# Q
I® | U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
%%PR0^ OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
Financial Management
Fiscal Years 2013 and 2012
Financial Statements for the
Pesticide Registration Fund
Report No. 15-1-0181
July 10, 2015

-------
Report Contributors:	Paul Curtis
Wanda Arlington
Philip Cleveland
Robert Hairston
Sheree James
Sabrina Jones
Mairim Lopez
Claire McWilliams
Guillermo Mejia
Cynthia Poteat
Myka Sparrow
Lynda Taylor
Abbreviations
CFO Act	Chief Financial Officers Act
EPA	U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FMFIA	Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act
FY	Fiscal Year
OCFO	Office of the Chief Financial Officer
OIG	Office of Inspector General
OMB	Office of Management and Budget
PRIA	Pesticide Registration Improvement Act
Are you aware of fraud, waste or abuse in an
EPA program?
EPA Inspector General Hotline
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW (2431T)
Washington, DC 20460
(888) 546-8740
(202) 566-2599 (fax)
OIG Hotline@epa.gov
More information at www.epa.gov/oiq/hotline.html.
EPA Office of Inspector General
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW (241OT)
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 566-2391
www.epa.gov/oig
Subscribe to our Email Updates
Follow us on Twitter @EPAoig
Send us your Project Suggestions

-------
tftD STAf.
* — 
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
OFFICE OF
INSPECTOR GENERAL
July 10,2015
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Fiscal Years 2013 and 2012 Financial Statements for the
Pesticide Registration Fund
Report No. 15-1-0181
FROM: Paul C. Curtis, Director
Financial Statement Audits

TO:
Jim Jones, Assistant Administrator
Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
David Bloom, Acting Chief Financial Officer
Office of the Chief Financial Officer
This is our report on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) fiscal years 2013 and 2012
financial statements for the Pesticide Registration Fund, conducted by the EPA Office of Inspector
General (OIG). This report contains findings that describe the problems the OIG has identified and
corrective actions the OIG recommends. This report represents the opinion of the OIG and does not
necessarily represent the final EPA position. Final determinations on matters in this report will be made
by EPA managers in accordance with established audit resolution procedures.
Action Required
In response to the draft report, the agency provided intended corrective actions and estimated
completion dates that addressed the recommendations. Therefore, a response to this report is not
required. The agency should track unimplemented corrective actions in the Management Audit Tracking
System.
If you submit a response, it will be posted on the OIG's public website, along with our comment on your
response. Your response should be provided as an Adobe PDF file that complies with the accessibility
requirements of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended. The final response should
not contain data that you do not want to be released to the public; if your response contains such data,
you should identify the data for redaction or removal along with corresponding justification.
We will post this report to our website at http://www.epa.gov/oig.

-------
Fiscal Years 2013 and 2012 Financial Statements
for the Pesticide Registration Fund
15-1-0181
Table of C
Inspector General's Report on the Fiscal Years 2013 and 2012
Financial Statements for the Pesticide Registration Fund
Report on the Financial Statements		1
Evaluation of Internal Controls		2
Tests of Compliance With Laws and Regulations		4
Management's Discussion and Analysis Section of the Financial Statements		4
Prior Audit Coverage		5
Agency Comments and OIG Evaluation		5
Attachments
1	Material Weakness		6
EPA Should Improve Its PRIA Financial Statement Preparation Process		7
2	Status of Recommendations and Potential Monetary Benefits		10
Appendices
A Fiscal Years 2013 and 2012 PRIA Financial Statements
B Agency's Response to Draft Report
C Distribution

-------
Inspector General's Report on the
Fiscal Years 2013 and 2012 Financial Statements
for the Pesticide Registration Fund
The Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Report on the Financial Statements
We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the Pesticide
Registration Fund (known as the PRIA Fund), which comprise the balance sheet
as of September 30, 2013, and September 30, 2012, and the related statements of
net cost, changes in net position, the statement of budgetary resources for the
years then ended, and the related notes to the financial statements.
Management's Responsibility for the Financial Statements
Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these
financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted
in the United States of America. This includes the design, implementation and
maintenance of internal controls relevant to the preparation and fair presentation
of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to
fraud or error.
Auditor's Responsibility
Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based
upon our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted
government auditing standards; the standards applicable to financial statements
contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General
of the United States; and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Bulletin No.
14-02, Audit Requirements for Federal Financial Statements. These standards
require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about
whether the financial statements are free of material misstatements.
An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the
amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. The procedures selected
depend on the auditor's judgment, including the assessment of the risks of
material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error. In
making those risk assessments, the auditor considers internal control relevant to
the entity's preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in order to
design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances. An audit also
15-1-0181
1

-------
includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the
reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by management, as well
as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements.
We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate
to provide a basis for our audit opinion.
Opinion
In our opinion, the financial statements, including the accompanying notes,
present fairly, in all material respects, the assets, liabilities, net position, changes
in net position, and budgetary resources of the PRIA Fund, as of and for the years
ending September 30, 2013 and 2012, in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America.
Evaluation of Internal Controls
As defined by OMB, internal control is a process effected by "those charged with
governance, management, and other personnel" that is designed to provide
reasonable assurance about the achievement of the entity's objectives with regard
to the reliability of financial reporting, effectiveness and efficiency of operations,
and compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Internal control over
safeguarding of assets against unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition may
include controls relating to financial reporting and operations objectives.
Although most controls relevant to the audit are likely to relate to financial
reporting, not all controls that relate to financial reporting are relevant to the
audit. Consistent with the guidance set forth in OMB Circular No. A-123,
Management's Responsibility for Internal Control, and Circular A-13 6, internal
control over financial reporting is more narrowly defined and includes:
•	Reliability of financial reporting—Transactions are properly recorded,
processed and summarized to permit the preparation of the basic financial
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles,
and assets are safeguarded against loss from unauthorized acquisition, use
or disposition.
•	Compliance with applicable laws and regulations—Transactions are
executed in accordance with laws and regulations, including laws
governing the use of budget authority, laws, regulations, and
governmentwide policies identified by OMB, and other laws and
regulations that could have a direct and material effect on the basic
financial statements.
Opinion on Internal Controls. In planning and performing our audit, we
considered the EPA's internal controls over financial reporting by obtaining an
understanding of the agency's internal controls, determining whether internal
15-1-0181
2

-------
controls had been placed in operation, assessing control risk, and performing tests
of controls. We did this as a basis for designing our auditing procedures for the
purpose of expressing an opinion on the financial statements and to comply with
OMB audit guidance, not to express an opinion on internal control. Accordingly,
we do not express an opinion on internal control over financial reporting nor on
management's assertion on internal controls included in Management's
Discussion and Analysis. We limited our internal control testing to those controls
necessary to achieve the objectives described in OMB Bulletin No. 14-02,
Audit Requirements for Federal Financial Statements. We did not test all internal
controls relevant to operating objectives as broadly defined by the Federal
Managers' Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA) of 1982, such as those controls
relevant to ensuring efficient operations.
Material Weakness and Significant Deficiencies. Our consideration of the
internal control over financial reporting would not necessarily disclose all matters
in the internal controls over financial reporting that might be significant
deficiencies. Under standards issued by the American Institute of Certified Public
Accountants, a significant deficiency is a deficiency, or combination of
deficiencies, that is less severe than a material weakness, yet important enough to
merit attention by those charged with governance. A material weakness is a
deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, such that there is a reasonable
possibility that a material misstatement of the entity's financial statements will
not be prevented, or detected and corrected in a timely manner. Because of
inherent limitations in internal controls, misstatements, losses or noncompliance
may nevertheless occur and not be detected. We noted a matter, discussed below,
involving the internal control and its operation, that we consider to be material.
This issue is summarized below and detailed in Attachment 1.
Material Weakness
EPA Should Improve Its PRIA Financial Statement Preparation Process.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) could not initially produce
accurate, timely and complete financial statements for the PRIA fund. The agency
was not preparing a complete set of financial statements for fiscal year (FY) 2013
because of its view that such statements were not required. This delayed the
preparation of the first complete set of FY 2013 PRIA financial statements until
July 2014. Material errors in those statements and subsequent versions delayed
the audit. Without exercising quality control over the preparation of its financial
statements, the agency cannot provide reasonable assurance that financial data
provided accurately reflects the agency's financial activity and balances. Details
are in Attachment 1.
Comparison of EPA's FMFIA Report With Our Evaluation of Internal
Controls
OMB Bulletin No. 14-02, Audit Requirements for Federal Financial Statements,
requires us to compare material weaknesses disclosed during the audit with those
15-1-0181
3

-------
material weaknesses reported in the agency's FMFIA report that relate to the
financial statements and identify material weaknesses disclosed by the audit that
were not reported in the agency's FMFIA report.
For financial statement, audit and financial reporting purposes, OMB defines a
material weakness in internal control as a deficiency or combination of
deficiencies in internal control, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a
material misstatement of the financial statements will not be prevented or detected
and corrected on a timely basis. The agency did not report any material
weaknesses for FY 2013 impacting the PRIA Fund; however, we identified a
material weakness with the agency's financial statement preparation process.
Details concerning this material weakness are in Attachment 1.
Tests of Compliance With Laws and Regulations
In accordance with PRIA, the Administrator is required to publish a schedule of
decision time review periods for pesticide registration actions and corresponding
registration fees in the Federal Register. Decision time review periods are
specified time limits for the agency to grant or deny pesticide registrations. PRIA
also requires the OIGto perform an analysis of the agency's compliance with
decision time review periods. The agency was in substantial compliance with the
statutory decision timeframes.
As part of obtaining a reasonable assurance as to whether the agency's financial
statements are free of material misstatement, we tested compliance with those
laws and regulations that could either materially affect the PRIA financial
statements or that we considered significant to the audit. The objective of our
audit, including our tests of compliance with applicable laws and regulations,
was not to provide an opinion on overall compliance with such provisions.
Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. We did not identify any
noncompliances that would result in a material misstatement to the audited
financial statements.
Management's Discussion and Analysis Section of the
Financial Statements
Our audit work related to the information presented in the Management's
Discussion and Analysis of the pesticide program included comparing the
overview information with information in the EPA's principal financial
statements for consistency. We did not identify any material inconsistencies
between the information presented in the two documents.
15-1-0181
4

-------
Prior Audit Coverage
During previous financial statement audits, we reported the following significant
deficiencies:
•	EPA materially overstated the expenses from other appropriations that
support the PRIA Fund. This occurred because the agency did not have an
effective system to accurately accumulate and report costs incurred by
other appropriations in support of PRIA Fund activities.
•	EPA materially understated the PRIA Fund payroll liabilities covered by
budgetary resources, as well as related payroll expense included in gross
costs. The agency's practice of transferring employees and expenses and
liabilities from PRIA to the Environmental Programs and Management
Fund for cash flow reasons led to the understatement.
The agency has taken action and corrected both deficiencies by correcting the
FYs 2012 and 2011 proper expenses paid by other appropriations and the
FYs 2012 and 2011 payroll and benefits payable amounts in the PRIA Fund
financial statements. The agency has closely monitored the payroll liability
amounts for PRIA at year-end. The agency also gave the Office of Chemical
Safety and Pollution Prevention the opportunity to review the financial statements
before submission to the OIG. In addition, the agency, in conjunction with the
Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention and other stakeholders,
developed an agencywide process to improve the capture of user fee program
costs.
In a memorandum dated May 13, 2015, the agency responded to our draft report.
The agency agreed with our findings and recommendations. The agency's
complete response is included as Appendix B to this report.
Paul C. Curtis
Director, Financial Statement Audits
Office of Inspector General
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
July 8,2015
15-1-0181	5
Agency Comments and OIG Evaluation

-------
Attachment 1
Material Weakness
Table of Contents
1 - EPA Should Improve Its PRIA Financial Statement Preparation Process	 7
15-1-0181	6

-------
1 - EPA Should Improve Its PRIA Financial Statement Preparation Process
The EPA could not initially produce accurate, timely and complete financial statements for the
Pesticide Registration Fund (known as the PRIA fund) after multiple attempts. The agency is
required by the Chief Financial Officers Act (the "CFO Act," or Public Law 101-576) to
accurately, reliably and timely report financial information. However, the agency was not
preparing a complete set of financial statements for FY 2013 because of its view that such
statements were not required. This delayed the preparation of the first complete set of FY 2013
PRIA financial statements until July 2014. Material errors in those statements and subsequent
versions delayed the audit process. Without exercising quality control over the preparation of its
financial statements, the agency cannot provide reasonable assurance that financial data provided
accurately reflects the agency's financial activity and balances.
The agency each year prepares financial statements that present financial information about the
EPA's progress in registering pesticides. Section 902(a)(3)(D)(i) of the CFO Act requires the
agency to "develop and maintain an integrated agency accounting and financial management
system, including financial reporting and internal controls, which provides for complete, reliable,
consistent, and timely information which is prepared on a uniform basis and which is responsive
to the financial information needs of agency management." Under the Pesticide Registration
Improvement Act (PRIA), to expedite the registration of certain pesticides, Congress authorized
the EPA to assess and collect pesticide registration fees. PRIA mandates that the OIG conduct
annual audits of the PRIA fund's financial statements.
The Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) encountered difficulties in preparing timely
and reliable financial statements. In OCFO's draft and initial final set of financial statements. We
found a number of errors that we believe the agency should have caught or fixed. These issues
highlight the need for the agency to strengthen its quality control processes to ensure accurate
data is available on a timely basis to prepare the financial statements and to guarantee key
financial statement preparation milestones are met.
At the start of the FY 2013 PRIA Fund financial statement audit, the agency informed the OIG of
its plans to streamline the financial statement process by eliminating separate statements for the
PRIA Fund and making them part of the agency's consolidated financial statement audit. The
agency disputed whether it needed to provide a separate set of financial statements complete with
footnote disclosures and supplemental information, and asserted that certain financial data
requested by OIG auditors would not be provided. After several communications with the OIG,
the agency provided incomplete financial statements in March 2014 and again in April 2014.
Subsequently, the agency informed the OIG that following its discussions with OMB attorneys,
stand-alone PRIA Fund financial statements were required. As a result, OCFO agreed to prepare
and provide to the OIG a full set of financial statements for PRIA. The agency expeditiously
worked to provide financial statements to the OIG in July 2014. Due to staff limitations, the OIG
agreed to scan those statements for errors and communicate such errors to the agency, but stated
that additional audit work would be postponed until completion of the OIG's audit of the
agency's Annual Consolidated Financial Statements in November 2014. The OIG's initial review
of the FY 2013 PRIA financial statements found that OCFO had included incorrect FY 2012
dollar amounts, and OCFO acknowledged these errors.
15-1-0181
7

-------
After completion of the Consolidated Financial Statements audit, the OIG review of the
supporting data for the revised draft FY 2013 financial statements found incorrect references
throughout the financial statements, and errors in the Management Discussion and Analysis,
payroll, and Reconciliation of Net Cost of Operations to Budget. In what was to be the final
PRIA financial statements presented in January 2015, the OIG determined considerable
Management Discussion and Analysis, Payroll, and Reconciliation of Net Cost of Operations to
Budget errors remained. In addition, many of the previously provided comments were not
addressed. Accordingly, the statements needed further revision.
We believe that financial statements presented to the OIG should be complete, reviewed by
agency management, and free of obvious errors such as incorrect prior-year amounts. Having to
continually revise and re-edit the statements delays completion of the mandated OIG audit. The
number of errors we found in multiple versions of the financial statements indicate that the
agency is not exercising good quality control over the preparation of financial statements or
performing a thorough review of its statements prior to submission to the OIG. Without
exercising good quality control over the preparation of its financial statements, the agency cannot
provide reasonable assurance that financial data provided accurately reflects the agency's
financial activities and balances.
The OCFO's current process for preparing financial statements needs to be improved so that the
agency can submit accurate financial statements, as required by PRIA, in a timely manner. The
CFO Act requirement for an integrated agency accounting and financial management system,
including financial report and internal controls, was enacted so that complete, reliable, timely and
consistent financial information is available for use by the executive branch of the government
and the Congress in the financing, managing and evaluating of federal programs. When
information submitted to the OIG is not accurate and reliable for the purpose of issuing an
opinion on the financial statements, we believe this is an indication that the agency needs to
make further financial management improvements to meet the intent of the CFO Act.
Recommendations
We recommend that the Chief Financial Officer:
1.	Evaluate the OCFO's process for preparing the PRIA financial statements and implement
the necessary improvements for submission of accurate, timely and complete financial
statements.
2.	Develop a systematic method to address all OIG comments on the PRIA financial
statements.
Agency Response and OIG Evaluation
The agency agreed with our findings and recommendations and has completed corrective actions
on Recommendation 1. OCFO has developed a project plan with new controls and processes to
ensure the financial statement preparation for PRIA is accurately and submitted timely. We have
not validated the corrective actions.
15-1-0181
8

-------
Agency actions on Recommendation 2 are pending. OCFO will work with the OIG to develop a
more formal process for communicating corrections and changes in future PRIA audits. The
estimated completion date for this corrective action is September 30, 2015.
We agree with the agency's proposed corrective actions and estimated completion dates. We
believe the planned actions adequately address the issues raised.
The agency's complete response is included in Appendix B to this report.
15-1-0181
9

-------
Status of Recommendations and
Potential Monetary Benefits
RECOMMENDATIONS
POTENTIAL MONETARY
BENEFITS (In $000s)
Rec.
No.
No.
Subject
Status1
Action Official
Planned
Completion
Date
Evaluate the OCFO's process for preparing the
PRIA financial statements and implement the
necessary improvements for submission of
accurate, timely and complete financial statements.
Develop a systematic method to address all OIG
comments on the PRIA financial statements.
Chief Financial Officer
Chief Financial Officer
3/31/15
9/30/15
Claimed
Amount
Ag reed-To
Amount
1 0 = Recommendation is open with agreed-to corrective actions pending.
C = Recommendation is closed with all agreed-to actions completed.
U = Recommendation is unresolved with resolution efforts in progress.
15-1-0181
10

-------
Appendix A
FYs 2013 and 2012 PESTICIDE REGISTRATION FUND
(PRIA)
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Produced by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Office of Financial Management

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Management's Discussion and Analysis	1
Principal Financial Statements	7
15-1-0181
EPA's FY 2013 Annual PRIA Financial Statements

-------
Management's Discussion and Analysis
15-1-0181
EPA's FY 2013 Annual PRIA Financial Statements

-------
Under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of
1996, the EPA's Pesticide Program registers new pesticides and re-evaluates existing pesticides
to ensure that they can be used safely and that levels of residue in food and animal feed are safe
(there is a reasonable certainty of no harm). The agency must also conclude that, when used in
accordance with labeling and common practices, the product will not generally cause
unreasonable adverse effects on the environment.
The Pesticide Registration Improvement Act (PRIA) of 2003 established the Pesticide
Registration Fund. PRIA authorizes the collection of new Registration service fees, which are
deposited into the Registration Fund and made available for obligation to the extent provided in
appropriation acts, and are available without fiscal year limitation.
Pesticide Registration
Under FIFRA and FFDCA pesticides must be registered with by the EPA. The passage of PRIA
introduced deadlines for the agency to complete certain registration actions. EPA expedites the
registration of reduced-risk pesticide uses, which generally pose lower risks to people and the
environment. Accelerated pesticide reviews provide an incentive for industry to develop and
register lower risk pesticides, and the availability of these reduced-risk pesticides provides
alternatives to older, potentially more harmful products currently on the market.
PRIA prescribed the amount of the registration service fee and the corresponding decision
review time for various categories of registration action. The goal is to create a more predictable
evaluation process for affected pesticide registrants and couple the collection of individual fees
with specific decision-making periods. The legislation also promotes shorter decision review
periods for reduced-risk pesticide applications. PRIA 1, effective on March 23, 2004, authorized
collection of registration fees through FY 2008. The Pesticide Registration Improvement
Renewal Act (PRIA 2), effective on October 1, 2007, authorized collection of registration fees
through FY 2012. The Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act (PRIA 3) was
effective on October 1, 2012.
For a pending or a new application covered by PRIA to be deemed complete and subject to the
decision review periods, a registrant is required to pay the applicable fee or receive a waiver
from the fees. For most applications, the decision review period starts 21 days after submission
of the application, provided that the fee has been paid, fee waiver granted or in the case of a 75%
or 50% fee waiver under PRIA 3, the fee has been paid and waiver granted. The legislation
provides fee waivers for certain categories of small businesses and minor uses1. Exemption from
the requirement to pay a registration service fee is continued under PRIA 3 for applications
1 Minor use pesticides are those that produce relatively little revenue for their manufacturers, for a variety of
reasons. They may be registered for a seldom seen pest, or for a crop that is not grown by a large number of
producers. However, minor crops include some high revenue fruit, vegetable, and ornamental crops.
15-1-0181
EPA's FY 2013 Annual PRIA Financial Statements

-------
solely associated with IR-4 petitions2. Applications from federal and state agencies are also
exempt from registration service fees. If the registrant requests a waiver or reduction of the fee,
the decision review period will begin when the agency grants such request or in the case of small
business fee waivers, no more than 60 days after receipt of the waiver application. If the agency
determines that a fee is required and the waiver is not granted, the decision review period starts
after the fee is collected.
Applications received prior to October 1, 2007, were covered by PRIA 1. Applications received
up to September 30, 2012, were covered by PRIA 23 and applications received on or after
October 1, 2012, are covered by PRIA 3. PRIA 3 contains the same audit provision as PRIA 2.
PRIA 3 includes new authority to reject an application if it fails a preliminary technical screen.
PRIA 3 also increases the fee categories or types of applications covered by PRIA from 140 to
189 and maintains set-asides to support worker protection and applicator training activities as
well as IPM grants at levels comparable to PRIA 2.
Research Program Description
EPA's Chemical Safety for Sustainability (CSS) research program is leading the sustainable
development, use, and assessment of chemicals and materials by advancing integrated chemical
evaluation strategies and decision support tools that promote human and environmental health
and are protective of vulnerable species and populations. The research is focused on providing
integrated solutions in support of the Agency's efforts to manage chemical (including pesticides
and toxics) risks. The data, methods and tools developed will guide the prioritization and testing
process, from screening approaches through more complex testing and assessments. The
research program's major goals are: (1) to build the knowledge infrastructure to support
scientific discovery and sustainable decisions, (2) to develop and apply rapid, efficient, and
effective methods for improved chemical prioritization, screening, and testing, (3) to provide
models and tools necessary to make decisions supporting safe use across the chemical lifecycle.
Current testing and assessment approaches are resource intensive and lack data sufficient to meet
decision-making needs posed by the large and growing number of chemicals. The CSS ToxCast
Program performs cost-effective, state-of-the-art chemical screening to assess how chemicals
may affect human health. ToxCast simultaneously tests thousands of chemicals using hundreds
of high-throughput and high-content approaches. This allows the EPA to directly examine
environmental chemicals' role in human disease processes, cell systems, and pathway targets.
2 The IR-4 (Interregional Research Project No.4) program is involved in making sure that pesticides are registered
for use on minor crops. IR-4 helps by conducting research on minor use pesticides, pesticides that would not
otherwise be profitable to manufacture.
3Out of approximately 7,892 completed PRIA 2 (FY '08 - FY ' 12) actions more than 99% were completed on or
before their PRIA due date. Out of 2,084 decisions completed during the first year of PRIA 3 (FY '13), 98.8% were
completed on or before their PRIA due date.
15-1-0181
EPA's FY 2013 Annual PRIA Financial Statements

-------
The ToxCast program has moved beyond the proof-of-concept phase focus on pesticide actives.
Results of Phase II of this program, which covers 1,860 chemicals, are available at
http ://www. epa. gov/ncct/toxcast/data, html.
In providing research on methods, models, and data to support decision-making regarding
specific individual or classes of pesticides and toxic substances that are of high priority, the
program will continue to develop:
•	Predictive biomarkers, quantitative structure activity relationships, and alternative test
methods for prioritizing and screening chemicals for a number of adverse effects (e.g.,
neurotoxicity, reproductive toxicity) that will lead to a reduction in and more efficient use
of whole animals in toxicity testing; and
•	Approaches for applying high-throughput screening and computational models developed
under the ToxCast program to support prioritization of chemicals for further testing under
EPA's Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program.
•	Data and protocols on the impact of waste water treatment technologies on pesticides and
their products of transformation.
To support the development of probabilistic risk assessments to protect endangered populations
of birds, fish, other wildlife, and non-target plants from pesticides while making sure farmers and
communities have the pest control tools they need, this program has four key research
components:
•	Extrapolation among wildlife species and exposure scenarios of concern;
•	Population biology to improve population dynamics in spatially-explicit habitats;
•	Models for assessing the relative risk of chemical and non-chemical stressors; and
•	Models to define geographical regional/spatial scales for risk assessment.
•
Methods for characterization of population-level risks of toxic substances to aquatic life and
wildlife also are being developed as part of the Agency's long-term goal of developing
scientifically valid approaches for assessing spatially-explicit, population-level risks to wildlife
populations and non-target plants and plant communities from pesticides, toxic chemicals and
multiple stressors while advancing the development of probabilistic risk assessment.
The program anticipates that the Agency will be better positioned to perform its mission of
protecting human health and the environment as scientific information becomes digitized and
readily available, methods and models to capture the complexities of chemical exposure and
hazard in toxicity testing are developed and approaches focused on development of more
sustainable alternatives are provided to decision-makers.
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program Description
The Pesticide Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program focuses on pesticide product
and user compliance. These include problems relating to pesticide worker safety, certification
15-1-0181
EPA's FY 2013 Annual PRIA Financial Statements

-------
and training of applicators, ineffective antimicrobial products, food safety, adverse effects, risks
of pesticides to endangered species, pesticide containers and containment facilities, and e-
commerce and misuse. The enforcement and compliance assurance program provides
compliance assistance to the regulated community through its National Agriculture Compliance
Assistance Center, seminars, guidance documents, brochures, and other forms of communication
to ensure knowledge of and compliance with environmental laws.
EPA's grant support to states' and tribes' pesticide programs emphasizes its commitment to
maintaining a strong compliance and enforcement presence. Agency FIFRA Cooperative
Agreement priorities for FY2015 - FY2017 include the enforcement of worker protection
standards and pesticide applicator certification; compliance monitoring and enforcement
activities related to the pesticide container and containment rules, the revised soil fumigant
labels, compliance of supplemental distributor products, contact manufacturing and program
performance reporting. Core program activities include inspections of producing
establishments; dealers/distributors/retailers; e-commerce; imports and exports, and pesticide
misuse. Additionally, through the Cooperative Agreement resources we support inspector
training and training for state/tribal senior managers, scientists, and supervisors.
Highlights and Accomplishments
Registration Financial Perspective
During FY 2013, the Agency's obligations charged against the PRIA Fund for the cost of
registration were $21.6 million and 18.9 work-years. Of this amount, OPP obligated $2.8 in
PC&B.
Appropriated funds are used in addition to Registration funds. In FY 2013, the Enacted
Operating Plan included approximately $ 34.046 million in appropriated funds for registration
activities. The unobligated balance in the Fund at the end of FY 2013 was $11.7 million.
The Fund has two types of receipts: fee collections and interest earned on investments. Of the
$15.5 million in FY 2013 receipts, more than 99.9% were fee collections.
Registration Program Performance Measures
The following measures support the program's strategic goals of Healthy Communities and
Ecosystems as contained in the FY 2013 President's budget.
Measure 1: Number of new active ingredients registered.
Results: InFY2013 EPA registered 26 new active ingredients, of which 14 are biopesticides, 9
are conventional pesticides (including one new active ingredient with import tolerance use only)
15-1-0181
EPA's FY 2013 Annual PRIA Financial Statements

-------
and 2 are antimicrobial pesticides. This measure includes both reduced-risk and non-reduced-
risk pesticides.
Measure 2: Progress in Registering Reduced-risk Pesticides.
Results: In FY 2013, EPA registered 23 reduced-risk new active ingredients 14 of which were
biological pesticides and 1 biological pesticide. . Biological pesticides are certain types of
pesticides derivedfrom such natural materials as animals, plants, bacteria, and certain
minerals. They are usually less toxic and are typically considered safer pesticides than the
traditional conventional chemicals; therefore, the 14biopesticides new active ingredients are
counted as reduced-risk pesticides. Conventional "reduced risk" pesticides have one or more of
the following advantages over currently registered pesticides: low impact on human health, low
toxicity to non-target organisms, low potential for groundwater contamination, lower use rates,
low pest resistance potential, and compatibility with integrated pest management strategies.
Measure 3: Number of New Food Uses Registered.
Results: EPA registered 183 new uses for previously registered active ingredients. Of these new
uses, 168 were for conventional pesticides and 15 were for antimicrobial pesticides.
Measure 4: Progress in Registering Reduced-risk New Uses.
Results: Included in the new uses registered are 22 reduced-risk uses associated with 10
conventional pesticides and 1 was a biopesticide new use.
15-1-0181
EPA's FY 2013 Annual PRIA Financial Statements

-------
PRINCIPAL
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
15-1-0181
EPA's FY 2013 Annual PRIA Financial Statements

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Financial Statements
Balance Sheet	9
Statement of Net Cost	10
Statement of Changes in Net Position	11
Statement of Budgetary Resources	12
Notes to Financial Statements
Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies	14
Note 2. Fund Balance with
Treasury	17
Note 3. Other
Assets	17
Note 4. General Property, Plant and Equipment	18
Note 5. Other Liabilities	18
Note 6. Payroll and Benefits
Payable	19
Note 7. Income and Expenses from Other Appropriations	20
Note 8. Exchange Revenues, Statement of Net Cost	22
Note 9. Intragovernmental Costs and Exchange Revenue	22
Note 10. Reconciliation of Net Cost of Operations to Budget (formerly the
Statement of Financing)	23
15-1-0181
EPA's FY 2013 Annual PRIA Financial Statements

-------
Environmental Protection Agency
PRIA
Balance Sheet
For the Years Ended September 30, 2013 and 2012
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2013	FY 2012
ASSETS


Intragovernmental:


Fund Balance With Treasury (Note 2)
$ 18,243 $
12,443
Total Intragovernmental
$ 18,243 $
12,443
Property, Plant & Equipment, Net (Note 4)
2,248
2,753
Total Assets
$ 20,491 $
15,196
Stewardship PP& E


LIABILITIES


Intragovernmental:


Accounts Payable and Accrued Liabilities
52
93
Other (Note 5)
56
74
Total Intragovernmental
00
o
167
Accounts Payable & Accrued Liabilities
$ 442 $
757
Payroll & Benefits Payable (Note 6)
1,078
2,022
Other (Note 5)
17,461
11,277
Total Liabilities
$ 19,089 S
14,223
NET POSITION


Cumulative Results of Operations
1,402
973
Total Net Position
1,402
973
Total Liabilities and Net Position
$ 20,491 $
15,196
15-1-0181	EPA's FY 2013 Annual PRIA Financial Statements

-------
Environmental Protection Agency
PRIA
Statement of Net Cost
For the Years Ended September 30, 2013 and 2012
(Dollars in Thousands)

FY2013
FY 2012
COSTS


Gross Costs (Note 9) $
Expenses from Other Appropriations (Note 7)
8,985 $
31,359
15,848
29,726
Total Costs
Less:
Earned Revenue (Notes 8 and 9)
40,344
9,389
45,574
14,396
NET COST OF OPERATIONS (Note 10) $
30,955 $
31,178
15-1-0181
EPA's FY 2013 Annual PRIA Financial Statements

-------
Environmental Protection Agency
PRIA
Statement of Changes in Net Position
For the Years Ended September 30, 2013 and 2012
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2013	FY 2012
Cumulative Results of Operations:
Net Position - Beginning of Period		973 	2,401
Beginning Balances, as Adjusted
$ 973 $
2,401
Budgetary Financing Sources:
Nonexchange Revenue - Securities Investment
Nonexchange Revenue - Other
Income from Other Appropriations (Note 6)
Total Budgetary Financing Sources
2
(12)
31,359
$ 31,349 $
1
12
29,726
29,739
Other Financing Sources (Non-Exchange)
Imputed Financing Sources
T otal Other F inancing Sources
35
$ 35 $
11
11
Net Cost of Operations
(30,955)
(31,178)
Net Change
429
(1,428)
Cumulative Results of Operations
$ 1,402 $
973
15-1-0181
EPA's FY 2013 Annual PRIA Financial Statements

-------
Environmental Protection Agency
PRIA
Statement of Budgetary Resources
For the Years Ended September 30, 2013 and 2012
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY2013	FY2012
BUDGETARY RES OURCES


Unobligated balance, brought forward, October 1: $
6,756 $
4,247
Unobligated Balance Brought Forward, October 1, as adjusted
6,756
4,247
Recoveries of prior year unpaid obligations
22
43
Unobligated balance from prior year budget authority, net
6,778
4,290
Appropriations (discretionary and mandatory)
14,795
15,619
Spending Authority from offsetting collection (discretionary and mandatory)
0
39
Total Budgetary Resources
21,573
19,948
S TATUS OF BUDGETARY RES OURCES


Obligations Incurred $
9,854 $
13,192
Unobligated Balance, end ofyear:


Apportioned
11,184
6,756
Unapportioned
535
-
Total Unobligated balance, end of period
11,719
6,756
Total Status of Budgetary Resources
21,573
19,948
CHANGE IN OBLIGATED BALANCE


Unpaid Obligations:


Unpaid obligations, brought forward, October 1 (gross) $
5,644 $
6,955
Obligated balance, start ofyear (net), before adjustments
5,644
6,955
Obligated balance, start ofyear (net), as adjusted
5,644
6,955
Obligations incurred, net
9,854
13,192
Outlays (gross)
(9,753)
(14,460)
Recoveries of prior year unpaid obligations
(22)
(43)
Obligated balance, end of period


Unpaid obligations, end ofyear (gross)
5,723
5,644
Obligated balance, end of period (net)
5,723
5,644
BUDGET AUTHORITY AND OUTLAYS, NET: $
$

Budget authority, gross (discretionary and mandatory)
14,795
15,658
Actual offsetting collections (discretionary and mandatory)
(0)
(39)
Budget Authority, net (discretionary and mandatory)
14,795
15,619
Outlays, gross (discretionary and mandatory)
9,753
14,460
Actual offsetting collections (discretionary and mandatory)
(0)
(39)
Outlays, net (discretionary and mandatory)
9,753
14,421
Distributed offsetting receipts
(15,563)
(15,622)
Agency outlays, net (discretionary and mandatory		(5,810) 	(1,201)
15-1-0181
EPA's FY 2013 Annual PRIA Financial Statements

-------
Environmental Protection Agency
PRIA
Notes to Financial Statements
(Dollars in Thousands)
Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
A.	Reporting Entity
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or Agency) was created in 1970 by executive
reorganization from various components of other Federal agencies in order to better marshal and
coordinate federal pollution control efforts. The Agency is generally organized around the media
and substances it regulates — air, water, land, hazardous waste, pesticides and toxic substances.
The Pesticide Registration Fund (PRIA) is authorized under the Pesticide Registration
Improvement Act of 2003 (which amended the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide
Act (FIFRA)), and became effective on March 23, 2004. This Act authorizes the EPA to assess
and collect pesticide registration service fees on applications submitted to register pesticides
covered by this Act, as well as assess and collect fees to register new active ingredients not listed
in the Registration Division 2003 Work Plan of the Office of Pesticide Programs. The Pesticide
Registration Improvement Renewal Act (commonly referred to as PRIA II) extended the
authority to collect pesticide registration service fees through FY 2012. PRIA II became
effective October 1, 2007. PRIA II was reauthorized with the passage of the Pesticide
Registration Improvement Extension Act (referred to as PRIA III) on September 28, 2012 and
became effective 2 days later on October 1, 2012. The PRIA Fund is accounted for under
Treasury symbol number 68X5374.
The PRIA fund may charge some administrative costs directly to the fund and charge the
remainder of the administrative costs to Agency-wide appropriations. Costs funded by Agency-
wide appropriations for FYs 2013 and 2012 were $31,721 thousand and $29,726 thousand,
respectively. This amount was included as Income from Other Appropriations on the Statement
of Changes in Net Position and as Expenses from Other Appropriations on the Statement of Net
Cost for FYs 2013 and 2012.
B.	Basis of Presentation
These financial statements have been prepared to report the financial position and results of
operations of the EPA for the Pesticide Registration Fund (PRIA) as required by the Chief
Financial Officers Act of 1990 and the Pesticide Registration Improvement Act (PRIA) of 2003.
In the prior years, pesticide registration was included in the FIFRA financial statements. The
reports have been prepared from the books and records of the EPA in accordance with Office of
15-1-0181
EPA's FY 2013 Annual PRIA Financial Statements

-------
Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-136 Financial Reporting Requirements, and the
EPA's accounting policies which are summarized in this note. These statements are therefore
different from the financial reports also prepared by the EPA pursuant to OMB directives that are
used to monitor and control the EPA's use of budgetary resources. The balances in these reports
have been updated from the EPA consolidated financial statements to reflect the use of FY 2013
cost factors for calculating imputed costs for Federal civilian benefits programs. These updates
impact the Balance Sheet, Statement of Net Cost, and Statement of Changes in Net Position.
C.	Budgets and Budgetary Accounting
Funding for PRIA is provided by fees collected from industry to offset costs incurred by EPA in
carrying out these programs. Each year the EPA submits an apportionment request to OMB
based on the anticipated collections of industry fees.
D.	Basis of Accounting
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) for Federal entities is the standard
prescribed by the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board (FASAB), which is the official
standard setting body for the federal government. The financial statements are prepared in
accordance with GAAP for federal entities.
Transactions are recorded on an accrual accounting basis and a budgetary basis. Under the
accrual method, revenues are recognized when earned and expenses are recognized when a
liability is incurred, without regard to receipt or payment of cash. Budgetary accounting
facilitates compliance with legal constraints and controls over the use of Federal funds. All
interfund balances and transactions have been eliminated.
E.	Revenues and Other Financing Sources
For FYs 2013 and 2012, PRIA received funding from fees collected from registrants requesting
pesticide registrations. For FYs 2013 and 2012, revenues were recognized from fee collections
to the extent that expenses are incurred during the fiscal year.
F.	Funds with the Treasury
The PRIA fund deposits receipts and processes disbursements through its operating account
maintained at the U.S. Department of the Treasury.
G.	Investments in U. S. Government Securities
Investments in U. S. government securities are maintained by Treasury and are reported at
amortized cost net of unamortized discounts. Discounts are amortized over the term of the
investments and reported as interest income. PRIA holds the investments to maturity, unless
15-1-0181
EPA's FY 2013 Annual PRIA Financial Statements

-------
needed to finance operations of the fund. No provision is made for unrealized gains or losses on
these securities because, in the majority of cases, they are held to maturity.
H.	General Property, Plant and Equipment
Purchases of the EPA-held personal equipment are capitalized if the equipment is valued at $25
thousand or more and has an estimated useful life of at least two years. Depreciation is taken on
a basic straight-line method over the specific asset's useful life, ranging from two tol5 years.
The EPA shows property, plant and equipment at net of depreciation on its audited financial
statements.
All funds (except for the Working Capital Fund) capitalize software if those investments are
considered Capital Planning and Investment Control (CPIC) or CPIC Lite systems with the
provisions of SFFAS No. 10, "Accounting for Internal Use Software." Once software enters the
production life cycle phase, it is depreciated using the straight-line method over the specific
asset's useful life ranging from two to 10 years.
I.	Liabilities
Liabilities represent the amount of monies or other resources that are likely to be paid by the
Agency as the result of an Agency transaction or event that has already occurred and can be
reasonably estimated. However, no liability can be paid by the Agency without an appropriation
or other collections. Liabilities for which an appropriation has not been enacted are classified as
unfunded liabilities and there is no certainty that the appropriations will be enacted. For PRIA,
liabilities are liquidated from fee receipts, since PRIA receives no appropriation. Liabilities of
the Agency arising from anything other than contracts can be abrogated by the Government
acting in its sovereign capacity.
J. Accrued Unfunded Annual Leave
Annual, sick and other leave is expensed as taken during the fiscal year. Sick leave earned but
not taken is not accrued as a liability. Annual leave earned but not taken as of the end of the
fiscal year is accrued as an unfunded liability. Accrued unfunded annual leave is included in the
Balance Sheet as a component of "Payroll and Benefits Payable."
K. Retirement Plan
There are two primary retirement systems for Federal employees. Employees hired prior to
January 1, 1987, may participate in the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS). On January 1,
1984, the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) went into effect pursuant to Public Law
99-335. Most employees hired after December 31, 1983, are automatically covered by FERS
and Social Security. Employees hired prior to January 1, 1984, elected to either join FERS and
Social Security or remain in CSRS. A primary feature of FERS is that it offers a savings plan to
15-1-0181
EPA's FY 2013 Annual PRIA Financial Statements

-------
which the Agency automatically contributes one percent of pay and matches any employee
contributions up to an additional four percent of pay. The Agency also contributes the
employer's matching share for Social Security.
With the issuance of SFFAS No. 5, "Accounting for Liabilities of the Federal Government,"
accounting and reporting standards were established for liabilities relating to the federal
employee benefit programs (Retirement, Health Benefits, and Life Insurance). SFFAS No. 5
requires that the employing agencies recognize the cost of pensions and other retirement benefits
during their employees' active years of service. SFFAS No. 5 requires that the Office of
Personnel Management (OPM), as administrator of the CSRS and FERS, the Federal Employees
Health Benefits Program, and the Federal Employees Group Life Insurance Program, provide
federal agencies with the actuarial cost factors to compute the liability for each program.
L. Offsetting Receipts
Beginning in FY 2007 OMB Circular A-13 6, Financial Reporting Requirements, requires that
the amount of distributed offsetting receipts reported in the Statement of Budgetary Resources
(SBR) should equal the amount recorded as offsetting receipts by the Department of the Treasury
(Treasury). Pesticide Registration Fees collected under PRIA are considered to be offsetting
receipts by Treasury.
M. Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements requires management to make certain estimates and
assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the reported amounts of
revenue and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those
estimates.
Note 2. Fund Balance with Treasury
FY 2013	FY 2012
Revolving Funds: Entity Assets $ 18,243 $ 12,443
Note 3. Other Assets
Other Assets consist of advances for Interagency Agreements. As of September 30, 2013 and
2012, funds advanced that will be applied to future costs as incurred were $0 and $0 thousand
respectively.
15-1-0181
EPA's FY 2013 Annual PRIA Financial Statements

-------
Note 4. General Property, Plant and Equipment
General property, plant and equipment consists of the EPA-Held personal property, software,
and software in development.
As of September 30, 2013 and 2012, General Property, Plant and Equipment consist of the
following:
FY 2013	FY 2012
EPA-Held Equipment
Software
Total
Acquisition
Accumulated
Net Book
Acquisition
Accumulated
Net Book
Value
Depreciation
Value
Value
Depreciation
Value
411
(339)
72
410
(305)
105
4,702
(2,526)
2,176
4,458
(1,810)
2,648
5,113
(2,865)
2,248
$ 4,868
(2,115)
2,753
Note 5. Other Liabilities
For FYs 2013 and 2012, Payroll and Benefits Payable, non-federal, are presented on a separate
line of the Balance Sheet and in a separate footnote (see Note 6).
FY 2013	FY 2012
Other Intragovernmental Liabilities -
Covered by Budgetary Resources
Employer Contributions - Payroll
Total
Other Non-Federal Liabilities - Covered
by Budgetary Resources
Advances from Non-Federal Entities
Total
$
56
$
74
$
56
$
74
$
17,461
$
11,277
$
17,461
$
11,277
15-1-0181
EPA's FY 2013 Annual PRIA Financial Statements

-------
Note 6. Payroll and Benefits Payable, Non-Federal:
FY 2013	FY 2012
Covered by Budgetary Resources




Accrued Payroll Payable to Employees
$
397
$
415
Withholdings Payable
$
46
$
28
Thrift Savings Plan Benefits Payable
$
17
$
18
Total
$
460
$
461
Not Covered by Budgetary Resources




Unfunded Annual Leave
$
618
$
1,561
Total
$
618
$
1,561
At various periods throughout FYs 2013 and 2012 employees with their associated payroll costs
were transferred from PRIA to the Environmental Programs and Management (EPM)
appropriation. (See graph in Note 7 below showing trend of hours charged per month to the
PRIA fund for FYs 2013 and 2012.) These employees were transferred in order to keep PRIA's
obligations and disbursements within budgetary limits.
This process has led to variations between the year-end liabilities of FYs 2013 and 2012. The
liabilities covered by budgetary resources (both intragovernmental and non-Federal) represent
unpaid payroll and benefits at year-end. For FY 2013 Pay Period 25; one employee was
charging any part of their salary and benefits to PRIA. As of September 30, 2013, the liabilities
were $56 thousand and $460 thousand for employer contributions and accrued funded payroll
and benefits as compared to FY 2012's balances of $74 thousand and $461 thousand,
respectively.
In contrast, the unfunded annual leave liability is a longer term liability than the funded
liabilities. At various periods throughout FYs 2013 and FY 2012, approximately 56 and 211
employees, respectively, in total have been under PRIA's accountability. As of September 30,
2013 and 2012 liability balances for unfunded annual leave were accrued to cover these
employees for a total of $618 thousand and $1,561 thousand, respectively.
Note 7. Income and Expenses from Other Appropriations:
The Statement of Net Cost reports program costs that include the full costs of the program
outputs and consist of the direct costs and all other costs that can be directly traced, assigned on a
cause and effect basis, or reasonably allocated to program outputs.
15-1-0181
EPA's FY 2013 Annual PRIA Financial Statements

-------
During FYs 2013 and 2012, the EPA had two appropriations which funded a variety of
programmatic and non-programmatic activities across the Agency, subject to statutory
requirements. The EPM appropriation was created to fund personnel compensation and benefits,
travel, procurement, and contract activities. Transfers of employees from PRIA to EPM at
various times during FYs 2013 and 2012 (see Note 6 above) resulted in an increase in payroll
expenses in EPM, and these costs financed by EPM are reflected as an increase in the Expenses
from Other Appropriations on the Statement of Net Cost. The increased financing from EPM is
reported on the Statement of Changes in Net Position as Income from Other Appropriations.
In terms of hours charged to PRIA each month, the transfers of employees and their associated
costs during FYs 2013 and 2012 are shown below. Note that a decrease in hours charged to
PRIA normally signifies an increase in EPM's payroll costs, and vice versa.
PRIA - Total Employee Hours by Calendar Month
3
O
X
(D
(D
>
_o
Q.
E
35
tn
TD
c
ru
tn
o 30
25
20
15
10




& ^ ^ jf if
¦2013 Base Hours
• 2012 Base Hours
The EPM costs related to PRIA are allocated based on specific EPM program codes which have
been designated for Pesticide registration activities. As illustrated below, there is no impact on
PRIA's Statement of Changes in Net Position.
15-1-0181
EPA's FY 2013 Annual PRIA Financial Statements

-------
Income from Other	Expenses from Other	Net
Appropriations	Appropriations	Effect
FY 2013 _$	31,359 _$	31,359 _$		
FY 2012 $ 29,726	$ 29,726	$ -
Note 8. Exchange Revenues, Statement of Net Cost
For FYs 2013 and 2012, the exchange revenues reported on the Statement of Net Cost consists of
non-Federal amounts.
Note 9. Intragovernmental Costs and Exchange Revenue
COSTS:	FY 2013	FY 2012
Intragovernmental	$ 1,440	$ 2,171
With the Public	$ 7,545	$13,677
Expenses from Other Appropriations $ 31,359	$ 29,726
Total Costs	$40,344	$45,574
REVENUE
With the Public	$ 9,389	$14,396
Total Revenue	$ 9,389 $ 14,396
NET COST OF OPERATIONS	$ 30,955 $ 31,178
Intragovernmental costs relate to the source of the goods or services not the classification of the
related revenue.
15-1-0181
EPA's FY 2013 Annual PRIA Financial Statements

-------
Note 10. Reconciliation of Net Cost of Operations to Budget (formerly the Statement of
Financing)
RESOURCES USED TO FINANCE ACTIVITIES:
Budgetary Resources Obligated
Obligations Incurred
Less: Spending Authority from Offsetting Collections and Recoveries
Obligations, Net of Offsetting Collections
Less: Offsetting Receipts
Net Obligations
Other Resources
Imputed Financing Sources
Income from Other Appropriations (Note 7)
Net Other Resources Used to Finance Activities
FY 2013
9,854
(23)
9,831
(11)
9,820
35
31,359
FY 2012
13,192
(82)
13,110
(12)
13,098
11
29,726
31,394 $
29,737
Total Resources Used To Finance Activities
41,215
42,835
RESOURCES USED TO FINANCE ITEMS
NOT PART OF THE NET COST OF OPERATIONS:
Change in Budgetary Resources Obligated
Offsetting Receipts Not Affecting Net Cost (Note 1 Section L)
Resources that Finance Asset Acquistion
Adjustments to Expenditure Transfers
Total Resources Used to Finance Items Not Part of the Net Cost of Operations
Total Resources Used to Finance the Net Cost of Operations
COMPONENTS OF THE NET COST OF OPERATIONS THAT WILL
NOT REQUIRE OR GENERATE RESOURCES IN THE CURRENT PERIOD:
Components Requiring or Generating Resources in Future Periods:
Increase in Annual Leave Liability
Increase in Public Exchange Revenue Receivables
(455)
(11)
(243)
(709)
40,505
FY 2013
(943) $
(9,356)
1,286
12
(260)
1,038
43,873
FY 2012
1,004
(14,396)
Total Components of Net Cost of Operations that Require or
Generate Resources in Future Periods
(10,299) $
(13,392)
Components Not Requiring/Generating Resources:
Depreciation and Amortization
Expenses Not Requiring Budgetary Resources
Total Components of Net Cost that Will Not Require or Generate Resources
749 $
0
749 $
696
1
697
Total Components of Net Cost of Operations That Will Not Require or
Generate Resources in the Current Period
(9,550) $
(12,695)
Net Cost of Operations
$ 30,955 $
31,178
15-1-0181
EPA's FY 2013 Annual PRIA Financial Statements

-------
Appendix B
Agency's Response to Draft Report
May 13, 2015
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Response to Office of Inspector General Draft Report No. OA-FY14-0122
"Fiscal Years 2013 and 2012 Financial Statements for the Pesticides
Reregistration Fund, " dated April 29, 2015
FROM: David A. Bloom /Signed/
Acting Chief Financial Officer
TO:	Paul Curtis, Director
Financial Statement Audits
Office of Inspector General
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the issues and recommendations in the subject draft
audit report. Following is a summary of the agency's position on each of the report
recommendations, including high-level intended corrective actions and estimated completion
dates.
AGENCY'S RESPONSE TO REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS
The agency concurs with the two draft report recommendations.
Agreements
No.
Recommendation
High-Level Intended Corrective
Action(s)
Estimated Completion by
Quarter and FY
1
Evaluate the OCFO's process
for preparing the PRIA
financial statements and
implement the necessary
improvements for submission
of accurate, timely and
complete financial statements.
OCFO has developed a project
plan with new controls and
processes to ensure that the
financial statement preparation
for PRIA is accurate and timely
submitted.
3/31/2015 (complete)
2
Develop a systematic method
to address all OIG comments
on the PRIA financial
statements.
OCFO will work with the OIG
to develop a more formal
process for communicating and
addressing corrections and
changes in future PRIA audits.
9/30/2015
15-1-0181

-------
CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions regarding this response, please contact Stefan Silzer of the Office of
Financial Management on (202) 564-4905.
cc: Stefan Silzer
Meshell Jones-Peeler
Steven Bradbury
Marty Monell
Kevin Christensen
Richard Eyermann
John O'Connor
Istanbul Yusuf
Dale Miller
Peter Caulkins
Maria Sorrell
Michael Hardy
Vickie Richardson
John Street
Wanda Arlington
Margaret Hiatt
Robert L. Smith
Art Budelier
Sheila May
Janet Weiner
Lorna Washington
15-1-0181

-------
Appendix C
Distribution
Office of the Administrator
Chief Financial Officer
Assistant Administrator for Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
Assistant Administrator for Administration and Resources Management
Deputy Chief Financial Officer
Agency Follow-Up Coordinator
General Counsel
Associate Administrator for Congressional and Intragovernmental Relations
Associate Administrator for Public Affairs
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
Deputy Director, Office of Pesticide Programs, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
Senior Advisor, PRIA Implementation, Office of Pesticide Programs, Office of Chemical Safety
and Pollution Prevention
Director, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division, Office of Pesticide Programs,
Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
Director, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, Office of Chemical
Safety and Pollution Prevention
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, Office of Chemical Safety and
Pollution Prevention
Director, Antimicrobials Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, Office of Chemical Safety and
Pollution Prevention
Director, Information Technology and Resources Management Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
Director, Office of Human Resources, Office of Administration and Resources Management
Director, Office of Policy and Resource Management, Office of Administration and
Resources Management
Director, Office of Financial Management, Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Director, Office of Financial Services, Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Director, Reporting and Analysis Staff, Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Director, Financial Policy and Planning Staff, Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Director, Research Triangle Park Finance Center, Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Director, Cincinnati Finance Center, Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Director, Las Vegas Finance Center, Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Director, Payroll Management and Outreach Staff, Office of Financial Services, Office of the
Chief Financial Officer
Staff Director, Accountability and Control Staff, Office of Financial Services, Office of the Chief
Financial Officer
Audit Follow-Up Coordinator, Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Audit Follow-Up Coordinator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
Audit Follow-Up Coordinator, Office of Administration and Resources Management
PRIA Audit Coordinator, Office of Pesticide Programs, Office of Chemical Safety and
Pollution Prevention
15-1-0181

-------