developed by the States. Due to continued budget cuts, States continue to be impacted and have limited
resources to solely focus on TMDL development, and as such States are shifting their focus to prioritize how resources will be spent (e.g., implementation). This approach
is in-line with the new 303(d) program measure, which will start to be tracked in FY 2015.
Additional Information: Cumulatively, more than 59,000 state TMDLs were completed through FY 2013. 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
Target
Actual
FY 2008
95
120
FY 2009
95
147
FY 2010
95
142
FY2011
100
135
FY 2012
100
130
in the fiscal
FY 2013
80
55
year.
FY 2014
80
FY 2015
80
Unit
Permits
Explanation of Results: This measure was changed for FY 201 3, which caused some confusion as people adjust to the new requirements. There were also some states that
had a stretch goal. Additionally, priority permits are often the hardest to issue due to a high level of interest from third parties. Resources are also diminished in many
states.
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, 104percent of
the designated priority permits were issued in the fiscal year. Starting in FY2013, results can no longer exceed lOOpercent 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.
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
843
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
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
657,299
FY 2014
FY 2015
Unit
Dollars
Additional Information: The cost per water segment restored was $1,544,998 in 2004.
(PM bpn) Percent of major dischargers in Significant Noncompliance (SNC) at any time during the fiscal year.
Target
Actual
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
21
FY 2013
22.5
Data Avail
03/2014
FY 2014
FY 2015
Unit
Dischargers
Explanation of Results: As in previous years, due to the reporting cycle and QA/QC time, data for this measure is currently unavailable. Data from OECA will become
available in March 2014.
(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 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
82.4
FY 2014
87
FY 2015
Unit
Submissions
Explanation of Results: Higher priority work and complex policy, technical, and litigation issues have caused several submissions to have an extended or delayed, lower
priority review for approval. Examples include Florida's SSAC for nutrients and Maine's human health criteria.
Additional Information: In 2004, the baseline was 87.6 percent submissions approved.
(PM bpr) Loading (pounds) of pollutants removed per program dollar expended.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
332
332
FY 2009
368
368
FY 2010
371
371
FY2011
377
377
FY 2012
385
385
FY 2013
409
409
FY 2014
FY 2015
Unit
Pounds
Additional Information: The loading (pounds) of pollutants removed per program dollar expended was 122 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
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
844
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
standards. The terms "approved" and "established" refer to the completion and approval of the TMDL itself.]
Target
Actual
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
68,061
FY 2014
70,238
FY 2015
Unit
TMDLs
Explanation of Results: In FY 201 3, over 1 3,000 TMDLs were due to a State- wide mercury TMDL in North Carolina. There were fewer Consent Decree TMDLs for
EPA and States to develop, so the majority of TMDLs were developed by the States. Due to continued budget cuts, States continue to be impacted and have limited
resources to solely focus on TMDL development, and as such States are shifting their focus to prioritize how resources will be spent (e.g., implementation). This approach
is in-line with the new 303(d) program measure, which will start to be tracked in FY 2015.
Additional Information: Cumulatively, EPA and states completed more than 68,000 TMDLs through FY 2013. 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 2008
95
119
FY 2009
95
144
FY 2010
95
138
FY2011
100
132
FY 2012
100
128
FY 2013
80
55
FY 2014
80
FY 2015
80
Unit
Permits
Explanation of Results: This measure was changed for FY 201 3, which caused some confusion as people adjust to the new requirements. There were also some states that
had a stretch goal. Additionally, priority permits are often the hardest to issue due to a high level of interest from third parties. Resources are also diminished in many
states.
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, 104percent of the designated priority permits were issued in the fiscal year. Starting in FY2013, results can no longer exceed lOOpercent 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 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 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
58.9
FY 2014
66.1
FY 2015
67.9
Unit
States and
Territories
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
845
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: Kentucky and Kansas did not submit criteria for FY 2013 as anticipated. Additionally, the workload related to promulgating nitrogen/phosphorus
criteria prevented action on criteria submitted by Mississippi during FY 2013.
Additional Information: In 2004, the baseline was 70percent of states and territories submitting acceptable water quality criteria reflecting new scientific information.
(PM bpx) Extent of priority areas identified by each state that are addressed by EPA-approved TMDLs or alternative
restoration approaches for impaired waters that will achieve water quality standards. These areas may also include
protection approaches for unimpaired waters to maintain water quality standards.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
8
Unit
Priority
Watershed
Areas
Additional Information: This is a new measure replacing the measures that tracked state and total TMDL development. Cumulatively, EPA and states completed more
than 65,000 TMDLs through FY 2013. 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. The universe for the measure is lOOpercent of watershed areas corresponding to priority waters
identified by each state. The baseline is the extent of priority areas identified by each state that have been addressed by EPA-approved TMDLs or alternative restoration
approaches for impaired waters, or protection approaches for unimpaired waters, at the beginning of the year when the baseline is established. Baseline information will
begin to be available in FY 2015, but finalized in FY 2016. The target is the extent of areas within priority areas projected to have a TMDL or alternative restoration or
protection plan in 2022. States will identify annual commitments in each fiscal year to work toward the 2022 target.
(PM wq2) Remove the specific causes of water body impairment identified by states in 2002 (cumulative).
Target
Actual
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
11,754
FY 2014
12,134
FY 2015
12,514
Unit
Causes
Additional Information: In 2002, an estimate of 69,677 specific causes of water body impairments were identified by states.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, improve water quality conditions in 575 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 2013: 376 improved watersheds.)
(PM uwl) Number of urban water projects initiated addressing water quality issues in the community.
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
846
-------
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
3
46
FY 2013
10
9
FY 2014
30
FY 2015
22
Unit
Projects
Program Area
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
61
Unit
Projects
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: All ten regions were offered the opportunity to make one additional award from the list of proposals received from the FY2012 RFP. Due to FTE
constraints, one region elected not to make an additional award.
Additional Information: This measure tracks progress in grants that help communities access, improve, and benefit from their urban waters and surrounding land. The
target of 30 projects initiated for FY 2014 includes 10 projects under EPA's Urban Waters Small Grants (direct grants) and 20 projects under the Five-Star and Urban
Waters Restoration Program managed by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (sub-grants with EPA and leveraged public and private funds). Projects under both
programs advance water quality improvement and EPA investments are consistent with CWA Section 104(b)(3) authority. In FY 2015, 10 projects are from the Urban
Waters Small Grants and 12 projects are funded jointly withNFWF.
(PM uw2) Number of urban water projects completed addressing water quality issues in the community.
Additional Information: As this is a new measure in FY 2012, projects were not completed in FY 2013 or FY 2014. Measure was deactivated for FY 2013 and 2014.
Measure reactivated in F Y 2015. Included in the F Y 2015 target are grants funded in part by the Urban Water Program funding and through the Five Star and Urban
Waters Restoration Program managed by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation.
(PM wq3) Improve water quality conditions in impaired watersheds nationwide using the watershed approach
(cumulative).
Target
Actual
FY 2008
40
60
FY 2009
102
104
FY 2010
141
168
FY2011
208
271
FY 2012
312
332
FY 2013
370
376
FY 2014
408
FY 2015
446
Unit
Watersheds
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 2018, in coordination with other federal agencies, provide access to basic sanitation for 91,900
American Indian and Alaska Native homes. (FY 2012 baseline: 63,000 homes. Universe: 406,000 homes.)
(PM Opb) Percent of serviceable rural Alaska homes with access to drinking water supply and wastewater disposal.
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
847
-------
Program Area
(2) Improve
Coastal and
Ocean Waters
Performance Measures and
Target
Actual
FY 2008
94
91
FY 2009
96
91
FY 2010
98
92
FY2011
92
92
FY 2012
93
91
Data
FY 2013
93
91
FY 2014
93.5
FY 2015
92.5
Unit
Homes
Explanation of Results: In 201 3 the Alaska Native Villages (ANV) Program adopted a new web/GIS based housing inventory maintained by the Indian Health Service
called the Housing Inventory Tracking System (HITS) to report on this measure for the ANV Program. This is the first reporting year for HITS. The improved system
allows the ANV Program to report near the EOY, rather than 6 months later (as the previous system required). HITS also more accurately reflects the water infrastructure
status of rural Alaskan homes because it allows the ANV Program to visually verify the existence of houses, verify that inadvertent double counting of houses does not
occur, and accurately verify that changes in service levels does occur as funding is provided for housing groups in a community. The ANV Program relies on data from
HITS, the US Census, and State of Alaska Village Safe Water project engineers.
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 changed in 2013 as the State of Alaska moved 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
forth in the Management Control Policy.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
94
90.5
FY 2010
94.5
85
FY2011
95
92
FY 2012
95.5
84.2
FY 2013
95
89.8
project construction schedule set
FY 2014
95
FY 2015
Unit
Dollars
Explanation of Results: Only one grant, the FY08 grant, out of seven open Alaska Native Village grants is not in compliance with the ANV efficiency measure. 91percent
of the $21,193,738 FY08 grant has been expended as of 1 1/20/13. This large FY08 grant is skewing the efficiency measure due to the fact the most recent grants are much
smaller compared to the FY08 grant. In fact the sum of the FY 2013, FY12 and FY1 1 grants is $19,799,150 or $1,394,588 less than the FY08 grant.
Additional Information: A baseline had been set in 2008 of 93.5 percent.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, improve regional coastal aquatic ecosystem health, as measured on the "good/fair/poor" scale of
the National Coastal Condition Report. (FY 2012 baseline: National rating of "fair" or 3.0 where the rating is based on a 4-point
system ranging from 1.0 to 5.0 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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
75
85.4
FY 2012
75
CHLA: 70.9;
FY 2013
75
>75 (CHLA:
FY 2014
75
FY 2015
75
Unit
Stations
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
848
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
KD: 72.5
84.5; KD:
80.4)
Explanation of Results: This measure has two parts and R4 met both: Chla 84.5percent and Kd 80.4percent.
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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
75
73.6
FY 2012
75
DIN: 81; TP:
89.5
FY 2013
75
<75 (DIN:
60.0; TP:
82.3)
FY 2014
75
FY 2015
75
Unit
Stations
Explanation of Results: This measure has two parts and requires both DIN and TP targets be met to achieve the measure. The EPA did not meet both: DIN 60.0percent
and TP 82.3percent. Since 1995 elevated DIN numbers have been found closer to shore suggesting human impact. The elevated FY 2013 DIN number may suggest
increasing polluted runoff entering the waterways or may be a bias in the dataset introduced by the reduction of monitoring stations in the western FKMNS (less human
impact) and an increase in near shore shores (heavily human impacted sites).
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 storm water treatment areas.
Target
Actual
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
Not
Maintained
FY 2014
Maintain P
Baseline
FY 2015
Unit
Parts/Billion
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
849
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: As in all previous years, final FY 2013 EOY results for SFL SP48 will not be available until March 2014, but the status of "measure not met" will
not change. In 2013 the TP marsh data maintained the baseline as all areas were lower than the 2005 baseline. STA discharges maintained the baseline for all STAs except
STA2. Therefore, overall the baseline was not maintained. The performance measure was not met since the impacted areas of the Everglades marsh did not meet the
criterion. However, this measure has been replaced in FY 2015.
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, 13 ppb in the Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge, and 18 ppb in Water Conservation Area 2A; annual average flow-weighted from total phosphorus
discharges from Storm water Treatment Areas ranged from 13 ppb for area 3/4 and 98 ppb for area 1W. Effluent limits will be established for all discharges, including
Storm water Treatment Areas.
(PM sf6) The number of Everglades Stormwater Treatment Areas (STAs) with the annual total phosphorus (TP)
outflow less than or the same as the five-year annual average TP outflow, working towards the long-term goal of
meeting the 10 parts per billion annual geometric mean.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
3
Unit
Stormwater
Treatment
Areas
Additional Information: This is a new measure for FY 2015, replacing PM sf5. The baseline period is the most recent 5 years. The 5-year baseline takes into account
variability due to climatic conditions including extremely wet or dry years which are common in South Florida. For FY 2015, the 5-year baseline, 2010 to 2015, is 36 parts
per billion (ppb) for STA-1E, 35 ppb for STA-1W, 21 ppb for STA-2,17 ppb for STA-3/4, and 54 ppb for STA-5/6. The universe is 5 STAs. This measure is working
towards the long-term goal of the phosphorus criterion for the Everglades marsh, a 5-year geometric mean of 10 ppb. The equivalent flow-weighted mean discharge
concentration at the STAs is 13 ppb.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, 95 percent of active dredged material ocean dumping sites, as determined by 3-year average, will
have achieved environmentally acceptable conditions (as reflected in each site's management plan and measured through onsite
monitoring programs). (2012 baseline: 97 percent. FY 2012 universe is 67.) (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 2008
95
99
FY 2009
98
99
FY 2010
98
90.1
FY2011
98
93
FY 2012
95
97
FY 2013
95
96
FY 2014
95
FY 2015
95
Unit
Sites
Additional Information: The 2013 baseline is 66 sites.
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
850
-------
Program Area
(3) Increase
Wetlands
Performance Measures and
Data
Strategic Measure: By 2018, working with partners, protect or restore an additional (i.e., measuring from 2012 forward)
600,000 acres of habitat within the study areas for the 28 estuaries that are part of the National Estuary Program. (2012
baseline: 1,167,733 acres of habitat protected or restored, cumulative from 2002-2012. In FY 2012, 1 14,579 acres were
protected or restored.)
(PM 202) Acres protected or restored in National Estuary Program study areas.
FY 2008
Target 50,000
Actual 83j490
FY 2009 FY 2010
100,000 100,000
125,410 89,985
FY2011 FY2012
100,000 100,000
62,213 114,575
FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015
100,000 100,000 100,000
127,594
Unit
Acres
Explanation of Results: Factors contributing to the number of acres protected and restored each year by the NEPs and their partners are numerous and complex making it
difficult to accurately forecast with any degree of certainty. Unknown factors and factors outside of NEP control include, but are not limited to:
• Funding, sometimes monies unexpectedly become available and therefore projects can move forward; most NEPs and their partners only report on the
projects they are confident will receive funding (or they have already acquired all the funds).
• Negotiating with landowners for a protection or restoration project can be lengthy with final agreement dates, and therefore project completion timeframes
are not possible to predict.
• The amount of habitat potentially available to be protected and restored in the NEP study areas varies significantly from one region to the next. Several NEPs
have large study areas where opportunities for habitat protection and restoration are greater, although the number of acres of habitat size can be significant,
these large projects are often the most difficult to predict if they will be completed within the next year.
• Unanticipated weather associated delays can occur doing any stage of a project, acreage then would be reported in out years.
• Big projects require multiple partners, coordinating with so many partners is very time consuming with unknown outcomes; NEPs and their partners are
reluctant to report on these types of projects for the coming year because it cannot be known when they will be completed.
• Many of the acres protected this year were by easements (restoration projects have become more expensive and time consuming in recent years). For
example, several large easement projects that were unanticipated a year ago were completed during FY 2013.
Additional Information: 2012 Baseline: 1,167,729 acres of habitat protected or restored; cumulative from 2002-2012.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, 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. (2012 baseline: 1 10.1 million
acres of wetlands in the conterminous United States, and 62,300 wetland acres were lost over 2004-2009.) ("No net loss" of
wetlands is based on requirements for mitigation in CWA Section 404 permits and not the actual mitigation attained.)
(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. ("No net loss" of wetlands is based on requirements
for mitigation in CWA 404 permits and not the actual mitigation attained.)
FY 2008
FY 2009 FY 2010
FY2011 FY2012
FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015
Unit
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
851
-------
Program Area
(4) Great
Lakes
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
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
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 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
207,000
FY 2014
220,000
FY 2015
230,000
Unit
Acres
Explanation of Results: Unexpected increase in acreage from the NEP program. 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: 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 2018, implement all management actions necessary for later delisting at 12 Areas of Concern in the
Great Lakes (cumulative). (2012 baseline: 2.)
(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 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
24.7
FY 2014
23.4
FY 2015
23.4
Unit
Point on a
40-point
scale
Additional Information: Results from this measure are achieved through GLRI funding as well as other non-GLRI 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 2014 to
FY2015.
(PM 620) Cumulative percentage decline for the long-term trend in concentrations of PCBs in whole lake trout and
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
852
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
walleye samples.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
5
6
FY 2009
5
6
FY 2010
10
43
FY2011
37
44
FY 2012
40
43
FY 2013
43
46
FY 2014
46
FY 2015
49
Unit
Percent
Decline
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 2008
16
11
FY 2009
21
12
FY 2010
20
12
FY2011
26
26
FY 2012
33
33
FY 2013
41
41
FY 2014
46
FY 2015
51
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 at 6 AOCs in FY 2013:
'Restrictions on Fish and Wildlife Consumption' BUI at Muskegon Lake AOC (2/25/13) and White Lake AOC (2/25/13); 'Restrictions on Drinking Water' BUI at
Muskegon Lake AOC (2/20/13); 'Fish Tumors and Other Deformities' BUI at Presque Isle Bay AOC (2/8/13); 'Loss of Fish and Wildlife Habitat' BUI at Waukegan
Harbor AOC (8/12/13); 'Tainting of Fish and Wildlife' BUI at Detroit River AOC (8/22/13); 'Beach Closing' BUI at River Raisin AOC (9/24/13); and 'Eutrophication'
BUI at River Raisin AOC (9/24/1 3).
(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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
l
2
FY 2012
3
2
FY 2013
4
3
FY 2014
5
FY 2015
8
Unit
AOCs
Explanation of Results: Management actions were completed at the Sheboygan River AOC (WI). Following a delay resulting from unexpected field conditions,
management actions at the White Lake AOC (MI) were completed by the end of calendar year 2013.
Additional Information: Universe of 3 1 ; 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) Rate of aquatic nonnative species newly detected in the Great Lakes ecosystem.
Target
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
1.0
FY 2012
0.8
FY 2013
0.8
FY 2014
0.8
FY 2015
0.8
Unit
Soecies
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
853
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Actual
0.83
0.77
.71
Explanation of Results: The target is met if the result is at or below .8.
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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
1,500
13,045
FY 2012
15,500
31,474
FY 2013
34,000
35,924
FY 2014
38,000
FY 2015
50,000
Unit
Acres
Explanation of Results: Target had been increased to 34,000 as part of the FY 2014 budget process.
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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
4
8
FY 2012
12
23
FY 2013
26
30
FY 2014
35
FY 2015
40
Unit
Number
Responses/Pi
ans
Explanation of Results: Target had been increased to 26 as part of the FY 2014 budget process.
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
draining targeted watersheds.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
0
Data
Unavailable
FY 2012
0.5
Data
Unavailable
FY 2013
1.0
Data
Unavailable
FY 2014
1.0
FY 2015
Unit
Metric
Tons/Year
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
854
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
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, Genesee, 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 are 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 3.8percent increase to a 3.4percent 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 3.6percent increase to
a 15. Spercent 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 sub watersheds and ecosystem change in principal watersheds, the revised measure will
likely emphasize outputs achieved in the priority sub watersheds.
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) Percent increase in acreage in Great Lakes watershed with USDA conservation practices implemented to
reduce erosion, nutrients, and/or pesticide loading.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
2
62
FY 2012
8
70
FY 2013
20
60
FY 2014
30
FY 2015
35 (225,800)
Unit
Acres
Explanation of Results: In FY 2013, 263,350 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 60percent increase over the baseline of 165,000 acres. The significant increase in FY 2013 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.
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 percentage reported is the percent increase over the baseline of 165,000 acres. The number reported is the number of acres for the respective year.
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).
FY2008 FY2009 FY 2010 FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015
Unit
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
855
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
33%; 48/147
31%; 46/147
33%; 48/147
33%; 48/147
34%; 50/147
34%; 50/147
35%; 52/147
36%; 53/147
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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
5,000
9,624
FY 2012
11,000
65,639
FY 2013
68,000
83,702
FY 2014
88,000
FY 2015
95,000
Unit
Acres
Explanation of Results: Target had been increased to 68,000 as part of the FY 2014 budget process. The EPA collaborated with and funded the BIA, USFWS, NPS, FS,
NOAA, and USAGE to meet this measure. Some of the most significant completions received funding from the BIA for restoring wild rice and other cultural wetland
resources across the basin.
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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
15,000
12,103
FY 2012
15,000
28,034
FY 2013
33,000
33,250
FY 2014
38,000
FY 2015
40,000
Unit
Acres
Explanation of Results: Target had been increased to 33,000 as part of the FY 2014 budget process. The EPA collaborated with and funded the BIA, USFWS, NPS, FS,
NOAA, and USAGE to meet this measure. The agencies protected, restored, or enhanced these acres across the Great Lakes basin.
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
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
0
i
FY 2012
l
l
FY 2013
2
1
FY 2014
2
FY 2015
l
Unit
Species
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
856
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: Achieving the FY 2013 target was dependent on recovery of the federally threatened Pitcher's Thistle in the Great Lakes (targeted for delisting in
the GLRI Action Plan). Pitcher's Thistle recovery is dependent on controlling a recently discovered pest (a weevil, Larinus planus) which feeds on the seeds of the
Pitcher's Thistle. Research is ongoing to assess the ecological impacts of the weevil on Pitcher's thistle populations and will provide valuable information for the plant's
management and recovery.
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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
90
93.5
FY 2013
90
94
FY 2014
FY 2015
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 2018, implement and evaluate actions necessary to protect, restore, or enhance 20 percent of U.S. Great
Lakes coastal wetlands greater than 10 acres. (2012 baseline: 0.)
(PM 606) Cubic yards of contaminated sediment remediated (cumulative from 1997) in the Great Lakes.
Target
Actual
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
11.5
FY 2014
12
FY 2015
12.4
Unit
Cubic Yards
(Million)
Additional Information: 9.7 million cubic yards of contaminated sediments were remediated from 1997 through 2011 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 2008
FY 2009
200
122
FY 2010
200
125
FY2011
200
144
FY 2012
200
131
FY 2013
200
142
FY 2014
200
FY 2015
200
Unit
Dollars/Cubi
c Yard
Additional Information: In 2006, the cost per cubic yard of contaminated sediments remediated was $115.
(5)
Chesapeake
Strategic Measure: By 2018, achieve 45 percent attainment of water quality standards for dissolved oxygen, water
clarity/underwater grasses, and chlorophyll a in Chesapeake Bay and tidal tributaries. (2011 Baseline: 40 percent.)
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
857
-------
Program Area
Bay
(6) Gulf of
Mexico
Performance Measures and Data
(PM 234) Reduce per capita nitrogen loads (pounds per person per year) to levels necessary to achieve Chesapeake Bay
Total Maximum Daily Load allocations.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
15.17
14.92
FY 2014
15
FY 2015
14.5
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 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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
l
8
FY 2012
15
21
FY 2013
22.5
25
FY 2014
30
FY 2015
37.5
Unit
Percent Goal
Achieved
Additional Information: The F Y 20 1 0 baseline is 0 percent. The universe is 1 00 percent goal achievement by December 3 1 , 2025 (F Y 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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
l
l
FY 2012
15
19
FY 2013
22.5
27
FY 2014
30
FY 2015
37.5
Unit
Percent Goal
Achieved
Additional Information: The F Y 20 1 0 baseline is 0 percent. The universe is 1 00 percent goal achievement by December 3 1 , 2025 (F Y 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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
l
ll
FY 2012
15
30
FY 2013
22.5
32
FY 2014
30
FY 2015
37.5
Unit
Percent Goal
Achieved
Additional Information: The F Y 20 1 0 baseline is 0 percent. The universe is 1 00 percent goal achievement by December 3 1 , 2025 (F Y 2026).
Strategic Measure: By 2018, support best management practices and projects to reduce releases of nutrients throughout the
Mississippi River Basin to aid in the reduction of the size of the hypoxic zone in the Gulf of Mexico to less than 5,000 km2, as
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
858
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
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 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
2.4
FY 2014
2.4
FY 2015
2.4
Unit
Scale
Explanation of Results: The National Coastal Conditions Reports (NCCR)". . .summarize the condition of ecological resources in the coastal waters of the United
States. . ." They are jointly prepared by the EPA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the U.S. Geological Survey, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
coastal states and the National Estuary Programs. The current report is data 2012 and reflects data collected from 2003 - 2006.
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 2008
64
131
FY 2009
96
131
FY 2010
96
170
FY2011
202
286
FY 2012
320
316
FY 2013
360
Data Avail
02/2014
FY 2014
360
FY 2015
360
Unit
Impaired
Segments
Explanation of Results: All five Gulf of Mexico states have submitted their 2012 Integrated Reports and have approved lists from EPA. Decision Documents for Texas
and Louisiana have been made available. The Gulf of Mexico Program Office is still waiting on the Decision Documents for Mississippi, Alabama and Florida. Without
these Decision Documents, the Program Office cannot accurately determine the number of impaired segments. Texas has been completed and the Program Office will be
beginning on Louisiana's list next. As soon as Region 4 sends the Program Office the Decision Documents for Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida, work will begin to
determine the number of impaired segments. The request has been sent to Region 4 asking for the Decision Documents when they become available.
Additional Information: In 2008, the Gulf of Mexico coastal wetlands habitats included 3,769,370 acres.
(PM xg2) Restore, enhance, or protect a cumulative number of acres of important coastal and marine habitats.
Target
Actual
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
30,306
FY 2014
30,600
FY 2015
30,800
Unit
Acres
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
859
-------
Program Area
(7) Long
Island Sound
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: InFY2012, one of our funded projects restored 196.45 acres (natural flow was restored to an area that had previously been cut-off.) In FY201 3,
our funded projects restored/protected/enhance 57.36 acres. The GMPO was delayed in our ability to release a new RFP in FY 201 3 due to the sequestration and
government shutdown. Therefore no new proj ects were awarded during fiscal year 2013 that would aid in the protection, restoration or enhancement of habitat and thus
increase our acreage numbers to meet our target goal. We did release our RFP in early October of FY 2014 and expect to award restoration projects this 13/14 FY, thus
increasing our acreage numbers and meeting our goal of 30,600 by the end of next fiscal year.
Additional Information: In 2008, 25,215 acres were restored, enhanced, or protected in the Gulf of Mexico.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, 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 2000-2017.
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 115) 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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
52
70
FY2011
72
69
FY 2012
74
83
FY 2013
76
Data Avail
03/2014
FY 2014
85
FY 2015
91.5
Unit
TE
Pounds/Day
Explanation of Results: Data not available until mid-March due to normal lag time in reporting discharge data from sewage treatment plants on a full calendar year basis,
January-December. December data are processed by the STPs to the states in January; the states QA the data and reconcile with the STPs in February; data is finalized and
reported by the states to EPA in March.
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. New York City and Westchester County STPs are
under Consent Orders that extended their TMDL compliance deadline to 2017. EPA will continue to monitor these post-2014 for compliance, as well as Connecticut STPs
for anti-backsliding compliance with their final 2014 TMDL limits, or as renegotiated with EPA.
(PM H8)
Target
Actual
Restore, protect or enhance acres of coastal habitat from the 2010 baseline of 2,975 acres.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
218
537
FY 2013
420
336
FY 2014
410
FY 2015
186
Unit
Acres
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
860
-------
Program Area
(8) Puget
Sound Basin
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: Acreage target was not achieved due to the impacts of Hurricane Sandy in October 2012. Agencies whose efforts were anticipated to contribute
toward the target were forced to redirect their attention to more urgent Sandy-response activities. Also, the hurricane directly affected projects. For example, Sunken
Meadow State Park was a planned restoration site of over 1 50 acres that was restored to open water circulation by the storm, which destroyed a berm and culvert that had
restricted flow. The fact that the restoration was achieved naturally precluded us from counting the restoration as an accomplishment.
Additional Information: 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.
(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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
28
72.3
FY 2013
75
56
FY 2014
1.5
FY 2015
27
Unit
Miles
Explanation of Results: River miles target was not achieved due to the impacts of Hurricane Sandy in October 2012. . Coastal and inland areas in New York and
Connecticut were severely affected by the storm. In addition, ambient conditions were not suitable for construction projects, i.e., downed trees, swollen and diverted
streams and river banks and severe sedimentation. As a result, agencies whose efforts were anticipated to contribute toward the target were forced to redirect their
attention to more urgent Sandy-response activities.
Additional Information: EPA revised this measure in FY 2012 to report 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.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, improve water quality and enable the lifting of harvest restrictions in 6,000 acres of shellfish bed
growing areas impacted by degraded or declining water quality in the Puget Sound. (2012 baseline: 2,489 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 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
3,203
FY 2014
4,000
FY 2015
4,700
Unit
Acres
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
861
-------
Program Area
(9) U.S.-
Mexico Border
Environmental
Health
Performance
Measures and
Data
Explanation of Results: A gain in harvestable shellfish beds of 728 net acres was achieved in FY 2013, with very few acres downgraded. Stepped-up work to reduce the
levels of pathogens in the Samish Bay watershed has resulted in a definite downward trend of pathogen pollution, but not yet to the levels needed for an approved shellfish
harvest classification.
Additional Information: The Puget Sound has approximately 143,000 acres of approved shellfish harvest beds that require federal, state, local and tribal partners working
together to ensure that adjacent water quality and safe harvesting conditions are preserved. Additionally, there are approximately 10,000 acres of potentially recoverable
shellfish beds in Puget Sound closed due to nonpoint source pollution. The performance measure reports the net gains (losses) of recovered harvest areas minus any loss of
currently approved acres. The Puget Sound Program works to both protect the existing approved shellfish harvest beds, and to improve water conditions so that
recoverable harvest areas can be approved for harvest. 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. Protecting water quality in existing approved areas is critical to the achievement of the performance measure for lifting harvest restrictions. The Puget Sound
Program strategically directs resources to address the pathogen pollution problems impacting shellfish harvest in Puget Sound both in the near term - focusing on specific
geographical locations (e.g. Samish Bay), and in the long term for the universe of existing approved harvest areas and for the potentially recoverable shellfish acres basin-
wide in Puget Sound.
(PM ps3) Number of
Target
Actual
FY 2008
2,310
4,413
near shore,
FY 2009
3,000
5,751
riparian, and wetland habitat acres protected or restored.
FY 2010
6,500
10,062
FY2011
12,363
14,629
FY 2012
19,063
23,818
FY 2013
31,818
30,128
FY 2014
33,818
FY 2015
35,818
Unit
Acres
Explanation of Results: Anticipated work in the Elwha riparian areas was delayed in FY 201 3. In spite of this, over 6,000 acres were protected and/or restored during that
year, and the 6-year cumulative target of 31,800 acres was narrowly missed by only approximately 1,700 acres. FY 2014 results will include acres from the Elwha as well
as other salmon recovery efforts.
Additional Information: In 2008, 4,413 acres (cumulative) of tidally- and seasonally-influenced estuarine wetlands were restored. The protection and restoration of
habitat is one of the three priority areas for the Puget Sound NEP. The target for this measure has been exceeded every year from FY 2008 - FY 2012 resulting in the
protection and/or restoration of 23,818 acres during that period. This is critical to meet salmon recovery goals of viable, harvestable populations of this tribal treaty
protected resource. Moving forward, the focus will be on critical floodplain, near shore, and riparian habitat.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, provide access to safe drinking water and adequate wastewater sanitation to 75 percent and 90
percent, respectively, 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. 2018 target: 73,886 homes provided with access to safe drinking water and 621,651
homes with adequate wastewater sanitation.)
(PM 4pg) Loading of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD)
area since 2003.
Target
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
108.2
removed (million pounds/year) from the U.S.-Mexico border
FY 2012
115
FY 2013
121.5
FY 2014
137.3
FY 2015
142
Unit
Million
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
862
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Actual
108.5
119
128.3
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 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)
3,400
(Annual)
FY 2014
1,700
(Annual)
FY 2015
520 (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 (98,5 1 5 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 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)
25,695
(Annual)
FY 2014
39,500
(Annual)
FY 2015
44,700
(Annual)
Unit
Homes
Explanation of Results: Mexican projects expected to be completed in FY2013 were moved to FY2014 due to Mexico requiring an additional annual funding cycle to
provide matching funds for remaining construction contracts. The National Water Program Guidance target (SP-25) was revised from 20,000 to 17,000 to this effect by
Region 9 on June 15, 2012.
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 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
863
-------
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Clean up communities, advance sustainable development, and protect disproportionately impacted low-income and minority 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
Clean Up
Brownfields
Performance
Measures and
Data
Strategic Measure: By 2018, conduct environmental assessments at 26,350 (cumulative) brownfield
of the end of FY 2012, EPA assessed 19,154 properties.)
properties. (Baseline: As
(PM B29) Brownfield properties assessed.
Target
Actual
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
1,528
FY 2014
1,200
FY 2015
1,200
Unit
Properties
Explanation of Results: The Brownfields program exceeded its target of 1,200 properties assessed by 27percent (328 properties) primarily because the program undertook
a review of properties assessed in an effort to accumulate the leveraged accomplishments, such as 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.htmlSquarterly and the government-wide ARRA site www.recovery.gov.
Strategic
(Baseline
Measure: By 2018, make an additional 16,800 acres of brownfield properties
: As of the end of FY 2012, EPA made 25,408 acres ready for reuse.)
ready for reuse from the 2012 baseline.
(PM B33) Acres of Brownfields properties made ready for reuse.
Target
Actual
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
4,644
FY 2014
3,000
FY 2015
2,800
Unit
Acres
Explanation of Results: EPA exceeded its target primarily as a result of 12 sites reporting more than 100 acres ready for anticipated use (RAU) each, which added over
2,800 acres available for redevelopment purposes.
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.htmlSquarterly and the government-wide ARRA site www.recovery.gov.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
864
-------
Program Area
(3) Reduce
Chemical
Risks at
Facilities and
Performance Measures and Data
(PM B32) Number of properties cleaned up using Brownfields funding.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
60
78
FY 2009
60
93
FY 2010
60
109
FY2011
60
130
FY 2012
120
120
FY 2013
120
122
FY 2014
120
FY 2015
115
Unit
Properties
Additional Information: Although the program receives funds from ARRA, 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.htmlSquarterly and the
government-wide ARRA site www.recovery.gov.
(PM B34) Jobs leveraged from Brownfields activities.
Target
Actual
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
10,141
FY 2014
5,000
FY 2015
4,750
Unit
Jobs
Explanation of Results: The target exceedance is primarily a result of nine sites reporting a total of 5,883 jobs leveraged with one property in Oklahoma reporting over
2,200 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.htmlSquarterly 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 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
1.54
FY 2014
1.2
FY 2015
l.l
Unit
Dollars
(Billions)
Explanation of Results: The target exceedance is primarily due to 1 1 sites, each reporting over $25M leveraged, for a combined total of $1B leveraged.
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.htmlSquarterly and the government-wide ARRA site www.recovery.gov.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, conduct 2,300 inspections at risk management plan (RMP) facilities. (Baseline: Between FY
2000 and FY 2012, more than 7,400 RMP inspections were completed.)
(PM CH2) Number of risk management plan inspections conducted.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
Unit
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
865
-------
Program Area
in
Communities
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
400
628
400
654
400
618
560
630
530
652
500
539
460
460
Inspections
Additional Information: Between F Y 2000 and F Y 20 1 3 , more than 7,900 Risk Management Plan (RMP) inspections were completed.
Objective 2 - Preserve Land: Conserve resources and prevent land contamination by reducing waste generation and toxicity, promoting proper
management of waste and petroleum products, and increasing sustainable materials management.
Program Area
(1) Waste
Generation
and Recycling
Performance Measures and Data
Strategic Measure: By 2018, increase by 500,000 tons the amount of virgin materials that were offset by the reuse or recycling
of waste products through the use of sustainable materials management. (Baseline: In FY 2013, an estimated 8,500,000 tons of
waste products will be reused or recycled through sustainable materials management practices.)
(PM MW2) Increase in percentage of coal combustion ash that is beneficially used instead of disposed.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
1.8
1.8
FY 2009
1.8
-3.1
FY 2010
1.4
-0.6
FY2011
1.4
-.7
FY 2012
1.4
Data Avail
12/2014
FY 2013
1.4
Data Avail
12/2015
FY 2014
FY 2015
Unit
Percent
Increase
Explanation of Results: Results are due to the suspension of the Coal Combustion Products Partnership program in FY 2010. Data lags two years.
Additional Information: This annual performance measure has been discontinued beginning in FY 2014. The strategic measure which this annual measure supports is not
included in EPA's FY 2014-2018 Strategic Plan
(PM SMI) Tons of materials and products offsetting use of virgin resources through sustainable materials management.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
8,549,502
Data Avail
3/2014
FY 2013
8,501,537
Data Avail
2/2015
FY 2014
8,603,033
FY 2015
8,603,033
Unit
Tons
Explanation of Results: Data will not be available until February 2015.
Additional Information: This measure was established in FY 2012 to reflect EPA's national program shift from waste management to sustainable materials management.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
866
-------
Program Area
(2) Minimize
Releases of
Hazardous
Waste and
Petroleum
Products
Performance
Measures and
Data
Strategic Measure: By 2018, increase by 50 the number of tribes covered by an integrated waste management plan compared
to FY 2013. (Baseline: As of March 2013, 160 of 574 federally recognized tribes were covered by an integrated waste
management plan.)
(PM MW5) Number
Target
Actual
FY 2008
30
166
of closed, cleaned up, or
FY 2009
27
129
FY 2010
22
141
upgraded open dumps in
FY2011
45
82
FY 2012
45
74
Indian country or on other tribal lands.
FY 2013
45
106
FY 2014
45
FY 2015
Unit
Dumps
Explanation of Results: Leveraging available EPA resources and tribal funds resulted in significantly exceeding the pace of cleanups and closure of open dumps on tribal
lands.
Additional Information: This annual performance measure is being discontinued beginning in FY 2015. EPA will continue to track results during FY 2014 and is
currently developing a new performance measure that is more closely tied to EPA activities.
(PM MW8) Number
Target
Actual
FY 2008
26
35
of tribes covered by an integrated solid waste management plan.
FY 2009
16
31
FY 2010
23
23
FY2011
14
17
FY 2012
3
13
FY 2013
3
26
FY 2014
10
FY 2015
10
Unit
Tribes
Explanation of Results: Leveraging available resources and tribal funds greatly accelerated the expected pace of tribes developing integrated waste management plans.
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. By concentrating these resources on assisting tribes with
developing waste management plans, EPA has revised its F Y 20 14 target for this measure from 3 to 1 0 tribes. As of September 20 1 3, 1 73 of 574 federally recognized
tribes were covered by an integrated waste management plan.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, prevent releases at 500 additional hazardous waste management facilities by issuing initial
approved controls or updated controls resulting in the protection of an estimated 20 million people living within a mile of all
facilities with controls. (Baseline: At the end of FY 2013, an estimated 1,220 facilities will require these controls out of the
universe of 6,600 facilities, with over 20,000 process units.)
(PM HWO) Number of hazardous waste facilities with new or updated controls.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
100
115
FY 2010
100
140
FY2011
100
130
FY 2012
100
117
FY 2013
100
114
FY 2014
100
FY 2015
110
Unit
Facilities
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
867
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Additional Information: In FY 2013, 114 facilities received new or updated controls.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, prevent exposures at polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) sites by issuing 750 approvals for PCB
cleanup, storage, and disposal activities
(PM PCB) Number of approvals issued for polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) cleanup, storage and disposal activities.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
150
FY 2015
150
Unit
Approvals
Additional Information: This new measure tracks all approvals issued by EPA under Section 761 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for PCBs. EPA issued 673
approvals between FY 2009 and FY 2013.
Strategic Measure: Each year through 2018, increase the percentage of underground storage tank (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 an estimated 70 percent in 2014 to 72
percent in 2018.)
(PM ST6) Increase the percentage of UST facilities that are in significant operational compliance (SOC) with both
release detection and release prevention requirements by O.Spercent over the previous year's target.
Target
Actual
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
71.6
FY 2014
70
FY 2015
70.5
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: There were 95,827 on-site inspections of underground storage tanks (UST) between October 2012 and September 2013, and 71.6 percent of
those were found to be in significant operational compliance with both release detection and release prevention requirements. The FY 2014 target was increased from 67.5
to 70 percent based on performance trends.
Strategic Measure: Each year through 2018, reduce the number of confirmed releases at UST facilities to 5 percent fewer than
the prior year's target. (Baseline: Between FY 2008 and FY 2012, confirmed UST releases averaged 6,500.)
(PM ST1) Reduce the number of confirmed releases at UST facilities to five percent (Spercent) fewer than the prior
year's target.
Target
FY 2008
<9,000
FY 2009
<9,000
FY 2010
<9,000
FY2011
<8,550
FY 2012
<8,120
FY 2013
<7,715
FY 2014
<7,330
FY 2015
<6,965
Unit
Releases
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
868
-------
Program Area
Performance
Actual
7,364
7,168
6,328
5,998
Measures and
5,674
Data
6,218
Explanation of Results: Confirmed releases remain low due to significant release prevention efforts such as frequent inspections. A slight increase in FY 2013 is likely
due to increased property transfers as the economy improved, and better leak detection efforts because of effective operators' training.
Objective 3 - Restore Land: Prepare for and respond to accidental or intentional releases of contaminants
for reuse.
and clean up
and restore polluted sites
Program Area
(1) Emergency
Preparedness
and Response
Performance Measures and Data
Strategic Measure: By 2018, achieve and maintain at least 85 percent of the maximum score on the Core National Approach to
Response (NAR) evaluation criteria. (Baseline: In FY 2012, the average Core NAR Score was 76 percent for EPA headquarters,
regions, and special teams prepared for responding to emergencies.)
(PM Cl)
Target
Actual
Score on annual Core NAR.
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
82.2
FY 2014
75
FY 2015
80
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: Since FY 201 1, 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. Beginning in FY 2014, the Core NAR
evaluation will take place after the end of the fiscal year in order to capture a more complete picture of response readiness. Results will be reported in March the following
year.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, complete an additional 1,395 Superfund removals. (Baseline: In FY 2013, there were 295
Superfund removal actions completed.)
(PM 132) Superfund-lead removal actions completed annually.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
195
215
FY 2009
195
214
FY 2010
170
199
FY2011
170
214
FY 2012
170
232
FY 2013
170
179
FY 2014
170
FY 2015
Unit
Removals
Additional Information: This measure will be discontinued at the end of FY 2014. However, EPA will report removal results in its Annual Performance Report. In FY
2015, EPA will implement a new measure, "Number of Superfund removals completed" , which combines the Superfund-lead and PRP-lead removal actions, to track the
total number of removals completed each year.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
869
-------
Program Area
Performance
(PM 135) PRP removal completions (including voluntary,
Administrative Order actions) overseen by EPA.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
125
157
FY 2009
130
154
FY 2010
170
192
FY2011
170
191
Measures and Data
Administrative Order on
FY 2012
170
196
FY 2013
170
125
Consent, and Unilateral
FY 2014
125
FY 2015
Unit
Removals
Explanation of Results: The target for this performance measure has proved difficult to predict because SOpercent of PRP-lead removals are emergencies. EPA missed its
target in FY 2013 because the number of emergencies requiring EPA assistance and oversight were down in FY 2013.
Additional Information: This measure will be discontinued at the end of FY 2014. However, EPA will report removal results in its Annual Performance Report. In FY
2015, EPA will implement a new measure, "Number of Superfund removals completed" , which combines the Superfund-lead and PRP-lead removal actions, to track the
total number of removals completed each year.
(PM 137) Number of
Target
Actual
FY 2008
Superfund removals completed.
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
275
Unit
Removals
Additional Information: New measure beginning in FY 2015 combines existing Superfund-lead (PM 132) and PRP removals with EPA oversight (PM 135) measures.
EPA will continue to internally report results for both Superfund-lead and PRP-lead removals with agency oversight. Between FY 2008 and FY 2013, EPA completed an
average of 378 removal actions.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, bring into compliance 60 percent of FRP inspected facilities found to be non-compliant.
(Baseline: In FY 2010, 268 FRP facilities were inspected and 121 were found to be non-compliant, an initial compliance rate of
55 percent.)
(PM 337) Percent of all FRP inspected facilities found to be non-compliant which are brought into compliance.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
Explanation of Results: EPA has been develoj
more time to the field work of conducting insp
Additional Information: EPA established this
greater potential to cause harm to human healtl
Strategic
FY 2010
15
48
FY2011
30
48
)ing improved guidance and targeti
;ctions and bringing facilities into <
measure in FY 2010 to track FRP f
i and the environment than at other
FY 2012
35
73
FY 2013
40
78
ng procedures to bring more facilitk
compliance.
acilities brought into compliance be
oil facilities.
FY 2014
50
FY 2015
60
Unit
Percent
:s into compliance. This has enabled EPA to devote
sause if an oil spill occurs at these
Measure: By 2018, bring into compliance 60 percent of SPCC inspected facilities found to
facilities there is a
be non-compliant.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
870
-------
Program Area
(2) Clean Up
Contaminated
Land
Performance
(Baseline: In FY 20 10
of 42 percent.)
Measures and
Data
, 781 SPCC facilities were inspected and 456 were found to be non-compliant, an initial compliance rate
(PM 338) Percent of all Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure
compliant which are brought into compliance.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
15
36
FY2011
30
45
FY 2012
35
63
(SPCC) inspected facilities found to
FY 2013
40
69
FY 2014
50
FY 2015
60
be non-
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: EPA has been developing improved guidance and targeting procedures to help the Regions bring more facilities into compliance. This has
enabled EPA to devote more time to the field work of conducting inspections and bringing facilities into compliance.
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 there is a greater potential to cause harm to human health and the environment than at other oil facilities.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, complete 95,500 assessments at potential hazardous waste sites to determine if they warrant
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) remedial response or other cleanup
activities. (Baseline: As of 2012, the cumulative total number of assessments completed was 91,300.)
(PM 115) Number of
Target
Actual
FY 2008
Superfund remedial site
FY 2009
FY 2010
assessments completed.
FY2011
900
1,020
FY 2012
900
1,151
FY 2013
650
772
FY 2014
700
FY 2015
850
Unit
Assessments
Explanation of Results: Target exceedance is primarily due to performing more lower-cost assessments at former lead smelter locations and other sites than originally
estimated.
Additional Information: This measure accounts for all remedial assessments performed at sites addressed under the Superfund Remedial program. Through FY 2013,
EPA had completed a cumulative total 92,282 Remedial Site Assessments. FY 2014 and 2015 target increases reflect EPA's focus on older sites in the Superfund
inventory still needing low cost initial assessments.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, increase to 92 percent the number of Superfund sites and RCRA facilities where human
exposures to toxins from contaminated sites are under control. (Baseline: As of October 2013, an estimated 83 percent of
Superfund sites and 85 percent of RCRA facilities had human exposures under control out of a combined universe of 5,451.)
(PM 151) Number of
Target
FY 2008
10
Superfund sites with human exposures under control.
FY 2009
10
FY 2010
10
FY2011
10
FY 2012
10
FY 2013
10
FY 2014
10
FY 2015
9
Unit
Sites
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
871
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Actual
24
11
18
10
13
14
Explanation of Results: Target exceedance is due primarily to the completion of Superfund investigations where data became available in FY 2013 and showed that there
were no acceptable exposures occurring.
Additional Information: Beginning in FY 2014, performance results will include non-NPL Superfund Alternative Approach (SAA) sites. Through FY 2013, EPA
controlled human exposures at 1,389 final and deleted NPL sites. The FY 2015 target is reduced because reductions in spending in FY 2013 and 2014 will affect the
number and pace of actions that are critical to achieving Human Exposure Under Control, such as new remedial investigations and remedial action starts. Further, the pool
of candidate sites is shrinking and many of the sites that remain are highly complex long term cleanups (e.g., large sediment sites with exposure to contaminated fish).
(PM CA1) Cumulative percentage of RCRA facilities with human exposures to toxins under control.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
No Target
Established
65
FY 2010
69
72
FY2011
72
77
FY 2012
81
81
FY 2013
85
85
FY 2014
87
FY 2015
90
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: Through FY 2013, EPA achieved human exposures under control at 85 percent of RCRA corrective action facilities. Based on recent estimates,
EPA was unlikely to meet FY 2014 target. Consequently, the FY 2014 target was revised from 90 to 87 percent. The target revision is set against a universe of 3,779
corrective action facilities, based upon a recently completed analysis of the 2020 corrective action universe.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, increase to 86 percent the number of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) facilities
with migration of contaminated groundwater under control. (Baseline: At the end of FY 2013, the migration of contaminated
groundwater was controlled at 76 percent of all 3,779 facilities needing corrective action.)
(PM CA2) Cumulative percentage of RCRA facilities with migration of contaminated groundwater under control.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
No Target
Established
58
FY 2010
61
63
FY2011
64
67
FY 2012
69
72
FY 2013
73
76
FY 2014
77
FY 2015
79
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: Through FY 2013, EPA achieved migration of contaminated groundwater under control at 76 percent of RCRA corrective action facilities. Based
on recent estimates, EPA was unlikely to meet its FY 2014 target. Consequently, the FY 2014 target was revised from 80 to 77 percent. The target revision is set against a
universe of 3,779 corrective action facilities, based upon a recently completed analysis of the 2020 corrective action universe.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, increase to 73 percent the number of RCRA facilities with final remedies constructed. (Baseline:
At the end of FY 2013, all cleanup remedies were constructed at an estimated 51 percent of all 3,779 facilities needing
corrective action.)
(PM CAS) Cumulative percentage of RCRA facilities with final remedies constructed.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
872
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
No Target
Established
32
FY 2010
35
37
FY2011
38
42
FY 2012
46
47
FY 2013
51
51
FY 2014
55
FY 2015
60
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: Through FY 2013, EPA constructed final remedies at 51 percent of RCRA corrective action facilities. Based on recent estimates, EPA was
unlikely to meet its FY 2014 target. Consequently, the FY 2014 target was revised from 57 to 55 percent. The target revision is set against a universe of 3,779 corrective
action facilities, based upon a recently completed analysis of the 2020 corrective action universe.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, increase to 25 percent the number of RCRA facilities with corrective action performance
standards attained. (Baseline: At the end of FY 2013, performance standards were attained at an estimated 20 percent of all
3,779 RCRA facilities requiring corrective action.)
(PM CA6) Cumulative percentage of RCRA facilities with corrective action performance standards attained.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
21
FY 2015
22
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: New measure beginning in FY 2014. This measure accounts for the last step in the cleanup process (i.e., meeting the cleanup performance
standards for the site). For example, sites that have achieved their performance standards by reaching soil cleanup levels and/or drinking water maximum contaminate
levels will be counted under this measure. Beginning in FY 2014, the universe of corrective action facilities will total 3,779, based upon a recently completed analysis of
the 2020 corrective action universe.
Strategic Measure: Each year through 2018, reduce the backlog of LUST cleanups (confirmed releases that have yet to be
cleaned up) that do not meet risk-based standards for human exposure and groundwater migration by 1 percent. This means a
decrease from 16 percent in 2012 to 10 percent in 2018. (At the end of FY 2012, there were 82,903 releases not yet cleaned up.)
(PM 111) Percent of confirmed releases awaiting cleanup at UST facilities.
Target
Actual
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
15
FY 2014
15
FY 2015
14
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: This is a long-standing strategic measure included in EPA's FY 2014-2018 Strategic Plan. EPA has been tracking results under this measure
since FY 2006, however, in FY 2014 this will be a new annual performance measure with annual targets. As of the end of FY 2013, there have been 514,123 releases
reported, 436,406 (or 85 percent) of which have been cleaned up, leaving 77,717 remaining to be cleaned up.
(PM 112) Number of LUST cleanups completed that meet risk-based standards for human exposure and groundwater
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
873
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
migration.
Target
Actual
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
11,582
FY 2014
9,000
FY 2015
8,600
Unit
Cleanups
Additional Information: Through FY 2013, EPA completed a cumulative total of 436,406 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 and 2015 targets reflect a variety of challenges in
cleaning up remaining sites, including the complexity of remaining sites, an increased state workload, a decrease in available state resources, the increasing costs of
cleanups and recalibration based on the expiration of ARRA funding.
Strategic Measure: Each year through 2018, 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 23 percent in 2012 to 17 percent in 2018.
(PM 113) Number of LUST cleanups completed that meet risk-based standards for human exposure and groundwater
migration in Indian country.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
30
40
FY 2009
30
49
FY 2010
30
62
FY2011
38
42
FY 2012
42
47
FY 2013
42
18
FY 2014
37
FY 2015
30
Unit
Cleanups
Explanation of Results: Target not met due to resource constraints and an increased focus on a number of large, complex sites with substantial releases.
Additional Information: Through FY 2013, EPA completed a cumulative total of 1,049 leaking underground storage tank cleanups in Indian country, out of a universe of
1,353 confirmed releases. This is a subset of the national total of 436,406 leaking underground storage tanks cleanups completed.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, ensure that 946 Superfund sites are "sitewide ready for anticipated use." (Baseline: As of October
2012, 606 Superfund sites had achieved "sitewide ready for anticipated use" out of a universe of 1,742 sites.)
(PM 141) Annual number of Superfund sites with remedy construction completed.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
30
30
FY 2009
20
20
FY 2010
22
18
FY2011
22
22
FY 2012
22
22
FY 2013
19
14
FY 2014
15
FY 2015
13
Unit
Completions
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
874
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: Due to two years of reductions in the remedial action funding, EPA was unable to start construction at two sites that were targeted for completion
in FY 2013. In addition, delays in funding in FY 2013 impacted the timing for one Superfund-lead and two DOD projects, preventing completions in FY 2013. Also, there
is a decreasing universe of cleanups completed for eligible NPL sites, and the remaining sites are increasingly more complex and subject to emerging issues.
Additional Information: Beginning in FY 20 14, performance measure results will include non-NPL Superfund Alternative Approach (SAA) sites. Through FY 20 13,
EPA has completed construction at 1,156 final and deleted National Priority List (NPL) sites. Targets have been reduced for FY 20 14 and FY 201 5 because of significant
limitations in the number of new starts in FY 2012 and 2013, as well as concerns about funding amounts and timing in FY 2014, which would prevent timely initiation and
completion of projects. In addition, sites remaining on the NPL tend to be more complex and subject to emerging issues such as newly identified contaminants as well as
more stringent contaminant standards.
(PM 152) Number of Superfund sites with contaminated groundwater migration under control.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
15
20
FY 2009
15
16
FY 2010
15
18
FY2011
15
21
FY 2012
15
18
FY 2013
15
18
FY 2014
15
FY 2015
13
Unit
Sites
Explanation of Results: The target exceedance is primarily due to Superfund Five- Year Review results that showed that a number of contaminated plumes were under
control.
Additional Information: Beginning in FY 20 14, performance measure results will include non-NPL Superfund Alternative Approach (SAA) sites. Through FY 20 13,
EPA had controlled groundwater migration at 1,091 final and deleted National Priority List (NPL) sites. The FY 2015 target is reduced because reductions in spending in
FY 201 3 and 2014 will affect the number and pace of actions that are critical to achieving groundwater migration under control, such as groundwater investigations and
remedial design. Further, the pool of candidate sites is shrinking and many of the sites that remain are highly complex long term cleanups.
(PM 170) Number of remedial action projects completed at Superfund NPL sites.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
103
132
FY 2012
130
142
FY 2013
115
121
FY 2014
115
FY 2015
105
Unit
Completions
Additional Information: Beginning in FY 20 14, performance measure results will include non-NPL Superfund Alternative Approach (SAA) sites. Through FY 20 13,
EPA completed 2,036 remedial action projects at final and deleted NPL sites. The F Y 20 1 5 target is reduced because of a reduced number of candidate projects nearing
completion due to reductions in spending on RI/FSs and remedial designs in FY 2013-2014; reductions in remedial action funding which has slowed some projects and
prevented initiation of other projects; and remaining projects that are increasingly complex.
(PM FF1) Percent of Superfund federal facility sites construction complete.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
86
FY 2015
87
Unit
Percent
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
875
-------
Program Area
Performance
Measures and
Data
Additional Information: The Superfund Federal Facilities Response program has begun targeting a 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 82percent.
(PM S10) Number of Superfund sites ready for anticipated use site-wide.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
30
85
FY 2009
65
66
FY 2010
65
66
FY2011
65
65
FY 2012
65
66
FY 2013
60
56
FY 2014
55
FY 2015
55
Unit
Sites
Explanation of Results: Sitewide Ready for Anticipated Reuse (SWRAU) candidates are increasingly more complex and subject to emerging issues, as well as more
stringent contaminant standards. In addition, several staffing shortages and state implementation issues related to institutional controls contributed to missing the target.
Additional Information: Beginning in FY 20 14, performance measure results will include non-NPL Superfund Alternative Approach (SAA) sites. Through FY 20 13,
EPA ensured that 662 final and deleted NPL sites met the criteria to be determined ready for anticipated use site-wide. EPA lowered the FY 2014 target for this measure
from 60 to 55 sites due to staffing shortages and institutional control state implementation issues.
Objective 4 - Strengthen Human Health and Environmental Protection in Indian Country: Directly implement federal environmental
programs in Indian country and support federal program delegation to tribes. Provide tribes with technical assistance and support capacity
development for the establishment and implementation of sustainable environmental programs in Indian country.
Program Area
(1) Improve
Human Health
and the
Environment
in Indian
Country
Performance
Measures and
Data
Strategic Measure: By 2015, increase the percent of tribes implementing federal regulatory environmental programs in Indian
country to 25 percent. (FY 2009 baseline: 22 percent of 572 tribes.)
(PM 5PQ) Percent of Tribes implementing federal regulatory environmental programs in Indian country (cumulative).
Target
Actual
FY 2008
6
14
FY 2009
7
13
FY 2010
14
14
FY2011
18
17
FY 2012
22
21
FY 2013
24
22
FY 2014
25
FY 2015
25
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: While a substantial increase in the number of total tribes with TAS approval in FY 201 1, the total percentage of tribes implementing federal
regulatory programs barely missed the F Y 20 12 and F Y 20 1 3 targets due to tribes moving from the use of DICTAs (a portion of how the measure is calculated) to other
cooperative agreements such as PPGs.
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.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
876
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and
Data
Strategic Measure: By 2015, increase the percent of tribes conducting EPA-approved environmental
assessment activities in Indian country to 58 percent. (FY 2012 baseline: 54 percent of 572 tribes)
(PM 5PR) Percent of Tribes conducting EPA
country (cumulative.)
Target
Actual
FY 2008
21
42
FY 2009
23
40
FY 2010
42
50
approved environmental
FY2011
52
52
FY 2012
54
54
monitoring
and
monitoring and assessment activities in Indian
FY 2013
57
56.5
FY 2014
58
FY 2015
58
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: The performance goal was set at an approximate target level, and the deviation from that level is slight. There was no effect on overall program or
activity performance.
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.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
877
-------
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 and increase the safety of chemicals that enter our products, our environment and our
bodies.
Program Area
(1) Protect
Human Health
from Chemical
Risks
Performance Measures and Data
(PM CIS) Percentage of existing CBI claims for chemical identity in health and safety studies reviewed and, as
appropriate, challenged.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
5
5.3
FY 2012
10
59.7
FY 2013
13
13.4
FY 2014
22
FY 2015
Unit
Percent
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.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
100
100
FY 2012
100
100
FY 2013
100
100
FY 2014
100
FY 2015
100
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: Prior to August 2010, Opercent 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.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, reduce by 30 percent the number of moderate to severe exposure incidents associated with
organophosphates and carbamate insecticides in the general population. (Baseline for moderate to severe exposure incidents
reported during 201 1 is 274, as reported in the American Association of Poison Control Centers' National Poisoning Data
System (NPDS) for organophosphates and carbamate pesticides.)
(PM Jll) Reduction in moderate to severe exposure incidents associated with organophosphates and carbamate
insecticides in the general population.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
10
16
FY 2013
15
20
FY 2014
25
FY 2015
30
Unit
Percent
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
878
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Additional Information: Baseline for 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. In FY 2011,274 moderate to severe exposure incidents were reported
for organophosphates and carbamate pesticides.
Strategic Measure: Through 2018, work to ensure that the percentage of children with blood lead levels above 5 |ig/dl does not
rise above the 1.0 percent target for FY 2014 and work to make further reductions in blood lead levels. (Baseline is 2.6 percent
of children ages 1-5 had elevated blood lead levels (5 ug/dl or greater) in the 2007-2010 sampling period according to the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC's) National Health and Nutritional Evaluation Survey (NHANES).)
(PM 008) Percent of children (aged 1-5 years) with blood lead levels (>5 ug/dl).
Target
Actual
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
Biennial
FY 2014
1.0
FY 2015
No Target
Established
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: Biennial measure; no target set in FY 13
Additional Information: Data released by CDC from the National Health and Nutritional Evaluation Survey (NHANES) for the 2007-2010 sampling period estimated that
2.6percent of children aged 1-5 had elevated blood lead levels (5 ug/dl or greater). Data for this measure are reported biennially.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, reduce the percent difference in the geometric mean blood lead level in low-income children 1-5
years old as compared to the geometric mean for non-low income children 1-5 years old to 10.0 percent. (Baseline is 28.4
percent difference in the geometric mean blood lead level in low-income children ages 1-5 years old as compared to the
geometric mean for non-low income children 1-5 years old in 2007-2010 sampling period according to CDC National Health
and Nutritional Evaluation Survey (NHANES).)
(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 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
Biennial
FY 2014
20
FY 2015
No Target
Established
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: Data released by CDC from the National Health and Nutritional Evaluation Survey (NHANES) for the 2007-2010 sampling period estimated the
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 28.4percent. Data for this measure are reported biennially.
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
879
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Strategic Measure: By 2018, complete Endocrine Disrupter Screening Program (EDSP) decisions for 100 percent of chemicals
for which complete EDSP data are expected to be available by the end of 2017. (Baseline is 15 decisions have been completed
through 2012 for any of the chemicals for which complete EDSP information is anticipated to be available by the end of 2017.
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.)
(PM 266) Reduction in concentration of targeted pesticide analytes in the general population.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
30
Data Not
Avail
FY 2009
No Target
Established
Biennial
FY 2010
50
Data Not
Avail
FY2011
No Target
Established
Biennial
FY 2012
50,50
Deleted
FY 2013
No Target
Established
Biennial
FY 2014
50,50
FY 2015
Unit
Percent
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
(TCPy) is 12.4 ng/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. Measure deleted from strategic plan due to lack of data availability. Receipt of timely, accurate data has been an ongoing problem since inception
of the measure. OCSPP never received results since the measure inception. Without results or sufficient data, a target for FY 2015 cannot be set.
(PM D6A) Reduction in concentration of PFOA in serum in the general population.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
l
Data Avail
10/2014
FY 2013
No Target
Established
Biennial
FY 2014
25
FY 2015
No Target
Established
Unit
Percent
Reduction
Additional Information: Derived from 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 as determined from 2007-2010 sampling data is 3.07 |ig/L. Data for this measure are reported biennially.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, complete Endocrine Disrupter Screening Program (EDSP) decisions for 100 percent of chemicals
for which complete EDSP data is expected to be available by the end of 2017. (Baseline is 15 decisions have been completed
through 2012 for any of the chemicals for which complete EDSP information is anticipated to be available by the end of 2017.
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.)
(PM E01) Number of chemicals for which Endocrine Disrupter Screening Program (EDSP) decisions have been
completed
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
880
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
3
3
FY 2012
5
1
FY 2013
20
0
FY 2014
59
FY 2015
0
Unit
Chemicals
Explanation of Results: In F Y2013, 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 was revised and issued in June 2013 and pending approval of the Information Collection Request (ICR), the agency anticipates
issuing test orders across three years of the duration of the ICR.
Additional Information: Baseline is 15 decisions have been completed through 2012 for any of the chemicals for which complete EDSP information is anticipated to be
available by the end of 2017. 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. Targets for EDSP performance measures E01,E04, and EOS are set at zero for FY 2015 in
reflection of the time needed for issuance of test orders and completion of the scientific data review processes. Issuance of test orders is dependent on an Office of
Management and Budget-approved information collection request (ICR) for the List 2 chemicals. Currently, the ICR is being reviewed by Office of Management and
Budget for a decision on whether or not to approve the request and the decision is stipulated on the agency responding to the initial ICR terms of clearance. The agency
currently projects to have an Office of Management and Budget-approved ICR by no earlier than FY 2014 which would allow the agency to issue test orders no earlier
than late 2014. When recipients receive the Tier 1 test order, the agency allows 2 years minimum for data generation and 1 year for the agency's review of that submitted
data, a total of 3 years. Based on these projections, the agency anticipates that results for E01, E04, and EOS would not be realized until 2017.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, reduce rodenticide exposure incidents by 75 percent in children ages 1-6. (The baseline total
number of confirmed and likely rodenticide exposures to children ages 1-6 in 2011 is 10,259 according to data by the Poison
Control Centers' National Poison Data System.)
(PM 012) Percent reduction of children's exposure to rodenticides.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
10
0
FY 2012
5
5
FY 2013
5
12
FY 2014
10
FY 2015
25
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: OPP initiated regulatory action to cancel and remove non-compliant rodenticide products from the consumer market and expects to see continued
reductions in incidents involving children less than six years old.
Additional Information: The baseline for the total number of confirmed and likely rodenticide exposures to children is 11,674 in 2008, based data from the Poison
Control Centers' National Poison Data System. By FY 2011, the number of confirmed and likely rodenticide exposures to children ages 1-6 was 10,259.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, EPA will have assessed all currently identified TSCA Work Plan Chemicals. (Baseline is zero
assessments finalized for the 83 initially identified TSCA Work Plan Chemicals through 2012.)
(PM RA1) Annual number of chemicals for which risk assessments are finalized through EPA's TSCA Existing
Chemicals Program.
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
Unit
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
881
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
3
7
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.
(PM 009) Cumulative number of certified Renovation Repair and Painting firms
Target
Actual
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
133,587
FY 2014
138,000
FY 2015
145,000
Unit
Firms
Explanation of Results: In FY 201 3, the Lead RP%P Program consistently experienced lower than expected monthly certification rates. This was the case for both the
EPA-administered RP%P program and authorized state RP%P programs.
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 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
709
FY 2014
900
FY 2015
100
Unit
Decisions
Explanation of Results: It's anticipated that the reregistration of conventional pesticide products will be completed at the end of FY2014, as scheduled. However, ongoing
reductions to resources and FTEs is impacting our ability to meet current target.
Additional Information: By F Y 20 12, 1 8,208 product re-registrations decisions were according to internal tracking as part of the product reregistration process.
FTE/resource information was provided to the Office of Management and Budget to make the budget justification for the FY 2014 target reduction.
(PM 091) Percent of decisions completed on time (on or before PRIA or negotiated due date).
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
99
99.7
FY2011
99
98.4
FY 2012
99
99.1
FY 2013
99
98.8
FY 2014
97
FY 2015
96
Unit
Percent
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
882
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: In this climate of reduced resources, dollars and FTE, OPP was not able to meet the FY 2013 target. Reductions to future targets have been
requested and approved.
Additional Information: Baseline average percentage of decisions completed on time between 2010-2012 is 99.0 percent according to EPA internal data. FTE/resource
information was provided to the Office of Management and Budget to make the budget justification for the FY 2014 target reduction.
(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 2008
91
91
FY 2009
92
92
FY 2010
92
96
FY2011
92
95
FY 2012
95
97
FY 2013
95
99
FY 2014
95
FY 2015
95
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: Senior management focus on these work flows and processes spurred by monitoring through the GPRA and ACS process has resulted in
continuous improvement over the past two years.
Additional Information: Baseline is 94percent, as determined by averaging the annual performance results for this measure over the period 2008-2012. Data obtained
from Federal Lead Based Paint Program (FLPP) information system.
(PM 143) Percentage of agricultural acres treated with reduced-risk pesticides.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
18.5
21
FY 2009
20
21.5
FY 2010
21
21
FY2011
21
22
FY 2012
22
22.5
FY 2013
22.5
Data Avail
10/2014
FY 2014
22.5
FY 2015
22.5
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: The baseline for acres-treated is 22percent of total acreage in 201 1 when the reduced-risk pesticide acre treatments was 315,000,000 and total (all
pesticides) was 1,444,000,000 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 lagged one year.
(PM 247) Percent of new chemicals or organisms introduced into commerce that do not pose unreasonable risks to
workers, consumers, or the environment.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
100
100
FY 2009
100
97
FY 2010
100
91
FY2011
100
100
FY 2012
100
100
FY 2013
100
100
FY 2014
100
FY 2015
100
Unit
Percent
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
883
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Additional Information: Baseline is 97percent, as determined by averaging the annual performance results for this measure over the period 2009-2012. Data obtained
from the 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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
61
50
FY2011
63
59
FY 2012
65
65
FY 2013
67
67
FY 2014
81
FY 2015
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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
40
0
FY 2012
40
0
FY 2013
40
0
FY 2014
FY 2015
Unit
Chemicals
Explanation of Results: In F Y20 1 3 , 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 was revised and issued in June 2013 and pending approval of the Information Collection Request (ICR), the agency anticipates
issuing test orders across three years of the duration of the ICR.
Additional Information: F Y 20 1 0 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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
2
2
FY 2012
4
1
FY 2013
6
6
FY 2014
FY 2015
Unit
Assays
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
884
-------
Program Area
Performance
Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: In FY2013, the Endocrine Program completed the validation efforts for five ecological Tier 2 test methods, including an additional Tier 1 test
method that seeks to replace the use of whole animals with human recombinant cell lines. All six test methods have been submitted for external peer review as of
September 30, 2013. The FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel report for the review of the interlaboratory validation data for the bird, fish, frog, mysid and copepod species
have been submitted to the Agency as of September 30, 2013 and the Human Recombinant Estrogen Receptor (E1RER) Tier 1 test method integrated summary report had
been submitted for external peer review on September 30, 2013.
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 prevalidation 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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
52
FY 2015
0
Unit
Chemicals
Additional Information: FY 2012 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. Targets for EDSP performance measures E01, E04, and EOS are set at zero for FY 2015 in reflection of the time needed
for issuance of test orders and completion of the scientific data review processes. Issuance of test orders is dependent on an Office of Management and Budget-approved
information collection request (ICR) for the List 2 chemicals. Currently, the ICR is being reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget for a decision on whether or
not to approve the request and the decision is stipulated on the agency responding to the initial ICR terms of clearance. The agency currently projects to have an Office of
Management and Budget-approved ICR by no earlier than FY 2014 which would allow the agency to issue test orders no earlier than late 2014. When recipients receive
the Tier 1 test order, the agency allows 2 years minimum for data generation and 1 year for the agency's review of that submitted data, a total of 3 years. Based on these
projections, the agency anticipates that results for E01, E04, and EOS would not be realized until 2017.
(PM EOS) Number of chemicals for which scientific weight of evidence determinations have been completed.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
52
FY 2015
0
Unit
Chemicals
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
885
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Additional Information: FY 2012 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). Targets for EDSP performance measures E01, E04, and EOS are set at zero for FY 2015 in reflection of the time needed for issuance of test orders and
completion of the scientific data review processes. Issuance of test orders is dependent on an Office of Management and Budget-approved information collection request
(ICR) for the List 2 chemicals. Currently, the ICR is being reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget for a decision on whether or not to approve the request and
the decision is stipulated on the agency responding to the initial ICR terms of clearance. The agency currently projects to have an Office of Management and Budget-
approved ICR by no earlier than FY 2014 which would allow the agency to issue test orders no earlier than late 2014. When recipients receive the Tier 1 test order, the
agency allows 2 years minimum for data generation and 1 year for the agency's review of that submitted data, a total of 3 years. Based on these projections, the agency
anticipates that results for EO1, E04, and EOS would not be realized until 2017.
(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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
8
FY 2015
18
Unit
Assays and
Tools
Additional Information: FY 2012 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
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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
230
270
FY2011
300
318
FY 2012
300
300
FY 2013
300
26
FY 2014
FY 2015
Unit
Chemicals
Explanation of Results: Hazard characterizations were impacted by budget reductions due to sequestration. Measure is being replaced in FY 2014 by new Risk
Assessment measures (RA1)
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 2011 1,683 hazard characterizations have
been completed. This measure will be discontinued after FY 2013 and replaced by measure RA1 in FY 2014.
(PM J15) Reduction in concentration of targeted pesticide analytes in children.
Target
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
50,50
FY 2013
No Target
Established
FY 2014
50,50
FY 2015
Unit
Percent
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
886
-------
Program Area
(2) Protect
Ecosystems
from Chemical
Risks
Performance Measures and Data
Actual
Data Not Avail
Biennial
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 umol/L, and Chlorpyrifos metabolite (TCPy) is 16.0 ug/L, respectively. Data for this measure is
reported biennially. Measure deleted from strategic plan due to lack of data availability. Receipt of timely, accurate data has been an ongoing problem since inception of
the measure. OCSPP never received results since the measure inception. Without results or sufficient data, a target for FY 201 5 cannot be set.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, no watersheds will exceed aquatic life benchmarks for targeted pesticides. (Data for 2012
provides the most recent percent of agricultural watersheds sampled by the USGS National Water Quality Assessment
(NAWQA) program that exceeds the National Pesticide Program aquatic life benchmarks for azinphos-methyl (7 percent) and
chlorpyrifos (7 percent). Urban watersheds sampled by the NAWQA program that exceed the National Pesticide Program
aquatic life benchmarks for diazinon (0 percent), chlorpyrifos (0 percent), and carbaryl (9 percent).)
(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 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
Biennial
FY 2014
0,0,0
FY 2015
No Target
Established
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: Urban watersheds sampled by the USGS National Water Quality Assessment (NAWQA) program that exceeds the National Pesticide Program
aquatic life benchmarks in 2012 for diazinon, chlorpyrifos and carbaryl is 0 percent, 0 percent, 9 percent, respectively. 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 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
Biennial
FY 2014
0,0
FY 2015
No Target
Established
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: Agricultural watersheds sampled by the USGS National Water Quality Assessment (NAWQA) program that exceeds the National Pesticide
Program aquatic life benchmarks for azinphos-methyl and chlorpyrifos are 7 percent and 7 percent, respectively. Data for this measure are reported biennially.
(PM 164) Number of pesticide registration review dockets opened.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
70
75
FY2011
70
81
FY 2012
70
79
FY 2013
72
77
FY 2014
73
FY 2015
73
Unit
Dockets
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
887
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: In order to keep registration review on schedule to meet the statutorily mandated completion date in 2022 the program placed special emphasis on
the opening of dockets. The program does not anticipated being able to maintain this pace.
Additional Information: By 2012, total of 376 chemical case work dockets were opened according to EPA internal data.
(PM 230) Number of pesticide registration review final work plans completed.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
70
70
FY2011
70
75
FY 2012
70
70
FY 2013
72
79
FY 2014
73
FY 2015
73
Unit
Work Plans
Explanation of Results: In order to keep registration review on schedule to meet the mandated completion date 2022, the program placed special emphasis on the
completion of final work plans. The program does not anticipate being able to maintain this pace.
Additional Information: By 2012, total of 327 final work plans for registered pesticides were completed according to EPA internal data.
(PM 240) Maintain timeliness of Section 18 Emergency Exemption Decisions
Target
Actual
FY 2008
45
34
FY 2009
45
40
FY 2010
45
50
FY2011
45
52
FY 2012
45
43
FY 2013
45
27
FY 2014
45
FY 2015
45
Unit
Days
Explanation of Results: One action (amitraz to control varroa mites in beehives) was national in scope and resulted in 39 Section 18's with an average turnaround time of
3 days.
Additional Information: Baseline average number of days for SI 8 decisions between 2009-2012 is 46 days 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 DOI.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
5
0
FY 2013
5
Data Avail
10/2014
FY 2014
15
FY 2015
5
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: NAS report recommendations and their implementation are not scheduled for release until 2014. The program is working with other federal
agencies to evaluate the potential impacts of pesticides to endangered species based on the NAS report results.
Additional Information: The baseline is zero percent 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.
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
888
-------
Objective 2 - Promote Pollution Prevention: Conserve and protect natural resources by promoting pollution prevention and the adoption of
other sustainability practices by companies, communities, governmental organizations, and individuals
Program Area
(1) Promote
Pollution
Prevention
Performance
Measures and
Data
Strategic Measure: By 2018, reduce 600 million pounds of hazardous materials cumulatively through pollution prevention.
(Baseline is 578 million pounds reduced from FY 2008 through FY 2012, after removing 626 million pounds in reported results
that should not be expected to continue in future years due to atypical results, and increased quality assurance standards for the
results that come from states and other grant recipients.)
(PM 264) Pounds of hazardous materials reduced through pollution prevention.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
190
272.4
FY 2009
192
129.5
FY 2010
188.1
110.3
FY2011
199.6
35.1
FY 2012
88.7
1,711
FY 2013
71.6
Data Avail
11/2014
FY 2014
23.4
FY 2015
30
Unit
Pounds
(Millions)
Explanation of Results: Normal 1-year data lag
Additional Information: Baseline is 578 million pounds reduced from FY 2008 through FY 2012, after removing 626 million pounds in reported results that should not be
expected to continue in future years due to: 1) atypical results, and 2) increased quality assurance standards for the results that come from states and other grant recipients.
In previous Congressional Justifications, for Fiscal Years 2010 through 2014, targets and results included Recurring Results, which are results produced in prior years that
continue to deliver environmental benefits over multiple years. Starting in FY 2015, to align the targeted results with the annual budget request, the Agency is returning to
display only new annual targets and results. For example with recurring results the F Y 20 1 1 the target was 1 ,549 and the results were 1 ,563 .
Strategic Measure: By 2018, reduce 7 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2Eq.) cumulatively through
pollution prevention. (Baseline is 7 MMTCO2Eq. reduced from FY 2008 through FY 2012, after removing 3.5 MMTCO2Eq in
reported results that should not be expected to continue in future years due to atypical results, and increased quality assurance
standards for the results that come from states and other grant recipients. 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 (MTCO2Eq) reduced or offset through pollution prevention.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
1.8
1.4
FY 2010
2.11
1.68
FY2011
2.19
1.38
FY 2012
1.74
5.26
FY 2013
1.46
Data Avail
11/2014
FY 2014
1.0
FY 2015
1.2
Unit
MMTCO2E
q
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
889
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: Exceeding the annual target in FY 2012 is primarily attributed to FY 2012 Presidential Green Chemistry Award Winners. The Presidential Green
Chemistry Challenge awardees in 2012 focused on innovations that had very high contributions to reducing GHG, along with Hazardous Materials and Cost Savings,
compared to recent years. One award alone is responsible for reducing BTU use by trillions of units, which translated directly into significant GHG reductions.
FY 2013 data available 10/2014
Additional Information: Baseline is 7 MMTCO2Eq. reduced from FY 2008 through FY 2012, after removing 3.5 MMTCO2Eq in reported results that should not be
expected to continue in future years due to: 1) atypical results, and 2) increased quality assurance standards for the results that come from states and other grant recipients.
In previous Congressional Justifications, for Fiscal Years 2010 through 2014, targets and results included Recurring Results, which are results produced in prior years that
continue to deliver environmental benefits over multiple years. Starting in FY 2015, to align the targeted results with the annual budget request, the Agency is returning to
display only new annual targets and results. For example with recurring results the FY 2011 the target was 5.7 and the results were 4.3.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, reduce 6.9 billion gallons of water use cumulatively through pollution prevention. (Baseline is
6.9 billion gallons reduced from FY 2008 through FY 2012, after removing 24 billion gallons in reported results that should not
be expected to continue in future years due to atypical results, and increased quality assurance standards for the results that
come from states and other grant recipients.)
(PM 262) Gallons of water reduced through pollution prevention.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
1,640
22,179
FY 2009
1,790
4,650
FY 2010
781
1,472
FY2011
783
1,397
FY 2012
785
1,175
FY 2013
771
Data Avail
10/2014
FY 2014
932
FY 2015
1,156
Unit
Gallons
(Millions)
Explanation of Results: Data available in 10/2014
Additional Information: Baseline is 6.9 billion gallons reduced from FY 2008 through FY 2012, after removing 24 billion gallons in reported results that should not be
expected to continue in future years due to: 1) atypical results, and 2) increased quality assurance standards for the results that come from states and other grant recipients.
In previous Congressional Justifications, for Fiscal Years 2010 through 2014, targets and results included Recurring Results, which are results produced in prior years that
continue to deliver environmental benefits over multiple years. Starting in FY 2015, to align the targeted results with the annual budget request, the Agency is returning to
display only new annual targets and results. For example with recurring results the FY 2011 the target was 28.6 and the results were 29.1.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, save $ 1.3 billion in business, institutional, and government costs cumulatively through pollution
prevention improvements. (Baseline is $1.33 billion saved from FY 2008 through FY 2012, after removing $231 million in
reported results that should not be expected to continue in future years due to atypical results, and increased quality assurance
standards for the results that come from states and other grant recipients.)
(PM 263) Business, institutional and government costs reduced through pollution prevention.
Target
FY 2008
45.9
FY 2009
130
FY 2010
253.9
FY2011
268.5
FY 2012
196.9
FY 2013
195.6
FY 2014
133.3
FY 2015
197
Unit
Dollars
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
890
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Actual
234.4
272.2
190.8
232.9
626
Data Avail
11/2014
Saved
(Millions)
Explanation of Results: Normal 1-year data lag
Additional Information: Baseline is $1.33 billion saved from FY 2008 through FY 2012, after removing $231 million in reported results that should not be expected to
continue in future years due to: 1) atypical results, and 2) increased quality assurance standards for the results that come from states and other grant recipients. In previous
Congressional Justifications, for Fiscal Years 2010 through 2014, targets and results included Recurring Results, which are results produced in prior years that continue to
deliver environmental benefits over multiple years. Starting in FY 2015, to align the targeted results with the annual budget request, the Agency is returning to display
only new annual targets and results. For example with recurring results the F Y 20 1 1 the target was 1 ,042 and the results were 1 ,044.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, increase the number of safer use chemicals and safer chemical products cumulatively by 1,900.
(Baseline is 600 safer chemicals and 2,500 safer chemical products recognized in 2013 by Design for the Environment
program.)
(PM P25) Percent increase in use of safer products
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
7
62
FY 2013
7
48
FY 2014
FY 2015
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: EOY target continued to be exceeded because of continued leveraging of 3rd parties— paid by requesting companies— to conduct product reviews.
Targets for years prior to FY 2014 were unable to be adjusted based on performance, out-year targets have been adjusted to represent expected program performance.
Additional Information: Baseline is 476 million pounds, of safer chemicals in commerce in 2009 as reported by Design for the Environment.
(PM P26) Number of safer chemicals and safer chemical products.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
475
Unit
Chemicals/
Products
Additional Information: Baseline is 600 safer chemicals and 2,500 safer chemical products recognized in 201 3 by Design for the Environment program.
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
891
-------
GOAL 5: PROTECTING HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT BY ENFORCING LAWS AND ASSURING COMPLIANCE
Protect human health and the environment through vigorous and targeted civil and criminal enforcement. Use Next Generation Compliance strategies
and tools to improve compliance with environmental laws.
Objective 1 - Enforce Environmental Laws to Achieve Compliance
: Pursue vigorous civil and criminal enforcement that targets the most serious water, air, and chemical hazards in communities to achieve
compliance. Assure strong, consistent, and effective enforcement of federal environmental laws nationwide. Use Next Generation Compliance
strategies and tools to improve compliance and reduce pollution.
Program Area
(1) Maintain
Enforcement
Presence
Strategic
baseline:
Performance
Measures and
Data
Measure: By 2018, conduct 79,000 federal inspections and evaluations (5-year cumulative). (FY 2005-2009
21,000 annually. Status for FY 2013: 18,000.)
(PM 409) Number of
Target
Actual
FY 2008
federal inspections and evaluations.
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
19,000
20,000
FY 2013 FY 2014
17,000 17,000
18,000
FY 2015 Unit
15,500 Inspections/
Evaluations
Additional Information: FY 2005-2009 baseline: 21,000 annually.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, initiate 14,000 civil judicial and administrative enforcement cases (5-year cumulative). (FY
2005-2009 baseline: 3,900 annually. Status for FY 2013: 2,400.)
(PM 410) Number of
Target
Actual
FY 2008
civil judicial and administrative enforcement cases initiated.
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
Explanation of Results: FY 2013 result is lower than target. EPA is pursuing larg
initiations and conclusions.
Additional Information: FY 2005-2009 baseline: 3,900 annually.
FY 2012
3,300
3,000
FY 2013 FY 2014
3,200 3,200
2,400
FY 2015 Unit
2,700
Cases
er, more complex risk-based enforcement cases, which has led to fewer enforcement
Strategic Measure: By 2018, conclude 13,600 civil judicial and administrative enforcement cases (5-year cumulative). (FY
2005-2009 baseline: 3,800 annually. Status for FY 2013: 2,500.)
GOAL 5: PROTECTING HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT BY ENFORCING LAWS AND ASSURING COMPLIANCE
892
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
(PM 411) Number of civil judicial and administrative enforcement cases concluded.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
3,200
3,000
FY 2013
3,000
2,500
FY 2014
2,800
FY 2015
2,400
Unit
Cases
Explanation of Results: FY 2013 result is lower than target. EPA is pursuing larger, more complex risk-based enforcement cases, which has led to fewer enforcement
initiations and conclusions.
Additional Information: FY 2005-2009 baseline: 3,800 annually.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, maintain review of the overall compliance status of 100 percent of the open consent decrees.
(Baseline 2009: 100 percent. Status for FY 2013: 91 percent.)
(PM 412) Percentage of open consent decrees reviewed for overall compliance status.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
91
FY 2013
100
91
FY 2014
100
FY 2015
100
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: The total number of consent decrees to be reviewed annually is small. Therefore, a small number of not reviewed consent decrees 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 2018, support clean ups 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 $500,000. ((1) FY 2007-2009 annual average baseline: 99 percent
of sites reaching a settlement or EPA taking an enforcement action. (2) FY 2009 baseline: 100 percent cost recovery statute of
limitation cases addressed. )
(PM 078) Percentage of all Superfund statute of limitations cases addressed at sites with unaddressed past Superfund
costs equal to or greater than $500,000.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
100
100
FY 2009
100
100
FY 2010
100
100
FY2011
100
100
FY 2012
100
100
FY 2013
100
100
FY 2014
100
FY 2015
100
Unit
Percent
GOAL 5: PROTECTING HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT BY ENFORCING LAWS AND ASSURING COMPLIANCE
893
-------
Program Area
(2) Support
Addressing
Climate
Change and
Improving Air
Quality
(3) Support
Protecting
America's
Waters
Performance
Measures and
Additional Information: In FY 2009, the Agency will have addressed 100 percent of Cost Recovery
than $200,000. The threshold for this measure was increased from $200,000 to $500,000 in FY 2013
Data
at all NPL and non-NPL sites with total past costs equal to or greater
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 2008
95
95
FY 2009
95
100
FY 2010
95
98
FY2011
95
100
FY 2012
99
100
FY 2013
99
100
FY 2014
99
FY 2015
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.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, reduce, treat, or eliminate 1,590 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. Status for FY 2013: 610 million pounds.)
(PM 400) Millions of
Target
Actual
FY 2008
pounds of air pollutants
FY 2009
FY 2010
480
410
reduced, treated, or eliminated through concluded enforcement actions.
FY2011
480
1,100
FY 2012
480
250
FY 2013
450
610
FY 2014
350
FY 2015
310
Unit
Million
Pounds
Explanation of Results: Results for this measure are highly variable from year to year because they are driven by enforcement cases, which have a high degree of
variability.
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 2018, reduce, treat, or eliminate 1,280 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. Status for FY 2013: 660 million pounds.)
(PM 402) Millions of
FY 2008
pounds of water pollutants reduced,
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
treated, or eliminated through concluded enforcement actions.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
Unit
GOAL 5: PROTECTING HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT BY ENFORCING LAWS AND ASSURING COMPLIANCE
894
-------
Program Area
(4) Support
Cleaning Up
Communities
and Advancing
Sustainable
Development
Performance
Target
Actual
320
1,000
320
740
Measures and Data
320
500
320
660
280
250
Million
Pounds
Explanation of Results: Results for this measure are highly variable from year to year because they are driven by enforcement cases, which have a high degree of
variability.
Additional Information: FY 2005-2008 Average Baseline: 320 million pounds, annual average over the period. For FY 2010, two storm water home builder actions
contributed to more than half of the one billion pound pollutant reduction result.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, treat, minimize, or properly dispose of 14,600 million estimated pounds of hazardous waste as a
result of concluded enforcement actions (5-year cumulative.) (FY 2008 baseline: 6,500 million pounds. Status for FY 2013: 150
million pounds.)
(PM 405) Millions of pounds of hazardous waste reduced,
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
6,500
11,800
FY2011
6,500
3,600
treated, or eliminated through concluded enforcement actions.
FY 2012
6,500
4,400
FY 2013
6,000
150
FY 2014
5,000
FY 2015
2,400
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 99percent 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 2018, obtain commitments to clean up 1,025 million cubic yards of contaminated soil and groundwater
media [4] 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. Status for
FY 2013: 750 million cubic yards.)
(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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
300
400
FY 2013
275
750
FY 2014
225
FY 2015
200
Unit
Million
Cubic Yards
GOAL 5: PROTECTING HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT BY ENFORCING LAWS AND ASSURING COMPLIANCE
895
-------
Program Area
(5) Support
Ensuring the
Safety of
Chemicals and
Preventing
Pollution
(6) Enhance
Strategic
Deterrence
through
Criminal
Enforcement
Performance
Measures and
Data
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 2007-2009 baseline: 300 million cubic yards of contaminated soil and groundwater media, annual average over the period. Contaminated
groundwater media, as defined for the Superfund and RCRA corrective action programs, is the volume of physical aquifer (both soil and water) that will be addressed by
the response action. 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 concluded in any given year. For example, in FY 201 1 75percent 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
was adjusted (from 300 to 275) to reflect decreases in contributing program project areas in the FY 2013 budget.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, reduce, treat, or eliminate 14 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. Status for FY 2013: 4.6 million pounds.)
(PM 404) Millions of
enforcement actions.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
pounds of toxic and pesticide pollutants reduced, treated, or eliminated through concluded
FY 2009
FY 2010
3.8
8.3
FY2011
3.8
6.1
FY 2012
3.8
1,400
FY 2013
3.0
4.6
FY 2014
2.5
FY 2015
2.3
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 2005-2008 Average Baseline: 3.8 million pounds, annual average over the period. The results for this measure are usually driven by a small
number of very large enforcement cases, which yielded the majority of the pounds addressed and can cause significant fluctuations in results from year to year, depending
on the types of cases concluded in any given year. A change in focus in this program (more emphasis on the TSCA Lead-Based Paint (LBP) program area) will result in a
reduction in the target for the number of pounds of pollutants reduced.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, increase the percentage of criminal cases having the most
deterrence impacts to 45 percent. (FY 2010 baseline: 36 percent. Status for FY 2013: 44
(PM 418) Percentage
Target
Actual
FY 2008
of criminal
FY 2009
significant health, environmental, and
percent.)
cases having the most significant health, environmental, and deterrence impacts.
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
43
45
FY 2013
43
44
FY 2014
43
FY 2015
45
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: FY2010 baseline: 36 percent.
Strategic
baseline:
Measure: By 2018, increase the percentage of criminal cases with charges filed to 45 percent. (FY 2006-2010
36 percent. Status for FY 2013: 38 percent.)
GOAL 5: PROTECTING HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT BY ENFORCING LAWS AND ASSURING COMPLIANCE
896
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
(PM 420) Percentage of criminal cases with charges filed.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
40
44
FY 2013
40
38
FY 2014
40
FY 2015
45
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: This result is within the expected annual variability for this measure.
Additional Information: FY 2006-20 10 baseline: 36 percent.
Strategic Measure: By 2018, maintain an 85 percent conviction rate for criminal defendants. (FY 2006-2010 baseline: 85
percent. Status for FY 2013: 94 percent.)
(PM 419) Percentage of criminal cases with individual defendants.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
75
70
FY 2013
75
80
FY 2014
75
FY 2015
75
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: FY 2006-2008 baseline: 75 percent.
(PM 421) Percentage of conviction rate for criminal defendants.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
85
95
FY 2013
85
94
FY 2014
85
FY 2015
85
Unit
Percent
Additional Information: FY2006-FY2010 baseline: 85 percent.
GOAL 5: PROTECTING HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT BY ENFORCING LAWS AND ASSURING COMPLIANCE
897
-------
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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
100
FY 2013
100
92
FY 2014
100
FY 2015
100
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: In FY 2013, the Air, Climate and Energy Research Program completed 92% of its planned research products. The work that was not completed on time was a report
evaluating the use of hydrologic landscape classification to assess changes to streams, wetlands and aquatic resources in response to climate change. This work was delayed due to staff limitations
(the former task lead retired in April, new task lead was out on full-time medical leave).
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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
77
FY 2013
100
83
FY 2014
100
FY 2015
100
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: In FY 2013, the Air, Climate and Energy Research Program completed 83% of its planned research outputs. The work that was not completed on time was: A decision
support tool for States and communities to assess water quality impacts from leaking underground storage tanks; an improved method for ambient acrolein measurement, which will be delivered in
FY14 to be consistent with the delivery of the FY14 product that feeds into this output, and; an assessment of the variability in particulate and gaseous emissions from stationary diesels of differing
generation capacity both with and without particulate catches, delayed to FY14 due to unanticipated equipment malfunction
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.
RESEARCH
898
-------
Performance Measures and Data
(PM CS1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Chemical Safety for Sustainability research program.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
100
FY 2013
100
100
FY 2014
100
FY 2015
100
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: 100% of planned FY13 research products for this program were completed on time.
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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
50
FY 2013
100
100
FY 2014
100
FY 2015
100
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: 100% of planned FY13 research outputs for this program were completed on time.
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 HC1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Sustainable and Healthy Communities research program.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
100
FY 2013
100
83
FY 2014
100
FY 2015
100
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: In FY 2013, the Sustainable and Healthy Communities Research Program completed 83% of its planned research products. The work that was not completed on time was:
the public release of National Atlas Version 2.1 (now called EnviroAtlas), a web-based tool complete with at least 100 data layers, high resolution land cover and methodologies for 6 cities, and
tools for watershed navigation, and; an analysis of approaches to assess various beneficial use of wastes, including a review of material streams of interest to States, communities and consumers,
which was delayed to FY14 due to sequestration furloughs & contracting delays.
RESEARCH
899
-------
Performance Measures and Data
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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
50
FY 2013
100
68
FY 2014
100
FY 2015
100
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: In FY 2013, the Sustainable and Healthy Communities Research Program completed 68% of its planned research outputs. The work that was not completed on time was:
Full public release of Version 2 of the En viro Atlas with additional national, regional, and community data, additional functionality, and overall improvements based on results of new research and
feedback from users of Version, which was delayed to FY14 since the program has not received approval to fund the vehicles responsible for completing some data layers and some functionality
originally planned for the public release; simple, efficient, and rapid methods to determine the potential for vapor intrusion into the home and other buildings, delayed until FY14; a synthesis report
on existing tools and state of the practice for Community decisions in the buildings and infrastructure sector, delayed until FY14; a synthesis report on existing tools and state of the practice for
Community decisions about waste and materials management, delayed until FY14; a synthesis of literature and existing case studies that summarizes the science and practical application of
methodologies for TRIO (Total Resource Impacts and Outcomes), and; issuing RFAs for STAR FELLOWSHIPS, since the FY14 President's Budget reflected a transfer of fellowship resources to
NSF. This course change, along with sequestration cuts, prevented EPA from issuing RFAs to for new fellows in FY13. Instead, FY13 fellowship resources were used to fund existing fellows.
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 HS1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Homeland Security research program.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
100
FY 2013
100
100
FY 2014
100
FY 2015
100
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: 100% of planned FY13 research products for this program were completed on time.
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.
RESEARCH
900
-------
Performance Measures and Data
(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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
78
FY 2013
100
100
FY 2014
100
FY 2015
100
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: 100% of planned FY13 research outputs for this program were completed on time.
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 RA1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Human Health Risk Assessment research program.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
100
FY 2013
100
88
FY 2014
100
FY 2015
100
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: In FY 2013, the Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) Research Program completed 88% of its planned research products, including the delivery for external peer
review of high-priority IRIS assessments. The HHRA Research Program completed two final IRIS assessments in FY 2013 (methanol (non cancer) and 1,4-dioxane) and implemented several
enhancements to the process including stakeholder engagement and recommendations from the ongoing review of the IRIS process by the NAS, resulting in a reduced number of final IRIS
assessments completed.
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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
38
FY 2013
100
100
FY 2014
100
FY 2015
100
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: 100% of planned FY13 research outputs for this program were completed on time.
RESEARCH
901
-------
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 RA6) Number of regulatory decisions in which decision-makers used HHRA peer-reviewed assessments (IRIS, PPRTVs, exposure
assessments and other assessments)
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
No Target
Established
NA
FY 2013
20
140
FY 2014
20
FY 2015
20
Unit
Number
Explanation of Results: During FY13 at least 140 Agency decisions utilized assessment products from the HHRA research program
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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
50
8
FY 2013
50
17
FY 2014
40
FY 2015
40
Unit
Score
Explanation of Results: Substantial progress was made on 2013 IRIS milestones. Benzo[a]-pyrene was released for public comment, Biphenyl underwent final Agency and interagency review and
was posted in August, 1, 4-dioxane (inhalation) underwent final Agency and interagency review and was posted in September, literature searches/evidence tables for ETBE, RDX and TEA were
released, EtO (inhalation- cancer) underwent Agency review and was released for public comment, Methanol (non-cancer) underwent Agency and interagency review and was posted in September,
TCE addendum underwent Agency and interagency review, and Ammonia and TMBs underwent public comment. However, in F Y 2013 EPA implemented several enhancements to the IRIS
process, including stakeholder engagement and recommendations from the ongoing review of the IRIS process by the NAS, resulting in a reduced number of final IRIS assessments completed.
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.
RESEARCH
902
-------
Performance Measures and Data
(PM RA8) Annual progress score for finalizing IRIS health assessments.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
20
17
FY 2013
20
8
FY 2014
15
FY 2015
15
Unit
Score
Explanation of Results: Substantial progress was made on 2013 IRIS milestones. Benzo[a]-pyrene was released for public comment, Biphenyl underwent final Agency and interagency review and
was posted in August, 1, 4-dioxane (inhalation) underwent final Agency and interagency review and was posted in September, literature searches/evidence tables for ETBE, RDX and TEA were
released, EtO (inhalation- cancer) underwent Agency review and was released for public comment, Methanol (non-cancer) underwent Agency and interagency review and was posted in September,
TCE addendum underwent Agency and interagency review, and Ammonia and TMBs underwent public comment. However, in F Y 2013 EPA implemented several enhancements to the IRIS
process, including stakeholder engagement and recommendations from the ongoing review of the IRIS process by the NAS, resulting in a reduced number of final IRIS assessments completed.
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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
86
FY 2013
100
70
FY 2014
100
FY 2015
100
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: In FY 2013, the Safe and Sustainable Water Resources Research Program completed 70% of its planned research products. The work that was not completed on time was:
green infrastructure modeling tools and data inventories, to be completed in FY14 because the Principal Investigator was prioritized to other activities, primarily the Storm water Calculator with
Climate Adaption Tool; the Bristol Bay Assessment, the second draft of which was completed and went out for public comment on 4/26/13 (final report expected in FY14), and; 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, delayed
to FY14 since data for the analysis was delayed.
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
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
100
FY 2013
100
FY 2014
100
FY 2015
100
Unit
Percent
RESEARCH
903
-------
Actual
50
100
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: 100% of planned FY13 research outputs for this program were completed on time.
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.
RESEARCH
904
-------
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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
335/80
323/85
FY 2013
323 / 80
285/ 85
FY 2014
85
FY 2015
85
Unit
Number/
Percent
Explanation of Results: EPA exceeded the percentage of certified 1 102s but the baseline number decreased as a result of budget reductions and hiring freezes that have
taken place over the last two years. From October 1, 2011 until October 1, 2013, the number of EPA 1 102 on boards reduced from 324 to 285. In FY 2014, the agency
anticipates a slight increase to 290 1 102 on boards.
Additional Information: As of August 201 3, there were 290 1102 staff onboard, of which 246 (85%) were certified. A current projection for 1102 staff on board for FY
2014 is 290. While the Agency does not expect to meet the target number of 1 102 on board for 2014, OARM will continue to strive to ensure that at least 85% of current
1 102 staff are trained and certified.
(PM 010) Cumulative percentage reduction in Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Scopes 1 & 2 emissions.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
1.0
79.5
FY2011
0.4
59
FY 2012
6.4
54.1
FY 2013
12.2
Data Avail
2/2014
FY 2014
16.3
FY 2015
16.3
Unit
Percent
Explanation of Results: FY 2013 data available 02/2014.
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).
(PM 098) Cumulative percentage reduction in energy consumption.
Target
Actual
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
Data Avail
FY 2014
27
FY 2015
27
Unit
Percent
905
-------
02/2014
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: FY 2013 data available 02/2014.
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 393,130 BTUs per square foot. OARM has reported baseline revisions each
year - generally to correct for more accurate Gross square footages of various facilities. This results in FY 2003 baseline changes of+/- 200 BTUs/GSF/year and are
reviewed and approved by DOE annually. In FY 2008, OARM submitted and DOE approved one FY 2003 baseline revision, and that was when the RTF advanced
metering system began operations. OARM switched from "back of the envelope" calculations based on meter readings at the Central Utility Plant to metered data for
chilled and hot water arriving at the RTF Main and RTF NCC facilities. That revision resulted in the revision to EPA's present baseline to 390,000 +/- BTUs/GSF/Yr FY
2003 Baseline is 393,130 BTU/GSF/YR.
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 2008
45
48
FY 2009
50
55
FY 2010
60
60
FY2011
60
64
FY 2012
67
68
FY 2013
75
73
FY 2014
80
FY 2015
85
Unit
Systems
Explanation of Results: The target of 75 was selected based on the expectation that we would migrate 7 data flows to production. We migrated 9 new flows (exceeding
75) in FY 2013 but 4 data flows were decommissioned bringing the total number of data flows to 73 in FY 2013.
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 2008
55
59
FY 2009
60
59
FY 2010
65
69
FY2011
65
72
FY 2012
80
92
FY 2013
95
97
FY 2014
98
FY 2015
103
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.
906
-------
Performance Measures and Data
(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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
500
600
FY 2014
500
FY 2015
600
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 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY2011
Baseline Year
56,200
FY 2012
58,000
65,238
FY 2013
70,000
79,818
FY 2014
75,000
FY 2015
84,000
Unit
Users
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.
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 2008
334
463
FY 2009
318
272
FY 2010
334
391
FY2011
334
315
FY 2012
334
216
FY 2013
307
215
FY 2014
248
FY 2015
260
Unit
Actions
Explanation of Results: During F Y 20 1 3 the target was adjusted consistent with the adjustment in the enacted budget due to sequestration. There was a significant relative
improvement over FY 2012 due to a greater focus on follow-up and resolution, however the number of business actions taken were lower than anticipated.
Additional Information: The baseline is a moving average for the three most recent years. For the period concluding with fiscal year 20 1 0, the baseline is 375 actions.
(PM 35B) Environmental and business recommendations
or risks identified for corrective action.
907
-------
Performance Measures and Data
Target
Actual
FY 2008
971
624
FY 2009
903
983
FY 2010
903
945
FY2011
903
2011
FY 2012
903
1242
FY 2013
786
1003
FY 2014
687
FY 2015
721
Unit
Recommendations
Explanation of Results: During F Y 20 1 3 the target was adjusted consistent with the adjustment in the enacted budget due to sequestration. There was an improvement in
the relative percentage of recommendations and risks identified for corrective actions.
Additional Information: In FY 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 2008
150
186
FY 2009
120
150
FY 2010
120
36
FY2011
120
151
FY 2012
110
743
FY 2013
125
248
FY 2014
132
FY 2015
139
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.
Target
Actual
FY 2008
80
84
FY 2009
80
95
FY 2010
75
115
FY2011
80
160
FY 2012
85
152
FY 2013
90
256
FY 2014
125
FY 2015
131
Unit
Actions
Explanation of Results: There was considerable improvement in the results due to catching up results on actions initiated in previous years.
Additional Information: In FY 2009 the OIG established a revised baseline of 80 criminal, civil and administrative actions, which has remained constant over time.
908
-------
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/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockev=P 1OOHOJF.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.
909
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2015 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Appendix A
COORDINATION WITH OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES 912
Environmental Programs 912
Enabling Support Programs 955
MAJOR MANAGEMENT CHALLENGES 963
EPA USER FEE PROGRAM 978
WORKING CAPITAL FUND 981
ACRONYMS for STATUTORY AUTHORITY 982
Statutory Authority and Eligible Uses 987
PROGRAM PROJECTS BY PROGRAM AREA 1000
DISCONTINUED PROGRAMS 1010
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Management 1011
EXPECTED BENEFITS OF THE PRESIDENT'S E-GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES 1012
FY 2014-2015 EPA AGENCY PRIORITY GOALS 1017
Proposed FY 2015 Administrative Provisions 1019
EPA Major Offices 1021
Payments of Attorney Fees under EAJA 1024
Physicians' Comparability Allowance (PCA) Worksheet for PY 2014 1027
910
-------
911
-------
COORDINATION WITH OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES
Environmental Programs
Goal 1- Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Objective: Address Climate Change
To support the President's Climate Action Plan and to carry out a diverse range of regulatory and
voluntary programs that address climate change, EPA works a number of other federal agencies,
including the Department of Energy (DOE), the Department of Agriculture (USDA), the
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Department of State, the U.S. Agency
for International Development (USAID), and the Department of Transportation (DOT).
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 Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Department of
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 are not duplicative in
any way.
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
912
-------
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
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.
Research
The Agency coordinates its global change research with other federal agencies through the U.S.
Global Change Research Program (USGCRP).l 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 includes 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
1 For more information, see .
913
-------
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 paniculate 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 (DOT), and the Department of Defense
(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 (ACE) 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 paniculate 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 (NFS), 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
914
-------
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 is also working with the USFS to revise the health
information in the smoke management guide, which is used by burn managers. The AIRNow
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 has also been collaborating with the USCG
in the implementation of Emission Control Area (EGA) around the United States.
915
-------
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 contributes 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 USDA, and the U.S. Forest Service
(USFS).
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
916
-------
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:
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.
917
-------
International
• U.S. Government-wide Cookstoves Interagency Working Group, whose members
include the DOS, the EPA, USAID, 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
The EPA coordinates its air quality research with other federal agencies through the
Subcommittee on Air Quality Research 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 paniculate 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 Arctic research issues through the Interagency Arctic Research Policy
Committee (lARPC).
The EPA is also 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.
Furthermore, in coordination with federal partners DOE and USGS, EPA will study potential
impacts of hydraulic fracturing on air, water quality, water resources, ecosystems, and health.
This research will assist decision makers (federal, state, and local; the industry and energy
sectors, and the public) in making environmentally responsible decisions that ensure sustainable
approaches to oil and natural gas extraction.
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
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.
918
-------
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.
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
5 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
919
-------
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
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.
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. To support the Federal
Radon Action Plan, the EPA collaborates with HHS, USDA, DOD, DOE, HUD, DOI,
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and General Services Administration (GSA).
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
920
-------
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
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
Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Intelligence Analysis Directorate in the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS), 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.
The EPA will continue to work with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) and the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 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 ACE, FEMA, and the EPA are to clarify their roles and responsibilities
under the new National Disaster Recovery Framework.
The President signed Executive Order 13646, Improving Critical Infrastructure Cyber security,
on February 12, 2013. The Order directs the EPA to coordinate with DHS and the Department
of Commerce in developing implementation guidance on cybersecurity practices for water
systems. The EPA intends to harness the extensive cybersecurity capabilities of DHS in carrying
out its responsibilities under this Presidential mandate.
921
-------
Climate Change
The EPA has developed the Climate Ready Water Utilities initiative to provide practical tools
and training that enable water systems to integrate climate change considerations into long-range
planning. EPA relies heavily on other federal agencies for the data that populate these tools
including climate and extreme weather data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, climate projections from the U.S. Global Climate Research Program, and flood
data from FEMA. EPA will continue to leverage the research and expertise from these and other
federal agencies in developing climate and extreme event products for water systems.
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 also
coordinates with U.S. Geological Survey, Internal Revenue Service, Department of the 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 CO2 sequestration, and manage the
movement of CC>2 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 (MOA) - 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 MOA addresses the following four areas. 1)
Sustainability of 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.
922
-------
National Water Sector Workforce Development: Department of Veterans Affairs
In 2012, the EPA and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Vocational Rehabilitation and
Employment (VR&E) Service signed a new memorandum of understanding to jointly promote
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. Key objectives of this collaborative effort are to: 1) educate those involved with
transitioning veterans to civilian careers about the water and wastewater industries; promote
Water Sector career opportunities to veterans; 3) educate utilities about Veterans Affairs
programs and connect them with veterans; and 4) promote state program collaboration
(particularly operator certification programs) with local Veterans Affairs counselors.
Tribal Access Coordination
The EPA, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Housing and Urban Development,
the Department of Health and Human Services, the Indian Health Service and the Department of
the Interior are joining forces to renew their commitment to work together to maintain and
improve coordination in delivering water and wastewater infrastructure services and financial
assistance to American Indian and Alaska Native communities. The agencies will continue to
work together to reduce by 50 percent the number of tribal homes lacking access to safe water
and basic sanitation by 2015. A memorandum of understanding signed by the agencies on this
commitment will remain in effect for the next eight years. 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 the 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 (Natural Resource Conservation
Service and Forest Service) and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 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.
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
923
-------
Authority to make data more available to states and the public. In addition, the EPA has
collaborated with the other federal agencies, states, and industry associations to establish a
National Ground Water Monitoring Network with States to provide a fuller set of ground water
data nationally through a single portal. Data will help to address national and regional issues
related to water use, climate change and adaptation, and food and energy production. The USGS
created the portal and six states have made data available in the pilot demonstration.
Collaboration with the Department of Energy and US Geologic Survey on Induced Seismicity
The EPA is collaborating with DOE and USGS in a federal interagency research effort to address
the highest priority challenges associated with development of unconventional oil and gas
resources. The goal of this project is to better understand the potential for injection-induced
seismicity. As such, the EPA is working with DOE and USGS to identify research that will be of
benefit to EPA and state Underground Injection Control Program activities. The agencies have
also begun discussions looking at the potential for induced seismicity in geologic sequestration
activities.
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
924
-------
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
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.
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
• Federal Emergency Management Agency
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
925
-------
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 a national approach for
supporting Urban Waters Federal Partnership Pilots, the identification of policy actions needed
to integrate federal support to communities and remove barriers to local and community action.
The Partnership will also continue supporting the Five-Star Urban Waters Restoration Program,
a public-private partnership that leverages private funding to support local water quality projects.
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. The 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
926
-------
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
National Fish Hatcheries System planning and their Contaminants Program. The EPA
assessments and datasets are making significant contributions to the government-wide National
Fish Habitat Action Partnership national assessment offish 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, the National Park Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Fish and Wildlife
Service and the Forest Service on implementation, analysis and/or 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 pollutant 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.
927
-------
Specifically, the EPA will continue to collaborate with states and USDA to implement the
National Water Quality Initiative, focusing EQIP conservation funds to improve water quality
and assess progress in 165 small watersheds nationwide. 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.
Marine Pollution Prevention
The EPA works closely with a number of federal agencies including the U.S. Coast Guard, U.S.
Navy, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACE), 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.
The EPA works with the U.S. Navy on the Uniform National Discharge Standards (UNDS)
Rulemaking. Section 312(n) of the Clean Water Act requires the EPA and the Department of
Defense (DOD) to identify, evaluate, and establish discharge standards for certain discharges
from vessels of armed forces.
The EPA works with the U.S. Coast Guard on the Clean Boating Act Rulemaking. Section
312(o) of the Clean Water Act requires the EPA and the U.S. Coast Guard to identify, evaluate,
and establish management practices for discharges incidental to the normal operation of a
recreational vessel. The EPA also works closely with the U.S. Coast Guard on addressing ballast
water discharges.
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 under the Clean Water Act (CWA) and Marine Protection, Research, and
Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA).
The EPA entered into an Interagency Agreement (IA) in September 2012 with NOAA to support
the EPA's ocean dumping monitoring program. The IA will help support the EPA's
implementation of the MPRSA by enabling the EPA scientists to conduct ocean dump site
monitoring using NOAA vessels. In addition, the EPA is using ACE contract vessels through an
IA to conduct ocean dump site monitoring. The EPA is also exploring the use of University-
National Oceanographic Laboratory System (UNOLS) vessels for future surveys.
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, including ocean dumping and pollution from vessels.
928
-------
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 and London Protocol (LC / LP) Scientific Groups
and Alternate Head of the U.S. Delegation for the LC / LP Consultative Meeting of the Parties;
the London Convention and Protocol are the international treaties for the dumping of waste and
other matter at sea.
The EPA also works with Department of State, Department of the Interior, Department of State,
and other federal agencies to support development of international guidance under the London
Convention and London Protocol related to sub-seabed sequestration of carbon dioxide.
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
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
929
-------
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, 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.
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.
930
-------
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;
D protecting the Great Lakes from invasive species, including Asian carp;
D coordinating habitat protection and restoration with states, tribes, USFWS, NOAA,
USFS, andNRCS;
• 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 (EC), which oversees the policy
8 The Interagency Task Force includes eleven agency and cabinet organizations: EPA; Department of State, DOI,
USD A, 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.
931
-------
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
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.
In FY 2013 and FY 2014, Chesapeake Bay Program partners are collaboratively developing a
new partnership agreement that is to establish management strategies and outcomes for the
932
-------
partnership. The new agreement is expected to provide an updated plan for meeting the goals of
the program in fisheries, water quality, habitat, education, and other key areas. The agreement is
also expected to confirm the partnership's commitment to enhancing its adaptive management
process. The EPA maintains and is improving its tools to gather, interpret, and share evidence,
data, and information to better inform the partnership's decision making processes.
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 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
Established in 1988, the Gulf of Mexico Program is designed to assist the Gulf States and
stakeholders in developing a regional, ecosystem-based framework for restoring and protecting
the Gulf of Mexico through coordinated Gulf-wide as well as priority specific efforts. The Gulf
States strategically identify the key environmental issues and work at the regional, state, and
local level to define, recommend, and voluntarily implement the supporting solutions. To
achieve the Program's environmental objectives, the partnership must target specific Federal,
state, local, and private programs, processes, and financial authorities in order to leverage the
resources needed to support state and community actions.
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.
The 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill caused damage to the Gulf of Mexico's natural resources
and deeply impacted state economies and communities that rely on the natural ecosystems. In an
effort to help the region rebuild in the wake of the spill, Congress passed the Resources and
Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist Opportunities, and Revived Economies of the Gulf Coast
States Act of 2012 (RESTORE Act). The RESTORE Act also established the Gulf Coast
Ecosystem Restoration Council (Council). The Council is tasked with developed and
implementing a "Comprehensive Plan" to restore the ecosystem and the economy of the Gulf
Coast region. The EPA, along with numerous other Federal agencies, is a non-voting member of
the Council and provides technical and other in-kind support to the Council.
933
-------
The Gulf Program provides significant leadership and coordination among 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;
• Department of Defense, U.S. Navy;
Department of Defense, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers;
Department of Transportation;
• Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Coast Guard;
• 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.
San Francisco Bay Delta-Estuary
The Interim Federal Action Plan for the California Bay-Delta (2009) underscored the federal
government's commitment to protect and restore this critically important ecosystem - one that
provides water to 25 million residents, sustains one of the world's most productive agricultural
regions, and one that once supported a fishery that contributed $600 million in annual revenue to
the California economy9. In 2012, EPA Region 9 issued the Bay Delta Action Plan and we are
working with federal and state agencies in numerous forums to advance the improvement of
water quality and the protection of aquatic life. These forums include the Bay Delta Water
Quality Control Plan (WQCP) process convened by the State Water Board, and the Bay Delta
Conservation Plan (BDCP) process convened by State Department of Water Resources in
partnership with USER, and the San Francisco Estuary Partnership. In addition to EPA and U.S.
Bureau of Reclamation, federal agencies involved in these processes include Department of the
Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service-National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration Fisheries Service, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S.
9 http://californiafisheriesfund.org/reso atlas.html
California fisheries are valuable assets, in both monetary and intrinsic terms. While fisheries now account for only
about 2 % of California's ocean economy, landings were once over 500,000 metric tons per year, valued at over
$600 million annually. Commercial fish landings declined dramatically; by 2007, they had dropped to 173,000
metric tons valued at $117 million.
934
-------
Department of Agriculture-Natural Resources Conservation Service, and U.S. Geological
Survey.
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, the 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 Understanding10 to better integrate, organize, and focus federal efforts in the
Puget Sound ecosystem. Through the Caucus, the EPA and other member agencies are aligning
resources and strengthening federal coordination on Puget Sound protection, science, recovery,
resource management and outreach efforts. Through these coordinated actions, federal agencies
can contribute significantly to the restoration and protection of Puget Sound.
The Federal Caucus is 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. The Caucus also developed an initial action
plan focusing on commitments to actions that would restore shorelines, floodplains, and water
quality. The plan created a federal/Tribal Forum to address obstacles to watershed-specific
salmon recovery plan implementation that are brought forward by individual tribes. Initial
reaction from tribes indicated a feeling that this action plan was a good start but would not
restore treaty protected resources. The caucus members responded by forming three workgroups
tasked with developing a three-part "path forward" to specifically target key threats to habitat.
These workgroups will explore how best to address these threats on federal lands, explore
potential improvements in the regulatory regime, and commit to investing restoration dollars in
coordinated efforts.
Additionally, the EPA, the US Forest Service and USDA's NRCS have begun work in 2013 on a
collaborative project for the Urban Waters program on the Green -Duwamish watershed in
Washington State. The 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:
http ://www. epa. gov/pugetsound/pdf/pugetsound_federalcaucus_mou_ 13 signators.pdf
935
-------
• Federal Highway Administration
• Federal Transit Administration
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
• National Park Service
• National Resource Conservation Service
• Navy Region Northwest
• Joint Base Lewis-McChord 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
Lake Champlain
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
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. Federal partners include:
• Army Corps of Engineers
• Federal Emergency Management System
• Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/Sea Grant
• National Park Service
• U.S. Department of Agricultural/Natural Resources Conservation Service
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Regions 1 and 2)
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
• U.S. Forest Service - Green Mountain National Forest
• U.S. Geological Survey
Long Island Sound
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 EPA
assists the states in implementing the Sound's 1994 Comprehensive Conservation and
Management Plan (CCMP). The EPA and the 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. In addition to the stakeholders listed,
936
-------
federal partners include the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National
Marine Fisheries Service, the Department of the Interior's Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S.
Geological Survey, the Natural Resources Conservation Service and the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers. These federal partners have ongoing legislative and regulatory authorities and
responsibilities for the protection and restoration of Long Island Sound and its physical and
biological resources.
Research
While EPA is the federal agency mandated to ensure safe drinking water, other federal and non-
federal entities are conducting research that complements EPA's research priority contaminants
in drinking water. For example, the CDC and NIEHS conduct health effects and exposure
research. FDA also performs research on children's risks.
Many of these research activities are being conducted in collaboration with EPA scientists. The
private sector, particularly the water treatment industry, is conducting research in such areas as
analytical methods, treatment technologies, and the development and maintenance of water
resources. Cooperative research efforts have been ongoing with the American Water Works
Association, Water Research Foundation and other stakeholders to coordinate drinking water
research. EPA also is working with USGS to evaluate performance of newly developed methods
for measuring microbes in potential drinking water sources.
EPA has developed joint research initiatives with NOAA and USGS for linking monitoring data
and field study information with available toxicity data and assessment models for developing
sediment criteria.
In coordination with federal partners DOE and USGS, EPA will study potential impacts of
hydraulic fracturing on air, water quality, water resources, ecosystems, and health. This research
will assist decision makers (federal, state, and local; the industry and energy sectors, and the
public) in making environmentally responsible decisions that ensure sustainable approaches to
oil and natural gas extraction.
Goal 3-Cleaning Up Our Communities
Objective: Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities
Brownfields
The 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 reuse of brownfields for
new Manufacturing initiatives with EDA, HUD and the Department of Labor and NIEHS to
support environmental workforce development and job training and placement efforts in
brownfield communities. Other work with USDA and HHS and ATSDR examine agriculture and
food access as well as access to health care and other services to catalyze redevelopment that
937
-------
improves services and contributes to healthier communities. The Portfields and Mine-Scarred
Lands projects are past examples of partnership efforts and we continue 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 2015, EPA, HUD, and
DOT will work to align investments, grant criteria, and planning requirements to better support
community smart growth and sustainable design efforts. EPA will also work with the US
Department of Agriculture on sustainable communities' approaches in rural communities, towns
and cities. Work with the Partnership and other agencies like USD A, NOAA, FEMA, and others,
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 General
Services Administration (GSA) 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. Additionally, the EPA and GSA will partner to provide
technical assistance to communities to integrate the siting of new federal facilities or reuse of
existing facilities into neighborhood wide efforts to improve community sustainability.
The EPA will continue to provide support to other federal agencies, such as the U.S. Department
of Agriculture, and Appalachian Regional Commission, 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 will seek to extend this
work to the Delta Regional Authority and other agencies working in rural America. EPA will
continue to collaborate with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the
Federal Emergency Management Agency to expand efforts to deliver targeted assistance to
communities recovering from natural disasters and pursuing climate change adaptation planning
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.
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.
938
-------
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, the 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.
Economically Distressed Communities
The EPA will continue to support the White House Council on Strong Cities, Strong
Communities, where it has been a leader in setting the agenda and implementing strategies that
are being used to help economically distressed communities recover and grow in sustainable,
economically resilient, and environmentally friendly ways. As part of the White House Council,
EPA has ensured that addressing environmental challenges are part of economic recovery. In
particular, the EPA has brought expertise on the importance of downtown revitalization, the use
of green infrastructure strategies, green demolition, and equitable development strategies to the
work of the council. The EPA's influence in bringing the environment to the forefront of the
work of the White House Council has impacted the work of HUD, DOT, Commerce, HHS,
Homeland Security, the Small Business Administration, Justice, Labor, and many other agencies
and departments. In 2015, EPA will continue to play this important role.
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, the EPA has continued to work with
939
-------
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, the
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.
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, the 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, the 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, DOI (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
940
-------
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
has developed an MOU11 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 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: Preserve 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.
1' For more information please go to: Interagency Steering Committee on Multimedia Environmental Models MOU,
http://www.iscmem.org/Memorandum.htm
941
-------
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. Many federal offices are partners in one of EPA's Sustainable
Materials Management challenges, the Federal Green Challenge, which reduces the
government's environmental impact in six areas: waste, purchasing, electronics, energy, water,
and transportation. The EPA also collaborates with the USDA on the U.S. Food Waste
Challenge, a food waste diversion program.
In addition to business, industry, and other non-governmental organizations, the EPA works with
federal, state, Tribal, and local governments to encourage the proper management and reduced
generation and safe recycling of hazardous wastes. The RCRA Waste Management program
coordinates closely with federal agencies, primarily the DoD and DOE, which have many sites in
the hazardous waste permitting universe. 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. Partners in this effort
include the Environmental Council of States and the Association of State and Territorial Solid
Waste Management Officials. The EPA also is collaborating with DOT, the Transportation
Security Agency (TSA), and the U.S. Postal Service on the development of the electronic
hazardous waste manifest, or e-Manifest, system.
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 Superfund site cleanups 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
942
-------
technical on-site support to Regions in the enforcement oversight of numerous construction
projects performed by private Potentially Responsible Parties.
Super fund 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
rounds of BRAC. The FY 2015 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.
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. The EPA has been working collaboratively
with DoD, DOE, and Department of the Interior (DOT) 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. In FY 2015, the workgroup will continue to
assess the use of best management practices and evaluate trend data to 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.
Super fund Financial Responsibility Regulations
The EPA currently is developing regulations that will require facilities in the hardrock mining
and mineral processing industry to provide appropriate financial assurance for response action
liabilities, so that the taxpayers do not have to pay for cleanups at these sites. This effort will
require close coordination with the DOT (Bureau of Land Management) and USDA (Forest
Service) related to mining/mineral processing activities on federal lands, and with DoD and DOE
regarding the other industrial facilities that will be potentially impacted.
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
The RCRA Corrective Action program coordinates closely with other federal agencies, primarily
the DoD and DOE, which have many sites in the corrective action universe. Encouraging federal
facilities to meet the RCRA Corrective Action program's goals remains a top priority. EPA also
coordinates with other agencies, primarily DoD, on cleanup and disposal issues posed by
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), under authority of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
943
-------
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.
The EPA also works with FEMA on hazard mitigation and recovery through a Memorandum of
Agreement that seeks to incorporate sustainable communities approaches into planning for and
recovering from natural disasters including the effects of climate change. This MOA allows
EPA and FEMA to collaborate on policies, as well as with other agencies like NOAA, HUD, and
DOT, to help communities become more resilient to natural disasters, the effects of climate
change on communities, and mitigation strategies (to date OP has worked in communities in
Iowa, North Carolina, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont, and others).
Super fundEnforcement (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, DOI, 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 2015, 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.
944
-------
Objective: Strengthen Human Health and the Environment in Indian Country
On June 26, 2013, President Obama signed Executive Order 13674, establishing the White
House Council on Native American Affairs, as well as a national policy to ensure the Federal
Government carries out its trust responsibilities in a coordinated and effective manner, engaging
in a true and lasting government-to-government relationship with federally recognized tribes.
The Council is chaired by the Department of the Interior Secretary, and consists of the heads of
31 executive departments, agencies, and offices, including the EPA Administrator. In this role,
the Administrator will work through the Council to protect tribal lands, environments, and
natural resources, and promote respect for tribal cultures.
The EPA works under two important Tribal Infrastructure Memoranda of Understandings
(MOU) amongst five federal agencies. The 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.
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
945
-------
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 matched
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.
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.
The 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
support for compliance through EPA's Regional programs and those of the states and tribes.
In addition to the training that the EPA provides to farm workers and restricted use pesticide
applicators, the 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.
946
-------
The 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.
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. The EPA,
USDA, 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, enforcement actions that involve pesticide residues on
food, and coordinate the review of antimicrobial pesticides. The agency coordinates with
USDA/ARS in promotion and communication of resistance management strategies.
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), the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development (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 the
EPA engagement. The 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
947
-------
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)
heavy metals, the EPA must continue to coordinate with other federal agencies and external
stakeholders, such as Congressional staff, industry, and environmental groups. Similarly, the
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.
The 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.
The 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, the 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.
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.
The EPA relies on data from HHS to help assess the risk of pesticides to children. Other
collaborative efforts 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 unhealthy pesticide residue levels.
The 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 the 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
recognized Tribes to ensure that authorized state and Tribal programs continue to comply with
948
-------
requirements established under TSCA, and that the ongoing federal accreditation certification
and training program for lead professionals is administered effectively.
The EPA has a MOU with HUD to coordinate 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 the 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
The EPA's Toxicity Forecaster (ToxCast™) is part of an ongoing multi-agency effort under the
Tox21 collaboration MOU. Tox21 pools chemical research, data and screening tools from
multiple federal agencies including the EPA, 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). EPA also has an agreement to provide NCATS funding to support the effort.
The EPA recently announced the public release of chemical screening data on 1,800 Chemicals
that was gathered through advanced techniques, including robotics and high-throughput
screening, as part of the ongoing Tox21 federal collaboration to improve chemical screening. In
FY 2015, the EPA will continue to engage stakeholder and partner communities to develop a
framework for providing confidence in the use of high-throughput screening data to address a
broad range of risk assessment needs. A significant element of EPA's FY 2015 research strategy
includes expanded coverage of ToxCast by increasing the toxicity pathways and the types of
chemicals that can be screened. Tox21's high-speed robot screening system will continue testing
thousands of 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 the
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.
949
-------
The 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 EPA has collaborated with many federal agencies in the development of
a government-wide approach to nanotechnology research through the Committee on
Environment, Natural Resources, and Sustainability Charter (CENRS) at the White House's
Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP).The agency's Science to Achieve Results
(STAR) program, which awards research grants to universities and non-profit organizations, has
issued its recent nanotechnology grants13 jointly with NIOSH, NIEHS, and NSF.
The 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.
The EPA consults extensively 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, NIOSH, and NIEHS), many other
agencies (e.g., DOD, NASA, SBA, DOT, DOE, DOI, etc.), and White House offices (OMB,
OSTP, and CEQ). EPA also coordinates with ATSDR through a memorandum of understanding
on the development of toxicological reviews and toxicology profiles, respectively. The EPA
contracts with the National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council (NRC) on very
difficult and complex human health risk assessments through consultation or review. The NRC
currently is conducting a comprehensive review of the IRIS assessment development process,
including EPA's recent enhancements.
Homeland Security research is conducted in collaboration with numerous agencies, leveraging
funding across multiple programs to produce 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 without duplication. EPA is also working with DHS to
provide support and guidance 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, the 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, the EPA is also collaborating with CDC. The 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
For more information, see .
13 For an example, see .
950
-------
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.
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
The 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 (to use Green Purchasing as a tool to achieve the
sustainability goals of the parks), the Department of Defense (use of environmentally preferable
construction materials), and the 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 further works with the Department of Commerce's
National Institute of Science 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. The 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,
951
-------
Minerals Management Service and National Parks Service), Department of Energy (including the
Federal Regulatory Commission), and the Department of Defense.
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. The 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 and on hazardous waste and Cathode Ray Tube
exports. The 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. The 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
952
-------
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.
Under Executive Order 12088, the EPA is directed to provide technical assistance to other
federal agencies to help ensure their compliance with all environmental laws. The Federal
Facility Enforcement program coordinates with other federal agencies, states, local, and Tribal
governments to ensure compliance by federal agencies with all environmental laws. The 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 the 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, the 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.
The 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. The EPA is
the lead agency and coordinates U.S. participation in the CEC. The 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.
953
-------
The Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program, together with the 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.
business engaged in global competition, helps other countries improve their environmental
conditions, and ensures U.S. compliance with obligations for environmental cooperation as
outlined in various free trade agreements. In support of these activities, the 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. The EPA also participates in the OECD Mutual Acceptance of Data
program, designed to garner international recognition of testing data in support of pesticides and
chemical registrations.
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.
954
-------
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,
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. In addition, OP
coordinates EPA's review of other agency's actions submitted to OMB for review under EO
12866. Under the Congressional Review Act (CRA), rules are submitted to each House of
Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. OP reviews, edits, tracks and
submits regulatory actions and other documents that are published by the Office of the Federal
Register. For regulations that may have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities, OP collaborates extensively with the Small Business Administration (SBA) and
OMB. Finally, OP also leads EPA's review of draft Executive Orders and Presidential
Memorandum.
OP collaborates with other federal regulatory and natural resource agencies (e.g., the United
States Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Department of Energy (DOE), Department of the
Interior (DOI), 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 USDA and 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
955
-------
workgroups geared toward improving federal capacity to conduct or oversee rigorous and
objective evaluation studies.
OP supports interagency, government-wide efforts that do not fall within the scope of any single
program office. For example, OP participates in green purchasing activities, in collaboration with
OCSPP, with GSA. OP hosts a website to encourage lean manufacturing and created tools that
are used by other federal agencies in efforts that promote increased integration of environmental
and energy considerations into "lean manufacturing" techniques. The tools 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 supports the Deputy Administrator's work on the interagency Council on Preparedness and
Resilience, which was established in 2013 under Executive Order 13653 and charged with
overseeing all priority Federal Government actions related to climate preparedness and
resilience. OP also chairs the interagency Adaptation Planning Work Group on behalf of the
Council and the White House Council on Environmental Quality. The Work Group is
responsible for overseeing Section 5 ("Federal Agency Planning for Climate Change Related
Risk") of EO 13653 and charged with supporting the development and implementation of
Climate Change Adaptation Plans by all federal departments and agencies. It is also responsible
for overseeing the interagency Community of Practice (COP), and for working with the U.S.
Global Change Research Program's (USGCRP) Adaptation Science Work Group to ensure the
USGCRP provides timely and useful information to federal agencies as they implement their
Climate Change Adaptation Plans. OP co-chairs the COP with the Department of the Interior to
provide a forum for staff and managers from all Federal agencies that provides opportunity for
information sharing, collaboration and coordination on issues related to implementation of
Agencies' and Departments' 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 resources management and
accountability throughout the federal government. OCFO actively participates on the
Performance Improvement Council which coordinates and develops strategic plans, performance
plans, and performance reports as required by law for the Agency. In addition, OCFO
participates in numerous OMB-led E-Gov initiatives such as the Financial Management and
Budget Formulation and Execution Lines of Business and has interagency agreements with the
Department of the Interior's National Business Center 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, OMB, and U.S. Department of
Labor (DOL). OCFO participates with the DOC's Bureau of Census in maintaining the Federal
Assistance Awards Data System. OCFO also coordinates appropriately with Congress and other
federal agencies, such as the Department of Treasury, the Government Accountability Office
(GAO), and the General Services Administration (GSA).
956
-------
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 Award Committee for E-Government, which provides strategic vision for the
portfolio of systems/Federal wide supporting both Federal acquisition and financial
assistance. Support is also provided to the associated functional community groups,
including the Procurement Committee for E-Gov and Grants and Loans Committee for E-
Gov.
• The Interagency Suspension and Debarment Committee (ISDC), is a representative
committee of federal agency leaders in suspension and debarment. The Committee
facilitates lead agency coordination, serves as a forum to discuss current suspension and
debarment related issues, and assists in developing unified Federal policy.
OARM is participating in the OMB-approved Financial Management Line of Business
(FMLoB), which has been expanded to also encompass the Grants Management Line of
Business. The combined FMLoB, with the Department of Treasury 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/training on the suspension and debarment process for the Inspector General
Academy and the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency
957
-------
In addition, throughout FY 2014 and FY 2015, the 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, the GSA, the 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/EVI 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
958
-------
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 EPA serves as the lead for the FOIA Online, a
multi-agency solution that enables the EPA and partner agencies to meet their responsibilities
under FOIA while creating a repository of publicly released FOIA records for reuse. Through the
FOIA Online, the public has the ability to submit and track requests, search and download
requests and responsive records, correspond with processing staff and file appeals. The Agency
users are provided with a secure, login-access web site to receive and store requests, assign and
process requests (and refer to other agencies), post responses online, produce the annual FOIA
report to DOJ and manage records electronically. 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.
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.
959
-------
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 2015, EPA will be
conducting pilot tests for electronic reporting and processing of EPA-regulated imports for
vehicle and engines, pesticides, and toxic substances. 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 Department of Interior (DOI),
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS),
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the United States Department of
Agriculture (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 also participates in the FGDC Steering Committee and Executive
Committee. 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.
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,
960
-------
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. Other EPA partners in this federal
GEOSS initiative include EPA's Office of the Science Advisor, the U.S. Group on Earth
Observations (USGEO) and a significant number of other federal agencies, including NASA,
NOAA, USGS, HHS, Department of Energy (DOE), Department of Defense (DoD), USD A, the
Smithsonian Institution, the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of State, and
the Department of Transportation (DOT). 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 (IEOS), 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/. Deep Water Horizon Task Force, and its outreach activities.
Additionally, the EPA OIG initiates and participates in collaborative audits, program evaluations,
and investigations with OIGs of agencies with an environmental mission such as the DOI and
USDA, and with EPA as well as other federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies as
961
-------
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.
962
-------
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 procedures 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 key management challenges facing the
agency. 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 following discussion summarizes each of the FY 2013 management challenges identified by the
EPA's OIG and the GAO 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: Over the past several years, the EPA has taken important action 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.
These include transportation; energy efficiency and renewable energy; and new technologies, such as
carbon capture and storage.
The EPA is both taking regulatory actions and implementing ongoing voluntary partnership programs to
address climate change, including:
• 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 Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program.
Recognizing that climate change cuts across many agency programs and offices, the EPA's 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
963
-------
across offices and 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.
Finally, the EPA continues to deliver on all commitments under its ongoing partnership programs to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions, which are focused on energy efficiency, transportation, and other
sectors. Experience and knowledge gained through these programs inform the EPA's contribution to 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 EPA agrees that complete information about concentrated animal feeding
operations (CAFOs) would improve its ability to implement its responsibilities under the Clean Water
Act. Additionally, the agency believes its current efforts to strengthen the Section 319 Program align well
with the GAO recommendations. In October 2011, the EPA proposed a rule that would collect basic
information regarding CAFOs. As a result of opposing public comments, the EPA withdrew the proposal,
stating that it would collect CAFO information using existing sources of information. In November 2011
the EPA completed the National Evaluation of the Clean Water Act Section 319 Program, which outlines
potential Section 319 program enhancements to strengthen the EPA oversight of state programs. Efforts
undertaken to address the nonpoint source issue include:
• Evaluating National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program effectiveness,
including the identification of CAFOs that discharge and review of state programs.
• Assisting states, territories, and tribes in implementing nonpoint source pollution prevention
programs.
• Developing comprehensive conservation and management plans as part of the National Estuary
Program.
• Encouraging states to use an integrated, priority-setting system in developing priorities for
implementing the Clean Water State Revolving Fund Program, which funds a wide variety of
water quality protection projects.
• Finalizing the Nonpoint Source Program and Grants Guidelines for States and Territories (April
2013) for use in FY 2014 and beyond.
• Collaborating with the U.S. Department of Agriculture in high-priority watersheds to address
agricultural nonpoint source pollution, increasing on-the-ground conservation to better protect
water resources from nonpoint source pollution, including nitrogen and phosphorus.14
EPA regional offices are working to reduce nutrient and sediment pollution in the Chesapeake Bay
watershed by implementing the Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL), which establishes
maximum amounts of nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment that the Chesapeake Bay can receive and still
meet water quality standards. The seven Bay watershed jurisdictions developed Watershed
14 This effort, the National Water Quality Initiative, will focus 5 percent of the Environmental Quality Incentive
Program's financial assistance funds on conservation practices.
964
-------
Implementation Plans (WIPs) that describe how they will reduce their loads of these pollutants to the Bay
and its tributaries. In May 2013, the EPA provided the jurisdictions with interim assessments of their
progress toward 2012-2013 milestones and WIP goals. The EPA also provided federal agencies an
interim assessment of their progress toward the 2012-2013 water quality milestones set forth under the
strategy for implementing Executive Order 13508. The WIP goals and milestones outline the steps the
jurisdictions and federal agencies are taking toward having all pollution control measures in place by
2025 to fully restore the Chesapeake Bay.
Other regional efforts to address the deterioration issue include developing and implementing watershed
management plans consistent with the EPA guidance and developing a nutrient modeling tool for permit
limits at Great Lakes nonpoint sources. Regions are working with other federal agencies, states, and tribes
to develop criteria which will reduce nutrient loads and impacts to the Great Lakes, and taking
enforcement action to prevent pollutants from entering the Great Lakes basin from combined sanitary
sewer overflows.
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. The GAO notes that to improve its ability to oversee the
SDWA the agency needs to implement all of the recommendations cited in the GAO's May 2011 report,
"Safe Drinking Water Act: EPA Should Improve Implementation of Requirements on Whether to
Regulate Additional Contaminants. "
Agency Response: Ensuring that Americans have water that is safe to drink is a fundamental element of
the EPA's mission. The agency agrees with critical recommendations provided in the GAO's report and
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 its regulatory determinations.
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. The agency used a rigorous
scientific approach to better ensure that contaminants on the CCL3 list are of the highest priority for
public health protection. It consulted with an independent panel of scientists on its third Regulatory
Determinations, specifically on evaluating the contaminants against SDWA criteria, using the best
available science to evaluate these criteria, integrating the information, and determining whether the
process focuses on the greatest public health risk. Under the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rules
(UCMR), the EPA promulgated monitoring requirements for 30 contaminants 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. Additionally, the
agency increased transparency for the UCMR program by 1) convening a webinar/meeting to present
information on analytical methods being developed/refined for UCMR4 and 2) soliciting from these
stakeholders information about new/innovative analytical methods for unregulated contaminants that
could be added to the array of analytical techniques available for selecting unregulated contaminants for
monitoring in UCMR4.
965
-------
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: The EPA has advanced significant efforts to oversee and manage the long-term
stewardship of contaminated sites within its control. 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 agency's
authority and control over contaminated sites varies depending on the statutory authority under which the
site is being addressed. Sites undergoing cleanup through the Superfund Program provide the agency the
most direct control through its authority to order the cleanup, provide oversight, seek penalties for non-
compliance, and negotiate the cleanup process. The agency can delegate all or parts of the RCRA
program to states to manage in lieu of EPA. For the RCRA Corrective Action Program, 44 states are
authorized to implement the federal program and have the primary decision-making responsibility to
ensure safe long-term remedies. In unauthorized states, and where work share arrangements have been
made, the EPA Regions are the lead for ensuring protective long-term remedies. The agency retains
enforcement authority at state delegated sites to ensure the proper cleanup and management of hazardous
wastes. The Brownfield program provides funding to eligible entities to cleanup sites. Brownfield sites
are cleaned up in accordance with state cleanup levels and oversight. Cleanups being conducted under the
Underground Storage Tank program are typically conducted and overseen through state programs;
however, EPA typically conducts the cleanup from leaking underground storage tanks on tribal lands.
The EPA's ability to oversee and manage the long-term stewardship of contaminated sites must be based
on these differences in its legal authority and state and local governments' responsibilities.
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. However, in many circumstances the maintenance for long-term stewardship rests with a
state, local, trust or other private entity.
The Superfund, Corrective Action, Brownfields and Underground Storage Tank programs annually report
the number of sites ready for anticipated use (RAU). This measure is met when programs receive
information that a site has no pathway for human exposures to unacceptable levels of contamination
based on current site conditions, all cleanup goals are achieved for media that may affect anticipated land
use, and all institutional controls identified as part of the response action are in place. Any determination
made for the purposes of the RAU measure is based on the information at the time the determination is
made. This may change if the site's conditions change or if new or additional information is discovered
regarding the contamination or conditions on the site. As such, parties (e.g. land owners or developers)
interested in finding out what uses would be protective for a particular property should rely on site-
specific cleanup documents and site-specific institutional controls.
RAU is an internal performance measure, and is not an external designation of any type. When requested,
the Superfund program can issue Ready for Reuse (RfR) Determinations which are status reports
documenting that a property can support an intended use as long as all required response conditions and
use limitations identified in the site's response decision documents and land title documents continue to
966
-------
be met. However, the RfR determinations are only reflections of the environmental status of a property at
a point in time. They do make any claims about the activities taken by individuals who are legally
responsible for ensuring the maintenance and integrity of institutional controls.
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. Recently, EPA has developed several new guidance documents to ensure consistent
decision-making and documentation for Five-Year Reviews.
The EPA and our state and tribal co-implementers may select institutional controls (ICs) to control land
and resource use where residual contamination remains in place. ICs help minimize the potential for
exposure to contamination and/or protect the integrity of engineered components. The agency has
developed cross-program guidance, Institutional Controls: A Guide to Planning, Implementing,
Maintaining and Enforcing Institutional Controls at Contaminated Waste Sites (PIME guidance), 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. Additionally, the PIME guidance highlights a number of
factors for entities implementing ICs to consider, including: 1) providing adequate documentation of use
restrictions in the response decision documents; 2) formalizing agreements for state assurance on 1C
responsibilities early in the response process; 3) providing strategies to implement ICs on properties with
non-liable landowners; and 4) criteria to select an appropriate grantee to hold the covenant or title to the
real property interest (for proprietary controls). The agency has also developed Institutional Controls: A
Guide to Preparing Institutional Controls Implementation and Assurance Plans at Contaminated Sites,
which will assist regions in systematically establishing and documenting the activities associated with
implementing and ensuring the long-term stewardship of ICs. These plans will provide information to
stakeholders on the legal authorities for enforcing ICs, including relevant state 1C laws, agency orders or
agreements, or voluntary cleanup agreements. These guidances relate to ICs when they are a component
of the EPA's cleanup decisions; the installation of ICs is by state and local governments.
The agency will continue to encourage state and tribal response program funding of tracking and
management systems for land use and ICs. The EPA prepares a report annually that highlights response
programs and their brownfield and contaminated site inventory efforts and systems in place to track
institutional and other land use controls. The latest report is posted at http://www.epa.gov/brownfields.
The agency has developed general education and outreach materials about ICs and their importance in
supporting safe land reuse. The EPA continues to include training sessions on ICs 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, and
967
-------
• Site Reuse Fact Sheets (which highlight critical remedial components in place, long-term
maintenance activities, and ICs).
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.
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 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 (ICI), the EPA introduced a new remedial action project
completion measure which responds to GAO's recommendations to provide more data on site progress. In
addition, as a follow on to the ICI, in November 2012, the Superfund Remedial program initiated a
comprehensive review of its operations to identify options to maintain its effectiveness in achieving its
core mission of protecting human health and the environment in the face of diminishing funding
availability. Several areas are being considered in this Program Review to capture important technical
developments in the cleanup process, as well as innovations in remedial project management. Finally, in
an effort to improve transparency and accountability, the Superfund Remedial Program is deploying the
Superfund Enterprise Management System (SEMS) in early FY 2014. SEMS will use a formal project
management software tool to better understand and track site progress and to enable it to more accurately
and consistently plan, track and report activities and resources.
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 infra-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
968
-------
acknowledged "Streamlining Chemical Assessments Under IRIS" as an agency-level weakness under the
Federal Managers' Financial 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 25 assessments, which include some of the agency's highest
priorities such as trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene, and dioxin (noncancer). The agency has made
significant progress on several other high profile assessments such as formaldehyde, inorganic arsenic,
chromium VI, methanol, benzo[a]pyrene, and Libby asbestos. In addition, EPA's IRIS Program is
developing assessments of health effects for chemicals found in environmental mixtures such as
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), phthalates and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). These
cumulative assessments will increase the number of chemicals that are addressed by the IRIS Program
and are based upon the agency's expressed needs.
The following actions, some of which are now being implemented or are completed, address many of
GAO's concerns, including issues related to transparency and development of timely and credible
assessments.
• The EPA will begin releasing preliminary materials and hold a public meeting early in the IRIS
assessment development process to explain the criteria for selecting studies and to ensure that
critical research was not omitted. Meeting with the public earlier in the process will result in more
timely opportunities for public input into the assessment and comment on the information
available for each chemical assessed.
• The IRIS Program continues to use a database that facilitates public access to the scientific
studies that underpin key regulatory decisions. The Health and Environmental Research Online
(HERO) database contains the key studies the EPA uses to develop environmental risk
assessments. It includes references and data for IRIS assessments, which support critical agency
decision-making for chemical regulation. The HERO database is publicly accessible so anyone is
able to review the scientific literature behind EPA assessments, thereby strengthening the
transparency of the science supporting agency decisions.
• The agency has adopted a new streamlined document structure for assessments with standardized
evidence tables and a systematic approach to conducting literature searches, identifying relevant
literature, and selecting key studies. Except for assessments that are late in the process, all IRIS
assessments have been converted to the streamlined structure. This new document structure for
IRIS assessments is clearer, more concise and more systematic, making information more
accessible.
• The IRIS Program has partnered with the National Academies' National Research Council
(NRC). In FY 2013, the National Center for Environmental Assessment focused on responding to
several general recommendations by the NRC for all IRIS assessments, which were issued as part
of NRC's April 2011 review report of EPA's draft IRIS assessment of formaldehyde. Separately,
the EPA is sponsoring an NRC review of the IRIS assessment development process and the
changes being implemented or planned by EPA. As part of this review, the NRC is reviewing
current methods for evidence-based reviews and will recommend approaches for weighing
scientific evidence for chemical hazard and dose-response assessment.
969
-------
• The EPA's Science Advisory Board established the Chemical Assessment Advisory Committee
(CAAC) to provide expert peer review for IRIS assessments. Most IRIS assessments will be
reviewed by the CAAC, starting with the draft IRIS assessments of ammonia and 1,2,3-, 1,2, 4-,
and 1, 3, 5-trimethylbenzenes (TMBs), followed closely by the draft benzo[a]pyrene assessment.
To enhance overall productivity, scientific quality, and management of IRIS assessments, the EPA has
instituted a new internal process for developing assessments. Eight disciplinary workgroups
(neurotoxicity, reproductive/developmental toxicity, respiratory/inhalation toxicity, systemic
toxicity/cancer/immunotoxicity, epidemiology, toxic pathways/genotoxicity, pharmacokinetics, and
statistics) have been established to develop and revise specific sections of IRIS assessments and work
with the assessment leads to develop an integrated assessment. This approach will improve the scientific
quality and consistency of the assessments by having a critical mass of experts in each area write and
review the sections. To manage the new draft development process, the agency has established an IRIS
Management Council, consisting of managers who supervise scientists working on IRIS assessments. The
IRIS Management Council is responsible for assigning appropriate staff to assessments, developing
schedules, and ensuring that schedules are met. A parallel IRIS Science Council, consisting of science
managers and the chairs of the disciplinary workgroups, is responsible for identifying and resolving cross-
cutting scientific issues.
With these changes, EPA's goal is to increase the number of assessments being completed each year,
provide more accurate assessment development timelines to the public, and comprehensively address all
of GAO's concerns and recommendations.
Assessing and Managing Chemical Risk. The EPA agrees that statutory changes are needed to enable
the agency to successfully meet its goal of ensuring chemical safety now and into the future. The
Administration has put forward a set of essential principles for reform of chemicals management
legislation that will modernize and strengthen the tools available in TSCA to increase confidence that
chemicals used in commerce are safe. However, until legislative reform takes place, the EPA has adopted
and is following an Existing Chemicals Strategy, released in February 2012, which outlines a
comprehensive approach for prioritizing chemicals for risk assessment and risk reduction, increasing the
public's access to chemical data and advancing innovation for safer products and green chemistry.
Integral to this approach are the key steps of identifying chemicals for detailed risk assessment, collecting
and making effective use of chemical data, and pursuing action to manage the risks posed by existing
chemicals found to pose unreasonable risk to human health and the environment.
EPA has taken a number of specific steps to strengthen its chemical safety work within existing
authorities. Among the most significant are the following:
• EPA has identified a group of 83 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.
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 review in
January 2013.
• EPA is filling information gaps on existing chemicals by taking a range of TSCA information
gathering actions (including the Chemical Data Reporting Rule and test rules); expanding
electronic reporting of PreManufacture Notices and other submissions under TSCA; and
reviewing, and where appropriate challenging, all new submissions under TSCA where
confidential business information (CBI) is claimed in health and safety studies as well as all CBI
cases submitted prior to August 2010.
970
-------
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 initiated the State Review Framework (SRF) in 2004 to address concerns
about consistency in the minimum level of enforcement activity across states and the oversight of state
programs by EPA regions. The SRF uses twelve core elements to assess enforcement activities across
three key programs: the Clean Air Act (CAA) Stationary Sources, the Clean Water Act National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System, and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Subtitle C.
The first round of reviews of 54 state and territorial programs was completed in 2007. After evaluating
the reviews, the EPA initiated Round 2 in September 2008, making key improvements: additional and
enhanced training for regions and states, streamlined reporting through a standard template, clearer
elements, improved metrics, more explicit guidance on incorporating local agencies into reviews, better
understanding of where consistency is important, a streamlined review of reports, tracking and
management of the implementation of recommendations, and additional steps for communication and
coordination between regions and states. The EPA began Round 3 of the SRF in 2011 with changes
including:
• Integrated permit quality reviews under the CWA/NPDES program;
• Reviews of Memoranda of Agreement under CWA/NPDES to determine if updates are
necessary and if outdated language is having adverse programmatic impacts;
• Reduced number of metrics to focus on those most telling of performance level;
• Data verification-giving states opportunity to correct data in national data system to allow for
more accurate and efficient review;
• Annual data metric analysis—giving EPA opportunity to use verified data to check-in on state
performance annually and make informal recommendations as needed.
The current SRF outlines the process for uniformly addressing significant problems identified in state
programs. The region and state: 1) define the state's attributes and deficiencies and develop a schedule for
implementing needed changes; 2) jointly develop a plan to address performance, using established
mechanisms such as Performance Partnership Agreements, Performance Partnership Grants, or
categorical grant agreements to codify the plans; and 3) manage and monitor implementation of the plan
to ensure progress as planned and to identify and address issues as they arise. EPA's Office of
Enforcement and Compliance Assistance is currently drafting a strategy for dealing with recalcitrant
problems encountered in the state reviews.
In 2009, the EPA made the SRF reports, as well as the recommendations for improvement from the
reviews and the status of their implementation, publicly available on the Internet, thereby increasing the
accountability of environmental enforcement programs. In addition, the agency recently released a new
web site that contains information on state environmental program implementation under the Clean Water
Act in a user friendly dashboard format that summarizes state permit, inspection, and enforcement action
results using charts, graphs, and maps. The EPA is working on similar dashboards for the CAA, RCRA
and the Safe Drinking Water Act.
971
-------
As part of its responsibilities in implementing the agency's Clean Water Action Plan, the EPA will be
integrating the agency's existing permit quality review process into the established SRF process used to
evaluate enforcement programs.
The EPA has made substantial progress in improving state programs through the SRF. The SRF helps
maintain a level of consistency across state programs, ensuring that states meet minimum standards and
implement fair and consistent enforcement of environmental laws across the country. The EPA will
continue to analyze trends in findings and track corrective actions that result from the SRF to ensure
continuing improvement in state performance.
8. EPA's Laboratory Enterprise
Summary of Challenge: The GAO reports that because the EPA operates its scientific laboratories under
the direction of 15 different senior officials, the EPA has a limited ability to know if scientific activities
are being unintentionally duplicated among the laboratories or if opportunities exist to collaborate and
share scientific expertise, equipment, and facilities across EPA 's organizational boundaries. In addition,
a study by the National Academy of Sciences found that the lack of top science official was a formula for
weak scientific performance in the agency and poor scientific credibility outside the agency.
Agency Response: The EPA expanded the responsibilities of the agency's Science Advisor to include
coordinating, overseeing, and making recommendations to the Administrator regarding major scientific
activities across the agency, including the work of all regional, program, and ORD laboratories. In
addition, the Agency's Science and Technology Policy Council (STPC), which is chaired by the EPA's
Science Advisor, established a workgroup for EPA's Laboratory Enterprise.
In December 2012, the EPA began an integrated evaluation of its laboratory enterprise to increase
efficiency and effectiveness while ensuring the agency's ability to provide the preeminent research,
science, and technical support critical to advance our mission. The EPA requested and received $2 million
for this long-term study of its laboratory enterprise. During the laboratory study, the agency will be
evaluating options for its future laboratory portfolio that maintain lab capabilities for outstanding science
and customer service while increasing efficiency.
Under the guidance of the EPA Science Advisor, subcommittees of the STPC workgroup for the
laboratory enterprise are collecting and analyzing data about EPA lab facilities, operating costs,
workforce, and science contributions. In addition, a contract was awarded to the Smith Group, a
nationally-recognized architectural and engineering firm, to assist the EPA with portfolio-level analysis of
lab facility and operating cost data. Currently, work is underway to organize the facility data, metrics, and
other analytic information for the EPA laboratory enterprise. This includes conducting financial and other
analyses that respond to EPA options to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the laboratory
portfolio, including options for sharing (co-location) and consolidation. In comparison to the baseline for
each option, the agency's evaluation will also consider the total cost of ownership, savings and avoided
costs (defined as the portfolio of 34 laboratories in FY 2012), the investment required to achieve, and the
return on investment.
In addition, the EPA has prepared a charge for a review of the laboratory enterprise by an independent
expert committee of the National Research Council (NRC) of the National Academy of Sciences. This
review will assess 1) how well the EPA's laboratory enterprise is aligned with the agency's mission and
strategic needs, now and during the next ten years, and 2) the laboratory science functions required to
sustain the agency's preeminent lab capabilities and to meet the agency's highest priority needs during the
next 10 years. The NRC committee plans to conduct its review with three to four workshops during fall
2013.
972
-------
The results of the evaluation will help ensure the agency meets requirements of the GPRA Modernization
Act of 2010 and improve the planning, coordination, management, and efficiency of its laboratory
enterprise. At the conclusion of the study in January 2014, recommendations and options will be provided
the Administrator and Deputy Administrator for consideration.
One of these recommendations will describe the size of the future portfolio of EPA laboratories that will
help meet the agency's needs for high-priority and outstanding science, increased efficiency, and
excellent customer service. This recommendation also will help the EPA respond to government-wide
guidance from the President and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to create a more sustainable
portfolio of federal facilities. Before these recommendations can be translated into plans and
specifications for individual EPA laboratory facilities, the EPA will meet with OMB and with internal
and external stakeholders.
9. Oversight of Delegation to States / Diminished Capacity of States to Implement Federal
Environmental Programs
Summary of Challenge: The 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 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.
In FY 2012 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. Under this key performance indicator, the EPA established an agency-wide workgroup
(comprising national program managers, regions, and HQ support offices) to plan and implement an
agency-wide 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.
With regard to the GAO's management challenge on Diminished Capacity of States to Implement Federal
Environmental Programs, the agency agrees that continued budgetary constraints and cutbacks raise
concern about EPA's oversight of state programs and implications for states to fulfill core program
requirements. The agency's strategy for assisting states in meeting their federal environmental program
requirements is focused on identifying programmatic areas that may be reduced in scope, reducing
administrative burdens where possible, and providing additional time for required activities where
allowed while still meeting the intent of all regulatory mandates.
For example, among the EPA's collaborative efforts to reduce states' administrative are: introducing cost
effective, streamlined administrative processes, such as reforming the State Implementation Plan (SIP)
process for efficiency and cost saving; striving to write rules to minimize additional state burdens;
973
-------
implementing electronic emissions reporting for sources; delaying the deployment of the near-road
monitoring network; and acknowledging mutually established priorities with states in annual national
program guidance.
The agency will continue to look for more strategic and coordinated approaches to address the issue.
10. 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: The EPA strives to enhance its collaborations with its intergovernmental partners.
The agency has established this as a priority in its FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan; routinely uses
partnership, task forces, and working groups; consults with senior state, local, and tribal government
leaders or their representatives; and examines opportunities across the Executive Branch to enhance its
ability to protect the nation 's health and environment in an effective and efficient manner while reducing
the burden and resource requirements shouldered by our intergovernmental partners.
The EPA has established the following strategic framework to improve its coordination with other
agencies:
• 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.
There are numerous examples of successful coordination, as well as efforts to further improve
coordination:
• "Strengthening State, Tribal and Intergovernmental Partnerships" is one of five cross- cutting
strategies in EPA's FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan.The agency uses annual action plans with
accountability for measurable commitments to implement this strategy, and it shares its
accomplishments with its partners semiannually.
• To belter understand and anticipate state and tribal program implementation needs, the agency
shares its annual draft budget guidance documents with its intergovernmental partners and
solicits state and tribal input in developing its annual President's budget submission.
• EPA staff meets monthly with state representatives in a Partnership and Performance
Workgroup. This group collaborates to identify barriers and opportunities to efficient
coordination and implementation of budgeting, planning and regulatory goals.
• The agency routinely seeks state input in developing regulatory actions, and it conducts rule-
specific consultations with the "big 10" state and local government associations. Beyond its
Executive Order responsibilities, the agency periodically seeks input from the "big 10" and other
representative associations to assess its coordination and identify other opportunities to work
effectively with its intergovernmental partners.
974
-------
• The EPA has initiated two pilot projects with state government representatives to explore,
identify, and test methods and processes to better integrate state implementation planning into
the EPA's regulation development. One project is working to identify state and EPA
engagements and outputs needed for successful implementation of the 2012 PM2.5 National
Ambient Air Quality Standards; the other, focusing on an Office of Water rule, will identify
general implementation issues and potential solutions and approaches which are transferable to
other rule development efforts. Both projects are looking to identify lessons for improving the
timeliness and effectiveness of state implementation of federal environmental rules.
• The EPA actively participates in the Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force, which
includes representatives from over 20 federal agencies, and chairs the Interagency Work Group
on Climate Change Adaptation Planning, responsible for helping over 60 federal departments
and agencies develop and implement Climate Change Adaptation Plans to ensure they can
fulfill their missions even as the climate changes. The EPA also co-chairs the Interagency Water
Resources and Climate Change Adaptation Work Group.
• Through the Partnership for Sustainable Communities, the EPA worked with the Departments of
Transportation and Housing and Urban Development to coordinate investments and align
policies. This work helps communities across the country to protect the environment, provide
more housing choices, and make transportation systems more efficient and reliable.
• The Chesapeake Bay Program Office (CBPO) continues to facilitate the Chesapeake Bay
Program partnership in accordance with Executive Order 13508 and Clean Water Act section
117. In FY 2013, the CBPO undertook efforts to establish a new agreement for the partnership
by working with its federal and jurisdictional partners to establish meaningful goals and
outcomes for their efforts to restore the Chesapeake Bay.
• The Global Methane Initiative (formerly the Methane-to-Market Partnership) is an international
public-private initiative that advances cost-effective, near-term methane recovery and use as a
clean energy source in agriculture, coal mines, landfills, and oil and gas systems. There are 40
partner countries and over 1,000 members of the Project Network, including private sector,
nongovernmental, and multilateral organizations such as the World Bank, Asian Development
Bank, and Inter-American Development Bank. As the lead U.S. agency, the EPA coordinates
with the Departments of State, Energy, and Agriculture, the U.S. Agency for International
Development, and the U.S. Trade and Development Agency.
11. Enhancing Information Technology Security to Combat Cyber Threats (formerly Limited
Capability to Respond to Cyber Security Attacks)
Summary of Challenge. The OIG notes that the EPA has made great strides in addressing the cyber
security challenge over the last 2 years; however, there are areas where management must close the gaps
between putting in place basic infrastructure for monitoring security over agency assets and building a
strong cyber security capability. The OIG believes the EPA leadership must continue to meet this
challenge head-on by sufficiently funding the development of a real time capability to identify and
investigate attacks against the EPA 's computer and network systems.
Agency Response: The EPA acknowledges that advanced persistent threats pose a significant challenge
for all federal agencies. The EPA is implementing several corrective actions to address concerns raised by
the OIG and is securely implementing specific automated tools to address cyber security challenges. To
address the six areas identified by the OIG, the EPA is:
• Strengthening user authentication and identification processes, by identifying opportunities for
improving network discovery services;
975
-------
• Implementing automated tools, such as deploying the Security Information Event Management
tool;
• Correcting known weaknesses in incident response capability by addressing audit findings and
recommendations and tracking remediation efforts;
• Developing a vulnerability remediation program and incorporating needed modifications to its
vulnerability management standard operating procedure;
• Increasing skills for personnel with significant security by analyzing needed and current skill sets
and developing training based on National Institute of Science and Technology and Office of
Personnel Management guidance.
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: The EPA is making significant progress in both workforce and workload
management. The agency is developing functional workload analyses to inform planning decisions in a
cost effective manner and has conducted two agency-wide organizational workforce assessments.
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 and 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). Lead
offices for both these efforts work extensively with experts in programs and offices across the agency.
The EPA has undertaken three major initiatives to increase understanding of resources needed for specific
functions or tasks to strengthen its ability to capture and evaluate workload data and use workload data to
analyze specific tasks:
• Surveying 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.
• Completing a report on 23 other federal agencies' workload analysis tools and efforts. The report
focused on how other agencies managed functions and processes similar EPA's to provide
lessons and options for EPA's efforts. It was noteworthy that no other agencies had active
workload models for functions similar to EPA's.
• Piloted an approach that Coast Guard used for gathering and analyzing data. In FY 2012, EPA's
Offices of Air and Radiation, Water, and the Chief Financial Officer and the regions combined
their pilot projects and developed workload analyses for the air and water permitting programs.
976
-------
In FY 2013, the agency extended these efforts to grants management and SF enforcement. These
processes are intended to serve as templates for additional future analyses.
The agency is leading a collaborative workforce planning initiative to identify the critical occupations
required to meet the agency's current and future mission objectives. The workforce planning initiative
began in August 2011 and is conducted annually. The initiative is aligned with the agency's fiscal year
budget process and a report was issued to senior leadership in August 2012. In September 2012, the
agency conducted its second workforce planning initiative. Through the initiative, every regional and
program office evaluated its existing workforce and identified occupational needs to the sub-office level,
engaging local level managers and providing a more accurate representation of planned workforce
changes. The results will be included in the "Workforce Planning Gap Analysis Report 2013 - EPA's
Workforce Needs 2013-2016."
The EPA intends to continue working closely with programs and other major stakeholders to refine
workload analysis tools to provide the most salient and actionable management understanding. The GAO
and OIG acknowledge the EPA's efforts to develop and test options for implementing workforce planning
aimed to institutionalize workforce analysis agency-wide. The agency's ability to assess its workload and
accurately estimate workforce levels necessary to carry out that workload is critically important to
mission accomplishment.
977
-------
EPA USER FEE PROGRAM
In FY 2015, 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, such as fast track amendments. In FY 2015, the
EPA expects to collect approximately $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 2015, 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. Fees collected for this activity are
deposited in the U.S. Treasury. The EPA estimates that $1.1 million will be deposited in FY
2015.
• Lead Accreditation and Certification Fee
The Toxic Substances Control Act, Title IV, Section 402(a)(3), mandates the development of a
schedule of fees to cover the costs of administering and enforcing the standards and regulations
for persons operating lead training programs accredited under the 402/404 rule and for lead-
based paint contractors certified under this rule. The training programs ensure that lead paint
abatement and renovation professionals are properly trained and certified. Fees collected for this
978
-------
activity are deposited in the U.S. Treasury. The EPA estimates that $16.0 million will be
deposited in FY 2015.
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 are
also 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 2015, the
EPA expects to collect approximately $21.9 million from this fee program.
Fee Proposals: Other
• Pre-Manufacturing Notification Fee: Revisions
Under the current fee structure, the Agency would collect around $1.1 million in FY 2015.
Legislative language will be submitted to Congress shortly after the submission of the
President's Budget which proposes to remove the statutory cap in the Toxic Substances Control
Act on Pre-Manufacturing Notification (PMN) Fees to collect an additional $4.5 million in FY
2015 (raising the total collected in FY 2015 to $5.6 million - approximately 40 percent of the
cost of administering the New Chemicals Program).
• TSCA Confidential Business Information Management Fee: New
The Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 (TSCA) provides EPA with the authority to require
reporting, record-keeping and testing requirements, and restrictions relating to chemical
substances and/or mixtures. Information directed to the EPA through TSCA may be claimed
under TSCA section 14(a) as confidential business information (CBI). EPA incurs direct costs to
manage TSCA CBI. These costs relate to the management and maintenance of a headquarters
CBI repository (Confidential Business Information Center), separate division and regional office
depositories, a stand- alone secure e-communications system and data base structure (CBI LAN),
a CBI procedural protection program, physical security (Secure Storage Areas), and CBI reviews
and sanitizations.
979
-------
EPA presently does not have the authority to directly recoup these costs from all submitters of
TSCA CBI information. Legislative language will be submitted to Congress shortly after the
submission of the President's Budget, which will allow for the Agency to charge fees from
TSCA CBI submitters to defray the EPA's administrative costs to manage CBI documents
received under all sections of TSCA, and to establish in the Treasury of the United States a
revolving fund, to be known as the 'Toxic Substances Control Act Confidential Business
Information Management Fund', into which CBI Fee collections would be deposited for use in
managing TSCA CBI data and without fiscal year limitation and without further appropriation.
Upon amendment to TSCA section 26, EPA would charge fees to defray approximately 40
percent yearly (or between $4.4M and $5.7M) of the direct costs of running this program.
• 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 $75 million annually.
980
-------
WORKING CAPITAL FUND
In FY 2015, the agency will be in its nineteenth 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.
In FY 2015, there will be eight agency activities provided under the WCF. 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; the agency's core accounting system,
time and attendance system, employee relocation services and conference planning services,
managed by the Office of the Chief Financial Officer; and the agency's continuity of operations
site managed by the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
The agency's FY 2015 budget request includes resources for these eight activities in each
National Program Manager's submission, totaling approximately $210 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 2015, 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.
981
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
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
982
-------
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.
983
-------
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
984
-------
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)
985
-------
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
986
-------
FY 2015 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 au-
to xics
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
FY2013
Actuals
Dollars
(X1000)
$43,082.2
$4,709.0
$2,163.0
FY2013
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$41,875.0
$4,709.0
$2,163.0
FY2014
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$41,875.0
$4,959.0
$5,079.0
FY2015
President's
Request
(X1000)
$38,250.0
$8,759.0
$1,279.0
987
-------
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
contmum Q
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-
jurisdictional
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
FY2013
Actuals
Dollars
(X1000)
$173,830.0
Section 105
grants
$0.0
$600.0
Section 106
grants
Total:
$224,384.2
FY2013
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$174,240.0
Section 105
grants
$0.0
$450.0
Section 106
grants
Total:
$223,437.0
FY2014
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$175,706.0
Section 105
grants
$0.0
$600.0
Section 106
grants
Total:
$228,219.0
FY2015
President's
Request
(X1000)
$170,049.0
Section 105
grants
$24,292.0
$600.0
Section 106
grants
Total:
$243,229.0
988
-------
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
FY2013
Actuals
Dollars
(X1000)
$11,885.4
Section 103
grants
$400.0
Section 105
grants
Total:
$12,285.4
$7,322.0
FY2013
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$12,160.0
Section 103
grants
$400.0
Section 105
grants
Total:
$12,560.0
$7,626.0
FY2014
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$12,429.0
Section 103
grants
$400.0
Section 105
grants
Total:
$12,829.0
$8,051.0
FY2015
President's
Request
(X1000)
$12,429.0
Section 103
grants
$400.0
Section 105
grants
Total:
$12,829.0
$0.0
989
-------
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.
Goal/
Objective
Goal 2,
Obj.2
Goal 2,
/~\Vvi 1
Ob). 2.
Goal 2,
/-\i_ • 's
Obj. 2
FY2013
Actuals
Dollars
(X1000)
$226,337.3
$157,766.7
$14,252.5
FY2013
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$225,970.0
$155,915.0
$14,354.0
FY2014
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$230,806.0
$159,252.0
$14,661.0
FY2015
President's
Request
Dollars
(X1000)
$249,164.0
$164,915.0
$14,661.0
990
-------
Grant Title
Public Water
System
Supervision
(PWSS)
Underground
Injection
Control (UIC)
Statutory
Authorities
SDWA,
Section
1443(a); TCA
in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
SDWA,
Section
1443(b); TCA
in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
Eligible
Recipients
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
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.
Goal/
Objective
Goal 2,
/~\Vvi 1
UuJ. 1
Goal 2,
/-\i_ • i
Obj. 1
FY2013
Actuals
Dollars
(X1000)
$99,680.9
$10,059.5
FY2013
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$99,827.0
$10,286.0
FY2014
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$101,963.0
$10,506.0
FY2015
President's
Request
Dollars
(X1000)
$109,700.0
$10,506.0
991
-------
Grant Title
Beaches
Protection
Hazardous
Waste Financial
Assistance
Statutory
Authorities
BEACH Act of
2000; TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
RCRA,
Section 3011;
FY 1999
Appropriations
Act (PL 105-
276); TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
Eligible
Recipients
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia,
Local
Governments
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
Eligible Uses
Develop and
implement
programs for
monitoring and
notification of
conditions for
coastal
recreation waters
adjacent to
beaches or
similar points of
access that are
used by the
public.
Development &
Implementation
of Hazardous
Waste Programs
Goal/
Objective
Goal 2,
/~\Vvi 1
UuJ. 1
Goal 3, Obj. 2
Goal3, Obj.3
FY2013
Actuals
Dollars
(X1000)
$9,451.5
$68,905.5
$29,171.0
Total
$98,076.5
FY2013
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$9,349.0
$68,887.0
$28,717.0
Total
$97,604.0
FY2014
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$9,549.0
$71,161.0
$28,532.0
Total
$99,693.0
FY2015
President's
Request
Dollars
(X1000)
$0.0
$69,815.0
$29,789.0
Total
$99,604.0
992
-------
Grant Title
Brownfields
Underground
Storage Tanks
(UST)
Statutory
Authorities
CERCLA, as
amended by
the Small
Business
Liability Relief
and
Brownfields
Revitalization
Act, Section
128(a) (42
U.S.C. 9628);
GMRA(1990);
FGCAA.
SWDA,
Section
2007(1), 42
U.S.C.
6916(1)(2);
EPActof2005,
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, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
States
Eligible Uses
Build and
support
Brownfields
programs which
will assess
contaminated
properties,
oversee private
party cleanups,
provide cleanup
support through
low interest
loans, and
provide certainty
for liability
related issues.
Provide funding
for States'
underground
storage tanks
and to support
direct UST
implementation
programs.
Goal/
Objective
Goal 3,
/~\Vvi 1
Ob). 1
Goal 3,
/~O-i O
UuJ. 2
FY2013
Actuals
Dollars
(X1000)
$45,870.5
$1,489.0
FY2013
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$46,745.0
$1,467.0
FY2014
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$47,745.0
$1,498.0
FY2015
President's
Request
Dollars
(X1000)
$47,745.0
$1,498.0
993
-------
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 for
implementation
of pesticide
programs,
including:
Certification and
Training (C&T)
/ Worker
Protection,
Endangered
Species
Protection
Program (ESPP)
Field Activities,
Pesticides in
Water,
Tribal Program.
Goal/
Objective
Goal 4,
Obj. 1
FY2013
Actuals
Dollars
(X1000)
$11,535.8
- States formula
$41.1
HQ Programs:
- Tribal
-PREP
- Regional Ag
Grants
Total:
$11,576.9
FY2013
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$10,828.0
- States formula
$1,607.0
HQ Programs:
- Tribal
-PREP
- Regional Ag
Grants
Total:
$12,435.0
FY2014
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$11,424.0
- States formula
$1,277.0
HQ Programs:
- Tribal
-PREP
- School IPM
~ ~
Total:
$12,701.0
FY2015
President's
Request
Dollars
(X1000)
$10,830.0
- States formula
$1,871.0
HQ Programs:
- Tribal
-PREP
- School IPM
Total:
$12,701.0
994
-------
Grant Title
Lead
Statutory
Authorities
TSCA,
Sections 10
and 404 (g);
FY 2000
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.
Goal/
Objective
Goal 4,
/~\Vvi 1
UuJ. 1
FY2013
Actuals
Dollars
(X1000)
$10,271.2
404(g) State/
Tribal
Certification
$3,243.5
404(g) Direct
Implementation
Total:
$13,514.7
FY2013
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$10,435.0
404(g) State/
Tribal
Certification
$3,320.0
404(g) Direct
Implementation
Total:
$13,755.0
FY2014
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$11,009.0
404(g) State/
Tribal
Certification
$3,040.0
404(g) Direct
Implementation
Total:
$14,049.0
FY2015
President's
Request
Dollars
(X1000)
$11,009.0
404(g) State/
Tribal
Certification
$3,040.0
404(g) Direct
Implementation
Total:
$14,049.0
995
-------
Grant Title
Toxic
Substances
Compliance
Pesticides
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.
Goal/
Objective
Goal 5,
Obj.l
Goal 5,
/~O-i 1
UuJ. 1
FY2013
Actuals
Dollars
(X1000)
Total: $4,655.2
$17,369.5
FY2013
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$1,558.0
Lead
$3,258.0
PCB/Asbestos
Total: $4,816.0
$17,672.0
FY2014
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$1,634.0
Lead
$3,285.0
PCB/Asbestos
Total: $4,919.0
$18,050.0
FY2015
President's
Request
Dollars
(X1000)
In 20 15, funding
is not split
between lead and
PCB/Asbestos.
Total: $4,919.0
$18,050.0
996
-------
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;
FY 2002
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.
Goal/
Objective
N/A
FY2013
Actuals
Dollars
(X1000)
$9,924.0
FY2013
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$9,444.0
FY2014
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$9,646.0
FY2015
President's
Request
Dollars
(X1000)
$25,664.0
997
-------
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.
Goal/
Objective
Goal 4,
Obj.2
FY2013
Actuals
Dollars
(X1000)
$4,894.2
FY2013
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$4,665.0
FY2014
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$4,765.0
FY2015
President's
Request
Dollars
(X1000)
$4,765.0
998
-------
Grant Title
Tribal General
Assistance
Program
Statutory
Authorities
Indian
Environmental
General
Assistance
Program Act
(42 U.S. C.
4368b); TCA
in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
Eligible
Recipients
Tribal
Governments,
Intertribal
Consortia
Eligible Uses
Plan and develop
Tribal
environmental
protection
programs.
Goal/
Objective
Goal 3,
Obj.4
FY2013
Actuals
Dollars
(X1000)
$66,493.8
FY2013
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$64,104.0
FY2014
Enacted
Dollars
(X1000)
$65,476.0
FY2015
President's
Request
Dollars
(X1000)
$96,375.0
999
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2015 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 Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certification
Subtotal, Clean Air and Climate
Indoor Air and Radiation
Indoor Air: Radon Program
Radiation: Protection
Radiation: Response Preparedness
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air
Subtotal, Indoor Air and Radiation
Enforcement
Forensics Support
Homeland Security
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection
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
Pesticides Licensing
Pesticides: Protect Human Health from Pesticide Risk
Pesticides: Protect the Environment from Pesticide Risk
FY2013
Actuals* *
$8,206.1
$13,008.9
$6,883.7
$86,858.1
$114,956.8
$56.7
$1,931.4
$4,040.2
$361.3
$6,389.6
$14,389.0
$10,382.8
$27,961.7
$540.0
$38,884.5
$3,676.0
$74,351.2
$3,647.8
$2,257.4
FY2014
Enacted
$8,596.0
$8,313.0
$7,020.0
$96,500.0
$120,429.0
$198.0
$2,133.0
$3,807.0
$311.0
$6,449.0
$14,125.0
$10,431.0
$27,381.0
$548.0
$38,360.0
$3,525.0
$70,370.0
$3,585.0
$2,056.0
FY2015
Pres Budget
$8,447.0
$8,018.0
$7,047.0
$94,974.0
$118,486.0
$0.0
$2,019.0
$3,667.0
$412.0
$6,098.0
$14,149.0
$12,067.0
$26,800.0
$576.0
$39,443.0
$3,089.0
$75,824.0
$3,430.0
$2,293.0
2015 Pres Budget
vs. 2014 Enacted
($149.0)
($295.0)
$27.0
($1,526.0)
($1,943.0)
($198.0)
($114.0)
($140.0)
$101.0
($351.0)
$24.0
$1,636.0
($581.0)
$28.0
$1,083.0
($436.0)
$5,454.0
($155.0)
$237.0
1000
-------
Pesticides: Realize the Value of Pesticide Availability
Subtotal, Pesticides Licensing
Research: Air, Climate and Energy
Research: Air, Climate and Energy
Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Human Health Risk Assessment
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
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
Total, Science & Technology
Environmental Program & Management
Clean Air and Climate
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs
Climate Protection Program
Federal Stationary Source Regulations
Federal Support for Air Quality Management
Stratospheric Ozone: Domestic Programs
Stratospheric Ozone: Multilateral Fund
Subtotal, Clean Air and Climate
Indoor Air and Radiation
FY2013
Actuals**
$392.3
$6,297.5
$87,126.1
$106,240.9
$154,720.2
$34,226.1
$18,069.1
$20,130.8
$50,667.0
$88,866.9
$123,093.0
$3,610.8
$6,784.4
$740,520.0
$20,330.2
$90,161.4
$24,931.6
$117,475.0
$5,052.6
$8,792.0
$266,742.8
FY2014
Enacted
$587.0
$6,228.0
$94,972.0
$111,018.0
$154,978.0
$40,010.0
$16,253.0
$21,409.0
$53,160.0
$90,822.0
$130,832.0
$3,636.0
$4,234.0
$759,156.0
$19,626.0
$95,436.0
$26,544.0
$121,757.0
$5,149.0
$8,979.0
$277,491.0
FY2015
Pres Budget
$502.0
$6,225.0
$101,942.0
$114,175.0
$144,144.0
$37,870.0
$15,677.0
$28,626.0
$54,336.0
$98,639.0
$136,509.0
$3,688.0
$0.0
$763,772.0
$18,349.0
$103,996.0
$32,914.0
$136,365.0
$5,037.0
$9,057.0
$305,718.0
2015 Pres Budget
vs. 2014 Enacted
($85.0)
($3.0)
$6,970.0
$3,157.0
($10,834.0)
($2,140.0)
($576.0)
$7,217.0
$1,176.0
$7,817.0
$5,677.0
$52.0
($4,234.0)
$4,616.0
($1,277.0)
$8,560.0
$6,370.0
$14,608.0
($112.0)
$78.0
$28,227.0
1001
-------
Indoor Air: Radon Program
Radiation: Protection
Radiation: Response Preparedness
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air
Subtotal, Indoor Air and Radiation
Brownfields
Brownfields
Compliance
Compliance Monitoring
Enforcement
Civil Enforcement
Criminal Enforcement
Environmental Justice
NEPA Implementation
Subtotal, Enforcement
Geographic Programs
Geographic Program: Chesapeake Bay
Geographic Program: Gulf of Mexico
Geographic Program: Lake Champlain
Geographic Program: Long Island Sound
Geographic Program: Other
Lake Pontchartrain
Southern New England Estuary (SNEE)
Geographic Program: Other (other activities)
Subtotal, Geographic Program: Other
Great Lakes Restoration
Geographic Program: South Florida
Geographic Program: San Francisco Bay
Geographic Program: Puget Sound
Subtotal, Geographic Programs
Homeland Security
Homeland Security: Communication and Information
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and
Infrastructure
FY2013
Actuals**
$3,563.1
$9,033.1
$2,508.6
$13,327.6
$28,432.4
$21,826.5
$101,820.1
$167,924.2
$47,912.5
$6,376.1
$16,184.2
$238,397.0
$53,443.5
$3,842.3
$2,268.0
$3,754.6
$1,829.0
$0.0
$1,246.4
$3,075.4
$269,549.6
$1,334.9
$1,517.2
$28,359.2
$367,144.7
$4,066.5
$875.1
$7,328.9
FY2014
Enacted
$2,366.0
$8,714.0
$2,493.0
$14,508.0
$28,081.0
$26,002.0
$103,297.0
$173,573.0
$47,829.0
$6,737.0
$16,360.0
$244,499.0
$70,000.0
$4,482.0
$1,399.0
$3,940.0
$948.0
$2,000.0
$1,445.0
$4,393.0
$300,000.0
$1,704.0
$4,819.0
$25,000.0
$415,737.0
$3,655.0
$980.0
$5,724.0
FY2015
Pres Budget
$3,369.0
$9,138.0
$3,121.0
$14,565.0
$30,193.0
$28,280.0
$118,892.0
$180,641.0
$50,885.0
$7,936.0
$17,841.0
$257,303.0
$73,098.0
$3,804.0
$1,399.0
$2,893.0
$948.0
$5,000.0
$962.0
$6,910.0
$275,000.0
$1,402.0
$4,763.0
$25,011.0
$394,280.0
$4,102.0
$1,004.0
$5,716.0
2015 Pres Budget
vs. 2014 Enacted
$1,003.0
$424.0
$628.0
$57.0
$2,112.0
$2,278.0
$15,595.0
$7,068.0
$3,056.0
$1,199.0
$1,481.0
$12,804.0
$3,098.0
($678.0)
$0.0
($1,047.0)
$0.0
$3,000.0
($483.0)
$2,517.0
($25,000.0)
($302.0)
($56.0)
$11.0
($21,457.0)
$447.0
$24.0
($8.0)
1002
-------
Subtotal, Homeland Security
Information Exchange / Outreach
State and Local Prevention and Preparedness
TRI / Right to Know
Tribal - Capacity Building
Executive Management and Operations
Environmental Education
Exchange Network
Small Minority Business Assistance
Small Business Ombudsman
Children and Other Sensitive Populations: Agency
Coordination
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
Integrated Environmental Strategies
Administrative Law
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Civil Rights / Title VI Compliance
Legal Advice: Environmental Program
Legal Advice: Support Program
Regional Science and Technology
Science Advisory Board
Regulatory/Economic-Management and Analysis
Subtotal, Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Operations and Administration
FY2013
Actuals**
$12,270.5
$12,553.5
$15,221.0
$13,396.6
$46,812.8
$6,991.1
$17,670.9
$1,483.1
$1,737.0
$5,733.4
$121,599.4
$3,471.1
$7,256.2
$5,294.6
$16,021.9
$6,707.3
$77,765.7
$84,473.0
$13,189.0
$5,099.7
$1,256.4
$9,756.3
$40,441.7
$14,456.5
$2,065.9
$3,817.4
$14,738.3
$104,821.2
FY2014
Enacted
$10,359.0
$14,956.0
$15,956.0
$13,811.0
$47,168.0
$8,702.0
$17,206.0
$1,834.0
$2,388.0
$6,548.0
$128,569.0
$3,433.0
$7,323.0
$4,891.0
$15,647.0
$6,410.0
$85,579.0
$91,989.0
$12,929.0
$5,202.0
$1,297.0
$11,248.0
$43,136.0
$17,374.0
$2,211.0
$5,090.0
$14,715.0
$113,202.0
FY2015
Pres Budget
$10,822.0
$27,489.0
$14,927.0
$14,942.0
$50,448.0
$0.0
$32,588.0
$2,107.0
$2,252.0
$8,077.0
$152,830.0
$3,225.0
$7,513.0
$5,939.0
$16,677.0
$6,604.0
$86,793.0
$93,397.0
$14,203.0
$4,750.0
$1,370.0
$11,857.0
$43,948.0
$18,305.0
$2,991.0
$6,179.0
$18,493.0
$122,096.0
2015 Pres Budget
vs. 2014 Enacted
$463.0
$12,533.0
($1,029.0)
$1,131.0
$3,280.0
($8,702.0)
$15,382.0
$273.0
($136.0)
$1,529.0
$24,261.0
($208.0)
$190.0
$1,048.0
$1,030.0
$194.0
$1,214.0
$1,408.0
$1,274.0
($452.0)
$73.0
$609.0
$812.0
$931.0
$780.0
$1,089.0
$3,778.0
$8,894.0
1003
-------
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Acquisition Management
Human Resources Management
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
Pesticides Licensing
Science Policy and Biotechnology
Pesticides: Protect Human Health from Pesticide Risk
Pesticides: Protect the Environment from Pesticide Risk
Pesticides: Realize the Value of Pesticide Availability
Subtotal, Pesticides Licensing
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
RCRA: Corrective Action
RCRA: Waste Management
eManifest
RCRA: Waste Management (other activities)
Subtotal, RCRA: Waste Management
RCRA: Waste Minimization & Recycling
Subtotal, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA)
Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
Endocrine Disrupters
Pollution Prevention Program
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Management
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Review and
Reduction
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
FY2013
Actuals**
$69,366.3
$293,188.6
$28,381.3
$35,752.6
$24,186.0
$450,874.8
$1,543.3
$52,854.4
$37,911.9
$12,120.3
$104,429.9
$37,250.6
$970.0
$59,303.9
$60,273.9
$8,771.2
$106,295.7
$5,734.2
$14,634.1
$4,902.5
$54,695.2
$12,317.8
$92,283.8
$11,535.3
$23,940.2
$19,881.9
$43,822.1
FY2014
Enacted
$71,875.0
$310,057.0
$31,866.0
$42,013.0
$24,671.0
$480,482.0
$1,525.0
$58,070.0
$34,162.0
$10,249.0
$104,006.0
$37,198.0
$92.0
$62,284.0
$62,376.0
$8,164.0
$107,738.0
$7,553.0
$13,904.0
$0.0
$58,624.0
$13,745.0
$93,826.0
$12,714.0
$25,098.0
$21,065.0
$46,163.0
FY2015
Pres Budget
$75,572.0
$325,138.0
$31,779.0
$48,445.0
$25,359.0
$506,293.0
$1,504.0
$59,931.0
$39,035.0
$10,525.0
$110,995.0
$36,305.0
$0.0
$60,121.0
$60,121.0
$8,451.0
$104,877.0
$6,365.0
$13,486.0
$0.0
$62,709.0
$13,644.0
$96,204.0
$11,295.0
$26,723.0
$24,220.0
$50,943.0
2015 Pres Budget
vs. 2014 Enacted
$3,697.0
$15,081.0
($87.0)
$6,432.0
$688.0
$25,811.0
($21.0)
$1,861.0
$4,873.0
$276.0
$6,989.0
($893.0)
($92.0)
($2,163.0)
($2,255.0)
$287.0
($2,861.0)
($1,188.0)
($418.0)
$0.0
$4,085.0
($101.0)
$2,378.0
($1,419.0)
$1,625.0
$3,155.0
$4,780.0
1004
-------
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
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
FY2013
Actuals**
$2,109.1
$94,244.6
$96,353.7
$10,692.6
$193,699.4
$204,392.0
$0.0
$2,473,536.8
$44,003.9
$44,003.9
$5,861.9
$27,676.4
$33,538.3
$2,223.5
$10,088.9
$1,060.4
FY2014
Enacted
$1,927.0
$98,161.0
$100,088.0
$11,850.0
$199,709.0
$211,559.0
$12,700.0
$2,624,149.0
$41,849.0
$41,849.0
$6,676.0
$27,791.0
$34,467.0
$1,991.0
$9,939.0
$998.0
FY2015
Pres Budget
$722.0
$100,931.0
$101,653.0
$10,628.0
$213,780.0
$224,408.0
$0.0
$2,737,156.0
$46,130.0
$46,130.0
$7,875.0
$45,632.0
$53,507.0
$2,044.0
$11,064.0
$1,083.0
2015 Pres Budget
vs. 2014 Enacted
($1,205.0)
$2,770.0
$1,565.0
($1,222.0)
$14,071.0
$12,849.0
($12,700.0)
$113,007.0
$4,281.0
$4,281.0
$1,199.0
$17,841.0
$19,040.0
$53.0
$1,125.0
$85.0
1005
-------
Criminal Enforcement
Environmental Justice
Forensics Support
Superfimd: Enforcement
Superfund: Federal Facilities Enforcement
Subtotal, Enforcement
Homeland Security
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
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Acquisition Management
Human Resources Management
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Human Health Risk Assessment
FY2013
Actuals**
$6,964.0
$603.8
$2,382.2
$160,229.3
$7,829.2
$178,008.5
$39,468.4
$683.5
$40,151.9
$1,329.4
$544.0
$13,667.4
$14,211.4
$663.9
$652.0
$1,315.9
$21,791.6
$80,960.5
$21,617.7
$5,091.4
$3,053.4
$132,514.6
$17,885.7
$2,425.1
FY2014
Enacted
$7,488.0
$604.0
$2,344.0
$157,592.0
$7,490.0
$175,518.0
$36,802.0
$1,265.0
$38,067.0
$1,340.0
$664.0
$13,911.0
$14,575.0
$792.0
$503.0
$1,295.0
$21,797.0
$67,470.0
$22,388.0
$5,880.0
$2,990.0
$120,525.0
$14,380.0
$3,040.0
FY2015
Pres Budget
$7,438.0
$597.0
$1,112.0
$154,303.0
$7,405.0
$170,855.0
$35,754.0
$1,113.0
$36,867.0
$1,466.0
$704.0
$14,234.0
$14,938.0
$753.0
$516.0
$1,269.0
$24,155.0
$78,905.0
$23,762.0
$7,547.0
$2,945.0
$137,314.0
$14,032.0
$2,843.0
2015 Pres Budget
vs. 2014 Enacted
($50.0)
($7.0)
($1,232.0)
($3,289.0)
($85.0)
($4,663.0)
($1,048.0)
($152.0)
($1,200.0)
$126.0
$40.0
$323.0
$363.0
($39.0)
$13.0
($26.0)
$2,358.0
$11,435.0
$1,374.0
$1,667.0
($45.0)
$16,789.0
($348.0)
($197.0)
1006
-------
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Subtotal, Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Superfund Cleanup
Superfimd: Emergency Response and Removal
Superfund: EPA Emergency Preparedness
Superfund: Federal Facilities
Superfund: Remedial
Subtotal, Superfund Cleanup
Total, Hazardous Substance Superfund
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Enforcement
Civil Enforcement
IT / Data Management / Security
IT / Data Management
Operations and Administration
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Acquisition Management
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
FY2013
Actuals**
$0.4
$2,425.5
$183,331.1
$8,777.2
$25,099.4
$536,942.3
$754,150.0
$1,155,365.7
$691.9
$0.1
$602.9
$933.4
$151.9
$1,688.2
$11,771.3
$57,085.1
$29,198.2
$98,054.6
$382.1
$100,816.9
$131.8
FY2014
Enacted
$0.0
$3,040.0
$177,826.0
$8,150.0
$21,125.0
$500,000.0
$707,101.0
$1,088,769.0
$746.0
$0.0
$572.0
$823.0
$155.0
$1,550.0
$10,195.0
$56,126.0
$25,629.0
$91,950.0
$320.0
$94,566.0
$139.0
FY2015
Pres Budget
$0.0
$2,843.0
$186,987.0
$7,636.0
$24,805.0
$543,400.0
$762,828.0
$1,156,603.0
$639.0
$0.0
$403.0
$836.0
$138.0
$1,377.0
$9,240.0
$57,402.0
$28,859.0
$95,501.0
$405.0
$97,922.0
$147.0
2015 Pres Budget
vs. 2014 Enacted
$0.0
($197.0)
$9,161.0
($514.0)
$3,680.0
$43,400.0
$55,727.0
$67,834.0
($107.0)
$0.0
($169.0)
$13.0
($17.0)
($173.0)
($955.0)
$1,276.0
$3,230.0
$3,551.0
$85.0
$3,356.0
$8.0
1007
-------
Enforcement
Civil Enforcement
Oil
Oil Spill: Prevention, Preparedness and Response
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Total, Inland Oil Spill Programs
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
Infrastructure Assistance: Alaska Native Villages
Brownfields Projects
Infrastructure Assistance: Clean Water SRF
Infrastructure Assistance: Drinking Water SRF
Infrastructure Assistance: Mexico Border
Diesel Emissions Reduction Grant Program
Subtotal, State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
Categorical Grants
Categorical Grant: Nonpoint Source (Sec. 319)
Categorical Grant: Public Water System Supervision
(PWSS)
Categorical Grant: State and Local Air Quality
Management
Categorical Grant: Radon
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: Wetlands Program Development
Categorical Grant: Underground Injection Control
(UIC)
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Program Implementation
Categorical Grant: Lead
FY2013
Actuals**
$2,266.9
$13,050.0
$547.4
$597.6
$16,593.7
$9,414.7
$100,775.2
$1,422,285.8
$926,663.0
$5,098.0
$11,706.9
$2,475,943.6
$157,766.7
$99,680.9
$224,384.2
$7,322.0
$16,883.7
$209,453.6
$226,337.3
$14,252.5
$10,059.5
$11,576.9
$13,514.7
FY2014
Enacted
$2,413.0
$14,409.0
$584.0
$664.0
$18,209.0
$10,000.0
$90,000.0
$1,448,887.0
$906,896.0
$5,000.0
$20,000.0
$2,480,783.0
$159,252.0
$101,963.0
$228,219.0
$8,051.0
$17,848.0
$212,958.0
$230,806.0
$14,661.0
$10,506.0
$12,701.0
$14,049.0
FY2015
Pres Budget
$2,514.0
$20,489.0
$498.0
$485.0
$24,133.0
$10,000.0
$85,000.0
$1,018,000.0
$757,000.0
$5,000.0
$0.0
$1,875,000.0
$164,915.0
$109,700.0
$243,229.0
$0.0
$18,500.0
$230,664.0
$249,164.0
$14,661.0
$10,506.0
$12,701.0
$14,049.0
2015 Pres Budget
vs. 2014 Enacted
$101.0
$6,080.0
($86.0)
($179.0)
$5,924.0
$0.0
($5,000.0)
($430,887.0)
($149,896.0)
$0.0
($20,000.0)
($605,783.0)
$5,663.0
$7,737.0
$15,010.0
($8,051.0)
$652.0
$17,706.0
$18,358.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
1008
-------
Categorical Grant: Hazardous Waste Financial
Assistance
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Enforcement
Categorical Grant: Pollution Prevention
Categorical Grant: Toxics Substances Compliance
Categorical Grant: Tribal General Assistance Program
Categorical Grant: Underground Storage Tanks
Categorical Grant: Tribal Air Quality Management
Categorical Grant: Environmental Information
Categorical Grant: Beaches Protection
Categorical Grant: Brownfields
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
TOTAL, EPA
FY2013
Actuals**
$98,076.5
$17,369.5
$4,894.2
$4,655.2
$66,493.8
$1,489.0
$12,285.4
$9,924.0
$9,451.5
$45,870.5
$1,035,404.3
$23,166.0
$3,534,513.9
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$8,098,889.2
FY2014
Enacted
$99,693.0
$18,050.0
$4,765.0
$4,919.0
$65,476.0
$1,498.0
$12,829.0
$9,646.0
$9,549.0
$47,745.0
$1,054,378.0
$0.0
$3,535,161.0
$3,674.0
$3,674.0
$0.0
$8,200,000.0
FY2015
Pres Budget
$99,604.0
$18,050.0
$4,765.0
$4,919.0
$96,375.0
$1,498.0
$12,829.0
$25,664.0
$0.0
$47,745.0
$1,130,374.0
$0.0
$3,005,374.0
$10,423.0
$10,423.0
($5,000.0)
$7,890,020.0
2015 Pres Budget
vs. 2014 Enacted
($89.0)
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$30,899.0
$0.0
$0.0
$16,018.0
($9,549.0)
$0.0
$75,996.0
$0.0
($529,787.0)
$6,749.0
$6,749.0
($5,000.0)
($309,980.0)
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the Superfund account.
***2013 Actuals do not include Sandy Supplemental
1009
-------
DISCONTINUED PROGRAMS
NOTE: The EPA does not request funding for the Congressionally directed
projects funded in FY 2013.
Congressionally Directed Projects (By Appropriation):
(Dollars in Thousands)
Appropriation
STAG
Total
FY 2013
Actuals
$23,166.0
$23,166.0
FY2014
Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$0.0
$0.0
Change:
15 Pres Budget -
14 Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
1010
-------
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 2013
Actuals
$4,902.5
$4,902.5
26.8
FY 2014
Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY 2015
Pres Budget
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
FY 2015 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2014 Enacted
$0.0
$0.0
0.0
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 recent years, the CRM Program
has focused 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 2015 Activities and Performance Plan:
The EPA is not requesting funds to support this program in FY 2015.
Performance Targets:
There are no performance targets for this program.
FY 2015 Change from FY 2014 Enacted Budget (Dollars in Thousands):
• No change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq. - Sections 1-31.
1011
-------
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
2014
2015
Account Code
020-00-04-00-04-0 1 60-24
020-00-04-00-04-0 1 60-24
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
$373.0
$282.0
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 SAM, to replace internally maintained
vendor data. Contracting officers can download vendor-provided representation and certification
information electronically, via SAM as well 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 (EPLS), via SAM 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
Opportunities (FBO) website, where the information is accessible to the public. Vendors use this
website to identify business opportunities in federal contracting.
1012
-------
Fiscal Year
2014
2015
Account Code
020-00-01-16-04-0230-24
020-00-01-16-04-0230-24
EPA Service Fee
(in thousands)
$149.0
$149.0
Integrated Acquisition Environment Loans and Grants
The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) require 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
2014
2015
Account Code
020-00-01-16-02-4300-24
020-00-01-16-02-4300-24
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
$96.0
$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
2014
2015
Account Code
020-00-01-16-03-1219-24
020-00-01-16-03-1219-24
EPA Service Fee
(in thousands)
$280.0
$293.0
USA Jobs
U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) USA Jobs simplifies the process of locating and
applying for federal jobs. USA Jobs 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
USA Jobs initiative has increased job seeker satisfaction with the federal job application process
and is helping the agency to locate highly-qualified candidates and improve response times to
applicants.
1013
-------
The agency is required to integrate with USA Jobs, 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,
USA Jobs 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
USA Jobs feature allows applicants to obtain up-to-date information on the status of their
application upon request.
Fiscal Year
2014
2015
Account Code
020-00-01-16-04-1218-24
020-00-01-16-04-1218-24
EPA Service Fee
(in thousands)
$111.0
$107.0
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
2014
2015
Account Code
020-00-01-16-04-1200-24
020-00-01-16-04-1200-24
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
$65.0
$65.0
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 the end of 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
1014
-------
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
benefit of our partners in the Geo LoB as well as colleagues in state, local and Tribal government
organizations. In FY 2015, 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 2015. 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 2015, EPA will benefit from the National Geospatial Platform moving from planning into
the operational stage.
Fiscal Year
2014
2015
Account Code
020-00-01-16-04-3100-24
020-00-01-16-04-3100-24
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
$225.0
$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
176 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 1,559 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. In FY2013, the EPA posted 1,225 rules and proposed rules, 984 Federal Register
notices, and 39,900 public submissions mRegulations.gov. EPA also posted 17,711 documents
that consisted of supporting and related materials associated with other postings. Overall, EPA
provides public access to 767,900 documents in Regulations.gov.
1015
-------
Fiscal Year
2014
2015
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
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
2014
2015
Account Code
020-00-01-01-04-1100-24
020-00-01-01-04-1100-24
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
$96.0
$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 Government-wide
Treasury Account Symbol Adjusted Trial Balance System are expected to be implemented in
2014.
Fiscal Year
2014
2015
Account Code
010-00-01-01-04-3200-24
010-00-01-01-04-3200-24
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
$75.0
$75.0
1016
-------
FY 2014-2015 EPA AGENCY PRIORITY GOALS
Below are EPA's FY 2014-2015 Agency Priority Goals. Additional information on Priority
Goals can be found on Performance.gov.
EPA Priority Goals
Goal Leader(s)
Reduce greenhouse gas emissions from cars and trucks
Reduce greenhouse gas emissions from cars and trucks. Through
September 30, 2015, EPA, in coordination with Department of
Transportation's fuel economy standards program, will be implementing
vehicle and truck greenhouse gas standards that are projected to reduce
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 6 billion metric tons and reduce oil
consumption by about 12 billion barrels over the lifetime of the affected
vehicles and trucks.
Elizabeth A. Shaw,
Deputy Assistant
Administrator,
Office of Air and
Radiation
Clean up contaminated sites to enhance the livability and economic
vitality of communities
By 2015, an additional 18,970 sites will be made ready for anticipated use
protecting Americans and the environment one community at a time.
Barry Breen,
Deputy Assistant
Administrator,
Office of Solid Waste
and Emergency
Response
Assess and reduce risks posed by chemicals and promote the use of
safer chemicals in commerce
By Sept 30, 2015, EPA will have completed more than 250 assessments of
pesticides and other commercially available chemicals to evaluate risks
they may pose to human health and the environment, including the
potential for some of these chemicals to disrupt endocrine systems. These
assessments are essential in determining whether products containing
these chemicals can be used safely for commercial, agricultural and/or
industrial uses.
Louise P. Wise, Deputy
Assistant Administrator,
Office of Chemical
Safety and Pollution
Prevention
Improve environmental outcomes and enhance service to the
regulated community and the public
By September 30, 2015 reduce reporting burdens to EPA by one million
hours through streamlined regulations, provide real-time environmental
data to at least two communities, and establish a new portal to service the
regulated community and public.
Lawrence Starfield,
Principal Deputy
Assistant Administrator,
Office of Enforcement
and Compliance
Assurance
Improve, restore, and maintain water quality by enhancing nonpoint
source program leveraging, accountability, and on-the-ground
effectiveness to address the Nation's largest sources of pollution
By September 30, 2015, 100 percent of the states will have updated
nonpoint source management programs that comport with the new Section
319 grant guidelines that will result in better targeting of resources
through prioritization and increased coordination with USDA.
Michael H. Shapiro,
Deputy Assistant
Administrator, Office of
Water
Office of Water
1017
-------
Improve public health protection for persons served by small
drinking water systems, which account for more than 97% of public
water systems in the U.S., by strengthening the technical, managerial,
and financial capacity of those systems
By September 30, 2015, EPA will engage with an additional ten states (for
a total of 30 states) and three tribes to improve small drinking water
system capability to provide safe drinking water, an invaluable resource.
Michael H. Shapiro,
Deputy Assistant
Administrator, Office of
Water
Office of Water
1018
-------
Proposed FY 2015 Administrative Provisions
To further clarify proposed Administrative Provisions that involve more than a simple annual
extension, that were not included in P.L. 113-76, or propose a modification to an existing
provision, the following information is provided.
FY 2015 Title 42 Hiring Authority
The change proposed in FY 2015 will extend the authority to 2017 and remove the ceiling of
fifty persons at any one time.
The fourth paragraph under the heading Administrative Provisions of title n 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, the third paragraph under such heading of title II of Public Law 111-88, and the sixth
paragraph under such heading of title II of division G of Public Law 113-76, is further amended
by striking "up to fifty persons at any one time" and inserting "persons", and by striking "2015"
and inserting "2017".
The current proviso states that the Administrator may, after consultation with the Office of
Personnel Management, employ up to fifty persons at any one time in the Office of Research and
Development under the authority provided in 42 U.S.C. 209, and this authority expires at the end
of FY 2015. The change proposed in FY 2015 would remove the ceiling of fifty persons at any
one time and extend the authority through FY 2017.
Southeastern New England Coastal Watershed Restoration Program Language
The Administrator is authorized to use the amounts appropriated under the heading
"Environmental Programs and Management" for 2015 to provide grants to implement the
Southeastern New England Water shed Restoration Program.
The Southeastern New England Coastal Watershed Restoration Program (SNECWRP)
encompasses the coastal land and water area from Westerly, RI to Pleasant Bay on Cape Cod.
This language allows SNECWRP to issue implementation grants in that geographic span.
Currently available authorities present challenges, because Section 104(b)3 does not allow for
implementation, while Section 320 does not allow for implementation projects in areas outside of
NEP Study Areas. This language would allow the program to provide grants for implementation
in the entire Southeastern New England region.
STAG Rescission
From unobligated balances to carry out projects and activities funded through the "State and
Tribal Assistance Grants" accounts, $5,000,000 are hereby permanently cancelled: Provided,
That no amounts may be cancelled from amounts that were designated by the Congress as an
emergency requirement pursuant to the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget or the Balanced
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, as amended.
1019
-------
These funds originate from Congress!onally designated projects where projects are completed
and funds remained, or there were other reasons the funds could not be fully utilized and the
designated grantee has officially returned the funds. These funds may not be re-purposed due to
the nature of the designations within the appropriation.
1020
-------
EPA Budget by National Program Manager and Major Office
Do lars ir T -•:••_:-;- L :
NPM
OA:3
OAR
OARM
OCFO
Major Office
Immec ate Office
Office o- Congressioral and Intergovernrnenta Relations
Office of ExteTal Affairs ar«l Environmental Education
Office o-" Po'cv
Cniidrer s Healtn Protection
Environ mental Education
Office o-' Civil Rights
Executive Secretariat
Executive Services
Home anc Security
Science Adviso-,1 Ba arc
1"--' ; arc! D ;;c -.a- ta;ec E -:'-=:; Utilisation
Regional Resources
TOTAL
Immediate Office
Office o-'AirQua ity P'arning ard Stardarcs
Office o* Atmosahe'-'c Programs
Office o-'Trar-spotatior and AY Quality
Office o- Radiaton and Indoor Air
Regional Resources
TOTAL
Immec ate Office
Office o-" Diversity Acvisory Committee Management and Outre acii
Administrative Law judges'
Enviror mental Appeals Board'
Office o* Ace u j:i:ior N'anaeemert
Office tr Administratior
Office
-------
EPA Budget by National Program Manager and Major Office
Do lars irThousand
NPM
OC5PP
OKA
OEI
OGC
OK
orra
Major Office
TOTAL
Immec^ate Office
Office of Pesticide Programs
Office of Po jtion Prevention and Toxics
Office of Science Cooperation arxi Policy
Regional Resources
TOTAL
lmm.ec:atc Office
Office o-" Civil Enforcement
Office of Criminal Enforcement. Fonens'cs. and Training
Office o-CoTin anee
Office of Environments Justice
Office o-' Federal Actv'ties
Federal Facilities Enforcement Off ce
Office of Site Rerrec atior Enforcement
Regional Resources
TOTAL
Irnrrec'ate Office
EPA Quality Management Program
Office of P ann n£. Resojrces. and Outre acti
Office of Information Collect'on
Office ofTecnnology Openatons anc Planning
Office of Information Analyst and Access
Regional Resources
TOTAL
Immec'ate Office
Air and Radiation Law Office
Pesticides anc Toxic 5uastances Lay* Office
Solic Waste anc Emergency Response Law Office
Water Law Offue
Other Legal Support
Regional Resources
TOTAL
Immecate Office
Office of Aucit
Office o-" Congressional. PUB c Affairs anc N'aragement
Office of Cf e- of Staff
Office of Investigatons
Office of Wjs'on Systems
Office of Program Evaluation
TOTAL
Immec ate Office
P»Y(SK]
571,937.0
56,607.8
573,243.8
545,974.3
53,494.2
5150,408.0
58,552.0
555,9253
519,893.5
52,460.6
53,923.5
52,672.2
59,603.8
5313,477.0
$439,219.0
52.276.5
51.713.1
54,749.8
59,5106
$11,325.2
$12.662.8
$23.249.0
519S7.5
56,989.9
53,2368
52,135.7
53,3659
$16,474.4
$24,375.0
558^65.0
55466
512,651.5
52,742.1
53,137.6
$11,961.0
53,8519
$11.3712
$47,262.0
51,140.5
FY 2014 Enacted
Non-Pay lit; Total ($K)
532,813.0
52,073.1
518,643.7
526.681.0
55,839.9
S31.2O9.0
584,147.0
$2,«7.0
$7,260.6
$19.418.8
$2.900.6
$1,255.7
$586.0
529.404.6
545.43 Z.O
$121,170.0
$5,483.8
$943.8
$3.423.7
531,797.8
512.95S.2
519.431.0
593,688.0
536.0
$43.1
S3O.O
$12.0
$27.0
54.308.8
$507.0
$4,971.0
$143.9
$458.6
$273.9
$910.8
$1.275.7
$1,242.9
$220.2
$4,536.0
$50.2
$104,750.0
58.681.2
591,887.5
572.655.3
59.334.1
552.297.0
5231,855.0
$11,199.0
530,001.7
567,790.0
539.312.3
$5.361.2
55.1792
53.25S.2
539,008.4
$359,309.0
5560,719.0
57.760.2
52.656.9
!t. 173.5
541,308.5
524,284.4
532.311.5
542,680.0
5159,175.0
52.023.5
57,032.9
53.266.8
52.157.7
53.392.9
520,783.2
524,882.0
$63,539.0
5690.5
513,110.1
53,016.0
54.048.4
$13,236.7
55,094.8
512.591.5
$51,788.0
51,190.6
FTE
539.2
42.5
483.4
295.7
22.6
154.7
998.9
54.0
130.9
326.0
1285
18.8
24.5
14.9
69.0
2,192.5
2,959.1
13.0
12.0
31.0
60.9
72.5
82.2
169.6
441.2
11.1
39.3
18.2
11.7
19.1
92.3
140.6
332.3
3.1
95.6
1B.1
21.3
69.1
28.7
95.6
331.5
rT
Pay($K)
$71,180.0
$6.929.0
576.025.5
545.193.4
$3.238.1
520.364.0
$151,750.0
$8,687.1
523,447.1
557.346.6
521.519.6
$4,049.7
$3,987.2
$2,814.7
$11.408.0
$307.161.0
$«0,42LO
52.548.1
51.952.2
$4.103.4
$9.726.7
512.328.3
512.526.3
522.762.0
$65,947.0
$2.315.7
$7.239.2
$3.464.6
$2.159.5
$3.695.2
517.140.8
523.398.0
$59,433.0
5514.8
513.211.2
$2.853.2
53.260.5
$12.508.3
$4.020.2
512.903.8
$49,272.0
$1.169.6
FT 2015 President
540,164.0
51,6817
$24,537.2
$30,186.5
54,744.6
$30,285.0
$91,4M.O
$3,007.4
$11.629.9
$12,658.4
$58,323.8
$4457*
$1717.3
$7311
$28,419.3
$23,1410
$142,086.0
57.192.4
5706.4
52,326.6
$67,6811
$11,418.8
$15,899.7
$19,0110
5124,266.0
538.0
540,0
$29.0
$32.0
$183.0
55.015.0
5581.0
55,921.0
$274.1
$687.2
$3441
52,4610
$1,652.9
51.969.8
$532.9
$7,922.0
$75.6
s Budget
FotBlfSK)
$114,341.0
$8.614.7
$100.562.7
575.379.S
57.962.7
650,649.0
$213,189.0
535.077.1
570,005.0
579.843.1
56.507.2
$5.704.7
$3.545.8
539.827.4
$330.302.0
$582,507.0
59.740.4
52,658.6
$6.430.0
577.407.8
523.747.1
528.426.0
541.803.0
$190,213.0
$2.336.0
$7.224.0
$3,487.0
$2.175.0
$3.875.0
$22.278.0
523.979.0
565,354.0
S7SB.9
513.898.4
53.197.3
55.721.5
514.161.2
55,9900
513,436.7
$57,191.0
$1.245.2
FIT
527.6
42.6
4S4.0
2JJ4.9
19.2
145.9
986.6
50.5
130.9
326.0
128.5
26.6
24.5
14.9
69.0
2.111.8
2,882.9
14.3
12.6
26.5
61.2
76.6
79.9
162.5
433.6
12.8
40.3
19.4
11.7
20.7
94.0
131.7
330.6
3.2
92.6
17.4
20.9
66.9
28.0
92.6
321-5
1022
-------
EPA Budget by National Program Manager and Major Office
Do lars ir Thojsancj
NPM Major Office
Office o-'Res'ona anc B' ate ral Affairs
Office o" G DOS Affs rssnd Po icv
Office of r/anagerient and Inte'nst'ona Service;
American Ire ar Environmental O*nce
Regional Resources
TOTAL
ORD ORD Headquarters
National CenterfonEnv'ionrpental Reseatn
Natioral Exposure Research Laboratory
Natipral Health and Environments Effects Research Laboratory
Natioral Homeland Seojri-y Research Center
National RISK Management Research Laboratory
Office o" the Saen« Ac visor
Natioral Center for Compilations Toxicology
Natioral Cente'forEnv>onrrertal Assessment
TOTAL
OSWER Imrreratc Office
Fede-al Fac ties Restoration and RSLM Office
Innov.ton Partnership & CoTiTiun 'cst'on Offce
Office of 5uper-T_nd Remediston and Technology Innovation
Office of Resource Conservation snd Recoveny
Office of Underground Storage Tanks
Office o- Brownf'elds and Land Revtalization
Office of Emergency Management
Regional P-esources
TOTAL
OW Immediate Office
Office oF Ground Water anc Drinking Water
Office o'" Science and Technology
Office V Wastewater Management
Office of Wed ands, Oceins anc Watenshieds
Regional Resources
TOTAL
Less Resclss'on of Prion'Vear Funds
Reimaursabe FTE
Total Agency Resource;
P.y(SK}
53,229.4
SiOStS
52.0BS.9
$2,685.7
$10,944.0
$ZJ,1S5.0
548,025.5
59,30^1
S45.592.B
$63,013.4
56,672.4
539,Slil
52,7714
52,555.0
526,857.3
$249,617.0
5S.996.4
S2.Z315
51,285.9
519,986.6
527,066.7
53..9S2.5
S2.K2.B
510,693.6
5257.4640
$334,882.0
511,013.5
52i,6SB.O
51S.702.2
515,092.1
518,301.2
51S7,33610
$275,135.0
$2,209,778.0
$2,209,77S.O
Rf 2IH4 Enacted
Non-Pay ($K) Total ($K)
52,756.7 55.986.2
$200.9 $3.289.4
$793.7 $2.860.6
5957.4
$67020.0
$71,779.0
566,849.6
$74,433.9
$29.474.5
$44.111.5
$14.415.5
$26.997.1
$3,360.4
59,624.1
517.137.5
5288,404.0
55.1O8.5
St. 131.6
51,005.6
577,493.2
59.877.6
54.558.9
51B.056.S
$31.100.7
$766.368.0
$916,701.0
56,861.6
$44.417.1
$19.348.5
$10,222.9
$25.925.9
$3,306.248.0
$3,417,044.0
$5,990,222.0
$5,990,222.0
53.643.1
$77.964.0
$94,934^
5116,875.1
$63.742.0
$75,067.3
$112.124.9
$21.287.9
$66,615.2
$e,iau
$12.180.0
$43,994.6
$53S,IHUO
S14.UH.9
$3.365.1
$2,291.6
$97,479.9
$36,944.4
58.5214
$21.049.6
$41,994.3
$1.02,5.832.0
$1,251,583.0
$19.895.1
$69,1)05.1
$38.050.7
$2.5.315.0
$44,227.0
$3,495.586.0
$3,692,179.0
58,200,000.0
$a,200,l»O.Q
ns
20.S
19.2
isa"
18.0
81.0
161.1
325.0
60.5
323.9
498.2
i3.3
286.5
13.5
ISA
1&4.6
VM.9
54.5
14.2
aj
147.2
170.6
25.6
20.0
69.9
1,827.1
2^37.4
69.3
162.1
119.7
97.7
114.2
1.363.S
1,926.8
15,196.4
322.4
15,520.8
P«Y($K)
$3.566.9
$3.25S.O
52.180.4
$2.738.2
$10.838.0
$23,771.0
$30.832.3
$8,052.3
$53.452.6
575.535.5
$6.i50.3
$42.096.6
$3.294.5
$2.993.1
$31.560.5
$254268.0
$9,105.7
$2.108.2
$1.312.1
$23.402.1
$27.161.3
$4.054.6
$3.520.5
$11.617.6
$262.994.0
$345,276.0
$10.813.1
$25.955.1
$18.077.0
$15.571.7
$18.681.1
$188.367.0
$277,465.0
$2,244,496.0
$2^44,436.0
n 2015 President's Budget
Non-Pay ($K) Total |$K)
$2,843.4 $6,430.3
$302.4 $3.560.4
$922.3 53,102.6
$2,205.4 $4.943.5
$97,8740 $106,712.0
$104,223.0 $127,994.0
$61,7610 $92,593.3
$61.424,0 $69,476.3
$32,283.0 $85,735.6
$47,43flO $122,965.5
$13,981.0 $20,431.3
$34,135.0 $76.291.8
$3,395.0 $6,669.5
$12,5170 $15.510.1
$15,999.0 $47.559.5
$282,985.0 $537,253.0
$6,025.4 $15.131.0
$902.1 53,010.3
$1.131.4 52.443.5
$74,7843 $96,166.4
$15,793.3 $42,954.6
52,512.1 $6.566.7
$17,4603 $20.960.8
$45,1461 $56,765.7
5818,153.0 51,081,147.0
$981,910.0 $1^27,186.0
$8,519.5 $19,332.7
$33,417.7 $59,372.8
$20,756.6 $38,835.6
$16,465.8 $32,037.4
$29,789.4 $48,470.5
$2.734.707.0 52.923,074.0
$2,643,658.0 $3,121,123.0
$5,650,524.0 $7,895,020.0
(55.000.0; 155.000.01
$5,&45r524.fl
$7,890,020.0
Frt
21.9
19.2
15.0
16.0
76.5
159J
330.7
59.6
327.3
496.1
40.1
281.6
12.5
21.1
185.7
1,754.9
54.0
isT
8.3
147.2
167.6
25.6
22.6
70.9
1,827.2
2,337.0
66.6
167.6
114.5
S9.1
114.6
1,342.4
1.905J
15,000.0
3246
15,324.6
1023
-------
Attorney Fee and Cost Payments Obligated in FY 2013 under Equal Access for Justice Act (EAJA)
as a Result of Defensive Environmental Litigations under Environmental Statutes15
Date of
Final fee
agreement
or court
disposition
10/10/2012
10/12/2012
11/1/2012
11/19/2012
11/29/2012
Case Name
Conservation Law
Foundation v.
EPA, et al.
Sierra Club v. EPA
Sierra Club, et al.
v. EPA
Sierra Club v. EPA
Miccosukee Tribe
of Indians, etal. v.
EPA
Court
D.Me.
D.D.C.
N.D.
Cal.
D.D.C.
S.D.
Fla.
Case
Number
12-cv-
00176
12-cv-
00013
10-cv-
04060
11-cv-
02000
04-cv-
21448
Judge
George
Singal
Richard
Roberts
Charles
Breyer
Rosemary
Collyer
Alan Gold
Case
Dispositio
n
Dismissed
following
settlement
Dismissed
following
settlement
Dismissed
following
settlement
Case
settled
EPA lost
merits,
fees
litigated
Amount of
Fees and/or
Costs Paid
$7,000.00
$8,900.00
$27,300.00
$12,000.00
$244,650.15
Source of
Funds
Judgment Fund
Judgment Fund
Judgment Fund
Judgment Fund
EPA
Appropriations
Was
amount
negotiated
or court
ordered?
Negotiated
in context of
a settlement
agreement
Negotiated
in context of
a consent
decree
Negotiated
in context of
a settlement
agreement
Negotiated
in context of
a consent
decree
Court
ordered after
litigation of
fees
Recipients
Conservation
Law
Foundation
Sierra Club
Sierra Club &
Wildearth
Guardians
Robert
Ukeiley and
co-counsel,
representing
Sierra Club
Friends of the
Everglades
(John Childe,
David Reiner)
Nature of Case
Water quality
standards in Maine
State action plan for
the Charlotte-
Gastonia Rock Hill
(NC-SC) 1997 8-hour
ozone nonattainment
area
Implementation Plans
for the 19978-hour
ozoneNAAQSinlS
states
State action plans for
areas of Georgia,
Alabama and
Tennessee and
Georgia ozone
Underlying case was
regarding Water
Quality Standards in
Florida; fees were
litigated as well.
' The FY 2012 report to Congress only included cases paid from EPA's appropriations. This report includes cases paid for by the Judgment Fund.
1024
-------
Date of
Final fee
agreement
or court
disposition
12/10/2012
1/29/2013
3/4/2013
4/30/2013
Case Name
Wisconsin Builders
Association, et al.
v. EPA
Center for
Biological
Diversity, et al. v.
EPA
Sierra Club v. EPA
Sierra Club v. EPA
Court
7th
Cir.
N.D.
Cal.
D.D.C.
D.D.C.
Case
Number
09-cv-
1327
11-cv-
6059
11-cv-
01576
11-cv-
2180
Judge
7th Circuit
panel
(Mannion,
Kanne, and
Wood)
Yvonne
Gonzalez
Rogers
Reggie
Walton
Reggie
Walton
Case
Dispositio
n
Held in
Abeyance
Case
settled
Dismissed
Case
settled
Amount of
Fees and/or
Costs Paid
$169,250.00
$90,000.00
$15,583.71
$14,000.00
Source of
Funds
Judgment Fund
Judgment Fund
Judgment Fund
Judgment Fund
Was
amount
negotiated
or court
ordered?
Negotiated
in context of
a settlement
agreement
Negotiated
in context of
a consent
decree
Court
ordered after
litigation of
fees
Negotiated
in context of
a consent
decree
Recipients
National
Association
of
Homebuilders
($93,000) and
Utility Water
Act Group
($76,250)
Greenpeace,
Port
Townsend
Airwatchers
and Center for
Biological
Development
Law Office of
Robert
Ukeiley
Robert
Ukeiley,
P.S.C.
Nature of Case
Construction and
Development
Effluent Limitations
Guidelines
New source
performance
standards for new
and modified kraft
pulp mills
Petition regarding
computer models to
estimate
concentrations of
ozone and PM2. 5
pollution for ambient
air
State implementation
plans from New
Jersey, New York,
Massachusetts,
Connecticut,
Pennsylvania,
Virginia, West
Virginia, Maryland
and Delaware
1025
-------
Date of
Final fee
agreement
or court
disposition
5/31/2013
5/31/2013
6/7/2013
8/12/2013
9/23/2013
Case Name
Center for
Biological
Diversity v. EPA,
etal.
Center for
Biological
Diversity, et al. v.
EPA, et al.
Sierra Club v. EPA
Center for
Biological
Diversity, et al. v.
EPA
Clean Air Council
v. EPA
Court
N.D.
Cal.
N.D.
Cal.
D.D.C.
N.D.
Cal.
D.D.C.
Case
Number
12-cv-
1920
12-cv-
01920
08-cv-
00424
12-cv-
4968
12-cv-
707
Judge
William
Alsup
William
Alsup
Richard
Roberts
Jon Tigar
Richard
Roberts
Case
Dispositio
n
Dismissed
following
settlement
Dismissed
following
settlement
Case
settled
Case
settled
Case
settled
Amount of
Fees and/or
Costs Paid
$6,500.00
$6,500.00
$63,000.00
$13,317.50
$5,500.00
Source of
Funds
Judgment Fund
Judgment Fund
Judgment Fund
Judgment Fund
Judgment Fund
Was
amount
negotiated
or court
ordered?
Negotiated
in context of
a settlement
agreement
Negotiated
in context of
a settlement
agreement
Negotiated
in context of
a consent
decree
Negotiated
in context of
a consent
decree
Negotiated
in context of
a consent
decree
Recipients
Center for
Biological
Diversity
Center for
Biological
Diversity
Sierra Club
(represented
by
Earthjustice)
Robert
Ukeiley,
P.S.C.
Clean Air
Council
Nature of Case
Listing of products
on NCP Product
Schedule and
Endangered Species
Act
Use of dispersants
Emission standards
for the major source
brick and structural
clay ceramics source
categories.
State implementation
plans for various
states for the 2008
Lead NAAQS
Implementation plans
for the Liberty-
Clairtonl997PM2.5
NAAQS
nonattainment area
1026
-------
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.
PY 2013
(Actual)
5
0
5
$131,690
$24,546
5
0
CY2014
(Estimates)
6
0
6
$137,661
$23,486
6
0
BY 2015*
(Estimates)
6
0
6
$137,661
$23,486
6
0
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 $29,214.
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.
1027
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2015 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Appendix B
Overview of EPA's FY 2013 Annual Performance Report 1032
EPA's FY 2013 Annual Performance Report 1032
Key Areas of Focus for FY 2013 Performance Management 1034
Program Evaluations 1035
Selected FY 2013 Performance Results 1039
STRATEGIC GOAL 1: 1040
TAKING ACTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY 1040
Goal 1 Overview 1042
EPA Contributing Programs 1044
FY 2013 PERFORMANCE ACCOMPLISHMENTS 1045
FY 2012-2013 Agency Priority Goal (APG): Reduce GHG emissions from cars and trucks
1046
Encouraging States to Take Delegation of Permitting Large Sources of GHGs 1046
FY 2013 Performance Challenges 1048
FY 2013 Performance Challenges 1053
FY 2013 PERFORMANCE ACCOMPLISHMENTS 1054
Reducing Consumption of HCFCs 1055
FY 2013 Performance Challenges 1055
Developing Flexible and Specific Solutions 1055
FY 2013 Performance Accomplishments 1056
FY 2013 Performance Challenges 1057
STRATEGIC GOAL 2: 1058
PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS 1058
GOAL 2 OVERVIEW 1060
EPA Contributing Programs 1061
FY 2013 Performance Accomplishments 1062
FY 2013 Performance Challenges 1065
FY 2013 Performance Accomplishments 1067
FY 2013 Performance Challenges 1070
FY 2013 Performance Accomplishments 1076
Brownfield Properties Assessed 1076
1028
-------
Brownfield Properties Cleaned Up 1077
FY 2013 Performance Accomplishments 1079
FY 2013 Performance Accomplishments 1082
FY 2013 Performance Accomplishments 1087
Implementing Federal Regulatory Environmental Programs in Indian Country 1087
Obtaining Treatment in a Manner Similar to a State (TAS) Status 1088
STRATEGIC GOAL 4: 1090
ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND POLLUTION PREVENTION 1090
Goal 4 Overview 1092
EPA Contributing Programs 1093
FY 2013 Performance Accomplishments 1095
TSCA Work Plan Chemical Risk Assessments 1095
CBI Review Program 1095
Pesticide Registration Reviews 1096
Reduction of Children's Exposure to Rodenticides 1097
FY 2013 Performance Challenges 1097
Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting Certified Firms 1097
Implementation of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) During Registration Review 1098
The Endocrine Disrupter Screening Program (EDSP) 1098
FY 2013 Performance Accomplishments 1101
Presidential Green Chemistry Challenge Awards 1101
Energy, Economy, Environment (E3) and Green Suppliers Network (GSN) Programs. 1101
Design for the Environment (DfE) Safer Products Labeling Program and Safer Chemicals
Ingredients List 1101
Goal 5 Overview 1105
FY 2013 Performance Accomplishments 1108
FY 2012-2013 Agency Priority Goal: Increase transparency and reduce burden through E-
reporting 1108
Level of Effort Measures and Reducing, Treating, and Eliminating Pollutants 1109
Results from Enforcement Cases 1112
Environmental Impact Statements 1113
Federal Facilities Enforcement 1113
Superfund Enforcement 1114
Increasing Transparency 1116
Advancing Environmental Justice 1116
1029
-------
Electronic Reporting 1116
STRATEGY 2: WORKING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND CHILDREN' s HEALTH 1121
1030
-------
1031
-------
OVERVIEW OF
EPA's FY 2013 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT
(Appendix B of EPA's FY 2015 Congressional Justification)
1032
-------
INTRODUCTION
EPA's FY 2013 Annual Performance Report (APR) is integrated throughout EPA's FY 2015
Annual Performance Plan and the Congressional Justification. It presents environmental and
program performance results achieved in FY 2013 under the strategic goals and objectives
established in the Agency's FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan and against the performance measures
and targets established in the Agency's FY 2013 Annual Performance Plan and the
Congressional Justification. The APR also describes progress towards the cross-cutting
fundamental strategies established in the FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan and associated FY 2013
Action Plans.
In addition to this Overview, EPA's FY 2013 performance results are incorporated in the sections
of the FY 2015 Annual Performance Plan and the Congressional Justification described below:
• The "Introduction and Overview" section presents EPA's mission statement and
organizational structure.
• The "Goal and Objective Overview" section includes FY 2013 performance results where
helpful to support discussion of future directions.
• Appropriation Program/Project Fact Sheets include FY 2013 performance results and
trend data to provide context for budget decisions.
• The "Program Performance and Assessment" section presents a detailed, 8-year table of
performance data—displayed by strategic goal and objective—which provides results for
each measure established in the Agency's FY 2013 Annual Performance Plan and
includes explanations for missed or exceeded targets.1
r-M-, 9
• The "Overview of FY 2013 Program Performance" summary is provided in this section.
FY 2013 was a transition year, as the Agency continued to implement its FY 2011-2015
Strategic Plan and began to develop its new FY 2014-2018 Strategic Plan. FY 2014 will be
EPA's first year implementing its FY 2014-2018 Strategic Plan, and accordingly the Agency has
structured its FY 2015 Annual Performance Plan and the Congressional Justification, including
the eight-year performance tables provided in the Program Performance and Assessment section,
to reflect the new strategic plan architecture. As noted above, however, this Overview presents
FY 2013 performance results against the FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan architecture and describes
progress towards those strategic goals and objectives.
EPA's FY 2013 APR results information complies with requirements of the Government
Performance and Results Modernization Act of 2010 and Office of Management and Budget
implementing guidance. In addition to the FY 2013 APR, please refer to EPA's FY 2013 Agency
Financial Report (APR), which includes FY 2013 performance highlights, and the web-based FY
2013 Highlights, which presents key financial and performance information from both the APR
and APR and provides links to additional information.
1 The 8-year performance data tables—which include FY 2013 results—are structured to reflect the newFr 2014-2018 Strategic
Plan architecture.
2 This "Overview of FY 2013 Program Performance" appendix discusses progress toward the goals and objectives as established
under the FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan.
1033
-------
Performance Management in FY 2013
EPA's Strategic Plan establishes long-term strategic goals, supporting objectives, and strategic
measures. To promote achievement of its goals and objectives, EPA also establishes a suite of
annual performance measures in its Annual Performance Plan and Budget. The Agency reports
its results against these annual performance measures and discusses progress toward longer-term
objectives and measures in its APR. EPA strives to assess and communicate performance results
as the basis for formulating and justifying its resource requests. In February 2010, EPA began
incorporating its APR with its Annual Performance Plan and the Congressional Justification to
strengthen the integration of performance and budget.
EPA's Performance Management System
Strategic Planning
• Strategic Plan
• Futures
Results Measurement, Reporting,
and Evaluation (Accountability)
• FY 2012 Annual Performance Report/Highlights
• FY 2013 Agency Financial Report
• Program Evaluation
• Cross-Cutting Fundamental Strategy Annual
Progress Reports
• Management Integrity and Audit Management
Annual Planning
and Budgeting
1 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
Key Areas of Focus for FY 2013 Performance Management
Development of the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan: In FY 2013 EPA initiated development
of its FY 2014-2018 Strategic Plan to set the Agency's direction over the next four years and
advance the Administrator's seven themes and Agency mission results. EPA expects to issue its
new Strategic Plan in 2014.
Agency Performance Reviews: EPA's Deputy Administrator met with senior leadership quarterly
to discuss progress on the Agency Priority Goals (APGs) and twice a year (mid-year and end-of-
year) to discuss progress toward the five goals and five cross-cutting fundamental strategies
established in the Agency's FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan. EPA senior management discussed
progress and challenges in achieving FY 2013 performance results, and considered this
1034
-------
information in developing the FY 2014-2018 Strategic Plan, the FY 2014-2015 APGs, and the
Agency's FY 2015 budget.
Agency Priority Goals: In FY 2013, EPA completed implementation of FY 2012-2013 Action
Plans for each of its five APGs and documented progress toward the Cross-Agency Priority Goal
for Cybersecurity. EPA reported progress under each Action Plan on
http://www.performance.gov and discusses end-of-year progress for these APGs in this FY 2013
APR. During FY 2013, the Agency also drafted FY 2014-2015 APGs as it developed its FY
2014-2018 Draft Strategic Plan. Final FY 2014-2015 APGs are identified in the FY 2015
budget and in the FY 2014-2018 Strategic Plan.
Streamlined Performance Reporting: The Agency will issue its second web-based Financial and
Performance Highlights in February 2013. Internally, the Agency continued to rely on the
Performance Dashboard for access to performance information to support day-to-day program
management. Agency managers view trend data on the results of their programs (as well as
progress of other programs and regions), determine whether they are meeting their annual
targets, and communicate results at mid-year and end-of-year performance reviews. EPA also
continued to work with the Office of Management and Budget to make performance information
easily accessible to the public through http://www.performance.gov.
Enhanced Stewardship: To strengthen stewardship for managing programs and resources
effectively and efficiently, EPA piloted new comprehensive Management Accountability
Reviews in selected program and regional offices. These reviews combined previously separate
reviews in a single visit, improving efficiency and focusing attention on the Agency's
responsibilities for audit management and implementation of the Federal Managers' Financial
Integrity Act. Based on the results of the pilot, EPA will continue to conduct these streamlined
reviews, helping to ensure that EPA programs and activities are managed to prevent waste, fraud,
and abuse.
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 benefit for human health and the environment, provide the
roadmap needed to replicate successes, and identify areas needing improvement. This is
particularly important during these challenging fiscal times and for fostering transparency and
accountability. Summaries of program evaluations completed during FY 2013 are available at
http://www.epa.gov/planandbudget/results.html.
1035
-------
^to sr/,^ THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
*
WASHINGTON D.C. £04-60
Reliability oftbe U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Performance Data
Data used to report performance results arc reliable and as complete as possible. Because
improvements in human health and the environment may not become immediately apparent,
there might be delays between the actions we have taken and results we can measure.
Additionally, we cannot provide results data for several of our performance measures for Ihis
reporting year. When possible, however, we have portrayed trend data to illustrate progress over
time. We also report final performance results for prior years that became available in FY 2013.
wvtfttfc^
McCarthy
MAR - 6 2DH
Gina McCarthy Dale
Administrator
This papsr is printed wild vegelable-oil-based inks and is 100-percent postconsumer racvdsd malarial, nhlorlne-ftee-orocessed and recvclaole.
1036
-------
EPA's FY 2013 Performance Results
(Total measures = 196)
Summary of FY 2013 Performance Results
In its FY 2013 Annual Performance Plan and the
Congressional Justification, EPA committed to 196
annual performance measures/targets. These
performance measures/targets and EPA's results are
presented in the 8-year table included in the
"Program Performance and Assessment" section of
the FY 2015 Congressional Justification. The 8-year
table also provides explanations for missed and
significantly exceeded targets and describes the
Agency's plans to meet these performance measures
in the future. EPA reviews annual results in terms of
long-term performance, and will carefully consider
its FY 2013 results and adjust its program strategies
and approaches accordingly.
As of February 28, 2014, data are available for 158
of these annual budget performance measures/targets. The Agency met 110 of its FY 2013
performance measures, 70 percent of the performance measures for which data were available.
EPA significantly exceeded targets for several of its FY 2013 performance measures. In some
cases, a new collaborative effort or a new approach allowed EPA to accomplish more than it had
planned. Following are some examples of these measures that illustrate EPA's FY 2013 progress
toward its longer-term strategic goals and objectives:
• Goal 1: EPA proposed Tier 3 Motor Vehicle Emissions and Fuel Standards for cars and
gasoline that will help avoid up to 2,400 premature deaths per year and 23,000 cases of
respiratory ailments in children. The proposal will reduce emissions of harmful
pollutants, including smog-forming volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides, by
80 percent; establish a 70 percent tighter particulate matter standard; and reduce fuel
vapor emissions to near zero. The proposal will also reduce vehicle emissions of toxic air
pollutants, such as benzene and 1,3-butadiene, by up to 40 percent and reduce gasoline
sulfur levels by more than 60 percent—down to 10 parts per million in 2017.
• Goal 2: EPA signed the final 2013 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) Vessel General Permit for another five years. This permit will cover 700,000
vessels, ensuring that vessels do not introduce invasive species to U.S. waters and
reducing the toxicity level and volume of pollutant discharge (e.g., oils) to the nation's
waterways.
• Goal 3: To respond to Hurricane Sandy, EPA quickly activated Emergency Operation
Centers and assessed 105 Superfund removals and 142 long-term remedial sites in the
storm's path to determine what damage Hurricane Sandy may have caused; supplemental
funds were provided for response actions at four Superfund sites. EPA also supported
debris management and recovery operations and partnered closely with the Federal
1037
-------
Emergency Management Agency and the states of New York and New Jersey to
investigate more than 1,000 underground storage tanks for potential damage.
• Goal 4: EPA met its accelerated FY 2013 target for reviewing, and where appropriate
challenging and declassifying, confidential business information (CBI) claims under the
Toxic Substances Control Act. Seventy-eight percent of the 22,483 existing CBI cases
have been addressed, positioning EPA to complete this effort by the end of FY 2014, a
year ahead of schedule.
• Goal 5: EPA is pursuing justice for Gulf Coast residents through Deepwater Horizon
cases. Transocean Deepwater Inc. has agreed to pay a total of $1.4 billion in civil
penalties, criminal fines and court-ordered environmental projects for violating the Clean
Water Act, as well as substantial injunctive relief to improve the safety of oil drilling
practices, spill response and preparedness. BP Exploration and Production Inc. was
sentenced to pay a total of $4 billion in criminal fines and court-ordered environmental
projects.
Despite its best efforts, the Agency missed 49 of its FY 2013 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 on project plans due to weather,
technological challenges, or population growth and land-use patterns.
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 37 of its 196 performance measures. Often environmental
results do not become apparent within a fiscal year, and assessment is a longer term effort
requiring information over time.
Data lags may also result when reporting cycles do not correspond with the federal fiscal year on
which this report is based. For example, data reported biennially are not available for this report,
though they will be available in the Agency's FY 2014 and FY 2015 APRs.
Extensive quality assurance/quality control processes can also delay the reporting of
performance data. 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 cannot obtain
complete end-of-year information from all sources in time for this report, additional FY 2013
results will be available in the Agency's FY 2014 APR, which will be included in the FY 2016
Annual Performance Plan and the "Program Performance and Assessment" section of the
CongressionalJustification published in 2015.
Previous Fiscal Year Data Now Available
EPA can now report data from FY 2012 that became available in FY 2013. In summary, final
performance results became available for 31 of the 50 FY 2012 performance measures (out of a
1038
-------
total of 211 FY 2012 performance measures) for which data were unavailable at the end of FY
2012. Of these 31 performance measures, EPA met 25 and did not meet 6. Data remain
unavailable for 7 measures; 8 measures were retroactively deleted in agreement with the Office
of Management and Budget,3 and the Agency will not collect data for 4 measures.4
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) Data
EPA continues to track performance for ARRA-funded projects and assess the environmental and
economic benefits to communities across the country. Since the end of FY 2009, EPA has
tracked program performance for six key ARRA-funded environmental programs, which 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 1,672 clean water projects and 1,240 drinking water projects.
• Retrofitted, replaced, or retired 30,900 diesel engines.
• Made 1,566 acres of brownfields properties ready for reuse.
• Completed cleanup at 2,448 leaking underground storage tanks.
• Completed 38 remedial action projects, advancing the cleanup of 31 Superfund sites.
EPA's quarterly ARRA performance reports, along with more information on each of the
programs, are available at http://www.epa.gov/recovery/plans.html.
Selected FY 2013 Performance Results
This Overview highlights selected performance accomplishments and challenges under each of
the five strategic goals and five cross-cutting fundamental strategies established in EPA's FY
2011-2015 Strategic Plan. For each of the five strategic goals, this section discusses the key
programs or offices that contribute to the goal and selected results for each strategic objective,
including results achieved for FY 2012-2013 APGs, as relevant. For each of EPA's five cross-
cutting fundamental strategies, this section highlights progress and challenges in completing
activities identified in FY 2013 action plans.
' Goal 1-4 measures deleted; Goal 2-2 measures deleted; Goal 4-2 measures deleted
4 Goal 1-1 measure; Goal 2-2 measures; Goal 3-1 measure
1039
-------
STRATEGIC GOAL 1:
TAKING ACTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE
AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
1040
-------
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 2013 Performance Measures
Met: 12 Not Met: 0 Data Unavailable: 20 {Total Measures: 32)
FY2013
Ensuring Che Safety of Chemicals
and Preventing Pollution
$706 979 7 Protecting America's Waters
$1,066,455.9
Enforcing Environmental Laws
$787,904.9
Taking Action
on Climate Change
and Improving Air Quality
$1,015,482.8
Cleaning Up Communities and
Advancing Sustainable Development
$3,181,168.0
25
20
IS
10
5
0
25
20
15
10
5
0
Met
Not Met
Data available after
February 28,2014
Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 Objective 4
FV2012
Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 Objective 4
Strategic Objective
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 ecosystems become more resilient to the effects of climate
change.
Objective 1.2: Improve Air Quality- Achieve and maintain health-based air
pollution standards and reduce risk from toxic air pollutants and indoor air
contaminants.
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.
Objective 1.4; Reduce Unnecessary Exposure to Radiation. Iv^nimize
unnecessary releases of radiation and be prepared to minimize impacts should
unwanted releases occur.
Goal 1 Total
FY 2013 Obligations
(in thousands)
$200,609.2
$757,045.7
$17,389.3
$40,438.6
$1,015,482.8
% of Goal 1 Funds
20%
75%
2%
A%
100%
Due to rounding, some numbers might add up to slightly less or more than 100%.
-------
GOAL 1 OVERVIEW
EPA manages climate change, indoor and outdoor air quality, stratospheric ozone, and radiation
programs, each of which plays a vital role in protecting human health and the environment.
Through these programs, the Agency and its partners have made substantial progress in
improving air quality and continue to take steps to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
Between 1980 and 2012, gross domestic product increased 133 percent, vehicle miles traveled
increased 92 percent, energy consumption increased 27 percent, and US population grew 38
percent. During the same period, total emissions of the six criteria air pollutants dropped 67
percent. While substantial progress has been made, much work still remains.
EPA's FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan establishes four strategic objectives under Goal 1: address
climate change, improve air quality, restore the ozone layer, and reduce unnecessary exposure to
radiation. EPA is on track to meet its long-term targets for its strategic measures based on steady
and continued progress made over the last several years. The FY 2013 annual performance
measures and results presented in the eight-year table included in the "Program Performance
Assessment" section of the FY 2015 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification,
along with the illustrative activities and examples that follow four strategic objective sections,
indicates that the Agency is making significant progress toward its long-term goal to take action
on climate change and improve air quality.
As an example of EPA's continued progress, this year the Agency strengthened the nation's air
quality standards for fine particle pollution to improve public health. This will add to significant
pollution reductions that have already occurred. The most recent data from 2012 show a 26
percent reduction in population-weighted ambient concentrations of fine particle emissions in
monitored counties across the nation since 2003. Despite progress under the Clean Air Act, 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. While outdoor
air is a key concern, the nexus with indoor air is critically important and EPA continues to
emphasize reducing risks from indoor air from a variety of indoor environmental pollutants and
sources of pollution, including radon, mold and moisture, secondhand smoke, environmental
asthma triggers, and indoor wood smoke.
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 an
Agency Priority Goal, EPA, in partnership with the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, implements groundbreaking standards that will increase fuel economy and
reduce GHGs emissions from cars and trucks in half by the year 2025. Meanwhile, voluntary
programs have made progress in raising awareness of climate change and in reducing energy
consumption which, in turn, has helped curb additional emissions of GHGs. The climate
continues to change, however, posing serious concerns for public health and the environment. To
this end, the Agency must adjust its programs to take into account warmer temperatures, rising
sea levels, and other changing weather patterns. One example of progress in this area is the
Agency's release of its draft Climate Change Adaptation Plan and 17 Program and Regional
Adaptation Implementation Plans for public comment. In these draft plans, EPA's Program and
1042
-------
Regional offices describe how each will address the impacts of climate change on its mission,
operations, and programs.
1043
-------
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
1044
-------
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 partnership and regulatory programs to reduce GHGs that contribute to the
warming of the planet's climate. Businesses and other organizations have partnered with EPA
through its climate protection programs to pursue common sense approaches to reducing GHGs.
To complement its partnership programs, EPA has pursued regulatory action to curb emissions
from mobile and stationary sources. EPA's strategies to address climate change reflect the
President's call to action in his Climate Action Plan (June 2013).
FY 2013 PERFORMANCE ACCOMPLISHMENTS
EPA continues to take make progress towards this objective, but the threats posed by a changing
climate grow each year. In 2013, EPA continued reducing GHG emissions and promoting a clean
energy economy through common-sense regulatory initiatives, including proposing a Clean Air
Act standard for carbon pollution from new power plants. The standard reflects the President's
Climate Action Plan and the trend to build cleaner plants that take advantage of American-made
technologies, including clean-burning, efficient natural gas.
In 2013, EPA continued work with state _. _ _
, , , 4 , , REGULATING GREENHOUSE GASES UNDER A
and local agencies to permit large PLANT WIDE APPLICABILITY LIMIT
industrial sources of GHG emissions. m support of the Agency,g efforts fo addresg
States continue to accept delegation of power plant carbon ponutlon under the aean Air
GHG permitting responsibilities and to Act, EPA Region 3 issued the first-ever Clean
issue permits in a timely manner. Most Air Act (CAA) permit regulating greenhouse
of the permits issued to date have gases (GHGs) under a plant wide applicability
included work practice standards or limit (PAL) in response to the application
energy efficiency processes to limit submitted by the Architect of the Capitol.. PALs
GHG emissions §iye facilities the flexibility to make changes
without triggering the requirements of a pre-
EPA also continues to build upon its construction permit. Combined with other EPA
, . , , ,, , ^ , . . Al and D.C. permits, the PAL permit will enable the
highly successful partnerships in the ^ ^ m ^ashm^ D c to
buildings, industry, and transportation mgtall mor£ efficient5 lower.emittmg gas.fired
sectors delivering substantial turbines
environmental results and economic
benefits. For example, EPA launched an
upgrade to its widely used ENERGY
STAR Portfolio Manager® tool, an online energy management and tracking tool for commercial
buildings. More than 70,000 account holders—such as school districts, retail chains, hospital
systems, and local governments—currently use Portfolio Manager to measure the energy
performance, utility costs, and GHG emissions of more than 300,000 buildings nationwide. This
upgrade delivers a more user-friendly design, better reporting, and other enhancements to users
of the tool.
1045
-------
Finally, EPA made the second year of GHG Reporting Program data available to the public
through its interactive Data Publication Tool. The tool provides 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.
FY 2012-2013 Agency Priority Goal (APG): Reduce GHG emissions from cars and trucks
Through September 30, 2013, EPA in coordination with the 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
In FY 2013, EPA achieved its annual performance targets focusing on implementing the 2012-
2018 vehicle GHG standards (light-duty rules 2012-2016 and heavy-duty rules 2014-2018). This
involved certifying new vehicles as meeting the standards, receiving and reviewing
manufacturers' final GHG reports to ensure that manufacturers meet their vehicle fleet
requirements, and ensuring that the certified GHG results are achieved under actual in-use
operation. As of September 30, 2013, EPA issued a total of 639 certificates for both light-duty
and heavy-duty vehicles, and conducted a total of 144 confirmatory tests and 20 surveillance
tests of both light-duty and heavy-duty vehicles at the Ann Arbor Laboratory test track.
Encouraging States to Take Delegation of Permitting Large Sources of GHGs
GHG emissions from the largest stationary sources are
now covered by the Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) and Title V Operating Permit
Programs. State and local permitting authorities have
long-standing experience working with owners and
operators of industrial facilities, and they are well
positioned to issue Clean Air Act permits to sources of
GHG emissions.
EPA has had significant success working with states to
develop their plans to accept delegation of the permitting
program for large sources of GHG emissions. As of
September 30, 2013, 76 state and local permitting
agencies have authority to issue GHG permits. These
permitting programs are applying proven, successful air
quality control implementation strategies to GHG
emission permitting. Most of the permits issued to date
have also included work practice standards or energy
efficiency processes to limit GHG emissions.
There are still several states where the permitting
authority issues preconstruction permits (referred to as
PSD or New Source Review permits) for other
GREENHOUSE GAS
PERMITTING
Region 6 implemented EPA's
largest greenhouse gas (GHG)
permitting program, reflecting
more than 80 percent of EPA's
GHG permitting workload. The
Region received 76 GHG pre-
construction permit
applications and issued 20
permits; six more were at
public notice or pending final
issuance. Concurrently, Region
6 and the Arkansas Department
of Environmental Quality
worked together to develop a
state program to replace the
federal GHG permitting
program, thereby eliminating
the need for businesses to seek
air permits from two separate
regulatory agencies.
1046
-------
pollutants but has not received approval to issue permits with regard to GHGs. Many local
permitting authorities in California and other U.S. territories have not yet requested approval to
issue PSD permits or received delegation from EPA. EPA will continue to work with states and
localities to establish their own GHG permitting programs.
GHG Reductions in the Transportation Sector
In 2013, EPA's SmartWay program
continued its multiyear effort to enhance,
automate, and improve the efficiency of data
management and partner service processes.
Beginning in 2012, SmartWay has enhanced
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.
Million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTCO2e) of
greenhouse gas reductions in the transportation sector.
Performance Trend Data
15.41"
- • I
|J3,U
I
FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15
Collectively, SmartWay partners have reduced 28 MMTCC^E (see graph above), 478 thousand
tons of NOX, and 22 thousand tons of 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. A relatively small federal investment has brought significant
change to this sector.
GHG Reductions in the Buildings and Industry Sector
EPA continued to implement more than 15 climate change programs that work with the private
sector to reduce GHGs and facilitate energy-efficiency improvements. Data available in FY 2013
show that EPA exceeded its target by helping the business and industry sectors avoid 600
MMTCO2E. The Agency met part of this goal through the more than 100,000 ENERGY STAR
certified new homes—representing 16 percent of new home starts. More than 20,000 commercial
buildings earned the ENERGY STAR label in 2012, with the energy use of more than 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 2012 alone.
Release of EPA's Updated Base Case Integrated Planning Model (IPM) v.5.13 Platform
In November 2013, EPA released its updated model documentation, input and output files, and
associated databases for its power sector model IPM Base Case v.5.13, to increase public
understanding and participation in the development of the modeling platform EPA intends to use
for future regulatory actions.
1047
-------
Completing this IPM upgrade and the first-ever public platform roll-out, independent of a
proposed regulation, establishes a solid, transparent foundation for implementation of the
President's Climate Action Plan. EPA's IPM Base Case v.5.13 provides state-by-state
projections of CO 2 levels and reflects the Agency's understanding of the current composition
and activity of the power sector in each state. This IPM model platform incorporates the Energy
Information Administration's Annual Energy Outlook 2013 and rules that are "on the books"
(CAIR, MATS, state rules, etc.), but does not include actions that have not been finalized.
FY 2013 Performance Challenges
Certificate Workload
Over the last decade, regulatory activities have created new national standards for engines and
fuels that promise very significant public health benefits. These new standards, however, have
dramatically increased the number and complexity of certificates and other approvals EPA must
issue before engines, vehicles, or fuels can be sold in the United States.
EPA has taken a number of actions to address a significantly larger implementation workload in
order to assure that the benefits of new standards are fully realized. EPA is continuing to invest
in IT systems that centralize its emission-related, fuel economy, and fuel data for all
transportation and other mobile source industries. Additionally, EPA has developed training
videos, webinars, and presentations and has held compliance workshops to educate engine and
vehicle manufacturers and fuel producers on regulatory requirements, reducing the burden on
staff to provide manufacturer assistance. EPA has also shifted some staff to align skills with
priorities to address this challenge.
1048
-------
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 clean air programs, including those addressing indoor air and outdoor air (six common
criteria pollutants, plus 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 contribute to 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 every
year. EPA helps reduce the risk of indoor air pollution 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 2013 PERFORMANCE ACCOMPLISHMENTS
EPA is on track to meet its strategic targets supporting this objective. Between 1980 and 2012,
gross domestic product increased 133 percent, vehicle miles traveled increased 92 percent,
energy consumption increased 27 percent, and U.S. population grew by 38 percent. During the
same time period, total emissions of the six principal air pollutants dropped by 67 percent.
Despite significant progress in improving air quality, approximately 142 million people
nationwide lived in counties with pollution levels above the primary National Ambient Air
Quality Standard (NAAQS) in 2012 and emissions of air pollutants continue to play an important
role in a number of air quality issues.
In recent years, EPA has dramatically improved America's air quality by designing and
developing national programs that, when fully implemented, will achieve significant reductions
in air emissions. These actions include setting health-based ambient air quality standards
developed using the best available scientific research, setting fuel economy standards that will
improve air quality and save money at the gas pump, engaging communities to address indoor air
risks, and developing regulations that will reduce industrial emissions of harmful pollutants such
as mercury.
In 2013, EPA made tremendous progress in advancing long-lasting improvements in air quality
by completing a review of the NAAQS for paniculate matter, developing a proposal to review
the ozone standard, promulgating technology-based standards that will reduce emissions of air
toxics from large industrial sources, and working with federal partners to reduce the risks
associated with asthma and radon.
Finalized Revised National Standard for Particulate Matter (PM)
On December 14, 2012, EPA finalized its revisions to the fine particulate standard (PM2.5),
including soot, setting the annual health standard at 12 micrograms per cubic meter. By 2020,
ninety-nine percent of U.S. counties are projected to meet revised health standard without any
additional actions. It is expected that fewer than 10 counties out of the more than 3,000 counties
in the United States will need to consider any local actions to reduce fine particle pollution in
1049
-------
order to meet the new standard by 2020, as required by the Clean Air Act. The rest can rely on
air quality improvements from federal rules already on the books to meet this new standard.
Cumulative percentage reduction in population-weighted
ambient concentration of fine particulate matter (PM-2.5) in all
monitored counties from 2003 baseline.
Performance Trend Data
30
20
13
L
1
FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15
The Clean Air Act requires EPA to review
its air quality standards every five years to
determine whether the standards should be
revised. The law requires the Agency to
ensure the standards are "requisite to
protect public health with an adequate
margin of safety" and "requisite to protect
the public welfare."
The revised PM standard is based on an
extensive body of scientific evidence that
includes thousands of studies—including
many large studies that show negative
health impacts at lower levels than
previously understood. It also follows extensive consultation with stakeholders including the
public, health organizations, and industry, as well as consideration of more than 230,000 public
comments. Because reductions in fine particle pollution have direct health benefits, including
decreased mortality rates and fewer incidents of heart attacks, strokes, and childhood asthma, the
revised PM2.5 standard has major economic benefits with comparatively low costs. EPA
estimates that health benefits of the revised standard range from $4 billion to over $9 billion per
year, with estimated costs of implementation ranging from $53 million to $350 million.
Tier 3 Motor Vehicle Emissions and Fuel Standards for Cars and Gasoline
In March 2013, EPA proposed Tier 3 Motor Vehicle Emissions and Fuel Standards for cars and
gasoline that will significantly reduce harmful pollution, preventing thousands of premature
deaths and illnesses, while also enabling efficiency improvements in cars and trucks. These
cleaner fuel and vehicle standards are an important component of the administration's national
program for clean cars and trucks, which also include historic fuel efficiency standards that are
saving new vehicle owners at the gas pump today.
If implemented as proposed, the standards would help avoid up to 2,400 premature deaths per
year and 23,000 cases of respiratory ailments in children. The proposal would also slash
emissions of a range of harmful pollutants, including reducing smog-forming VOCs and NOX by
80 percent, establish a 70 percent tighter particulate matter standard, and reduce fuel vapor
emissions to near zero. The proposal would also reduce vehicle emissions of toxic air pollutants,
such as benzene and 1,3-butadiene, by up to 40 percent and reduce gasoline sulfur levels by more
than 60 percent—down to 10 parts per million in 2017.
Final Amendments to Air Toxics Standards for Portland Cement Manufacturing
EPA finalized amendments to its air toxics rules for Portland cement manufacturing on
December 20, 2012. The amendments responded to a federal court decision, petitions for
1050
-------
reconsideration, and technical information received after final rules were issued in 2010. The
amended rule maintains dramatic reductions of mercury, acid gases, PM, and total hydrocarbons
from existing cement kilns across the country, while ensuring that emissions from new kilns
remain low.
The amendments apply to two air emissions rules for the Portland cement industry: air toxics
standards and New Source Performance Standards. The final air toxics rule retains emission
limits for mercury, acid gases, and total hydrocarbons from the 2010 rules, along with retaining
requirements that kilns continuously monitor compliance with limits for mercury, total
hydrocarbons, and PM. The rule is expected to significantly reduce pollution from Portland
cement manufacturing over 2010 levels when fully implemented, cutting emissions of mercury
by 93 percent, hydrochloric acid by 96 percent, PM by 91 percent, and total hydrocarbons by 82
percent.
Sustained Steady Progress in Reducing Power Sector Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) and Nitrogen
Oxides (NOX) Emissions
In 2013, EPA released its latest report summarizing and evaluating progress achieved through
the implementation of both the Acid Rain Program (ARP) and the Clean Air Interstate Rule
(CAIR) Program.
Annual emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) from electric power
generation sources.
Performance Trend Data
10,000.000
8.000.000
? 6.000.000
4.000.000
2,000.000
* &
I
IB
ll I I
1
FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15
FY 2012 data on combined emissions
reductions and compliance results show a
68 percent decrease in annual SC>2
emissions and a 53 percent decrease in
annual NOX emissions from 2005 levels
as well as perfect compliance for all
reporting facilities (see graph to right).
Power plant SO2 and NOX emissions not
only are the primary precursors of acid
rain, but also contribute substantially to
the formation of ground-level ozone and
fine particle pollution. These programs
address the interstate transport of air
pollutants and have figured prominently in the EPA and state strategies to help all areas in the
eastern United States meet and maintain health-based, protective air quality standards.
Radon Risk Reduction
In February 2013, EPA, HUD, DOE, and CEQ unveiled "Advancing Healthy Housing—A
Strategy for Action." The initiative represents a new approach and vision for addressing the
nation's health and economic burdens caused by preventable hazards in homes.
Nine federal agencies led by EPA collaborated to produce the first-ever comprehensive, multi-
agency Federal Radon Action Plan, a key component of the Healthy Housing Strategy to address
radon, the second leading cause of lung cancer in the United States—and the leading cause of
1051
-------
Additional health care professionals trained annually on the
environmental management of asthma triggers.
Performance Trend Data
lung cancer mortality among non-smokers. The first progress report on the Radon Action Plan
was released in 2013 and highlighted the completion of 20 of 31 commitments made by federal
agencies in the Plan. The Plan is driving bottom-line radon risk reduction by mobilizing existing
federal resources and authorities to promote mitigation in existing homes and the construction of
new homes with radon-reducing features.
Childhood Asthma
EPA co-led implementation of the Coordinated Federal Action Plan to Reduce Racial and Ethnic
Asthma Disparities, continued to support training of health care professionals to deliver
guidelines-based asthma care, and launched a new wave of its public service media campaign in
partnership with the Ad Council.
The Coordinated Federal Action Plan to
Reduce Racial and Ethnic Asthma
Disparities includes a strategic focus on
building health care provider capacity to
deliver guidelines-based asthma care that
includes a focus on environmental asthma
trigger management. The Plan also calls
for community capacity-building efforts to
help build sustainable, community-wide
asthma care systems. EPA supports both
of these strategies by delivering provider
training through expert, trusted partner
organizations, in alignment with the
Action Plan and through a public service media campaign designed to educate and equip parents
of children with asthma to avoid environmental exposures that worsen childhood asthma. The
campaign is tailored to reach populations suffering disproportionately from poor asthma health
outcomes, a primary focus of the Federal Action Plan.
Deploying Innovative Air Pollution Measurement
EPA scientists developed, tested, and deployed innovative low-cost technologies for measuring
air pollutants in ambient air and near sources. One example is a prototype solar-powered air
quality measurement system called the "Village Green project" that contains air quality
monitoring sensors and solar panels housed within a park bench. The sensors will enable near-
instantaneous collection and wireless reporting of environmental data, which will be sent to a
public website.
Updating Integrated Science Assessments
The Clean Air Act requires formal evaluation of air quality standards every five years for six
criteria pollutants: ozone, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxides, nitrogen oxides,
and lead. In preparation, EPA researchers compile an Integrated Science Assessment which
reflects the latest scientific knowledge relevant to the public health effects of these six pollutants
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15
1052
-------
and provides the scientific basis for the review of NAAQS. In FY 2013, EPA issued updated
final assessments for both lead and ozone, including analyses of populations at risk.
FY 2013 Performance Challenges
Completing the 2011 National Air Toxics Assessment (NATA)
In FY 2013, EPA continued to work on the NATA 2011 though at a slightly slower pace than
originally planned due to funding constraints. NATA is EPA's ongoing comprehensive
evaluation of air toxics in the United States. The Agency developed the NATA as a state-of-the-
science screening tool for state, local, and tribal agencies to prioritize pollutants, emission
sources, and locations of interest for further study in order to gain a better understanding of the
risk of cancer and other serious health effects from breathing (inhaling) air toxics. EPA is
currently planning to release the results of the 2011 NATA which reflects the 2011 emissions
inventory in early 2015.
1053
-------
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 that reduce and control
ozone-depleting substances (ODS) and facilitate the transition to substitutes that reduce GHG
emissions and save energy.
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. 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.
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. Increased UV levels are associated with other
human and non-human effects, including cataracts, immune suppression, and effects on aquatic
ecosystems and agricultural crops.
FY 2013 PERFORMANCE ACCOMPLISHMENTS
EPA is on track to meet its strategic targets supporting this objective. The Agency ensured
compliance with the Montreal Protocol by restricting U.S. consumption of
hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) through a final rule published in April 2013 that allocated
HCFCs through 2014.
In addition to restricting quantities of ODS to protect the ozone layer, the program, through
several key actions under the Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) Program, expanded
the menu of acceptable, environmentally safer alternatives that consumers and businesses can
choose. These actions include rulemakings and notices that allow for the use of alternatives with
low global warming potential (GWP) in new sectors, such as fire suppression, foams, and
refrigeration.
1054
-------
Reducing Consumption ofHCFCs
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.
Remaining U.S. consumption of hydrochlorofluorocarbons
(HCFCs), chemicals that deplete the Earth's protective ozone
layer, measured In tons of ozone depleting potential (OOP).
10000
8000
£ 6000
g 4000
2000
0
Performance Trend Data
gal!
rf *- n 3.
FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FYU FY15
FY 2013 Performance Challenges
Developing Flexible and Specific Solutions
EPA must ensure that ODS production and imports are capped under the Montreal Protocol. The
EPA continues to implement rules to reduce and control these substances, including a proposed
rule published in December 2013 that (when finalized) will provide HCFC allocations for 2015-
2019.
As the amount of ODS produced continues to decline, demands for flexibility and specific,
tailored solutions to key problems grows. For example, EPA manages ongoing exemption
programs to allow low-quantity continued production of ODS in areas of critical need for
agriculture. EPA is also continuing to review submissions under the SNAP program for
alternatives, many of which can substitute for both ODS and high-GWP HCFCs.
1055
-------
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
radiation-contaminated sites.
FY 2013 Performance Accomplishments
EPA is on track to meet its strategic
objective of maintaining a 90 percent
level of readiness of radiation program
personnel and assets to support federal
radiological emergency response and
recovery operations (see graph to right).
In 2013, EPA reorganized its two
laboratories to improve the alignment of
its radiation emergency response
functions and resources. EPA also made
significant progress in updating older
radiation guidance and regulations to
reflect scientific and technological
advances.
Average time before availability of quality assured ambient
radiation air monitoring data during an emergency.
Performance Trend Data
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0 0
s
.5 .5 « .5 .5
iiii
• . o . ._
FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15
Office of Radiation and Indoor Air (ORIA) Laboratory Reorganization
EPA made substantial progress in reorganizing its two national laboratories, the National Air and
Radiation Environmental Laboratory in Montgomery, Alabama, and the Radiation and Indoor
Environments National Laboratory in Las Vegas, Nevada. The radio-analytical function is
consolidated at the Montgomery facility, now known as the National Analytical Radiation
Environmental Laboratory. The radiation field operations are consolidated at the Las Vegas
facility, now known as the National Center for Radiation Field Operation.
Increases in efficiency and effectiveness at each location have already been realized as a result of
eliminating duplicative functions and establishing a unique mission for each facility. As a result,
each unit is positioned to become a Center of Excellence, with stronger accountability and more
effective communications, coordination, and customer service in and outside of EPA. Recent
results demonstrate that EPA has increased its level of readiness to respond to a radiological
emergency with FY 2012 results demonstrating a 92 percent level of readiness based on response
team members and assets.
1056
-------
Revision to the Protective Action Guides Manual
In 2013, EPA updated and published its "Protective Action Guides and Planning Guidance for
Radiological Incidents" (PAG Manual) in the Federal Register for public comment. The PAG
Manual provides guidance to first responders and state and local officials so they can make better
informed decisions to protect public health, save lives, and minimize the impact of a radiological
emergency. This updated guidance reflects the best available radiation science to trigger
protective actions such as evacuation or shelter in place. PAGs are not legal radiation limits and
do not supersede any environmental laws or regulations.
Rare but serious incidents like Chernobyl and Fukushima require advance planning and pre-set
action levels to take protective actions for impacted communities. Protective actions for
radiological incidents range from shelter in place to evacuation to food and water controls, over
several response time phases culminating with cleanup and recovery. The guides are written by a
multi-agency group of radiation and emergency management experts, including representatives
from FEMA, DOE, HHS, NRC, USDA, OSHA, and DOD, and published by EPA under the
Atomic Energy Act authorities. The proposed revision is available for interim use while the
Agency addresses public comments; the final PAG manual will be issued in FY 2014.
FY 2013 Performance Challenges
Maintaining Radiation Expertise
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, 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 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.
1057
-------
STRATEGIC GOAL 2:
PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
1058
-------
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 subsis-
tence activities.
FY 2013 Performance Measures
Met: 40 Not Met: 21 Data Unavailable: 7 (Total Measures: 68)
Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals
and Preventing Pollution
$706,979.7
Enforcing environmental Laws
$/8/,
-------
GOAL 2 OVERVIEW
While much progress has been made since the Clean Water Act was passed 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 assessments5 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.
The efforts under this goal support the two main strategic objectives established in the FY 2011-
2015 Strategic Plan, protect human health and protect and restore watersheds and aquatic
ecosystems. The FY 2013 annual performance measures and results presented in the eight-year
table included in the "Program Performance Assessment" section of the FY 2015 Annual
Performance Plan and Congressional Justification, along with activities and examples that
follow in the two strategic objective sections, illustrates how the Agency is making progress and
addressing challenges in protecting America's waters. The Agency is making progress on the
strategic measures outlined in the FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan, however, some work remains to
be done.
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 addressing water quality
impairments associated with aging infrastructure. Also, under Goal 2 in FY 2013, the Agency
reported on progress against the two FY 2012-2013 Agency Priority Goals. Those Agency
Priority Goals were: 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; and 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 programs according to new Section 319
grant guidelines that EPA will release in November 2012.6
5 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 U.S. EPA. 2010. National Lakes Assessment: A Collaborative
Survey of the Nation's Lakes. EPA 841-R-09-001. Available at http: //www. epa. go v/lakessurvev/pdf/nla_chapterO .pdf.
6The Section 319 guidelines, released in April 2013, are available at: http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/cwact.cfm.
1060
-------
EPA CONTRIBUTING PROGRAMS
Analytical Methods Water Monitoring
Beach Program Water Quality Research
Coastal and Ocean Programs Water Quality Standards and Criteria
Chesapeake Bay Watershed Management
Children's Health Protection Wetlands Marine Pollution
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 Research
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund
Effluent Guidelines
Fish Consumption Advisories
Great Lakes
Gulf of Mexico
Human Health and Ecosystem Protection
Research
Human Health Risk Assessment
Long Island Sound
Mercury Research
National Environmental Monitoring
Initiative
National Estuary Program/Coastal
Waterways
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System
Nonpoint Source Pollution Control
Other Geographic Programs (including Lake
Pontchartrain and Northwest Forest),
Lake Champlain, San Francisco Bay
Delta Estuary, South Florida
Persistent Organic Pollutants
Pollutant Load Allocation
Puget Sound
Surface Water Protection Program
Sustainable Infrastructure Program
Total Maximum Daily Loads
Trade and Governance
Underground Injection Control Program
U.S.-Mexico Border
Wastewater Management
Water Efficiency
1061
-------
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 1: PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH
Reduce human exposure to contaminants in drinking water, fish and shellfish, and
recreational waters, including protecting source waters.
A key component of this objective is to protect public health by ensuring that public water
systems deliver safe drinking water to their customers. To achieve this objective, the program
must work to maintain the gains of the previous years' efforts: drinking water systems of all
types and sizes that are currently in compliance will work to remain in compliance. Efforts will
be made to bring non-complying systems into compliance and to ensure that all systems will be
prepared to comply with the new regulations.
As of October 2013, 92 percent of the nation's population served by community water systems
receive drinking water that meets all applicable health-based drinking water standards through
approaches including effective treatment and sources water protection. This meets 92 percent
target. The consistently high rate of compliance with drinking water standards over the years is a
positive programmatic outcome given there have been new and revised drinking water rules
(e.g., the Ground Water Rule (December 2009) and new monitoring requirements for the Stage 2
Disinfection Byproduct Rule (2009 - 2013) and the number of people served by public water
systems has significantly increased in some geographic areas. The responsibility for communities
and public water systems to continuously provide safe drinking water is a key component of the
nation's health and well-being. This success reflects EPA's and its State partners' continued
implementation efforts of drinking water regulatory standards as well as its commitment to
provide safe drinking water and limit human exposure to contaminants of concern. More than
156,000 public water systems provide drinking water to approximately 320 million people in the
United States.
Another key element of this Objective is to protect the public from contaminated fish, shellfish,
and unsafe recreational waters. We are seeing success in this area. For example, a study released
in FY 2013 indicated that blood mercury levels have decreased by 34 percent as compared to
between 1999-2000 and 2001-2010 in women of childbearing age, suggesting that women have
reduced their consumption of the types of fish that have higher mercury concentrations. EPA
believes these positive trends reflect EPA's and states' efforts to promote fish consumption
advisories to vulnerable populations.7
FY 2013 Performance Accomplishments
FY 2012-2013 Agency Priority Goal: Small Drinking Water System capability
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
7See the following website for further information:
http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/fishshellfish/fishadvisories/upload/Trends-in-Blood-Mercurv-Concentrations-and-Fish-
Consumption-Among-U-S-Women-of-Childbearing-Age-NHANES-1999-2010.pdf
1062
-------
water system capability through two EPA programs, the Optimization Program and/or
the Capacity Development Program8
EPA achieved its performance goal by engaging with more than 20 states to improve small
drinking water system capability. Examples of progress over the past year include:
• EPA and the Rural Utilities Service (part of USDA Rural Development) published the
Rural and Small System Guidebook to Sustainable Utility Management, developed under
a Memorandum of Understanding between the two agencies.9 The Guidebook is designed
to introduce rural and small water and wastewater systems to the key areas of effective
system management. It provides background information on 10 areas, as well as
instruction and assistance on how to assess a system based on those areas. It also includes
information on how to prioritize areas for improvement, while developing measures of
progress that can help small systems with performance improvement.
• EPA held quarterly meetings with small community water system mangers to support the
growing community of Check Up Program for Small Systems (CUPSS) asset
management software users and trainers.
• Region 8 distributed a two-page informational document titled "Preparing for Your
Drinking Water Sanitary Survey" and a 14-page brochure entitled "EPA Region 8's
Technical Guide to Drinking Water Regulations for Wyoming Small Business Owners"
to PWSs receiving sanitary surveys in 2013 (including approximately 150 TNC systems).
• EPA continued to execute the Distribution System Performance Based Training pilot to
demonstrate that improving distribution system water quality enhances system
optimization and compliance assistance activities.
Some of the challenges EPA faced that affected its progress in meeting the Small Systems
Agency Priority Goal included the inability of some states and EPA regions to engage in this
effort due to state resource constraints. EPA is continuing this goal in FY 2014 to reach 10
additional states.
Percent of "Person Months" During Which Community Water Systems (CWSs) Provide
Drinking Water That Meets All Applicable Health-Based Drinking Water Standards
The percent of person months metric is described as the percent of person months during which
CWSs provide drinking water that meets all applicable health-based drinking water standards in
the most recent four-quarter period.70 The purpose of this measure is to capture the length of
8 See the following website for further information:
http://www.epa. go v/ogwdw/dwsrf/pdfs/fs_dwsrf_awopsforcapacitvdevelopmentusingsrfpdf and
http://water.epa.gov/type/drink/pws/smallsystems/index.cfm.
9 U.S. EPA and USDA. 2013. Rural and Small Systems Guidebook to Sustainable Utility Management. Available at
http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/SupportDocuments/GUIDEBOOK%20TO%20SUSTArNABLE%20MANAGEMENT%20OF%20R
URAL%20AND%20SMALL%20SYSTEMS%20FiNAL.pdf
10 Person-months for each CWS are calculated as the number of months in the most recent four-quarter period in which health-
based violations overlap, multiplied by the retail population served. This measure includes federally-regulated contaminants of
1063
-------
time a given population is served by a water system that is in violation of drinking water
standards.
Percent of person months during which community water
systems provide drinking water that meets all applicable
health-based standards.
Performance Trend Data
» 100
rz
o
5
c 90
o
I
Q_
d 80
*
u
i
Q_
97 97.2 97.3 97.4 9 8 98.9
•
I
Targol
• Actual
I
FYOS FY09 FY10 FYt 1 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15
During FY 2013, 97 percent of person months (all
persons served by community water systems times
12 months) were provided drinking water that met
all applicable health-based drinking water
standards—exceeding the FY 2013 target of 95
percent (see graph above).77 The success of the
measure is attributed to a national decrease in
treatment technique violations at the largest water
systems, as well as on states' focus to address
background drinking water contaminants (e.g.,
arsenic) that chronically challenge water systems.
This performance also reflects the long-term
efforts of the states and EPA to minimize health-
based violations, while building appropriate
technical, managerial, and financial system capability—including utilizing available resources
for infrastructure improvements—to protect public health while delivering drinking water to
consumers.
SALMON FALLS WATERSHED
COLLABORATIVE PROTECTS
MAINE AND NEW HAMPSHIRE
DRINKING WATER
EPA Region 1 spearheaded
development of the Salmon Falls
Watershed Collaborative. an
interstate group committed to
protecting the drinking water source
for 47,000 people in Maine and New
Hampshire. The watershed has been
threatened by increased polluted
runoff resulting from population
growth, development, and
deforestation. A $6K EPA investment
leveraged more than $700K from the
U.S. Department of Agriculture and
built local, state, and federal agency
partnerships that led to the
conservation of 5,000 acres of forest
and habitat. The Collaborative is a
nationally recognized effort, awarded
the U.S. Water Prize by the Clean
Water America Alliance.
the following violation types: Maximum Contaminant Level, Maximum Residual Disinfection Limit, and Treatment Technique
violations. It includes any violations from currently open and closed.
11 CWSs that overlap any part of the most recent four quarters. The EPA Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water calculates
this measure using data reported in the Safe Drinking Water Information System-Federal (SDWIS-FED).
1064
-------
PROTECTING DRINKING WATER IN THE LOWER YAKIMA VALLEY
EPA signed an Administrative Order on Consent (AOC) with five large dairies in the
environmental justice community, Lower Yakima Valley (WA) to address nitrate contamination
in the drinking water aquifer. Under the AOC the dairies tested about 170 private drinking water
wells and found that about 60 percent exceed the maximum contaminant level (MCL) for nitrate.
In response, they have begun installing reverse osmosis units in residences that exceed the MCL;
ensured backflow prevention devices were installed on all dairy wells; initiated actions to reduce
nitrate concentrations from silage storage and solids separators; installed a groundwater
monitoring wells network; and begun sampling the wells. Over the next year, the dairies will
assess their wastewater lagoons to ensure they meet the current Natural Resources Conservation
Service permeability standard, install irrigation water management systems, and employ more
rigorous soil nitrate testing in their application fields.
FY 2013 Performance Challenges
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
An important priority for the National Water Program is to ensure that drinking water consumers
in Indian Country receive public health and environmental protection though sustained public
water system (PWS) compliance with the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
(NPDWRs). EPA sets annual targets and reports results on the percent of the population in
Indian Country that is served by CWSs and receive drinking water that meets all applicable
health-based drinking water standards
.12
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.
The FY 2013 performance result was
77 percent, falling short of the 2013
performance target of 87 percent (see
graph to left). It should be noted that
there can be a great deal of fluctuation
in results for this measure since tribal
population tend to be small and that a
single compliance issue heavily impacts
the performance results. For example,
one violation at a utility that has 30
percent of an EPA Region's tribal
population is significant.
12 Like the general population metric, this measure includes federally-regulated contaminants of the
following violation types: Maximum Contaminant Level, Maximum Residual Disinfection Limit and
Treatment Technique violations. It includes any violations from currently open and closed CWSs
in Indian Country that overlap any part of the most recent four quarters. The EPA Office of
Ground Water and Drinking Water (Headquarters) calculates this measure using data reported in
SDWIS-FED.
Performance Trend Data
100
c 90
•5 80
-I 70
§- 60
°- 50
g 40
H 30
0
Q. 20
10
8
„ 87
1 • *
87 8
1.2
7.2
• 8
87.
1.2
4
1
Target
• Actual
1 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15
1065
-------
In addition, some of the most significant challenges faced by EPA and tribes, as well as all
drinking water facilities, in FY 2013 include:
• Aging infrastructure:
• Lacking adequate revenue to maintain existing systems or access to Financing:
• Retiring experienced system operators and inability to recruit new operators to replace
them:
• Increasing regulatory requirements: and
• Understanding existing or new regulatory requirements is difficult.
EPA will continue to focus on small systems under the following principles:
• Every person served by a public water system should be provided with safe drinking
water:
• EPA will use a variety of strategies to address the full spectrum of needs:
• EPA will promote the long-term sustainability of small systems: and
• Assistance should be targeted to those small systems that are most in need.
As part of its FY 2014-2015 Agency Priority Goal which will be included in EPA's FY 2014-
2018 Strategic Plan, EPA has added three tribes to its list of 10 additional states that it will
engage to improve small drinking water system capability.
1066
-------
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.
In this section, EPA discusses accomplishments and challenges in addressing water quality.
While EPA is making progress toward restoring clean water to impaired lakes and streams,13 it
continues to face challenges, such as aging infrastructure, in meeting water quality standards.
In FY 2013, EPA continued to make notable progress in protecting and restoring watersheds and
aquatic ecosystems. A cumulative total of 3,679 water bodies (152 in FY 2013) listed as
impaired in 2002 were attaining all their water quality standards by the end of the year, the
condition for removal of waterbodies from the list of impaired waters. Although EPA and its
partners did not meet the annual target of 3,727 for this measure, they removed a cumulative
total of 11,754 specific causes of impairment since 2002 (620 in FY 2013). Specific causes of
impairments, like combined sewer overflows, can be targeted for intervention through
establishment or approval of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs). Since 1996 EPA
established or approved over 65,000 Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) cumulatively by the
end of FY 13, including 15,476 in 2013, exceeding the annual target for this key programmatic
goal. EPA and its partners also increased the number of wetland acres restored and improved
under the Agency's 5-Star, National Estuary Program, Section 319, and great waterbody
programs to a cumulative total of 207,000 acres (27,000 acres in FY 2013). EPA fell short,
however, in meeting its annual targets of issuing 80 percent of high-priority NPDES permits and
approving new or revised water quality standards from states and territories.
EPA's Ocean and Coastal and place-based programs were largely successful in achieving their
end of year goals. Key accomplishments included over 127,000 acres protected or restored in
National Estuary Program study areas, 11.5 million cubic yards of contaminated sediments
removed from the Great Lakes, and significant progress in implementing nitrogen reduction
actions to achieve final TMDL allocations within the Chesapeake Bay watershed (e.g., over 22
percent of the 2025 goal has been achieved). In addition, EPA helped provide 3,400 additional
homes with safe drinking water and 25,695 additional homes with access to adequate wastewater
sanitation in the U.S.- Mexico Border area. EPA was not successful, however, in meeting its
annual target in restoring, protecting, or enhancing coastal habitat in Long Island Sound due to
impacts from Super Storm Sandy.
FY 2013 Performance Accomplishments
FY 2012-2013 Agency Priority Goal: Improve, restore, or maintain water quality
Improve, restore, or maintain water quality by enhancing nonpoint source program
accountability, incentives, and effectiveness. By September 30, 2013, 50 percent of the
13 See the following website for further information:
http://water. epa.gov/tvpe/rsl/monitoring/rivers survev/upload/NRSA0809_Report_Final_508Compliant_130228.pdfhttp://water.e
pa.gov/type/lakes/upload/nla newlowres fullrpt.pdf
1067
-------
states will revise their nonpoint source program according to new Section 319 grant
guidelines that EPA will release in November 201214
In FY 2013, EPA worked toward the priority goal of improving, restoring or maintaining water
quality by enhancing nonpoint source program accountability, incentives, and effectiveness. As
well as being ambitious, this goal is important because an effective nonpoint source (NFS)
management program for a state provides the roadmap for effectively using and leveraging
limited resources, such as Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 319 funds. An effective state
program also articulates goals and objectives and contains up-to-date trackable annual
milestones, as required by Section 319 of the Clean Water Act. It further describes state
priorities, authorities, initiatives, funding sources, partnerships, implementation programs, and
tools. Although EPA and states have made strong progress towards this very ambitious goal in
the past 18 months, EPA fell short of its goal. As of September 30, 2013, 18 of 45 states (and
Washington, DC) with outdated NPS management programs have met EPA's APG. That is, 40
percent of states with outdated programs have updated them. The FY 2014-2015 APG continues
and expands upon this work with a goal of 100 percent of the states having revised NPS
programs.
Over the past two years, EPA has been working closely with states to strengthen the Section 319
program.15 In April 2013, EPA issued revised national guidelines for Section 319 grants to
states. Key aspects of the new guidelines include devoting 50 percent of a state's Section 319
funds to on-the-ground projects to restore and protect waterways; strengthened incentives for
leveraging additional state and local funds; emphasizing collaboration with USDA and
leveraging Farm Bill program resources; and requiring all states to have updated NPS
management programs with relevant goals and annual milestones to guide their investment of
Section 319 funds. Effective use of limited resources requires setting and sustaining priorities
over time, as well as substantial leveraging with other programs and partners.
In addition to reforms to state NPS management programs, EPA is working more closely with
federal agencies to advance the coordination of complementary efforts that can be brought to
bear on controlling NPS pollution. Since 2012, EPA has been collaborating with USDA on the
National Water Quality Initiative (NWQI).16 EPA, through the 319 program, and USDA, through
the Environmental Quality Incentives Program, partnered to focus federal resources on
agricultural sources of pollution in select watersheds in every state. In FY 2013, 164 priority
watersheds were selected in 51 states and areas, representing a net increase of 10 watersheds
from FY 2012. The goal of our collaboration is to coordinate Agency efforts, thereby targeting
conservation on the ground to better protect water resources from NPS pollution.
Number of TMDLs That Are Established or Approved by EPA (Total TMDL) on a Schedule
Consistent with National Policy (Cumulative)17
National policy is to complete TMDLs for Section 303(d)-listed, impaired waters within eight to
14 The Section 319 guidelines, released in April 2013, are available at http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/cwact.cfm.
15 See the following website for further information: http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/cwact.cfm.
16 See the following website for further information:
http://www.nrcs.usda. go v/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/programs/financial/eqip/?&cid=stelprdbl 047761.
17 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.
1068
-------
Number of TMDLs that are established or approved by the EPA
[total TMDL] on a schedule consistent with national policy
(cumulative).**
Performance Trend Data
13 years from their date of initial listing, on average, and to complete all consent decree TMDL
commitments.18 This measure tracks the annual pace of TMDL completion in line with national
policy on a state-by-state basis.
In FY 2013, there were more than 15,000
TMDLs approved (see graph to left), 87
percent of which correspond to a state-
wide mercury TMDL in North Carolina.
There were fewer consent decree TMDLs
for EPA and states to develop, so the
majority of TMDLs were developed by
the states. Constrained state funding has
resulted in fewer resourced directed solely
on TMDL development, and states are
shifting their focus to a greater priority on
TMDL implementation. This approach is
in line with the new 303(d) program
measure, which will start to be tracked in
FY2015.
ao.ooo
40.000
30.000
10.000
68,061
_ 35,979
41,866
FY08 FY09 FY10 FY1 1 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15'
discontinues In FY 15,
"Nole: A TMDL is a lachncal plan fee reducing pctiulanCs in order to attain waler quaity standards.
The terms "approved" and "established" reler ID Ihe KxrpJeiion and approval at Che TMCL Hsefl.
The CWA 303(d) Listing and TMDL Program has engaged with states to implement the new 10-
year vision for the program.19 As part of this effort, EPA will continue to encourage states to
identify priority waters for assessment, develop TMDLs and other restoration plans for impaired
segments, and pursue protection approaches for
unimpaired waters. In FY 2015, we will shift from
reporting on TMDL development and begin reporting
on a new TMDL prioritization measure that is
consistent with states' focus.
Number of Beneficial Use Impairments (BUIs)
Removed Within Great Lakes Areas of Concern
(AOCs)
Led by EPA, Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI)
partners have accelerated the pace at which Great Lakes
AOCs, the most severely degraded geographic areas
within the Great Lakes Basin, are delisted. AOC
delisting is an Administration priority. EPA and its
federal partners (principally, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S.
Geological Survey, and National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration) work with and fund
EPA CLEANS UP GREAT
LAKES AREAS OF CONCERN
EPA's Great Lakes National
Program delisted the Presque
Isle Bay Area of Concern in
Pennsylvania (only the second
U.S. AOC delisted since 43
highly contaminated Great
Lakes Areas of Concern were
designated under the 1987
Canada-U.S. Great Lakes
Water Quality Agreement) and
completed all remediation and
restoration work required to
delist the Sheboygan River
Area of Concern in Wisconsin.
18 In numerous cases since the early 1990s, EPA was placed under court order, or agreed in a consent decree, to establish TMDLs
if a state failed to do so within a prescribed schedule.
19
See the following website for further information: http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/lawsguidance/cwa/tmdl/index.cfm.
1069
-------
Number of Beneficial Use Impairments removed within Areas
of Concern (cumulative).
stakeholders to remove BUIs (indicators of poor environmental health such as restrictions on fish
and wildlife consumption, fish tumors, and restrictions on dredging) within the AOCs.
Restoration of U.S. or bi-national AOCs will ultimately be measured by the removal of all BUIs.
In FY 2013, GLRI partners delisted Presque Isle Bay, Pennsylvania, AOC—the first U.S.
delisting since 2006. Since the 2006
deli sting, only six BUIs were removed
until the start of the GLRI in FY 2010.
From 2010 onward, GLRI-supported
activities have led to a significant increase
in BUI removals: two in FY 2010, 12 in
FY 2011, seven in FY 2012, and eight in
FY 2013, thereby allowing EPA to meet or
exceed its BUI removal targets for
successive years. In FY 2013, GLRI
partners removed eight BUIs at six AOCs,
meeting a cumulative target of 41 BUI
removals (see graph to left).
Performance Trend Data
FYQ8 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15
To achieve these results, EPA prioritized restoration of AOCs within the GLRI. Prioritization
included the following:
• Focused multi-agency activities and funding to advance the pace and amount of work
performed at AOCs. EPA uses the largest portion of its GLRI funding for sediment
remediation at AOCs. Remediation of contaminated sediments is an important factor in
removal of most, but not all, BUIs.
• Centralized management related to the planning, coordination, and implementation of
remediation and restoration actions. AOCs are assigned a "Task Force Leader" to oversee
and coordinate the work being done. The Great Lakes National Program Office
management meets regularly with Task Force Leaders to problem-solve, coordinate,
budget, and plan. This centralized management has increased involvement of appropriate
partners in activities leading to delisting and has increased communications regarding
necessary AOC-related activities.
FY 2013 Performance Challenges
Number of Water Body Segments Identified by States in 2002 as Not Attaining Standards,
Where Water Quality Standards Are Now Fully Attained (Cumulative)
This measure is designed to demonstrate cumulative
successes of the surface water program in achieving
water quality standards in waters formerly assessed
as not meeting water quality standards.
Number of water body segments Identified by states in 2002 as
not attaining standards, where water quality standards are
now fully attained (cumulative).
1070
hYU8 F-Y09 mi) HY11 KY12
FY SOI 5 Slrtflcc TaHjBt 10 all** 3,360
ma m4
-------
EPA did not meet its target for this measure (see graph to right). Results for this measure are
lower than in the past due to a number of challenges:
• Reduced state budgets are slowing implementation activities, which are necessary to
improve impaired water bodies;
• 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; and
• Many of the impairments which remain in waters identified in 2002 require many years
before restoration strategies accomplish full recovery of the water body segments.
For future reporting, EPA is evaluating a new approach for measuring local improvements in
water quality. The goal is to provide a consistent method for measuring progress. This new
approach will enable EPA to more effectively track water quality outcomes from investments in
protection and restoration.
1071
-------
STRATEGIC GOAL 3:
CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND
ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
1072
-------
Goal 3 at a Glance
CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Cleanup communities, advance sustainable development, and protect disproportion-
ately impacted low-income, minority, and tribal communities. Prevent releases of
harmful substances and clean up and restore contaminated areas.
Met: 23
FY 2013 Performance Measures
Not Met: 6 Data Unavailable: 2 (Total Measures: 31)
Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals
and Preventing Pollution
$706,979.7
Enforcing Environmental Laws
$787,904.9
Taking Action
on Qimate Change
and Improving Air Quality
$1,015,182.8
Cleaning Up Communities and
Advancing Sustainable Development
$3,484,463.0
Protecting America's Waters
$4,066,455.9
20
15
10
Met
Not Met
Data available after
January 31, 2014
Objective! Objective 2 Objectives Objective 4
Strategic Objective
Objective 3.1: 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.
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.
Objective 3.3: Restore Land. Prepare for and respond to accidental or
intentional releases of contaminants and clean up and restore polluted sites.
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.
Goal 3 Total
FY 2013 Obligations
(in thousands)
$510,154.8
$1,346,723.1
$1,539,675.0
$87,915.1
$3,484,468.0
% of Goal 3 Funds
15%
39%
44%
3%
100%
Due to rounding, some numbers might add up to slightly less or more than 100%.
1073
-------
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. The EPA works collaboratively with state and tribal governments to achieve these
aims and with communities to ensure that they have a say in environmental decisions that affect
them.
In addition, EPA works with more than 560 federally recognized tribes across the United States
to improve environmental and human outcomes. 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. Through its
Indian General Assistance Program, EPA provides funds to federally recognized tribes to plan,
develop, and establish tribal environmental protection programs.
EPA's commitments support four strategic objectives established in the FY 2011-2015 Strategic
Plan under Goal 3: Promote sustainable and livable communities; preserve land; restore land;
and strengthen human health and environmental protection in Indian Country. The FY 2013
annual performance measures and results presented in the eight-year table included in the
"Program Performance Assessment" section of the FY 2015 Annual Performance Plan and
Congressional Justification, along with the illustrative activities and examples that follow in the
four strategic objective sections, illustrates how the Agency is making progress and addressing
challenges in cleaning up communities and advancing sustainable development. The Agency is
making progress on the strategic measures outlined in the FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan,
however, some work remains to be done.
Examples of the accomplishments and challenges under this goal include: assessing and cleaning
up Brownfields; advancing the sustainable materials management program: eliminating
unacceptable human exposure to contaminants at Superfund and RCRA Corrective Action sites;
and implementing federal regulatory environmental programs in Indian Country. In FY 2013,
EPA achieved one of its FY 2012-2013 Agency Priority Goals by making 23,914 formerly
contaminated sites ready for anticipated use. To date, EPA has made over 2.3 million acres ready
for communities to reclaim for ecological, recreational, commercial, residential, and other
purposes.
1074
-------
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
1075
-------
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 2013, EPA continued funding for brownfields cleanup activities by providing grants and
technical assistance to communities, states, and tribes for the assessment, cleanup, and
redevelopment of formerly contaminated properties, as well as leveraging thousands of jobs. In
furthering these efforts, EPA worked closely with both existing and new Brownfields Area-Wide
Planning grantees across the country to help them involve the community, prepare their plans,
and leverage investments toward site cleanup and reuse. In addition, the Agency advanced multi-
purpose brownfield pilot grants to better align and coordinate funding to deliver improved
environmental outcomes.
In FY 2013, EPA continued to achieve its risk management plan inspections target to prevent
chemical releases at facilities in communities. Furthermore, EPA, along with the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and
Explosives (ATF), issued a chemical advisory that provides information on the hazards of
ammonium nitrate storage, handling, and management. This advisory outlines lessons learned
from all stakeholders and communities to prevent incidents like the explosion at the fertilizer
plant in West, Texas, where ammonium nitrate was released due to poor handling and storage of
chemicals.
FY 2013 Performance Accomplishments
EPA has achieved FY 2013 results and is on track to meet the Assess and Cleanup Brownfields
strategic measures established in the FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan: by 2015, conduct
environmental assessments at 20,600 (cumulative) brownfield properties; and by 2015, make an
additional 17,800 acres of brownfield properties ready for reuse from the 2009 baseline.
Brownfield Properties Assessed
In FY 2013, EPA exceeded its annual
brownfields assessment target (1,200
properties assessed) by 27.3 percent (328
additional sites). Since 1995, EPA has
assessed 22,073 brownfields properties (see
graph to right). Phase I, funding for property
assessments, helps communities examine
historical records to identify properties
likely to be contaminated based on past
uses, and indicates the need for additional
environmental work, such as a Phase II
assessment to characterize suspected
Brownfield properties assessed.
Performance Trend Data
2000
1500
8 I 8
8 8
FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15
1076
-------
contamination. This measure represents an
important milestone in the overall cleanup
process and can lead to a reuse/redevelopment
outcome that would leverage local development
sources to drive employment and enhance the
livability of the community containing the
property. Equally important, assessments can
indicate that brownfield sites may not be
contaminated and can therefore be safely reused
without cleanup.
Brownfield Properties Cleaned Up
CONDUCTED BROWNFIELD OUTREACH:
Brownfield outreach efforts in Region 4 helped
communities in Alabama, Florida, Kentucky,
Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina,
Tennessee and Mississippi receive $15.3
million in competitive Assessment, Revolving
Loan Fund, Cleanup, Area Wide Planning,
Environmental Workforce Development and
Job Training, and Revolving Loan Fund
Supplement Brownfield grants. Through these
grants, southeastern communities will be able to
protect human health and the environment,
return contaminated and blighted properties to
productive use and create jobs.
A fundamental purpose of EPA's Brownfields
Program is to provide funding and resources to
clean up properties with contamination that
poses health or environmental risks, impeding reuse and economic redevelopment. The
Brownfields Program provides communities with grants to help fund the cleanup of
contaminated sites.
Number of properties cleaned up using brownf ields funding.
Performance Trend Data
In FY 2013, EPA completed 122 brownfields
cleanups, an increase of two cleanups from
FY 2012 (see graph to right). From program
inception through the end of FY 2013, the
Brownfields program has funded 916
completed cleanups. Over the past several
budget cycles and grant competitions, there
has been a shift in resources toward aspects
of the program that fund cleanup activities as
a result of the Brownfields Evaluation. There
has also been an increased effort to ensure
that grant recipients actively report cleanup activities and progress in ACRES.
150
120
GO
30
60 • 60
II
120 122
FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15
TARGETED CLEANUP AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS IN EJ COMMUNITIES
Coordinating work across Goal 3, 4, and 5, Region 5 targeted cleanup and enforcement actions in
environmental justice communities—communities that are disproportionately impacted by environmental
problems—by awarding brownfield grants totaling $27 million; reducing air pollution from facilities in
these neighborhoods by 130 million pounds per year; remediating contaminated sites; removing PCB-
contaminated lighting ballasts in schools; and training workers to use lead-safe practices when
renovating, repairing, and painting older buildings.
1077
-------
In addition to the environmental and health benefits of brownfields cleanups, remediation has
been shown to have a positive economic impact within communities. A 2012 assessment20 of the
economic impact of brownfields remediation demonstrated that homes within 1 kilometer of a
brownfield site that has been cleaned up using Brownfields Program funding may experience a
5.8 to 12.3 percent increase in residential property value.
LITTLE ROCK SEES SUSTAINABLE GROWTH
FROM INVESTMENTS BY FEDERAL
PARTNERSHIP
EPA and the U.S. Departments of Housing and
Urban Development and Transportation are
partnering to improve access to affordable
housing, lower transportation costs, and promote
a healthy environment and strong economy in
Little Rock, Arkansas. Under EPA's Greening
America's Capitals Program, designs for
downtown Main Street were developed and
other investments initiated, including $900,000
from the Arkansas Department of Natural
Resources for green infrastructure, $900,000
from Pulaski County for cleanup and
redevelopment of vacant buildings, and
$150,000 from the National Endowment of the
Arts for an arts corridor. The coordinated public
investments have already leveraged millions of
dollars in private donations to downtown Little
Rock. These efforts are already yielding 40 new
permanent jobs on Main Street and are serving
as a catalyst for downtown revitalization.
BUILDING SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES
IN FRESNO
As the lead agency for the White House
Council on Strong Cities. Strong
Communities initiative in Fresno. California.
EPA partnered with the City of Fresno, the
State of California, and 11 other federal
agencies to provide intensive technical
assistance and support for the city's economic
development plans. The federal team built the
foundation for economic transformation by
aligning federal resources, building local
capacity, and streamlining federal services
through a place-based approach. The Fresno
team's primary focus was supporting the
mayor's top goals of revitalizing downtown
Fresno and directing the city's growth into
urban infill areas. The initiative enabled
Fresno to better use more than $63 million in
existing federal funds, built capacity that led
to Fresno securing $22 million in new federal
and non-federal grant and contract resources,
and helped leverage more than $lmillion of
outside resources to support economic
development goals.
20 Haninger, Kevin, and Christopher Timmins. 2012. "Estimating the Impacts of Brownfield Remediation on Housing Property
Values." Nicholas Institute Working Paper No. EE 12-08.
1078
-------
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.
In FY 2013, EPA continued to advance the sustainable materials management program by
refocusing how we think about environmental protection and recognizing the impacts of the vast
amount of materials we consume. EPA, in partnership with states, continued to reduce the risk
posed by underground storage tanks (USTs) at more than 200,000 facilities throughout the
country by increasing significant operational compliance through inspections and technical
assistance, which in turn reduced the number of confirmed releases.
EPA continues to work toward its hazardous waste management goals by controlling
transportation of hazardous waste; ensuring the safe treatment, storage, and disposal of
hazardous wastes by establishing specific requirements/permits for managing those wastes; and
inspecting facilities to ensure compliance with regulations.
FY 2013 Performance Accomplishments
EPA has achieved the FY 2013 targets and is on track to meet the Minimize Releases of
Hazardous Waste and Petroleum Products strategic measures established in the FY 2011-2015
Strategic Plan: 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; and each year through 2015, increase
the percentage of underground storage tank (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.
Tons of Materials and Products Offsetting Use of Virgin Resources through Sustainable
Materials Management (SMM)
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 "Reduce,
Reuse, Recycle," concept, 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.
Although FY 2013 results for the measure will not be available until February 2015, EPA made
significant progress in developing and implementing a strategically targeted SMM program
focusing on responsible management of used electronics, sustainable food management, reducing
the environmental footprint of the federal government, and strengthening partnerships with state
and local governments.
The SMM Electronics Challenge was launched September 20, 2012, with 10 participants who
represent some of the nation's largest retailers and manufacturers of electronics. During FY
1079
-------
2013, EPA extensively assisted these 10 existing participants in interpreting the Challenge
requirements as they relate to each company's unique business structure and processes. EPA also
collected participant baseline data and information, developed the electronics portion of the
SMM Data Management System, and developed a narrative awards process and criteria. By
participating in the Challenge, original equipment manufacturers and retailers are promoting
responsible electronics recycling. They are increasing the number of electronics being collected,
sending 100 percent of their used electronics to a recognized third-party certified recycler by the
third year of their participation, and publicly reporting this information.
EPA's Food Recovery Challenge engaged participants in preventing wasted food, and in
diverting food waste from landfills, resulting in decreased GHG and other environmental
impacts. In FY 2012 participants in the Food Recovery Challenge reported over 70,000 tons of
food donated rather than disposed of and 137,000 tons of food composted. Participants reported
over 211,000 tons of food diverted from landfills, which is a 32 percent improvement over the
2011 Challenge.
The Federal Green Challenge is a national effort challenging EPA and other federal agencies
throughout the country to lead by example in reducing the federal government's environmental
impact. In FY 2012, Challenge-related efforts to reduce waste, water, and electricity usage
resulted in an estimated cost savings of $31 million and over 900,000 metric tons of GHG
reductions. With 126 new federal facilities joining in FY 2013 (exceeding the goal of 50 and
bringing the total number of participants to 365), the cost savings and GHG reductions are likely
to increase significantly.
Number of Hazardous Waste Facilities with New or Updated Controls
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
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.
Number of hazardous waste facilities with new or updated
controls.
Performance Trend Data
150
120
60
3C
EPA measures program progress by
reporting the number of RCRA hazardous
waste facilities with new or updated
controls completed each fiscal year. This
annual measure contributes to the long-
term goal of 500 additional facilities
described in the Agency's FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan. In FY 2013, EPA completed a total of
114 facilities with new or updated controls, surpassing the target by 14 percent and setting EPA
on track to meet the strategic goal by 2015 (see graph above).
FV08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15
1080
-------
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.
In FY 2013, EPA increased the number of UST facilities that were in SOC to 71.6 percent.
exceeding its goal of 67 percent (see
graph to right). Preventing releases is the
best way to ensure that our communities
are clean and safe. Since the enactment of
the Energy Policy Act (EPAct) and the
implementation of the requirement that
USTs are inspected at least once every
three years, EPA continues to see a steady
increase in the number of UST facilities
that are in compliance with leak
prevention and detection requirements.
Performance Trend Data
80
70
60
I 50
I 40
a 30
20
10
_
7
-66 KR 66 BS s 66
-1
_l
-1
1 71
66.5
1
3 71.6
•
I
I
Target
• Actual
I
0 7(
,5
' FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 F=Y14 FY15
1081
-------
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 programs reduce risks to human health and the environment by assessing
contaminated sites, cleaning them up, and returning them 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. OSWER has made substantial progress restoring the land over the past year. OSWER's
land cleanup programs track over 540,000 sites and close to 23 million acres; this translates to
slightly over 17 percent of all developed land in the United States.
FY 2013 Performance Accomplishments
FY 2012-2013 Agency Priority Goal: Clean up contaminated sites and make them ready for
use
By September 30, 2013 clean up an additional 22,100 contaminated sites and make them ready
for anticipated use (RAU)
In FY 2013, a total of 12,359 sites were made RAU, resulting in 23,914 sites made RAU in FY
2012 and FY 2013, exceeding the APG target. EPA's Superfund, RCRA corrective action,
leaking underground storage tank, and Brownfields
cleanup programs all contribute to this goal. When the
responsible local, state, or federal agency determines that
a site is RAU, it is a determination that cleanup goals and
engineering and institutional controls have been
implemented for the environmental media that affects
current and reasonably anticipated future use, so the site
is available for communities to use or reuse. The RAU
measure is based on the information at the time the
determination is made, and may change if the site's
conditions change or if more information is discovered
about the contamination or conditions at the site.
Although each program establishes its own targets, the
collective nature and combined overall target of the RAU
APG offers an opportunity for EPA cleanup programs to
work together to identify lessons learned, efficiencies and
opportunities to advance site cleanup. Thus, EPA will
continue this APG for FY 2014-2015.
FINAL SITE-WIDE REMEDY IN
THE SAN JUAN MOUNTAINS
OF SOUTHWESTERN
COLORADO
EPA Region 8 completed a
site-wide water treatment
system at the Summitville
Mine Superfund site after 20
years of response action to
minimize, control, and mitigate
uncontrolled releases of acid
mine drainage from the site.
Since 1992, EPA has spent
over $300 million to reach this
phase and complete the system.
Full operations and
maintenance responsibility will
be transferred to the State of
Colorado in 2021.
1082
-------
CLEANUP OF LEAD SITES
Region 7 States: The Superfund Program in Region 7 continued to clean up lead-contaminated sites in
Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska, excavating mine and smelter waste amounting to 8.6 million cubic
yards, remediating 1702 residential yards, and stabilizing lead based paint in 184 residential properties. In
addition, 325 homes with lead-contaminated drinking water received alternate water supplies.
Price Battery Site, Hamburg, PA: In September 2013, EPA completed residential cleanups at the Price
Battery site in Hamburg, Pennsylvania, cleaning up lead from 554 residential yards and lead-contaminated
dust from 402 residential interiors. Properties throughout Hamburg were impacted by aerial lead deposition
from the operation of a secondary lead smelter at the former Price Battery facility, and EPA worked for
several years to remove high levels of lead contamination from residential yards and homes and prevent lead
exposure in young children. EPA participated in local lead awareness campaigns and worked with health
agencies to offer important advice on preventing lead exposure and to conduct periodic blood lead level
screening, part of the Pennsylvania Department of Health's ongoing effort to identify children with blood
lead levels elevated by exposure to lead from this former battery recycling and manufacturing site.
Independent research indicates that cleaning up land
provides many benefits to the community, including
preservation of land, and increased property
values.22'23 Since the inception of the respective
programs until the end of FY 2013, 441,333 sites
and 2.3 million acres were made RAU.
In addition, EPA is on track to meet the Cleanup
Contaminated Land strategic measure established
in the FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan: 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. Due to lower
than anticipated results for the potentially
responsible parties (PRPs) removal measure, EPA
may not meet the Emergency Preparedness and
Response strategic measure: by 2015, complete an
additional 1,700 Superfund removals through
Agency-financed actions and through oversight of
removals conducted by PRPs.
so that it can be put to productive use
reduced morbidity and mortality risks,21
FINALIZED CLEANUP PLAN FOR
BROOKLYN'S GOWANUS CANAL
In 2010, EPA added the Gowanus Canal
to the National Priorities List of
Superfund Sites, making it only the
second NPL site in New York City. The
work on the Canal has progressed from
the Remedial Investigation phase to a
2013 Record of Decision. The ROD
calls for removing 588,000 cubic yards
of sediment by dredging; implementing
controls to prevent combined sewer
overflows; capping the dredged areas;
excavating and restoring one street
basin; excavating and restoring a portion
of another street basin; and treating the
dredged sediment off-site. The
estimated cost for this cleanup is $506
million.
21 Currie, Janet, Michael Greenstone, and Enrico Moretti. 2011. "Superfund Cleanups and Infant Health." NBER Working Paper
16844.
22 Rowland, Marie. 2007. "Employment Effects of Brownfields Redevelopment, What do we Know from the Literature?"
Journal of Planning Literature, 22:91.
23 Gamper-Rabidron, Shantic, and Christopher Timmins. 2012. "Does the Cleanup of Hazardous Sites Raise Housing Values?
Evidence of Spatially Localized Benefits." Duke Environmental Economics, Working Paper Series, Working paper EE1203.
1083
-------
Superfund Sites and RCRA Corrective Action Facilities Where Human Exposures to Toxins
Are Under Control
Number of Superfund sites with human exposures under
control.
Performance Trend Data
25
20
| 15
55
10
5
•
•
Target
10 lg 10
II
• Actual
13
10 1 10 1
1 II 1
' FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15
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. 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.
In FY 2013, EPA eliminated unacceptable human exposure to contaminants at 14 Superfund
sites, exceeding its 10 sites target (see graph above) and bringing total sites to 1,389 where
human exposures are under control. Actions taken to bring human exposure under control
included reducing exposure to unsafe drinking water by providing an 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 2013, the RCRA Corrective
Action Program achieved its goal of 85
percent of its sites reaching human
exposures under control. EPA places a
high priority on this measure and will
continue to focus resources on those
sites that present the highest risk.
As of October 2013, over 80 percent of
Superfund sites and 85 percent of
RCRA facilities have human exposures
under control (see graph to right).
Cumulative percentage of RCRA facilities with human
exposures to toxins under control.
100
80
w 60
°- 40
20
0
Performance Trend Data
Target
• Actual
FY08 FY09 FY10 FY1 1 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15
1084
-------
Percent of All Noncompliant Facility Response Plan (FRPs) Inspected Facilities Brought into
Compliance
In FY 2013, 78 percent (see graph to right)
of all FRP inspected facilities found to be
noncompliant were brought into
compliance, significantly exceeding the
FY 2013 target of 40 percent. EPA has
been developing improved guidance and
targeting procedures to help bring more
facilities into compliance. This has
enabled EPA to devote more time to the
field work of conducting inspections and
bringing facilities into compliance.
Percent of all FRP Inspected facilities found to be
non-compliant which are brought into compliance.
Performance Trend Data
I
FYOS FY09 FY10 FY1 1 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15
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, as well as require countermeasures to control, contain,
clean up, and mitigate the effects of an oil spill. Under this program, certain oil storage facilities
and refineries that have the greatest risk of causing harm to the environment or human health in
the event of a release, must prepare FRPs setting forth the facilities' plan for response actions for
discharges of oil. This measure tracks the percentage of FRP inspected facilities found to be
noncompliant that are subsequently brought into compliance with EPA regulations.
FY 2013 Performance Challenges
PRP Removal Completions Overseen by EPA
The Superfund Removal program functions as the backbone federal response to many
contamination events, providing response support to state, local, tribal, and potentially
responsible parties (PRP) when their
response capabilities are exceeded and
managing risks to human health, the
environment, and the economic viability of
communities. Removal actions are typically
immediate short-term responses intended to
protect people from threats posed by
hazardous waste sites.
PRP removal completions (including voluntary, Administrative
Order on Consent, and Unilateral Administrative Order actions)
overseen by EPA.
Performance Trend Data
200
150
1 100
In FY 2013, EPA oversaw 125 removals
conducted by the PRP, missing the target of
170 (see graph to right). Removal targets are
hard to predict since the responses are
usually for short, immediate, and emergency-
based cleanups. Eighty percent of PRP-led removals are emergencies (e.g., a tanker truck
accident on a highway). The Agency is reviewing data and exploring a variety of reasons to
FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15'
dsoonlnues in Pf 15
1085
-------
determine why we are accomplishing less of these types of removals. In FY 2015, EPA is
implementing a new measure "number of Superfund removals completed" to track the total
number of removals completed each year for both PRP-lead and Superfund-lead removals.
1086
-------
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
environment in Indian Country. The relationship
between the U.S. government and federally recognized
tribes is unique: we work 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 our mission. EPA assists tribes in
developing the capacity to manage their own
environmental protection programs and provides
technical assistance and grants to federally recognized
tribes to help them plan, develop, and establish
environmental protection programs.
FY 2013 Performance Accomplishments
Implementing Federal Regulatory Environmental
Programs in Indian Country
Percent of Tribes implementing federal regulatory environmental
programs in Indian country (cumulative).
Performance Trend Data
FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11
Achieved tha FY 2015 Strategic Target of 13%
FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15
EPA is on track to meet the strategic target established
in the FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan: to increase the
percent of tribes implementing federal regulatory
environmental programs in Indian Country to 18
percent by FY 2015 (see graph above).
for protecting human health and the
SOLID WASTE AND
BACKHATJL PROJECTS IN
ALASKA
In FY 2013, EPA Region 10's
Household Hazardous Waste
Collection and Disposal Grant
Program for Alaska Tribes
diverted 56,877 pounds of
electronics, mixed batteries,
lead-acid batteries, and
fluorescent light bulbs from
eight tribal communities living
in the Yukon-Kuskokwim
Delta of western Alaska. The
nationally funded, Region-10-
managed Yukon River Inter-
Tribal Watershed Council
Hazardous Waste grant
diverted a million pounds of
junk vehicles, batteries, scrap
metal, and electronics.
Together these efforts protect
the environment and
subsistence resources of 62
tribal communities living
within the 1,980-mile Yukon
River Watershed and the
immense Yukon-Kuskokwim
Delta. In addition, Region 10
committed $6.5 million in GAP
funding to 181 tribes and
consortia for solid and
hazardous waste projects in
Alaska.
1087
-------
ADDRESSING URANIUM
CONTAMINATION ON THE
NAVAJO NATION
EPA worked with the Navajo
Nation and five federal agency
partners to address uranium-
related health risks on the
Navajo
Nation.
Work
completed over the past five
years has reduced some of the
most urgent risks to Navajo
residents by remediating 34
contaminated homes, providing
safe drinking water to 1,825
families, and stabilizing or
cleaning up nine abandoned
mines. EPA also conducted
field assessments of 240 water
sources and 520 mines, while
the Navajo Nation EPA
assessed nearly 800 homes and
other structures.
EPA expects that annual results for this measure will likely
plateau at FY 2013 levels (around 21 to 22 percent). This
reflects a range of realities that make it increasingly difficult to
assess how many more federal programs will be implemented
by tribes. For example, many federally recognized tribes face
legal barriers to federal approval for program implementation,
and, as federal resources decline or remain stagnant, and the
cost of living continues to increase, the real dollars available to
support capacity development and implementation shrink. In
addition, this measure does not reflect individual tribes'
increasing capacities (e.g., when a tribe takes over more than
one regulatory program). The Indian General Assistance
Program (GAP) Guidance released in May 2013 is designed to
improve tribal capacity development milestones (beyond the
current indicator, which shows the percent of tribes
implementing federal regulatory programs).
As a first step, in FY 2013, EPA developed a suite of
environmental protection program capacity building indicators
for inclusion in GAP guidance. Tribes will use these indicators
as they develop specific program capacities under the GAP.
These indicators reflect examples of the range of program
capacities that tribes develop, up to the program implementation
phase. Moving forward, EPA will collect baseline data in FY
2014 to help inform the development of appropriate performance measures and targets in FY
2015 for reporting in FY 2016-FY 2018.
Assessing Resources in Bristol Bay, Alaska
In April 2013, EPA released the second draft assessment of the biological and mineral resources
of the Bristol Bay watershed. The purpose of the assessment is to characterize the watershed's
biological and mineral resources, increase understanding of the impacts of large-scale mining on
the region's fish resources, and inform future government decisions related to protecting and
maintaining the physical, chemical, and biological integrity of the watershed.EPA received
800,000 public comments, majority of which supported EPA and the assessment.
FY 2013 Performance Challenges
Obtaining Treatment in a Manner Similar to a State (TAS) Status
Tribes differ broadly with respect to population, culture, income, geography, economic
development, environmental program management expertise, and priorities. EPA also recognizes
that many tribes may not have the capacity to implement programs in a manner similar to a state
(TAS), where programmatically available. Further, the decision to be treated in a manner similar
to a state is voluntary, and may not be a priority to a tribe. Currently, over 200 tribes are not
1088
-------
legally able to apply for TAS, yet they are building programmatic capacity in other ways. EPA
continues to play a critical role in ensuring environmental protection in Indian country.
1089
-------
STRATEGIC GOAL 4:
ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS
AND POLLUTION PREVENTION
1090
-------
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 2013 Performance Measures
Met; 12 Not Met: 6 Data Unavailable: 6 (Total Measures: 24)
Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals
and Preventing Pollution
$706,979.7
Enforcing Environmental Laws
$787,904,9
Taking Action
on Climate Change
and Improving Air Quality
$1,015,482.8
Cleaning Up Communities and
Advancing Sustainable Development
$3,484,468.0
Protecting America's \
$4,066,455.9
20
15
10
Met
Not Met
Data available after
February 28, 2014
Objective 1
Objective 7
Strategic Objective
Objective 4. 1: Ensure Chemical Safety. Reduce the risk of chemicals that enter
our products, our environment, and our bodies.
Objective 4.2: 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.
Goal 4 Total
FY 2013 Obligations
(in thousands)
$649,230:8
$57,748.9
$706,979.7
% of Goal 4 Funds
92%
8%
100%
Due to rounding, some numbers might add up to slightly lessor more than 100%.
-------
GOAL 4 OVERVIEW
EPA's FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan identifies two strategic objectives under Goal 4 to advance
chemical safety and implement the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); the Pollution Prevention Act (PPA); and several
chemical-specific statutes. The first advances EPA's work to ensure the safety of chemicals, and
the second advances pollution prevention as the strategy of choice to address environmental and
human health risks. In addition, the Plan establishes cross-cutting fundamental strategies, which
influence relevant aspects of work under this goal. In particular, 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 agency guidance. Consistent with
its work under all aspects of the Strategic Plan, EPA collaborates with other countries, federal
agencies, states, tribes, and the public.
FY 2013 was a transitional year for the Chemical Safety program as the program transit!oned
from conducting Hazard Characterizations of HPV (High Production Volume) chemicals,
completing over 2,000 Hazard Characterizations over the life of the program, to the Chemical
Safety program's new approach of conducting Risk Assessments for TSCA Work Plan
Chemicals. The Agency also continued to increase the transparency of chemical information
through its Enhanced Chemical Management approach, which expands and enhances the
amount, accessibility, and usefulness of chemical safety information. In FY 2013, EPA also
continued to focus on two key strategies to advance pollution prevention (P2): fostering the
development of P2 solutions (greener/leaner/safer chemicals, technologies, and practices) and
promoting increased use of those solutions. These strategies have successfully reduced the use of
hazardous materials, energy, and water and the generation of GHGs, while significantly
increasing the use of safer chemicals and products and enabling businesses and governments to
reduce their costs.
While EPA continues to make strides in guarding against exposure to chemicals that pose
potential risks to human health and the environment, the Agency still faces challenges to its
chemical safety efforts. Implementing Endangered Species Act (ESA) requirements to ensure
that regulatory actions are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of threatened or
endangered species or destroy or adversely modify their critical habitat, while meeting
registration review statutory deadlines, is a tremendous challenge. Another challenge for the
Agency lies in reducing the continuing risks 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 tens of millions
of pre-1978 homes.
The FY 2013 annual performance measures and results presented in the eight-year table included
in the "Program Performance Assessment" section of the FY 2015 Annual Performance Plan and
Congressional Justification, along with activities and examples that follow in the two strategic
objective sections, illustrates how the Agency is making progress and addressing challenges in
ensuring the safety of chemicals and preventing pollution.
1092
-------
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
1093
-------
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 1: ENSURE CHEMICAL SAFETY
Reduce the risk of chemicals that enter our products, our environment, and our bodies.
EPA's chemical safety programs are at the forefront of its efforts to advance a sustainable future.
Chemicals are often released into the environment as a result of their manufacture, processing,
use, and disposal; people are exposed to chemicals in their homes, where they work and play,
and in their use of products. The Agency uses a variety of approaches to ensure chemical safety,
including review of new chemicals before they enter commerce and, for the tens of thousands of
existing chemicals already in commerce, obtaining and making public chemical health and safety
information available, using that information to screen and assess chemical risks, and taking
action to eliminate or reduce identified risks.
EPA achieved a chemical safety milestone in January 2013 with the release of its first five TSCA
Work Plan Chemical risk assessments for public and peer review, an important step reflecting
the Agency's shift in strategy to use all available information to assess the safety of thousands of
chemicals that have been widely used for years. The chemicals assessed in this initial group of
risk assessments were among the more than 80 prioritized for assessment in the FY 2012 TSCA
Work Plan. Risk assessments were also initiated in FY 2013 for another six commonly used
Work Plan chemicals, including three flame retardants that are part of larger clusters of related
flame retardants. As EPA explained in its Enhanced Chemical Management Approach, once
draft risk assessments are finalized, EPA will pursue risk management actions for chemicals
found to present risks to human health or the environment, such as issuing regulations under
TSCA to restrict or ban the manufacture, importation, processing, distribution, use and/or
disposal of chemicals. Another important accomplishment in FY 2013 was the development,
loading, and release of ChemView, a new database that greatly improves access to health and
safety data, including exposure, hazards, and risk information, on chemicals regulated under
TSCA in a one-stop shop venue. ChemView currently contains information on more than 1,500
chemicals.
All pesticides distributed and sold in the United States must be registered by EPA, based on
scientific data showing that they will not cause unreasonable risks to human health, workers, or
the environment when used as directed on product labeling. The registration review program
makes sure that, as the ability to assess risk evolves and as policies and practices change, all
registered pesticides continue to meet the statutory standard of no unreasonable adverse effects—
that is, they continue to be safe when used according to the label. Through the registration review
program, the Agency reevaluates pesticides every 15 years to make sure that products in the
marketplace can still be used safely. The registration review program challenges EPA to
continually improve its process, science, and information management while maintaining a
collaborative and open process for decision-making to ensure safety for human health and the
environment.
The Endocrine Disrupters Screening Program (EDSP) has made noteworthy accomplishments
over the past few years, including validating test guidelines for the 11 shorter term screening
level assays; issuing test orders for the first list of 67 pesticide chemicals to undergo screening;
and reviewing test order responses, other relevant information, and data from the initial
screening level studies. In FY 2013 the program made progress toward validating Tier 2 longer
1094
-------
term test methods; renewing and amending the Information Collection Request (ICR) in order to
send out test orders for the second list of chemicals, which includes water contaminants and
pesticide active ingredients; and developing a plan to increase use of computational models and
molecular-based (in vitro) high-throughput assays to prioritize and screen EDSP chemicals.
FY 2013 Performance Accomplishments
TSCA Work Plan Chemical Risk Assessments
As discussed above, EPA has made significant strides toward fulfilling its long-range goal of
completing assessments for the more than 80 TSCA Work Plan Chemicals identified for
prioritized review by the Agency in 2012. Draft risk assessments were released in FY 2013 for
five Work Plan Chemicals and work was commenced for another six, including three flame
retardants. These accomplishments provide a solid foundation for achieving the ambitious
chemical assessment goals laid out in EPA 's FY 2014-2018 Strategic Plan. EPA plans to release
a total of 19 draft assessments for public comment and peer review through FY 2015 and address
all remaining Work Plan Chemicals by 2018.
CBI Review Program
Through its Confidential Business Information (CBI) Review Program, launched in FY 2010,
EPA works to achieve greater public access to chemical data by examining previously submitted
CBI claims to determine whether those claims are valid under the TSCA. In the past, public
access to health and safety studies containing chemical data has been restricted by CBI claims
submitted by industry under TSCA.
EPA's original strategic target was to
complete by FY 2015 the review of 22,483
existing CBI cases potentially containing
health and safety studies, making available
chemical identities previously claimed as
confidential to the extent allowed by law.
In FY 2013, EPA reviewed more than
3,000 existing case filings under the
TSCA, for a cumulative total of 17,617
cases reviewed through that fiscal year
(see graph to right).
Percentage of existing CBI claims for chemical identity in
health and safety studies reviewed and, as appropriate,
challenged.
Performance Trend Data
59.7
13.4
I
FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11
FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15
•Measure drops in F/201S
This milestone was achieved using creative and more efficient approaches to the review of
documents that enabled broad filtering of certain filings, such as identifying where chemical
names were publicly available from another public index, a Federal Register notice, or a TSCA
test rule. Subject to resource availability, the projected completion date for reviews of all
previously submitted TSCA CBI filings believed to contain health and safety studies has been
advanced to the close of FY 2014—a year ahead of schedule. As a result of the work
accomplished in the CBI Review Program in FY 2013 and prior years, EPA in FY 2014 expects
to be able to release 1,000 health and safety studies on chemicals in commerce that were
1095
-------
previously treated as CBI or otherwise not made publicly available, bringing the cumulative
number of TSCA health and safety studies declassified to nearly 2,000.
Pesticide Registration Reviews
EPA initiates a registration review by establishing a docket for a pesticide registration review
case and opening the docket for public review and comment. The Agency publishes a Federal
Register notice that announces the
availability of the docket and provides a
comment period of at least 60 days.
Anyone may submit data or information in
response to the request for comments.
EPA will consider information received
during the comment period in conducting a
pesticide's registration review and
completing a final work plan, which
explains what information EPA has about
the pesticide and the anticipated path
forward for the remainder of registration
review (see graph to right). By sharing this
information in the docket, EPA anticipates that the public will be better able to see what types of
new or available data or other information would be helpful as it moves toward a decision.
Through registration review, EPA is reviewing each registered pesticide every 15 years to
determine whether it still meets the FIFRA standard for registration. In this way, the Agency is
ensuring that all registered pesticides do not cause unreasonable risks to human health, workers,
or the environment when used as directed on product labeling. The scope and depth of the
Agency's reviews are tailored to the circumstances, so registration reviews are commensurate
with the complexity of issues currently
associated with each pesticide.
Number of pesticide registration review dockets opened.
Number of pesticide registration review final work plans
completed.
Performance Trend Data
80
70
« 60
^5 50
0.
.£ 40
| 30
20
10
- 7
_ 0 70 70
-
Target
• Actual
-
:
•
70
i
73 73
' FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15
103
Performance Trend Data
By exceeding the number of planned
docket openings and final work plans in
FY 2013, EPA is demonstrating its
commitment to—and progress toward—its
statutory mandate to complete the first 15-
year cycle of registration review by
October 1, 2022 (see graph to left). Input
received during the comment periods will
help improve the accuracy and reliability
of the risk assessments planned during
registration review. This will allow EPA to fully assess the safety of all pesticide active
ingredients and make sound regulatory decisions to ensure the continued safe use of pesticides.
FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15
1096
-------
Percent reduction of children's exposure to rodenticides.
Performance Trend Data
25
20
§ 15
y
5
-
— Target
• Actual
' FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11
1?
FY12 FY13
25
10
FY14 FY15
Reduction of Children's Exposure to Rodenticides
EPA aims to reduce rodenticide incidents involving younger children and infants by requiring
new rodenticide products be placed in tamper-resistant bait station. In support of this effort, EPA
has initiated regulatory action to cancel
and remove non-compliant rodenticide
products from the consumer market and
expects to see continued reductions in
incidents involving children less than six
years old. In FY 2013, EPA exceeded its
goal of achieving a 5 percent reduction in
rodenticide exposure incidents in children
ages 1-6, by instead achieving a 12
percent reduction in rodenticide exposure
incidents in this age group (see graph to
right).
Evaluating Toxicity in High-Priority Chemicals
EPA's chemical safety researchers used chemical screening technology to evaluate over 1,800
high-priority chemicals for potential toxicity. The innovative chemical screening technology
tests for different types of toxicity, such as reproductive and developmental effects, and cancer.
To complement the toxicity data, EPA researchers also developed automated predictive models
for chemical exposures. These models were developed using critical exposure data (consumer
product use data, chemical ingredients/composition data, and human activity patterns) captured
by EPA researchers. Having rapid, automated predictions for toxicity and exposure provides
EPA with the means for efficient risk-based prioritization of chemicals. This research is taking
the steps to implement the National Academies of Science recommendations in the Exposure
Science in the 21- Century: A Vision and a Strategy report and the Toxicity Testing in the 21-
Century report.
FY 2013 Performance Challenges
Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting Certified Firms
EPA's strategy to reduce risks from lead-based paint in homes and child-occupied facilities is
focused in part on implementing the Lead Renovation, Repair, and Painting (RRP) Rule, which
took effect in April 2010. This regulation requires that firms performing renovation, repair, or
painting activities that disturb lead-based paint in homes or child-occupied facilities built before
1978 be certified by EPA (or an EPA-authorized state) to conduct such work, use certified
renovators trained by EPA-approved training providers and follow lead-safe work practices.
These work practices are designed to protect children and others from harmful exposure to lead-
based paint that may be disturbed while such activities are taking place.
1097
-------
Cumulative number of certified Renovation Repair and Painting
firms.
Performance Trend Data
150000
120000
90000
60000
30000
40000
11-1,H34
59,143
FYOH FY09 FY10 FY1 1 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15
Through FY 2013, EPA and authorized
states have certified 133,587 firms under
the Lead Renovation, Repair, and
Painting Rule (see graph to left). EPA
originally estimated that 140,000 firms
would be certified through FY 2013, but
outreach work has been constrained by
reduced budgetary resources, continued
slow growth in the renovation industry
and possibly a lack of public awareness
about the benefits of using certified
firms. Although the cumulative number
of certified firms continued to increase in
FY 2013, the rate of increase has slowed since this measure began in FY 2010, in part due to the
economic slow-down. Accordingly, the Agency's FY 2014 target is a cumulative total of
138,000 certified firms.
Implementation of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) During Registration Review
The ESA requires all federal agencies to ensure that their regulatory actions are not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of listed threatened or endangered species or destroy or
adversely modify their critical habitat, including EPA's registration of pesticides in the United
States. It is a challenge for EPA to implement the ESA while meeting its registration review
statutory deadline, primarily due to the additional time and resources required for EPA to comply
with ESA requirements for each registration review.
EPA and the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, and the Interior requested that the National
Research Council of the National Academy of Science convene a committee of independent
experts to examine topics pertaining to tools and approaches for assessing the effects of proposed
FIFRA actions on endangered and threatened species and their critical habitats. The NAS
released its report in April 2013 recommending that EPA, the National Marine Fisheries Service,
and Fish and Wildlife Service develop and use a common risk assessment approach that
incorporates specific scientific and technical criteria. Working together, scientists from the
requesting agencies have met, analyzed the recommendations, and developed interim approaches
they will jointly implement as part of a phased iterative process. They are also identifying future
tools, models, and approaches that will need to be developed over a period of years.
The Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP)
The EDSP continues to progress toward full implementation with ongoing evaluation of
chemicals, prioritization of the universe of chemicals and greater use of 21st century tools.
However, the EDSP also continues to experience delays due to the complexity of the scientific
and regulatory processes associated with the program. New test methods for definitive testing
has been developed, but require significant scientific validation prior to regulatory use and new
test methods involve significant adjustments in extant testing laboratories performing these
complex studies that often require whole animals and novel testing methods. Delays in the initial
1098
-------
screening level assays, for example, have required adjustments in data review schedules and
estimated resources needed to render decisions on regulatory risk assessments and management
options.
EPA's updated EDSP Comprehensive Management Plan was issued June 28, 2012. This plan
provides internal strategic guidance to better anticipate, address, and manage challenges
encountered by the program. As the EDSP progresses through phases of implementation, new
performance measures have been developed for 2014 to reflect the major activities including the
number of completed screening level decisions and the number of new computational test
methods made available on the endocrine pathways to allow the program to be more strategic in
our testing approach. Development of the Comprehensive Management Plan and new
performance measures address recent Office of Inspector General recommendations and allow
EDSP to optimize the use of 21st century technologies to enhance the overall efficiency and
effectiveness of the program.
In FY 2013, the EDSP continued to review public comments on its proposed second list of
chemicals to undergo initial screening level studies and, it did not accomplish the goal of issuing
additional test orders for screening those chemicals. This second list includes drinking water
contaminants, in addition to pesticide active ingredients; it was revised and issued in June 2013
and pending the approval of the Information Collection Request (ICR), the Agency anticipates
issuing test orders across the three-year duration of the ICR.
The EDSP continues to pursue validation of remaining longer term, definitive reproduction
assays that address bird, fish, frog, and
invertebrate taxa. In FY 2013, the program
submitted five ecological methods for
external peer review, and an additional
screening level assay that seeks to replace
the use of whole animals with human
recombinant cell lines (see graph to left).
The FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel
report for the review of the inter-
laboratory validation data for the bird,
fish, frog, mysid, and copepod species has
been submitted to the Agency as of
September 30, 2013, and the Human
Recombinant Estrogen Receptor Tier 1 test method integrated summary report had been
submitted for external peer review on September 30, 2013.
Number of screening and testing
decisions have been reached.
assays for which validation
Performance Trend Data
e
5
en 4
tn r,
-------
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.
To advance P2, EPA focuses on two key strategies: fostering the development of P2 solutions
(greener/leaner/safer chemicals, technologies, and practices) and promoting increased use of
those solutions (e.g., increased consumer purchasing of greener products; increased industrial
application of greener technologies and practices). These strategies have demonstrated success in
reducing the use of hazardous materials, energy, and water and the generation of GHGs, while
significantly increasing the use of safer chemicals and products and enabling businesses and
governments to reduce their costs. These strategies are key elements of EPA's approach to
achieving a sustainable future.
With respect to fostering the development of new P2 solutions, significant accomplishments in
FY 2013 included:
• Launching a "One-EPA" green chemistry website, developed in collaboration with the
national green chemistry program and EPA regional offices (users can search green
chemistry technology solutions by industry sector, by technology, and by year);
• Developing draft guidelines for assessing environmental performance standards and eco-
labels in federal purchasing for public comment; and
• Updating the Electronics Environmental Benefits Calculator to include new imaging
equipment and TV standards.
With respect to promoting increased use of P2 solutions, significant accomplishments in FY
2013 included:
• Convening the Green Chemistry Roundtable with Presidential Green Chemistry Award
winners and other stakeholders;
• Initiating an E3 pilot program to incorporate green chemistry thinking into E3 facility
assessments;
• Developing a P2/green chemistry training pilot program to explore innovative
sustainable/green chemistry, green engineering, and DfE technology solutions;
• Making DfE's Safer Chemical Ingredient List information publically available through
the ChemView portal;
• Conducting over 300 E3 facility reviews in collaboration with EPA's federal partners.
• Launching an online resource directory for green sports; and
• Conducting twelve technical assistance webinars for Federal Electronics Challenge
(FEC) partners and granting FEC awards to 27 federal facilities.
The FY 2013 outcome measure results stemming from these FY 2013 accomplishments will be
available in October 2014 due to regular data lags that are necessary to calculate and compile the
results from the P2 program. The program's most currently available outcome measure results,
1100
-------
provided in this FY 2013 report, are associated with FY 2012 accomplishments (which can be
seen in the graphs throughout this section).
FY 2013 Performance Accomplishments
Presidential Green Chemistry Challenge Awards
The Presidential Green Chemistry Challenge Awards promote the environmental and economic
benefits of developing and using novel green chemistry. These prestigious annual awards
recognize chemical technologies that incorporate the principles of green chemistry into chemical
design, manufacture, and use.
•
The FY 2012 Presidential Green
Chemistry Challenge awardees focused on
innovations that had very high
contributions to reducing GHGs, along
with hazardous materials and cost savings,
compared to recent years. One of the
awardees, Cytec Industries Inc.,
developed a new scale inhibitor for use in
converting bauxite ore to alumina, the raw
material for aluminum; this technology is
attributed to saving trillions of BTUs,
preventing the emission of billions of
Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (MTCO2e) reduced
or offset through pollution prevention.
Performance Trend Data
10 (-
"in
J
I. 6
&
8 4
5 2
_
— Target
• Actual
5.9
- 3.45
I I
' FY08 FY09
FY10
8.8
6.8
57 I
•
I
i-
1
o
15
11 1
I.
FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
3.42
1
FY15
pounds of carbon dioxide equivalents (CC^e) annually.
Energy, Economy, Environment (E3) and Green Suppliers Network (GSN) Programs
In FY 2013, EPA continued to expand 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.
In FY 2013, the Pollution Prevention program conducted over 300 E3 facility reviews. Together
with GSN assessments conducted that year, EPA has completed more than 600 facility reviews
and assessments since FY 2010.
Design for the Environment (DfE) Safer Products Labeling Program and Safer Chemicals
Ingredients List
In FY 2012, EPA began tracking the percent increase in the use of safer chemicals from the FY
2009 baseline of 476 million pounds. In FY 2013, the P2 program increased the use of safer
chemicals products by 48 percent relative to the FY 2009 baseline.
Through FY 2013, over 2,500 products have been recognized by the DfE Safer Products
Labeling Program and contain the DfE label. In FY 2013, the DfE program began implementing
1101
-------
audit procedures that will ensure data accuracy by removing products that are no longer in
commerce, no longer meet criteria for labeling, or are no longer labeled.
In FY 2013, the P2 program added an additional 130 chemicals, including 119 fragrances (the
first entries in that category), to the Safer Chemical Ingredient List, which now contains over 600
chemicals. The list serves as a resource for product manufacturers in identifying chemicals that
the DfE program has already evaluated and identified as safer for use in products.
1102
-------
STRATEGIC GOAL 5:
ENFORCING ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS
1103
-------
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 2013 Performance Measures
Met: 10 Not Met: 5 Data Unavailable: 0 (Total Measures: 15)
suring ihe Safely of QiemicaK
and Preventing Pollution
£706,979.7
Enforcing Environmental Laws
$787,904.9
Taking Action
on Climate Change
and Improving Air Quality
Cleaning Up Communities and
Advancing Sustainable Development
$3,484,465.0
Protecting America's Waters
$4,066,455.9
Met
Not Met
Data available* after
February 2SF 2014
Objective 1
Strategic Objective
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.
Goal 5 Total
FY 2013 Obligations
(in thousands)
$787,904.9
$787,904.9
% of Goal 5 Funds
100%
100%
Due to rounding, some numbers might add up to slightly less or more than 1OO%.
1104
-------
GOAL 5 OVERVIEW
Vigorous enforcement to achieve compliance 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 a strong enforcement presence
in combination with new strategies to compel compliance with rules already in place. In
conducting its enforcement and compliance assurance program, EPA targets the most serious
water, air, and chemical hazards and advances environmental justice by taking into account low-
income, minority, and tribal communities that are disproportionately impacted by such hazards.
EPA's FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan establishes one strategic objective under Goal 5. In FY
2013, EPA concluded high-impact enforcement cases that significantly improved Americans'
health. Based on annual performance results, EPA was largely successful in achieving targets for
10 of the 15 strategic measures that contribute to this strategic objective. In FY 2013, EPA
achieved the highest penalty year of all time and exceeded its GPRA inspection targets. The
Agency exceeded its environmental benefit targets with regard to reductions in air, water, and
toxic and pesticide pollutants. EPA exceeded its Superfund targets with regard to reaching a
settlement or taking enforcement actions at all private party sites before the start of a remedial
action and obtaining commitments to clean up contaminated soil and groundwater media as a
result of concluded Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA) and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) corrective enforcement
actions. EPA exceeded GPRA targets on significant criminal cases, percentage of individual
defendants, and criminal conviction rate. FY 2013 was the strongest year in criminal sentencing
since 2005, including a combined 161 years of incarceration for environmental crimes,
demonstrating the seriousness of the criminal cases that EPA investigated.
However, our focus on high-impact civil and criminal cases, combined with mid-year
sequestration cuts and furloughs, means that the overall number of civil case initiations and
conclusions will tend to be lower than in past years. In FY 2013, EPA did not meet its GPRA
target for civil case initiations and conclusions. Regardless, the FY 2013 annual performance
measures and results presented in the eight-year table included in the "Program Performance
Assessment" section of the FY 2015 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification,
along with the illustrative activities, facts, and examples that follow in the separate performance
accomplishment section, indicate that the Agency is making significant progress overall toward
enforcing environmental laws.
EPA's enforcement and compliance program also identifies and focuses on priority
environmental risks and noncompliance problems through its National Enforcement Initiatives.
EPA developed and implements six National Enforcement Initiatives to address some of the
more complex pollution problems in our nation:
1. Keeping raw sewage and contaminated stormwater out of our nation's waters.
2. Preventing animal waste from contaminating surface and ground water.
1105
-------
3. Reducing widespread air pollution from the largest sources (especially the coal-fired
utility, cement, glass, and acid sectors).
4. Cutting toxic air pollution that affects communities' health.
5. Ensuring energy extraction sector compliance with environmental laws.
6. Reducing pollution from mineral processing operations.
EPA made significant advances in addressing these problems in FY 2013.
As the Agency continues making progress in addressing pollution and looks for innovation and
efficiencies, the enforcement program is implementing its new initiative (called Next Generation
Compliance, or Next Gen) to achieve better compliance results and reduce pollution by taking
advantage of new information and monitoring technologies. EPA is focusing on five main areas:
1. Designing regulations and permits that are easier to implement and build in approaches
that drive better compliance.
2. Using and promoting advanced emissions/pollutant detection technology to more easily
see pollutant discharges and noncompliance.
3. Shifting toward electronic reporting so we have more accurate, complete, and timely
information on pollution and compliance while saving time and money.
4. Developing and using innovative enforcement approaches to achieve more widespread
compliance.
5. Expanding transparency (such as making compliance data more accessible to the public).
More information about EPA's FY 2013 enforcement results can be found at
http://www2.epa.gov/enforcement/enforcement-annual-results-fiscal-year-2013.
1106
-------
EPA Contributing Programs
Environmental Justice
Compliance Assistance 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
1107
-------
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 2013 Performance Accomplishments
FY 2012-2013 Agency Priority Goal: 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
EPA issued a new final Agency policy to establish electronic reporting as the default
assumption in developing new rules. Over the past two years, the Agency established electronic
reporting in five new programs by:
1. Finalizing a rule requiring all Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) facilities to submit their
TRI data electronically using the TRI-MEweb reporting application.
2. Publishing a proposed rule requiring facilities regulated under the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program to electronically report information
and data related to the NPDES program in lieu of filing written reports to state, tribe,
territory, and federal regulators. On July 30, 2013, EPA proposed the NPDES Electronic
Reporting Rule, which will modernize Clean Water Act (CWA) reporting processes for
hundreds of thousands of municipalities, industries, and other facilities by converting to
an electronic data reporting system. The proposed rule would make facility-specific
information, such as inspection and enforcement history, pollutant monitoring results,
and other data required by permits accessible to the public through EPA's website. If
implemented as proposed, in addition to dramatically cutting costs for states and other
regulatory authorities, the rule would make it easier for the public and government
entities alike to quickly access critical data on compliance and pollution that may be
affecting communities.
3. Publishing a final rule requiring electronic reporting under the Toxic Substances Control
Act (TSCA) sections 4, 5, 8a, and 8d in December 2013.
4. Collecting TSCA section 5 Pre-Manufacturing Notifications electronically through the
use of e-PMN software.
5. Collecting all reporting data for the Chemical Data Reporting Rule electronically for the
2012 submission period.
EPA also built a generic suite of reusable services offered through the Central Data Exchange
that EPA and its co-regulators (states, tribes, and territories) can use as they develop e-reporting
systems to meet EPA's regulatory performance standards (e.g., electronic signature, non-
repudiation). Two state pilots are underway to test these services. The Agency also developed
an automated workflow system to expedite the review process for all new EPA and co-regulator
e-reporting data systems that establish electronic reporting.
1108
-------
In related efforts, EPA created a conceptual blueprint and the charter for a new collaborative
State and EPA E-Enterprise Leadership Council to work closely with states and the
Environmental Council of the States on e-enterprise activities. The Agency trained 370 EPA staff
and managers on designing effective rules to maximize enforcement and compliance benefits in
support of Next Gen. EPA is also working to incorporate Next Gen concepts, including
certification requirements into proposed rules. One example in the oil and gas sector highlights
efforts to develop rules with compliance built in. In a proposed emissions control rule released in
April, EPA outlined an idea to make compliance easier and reduce related costs. EPA asked
manufacturers to certify air pollution control equipment as "compliance ready" so energy
extraction companies could buy those models, eliminating the need for separate field testing. The
user's certification can then be cross-checked with the manufacturer's sales confirmation,
making compliance checks easier. EPA is integrating Next Gen tools into settlements where
appropriate—for example, the Shell Oil settlement's new controls and requirements include the
installation of a state-of-the-art system to monitor benzene levels at the fence line of the refinery
and chemical plant near a residential neighborhood and school, and uploading the results online
for the community to see.
Level of Effort Measures and Reducing, Treating, and Eliminating Pollutants
The FY 2013 enforcement results reflect EPA's commitment to vigorous civil and criminal
enforcement for cases with the highest impact on public health and the environment, and to
innovations in targeting and strategic use of enforcement resources to reduce pollution and
improve compliance. Through enforcement actions, EPA secures commitments for future
pollution controls to reduce, treat, or eliminate millions of pounds of pollution. These
commitments are a direct result of inspections, case initiations, and case conclusions, which are
our level of effort measures.
Typically, the results for these traditional measures are driven by several large cases. For FY
2013, EPA enforcement cases resulted in commitments to reduce, treat, or eliminate an estimated
1.4 billion pounds of pollution of air, water, pesticides, toxics, and hazardous waste pollution.
The reductions for air, water, and toxic and pesticide pollutants are significantly greater than the
FY 2013 targets. The reductions for hazardous waste pollutants are lower than the target as a
result of several large cases that were projected for FY 2013 but will resolve in FY 2014 instead.
In FY 2013, EPA conducted 18,000 inspections and evaluations, initiated 2,400 civil judicial and
administrative cases, and concluded 2,500 such cases. EPA exceeded its target of 17,000 federal
inspections conducted, but conducted 2,000 fewer inspections in FY 2013 than in FY 2012. The
case initiation and conclusion numbers were lower than the target (3,200 and 3,000, respectively)
for the second year in a row. These lower case numbers resulted from our efforts to balance
concluding new cases with pipeline management of ongoing cases and tracking of previously
concluded consent decrees, given that all are funded from the same pool of resources. In FY
2013, EPA civil enforcement actions resulted in a total of $1.1 billion in civil penalties
(administrative and judicial) to achieve compliance, punish misconduct, and deter other
violators. Factoring in the criminal program, discussed later, the FY 2013 total is $2.6 billion in
criminal fines and restitution and civil penalties, the highest amount ever.
1109
-------
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:
1. Keeping raw sewage and contaminated stormwater out of our nation's waters.
2. Preventing animal waste from contaminating surface and ground water.
3. Reducing widespread air pollution from the largest sources (especially the coal-fired
utility, cement, glass, and acid sectors).
4. Cutting toxic air pollution that affects communities' health.
5. Ensuring energy extraction sector compliance with environmental laws.
6. Reducing pollution from mineral processing operations.
In 2013, 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 on wastewater
and stormwater management. This approach allows municipalities to prioritize CWA
requirements, addressing the most pressing public health and environmental protection issues
first while maintaining existing regulatory standards. 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, 85 percent of large combined sewer systems and 85 percent of sanitary
sewer systems are on track to address their pollution problems. In a series of CWA settlements,
cities are required to pursue measures such as controlling wet weather flows, reducing or
replacing gray sewer overflows, and identifying comprehensive land use policies.
One example is the EPA and Department of Justice (DOJ) settlement agreement with King
County, Washington, to address unauthorized overflows of untreated raw sewage and to reduce
pollution levels in urban stormwater. King County owns and operates the largest wastewater
treatment and collection system in the state of Washington and currently discharges
approximately 900 million gallons of raw sewage per year through its combined sewer overflows
(CSOs). The King County consent decree requires the County to implement its approved Long
Term Control Plan (LTCP) to control its CSO discharges by no later than December 31, 2030.
The County must develop and implement a Comprehensive System-Wide Operations and
Maintenance Plan and a Joint Operations and System Optimization Plan with the city of Seattle.
The injunctive relief will cost the County approximately $860 million and will reduce CSO
discharges by approximately 95 to 99 percent. The consent decree also gives the County the
opportunity to propose the integration of water quality improvement projects with its approved
LTCP through an Integrated Planning Proposal that the County needs to submit to EPA by June
30, 2018. The consent decree further allows the County to substitute green infrastructure projects
for gray infrastructure projects at four of its approved CSO control projects. The County will pay
a civil penalty of $400,000.
1110
-------
As part of the National Enforcement 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. Additionally,
., A • 4.- • ^ e CONSENT DECREE NEGOTIATIONS WITH
the Agency is continuing New Source SEATTLE ^ Km& COUNTY FQR CQMBINED
Review initiatives in the coal-fired SEWER OVERFLOW CONTAMINATION
plant, cement kiln, glass, and acid ^ py 20135 EPA Reglon 10 entered
consent
5
manufacturing sectors, and is securing decrees with King County and the City of
major reductions in emissions that Seattle. resulting in the municipalities
adversely affect community health. committing to more than $1.4 billion in work and
EPA continued to focus on the largest more than $750,000 in penalties to protect water
cases — more than 79 percent of sources quality in the Puget Sound, the second-largest
have been investigated or are currently estuary in the United States. The consent decrees
under investigation. Our enforcement recluire the county and Clt? to develop and
actions also required companies to implement a joint operations and system
, , ... • . ,, , optimization plan to improve the holistic
conduct mitigation pro ects that ^ . j .• • r- i • i- .
0 it operation and coordination of their combined
promote renewable energy gewer sygtem ^ twQ decreeg ar£ among ^
development and protect clean air for firgt m the natlon to mcorporate EPA'S Integrated
local communities. For example, Ash Municipal Stormwater and Wastewater Planning
Grove Cement Company agreed to pay Approach Framework.
a $2.5 million penalty and invest
approximately $30 million in pollution
control technology at its nine Portland
cement manufacturing plants to resolve
alleged violations of the Clean Air Act. The consent decree requires Ash Grove to install and
continuously operate current best available control technology at several of its kilns.
The Agency is improving its enforcement activities to control air toxics that pose significant
risks to communities 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. For example, as discussed in the next section, Shell Oil agreed to resolve alleged violations
of the Clean Air Act at a large refinery and chemical plant in Deer Park, Texas, by spending at
least $115 million to control harmful air pollution from industrial flares and other processes, and
by paying a $2.6 million civil penalty.
Additionally, the Agency is taking actions to address the highest-risk mineral processing sites
across the nation. These actions include (but are not limited to) imposing civil penalties and
requiring restoration of land and stream beds. 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. For example, in
FY 2013, EPA reached a settlement with XTO, a subsidiary of Exxon Mobil Corporation, to
resolve an alleged CWA violation related to the unpermitted discharge of wastewater generated
by the company's natural gas exploration and production activities in Pennsylvania. The
1111
-------
settlement requires XTO to spend an estimated $20 million on a comprehensive plan to improve
its wastewater management practices by recycling, properly disposing of, and preventing spills
of wastewater generated from the company's natural gas exploration and production activities in
Pennsylvania and West Virginia.
Details on actions taken under all of the National Enforcement Initiatives can be found at
http://www2.epa.gov/enforcement/national-enforcement-initiatives.
Results from Enforcement Cases
In FY 2013, EPA enforcement actions resulted in companies investing an estimated $7.3 billion
in actions and equipment to control pollution and redress harm from pollution (known as
injunctive relief and mitigation). These successes in controlling pollution will yield tremendous
benefits for neighboring communities. The
$7.3 billion in injunctive relief is less than ENFORCEMENT HELPS REDUCE CHEMICAL
in previous years due to a couple of HAZARDS IN SCHOOLS
extremely large Clean Air Act settlements As part of a consent agreement resolving alleged
in 2008 and 2011. Also in FY 2013, EPA RCRA violations against the Northland
obtained agreements from companies to Environmental facility in Providence, Rhode Island,
spend an estimated $22 million on beyond- the company and its owner will be required to spend
compliance projects that benefit the $252,152 performing chemical cleanouts,
environment and public health (known as conducting hazardous waste training for school
, . , . . , • ... \ i x staff, and providing school safety equipment for
supplemental environmental projects) but . . , ,„ ,&, , , j .j,, , ,
, r . 1 • 1 11 approximately 60 high schools and middle schools.
that companies are not otherwise legally The cleanouts wlll be focused m environmental
required to perform. justice areas of Rhode Island and Massachusetts
within 50 miles of the Providence facility.
For example, Shell Oil and affiliated
partnerships agreed to resolve alleged
violations of the Clean Air Act at a large
refinery and chemical plant in Deer Park, Texas, by spending at least $115 million to control
harmful air pollution from industrial flares and other processes. Shell will implement three
mitigation projects valued at between $15 and $60 million by:
• Significantly modifying its wastewater treatment plant to reduce emissions of volatile
organic compounds (VOCs).
• Controlling VOC emissions from certain tanks by replacing two old tanks, repairing one
tank, and engaging in an innovative biweekly infrared-camera imaging program for 15
other tanks.
• Controlling emissions of hazardous air pollutants and VOCs at its benzene production
unit through enhanced monitoring and repair practices.
The company also agreed to perform two supplemental environmental projects: (1) spending $1
million to install and operate a state-of-the-art air monitoring station at its fence-line and (2)
retrofitting publicly owned vehicles in the vicinity of the complex to reduce diesel emissions at a
cost of $200,000. When fully implemented, the new controls and requirements under the consent
decree are estimated to reduce emissions by over 4,500 tons per year.
1112
-------
Another example is EPA and DOJ's settlement agreement with Safeway, the nation's second-
largest grocery store chain, which agreed to pay a $600,000 civil penalty and implement a
corporation-wide plan to significantly reduce its emissions of ozone-depleting substances from
refrigeration equipment at 659 of its stores nationwide, estimated to cost approximately $4.1
million. The settlement involves the largest number of facilities ever under the Clean Air Act's
regulations governing refrigeration equipment.
The third example is the May 2013 Consent Agreement and Final Order with Wai-mart Stores
Inc. to resolve civil violations of RCRA and the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide
Act (FIFRA). In related actions on the same day, Wal-Mart also pleaded guilty to criminal
violations of the CWA in two cases prosecuted in California, as well as criminal violations of
FIFRA in one case prosecuted in Missouri. In addition to paying $51 million in criminal and
civil penalties for the three cases, Wal-Mart will pay over $20 million to fund various
community service projects. To address the mismanagement of hazardous waste at its stores,
Wal-Mart implemented a corporation-wide hazardous waste management program. As a result of
the consent agreement and the three criminal cases, Wal-Mart will pay about $81.6 million for its
unlawful conduct.
Environmental Impact Statements
The National Environmental Policy Act requires federal agencies to consider the impacts of
proposed actions, as well as any reasonable alternatives, in their decision-making. For proposed
projects with potentially significant impacts, federal agencies prepare a detailed Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS), which is reviewed by EPA in fulfillment of its responsibilities under
Section 309 of the Clean Air Act, and made available for public comment. In FY 2013, EPA
reviewed and commented on 372 draft and final EISs. These included EISs concerning
renewable energy development, oil and gas exploration and extraction, mining, transmission
lines, and highway projects.
In FY 2013, EPA launched an interactive Web-based mapping tool that provides the public with
access and information on EISs filed with EPA for major projects proposed on federal lands and
other proposed federal actions. When visiting the website, users can click on any state for a list
of EISs, including information about the potential environmental, social, and economic impacts
of these projects. This furthers our transparency goals.
Federal Facilities Enforcement
One of numerous highlights in FY 2013 for the federal facilities enforcement program was EPA,
the Air Force, and the State of Florida signing, on September 20, 2013, a CERCLA-required
Federal Facility Agreement (FFA) at Tyndall Air Force Base. The new accord is necessary to
protect the community, to guide the cleanup, and to ensure proper accountability. Tyndall was
added to the National Priority List in 1997 due to extensive contamination and high
concentrations of probably human carcinogens, including DDT (present at some 200 times
greater than EPA's risk-based standards), chlordane, trichloroethylene (TCE), vinyl chloride,
PCBs, munitions constituents, lead, arsenic, chromium, barium and fire-suppression chemicals.
1113
-------
The Tyndall signing leaves only one overdue FFA now outstanding - at the Army's Redstone
Arsenal (AL) - among some 170 federal facilities on the NPL.
EPA also demonstrated rapid, protective cleanup enforcement at Fort Devens (MA) and NASA's
Ames Research Center (CA), restoring a remedy shutdown in the first instance and preventing
recontamination of a $9.7 million cleanup in the second. Formal CERCLA disputes were
resolved with the Department of Energy (DOE) at Oak Ridge (TN) and at the Savannah (IL)
Army Depot. Notable regulatory enforcement actions in FY 2013 included a SDWA action
against the Department of the Interior in Keams Canyon (AZ) to protect Indian Affairs school
children, a RCRA waste action against the Department of Energy at the Federal government's
largest Superfund cleanup, the Hanford Site (WA), and the first EPA environmental enforcement
action at the Pentagon. In all, the federal facility regulatory enforcement program issued about 42
administrative penalty actions and conducted more than 250 EPA-led inspections at federal
facilities in FY 2013, across all regions of the country.
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, potentially responsible parties exist, requiring them to pay for or perform
site cleanups. The Superfund law, CERCLA, gives EPA 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 potentially responsible parties
either do not exist or lack the funds or capability to conduct site cleanups. The results of EPA's
Enforcement First and cost recovery policies are shown in the table below.
1114
-------
FY 2013 ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE SUPERFUND ANNUAL RESULTS
(Inflation/Deflation Adjusted to FY 2011 Dollars)
Cost recovery:
amount of federal dollars spent by
EPA to perform site study and
cleanup that were later recovered
from PRPs
Oversight:
costs incurred by EPA to ensure
that the PRP properly conducts the
site study and cleanup, which are
then reimbursed by the PRP
Site study and cleanup:
costs incurred by PRPs to address
contamination at particular sites
FY2009
(Million $)
387
82
2,082
FY2010
(Million $)
158
84
1,448
FY2011
(Million $)
300
74
3,000
FY2012
(Million $)
172
67
657
FY 2013
(Million $)
292
93
1,242
Data source for cleanup and cost recovery: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Information System (CERCLIS). Data sources for oversight: Compass (FY 2012-2013); Integrated Financial
Management System (previous fiscal years).
During FY 2013, EPA obtained commitments to clean up 740 million cubic yards of
contaminated soil and groundwater media as a result of concluded CERCLA and RCRA
corrective action enforcement actions. This amount exceeds the FY 2013 target of 275 million
cubic yards and is an increase from last year, FY 2012, when EPA obtained commitments to
clean up 400 million cubic yards of contaminated soil and groundwater media. In addition, in FY
2013, the largest single-site cash-out settlement in the history of the Superfund program
occurred. On September 19, 2013, the U.S. District Court for Massachusetts entered a CERCLA
consent decree whereby AVX Corporation agreed to pay $366.25 million toward the cleanup of
PCB contamination in New Bedford Harbor. The payment will mean that the cleanup, which
under current funding would have taken 40 years, will be completed in five to seven years.
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.
FY 2013 was the strongest year in criminal sentencing since 2005, including a combined 161
years of incarceration for environmental crimes. The conviction rate was 94 percent. The total
amount of fines and restitution from EPA's criminal enforcement program was $1.5 billion,
compared to $44 million in FY 2012. Court-ordered environmental projects amounted to $3
billion during FY 2013. This large amount was largely the result of three major criminal
prosecutions associated with the Deepwater Horizon oil rig explosion and massive oil spill in the
Gulf of Mexico.
1115
-------
In January 2013, BP Exploration and Production Inc. was sentenced to pay $4 billion in criminal
fines and environmental restoration projects—the largest criminal resolution in U.S. history—
after pleading guilty to 11 counts of felony manslaughter, one count of felony obstruction of
Congress, and violations of the Clean Water and Migratory Bird Treaty Acts for its role in the
2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster that killed 11 people and the subsequent oil spill that resulted
in the largest environmental disaster in U.S. history.
The percentage of criminal cases having the most significant health, environmental, and
deterrence impacts exceeded the FY 2013 target of 43 percent, with an end-of-year result equal
to 44 percent. In FY 2013, 297 environmental crime cases were opened. This is a 7 percent
decrease from FY 2012, the result of EPA's criminal enforcement program's increased focus on
pursuing bigger and more complex cases. This fiscal year, EPA brought criminal charges against
278 defendants, which is a 20 percent increase from FY 2012.
Increasing Transparency
During FY 2013, there were numerous activities to increase transparency. One example is EPA's
modernization of the Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO) website. ECHO
provides public access to regulatory compliance and enforcement data for more than 800,000
regulated facilities. In FY 2013, the ECHO website added interactive state performance
dashboards and comparative maps that provide more transparent information about the
performance of state and EPA enforcement and compliance programs across the country.
Advancing Environmental Justice
During FY 2013, following a one-year pilot, EPA reissued its internal guidance for staff to use
for compliance and enforcement actions. The guidelines help EPA increase the focus on
environmental justice concerns in communities where it brings enforcement actions, identify any
appropriate opportunities to address such concerns through enforcement, and improve its ability
to measure and report on its enforcement work in vulnerable communities.
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 or drive performance
improvements at both regulated facilities and government.
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 is working to convert to 21st century electronic reporting technology. This effort will
require some short-term budget investments but is expected to provide substantial long-term
benefits for industry, states, EPA, and the public. More specifically, electronic reporting allows
1116
-------
for much better targeting, promotes evidence-based approaches, and even lays a foundation for
greater transparency. In July 2013, the enforcement program proposed a rule requiring facilities
regulated under the NPDES program to electronically report information and data related to that
program in lieu of filing written reports to state, tribal, territorial, and federal regulators. The
proposal will modernize CWA reporting processes for hundreds of thousands of municipalities,
industries, and other facilities by converting to an electronic data reporting system.
Enforcement Program Performance Measures
EPA wants to adopt a new strategic approach to performance measurement to better address and
communicate the impact of compliance assurance and enforcement actions. In addition, EPA is
working to develop performance measures in support of the Next Generation Compliance
Initiative.
Vigorous enforcement continues to be the backbone of environmental protection. EPA's
commitment to high-impact cases that make the most difference to human health and the
environment will remain a top priority. This commitment will only be strengthened by smart
investments in innovation in order to bring the most serious violators to justice and fulfill EPA's
mission of protecting public health and the environment.
1117
-------
CROSS-CUTTING FUNDAMENTAL STRATEGIES
Introduction
This year concludes the first round of Cross-Cutting Fundamental strategies, identified in EPA's
FY 2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. These strategies stem from agency priorities and are
designed to fundamentally change how we work, both within and outside EPA, to achieve our
mission results.
By their very nature, these strategies are cross-program, agency-wide, and encourage
collaborative engagement beyond traditional organizational boundaries. Agency efforts to
advance the strategies are taking hold, buoyed by our experience over the last few years, and are
gaining momentum as we establish the new strategies to advance Administrator McCarthy's
themes in EPA's FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan.
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 embodied in the
strategies.
• The FY 2013 Action Plans can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/planandbudget/fy2013.
• The FY 2013 Action Plan Annual Progress Reports are available at
http://www2.epa.gov/planandbudget/fy2013.
Selected highlights from the Annual Progress Reports are described in the sections that follow.
1118
-------
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.
In FY 2013, the Agency continued efforts to include a broader range of people and communities
in our work and engage with communities that have been historically under-represented in our
decision-making processes. These actions expanded access to information and provided
communities and the public increased opportunities to understand and engage with the Agency.
Most strides were made in the area of limited English proficiency and environmental
information. However, our work to promote environmental education actions continued to lag in
successful completion.
Accomplishments
• To support community and citizen involvement in environmental decision-making, EPA
published 74 datasets and nine applications from the Agency's national programs in
Data.gov. Since FY 2011, EPA has published 296 raw datasets and 44 applications in
Data.gov.
• EPA's Region 8 implemented several initiatives to address issues with limited English
proficiency, including compiling a list of regional volunteer translators for numerous
languages and creating a Spanish-speaking hotline number where citizens can leave
messages and receive replies in Spanish.
• In Pennsylvania, EPA's Region 3 collaborated with the Havertown Township, the
Community Capital Campaign, and the YMCA of Philadelphia to address environmental
issues associated with the development of a YMCA next to the Havertown PCP Superfund
site. This 7,000-square-foot facility, comprising a wellness and aquatic center, a gymnasium,
a running and walking track, and a child and family development center, was built over a
portion of the ground water plume from the Superfund site. EPA worked closely with
residents and local officials to review facility designs, siting plans, and other project details
to fully mitigate any potential harm from ground water contamination from the adjacent site.
• EPA's Region 2 has engaged extensively with the culturally and demographically diverse
Brooklyn, New York neighborhoods that border the Gowanus Canal, a federal Superfund site
considered one of the nation's most contaminated water bodies. During fiscal year 2013, the
region worked closely with a broad and diverse range of stakeholders and members of the
55-member Gowanus Community Advisory Group (CAG), established to increase
community engagement on the planned cleanup. EPA provided technical assistance,
coordinated monthly CAG meetings, held several public meetings on the proposed cleanup
plan, provided opportunities for community input in English and Spanish, allowed for a
lengthy public comment period and ultimately received 1400 public comments that were
considered before the cleanup plan was finalized. In addition, the region uses its Gowanus
Canal website, a Facebook group, regular Twitter feeds and Community Updates to
1119
-------
continually expand the conversation about environmentalism in the Gowanus Canal
Community.
Challenges
• Due to resource constraints, EPA did not complete some of the planned FY 2013
environmental education initiatives. Moving forward, EPA needs to partner with major
environmental organizations to leverage resources for campus environmental education
programs.
1120
-------
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.
In FY 2013, EPA took steps to promote environmental justice and children's health through:
participation in state grant programs and National Environmental Performance Partnership
System (NEPPS) agreements; providing enhanced guidance to agency rule writers in the
development of regulations governing health risks to children and the underserved; the
development of recommendations to improve future community-focused efforts acquired from
regional community pilot experiences; and, by providing training opportunities for the public and
agency staff on children's health and environmental issues in underserved and minority
communities.
Accomplishments
• Enhanced agency collaboration has increased visibility of the impacts of air quality,
asthma, and noise on children's health through integration of these considerations into the
review of Environmental Impact Statements under the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA).
• EPA staff participated in 40 outreach forums to promote the Agency's voluntary
guidelines and 40 additional outreach forums support other programmatic school
environmental health tools (e.g. Tools for Schools, Schools Chemical Cleanout
Campaign, Sensible Steps to Healthier School Environments brochure and webinars).
• In the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, EPA's Region 2 identified and prioritized severely
affected areas through the EPA tool, EJSCREEN, alerting disaster relief providers with
detailed information on the existing demographics, environment, health, and economic
condition of those particularly vulnerable communities most impacted by the storm. As
an outgrowth of this work, additional training of federal recovery staff is being
considered to prepare for future disasters affecting underserved area communities.
• EPA established "Environmental Justice in Rulemaking" training materials and intranet
site to increase awareness of the environmental justice (EJ) guidance and promote early
consideration of EJ in the action development process.
• Environmental Justice Legal Tools (EJLT) Repository compiled 82 examples, from both
the NPMs and Regions, of the use of EJ legal tools to more fully ensure that programs,
policies, and activities fully protect human health and the environment in underserved,
minority and low-income communities.
1121
-------
Challenges
• Regional coordinators have encountered barriers while working within the NEPPS to
enhance communications with states. Many states are hesitant to make revisions to
agreements for unfunded initiatives.
1122
-------
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.
Over the past few years, EPA has made remarkable progress towards integrated transdisciplinary
research that takes a systems approach to sustainability. The Strategic Research Action Plans for
the Agency's six new integrated research programs are important tools for communicating this
new approach. In FY 2013, EPA: established an Executive Management Council committee to
focus on sustainability; promoted workshops on next generation monitoring; developed new
analytical tools; and, increased communication and sharing of best practices and new
tools/approaches.
Accomplishments
• EPA developed the "EPA Nitrogen Research Roadmap," an integrated, systems-based
approach for managing excess nitrogen and co-pollutants such as phosphorous in
waterways. These elements, along with sediment, degrade water quality increasing the
growth of algae and lowering or eliminating the oxygen content of waterways, often causing
"dead zones" where nothing can grow. Demonstrations of the roadmap are anticipated for
the Narragansett Bay (RI) watershed, the Mississippi-Atchafalaya River Basin, and the
northern Gulf of Mexico.
• EPA developed a Sustainability Analytics website, which provides existing science-based
tools and approaches for analyzing sustainability issues and better integrating sustainability
into environmental decision making processes.
• EPA supported implementation of several Next Generation Air Monitoring initiatives in
order to promote the development and implementation of low-cost, air monitoring
technology for use by citizens, community groups, schools, researchers, government
agencies, and industries. These FY 13 efforts include: the first public pilot launch of Village
Green Project, a community based monitoring system built into a park bench platform using
solar power with wireless streaming in Durham in June; the 2nd Annual Air Pollutions Apps
and Sensors Workshop which was held in March; and continued Open Source Challenges
(like My Air My Health).
• EPA's Region 4 partnered with each of its eight states to create the nation's first region-wide
customized recycling measurement program. This program allows government to collect,
manage, report and analyze all information related to solid waste recycling and diversion
programs without creating a new reporting requirement. This program allows access to real-
time data and has reduced the administrative time associated with paper-based reporting
systems, increased the accuracy of reporting and increased thee states' efficiency in
responding to legislative requests. For example, the State of Tennessee estimates a savings
of $75,000 per year in reduced information technology expenses.
1123
-------
• EPA's Region 9 in partnership with the Clean Air Technology Initiative, the California Air
Resources Board, the California Energy Commission, and several other local, state, and
federal agencies is helping to reduce emissions and bring new clean air and energy
technologies to market using innovative solutions and non-traditional funding. In FY 2013,
Region 9 funded several initiatives in California including: replacement of over 60 old diesel
delivery trucks and school buses with battery-electric vehicles that emit no emissions; and,
joint funding for the initial testing of zero-emission battery-electric and hybrid electric-
natural gas trucks that operate on electric lines around the ports of Los Angeles and Long
Beach. Joint funding was also provided in the San Joaquin Valley for battery-electric, hybrid
electric-natural gas and hybrid electric diesel trucks and several biogas waste-to-energy
projects to convert methane to a transportation fuel at landfills, food waste processing
facilities and dairies.
Challenges
• Advancing science, research and technological innovation in a time of declining resources
and a reduced scientific workforce is a major challenge for both planning and managing the
sustainability of our existing workforce. EPA is utilizing the ORD Workforce Enhancement
Project and senior ORD leaders to identify opportunities to streamline programs and identify
ways to mitigate the Agency's restrictions on hiring and the gaps in expertise caused by
attrition.
• EPA is seeking to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its laboratory science
capability by conducting an enterprise-level analysis of the Agency's entire network of
Regional, Program, and Research and Development laboratory facilities.
1124
-------
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 2013, EPA strengthened its state, tribal, and international partnerships to achieve
mutual environmental and human health goals. Key FY2013 accomplishments include:
partnering with states for timely implementation of Hurricane Sandy environmental recovery
efforts; issuance of the Tribal General Assistance Program (GAP) Guidance; and, helping to
negotiate the United States' signing of the Minamata Convention to help reduce global mercury
pollution. In addition other FY 2013 progress is highlighted below, to illustrate how engagement
with our partners through increased consultation, collaboration, and shared accountability has
advanced agency mission results.
Accomplishments
State/Local
• EPA's Region 4 took final action on 47 State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions in the
backlog, exceeding the target by 62 percent, which included working with the states to
resolve difficult policy issues in order to meet court-ordered deadlines for 17 of the SIPS.
• EPA's Region 7 and the Iowa Department of Natural Resources signed a five-year plan with
steps to correct deficiencies in National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permitting
and enforcement for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations.
• EPA's Region 8 completed an effort to improve the FY 2014 Performance Partnership
Agreement (PPA) process. Past processes were evaluated based on discussions with each
Region 8 state and internally. Steps to improve the process were discussed with each state
during its mid-year meeting. Changes were made to use MAX.gov to better share
information with and track progress for each PPA As a result of these efforts, Region 8 state
PPAs were signed by the Regional Administrator earlier than planned or on time.
• In response to Hurricane Sandy, EPA's Region 2 assisted the New Jersey and New York
joint field offices in developing and carrying out the recovery support strategy adopted under
the National Disaster Recovery Framework. EPA project managers assessed storm impacts at
all hazardous waste sites in the affected areas. EPA staff worked with state personnel on
ambient air monitoring for burning vegetative debris, developed guidance on the handling of
abandoned boats and vehicles, advised on rebuilding using ENERGY STAR and WaterSense
products, coordinated issuance of fuel waivers and other necessary documentation to
minimize disruption to fuel supplies in these states, and worked with the States to determine
project eligibility and other criteria for nearly $600 million in supplemental SRF assistance to
New York and New Jersey.
• EPA's Regions planned and facilitated numerous drills and exercises with state and local
responders, supported Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPCs), and attended LEPC
meetings throughout the country. Region 3 also provided EPA-led training programs on
1125
-------
topics such as Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER), pool
chemicals, spills, and emergency medical services, as well as a wide variety of hazardous
materials training courses for state and local emergency first responders.
• EPA conducted formal federalism consultations for the Uniform National Discharge
Standards (UNDS) for Military Vessels and for the New Source Performance Standards and
Emissions Guidelines for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills. The UNDS action was the first
federalism consultation triggered by the preemptive effects of a rule on future state/local
rulemaking rather than intergovernmental costs. Outside the realm of formal federalism
consultations, EPA conducted outreach with intergovernmental partners on high-profile
actions and initiatives such as storm water, the Waters of the United States rulemaking, and
the President's Climate Action Plan.
• EPA completed a review of the National Environmental Performance Partnership System
(NEPPS) and held a webinar for states to communicate the findings and recommendations.
EPA and states also began a dialogue about how to work together on areas of mutual interest
that will make NEPPS more useful and effective for both states and EPA, with a focus on
efforts to ensure the process, timing, and content of NPM guidance and programmatic grant
guidance fully aligns and supports NEPPS implementation.
• To ensure EPA and states continue to effectively implement delegated national programs,
EPA conducted an initial assessment of the practices and tools for overseeing state permitting
programs. EPA gathered and synthesized NPDES, CAA Title V, and RCRA Subtitle C
program data, considering emerging areas of state oversight concern, such as financial and
human resource constraints caused by declining or flat state environmental budgets. The
Agency developed two products: (1) a program oversight framework that outlines the
essential elements of EPA oversight of state permitting programs, and (2) a draft oversight
statement of principles. These products will help frame discussions with states about how to
improve the EPA-state oversight relationship
Tribal
• In its second year, EPA's Tribal ecoAmbassador forged a new partnership between EPA's
Tribal Program and the National Museum of the American Indian (NMAI), featuring tribal
college professors and students. For example, the focus of the Living Earth Symposium at the
NMAI Festival was to celebrate indigenous contributions to environmental sustainability,
knowledge, and activism. Several EPA-funded tribal college professors and students gave
presentations about the projects at the event - expanding our reach.
• Using EPA grant funding, the Yukon River Inter-Tribal Watershed Program Hazardous
Waste effort diverted one million pounds of junk vehicles, batteries, scrap metal, and
electronics from their 53 member communities.
• EPA's Regions expanded on providing additional trainings on tribal consultations. For
example, Region 9 delivered two trainings to employees on tribal consultation and three
trainings on the Tribal Consultation Opportunities Tracking System. In addition, Region 9
facilitated many consultations at a government-to-government level with tribes, participated
1126
-------
in reviews of the GAP Guidance and Guidebook, and facilitated tribal participation in
national consultations.
• EPA hosted meetings with state, tribal, and international partners to discuss regulatory and
risk management activities and risk assessments for Toxics Substance Control Act Work Plan
chemicals.
International
• In November 2013, the United States signed the Minamata Convention on Mercury, a
new multilateral environmental agreement that addresses specific human activities
which are contributing to widespread mercury pollution. EPA worked closely with the
State Department and other federal agencies in the negotiation of this agreement.
Implementation of this agreement will help reduce global mercury pollution over the coming
decades. In addition to signing, the United States deposited its Instrument of Acceptance to
become a party to the Convention.
• EPA and CONAGUA, its counterpart water agency in Mexico, coordinated the development
of the first Border 2020 Water Goal biennial plan. The plan captures over 70 initiatives along
the U.S.-Mexico border to be implemented during the 2013 to 2015 timeframeby
EPA, CONAGUA, the International Boundary Water Commission, CILA (Comision
Internacional de Limites y Aguas), and states, tribes, local governments, non-governmental
organizations, and academia. These initiatives address bi-national water issues, such as water
infrastructure needs and sustainability, water quality data availability, and watershed
approaches to water contamination and conservation. EPA- sponsored activities include
conducting water and energy audits in selected U.S.-Mexico Border Water Infrastructure
Program projects to improve energy efficiency and promote efficient water use at border
drinking water and wastewater facilities.
Challenges
• Alaska's 229 federally recognized tribes face enormous environmental challenges in their
efforts to safely manage solid and hazardous wastes in their communities. Despite this, they
have developed impressive programs to remove thousands of pounds of hazardous materials
from their communities to reduce human exposures to these toxins.
• As tribes and EPA begin implementing the revised GAP guidance, we will develop and
implement EPA-Tribal Environmental Plans (ETEPs) with all tribes to identify long-term
goals, roles, and regulated universe. EPA will undertake efforts to address issues of national
significance on specific topics often involving multiple agencies—climate change impacts
and adaptation, treaty rights, fish consumption rates, water quality standards, resource
extraction, etc.
1127
-------
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 2013, EPA improved its ability to work collaboratively, efficiently, and effectively. We
focused on maintaining a talented and diverse workforce, giving employees a flexible and
collaborative work environment, and equipping them with the tools to work productively and
effectively in today's business environment. Our aim is to build and maintain a modern
workplace where EPA employees are knowledgeable, skilled, encouraged, and enabled to do
their best work together to protect human health and the environment while at the same time
asked to act with fiscal responsibility, maximize the use of limited resources, and still
demonstrate results.
Accomplishments
• EPA completed an agency-wide migration to a new suite of office tools and capabilities that
included email, instant messaging, calendar, and contacts, instituted Microsoft Office Online
2013 to help employees work remotely, and provided access to Sky drive shared storage.
• EPA has increased telework use every year—in every regional and Headquarters office—
since it began tracking telework use in FY 2009. In FY 2013, EPA increased telework hours
by 18 percent over FY 2012.
• In support of the President's request that federal agencies expedite the disposal,
consolidation, and realignment of unneeded property to realize savings, promote
sustainability, and reduce the deficit, EPA completed all three scheduled moves, including
Region 7, the Environmental Appeals Board, and the Administrative Law Judges. These
moves are projected to save EPA over $1.6 million per year in rent avoidance.
• To improve its ability and capacity to grow new leadership talent, EPA_developed a
Succession Management Guide, incorporating lessons learned from preliminary tests in two
offices.
• To expand access to employment and professional development opportunities, EPA
improved its Diversity Dashboard as a workforce assessment tool to monitor progress with
headquarters and regional action plans under Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
directives. The Agency also developed standard procedures to broaden opportunities for
outreach and recruitment and established a baseline among demographic groups of employee
participation in leadership and development programs.
• To improve work productivity in field settings, EPA's Region 1, with assistance from EPA's
Office of Environmental Information, developed and tested a field application prototype for
field inspections, allowing an EPA inspector to complete his work at a facility using an
1128
-------
automated version of the required form on a tablet and to then relay the inspection results
back to EPA wirelessly in real time.
• EPA's Region 8 developed a Workplace Dispute Resolution Program. The program provides
clear guidelines on how to request mediation and what to expect during this process. The
program works with the Agency's equal employment opportunity staff and human resources
staff to address alleged discrimination and workplace dispute cases. It also provides a group
of objective mediators available to guide EPA regional personnel.
• EPA saved nearly $2.6 million in FY 2013 with the implementation of strategic sourcing
solutions for cellular service, domestic deliveries, and office supplies. EPA anticipates saving
an additional $500,000 in FY 2014 with the November 2013 Blanket Purchase Agreement
for Lab Supplies.
• EPA reduced unliquidated obligations on grants expired as of October 1, 2012, by 86 percent
(for a savings of $15.1 million) and on contracts expired as of October 1, 2012, by 62 percent
(for a savings of $26.3 million).
Challenges
• EPA's FY 2013 average time-to-hire was 101 days for General Schedule new hires. The
Agency's efforts to reach EPA's FY 2013 86-day goal were challenged by an intentional
slowdown in hiring (a pause followed by a "one for three" hiring policy) necessitated by
funding uncertainties and budget reductions. The Agency will continue to improve the hiring
process through streamlining and use of collaboration tools, including standardized
recruitment packages, virtual job analysis meetings via AdobeConnect, and the new
FastTrack online solution offering one-stop shopping for managers to assemble their standard
recruitment packages.
• EPA delayed opportunities to achieve additional savings from reduced rent expenditures and
reduction of EPA's footprint due to challenges related to funding uncertainties and budget
reductions/sequester-related cuts. The space modernization pilot for EPA's Office of
Administration and Resources Management in the Federal Triangle complex at headquarters
will be complete in April 2014. EPA will look for additional opportunities to achieve
immediate space reductions with little to no construction required and achieve further
reductions as part of the lease renewal process.
1129
------- |