FY 2016-
2017
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
DRAFT National Program Manager Guidance
February 19, 2015 Draft
Publication 300P15001
-------
Table of Contents
I. EPA Overview to the FY 2016-2017 NPM Guidance 1
II. Introduction 1
III. National Areas of Focus 4
This section discusses OECA 's national enforcement priorities:
1. Implementing Clean Air Act National Enforcement Initiatives 4
2. Implementing Clean Water Act National Enforcement Initiatives 6
3. Assuring Safe Drinking Water 7
4. Reducing Pollution from Mineral Processing Operations 9
5. Assuring Energy Extraction Sector Compliance with Environmental Laws 10
6. Implementing the Clean Water Act Action Plan 10
7. Advancing Next Generation Compliance 12
8. Strengthening State Performance and Oversight 14
IV. Program-Specific Guidance 16
This section provides critical national direction on the following program areas:
1. Field Operations Guidance (FOG) Guidelines 16
2. Environmental Justice 17
3. Federal Facilities 19
4. CWANPDES Program for Compliance Assurance and Enforcement 21
5. CWA Section 404 Discharge of Dredge and Fill Material 23
6. CWA Section 311 Oil Pollution Act 24
7. SDWA Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program 25
8. CAA Program for Compliance Assurance and Enforcement 25
9. RCRA Subtitle C Hazardous Waste Program 28
10. RCRA Underground Storage Tank (UST) Subtitle I Program 30
11. RCRA Corrective Action 32
12. TSCA Chemical Risk Reduction Programs 33
A. TSCA Lead Risk Reduction Program 33
B. TSCA New and Existing Chemicals Program 35
C. TSCA PCB Program 36
D. TSCA Asbestos Program/AHERA 37
13. FIFRA Program for Compliance Assurance and Enforcement 39
A. Pesticide Product Integrity 40
B. Border Compliance 41
C. Worker Protection Standards 42
14. CERCLA 42
15. EPCRA 313 Toxics Release Inventory 44
16. EPCRA 304, 311/312 and CERCLA 103 45
17. Federal Activities 46
18. Criminal Enforcement Program 47
Appendix 1: OECA's FY 2016 Draft ACS Measures
Appendix 2: Explanation of Changes between FY 2015 and FY 2016-2017 Guidance
Appendix 3: OECA Key Contacts for each section of FY 2016-2017 NPM Guidance
-------
I. EPA Overview to the FY 2016-2017 NPM Guidance
The EPA Overview to the National Program Manager (NPM) Guidances communicates
important agency-wide information and should be reviewed in conjunction with this draft fiscal
year (FY) 2016-2017 NPM Guidance as well as other applicable requirements. Read the
overview at: http://www2.epa.gov/planandbudget/national-program-manager-guidances.
II. Introduction
This National Program Manager Guidance applies to the Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance (OECA), all U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regional enforcement
programs, and states and federally-recognized Indian tribes (tribes) implementing EPA-approved
inspection and enforcement programs1. OECA coordinates with the regions, states and local
agencies and engages in consultation and coordination with tribal governments as it designs,
develops, implements and oversees national compliance and enforcement programs. Regional
offices also work with states and local agencies and consult with tribes to implement and review
these programs.2 OECA 's National Program Manager (NPM) Guidance provides clear direction
for FY 2016-2017. It identifies the national compliance and enforcement priorities, discusses
national direction for all compliance assurance programs, identifies activities to be carried out by
authorized programs, and describes how the EPA should work with states and tribes to ensure
compliance with environmental laws. Once implemented, the priorities and activities described
in the NPM Guidance serve to protect the Nation's environment and public health and provide a
level playing field for responsible businesses. Most of the work in the NPM Guidance is
accomplished under the Agency's Goal 5 - "Protecting Human Health and the Environment by
Enforcing Laws and Assuring Compliance" in the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan.
The EPA's national enforcement and compliance assurance program continues to assure
compliance with federal environmental statutes using a variety of tools, including civil and
criminal enforcement. These tools advance OECA's overall national goals for:
• Tough civil and criminal enforcement for violations that threaten communities and the
environment.
• Next Generation Compliance: achieving greater compliance and protection using advanced
monitoring and information technologies. Next Generation Compliance tools are intended to
supplement and advance strong enforcement programs.
• Strong EPA/State/Tribal environmental protection: working together toward shared
environmental goals.
To help achieve these enforcement goals, OECA will continue to focus on high priority work
where significant environmental risk and noncompliance patterns are known to exist or where
there are important opportunities to improve performance. This work includes:
1. Implementing Clean Air Act National Enforcement Initiatives;
1 When referring to states and tribes throughout this NPM guidance, OECA is referring to states and tribes
authorized to implement federal programs.
2 EPA consults with tribes consistent with the EPA Policy on Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribes and
Executive Order 13175.
-------
2. Implementing Clean Water Act National Enforcement Initiatives;
3. Assuring Safe Drinking Water;
4. Reducing Pollution from Mineral Processing Operations;
5. Assuring Energy Extraction Sector Compliance with Environmental Laws;
6. Implementing the Clean Water Act Action Plan;
7. Advancing Next Generation Compliance; and
8. Strengthening State Performance and Oversight.
These priorities continue from FY 2015.
As part of the process for identifying national priorities, OECA and the EPA regions sought early
input from states, tribes and associations on priorities, suggestions for FY 2017-2019 National
Enforcement Initiatives and the remaining content of the FY 2016-2017 NPM Guidance. The
EPA took this input into account when developing the NPM Guidance and is responding to each
state, association and tribal partnership group who provided comments. Several sections of the
NPM Guidance were influenced by stakeholder comments, including comments to continue our
safe drinking water priority area and other priorities, and comments related to the sections on the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) Underground Storage Tanks program. Stakeholders submitted several
ideas for the FY 2017-2019 National Enforcement Initiatives, which are still under discussion.
OECA will identify the FY 2017-2019 national initiatives in an FY 2017 Addendum to the NPM
Guidance. The EPA looks forward to working together with its state and tribal partners to
achieve our shared environmental goals, including Next Generation Compliance.
Robust compliance monitoring and enforcement continue and are critically important for
addressing violations and promoting deterrence. But this alone will not solve our noncompliance
problems. To address these problems, OECA is continuing to implement Next Generation
Compliance which will enable the EPA and states to better address large regulated universes
with approaches that go beyond traditional single facility inspections and enforcement. Advances
in emissions monitoring and information technology are foundations of this new approach. The
EPA will increase the use of advanced monitoring technologies, and other Next Generation
Compliance tools, in rules, permits and inspections to detect, correct and report pollution
problems. Use of advanced emissions/pollutant detection technology will make pollution that is
currently "invisible," "visible." Industry can then more effectively prevent and reduce pollution
and often make their operations more efficient. Developing more effective regulations and
permits using electronic reporting, public accountability and third party verification, and
continuing to develop innovative enforcement approaches and increase transparency are all
encompassed under Next Generation Compliance. The EPA, states, and other partner agencies
continue to implement this transformation together - realizing both efficiencies and cost savings
in the longer term while protecting public health and the environment.
During FY 2016-2017, regional enforcement programs will also work with their state, tribal, and
local partners to implement each region's Climate Change Adaptation Plan in conjunction with
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Climate Change Adaptation Plan, available at:
www.epa.gov/climatechange/impacts-adaptation/fed-programs/Final-EPA-Adaptation-
plans.html. OECA will strive to integrate climate adaptation planning into its programs, policies,
-------
and operations where appropriate to protect human health and the environment as the climate
changes.
It's important to note that, in 2014, OECA issued updated Compliance Monitoring Strategies
(CMSs) which provide increased compliance monitoring flexibility for the Clean Water Act, the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the Clean Air Act and FIFRA programs. They were
issued after OECA held a national dialogue about flexibility in the CMSs and how compliance
monitoring activities could be further expanded while maintaining program integrity. The revised
CMSs provide increased flexibility to EPA and state agencies when conducting compliance
monitoring activities through an expanded set of tools for determining compliance and to address
local pollution and compliance concerns. The revised strategies provide additional flexibility to
address the most important pollution problems within each media program, an expanding
universe of regulated entities and resource limitations. In response to state comments and at the
request of the states, OECA also developed more specific guidance on the process for states to
request alternative CMS plans and for regions to review and approve state alternative plans. This
guidance has been distributed to states and associations is accessible at:
http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/monitoring/cwa/npdescms.pdf.
OECA and the Office of Pesticides Programs (OPP) jointly issue FIFRA Cooperative Agreement
Guidance, which explicitly discusses parameters for flexibility. The FIFRA Cooperative
Agreement Guidance attempts to balance support for National Pesticide Program priorities, goals
and performance measures, with providing flexibility to grantees to focus on those national
program areas which present the greatest concern locally. The specific parameters for flexibility
are discussed in the Guidance Framework on page 2 of the FIFRA Cooperative Agreement
Guidance (http://www.epa.gov/compliance/state/grants/fifra.html). Grantees may also negotiate a
Performance Partnership Grant (PPG) in lieu of pesticide program and enforcement cooperative
agreements. Under the PPG system, regions and grantees should continue to use our FIFRA
Cooperative Agreement Guidance to ensure that program areas are addressed consistent with the
Guidance.
OECA, in coordination with the EPA regions, established the Regional Strategic Plan process to
provide a vehicle for meaningful and efficient strategic planning dialogue at senior management
levels in the regions and within OECA across all civil regulatory enforcement programs. The
Regional Strategic Plans provide a concise overview of regional strategy and rationale for
deployment of enforcement resources consistent with national priorities, regional priorities, state
oversight and resource constraints. The Regional Strategic Planning process seeks to align
priorities with ACS commitments, recognizing the need to focus on the highest priority work;
flexibility and elevation of issues are integral parts of that planning process.
Finally, beyond the discussion of Regional Plans, in implementing the NPM Guidance, if issues
or questions arise beyond those discussed above, OECA has also established general guidelines
for seeking approval for flexibilities and elevating issues, as needed. If resources do not allow for
activities in the Guidance to be implemented, then EPA regional management should raise the
specific activities for discussion with the appropriate OECA Office Director(s) (ODs). If
agreement cannot be reached at the OD level, then the discussion will be elevated to the
Assistant Administrator's office. Similarly, delegated or authorized state, tribal or local agencies
-------
that are facing resource challenges can raise specific activities for discussion with the appropriate
senior regional manager(s) when developing their annual work plans with the EPA regions. The
appropriate OECA Office Director is ready to assist if regional management wants to discuss any
state, tribal or local issues with OECA. These guidelines are necessary to help ensure EPA
consistency, as appropriate, in implementing critical activities across media programs and
ensuring a level playing field nationally.
III. National Areas of Focus
Every three years, the EPA selects National Enforcement Initiatives (NEIs) to address specific
environmental problems, risks, or patterns of noncompliance. These initiatives are reevaluated
every three years in order to assure that federal enforcement resources are focused on the most
important environmental problems where noncompliance is a significant contributing factor, and
where federal enforcement attention can have a significant impact. After reviewing input from
tribes, states and other external stakeholders, OECA chose the FY 2014-2016 NEIs which
conclude at the end of FY 2016. Although the initiatives have made substantial progress in
addressing noncompliance within their respective sectors, more work remains to be done in FY
2016.
The next cycle of National Enforcement Initiatives will be implemented in FY 2017-2019.
OECA solicited early input on these initiatives from states, tribes, associations and tribal
partnership groups. OECA intends to seek additional comment from all interested parties through
a Federal Register (FR) Notice to be published in 2015. OECA will take into account all early
input received to date and in response to the FR Notice during the process of selecting the FY
2017-2019 national initiatives; discussions are still underway. The FY 2017-2019 national
initiatives will be identified in the FY 2017 Addendum to this National Program Manager (NPM)
Guidance; the Addendum will be published around April, 2016. The FY 2017 Addendum will
highlight any significant changes or new decisions impacting FY 2017 which could not be
predicted when EPA released the final FY 2016-2017 NPM Guidance.
This section discusses each of OECA's FY 2014-2016 NEIs, as well as other national priorities
for FY 2016-2017, and identifies critical supporting activities, responsibility for implementation,
and associated measures for tracking. If resources do not allow for activities in the guidance to
be implemented, then regional management should raise the specific activities for discussion
with the appropriate OECA Office Director(s) per the discussion above. Similarly, delegated or
authorized state, tribal or local agencies that are facing resource challenges can raise specific
activities for discussion with the appropriate senior regional manager(s) when developing their
annual work plans with the EPA regions.
1. Implementing Clean Air Act (CAA) National Enforcement Initiatives
Description: The following is a discussion of work in 2 CAA-specific National Enforcement
Initiative areas.
Cutting Toxic Air Pollution that Affects Communities' Health:
-------
In 1990, Congress identified hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), currently totaling 187, that present
significant threats to human health and have adverse ecological impacts
(http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/188polls.html). The CAA and EPA's regulations impose strict
emission control requirements (known as "Maximum Achievable Control Technology" or
"MACT") for these pollutants, which are emitted by a wide range of industrial and commercial
facilities. The EPA will target and reduce emissions of toxic air pollutants in three areas where
the agency has determined there are high rates of noncompliance: (A) leak detection and repair;
(B) reduction of the volume of waste gas to flares and improvements to flare combustion
efficiency; and (C) excess emissions, including those associated with startup, shut down and
malfunction. Through this Air Toxics Initiative, the EPA will undertake compliance monitoring
and enforcement activities to maximize environmental and human health benefits, which is
particularly important for disproportionately burdened communities. OECA will utilize
innovative monitoring and evaluation techniques and partner with the EPA's Office of Air and
Radiation (OAR) and Office of Research and Development. OECA will also provide equipment
and training to inspectors to enhance the effectiveness of on-site activities.
Reducing Widespread Air Pollution from the Largest Sources, Especially the Coal-fired
Utility, Cement, Glass, and Acid Sectors:
The New Source Review/Prevention of Significant Deterioration (NSR/PSD) requirements of the
CAA require certain large industrial facilities to install state-of-the-art air pollution controls
when they build new facilities or make "significant modifications" to existing facilities.
However, many industries have not complied with these requirements, leading to excess
emissions of air pollutants such as sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and particulate matter. These
pollutants can be carried long distances by the wind and can have significant adverse effects on
human health, including asthma, respiratory diseases and premature death. These effects may be
particularly significant for communities overburdened by exposure to environmental risks and
vulnerable populations, including children. In recent years, the EPA has made considerable
progress in reducing excess pollution by bringing enforcement actions against coal-fired power
plants, cement manufacturing facilities, sulfuric and nitric acid manufacturing facilities, and
glass manufacturing facilities. However, work remains to be done to bring these sectors into
compliance with the CAA and protect communities burdened with harmful air pollution.
Activities:
EPA regions will:
• Implement the strategy for the Air Toxics National Enforcement Initiative.
• Implement the strategy for the National Enforcement Initiative on New Source Review -
Coal Fired Electric Utilities, Cement, Glass, Sulfuric and Nitric Acid.
Measures: For the Air Toxics Initiative, see Annual Commitment System (ACS) measures
PBS-ATX03 and ATX04. For the initiative addressing the largest sources, see ACS measures
PBS-NSR01-NSR09. Both sets of measures are in Appendix I, pages 1-2.
2. Implementing Clean Water Act (CWA) National Enforcement Initiatives
-------
Description: The following is a discussion of work in 2 CWA-specific National Enforcement
Initiative areas.
Keeping Raw Sewage and Contaminated Stormwater Out of Our Nation's Waters:
The EPA will continue its enforcement focus on reducing discharges of raw sewage and
contaminated Stormwater into our nation's rivers, streams and lakes. This National Enforcement
Initiative focuses on reducing discharges from combined sewer overflows (CSOs), sanitary
sewer overflows (SSOs), and municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s) by obtaining
cities' commitments to implement timely, affordable solutions to these problems. In FY 2012,
the EPA developed the Integrated Municipal Stormwater and Wastewater Planning Approach
Framework, posted athttp://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/integrated_planning_framework.pdf, to
provide further guidance on developing and implementing effective integrated planning solutions
to municipal wastewater and Stormwater management. This approach allows municipalities to
prioritize CWA requirements in a manner that addresses the most pressing public health and
environmental protection issues first, while maintaining existing regulatory standards. All or part
of an integrated plan may be incorporated into the remedy of enforcement actions. These
remedies may include expansion of collection and treatment system capacity and flow reduction
measures including increased use of green infrastructure and other innovative approaches. The
EPA is committed to working with communities to incorporate green infrastructure, such as
green roofs, rain gardens, and permeable pavement into permitting and enforcement actions to
reduce Stormwater pollution and sewer overflows where applicable. Regions should consider and
promote the opportunity to utilize green infrastructure controls in municipal enforcement actions.
See information on green infrastructure at: http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/home.cfm7program id=298.
Building on the Integrated Planning Framework, EPA released the Financial Capability
Assessment Framework (FCA Framework) in November of 2014. The FCA Framework provides
clarifications on the flexibilities built into EPA existing guidance on how to evaluate financial
capability when developing Clean Water Act compliance schedules. As envisioned by that
guidance, it also provides examples of additional information that could be submitted to give a
more complete picture of a permittee's unique circumstances so as to better inform schedule
development.
Preventing Animal Waste from Contaminating Surface and Ground Waters:
Concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) are a subset of livestock and poultry animal
feeding operations (AFOs) that meet the regulatory thresholds of number of animals for various
animal types. The EPA's goal is to take action to reduce animal waste pollution from livestock
and poultry operations that impair our nation's waters, threaten drinking water sources, and
adversely impact vulnerable communities. EPA's regulations require permit coverage for any
CAFO that discharges manure, litter, or process wastewater into waters of the U.S. CAFOs that
discharge to U.S. waters but do not have National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permits are in violation of the CWA. The EPA will continue to focus federal
enforcement investigations primarily on existing large and medium CAFOs identified as
discharging without a permit to waters of the U.S., particularly in areas impacted by CAFO/AFO
wastes. In addition, EPA's resources will be used to assure that CAFOs that already have permits
are in compliance with those permits. Each EPA region, in coordination with the states and tribes
-------
where appropriate, will consider a variety of factors to prioritize its CAFO activities. These
factors include, but are not limited to, identifying watersheds or water bodies where CAFO/AFO
wastes are negatively affecting surface water quality, proximity of CAFOs to drinking water
sources and vulnerable communities, and status of states or tribes with NPDES-authorized
CAFO programs.
Activities:
EPA regions, coordinating with their states and tribes where appropriate, will:
• Implement the strategy for the Municipal Infrastructure National Enforcement Initiative.
• Identify appropriate opportunities for implementing EPA's Integrated Municipal Stormwater
and Wastewater Planning Approach Framework.
• Work with permittees to foster better understanding of EPA approaches to Financial
Capability Assessment through the implementation of the FCA Framework.
• Implement the strategy for the Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) National
Enforcement Initiative.
Measures: For the initiative addressing raw sewage and contaminated storm water, see ACS
measures PBS M105-M108 in Appendix 1, page 2. For the CAFO initiative, see ACS measures
PBS-CAF002, CAF007 and CAF008 in Appendix I, page 2.
3. Assuring Safe Drinking Water
Description: The EPA's focus on public water systems (PWS), including those in Indian
country, protects the public from the potential acute and chronic health effects of drinking water
that fails to comply with the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). The EPA's Enforcement
Response Policy (ERP)3 has the ultimate goal of returning non-compliant PWS's to compliance.
The ERP establishes a holistic approach for prioritizing systems to address through an
enforcement action. Those PWS's that reach a score of 11 or higher are identified as an
enforcement priority and must return to compliance or be issued a formal enforcement action
within six months. Scores for each PWS with unresolved violations are based upon the number,
severity and length of violations.
A quick response to violations of the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations decreases
the risks to public health and allows primacy agencies flexibility to use a variety of tools such as
assistance and informal enforcement actions to bring the PWS back into compliance. Primacy
agencies should be proactive in addressing violations to prevent systems from reaching a score of
11 or greater. This approach is especially important in Indian country, as it allows for timely and
appropriate consultation and coordination with the tribal government as soon as a violation is
identified. It is also particularly important in responding to violations at small systems, which
may require more assistance to return to compliance.
! The ERP is available at http://www.epa.gov/enforcement/water/documents/policies/drinking water erp 2009.pdf
-------
The EPA realizes that some small systems remain in persistent noncompliance despite primacy
agency efforts. EPA, states and tribes will be working together to explore root causes of
noncompliance and options for resolving them in a concerted effort to ensure that all available
tools, resources and partners are engaged to help these systems operate safely, comply with
SDWA, and become sustainable, if possible.
EPA's Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO) makes public access to PWSs'
compliance status more readily available and highlights the importance of accurate and complete
data. Inaccurate and incomplete data limits EPA's and the public's understanding of the state of
compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act. This in turn limits the EPA's ability to identify
priorities, and evaluate program needs and effectiveness consistently and appropriately. OECA
continues to coordinate with and support OW to improve data quality. EPA regions, states,
territories and tribes should continue their efforts to improve the completeness, accuracy and
timeliness of data reported.
Activities:
EPA regions will:
• Ensure that primacy agencies fulfill the enforcement conditions of their primacy agreements.
• Promote accurate, timely and complete reporting by each primacy agency, including the
EPA.
• Ensure that primacy agencies implement the ERP, and use the Enforcement Targeting Tool
(ETT).
• Collaborate with primacy agencies to ensure that the PWSs with the most serious violations
are addressed and returned to compliance in a timely and appropriate manner, particularly
where PWSs are in substantial noncompliance with state, territorial, or tribal enforcement
orders.
• Using the quarterly ETT, hold in-depth regular discussions with primacy agencies regarding
compliance and enforcement matters. These exchanges should include progress in returning
systems to compliance, monitoring implementation of orders, number of systems addressed,
number of systems in violation, and overall performance in implementing the ERP.
• Apply the ERP in Indian country, Wyoming, and the District of Columbia. When serving as
the primacy agency for Indian country, ensure the ERP timeline for return to compliance
(RTC) is accomplished while simultaneously implementing OECA 's Guidance on the
Enforcement Principles Outlined in the 1984 Indian Policy (January 17, 2001), which can be
found at: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/state/84indianpolicy.pdf.
Application of the guidance, which contains threshold criteria for EPA's consideration of
formal civil enforcement actions, including appropriate consultation and compliance
assistance, should not result in a lesser degree of human health and environmental protection
in Indian country than elsewhere in the United States and must address and resolve drinking
water violations on a schedule consistent with the ERP.
• When appropriate, authorize state and tribal inspectors to conduct inspections on EPA's
behalf. Ensure that state and tribal inspectors who conduct inspections on EPA's behalf are
trained and credentialed consistent with agency guidance, including the Guidance for Issuing
Federal EPA Inspector Credentials to Authorize Employees of State/Tribal Governments to
Conduct Inspections on Behalf of EPA (2004). Consistent with the EPA Order 3510, annually
8
-------
conduct an inventory of federal credentials which includes an annual physical possession
check of 10 percent of the federal credentials issued to state and tribal inspectors and a count
of unused credentials stock.
• Perform the activities listed below under "State, territories and tribes with primacy" in
circumstances where the EPA is the primacy agency.
States, territories and tribes with primacy will:
• Fulfill the enforcement conditions of their primacy agreements.
• Use the ETT and implement the ERP to ensure that priority systems, within six months of
having reached a score of 11, either return to compliance or receive formal enforcement
actions that compel the systems to return to compliance in a timely fashion.
• Work to reduce their backlog of systems that have already been at a score of 11 or higher for
more than six months.
• Return to compliance or address violations at non-complying PWSs before they become
priority systems with a focus on schools and child care facilities, as resources allow.
• Report compliance and enforcement data to ensure that it is entered into SDWIS in a
complete, accurate and timely manner.
• Coordinate internally among enforcement programs in all media to protect drinking water
sources.
Measures: See ACS measure SDWA02 in Appendix I, page 3.
4. Reducing Pollution from Mineral Processing Operations
Description: The following is a discussion of work in this National Enforcement Initiative
area.
Mining and mineral processing facilities generate more toxic and hazardous waste than any other
industrial sector, based on the EPA's Toxic Release Inventory. Many of these facilities have
impacted surrounding communities and continue to pose high risk to human health and the
environment. For example, over 120 mining and mineral processing sites are on the Superfund
National Priorities List and more sites are being added every year, including operating facilities.
The EPA has spent over $2.4 billion to address the human health and environmental threats to
communities as a result of mining and mineral processing. In some cases, the EPA had to sample
drinking water wells due to potential impacts to children in low income communities. At some
sites, EPA's inspections have found significant non-compliance with hazardous waste and other
environmental laws. Some of the more serious cases required alternative drinking water supplies
or removal of lead-contaminated soil from residential yards. In other cases, toxic spills into
waterways from mining and mineral processing caused fish kills and impacted the livelihood of
low income communities. The EPA will continue its enforcement initiative to bring these
facilities into compliance with the law and protect the environment and nearby communities.
Activities:
EPA regions will:
-------
• Implement the strategy for reducing pollution through the Mineral Processing National
Enforcement Initiative.
Measures: See ACS measure PBS-MNP05 in Appendix I, page 2.
5. Assuring Energy Extraction Sector Compliance with Environmental Laws
Description: The following is a discussion of work in this National Enforcement Initiative
area.
Vast natural gas reserves, unlocked through technological advances, are a key part of the nation's
energy future. The full promise of this resource will be realized only if it is developed
responsibly in a manner that protects the nation's air, water, and land.
OECA initiated the Energy Extraction National Enforcement Initiative in FY 2011 to address
environmental compliance concerns with land-based natural gas extraction and production, and
ensure that natural gas development proceeds in a manner protective of human health and the
environment. The EPA will continue to monitor and assess compliance with regulatory
requirements, and utilize a range of legal authorities to address violations.
In addition, EPA will continue to utilize Next Generation technologies and reporting techniques
to assess and quantify emissions at land-based natural gas extraction and production facilities,
and develop and use innovative compliance and enforcement approaches.
Activities:
EPA regions will:
• Implement the Strategy for the Land-Based Gas Extraction and Production National
Enforcement Initiative.
Measures: See ACS measures PBS-EE01 and EE03 in Appendix I, page 3.
6. Implementing the Clean Water Act (CWA) Action Plan
Description: OECA, together with the EPA regions, the Office of Water, states and tribes
with program authorization, continues to implement the CWA Action Plan issued in October
2009. The CWA Action Plan Steering Committee oversees implementation of the Action Plan
through regular communication with and feedback to the EPA/state workgroups who are leading
the individual action items associated with the four fundamental changes. The changes are
designed to revamp the NPDES permitting, compliance and enforcement program to better
address today's serious water quality problems. They are:
1. Switch from existing paper reporting to electronic reporting, resulting in increased efficiency
and improved transparency of the NPDES program.
10
-------
2. Use Next Generation Compliance approaches to create a new paradigm in which regulations
and permits improve compliance via public accountability, self-monitoring, self-certification,
electronic reporting and/or other innovative methods.
3. Address the most serious water pollution problems by re-tooling key NPDES permitting and
enforcement practices, while continuing to vigorously enforce against serious violators.
4. Conduct comprehensive and coordinated permitting, compliance, and enforcement programs
to improve state and EPA performance in protecting and improving water quality. (Related
activities are discussed under Strengthening State Performance and Oversight, pages 15-16.)
The EPA will engage in appropriate consultation and coordination with tribes on the Clean
Water Act Action Plan consistent with the EPA Policy on Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribes.
Activities:
EPA regions should:
• Prepare for implementation of the Proposed NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule, including
working to:
a. Actively market NetDMR, NeT and other e-reporting tools to the regulated community.
Train permittees;
b. Ensure state and regional general permit requirements are entered into the Integrated
Compliance Information System (ICIS) (or the state NPDES program data management
system);
c. Review state and regional general permit paper forms to evaluate consistency with
Appendix A in the Proposed NPDES e-reporting rule.
d. Ensure states are preparing for the implementation of the electronic reporting rule by
adopting the use of EPA electronic reporting tools (NetDMR, NeT), or developing their
own state e-reporting tools; and
e. Coordinate closely with the Office of Compliance to individually evaluate their states'
readiness to implement the electronic reporting rule, including: Cross-Media Electronic
Reporting Regulation (CROMERR) compliant electronic reporting tools compliant with
EPA's electronic reporting regulations; state system readiness; and level of participation
using the state e-reporting tools (e.g., 90 percent participation by NPDES-regulated
facilities).
• Require electronic reporting, as appropriate, for all permits written by the regions and all data
required by enforcement actions, where appropriate and in accordance with national
guidance.
• Provide relevant feedback to permitting offices regarding permit prioritization and
modifications to consider when new permits are developed or a permit is renewed. Request
that permit writers consider including e-reporting and comments provided by inspectors
and/or enforcement personnel in developing appropriate permit conditions.
• Actively participate in CWA Action Plan projects including those to address effluent
violations reported on Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) using new strategies and tools.
Consider innovative approaches to deal with more routine paperwork violations.
• Participate with OECA in an effort to draft a new NPDES enforcement framework (i.e..,
criteria and method) for identifying and addressing serious violations that supports the
11
-------
principles described in the 2009 CWA Action Plan. Staff and managers in regions, states and
tribes with program approval are encouraged to participate actively in this workgroup to
develop this framework.
• Include in targeting, monitoring, enforcement and state oversight the complete array of the
NPDES regulated universe, going beyond the historic focus on traditional NPDES majors.
Use targeting tools, such as the DMR Pollutant Loading Tool, to determine the source,
location and amount of discharged pollutants, including a subset of non-major facilities
(www.epa.gov/pollutantdischarges).
State and EPA representatives on the CWA Action Plan Steering Committee and the various
associated workgroups should:
• Attend and participate in regular meetings.
• Assist in numerous aspects of workgroup responsibility including, as appropriate, drafting
work products and deliverables and identifying appropriate timing for raising issues with the
Steering Committee.
• Represent states and regions, respectively, by engaging and providing meaningful input and
direction on implementation issues.
States should:
• Work towards implementation of e-reporting.
• Educate and train regulated community.
• Develop e-reporting tools or use EPA tools (NetDMR; NeT).
7. Advancing Next Generation Compliance
Description: The health and environmental benefits envisioned by our statutes, regulations,
and state and tribal programs are not being fully achieved. Although the available data is
incomplete, high noncompliance is evident in much of the data we do have. State and federal
resources for onsite compliance assistance, individual inspections, and enforcement actions are
not adequate to address the large universe of regulated sources, especially the numerous small
sources that are important contributors to environmental problems. Robust compliance
monitoring and enforcement are critically important for identifying and addressing violations and
promoting deterrence. While individual facility inspections and enforcement actions remain a
critically important part of addressing noncompliance, this alone is not sufficient to achieve the
improvements in compliance we need. Field operations and EPA regulations must consider
emerging approaches and technology to be effective and efficient. Together with the program
offices, regions, and states, OECA is implementing Next Generation Compliance, which takes
advantage of advances in emissions monitoring and information technology. EPA has completed
a Next Generation Compliance Strategic Plan and is proceeding to implement the Plan. See
http://www2.epa.gov/compliance/next-generation-compliance. The EPA is visiting states to
discuss Next Generation Compliance and its benefits for states, to learn from states, and to
explore possible collaborative projects to test or pilot Next Generation Compliance approaches.
As of November 2014, the EPA has visited 8 states and expects to visit around 20 states by end
of FY 2015. While there are no Next Generation Compliance implementation requirements for
states, OECA and the regions need to perform work in five areas:
12
-------
1 Design more effective regulations and permits that are easier to implement, with a
goal of improved compliance and environmental outcomes. OECA is working with
the program offices and regions to design more effective regulations and permits that
include Next Generation Compliance tools and approaches that will drive us towards
better compliance and environmental outcomes. We are looking to pilot the use of Next
Generation Compliance tools in air, water, and waste permits in FY 2015 and FY 2016.
2 Use and promote advanced emissions/pollutant detection technology so that
regulated entities, the government, and the public can more easily see pollutant
discharges, environmental conditions and noncompliance. This technology will make
"visible" pollution that is currently "invisible." Industry can more effectively prevent and
reduce pollution, and often make their operations more efficient, while government can
better target significant pollution and noncompliance problems. Private sector
development of monitoring technology that can be used by the public could empower
citizens and encourage industry and government to reduce pollution. In addition,
advanced monitoring technology, coupled with electronic reporting, will produce more
complete universe data on regulated sources, their emissions and discharges, and
environmental conditions. This data will support the development of new and improved
compliance measures, allowing for more evidence-based approaches to compliance work
and better assessment of compliance rates.
3. Shift toward electronic reporting by regulated entities so that we have more
accurate, complete, and timely information on pollution sources, pollution, and
compliance, saving time and money while improving effectiveness and public
transparency. Electronic reporting should not be simply emailing files to the
government. It is taking advantage of advances in IT to improve and streamline
information submission, improving government while saving money and making the data
more available for public use. For example, electronic "smart" tools will be deployed that
guide the regulated entity through the reporting process. Error prevention and two-way
communication can be integrated into reporting tools, allowing electronic compliance
assistance, alerts on new regulations, and helping to ensure that only necessary data is
collected.
4. Expand transparency by making the information we have today more accessible, and
making new information obtained from advanced emissions monitoring and electronic
reporting publicly available. This will empower communities to play an active role in
compliance oversight and improve the performance of both the government and regulated
entities.
5. Develop and use innovative enforcement approaches to achieve more widespread
compliance. We are developing new enforcement approaches that help to increase the
effectiveness of our compliance work, such as greater use of fenceline monitoring and
publication of pollution information, to both track pollution that is important to
communities and to engage the community in monitoring compliance. We are also using
advanced monitoring and electronic reporting in our enforcement investigations and
settlements and making greater use of targeted deterrence approaches, and self and third
party certification tools, to help drive better compliance and reduce pollution.
13
-------
Activities:
EPA regions should:
• When participating on regulation development workgroups, provide real-world inspection,
compliance monitoring, and enforcement knowledge and advocate for Next Generation
Compliance Rule Effectiveness approaches in the agency's rules.
• Actively participate in agency and OECA workgroups related to implementing Next
Generation Compliance components, such as electronic reporting, advanced monitoring and
enforcement settlements.
• Identify and implement best practices to improve rule and permit implementation. Include
Next Generation Compliance principles, tools, and approaches when issuing permits,
reviewing permits, and training permit writers.
• Work with OECA to ensure inspectors are trained in the effective use of advanced
monitoring equipment.
• Incorporate Next Generation Compliance tools such as electronic reporting, advanced
monitoring at the facility and fence-line, third party verification, and public accountability in
enforcement settlements pursuant to the January 2015 OECA Memorandum on Use of Next
Generation Compliance Tools in Civil Enforcement Settlements. OECA will highlight
examples of EPA enforcement cases that use different Next Generation Compliance
approaches, especially those that maximize environmental and human health benefits for
overburdened communities and potential disproportionate impacts to these communities,
including the protection of children's health.
• Actively market electronic reporting and e-tools to the regulated community and states.
• Identify and use innovative enforcement approaches.
• Coordinate with OECA and the national and regional Field Operation Guidelines
Workgroups to develop smart mobile tools for our inspectors that improve the quality of our
inspections and allow us to electronically submit inspection reports.
States and tribes are encouraged to:
• Expand their understanding and use of Next Generation Compliance by participating in
OECA Next Generation Compliance visits.
• Share with the EPA examples of current state or tribal efforts that demonstrate Next
Generation Compliance tools in operation today to be included in a compilation of Next
Generation Compliance NPDES Examples.
• To the extent interested, collaborate with OECA in designing and implementing Next
Generation Compliance demonstration projects, evaluation projects or CWA Action Plan
pilots.
8. Strengthening State Performance and Oversight
Description: Our nation's environmental laws are based on the principle of cooperative
federalism under which the EPA and states work in partnership to protect human health and the
environment. Most major federal environmental laws require the EPA to establish minimum,
nationwide standards, and then allow the agency to delegate authority to implement these
14
-------
standards to the states. The EPA retains broad enforcement authority under federal law, and
provides oversight of delegated state programs.
As part of its oversight responsibilities, the EPA must clearly articulate expectations for state
program performance and evaluate the states in a fair, consistent and equitable manner. This
National Program Manager Guidance, working in conjunction with national enforcement policies
and program grant agreements, is one place where these expectations are articulated. To evaluate
state enforcement performance, states and the EPA worked in partnership to create the State
Review Framework (SRF). The SRF is designed to ensure the EPA conducts oversight
evaluations of state CWA, CAA and RCRA compliance and enforcement programs in a
nationally consistent and efficient manner. Where regions directly implement the federal
program in states that do not have authorized programs, OECA conducts the SRF review of the
regions' program using the same process and procedures as for all SRF reviews. A national
approach to enforcement of the nation's environmental laws assures that: (1) all states are treated
equitably and held to the same standards as the EPA regions; (2) a level playing field exists
across states and for regulated businesses; (3) the public has similar protection from impacts of
pollution regardless of where they live or work; and (4) timely compliance with national
environmental laws and regulations is widely achieved.
In FY 2013, OECA, the EPA regions, and states incorporated program changes that will improve
SRF effectiveness while reducing the resources necessary to conduct reviews. Also, in 2013,
OECA issued the National Strategy for Improving Oversight of State Enforcement Performance.
The National Strategy clarifies that an integral part of the SRF is a consistent national approach
for dealing with significant state enforcement performance issues, once they have been
identified. The National Strategy describes three sets of actions aimed at improving state
enforcement performance to achieve the above-stated goals: (1) an escalation approach to
problem-solving; (2) the regular and periodic State Review Framework evaluation process; and
(3) transparency efforts.
Activities:
EPA regions will:
• Conduct all Round 3 SRF reviews of state CAA, CWA, and RCRA enforcement programs
scheduled for 2016 and 2017, following Round 3 headquarters guidance issued in December
2013 and available on the ECHO SRF page.
• Enter complete draft and final SRF reports, including data metric analyses, file reviews,
recommendations and state comments into the SRF Tracker.
• Monitor progress of states in carrying out the recommendations and record progress quarterly
in the SRF Tracker.
• Implement the National Strategy for Improving Oversight of State Enforcement
Performance.
• Use data verification and annual data metric analyses to inform regular discussions with
states and to track performance.
• Focus oversight resources on the most pressing performance problems in states, working
with them to demonstrably improve state performance. Where progress toward resolving
significant state performance issues is not being made, regions should escalate their
15
-------
responses in accordance with OECA's escalation strategy described in the National Strategy
for Improving Oversight of State Enforcement Performance.
• Ensure commitments to implement recommendations for program improvements are
captured in appropriate negotiated PPAs, PPGs, categorical grant agreements or other written
documents.
• Implement any regional components to address agreed-upon national focus issues under the
National Approach to Common State Enforcement Program Issues (Common Issues) project.
• Per the June 22, 2010 memorandum from Cynthia Giles and Peter Silva "Interim Guidance to
Strengthen Performance in the NPDES Program" and the October 22, 2010 memorandum
from Lisa Lund and Jim Hanlon "Using the Results of NPDES Permit and Enforcement
Reviews to Address Significant Issues," regions should convene routine and regular meetings
between the EPA region and authorized state to discuss progress towards meeting annual
permitting and enforcement commitments and how the state has been performing overall.
• Review the number of Significant Non-compliers (SNCs)/High Priority Violators (HPVs)
identified (and percent of universe) by state and the number (and percent) addressed in a
timely and appropriate manner.
State and local agencies should:
• Work cooperatively with the EPA regions to conduct SRF reviews as scheduled.
• Implement recommendations within agreed upon time frames in the final SRF reports
provided to the state or local agency.
• Implement additional necessary work to resolve issues impeding effective implementation of
their enforcement program.
• Where EPA's review of state-EPA MO As determined that MO As might require revision,
updating or supplementation, states should work cooperatively with the EPA regions to
identify and complete appropriate actions by the end of FY 2017.
Measures: See ACS measure SRF01 in Appendix I, page 3.
IV. Program-Specific Guidance
This section provides critical national direction on specific program areas not addressed in the
preceding section. For each program area, the guidance identifies critical supporting activities,
responsibility for implementation and associated measures for tracking implementation. If
resources do not allow for activities in the guidance to be implemented, then regional
management should raise the specific activities for discussion with the appropriate OECA Office
Director(s). Similarly, delegated or authorized state, tribal or local agencies that are facing
resource challenges can raise specific activities for discussion with the appropriate senior
regional manager(s) when developing their annual work plans with the EPA regions. This
discussion is necessary to help ensure national consistency, as appropriate, in implementing
critical activities across media programs and ensuring a level playing field nationally.
1. Field Operations Group (FOG) Guidelines
16
-------
Description: The EPA created a Field Operations Group (FOG) to promote national
consistency among the Agency's field activities. The EPA's FOG developed ten operational
guidelines (referred to as the FOG Guidelines) for field activities to ensure consistency in
managing field practices and to reduce potential vulnerabilities. The FOG Guidelines apply to
any field sampling, measurements, and observations used by the EPA for any purpose, such as
ambient monitoring, research, clean-ups, risk management, studying new/revised regulations,
screening, compliance monitoring, and enforcement. In March 2013, EPA's Deputy
Administrator directed all EPA organizations conducting field activities to implement a
sustainable management system that incorporates the ten Field Operations Group guidelines no
later than February 15, 2016. Additional information is available at:
http://www.epa.gov/irmpoli8/policies/2105-p-02.pdf
Activities:
Regions and Headquarters offices should:
• Complete development and implementation of policies, procedures and systems that fully
address the ten Field Operations Group (FOG) Guidelines by the February 2016 deadline
established by the Deputy Administrator.
• Once completed, conduct regional and HQ field activities (e.g., compliance inspections and
sampling) in accordance with the established procedures.
• Implement process and procedures under Guidelines 9 and 10 to audit progress in
implementing Guidelines 1-8, and address any needed corrective actions.
• Provide training to new staff on the FOG guidelines and the established procedures, and
annual refresher training to existing staff.
2. Environmental Justice
Description: In addition to being the National Program Manager for the agency's
Environmental Justice Program, OECA oversees the implementation of environmental justice
(EJ) within the compliance and enforcement program. In its enforcement role, OECA ensures
that facilities in communities overburdened by environmental problems are complying with the
law. OECA aggressively applies regulatory tools to protect these communities, engages our
regional, federal, state and tribal partners to meet community needs, and fosters community
involvement in the EPA's decision-making processes by making information available, as
appropriate. To ensure long-term, effective consideration of EJ within the enforcement and
compliance program, OECA also leverages other initiatives and priorities that promote action in
communities, such as Next Generation Compliance, EPA's Cross-Agency Strategies and EPA's
Strategy for Protecting Children's Environmental Health, as appropriate.
Activities:
Regions, together with states, tribes and other partners as appropriate, will:
• Consider EJ in the implementation of the National Enforcement Initiatives (NEIs), consistent
with the strategies for each NEI, to maximize environmental and human health benefits for
overburdened communities.
17
-------
• Specifically consider overburdened communities and potential disproportionate impacts to
these communities, including those in Indian country, when selecting enforcement actions to
address other important compliance problems. Targeting evaluations should always use the
best available data and methods to achieve enforcement program objectives.
• Review civil enforcement cases to be initiated in FY 2016 and 2017 for potential EJ concerns
using the agency's EJSCREEN tool, and record the results of these reviews in ICIS, in
accordance with the Internal Technical Directive: Reviewing EPA Enforcement Cases for
Potential EnvironmentalJustice Concerns and Reporting Findings to the ICIS Data System
(April 2013).
• Identify specific opportunities to work with other federal agencies, state and local
governments, tribal governments, and/or the business community to leverage the benefits to
communities resulting from enforcement activities. Document and share recommendations
and best practices for taking action on these opportunities.
• Where appropriate, design compliance and enforcement actions to gain the greatest possible
environmental benefits in overburdened communities. For example, this could include use of
multi-media inspections and/or process inspections to comprehensively address potential
impacts from violations at a given facility, or incorporation of Next Generation Compliance
principles, tools or approaches.
• Seek appropriate remedies in enforcement actions to benefit overburdened communities and
address environmental justice concerns. Increase efforts to address environmental justice
concerns through appropriate injunctive relief, including seeking mitigation actions to redress
harm caused by the violations being resolved, and/or by encouraging defendants to consider
performing beyond-compliance Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs) related to the
violations.
• Consider activities to effectively reach large numbers of small sources with environmental
violations that have significant local impacts on overburdened communities.
• Identify and address EJ concerns as appropriate when consulting with tribal governments.
• Enhance communication with communities with EJ concerns and the public about
enforcement strategies and actions that may affect them, consistent with the confidentiality
requirements needed to protect the integrity of the enforcement process.
• Specifically provide opportunities for community input on EJ concerns and remedies to be
sought in enforcement actions affecting communities through the EPA's website, local
information repositories, and other appropriate means.
• Effectively communicate the benefits of our enforcement actions for vulnerable and
overburdened communities, consistent with the internal memorandum entitled Guidance on
Characterizing and Communicating Environmental Justice Benefits Achieved in Enforcement
Actions (September 2011).
• Identify opportunities for the compliance and enforcement program to advance the EPA's
Cross-Agency Strategy on Working to Make a Visible Difference in Communities, as
appropriate.
Measures: See ACS measure EJOlin Appendix I, page 4. [Note: Although we are tracking
this measure, there is no specific target number or trend we expect to achieve. EJ is one of many
factors the Agency considers in bringing an enforcement action.]
18
-------
3. Federal Facilities
Description: The EPA's compliance and enforcement program is managed by the Federal
Facilities Enforcement Office (FFEO) and involves more than 30,000 federal facilities and
installations spread across nearly 30 percent of the nation's territory, among which are some
10,000 currently regulated under the agency's various statutes. The EPA holds these federal
agencies accountable to the same standard of environmental compliance as other members of the
regulated community. This equal accountability is required by CERCLA, envisioned by most
other statutes and affirmed under Presidential executive order. Federal agencies are now
expected to go beyond compliance and serve as an example to others regarding environmental
stewardship and management, as Presidential Executive Order No. 13514 on federal
environmental sustainability makes clear. The federal facilities enforcement and compliance
program is described at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/federalfacilities/index.html. The
agency's primary focus in this sector has been on monitoring and enforcement, given the
extensive compliance assistance now offered by others, especially at FedCenter,
http://www.fedcenter.gov/, the sector's on-line environmental stewardship and compliance
assistance center sponsored by more than a dozen federal agencies.
Throughout FY 2014 and FY 2015, EPA's federal facilities enforcement and compliance
program, in conjunction with the regions, has reassessed its national Program Agenda, its
traditional Integrated Strategies and other program components in an effort to "right-size" its
activities in the face of recent resource reductions. In FY 2015, FFEO sought to more closely
align its various federal facility sector activities, including its Annual Commitment System
(ACS) obligations, with EPA's National Enforcement Initiatives (NEIs) and other Agency-wide
and regional environmental enforcement priorities whenever possible. As FFEO completes its
"right-sizing" efforts, the EPA, in addition to increased emphasis on the NEIs and other Agency
and regional environmental enforcement priorities, will continue its focus on a set of previously
identified federal facility enforcement priority areas as established in FFEO's FY 2015 Program
Agenda, and identified in the activities below. FY 2016 commitments will reflect continued
emphasis on some priority areas, while new priority areas may also be identified.
Activities:
EPA regions should:
• Consult with FFEO on all federal facility enforcement actions. FFEO will focus its resources
to make these consultations timely and effective, and bring clear value to these regional
actions.
• Utilize FFEO's new inspection targeting capabilities for improved monitoring, especially of
vulnerable communities associated with federal facilities.
• Target federal facilities as part of implementing EPA's National Enforcement Initiatives,
regional priorities, federal facility enforcement priority areas or targets established in
Regional (Enforcement) Plans.
• Sustain a vigorous enforcement program at federal facilities, by integrating, as appropriate
National Areas of Focus/National Enforcement Initiatives, federal facility enforcement
priority areas and regional priorities into the region's inspection and enforcement efforts.
19
-------
These priority areas align enforcement, compliance, and stewardship activities for maximum
effect and help achieve environmental and health benefits by addressing those problems that
matter to communities.
• Continue to pursue federalfacility enforcement priority areas dealing with vulnerable
communities (where environmental justice issues are often most prevalent), CAA 122 (r) risk
management plans, RCRA (medical waste and LQGs), SDWA, industrial stormwater,
climate change/flood plain areas and Government Owned/Contractor Operated/Government
Owned/Privately Operated (GOCO/GOPO) facilities and other potential areas still under
consideration by FFEO and the Regional Federal Facility Program Managers.
• Continue to use FFEO's contractor inspection program and inspector travel funding support
to the fullest extent possible as incorporated in the Regional Federal Facility Enforcement
Plans.
• Continue to implement a 2011 enforcement settlement with the Department of the Interior's
Indian Affairs program for violations at its schools and water treatment plants across Indian
country.
• Adopt creative work sharing arrangements and exploit new Agency initiatives, such as the
One EPA Skills Marketplace and SharePoint, to more fully utilize EPA resources to address
compliance and enforcement needs at federal facilities.
• Foster collaboration between OECA, FFEO, and the regions to identify and implement Next
Generation Compliance opportunities under advanced monitoring, electronic reporting,
transparency and innovative enforcement, to create more effective and efficient enforcement
in this sector.
• Encourage the use of Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs) in settlements, consistent
with the SEP Policy, and as resources allow, as a means to achieve greater human health and
environmental outcomes.
• FFEO will continue to provide targeting, contractor inspection and travel funding support to
the Regions to the fullest extent possible. Regions will incorporate their future activities for
the federal facility ACS commitment in their Regional (Enforcement) Plans.
• Promote greater public awareness and consider greater public engagement through increased
transparency of federal facility compliance activity, violations and enforcement actions,
including press releases for enforcement actions.
• Project at mid-year the number of formal: (1) federal facility enforcement case initiations;
and (2) federal facility settlements for FY 2016. (These projections, which need not include
Records of Decision at federal facility CERCLA sites, are not commitments but rather
indicators of regional progress.)
States and EPA regions should:
• Continue to ensure adequate coverage of the federal facility sector through compliance
monitoring and enforcement activity. Coordinate inspections, compliance monitoring or
enforcement activity where appropriate. Regions should be a resource when questions of
enforcement authorities arise, including questions of sovereign immunity.
Measures: See ACS measure FED-FAC05 in Appendix I, page 4.
20
-------
4. CWA National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program
for Compliance Assurance and Enforcement
Description: There are essential activities under the Clean Water Act NPDES program that
help ensure compliance with the Clean Water Act (CWA) and associated regulations.
Activities:
Authorized states and territories and EPA regions with direct implementation responsibilities
(e.g., non-authorized states, federal facilities and Indian country) should:
• Target serious sources of pollution and serious violations. Use appropriate tools, including
those developed pursuant to the CWA Action Plan and the NPDES Compliance Monitoring
Strategy (NPDES CMS) (issued July 21, 2014) for the Core Program and Wet Weather
Sources to target the most significant sources of pollutants affecting those water bodies and
watersheds where compliance and enforcement tools will be effective in addressing the
problem. Give priority to discharges that affect: (1) water bodies that are not meeting water
quality standards; (2) drinking water sources; or (3) individual communities. Available tools
include ambient monitoring data, the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) Pollutant Loading
Tool and the Clean Water Act Inspection Targeting Model (available to EPA and states by
logging in at Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO), http://echo.epa.gov/X as
well as GIS resources on EPA's GeoPlatform.
• Develop annual compliance monitoring plans that take advantage of the flexibility available
in the NPDES CMS.
• Ensure that all available data regarding violations are evaluated to determine the seriousness
of the violation. Take appropriate enforcement responses, consistent with national policy, to
address violations discovered. Ensure that civil enforcement actions are taken, where
appropriate, to address serious violations contributing to a community's water quality
problems.
• Ensure compliance with civil judicial consent decrees and administrative orders where
applicable.
• Implement targeted "real time" (quick response) enforcement activities to address CWA
violations impacting communities' waters where appropriate.
• Ensure all required compliance and enforcement data are input or transmitted to the national
data base (ICIS-NPDES) in a timely manner consistent with EPA national policy and, if
promulgated, the NPDES e-reporting rule. All other data related to compliance and
enforcement should be tracked and managed, as appropriate, to allow the region or state to
effectively manage their program. The EPA encourages authorized states to expand their use
of the national database to include compliance and enforcement data that pertains to the
entire NPDES universe.
• Continue implementation of integrated planning in accordance with EPA's 2012 Integrated
Municipal Stormwater and Wastewater Planning Approach Framework, available at
http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/integrated_planning framework.pdf
• Continue implementing the Federal Facility Enforcement Priority Area for Industrial
Stormwater.
21
-------
EPA regions should also:
• Implement existing CWA compliance and enforcement strategies for specific geographic
areas, as applicable, including the Chesapeake Bay Compliance and Enforcement Strategy
and other region-specific initiatives.
• Conduct a sufficient number of NPDES oversight inspections to ensure the integrity and
quality of each authorized state's or tribe's compliance monitoring program. See Part 2 of the
NPDES CMS for more discussion of oversight inspections.
• Ensure the full regulated universe of NPDES permittees is addressed in the state's CMS plan,
focusing on the most important sources and most serious noncompliance. Provide annual
CMS plans for each authorized state and for regional direct implementation areas to OECA
by December 31 of each year.
• Provide draft alternative plans to OECA for consultation and review by August 15 of each
year (in advance of the beginning of the plan coverage year), or a later date if agreed to by
the region and OECA. Work with OECA as needed to address national consistency and
program integrity issues identified through OECA's review of draft alternative plans.
• Track compliance monitoring activities and submit annual end of year reports for each state
and for regional direct implementation to OECA by December 31 of each year. End of year
reports should account for all compliance monitoring activities conducted in the prior year in
accordance with the NPDES CMS.
• Coordinate with their authorized states to ensure that state partners who do not directly input
data into ICIS-NPDES continue to use the National Environmental Information Exchange
Network to report data to the EPA.
• Utilize multi-sector general permit (MSGP) violation and benchmark data when available
through ICIS-NPDES to support monitoring, targeting and enforcement in areas where the
EPA has direct implementation authority.
• Routinely review all DMRs and non-compliance reports received for compliance with permit
requirements where the region directly implements the program, including Indian country.
• Work with OECA to identify and evaluate new priority areas that could become CWA
enforcement initiatives in the future. Assist OECA in collecting and reviewing data about
core program areas that warrant further review and consideration as national initiatives.
• Directly implement the CWA/NPDES program in Indian country unless and until a tribe
obtains program authorization. When directly implementing the program apply the NPDES
CMS, applicable enforcement response policies, and the Guidance on the Enforcement
Principles Outlined in the 1984 Indian Policy (January 17, 2001)
^ttp://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/state/84indianpolicy.pdf). The latter
policy contains procedures for consultation with federally-recognized tribes in the civil
compliance monitoring and enforcement context and contains threshold criteria for EPA's
consideration of formal civil enforcement actions. The threshold criteria are not intended to,
and should not result in, a lesser degree of human health and environmental protection in
Indian country than elsewhere in the United States.
• When appropriate, credential state and tribal inspectors to conduct compliance evaluations on
the EPA's behalf. Ensure that state and tribal inspectors who conduct inspections on EPA's
behalf are trained and credentialed consistent with agency guidance, including the Guidance
for Issuing Federal EPA Inspector Credentials to Authorize Employees of State/Tribal
Governments to Conduct Inspections on Behalf of EPA (2004) EPA Order 3500.1: Training
Requirements for EPA Personnel Who Are Authorized to Conduct Civil Compliance
22
-------
Inspections/Field Investigations and EPA Inspector Supervisors (June 19, 2014), and EPA
Order 3510: EPA Federal Credentials for Inspections and Enforcement of Federal
Environmental Statutes and Other Compliance Responsibilities (October 31, 2012).
• Consistent with the EPA Order 3510, annually conduct an inventory of federal credentials
which includes an annual physical possession check of 10 percent of the federal credentials
issued to state and tribal inspectors and a count of unused credentials stock.
• Fully implement and oversee the pretreatment program:
• In non-authorized states and in Indian country, oversee all approved POTW pretreatment
programs consistent with the NPDES CMS, including audits and inspections, and inspect
Industrial Users (HJs) that discharge into POTWs without approved pretreatment
programs.
• In states authorized to implement the pretreatment program, evaluate the effectiveness of
the state's (i.e., the approval authority) program by inspecting and auditing POTWs with
approved pretreatment programs (i.e., control authorities). In conjunction with POTW
inspections, ensure that POTWs with control authority are carrying out their
responsibilities, including annual inspections and sampling of all Significant Industrial
Users (SIUs).
• Where states are the control authority, assess each state program's performance in
conducting annual inspections and sampling of all SIUs.
• Coordinate with the Center of Excellence for Biosolids to respond to work that may arise in
this program and to access biosolid program annual reports that may be needed to support
regional compliance monitoring activities, such as targeting for pretreatment inspections.
• Investigate the CWA compliance status of surface mining facilities within each region,
including mountaintop removal mining operations. Evaluate the compliance status of such
facilities with respect to NPDES permitting requirements and CWA section 404 permitting
requirements. Take appropriate enforcement actions in response to CWA violations.
• Oversee compliance with the Vessel General Permit through coordination with the U.S.
Coast Guard, as necessary, in implementing the Vessel General Permit MOU, reviewing
Coast Guard deficiency data, and conducting joint inspections.
• Support the agency's Next Generation Compliance initiative by promoting advanced
monitoring, electronic reporting, and transparency to improve compliance with regulations
and enhance the ability to identify violations that may harm public health and/or the
environment. Develop innovative regulation design and enforcement approaches to ensure
regulations promote compliance and are implementable.
• Conduct SRF consistent with the schedule outlined in the agreed-upon ACS commitments.
Provide recommendations and conduct follow-up as appropriate in accordance with national
SRF guidance.
Measures: See ACS measure CWA07 in Appendix I, page 4.
5. CWA Section 404 - Discharge of Dredge and Fill Material
Description: The compliance and enforcement activities related to CWA Section 404 which
should be implemented are described below.
23
-------
Activities:
EPA regions should:
• Work with OECA in implementing the Section 404 Enforcement and Coordination Strategy.
• Coordinate, as appropriate, with other federal agencies [i.e., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(Corps), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS), and National Marine Fisheries (NMFS)] which have significant roles in wetlands
protection through the use of MOUs/MOAs or other appropriate mechanisms.
• Meet with Corps Districts on an annual basis to establish regional priorities and communicate
priorities to OECA.
• Review field level agreements with Corps Districts, and revise them to ensure consistency with
the Section 404 Enforcement and Coordination Strategy, as appropriate.
• Utilize the Office of Water's DARTER (Data on Aquatic Resources Tracking for Effective
Regulation) system as well as ICIS (Integrated Compliance Information System) to identify
and track potential repeat violators. (ICIS continues to be the data base of record for tracking
EPA information on CWA Section 404 enforcement actions.)
• In addition to working with the Corps on developing cases under the 1989 MO A, regions
should explore methods to effectively leverage other program resources (such as GIS and
remote sensing resources, NWI map updates, and reports or studies of known stressors to
wetlands in their regions) to more systematically identify potential serious Section 404
violations, target areas or sectors of known wetland stressors, and take appropriate enforcement
responses to address these violations. Share effective techniques with OECA for use in
developing the national aquatic resources (including wetlands) enforcement strategy.
• Utilize existing regional cross training opportunities as well as opportunities identified by
OECA to cross-train inspectors and to train other federal and state agencies and stakeholders
to identify CWA Section 404 violations.
6. CWA Section 311-Oil Pollution Act
Description: The compliance and enforcement activities which should be implemented to
help ensure compliance with the Oil Pollution Act are described below.
Activities:
EPA regions should, where appropriate:
• Participate in judicial enforcement cases to address spills from inter-state pipelines and
others, such as production facilities, on a company-wide basis. Ensure these spill cases
include company-wide injunctive relief requirements to prevent future spill violations at all
facilities of the owner or operator.
• Participate in judicial enforcement cases to address facility response plan (FRP) violations at
facilities owned or operated by the same company. Ensure these FRP cases include company-
wide injunctive relief requirements to improve facility response planning and implementation
at all facilities of the owner or operator.
» Target and investigate facilities subject to the EPA spill prevention and facility response
planning regulations, including offshore platforms within EPA jurisdiction, and take
24
-------
appropriate enforcement responses to address non-compliance with these regulatory
requirements.
» As necessary, target, investigate, and develop enforcement actions to address discharge
violations (spills) wherever the violation occurs, whether or not the spill occurred at a facility
subject to the EPA's spill prevention or facility response planning regulations.
• Conduct spill enforcement investigations to identify noncompliance and build cases for
enforcement actions.
• Whenever enforcement is pursued at facilities subject to EPA regulations, the case
development staff should evaluate all potential violations of CWA Section 311 and
underlying regulations and include claims in the enforcement case to address all
noncompliance in these areas. Include penalties, injunctive relief and/or enforceable
administrative obligations to prevent future violations from similar causes across all facilities
of the same owner or operator.
• Participate in OECA-led coordination and strategy meetings, as appropriate.
7. SDWA Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program
Description: The EPA plans to focus UIC enforcement efforts on violations that pose the
greatest threat to public health and shift away from enforcement work on more routine
violations. Data generally show good compliance at most facilities that the EPA inspects,
supporting a strategy of focusing our attention on the worst problems. Additionally, the agency
will invest in new pollution detection and e-reporting technologies to more effectively address
the large universe of pollution sources and empower communities.
The EPA has approved primacy by rule for injection well Classes I - V for 33 states and three
territories and, it shares responsibility in seven states and two tribes. EPA implements the UIC
program for injection well Classes I - V in 10 states, two territories, the District of Columbia,
and for most of Indian country. For Class VI Geologic Sequestration injection wells, the EPA
implements the program in all states, tribes, and territories.
Activities:
EPA regions should:
• Directly implement the program where the EPA retains primacy.
Authorized state and tribal programs should:
• Implement the UIC program consistent with their specific authorization codified in 40 CFR
Part 147.
8. CAA Program for Compliance Assurance and Enforcement
Description: The CAA compliance assurance and enforcement activities, described below,
should be implemented to help ensure compliance with the CAA and implementing regulations.
25
-------
Activities:
Delegated state, tribal and local agencies and EPA regions should:
• Implement programs in accordance with existing national compliance and enforcement
policy and guidance [e.g., the CAA Stationary Source Compliance Monitoring Strategy
(CMS), the CAA National Stack Testing Guidance, the Area Source Implementation
Guidance, the Timely and Appropriate Enforcement Response to High Priority Violations
(HPV Policy)4, the asbestos NESHAP Demolition and Renovation Enforcement Strategy and
the Guidance on Federally-Reportable Violations for Clean Air Act Stationary Sources5] to
address air pollution problems that adversely affect impacted communities.
• Identify and evaluate all violations, determine an appropriate response, address and
ultimately resolve air violations in order to bring sources into compliance which includes
taking timely and appropriate actions against facilities determined to have High Priority
Violations. Available for use is the Environmental Justice screening tool, EJSCREEN.
• Initiate civil and criminal enforcement actions, as appropriate, and whenever necessary to
protect communities.
• Ensure complete, accurate and timely compliance and enforcement data is reported into the
Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) consistent with agency policies, the "Air
Stationary Source Compliance and Enforcement Information Reporting" Information
Collection Request (ICR) and agreements incorporated in documents such as Memorandums
of Understanding (MOUs), State Enforcement Agreements (SEAs), EPA-Tribal Enforcement
Agreements, Performance Partnership Agreements (PPAs)/Performance Partnership Grants
(PPGs) or Section 105 grant agreements. This reporting effort includes the verification of
data used by the State Review Framework (SRF) and made available to the public.
• Negotiate settlements and track compliance with consent decrees and administrative orders
and take all necessary actions to ensure compliance with the terms of enforcement actions.
• Incorporate new technologies and innovative compliance monitoring approaches in
compliance monitoring programs, as appropriate and where feasible.
» Continue work with EPA headquarters to provide input into the design and development of
future versions of ICIS as it pertains to CAA compliance and enforcement information.
EPA regions should also:
• Work collaboratively with OECA and OAR to identify and address, as appropriate,
noncompliance issues that arise in the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reporting Program.
• Identify the most important air pollution problems and the most serious violations, using
targeting tools and other information, including, but not limited to, the National Air Toxics
Assessment (NATA) data, chemical toxicity data, non-attainment areas, and EJ SCREEN.
Consider EJ information, children's health, tips/complaints, and community input.
4The revised HPV policy, issued August 25, 2014, is accessible at http://www2.epa.gov/enforcement/air-
enforcement-policv-guidance-and-publications
5 The Guidance on Federally-Reportable Violations for Clean Air Act Stationary Sources is dated September 23,
2014 and is accessible at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/monitoring/caa/frv-policv.pdf
26
-------
Conduct evaluations as outlined in the agreed-upon ACS commitments, initiate enforcement
actions to address non-compliance, and seek penalties, where appropriate, consistent with the
CAA Civil Penalty Policy (including the Amendments) and in accordance with the 2013
Civil Monetary Penalty Inflation Adjustment Rule.
As the successor to the Air Facility System (AFS), ICIS is the data system of record for the
national CAA stationary source compliance and enforcement program. The regions should
continue to report all federal evaluations and enforcement actions, including FRVs, FIPVs
and penalties, into ICIS.
Continue any on-going investigations and initiate new ones, as appropriate. Report both
initiated and completed investigations in AFS. Reported investigations should meet the
definition in the CMS and minimum data requirements.
Review state implementation plan (SIP) submissions for enforceability and
approve/disapprove as necessary.
When reviewing Title V permits consistent with national guidance, ensure permits do not
shield sources subject to a pending or current CAA enforcement action or investigation. Also
ensure that consent decree requirements, including required schedules of compliance, are
incorporated into underlying federally enforceable non-Title V and Title V permits.
Furthermore, ensure the delegated agencies/tribes are reviewing Title V certifications
consistent with the CMS.
Conduct all RMP inspections in accordance with "Guidance for Conducting Risk
Management Program Inspections Under Clean Air Act Section 112(r)" (EPA 550-K-l 1-001,
January, 2011). Evaluate facilities that experience significant chemical accidents to
determine compliance with CAA sections 112(r)(l) and (7) and pursue appropriate
enforcement responses for violations.
All inspections at RMP facilities with Program 2 and/or 3 processes must evaluate a facility's
compliance with some or all of the accident prevention and emergency response program
requirements of Subparts C, D and E of 40 CFR Part 68, in addition to evaluating compliance
with other 40 CFR Part 68 requirements as time and resources allow. For inspections at
multi-process or high-risk facilities, conduct inspections where the field portion of the
inspection involves the appropriate number of inspectors/technical experts and time to
evaluate the RMP program compliance and chemical safety at the facility, as stated above.
For inspections at larger and more-complex facilities, regions should devote additional staff
and/or time as appropriate to the size and complexity of the facility.
Continue implementing the June 30, 2010 memorandum titled 'Identification of Facilities
Subject to 40 CFR Part 68'. Settle or litigate cases filed in years prior to FY 2016.
Directly implement the CAA in Indian country unless and until a tribe obtains program
approval and apply the various compliance monitoring strategies, enforcement response
policies, and the OECA Guidance on the Enforcement Principles Outlined in the 1984 Indian
Policy (January 17, 2001)
^ttp://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/state/84indianpolicy.pdf).
This guidance contains procedures for consultation with tribes in the civil compliance
monitoring and enforcement context and contains threshold criteria for EPA's consideration
of formal civil enforcement actions. The guidance criteria are not intended to, and should not,
result in a lesser degree of human health and environmental protection in Indian country than
elsewhere in the United States.
27
-------
• When appropriate, authorize state and tribal inspectors to conduct compliance evaluations on
the EPA's behalf. Ensure that state and tribal inspectors who inspect on EPA's behalf are
trained and credentialed per the Guidance for Issuing Federal EPA Inspector Credentials to
Authorize Employees of State/Tribal Governments to Conduct Inspections on Behalf of EPA
(2004).
• Consistent with the EPA Order 3510, annually conduct an inventory of federal credentials
which includes an annual physical possession check of 10 percent of the federal credentials
issued to state and tribal inspectors and a count of unused credentials stock.
• In accordance with the HPV Policy, have frequent discussions with delegated agencies to
ensure consistent implementation of the Policy, including consideration of the Watch List
replacement tool when available.
• Negotiate facility-specific CMS plans with all delegated agencies and ensure delegated
agencies are aware of the flexibilities available within the CMS. Evaluate progress
throughout the year and work with delegated agencies to revise such CMS plans as
necessary. Work with headquarters to ensure that when delegated agencies use the
flexibilities offered in the CMS to tailor their strategy to state/tribal/local specific
circumstances, such use of flexibility is taken into account to accurately represent delegated
agency performance in program reviews and to the public.
• Conduct a sufficient number of oversight inspections to ensure the integrity and quality of each
authorized state's or tribe's compliance monitoring program.
• In follow-up to annual planning meetings with senior federal and state management, convene
routine and regular (several times per year) meetings with senior state management to assess
progress in how the state has been performing overall in its implementation of the program.
• Ensure facility performance data is accessible to the public consistent with agency policy and
regulations.
• Support the agency's Next Generation Compliance by identifying and promoting advanced
monitoring and electronic reporting to improve compliance and enhance the ability to
identify violations that may harm public health and/or the environment. Increase
transparency and improve targeting for noncompliance. Develop innovative enforcement
approaches and participate in agency rulemaking workgroups to ensure regulations are
designed to promote compliance and are implementable.
• Conduct SRF consistent with the schedule outlined in the agreed-upon ACS commitments.
Provide recommendations and conduct follow-up as appropriate in accordance with national
SRF guidance.
Measures: See ACS measures CAA04 and CAA06 in Appendix I, page 5.
9. RCRA Subtitle C Hazardous Waste Program
Description: The critical compliance monitoring and enforcement activities for the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Subtitle C Hazardous Waste Program are described
below.
Activities:
28
-------
Authorized states and EPA regions, in their oversight and direct implementation roles, including
in Indian country, should:
• Address RCRA problems that matter to communities, especially tips and complaints, and
identify and follow-up on the highest priority concerns.
• Meet statutory requirements to conduct a minimum number of thorough inspections annually
including financial assurance requirements for Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities
(TSDF), operated by federal, state/local governments, and biennially for non-governmental
TSDFs.
• Follow the RCRA Compliance Monitoring Strategy (CMS). Note: states may use the
flexibilities described in the RCRA CMS for Large Quantity Generators (LQGs) and TSDFs.
• Undertake timely and appropriate enforcement actions that produce significant
environmental benefits.
• Complete on-going work in the mining/mineral processing priority area, consistent with the
national strategy, unless continued noncompliance is detected.
• Consider the following focus areas as a high priority when developing strategies for targeting
compliance assurance work and annual plans for respective activities in the regions:
• Improper treatment at TSDFs/Waste Analysis Plans at TSDFs: Ensure proper
characterization of incoming wastes, treatment and stabilization techniques, and the
sampling and analysis of hazardous waste treated to meet the Land Disposal
Restriction (LDR) treatment standards for land disposal.
• RCRA AA/BB/CC: Ensure compliance with RCRA air emission requirements.
• Where resources allow and given regulated universe considerations of any particular
region/state, other potential focus areas for regional and state consideration are:
• Surface Impoundments: hazardous waste in unlined surface impoundments.
• Zinc Hazardous Secondary Materials Recyclers: zinc fertilizer manufacturing that
use hazardous waste; sham recycling and recycling.
• RCRA Corrective Action: facilities that have not made meaningful progress in
achieving remedial objectives, and on financially marginal or bankrupt facilities.
Monitor compliance with orders and permits, identify substantial noncompliance
with such instruments, and take enforcement actions where appropriate.
• Mercury from specific sources: sectors such as universal waste lamp handlers and
recyclers.
EPA regions should also:
• Ensure that the most serious instances of noncompliance are addressed through planning with
states, state oversight, regular (e.g. quarterly) meetings, targeted inspections and
enforcement, and through direct implementation in states and Indian country.
• Conduct a sufficient number of oversight inspections to ensure the integrity and quality of
each state's compliance monitoring program.
• Support the agency's Next Generation Compliance by promoting advanced monitoring and
electronic reporting to improve compliance and enhance the ability to identify violations that
may harm public health and/or the environment. Increase transparency and improve targeting
for noncompliance. Develop innovative enforcement approaches and participate in agency
rulemaking workgroups to ensure regulations are designed to promote compliance and are
implementable.
29
-------
• Conduct SRF consistent with the schedule outlined in the agreed-upon ACS commitments.
Provide recommendations and conduct follow-up as appropriate in accordance with national
SRF guidance.
• Take enforcement action, consistent with national policy, where states are not addressing
serious noncompliance or when federal enforcement may provide a more comprehensive
response than an individual state response (for example on issues that involve multiple
states).
• Use electronic reporting tools as feasible when monitoring compliance with orders/permits.
* Screen for potential environmental justice concerns at RCRA facilities.
• Support, and encourage states to support RCRA inspector training development.
• Ensure regional direct implementation in states and Indian country includes applying the
RCRA compliance monitoring strategies and enforcement policies and OECA's Guidance on
the Enforcement Principles Outlined in the 1984 Indian Policy (January 17, 2001)
(http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/state/84indianpolicy.pdf), which contains
procedures for consultation with federally-recognized tribes in the civil compliance
monitoring and enforcement context and threshold criteria for the EPA's consideration of
formal civil enforcement actions. The threshold criteria should not result in a lesser degree of
human health and environmental protection in Indian country than elsewhere in the United
States.
* Ensure that state and tribal inspectors who inspect on behalf of the EPA are trained and
credentialed consistent with agency guidance, including the Guidance for Issuing Federal
EPA Inspector Credentials to Authorize Employees of State/Tribal Governments to Conduct
Inspections on Behalf of EPA (2004). Consistent with the EPA Order 3510, annually conduct
an inventory of federal credentials which includes an annual physical possession check of 10
percent of the federal credentials issued to state and tribal inspectors and a count of unused
credentials stock.
* As necessary, work with OECA to identify and evaluate program areas that could become
national priorities/enforcement initiatives in the future.
» Participate in the development and implementation of nationally consistent field mobility
business solutions such as electronic inspection software.
Measures: See ACS measures RCRA02 and RCRA02s in Appendix I, page 7. Measures
RCRA 01, RCRA Ols, RCRA03 support the statutory and regulatory requirements and are listed
on pages 5-7.
10. RCRA Underground Storage Tank (UST) Subtitle I Program
Description: A major focus of the RCRA UST program is to maintain an enforcement
presence concerning leak prevention, leak detection, corrective action, closure and financial
responsibility violations. States have primary responsibility for determining facility compliance,
ensuring adequate inspection coverage of the regulated universe, taking appropriate actions in
response to non-compliance and playing a vital role in alerting the EPA to regulatory
implementation problems. The agency's enforcement activities will focus on addressing
violations that pose the greatest threat to human health and the environment where a federal
response is necessary and maintaining compliance monitoring and enforcement resources to
30
-------
directly implement the UST program in Indian country. The enforcement program will also
continue to support the Office of Underground Storage Tanks' efforts on the implementation of
the new final UST regulations such as helping to develop innovative approaches to promote and
maintain compliance using next generation compliance and enforcement methods. The Leaking
UST (LUST) program will continue its emphasis on corrective action and petroleum
brownfields, and efforts to reduce the backlog of LUST sites. OECA headquarters has been
involved in supporting work on abandoned tanks, bankruptcy, responsible party (RP) search,
ability-to-pay (ATP), and enforcement at RP-lead cleanups.
Activities:
EPA regions will focus on:
• Owners and operators of USTs located in Indian country. Regional direct implementation in
Indian country should take place pursuant to the applicable enforcement policies and OECA's
Guidance on the Enforcement Principles Outlined in the 1984 Indian Policy (January 17,
2001), which contains procedures for consultation with federally-recognized tribes in the
civil compliance monitoring and enforcement context and threshold criteria for EPA's
consideration of formal civil enforcement actions. The threshold criteria should not result in a
lesser degree of human health and environmental protection in Indian country than elsewhere
in the United States.
• UST inspections that will produce the greatest environmental and human health benefits.
Factors to consider in identifying facilities for inspection under the UST program include:
• Owners and operators managing UST facilities in multiple states;
• Mid-level distributors operating multiple UST facilities;
• Problem non-compliers (i.e. repeat violators; owners/operators who fail to cooperate
in an effort to return to compliance);
• Owners and operators of facilities with USTs that endanger sensitive ecosystems or
sources of drinking water;
• Corporate, government-owned and federal central fueling facilities; and
• Owners and operators of UST facilities in areas with potential environmental justice
concerns.
• Ensuring timely and accurate reporting of state/tribal performance data (following guidance
provided by OUST) and entering federal inspection and enforcement data into ICIS.
• Issuance of enforcement actions and assessment of penalties, as appropriate. Focus on
developing large complex cases involving noncompliance on a corporate-wide basis or
noncompliance in multi-state operations. Regions will consult with the states when they plan
to use delivery prohibition in those states, when appropriate, to address significant
noncompliance.
• Where action is appropriate in smaller cases (e.g. in Indian Country), regions will consider
utilizing cost-effective tools such as field citations or expedited settlements, when
appropriate.
• Regions should encourage their states to optimize deterrence from the impact of enforcement
utilizing efficiencies within their authority including the use of delivery prohibition and
addressing noncompliance on a corporate-wide basis statewide or other opportunities.
31
-------
11. RCRA Corrective Action
Description: RCRA corrective action is implemented by the EPA and 44 authorized states
and territories. On April 27, 2010, OECA and OSWER jointly issued the "NationalEnforcement
Strategy for Corrective Action" (NESCA). This strategy encourages the EPA and states to
continue to work in partnership to achieve the 2020 Corrective Action goals and emphasizes the
need for close communication and coordination between the EPA and states to meet these goals.
NESCA provides guidance to regions and states for targeting enforcement efforts and addressing
special considerations that arise in the enforcement arena, such as ensuring enforceable
requirements and deadlines in permits and orders are clearly identified, focusing on companies
having financial difficulties, using CERCLA authorities, where appropriate, ensuring
institutional controls are effective and enforceable and long-term stewardship requirements are
met, and increasing the transparency and community involvement of enforcement efforts. OECA
will continue to provide training to regions and states on how to review financial assurance
submissions for compliance, and in particular, the financial test and corporate guarantee. In
addition, OECA has updated its Model 3008(h) administrative order on consent (AOC) and will
explore updating or developing other model orders.
To help achieve the RCRA Corrective Action program goals and ensure that meaningful
progress is being made at facilities subject to corrective action, regions and authorized states
should work closely together and continue implementing NESCA in FY 2016-2017. On
September 27, 2012, the EPA issued a NESCA assessment report that recommended the
following future actions: increase emphasis on communication and coordination within the EPA
and with state partners, explore opportunities for compliance monitoring, and increase the state
role in corrective action compliance monitoring and enforcement (see
http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/documents/nesca-assessment-2012.pdf). In FY 2016
and 2017, OECA will continue to implement the next steps included in the September 27, 2012
NESCA assessment report with an emphasis on enhancing compliance monitoring in the
corrective action program. OECA's compliance monitoring activities will include continuing its
Corrective Action inspection training efforts, encouraging long-term stewardship inspections and
addressing environmental justice issues through Corrective Action inspections and enforcement
actions, as appropriate.
Activities:
Authorized states and regions should:
• Enhance coordination within your offices and amongst regulatory partners. When permits or
orders are being developed, renewed or modified, coordinate to ensure that they contain clear
schedules for corrective action and enforcement processes as appropriate.
• Emphasize compliance monitoring, including reviewing permits and orders to determine
whether noncompliance with cleanup milestones exists, and taking appropriate action in
cases of noncompliance.
• When establishing potential enforcement targets, regions are encouraged to focus attention
on identifying and addressing disproportionate impacts on minority, low income, tribal and
other vulnerable populations.
32
-------
• Leverage federal, state, tribal, local and other partnerships to maximize resources; improve
cleanups using greener and more resilient and sustainable practices; and revitalize sites through
policy, guidance and, when appropriate, agreements and comfort letters.
• Implement specific actions designated in EPA's Climate Change Adaptation Plan to more fully
integrate climate change adaptation activities, greener remediation, and sustainability efforts
into the cleanup enforcement program (e.g. consent decrees, comfort letters or other
enforcement instruments), where appropriate.
Measures: See ACS measure HQ-VOL in Appendix I, page 7.
12. TSCA Chemical Risk Reduction Programs
Description: The EPA regions and when authorized, states and tribes are expected to
implement the National Compliance Monitoring Strategy (CMS) for the four major Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA) programs. The New and Existing Chemical program (core
TSCA) and PCB programs are generally implemented by the EPA. The asbestos program, and
the Lead-based Paint program are implemented by the EPA except where states or tribes have
been authorized to implement those programs in lieu of the Agency.
The CMS creates a "One-TSCA" program framework for regional compliance monitoring
programs that gives each region the flexibility to shift its priority focus as needed to address its
most significant compliance, human health, and environmental issue(s). It is important for each
region to be knowledgeable about the array of environmental problems across their region and
the regulated universe subject to each of its TSCA focus areas (e.g., the universe size, constituent
sectors), compliance levels, the roles and effectiveness of authorized state and tribal programs
and to consider and address the potential impact that directing most of its resources to its priority
issue(s) likely will have on its other TSCA programs and activities. With these factors in mind,
the regions are to develop a plan for their inspections and other compliance activities based on
the resources available and that prioritizes the problems to be addressed along with how the
regions are providing oversight of state programs. If a region chooses not to develop a plan for
its TSCA programs then the region shall use the following distribution for resource allocation.
For FY 2016-2017, 90 percent of the region's overall TSCA resources should focus on the lead
compliance assurance program. However, up to 20 percent of these same resources may be
shifted by the region to other TSCA compliance assurance activities consistent with this NPM
Guidance. The intent here is to provide flexibility for regional TSCA initiatives and to take into
account unique regional situations while still maintaining a national TSCA program. Where
regions choose to exercise this flexibility they should provide a rationale and articulate how this
flexibility is consistent (or why inconsistent) with the CMS.
A. TSCA Lead Risk Reduction Program
Description: In 1992, Congress enacted Title X: Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard
Reduction Act. Among other things, The Act authorized four key programs for EPA to
implement: the Section 1018 - Lead-Based Paint Risk Disclosure Program; the Lead-Based
33
-------
Paint Activities Program; the Lead-Based Paint Pre-Renovation Education Program; and the
Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting Program. The EPA will focus its efforts on
addressing the most serious violations of the Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting
Program in order to protect children's health. For FY 2016-2017, 90 percent of the region's
TSCA resources should focus on the lead compliance assurance program.
Activities:
EPA regions should:
• Focus primarily on compliance with the LBP Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) Rule
/Pre-Renovation Education (PRE) Rule. With regard to the regions' lead based paint
compliance efforts, regions should direct 95 percent of their efforts in the lead program
towards RRP/PRE, and no more than 5 percent to new § 1018-only compliance. Regions
should prioritize their activities to assure compliance with RRP work practices requirements.
Regions may employ targeting that, while focusing on RRP/PRE, allows for concomitant
compliance monitoring with other LBP rules (the § 1018 and § 402 Abatement rules), as
appropriate.
• Implement the program priorities and activities, including those set out in detail in the
National Compliance Monitoring Strategy (CMS) for Lead Based Paint (LBP)6, to balance
the various types of inspections and other compliance assurance activities. The effective and
efficient targeting of inspections, particularly work practice inspections, requires that the
regions know the regulated universe, and prioritize the problems to be addressed. Regions
should attempt to maximize their enforcement presence by focusing on larger violators, as
appropriate.
• Use the inspection targeting principles set forth in the CMS with a focus on monitoring
contractors' actual compliance with required work practices. Focus efforts in high-priority
lead "hot spots" as described in the CMS [e.g., geographical areas with evidence or
indicators of significant or wide-spread Elevated Blood Lead Levels (EBLLs)].
• Respond appropriately to tips and complaints and actively follow-up on the highest priorities.
• Coordinate with OECA to bundle press activities related to cases from multiple regions, as
appropriate.
• Partner with state and local government code enforcement and building permit programs and
state/local health departments to conduct joint inspections.
• Partner with health departments and health care providers to identify lead hot spots and
individual properties associated with EBLL children.
• Initiate civil enforcement actions, consistent with national policy, to eliminate any regional
inspection backlog and expeditiously bring facilities into compliance.
• Work with their LBP program to encourage states to seek authorization for the RRP program.
• Conduct appropriate oversight of authorized state § 402 and § 406 programs.
• Consistent with the EPA Order 3510, conduct an annual inventory of federal credentials
which includes a physical possession check of 10 percent of the federal credentials issued to
state inspectors and a count of unused credentials stock.
6 Please see Compliance Monitoring Strategy for the Toxic Substances Control Act (September 16, 2011),
including Appendix E - Lead-based Paint Program and Appendix F - Lead-based Paint Program
Resources, at: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/monitoring/tsca/tsca-cms.pdf.
34
-------
• Enter all federal inspection and enforcement cases into the national database ICIS in a timely
and accurate manner.
» As necessary, work with OECA to identify and evaluate program areas that could become
national priorities/enforcement initiatives in the future.
Measures: See ACS measures TSCA 01OC and TSCA 02OC in Appendix I on page 8. The
Lead Based Paint component of ACS commitment TSCA 01OC will serve as an OECA FY 2016
measure of compliance work being done to protect children's health.
B. TSCA New and Existing Chemicals Programs
Description: The TSCA New and Existing Chemicals Program is exclusively a federal
program that provides for review of the risk of chemicals prior to their manufacture and
importation to prevent unreasonable risk to human health and the environment and requires a
series of notifications and submissions from regulated industry. For FY 2016-2017, 90 percent of
the region's TSCA resources should focus on the lead compliance assurance program7. However,
up to 20 percent of these same resources may be shifted by the region to other TSCA compliance
assurance activities consistent with this NPM Guidance. The intent here is to provide flexibility
for regional TSCA initiatives and to take into account unique regional situations. Where regions
choose to exercise this flexibility they should provide a rationale and articulate how this
flexibility is consistent (or why inconsistent) with the Compliance Monitoring Strategy (CMS)
for the Toxic Substances Control Act.
Activities:
EPA regions opting to engage in compliance monitoring and assurance activities for TSCA New
and Existing Chemicals should:
• Focus on chemical manufacturing (including importing), distribution, processing, use, or
disposal of new chemicals and emerging technologies (such as nanotechnology and
biotechnology). Focus monitoring and enforcement efforts on ensuring facility compliance
with TSCA § 5 - new chemicals requirements such as Pre-manufacturing Notice (PMN);
Significant New Use Rules (SNUR's); Low Volume Exemptions (LVE's), and on chemicals
of concern including short chained and other chlorinated paraffins, fractions, Work Plan and
other priority or Action Plan chemicals or targets.
• Implement the Compliance Monitoring Strategy for the Toxic Substances Control Act
(September 16, 2011)8 including Appendix B which addresses New and Existing Chemicals.
• Obtain information through inspections and/or subpoena as appropriate. Increase the use of
TSCA subpoenas for investigation of potential noncompliance.
• Initiate civil enforcement actions, as appropriate, to bring facilities into compliance,
consistent with national policy.
7 Please see first paragraph in the description section for the TSCA Chemical Risk Reduction Programs on page 33.
8 The TSCA CMS, including Appendix B, can be found at:
http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/monitoring/tsca/tsca-cms.pdf.
35
-------
• Target existing chemical reporting and record keeping requirements such as TSCA § 4, 8
and the 2016 Chemical Data Reporting Rule.
• Evaluate and prioritize tips and complaints and follow-up as appropriate. Regions not
implementing this program should refer tips and complaints to the Waste and Chemical
Enforcement Division within the Office of Civil Enforcement.
• Strengthen program integrity through enhanced chemical data collection, reporting and
coordination between headquarters and regions. In particular, increase coordination on
targeting between OPPT, OECA and the participating regions to focus on the chemical
manufacturing sector. Additionally, coordinate when setting program priorities and
communicating best practices.
• Enter all federal inspection and enforcement cases into the national database ICIS in a timely
and accurate manner.
Measures: See ACS measures TSCA 01OC and TSCA 02OC in Appendix I on page 8.
C. TSCA PCB Program
Description: The TSCA PCB enforcement program is a federal only program. However, nine
states through cooperative agreements inspect on behalf of the EPA. TSCA and EPA's
implementing regulations aim to minimize risks posed by the use, storage, handling, and disposal
of PCBs and PCB-containing items. The EPA's enforcement program will focus its PCB
enforcement resources on nationally-significant situations involving the greatest threats to health
in each region. The EPA will pursue nationally-significant PCB civil and criminal violations that
may present a significant risk of injury to health or the environment and maintain some field
presence at EPA-approved commercial PCB storage and disposal facilities. For FY 2016-2017,
90 percent of the region's TSCA resources should focus on the lead compliance assurance
program9. However, up to 20 percent of these same resources may be shifted by the region to
other TSCA compliance assurance activities consistent with this NPM Guidance. The intent here
is to provide flexibility for regional TSCA initiatives and to take into account unique regional
situations. Where regions choose to exercise this flexibility they should provide a rationale and
articulate how this flexibility is consistent (or why inconsistent) with the Compliance Monitoring
Strategy (CMS) for the Toxic Substances Control Act. OECA will continue to evaluate
enforcement options for PCBs in building materials used in schools and will update existing
guidance or provide new guidance at a later date.
Activities:
EPA regions opting to engage in compliance monitoring and assurance activities for the TSCA
PCB program should:
• Address nationally-significant PCB civil and criminal violations that may present a
significant risk to human health or the environment, consistent with national policy.
• Dependent on regional resources devoted to this program, focus inspections, case
development and enforcement on the following areas of potential significant risk:
9 Please see first paragraph in the description section for the TSCA Chemical Risk Reduction Programs on page 33.
36
-------
1. PCB treatment, storage and/or disposal facilities targeted based on potential for releases,
cumulative burden on EJ communities, or associated with approvals (permitting):
a. At facilities conducting approved PCB treatment, storage, disposal, or cleanups
(the regions should inspect all approved commercial PCB treatment, storage, and
disposal facilities at least once every three years);
b. As appropriate, at oil recyclers through coordinated joint TSCA/RCRA PCB
inspections to efficiently use resources.
2. Non-TSD Locations:
a. Natural gas pipelines;
b. Used oil facilities that receive and dilute PCB contaminated oil, and related
possible distribution in commerce, contamination, decontamination, and disposal;
c. Follow-up where improperly or unmanifested PCB waste was turned away by
disposal sites and was either returned to the generator or taken in by the storer/
disposer, as well as facilities that have the potential to receive unmanifested
shipments;
d. Potential PCB-containing abandoned buildings, textile mills, and other facilities
located in close proximity to residential communities assuming the existence and
location of these facilities is known to the EPA region.
3. Follow-up on tips/complaints that involve potential for illegal disposal and significant
risk.
4. As appropriate, coordinating joint TSCA/RCRA PCB inspections at oil recyclers to
efficiently use resources.
• Taking into account the aforementioned focus for the FY 2016-2017 program, implement the
Compliance Monitoring Strategy for the Toxic Substances Control Act (September 16, 2011)
including Appendix C - PCBs10.
• Monitor, evaluate and take action on compliance requirements/submittals/schedules under
Consent Decrees and Consent Agreements.
• Ensure that any state and tribal inspectors who inspect on behalf of the EPA are trained and
credentialed consistent with agency guidance, including the Guidance for Issuing Federal
EPA Inspector Credentials to Authorize Employees of State/Tribal Governments to Conduct
Inspections on Behalf of EPA (2004).
• Consistent with the EPA Order 3510, conduct an annual inventory of federal credentials
which includes a physical possession check of 10 percent of any federal credentials issued to
state and tribal inspectors and a count of unused credentials stock.
• Enter all federal inspection and enforcement cases into the national database ICIS in a timely
and accurate manner.
States with EPA cooperative agreements should:
• Implement the agreed-upon work plan in their cooperative agreements.
Measures: See ACS measures TSCA 01OC and TSCA 02OC in Appendix I on page 8.
D. TSCA Asbestos Program/AHERA
10 The TSCA CMS, including Appendix C, can be found at:
http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/monitoring/tsca/tsca-cms.pdf
37
-------
Description: Since 1986, the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA) amended
TSCA to require schools to inspect their buildings for asbestos-containing materials and
implement asbestos-management programs. The EPA will focus its efforts on addressing the
most egregious violations of AHERA in order to protect human health and the environment. For
FY 2016-2017, 90 percent of the region's TSCA resources should focus on the lead compliance
assurance program11. However, up to 20 percent of these same resources may be shifted by the
region to other TSCA compliance assurance activities consistent with this NPM Guidance. The
intent here is to provide flexibility for regional TSCA initiatives and to take into account unique
regional situations. Where regions choose to exercise this flexibility they should provide a
rationale and articulate how this flexibility is consistent (or why inconsistent) with the
Compliance Monitoring Strategy (CMS) for the Toxic Substances Control Act.
Activities:
EPA regions opting to engage in compliance monitoring and assurance activities for the TSCA
Asbestos/AHERA program should:
• Address the most egregious violations of AHERA consistent with national policy.
• For states and tribes that do not have a cooperative agreement with the EPA, taking into
account regional resources devoted to this program, investigate and respond appropriately
(including taking enforcement action as appropriate) within a reasonable amount of time to
tips/complaints containing allegations that provide a reasonable basis to believe that a
violation has occurred.
• For states and tribes that do not have a cooperative agreement with the EPA, taking into
account regional resources devoted to this program, consider conducting compliance
inspections at state and local government facilities to monitor compliance with the asbestos
worker protection requirements in states where state and local government employees are not
protected by the OSHA Asbestos Standards.
• In states that have non-waiver status, review and evaluate inspection reports for enforcement
action.
• Taking into account the aforementioned focus for the FY 2016-2017 program, implement the
Compliance Monitoring Strategy for the Toxic Substances Control Act (September 16, 2011)
including Appendix D - Asbestos12.
• Ensure that any state and tribal inspectors who inspect on behalf of the EPA are trained and
credentialed consistent with agency guidance, including the Guidance for Issuing Federal
EPA Inspector Credentials to Authorize Employees of State/Tribal Governments to Conduct
Inspections on Behalf of EPA (2004).
• Consistent with the EPA Order 3510, conduct an annual inventory of federal credentials
which includes a physical possession check of 10 percent of the federal credentials issued to
state and tribal inspectors and a count of unused credentials stock.
• Enter all federal inspection and enforcement cases into the national database ICIS in a timely
and accurate manner.
11 Please see first paragraph in description section for the TSCA Chemical Risk Reduction Programs on page 33.
12 The TSCA CMS, including Appendix D can be found at:
http: //www. epa.gov/compliance/resource s/policie s/monitoring/tsca/tsca-cms .pdf
38
-------
Waiver and non-waiver states are expected to:
• Within a reasonable period of time, investigate and respond appropriately to any
tips/complaints containing allegations that provide a reasonable basis to believe that a
violation has occurred.
• Conduct inspections in each state to assure equitable protection and ensure compliance with
the TSCA asbestos regulations.
• In waiver states, take appropriate enforcement action under state law.
• In non-waiver states, submit completed inspection reports to the EPA region for review and
enforcement action as appropriate, consistent with the state's cooperative agreement.
Consider conducting compliance inspections at state and local government facilities to
monitor compliance with the asbestos worker protection requirements in states where state
and local government employees are not protected by the OSHA Asbestos Standards.
Measures: See ACS measures TSCA 01OC and TSCA 02OC in Appendix I on page 8.
13. FIFRA Program for Compliance Assurance and Enforcement
Description: The EPA will generally prioritize its compliance monitoring activities based on
risk to human health and the environment. The region's FIFRA resources should include a
balance of compliance and enforcement activities covering: worker protection, pesticide
registration and labeling, product efficacy (including enforcement follow-up of efficacy failures
of antimicrobial products) and compositional integrity, producing establishment registration and
reporting, import and export requirements, unreasonable adverse effects reporting, and other
noncompliant pesticides. For FY 2016-2017, the three FIFRA Focus Areas are: a) Product
Integrity; b) Border Compliance; and c) Worker Protection Standards; implementation of the
FIFRA Focus Areas will generally be done through direct implementation activities or in support
of state and tribal programs.
Activities:
For its direct implementation program, EPA regions should:
• Participate in the three FIFRA Focus Areas: a) Product Integrity; b) Border Compliance; and
c) Worker Protection Standards, discussed below.
• Conduct inspections and perform sampling in support of the Focus Areas and other core
FIFRA program areas, as appropriate, and in accordance with any final FIFRA Compliance
Monitoring Strategy.
• Initiate enforcement actions, consistent with the FIFRA ERPs and with emphasis on
addressing risk, obtaining appropriate deterrence, and optimizing environmental benefits.
• Apply the various FIFRA enforcement policies and OECA's Guidance on the Enforcement
Principles Outlined in the 1984 Indian Policy (January 17, 2001)
(http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/state/84indianpolicy.pdf) when doing
direct implementation in Indian country to ensure adequate human health and environmental
protection in Indian country as elsewhere in the United States.
• Ensure timely and accurate entry of federal inspection and enforcement data into ICIS.
39
-------
For its support of state and tribal programs, EPA regions should:
• Encourage state and tribal involvement in supporting the EPA Focus Area activities, as
appropriate and consistent with the cooperative agreement guidance.
• Negotiate, oversee implementation of and review state and tribal performance under pesticide
enforcement cooperative agreements following existing policies and guidance.
• Work with EPA Headquarters to document and improve upon current procedures and
training to conduct: (1) program evaluations; and (2) grant performance evaluations,
incorporating existing relevant protocols to the extent possible. Oversight resources should
be focused on the most pressing performance problems and work to demonstrably improve
state/tribal performance. Participate in development of FIFRA state performance dashboards
based on 5700 data.
• Convene routine and regular meetings between the region and state or tribe to discuss how
the state or tribe has been performing overall in its implementation of the program, and in
respect to its negotiated cooperative agreement. When appropriate and consistent with the
Interpretive Rule and other national policy, take enforcement to address serious violations in
the absence of appropriate state response or when significant state cases are referred to EPA
for enforcement.
• Ensure timely and accurate reporting of state and tribal performance data.
Measures: See ACS measure FIFRA-FED1 in Appendix I, page 8.
A. Pesticide Product Integrity
Description: Pesticides are registered after undergoing a significant review and risk/benefit
analysis intended to ensure that human health and environmental risks are adequately mitigated
through the Agency's registration and related labeling process. This focus area will address
pesticides which potentially present significant risks to human health and the environment while
safeguarding the basic integrity of the pesticide registration process. For this focus area, regions
would be expected to monitor compliance against four prongs of product integrity: (1) product
registration, (2) label/labeling compliance, (3) composition compliance, and (4) product efficacy,
(apply only in cases dealing with the on-going antimicrobial testing program (ATP)).
Activities:
EPA regions should:
• Conduct producer establishment inspections known to produce (1) supplemental distributor
products, (2) RUP or Tox-1 pesticides, or (3) pesticides of regulatory concern.
• Collect samples and submit to laboratory for formulation analysis to ensure product
composition complies with terms of registration.
• Initiate enforcement actions, as appropriate, to address violations of registration,
composition, and labeling requirements to ensure optimum deterrence effect and enforcement
impact, including enforcement actions that address corporate-wide noncompliant behavior
and high-risk unregistered pesticide products.
• Address ATP efficacy failures through enforcement actions, in collaboration with OPP.
40
-------
Measures: See ACS measure FIFRA-FED1 in Appendix I, page 8.
B. Border Compliance
Description: The EPA's enforcement program addresses the illegal importation of
unregistered or otherwise noncompliant pesticide products into the United States by bringing
enforcement actions against importers and others and working with other governments, agencies
and stakeholders to prevent and reduce risks of unsafe products entering our country, with
special emphasis on enforcing against importers of high-risk unregistered pesticides. Illegal
pesticide imports may present significant human health and environmental risks and have been
linked to poisonings of children and pets, so prevention before they enter the United States is
critical. The EPA regions are the primary source of inspections and enforcement for this area.
States may become involved through region-to-state referrals to monitor post-entry import
compliance or states may encounter imported products during the course of other compliance
monitoring inspections. Regions should make their states aware of the EPA's strong interest in
import compliance and encourage collaboration with the EPA when situations warrant. This
work helps to further the work of the Interagency Working Group on Import Safety established
by Executive Order 13439 and the current "One U.S. Government at the Border" initiative.
Currently, the EPA staff manually review FIFRA Notices of Arrival (NO As) for pesticide
products and devices entering the U.S. and provide direction and guidance to Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) as to whether the product should be allowed to enter U.S. commerce.
The planned transition to an automated processing system in FY 2016 [Automated Commercial
Environment in the International Trade Data System (ACE/ITDS)] creates opportunities to
reduce the investment in manual processing of Notices of Arrival (NO As). Once fully functional,
ACE/ITDS will process the majority of NO As, significantly reducing the need for manual review
and approval by the EPA.
Activities:
Focus on importers with a history of noncompliance or significant importation activity from
countries frequently associated with noncompliant shipments. EPA regions should:
• Monitor import compliance through inspections at:
o Entry ports, when appropriate.
o Designated destination points (conducted after the imported products have been released
by CBP and have entered into U.S. commerce, Foreign Trade Zones being used for
storage, processing or packaging prior to release into U.S. commerce).
• Collect samples and submit to laboratory for formulation analysis to ensure product
composition complies with terms of registration.
• Screen NO As for potential Confidential Statement of Formula discrepancies relating to
source of active ingredient and countries of origin. Where potential discrepancies are noted,
follow-up investigations may be warranted at U.S. registered agents for foreign producers
and domestic producing establishments.
• Take enforcement actions, as appropriate, to ensure optimum deterrence effect and
enforcement impact, including enforcement actions that address corporate-wide
noncompliant behavior and high-risk unregistered pesticide products.
41
-------
• Participate in Commercial Targeting and Analysis Center (CTAC) National Operations
initiatives, as appropriate.
Measures: See ACS measure FIFRA-FED1 in Appendix I, page 8.
C. Worker Protection Standards
Description: Addressing disproportionate risks of agricultural farm workers, handlers and
pesticide applicators to pesticide exposure continues to remain a focus area for the EPA.
Although most states have "primacy" to enforce pesticide use, including worker protection
standards (WPS), regions should seek opportunities for federal cases to support state efforts.
Where the EPA directly implements FIFRA, such as in Indian country and states without
primacy status, EPA regions should monitor compliance and enforce pesticide use requirements,
although tribes with cooperative enforcement agreements may conduct inspections under their
own tribal codes. Regions are expected to place emphasis on farming activities that involve
frequent use of highly toxic pesticides or significant worker exposure, such as fruit and vegetable
production and on-farm fumigation. In FY 2016 and FY 2017, OECA will continue to address
WPS noncompliance, but adjust the activities in several ways as described below.
Activities:
EPA regions should:
• Monitor compliance and initiate enforcement in states and tribal lands where the EPA has
direct implementation authority, placing emphasis on commercial applicators.
• Collaborate with states to monitor WPS compliance associated with the use of specific
products of concern on specific farm commodities where worker exposure is of special
concern (regions should encourage states to identify enforcement cases that could benefit
from federal enforcement by the regional office).
• Conduct federal compliance monitoring inspections of products subject to the new WPS
labeling requirements.
• Increase oversight of state activities addressing WPS use related violations consistent with
EPA authorities under FIFRA Section 26 and 27.
Measures: See new proposed ACS measure FIFRA-FED2 in Appendix I, page 8. The
proposed measure reads as follows: For EPA regions with direct implementation responsibilities
in Indian country and states without primacy, project the number of regional (federal) FIFRA
inspections focused on the Worker Protection Standard (WPS).
14. CERCLA
Description: The EPA's CERCLA 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. The Superfund enforcement program protects
communities by requiring responsible parties to conduct cleanups which helps preserve federal
dollars for sites where there are no viable contributing parties. The EPA identifies potentially
42
-------
responsible parties and negotiates cleanup agreements at hazardous waste sites and, where
negotiations fail, either takes enforcement actions to require cleanup or expends Superfund
appropriated dollars to clean up the sites. In some cases, the EPA takes both actions. When the
EPA uses appropriated dollars, it takes action against any viable responsible parties to recover
cleanup costs.
Activities:
EPA regions will:
• Maintain focused enforcement efforts to compel cleanup early in the pipeline at non-
emergency removal action and remedial investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS) stages;
expedite remedial action by holding parties accountable to negotiation timeframes and
scheduled cleanup commitments; and rejuvenate the process for identifying responsible
parties at the site assessment stage where it appears likely that a removal or remedial
response will be necessary.
• Continue to focus on activities that maximize PRP involvement in all phases of response at
Superfund sites.
* Focus Superfund enforcement resources on the highest-priority sites and those enforcement
activities that achieve the biggest return on our investment based on environmental risk.
» Use Federal Facility Agreements (FFAs) or other applicable enforcement authorities (such as
imminent and substantial endangerment orders in applicable circumstances), when federal
facilities are not complying with the terms of the agreements or with other legal
requirements. Additionally, regions and headquarters offices must collaborate to establish
new agreements. The EPA has CERCLA Section 121 interagency agreements, known as
FFAs, in place at all but one of 176 federal facility NPL sites. Those agreements govern the
cleanups conducted by the facilities, delineate EPA's oversight of those cleanups and identify
procedures for resolving disputes and ensuring accountability.
• Better utilize FFAs to make site performance data available to the public and otherwise
empower citizen involvement to enhance cleanup oversight and accountability.
• Implement the "nationally significant" consultation procedures; since all federal facility
enforcement actions are "nationally significant" by OECA policy and require consultation
with headquarters. This consultation will be even more important as the regions contemplate
new work in this program.
• Ensure that institutional controls are implemented at all appropriate sites including those in
potential environmental justice areas of concern.
• Provide site-specific fact sheets, which include enforcement information that is finalized and
available to the public on regional web pages.
• Leverage federal, state, tribal, local and other partnerships to maximize resources; improve
cleanups using greener and more resilient and sustainable practices; and revitalize sites through
policy, guidance and, when appropriate, agreements and comfort letters.
• Implement specific actions designated in the EPA's Climate Change Adaptation Plan to more
fully integrate climate change adaptation activities, greener remediation, and sustainability
efforts into the cleanup enforcement program (e.g. consent decrees, comfort letters or other
enforcement instruments), where appropriate.
43
-------
Measures: See ACS measures OSRE-01, OSRE-02 and HQ-VOL in Appendix I, pages 7-8.
15. EPCRA 313 Toxics Release Inventory
Description: The EPA and the public rely on EPCRA 313 for information on chemical
releases entering the environment. The EPA must ensure that companies report accurately and
within required time frames so the publicly available database remains timely, accurate and
inclusive. Regions should ensure the compliance of facilities that may be contributing to
pollution problems that matter to their respective communities, and develop enforcement cases
that produce significant environmental benefits.
Activities:
EPA regions should:
• Physically inspect, send information requests or show cause letters, or use other agreed upon
compliance monitoring activities (pursuant to the national dialogue on EPCRA 313
compliance monitoring) to determine the compliance of enforcement targets developed by
OECA/Office of Environmental Information (OEI) in collaboration with the regions. If a
region, based on its own regional priorities, decides not to use OECA/OEI targets, and
develops its own enforcement targets, the region should notify Headquarters of its intent, be
able to summarize areas of enforcement targets and describe the improved enforcement
outcomes of the regional targeting. Address the following categories of concern as resources
allow:
• Potential never-reporters (such as targeting facilities in the same sectors where a facility
may not have reported but a similar facility in the same sector did report);
• Potential data quality issues (such as facilities with significant changes in release
estimates or other waste management amounts from one year to the next or facilities in
the same sector where a facility reports significantly more/less than a similar facility in
the sector);
• Potential non/late-reporters (facilities that report in one year but failed to report the
following year or any prior year up to the past five years);
• Additional OECA-provided targeting focusing on revisions, communities, chemicals,
sectors of concern or new regulations, failures to comply with Notices of Noncompliance
for non-certification and failures to correct Notices of Significant Errors. Regions may
focus on facilities whose releases have the most impact on the TRI database (which is
approximately 90 percent of the releases to be entered into the database). This will allow
the regions flexibility in selecting their targets.
• Track and prioritize tips and complaints and follow-up, as needed.
• Work with the Air, RCRA and Water compliance and enforcement programs to add EPCRA
questions to information requests where appropriate, evaluate the responses and take
appropriate enforcement actions, consistent with national policy, or combine with other
enforcement actions.
• Respond to OECA's requests for reviewing draft TRI regulations for enforceability, the
revised draft section 313 enforcement response and penalty policy and any other documents
or proposed actions where OECA requests regional input on enforcement matters.
44
-------
• Provide legal and technical enforcement case support; obtain additional information through
investigations, show cause letters, subpoenas and other actions, as appropriate, or determine
that follow-up is not necessary.
• Enter all federal enforcement cases into national databases in a timely and accurate manner.
» As necessary, work with OECA to identify and evaluate program areas that could become
national priorities/enforcement initiatives in the future.
Measures: See ACS measures EPCRA 01 and 02 in Appendix I, page 8.
16. EPCRA 304, 311/312 and CERCLA 103
Description: Chemical release notification and emergency preparedness are addressed under
EPCRA 304, 311 and 312 and CERCLA 103. The EPA and the public rely on EPCRA for
information on chemical releases entering the environment, and on the storage of chemicals at
facilities. The EPA, states, tribes, local entities, and communities rely on the combined EPCRA
and CERCLA information to prepare local chemical emergency response plans, and to more
safely and adequately respond to chemical emergencies. EPCRA sections 311 and 312 will
continue to require facilities to develop or have available Safety Data Sheets and to provide
annual reports on a facility's chemical inventory directly to state and local emergency response
entities. The statute authorizes citizen suits and civil suits by state or local governments against
owners or operators of a facility for failure to comply with specific EPCRA provisions.
Regarding federal enforcement, the EPA will focus resources on the highest priority violations,
and be available to respond to significant enforcement issues (e.g. violations that create
significant risks to communities, workers and first responders or state or tribal requests for
federal action against recalcitrant facilities). Furthermore, the EPA will leverage agency-wide
resources, as appropriate, to address this program; both OSWER and OECA agree that Risk
Management Plan inspections should also include an evaluation of the facility's compliance with
EPCRA sections 304 and 311/312 and CERCLA 103.
Activities:
EPA regions should:
• Use screening and targeting tools to focus limited federal resources on national and regional
priority areas. In targeting for inspections, regions should consider the presence of significant
quantities of CERCLA hazardous or EPCRA extremely hazardous chemicals, proximity to
population centers, a history of significant accidental releases and any other information that
indicates a facility may be high-risk.
• Evaluate compliance with applicable EPCRA and CERCLA requirements during CAA
section 112(r) inspections.
• Within a reasonable period of time, evaluate and respond, if appropriate (including taking
enforcement action where appropriate) to any tip or complaint containing allegations that
provides a reasonable basis to believe that a violation has occurred.
• Evaluate certain continuous release submissions for accuracy and compliance and take
appropriate enforcement actions for non-compliance.
45
-------
• Focus resources on the highest priority violations and respond to significant enforcement
issues.
• Enter timely, complete and accurate data into national databases.
17. Federal Activities
Description: The Office of Federal Activity's (OFA's) work focuses on three areas:
fostering compliance and pollution prevention through international cooperation; assisting other
federal agencies in making environmentally sound decisions which include early public
involvement and transparency by complying with the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA); and guiding the EPA's own compliance with NEPA and applicable statutes and
Executive Orders.
Activities:
EPA regions should work to assure international compliance and prevent illegal trans-boundary
movement of hazardous waste by:
• Improving environmental performance and cooperation in accordance with Goal 5 of the
U.S./Mexico Border 2020 Plan (Regions 6 and 9).
• Enhancing enforcement, compliance, and capacity building efforts with Mexico and Canada
relating to trans-boundary compliance monitoring on the U.S. borders for hazardous waste, e-
waste, ozone depleting substances, selected chemicals and products (e.g., mercury), engine
imports that are non-compliant with air emission standards and other regulated substances
(border regions).
• Improving performance of joint responsibilities along the border and ports of entry into the
United States by working with the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) through
appropriate contact channels (all regions).
• Promoting international environmental enforcement by supporting foreign capacity building
efforts, as appropriate, and through participation in relevant organizations and networks, such
as the Enforcement Working Group of the North American Commission for Environmental
Cooperation (CEC) and the International Network for Environmental Compliance and
Enforcement (INECE) and, in particular, its Seaport Environmental Security Network
(regional participation as appropriate).
• Reviewing the permit and compliance status of U.S. receiving facilities, utilizing established
guidance, in connection with 100 percent of the notifications for the import of hazardous
waste they receive from EPA headquarters and, based on the review, recommending consent
or objection to notifications within the time periods allowed under applicable international
agreements (all regions).
• As a regular part of regional inspection activities, conducting periodic inspections of U.S.
facilities which receive imported hazardous waste (TSDFs) and generators and other primary
exporters of hazardous waste, cathode ray tubes (CRTs) and spent lead acid batteries
(SLABs), based on information provided by OFA which identifies those facilities
participating in import and export shipments.
EPA regions should implement the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) by:
46
-------
• Fulfilling EPA's obligations under NEPA and Section 309 of the Clean Air Act by reviewing
and commenting on all major proposed federal actions to promote identification, elimination
or mitigation of significant adverse effects, and making the comments available to the public.
• Providing recommendations to assist federal decision-makers in ensuring that projects likely
to have significant impacts (e.g., transportation, mountaintop mining, and energy) receive
sound environmental analysis, use cooperation among agencies to resolve differences,
consider environmental justice, incorporate innovation and support public involvement
through a more streamlined and transparent environmental review process.
• Writing clear and effective comments on EISs with the goal of influencing federal decision-
makers to mitigate at least 70 percent of the significant impacts identified by the EPA during
the NEPA process.
• Ensuring that at least 90 percent of EPA projects subject to NEPA environmental assessment
or EIS requirements (e.g., water treatment facility projects and other grants, new source
NPDES permits and EPA facilities) are expected to result in no significant environmental
impact.
• Promoting environmental justice considerations throughout the environmental decision-
making process and encouraging public involvement early in the process to maximize
transparency.
• Preparing environmental analyses (EISs or EAs) and posting them on the internet or making
categorical exclusion determinations for EPA-issued National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permits for new sources, for states/tribes without authorized
NPDES programs; off-shore oil and gas sources, including permits for deep water ports, EPA
laboratories and facilities; and Clean Water Act wastewater treatment plant grants.
• Preparing environmental analyses (EAs or EISs) and posting them on the internet or making
categorical exclusion determinations for Special Appropriation grants for wastewater,
drinking water supply and solid waste collection facilities; Border Environment
Infrastructure Funds (for the US/Mexico Border Environment Cooperation Commission
projects); and reviews conducted under "EPA 's Voluntary NEPA Compliance Policy."
• Entering the results of their 309 reviews and NEPA compliance actions into the Lotus Notes
EIS Tracking Database maintained by headquarters OF A. Regions should report to the Office
of Federal Activities quarterly on the status of their 309 reviews and NEPA compliance
actions pursuant to the Government Performance Reporting Act reporting process.
• Assisting other federal agencies to improve the analysis of climate change issues under
NEPA, including estimating greenhouse gas emissions associated with federal actions and
consideration of mitigation measures, as well as fostering climate resiliency.
18. Criminal Enforcement Program
Description: The criminal enforcement program investigates and assists in the criminal
prosecution of knowing violations of environmental laws as well as any associated violations
of the U.S. criminal code, such as wire fraud, smuggling, obstruction of justice, etc. The program
works with other federal law enforcement agencies on cases of mutual interest, e.g., the
Department of Homeland Security related to the illegal importation of banned pesticides. The
program will continue to work with civil enforcement to look for criminal enforcement
opportunities to advance National Enforcement Initiatives and instances of behavior on the part
47
-------
of regulated entities that represent inherently criminal conduct, such as falsifying data. The
program will work with EPA civil enforcement and program offices in headquarters (HQ) and
the regions to enhance the case screening process so that decisions to prosecute civilly or
criminally are based on the best way to respond to the violation; the program will focus on
securing the best results by providing clarity on when civil investigators should refer a matter to
criminal enforcement and sharing criminal enforcement information with the civil enforcement
program, where appropriate. The program will integrate environmental justice (EJ) concerns in
assessments of criminal investigations and will use the EPA's screening tools, regional input and
other relevant information. Cases that meet the threshold level for heightened analysis are
considered to have potential EJ concerns for criminal enforcement purposes.
Activities:
EPA regions and OECA's Headquarters Civil Program coordinate with the Office of Criminal
Enforcement, Forensics and Training to:
• Refer to the criminal enforcement program for consideration any matter that appears to be
criminal in nature.
• Revise/update existing case screening policy memos to ensure that the criminal and civil
enforcement programs are coordinating to ensure the optimal enforcement response to
violations of federal environmental laws.
• Develop incentives and measures to ensure efficient sharing of information and resources
between civil and criminal enforcement programs.
• Develop a shared civil/criminal case screening database, similar to the one developed in
Region 1, for use in every region.
• Conduct case screening sessions to agree upon the appropriate enforcement response to a
potential criminal offense.
The Office of Criminal Enforcement Forensics and Training will:
• Develop/refine criteria for Tier 1 (TI) and Tier 2 (T2) cases as well as for opening lower Tier
cases. Identify NON-T1/T2 cases that offer high deterrent value because of cumulative
impacts of many similar smaller cases.
• Conduct semiannual case and docket reviews, by headquarters' Criminal Investigation
Division, of SAC offices to advance and track high impact cases, including Tl and T2.
Determine which cases, if any, should be closed (especially Tiers 3 and 4); reallocate
resources to higher-impact cases.
• Develop and provide training for civil EPA counterparts to identify and share information
regarding criminal conduct.
• Through NEIC, evaluate new and emerging technologies needed to implement enhanced
targeting and compliance assurance approaches.
• Analyze emissions and compliance information to identify potential criminal violations by
certain industrial sectors and individual facilities.
• Work with Department of Justice to: (1) explore innovative uses of criminal sentencing
options, e.g., community service or environmental compliance plans; and (2) use information
obtained pursuant to the Crimes Victim's Rights Act (CVRA) when developing
environmental crimes case resolutions, e.g., restitution.
48
-------
Provide targeted training to state, tribal and law enforcement partners, particularly the
International Association of Chiefs of Police, to enhance their abilities to safely spot, report
and address environmental violations.
Continue international enforcement efforts, e.g., working with INTERPOL to combat the
illegal shipment of e-wastes.
49
-------
Appendix 1: FY 2016 Draft ACS Measures
This appendix proposes measures for FY 2016. Revisions from last year are underlined. When OECA identifies the National
Enforcement Initiatives (NEIs) for FY 2017-2019 in the FY 2017 Addendum to the NPM Guidance, the EPA will also identify ACS
measures for the new NEIs.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
FY 2016 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES APPENDIX
G/
o/
s*
5
5
5
5
5
5
ACS
Code
PBS-
ATX03
PBS-
ATX04
PBS-
NSR01
PBS-
NSR02
PBS-
NSR03
PBS-
NSR04
Measure Text
Number of facilities evaluated for compliance within the
national focus areas.
Number of addressing actions at facilities within the national
focus areas.
Number of NSR/PSD investigations of cement plants.
Number of investigation completion reports or referrals to
DOJ for cement plants.
Number of NSR/PSD investigations of glass manufacturing
plants.
Number of completion reports or referrals to DOJ for glass
manufacturing plants.
Non-
Commitment
Indicator
(Y/N)
N
N
N
N
N
N
State
Performance
Measure
(Y/N)
N
N
N
N
N
N
Planning Target13
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
National Target (FY
2016 Pres. Bud)
N
N
N
N
N
N
13 Annual Commitment System (ACS) planning targets for FY 2016 are negotiated between the EPA regions and headquarters during 2015. For the measures
which encompass state activities, the EPA regions coordinate with the affected states on the planning targets as applicable.
-------
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
PBS-
NSR05
PBS-
NSR06
PBS-
NSR07
PBS-
NSR08
PBS-
NSR09
PBS-
M105
PBS-
M106
PBS-
M107
PBS-
M108
PBS-
CAF002
PBS-
CAF007
PBS-
CAF008
PBS-
MNP05
Number of NSR/PSD investigations of nitric and/or sulfuric
acid plants.
Number of investigation completion reports or referrals to
DOJ for nitric and/or sulfuric acid plants.
Number of NSR/PSD investigations of coal -fired electric
utilities.
Number of completion reports or referrals to DOJ for coal-
fired electric utilities.
Number of facilities reviewed for prospective projects that
trigger NSR.
Number of Phase 1 municipal separate storm sewer system
permit assessments conducted.
Number of civil judicial referrals and/or addressing actions
for sanitary sewer systems (SSS) with total treatment
capacity > 10 mgd.
Number of civil judicial referrals and /or addressing actions
for CSS communities serving populations >50,000.
Number of civil judicial referrals and/or addressing actions
for Phase I and II MS4s.
Number of federal AFO/CAFO inspections.
Number of federal CAFO addressing actions.
Submit 1 progress report per federal fiscal year.
Number of targeted mines, mineral processing facilities, or
both, inspected.
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
-------
PBS-
EE01
Number of compliance evaluations/inspections conducted in
the air and water programs at land-based natural gas
extraction and production facilities (e.g., wells, compressor
stations, gas plants), and at disposal sites (e.g., injection
wells, lagoons, ponds, land application). Land impacts and
inspections conducted under other media programs may be
included per discussion and agreement with the EEPI
Strategy Implementation Team.
N
N
Y
N
PBS-
EE03
Number of land-based natural gas extraction and production
addressing actions.
N
N
Y
N
SDWA02
During FY2016. the primacy agency must address with a
formal enforcement action or return to compliance the
number of priority systems equal to the number of its PWSs
that have a score of 11 or higher on the July 2015 ETT
report. State, territory and tribal breakouts shall be indicated
in the comment field of the Annual Commitment System.
Please note: A primacy agency's success at addressing
violations will be tracked by means of the quarterly ETT
reports. Numerical targets may be adjusted at mid-year.
While it remains the ERP's goal that all of a priority
system's violations will be returned to compliance, a primacy
agency has met its commitment under the FY2016 SDWA
ACS measures with respect to a priority system if the score
for that system has been brought below, and remains below,
11.
N
Y
Y
N
SRF01
Finalize all Round 3 SRF reports for state CAA, CWA and
RCRA enforcement programs scheduled for calendar year
2015 no later than December 31, 2015 (first quarter of FY
2016). By September 30, 2016. complete draft reports for all
Round 3 SRF reviews scheduled for calendar year
2016. (Final reports are to be completed by December 31,
2016 (first quarter of FY 2017).) Regions inFY 2013
developed a plan to complete all Round 3 state reviews by
the end of calendar year 2017. OC and OWM will hold
annual discussions with regions to establish whether any
modifications to the schedules are necessary.
N
N
Y
N
-------
EJ01
Percentage of non-exempt cases brought by the EPA in areas
determined by the EPA to have potential EJ concerns.
[Note: While we are tracking this measure, there is no
specific target number or trend we expect to achieve. EJ is
one of many factors the Agency considers in bringing an
enforcement action. 1
Y
N
N
N
FED-
FAC05
Conduct ten (10) federal facility inspections. These
inspections may be done in federal facility enforcement
priority areas, national areas of focus, national enforcement
initiatives, regional priority areas, priorities established in
federal facility regional enforcement enhancement plans, or
as otherwise deemed necessary by the region. These 10
inspection commitments can be achieved through any
combination of single media or multimedia inspections. For
any multimedia inspection conducted, it shall count as up to
four inspections toward this goal if up to four of the
individual inspections support priority areas as listed above.
All of these inspections may simultaneously satisfy
inspection commitments required in any National
Enforcement Initiative or other core program area._FFEO
will be as flexible as possible in assisting the regions in
meeting this vital federal facility commitment.
N
N
100 federal facility
inspections nationally
N
CWA07
By December 31, provide to OECA a specific NPDES
Compliance Monitoring Strategy (CMS) plan for the current
year for each authorized state in the region and a regional
plan wherever EPA direct implementation occurs (e.g., non-
authorized states, territories, Indian country, pretreatment,
etc.). Each CMS plan should be developed in accordance
with the guidelines in Part 1 of the 2014 revised NPDES
CMS. Any proposed alternative CMS plan should be
provided to OECA for consultation and review by August
15, unless the region and OECA agree upon a later date.
By December 31, provide for each state and EPA direct
implementation area, a numerical end of year report on EPA
and state CMS plan outputs from the prior year, by category
and subcategory, corresponding to each of the planned CMS
activities.
N
N
Y
N
-------
5
5
5
CAA04
CAA06
RCRA01
The ACS commitment for each region should reflect the total
number of state and regional CMS plans and end of year
reports to be submitted to OECA for the year (e.g., an annual
ACS commitment of 12 for a region that will submit six state
and regional CMS plans and six state and regional CMS end-
of-vear reports).
The number of compliance evaluations to be conducted by
the regions at majors sources, 80% synthetic minors, and
other sources (as appropriate). [Note: Region should break
out evaluation projections by source classification and by
compliance monitoring category (FCE, PCE, and
Investigations). For the total number of evaluations to be
conducted, the region should also identify how many of these
evaluations are in Indian country.1 Projected investigations
under this commitment are those investigations initiated by
the regions for the air enforcement program outside of the
National Enforcement Initiatives, and identified by the air
program (e.g., MACT, NSPS).
Ensure that delegated state, tribal and local agencies
implement their compliance and enforcement programs in
accordance with the CAA CMS and have negotiated facility-
specific CMS plans in place. The regions are to provide the
number of FCEs at majors and 80% synthetic minors to be
conducted by individual state/local agencies to demonstrate
program implementation consistent with CMS. However, if a
delegated agency negotiates with a Region an alternative CMS
plan or alternative activities (pursuant to the CAA CMS
national dialogue), this commitment should reflect the
alternative plan. [Note: Break out evaluation and activity
projections (e.g., FCEs; PCEs included in alternative plan) by
source classification. Please indicate when a commitment is
pursuant to an approved alternative plan.} Prior to approving
an alternative plan, regions should consult with the Office of
Compliance (OC) and provide OC with information on how
the state, tribal or local agency compliance monitoring air
resources will be redirected and the rationale for making the
change.
Project by state, and Indian Country where applicable, the
number of operating non-governmental TSDFs, to be
inspected by the region during the year. Regions must
N
N
N
N
Y
N
Y
Y
N
N
N
-------
commit to inspect at least two (2) TSDFs in each state or
Indian country unless OECA approves a deviation from this
requirement, as indicated in the initial OECA opening
bid. Financial responsibility is an important component of
the RCRA core program and evaluating compliance with 40
CFR Parts 264/265 Subpart H and corrective action financial
responsibility should be included in the RCRA core program
inspections. Regions must commit to inspect at least the
same number of financial assurance instruments at RCRA
operating facilities as the region inspects for operating CEIs.
Once a region exceeds the number of CEIs and FA
instrument reviews from the final agreed upon bid, any
additional CEIs will not require a corresponding FA
instrument review. The determination of which financial
assurance instruments to review should take into account the
potential risk posed by the facility, the type of financial
assurance instrument provided by the facility, and whether
the financial assurance instrument has been previously
reviewed and is the same type of instrument (this does not
apply to the financial test, which may be reviewed each
year). The review of financial assurance instruments is for
RCRA Subtitle C closure and post-closure and includes
corrective action if there is a corrective action obligation at
the facility under review
Minimum of 100
TSDFs nationally
RCRA01.
Project by state the number of operating TSDFs to be
inspected by the state during the year.
Note: Only one inspection per facility counts towards this
coverage measure. The RCRA CMS establishes minimum
annual inspection expectations for TSDFs. At least 50 percent
of the operating non-governmental TSDFs in the state must be
inspected annually. The onsite inspections for RCRA01 and
RCRAOl.s should be CEIs. Completing the commitment
includes evaluating compliance with the financial assurance
requirements, 40 CFR Parts 264/265 Subpart H. Financial
responsibility is an important component of the RCRA core
program and should be included as part of the inspection of
each TSDF (although the financial responsibility reviews do
not have to occur at the same time nor be conducted by the
same people who conduct the field inspections).
N
Y
Y
N
-------
RCRA02
Project by state and Indian country, the number of LQGs,
including those at federal facilities, to be inspected by the
region during the year. Each region must commit to inspect
at least six (6) LQGs in each state, and 20% of the region's
LQGs universe in Indian country, unless OECA approves a
deviation from this requirement. For example, deviations are
given for states with small universes where it doesn't make
sense for a region to inspect 6 LQGs per year or 20% of the
region's LQG universe in Indian country. Regions should
select at least 2 of the region's total LQG inspections at
facilities described in the high priority section as areas of
emerging environmental concern. Regions may work with
OECA to coordinate these inspections, including whether the
inspection will be conducted at a TSDF or LQG. In the
Comment Section, provide the number of federal facility LQG
inspections.
N
N
Minimum of 300
LQG inspections
nationally and 20%
of LQGs in Indian
Country
N
RCRA02.
Project by state the number of LQGs to be inspected by the
state during the year. At least 20 percent of the LQG universe
should be covered by combined federal and state inspections
unless an alternative plan is approved under the RCRA CMS.
The region should identify in the "Comment" field of BAS
any state that is following an approved Alternative Plan and a
breakout of the inspection numbers in the plan.
N
Y
Y
N
Inspect each operating TSDF operated by states, local, or
Tribal governments.
RCRA03
N
N
Y
N
HQ-VOL
Volume of Contaminated Media Addressed (VCMA). As
part of the Goal 5 sub-objective, Support Cleaning up Our
Communities, the following is the GPRA target:
By 2015, obtain commitments to clean up 1.5 billion cubic
yards of contaminated soil and groundwater media as a
result of concluded CERCLA and RCRA corrective action
enforcement actions.
OECA has reported VCMA for contaminated soil and
groundwater media as separate measures in its annual results
since 2004. The GPRA target is a national target and regions
are not required to post commitments in ACS.
N
N
200 million cubic
yards
N
-------
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
TSCA
01OC
TSCA
02OC
FIFRA-
FED1
NEW
FIFRA-
FED2
OSRE-01
OSRE-02
EPCRA
01
EPCRA
02
Project the total number of FY 2016 TSCA inspections. In
the comment field of the Annual Commitment System
(ACS), the region shall break out the number of projected
inspections by TSCA program area (LBP, PCBs, Asbestos,
New and Existing Chemicals). Note: For the reasons
discussed in the executive summary, the LBP component of
this TSCA ACS commitment (TSCA 01OC) will serve as an
OECA FY 2016 measure of compliance work being done to
protect children 's health.
Report other compliance monitoring activities at the end of
the year; and break-out the description of other such
activities by TSCA program area. (See the CMS for more
details).
Project regional (federal) FIFRA inspections. Each region
should conduct a minimum often (10) FIFRA inspections.
In the Comment Section, provide the number of federal
facility inspections.
For EPA regions with direct implementation responsibilities
in Indian country and states without primacy, proiect the
number of regional (federal) FIFRA inspections focused on
the Worker Protection Standard (WPS).
Reach a settlement or take an enforcement action by the start
of remedial action at 99% of non-federal Superfund sites that
have viable, liable parties.
Address all unaddressed costs in Statute of Limitations cases
for sites with total past Superfund costs equal to or greater than
$500.000 in value via settlement, referral to DOJ, filing a
claim in bankruptcy, or where appropriate write-off.
Conduct at least four (4) EPCRA 313 data quality
inspections.
Conduct at least twenty (20) EPCRA 313 non-reporter
inspections (and/or other compliance monitoring activities as
determined by the compliance monitoring national dialogue).
N
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
Minimum of 100
FIFRA federal
inspections nationally
99 percent
100 percent of cases
Minimum of 40
nationally
Minimum of 200
nationally
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
*Goal/Objective/Sub-Heading
-------
Appendix 2 - EXPLANATION OF CHANGES BETWEEN FY 2014-2015 AND FY 2016-2017 GUIDANCE
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Change from FY 2015 Addendums and FY 2014 NPM
Guidances
General
Addition: The introduction was expanded for
FY 2016-2017 to summarize how early input
from stakeholders influenced the draft NPM
Guidance, to reference regional Climate
Change Adaptation Plans, and to highlight
opportunities and guidelines for seeking
flexibility when implementing OECA's NPM
Guidance and related activities.
The updated language takes into account
early input and necessary updates for FY
2016-2017.
ation of New/Modified
)rmation
Pages 1-4 of draft FY 2016-
2017 NPM Guidance.
National
Areas of
Focus
Addition: The introduction to the National
Areas of Focus was expanded to briefly
summarize the process and timing for
selecting OECA's FY 2017-2019 National
Enforcement Initiatives (NEIs).
The updated language shares information
with stakeholders on the process/timing for
selecting FY 2017-2019 NEIs.
Page 4
Modification: The description of the priority
area Assuring Safe Drinking Water was
updated to specifically address some small
systems that remain in persistent
noncompliance despite primacy agency
efforts.
The description was updated to note that
EPA, states and tribes will work together to
explore root causes of noncompliance and
options for resolving them to ensure all
available tools, resources and partners are
engaged to help these small systems operate
safely, comply with SDWA and become
sustainable if possible.
PageS
Modification: The activities under
Implementing the Clean Water Act (CWA)
Action Plan were updated for FY 2016-2017
to take into account the NPDES Electronic
Reporting Rule.
The activities were modified to take into
account actively marketing NetDMR, Net
and other e-reporting tools to the regulated
community; training permittees; ensuring
state and regional general permit
requirements are entered into ICIS or state
NPDES program data management system;
reviewing state and regional general permit
paper forms to evaluate consistency with
Page 11
-------
Appendix A in the Proposed NPDES e-
reporting rule.
Modification: State activities under
Implementing the Clean Water Act (CWA)
Action Plan were updated for FY 2016-2017
to further address e-reporting.
In FY 2016-2017, states should: work
towards implementation of e-reporting;
educate and train the regulated community;
and develop e-reporting tools or use EPA
tools (NetDMR; NeT).
Page 12
Modification: OECA updated the description
and activities section on Advancing Next
Generation Compliance for FY 2016-2017.
OECA updated the activities for FY 2016-
2017.
Pages 12-14
Modification: OECA added a State Review
Framework activity for regions for FY 2016-
2017.
During FY 2016-2017, regions will
implement any regional components to
address the agreed-upon national focus issues
under the "National Approach to Common
State Enforcement Program Issues (Common
Issues) project." OECA is coordinating with
regions and ECOS on the common issues
project.
Page 16
Program-
Specific
Guidance
Addition: A section on EPA's Field
Operations Group (FOG) Guidelines was
added for FY 2016-2017.
Regions and Headquarters intend to complete
development and implementation of policies,
procedures and systems that fully address
EPA's ten Field Operations Group (FOG)
Guidelines by the February 2016 deadline
established by EPA's Deputy Administrator.
Pages 16-17
Modification: The Environmental Justice
(EJ) section was revised to reference that
OECA leverages other initiatives and
priorities that promote action in communities,
such as Next Gen Compliance and the EPA's
Cross-Agency Strategies, as appropriate. The
language related to NEIs and Next Gen
Compliance was updated for FY 2016-2017.
Regions are asked to consider EJ in the
implementation of the NEIs. Also, where
appropriate, when designing compliance and
enforcement actions to gain the greatest
possible environmental benefits in
overburdened communities, regions should
incorporate Next Gen Compliance principles,
tools or approaches as appropriate.
Pages 17-18
10
-------
Modification: OECA's Federal Facilities
Enforcement Office (FFEO) updated the
description and regional activities within the
FFEO section to reflect changes for FY 2016-
2017.
FFEO updated the regional activities section
to reflect changes in focus for FY 2016-2017
and to reference Regional Enforcement Plans.
Pages 19-20
Modification: OECA updated regional
activities in the CWA NPDES section.
Language on timing for submission of draft
alternative Compliance Monitoring Strategy
plans was included. The existing bullet on
coordinating with the Center of Excellence
for Biosolids was revised to recommend
accessing biosolid program annual reports as
needed.
Page 22
Modification: In the RCRA Subtitle C
Hazardous Waste Program section, OECA
updated the regional focus areas.
OECA updated language on regional focus
areas.
Page 29
Modification: The description section for the
RCRA Underground Storage Tank (UST)
Subtitle I Program was updated for FY 2016-
2017. The regional activity bullets were
updated to address factors to consider when
prioritizing inspections, timely and accurate
reporting of data into RCRAInfo and ICIS,
and encouraging states to optimize deterrence
from the impact of enforcement by utilizing
efficiencies within their authority including
the use of delivery prohibition and addressing
noncompliance on a corporate-wide basis
statewide or other opportunities.
OECA updated the RCRA UST
description/background section and a few
regional activity bullets to appropriately
address the focus for FY 2016-2017, taking
into account early input from the program
office.
Page 31
Modification: The description highlights that
OECA has updated its Model 3008(h)
administrative order on consent (AOC). A
couple of regional activities for RCRA
Corrective Action were updated for FY
2016-2017.
Regions were asked to leverage federal, state,
tribal, local and other partnerships (e.g. EPA-
FEMA MOU) to better coordinate resources;
improve cleanups using greener and more
resilient and sustainable practices; and
revitalize sites through policy, guidance and,
when appropriate, agreements and comfort
Pages 32-33
11
-------
letters. Implementation of Regional Climate
Change Adaptation Plans were also
referenced.
Modification: OECA updated the
organization, heading and description/
background section for TSCA Chemical Risk
Reduction Programs; the description
indicates that regions should develop a plan
for their overall TSCA inspections and other
compliance activities based on the available
resources and that prioritizes the problems to
be addressed along with how the regions are
providing oversight of state programs. If a
region chooses not to develop a plan for its
TSCA program, then the region shall use the
distribution discussed in the NPM Guidance
for TSCA resource allocation. This language
is referenced via footnote in each TSCA
section.
The revised language provides flexibility to a
regional office to develop a plan for their
TSCA program (inspections and other
compliance activities) based on resources
available in lieu of using the TSCA resource
allocation approach outlined in the TSCA
section of the NPM Guidance. This language
is referenced via footnote in each TSCA
section.
Page 33
Modification: OECA updated and
consolidated the FIFRA section of the FY
2016-2017 Guidance taking into account early
input received from stakeholders. The draft
updated FIFRA section discusses activities
under the following 3 focus areas: Pesticide
Product Integrity; Border Compliance; and
Worker Protection Standards.
The updated activities in each FIFRA area
take into account the early input received
from stakeholders.
Pages 39-42
Modification: A couple of regional activity
bullets were updated in the CERCLA section.
Regions were asked to leverage federal, state,
tribal or local and other partnerships (e.g.
EPA-FEMA MOU) to better coordinate
resources; improve cleanups using greener
and more resilient and sustainable practices;
and revitalize sites through policy, guidance,
and, when appropriate, agreements and
comfort letters. Implementation of Climate
Page 43
12
-------
Change Adaptation Plans were also
referenced.
Modification: Updated language for FY 2016
was incorporated into the following ACS
measures: PBS EEO1, FED-FAC05, CWA
Annual 07 and CAA04.
Commitment For 4 other measures (SDWA02, SRF01,
Measures TSCAO1 OC, OSRE-02), the fiscal year
reference was updated to FY 2016 or a non-
substantive edit was made relative to the
existing measure.
Language was updated for FY 2016. All
revisions are underlined in Appendix 1.
Appendix 1, pages 3, 4 and 5.
PBSEEOl-pageS
FED-FAC05 - page 4
CWA07 - page 4
CAA04 - page 5
Addition: A new ACS measure FIFRA-
Fed2 was proposed for FY 2016 to address
regional inspections focused on the Worker
Protection Standard (WPS).
A new ACS measure was drafted for FY
2016 to reflect the focus area of WPS. The
draft ACS measure language reads as
follows: For EPA regions with direct
implementation responsibilities in Indian
country and states without primacy, project
the number of regional (federal) FIFRA
inspections focused on the Worker Protection
Standard (WPS).
Appendix 1, page 8.
13
-------
Appendix 3 - OECA Key Contacts for each section of FY 2016-2017 NPM Guidance
Note: For the convenience of readers, more than one OECA contact is listed for most of the subject areas below.
Contact Name
Scott Throwe
Phil Brooks
Ed Messina
Phil Brooks
Apple Chapman
Rick Duffy
Loren Denton
Seth Heminway
Mark Pollins
Martha Segall
Carol Galloway
Kathy Greenwald
Martha Segall
Joyce Chandler
Carol King
Van Housman
Mamie Miller
Andrew Stewart
Rob Lischinsky
Martha Segall
Amy Porter
Seth Heminway
David Hindin
Jon Silberman
Chris Knopes
Rick Duffy
Tracy Back
Arati Tripathi
Lance Elson
Marie Muller
Subject Area
Clean Air Act (CAA) National Enforcement Initiative (NEI):
Cutting Toxic Air Pollution that Affects Communities' Health
CAA NEI: Reducing Widespread Air Pollution from the Largest
Sources, Especially the Coal-fired Utility, Cement, Class, and
Acid Sectors
Clean Water Act (CWA) NEI: Keeping Raw Sewage and
Contaminated Storm water Out of Our Nation's Waters
CWA NEI: Preventing Animal Waste from Contaminating
Surface and Ground Waters
Assuring Safe Drinking Water
Reducing Pollution from Mineral Processing Operations NEI
Assuring Energy Extraction Sector Compliance with
Environmental Laws NEI
Implementing the Clean Water Act (CWA) Action Plan
Advancing Next Generation Compliance
Strengthening State Performance and Oversight
Field Operations Guidance (FOG) Guidelines
Environmental Justice
Federal Facilities
Phone
202-564-7013
202-564-0652
202-564-2300
202-564-0652
202-564-5666
202-564-5014
202-564-1148
202-564-7017
202-564-4001
202-564-0723
913-551-5092
202-564-3252
202-564-0723
202-564-7073
202-564-2412
202-564-0143
202-564-7011
202-564-1463
202-564-2628
202-564-0723
202-564-2431
202-564-7017
202-564-1300
202-564-2429
202-564-2337
202-564-5014
202-564-7076
202-564-2044
202-564-2577
202-564-0217
Email
throwe.scott@epa.gov
brooks .phil@epa.gov
messina.ed@epa.gov
brooks .phil@epa.gov
chapman.apple@epa.gov
duffy.rick@epa.gov
denton.loren@epa.gov
heminway . seth@epa.gov
pollins .mark@epa.gov
segall .martha@epa.gov
galloway.carol@epa.gov
greenwald.kathryn@epa.gov
segall .martha@epa.gov
chandler.j oyce@epa.gov
king.carol@epa.gov
housman.van@epa.gov
miller.mamie@epa.gov
stewart.andrew@epa.gov
lischinsky.robert@epa.gov
segall .martha@epa.gov
porter.amy@epa.gov
heminway . seth@epa.gov
hindin.david@epa.gov
silberman.jon@epa.gov
knopes.christopher@epa.gov
duffy.rick@epa.gov
back.tracy@epa.gov
tripathi .arati@epa.gov
elson.lance@epa.gov
muller.marie@epa.gov
14
-------
Martha Segall
Amy Porter
Seth Heminway
Rebecca Roose
Joe Theis
Martha Segall
Joe Theis
Dan Chadwick
Loren Denton
Martha Segall
Dan Chadwick
Julius Banks
Rob Lischinsky
Craig Haas
Todd Stedeford
Greg Sullivan
Julius Banks
Rob Lischinsky
Diana Saenz
Elizabeth Vizard
John Mason
Yolaanda Walker
Peter Neves
Paul Borst
Todd Stedeford
Greg Sullivan
Elizabeth Vizard
Everett Bishop
John Mason
Don Lott
Elizabeth Vizard
Helene Ambrosino
CWA National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) Program for Compliance Assurance and Enforcement
CWA Section 404 - Discharge of Dredge and Fill Material
CWA Section 3 1 1 - Oil Pollution Act
SDWA Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program
CAA Program for Compliance Assurance and Enforcement
CAA Section 112(r)
RCRA Subtitle C Hazardous Waste Program
RCRA Underground Storage Tank UST Subtitle I Program
RCRA Corrective Action
TSCA^
• Lead Risk Reduction Program
• New and Existing Chemicals Program
• PCB Program
• Asbestos Program/AHERA
• FIFRA
202-564-0723
202-564-2431
202-564-7017
202-566-1387
202-564-4053
202-564-0723
202-564-4053
202-564-7054
202-564-1148
202-564-0723
202-564-7054
202-564-0957
202-564-2628
202-564-6447
202-564-2977
202-564-1298
202-564-0957
202-564-2628
202-564-4209
202-566-5940
202-564-7037
202-564-4281
202-564-6072
202-564-7066
202-564-2977
202-564-1298
202-566-5940
202-564-7032
202-564-7037
202-564-2652
202-566-5940
202-564-2627
segall .martha@epa.gov
porter.amy@epa.gov
heminway . seth@epa.gov
roose.rebecca@epa.gov
theis.joseph@epa.gov
segall .martha@epa.gov
theis.joseph@epa.gov
chadwick.dan@epa.gov
denton.loren@epa.gov
segall .martha@epa.gov
chadwick.dan@epa.gov
banks j ulius@epa.gov
lischinsky.rob@epa.gov
haas.craig@epa.gov
stedeford.todd@epa.gov
sullivan.greg@epa.gov
banks j ulius@epa.gov
lischinsky.rob@epa.gov
saenz . diana@epa.gov
vizard.elizabeth@epa.gov
mason.john@epa.gov
walker.yolaanda@epa.gov
neves.peter@epa.gov
borst.paul@epa.gov
stedeford.todd@epa.gov
sullivan.greg@epa.gov
vizard.elizabeth@epa.gov
bishop.everett@epa.gov
mason.john@epa.gov
lott.don@epa.gov
vizard.elizabeth@epa.gov
ambrosino.helene@epa.gov
14 The TSCA contacts can respond to questions on the TSCA subject areas. However, Everett Bishop is the Office of Compliance (OC) staff contact for PCB and
asbestos program questions, while John Mason is the OC staff contact for Lead Program questions.
15
-------
Paul Borst
Kathy Clark
Greg Sullivan
Todd Stedeford
Elizabeth Vizard
Craig Haas
Greg Sullivan
Todd Stedeford
Cliff Rader
Bob Heiss*
Pat Straw
Julie Lastra
Jonathan Binder
Fran Jonesi
Maureen Lydon
Michele McKeever
CERCLA
EPCRA 313 Toxics Release Inventory
EPCRA 304, 3 1 1/3 12 and CERCLA 103
Federal Activities
• NEPA compliance and Environmental Impact Statement
reviews
• Import/export of hazardous waste and international capacity
building*
Criminal Enforcement Program
OECA Tribal Issues
OECA's FY 2016-2017 National Program Manager (NPM)
Guidance
202-564-7066
202-564-4164
202-564-1298
202-564-2977
202-564-5940
202-564-6447
202-564-1298
202-564-2977
202-564-7159
202-564-4108
202-564-2513
202-564-6510
202-564-2516
202-564-7043
202-564-4046
202-564-3688
borst.paul@epa.gov
clark.kathy@epa.gov
sullivan.greg@epa.gov
stedeford.todd@epa.gov
vizard.elizabeth@epa.gov
haas.craig@epa.gov
sullivan.greg@epa.gov
stedeford.todd@epa.gov
rader.cliff@epa.gov
heiss.robert@epa.gov
straw.patricia@epa.gov
lastra.j ulie @epa.gov
binder.jonathan@epa.gov
jonesi.fran@epa.gov
lydon.maureen@epa.gov
mckeever.michele@epa.gov
16
------- |