United States
Environmental Protection Agency
FISCAL YEAR 2019
Justification of Appropriation
Estimates for the Committee
on Appropriations
February 2018
EPA- 190-R-18-001 www.epa.gov/ocfo
-------
EPA's Mission
The mission of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is to protect human health and the
environment. This mission resonates with all Americans; we can all agree that we want our future
generations to inherit a cleaner, healthier environment that supports a thriving economy. In
carrying out its mission, the EPA works to ensure that all Americans are protected from exposure
to hazardous environmental risks where they live, learn, work, and enjoy their lives. The Agency
guides national efforts to reduce environmental risks, based upon on-going research and scientific
analysis.
EPA's FY 2019 Budget maintains core environmental protection with respect to statutory and
regulatory obligations. This budget provides the direction and resources to return the EPA to its
core mission of protecting human health and the environment. This can be accomplished by
engaging with state, local, and tribal partners to create and implement sensible regulations that
also work to enhance economic growth.
This strategy will be realized through the creation of three, new overarching strategic goals that
guide EPA's approach to protect human health and the environment:
• Goal 1 - Core Mission: Deliver real results to provide Americans with clean air, land, and
water, and ensure chemical safety.
• Goal 2 - Cooperative Federalism: Rebalance the power between Washington and the states
to create tangible environmental results for the American people.
• Goal 3 - Rule of Law and Process: Administer the law, as Congress intended, to refocus the
Agency on its statutory obligations under the law.
The EPA works to ensure our future generations will inherit a better and healthier environment.
Environmental stewardship while growing our economy is essential to the American way of life
and key to economic success and competitiveness. Regulation and policy will incorporate robust
input from the public through formal and informal mechanisms to seek full understanding of the
impacts of proposed policy on public health, the environment, the economy, jobs, families, and
our communities.
The EPA is proud to be a good steward of taxpayer resources and to efficiently deliver
environmental protection. To learn more about how the Agency accomplishes its mission,
including information on the organizational structure and regional offices, please visit:
http://www.epa.gov/aboutepa/.
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan
The EPA's FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget1 of $6,146 billion represents a $2.58
billion, or 23.2% reduction from the Agency's FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (ACR)
level. This resource level and the Agency requested 12,250.3 FTE will enable EPA to support our
highest priorities and fulfill our critical mission for the American people.
1 The Budget includes the addendum to the President's FY 2019 Budget to account for the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018.
1
-------
A major component of our FY 2019 budget request is funding for drinking water and clean water
infrastructure as well as for Brownfields and Superfund projects. Resources also are focused on
efforts to improve and protect air quality and to ensure the safety of chemicals. This budget ensures
that federal funding supports the highest priority national work. With the understanding that
environmental protection is a shared responsibility, funds are provided to our state and tribal
partners through programs such as the Multipurpose Grants to implement core mission work in a
flexible manner. This budget also provides essential resources to equip EPA in delivering vital
emergency response services in environmental disasters.
The FY 2019 Budget, along with the FY 2018-2022 Strategic Plan and the Agency Reform Plan,
highlight actions that will enable EPA to reduce costs and more effectively utilize limited
resources. The Agency will work across all of our programs to unite varied interests and
stakeholders to focus attention and leverage federal, state, local, and non-governmental resources
in a coordinated effort to address the nation's greatest environmental challenges.
FY 2018-2019 Agency Priority Goals
The budget highlights EPA's six FY 2018-2019 Agency Priority Goals2 (APGs) that advance EPA
priorities and the Agency's FY 2018-2022 Strategic Plan.
Improve air quality by implementing pollution control measures to reduce the number of
non-attainment areas. By September 30, 2019, EPA, in close collaboration with states, will
reduce the number of nonattainment areas to 138 from a baseline of 166.
Empower communities to leverage EPA water infrastructure investments. By September 30,
2019, EPA will increase by $16 billion the non-federal dollars leveraged by EPA water
infrastructure finance programs (Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds and the
Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act).
Accelerate the pace of cleanups and return sites to beneficial use in their communities. By
September 30, 2019, EPA will make an additional 102 Superfund sites and 1,368 Brownfields sites
ready for anticipated use (RAU).
Meet new statutory requirements to improve the safety of chemicals in commerce. By
September 30, 2019, EPA will complete in accordance with statutory timelines (excluding
statutorily-allowable extensions): 100% of required EPA-initiated Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA) risk evaluations for existing chemicals; 100% of required TSCA risk management actions
for existing chemicals; and 80% of TSCA pre-manufacture notice final determinations.
Increase environmental law compliance rate. Through September 30, 2019, EPA will increase
compliance by reducing the percentage of Clean Water Act (CWA) National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permittees in significant noncompliance with their permit limits to
21% from a baseline of 24%.
2 Agency Priority Goals reflect the top near-term Agency priorities that advance progress towards the three overarching Strategic
Plan Goals.
11
-------
Accelerate permitting-related decisions. By September 30, 2019, EPA will reduce by 50% the
number of permitting-related decisions that exceed six months.
FY 2019 Funding Priorities
Infrastructure
The infrastructure of the Nation is not limited to roads and bridges. The infrastructure needs of our
communities are broader and include making improvements to drinking water and waste water
infrastructure as well as cleaning up contaminated land. In FY 2019, EPA will work in a focused
manner to make infrastructure and public health protection investments in communities, by
working with and through our state and tribal partners.
A priority for the Agency is modernizing the outdated water infrastructure on which the American
public depends. This budget supports the President's commitment to infrastructure repair and
replacement and would allow states, municipalities, and private entities to finance high priority
infrastructure investments. The FY 2019 budget includes $2.3 billion for the State Revolving
Funds (SRF) and $20 million for the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA)
program.
Clean and safe drinking water is critical to the health of communities. While most small systems
consistently provide safe and reliable drinking water, many small systems face challenges with
aging infrastructure, increasing costs and decreasing rates bases, making the drinking water SRF
an important source of funding for these communities. This SRF funding also supports efforts
across the country to eradicate lead pipes that may leach into the nation's drinking water supply.
The budget maintains funding for the drinking water SRF to support this priority to reduce lead
exposure, and ensure small and disadvantaged communities have access to clean and safe water.
With $20 million in FY 2019 WIFIA appropriations, EPA could potentially provide up to $2
billion in credit assistance, which, when combined with other funding sources, could spur up to an
estimated $4 billion in total infrastructure investment.3 The WIFIA program is designed to offer
credit assistance with flexible terms in order to attract private participation, encourage new revenue
streams for infrastructure investment, and allow public agencies to get more projects done. This
makes the WIFIA program credit assistance a powerful new tool to help address a variety of
existing and new water infrastructure needs.
Given that EPA's infrastructure investments are catalysts for economic growth and environmental
protection, the Agency will support private and public investment in economic revitalization that
improve environmental outcomes across the country. EPA will identify opportunities to link
infrastructure and community assistance program resources to spur similar, non-Agency
investments with the goal of enhancing the collective impact those resource have in communities.
Through the combined work of the SRFs and WIFIA, EPA will ensure that it is serving
disadvantaged communities, leveraging private investment to improve the economy, and
protecting human health and the environment.
3 This approximation is based on notional calculations. Subsidy cost is determined on a loan-by-loan basis.
Ill
-------
Improving Air Quality
In FY 2019, the EPA will perform activities in support of the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) and implementation of stationary source regulations to support state, local,
and tribal air quality programs. The Agency will continue its Clean Air Act (CAA) mandated
responsibilities to administer the NAAQS and will provide a variety of technical assistance,
training, and information to support state clean air plans. The EPA will continue to prioritize
statutorily mandated responsibilities and court-ordered actions. A focus will be placed on states
achieving attainment, looking for improved processes for (State Implementation Plans) SIPS and
implementation options. In addition, the EPA will continue to conduct risk assessments, to
determine whether the Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) rules appropriately
protect public health.
In FY 2019, the Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certification program will focus its
efforts on certification decisions. The Agency will perform its compliance oversight functions on
priority matters, where there is evidence to suggest noncompliance, and conduct testing activities
for pre-certification confirmatory testing for emissions and fuel economy for passenger cars.
The Budget includes a proposal to authorize the EPA to establish user fees for entities that
participate in the ENERGY STAR program. By administering the ENERGY STAR program
through the collection of user fees, the EPA would continue to provide a trusted resource for
consumers and businesses who want to purchase products that save them money and help protect
the environment.
Air monitoring, which provides information to states used to develop clean air plans, for research,
and for the public, will continue to be a focus of the Agency. In FY 2019, the EPA will provide
grants to state, local, and tribal air pollution control agencies to manage and implement their air
quality programs. We will work with our state and tribal partners to rapidly approve their
implementation plans for attaining air quality standards to reduce contaminants that cause or
exacerbate health issues.
This budget supports implementation of Executive Order 13783, Promoting Energy Independence
and Economic Growth, which directs all agencies to identify, and propose measures to suspend,
revise or rescind regulatory barriers that impede progress towards energy independence. EPA will
continue to take appropriate deregulatory actions and work to speed up the environmental
permitting process to advance this effort.
Clean and Safe Water
The EPA will continue to provide scientific water quality criteria information, review and approve
state water quality standards, and review and approve state lists of impaired waters. In FY 2019,
the Agency will continue to work with states and other partners on Total Maximum Daily Loads
(TMDLs) as required by the Clean Water Act, as well as on other waterbody restoration plans for
listed impaired waterbodies. The EPA also will continue to implement and support core water
quality programs that control point-source discharges through permitting and pre-treatment
programs.
iv
-------
The EPA will continue to partner with states, drinking water utilities, and other stakeholders to
identify and address current and potential sources of drinking water contamination. These efforts
are integral to the sustainable infrastructure efforts as source water protection can reduce the need
for additional drinking water treatment and associated costs. In FY 2019, the Agency will continue
to emphasize efforts on small and rural community water systems. EPA also will coordinate and
support protection of the nation's critical water infrastructure from terrorist threats and all-hazard
events.
Revitalizing Land
The cleanup and reuse of contaminated lands often can play an important role in economically
revitalizing a community. The EPA's cleanup programs, including Superfund and Brownfields,
protect human health and the environment and also return sites to productive use, which is
important to the economic well-being of communities. Working collaboratively with partners
across the country, the EPA engages with communities in site cleanup decisions, fosters
employment opportunities in communities during and after remedy construction, promotes the
redevelopment of blighted areas, and protects human health and the environment.
The FY 2019 budget includes $864.7 million to fund EPA's cleanup programs. In FY 2019,
particular emphasis will be placed on the Agency's top priority list of Superfund sites.4 These sites
are targeted for immediate and intense action to accelerate clean-up and promote site reuse, while
addressing risks to human health and the environment. The Agency will accelerate cleanup by re-
prioritizing some resources to focus on remedial actions, construction completions, ready-for-
reuse determinations, and National Priorities List (NPL) site deletions. Further, the Agency will
focus efforts to clean up and propel development at Superfund sites that offer the greatest expected
redevelopment and commercial potential, as outlined in the recently released Superfund
Redevelopment Focus List5, and will promote additional private investment in cleanup activities
as recommended by the Superfund Task Force6.
The EPA also will invest in communities through Brownfields grants so communities can realize
their own visions for environmental health, economic growth, and job creation. In FY 2017, grants
awarded by the Brownfields program have led to over 69,200 acres of idle land made ready for
productive use and over 129,240 jobs and $24.7 billion leveraged.7 In addition, EPA will continue
to work with industry to prevent new releases from occurring through the accident prevention
training, regulation, and inspections. The FY 2019 Budget includes a proposal that would authorize
EPA to collect and use fees to provide on-site compliance assistance to oil and chemical facilities
seeking to use this service.
Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals
In FY 2019 resources will support the Agency's significant continuing and new responsibilities
under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for ensuring that new and existing chemicals are
4 https://www.epa.gov/superfund/superfund-sites-targeted-immediate-intense-action
5 https://www.epa.gov/superfund-redevelopment-initiative/superfund-redevelopment-focus-list
6 https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-07/documents/superfund_task_force_report.pdf
7 The EPA's ACRES database (https://cfext.epa.gov/acres/)
V
-------
evaluated in a timely manner and that any unreasonable risks are addressed. The EPA will work
aggressively to complete the 10 chemical risk evaluations initiated in December 2016, continue
prioritization efforts to identify future chemicals for evaluation and evaluate new chemicals before
they are allowed to commercialize. In addition to fees, $58.6 million is requested in FY 2019 for
the TSCA Chemical Risk Review and Reduction program to support this high priority work. EPA
will focus on meeting its statutory requirements and mandatory deadlines of TSCA and ensuring
our reviews are efficient, effective, and transparent to stakeholders. New chemicals will be
evaluated and decisions will be based on best available science and the weight of evidence. For
chemicals in commerce, the EPA will maintain an ambitious schedule for initiating and completing
chemical risk evaluations and, where risks are identified, for initiating and completing regulatory
actions to address those risks. The EPA's toxics program will maintain its 'zero tolerance' goal for
preventing the introduction of unsafe new chemicals into commerce. The EPA also will implement
the new mandates related to determinations on claims for confidentiality for chemical identities.
In FY 2019, the Agency will continue implementing TSCA activities not amended by the Frank
R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act. The Agency also will provide firm and
individual certifications for safe work practices for lead-based paint abatement and renovation and
repair efforts, as well as provide for the operation and maintenance of the online Federal Lead-
Based Paint program database (FLPP) that supports the processing of applications for training
providers, firms and individuals.
Identifying, assessing, and reducing the risks presented by the pesticides on which our society and
economy rely is integral to ensuring environmental and human safety. In FY 2019 the EPA will
invest resources to improve the compliance of pesticide registrations with the Endangered Species
Act. A portion of the funding also will ensure that pesticides are correctly registered and applied
in a manner that protects water quality. Chemical and biological pesticides help meet national and
global demands for food. They provide effective pest control for homes, schools, gardens,
highways, utility lines, hospitals, and drinking water treatment facilities, while also controlling
vectors of disease. EPA ensures pesticides available in the U.S. are safe when used as directed. In
addition, the Agency is increasing the focus on pollinator health, working with other federal
partners, states, and private stakeholder groups to stem pollinator declines and increase pollinator
habitat.
Establishing New Fees
EPA is proposing several new fees in FY 2019 to better align appropriated resources to the
Agency's core mission, provide dedicated funding sources for specific activities and to better align
program costs with beneficiaries. To increase compliance in industry, EPA proposes establishing
two new voluntary user fees. These fees will enable EPA to provide compliance assistance services
to both Risk Management Plan facilities, and Facility Response Plan and Spill Prevention Control
and Countermeasure facilities. EPA also is proposing to establish Energy Star as a fee-funded
program in FY 2019 to ensure the important work of the program continues. In addition, EPA will
continue to work with OMB and other Agencies to review potential areas where fee-funding may
be an appropriate mechanism to reduce the burden on taxpayers.
vi
-------
EPA Reform Plan
The Budget includes EPA's Reform Plan to implement the goals of Executive Order 13781:
Comprehensive Plan for Reorganizing the Executive Branch. The plan includes a series of proj ects
focused on improving how we provide services and engage our customers. Projects include
streamlining EPA's permit review process, deploying a Lean Management System, and reducing
the reporting burden on the regulated community. More information is available in the
Congressional Justification appendix.
Eliminated Programs
Programs and activities eliminated in the FY 2019 Budget total $598.5 million compared to FY
2018 Annualized CR levels. Details are found in [https://www.epa.gov/planandbudget/fy2019].
The Administration is committed to creating a leaner, more accountable, less intrusive, and more
effective Government.
vii
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Resource Summary Tables
APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 3
Budget Authority 3
Full-time Equivalents (FTE) 4
1
-------
2
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION SUMMARY
Budget Authority
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 Pres
Actuals
Annualized CR
Budget
Science & Technology
$723,576.4
$708,975.0
$448,965.0
Environmental Program & Management
$2,639,159.5
$2,602,009.0
$1,738,852.0
Inspector General
$41,053.7
$41,207.0
$37,475.0
Building and Facilities
$32,184.7
$34,233.0
$39,553.0
Inland Oil Spill Programs
$17,940.1
$18,085.0
$15,673.0
IG Transfer
Superfund Program
S& T Transfer
$9,156.4
$1,118,294.1
$17,248.9
$8,718.0
$1,057,265.0
$15,391.0
$8,718.0
$1,062,714.0
$17,398.0
Hazardous Substance Superfund
$1,144,699.4
$1,081,374.0
$1,088,830.0
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
$92,143.4
$91,317.0
$47,532.0
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
$3,557,752.4
$3,503,209.0
$2,929,467.0
Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest
System Fund
$4,915.4
$3,156.0
$0.0
Water Infrastructure Finance and
Innovation Fund
$3,597.7
$12,932.0
$20,000.0
SUB-TOTAL, EPA
$8,257,022.7
$8,096,497.0
$6,366,347.0
Cancellation of Funds
$0.0
-$90,348.0
-$220,460.0
TOTAL, EPA
$8,257,022.7
$8,006,149.0
$6,145,887.0
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the
Superfund account.
3
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION SUMMARY
Full-time Equivalents (FTE)
FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 Pres
Actuals Annualized CR Budget
Science & Technology
2,137.0
2,199.7
1,492.4
Environmental Program & Management
9,368.4
9,758.2
7,331.6
Inspector General
219.0
268.0
201.4
Inland Oil Spill Programs
92.4
98.3
75.7
IG Transfer
45.8
50.1
40.6
Superfund Program
2,530.2
2,541.9
2,466.9
S& T Transfer
67.4
71.6
83.1
Hazardous Substance Superfund 2,643.4 2,663.6 2,590.6
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks 48.5 54.1 40.7
State and Tribal Assistance Grants 4.9 0.0 0.0
Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest
System Fund 8.0 7.9 10.0
Water Infrastructure Finance and
Innovation Fund 9.6 12.0 12.0
Rereg. & Exped. Proc. Rev Fund 83.8 145.0 221.5
WCF-Reimbursable 142.4 201.3 211.8
Pesticide Registration Fund 61.3 0.0 0.0
Deepwater Horizon Natural Resource
Damage Assessment 4.0 0.0 0.0
TSCA Service Fee Fund 0.0 0.0 62.6
UIC Injection Well Permit BLM 1.7 0.0 0.0
SUB-TOTAL, EPA 14,824.4 15,408.1 12,250.3
TOTAL, EPA 14,824.4 15,408.1 12,250.3
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the
Superfund account.
4
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Goal and Objective Overviews
GOAL, APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 7
Budget Authority 7
Authorized Full-time Equivalents (FTE) 8
Core Mission 9
Cooperative Federalism 25
Rule of Law and Process 32
5
-------
6
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
GOAL, APPROPRIATION SUMMARY
Budget Authority
(Dollars
in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
Core Mission
$6,041,166.2
$5,891,427.0
$4,533,387.0
Science & Technology
$175,032.9
$167,710.0
$125,901.0
Environmental Program & Management
$1,491,381.3
$1,456,110.0
$712,825.0
Inland Oil Spill Programs
$14,422.5
$14,311.0
$12,273.0
Hazardous Substance Superfund
$808,488.7
$747,116.0
$752,091.0
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
$90,180.6
$89,040.0
$45,292.0
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
$3,453,147.1
$3,401,052.0
$2,865,005.0
Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest
System Fund
$4,915.4
$3,156.0
$0.0
Water Infrastructure Finance and
Innovation Fund
$3,597.7
$12,932.0
$20,000.0
Cooperative Federalism
$317,037.4
$316,713.0
$217,148.0
Environmental Program & Management
$219,223.2
$221,789.0
$158,120.0
Inland Oil Spill Programs
$145.2
$138.0
$0.0
Hazardous Substance Superfund
$2,353.0
$2,209.0
$988.0
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
$95,316.0
$92,577.0
$58,040.0
Rule of Law and Process
$1,898,819.1
$1,888,357.0
$1,615,812.0
Science & Technology
$548,543.5
$541,265.0
$323,064.0
Environmental Program & Management
$928,555.0
$924,110.0
$867,907.0
Inspector General
$41,053.7
$41,207.0
$37,475.0
Building and Facilities
$32,184.7
$34,233.0
$39,553.0
Inland Oil Spill Programs
$3,372.4
$3,636.0
$3,400.0
Hazardous Substance Superfund
$333,857.7
$332,049.0
$335,751.0
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
$1,962.8
$2,277.0
$2,240.0
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
$9,289.3
$9,580.0
$6,422.0
Sub-Total
$8,257,022.7
$8,096,497.0
$6,366,347.0
Cancellation of Funds
$0.0
-$90,348.0
-$220,460.0
TOTAL, EPA
$8,257,022.7
$8,006,149.0
$6,145,887.0
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
GOAL, APPROPRIATION SUMMARY
Authorized Full-time Equivalents (FTE)
FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 Pres
Actuals Annualized CR Budget
Core Mission 7,101.9 7,200.5 5,809.4
Science & Technology 522.3 530.6 456.9
Environmental Program & Management 4 861 2 5 028 0 3 622 3
Inland Oil Spill Programs 78 0 83 1 62 3
Hazardous Substance Superfund \ 426 5 l 348 2 1 339 2
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks 41 9 457 335
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
W CF-Reimbu rsable
WCF-Reimbu rsable
4.9 0.0 0.0
Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest
System Fund 8 0 7.9 10.0
Water Infrastructure Finance and
Innovation Fund 95 \2 0 12 0
Rereg. & Exped. Proc. Rev Fund 82 6 145 0 221 5
Cooperative Federalism 1 150 6 1 228.1 831.0
Environmental Program & Management \ 142 2 1 219 1 827 8
Inland Oil Spill Programs 0 7 0 9 0 0
Hazardous Substance Superfund 57 5 \ 12
2.0 2.0 2.0
Rule of Law and Process 6,572.0 6,979.5 5,609.9
Science & Technology 1,614.7 1,669.1 1,035.5
Environmental Program & Management 3 365 1 3 511 1 2 881 5
Inspector General 219.0 268.0 201.4
Inland Oil Spill Programs 13 7 14 3 13 4
Hazardous Substance Superfund 1 211 2 1 309 3 1 250 2
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks 55 $4 7 |
Rereg. & Exped. Proc. Rev Fund \ 2 0 0 0 0
140.4 199.3 209.£
TOTAL, EPA 14,824.5 15,408.1 12,250.3
8
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Core Mission
Core Mission: Deliver real results to provide Americans with clean air, land, and water, and ensure
chemical safety.
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES:
• Work with states and tribes to accurately measure air quality and ensure that more
Americans are living and working in areas that meet high air quality standards.
• Ensure waters are clean through improved water infrastructure and, in partnership with
states and tribes, sustainably manage programs to support drinking water, aquatic
ecosystems, and recreational, economic, and subsistence activities.
• Provide better leadership and management to properly cleanup contaminated sites to
revitalize and return the land back to communities.
• Effectively implement the Toxics Substances Control Act, and the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, to ensure new and existing chemicals and pesticides
are reviewed for their potential risks to human health and the environment and actions
are taken when necessary.
GOAL, OBJECTIVE SUMMARY
Budget Authority
Full-time Equivalents
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019
Pres Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018
Annualized CR
Core Mission
$6,041,166.2
$5,891,427.0
$4,533,387.0
-$1,358,040.0
Improve Air Quality
$715,084.9
$759,177.0
$409,589.0
-$349,588.0
Provide Clean and Safe
Water
$3,764,751.7
$3,640,714.0
$2,866,257.0
-$774,457.0
Revitalize Land and
Prevent Contamination
$1,327,484.0
$1,258,401.0
$1,095,896.0
-$162,505.0
Ensure Safety of Chemicals
in the Marketplace
$233,845.6
$233,135.0
$161,645.0
-$71,490.0
Total Authorized
Workyears
7,101.9
7,200.5
5,809.4
-1,391.1
9
-------
Goal 1: Core Mission
Strategic Goal: Deliver real results to provide Americans with clean air, land, and water, and
ensure chemical safety.
I V 2017
I V 2018
I V 2019
Delia
Core Mission
Knacled
Annualized
President's
I V 2019-
Budget
( U
liudgel
I V 2018
1.1 Improve Air Quality
$764,367
$759,177
$409,589
($349,588)
1.2 Provide Clean and Safe
Water
$3,662,587
$3,640,714
$2,866,257
($774,457)
1.3 Revitalize Land and
Prevent Contamination
$1,267,005
$1,258,401
$1,095,896
($162,505)
1.4 Ensure Safety of
Chemicals in the Marketplace
$234,727
$233,135
$161,645
($71,490)
Goal 1 Total
$5,928,686
$5,891,427
$4,533,387
($1,358,040)
Total Workyears 7,200.5 7,200.5 5,809.4 (1,391.1)
Note: Totals do not include proposed Agency-wide cancellation of funds.
Introduction
Pollution comes in many forms with myriad impacts on human health and the environment. With
the goal of clean and safe air, water, and land for all Americans, as well as safe chemicals, Congress
enacted a range of environmental statutes that spell out EPA's core responsibilities. Our Nation
has come a long way since EPA was established in 1970. We have made great progress in making
rivers and lakes safe for swimming and boating, reducing the smog that clouded city skies, cleaning
up lands that were once used as hidden chemical dumps, and providing Americans greater access
to information on the safety of the chemicals all around us. Today we can see enormous progress—
yet we still have important work to do.
In FY 2019, the Agency will work with states and tribes to more rapidly take action on their
implementation plans for attaining air quality standards, reducing contaminants that can cause or
exacerbate health issues. We will work with our state and tribal partners to provide for clean and
safe water by updating aging infrastructure, both for drinking water and wastewater systems. The
Agency will focus on advancing the cleanup of Superfund and brownfields sites, and will use a
list of top priority sites to make progress on Superfund sites of particular concern. EPA's top
priority for ensuring the safety of chemicals in the marketplace is the implementation of the new
Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, which modernizes the Toxic
Substances and Control Act (TSCA) by creating new standards and processes for assessing
chemical safety within specific deadlines. These efforts will be supported by strong compliance
assurance and enforcement in collaboration with our state and tribal partners, up-to-date training
for partners, and use of the best available science and research to address current and future
environmental hazards, develop new approaches, and improve the foundation for decision making.
10
-------
In FY 2019, EPA also proposes two new voluntary user fees programs to improve regulatory
compliance in industry, and one new user fee to fund the ENERGY STAR program.
The Agency will collaborate more efficiently and effectively with other federal agencies, states,
tribes, local governments, communities, and other partners and stakeholders to address existing
pollution and prevent future problems. EPA will directly implement federal environmental laws in
Indian country where eligible tribes have not taken on program responsibility.
With our partners, we will pay particular attention to vulnerable populations. Children and the
elderly, for example, may be at significantly greater risk from elevated exposure or increased
susceptibility to the harmful effects of environmental contaminants. Some low-income and
minority communities may face greater risks because of proximity to contaminated sites or because
fewer resources are available to avoid exposure to pollutants. Tribal ways of life such as traditional
subsistence hunting, fishing, and gathering also may increase exposure to contaminants and
increase risks. Much work remains and, together with our partners, we will continue making
progress in protecting human health and the environment.
Agency Priority Goals
The budget highlights EPA's FY 2018-2019 Agency Priority Goals (APGs) that advance EPA
priorities and the Agency's FY 2018-2022 Strategic Plan. Four of the six APGs support Goal 1:
• APG-1: Improve air quality by implementing pollution control measures to reduce the
number of nonattainment areas. By September 30, 2019, EPA, in close collaboration with
states, will reduce the number of nonattainment areas to 138 from a baseline of 166.
• APG-2: Empower communities to leverage EPA water infrastructure investments. By
September 30, 2019, EPA will increase by $16 billion the non-federal dollars leveraged by
EPA water infrastructure finance programs (Clean Water and Drinking Water State
Revolving Funds and the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act).
• APG-3: Accelerate the pace of cleanups and return sites to beneficial use in their
communities. By September 30, 2019, EPA will make an additional 102 Superfund sites
and 1,368 Brownfields sites ready for anticipated use (RAU).
• APG-4: Meet new statutory requirements to improve the safety of chemicals in commerce.
By September 30, 2019, EPA will complete in accordance with statutory timelines
(excluding statutorily-allowable extensions): 100% of required EPA-initiated Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA) risk evaluations for existing chemicals; 100% of required
TSCA risk management actions for existing chemicals; and 80% of TSCA pre-manufacture
notice final determinations.
11
-------
FY 2019 Activities
Objective 1: Improve Air Quality. Work with states and tribes to accurately measure air
quality and ensure that more Americans are living and working in areas that meet high air
quality standards.
As part of its mission to protect human health and the environment, EPA is dedicated to working
in partnership with states to reduce the number of nonattainment areas in the United States. From
1970 to 2016, aggregate national emissions of the six criteria air pollutants1 were reduced 73
percent, while Gross Domestic Product grew by over 253 percent.2 Despite this progress, in 2016,
more than 120 million people (about 40 percent of the U.S. population based on 2010 census data)
lived in counties with monitored air quality that did not meet standards for at least one criteria
pollutant. EPA works in cooperation with states, tribes, and local governments to design and
implement air quality standards and programs. EPA relies on partnerships with other federal
agencies, academia, researchers, industry, other organizations, and the public to achieve
improvements in air quality and reduce public health risks.
EPA requests $410 million and 1,235.8 FTE in FY 2019 to improve air quality. This strategic
objective is supported by core air program work highlighted below.
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) Implementation
EPA's criteria pollutant program is critical to continued progress in reducing public health risks
and improving the quality of the environment. However, listening to and working with state and
tribal partners to set and implement standards is key. The criteria pollutant program sets NAAQS
which are then implemented by state, local and tribal air agencies who have primary responsibility
under the Clean Air Act (CAA) for developing clean air plans.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to prioritize key activities in support of attainment of the NAAQS.
The Agency will address its CAA responsibilities by collaborating with and providing technical
assistance to states and tribes to develop implementation plans for attaining the NAAQS and
visibility requirements; reviewing state/tribal implementation plans; taking federal oversight
actions such as approving state implementation plan/tribal implementation plan (SIP/TIP)
submittals consistent with statutory obligations; developing regulations and guidance to implement
standards; and addressing transported air pollution. EPA will focus on ways to improve the
efficiency and effectiveness of the SIP/TIP process, including the Agency's own review process,
with a goal of maximizing timely processing of state/tribal-requested implementation plan actions
to help move more quickly to attainment.
Air Toxics
The air toxics program develops and implements national emission standards for stationary and
mobile sources and works with state, tribal and local air agencies to address air toxics problems in
communities. EPA reviews air toxics emissions standards, required every eight years under the
1 The Cagency Air Act (CAA) requires EPA to set National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for six common
air pollutants including carbon monoxide, lead, ground-level ozone, nitrogen dioxide, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide.
2 https://gispub.epa.gOv/air/trendsreport/2017/#growth w cleaner air
12
-------
CAA, to determine if additional emission control technologies exist and, if so, EPA proposes more
effective emission control technologies based on these reviews.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to prioritize CAA and court-ordered obligations and will tier its
work with an emphasis on meeting court-ordered deadlines to align with priorities and capacity.
EPA will continue to conduct risk assessments to determine whether the Maximum Achievable
Control Technology rules appropriately protect public health as required by Section 112 of the
CAA.
Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certification Program
EPA develops, implements, and ensures compliance with national emission standards to reduce
mobile source related air pollution from light-duty cars and trucks, heavy-duty trucks and buses,
nonroad engines and vehicles, and from their fuels. The program also evaluates new emission
control technology and provides information to state, tribal, and local air quality managers on a
variety of transportation programs.
In FY 2019, the budget requests $75.1 million for the Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and
Certification program, which will focus its efforts on prioritizing certification decisions to ensure
that manufacturers are able to enter their engines and vehicles into commerce once their products
have been certified. The Agency will continue to perform its compliance oversight functions on
priority matters, where there is evidence to suggest noncompliance. EPA will continue to conduct
testing activities for pre-certification confirmatory testing for emissions and fuel economy for
passenger cars.
Atmospheric Protection Program (Previously the Climate Protection Program in FY 2017
Enacted)
EPA implements the U.S. Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program, which requires mandatory
greenhouse gas emissions reporting from large industrial source categories in the U.S., covering a
total of 41 sectors and approximately 8,000 reporters. The data are shared with industry
stakeholders, state and local governments, the research community, and the public to better
understand emissions, inform opportunities, and communicate progress of actions. They also
inform the annual Greenhouse Gas Inventory, a U.S. treaty obligation. In addition, EPA will work
to complete the annual Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Emissions and Sinks. In FY 2019, the budget
requests $13.5 million to continue to implement the Atmospheric Protection program.
ENERGY STAR Fee Proposal
The FY 2019 budget request includes a proposal to authorize EPA to administer the ENERGY
STAR program through the collection of user fees. By administering the ENERGY STAR program
through the collection of user fees, EPA would continue to provide a trusted resource for consumers
and businesses who want to purchase products that save them money and help protect the
environment. Entities participating in the program would pay a fee that would offset the costs for
managing and administering the program. Through an upfront FY 2019 appropriation of $46
million to ensure continuous operation of the ENERGY STAR program, fee collections would
begin after EPA undertakes a rulemaking process to determine what aspects of the program could
be covered by fees and the level of fees, and to ensure that a fee system would not discourage
entities from participating in the program or result in a loss of environmental benefits. The fee
13
-------
collections would provide funding to replace to the extent allowable the upfront appropriation to
cover, expenses to develop, operate, and maintain the ENERGY STAR program.
Radiation
The Agency measures and monitors ambient radiation and radioactive materials and assesses
radioactive contamination in the environment. The Agency supports federal radiological
emergency response and recovery operations under the National Response Framework (NRF) and
the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP).
The Agency also has specific statutory responsibilities to protect the public from harmful radiation
under its radiation protection program through its federal guidance and standard-setting activities,
including: regulatory oversight at the Department of Energy' s Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP);3
the regulation of airborne radioactive emissions; and the development and determination of
appropriate methods to measure radioactive releases and exposures under CAA Section 112.
In FY 2019, EPA's Radiological Emergency Response Team (RERT) will maintain essential
readiness to support federal radiological emergency response and recovery operations under the
NRF and NCP. EPA will design and conduct essential training and exercises to enhance the
RERT's ability to fulfill EPA's responsibilities and improve overall radiation response
preparedness. The Agency also will continue to operate RadNet, the Agency's fixed ambient
environmental radiation monitoring network for the U.S.
Grants for State, Local and Tribal Air Quality Management
For FY 2019, EPA requests $161 million to provide federal support for grants to state and local
air quality management agencies and tribes where applicable, to manage and implement air quality
control programs. In FY 2019, states will continue to be responsible for SIPs, which provide a
blueprint for the programs and activities that states carry out to attain and maintain the NAAQS
and comply with visibility obligations. States also will operate and maintain their existing
monitoring networks at baseline levels to provide high quality data used to develop and maintain
clean air plans, for research, and for the public.
Objective 2: Provide for Clean and Safe Water. Ensure waters are clean through improved
water infrastructure and, in partnership with states and tribes, sustainably manage
programs to support drinking water, aquatic ecosystems, and recreational, economic, and
subsistence activities.
Providing support to ensure safe drinking water in communities, protecting surface water, and
increasing water infrastructure project investment are high priorities for EPA. The nation's water
resources are the lifeblood of our communities, supporting our economy and way of life. Across
the country, we depend upon reliable sources of clean and safe water. Just a few decades ago,
many of the nation's rivers, lakes, and estuaries were grossly polluted, wastewater sources received
little or no treatment, and drinking water systems provided very limited treatment to water coming
through the tap. Now over 90 percent of the population served by community water systems
3 Additional information at: http://www.epa.gov/radiation/wipp/background.html.
14
-------
receives safe drinking water, and formerly impaired waters have been restored and now support
recreational and public health uses that contribute to healthy economies.
EPA will continue to provide loans and grants to states and tribes to improve infrastructure. Given
that investment in infrastructure is necessary for economic growth and environmental protection
and that EPA investments are catalyst for both, EPA's efforts will be used to support private and
public investment in economic revitalization and improved environmental outcomes across the
country. This requires that EPA strengthen its infrastructure programs (e.g., the drinking water
SRF, clean water SRF, WIFIA) to better align EPA investments with each other and with other
investments in pursuit of economic revitalization and improved environmental outcomes. At the
same time, EPA will ensure that it is serving disadvantaged communities, leveraging private
investment to improve the economy, and protecting human health and the environment.
In FY 2019, EPA will focus resources on supporting the modernization of outdated drinking water,
wastewater, and stormwater infrastructure; creating incentives for new water technologies and
innovation; and funding the core requirements of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and Safe Drinking
Water Act (SDWA). The Agency will look to provide states and tribes with flexibility to best
address their particular priorities. FY 2019 resources requested include $2.9 billion and 1,530.5
FTE to support this objective. This strategic objective is supported by core water program work
highlighted below.
Water Infrastructure Investments
We have made significant progress since enactment of the CWA, SDWA, and Marine Protection,
Research, and Sanctuaries Act over 40 years ago. However, serious water quality and water
infrastructure challenges remain. Many communities need to improve and maintain both drinking
water and wastewater infrastructure and develop the capacity to comply with new and existing
standards. Tens of thousands of homes, primarily in tribal and disadvantaged communities and the
territories, lack access to basic sanitation and drinking water.
A top priority for EPA is modernizing the outdated water infrastructure on which the American
public depends. These funding levels are for critical drinking water and wastewater infrastructure
and further the President's ongoing commitment to infrastructure repair and replacement. These
resources also would allow states, municipalities, and private entities to continue to finance high
priority infrastructure investments that achieve or maintain compliance and protect human health
and the environment. The FY 2019 budget requests $2.3 billion for the State Revolving Funds and
$20 million for the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) program. WIFIA is
expected to leverage significant funding for infrastructure and could provide up to $2 billion in
direct credit assistance, which, when combined with other funding sources, could help to spur up
to $4 billion in total infrastructure investment.4
EPA's water infrastructure programs also benefit from a close relationship with states, municipal,
and tribal governments, as well as industry and other public groups. In addition to EPA's long-
standing partnerships through the State Revolving Funds (SRFs), the new Water Infrastructure
Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) credit program is working with both public and private
eligible borrowers to fund vital infrastructure projects. WIFIA is an innovative and flexible
4 This approximation is based on notional calculations. Subsidy cost is determined on a loan-by-loan basis.
15
-------
financing mechanism and, as demonstrated by the first round of applications and selected projects,
the program encourages a wide variety of finance approaches.5
Categorical Grants to States and Tribes
Protecting the nation's water from pollution and contaminants relies on cooperation between EPA,
states and tribes. States and tribes are best positioned to implement localized solutions to protect
their waters. EPA will work with states, territories, tribes, and local communities to better
safeguard human health; maintain, restore, and improve water quality; and make America's water
systems sustainable and secure, supporting new technology and innovation wherever possible.
In addition to the SRFs, in FY 2019, EPA requests funding for the following categorical grants
that support state and tribal implementation of the CWA and the SDWA: Public Water System
Supervision, Pollution Control (Sec. 106), Underground Injection Control, and Wetlands Program
Development Grants. EPA will work with states and tribes to target the funds to core requirements
while providing flexibility to best address their particular priorities. Funding for the categorical
grants to states and tribes to support core water programs is $265 million, including an additional
$27 million for the new Multipurpose Grant program, which can be used for any required statutory
responsibility.
Safe Drinking Water
For FY 2019, EPA requests $84 million for Drinking Water Programs, including drinking water
programs funded under the Science and Technology appropriation. EPA will work to reduce lead
risks by developing proposed revisions to the Lead and Copper Rule and to develop regulations to
implement the Water Infrastructure Improvement for the Nation Act and the Reduction of Lead in
Drinking Water Act. EPA also will continue to work with states and tribes to protect underground
sources of drinking water from injection of fluids. In addition, EPA will continue work with states
to develop the next generation Safe Drinking Water Information System tool used by the majority
of state drinking water programs. The tool will provide the following benefits: improvements in
program efficiency and data quality, greater public access to drinking water data, facilitation of
electronic reporting, reductions in reporting burdens on laboratories and water utilities, reductions
in data management burden for states, and ultimately reduction in public health risk.
Clean Water
For FY 2019, EPA requests $175 million for Surface Water Protection and $18 million for
Wetlands. The FY 2019 budget supports the following core Surface Water Protection program
components: water quality criteria, standards and technology-based effluent guidelines; National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System; water monitoring; Total Maximum Daily Loads;
watershed management; water infrastructure and grants management; core wetlands programs and
CWA Section 106 program management.
Homeland Security
In FY 2019, EPA will coordinate and support protection of the nation's critical water infrastructure
from terrorist threats and all-hazard events. Under this homeland security mission, EPA will train
on an annual basis over 2,500 water utilities, state officials, and federal emergency responders to
become more resilient to any natural or manmade incident that could endanger water and
5 https://www.epa.gov/wifia/wifia-fy-2017-letters-interest-and-selected-projects.
16
-------
wastewater services. EPA will continue to develop the most efficient mechanisms for detecting
and addressing harmful substances in the water distribution system. In addition, EPA will fulfill
its obligations under Executive Order (EO) 13636 - Improving Critical Infrastructure
Cybersecurity - which designates EPA as the lead federal agency responsible for cybersecurity in
the water sector. In FY 2019, EPA will conduct nationwide, in-person training sessions in
cybersecurity threats and countermeasures for about 200 water and wastewater utilities.
Objective 3: Revitalize Land and Prevent Contamination. Provide better leadership and
management to properly clean up contaminated sites to revitalize and return the land back
to communities.
EPA works to improve the health and livelihood of all Americans by cleaning up and returning
land to productive use, preventing contamination, and responding to emergencies. In FY 2019, the
Agency is prioritizing the accelerated pace of cleanups and reuse while addressing risks to human
health and the environment. Collaborating with and effectively leveraging efforts of other federal
agencies, industry, states, tribes, and local communities, EPA uses its resources to enhance the
livability and economic vitality of neighborhoods in and around hazardous waste sites. EPA
partners with states, tribes and industry to prevent and reduce exposure to contaminants. Superfund
and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) provide legal authority for EPA's work
to protect and restore the land. The Agency and its partners use Superfund authority to clean up
uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites, allowing land to be returned to productive use.
Under RCRA, EPA works in partnership with states and tribes to address risks associated with the
generation, transportation, treatment, storage or disposal of waste, and to clean up contamination
at active sites.
EPA collaborates with international, state, tribal, and local governments to reach its goals while
considering the effects of decisions on communities. EPA engages communities to help them
understand and address risks posed by intentional and accidental releases of hazardous substances
into the environment and to ensure that communities have an opportunity to participate in
environmental decisions that affect them. EPA's efforts are guided by scientific data, tools, and
research that alert us to emerging issues and inform decisions on managing materials and
addressing contaminated properties.
For FY 2019, EPA requests $1.10 billion and 2,045.5 FTE to support this objective, EPA will
focus on implementing core programs where a federal presence is required by the statute. This
strategic objective is supported by core land program work; highlights include:
Cleaning Up Contaminated Sites
EPA's cleanup programs (i.e., Superfund Remedial, Superfund Federal Facilities, Superfund
Emergency Response and Removal, RCRA Corrective Action, Underground Storage Tank and
Brownfields) work cooperatively with state, tribal, and local partners to take proactive steps to
facilitate the cleanup and revitalization of contaminated properties. Cleanup programs protect both
human health and the environment and return sites to productive use, which is important to the
economic well-being of communities. To this end, EPA has established four strategic measures
within the FY 2018-2022 EPA Strategic Plan to make additional Superfund, Brownfields, RCRA
17
-------
Corrective Action and Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) sites ready for anticipated
use. For FY 2019, EPA requests $865 million to fund EPA's cleanup programs.
Superfund Remedial
One of EPA's top priorities is accelerating progress on Superfund sites. EPA convened a
Superfund Task Force that identified 42 recommendations to streamline and improve the
Superfund process. These recommendations and other innovative ideas will be considered and
applied to Superfund sites with priority given to addressing sites on the National Priorities List
(NPL).6
Building on recommendations from the Superfund Task Force Report, the Agency will continue
to help communities clean up and revitalize once productive properties by: removing
contamination; enabling economic development; taking advantage of existing infrastructure; and
maintaining, and improving quality of life. There are multiple benefits associated with cleaning up
contaminated sites: reducing mortality and morbidity risk; preventing and reducing human
exposure to contaminants; improving nearby property values; making land available for
commercial, residential, industrial, or recreational reuse; and promoting community economic
development. For example, research shows that residential property values within three miles of
Superfund sites increased between 18.7 to 24.4 percent when sites were cleaned up and deleted
from the NPL.7
Superfund Removal
Working collaboratively with partners across the country, EPA engages with communities in site
cleanup decisions, fosters employment opportunities in communities during and after remedy
construction, and promotes the redevelopment of blighted areas. Over the last 10 years (FY 2007
- FY 2016), EPA completed or oversaw over 3,655 Superfund removal actions across the country.
This work is all performed as part of the overarching effort to clean up contaminants and protect
human health and the environment. Superfund properties are often reused as commercial facilities,
retail centers, government offices, residential areas, industrial and manufacturing operations,
parks, and recreational areas. The reuse of a site often can play a role in economically revitalizing
a community. As of FY 2017, EPA data shows that at 487 Superfund sites in reuse, approximately
6,622 businesses are generating $43.6 billion in sales and employ more than 156,352 people who
earn a combined income of $11.2 billion.8
In the case of a national emergency, EPA's Superfund Emergency Response and Removal program
is charged with preventing limiting, mitigating, or containing chemical, oil, radiological,
biological, or hazardous materials released during and in the aftermath of an incident. Typical
situations requiring emergency response and removal actions vary greatly in size, nature, and
location, and include chemical releases, fires or explosions, natural disasters, and other threats to
6 Please see the Superfund Task Force Recommendations at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-
07/documents/superfund_task force report.pdf.
7 Gamper-Rabindran, Shanti and Christopher Timmons. 2013. "Does cleanup of hazardous waste sites raise housing values?
Evidence of spatially localized benefits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 65(3): 345-360.
8 For more information on Redevelopment Economics and in depth case studies see www.epa. go v/superfund-redevelopment-
initiative/rede velopment-economic s- superfund-sites.
18
-------
people from exposure to hazardous substances. EPA's 24-hour-a-day response capability is a
cornerstone element of the National Contingency Plan.9
RCRA Corrective Action
EPA works in partnership with states, having authorized 44 states and one territory to directly
implement the RCRA Corrective Action program10. This program is responsible for overseeing
and managing cleanups at active RCRA sites. States have requested EPA participate in work
sharing under this program and, consequently, the Agency serves as lead or support for a
significant number of complex and challenging cleanups in both non-authorized and authorized
states.
Underground Storage Tanks
The Underground Storage Tank (UST) program has achieved significant success in addressing
releases since the beginning of the program. End of year FY 2017 data shows that, of the
approximately 538,000 releases reported since the beginning of the UST program in 1988, more
than 469,000 (or 87 percent) have been cleaned up. Approximately 68,000 releases remain that
have not reached cleanup completion. EPA is working with states to develop and implement
specific strategies and activities applicable to their particular sites to reduce the UST releases
remaining to be cleaned up.11 The important work of this program is demonstrated by a 2017 study
found that high profile UST releases decrease nearby property values by 2 to 6 percent. However,
once cleanup is completed, property values rebound by a similar margin.12 A total of $50.9 million
is being requested in FY 2019 for Underground Storage Tank direct cleanup and state cooperative
agreements.
Brownfields
By awarding Brownfields grants, EPA is making investments in communities so that they can
realize their own visions for environmental health, economic growth, and job creation.
Approximately 129 million people (roughly 40 percent of the U.S. population) live within three
miles of a Brownfields site that receives EPA funding.13 As of the end of FY 2017, grants awarded
by the program have led to over 69,200 acres of idle land made ready for productive use and over
129,240 jobs and $24.7 billion leveraged. In FY 2019, the Agency will continue to make additional
brownfields sites ready for anticipated use (RAU) through performance goals established under
9 For additional information, refer to: https://www.epa.gov/emergencv-response/national-oil-and-hazardous-substances-pollution-
contingencv-plan-ncp-overview.
10 State implementation of the RCRA Corrective Action program is funded through the STAG (Program Project 11) and
matching State contributions.
11 Sullivan, K. A. and A. Kafle. Do more frequent inspections improve compliance? Evidence from underground storage tank
facilities in Louisiana. Office of Communications, Partnerships and Analysis (OCPA) Working Paper No. 2017-05. May 2017.
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-
06/documents/olem_ocpa woriangjpaper_do more frequent inspections_improve_compliance.pdf.
12 Guignet, Dermis, Robin Jenkins, Matthew Ranson, and Patrick Walsh, "Contamination and Incomplete Information: Bounding
Implicit Prices using High-Pro file Leeks," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Forthcoming.
13 U.S. EPA, Office of Land and Emergency Management Estimate 2017. Data collected includes: (1) site information as of the
end of FY16; and (2) census data from the 2011-2015 American Community Survey.
19
-------
the FY 2018-2022 EPA Strategic Plan.14 A 2017 study found that housing property values
increased 5 to 15.2 percent near brownfield sites when cleanup was completed.15
Preserving Land
Preventing the release of contamination can be one of the most cost-effective ways of providing
Americans with clean land. With our state and tribal partners, EPA works to prevent releases of
contamination, allowing the productive use of facilities and land and contributing to communities'
economic vitality.
Chemical Facility Safety
The FY 2019, EPA requests $10.0 million for the State and Local Prevention and Preparedness
program. EPA plays a valuable role in working with states and communities to build the capacity
to prevent, prepare for, and respond to emergencies at chemical facilities. The program establishes
a structure composed of federal, state, local, and tribal partners who work together with industry
to protect emergency responders, local communities, and property from chemical risks through
advanced technologies, community and facility engagement, and improved safety systems. In FY
2019, the program will inspect Risk Management Plan facilities to ensure compliance with
accident prevention and preparedness activities.
State and Local Prevention and Preparedness Fee Proposal
The budget includes a new fee proposal in the State and Local Prevention and Preparedness
program to better support compliance assistance work for RMP facilities. The new voluntary fee
and service will provide support for facilities in complying with EPA regulations via an on-site
walk-through and assistance. Authorizing language for the new fee collection accompanies the
budget submission.
RCRA Waste Management
The FY 2019 budget provides $41.9 million to the RCRA Waste Management program. States
have primary responsibility for almost all of the efforts related to permitting hazardous waste units
(such as incinerators and landfills) at treatment, storage, and disposal facilities. In FY 2019,
permits for these activities will be issued, updated, or maintained. EPA directly implements the
entire RCRA program in two states and provides leadership, work-sharing, and support to the
states and territories authorized to implement the permitting program. In addition, EPA reviews
and approves Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB) cleanup, storage, and disposal activities as this
federal authority is not delegable to state programs.
Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest
On October 5, 2012, the Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest Establishment Act was enacted,
requiring EPA to develop and maintain a hazardous waste electronic manifest system. The system
is designed to, among other functions, assemble and maintain the information contained in the
estimated five million manifest forms accompanying hazardous waste shipments across the nation
annually. When fully implemented, the electronic hazardous waste manifest program will reduce
the reporting burden for industry by approximately $75 million annually. In addition, the
14 EPA's ACRES database.
15 Haninger, K., L. Ma, and C. Timmins. 2017. The Value of Brownfield Remediation. Journal of the Association of
Environmental and Resource Economists, 4(1): 197-241.
20
-------
e-Manifest system will improve knowledge of waste generation and final disposition, enhanced
access to manifest information, and provide greater transparency for the public about hazardous
waste shipments. In FY 2019, EPA will operate the E-Manifest system and the Agency will collect
and utilize fees for the operation of the system and necessary program expenses.
Oil Spill Prevention Preparedness and Response
Inland oil spills can threaten human health, cause severe environmental damage, and create
financial loss to industry and the public. The Oil Spill program helps protect the American people
by effectively preventing, preparing for, responding to, and monitoring inland oil spills. EPA
serves as the lead responder for cleanup of all inland zone spills, including transportation-related
spills, and provides technical assistance and support to the U.S. Coast Guard for coastal and
maritime oil spills. In FY 2019, EPA requests a total of $12.3 million for the Oil Spill Prevention,
Preparedness and Response program.
Oil Spill Prevention, Preparedness and Response Fee Proposal
The budget includes a new fee proposal in the Oil Spill Prevention, Preparedness, and Response
program to better support compliance assistance work for Facility Response Plan (FRP) and Spill
Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) facilities. The new voluntary fee and service will
provide support for facilities in complying with EPA regulations via an on-site walk-through and
assistance. Authorizing language for the new fee collection accompanies the budget submission.
Homeland Security
Terrorist attacks, industrial accidents, and natural disasters can result in acutely toxic chemical,
biological or radiological (CBR) contamination causing sickness or death, disruption of drinking
water and wastewater services, economic hardship in communities, and even shutdown of urban
areas. EPA's Homeland Security work is an important component of the Agency's prevention,
protection, and response activities. The FY 2019 budget includes $31.8 million to maintain Agency
capability to respond to incidents that may involve harmful CBR substances. Resources also will
allow the Agency to develop and maintain expertise and operational readiness for all phases of
consequence management following a CBR incident and sustain specialty equipment such as the
Airborne Spectral Photometric Environmental Collection Technology (ASPECT) plane and
Portable High-throughput Integrated Laboratory Identification (PHILIS) units.
Objective 4: Ensure Safety of Chemicals in the Marketplace. Effectively implement the Toxics
Substances Control Act (TSCA), and the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA), to ensure new and existing chemicals and pesticides are reviewed for their potential
risks to human health and the environment and actions are taken when necessary.
Chemicals and pesticides released into the environment as a result of their manufacture,
processing, use, or disposal can threaten human health and the environment. EPA gathers and
assesses information about the risks associated with chemicals and pesticides and implements risk
management strategies when needed. EPA's research efforts will help advance the Agency's
ability to assess chemicals more rapidly and accurately. In FY 2019, EPA's request for Ensuring
the Safety of Chemicals in the Marketplace is $161.6 million and 997.6 FTE.
21
-------
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
In 2016, TSCA was amended by the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century
Act. These amendments give EPA significant new, as well as continuing, responsibilities for
ensuring that chemicals in or entering commerce do not present unreasonable risks to human health
and the environment, including unreasonable risks to potentially exposed or susceptible
subpopulations. EPA works to ensure the safety of: (1) existing chemicals (those already in use
when TSCA was first enacted in 1976 and those that have entered commerce following new
chemical review by EPA), by obtaining and evaluating chemical data and by taking regulatory
action where appropriate, to prevent any unreasonable risk posed by their use; and (2) new
chemicals by reviewing and taking action on new chemical notices submitted by industry,
including Pre-Manufacture Notices, to ensure that no unreasonable risk will be posed by such
chemicals upon their entry into U.S. commerce.
EPA is on track to complete risk evaluations for an initial set of ten chemicals in accordance with
statutory timelines. The Agency published Scoping Documents for these evaluations on schedule
in June 2017. On the new chemicals front, the Agency has eliminated a backlog of 300 new
chemical cases under review when TSCA was amended on June 22, 2016 as well as a smaller
number of cases submitted thereafter. In FY 2019, increased resources will support the Agency's
significant continuing and new responsibilities under the TSCA for ensuring that new and existing
chemicals are evaluated in a timely manner and that any unreasonable risks are addressed.
Implementation of the 2016 amendments to TSCA is one of EPA's top priorities. In FY 2019,
$58.6 million is proposed to be allocated to the TSCA Chemical Risk Review and Reduction
Program. EPA will use these resources to meet the statutory requirements and deadlines of TSCA,
as amended. The Act also authorized a sustainable source of funding for EPA to carry out its new
responsibilities. The Agency will now be able to collect user fees from chemical manufacturers
and processers to defray 25 percent of its costs for administering certain sections16 of TSCA, as
amended.17 The funded activities also will support the Agency' s efforts to meet the strategic targets
set out in EPA's FY 2018-2022 Strategic Plan.
In FY 2019, the Agency will initiate risk management actions to address any unreasonable risks
identified by the completed chemical risk evaluations and will finalize those actions within two
years, with the possibility of an extension of up to two additional years, as required by law. Risk
management actions may include prohibiting or restricting the manufacture, processing,
distribution in commerce or commercial use of a chemical, and imposing requirements on labeling
or recordkeeping. EPA also will carry out the new fast-track process to address certain Persistent,
Bioaccumulative and Toxic chemicals within the period prescribed by law.
Toxic Release Inventory (TRI)
EPA's success in carrying out its mission to protect human health and the environment is
contingent on collecting timely, high-quality and relevant information. The Toxics Release
Inventory (TRI) program supports EPA's mission, and its chemical safety program in particular,
16 The costs of implementing TSCA (as amended) Sections 4, 5 and 6 are defrayable up to the statutory caps, as are the costs of
collecting, processing, reviewing and providing access to and protecting from disclosure, as appropriate, chemical information
under Section 14.
17 The authority to assess fees is conditioned on appropriations for the CRRR Program, excluding fees, being held at least equal
to the amount appropriated for FY 2014.
22
-------
by annually releasing to the public data reported by industrial and federal facilities on the quantity
of toxic chemicals they release and other waste management (e.g., recycling) and pollution
prevention practices. These data pertain to over 650 toxic chemicals from approximately 20,000
industrial and federal facilities. The TRI Program is a primary source of toxic chemical release
data for communities, non-governmental organizations, industrial facilities, academia and
government agencies. The Agency supports these activities through targeted enhancements to its
systems for managing information flows and scientific tools and models.
Pesticides
The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) is the primary federal law
governing oversight of pesticide manufacture, distribution, and use in the United States. FIFRA
requires EPA to register pesticides based on a finding that they will not cause unreasonable adverse
effects on people and the environment, taking into account the economic, social, and
environmental costs and benefits of the uses of the pesticides. Each time the law was amended,
Congress has strengthened FIFRA's safety standards while continuing to require consideration of
pesticide benefits.
Every 15 years, EPA reevaluates pesticides that were previously registered to ensure that they meet
current standards. EPA's Pesticides program remains on track to meet the statutory completion
date for this 15-year Registration Review period, October 1, 2022. Forward planning serves to
ensure that, through 2022, EPA will complete all FIFRA mandated decisions for the Pesticides
Registration Review Program. At the end of FY 2017, 239 interim or final decisions of a known
universe of 725 cases were completed. Through PRIA, the program continues to ensure that new
products meet U.S. safety standards, expediting the licensing of new products so they are available
in the marketplace for use in agricultural, consumer and public health pest control needs.
In addition to FIFRA, the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) governs the maximum
allowable level of pesticides in and on food grown and sold in the United States. The legal level
of a pesticide residue on a food or food item is referred to as a tolerance. FFDCA requires that the
establishment, modification, or revocation of tolerances be based on a finding of a "reasonable
certainty of no harm." Whereas FIFRA is a risk-based statute that allows for consideration of the
benefits of pesticide use in determining whether to register a pesticide, FFDCA is a risk-only
statute, and benefits cannot be used in determining whether the tolerance meets the safety standard.
When evaluating the establishment, modification, or revocation of a tolerance, EPA tries to
harmonize the tolerance with the maximum residue levels set by other countries to enhance the
trade of agricultural commodities.
EPA's pesticide licensing program evaluates new pesticides before they reach the market and
ensures that pesticides already in commerce are safe when used in accordance with the label as
directed by FIFRA, FFDCA, and the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA). EPA is responsible for
licensing (registering) new pesticides and periodically reevaluating (registration review) older
pesticides to protect consumers, pesticide users, workers who may be exposed to pesticides,
children, and other sensitive populations, while considering the benefits associated with the use of
the pesticide.
23
-------
In FY 2019, $93.3 million is provided to support EPA's Pesticide registration review and
registration program. Identifying, assessing, and reducing the risks presented by the pesticides on
which our society and economy relies is integral to ensuring environmental and human safety.
Chemical and biological pesticides help meet national and global demands for food. They provide
effective pest control for homes, schools, gardens, highways, hospitals, and drinking water
treatment facilities, while also controlling vectors of disease. The Pesticides program ensures that
the pesticides available in the U.S. are safe when used as directed.
The program places priority on reduced risk pesticides that, once registered, will result in increased
societal benefits. In FY 2019, appropriated funding will be augmented by approximately $48
million in Pesticides registration and maintenance user fees, as authority to collect fees is expected
to be reauthorized by PRIAIV legislation which is currently being considered by Congress.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to review and register new pesticides, new uses for existing
pesticides, and other registration requests in accordance with all statutory requirements. In
addition, the Agency will be reviewing, under the registration review program, pesticides that are
already in the market against current scientific standards for human health. EPA's FY 2019
activities will continue to involve increased efforts on comprehensive risk assessments to protect
the environment.
The Agency also will continue to invest resources to improve the compliance of pesticide
registrations with the Endangered Species Act. A portion of the funding also will ensure that
pesticides are correctly registered and applied in a manner that protects water quality. EPA will
continue registration and registration review requirements for antimicrobial pesticides.
Additionally, the Pesticides program continues to focus on pollinator health, working with other
federal partners, states, and private stakeholder groups to stem pollinator declines and increase
pollinator habitat.
Together, these activities and programs will minimize exposure to pesticides, maintain a safe and
affordable food supply, address public health issues, and minimize property damage that can occur
from insects, pests and microbes. The Agency's worker protection, certification, and training
programs will encourage safe pesticide application practices. EPA also will continue to emphasize
reducing exposures from pesticides used in and around homes, schools, and other public areas.
24
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Cooperative Federalism
Cooperative Federalism: Rebalance the power between Washington and the states to create
tangible environmental results for the American people.
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES:
• Improve environmental protection through shared governance and enhanced collaboration
with state, tribal, local, and federal partners using the full range of compliance assurance
tools.
• Listen to and collaborate with impacted stakeholders and provide effective platforms for
public participation and meaningful engagement.
GOAL, OBJECTIVE SUMMARY
Budget Authority
Full-time Equivalents
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019
Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018
Annualized CR
Cooperative Federalism
$317,037.4
$316,713.0
$217,148.0
-$99,565.0
Enhance Shared
Accountability
$300,972.1
$300,825.0
$215,148.0
-$85,677.0
Increase Transparency and
Public Participation
$16,065.3
$15,888.0
$2,000.0
-$13,888.0
Total Authorized
Workyears
1,150.6
1,228.1
831.0
-397.1
25
-------
Goal 2: Cooperative Federalism
Strategic Goal: Rebalance the power between Washington and the states to create tangible
environmental results for the American people.
I V 2017
I V 2018
I V 2019
Delia
Cooperative l-'ederalism
Knacled
Annualized
President's
I V 2019-
liudgel
CU
liudgel
I V 2018
2.1 Enhance Shared Accountability
$302,882
$300,825
$215,148
($85,677)
2.2 Increase Transparency and
Public Participation
$15,997
$15,888
$2,000
($13,888)
Goal 2 Total
$318,879
$316,713
$217,148
($99,565)
Total Workyears
1,228.1
1,228.1
831.0
(397.1)
Note: Totals do not include proposed Agency-wide cancellation of funds.
Introduction:
The idea that environmental protection is a shared responsibility between the states, tribes, and the
federal government is embedded in our environmental laws, which in many cases provide states
and tribes the opportunity and responsibility for implementing environmental protection programs.
More than 45 years after the creation of EPA and the enactment of a broad set of federal
environmental protection laws, most states, and to a lesser extent territories and tribes, are
authorized to implement environmental programs within their jurisdictions in lieu of EPA-
administered federal programs. Specifically, states have assumed more than 96 percent of the
delegable authorities under federal law.18 EPA retains responsibility for directly implementing
federal environmental programs in much of Indian country where eligible tribes have not taken on
program responsibility. There are also programs that by statute may not be delegated to the states
or tribes. Recognizing these evolving responsibilities, EPA will facilitate constructive dialogue
with states and tribes to ensure maximum utilization of resources. EPA will adapt its practices to
reduce duplication of effort with authorized states and tribes, and tailor its oversight of delegated
programs.
Cooperative federalism - the relationship between states, tribes and EPA - is not just about who
makes decisions, but about how decisions are made and a sense of shared accountability to provide
positive environmental results. EPA understands that improvements to protecting human health
and the environment cannot be achieved by any actor operating alone, but only when the states,
tribes, and EPA, in conjunction with affected communities, work together in a spirit of trust,
collaboration, and partnership. Effective environmental protection is best achieved when EPA and
its state and tribal partners work from a foundation of transparency, early collaboration - including
public participation - and a spirit of shared accountability for the outcomes of this joint work. This
foundation involves active platforms for public participation, including building the capacity of
the most vulnerable community stakeholders to provide input. With these public participation
opportunities, the beneficiaries of environmental protection - the American people - will be able
18 Environmental Council of the States (ECOS) Paper, "Cooperative Federalism 2.0." June 2017.
26
-------
to more meaningfully engage through their communities, their local governments, and their state
and tribal governments. Including the public's voice in EPA's policy, regulatory, and assistance
work, particularly the voices of the most vulnerable to environmental and public health challenges
among us, is essential to meeting their needs as the Agency implements its statutory
responsibilities.
EPA also recognizes that meeting the needs of states, tribes, local governments, and communities,
and achieving environmental improvements cannot be done in isolation from economic
growth. Opportunities for prosperous economic growth and clean air, water, and land are lost
without effective infrastructure investments that align with community needs. This is especially
true for infrastructure investments that repair existing systems; support revitalization of existing
communities and buildings; and lead to the cleanup and redevelopment of previously-used sites
and buildings. A prime example of cooperative federalism leading to development in communities
is EPA's State Revolving Fund (SRF) programs. The revolving nature of the Drinking Water and
Clean Water SRF funds and substantial state contributions have greatly multiplied the federal
investment. EPA estimates that for every federal dollar contributed thus far the nation has received
close to three dollars of investment in water infrastructure. EPA will optimize and align its relevant
programs to catalyze other resources, support beneficial infrastructure investments, and meet
community needs for thriving economies and improved environmental and human health
outcomes.
FY 2019 Activities
Objective 1: Enhance Shared Accountability. Improve environmental protection through
shared governance and enhanced collaboration with state, tribal, local, and federal partners
using the full range of compliance assurance tools.
In the spirit of cooperative federalism, EPA and its partners have made enormous progress in
protecting air, water, and land resources. EPA recognizes that states and tribes vary in the
environmental challenges that they face due to variations in geography, population density, and
other factors. EPA will maximize the flexibilities provided by law to take each state's unique
situation into account when making regulatory and policy decisions. Multipurpose Grants are an
example of this commitment to cooperative federalism. These grants will allow flexibility for our
state and tribal partners by allowing them to target funds to their highest priority statutory
responsibilities. EPA also directly implements the majority of federal environmental programs in
Indian country. The Agency actively works with tribes to develop their capacity to administer
environmental programs and to enable tribes that choose to implement federal environmental laws
and programs for their lands. The unique relationship among EPA and its co-regulators is the
foundation of the nation's environmental protection system; each organization fulfills a critical
role based on its expertise, abilities, and responsibilities in protecting and improving human health
and the environment.
27
-------
EPA recognizes the advances states and tribes have made in implementing environmental laws
and programs. This Administration will undertake a series of initiatives to rethink and assess where
we are and where we want to be with respect to shared governance. These initiatives will clarify
the Agency's statutory roles and responsibilities and tailor state and tribal oversight to maximize
our return on investment and reduce burden on states and tribes, while ensuring continued progress
in meeting environmental laws.
In addition, EPA, with its state, tribal, and local partners, ensures consistent and fair enforcement
of federal environmental laws and regulations. The Agency works jointly with its co-regulators to
protect human health and the environment, using a full set of compliance assurance tools, such as
compliance assistance and monitoring; electronic reporting; traditional enforcement; grants to
states and tribes; and tribal capacity building. EPA is building on progress made using E-Enterprise
for the Environment, a plat form for transformative change that operationalizes cooperative
federalism principles. EPA's E-Enterprise partnership with states and tribes modernizes the way
we do the business of environmental protection.
EPA directly implements the majority of federal environmental programs in Indian country. The
Agency actively works with tribes to develop their capacity to administer environmental programs
and to enable tribes that choose to implement federal environmental laws and programs for their
lands. Consistent with the 1984 Indian Policy and EPA policies on consultation and treaty rights19,
EPA will work on a government-to-government basis to build tribal capacity to implement federal
programs through delegations, authorizations, and primacy designations to enable tribes to
meaningfully participate in the Agency's policy making, standard setting, and direct
implementation activities under federal environmental statutes. For FY 2019, EPA requests
$217 million and 831 FTE to help enhance EPA's shared accountability and build cooperative
federalism.
Shared Governance
To develop a future model of shared governance that takes into account the progress states and
tribes have made in protecting human health and the environment, the Agency will undertake an
analysis of EPA's statutory roles and responsibilities to determine the Agency direction in light of
priorities. The Agency will work with states and tribes to find approaches to shared governance,
which provide flexibility and streamline oversight of state and tribal programs. As part of this
process, the Agency will seek to understand which approaches currently are working well for state,
tribal and local co-regulators. EPA will pilot new approaches to oversight (e.g., permit reviews)
where we have the legal flexibility to do so and streamline those processes by which EPA reviews
and approves state and tribal actions. EPA will continue to work with states and tribes through E-
Enterprise, focused on how we work and plan together, agree on priorities, and allocate roles and
responsibilities to update processes and programs. Through shared governance - engaging early
and meaningfully with states and tribes - the Agency will use E-Enterprise to deliver streamlined
processes as well as accessible, reliable information and data that benefit co-regulators and the
regulated community.
19 "EPA Policy for the Administration of Environmental Programs on Indian Reservations," "EPA Policy on Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribes," and "EPA Policy on Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribes: Guidance for
Discussing Tribal Treaty Rights."
28
-------
Compliance Assurance
The Agency will look for cost-effective ways to enhance the compliance assurance tool box in
collaboration with its state, tribal, local, federal, and industry partners. For example, the E-
Enterprise Web Portal offers a platform or gateway for making shared services available to states,
tribes, and EPA to transact business (e.g., e-permitting and reporting). It also provides information
for the regulated community (e.g., compliance assistance information). Tools and services are
designed to enhance efficiency, reduce burden on the regulated community, and improve
environmental outcomes. EPA will expand its compliance assistance work by continuing to partner
with third-party organizations and federal agencies to support the 17 existing web-based, sector-
specific compliance assistance centers20 and developing new centers. In general, an expanded and
modernized compliance assurance tool box will enhance EPA's ability to tailor compliance
assurance approaches to the differing needs and challenges among states and regulated entities.
EPA also is working closely with states and tribes to develop new compliance tools and approaches
to make programs more effective and efficient in promoting compliance and remedying violations.
Some of the Agency's ongoing collaborative efforts with the Environmental Council of the States
(ECOS) include21 producing webinars to help identify new compliance approaches that EPA could
pilot and evaluate; increasing availability of training; and preparing for advances in pollution
monitoring technology.22
A key component of EPA's overall compliance assurance program is compliance monitoring.
Compliance monitoring allows the regulatory agencies to detect noncompliance and promote
compliance with the nation's environmental laws. Effective targeting of compliance monitoring
plays a central role in achieving the goals EPA has set for protecting human health and the
environment. EPA, state, and tribal inspectors often provide regulated entities with compliance
assistance during the inspection process. On a national level, EPA works closely with individual
states, tribes, and state and tribal associations to develop, modernize, and implement national
compliance monitoring strategies to ensure a level playing field for regulated entities across the
country. EPA principally focuses compliance monitoring activities, such as field inspections,
electronic reporting, and data analysis tools, for those programs that are not delegated to states and
tribes. The Agency provides monitoring, program evaluations, and capacity building to support
and complement authorized state, tribal, and local government programs. The Agency will work
with its state and tribal partners to enhance compliance monitoring tools and increase the use of
Lean practices. Through E-Enterprise for the Environment, EPA, states, tribes, and territories will
collaborate to develop smart mobile tools to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of state,
tribal, and EPA inspectors, and support advanced monitoring technology. The FY 2019 budget
requests includes $87.4 million and 428.7 FTE to fund EPA's compliance monitoring activities.
International Partnerships
To achieve the Agency's domestic environmental and human health objectives, EPA will work
with international partners to address international sources of pollution, as well as the impacts of
pollution from the United States on other countries and the global environment. Pollution impacts
air, water, food crops, and food chains, and can accumulate in foods such as fish. In FY 2019, EPA
20 For more information on compliance assistance centers, see https://www.epa.gov/compliance/compliance-assistance-centers.
21 For more information on OECA's collaboration with ECOS via E-Enterprise, see Article: Advanced Monitoring Technology:
Opportunities and Challenges. A Path Forward for EPA. States, and Tribes.
22 For more information on a broader range of collaborations between OECA and ECOS, see Compendia of Next Generation
Compliance Examples in Water. Air. Waste, and Cleanup Programs.
29
-------
will continue to engage both bilaterally and through multilateral institutions to improve
international cooperation to prevent and address the transboundary movement of pollution. This
budget includes $4.2 million to support the International Sources of Pollution program. EPA
efforts will include working with international partners to strengthen environmental laws and
governance to more closely align with U.S. standards and practices and to help level the playing
field for U.S. industry.
Objective 2: Increase Transparency and Public Participation. Listen to and collaborate with
impacted stakeholders and provide effective platforms for public participation and
meaningful engagement.
EPA will strengthen its community-driven approach, which emphasizes public participation to
better partner with states, tribes, and communities and to maximize the support and resources of
the entire Agency to create tangible environmental results. The Agency will deploy its collective
resources and expertise to collaborate with states, tribes, and communities and support locally-led,
community-driven solutions to improved environmental protection and economic growth. EPA
will increase transparency with industry, environmental groups and other stakeholders; and
facilitate public participation, emphasizing cooperation and collaboration, especially at the early
stages of Agency actions. This will provide a more comprehensive understanding of community
needs.
The Agency also will coordinate better across its programs and with federal partners to ensure
mutual efforts are aligned, including consideration of vulnerable groups and communities in
decisions, and will reflect community needs in its actions and investments, recognizing that the
needs of rural communities may not be the same as urban areas. Increasing transparency and public
participation in EPA's work with other agencies will enhance the Agency's ability to partner with
states, tribes, and local governments and increase responsiveness to the needs of their most
vulnerable communities. EPA will serve as a convener and leverage resources with new and
existing partners to deliver services more efficiently and effectively. The Agency also will engage
with regulated entities to identify reforms to more efficiently and effectively meet the nation's
environmental goals.
EPA will meet community needs through public participation, building community capacity
through grants, technical assistance, partnering, and meaningful engagement. The Agency will
leverage recommendations provided by federal advisory committees, such as the National
Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC), LGAC, and Children's Health Protection
Advisory Committee (CHPAC), and focus on partnerships representing vulnerable populations,
such as youth, the elderly, and low-income communities. The SRFs are one example of how the
Agency provides needed financing to such populations, particularly small and rural communities.
In support of this aspect of our work, we are requesting continued flexibility for subsidization of
SRF loan to communities. Specifically, the Agency will engage with the focus communities
identified by EPA regions to understand each community's goals and identify its environmental
priorities and needs, recognizing that rural communities and more urban areas may have different
priorities.
30
-------
To further integrate and implement community environmental considerations within EPA
programs, the Agency will create tools to facilitate incorporation of community understanding,
needs, and concerns across program activities and advance more systematic incorporation of
existing tools and needs, such as use of the Environmental Justice Screening and Mapping Tool
(EJSCREEN) and EnviroAtlas. EPA will develop a cross-Agency communities team to lead
regional involvement in and resourcing of community-based environmental work through a fully-
integrated resource platform.
The Agency will work to coordinate across the federal government, with EPA regional offices
partnering with federal agencies in focus communities to deliver services more efficiently and
effectively. Such partnerships will leverage resources and expertise from across EPA and a range
of outside partners to advance economic revitalization through the environmental and health goals
of communities. The Agency also will continue leadership of and involvement in the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) Community Solutions Taskforce to better access and leverage
resources from across federal agencies, and will strengthen coordination with the Interagency
Working Group on Environmental Justice to better integrate EPA priorities and support and engage
communities. In addition, EPA will support and align its work with the activities and priorities of
the President's Task Force on Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks to Children.
EPA also will focus on enhancing the FOIA process. The complexity and volume of electronic
documents required to be searched, collected, and reviewed has increased over time. The Agency
will ensure that it can support the timely searching and collection of electronically-stored
information for purposes of responding to FOIA requests and other information needs in a cost-
effective, sustainable manner.
31
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Rule of Law and Process
Rule of Law and Process: Administer the law, as Congress intended, to refocus the Agency on its
statutory obligations under the law.
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES:
• Timely enforce environmental laws to increase compliance rates and promote cleanup of
contaminated sites through the use of all of EPA's compliance assurance tools, especially
enforcement actions to address environmental violations.
• Outline exactly what is expected of the regulated community to ensure good stewardship
and positive environmental outcomes.
• Refocus the EPA's robust research and scientific analysis to inform policy making.
• Issue permits more quickly and modernize our permitting and reporting systems.
• Provide proper leadership and internal operations management to ensure that the Agency
is fulfilling its mission.
GOAL, OBJECTIVE SUMMARY
Budget Authority
Full-time Equivalents
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019
Pres Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018
Annualized CR
Rule of Law and Process
$1,898,819.1
$1,888,357.0
$1,615,812.0
-$272,545.0
Compliance with the Law
$408,698.8
$401,843.0
$364,326.0
-$37,517.0
Create Consistency and
Certainty
$72,886.1
$68,898.0
$60,366.0
-$8,532.0
Prioritize Robust Science
$490,070.0
$478,088.0
$255,046.0
-$223,042.0
Streamline and Modernize
$37,821.7
$38,058.0
$29,021.0
-$9,037.0
Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness
$889,342.5
$901,470.0
$907,053.0
$5,583.0
Total Authorized
Workyears
6,572.0
6,979.5
5,609.9
-1,369.6
32
-------
Goal 3: Rule of Law and Process
Strategic Goal: Administer the law, as Congress intended, to refocus the Agency on its statutory
obligations under the law
I V 2017
I V 2018
I V 2019
Delia
Knaclcd
Annualized
President's
I V 2019-
Uule of Law and Process
liudgel
( U
liudgcl
I V 2018
3.1 Compliance with the Law
$404,590
$401,843
$364,326
($37,517)
3.2 Create Consistency and Certainty
$69,370
$68,898
$60,366
($8,532)
3.3 Prioritize Robust Science
$481,358
$478,088
$255,046
($223,042)
3.4 Streamline and Modernize
$38,318
$38,058
$29,021
($9,037)
3.5 Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness
$907,635
$901,470
$907,053
$5,583
Goal 3 Total
$1,901,271
$1,888,357
$1,615,812
($272,545)
Total Workyears
6,979.5
6,979.5
5,609.9
(1,789.4)
Note: Totals do not include proposed Agency-wide cancellation of funds.
Introduction
EPA will seek to reinvigorate the rule of law and process as it administers the environmental laws
as Congress intended, and to refocus the Agency on its core statutory obligations. To accomplish
this, EPA will work cooperatively with states and tribes to ensure compliance with the law, as well
as to create consistency and certainty for the regulated community. Of course, EPA will continue
to take civil or criminal enforcement action against violators of environmental laws.
A robust enforcement program is critically important for addressing violations and promoting
deterrence, and supports the Agency's mission of protecting human health and the environment.
Ensuring compliance with the law also ensures consistency and certainty for the regulated
community so the Agency has a complete understanding of the impact of proposed actions on
human health, the environment, and the economy, and a clear path and timeline to achieve that
compliance. EPA's policies and rules will reflect common sense, consistent with the Agency's
statutory authorities, and provide greater regulatory and economic certainty for the public. EPA
will enforce the rule of law in a timely manner and take action against those that violate
environmental laws to the detriment of human health or the environment.
One of EPA's highest priorities must be to create consistency and certainty for the regulated
community. Consistency in how the laws and regulations are applied across the country is part of
that process. EPA will undertake a variety of efforts to ensure that consistency in application of
laws and regulations is evaluated and addressed, while respecting the unique circumstances of each
state and tribe. EPA recognizes the importance of applying rules and policies consistently as well
33
-------
as creating certainty by meeting the statutory deadlines that are required for EPA's actions. The
rule of law must also be built on the application of robust science that is conducted to help the
Agency meet its mission and support the states and tribes in achieving their environmental goals.
Research, in conjunction with user-friendly applications needed to apply the science to real-world
problems, will help move EPA and the states forward in making timely decisions based on sound
science.
Carrying out this goal requires that EPA improve the efficiency of its internal business and
administrative operations. First, streamlining EPA's business operations, specifically the
permitting processes established by the different environmental statutes, is key to ensuring
economic growth, human health, and environmental protection. EPA will begin to modernize its
permitting practices to increase the timeliness of reviews and decisions, while working more
collaboratively, transparently, and cost effectively to achieve the Agency's mission. The second
part of improving internal operations includes reducing EPA's overhead and creating more
efficient and effective administrative processes (e.g. contracting) that allow EPA to accomplish its
core mission work.
Agency Priority Goals
The budget highlights EPA's FY 2018-2019 Agency Priority Goals that advance EPA priorities
and the Agency's FY 2018-2022 Strategic Plan. Two of the six APGs support Goal 3.
• APG-5: Increase environmental law compliance rate. Through September 30, 2019, EPA
will increase compliance by reducing the percentage of Clean Water Act (CWA) National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permittees in significant
noncompliance with their permit limits to 21% from a baseline of 24%.
• APG-6: Accelerate permitting-related decisions. By September 30, 2019, EPA will
reduce by 50% the number of permitting-related decisions that exceed six months.
FY 2019 Activities
Objective 1: Compliance with the Law. Timely enforce environmental laws to increase
compliance rates and promote cleanup of contaminated sites through the use of all of EPA's
compliance assurance tools, especially enforcement actions to address environmental
violations.
For decades, the protections mandated by federal environmental laws have been essential to the
growth of American prosperity. Noncompliance with those laws diminishes shared prosperity and
unfairly tilts the field of economic competition in favor of those that skirt the law. To carry out its
mission to protect human health and the environment, EPA, in collaboration with state and tribal
partners, relies on a strong national compliance assurance and cleanup enforcement program. An
effective enforcement program is key to ensuring that the ambitious goals of the nation's
environmental statutes are realized.
34
-------
In FY 2019, EPA's enforcement priorities remain focused on cleaning up hazardous waste sites
and addressing the most significant violations consistent with EPA's statutory authorities. EPA
takes the overwhelming majority of its enforcement actions in programs that are: (1) not delegable
to a state or tribe; (2) in states or tribes that have not sought authorization to implement a delegable
program; or (3) in states or tribes that do not have the resources or expertise, or that seek assistance
from the Agency—and these actions are taken in coordination with the states and tribes. For states
and tribes with authorized programs, EPA, states, and tribes share enforcement responsibility, with
primary enforcement responsibility residing with the state23 or tribe. Further, EPA is responsible
for addressing violations that occur in Indian country in the absence of an approved program.
Even in states or tribes authorized to implement a program, EPA serves a critical role in addressing
serious national noncompliance problems, such as those affecting multiple states or tribes, and in
serving as a backstop for instances when a state or tribe does not timely or appropriately address
serious noncompliance. EPA also may assist a state or tribe in remedying noncompliance problems
when the state or tribe is unable to address the problem because it lacks the capability or resources,
such as in actions against other federal or state agencies. For some serious violations, the Agency
and states or tribes may decide that the best approach is a joint enforcement action. Further, EPA
will take immediate action when there is an environmental emergency, such as an oil spill or
chemical accident. Through the State Review Framework, EPA periodically reviews authorized
state compliance monitoring and enforcement programs, using criteria agreed upon by states, to
evaluate performance against national compliance monitoring or enforcement program standards.
When states do not achieve standards, the Agency works with them to make progress. However,
EPA may also take a lead implementation role when authorized states have a documented history
of failure to make progress toward meeting national standards.
In all of its work, EPA's enforcement program strives to address noncompliance in an efficient
and timely manner, applying a broad range of enforcement and compliance tools to achieve the
goal of reducing noncompliance.
Civil Enforcement
The overall goal of EPA's civil enforcement program is to maximize compliance with the nation's
environmental laws and regulations to protect human health and the environment. The Agency
works closely with the U.S. Department of Justice, states, tribes, territories, and local agencies to
ensure consistent and fair enforcement of all major environmental statutes. To that end, the budget
includes up to $20 million to be transferred to the Department of Justice for environmental
compliance legal support. EPA will seek to strengthen environmental partnerships with its state
and tribal partners, encourage regulated entities to correct violations rapidly, ensure that violators
do not realize an economic benefit from noncompliance, and pursue enforcement to deter future
violations. EPA requests $143.5 million and 857.1 FTE for the Civil Enforcement program in FY
2019.
23 See e.g., ECOS Resolution 98-9, U.S. EPA Enforcement in Delegated States (revised September 28, 2016), describing the EPA
and state roles in enforcement in authorized states: "WHEREAS, U.S. EPA and the States have bilaterally developed policy
agreements which reflect those roles and which recognize the primary responsibility for enforcement action resides with the
States, with U.S. EPA taking enforcement action principally where the State requests assistance, is unwilling or unable to take
timely and appropriate enforcement actions, or in actions of national interest, or in actions involving multiple state jurisdictions."
35
-------
EPA recognizes that significant environmental progress has been made over the years, much of it
due to enforcement efforts by EPA, states, tribes, and local communities. To maximize
compliance, the Agency will refocus efforts toward areas with significant noncompliance issues
and where enforcement can address the most substantial impacts to human health and the
environment. EPA also recognizes the role of states and tribes as the primary implementers, where
authorized by EPA to implement the federal statutes, and will focus compliance assurance and
enforcement resources on direct implementation responsibilities, addressing the most significant
violations, and assisting authorized states and tribes in meeting national standards. Providing this
compliance assistance helps to ensure a level playing field. EPA is responsible for direct
implementation for programs that are not delegable or where a state or tribe has not sought or
obtained the authority to implement a particular program (or program component). Examples of
non-delegable programs include the CAA mobile source program, pesticide labeling and
registration under FIFRA, virtually all compliance assurance and enforcement in Indian country,
and enforcement of the federal Superfund cleanup program. Additionally, the enforcement of
portions of various other laws, including RCRA, the CWA, and stratospheric ozone under the CAA
are non-delegable. EPA also will pursue enforcement actions at federal facilities where significant
violations are discovered; will ensure that federal facilities are held to the same standards as the
private sector; and will provide technical and scientific support to states and tribes with authorized
programs.
Criminal Enforcement
In FY 2019, EPA requests $48.2 million to support the Criminal Enforcement program. EPA's
Criminal Enforcement program enforces the nation's environmental laws through targeted
investigation of criminal conduct committed by individual and corporate defendants that threaten
public health and the environment. EPA will collaborate and coordinate with the U.S. Department
of Justice and state, tribal, and local law enforcement counterparts to ensure that the Agency
responds to violations as quickly and effectively as possible. EPA enforces the nation's
environmental laws through targeted investigation of criminal conduct committed by individual
and corporate defendants that threatens human health and the environment. The Agency plays a
critical role across the country since states and tribes have limited capacity to prosecute
environmental crimes. The Agency will focus resources on the most egregious environmental
cases (i.e., those presenting significant human health and environmental impacts).
Cleanup Enforcement
Through the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA, or Superfund), EPA will facilitate prompt site cleanup and use an "enforcement first"
approach that maximizes the participation of liable and viable parties in performing and paying for
cleanups. The Agency will protect communities by ensuring that potentially responsible parties
(PRPs) conduct cleanups at Superfund sites, preserving federal taxpayer dollars for sites where
there are no viable contributing parties, and by recovering costs if the EPA expends Superfund-
appropriated dollars to clean up sites. EPA also will address liability concerns that can be a barrier
to potential reuse. Addressing the risks posed by Superfund sites and returning them to productive
use strengthens the economy and spurs economic growth. In FY 2017, EPA reached a settlement
or took an enforcement action at 100 percent of non-federally owned Superfund sites with viable,
liable parties before the start of an FY 2017 remedial action. In FY 2017, the Superfund
36
-------
Enforcement program also secured private party commitments exceeding $1.46 billion, a 27
percent increase from FY 2016.
In FY 2019, EPA will focus its resources on the highest priority sites, particularly those that may
present an immediate risk to human health or the environment. In accordance with the Superfund
Task Force recommendations, the Agency will improve and revitalize the Superfund program to
ensure that contaminated sites across the country are remediated to protect human health and the
environment and returned to beneficial reuse as expeditiously as possible. At federally-owned
sites, EPA also will focus on resolving formal disputes under the federal facility agreements. In
FY 2019, EPA requests $150.5 million and 745.3 FTE to fund the Superfund Enforcement program
and $6.0 million to fund the Federal Facilities Enforcement program.
Objective 2: Create Consistency and Certainty. Outline exactly what is expected of the
regulated community to ensure good stewardship and positive environmental outcomes.
The regulatory framework is inherently dynamic. As part of its statutory obligations, EPA is
required to publish many regulations within a set timeframe each year that implement
environmental programs and assist the Agency in meeting its core mission. These regulations
address newly mandated responsibilities as well as updates and revisions to existing regulations.
As EPA meets its obligations to protect human health and the environment through regulatory
action, it must also meet another key responsibility - minimizing "regulatory uncertainty" that
unnecessarily causes businesses and communities to face delays, planning inefficiencies, and
compliance complexities that impede environmental protection, economic growth, and
development. EPA will employ a set of strategies to reduce regulatory uncertainty while
continuing to improve human health and environmental outcomes consistent with the Agency's
authorities as established by Congress and while considering unique state, tribal, and local
circumstances. These strategies, which reflect EPA's commitment to cooperative federalism and
commitment to the rule of law, also will help advance Agency goals for streamlining and
modernizing permitting and enhancing shared accountability. In total, EPA requests $60.4 million
in resources to support this objective.
As EPA issues new or revised regulations, businesses and individuals can find it challenging to
know which rules apply to them and to adjust their compliance strategies. EPA will reinvigorate
its approach to regulatory development and prioritize meeting its statutory deadlines to ensure that
expectations for the regulated community and the public are clear and comprehensive and that
Agency actions are defensible and consistent with its authorities. The Agency will use new
approaches and flexible tools to minimize regulatory uncertainty and will communicate more
comprehensively to realize more consistent and better environmental outcomes, while centering
work on statutory and regulatory obligations. EPA will strengthen working relationships with
industry sectors to better understand their needs and challenges in implementing Agency
requirements and with communities to understand their concerns. This knowledge will enable the
Agency to develop better policies and regulations to protect human health and the environment in
line with the authorities given to EPA by Congress.
In addition, EPA will develop and engage stakeholders in reviewing a draft base catalog of
responsibilities that statutes require EPA to perform in programs delegated to states and tribes. In
37
-------
FY 2019, EPA will complete a base catalog and subsequently update as necessary. This will
provide EPA a foundation to make decisions that reduce contradictory policy determinations at
headquarters and across regions. It also will support EPA cooperative federalism commitments
aimed at minimizing duplication and overlap among regions, headquarters, states, and tribes. This
effort also leverages another commitment that EPA is making under cooperative federalism—to
identify for all environmental media an inventory and timeline for state-led permits that EPA
reviews.
The Agency will establish a national network to ensure consistent implementation of policy across
all regions. EPA will review regulatory guidance documents to identify key opportunities and will
clarify and realign Agency approaches to improve consistency and clarity. EPA will strengthen
working relationships with states, tribes, and local communities to transfer knowledge, leveraging
its commitments under cooperative federalism, such as the collaboration under E-Enterprise for
the Environment. EPA will make available to states and tribes tools or services designed by other
federal agencies, states, tribes, or local communities that enhance efficiency, reduce burden on the
regulated community, while ensuring protection of human health and the environment.
Objective 3: Prioritize Robust Science. Refocus the EPA's robust research and scientific
analysis to inform policy making.
EPA will identify, assess, conduct, and apply the best available science to address current and
future environmental hazards, develop new approaches, and improve the scientific foundation for
environmental protection decisions. EPA conducts problem-driven, interdisciplinary research to
address specific environmental risks, and is committed to using science and innovation to reduce
risks to human health and the environment, based on needs identified by EPA's program and
regional offices as well as state and tribal partners. Specifically, the Agency will strengthen
alignment of its research to support EPA programs, regions, states, and tribes in accomplishing
their top human health and environmental protection priorities for improved air quality, clean and
safe water, revitalized land, and chemical safety. Working closely with ECOS and its subsidiary,
the Environmental Research Institute of the States (ERIS), the Agency will strive to connect state
research needs with Agency priorities, and work to improve communication of research results.
Through the public-private coalition Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council24, EPA will
encourage the adoption of innovative technologies and solutions. The Agency also will emphasize
the translation of its work products for end user application and feedback.
EPA research will be reviewed by various scientific advisory boards (e.g. Board of Scientific
Counselors) that are made up of recognized experts in various scientific, engineering, and social
science fields and may be from industry; business; public and private research institutes or
organizations; academia; federal, state, tribal, and local governments; nongovernmental
organizations; and other relevant interest areas. The Agency recently issued a directive to ensure
that the composition of EPA's science committees is based on integrity, diverse geographic
makeup, and independence.
24 For more information on the Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council, go to http: //www.itrcweb, org/.
38
-------
Air Quality
EPA's research will advance the science and provide the information critical to improve air quality
and to inform stationary source regulations; vehicle and fuel standards and certification; emission
inventories; air quality assessments; and domestic ozone actions. The results of agency research
to support air quality program priorities will inform EPA programs; state, tribal, and local air
programs; communities; and individuals about measures and strategies to reduce air pollution.
Researchers will publish peer-reviewed scientific journal articles to disseminate research findings
as appropriate and consistent with resource and program needs. Recently, EPA's research led to
the development of a Wildfire Smoke Guide25 for public health officials, as well as an innovative
Smoke Sense mobile application26 for those impacted by wildfires. EPA requests $30.7 million in
FY 2019 to conduct air quality research.
Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
EPA will develop innovative, cost-effective solutions to current, emerging, and long-term water
resource challenges for complex chemical and biological contaminants. Using a systems approach
to develop scientific and technological solutions for protecting human health and aquatic
ecosystems, EPA researchers partner with program experts; federal and state agencies; tribes; local
communities; academia; nongovernmental organizations; and private stakeholders. For example,
EPA's researchers are developing laboratory analytical methods, evaluating chemical toxicity,
identifying and estimating human exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS),
identifying drinking water treatment technologies and providing technical support to EPA regions
and states to provide data that can be used to make informed decisions about managing PFAS. In
FY 2019, EPA requests $67.3 million for research into Safe and Sustainable Water Resources.
Sustainable and Healthy Communities
EPA requests $64.3 million in FY 2019 to support the Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Research Program. EPA will conduct research to support regulatory activities and protocol
development for the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan and
provide on-demand technical support at cleanup sites managed by federal, state or tribal
governments, as well as assistance during emergencies. The Agency conducts health,
environmental engineering, and ecological research and prepares planning and analysis tools for
localities nationwide to use in facilitating regulatory compliance and improving environmental and
health outcomes.
Chemical Safety
EPA's Chemical Safety Research program will evaluate and predict impacts from chemical use
and disposal and provide states and tribes with information, tools, and methods to make better
informed, more timely decisions about the thousands of chemicals in the United States. EPA
requests $61.7 million for FY 2019, to produce innovative tools that accelerate the pace of data-
driven evaluations, enable knowledge-based decisions that protect human health, and advance the
science required to anticipate and solve problems. For example, the new version of the Chemistry
Dashboard27, released in August 2017, includes new lists of toxins, increased amounts of toxicity
value data, enhanced performance of searches, and millions of new predicted data points from the
25 https://www3.epa.gov/aimow/wildfire_may2016.pdf
26 https://www3.epa.gov/air-research/smoke-sense
27 Interactive Chemistry Dashboard accessible here: https://comptox.epa.gov/dashboard/
39
-------
Toxicity Estimation Software Tool (TEST). The Chemistry Dashboard provides a one-stop-shop
for chemical properties, structure, exposure, and toxicity information that inform chemical
exposure and risk evaluations and assessments by the Agency and outside researchers.
Human Health Risk Assessment
EPA also will focus on the science of assessments that inform agency, state, and tribal decisions
and policies. These risk assessments provide the research and technical support needed to ensure
safety of chemicals in the marketplace, revitalize and return land to communities, provide clean
and safe water, and work with states and tribes to improve air quality. EPA's risk assessments will
be used to inform national standards, clean-up levels at local sites, and set advisory levels. EPA
requests $27.3 million in FY 2019 to support the Human Health Risk Assessment Research
Program.
Objective 4: Streamline and Modernize. Issue permits more quickly and modernize our
permitting and reporting systems.
EPA implements a host of environmental statutes that affect the regulated community. Permitting
requirements under these statutes can impose a variety of costs, including direct costs and
opportunity costs related to uncertainty, delay, and cancellation. Delays in the review of permits
and modifications by federal, state, or tribal permitting authorities can postpone or prevent
manufacturers from building, expanding, or beginning operations, even if the affected operations
ultimately may be deemed suitable as proposed. Delays can also impact construction of major
infrastructure projects. EPA is committed to speeding up reviews of permits and modifications to
create certainty for the business community, leading to more jobs, increased economic prosperity,
and streamlined permit renewals, which incorporate up-to-date information and requirements more
quickly, thereby improving environmental protection. Further, EPA will continue to work toward
converting permit applications and reports that rely on paper submissions to electronic processing
in order to reduce burden, shorten the wait for decisions, and increase the opportunity for public
transparency. To implement this objective, EPA requests a total of $29.0 million in FY 2019.
EPA will systematically collect and report permitting data for each of its permitting programs. The
Agency also will employ business process improvement strategies, such as Lean, to improve
efficiencies in all permitting processes and meet our commitments. The Agency also will work
with states and use Lean techniques to streamline the review of state-issued permits. Solutions may
include conducting earlier triage and communications, conducting Agency reviews in parallel with
public reviews, and/or focusing reviews where they add the most value.
EPA also will consider where policy changes can improve permitting efficiency without
sacrificing environmental results. Examples include expanding the scope of minor permit
modifications to reduce the number of permit reviews required, reinvigorating the use of plant-
wide applicability limits (PALs) to reduce unnecessary permitting transactions, and increasing
states' ability to incorporate federal regulations by reference, enabling them to adjust quickly and
efficiently to new regulatory provisions.
EPA will modernize permitting and reporting processes through efforts such as E-Enterprise for
the Environment, a shared governance model with EPA, states, and tribes. EPA will work with
40
-------
states and tribes to achieve this objective without overburdening those entities with costly
unnecessary reporting systems and technology.
Objective 5: Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness. Provide proper leadership and internal
operations management to ensure that the Agency is fulfilling its mission.
To support its mission to protect human health and the environment, EPA will improve the
efficiency and effectiveness of its business processes. Focus areas will include financial, facility,
human resource, contract, grant, and information technology (IT)/information management (IM).
These enhancements will improve EPA's future workforce, modernize and streamline its business
practices, and take advantage of new collaborative and cost-effective tools and technologies. The
Agency will build a modern and secure work environment that will protect critical information
and support its efforts to address the environmental problems of the 21st century. EPA will work
to alleviate challenges associated with outdated or non-existent policies, tension between
centralized and decentralized approaches, myriad federal acquisition and grants requirements,
complex processes, and varying levels of expertise across Agency programs. To support this
objective, EPA requests a total of $907.1 million and 2,222.5 FTE in FY 2019.
EPA will modernize and improve business processes and operations to promote transparency,
efficiency, and effectiveness; enhance collaborative, results-driven partnerships with internal and
external business partners; recruit, develop, and maintain a highly-skilled, diverse, and engaged
workforce; and improve the capabilities and cost-effectiveness of its IT and IM systems.
EPA will apply Lean principles and will leverage input from customer-focused councils, advisory
groups, surveys, workgroups, acquisition partnership initiatives, technical user groups, portfolio
reviews, and federal advisory committees to identify business process streamlining opportunities.
To improve the efficiency and cost effectiveness of its operations, EPA will standardize and
streamline internal business processes in its acquisition and grants processes and systems, and use
additional federal and/or internal shared services. When EPA has applied Lean to processes across
the Agency, process times were reduced by 50 percent on average.
EPA will ensure its workforce is positioned to accomplish the Agency's mission effectively by
providing access to quality training and development opportunities that will improve staffs and
managers' skills, knowledge, and performance, and prepare them to capitalize on opportunities
that advance progress. EPA will improve its workforce planning and management, strengthen its
Senior Executive Service, and focus on developing and maintaining a highly-skilled technical
workforce.
EPA also will work to transform and modernize its information systems, tools, and processes to
improve how the Agency collaborates both internally and with external stakeholders. EPA will
enhance the power of information by delivering on-demand data to the right people at the right
time. To enable the Agency, its partners, and the public effectively to acquire, generate, manage,
use, and share information - a critical resource in protecting human health and the environment -
EPA will improve its IT/IM capabilities and customer experiences. EPA will employ enterprise
risk management and financial data analytics to support data management decision making, using
the enterprise risk management framework mandated by OMB Circular A-123.
41
-------
To ensure that critical environmental and human health information is adequately protected, EPA
will strengthen its cybersecurity posture. The Agency will focus on implementing two key
cybersecurity priorities—the mandated federal-government-wide Continuous Diagnostics and
Mitigation (CDM) effort, and the complementary EPA-specific Cyber Risk Mitigation Projects
(CRMPs). These two priorities introduce or improve upon dozens of cybersecurity capabilities,
enhance the Agency's ability to respond to threats, and improve EPA's privacy posture via the
Privacy Act of 1974. EPA will work closely with the Department of Homeland Security and other
partners in implementing CDM capabilities.
To better understand complex interactions between pollutants and the environment and address
the environmental problems of the 21st century effectively and efficiently, EPA and its partners
analyze large volumes of data. EPA will develop a comprehensive data management strategy that
addresses the collection, management, and use of data generated both internally and from external
partners including states, tribes, grantees, the regulated community, and citizen science. The
Agency will deploy new data analysis, data visualization, and geospatial tools in a Cloud-based
framework to enable analysis and provide the basis for informed decision making.
Environmental decision making across media programs requires access to high-quality data and
analytics. EPA will build shared IT services, maximizing the benefits of our investments and
ensuring consistency and scalability in tools and services. EPA programs that receive submissions
from outside the Agency, whether from the reporting community, states, tribes, or local
governments, will rely increasingly on centrally-developed and maintained information services,
decreasing the volume of computer code each program must develop and maintain. Shared services
will reduce reporting burden for submitting entities and improve data quality for EPA. EPA
programs, states, and tribes must establish a common catalog of shared services and agree to a
minimum set of common standards and practices.
The Agency will enhance its extensive information resources by designing an enterprise-wide
information architecture that will facilitate the electronic management of data and information, as
well as multimodal access, effective searching, and ease of use. The Agency's future information
management architecture will support official recordkeeping requirements, as well as daily
document management, business processes, information access, and legal needs of EPA
employees and organizations, while also being flexible, scalable, and cost effective.
42
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Science and Technology
Resource Summary Table 45
Program Projects in S&T 45
Clean Air 48
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs 49
Federal Support for Air Quality Management 52
Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certification 54
Atmospheric Protection Program 59
Indoor Air and Radiation 60
Radiation: Response Preparedness 61
Indoor Air: Radon Program 63
Radiation: Protection 64
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air 66
Enforcement 67
Forensics Support 68
Homeland Security 70
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection 71
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and Recovery 76
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure 82
IT/ Data Management/ Security 84
IT / Data Management 85
Operations and Administration 87
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 88
Workforce Reshaping 90
Pesticides Licensing 92
Pesticides: Protect Human Health from Pesticide Risk 93
Pesticides: Protect the Environment from Pesticide Risk 97
Pesticides: Realize the Value of Pesticide Availability 101
Research: Air and Energy 104
Research: Air and Energy 105
Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources 109
43
-------
Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources 110
Research: Sustainable Communities 115
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities 116
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability 121
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability 122
Human Health Risk Assessment 127
Water: Human Health Protection 132
Drinking Water Programs 133
Congressional Priorities 135
Water Quality Research and Support Grants 136
44
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION: Science & Technology
Resource Summary Table
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2019 Pres
FY 2018
Budget v.
FY 2017
Annualized
FY 2019
FY 2018
Actuals
CR
Pres Budget
Annualized CR
Science & Technology
Budget Authority
$723,576.4
$708,975.0
$448,965.0
-$260,010.0
Total Workyears
2,137.0
2,199.7
1,492.4
-707.3
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the Superfund account.
Bill Language: Science and Technology
For science and technology, including research and development activities, which shall include
research and development activities under the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of1980; necessary expenses for personnel and related costs and
travel expenses; procurement of laboratory equipment and supplies; and other operating expenses
in support of research and development, $448,965,000, to remain available until September 30,
2020.
Program Projects in S&T
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Clean Air
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs
$6,045.0
$7,518.0
$5,739.0
-$1,779.0
Atmospheric Protection Program
$7,050.8
$7,964.0
$0.0
-$7,964.0
Federal Support for Air Quality Management
$7,283.8
$7,280.0
$4,031.0
-$3,249.0
Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and
Certification
$98,177.0
$92,988.0
$75,135.0
-$17,853.0
Subtotal, Clean Air
$118,556.6
$115,750.0
$84,905.0
-$30,845.0
Indoor Air and Radiation
Indoor Air: Radon Program
$145.0
$158.0
$0.0
-$158.0
Radiation: Protection
$2,328.6
$1,996.0
$1,000.0
-$996.0
Radiation: Response Preparedness
$3,785.0
$3,658.0
$3,666.0
$8.0
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air
$253.3
$144.0
$0.0
-$144.0
Subtotal, Indoor Air and Radiation
$6,511.9
$5,956.0
$4,666.0
-$1,290.0
Enforcement
45
-------
Program Project
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Forensics Support
$13,228.8
$13,576.0
$10,486.0
-$3,090.0
Homeland Security
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure
Protection
$9,950.4
$9,153.0
$5,216.0
-$3,937.0
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response,
and Recovery
$23,161.0
$23,298.0
$22,461.0
-$837.0
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA
Personnel and Infrastructure
$438.0
$446.0
$500.0
$54.0
Subtotal, Homeland Security
$33,549.4
$32,897.0
$28,177.0
-$4,720.0
IT / Data Management / Security
IT / Data Management
$3,342.0
$3,068.0
$2,725.0
-$343.0
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
$64,642.7
$67,875.0
$68,834.0
$959.0
Workforce Reshaping
$.0
$.0
$5,994.0
$5,994.0
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
$64,642.7
$67,875.0
$74,828.0
$6,953.0
Pesticides Licensing
Pesticides: Protect Human Health from Pesticide
Risk
$2,938.3
$3,090.0
$2,406.0
-$684.0
Pesticides: Protect the Environment from
Pesticide Risk
$2,046.2
$2,325.0
$2,122.0
-$203.0
Pesticides: Realize the Value of Pesticide
Availability
$548.1
$571.0
$530.0
-$41.0
Subtotal, Pesticides Licensing
$5,532.6
$5,986.0
$5,058.0
-$928.0
Research: Air and Energy
Research: Air and Energy
$90,076.2
$91,282.0
$30,711.0
-$60,571.0
Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
$104,687.6
$105,535.0
$67,261.0
-$38,274.0
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
$142,429.1
$133,415.0
$52,549.0
-$80,866.0
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Human Health Risk Assessment
$40,506.5
$37,554.0
$22,267.0
-$15,287.0
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Endocrine Disruptors
$15,497.0
$16,142.0
$10,006.0
-$6,136.0
Computational Toxicology
$21,790.5
$21,266.0
$17,213.0
-$4,053.0
Research: Chemical Safety and
Sustainability (other activities)
$51,905.1
$51,106.0
$34,518.0
-$16,588.0
46
-------
Program Project
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Subtotal, Research: Chemical Safety and
Sustainability
$89,192.6
$88,514.0
$61,737.0
-$26,777.0
Subtotal, Research: Chemical Safety and
Sustainability
$129,699.1
$126,068.0
$84,004.0
-$42,064.0
Water: Human Health Protection
Drinking Water Programs
$3,517.0
$3,495.0
$3,595.0
$100.0
Congressional Priorities
Water Quality Research and Support Grants
$7,803.4
$4,072.0
$0.0
-$4,072.0
TOTAL S&T
$723,576.4
$708,975.0
$448,965.0
$260,010.0
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the Superfund
account.
47
-------
Clean Air
48
-------
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs
Program Area: Clean Air
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
SI 5.236.6
SI 6.060.0
$12,574.0
-$3,486.0
Science JS t echnology
Sfi.O-lxO
S '.5 IS. ft
s.\ ~*v.«
-SI. "0.0
Total Budget Authority
$21,281.6
$23,578.0
$18,313.0
-$5,265.0
Total Workyears
68.4
71.4
63.7
-7.7
Program Project Description:
This program is responsible for managing the Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNET),
a long-term ambient monitoring network, established under Title IX of the Clean Air Act (CAA)
Amendments of 1990, which serves as the nation's primary source for atmospheric data on the dry
component of acid deposition, regional ground-level ozone, and other forms of particulate and
gaseous air pollution. Used in conjunction with the National Atmospheric Deposition Program's
(NADP) wet deposition networks and other ambient air quality networks, CASTNET's long-term
datasets and data products are used to determine the effectiveness of national and regional emission
control programs. The CASTNET program provides spatial and temporal trends in ambient air
quality and atmospheric deposition in non-urban areas and sensitive ecosystems (i.e., National
Parks). Maintaining the CASTNET monitoring network continues to be critical for assessing the
environmental benefits realized from the Acid Rain Program and regional programs that control
transported emissions (thereby reducing secondary pollutant formation of ozone and fine
particles).
EPA's Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) program was created to assess the health of water bodies in
response to changes in deposition of atmospheric pollutants. Today, it ensures that the Clean Air
Act continues to be effective in reducing the impact of atmospheric pollutants (e.g., strong acid
anions) on surface waters in New England, the Adirondack Mountains, the Northern Appalachian
Plateau (including the Catskill and Pocono mountains), and the Blue Ridge region. This program
is operated cooperatively with partners in state agencies, academic institutions, and other federal
agencies. The LTM surface water chemistry monitoring program provides field measurements for
understanding biogeochemical changes in sulfur, nitrogen, acid neutralizing capacity (ANC),
aluminum, and carbon in streams and lakes in relation to changing pollutant emissions. The LTM
program is one of the longest running programs at EPA, providing a longitudinal dataset based on
sampling and measurements that go back to 1983.
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs, established under Title I and IV of the Clean Air Act,
help implement the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and the Acid Rain
Program, as well as reduce toxics emissions and regional haze. Pollutants reduced include sulfur
49
-------
dioxide (S02), nitrogen oxides (NOx), ground-level ozone, fine particulate matter (PM2.5), and
mercury. EPA provides assistance to states as they develop, implement, and assess their state and
regional programs to address major regional and national air issues from large stationary sources.
This assistance has traditionally come in the form of technical analysis, modeling, and emissions
monitoring support.
The Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) requires 27 states to limit their state-wide emissions
of S02 and/or NOx in order to reduce or eliminate the states' contributions to fine particulate
matter and/or ground-level ozone pollution in other states. The emissions limitations are defined
in terms of maximum state-wide "budgets" for emissions of annual SO2, annual NOx, and/or
ozone-season NOx from each state's large electric generating units (EGUs). In September 2016,
EPA finalized an update to CSAPR for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.1, Improve Air Quality in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will:
• Continue quality assurance, analysis, and reporting of environmental data from the
CASTNET deposition/rural ozone and LTM surface water monitoring networks.
• Analyze and assess trends in sulfur and nitrogen deposition, rural ozone concentrations,
surface water quality, and other indicators of ecosystem health and ambient air quality in
non-urban areas of the U.S.
• Assure the continuation of ongoing SO2 and NOx emission reductions from power plants
in the eastern half of the U.S. by implementing CSAPR and the CSAPR update, and across
the contiguous U.S. by implementing the Acid Rain Program.1
• Ensure accurate and consistent results for the clean air and allowance trading programs.
Work will continue on performance specifications and investigating monitoring
alternatives and methods to improve the efficiency of monitor certification and emissions
data reporting.
• Work with states to implement emission reduction programs to comply with CAA Section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requirements.2
Performance Measure Targets:
FY 2018
FY 2019
(NOX) Ozone Season emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) from electric power
generation sources (tons).
Target
Target
590,000
580,000
1 Clean Air Act §§ 110(a)(2)(D) and 401
2 For more information on program performance, see http://www.epa.gov/airmarket/progress/progress-reports.html.
50
-------
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$1,779.0) This program change reduces support for the program with impacts to the
following activities in FY 2019: technical analysis, modeling, and emissions monitoring
support to states as they develop, implement, and assess their state and regional programs
to address regional and national air issues from large stationary sources, and discontinued
reanalysis including enhancement of current EPA IT systems related to multi-state air
emissions electronic reporting, monitor certification, and compliance determination.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Air Act.
51
-------
Federal Support for Air Quality Management
Program Area: Clean Air
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$127,113.4
$125,387.0
$96,097.0
-$29,290.0
Science A- t echnology
S J.V.?. .V
.S '.2S0.0
W .OM.it
Total Budget Authority
$134,397.2
$132,667.0
$100,128.0
-$32,539.0
Total Workyears
812.6
842.0
601.8
-240.2
Program Project Description:
Federal support for the criteria pollutant and air toxics programs includes a variety of tools to
characterize ambient air quality and the level of risk to the public from air pollutants and to measure
national progress toward improving air quality and reducing associated risks. The Federal Support
for Air Quality Management program supports development of State Implementation Plans (SIPs)
through modeling and other tools and assists states in implementing, attaining, maintaining, and
enforcing the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for criteria pollutants. The
program also develops and provides information, training, and tools to assist state, tribal, and local
agencies, as well as communities, to reduce air toxics emissions and risk specific to their local
areas. Finally, the program includes activities related to the Clean Air Act's stationary source
residual risk and technology review program, which involves an assessment of source categories
subject to Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards to determine if more
stringent standards are needed to further reduce the risks to public health and to determine if the
MACT standards should be revised to reflect developments in practices, processes, and control
technologies.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.1, Improve Air Quality in EPA's FY
2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. As part of implementing key activities in support of attainment of the
NAAQS, EPA will provide states and local air quality agencies with assistance in developing SIPs
during FY 2019. EPA also will help states in conducting their SIP demonstrations by providing
models, modeling inputs and tools, and technical guidance, identifying the control options
available and providing priority guidance to assist them in working toward attaining the NAAQS.
EPA will ensure national consistency in how air quality modeling is conducted as part of
regulatory decision-making, including federal and state permitting programs as well as how
conformity determinations are conducted across the U.S. The Agency will work with states and
local air quality agencies to ensure that particulate matter (PM) hot-spot analyses are conducted
in a manner consistent with the transportation conformity regulation and guidance.
52
-------
One of EPA's top priorities is to fulfill its Clean Air Act (CAA) and court-ordered obligations.
Section 112 of the CAA requires that the emissions control bases for all MACT standards be
reviewed and updated, as necessary, every eight years. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to conduct
risk assessments to determine whether the MACT rules appropriately protect public health. The
program will prioritize its work with an emphasis on meeting court-ordered deadlines.
EPA is working with other internal and external stakeholders on improving monitoring systems to
fill data gaps and get a better estimate of actual population exposure to toxic air pollution. EPA
will continue to provide quality assurance proficiency testing for federal and commercial
laboratories that produce data from PM2.5 air monitoring systems to ensure quality data for use in
determining air quality.
In FY 2019, EPA will work with partners to continue improving emission factors and inventories,
including the National Emissions Inventory. This effort includes gathering improved activity data
from monitoring equipment and using geographic information systems and satellite remote
sensing, where possible, for key point, area, mobile, and fugitive sources, and global emission
events.
Performance Measure Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the Federal Support for Air Quality
Management program under the EPM appropriation.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$523.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of base
workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce support,
and benefit costs.
• (-$3,772.0/ -3.1 FTE) This program change reflects a reduction to EPA's support of state,
tribal, and local agencies for SIP/TIP development as well as activities to reduce air toxic
emissions and risks in communities.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Air Act.
53
-------
Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certification
Program Area: Clean Air
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Science A- t echnology
VAN
S'JJ.VSti.tl
s
-SI
Total Budget Authority
$98,177.0
$92,988.0
$75,135.0
-$17,853.0
Total Workyears
308.2
308.5
296.7
-11.8
Program Project Description:
Under the Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certification program, EPA develops,
implements, and ensures compliance with national emission standards to reduce mobile source
related air pollution from light-duty cars and trucks, heavy-duty trucks and buses, nonroad
engines and vehicles, and from the fuels that power these engines. The program also evaluates
new emission control technology and provides state, tribal, and local air quality managers and
transportation planners with access to information on transportation programs and incentive-
based programs. As part of ensuring compliance with national emission standards, the program
tests vehicles, engines, and fuels, and establishes test procedures for federal emissions and fuel
economy standards.
The National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory (NVFEL) ensures air quality benefits and
fair competition in the marketplace by conducting testing operations on motor vehicles,
heavy-duty engines, nonroad engines, and fuels to certify that all vehicles, engines, and fuels
that enter the U.S. market comply with all federal clean air and fuel economy standards. The
NVFEL conducts vehicle emission tests as part of pre-production tests, certification audits, in-use
assessments, and recall programs to ensure compliance with mobile source clean air programs.
EPA works with states and local governments to ensure the technical integrity of the mobile
source control emission benefits included in State Implementation Plans (SIPs) and
transportation conformity determinations. EPA develops and provides information and tools to
assist state, local, and tribal agencies, as well as communities, to reduce air toxics emissions and
risks specific to their local areas. Reductions in emissions of mobile source air toxics, such as
components of diesel exhaust, are achieved through establishing national emissions standards and
partnership approaches working with state, local, and tribal governments, as well as a variety of
stakeholder groups.
EPA administers the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program. RFS was created under the Energy
Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct), which amended the Clean Air Act (CAA), and was expanded under
the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA). The RFS program requires a certain
54
-------
volume of renewable fuel to replace or reduce the quantity of petroleum-based transportation fuel,
heating oil or jet fuel.
The four renewable fuel categories under the RFS are biomass-based diesel, cellulosic biofuel,
advanced biofuel, and total renewable fuel. Obligated parties under the RFS program are refiners
or importers of gasoline or diesel fuel. Compliance is achieved by blending renewable fuels into
transportation fuel, or by obtaining credits (called "Renewable Identification Numbers," or RINs)
to meet an EPA-specified Renewable Volume Obligation (RVO).
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.1, Improve Air Quality in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. The Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certification program
supports the Agency's integrated criteria pollutant and greenhouse gas (GHG) compliance
programs by operating test cells that simultaneously measure criteria pollutants and GHG
emissions, reviewing certification applications for light-duty vehicles and heavy-duty engines to
approve applications for both the criteria pollutant and GHG programs, and examining potential
violations.
In FY 2019, the Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certification program will continue to
focus its efforts on certification decisions. The Agency will continue to perform its compliance
oversight functions on priority matters. In FY 2019, the Agency also will conduct compliance
oversight tests where there is evidence to suggest noncompliance. EPA will continue to conduct
testing activities for pre-certification confirmatory testing for emissions and fuel economy for
passenger cars.
In FY 2019, EPA anticipates reviewing and approving about 5,275 vehicle and engine
emissions certification requests, including light-duty vehicles, heavy-duty diesel engines, nonroad
engines, marine engines, locomotives, and others. There has been a significant increase in demand
for EPA's certification services over the last two decades, due in part to the addition of
certification requirements for marine, other nonroad, and small spark-ignited engines.
EPA uses in-use emissions data provided by light-duty vehicle manufacturers as a means to
measure compliance and determine if any follow-up evaluation or testing is necessary. Since
calendar year 2000, light-duty vehicle manufacturers have been required, by regulation, to test a
number of newer and older in-use vehicles and provide the data to EPA. The Agency receives
over 2,100 test results annually. EPA reviews the data and determines if there are any specific
vehicles, models, or manufacturers that are failing emissions in-use. EPA will use this
information submitted by light-duty manufacturers to determine if there are vehicle models that
should be identified for testing for the upcoming model year prior to granting the manufacturer
a certificate of conformity which allows the manufacturer to sell vehicles in the U.S.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to implement the harmonized fuel economy and existing
GHG emission standards for light-duty vehicles and heavy-duty vehicles which provide regulatory
certainty to the marketplace and spur innovation in vehicle technology. These standards were
finalized by EPA in coordination with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
55
-------
(NHTSA) and EPA is responsible for implementing both the emission standards and significant
aspects of the fuel economy standards.
In FY 2019, EPA also will oversee compliance with vehicle fuel economy labeling requirements.
In past years, EPA conducted in-use audits of manufacturer "coast-down" data revealing issues in
manufacturer data submitted to EPA and, as a result, inaccurate fuel economy labels on more than
a million vehicles from several well-known manufacturers.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue implementing the Tier 3 standards for light-duty vehicles and
certifying manufacturers' fleets for vehicle Model Year 2020. EPA is responsible for establishing
the test procedures needed to measure tailpipe emissions and for verifying manufacturers" vehicle
fuel economy data; as a result, the Agency will deploy its laboratory testing resources to
ensure that new cars and trucks are in compliance with the Tier 3 emissions standards.
On March 15, 2017, EPA and the Department of Transportation announced that EPA intends to
reconsider the Final Determination on the Appropriateness of the Model Year 2022-2025 Light-
Duty Vehicle GHG Emissions Standards, issued on January 12, 2017. Consistent with the original
schedule, in 2018, EPA intends to make a new Final Determination regarding the appropriateness
of the standards. If the Administrator's Final Determination is that the model year 2022-2025
standards or program should be modified, EPA will make any modifications to the existing rule
through a notice-and-comment rulemaking, including the issuing of a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking and a Final Rulemaking.
EPA will continue working with the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and the
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) on programs to control conventional pollutant
emissions from marine and aircraft engines, respectively. In FY 2019, EPA will work with ICAO
on its program to develop international action plans to reduce particulate matter (PM) emissions
from international civil aviation.
The Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator (MOVES) is the Agency's emission modeling system
that estimates emissions for mobile sources at the national, county, and project level for criteria
air pollutants, greenhouse gases, and air toxics. In FY 2019, MOVES will support the Agency's
emission control programs, as well as provide critical support to states in their determination
of program needs to meet air quality standards. The Agency also will evaluate the schedule for
updates to MOVES.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to provide state and local governments with assistance in
developing SIPs and providing assistance with transportation conformity determinations. EPA
will continue to work with states and local governments to ensure the technical integrity of the
mobile source emission estimates in their SIPs. EPA will assist in identifying control options
available and provide guidance, as needed. In addition, EPA will ensure national consistency
in how conformity determinations are conducted across the U.S. and in the development of
motor vehicle emissions budgets in air quality plans, for use in conformity determinations.
EPA will continue to provide assistance to state and local transportation and air quality
agencies working on PM2.5 hot-spot analyses. This will help ensure that analyses use the latest
available information and that a measure of consistency exists across the nation. Additionally,
56
-------
EPA will continue partnering with states to support inspection and maintenance (I/M)
programs that focus on in-use vehicles and engines. Basic and/or enhanced I/M testing is currently
being conducted in over 30 states with technical and programmatic guidance from EPA.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to work with a broad range of stakeholders to develop targeted,
sector-based, and place-based incentives for diesel fleets (including school buses, ports, and
freight) to limit emissions from older, pre-2007 diesel engines not subject to stringent emissions
standards. Because large numbers of people live near ports and are vulnerable to mobile source
diesel emissions, EPA will focus its efforts on reducing mobile source emissions in and around ports.
Approximately 39 million people in the U.S. currently live in close proximity to ports and can be
exposed to air pollution associated with emissions from diesel engines at ports, including particulate
matter, nitrogen oxides, ozone, and air toxics.3 EPA will focus its efforts on reducing mobile source
emissions in and around ports. EPA also is working with industry to bring about field testing
and emissions testing protocols for a variety of innovative energy-efficient, emissions reducing
technologies for the legacy fleet.
EPA will continue to implement the RFS program and to carry out actions required by the
EPAct of 2005 and the EISA of 2007, including operating and maintaining the credit trading
systems. EISA expanded the renewable fuels provisions of EPAct and requires additional studies
in various areas of renewable fuel use. EISA requires that EPA set an annual volume standard for
renewable fuels and the 2020 RFS volume requirements are statutorily required to be
promulgated in FY 2019.
EISA also requires EPA to develop a comprehensive lifecycle GHG methodology to implement
the Act's GHG threshold requirements for the RFS. Producers of new and advanced biofuels
regularly seek to qualify their fuels under RFS and EPA will continue to apply its lifecycle analysis
to such fuels to evaluate and determine eligibility for the program.
In FY 2019, EPA will maintain oversight of the RFS program and continue to evaluate compliance
with RFS provisions through its system, which is used to track the creation, trades, and use of
billions of Renewable Identification Numbers (RINs) for compliance. The tracking system handles
4,000 to 6,000 submissions per day, typically averaging more than 20,000 transactions per day, and
the generation of more than 1.4 billion RINs per month. RINs are generated with the production of
qualifying renewable fuel and are used to achieve national RFS programmatic goals of reducing or
replacing the quantity of petroleum-based transportation fuel, heating oil, or jet fuel. In FY 2019,
EPA will continue to implement its Fuel and Fuel Additive Registration program. The Agency will
prioritize its review and decisions for Part 79 registrations.
3 EPA National Port Strategy Assessment report: https://www.epa.gov/jx>rts-fflitktive/ratioiml-pcnt-strategy-assessiment.
57
-------
Performance Measure Targets:
(CRT) Number of certificates of conformity issued that demonstrate that the
respective engine, vehicle, equipment, component, or system conforms to all of the
applicable emission requirements and may be entered into commerce.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
5,200
5,275
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$582.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of base
workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce support,
and benefit costs.
• (-$18,435.0/ -11.8 FTE) This program change streamlines technical assistance to states and
local governments and focuses the program on core statutory requirements.
Statutory Authority:
Title II of the Clean Air Act; Motor Vehicle Information Cost Savings Act; Alternative Motor
Fuels Act of 1988; National Highway System Designation Act; Energy Policy Act of 1992; Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU);
Energy Policy Act of 2005; Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007.
58
-------
Atmospheric Protection Program
Program Area: Clean Air
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$89,143.7
$94,788.0
$13,542.0
-$81,246.0
Science A- t echnology
S ',050. fi
.S
so.o
-S
Total Budget Authority
$96,194.5
$102,752.0
$13,542.0
-$89,210.0
Total Workyears
217.3
224.1
120.0
-104.1
Program Project Description:
The Climate Protection Program supports implementation and compliance with greenhouse gas
(GHG) emission standards for light-duty and heavy-duty vehicles developed under EPA's Federal
Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certification program. Resources under this program also support
compliance activities for implementing the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's
(NHTSA) Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards. Under authorities contained in
the Clean Air Act and the Energy Policy Act, EPA is responsible for issuing certificates and
ensuring compliance with both the GHG and CAFE standards.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE for this program are proposed for elimination in FY 2019.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$7,964.0/ -33.8 FTE) This program change eliminates the program in the S&T account.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Air Act; Pollution Prevention Act (PPA), §§ 6602-6605; National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA), § 102; Clean Water Act, § 104; Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), § 8001; Energy Policy Act of 2005, § 756.
59
-------
Indoor Air and Radiation
60
-------
Radiation: Response Preparedness
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$2,543.1
$2,573.0
$2,221.0
-$352.0
Science JS t echnology
S.i.
s.ijos.n
ss.o
Total Budget Authority
$6,328.1
$6,231.0
$5,887.0
-$344.0
Total Workyears
39.7
39.2
31.5
-7.7
Program Project Description:
The National Analytical Radiation Environmental Laboratory (NAREL) in Montgomery,
Alabama, and the National Center for Radiation Field Operations (NCRFO) in Las Vegas, Nevada,
provide laboratory analyses, field sampling and analyses, and direct scientific support to respond
to radiological and nuclear incidents. This work includes measuring and monitoring radioactive
materials and assessing radioactive contamination in the environment. This program comprises
direct scientific field and laboratory activities to support preparedness, planning, training, and
procedure development. In addition, program personnel are members of EPA's Radiological
Emergency Response Team (RERT), a component of the Agency's emergency response program,
and are trained to provide direct expert scientific and technical assistance. EPA's Office of
Radiation and Indoor Air program's RERT asset is identified as an Agency Critical
Infrastructure/Key Resource, and is part of the Nuclear Incident Response Team under
Department of Homeland Security.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.1, Improve Air Quality in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA's RERT will continue to provide support for
federal radiological emergency response and recovery operations under the National Response
Framework (NRF) and the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
(NCP). They also will support basic field operations (e.g., on-site technical support/consultation,
fixed laboratory, and mobile laboratory analyses) to provide rapid and accurate radionuclide
analyses of environmental samples.4
In FY 2019, NAREL and NCRFO will prioritize and adjust the schedule to develop rapid methods
and techniques for the laboratory analysis of samples and rapid deployment capabilities to ensure
that field teams and laboratory personnel are ready to provide scientific data, analyses, and updated
analytical techniques for radiation emergency response programs across the Agency. Both
4 See additional information at: https://www.epa.gov/radiation/radiological-emergency-respouse.
61
-------
organizations will maintain core levels of readiness for radiological emergency responses;
participate in the most critical emergency exercises; provide scientific support to state radiation,
solid waste, and health programs that regulate radiation remediation; participate in the Protective
Action Guidance (PAG) application; and respond, as required, to radiological incidents.
Performance Measure Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in Radiation Response Preparedness program
under the EPM appropriation.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$317.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of base
workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce support,
and benefit costs.
• (-$309.0/ -4.3 FTE) This program change reflects a reduction in support activities for
preparedness work within the Radiation: Response Preparedness program, including basic
laboratory analytic functions, such as the measurement and monitoring of radioactive
materials and the assessment of radioactive contamination in the environment.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA);
Homeland Security Act of 2002; Atomic Energy Act of 1954; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970,
84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485 (codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic
statute); Clean Air Act; Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006 (PKEMRA);
Public Health Service Act (PHSA); Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance
Act; Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA).
62
-------
Indoor Air: Radon Program
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$2,985.9
$3,115.0
$0.0
-$3,115.0
Science it- Technology
S N5M
SI5HM
so.o
Total Budget Authority
$3,130.9
$3,273.0
$0.0
-$3,273.0
Total Workyears
9.2
10.6
0.0
-10.6
Program Project Description:
Title III of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) authorizes EPA to undertake a variety of
activities to address the public health risks posed by exposures to indoor radon. Under the statute,
EPA studies the health effects of radon, assesses exposure levels, sets an action level, and advises
the public of steps they can take to reduce exposure. For over 30 years EPA's radon program has
provided important guidance and significant funding to help states establish their own programs.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE for this program are proposed for elimination in FY 2019. This is a mature
program where states have technical capacity to continue this work.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$158.0) This program change proposes to eliminate funding for the Indoor Air: Radon
program.
Statutory Authority:
Title III of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); Title IV of the Superfund Amendments
and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA); Clean Air Act.
63
-------
Radiation: Protection
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$7,780.1
$8,519.0
$2,000.0
-$6,519.0
Science A- t echnology
SI. WO.(I
SlJHHUt
-S WO. ft
Hazardous Substance Superfund
$1,833.6
$1,972.0
$1,972.0
$0.0
Total Budget Authority
$11,942.3
$12,487.0
$4,972.0
-$7,515.0
Total Workyears
58.9
59.1
25.0
-34.1
Program Project Description:
EPA supports waste site characterization and cleanup by providing field and fixed laboratory
environmental radioanalytical data and technical support, radioanalytical training to state and
federal partners, and by developing new and improved radioanalytical methods. The National
Analytical Radiation Environmental Laboratory (NAREL) in Montgomery, Alabama and the
National Center for Radiation Field Operations (NCRFO) in Las Vegas, Nevada provide analytical
and field operation support for radioanalytical and mixed waste testing, quality assurance, analysis
of environmental samples, field radiological support, and field measurement systems and
equipment to support site assessment, cleanup, and response activities in the event of a radiological
accident or incident.
Together, these organizations provide technical support for conducting site-specific radiological
characterizations and cleanups. They also develop guidance for cleaning up Superfund and other
sites that are contaminated with radioactive materials.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.1, Improve Air Quality in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA, in cooperation with states, tribes, and other
federal agencies, will provide ongoing site characterization and analytical support for site
assessment activities, remediation technologies, and measurement and information systems. EPA
also will provide training and direct site assistance, including field surveys and monitoring,
laboratory analyses, health and safety, and risk assessment support at sites with actual or suspected
radioactive contamination.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
64
-------
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$103.0) This change to fixed and other costs is a decrease due to the recalculation of base
workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce support,
and benefit costs.
• (-$893.0/ -7.3 FTE) This program change reflects a reduction in support activities at the
National Analytical Radiation Environmental Laboratory (NAREL) in Montgomery,
Alabama and the National Center for Radiation Field Operations (NCRFO) in Las Vegas,
Nevada.
Statutory Authority:
Atomic Energy Act of 1954; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by
Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485 (codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute); Clean Air Act;
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA); Energy
Policy Act of 1992; Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982; Public Health Service Act; Safe Drinking
Water Act; Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) of 1978; Waste Isolation
Pilot Plant Land Withdrawal Act of 1992; Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act; Clean
Water Act.
65
-------
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$13,389.1
$13,242.0
$0.0
-$13,242.0
Science it Technology
SN4M
so.o
-SN4M
Total Budget Authority
$13,642.4
$13,386.0
$0.0
-$13,386.0
Total Workyears
38.6
40.7
0.0
-40.7
Program Project Description:
Title IV of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) authorizes EPA
to conduct and coordinate research on indoor air quality, develop and disseminate information,
and coordinate efforts at the federal, state, and local levels. EPA conducts field measurements and
assessments and provides technical support for indoor air quality remediation, when requested.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE for this program are proposed for elimination in FY 2019. This is a mature
program where states have technical capacity to continue this work.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$144.0/ -1.6 FTE) This program change proposes to eliminate funding for this
program.
Statutory Authority:
Title III of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); Title IV of the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA); Clean Air Act.
66
-------
Enforcement
67
-------
Forensics Support
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Compliance with the Law
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Scii'iu v X h'c/iiioloxy
su.:2s.s
SI0.-/sr,.n
-SJ.OW.O
Hazardous Substance Superfund
$1,543.6
$1,097.0
$1,097.0
$0.0
Total Budget Authority
$14,772.4
$14,673.0
$11,583.0
-$3,090.0
Total Workyears
73.6
80.3
52.1
-28.2
Program Project Description:
The Forensics Support program provides expert scientific and technical support for criminal and
civil environmental enforcement cases, as well as technical support for the Agency's compliance
efforts. EPA's National Enforcement Investigations Center (NEIC) is an environmental forensic
center accredited for both laboratory and field sampling operations that generate environmental
data for law enforcement purposes. It is fully accredited under International Standards
Organization (ISO) 17025, the main standard used by testing and calibration laboratories, as
recommended by the National Academy of Sciences.5 The NEIC maintains a sophisticated
chemistry laboratory and a corps of highly trained inspectors and scientists with expertise across
media. The NEIC works closely with EPA's Criminal Investigation Division to provide technical
support (e.g., sampling, analysis, consultation, and testimony) to criminal investigations. The
NEIC also works closely with EPA's Headquarters and Regional Offices to provide technical
support, consultation, on-site inspection, investigation, and case resolution services in support of
the Agency's Civil Enforcement program.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.1, Compliance with the Law in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. The Forensics Support program provides expert scientific and
technical support for EPA's criminal and civil enforcement efforts. In FY 2019, NEIC will
continue to streamline its forensics work, and identify enhancements to our sampling and
analytical methods, using existing technology. Work to collect and analyze materials in order to
characterize contamination, and attribute it to individual sources and/or facilities, will remain the
focus into the next fiscal year.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
5 Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward, National Academy of Sciences, 2009, available at:
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php7record id=12589.
68
-------
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$758.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (+$3.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of lab
fixed costs.
• (-$3,851.0/ -27.7 FTE) This program change reflects a focus on analyzing material to
attribute it to individual sources or facilities and a reduction in other lab support.
Statutory Authority:
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485
(codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute); Resource Conservation and Recovery Act;
Clean Water Act; Safe Drinking Water Act; Clean Air Act; Toxic Substances Control Act;
Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act; Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act; Ocean Dumping Act (i.e., MPRSA); Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act.
69
-------
Homeland Security
70
-------
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection
Program Area: Homeland Security
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$936.9
$956.0
$1,263.0
$307.0
Science A- t echnology
SV.V5it.-t
SV. Ixld
St. 2 !(>.()
-SJ.VJ-.O
Total Budget Authority
$10,887.3
$10,109.0
$6,479.0
-$3,630.0
Total Workyears
22.5
23.1
18.1
-5.0
Program Project Description:
Under the federal homeland security system, EPA is the Sector-Specific Agency responsible for
implementing statutory and Presidential directives relating to homeland security for the water
sector. EPA's water security program is implemented through close partnerships with the water
sector, state emergency response and water program officials, and other federal agencies—most
notably DHS, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the intelligence community. The water
security program is not driven by regulatory requirements on water systems or the states, but
instead operates on the basis of cooperative federalism by engaging federal, state, and local entities
in defining annual objectives and identifying high priorities for immediate action.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.2, Provide Clean and Safe Water in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. This program provides critical resources to coordinate and
support protection of the nation's critical water infrastructure from terrorist threats and all-hazard
events. Under this homeland security project area, EPA will train about 2,500 water utilities, state
officials, and federal emergency responders to become more resilient to any natural or manmade
incident that could endanger water and wastewater services. In FY 2019, EPA will provide tools,
training, and technical assistance which will address the highest risks confronting the water sector.
Natural Disasters and General Preparedness
Drought, floods, hurricanes, earthquakes, and other natural disasters represent a high risk to the
water sector owing to their historical frequency of occurrence and their enormous potential for
destruction. As evident from several recent natural disasters, the level of preparedness within the
water sector varies significantly—with many utilities lacking an adequate preparedness capability.
In FY 2019, EPA will improve the preparedness of the water sector by providing nationwide
training sessions to address natural disasters and general preparedness with the objective to train
water and wastewater systems, state officials, and emergency response partners.
71
-------
Specifically:
• EPA will provide in-person trainings and workshops which will include: Incident
Command System (ICS)/National Incident Management System (NIMS) training; drought
response training; flood response training; state functional exercises (scenarios of
hurricane, floods, and earthquakes); resource typing and site access workshops; a regional
interstate emergency response exercise (hurricane), etc.
• EPA will conduct tabletop and functional exercises to improve the operation of intra-state
and inter-state mutual aid agreements among water utilities.
• EPA will continue to address high priority security areas as identified in the stakeholder
generated 2017 Roadmap to a Secure and Resilience Water and Wastewater Infrastructure
with an emphasis on projects addressing the following four priorities: (1) establishing the
critical lifeline status of the water and wastewater sector and translate that definition into
strong support for the sector's needs and capabilities; (2) improving detection, response,
and recovery to contamination incidents; (3) advancing preparedness and improving
capabilities of the water and wastewater sector for area-wide loss of water and power; and
(4) advancing recognition of vulnerabilities and needed responses related to cyber risk
management.
• EPA will revisit two fundamental aspects of improving water security and resilience: risk
assessment and emergency response planning.
• EPA will conduct nationwide training sessions with three critical, inter-dependent sectors:
health care, emergency services, and energy. Most incidents, particularly natural disasters,
have underscored the mutual reliance on the water sector with other lifeline sectors.
Through training sessions with officials at the local, state, and federal levels from these
other sectors, EPA will seek to improve coordination among critical lifeline sectors.
• EPA will sustain operation of the Water Desk in the Agency's Emergency Operations
Center in the event of an emergency by: updating roles/responsibilities; training staff in the
incident command structure; ensuring adequate staffing during activation of the desk; and
coordinating with EPA's regional field personnel and response partners.
• EPA will develop annual assessments, as required under the National Infrastructure
Protection Plan, to describe existing water security efforts and progress in achieving the
sector's key metrics.
Water Security Initiative and Water Lab Alliance
The Water Security Initiative designs and demonstrates an effective system for timely detection
and appropriate response to drinking water contamination threats and incidents through a pilot
program that has broad application to the nation's drinking water utilities in high-threat cities.
The FY 2019 request includes $2.8 million for necessary WSI Surveillance and Response System
(SRS) activities to refine technical assistance products based on the five SRS pilots, implement a
certification program for water utilities interested in receiving recognition for adopting
contamination warning systems, and provide technical assistance to the dozens of water utilities
that seek to leverage EPA's expertise in deploying their own warning system.
72
-------
In FY 2019, EPA will train about 250 drinking water utilities in the design, operation, and response
components of contaminant early warning systems. In FY 2019, specifically:
• EPA's continued efforts to promote the water sector's adoption of Water Quality
Surveillance and Response Systems to rapidly detect and respond to water quality
problems such as contamination in the distribution system in order to reduce public health
and economic consequences through the development of several online training modules
and webinars, as well as the provision of in-person direct technical assistance.
• EPA will complete development of its SRS Capabilities Assessment Tool, a web-based,
easy-to-use, decision support tool that presents the user with a series of questions by which
to assess existing detection and response capabilities, compare these existing capabilities
to a target capability, and identify potential enhancements to address gaps between the
existing and target capabilities.
• EPA also is exploring the possibility of launching SRS implementation pilots within the
water sector - the purpose of which will be to: demonstrate the application of SRS tools to
designing and operating an early warning system for contamination events; illustrate
additional applications of SRS tools, such as extending the SRS approach to source water
monitoring; and identify champions within the industry for implementing surveillance and
response systems.
In a contamination event, the sheer volume or unconventional type of samples could quickly
overwhelm the capacity or capability of a single laboratory. To address this potential deficiency,
EPA has established a national Water Laboratory Alliance (WLA) comprised of laboratories
harnessed from the range of existing lab resources from the local (e.g., water utility) to the federal
levels (e.g., the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) Laboratory Response
Network). In FY 2019, EPA will continue to promote, through exercises, expert workshops, and
association partnerships, the Water Laboratory Alliance Plan, which provides a protocol for
coordinated laboratory response to a surge of analytical needs. Under WLA, EPA will train, in FY
2019, approximately 100 laboratories in improving their ability to handle potential problems
associated with surge capacity and analytical method capabilities during an emergency. In
particular:
• EPA will continue work with regional and state environmental laboratories to conduct
exercises and continue efforts to automate the exercises enabling laboratories and other
members of the water sector to participate in exercises simultaneously and continue the
innovative practice of pursuing validation of methods through exercises.
• EPA will expand the membership of the WLA with the intention of achieving nationwide
coverage. The WLA has 140 member laboratories that are geographically diverse and can
provide a wide range of chemical, biological, and radiological analyses. In order for the
WLA to become a robust infrastructure that can cover major population centers and address
a diverse array of high priority contaminants, membership must continue to increase.
• EPA will continue to target laboratories located in areas where the Water Laboratory
Alliance has both inadequate membership levels and gaps in laboratory analytical
capabilities.
73
-------
• EPA will coordinate with other federal agencies, primarily DHS, CDC, Food and Drug
Administration, and Department of Defense, on biological, chemical, and radiological
contaminants of high concern, and how to detect and respond to their presence in drinking
water and wastewater systems.
• EPA will continue to implement specific recommendations of the Water Decontamination
Strategy as developed by EPA and water sector stakeholders (e.g., defining roles and
responsibilities of local, state, and federal agencies during an event).
Cvbersecuritv
Cybersecurity represents a substantial concern for the sector, given the ubiquitous access to critical
water treatment systems from the Internet. In FY 2019, EPA will fulfill its obligations under
Executive Order (EO) 13636 - Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity - which designated
EPA as the lead federal agency responsible for cybersecurity in the water sector. EPA also will
partner with the water sector to promote cybersecurity practices and gauge progress in the sector's
implementation of these practices as directed by the Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2014,
conducting nationwide training sessions in cybersecurity threats and countermeasures for about
200 water and wastewater utilities. Specifically, in FY 2019:
• EPA will conduct one-day classroom training at locations distributed nationally on water
sector cybersecurity. The training will address cybersecurity threats, vulnerabilities,
consequences, best practices, and incident response planning.
• EPA will need to update and develop new course materials owing to the evolving nature
of the cyber threat.
• EPA also will develop brief, targeted guidance documents for underserved segments of the
water sector, such as small systems and technical assistance providers.
• EPA will develop outreach materials to promote the adoption of cybersecurity practices
across the water sector.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$588.0) This change to fixed and other costs is a decrease due to the recalculation of base
workforce costs due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce support, and benefit
costs.
• (-$3,349.0/ -7.0 FTE) This program change represents a reduction to the number of
nationwide training sessions to address natural disasters, general preparedness, and Water
Laboratory Alliance Plan activities.
74
-------
Statutory Authority:
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), §§ 1431-1435; Clean Water Act; Public Health Security and
Bioterrorism Emergency and Response Act of 2002; Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), §§ 301-305.
75
-------
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and Recovery
Program Area: Homeland Security
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Revitalize Land and Prevent Contamination
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Scii'iu v X h'c/iiioloxy
S 23,H>1.<)
S23.2VS.0
S 2 2.-It> 1.0
-SSJ'.O
Hazardous Substance Superfund
$33,899.4
$31,461.0
$31,752.0
$291.0
Total Budget Authority
$57,060.4
$54,759.0
$54,213.0
-$546.0
Total Workyears
128.9
127.4
127.1
-0.3
Program Project Description:
Exposure to hazardous chemicals, microbial pathogens, and radiological materials that are
released into the environment could pose catastrophic consequences to the health of first
responders and all American citizens. EPA has responsibility, under legislation and Presidential
Directives, to remediate contaminated environments affected by incidents such as terrorist attacks,
industrial accidents, or natural disasters. EPA's disaster-related responsibilities are described
by the following three objectives in the Homeland Security Research Program's (HSRP's)
Strategic Research Action Plan (StRAP): (1) protecting America's water systems; (2)
remediation of indoor and outdoor contaminated areas, and (3) the development of a
nationwide laboratory network with the capability and capacity to analyze for chemical,
biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) agents during routine monitoring and in response to
terrorist attacks and other disasters.
EPA also is responsible for operating and maintaining the network of near real-time stationary and
deployable monitors known as RadNet under the Nuclear/Radiological Incident Annex to the
National Response Framework (NRF). This network is critical in responding to large-scale incidents
with regional impacts such as Fukushima. This network is identified as an EPA Critical
Infrastructure/Key Resource asset. EPA additionally serves as the Sector-Specific Agency (SSA) for
the water sector, coordinating water sector-specific risk assessment and management strategies and
assessing and mitigating cybersecurity risks with DHS and the sector under Executive Order 13636:
Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity.
Funding will support research to fill critical gaps in EPA's capability to carry out the
aforementioned responsibilities that help communities prepare for, absorb, and recover from
disasters - safeguarding their economic, environmental, and social well-being. HSRP will continue
to build upon its record of providing measurable benefits to its program office and regional
partners, and state and local stakeholders through the development of innovative solutions for
decontamination and remediation. HSRP will deliver effective tools, methods, information, and
guidance to local, state, and federal decision-makers that will address both critical terrorism-
related issues and natural or manmade disasters.
76
-------
Research is planned and prioritized based on the needs of end-users of this science,
including regional On-Scene Coordinators6 (OSCs), water utility companies, states, and
EPA program and regional offices.7 Priorities also are informed by lessons learned from
EPA response activities, advice from external review boards, such as the Board of Scientific
Counselors (BOSC) and the Science Advisory Board (SAB), and participation on Office of
Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) subcommittees and workgroups. The HSRP collaborates
with state, local, and private sector organizations and key federal agencies8 to prioritize research
needs and prevent the duplication of scientific and technical work.
Recent Accomplishments:
• Responding to Water Emergencies - Chemical Threats in Water Systems
There are approximately 153,000 public drinking water systems and more than 16,000
publicly owned wastewater treatment systems in the United States. More than 80 percent
of the U.S. population receives their potable water from these drinking water systems and
about 75 percent of the U.S. population has its sanitary sewerage treated by these
wastewater systems.9 Within the past year, threats to drinking water systems ran the
spectrum from toxic chemicals accidentally being introduced into a water system to
concerns over an intentional attempt to poison a drinking water system.10 To prepare for
these incidents, HSRP examined the interactions of chemical threats with water
infrastructure, premise plumbing, and appliances. Research included full-scale studies of
decontamination methods in drinking water distribution system infrastructure (iron and
concrete) as well as home plumbing materials (PVC and copper) and appliances. Findings
from these studies and decontamination methods will be shared with EPA water programs,
associations representing water utilities, and states so that they can incorporate the latest
state-of-the-science into their guidance and tools for utilities.
• Decision Support Tools to Support Remediation
Remediation decisions during a response to a wide-area contamination incident are complex.
Decisions on decontamination approaches can impact the success of the remediation, the
amount of wastes to be managed, and, ultimately, public health. To support effective decision
making that accounts for these interdependencies, HSRP developed the Waste Estimation
Support Tool to examine tradeoffs between decontamination decisions and waste
management during a wide-area biological incident. The tool can anticipate affected
infrastructure and its composition by using sampling data and a map of the contamination
plume in order to assist the Incident Command/Unified Command (IC/UC) in determining
the waste streams that will be generated based on their decontamination decision. HSRP also
developed DeconST, a remediation decision support tool, for buildings/facilities that are
contaminated with chemical threats. This tool presents a comparison of various remediation
6 On-Scene Coordinators (OSCs) are the federal officials responsible for monitoring or directing responses to all oil spills and
hazardous substance releases reported to the federal government.
7 Water programs, Land & Emergency Management programs, and EPA Regions.
8 Partners include: Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Department of Defense (DoD), Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), National Institute of Health (NIH), National Science Foundation
(NSF), Department of Energy (DOE), and Department of Agriculture (DOA).
9 For more information, see: https://www.dhs.gov/water-and-wastewater-systems-sector.
10 These examples include the Corpus Christie drinking water system incident and threats made by ISIS to German water systems.
77
-------
technologies, estimates waste and cost, and allows decision makers to compare different
remediation options.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.3, Revitalize Land and Prevent
Contamination in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan.
• Characterizing Contamination and Assessing Exposure
During an incident, EPA oversees and provides support to state and local governments for
site characterization11 and remediation of contaminated water systems, and indoor and
outdoor areas. HSRP activities in this topic fill critical scientific research gaps by providing
the science needed for effective sampling strategy development; developing sampling and
analysis methods for biological contaminants, and developing methods to assess exposure
pathways for biological contamination to inform all aspects of the response. In FY 2019,
HSRP will:
o Develop innovative bio-threat agent sampling and analytical methods for the Selected
Analytical Methods (SAM) for Environmental Remediation and Recovery document,
available on a publically-accessible website, to support post-incident decisions regarding
exposure assessment, remediation, and re-occupancy.12
o Develop sample strategy options for characterization after a wide-area biological incident
and sampling methods to reduce the logistical burden of characterization,
o Inform sampling and decontamination decision making through the study of the fate and
transport of bio-threat agents after a release in an urban environment.
• Water System Security and Resilience
As the lead Agency overseeing the Water Sector, EPA addresses Water Sector research
needs identified by the Water Sector Coordinating Council and the Water Government
Coordinating Council's Critical Infrastructure Partnership Advisory Council.13 The
following research in this topic describes how HSRP will develop tools and data to address
water system contamination and water system disaster resilience. In FY 2019, HSRP will:
o Provide solutions for water contamination incidents by conducting field-scale
evaluations of water contamination sensors, decontamination methodologies, and water
treatment at the Water Security Test Bed. Data from these studies are made available to
water utilities through outreach activities with utilities,
o Develop methods to decontaminate infrastructure and manage contaminated water for
priority contaminants, including studying their fate and transport in infrastructure to
inform sampling and decontamination strategies.
11 The process of identifying and quantifying the contaminants in environmental samples of a site to determine the nature and extent
of contamination present.
12 To access, please see: https://www.epa.gov/homeland-securitv-research/sam.
13 The Water Sector Coordinating Council is a "self-organized, self-run, and self-governed council" composed of water utilities.
This council facilitates the development of policy impacting the water sector. The Water Government Coordinating Council was
formed as the federal government counterpart to the Water Sector Coordinating Council and is responsible for interagency
coordination of efforts related to the water sector.
78
-------
• Remediating Wide Areas
EPA will continue to address critical scientific knowledge gaps in responding to and
recovering from wide-area biological attacks on urban centers and public areas. EPA will
develop tools, methods, and technologies for decision makers and OSCs to respond to
disasters, providing solutions that optimize cleanup efficacy, and minimize cost, recovery
time, and unintended consequences. In FY 2019, HSRP will:
o Provide decision makers real-time access to the latest research supporting remediation
by developing a database that catalogs data on the effectiveness of decontamination
technologies and operational and logistical considerations,
o Improve sampling and decontamination decision-making through the development of a
proof-of-concept, virtual-reality training tool that allows the user a simulated sampling
and decontamination experience. This tool will support pre-incident training and
reduce the time responders spend in the hot zone during a response,
o Develop approaches to improve the capacity to conduct large-scale bio-agent cleanup
including methods that are widely available to local, state and federal responders, such
as municipal equipment (e.g., street sweepers) and commercial off-the-shelf methods for
effective distribution of decontaminants (e.g., pool chemicals),
o Develop scalable decontamination technologies for wide-area use and waste
management approaches for chemical, biological, and radiological incidents. For
chemical threats, approaches will predict decontamination efficacy and provide a basis
for field-scale testing of remediation methods. All methods developed are transitioned
to state, local, and federal responders through guidance developed by HSRP's Program
Office Partners.14
Radiation Monitoring
The RadNet fixed monitoring network provides near real-time radiation monitoring coverage near
each of the 100 most populous U.S. cities as well as expanded geographic coverage for a total of
140 monitoring sites. The RadNet air monitoring network will provide the Agency, first
responders, and the public with greater access to data, and should there be a radiological
emergency, improve officials' ability to make decisions about protecting public health and the
environment during and after an incident. Additionally, the data will be used by scientists to better
characterize the effect of a radiological incident.
In FY 2019, the Agency will continue to operate and maintain the RadNet air monitoring network,
providing essential maintenance to routinely operating fixed stations. Fixed stations will operate
in conjunction with available deployable monitors during a radiological incident.
14 Office of Land and Emergency Management's Office of Emergency Management and Office of Resource Conservation and
Recovery.
79
-------
Performance Measure Targets:
(HSl) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Homeland
Security research program.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
100
100
(HS2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients and partners to
improve their capabilities to respond to contamination resulting from homeland
security events and related disasters.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
100
100
The tables reflect the HSRP's annual performance measures. EPA uses these measures to assess
its effectiveness in delivering needed products and outputs to clients (decision-makers, states, and
local governments).
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$269.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$244.0/ -1.0 FTE) This program change reflects a decrease in FTE and contract dollars
used to keep RadNet capabilities current with technology to monitor the nation's air,
precipitation, and drinking water for radiation.
• (+$910.0/ +5.0 FTE) This program change reflects an increase for a focused effort to meet
EPA's responsibilities as the water Sector-Specific Agency (SSA) implementing specific
statutory and Presidential directives relating to water security.
• (-$929.0/ -4.0 FTE) This changes EPA's timeline to carry out its mandates to develop
strategies and methods for characterizing, decontaminating, and managing waste from an
intentional or unintentional release of chemical and radiological agents that results from
currently understood threats.
• (-$843.0/ -0.3 FTE) This program change refocuses resources from the development of
tools to support resilience of water systems, including response to contamination
incidents, and evaluation of sensors to support detection of contamination.
Statutory Authority:
Atomic Energy Act of 1954; Clean Air Act, §§ 102, 103; Comprehensive Environmental Response
Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), §§ 104-106; Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), §§
1431-1435, 1442; Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act; National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997, §§ 1411-1412; Public Health Security and
Bioterrorism Preparedness Response Act of 2002; Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), § 10;
Oil Pollution Act (OPA); Pollution Prevention Act (PPA); Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA); Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA); Clean Water
80
-------
Act; Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA); Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA); Food Safety Modernization Act
(FSMA), §§ 203, 208.
81
-------
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure
Program Area: Homeland Security
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
S4.918.0
$5,336.0
$4,986.0
-$350.0
Science JS t echnology
S43S.0
S 44(t.O
S 500.0
S 54.0
Building and Facilities
$6,119.2
$6,631.0
$6,176.0
-$455.0
Hazardous Substance Superfund
$1,306.2
$934.0
$934.0
$0.0
Total Budget Authority
$12,781.4
$13,347.0
$12,596.0
-$751.0
Total Workyears
5.9
12.2
12.2
0.0
Program Project Description:
This program supports activities to ensure that EPA's physical structures and assets are secure and
operational and that certain physical security measures are in place to help safeguard staff in the
event of an emergency. These efforts also protect the capability of EPA's vital laboratory
infrastructure assets. Specifically, funds within this appropriation support security needs for the
National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory (NVFEL).
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan.
In FY 2019, the Agency will continue to provide enhanced physical security for the NVFEL
and its employees. This funding supports the incremental cost of security enhancements
required as part of an Agency security assessment review.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$55.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$1.0) This program change reduces the budget for infrastructure security at the Agency's
National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory (NVFEL).
82
-------
Statutory Authority:
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004; Homeland Security Act of 2002;
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485
(codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute).
83
-------
IT/ Data Management/ Security
84
-------
IT / Data Management
Program Area: IT / Data Management / Security
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$82,580.0
$83,179.0
$69,264.0
-$13,915.0
Science A- t echnology
S 3J-I2.0
S_\ '25.0
-S.W.0
Hazardous Substance Superfund
$14,691.5
$13,720.0
$13,720.0
$0.0
Total Budget Authority
$100,613.5
$99,967.0
$85,709.0
-$14,258.0
Total Workyears
441.0
498.3
457.9
-40.4
Program Project Description:
EPA's Information Technology /Data Management (IT/DM) program promotes the use of quality
environmental information for informing decisions, improving management, documenting
performance, and measuring success, which supports the Agency's mission to protect public health
and the environment. Science and Technology (S&T) resources for EPA's IT/DM program fund
the following activities: Quality Program,15 EPA libraries, and One EPA Web.
The Quality Program provides quality policies and practices that are intended to ensure that all
environmentally-related data activities performed by or for the Agency will result in the production
of data that are of adequate quality to support their intended uses. In order for the data to be used
with a high degree of certainty for intended users, the quality of the data must be known and
documented. The Quality Program provides Quality Assurance (QA) policies, training, oversight
and technical support to assist EPA's programs in implementing quality management systems for
all environmental data operations. The Quality Program also oversees the implementation of
EPA's Information Quality Guidelines.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. The Quality Program will continue to
provide technical support to all EPA program/regional offices and laboratories in implementing
EPA quality policies, procedures and standards. In FY 2019, the Quality Program plans to conduct
several Quality Management Plan reviews and Quality System Assessments for selected EPA
programs. These oversight activities help ensure the quality of EPA's data for intended uses,
including environmental decision-making. Additionally, the Quality Program will provide
oversight of EPA's Information Quality Guidelines and facilitate the development of agency
responses to public requests for correction of information disseminated by EPA. The Agency's
15 More information about EPA Quality Program can be found at http://www.eDa.gov/qualitv.
85
-------
S&T resources for IT/DM also will help provide library services to all EPA employees and the
public, as well as support the hosting of EPA's websites and Web pages.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$526.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$869.0/ -3.6 FTE) This program change reflects a reduction to the technical support for
conducting quality assurance oversight, training, policy development, and support for
agency-wide quality activities.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA); Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA); Clean Air Act (CAA); Clean Water Act
(CWA); Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide
Act (FIFRA); Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA); Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA); Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA);
Government Management Reform Act (GMRA); Clinger-Cohen Act (CCA); Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA); Freedom of Information Act (FOIA); Controlled Substances Act (CSA).
86
-------
Operations and Administration
87
-------
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$293,997.9
$305,844.0
$300,738.0
-$5,106.0
Science JS t echnology
S(,2. "
sos.s.u.o
S V5VM
Building and Facilities
$26,065.5
$27,602.0
$33,377.0
$5,775.0
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
$502.2
$793.0
$773.0
-$20.0
Inland Oil Spill Programs
$376.2
$580.0
$665.0
$85.0
Hazardous Substance Superfund
$69,651.3
$75,985.0
$74,144.0
-$1,841.0
Total Budget Authority
$455,235.8
$478,679.0
$478,531.0
-$148.0
Total Workyears
323.4
356.7
318.0
-38.7
Program Project Description:
Science & Technology (S&T) resources in the Facilities Infrastructure and Operations program
fund rent, utilities, and security. This program also supports centralized administrative activities
and support services, including health and safety, environmental compliance and management,
facilities maintenance and operations, energy conservation, sustainable buildings programs, and
space planning. Funding is allocated for such services among the major appropriations for the
Agency.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness in
EPA's FY 2018-2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to invest to reconfigure EPA's
workspaces, enabling the Agency to release office space and reduce long-term rent costs,
consistent with HR 4465,16 the Federal Assets Sale and Transfer Act of 2016. Between FY 2015
and FY 2022 EPA will have released over 850,000 square feet of space nationwide, resulting in a
cumulative annual rent avoidance of nearly $30 million across all appropriations. These savings
help offset EPA's escalating rent and security costs.
S&T resources fund FY 2019 planned laboratory consolidations in Athens, GA, Willamette, OR,
and Gross lie, MI. Planned consolidations through FY 2019 will allow EPA to release an estimated
306,000 square feet of space. For FY 2019, the Agency is requesting $28.75 million for rent,
$19.66 million for utilities, and $13.92 million for security in the S&T appropriation.
16 For additional information, refer to: https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/4465. Federal Assets Sale and
Transfer Act of 2016.
88
-------
Performance Measure Targets:
FY 2018
FY 2019
(FAl) Reduction in EPA Space (sq. ft. owned and leased).
Target
Target
241,000
65,000
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$302.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (+$299.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
rent, utilities and security.
• (+$358.0) This program change reflects an increase to support facility operations to meet
basic needs and to fund cost escalation for contracts that support activities like custodial,
landscaping, and warehouse activities at EPA's research and development facilities and
laboratories.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Property and Administration Services Act; Public Building Act; Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act; Clean Water Act; Clean Air Act; Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act
(CERFA); Energy Policy Act of 2005; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as
amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485 (codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute).
89
-------
Workforce Reshaping
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
so.o
so.o
$25.549.0
$25,549.0
Science JS t echnology
so.o
so.o
S 5.1V4.0
S \VV-l.0
Total Budget Authority
$0.0
$0.0
$31,543.0
$31,543.0
Program Project Description:
Science and Technology (S&T) resources for the workforce reshaping program support
organizational restructuring efforts throughout the Agency. To help achieve its mission, EPA will
develop, review and analyze mission requirements and implement options to effectively align and
redistribute the Agency's workforce based on program priorities, resource reallocation, and
technological advances.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. Effective workforce reshaping is critical to
EPA's ability to accomplish its mission. EPA will be examining our statutory functions and
processes to eliminate inefficiencies and streamline our processes. Primary criteria will include
effectiveness and accountability, as EPA is focused on greater value and real results. These
analyses will likely create a need to reshape the workforce. The Agency anticipates the need to
offer voluntary early out retirement authority (VERA) and voluntary separation incentive pay
(VSIP), and potentially relocation expenses, as part of the workforce reshaping effort.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$5,994.0) In support of the reprioritization of agency activities, this increase will support:
o Voluntary early out retirement authority
o Voluntary separation incentive pay
o Workforce support costs for relocation of employees as we realign work assignments.
90
-------
Statutory Authority:
5 U.S.C. 8336(d)(2) includes the statutory VERA provisions for employees covered by the Civil
Service Retirement System. 5 U.S.C. 8414(b)(1)(B) includes the statutory VERA provisions for
employees covered by the Federal Employees Retirement System. Section 1313(b) of the Chief
Human Capital Officers Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-296, approved November 25, 2002)
authorized the VSIP option under regulations issued by OPM, as codified in sections 3521 to 3525
of title 5, United States Code (U.S.C.).
91
-------
Pesticides Licensing
92
-------
Pesticides: Protect Human Health from Pesticide Risk
Program Area: Pesticides Licensing
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Ensure Safety of Chemicals in the Marketplace
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$56,911.0
$55,696.0
$45,949.0
-$9,747.0
Science A- t echnology
S.\0'J0.0
S 2,-100.0
-SM-/.0
Total Budget Authority
$59,849.3
$58,786.0
$48,355.0
-$10,431.0
Total Workyears
413.6
418.7
416.5
-2.2
Program Project Description:
EPA's Pesticide Program screens new pesticides before they reach the market and ensures that
pesticides already in commerce are safe. As directed by Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (F1FRA), the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as amended by
the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996, as well as the Pesticide Registration
Improvement Extension Act of 201217 (or subsequent legislation), EPA is responsible for
registering and re-evaluating pesticides to protect consumers, pesticide users, workers who may
be exposed to pesticides, children, and other sensitive populations. To make regulatory decisions
and establish tolerances (maximum allowable pesticide residues on food and feed) for food use
pesticides and for residential or non-occupational use, EPA must find the pesticide safe, including
cumulative and aggregate risks, and ensure extra protection for children. The Agency must balance
the risks and benefits of other uses.
EPA's Chemical Safety, Pollution Prevention and Pesticide program operates two laboratories that
support the goal of protecting human health and the environment through diverse analytical testing
and analytical method development and validation efforts. The laboratories also provide a variety
of technical services to EPA, other federal and state agencies, tribal nations, and other
organizations.
EPA's Microbiology Laboratory
The Microbiology Laboratory develops and standardizes product efficacy test methods for public
health pesticides (i.e., antimicrobial pesticides) and generates data to support programmatic
decision-making. Antimicrobial pesticides are essential in combating pathogenic microorganisms
on environmental surfaces, including surfaces contaminated with new and emerging pathogens.
17 Authority provided under the Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act of 2012 expired on September 30, 2017.
Authority to continue to collect fees has been authorized by H.R. 601 - Continuing Appropriations Act, 2018, and subsequent
Continuing Resolutions through February 8, 2018.
93
-------
The Microbiology Laboratory leads the federal effort on designing and standardizing ways to test
important infectious agents such as Clostridium difficile (C. difficile) and multi-drug resistant
Candida auris. Deaths related to C. difficile (hospital-acquired infections) continue to increase due
in part to a stronger germ strain, and have now reached -14,000 deaths per year. Almost half of
the infections occur in people younger than 65, but more than 90 percent of the deaths occur in
people 65 and older.18 The organism has been shown to persist in the hospital environment, and
disinfectants are essential to reduce disease transmission. As of August 31, 2017, a total 153 cases
of multidrug resistant Candida auris infections have been reported to CDC from 10 states in the
U.S.19 This multi-drug resistant Candida auris is emerging globally and can cause serious and
sometimes fatal fungal infections. Any new emerging human or animal pathogen (H1N1,
Clostridium difficile, MRSA, etc.) represents a new method-development challenge for evaluating
disinfectants. The goal is to standardize the procedures to ensure consistent data from the testing
community. In 2017 and at the request of CDC, the laboratory mobilized quickly to develop a new
test methodology and efficacy data to ensure that guidance to hospitals is adequate for
environmental cleaning and disinfection of the multi-drug resistant Candida auris. The laboratory
also updated the regulatory guidance and test methods for C. difficile in 2017 to ensure the efficacy
of antimicrobial products for this pathogen.
The laboratory also is leading efforts to evaluate an internationally harmonized efficacy test
method, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) quantitative test
method, as well as methods for Pseudomonas and Staphylococcus biofilms, feline calcivirus,
Mycobacterium, and a new quantitative test method for evaluating hospital disinfectant towelette
formulations. Final guidance and test methods for registering claims against biofilms were issued
in 2017.
The laboratory analyzed data from two collaborative studies in FY 2016 for the towelette method
and the virus component of the OECD method. Following data analysis, methods also will be
adopted or placed under review at standard-setting organizations such as the American Society for
Testing and Materials or Association of Official Analytical Communities. Methods are posted at
https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-analvtical-methods/antimicrobial-testing-methods-procedures-
devel oped-epas-mi crobi ol ogv.
EPA's Analytical Chemistry Laboratory
The Analytical Chemistry Laboratory provides technical review of enforcement methods and
method validation and serves as a third-party confirmation laboratory. In addition, the laboratory
provides analytical and technical support to Regional Offices in enforcement cases, such as
evaluating possible adverse effects of pesticide use, including contaminated, deficient, or illegally
labeled products. The laboratory develops and validates multi-residue pesticide methods to
monitor and enforce agricultural uses of pesticides, and to analyze for pesticide residues in water,
soil, bees, crops, feeds. Multi-residue methods are a quicker and more cost effective "one-stop-
shop" method for multiple (100+) pesticides, based on their mode of action and chemical
properties. The laboratory is leading a team of chemists from EPA's Pesticide Programs, Food and
18 http://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2012/pQ306 cdiff.html.
19 https://www.cdc.gov/fungal/diseases/candidiasis/c-auris-alert-09-17.html.
94
-------
Drug Administration, United States Department of Agriculture, and Canada's Pest Management
Regulatory Agency in the update of the agency's 860.1360 Residue Chemistry Guidelines for
Multi-Residue Methods. The new guidelines, when approved as a replacement for the current
guideline (written in 1987), will enable the submission of multi-residue methods for use in
enforcement and tolerance setting, based on more cost effective and reliable techniques.
The Analytical Chemistry Laboratory works to standardize analytical methods that provide the
Agency with scientifically valid data for use in risk assessment. One example, is the
standardization of a tarp testing method to assist EPA in establishing measures to reduce potential
exposures from soil fumigants to agricultural workers and bystanders. The work involved
developing and validating a method to generate data for determining the permeability of fumigants
through agricultural tarps. This data is used to establish a buffer zone credit when agricultural tarps
are used, with the least permeable tarp getting the highest buffer zone reduction. They also provide
crop growers with information to determine the best tarps for their practices. The method is now
standardized by the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) International, and allows
tarps manufacturers to generate such data when applying for a buffer zone credit for newly
manufactured tarps. The laboratory continues to support EPA by reviewing and commenting on
such data.
The Analytical Chemistry Laboratory also operates EPA National Pesticide Standard Repository
(NPSR), which collects and maintains pesticide standards (samples of pure active ingredients or
technical grade active ingredients for pesticides). It distributes these standards (-5,000 per year)
to EPA and other federal, state, and tribal laboratories involved in pesticide use enforcement.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.4, Ensure Safety of Chemicals in the
Marketplace in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, the Agency will protect human
health by ensuring the availability of appropriate analytical methods for analyzing pesticide
residues in food, feed, water, soil, and bees (and their products), and ensuring their suitability for
monitoring pesticide residues, and enforcing tolerances. The Microbiology laboratory will
continue with efficacy testing of antimicrobials; complete current method development activities;
present data to the international community on the OECD collaborative data and determine the
course of action with respect to the method; initiate method development on Legionella; participate
in an industry-led collaborative on Salmonella; and initiate a collaborative study with
Trichophyton. The laboratory will assist with efforts to formulate a new regulatory schematic for
evaluating claims based on use of a disinfectant hierarchy for establishing efficacy claims for
antimicrobials. Post-registration testing of antimicrobials enables the agency to remove ineffective
products from the market. When EPA labs develops new methods, the regulated community is
able to register new products for use against emerging pathogens.
Additionally, EPA will continue to do the following in FY2019:
• Develop improved analytical methods using state of the art instruments to replace outdated
methods, thus increasing laboratory efficiency and accuracy of the data
95
-------
• Provide analytical support to fill in data gaps for the Pesticide Programs' risk assessment
and for Section 18 emergency exemptions, and to perform studies for use in risk mitigation
• Provide analytical assistance and technical advice to all regional offices in their
enforcement cases
• Operate EPA's National Pesticide Standard Repository (NPSR)
• Verify that antimicrobial pesticides are properly formulated
• Validate, optimize, and standardize a method to determine permeability of agricultural
tarps for fumigants
Performance Measure Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the Pesticides: Protect the Environment
from Pesticide Risk program under the EPM appropriation.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$385.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$1,069.0/ -1.3 FTE) This program change is a reduction for pesticide program activities
from annual appropriations with the intent to increase utilization of pesticide user fee
collections. Proposed legislative language accompanying the President's Budget will
expand EPA's scope of activities that can be funded with user fees.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA), §408.
96
-------
Pesticides: Protect the Environment from Pesticide Risk
Program Area: Pesticides Licensing
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Ensure Safety of Chemicals in the Marketplace
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$36,654.9
$38,302.0
$28,727.0
-$9,575.0
Science JS t echnology
S 2.0-10.2
.S 2.32x0
S 2.122.0
-S 20.10
Total Budget Authority
$38,701.1
$40,627.0
$30,849.0
-$9,778.0
Total Workyears
271.1
269.3
268.4
-0.9
Program Project Description:
The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), Section 3(c)(5), states that the
Administrator shall register a pesticide if it is determined that, when used in accordance with
labeling and common practices, the product "will also not generally cause unreasonable adverse
effects on the environment." FIFRA defines "unreasonable adverse effects on the environment",
as "any unreasonable risk to man or the environment, taking into account the economic, social,
and environmental costs and benefits of the use of any pesticide."20
In compliance with FIFRA, EPA conducts risk assessments using the latest scientific methods to
determine the risks that pesticides pose to human health and ecological effects on plants, animals,
and ecosystems that are not the targets of the pesticide. The Agency's significant regulatory
decisions are posted for review and comment to ensure that these actions are transparent and to
allow stakeholders, including at-risk populations, to be engaged in decisions that affect their
environment. EPA must determine that food and residential uses of pesticides are safe. For other
risk concerns, EPA must balance the risks of the pesticides with benefits provided from the use of
the product. To avoid unreasonable risks, EPA may impose risk mitigation measures such as
modifying use rates or application methods, restricting uses, or denying some or all uses. In some
regulatory decisions, EPA may determine that uncertainties in the risk determination need to be
reduced and may require monitoring of environmental conditions, such as effects on water sources
or the development and submission of additional laboratory or field study data by the pesticide
registrant.
In addition to FIFRA responsibilities, the Agency has responsibilities under the Endangered
Species Act (ESA).21 Under the ESA, EPA must ensure that pesticide regulatory decisions will not
destroy or adversely modify designated critical habitat or result in jeopardy to the continued
20
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act. Sections 2 and 3, Definitions, Registration of Pesticides (7 U.S.C. §§ 136,
136a). Available online at http://www.epa.gov/opp00001/regulating/laws.htm.
21
The Endangered Species Act of 1973 sections 7(a)(1) and 7 (a)(2); Federal Agency Actions and Consultations (16 U.S.C.
1536(a)). Available at U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered Species Act of 1973 internet site:
http://www.fws.gov/endangered/laws-policies/section-7.html.
97
-------
existence of species listed by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) or National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) as threatened or endangered. Where risks are identified, EPA must work
with the FWS and NMFS in a consultation process to ensure these pesticide registrations also will
meet the ESA standard.
The national program laboratories of EPA's Pesticide Programs provide a diverse range of
environmental data that EPA uses to make informed regulatory decisions. The Analytical
Chemistry Laboratory and the Microbiology Laboratory each provide critical laboratory testing
and support activities to assist the decision-making processes of the Agency. The laboratories
develop methods to test the efficacy of antimicrobial pesticides, evaluate the efficacy of
antimicrobial products, and validate analytical chemistry methods to ensure that the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA), the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), EPA, and states
have reliable methods to measure and monitor pesticide residues in food and in the environment.
EPA's Microbiology Laboratory
The Microbiology Laboratory ensures that antimicrobial pesticides deliver intended results by
evaluating efficacy and registrant claims. The laboratory provides analyses that support the
development of efficacy data for pesticides used for the decontamination of buildings (such as
chlorine dioxide), supports research on methods and rapid detection assays, and evaluates
commercial products used for the remediation and decontamination of sites contaminated with
biothreat agents such as Bacillus anthracis (commonly known as anthrax). Work conducted by the
laboratory led to a regulatory framework for licensing products against Bacillus anthracis as
outlined in Pesticide Registration Notice 2008-2. Several products are now registered against this
biothreat agent. The Microbiology Laboratory is the only EPA laboratory with a select agent
registration under the CDC's select agent program, enabling the laboratory to receive, transfer,
and work with Bacillus anthracis.
EPA's Analytical Chemistry Laboratory
The Analytical Chemistry Branch Laboratory supports the work of EPA to determine the
ecological risks that pesticides pose to ecosystems, plants, and animals, such as bees, that are not
the targets of the pesticide by bringing new analytical methods online and using in-house expertise
to develop and validate multi-residue pesticide analytical methods. Additional benefits are gained
by transferring technologies, such as the multi-residue methods, to other EPA organizations and
state laboratories for use in monitoring pesticide residues in the environment and ecological
systems, and the standard method for testing permeability of agricultural tarps to fumigants, which
is currently used by tarp manufacturers to measure the efficiency of newly developed and
manufactured tarps.
The Analytical Chemistry Laboratory will continue to provide analytical support to fill data gaps
for the pesticide program's risk assessments and for Section 18 emergency exemptions, and to
perform studies for use in risk mitigation. Support includes working collaboratively with the
United States Geological Survey (USGS), if requested, to identify the presence of pesticides in
rivers and streams across the nation. These data will allow USGS and EPA to study the patterns
of exposure of agricultural and urban ecosystems to pesticides. The Analytical Chemistry
98
-------
Laboratory also provides analytical assistance and technical advice to all EPA Regional Offices
for use in enforcement cases and reviews and validates analytical methods or studies submitted as
part of a pesticide registration.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.4, Ensure Safety of Chemicals in the
Marketplace in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. The Microbiology Laboratory is working
with the Department of Homeland Security to evaluate various materials (wood, concrete, fabric,
tile, etc.) for recovery (e.g., extracting the microbe of interest) of high consequence animal
pathogens (foot and mouth disease, avian influenza etc.) and the effect of decontamination
technologies (including National Stockpile chemicals) on these viruses. The goal is to develop a
methodology for evaluating antimicrobial pesticides against these pathogenic agents. These types
of hard and porous materials are found at sites requiring remediation due to contamination with
non-spore forming high consequence animal pathogens that can have a negative impact on the
economy. Particular interest to the Microbiology Laboratory are methods for evaluating
decontamination technologies for avian influenza (outbreaks due to migratory birds have affected
the poultry industry in the United States).
The Analytical Chemistry Laboratory will continue to focus on analytical method development
and validations as well as special studies to address specific short-term, rapid-turnaround priority
issues. The laboratory also will continue to provide technical and analytical assistance to EPA's
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program and EPA Regional Offices in support of their
enforcement cases. If requested by USGS, analytical support will continue in the sixth year of a
multi-year multi agency (EPA and USGS) project to assess the quality of rivers and streams across
the United States. The lab will continue to support pesticide registration review and U.S. tarp
manufacturers by reviewing the permeability data of fumigants through newly manufactured tarps.
In an effort to reduce emission of soil fumigants into the air, the Agency established certain buffer
zone credits based on the tarps' permeability: the lower the permeability of a tarp, the lower the
emission of fumigants into the air, and more fumigant remains in the soil for pest control. Thus,
EPA can allow a greater buffer zone reduction credit. Pollinators are another key contributor to
enhancing productivity. The Analytical Chemistry Laboratory will continue to work to understand
the effects on pollinators as part of the program's existing registration and registration review
processes.
Performance Measure Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the Pesticides: Protect the Environment
from Pesticide Risk program under the EPM appropriation.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$47.0) This change to fixed and other costs is a decrease due to the recalculation of base
workforce costs due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$156.0/ - 0.9 FTE) This program change reflects a reduction for pesticide program
activities from annual appropriations with the intent to increase utilization of pesticide user
99
-------
fee collections. Proposed legislative language accompanying the President's Budget will
expand EPA's scope of activities that can be funded with user fees.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); Endangered Species Act (ESA).
100
-------
Pesticides: Realize the Value of Pesticide Availability
Program Area: Pesticides Licensing
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Ensure Safety of Chemicals in the Marketplace
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$5,554.3
$6,191.0
$5,084.0
-$1,107.0
Science it- Technology
S5-W. 1
S
s xW.o
-S -11.0
Total Budget Authority
$6,102.4
$6,762.0
$5,614.0
-$1,148.0
Total Workyears
34.9
46.5
46.3
-0.2
Program Project Description:
The Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention's national program laboratories make significant
contributions to help the Agency realize the value of pesticides.
EPA's Microbiology Laboratory
The Microbiology Laboratory evaluates and develops data to support Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (F1FRA) Section 18 Emergency Exemption requests to combat
emerging or novel pathogens such as prions, new use sites (such as those colonized by biofilms,
including sinks, drains, and water lines) and also conducts applied research on new analytical
methods for novel antimicrobials. In many cases of new claims or pathogens, there is no standard
method for determining efficacy of a pesticide product. For example, it is recognized that
microorganisms that exist as biofilm communities may be more resistant to disinfection, which
can cause issues in healthcare settings. In FY 2018, the laboratory developed and released new,
innovative methods for testing antimicrobial products against biofilms. These biofilm methods
will open the marketplace for pesticide registrants to register antimicrobial products to control
biofilms in health care settings. The laboratory has technical expertise managing unusual
pathogens for which registration of a pesticide might not be economically viable under FIFRA
Section 3 Registration. The evaluation of these requests is necessary in order to make pesticides
available in the marketplace for these unusual or emergency situations. Examples include the
H1N1 virus, prions, foot and mouth disease, Severe Acute Respiratory (SAR) infections,
Clostridium difficile, and multi-drug resistant Candida auris. The Microbiological Laboratory also
evaluates the efficacy of antimicrobials to allow EPA to remove ineffective products from the
market. In addition, the Microbiology Laboratory provides technical support on numerous non-
standard protocols for antimicrobials, including: foggers, chemicals used for inactivation of prions,
use of citric acid for control of foot and mouth disease and evaluation of requests from other federal
agencies to use paraformaldehyde for decontamination of laboratory environments.
101
-------
EPA's Analytical Chemistry Laboratory (ACB)
The ACB Laboratory works to protect human health by developing methods and providing
analytical support to EPA Regions in their investigation and enforcement of illegal and misuse of
pesticide products. The Analytical Chemistry Branch (ACB) Laboratory efforts and successes
resulted in standardizing the fumigation tarp protocol through the American Society for Testing
and Materials (ASTM) international. They also provided tarp manufacturers with a method to test
their newly manufactured tarps before submitting data to the Agency to request a buffer zone
credit22 to reduce the required buffer zone, when a fumigant is used as pest control in the field.
The ACB Laboratory supports work to protect growers from crop damage caused by application
drift. Methods were developed to detect low levels of pesticides as evidence of drift and shared
with EPA regional laboratories. The laboratory also provided scientific data to EPA for use in
mitigating drift and volatilization of herbicides, such as Dicamba. The Laboratory continues with
method development in this area, and with providing technical and analytical support to EPA
Regions that are affected by drift of Dicamba products.
The ACB Laboratory works to protect human health by developing methods and providing
analytical support to EPA Regions in their investigation and enforcement of illegal and misuse of
pesticide products.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.4, Ensure Safety of Chemicals in the
Marketplace in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will realize the benefits
of pesticides by operating the National Pesticide Standard Repository and conducting chemistry
and efficacy testing for antimicrobials. As the recognized source for expertise in pesticide
analytical method development, EPA's laboratories will continue to provide quality assurance and
technical support and training to EPA's Regional Offices, state laboratories, and other federal
agencies that implement FIFRA.
The Microbiology Laboratory will continue to evaluate Section 18 emergency exemptions and
novel protocol requests for new uses and novel pathogens. The Analytical Chemistry Laboratory
will continue its work with the IR-4 Global Study and IR-4 Crop Group Validation Study.
Performance Measure Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the Pesticides: Protect the Environment
from Pesticide Risk program under the EPM appropriation.
22htto://www.epa.gov/soil-fumigants/calculating-buffer-zones-guide-applicators.
102
-------
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$58.0) This change to fixed and other costs is a decrease due to the recalculation of base
workforce costs due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (+$17.0/ - 0.2 FTE) This program change reflects an increase in funding for pesticide
laboratory operations and maintenance activities.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA), §408.
103
-------
Research: Air and Energy
104
-------
Research: Air and Energy
Program Area: Research: Air and Energy
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Prioritize Robust Science
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Science A- t echnology
s w.tr<>.2
svi.:s:.o
S.W. -/1.0
Total Budget Authority
$90,076.2
$91,282.0
$30,711.0
-$60,571.0
Total Workyears
281.4
287.8
153.8
-134.0
Program Project Description:
The Air and Energy (A&E) research program provides scientific information to EPA programs
and regional offices. The overall research effort in EPA is organized around six integrated and
transdisciplinary national research programs. Each program is guided by a Strategic Research
Action Plan (StRAP) that is the result of a collaboration with, and supportive of, EPA's program
and regional offices.
The resources requested for A&E will support the analysis of research data and publish scientific
journal articles to disseminate findings from prior EPA air quality, emissions, and health impacts
research. This program also will offer critical science support to provide essential science and tools
for policy decisions and public awareness on the topics described below in the FY 2019 Activities
and Performance Plan section. The A&E research program relies on successful partnerships with
other EPA research programs, offices, academic and industry researchers, states, local and private
sector organizations, as well as key federal agencies.
Recent accomplishments in the A&E research program include:
• Reducing the Environmental Public Health Burden of Wildfires:
Within the last decade, wildfires have increased in frequency and intensity and now burn
more than 7 million acres annually, 40 percent more than previous decades.23 Wildland
fires are a national challenge impacting public and environmental health, as well as the
economy. EPA provided leadership on this issue by conducting research to improve
affected communities' understanding of wildland fire emissions and provided improved air
quality modeling of wildland fire plume rise, transport, and chemical evolution. This
information is critical to states impacted by wildland fires in order for them to make timely
decisions about fire response. EPA conducted toxicological studies to differentiate how
wildland fire smoke impacts human health compared with a typical urban environment,
and also how the different phases of combustion (flaming to smoldering) impact human
health. This research led to the development of a Wildfire Smoke Guide24 for public health
23 For more information, see: http://www.nifc.gov/fireInfo/fireInfo stats totalFires.html.
24 For more information, see: https://www3 .epa.gov/airnow/wildfire mav2016.pdf.
105
-------
officials, as well as an innovative Smoke Sense mobile application25 for the public
impacted by wildfires. The Smoke Sense application provides information on air quality
and strategies to protect the users' health from smoke exposure. In the first month after its
release on August 1, 2017, there have been 5,000 downloads of the application for use.26
• Disparities in Public Health Impacts of Air Pollutants:
More than 120 million Americans live in counties with monitored air at values greater than
EPA regulations for at least one criteria pollutant.27 Some Americans experience more
symptoms and health impacts related to air pollution than others. EPA scientists examined
how a number of factors could affect how an individual responds to exposure to air
pollution, including poverty level, lack of access to health care, education, diet, and
housing. This research showed that those with cardiovascular disease who live in
disadvantaged neighborhoods are more susceptible to air pollution than those living in
more affluent neighborhoods.
• NAAQS and Air Monitoring Support to State Air programs:
In 2016, about 40 percent of the U.S. population lived in counties with air monitored air
values greater than EPA regulations for at least one criteria pollutant. EPA declared three
regions in northern Utah as non-attainment areas in 2009. These areas were reclassified as
"serious" non-attainment on December 16, 2016. Utilizing EPA's unique measurement
capabilities and expertise, these results aided the Utah Department of Environmental
Quality in developing a State Implementation Plan and informing potential control
strategies to address PM2.5 NAAQS non-attainment. This research also can be applied to
other states with similar pollution problems.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.3, Prioritize Robust Science in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. The A&E program features five related topic areas that include
research projects that support EPA's mission to protect human health and the environment, fulfill
the Agency's legislative mandates and advance cross-agency priorities. The A&E program will
continue to measure progress toward environmental health goals, and translate research results to
inform communities and individuals about measures to reduce impacts of air pollution. In addition,
research personnel will continue to analyze existing data from EPA air quality, emissions and
health impacts research, and publish scientific journal articles to disseminate findings associated
with these data. To support states and tribes, EPA will deliver state-of-the-art tools for states to
use in identifying effective emission reduction strategies to meet national ambient air quality
standards and enhance air quality measurement methods used to ascertain compliance with
NAAQS.
25_For more information, see: https://www3.epa.gov/air-research/smoke-sense.
26 Number derived from internal EPA metrics.
27 Obj ective 1.1 of Draft FY 2018-2022 EPA Strategic Plan.
106
-------
Performance Measure Targets:
(ACl) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Air and
Energy research program.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
100
100
(AC2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients for use in
improving air quality.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
100
100
The table reflects the A&E program's annual performance measures. EPA uses these measures to
assess our effectiveness in delivering needed products and outputs to clients and decision-makers
at the federal government level.
EPA has established a standing subcommittee under EPA's Board of Scientific Counselors
(BOSC) for the A&E program to evaluate its performance and provide feedback to the Agency. In
addition, EPA meets with the BOSC and Science Advisory Board (SAB) annually for input on
topics related to research program design, science quality, innovation, relevance and impact. EPA
will be advised on its strategic research direction as part of the review of the Research and
Development Programs' StRAPs.
EPA collaborates with the National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation, Department
of Energy, U.S. Department of Agriculture and the White House's Office of Science and
Technology Policy to assess research performance. EPA supports the interagency Science and
Technology in America's Reinvestment, Measuring the Effect of Research on Innovation,
Competitiveness and Science (STAR METRICS) efforts. ORD's state engagement program is
designed to inform states about ORD's research programs and role within EPA, and to enable
ORD to better understand the science needs of state environmental agencies. Key partners at the
state level include the Environmental Council of the States, with its Environmental Research
Institute of the States and the Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council, as well as state media
associations such as the Association of Air Pollution Control Agencies and the National
Association of Clean Air Agencies.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$1,922.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is a decrease due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce support and
benefit costs.
• (-$16,089.0/ -48.5 FTE) This program change eliminates climate change research.
• (-$32,105.0/ -85.5 FTE) This program change reduces air quality research.
• (-$10,455.0) This program change eliminates funding for the Science to Achieve Results
(STAR) program for FY 2019.
107
-------
Statutory Authority:
Clean Air Act; Title II of Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007; Environmental
Research, Development, and Demonstration Authorization Act (ERDDAA); Intergovernmental
Cooperation Act; National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), § 102; Pollution Prevention Act
(PPA); Global Change Research Act of 1990.
108
-------
Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
109
-------
Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
Program Area: Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Prioritize Robust Science
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Scii'iu v X h'c/iiioloxy
S
Sfi~.2fil.il
-S3 ft. 2 --I.II
Total Budget Authority
$104,687.6
$105,535.0
$67,261.0
-$38,274.0
Total Workyears
387.7
403.0
266.4
-136.6
Program Project Description:
The Safe and Sustainable Water Resources (SSWR) research program is developing cost-
effective, innovative solutions to current, emerging, and long-term water resource challenges for
complex chemical and microbial contaminants. The SSWR research program uses a systems
approach to develop scientific and technological solutions for the protection of human health and
watersheds. The research is being conducted in partnership with other EPA programs, federal and
state agencies, academia, non-governmental agencies, public and private stakeholders, and the
scientific community. This approach maximizes efficiency, interdisciplinary insights, and
integration of results.
SSWR is dedicated to sustaining EPA's focus and commitment to robust research and scientific
analysis to inform policy making under the authorities of the Safe Drinking Water Act and Clean
Water Act. Our research supports the Office of Water in ensuring clean and safe waters through
improved water infrastructure and sustainable water resource management.
The SSWR program is one of six integrated and transdisciplinary national research programs. Each
program is guided by a Strategic Research Action Plan (StRAP)28 that is the result of a
collaboration with, and supportive of, EPA's program offices and regions.
Recent accomplishments of the SSWR program include:
• Emerging contaminants: Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) contamination is
of increasing concern in multiple locations across multiple states (e.g., NC, NH, NJ and
WV). PFAS are widely dispersed and persistent environmental pollutants that are easily
absorbed by living organisms. There is toxicological evidence that some PFAS have
adverse reproductive, developmental and immunological effects.
SSWR researchers are developing laboratory analytical methods, evaluating chemical
toxicity, identifying and estimating human exposure to PFAS, identifying drinking water
28 For more information, see: https://www. epa. go v/research/strategic-research-action-plans-2016-2019
110
-------
treatment technologies and providing technical support to EPA regions and states to
provide data that can be used to make informed decisions about managing PFAS.
• Lead Treatment and Remediation: To support the states and communities in protecting
human health from the adverse outcomes of lead exposure, SSWR researchers are currently
developing sampling protocols and exposure risk assessment models for lead in drinking
water. Researchers also evaluated lead corrosion control treatment strategies in the field
with partner utilities and 18 states29 spanning eight EPA regions to inform implementation
of the Lead and Copper Rule.
The Agency's scientists and engineers provided their expertise and participated in EPA's
Flint Drinking Water Task Force to assist the State of Michigan and the City of Flint with
lead contamination and chlorine residual challenges in their drinking water system.30 The
Agency's SSWR research program contribution played a large part in helping to raise
chlorine residuals by flushing hydrants, as well as determining where chlorine sampling
would take place. The assistance provided by the Agency's research and development
program helped Flint move toward a solution to their drinking water crisis.
• Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs):31 SSWR developed the Cyanobacteria Assessment
Network (CyAN) Android mobile application, which is the first platform for immediate
HABs decision support for U.S. freshwater systems.32 The CyAN mobile app delivers
satellite data to the public in an accessible way that demonstrates its practical value to daily
life. The CyAN mobile app is operational and providing weekly data to collaborators. It is
currently available to any state regulatory agency or health department for beta testing.
• Stormwater Management:33 SSWR released the Green Infrastructure Modeling Toolkit,
which is comprised of five EPA models and tools for stormwater management decisions.
A training video and other materials accompany the toolkit as part of EPA's Stormwater
Management Guide that has over 8 thousand webpage visits. The toolkit is used by EPA
to train staff and for outreach to states, as well as by land use planners and developers.
• Recreational Water Quality: Advances were made in the performance of quantitative,
molecular methods for waterborne pathogens to provide more robust, same-day
notifications of fecal contamination in recreational waters. Method performance and
standardization, including developing standards for use by stakeholders, has been
evaluated in eight Midwestern rivers, the National Rivers and Streams Assessment, the
2015 National Coastal Condition Assessment study,34 and in a multi-laboratory survey
examining U.S. coastal and inland surface waters.
29 California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, North Carolina, New
York, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, and Washington, D.C.
30 For more information, see: https://www.epa.goY/flint.
31 For more information, see: https://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si public record report.cfm?direntrvid=328451.
32 For more information, see: https://www.epa.gOv/water-research/cvanobacteria-assessment-network-cvan#decision support.
33 For more information, see: https://www.epa.gov/water-research/green-infrastructure-modeling-toolkit.
34 For more information, see: https://www.epa.gov/national-aauatic-resource-survevs/manuals-used-national-aauatic-resource-
surveys.
Ill
-------
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.3, Prioritize Robust Science in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. The SSWR research program's work in FY 2019 will focus
explicitly on efforts integral to achieving the Administrator's priorities and informing the
Agency's implementation of key environmental regulations by leveraging research in areas of
nutrients, harmful algal blooms, watersheds and water infrastructure (including water reuse).
High priority SSWR efforts in FY 2019 include:
• Assist states, communities, and utilities in addressing stormwater and wastewater
infrastructure needs through applied models and technical assistance. In concert with the
aforementioned assistance, develop risk assessments on stormwater capture for
groundwater augmentation and reuse.
• Research and technical support to deliver safe drinking water. Efforts will focus on the
complete water cycle-from protecting source waters and wetlands to improving drinking
water and wastewater infrastructure and management. Research will assess the distribution,
composition, and health impacts of known and emerging, chemical and biological
contaminants.
• Improve methods for rapid and cost-effective monitoring of waterborne pathogens in
recreational waters.
• Investigate health impacts from exposure to harmful algal/cyanobacteria toxins, and
develop innovative methods to monitor, characterize, and predict blooms for early action.
• Support states in prioritizing watersheds for nutrient management and in setting water
quality and aquatic life thresholds. These research and communication efforts will help
states verify whether investments in implementing nutrient reduction management
practices achieve their expected benefits.
• Provide water reuse research support for future EPA guidance on safe, fit-for-purpose
potable and non-potable use by states.
Performance Measure Targets:
(SWl) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Safe and
Sustainable Water Resources research program.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
100
100
(SW2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients and partners to
improve the Agency's capability to ensure clean and adequate supplies of water that
support human well-being and resilient aquatic ecosystems.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
100
100
112
-------
The table reflects the SSWR program's annual performance measures. EPA uses these measures
to assess its effectiveness in delivering needed products and outputs to clients (decision-makers,
states, and local governments).
EPA is establishing a standing subcommittee under EPA's Board of Scientific Counselors
(BOSC) for the SSWR program to evaluate its performance and provide feedback to the Agency.
In addition, EPA will meet regularly with both the BOSC and the Science Advisory Board (SAB)
to seek their input on topics related to research program design, science quality, innovation,
relevance and impact. This includes advising EPA on its strategic research direction as part of the
review of the research and development program's StRAPs.
The Agency collaborates with several science agencies and the research community to assess our
research performance, such as the National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation,
Department of Energy, Department of Agriculture, U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Department of Defense, National Aeronautics
and Space Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and others. EPA's
Office of Research and Development's (ORD's) state engagement program is designed to inform
states about ORD's research programs and role within EPA, and to enable ORD to better
understand the science needs of state environmental agencies.
Key partners at the state level include the Environmental Council of the States, with its
Environmental Research Institute of the States and the Interstate Technology and Regulatory
Council, as well as state media associations such as the Association of Clean Water Administrators
and the Association of State Drinking Water Administrators. EPA also works with the White
House's Office of Science and Technology Policy and supports the interagency Science and
Technology in America's Reinvestment-Measuring the Effect of Research on Innovation,
Competitiveness and Science (STAR METRICS) effort.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,023.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce support, and
benefit costs.
• (-$23,134.0/ -79.2 FTE) This program change streamlines funding to the program for
research related to technical support and site-specific support; communication and
technology transfer efforts; translation of nutrient modeling and monitoring data; and
research assisting states to prioritize watersheds and differentiating sources of nutrient
overloading.
• (-$12,752.0/ -57.4 FTE) This program change refocuses resources from research on
recovering resources (e.g. nutrients) from wastewater, transformative water systems, life
cycle analysis, and research on advancing water systems technologies for FY 2019.
• (-$3,411.0) This program change eliminates funding for the Science to Achieve Results
(STAR) program for FY 2019.
113
-------
Statutory Authority:
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), § 1442(a)(1); Clean Water Act, §§ 101(a)(6), 104, 105;
Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration Authorization Act (ERDDAA);
Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA), § 203; Title II of Ocean Dumping
Ban Act of 1988 (ODBA); Water Resources Development Act (WRDA); Wet Weather Water
Quality Act of 2000; Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act of 1987 (MPPRCA);
National Invasive Species Act; Coastal Zone Amendments Reauthorization Act (CZARA);
Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection and Restoration Act; Endangered Species Act (ESA); North
American Wetlands Conservation Act; Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA); Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
114
-------
Research: Sustainable Communities
115
-------
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Program Area: Research: Sustainable Communities
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Prioritize Robust Science
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Science A- t echnology
S 1-I2.-12^.1
S 133.-11.\0
S 52.5-IV.O
-SHO.HMkO
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
$358.0
$318.0
$320.0
$2.0
Inland Oil Spill Programs
$653.4
$659.0
$516.0
-$143.0
Hazardous Substance Superfund
$12,717.6
$11,385.0
$10,885.0
-$500.0
Total Budget Authority
$156,158.1
$145,777.0
$64,270.0
-$81,507.0
Total Workyears
459.7
476.3
294.1
-182.2
Program Project Description:
EPA's Sustainable and Healthy Communities (SHC) research program supplies research to support
regulatory activities, including protocol development for the National Contingency Plan, and
provides on-demand technical support at federal, tribal or state-led cleanup sites and during
emergencies. SHC's research products are unique in that they account for the interrelationships
between social, economic, health, ecological, and environmental factors.
Program scientists conduct health, environmental engineering, and ecological research and
translate these into planning and analysis tools for localities throughout the United States to
facilitate regulatory compliance and improve environmental and health outcomes. These tools aim
to minimize negative unintended consequences to human health and the environment and promote
more robust and efficient infrastructure in built and natural environments.
The overall research effort is organized around six integrated and transdisciplinary national
research programs. Each program is guided by a Strategic Research Action Plan (StRAP) that is
the result of a collaboration with, and supportive of, EPAs program and regional offices.
Recent accomplishments of the SHC program include:
• Lead Exposure Estimates in Children: In light of recent concerns about lead (Pb)
contamination, SHC researchers devised a modeling approach to estimate how various
sources (drinking water, food, dust, soil, and air) contribute to blood lead levels in infants
and young children. Findings present"... a state-of-the-science methodology that can guide
a health-based benchmark for Pb in drinking water and also can be applied to other
media."35 By improving lead exposure estimates for its primary sources, the work can guide
35 "Children's Lead Exposure: A Multimedia Modeling Analysis to Guide Public Health Decision-Making",
https://ehp.niehs.nih. gov/ehpl605/?utm_source=rss&utm medium=rss&utm campaign=ehp 1.605.
116
-------
national and local public health decisions and actions aimed at minimizing total lead
exposure.
• Developing Guidelines for Evaluating the Post-Closure Care (PCC) Period for
Hazardous Waste Disposal Facilities: SHC is evaluating data from eight landfills located
throughout the United States that are nearing the end of their 30-year PCC period to
quantify the field performance of engineered containment systems. Results - which were
finalized in October 2017 - will form the basis for technical guidance to evaluate
performance of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Subtitle C hazardous
waste landfills.
• Adding Six New Metropolitan Areas to EnviroAtlas: EnviroAtlas36 -an interactive
online mapping system that displays layers of information on environmental quality, health
statistics, and socio-economic factors in specific communities- provides local leaders with
high resolution data to inform decision making. In 2016, SHC added the metropolitan areas
around and including Austin, TX, Cleveland, OH, Des Moines, IA, Memphis, TN,
Minneapolis, MN and New York, NY to the Atlas. High-resolution data for New Haven,
CT, Baltimore, MD, Birmingham, AL, Chicago, IL, Norfolk, VA, and Brownsville, TX
was released in October of 20 1 7.37 The addition of these cities will bring the number of
EnviroAtlas metropolitan areas to 24, comprising well over 500 cities and towns, with
another 12 areas planned for inclusion by the end of FY 2019.38
• Mapping Private Wells and Site Densities of Leaking Underground Storage Tanks:
State agencies need to identify locations with private wells as a part of the process for
conducting site investigations for leaking underground storage tanks and frequently lack
the information they need. To help states prioritize their efforts, SHC scientists developed
a methodology using available data from Oklahoma that illustrates how to develop
estimates of areas of high private well use and tank locations. Continuing work is expected
to expand these estimates to the entire United States and increase the resolution of the
estimates.
• Organic Waste Diversion in Columbia, SC: A group of interested stakeholders have
formed a partnership in the region to explore ways to regionally manage their organic
materials. To aid this effort, SHC scientists have compiled integrated management
strategies that divert organic materials into other beneficial uses, using Columbia, SC as a
case study. The stakeholders represented in this partnership include both sources and
potential receptors of organic waste, such as the U.S. Army Fort Jackson - the largest and
most active initial entry training center in the U.S. Army. Results of this study will be
broadly available to other communities facing organic waste issues.
• Report on bioavailability methods for assessing potential lead exposures of concern
to communities from urban contamination: Lead has long been a concern for children's
health, but the risk from lead can vary among the forms of lead present in the environment.
36 For more information, see: https
37 For more information, see: https
38 For more information, see: https
//www, epa. go v/enviroatlas.
//www.epa.gov/eaviroatlas/municipalities-within-enviroatlas-bouadaries.
//www, epa. gov/sites/productioii/files/201.6-07/documents/comiiibnd
117
-------
Research by SHC scientists indicates that the bioavailability of lead poses a greater risk
than the total soil lead concentrations. This distinction has important implications for
remediating lead contamination and assessing risk at a given site.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.3, Prioritize Robust Science in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. More specifically, SHC's FY 2019 research will focus explicitly
on conducting research to support regulatory activities and protocol development for the National
Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan and provide on-demand technical
support at federal-, tribal-, or state-managed cleanup sites, as well as assistance during
emergencies. The Agency conducts health, environmental engineering, and ecological research
and prepares planning and analysis tools for localities nationwide to use in facilitating regulatory
compliance and improving environmental and health outcomes. EPA scientists also will assess the
impact of pollution (e.g. health impact assessments) on such vulnerable groups as children, tribes,
environmental justice communities, and other susceptible populations.
Resources will support the research personnel who analyze existing research data and publish
scientific journal articles to disseminate findings associated with the data. Research efforts will
include EnviroAtlas (a web-based atlas of ecosystem services), conducting valuation of ecosystem
services, studying how ecosystem services impact human health, measuring impact on vulnerable
populations (e.g. children), and the remediation of contaminated sites.
Performance Measure Targets:
(HCl) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the
Sustainable and Healthy Communities research program.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
100
100
(HC2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients, partners, and
stakeholders for use in pursuing their sustainability goals.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
100
100
The table reflects the SHC program's annual performance measures. EPA uses these measures to
assess our effectiveness in delivering needed products and outputs to clients (decision-makers,
states, and local governments).
EPA has a standing subcommittee under ORD's Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) for the
SHC program to evaluate its performance and provide feedback to the Agency. The SHC program
will meet regularly with both the BOSC and Science Advisory Board over the next several years
to seek their input on topics related to research program design, science quality, innovation,
relevance and impact. This includes advising EPA on its strategic research direction midway
through the 4-year cycle of StRAPs.
EPA collaborates with the National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation, Department
of Energy, U.S. Department of Agriculture and the White House's Office of Science and
Technology Policy (OSTP) to assess research performance. EPA's Office of Research and
118
-------
Development's (ORD's) state engagement program is designed to inform states about ORD's
research programs and role within EPA, and to enable ORD to better understand the science needs
of state environmental agencies.
Key partners at the state level include the Environmental Council of the States, with its
Environmental Research Institute of the States and the Interstate Technology and Regulatory
Council, as well as state media associations such as the Association of State and Territorial Solid
Waste Management Officials. EPA supports the interagency Science and Technology in America's
Reinvestment, Measuring Effect of Research on Innovation, Competitiveness and Science (STAR
METRICS) efforts.39
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$2,458.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is a decrease due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce support, and
benefit costs.
• (-$34,423.0/ -90.1 FTE) This program change streamlines research support in FY 2019 by
eliminating work related to the following activities:
o The Ecotox database;
o EPA's Report on the Environment (ROE); and
o The inclusion of a data layer in EnviroAtlas on ecosystem services and their
beneficiaries.
• (-$16,235.0/ -51.6 FTE) This program change streamlines research efforts across
environmental media by eliminating work related to:
o Research on the life cycle of materials in commerce; and
o The People, Prosperity, and the Planet (P3) program for college-level competition.
• (-$19,227.0/ -40.5 FTE) This program change streamlines research on the following:
o The Health Impact Assessment (HIA) approach for assessing the impact of major
planned infrastructure development (e.g. highway construction) at a city scale of
governance;
o Research into the mechanisms of chemical exposures and effects on human health
outcomes and well-being, especially research into cumulative effects;
o Research into the uptake and distribution of contaminates (e.g., lead, arsenic) within
vulnerable populations; and
o Research into the environmental component of children's asthma.
• (-$8,523.0) This program change eliminates funding for the Science to Achieve Results
(STAR) program for FY 2019.
39 STAR METRICS: https://wvyw.starmetrics.nih.gov,
119
-------
Statutory Authority:
Clean Air Act (CAA); Clean Water Act (CWA); dinger Cohen Act; Coastal Zone Management
Act (CZMA); Environmental Research, Development & Demonstration Authorization Act
(ERDDAA); Endangered Species Act (ESA); Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA); Food Quality and Protection Act (FQPA); Intergovernmental Cooperation Act; Marine
Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act; National Environmental Education Act; National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); Toxic Substances Control Act, as amended by the Frank R.
Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act; Water Resources Research Act.
120
-------
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
121
-------
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Program Area: Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Prioritize Robust Science
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Science A- t echnology
SSS.51 -1.0
Total Budget Authority
$89,192.6
$88,514.0
$61,737.0
-$26,777.0
Total Workyears
308.6
307.7
240.9
-66.8
Program Project Description:
EPA's Chemical Safety for Sustainability (CSS) research program provides information, tools and
methods to make better-informed, more-timely decisions about the thousands of chemicals
circulating in the United States. CSS products strengthen the Agency's ability to evaluate and
predict human health and ecological impacts from the use and disposal of manufactured chemicals.
The CSS program works with multiple EPA program offices to plan and develop innovative
research that directly addresses Agency challenges and informs Agency decisions regarding
chemicals. Products delivered by the CSS program inform the implementation of multiple Agency
programs including the evaluation of existing and new chemicals (TSCA), development and use
of alternative testing protocols (TSCA), chemical prioritization (TSCA, SDWA), evaluation of
pesticide registrations (FIFRA), and mitigation activity at Superfund sites (CERCLA).
The CSS program is one of six integrated and transdisciplinary national research programs. Each
program is guided by a Strategic Research Action Plan (StRAP) that is the result of a collaboration
with, and supportive of, EPA's program and regional offices.
Recent accomplishments include:
• Public release of the interactive Chemistry Dashboard40: The CSS research program
released a new interactive Chemistry Dashboard with chemistry information for over
700,000 chemicals. The Chemistry Dashboard is a gateway to an array of related public
domain databases and serves as a hub that links together many EPA databases, providing
improved access to data and models for chemicals of interest. The Chemistry Dashboard
provides a one-stop-shop for chemical properties, structure, exposure and toxicity
information that inform chemical exposure and risk evaluations and assessments by the
Agency and outside researchers. A new version of the dashboard was released in August
2017, and includes new lists of toxins, increased amounts of toxicity value data, enhanced
40 Interactive Chemistry Dashboard accessible here: https://comptox.eDa.gov/dashboard/.
122
-------
performance of searches, and millions of new predicted data points from the Toxicity
Estimation Software Tool (TEST).
• Improved Characterization of Chemical Exposure: CSS research has enhanced the
capacity to rapidly generate quantitative human exposure and internal dose predictions for
large numbers of chemicals. CSS efforts are providing curated chemical monitoring,
consumer product ingredient, ingredient function, and product usage information through
a publicly accessible, web-based platform. The chemicals in consumer products database
(CPDat)41 and the Human Exposure Model (HEM)42 are two examples of the tools being
developed to better inform total chemical exposures. These tools also are providing
efficient evaluation of ecological exposure and risk in support of EPA's Endangered
Species Protection program and the Pesticide Registration process.43
• Public release of the Sequence Alignment to Predict Across Species Susceptibility
(SeqAPASS) tool44: SeqAPASS helps fill regulators' knowledge gaps faster and cheaper
by comparing and extrapolating toxicity information across species. This tool has proven
to be extremely valuable in evaluating risks of exposures from pesticides and
pharmaceuticals in wildlife species. The most recent version of the SeqAPASS tool was
released in May 2017.
• Improved definition of unknown chemicals: CSS investigators have developed
advanced analytical and computational tools to detect and identify unknown chemicals in
environmental media, biological media and consumer products. Using high-resolution
mass spectrometry (MS), it is now possible to translate unknown MS features into
"tentative", "probable" and "confirmed" chemical structures and then identify specific
chemicals.
• Evaluating engineered nanomaterials: CSS investments in the study of nanomaterials
have made it possible to develop a comprehensive framework for evaluating the
environmental health and safety of engineered nanomaterials. This framework was
presented in a review paper published in June 2017 in the journal, Critical Reviews in
Toxicology 45 This framework will help evaluations of health and safety impacts of the
release of engineered nanomaterials into the environment in an array of applications
including antimicrobials, sun screens, and wood preservatives.
In addition to these specific accomplishments, CSS continues to work with the Agency's Chemical
Safety and Pollution Prevention program, providing dedicated staff for the successful
implementation of TSCA as amended by the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st
Century Act. CSS contributes data and tools information for the development of chemical
prioritization approaches and provides joint leadership for the development of the TSCA
41 The CPDat database is linked to the interactive Chemistry Dashboard.
42 The Beta version of the Human Exposure Model is scheduled to be released internal to EPA at the end of FY2017 and will be
refined based upon input from OPPT.
43 For more information, see: https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-registration/about-pesticide-registration.
44 For more information, see: https://biog.epa.gov/blog/tag/seaapass/. Login here: https://seaapass.epa.gov/seaapass/.
45 A comprehensive framework for evaluating the environmental health and safety implications of engineered nanomaterials.
Link: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10408444.2017.132840Q.
123
-------
alternative toxicity testing strategies paper. TSCA requires that the strategies paper be completed
by June 2018.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.3, Prioritize Robust Science in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, the CSS research program will continue to produce
innovative tools that accelerate the pace of data-driven chemical evaluations, enable EPA and state
decisions to be environmentally sound, protective of public health, and support sustainable
innovation of chemicals. This work will focus explicitly on efforts integral to achieving the
Administrator's priorities. In FY 2019, CSS products will continue to inform the Agency's
implementation of key environmental regulations by leveraging research in areas of computational
toxicology, rapid exposure and dosimetry, endocrine disrupting chemicals, and emerging materials
(such as nanomaterials).
Computational Toxicology (CompTox): EPA continues to be a leader in developing innovative
computational and high-throughput methods for efficiently screening large numbers of chemicals
in a shorter amount of time, costing less and using fewer vertebrate animals for toxicity testing. In
FY 2019, CompTox research will provide essential support to Agency activities across diverse
regulatory frameworks (e.g., TSCA, FIFRA, SDWA) and multiple EPA program offices.
Development and application of new assessment methodologies add significant efficiency and
effectiveness to Agency operations and also provide states with the information to support
effective decisions and actions. Specific CompTox activities in FY 2019 include:
• Using ToxCast/Tox21 data to develop high-throughput risk assessments, in particular for
chemicals for which adequate information has not been available historically to conduct
risk assessments.
• Developing and releasing online software tools to transparently provide information on
thousands of chemicals and integrate human health, environmental, and exposure data for
a range of decisions, including chemical prioritization decisions.
• Exploring how high-throughput exposure and hazard information can be combined to
predict potential for exposure and risk to susceptible subpopulations.
CSS research activities in computational toxicology directly support efforts of the Agency in
fulfilling requirements for: chemical evaluation under TSCA, as amended by the Frank R.
Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, pesticide evaluation under FIFRA; chemical
testing for endocrine system impacts under the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA)
(Public Law 104-170); and chemical evaluation as part of SDWA.
Rapid Exposure and Dosimetry: In FY 2019, the CSS program will continue to provide data,
models and tools to characterize total human exposure to environmental chemicals. Human
exposure information informs Agency chemical evaluations (such as those conducted in support
of TSCA and FIFRA) and chemical prioritizations. This includes the continued development of
124
-------
advanced analytical and computational tools to detect and identify unknown chemicals in
environmental media, biological media and consumer products.
Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals, Emerging Materials and Nanotechnology: CSS will
continue to develop and evaluate improved methods to test for impacts on androgen receptors,
estrogen receptors, steroidogenesis and thyroid function in support of its core statutory
requirements under the FQPA. In addition, CSS will continue to work with OCSPP to define what
research is needed on nanomaterials to support the implementation of TSCA.
Performance Measure Targets:
(CSl) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Chemical
Safety for Sustainability research program.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
100
100
(CS2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients and partners to
improve their capability to advance the environmentally sustainable development,
use, and assessment of chemicals.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
100
100
The table reflects the CSS research program's annual performance measures. EPA uses these
measures to assess its effectiveness in delivering needed products and outputs to clients (decision-
makers, state, and local governments).
EPA has established a standing subcommittee under EPA's Board of Scientific Councilors
(BOSC) for the CSS program to evaluate the research dimensions of the CSS program as part of
its performance and provide feedback to the Agency. EPA will meet regularly with the BOSC and
Science Advisory Board to seek their input on topics related to research program design, science
quality, innovation, relevance and impact. This includes advising EPA on its strategic research
direction as part of the review of the research and development program's StRAPs.46
EPA collaborates with the National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation, Department
of Energy, U.S. Department of Agriculture and the White House's Office of Science and
Technology Policy to assess research performance. EPA's Office of Research and Development's
(ORD) state engagement program is designed to inform states about ORD's research programs
and role within EPA, and to enable ORD to better understand the science needs of state
environmental agencies.
Key partners at the state level include the Environmental Council of the States, with its
Environmental Research Institute of the States and the Interstate Technology and Regulatory
Council, as well as state media associations such as the Association of State and Territorial Solid
Waste Management Officials. EPA supports the interagency Science and Technology in America's
Reinvestment—Measuring the Effect of Research on Innovation, Competitiveness and Science
(STAR METRICS) effort. This interagency effort is helping EPA to more effectively measure the
impact federal science investments have on society, the environment, and the economy.47
46 EPA Strategic Research Action Plans: http://www.epa.gov/research/strategic-research-action-plans-2016-2019.
47 STAR METRICS: https://www.starmetrics.nih.gov/.
125
-------
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,116.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce support, and
benefit costs.
• (-$3,945.0/ -13.1 FTE) This program change reduces resources for the development of
high-throughput toxicity testing and the Agency's development of improved methods for
chemical evaluations.
• (-$3,498.0/ -10.7 FTE) This program change reduces research efforts focused on endocrine
disrupting chemicals under this program.
• (-$14,555.0/ -45.0 FTE) This program change reduces funding for the development of
virtual tissue models and tools that potentially can be used to conduct chemical toxicity
screening to understand impacts on human development and health outcomes, while
minimizing the use of animal testing.
• (-$5,895.0) This program change eliminates funding for the Science to Achieve Results
(STAR) program for FY 2019.
• (+2.0 FTE) The realignment of FTE from appropriated Chemical Risk Review and
Reduction FTE to TSCA user fee collections results in an increase of 2.0 FTE. Resources
have been realigned from the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention's
Chemical Risk Review and Reduction program to the Office of Research and
Development's Chemical Safety and Sustainability program to support risk assessment
and evaluation science to support new TSCA requirements.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Air Act §§ 103, 104, 154; Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA); Children's Health Act; 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and
Development Act; Clean Water Act, §§ 101-121; Environmental Research, Development and
Demonstration Authorization Act of 1976 (ERDDAA); Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA); Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); Food Quality Protection
Act (FQPA); Intergovernmental Cooperation Act; National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), §
102; Pollution Prevention Act (PPA); Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); Safe
Drinking Water Act (SDWA); Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) as amended by the FrankR.
Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act.
126
-------
Human Health Risk Assessment
Program Area: Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Prioritize Robust Science
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Science A- t echnology
S 40.500.5
S3 55-1.0
S22.20 '.0
-S/5.2ft~.0
Hazardous Substance Superfund
$3,020.5
$2,805.0
$5,021.0
$2,216.0
Total Budget Authority
$43,527.0
$40,359.0
$27,288.0
-$13,071.0
Total Workyears
169.2
177.6
111.6
-66.0
Program Project Description:
EPA's Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) research program is focused on the science of
assessments that inform decisions made by EPA and its partners, including states and tribes. These
assessments provide the scientific basis for decisions under an array of environmental laws,
including the Clean Air Act (CAA), Clean Water Act (CWA), Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA),
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) and Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). The current portfolio of HHRA products include:
Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS): IRIS risk assessments are used by EPA and other
health agencies to inform national standards, clean-up levels at local sites, and set advisory levels.
These risk assessments inform decisions under the CAA, CWA, SDWA, CERCLA/Superfund,
and TSCA. The IRIS Program utilizes a multi-step process which provides opportunities for
public, stakeholder, and interagency engagement. The assessments are complex, multidisciplinary
evaluations of scientific information, which are developed through a transparent process with
independent peer review. IRIS is the only federal program to provide toxicity values for both
cancer and non-cancer effects.
Integrated Science Assessments (ISAs): Provide a concise evaluation and synthesis of science
necessary to support decisions to retain or revise the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) for six criteria air pollutants (particulate matter, ozone, lead, sulfur oxides, nitrogen
oxides, and carbon monoxide) as required every five years by sections 108(a)(2) and 109(d)(1) of
the Clean Air Act.48 ISAs also inform the benefit-cost analyses that support the regulations
designed to allow states and local areas to meet the NAAQS.
Community and Site-specific Risk: Develop Provisional Peer-Reviewed Toxicity Values
(PPRTVs) and exposure assessment tools to help inform EPA's timely response to contaminated
48 For more information, see: https://www.epa.gov/clean-air-act-overview/clean-air-act-title-i-air-pollution-prevention-and-
control-parts-through-d#ia.
127
-------
Superfund and hazardous waste sites, as required by the CERCLA.49 PPRTVs are typically
developed for data poor chemicals for which no IRIS value exists.
Research to Advance Risk Assessment Methods: Develop tools and methods that support the
scientific advances in assessments. This includes research to incorporate non-animal testing data
into assessments. It also includes research on assessment methods for emerging contaminants such
as perfluorinated compounds and biotechnologies.
The HHRA research program anticipates developing new assessment approaches by means of an
expanded product line to enhance rapid response and screening capabilities and to augment toxicity
value derivation procedures for health assessments.
Recent accomplishments in the HHRA research program include:
Recent accomplishments in the HHRA research program include the 2017 GAO High Risk report,
which noted significant improvement in their high risk criteria ratings specific to the IRIS program.
Responsiveness in the Development of HHRA Deliverables
To support TSCA, a systematic review protocol as well as a draft document containing a
preliminary hazard evaluation for hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD) was delivered to the
Agency's Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention program to support their risk evaluation.
HBCD is one of the first ten chemicals designated to be evaluated under TSCA.
Final IRIS assessments for Ethylene Oxide, and Benzo(a)pyrene were completed; and draft IRIS
assessments for Ethyl tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE), and tert-Butyl Alcohol (TBA) were released to the
Science Advisory Board (SAB) for independent, external peer review.
ISA chapters were developed for two final Integrated Review Plans (IRPs): one to support the
primary and secondary NAAQS review for particulate matter and another to support the secondary
NAAQS review for oxides of nitrogen and sulfur. In addition, the final ISA for Oxides of Sulfur -
Health Criteria to support the primary NAAQS for S02 was issued in December 2017.
HHRA continues to provide ongoing technical support for EPA's human health and ecological
risk assessment program, delivered 12 high priority PPRTV assessments in FY 2017, and is
planning to deliver a similar number by the end of FY 2018.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.3, Prioritize Robust Science in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. The HHRA research program's work in FY 2019 will focus
explicitly on efforts integral to achieving the Administrator's priorities and informing the
Agency's implementation of key environmental regulations. Examples of this work include:
49 See, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 9601 etseq:.
http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title42/chapterl03&edition=prelim#9601 5 target.
128
-------
• Support the Agency's Implementation of TSCA: Provide scientific products and support
required for TSCA implementation to the Agency's Chemical Safety and Pollution
Prevention program. This will include support for risk evaluations of the first 10 TSCA
chemicals (Designation of Ten Chemical Substances for Initial Risk Evaluations Under the
Toxic Substances Control Act, 81 FR 91927), through to completion in FY 2019, as well
as any additional chemicals identified for the pipeline of TSCA risk evaluations [TSCA
section 6(b)(2)], The program will continue its efforts to maintain and improve support of
TSCA implementation.
• Support the Agency's Implementation of the Safe Drinking Water Act: Provide
research and technical support to the Water program. Specifically, in support of the Safe
Drinking Water and Clean Water Acts, HHRA will focus on evaluating health impacts
from exposure to known and emerging, chemical and biological contaminants under the
authorities of SDWA.
• Support the Agency's Implementation of the Clean Air Act:
o Provide the scientific products and support to the Agency's Air and Radiation program
to conduct Risk and Technology Reviews under Title III of the Clean Air Act.
o Provide ISAs to support decisions to retain or revise the NAAQS for six criteria air
pollutants as required every five years by the Clean Air Act. ISAs also inform analyses
by state and local officials, including benefit-cost analyses, to support implementation
of air quality management programs.
• Targeted support for program and regional offices, and states and tribes: Develop a
portfolio of products that optimize the application of best available science and technology,
with an increased focus on the specific decision needs. These more targeted assessments
will promote greater throughput, and will be shaped for use by several partners, including
the states, tribes, other federal agencies, and EPA's national and regional program offices.
• Support Superfund: Provide risk assessments, Provisional Peer-Reviewed Toxicity
Values (PPRTVs), and advanced exposure assessment tools as well as provide technical
support to help inform EPA's clean-up decisions at contaminated Superfund, Brownfields,
and hazardous waste sites, as required by RCRA and CERCLA.
• Human and Ecological Risk Assessments: Provide localized technical assistance and
scientific expertise on human and ecological risk assessments to states, tribes, regions and
programs. This includes direct support in cases of emergencies and other rapid response
situations.
In addition, the Agency is currently reviewing IRIS to ensure it supports the Agency's highest
public health decision-making, and its role in supporting the TSCA program, while continuing to
support all of EPA's programs. Examples of modifications to IRIS include:
• The implementation of systematic review to ensure risk assessments are complete,
unbiased, reproducible and transparent; and
129
-------
• Moving from traditional IRIS assessments to "fit-for-purpose" products to ensure risk
assessments remains responsive to stakeholders/partners.
Performance Measure Targets:
(RAl) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Human
Health Risk Assessment research program.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
100
100
(RA2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients and partners for
use in informing human health decisions.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
100
100
(RD2) Number of peer-reviewed journal articles with datasets cleared for
publication.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
336
336
(RD1) Number of Office of Research and Development (ORD) research products
meeting customer needs.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
No Target
Established
TBD
(RA8) Annual progress score for finalizing IRIS health assessments, Provisional
Peer-Reviewed Toxicity Values, and Integrated Science Assessments.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
5
5
The table above reflects the HHRA research program's annual performance measures. EPA uses
these measures to assess our effectiveness in delivering needed products and outputs to clients
(decision-makers, states, and local governments).
ORD's state engagement program is designed to inform states about ORD's research programs
and role within EPA, and to enable ORD to better understand the science needs of state
environmental agencies. Key partners at the state level include the Environmental Council of the
States, with its Environmental Research Institute of the States and the Interstate Technology and
Regulatory Council, the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials as well as state media
associations such as the Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials.
EPA has established a standing subcommittee under EPA's Board of Scientific Counselors
(BOSC) for the Chemical Safety for Sustainability and Human Health Risk Assessment National
Research Programs that will be utilized to evaluate the HHRA program as part of its performance
and provide feedback to the Agency. EPA will meet regularly with the BOSC for input on topics
related to research program design, science quality, innovation, relevance and impact. This
includes advising EPA on developing its strategic research direction and Strategic Research Action
Plans for FY 2019-2022.
EPA collaborates with several science agencies and the research community to assess our research
performance, such as the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation, the
130
-------
Department of Energy, and the United States Department of Agriculture. The Agency also will
work with the White House's Office of Science and Technology Policy. EPA supports the
interagency Science and Technology in America's Reinvestment—Measuring the Effect of
Research on Innovation, Competitiveness and Science (STAR METRICS) effort. This interagency
effort is helping EPA to more effectively measure the impact federal science investments have on
society, the environment, and the economy.50
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$937.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce support, and benefit
costs.
• (-$13,907.0/ -65.5 FTE) This program change:
o Significantly reduces the HHRA research program's ability to develop assessments to
support Agency decisions, which will not only impact the number of FTEs, but also the
composition of the multidisciplinary teams assembled to address the needs of complex
Agency decisions.
o Reduces the HHRA research program's ability to provide daily technical support to
program and regional offices and states and tribes, including during emergencies and
urgent circumstances.
• (-$2,317.0/ -15.2 FTE) Resources are being rebalanced to the Superfund appropriation
within this program for IRIS.
Statutory Authority:
CAA Amendments, 42 U.S.C. 7403 et seq. - Sections 103, 108, 109, and 112; CERCLA
(Superfund, 1980) Section 209(a) of Public Law 99-499; CWA Title I, Sec. 101(a)(6) 33 U.S.C.
1254 - Sec 104 (a) and (c) and Sec. 105; ERDDA 33 U.S.C. 1251 - Section 2(a); FIFRA (7 U.S.C.
s/s 136 et seq. (1996), as amended), Sec. 3(c)(2)(A); FQPAPL 104-170; SDWA (1996) 42 U.S.C.
Section 300j-18; TSCA (Public Law 94-469): 15 U.S.C. s/s 2601 et seq. (1976), Sec. 4(b)(1)(B),
Sec. 4(b)(2)(B).
50 STAR METRICS: https://www.stannetrics.nih.gov/.
131
-------
Water: Human Health Protection
132
-------
Drinking Water Programs
Program Area: Water: Human Health Protection
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2019 Pres
FY 2018
Budget v.
FY 2017
Annualized
FY 2019 Pres
FY 2018 Annualized
Actuals
CR
Budget
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$95,917.2
$96,200.0
$80,543.0
-$15,657.0
Sciciuv A- I fcliiiolo^y
SJJI '.I)
S 3.5V.\0
SI 00.0
Total Budget Authority
$99,434.2
$99,695.0
$84,138.0
-$15,557.0
Total Workyears
505.3
522.7
443.3
-79.4
Program Project Description:
The Drinking Water Technical Support Center leads the collection of national occurrence data for
unregulated contaminants in drinking water; develops and evaluates analytical methods that are
used to monitor drinking water contaminants accurately and reliably; leads the national program
under which laboratories are certified to conduct the analyses of water contaminants with
designated analytical methods; and works with states and public water systems collaboratively to
implement tools that help systems achieve performance and optimization practices that maximize
technical capacity while reducing operational costs.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.2, Provide Clean and Safe Water in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan.
In FY 2019, EPA's Drinking Water Technical Support Center will continue to carry out the
following activities:
• Lead the development, revision, evaluation, and approval of chemical and microbiological
analytical methods for unregulated and regulated contaminants to assess and ensure
protection of public health from contaminants in drinking water (e.g., toxins resulting from
harmful algal blooms, and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)).
• Implement EPA's Drinking Water Laboratory Certification Program51, which sets
direction for oversight of municipal and commercial laboratories that analyze drinking
water samples. Conduct three regional program reviews during FY 2019 and deliver two
certification officer training courses (for chemistry and microbiology) for state and regional
representatives to ensure the quality of the analytical results.
• Partner with states and water systems to optimize their treatment technology under the
drinking water Area Wide Optimization Program (AWOP)52. The AWOP is a highly
successful technical/compliance assistance and training program that enhances the ability
51 https://www.epa.gov/dwlabcert.
51 https://www.epa. gov/dwstandaidsregulations/optimization-program-driiiking-water-sy stems.
133
-------
of small systems to meet existing microbial, disinfectant, and disinfection byproduct
standards, and also addresses distribution system integrity and water quality issues. During
FY 2019, EPA expects to work with states and tribes to teach them how to identify
performance limiting factors at public water systems, and develop and apply tailored tools
to help these public water systems overcome operational challenges, achieve performance
and optimization levels, and reduce health-based compliance challenges.
• Continue monitoring under the fourth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR
4). The UCMR 4 was published in December 2016, and addresses collection of data on
occurrence of 30 contaminants of interest (e.g., cyanotoxins, disinfection by-products
(DBPs), pesticides) to assess the frequency and levels at which these contaminants are
found in public water systems. The UCMR 4 is a federal direct implementation program
coordinated by EPA, as directed by the Safe Drinking Water Act. The data collected are
used by EPA as part of the Agency's determination of whether to establish health-based
standards to protect public health. Monitoring activities for UCMR 4 will occur between
FY 2018 and FY 2021. Key activities for EPA include ensuring laboratories are available
to perform the required analyses, managing the field sample collection and sample analysis
for small systems, and managing data reporting by large systems. In addition, EPA makes
the data available to our state and tribal partners and to the general public.
Performance Measure Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in Drinking Water Programs under the
EPM appropriation.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$291.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$191.0/ -2.1 FTE) This program change reflects a reduction to the Drinking Water
Program and streamlining of activities.
Statutory Authority:
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA).
134
-------
Congressional Priorities
135
-------
Water Quality Research and Support Grants
Program Area: Congressional Priorities
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2019 Pres
FY 2018
Budget v.
FY 2017
Annualized
FY 2019 Pres
FY 2018 Annualized
Actuals
CR
Budget
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$12,688.0
$12,614.0
$0.0
-$12,614.0
Sciciuv A- I fcliiiolo^y
S '.SOJ.-I
S-1.0'2.0
SiU)
-S-l.0'2.0
Total Budget Authority
s:u4'U.4
sio,oSo.u
$0.0
-sio,oSo.o
Program Project Description:
In FY 2017, Congress appropriated $4.1 million in the Science and Technology appropriation to
fund high priority water quality and water availability research. EPA was instructed to award
grants on a competitive basis, independent of the Science to Achieve Results (STAR) program,
and give priority to not-for-profit organizations that: conduct activities that are national in scope;
can provide a twenty-five percent match, including in-kind contributions; and often partner with
the Agency.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE have been eliminated for this program in FY 2019.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$4,072.0) This funding change eliminates this program as part of the effort to limit federal
investment in lower priority activities and to focus resources on core environmental work.
Statutory Authority:
CAA 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Title 1, Part A- Sec. 103 (a) and (d) and Sec. 104 (c); CAA 42 U.S.C.
7402(b) Section 102; CAA 42 U.S.C. 7403(b)(2) Section 103(b)(2); dinger Cohen Act, 40 U.S.C.
11318; CERCLA (Superfund, 1980) Section 209(a) of Public Law 99-499; Children's Health Act;
CWA, Sec. 101 - 121; CWPPRA; CZARA; CZMA 16 U.S.C. 1451 - Section 302; Economy Act,
31 U.S.C. 1535; EISA, Title II SubtitleB; ERDDA, 33 U.S.C. 1251 - Section2(a); ESA, 16 U.S.C.
1531 - Section 2; FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. Sec. 346; FIFRA (7 U.S.C. s/s 136 et seq. (1996), as
amended), Sec. 3(c)(2)(A); FQPA PL 104-170; Intergovernmental Cooperation Act, 31 U.S.C.
6502; MPRSA Sec. 203, 33 U.S.C. 1443; NAWCA; NCPA; National Environmental Education
Act, 20 U.S.C. 5503(b)(3) and (b)(ll); NEPA of 1969, Section 102; NISA; ODBA Title II; PPA,
42 U.S.C. 13103; RCRA; SDWA (1996) 42 U.S.C. Section 300j-18; SDWA Part E, Sec. 1442
136
-------
(a)(1); TSCA, Section 10, 15, 26, U.S.C. 2609; USGCRA 15 U.S.C. 2921; WRDA; WRRA; and
WWWQA.
137
-------
138
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Environmental Programs and Management
Resource Summary Table 143
Program Projects in EPM 144
Clean Air 148
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs 149
Atmospheric Protection Program 153
Federal Stationary Source Regulations 156
Federal Support for Air Quality Management 159
Stratospheric Ozone: Domestic Programs 164
Stratospheric Ozone: Multilateral Fund 168
Brownfields 169
Brownfields 170
Compliance 173
Compliance Monitoring 174
Enforcement 178
Civil Enforcement 179
Criminal Enforcement 182
NEPA Implementation 184
Environmental Justice 186
Geographic Programs 188
Geographic Program: Chesapeake Bay 189
Geographic Program: Gulf of Mexico 191
Geographic Program: Lake Champlain 192
Geographic Program: Long Island Sound 193
Geographic Program: Other 194
Geographic Program: Puget Sound 196
Geographic Program: San Francisco Bay 197
Geographic Program: South Florida 198
Great Lakes Restoration 199
Homeland Security 202
Homeland Security: Communication and Information 203
139
-------
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection 206
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure 208
Information Exchange 210
Children and Other Sensitive Populations: Agency Coordination 211
Exchange Network 213
Executive Management and Operations 217
Small Business Ombudsman 220
State and Local Prevention and Preparedness 223
TRI / Right to Know 226
Tribal Capacity Building 228
Environmental Education 231
Small Minority Business Assistance 232
International Programs 234
International Sources of Pollution 235
Trade and Governance 237
US Mexico Border 238
IT/ Data Management/ Security 240
Information Security 241
IT / Data Management 244
Legal/ Science/ Regulatory/ Economic Review 248
Administrative Law 249
Civil Rights Program 251
Integrated Environmental Strategies 255
Legal Advice: Environmental Program 258
Legal Advice: Support Program 261
Regulatory/Economic-Management and Analysis 263
Science Advisory Board 266
Alternative Dispute Resolution 268
Regional Science and Technology 269
Operations and Administration 270
Acquisition Management 271
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance 274
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 277
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management 280
140
-------
Human Resources Management 283
Workforce Reshaping 285
Pesticides Licensing 287
Pesticides: Protect Human Health from Pesticide Risk 288
Pesticides: Protect the Environment from Pesticide Risk 295
Science Policy and Biotechnology 308
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 309
RCRA: Corrective Action 310
RCRA: Waste Management 313
RCRA: Waste Minimization & Recycling 316
Toxics Risk Review and Prevention 318
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Review and Reduction 319
Endocrine Disruptors 328
Pollution Prevention Program 329
Toxic Substances: Lead Risk Reduction Program 330
Underground Storage Tanks (LUST/UST) 332
LUST/UST 333
Water Ecosystems 336
Wetlands 337
National Estuary Program / Coastal Waterways 339
Water: Human Health Protection 340
Drinking Water Programs 341
Beach / Fish Programs 348
Water Quality Protection 349
Surface Water Protection 350
Marine Pollution 353
Indoor Air and Radiation 354
Radiation: Response Preparedness 355
Indoor Air: Radon Program 358
Radiation: Protection 359
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air 361
Congressional Priorities 362
Water Quality Research and Support Grants 363
141
-------
142
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION: Environmental Programs & Management
Resource Summary Table
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019
Pres Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018
Annualized CR
Environmental Program &
Management
Budget Authority
$2,639,159.5
$2,602,009.0
$1,738,852.0
-$863,157.0
Total Workyears
9,368.4
9,758.2
7,331.6
-2,426.6
Bill Language: Environmental Programs and Management
For environmental programs and management, including necessary expenses, not otherwise
provided for, for personnel and related costs and travel expenses; hire of passenger motor
vehicles; hire, maintenance, and operation of aircraft; purchase of reprints; library memberships
in societies or associations which issue publications to members only or at a price to members
lower than to subscribers who are not members; administrative costs of the brownfields program
under the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act of2002; and not to
exceed $19,000 for official reception and representation expenses, $1,738,852,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2020: Provided, That of the amounts provided under this heading,
the Chemical Risk Review and Reduction program project shall be allocated for this fiscal year,
excluding the amount of any fees made available, not less than the amount of appropriations for
that program project for fiscal year 2014.
In addition, $46,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2020, for necessary expenses of
the Energy Star program established by section 324A of The Energy Policy and Conservation Act
(42 U.S.C. 6294a): Provided, That the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
shall collect fees pursuant to section 324A(e) (42 U.S.C. 6294a(e)), as added by this Act, and such
fees shall be credited to this appropriation as offsetting collections: Provided further, That the
sum herein appropriated in this paragraph from the general fund shall be reduced as such
collections are received during fiscal year 2019 so as to result in a finalfiscal year appropriation
from the general fund estimated at $0: Provided further, That to the extent such collections
received in fiscal year 2019 exceed $46,000,000, those excess amounts shall be deposited in the
general fund.
143
-------
Program Projects in EPM
(pollars in Thousands)
Program Project
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Clean Air
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs
$15,236.6
$16,060.0
$12,574.0
-$3,486.0
Atmospheric Protection Program
$89,143.7
$94,788.0
$13,542.0
-$81,246.0
Federal Stationary Source Regulations
$20,282.9
$21,736.0
$16,898.0
-$4,838.0
Federal Support for Air Quality Management
$127,113.4
$125,387.0
$96,097.0
-$29,290.0
Stratospheric Ozone: Domestic Programs
$4,709.1
$4,606.0
$3,790.0
-$816.0
Stratospheric Ozone: Multilateral Fund
$8,326.0
$8,677.0
$0.0
-$8,677.0
Subtotal, Clean Air
$264,811.7
$271,254.0
$142,901.0
-$128,353.0
Indoor Air and Radiation
Indoor Air: Radon Program
$2,985.9
$3,115.0
$0.0
-$3,115.0
Radiation: Protection
$7,780.1
$8,519.0
$2,000.0
-$6,519.0
Radiation: Response Preparedness
$2,543.1
$2,573.0
$2,221.0
-$352.0
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air
$13,389.1
$13,242.0
$0.0
-$13,242.0
Subtotal, Indoor Air and Radiation
$26,698.2
$27,449.0
$4,221.0
-$23,228.0
Brownfields
Brownfields
$25,411.8
$25,419.0
$16,082.0
-$9,337.0
Compliance
Compliance Monitoring
$98,283.6
$100,975.0
$86,374.0
-$14,601.0
Enforcement
Civil Enforcement
$172,309.6
$170,849.0
$140,677.0
-$30,172.0
Criminal Enforcement
$48,039.2
$45,333.0
$41,107.0
-$4,226.0
Environmental Justice
$6,401.5
$6,691.0
$2,000.0
-$4,691.0
NEPA Implementation
$16,098.2
$16,130.0
$13,496.0
-$2,634.0
Subtotal, Enforcement
$242,848.5
$239,003.0
$197,280.0
-$41,723.0
Geographic Programs
Geographic Program: Chesapeake Bay
$66,773.5
$72,504.0
$7,300.0
-$65,204.0
Geographic Program: Gulf of Mexico
$3,395.8
$8,484.0
$0.0
-$8,484.0
Geographic Program: Lake Champlain
$4,395.0
$4,369.0
$0.0
-$4,369.0
Geographic Program: Long Island Sound
$7,989.8
$7,946.0
$0.0
-$7,946.0
Geographic Program: Other
Lake Pontchartrain
$0.0
$942.0
$0.0
-$942.0
S.New England Estuary (SNEE)
$5,020.0
$4,965.0
$0.0
-$4,965.0
144
-------
Program Project
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Geographic Program: Other (other
activities)
$1,374.7
$1,436.0
$0.0
-$1,436.0
Subtotal, Geographic Program: Other
$6,394.7
$7,343.0
$0.0
-$7,343.0
Great Lakes Restoration
$353,207.0
$297,963.0
$30,000.0
-$267,963.0
Geographic Program: South Florida
$1,624.0
$1,692.0
$0.0
-$1,692.0
Geographic Program: San Francisco Bay
$4,493.7
$4,786.0
$0.0
-$4,786.0
Geographic Program: Puget Sound
$27,971.9
$27,810.0
$0.0
-$27,810.0
Subtotal, Geographic Programs
$476,245.4
$432,897.0
$37,300.0
-$395,597.0
Flomeland Security
Flomeland Security: Communication and
Information
$3,480.0
$3,834.0
$3,511.0
-$323.0
Flomeland Security: Critical Infrastructure
Protection
$936.9
$956.0
$1,263.0
$307.0
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA
Personnel and Infrastructure
$4,918.0
$5,336.0
$4,986.0
-$350.0
Subtotal, Homeland Security
$9,334.9
$10,126.0
$9,760.0
-$366.0
Information Exchange / Outreach
State and Local Prevention and Preparedness
$14,413.1
$15,269.0
$10,031.0
-$5,238.0
TRI / Right to Know
$12,556.8
$14,187.0
$7,726.0
-$6,461.0
Tribal - Capacity Building
$14,760.7
$14,448.0
$12,631.0
-$1,817.0
Executive Management and Operations
$47,207.3
$46,398.0
$39,431.0
-$6,967.0
Environmental Education
$8,930.9
$8,643.0
$0.0
-$8,643.0
Exchange Network
$16,483.8
$16,578.0
$11,784.0
-$4,794.0
Small Minority Business Assistance
$1,704.6
$1,573.0
$0.0
-$1,573.0
Small Business Ombudsman
$2,102.2
$2,080.0
$1,965.0
-$115.0
Children and Other Sensitive Populations:
Agency Coordination
$6,294.6
$6,504.0
$2,018.0
-$4,486.0
Subtotal, Information Exchange / Outreach
$124,454.0
$125,680.0
$85,586.0
-$40,094.0
International Programs
US Mexico Border
$2,864.8
$3,012.0
$0.0
-$3,012.0
International Sources of Pollution
$6,338.3
$6,506.0
$4,188.0
-$2,318.0
Trade and Governance
$5,857.8
$5,777.0
$0.0
-$5,777.0
Subtotal, International Programs
$15,060.9
$15,295.0
$4,188.0
-$11,107.0
IT / Data Management / Security
Information Security
$9,166.5
$6,742.0
$13,755.0
$7,013.0
IT / Data Management
$82,580.0
$83,179.0
$69,264.0
-$13,915.0
Subtotal, IT / Data Management / Security
$91,746.5
$89,921.0
$83,019.0
-$6,902.0
145
-------
Program Project
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Integrated Environmental Strategies
$10,732.3
$10,581.0
$9,496.0
-$1,085.0
Administrative Law
$4,533.9
$4,381.0
$4,557.0
$176.0
Alternative Dispute Resolution
$1,142.0
$1,015.0
$0.0
-$1,015.0
Civil Rights Program
$10,101.9
$9,699.0
$8,545.0
-$1,154.0
Legal Advice: Environmental Program
$52,889.7
$49,657.0
$42,292.0
-$7,365.0
Legal Advice: Support Program
$14,489.7
$15,170.0
$16,451.0
$1,281.0
Regional Science and Technology
$1,398.2
$1,406.0
$0.0
-$1,406.0
Science Advisory Board
$3,820.3
$3,736.0
$3,779.0
$43.0
Regulatory/Economic-Management and Analysis
$15,498.4
$15,011.0
$15,532.0
$521.0
Subtotal, Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic
Review
$114,606.4
$110,656.0
$100,652.0
-$10,004.0
Operations and Administration
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
$73,003.2
$71,493.0
$68,635.0
-$2,858.0
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
$293,997.9
$305,844.0
$300,738.0
-$5,106.0
Acquisition Management
$31,042.0
$30,803.0
$25,438.0
-$5,365.0
Human Resources Management
$50,608.8
$43,930.0
$40,860.0
-$3,070.0
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management
$24,444.8
$25,416.0
$18,986.0
-$6,430.0
Workforce Reshaping
$0.0
$0.0
$25,549.0
$25,549.0
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
$473,096.7
$477,486.0
$480,206.0
$2,720.0
Pesticides Licensing
Science Policy and Biotechnology
$1,210.0
$1,479.0
$0.0
-$1,479.0
Pesticides: Protect Human Health from Pesticide
Risk
$56,911.0
$55,696.0
$45,949.0
-$9,747.0
Pesticides: Protect the Environment from
Pesticide Risk
$36,654.9
$38,302.0
$28,727.0
-$9,575.0
Pesticides: Realize the Value of Pesticide
Availability
$5,554.3
$6,191.0
$5,084.0
-$1,107.0
Subtotal, Pesticides Licensing
$100,330.2
$101,668.0
$79,760.0
-$21,908.0
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
RCRA: Corrective Action
$36,129.6
$36,584.0
$31,944.0
-$4,640.0
RCRA: Waste Management
$58,277.0
$58,439.0
$41,907.0
-$16,532.0
RCRA: Waste Minimization & Recycling
$9,254.1
$9,141.0
$0.0
-$9,141.0
Subtotal, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA)
$103,660.7
$104,164.0
$73,851.0
-$30,313.0
Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
Endocrine Disruptors
$6,006.4
$7,502.0
$0.0
-$7,502.0
146
-------
Program Project
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Pollution Prevention Program
$11,338.1
$12,194.0
$0.0
-$12,194.0
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Review and
Reduction
$64,329.5
$58,995.0
$58,626.0
-$369.0
Toxic Substances: Lead Risk Reduction Program
$12,780.9
$13,203.0
$0.0
-$13,203.0
Subtotal, Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
$94,454.9
$91,894.0
$58,626.0
-$33,268.0
Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST)
LUST / UST
$10,654.3
$11,218.0
$5,615.0
-$5,603.0
Water: Ecosystems
National Estuary Program / Coastal Waterways
$26,759.1
$26,542.0
$0.0
-$26,542.0
Wetlands
$20,448.7
$20,922.0
$17,913.0
-$3,009.0
Subtotal, Water: Ecosystems
$47,207.8
$47,464.0
$17,913.0
-$29,551.0
Water: Human Health Protection
Beach / Fish Programs
$1,364.0
$1,638.0
$0.0
-$1,638.0
Drinking Water Programs
$95,917.2
$96,200.0
$80,543.0
-$15,657.0
Subtotal, Water: Human Health Protection
$97,281.2
$97,838.0
$80,543.0
-$17,295.0
Water Quality Protection
Marine Pollution
$11,694.4
$10,102.0
$0.0
-$10,102.0
Surface Water Protection
$198,589.4
$198,886.0
$174,975.0
-$23,911.0
Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
Subtotal, Water Quality Protection
$210,283.8
$208,988.0
$174,975.0
-$34,013.0
Congressional Priorities
Water Quality Research and Support Grants
$12,688.0
$12,614.0
$0.0
-$12,614.0
Rescission of Prior Year Funds; Offsetting Receipt
Not Specified
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
TOTAL EPM
$2,639,159.5
$2,602,009.0
$1,738,852.0
-$863,157.0
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the Superfund
account.
147
-------
Clean Air
148
-------
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs
Program Area: Clean Air
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
SI5.23fi.fi
S Ifi.OfiO.O
SI 2.5'-1.0
-S.i.-iSfi.n
Science & Technology
$6,045.0
$7,518.0
$5,739.0
-$1,779.0
Total Budget Authority
$21,281.6
$23,578.0
$18,313.0
-$5,265.0
Total Workyears
68.4
71.4
63.7
-7.7
Program Project Description:
Sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) are precursors for fine particulate matter (PM2.5),
while NOx also is a precursor for ground-level ozone (O3). Researchers have associated PM2.5 and
O3 exposure with adverse health effects in toxicological, clinical, and epidemiological studies.
Lowering exposure to PM2.5 and O3 contributes to significant human health benefits.
The Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs are nationwide and multi-state programs that address
air pollutants that are transported across state, regional, and international boundaries, such as those
covered by the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR). In addition, under Title IV of the Clean
Air Act, the Acid Rain Program (ARP), EPA operates a national annual SO2 trading program and
a NOx emissions reduction program for the power sector.1
The Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs establish a total emission limit that is allocated to
affected emission sources in the form of allowances; authorizations to emit one ton of a pollutant.
The owners and operators of affected emission sources may select among different methods of
compliance - install pollution control equipment, purchase allowances, or switch fuel types. These
programs are managed through a centralized database system operated by EPA.2 Select data,
collected under these programs, is made available to the public through EPA's Air Markets
Program Data (AMPD) website. AMPD provides access to both current and historical data
collected as part of the Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs through interactive maps, charts,
reports, and pre-packaged datasets.
To implement the Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs, EPA operates the Part 75 emission
measurement program that requires approximately 4,500 affected units to monitor and report
emission and operation data.3 The emission measurement program requires high degrees of
accuracy and reliability from continuous emission monitoring systems (CEMS) or approved
alternative methods at the affected sources. EPA provides the affected emission sources with a
1 Clean Air Act § 401
2 Clean Air Act § 403(d)
3 Clean Air Act § 412; Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. P.L. 101-549. § 821
149
-------
software tool, the Emissions Collection and Monitoring Plan System (ECMPS), to process and
quality assure the data and facilitate reporting to EPA. The Agency conducts electronic audits,
desk reviews, and field audits of the emission data and monitoring systems. The emission
measurement program supports a number of other state and federal emission control and reporting
programs.
EPA's centralized database system, the allowance tracking system, records allowance allocations
and transfers.4 At the end of each compliance period, allowances are reconciled against reported
emissions to determine compliance for every facility with affected emission sources. For over 20
years, the affected facilities have maintained near-perfect compliance under the trading programs.
In 2016, total SO2 emissions from emission sources subject to the Acid Rain Program were 1.5
million tons, or approximately one-sixth of the statutory nationwide emissions cap. Total NOx
emissions were 1.2 million tons in 2016, reflecting a reduction of over 6 million tons from
projected 2000 NOx levels absent the Acid Rain Program, exceeding the program's total targeted
reduction of 2 million tons.5
The Clean Air Act's Good Neighbor provision6 requires states or, in some circumstances, the
Agency to reduce interstate pollution that interferes with the attainment and maintenance of the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Under this authority, EPA issued the Cross-
State Air Pollution Rule, which requires 27 states in the eastern U.S. to limit their state-wide
emissions of SO2 and/or NOx in order to reduce or eliminate the states' contributions to PM2.5
and/or ground-level O3 pollution in other downwind states. The emission limitations are defined
in terms of maximum state-wide "budgets" for emissions of annual SO2, annual NOx, and/or
ozone-season NOx from certain large stationary sources in each state.
EPA relies on the Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNET) for monitoring deposition,
ambient sulfate and nitrate concentrations, and other air quality indicators. EPA uses the Long-
Term Monitoring (LTM) program for assessing how water bodies and aquatic ecosystems are
responding to reductions in sulfur and nitrogen emissions. Data from these air quality and
environmental monitoring programs, in conjunction with SO2 and NOx emissions data from the
Part 75 monitoring program, have allowed EPA to develop a comprehensive accountability
framework to track the results of its air quality programs. EPA applies this framework to the
programs it implements and issues annual progress reports on compliance and environmental
results achieved by the Acid Rain Program and Cross-State Air Pollution Rule. Previous reports
have covered progress under the Clean Air Interstate Rule and the NOx Budget Trading Program.
These annual progress reports not only track reductions in SO2 and NOx emissions from affected
sources, but assess the impacts of these reductions on air quality (e.g., ozone and PM2.5 levels),
acid deposition, surface water acidity, forest health, and other environmental indicators.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.1, Improve Air Quality in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. EPA will continue to operate the Clean Air Allowance Trading
4 Clean Air Act § 403(d).
5 https://www3.epa.gov/airiiiarkets/progress/datatreiids/iiidex.litinl
6 Clean Air Act § 110(a)(2)(D); see also Clean Air Act § 110(c).
150
-------
Programs and the systems to assess the programs' progress toward the environmental goals
required by the Clean Air Act. EPA will work to meet requirements and requests for modeling in
support of the power sector and for legal defense of regulatory actions. The program will support
emission reporting for the Mercury and Air Toxics Standard (MATS) Rule,7 aligned with capacity.
Allowance tracking and compliance assessment
EPA will allocate SO2 and NOx allowances to affected emission sources and other account holders
as established in the Clean Air Act8 and state and federal CSAPR implementation plans. These
allowance holdings will be maintained in an updated allowance tracking system (i.e., central
database) that will record allowance transfers.9 At the end of each compliance period, EPA will
reconcile each facility's allowance holdings against its emissions to ensure compliance for all
affected sources.10
Emission measurement and data collection and review
EPA will operate the Part 75 emission measurement program to collect, quality assure, and track
emissions of air pollutants and air toxics, from approximately 4,500 fossil-fuel-fired electric
generating units.
Program assessment
EPA will develop progress reports and other information to communicate the extent of the
progress made by the Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs.11
Assistance to states
EPA will work with states to develop emission reduction programs to comply with Clean Air Act
Good Neighbor Provision requirements.12 This includes implementation of the CSAPR Update
regulation finalized on September 7, 2016.
Performance Measure Targets:
FY 2018
FY 2019
(NOX) Ozone Season emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) from electric power
generation sources (tons).
Target
Target
590,000
580,000
For more information on program performance, see
http://www.epa.gov/airmarket/progress/progress-reports.html.
7 40 C.F.R. pt. 63, subpt. UUUUU (National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Coal and Oil Fired Electric Utility
Steam Generating Units).
8 Clean Air Act § § 110 and 403
9 Clean Air Act § § 110 and 403
10 Clean Air Act §§110 and 404-405 and state CSAPR implementation plans
11 Government Performance and Results Act § 1115
12 Clean Air Act § 110(a)(2)(D)
151
-------
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$775.0) This change to fixed and other costs is a decrease due to the recalculation of base
workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce support,
and benefit costs.
• (-$2,711.0/ -7.7 FTE) This program change streamlines the program's modeling and
reporting activities and focuses the program on core statutory requirements.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Air Act.
152
-------
Atmospheric Protection Program
Program Area: Clean Air
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
s.s'v, i-ij.'
.NOV. "S'.S'.W
-S.S7.2-lh.n
Science & Technology
$7,050.8
$7,964.0
$0.0
-$7,964.0
Total Budget Authority
$96,194.5
$102,752.0
$13,542.0
-$89,210.0
Total Workyears
217.3
224.1
120.0
-104.1
Program Project Description:
EPA's Atmospheric Protection Program develops and delivers data, analysis, and technical
information and assistance to identify technologies and strategies for industries, states, communities
and tribes to meet Clean Air Act (CAA) obligations and other statutory requirements.
ENERGY STAR: EPA manages the ENERGY STAR program with clearly defined support from
the U.S. Department of Energy. ENERGY STAR is the recognized symbol for energy efficiency;
the program provides information that consumers and businesses rely on to make informed
decisions to reduce energy use, save money, and reduce harmful air pollutants. By reducing
energy use through voluntary action, ENERGY STAR lowers costs for states and local
governments as they design and implement plans to meet their air quality and other environmental
goals. Specifically, EPA manages and implements the following activities: the specification
process for more than 75 product categories and the ENERGY STAR Most Efficient recognition
program; the ENERGY STAR Certified Homes program for both single family homes and
multifamily buildings; and the ENERGY STAR commercial and industrial programs. This work
includes activities such as managing the ENERGY STAR brand, monitoring and verification,
setting performance levels for building types, and managing and maintaining the ENERGY STAR
Portfolio Manager to measure and track energy use in buildings.
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program: EPA implements the U.S. Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Program under statutory authority that directs EPA to "require mandatory reporting of greenhouse
gas emissions above appropriate thresholds in all sectors of the economy of the U.S." EPA annually
collects data from over 8,000 facilities from 41 large industrial source categories in the U.S. and
uses this data to improve estimates included in the Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
and Sinks, to support federal and state-level policy development, and to share with industry
stakeholders, state and local governments, the research community, and the public.
Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: In order to fulfill U.S. Treaty obligations,
under Article 4 of the 1992 Framework Convention on Climate Change, which was ratified by the
Senate, EPA prepares the annual Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks, to provide
153
-------
information on total annual U.S. emissions and removals by source, economic sector, and
greenhouse gas. EPA leads the interagency process of preparing the Inventory, working with
technical experts from numerous federal agencies, including the Department of Energy's Energy
Information Agency; U.S. Department of Agriculture; Department of Defense; U.S. Geological
Survey, and academic and research institutions.
Managing the Transition from Ozone Depleting Substances: EPA implements efforts directed by
Section 612 of the Clean Air Act to ensure a smooth transition from ozone depleting substances
(ODS) to safer alternatives.
Science. Economic, and Technical Analyses: EPA conducts a range of economic, scientific and
technical analyses for CAA regulatory actions and technical input.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.1, Improve Air Quality in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will provide technical, analytical and scientific
support for regulatory action consistent with Presidential Executive Order on Promoting Energy
Independence and Economic Growth dated March 28, 2017.
In FY 2019, EPA will establish user fees for entities that participate in the ENERGY STAR
program. Fee collection would start in FY 2019 after EPA undertakes a rulemaking and finalizes
a fees rule. By requesting an advance appropriation of $46 million for FY 2019, the budget
provides the program the authority to use fees to operate the program in advance of collections.
The fees would provide for necessary expenses, including the development, operation, and
maintenance of the ENERGY STAR program. The legislative proposal to authorize collection
and spending of the fees is included as an administrative provision in the President's Budget
Appendix.
The Agency will continue to implement priorities and efficiencies as called for in the January 24,
2017 Presidential Memorandum on Streamlining Permitting and Reducing Burden to Domestic
Regulatory Manufacturing. These efforts are expected to dovetail with previously identified
Executive Orders, including implementation of Executive Order 13771, Reducing Regulation and
Controlling Regulatory Costs and Executive Order 13777, Enforcing the Regulatory Reform
Agenda. EPA will evaluate recommendations, and where appropriate, take action to repeal, replace,
or modify existing regulations to make them less burdensome.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to implement the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program covering a
total of 41 sectors, with approximately 8,000 reporters. Focus areas for the program will include:
• Implementing regulatory revisions across multiple sectors to address stakeholder
concerns associated with collection and potential release of data elements considered
to be sensitive business information;
• Aligning the database management systems with those regulatory amendments; and
• Conducting a QA/QC and verification process through a combination of electronic
checks, staff reviews, and follow-up with facilities when necessary.
154
-------
EPA will work to complete the annual Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Emissions and Sinks.
Performance Measure Targets:
FY 2018
FY 2019
(G18) Percentage of Annual Greenhouse Gas Emission Reports verified by EPA
Target
Target
before publication.
65
65
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$2,896.0) This change to fixed and other costs is a decrease due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$78,350.0/ -140.3 FTE) This program change reflects a reduction in the GHG Reporting
program and eliminates appropriated funding for the partnership programs with industry,
businesses, states, tribes, and localities which will transition to fee funding.
• (+70.0 FTE) This program change reflects an increase in reimbursable FTE for the
development, operation, and maintenance of a fee-supported ENERGY STAR program.
By requesting an advance appropriation of $46 million for FY 2019, the budget allows for
the time involved in both a fee rulemaking and developing and enacting new authorizing
legislation by providing the program the authority to use fees to operate the program in
advance of collections.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Air Act; FY 2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act; Global Change Research Act of 1990;
Global Climate Protections Act; Energy Policy Act of 2005, § 756; Pollution Prevention Act,
§§6602-6605; National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), § 102; Clean Water Act, § 104; Solid
Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), §
8001.
155
-------
Federal Stationary Source Regulations
Program Area: Clean Air
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
S 20.2X2.')
S21. ~Mi.il
S10.ttVft.il
-S-I.SJS.O
Total Budget Authority
$20,282.9
$21,736.0
$16,898.0
-$4,838.0
Total Workyears
102.2
122.5
79.1
-43.4
Program Project Description:
Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA is required to set National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) for ambient pollutants considered harmful to public health and the environment. The
six "criteria" pollutants for which EPA has established NAAQS are: particulate matter (PM),
ozone, sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), carbon monoxide (CO), and lead. The CAA
requires EPA to periodically review the science upon which the NAAQS are based and the
standards themselves. These national standards form the foundation for air quality management
and establish goals that protect public health and the environment.
Section 109 of the CAA Amendments of 1990 established two types of NAAQS. Primary
standards are set at a level requisite to protect public health with an adequate margin of safety.
Secondary standards are set at a level requisite to protect public welfare from any known or
anticipated adverse effects.
This program also includes activities directed toward reducing air emissions of toxic, criteria, and
other pollutants from stationary sources mandated under Sections 111 and 112 of the CAA.
Specifically, to address air toxics, this program provides for the development of National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for major sources (i.e., Maximum Achievable
Control Technology - MACT standards) and area sources; the development of standards of
performance and emissions guidelines for waste combustion sources; the assessment and, as
necessary, regulation of residual risk remaining after implementation of the NESHAP; the periodic
review and revision of the NESHAP to reflect developments in practices, processes, and control
technologies; and associated national guidance and outreach. In addition to existing CAA and
court-ordered mandates, EPA is required to periodically review, and where appropriate, revise
both the list of air toxics subject to regulation and the list of source categories for which standards
must be developed. The program also includes issuing, reviewing, and periodically revising, as
necessary, New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for criteria and certain listed pollutants,
and providing guidance on Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) through issuance
and periodic review and revision of control technique guidelines (CTG).
156
-------
Sections 169A and 169B of the CAA also require protection of air quality related values (AQRV)
for 156 congressionally mandated national parks and wilderness areas, known as Class I areas.
Visibility is one such AQRV, and Congress established a national goal of returning visibility in
the Class I areas to natural conditions, i.e., the visibility conditions which existed without
manmade air pollution. The Regional Haze Rule sets forth the requirements that state plans must
satisfy to make reasonable progress towards meeting this national goal.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.1, Improve Air Quality in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, the Agency will continue to implement priorities and
efficiencies as called for in the January 24, 2017 Presidential Memorandum, Streamlining
Permitting and Reducing Regulatory Burdens for Domestic Manufacturing. These efforts are
expected to dovetail with previously identified Executive Orders, including implementation of
Executive Order 13771, Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs and Executive
Order 13777, Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda. EPA will evaluate recommendations, and
where appropriate, take action to repeal, replace, or modify existing regulations to make them less
burdensome.
NAAQS: In FY 2019, EPA will continue its reviews of the NAAQS and make revisions, as
appropriate. In FY 2019, EPA will finalize its review of the SO2 primary NAAQS, which
is currently required pursuant to consent decree. Each review involves a comprehensive
reexamination, synthesis, and evaluation of the scientific information, the design and conduct of
complex air quality and risk and exposure analyses, the development of a comprehensive policy
assessment providing analysis of the scientific basis for alternative policy options.
EPA will continue work to achieve and maintain compliance with existing standards. These
include the ozone standards established in 2015, 2008, 1997, and 1979; the 1997 PM10
standards; the 2012, 2006 and 1997 PM2.5 standards; the 2008 lead standard13; the 2010 N02
standard; the 1971 CO standard; and the 2010 S02 standard.
Section 111 of the CAA requires EPA to set NSPS for industrial categories that cause, or
significantly contribute to, air pollution that may endanger public health or welfare. In FY 2019,
EPA will continue work to address NSPS for sources of air pollutants, consistent with the
requirements of the CAA. Section 111 of the CAA also requires EPA, at least every eight years,
to review and, if appropriate, revise NSPS for each source category for which such standards have
been established.
Air Toxics: Section 112(d)(6) of the CAA requires EPA to review and revise, as necessary, within
eight years, all of the MACT standards for air toxics that have been promulgated under CAA
Section 112 since 1990. These reviews include collection of new information and emissions data
from industry; review of emission control technologies; and associated economic analyses for the
affected industries. Similarly, Section 112(f) of the CAA requires EPA to conduct reviews of the
risk that remains after the implementation of MACT standards within eight years of promulgation.
13 In September 2016, EPA completed the review of the 2008 Lead NAAQS and retained the standards without revision.
157
-------
In FY 2019, EPA will engage in rulemaking efforts to review and revise, as necessary and
appropriate, emissions standards for seven source categories, including Leather Finishing
Operations; Surface Coating of Wood Building Products; Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabric
and Other Textiles; Surface Coating of Metal Furniture; Surface Coating of Large Appliances;
Friction Products Manufacturing; and Wet Formed Fiberglass Mat Production. This is pursuant to
a court order with a deadline of December 31, 2018 for the final rules. EPA also is under court
orders to complete risk and technology review rulemakings under Section 112 of CAA by 2020
for 26 additional source categories. A substantial portion of the work for these rulemakings under
Section 112 of the CAA will need to occur in FY 2019. In addition, under Section 129 of the CAA,
EPA plans to continue efforts to address the risk and technology review for Large Municipal Waste
Combustors. Compliance testing and monitoring methodologies will continue to be developed and
improved in support of these risk determination and rulemaking efforts.
EPA will continue to develop the next National Air Toxics Assessment (NATA). The purpose of
NATA is to identify and prioritize air toxics, emission source types, and locations that are of
greatest potential concern in terms of contributing to population risk. The results are used in many
ways, including: to assist states in designing their own local-scale assessments; to set priorities and
help states improve emissions inventories; and to help direct priorities for expanding and improving
the air toxics monitoring network.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to address program-wide issues, including court-vacated rules
that apply across many industrial sources.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,904.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$6,742.0/ -43.4 FTE) This program change is a reduction in the Federal Stationary Source
Regulations program. As a result of this change, the Agency will work to develop a more
efficient approach to meeting its statutorily-required NAAQS reviews. In addition, EPA
will rely on states and other stakeholders to identify burden and cost-reduction actions
needed to improve the federal-state partnership and the stationary source regulatory process
as a whole.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Air Act.
158
-------
Federal Support for Air Quality Management
Program Area: Clean Air
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
N/J"//.*.-/
SI25Jft~.0
SVh.OV'M
-S 2V.2WUI
Science & Technology
$7,283.8
$7,280.0
$4,031.0
-$3,249.0
Total Budget Authority
$134,397.2
$132,667.0
$100,128.0
-$32,539.0
Total Workyears
812.6
842.0
601.8
-240.2
Program Project Description:
The Federal Support for Air Quality Management Program assists states, tribes, and local air
pollution control agencies in the development, implementation, and evaluation of programs for the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), establishes standards for reducing air toxics,
and sustains visibility protection. EPA develops federal measures and regional strategies that help
to reduce emissions from stationary and mobile sources; whereas states have the primary
responsibility (and tribes may choose to take responsibility) for developing clean air measures
necessary to meet the NAAQS and protect visibility. At the core of this program is the use of
scientific and technical air emissions data. EPA, working with states, tribes, and local air agencies,
develops methods for estimating and measuring emissions and concentrations, collects these data,
and maintains databases (e.g., Emissions Inventory System, Air Quality System, etc.). EPA also
supports training for state, tribal, and local air pollution professionals.
Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA is required to set the NAAQS for ambient pollutants
considered harmful to public health and the environment. The six "criteria" pollutants for which
EPA has established NAAQS are: particulate matter (PM), ozone, sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen
dioxide (NO2), carbon monoxide (CO), and lead (Pb). The CAA requires EPA to periodically
review the science upon which the NAAQS are based and the standards themselves. These national
standards form the foundation for air quality management and establish goals that protect public
health and the environment.
Section 109 of the CAA Amendments of 1990 established two types of NAAQS - primary and
secondary standards. Primary standards are set at a level requisite to protect public health with an
adequate margin of safety, including the health of at-risk populations. Secondary standards provide
public welfare protection, including protection against decreased visibility and damage to animals,
crops, vegetation, and buildings.
For each of the six criteria pollutants, under Section 110 of the CAA, EPA tracks two kinds of air
pollution information: air pollutant concentrations based on actual measurements in the ambient
(outside) air at monitoring sites throughout the country; and pollutant emissions based on
159
-------
engineering estimates or measurements of the total tons of pollutants released into the air each year.
EPA works with state and local governments to ensure the technical integrity of emission source
controls in State Implementation Plans (SIPs) and with tribes on Tribal Implementation Plans
(TIPs).
The new source review (NSR) preconstruction permit program in Title I of the CAA is a part of
state plans to attain and maintain the NAAQS. The two primary aspects of this program are the
prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) program, described in Section 165 of the CAA and
the nonattainment NSR program, which is described in various parts of the CAA, to include
Sections 173 and 182; among others.
Sections 169A and 169B of the CAA also require protection of visibility for 156 congressionally
mandated national parks and wilderness areas, known as Class I areas. Congress established a
national goal of returning visibility in the Class I areas to natural conditions (i.e., the visibility
conditions which existed without manmade air pollution). The Regional Haze Rule, which sets
forth the requirements that state plans must satisfy to make reasonable progress towards meeting
this national goal.
The provisions in the Clean Air Act that address the control of air toxics are found in Section 112
of the CAA. This section requires that the emissions control bases for all Maximum Achievable
Control Technology (MACT) standards be reviewed and updated, as necessary, every eight years.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.1, Improve Air Quality in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. Air quality has improved significantly for communities across
the country since passage of the CAA in 1970 (with amendments in 1977 and 1990). Since 1990,
for example, national average levels have decreased by 22 percent for ozone, 39 percent for
particulate matter, 85 percent for sulfur dioxide, and 99 percent for lead.14 In FY 2019, EPA will
continue to prioritize key activities in support of attainment of the NAAQS and implementation of
stationary source regulations support by state, tribal, and local air quality programs.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue its review of the NAAQS in accordance with the CAA. During
FY 2019, EPA will finalize its review of the 2010 SO2 primary NAAQS, which is currently
required pursuant to a consent decree. In addition, EPA will continue its CAA mandated
responsibilities to administer the NAAQS by reviewing state plans and decisions consistent with
statutory obligations; taking federal oversight actions such as acting on State Implementation
Plan/Tribal Implementation Plan (SIP/TIP) submittals; and by developing regulations and policies
to ensure continued health and welfare protection during the transition between existing and new
standards. EPA will work with states to adjust the schedules, as appropriate, for additional state-
requested rulemakings and guidance documents to support state and tribal efforts to implement
CAA SIP requirements to align with capacity and priorities. EPA will provide prioritized technical
and policy assistance to states and tribes developing or revising SIPs/TIPs.
uOur Nation's Air: Status and Trends Through 2016 https://gispub.epa.gOv/air/trendsreport/2017/#highlights.
160
-------
EPA, in close collaboration with states and tribes, will work to reduce the number of areas not in
attainment with the NAAQS. The agency will continue to look for ways to improve the efficiency
and effectiveness of the SIP process, including its own review process, with a goal of maximizing
timely processing of state-requested SIP actions. The Agency will take action on designation or re-
designation of nonattainment areas to attainment, as appropriate, pursuant to Sections 107 and 110
of the CAA, respectively. A focus will be placed on states achieving attainment, looking at
improved processes, and implementation options. Also, a new SIP-focused IT system currently
under development called SPeCS (the State Plan Electronic Collection System), is expected to
improve EPA tracking of SIP submittals and EPA action on SIPs in FY 2018 and beyond.
EPA will continue reviews to approve SIPs for regional haze to ensure that states are making
reasonable progress towards their visibility improvement goals, consistent with statutory
obligations. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to assist states that are developing plan revisions.
Section 169A of the CAA requires EPA to assess and approve the plans.
EPA will continue to assist other federal agencies and state and local governments in implementing
the conformity regulations promulgated pursuant to Section 176 of the CAA. These regulations
require federal agencies, taking actions in nonattainment and maintenance areas, to determine that
the emissions caused by their actions will conform to the SIP.
One ofEPA's priorities is to fulfill its CAA and court-ordered obligations. Section 112 of the
CAA requires that the emissions control bases for all MACT standards are reviewed and updated,
as necessary, every eight years. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to conduct risk assessments to
determine whether the MACT rules appropriately protect public health. EPA also will review
developments in practices, processes and technologies pursuant to Section 112(d)(6). The program
will prioritize its work with an emphasis on meeting court-ordered deadlines.
EPA will work to meet its Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Nonattainment New
Source Review (NNSR) obligations pursuant to Sections 165 and 173 of the CAA. EPA will
continue to review and respond to reconsideration requests and, take actions necessary to respond
to court decisions, and work with states and industries on NSR applicability issues. In aligning this
effort with Executive Order 13777, Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda and Executive Order
13771, Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs, EPA will evaluate existing
regulations and pursue opportunities to make them less burdensome.
EPA maintains the RACT/BACT/LAER clearinghouse (RBLC) to help permit applicants and
reviewers make pollution prevention and control technology decisions for stationary air pollution
sources. The RBLC includes data submitted by several U.S. territories and all 50 states on over
200 different air pollutants and 1000 industrial processes15. EPA expects to consider opportunities
to improve the RBLC to support efficiency in permitting for air agencies and sources.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to provide technical assistance to state, local, and tribal air agencies
for both NSR and title V (operating) permits. This support will occur at appropriate times and as
requested, consistent with applicable requirements, before and during the permitting process. EPA
expects to implement such support in an efficient manner and consistent with established
15 Please see http://cfpub.epa.gov/RBLC/ for more information.
161
-------
timeframes for applicable oversight of state, tribal, and local air agencies during the permitting
process.
The Agency will continue to implement priorities and efficiencies as called for in the January 24,
2017 Presidential Memorandum, Streamlining Permitting and Reducing Regulatory Burden for
Domestic Manufacturing. These efforts are expected to dovetail with previously identified
Executive Orders, including implementation of Executive Order 13771, Reducing Regulation and
Controlling Regulatory Costs and Executive Order 13777, Enforcing the Regulatory Reform
Agenda. EPA will evaluate recommendations, and where appropriate, take action to repeal,
replace, or modify existing regulations to make them less burdensome.
In FY 2019, EPA will provide assistance to state, tribal, and local agencies for various technical
activities. EPA uses a broad suite of analytical tools, such as source characterization analyses,
emission factors and inventories, statistical analyses, source apportionment techniques, quality
assurance protocols and audits, improved source testing and monitoring techniques, source-specific
dispersion and regional-scale photochemical air quality models, and augmented cost/benefit tools,
to assess control strategies16. The Agency will maintain the core function of these tools (e.g.,
integrated multiple pollutant emissions inventory, air quality modeling platforms, etc.) to provide
the technical underpinnings for more efficient and comprehensive air quality management by state,
local and tribal agencies.
In FY 2019, EPA will maintain baseline analytical capabilities required to develop effective
regulations including: analyzing the economic impacts of regulations and policies; developing and
refining existing emission test methods for measuring pollutants from smokestacks and other
industrial sources; developing and refining existing source sampling measurement techniques to
determine rates of emissions from stationary sources; updating existing dispersion models for use
in source permitting; and conducting air quality modeling that characterizes the atmospheric
processes that disperse a pollutant emitted by a source. Resources from the Science and Technology
appropriation component of this program support the scientific development of these capabilities.
In FY 2019, state and local agencies will have the lead in implementing the National Air Toxics
Trends Sites (NATTS). The NATTS, designed to capture the impacts of widespread pollutants, is
comprised of 27 permanent monitoring sites17. EPA will consult on priority data gaps to better
assess population exposure to toxic air pollution.
In FY 2019, EPA will maintain the Air Quality System (AQS), one of the Agency's mission
essential functions, which houses the nation's air quality data. EPA will provide the core support
needed for the AQS Data Mart, which provides access to the scientific community and others to
obtain air quality data via the internet. The Agency's national real-time ambient air quality data
system (AirNow) will maintain baseline operations. EPA will continue to operate and maintain the
Emissions Inventory System (EIS), a system used to quality assure and store current and historical
emissions inventory data, and to generate the National Emissions Inventory (NEI). The NEI is
used by EPA, states, and others to analyze the public health risks from air toxics and to develop
strategies to manage those risks and support multi-pollutant analysis covering air emissions. EPA
16 Please seehttps://www.epa.gov/technical-air-pollution-resources for more information.
17 See http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/airtoxpg.html for additional information.
162
-------
will continue to implement previously identified Lean strategies to streamline NEI development
and to reduce burden for industry for meeting their emissions data requirements through the
Combined Air Emissions Reporting (CAER) effort.
Performance Measure Targets:
(NA2) Percent of U.S. Population Living in Nonattainment Areas.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
36
34
(DV) Percent of measured air quality improvement in counties not meeting the
NAAQS from the 2016 baseline.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
-2
-3
(SIP) Number of SIPs acted on by the regional offices.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
150
175
(NA1) Number of Nonattainment Areas.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
155
138
(M92) Cumulative percentage reduction in the number of days with Air Quality
Index (AQI) values over 100 since 2003, weighted by population and AQI value.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
67
70
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$4,897.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$34,187.0/ -237.1 FTE) This program change is a reduction in technical assistance to and
support of state, tribal and local air programs, including those that develop and implement
clean air plans, issue air permits, and provide air quality information to the public. The
Agency will prioritize supporting state and local air agencies in obtaining air quality
improvements necessary to bring areas into attainment.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Air Act.
163
-------
Stratospheric Ozone: Domestic Programs
Program Area: Clean Air
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
S4. -<>>>. 1
S 4.(>t)(>.0
S3.
-SSKi.O
Total Budget Authority
$4,709.1
$4,606.0
$3,790.0
-$816.0
Total Workyears
20.2
22.0
18.0
-4.0
Program Project Description:
The stratospheric ozone layer protects life by shielding the Earth's surface from harmful
ultraviolet (UV) radiation. Scientific evidence demonstrates that ozone-depleting substances
(ODS) used around the world destroy the stratospheric ozone layer,18 which raises the incidence
of skin cancer and other illnesses through overexposure to increased levels of UV radiation.19
EPA estimates that in the United States alone, the worldwide phase out of ODS will avert millions
of cases of non-fatal and fatal skin cancers (melanoma and non-melanoma), as well as millions
of cataract cases, which is the leading cause of blindness. Full implementation of the Montreal
Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal Protocol) globally, including its
amendments and adjustments, is expected to avoid more than 280 million cases of skin cancer,
approximately 1.6 million skin cancer deaths, and more than 45 million cases of cataracts in the
United States among individuals born between 1890 and 2100.20
EPA implements provisions of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAA) and the Montreal
Protocol, resulting in the reduction of ODS in the U.S. and lower health risks to the American
public. EPA uses a combination of regulatory and partnership programs to protect and restore the
ozone layer. The CAA provides for a phase-out of production and consumption of ODS and
requires controls on their use, including banning certain emissive uses, requiring labeling to
inform consumer choice, and requiring sound servicing practices for the use of refrigerants
in air conditioning and refrigeration appliances. The CAA also prohibits venting ODS and
their substitutes and requires listing of alternatives that reduce overall risk to human health or the
environment, ensuring that businesses and consumers have alternatives that are safer for the ozone
layer than the chemicals they replace.
18 World Meteorological Organization (WMO). Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2014. Global Ozone Research and
Monitoring Project-Report No. 56, Geneva, Switzerland. 2014.
19Fahey, D.W., and M.I. Hegglin (Coordinating Lead Authors), Twenty questions and answers about the ozone layer: 2014
Update, In Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2014, Global Ozone Research and Monitoring Project-Report No. 56,
World Meteorological Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2014. Available on the internet at:
https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/csd/assessments/ozone/2014/twentvauestions2014uDdate.pdf.
20 EPA, Updating ozone calculations and emissions profiles for use in the Atmospheric Health Effects Framework Model ^OlSl
Available on the internet at: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-ll/documents/ahef 2015 update report-
final 508.pdf.
164
-------
As a signatory to the Montreal Protocol, the U.S. is committed to ensuring that our domestic
program is at least as stringent as international obligations and to regulating and enforcing the
terms of the Montreal Protocol respective of domestic authority. With U.S. leadership, the Parties
to the Montreal Protocol agreed to a more aggressive phase-out for ozone-depleting
hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) equaling a 47 percent reduction in overall emissions during
the period 2010-2040. An adjustment in 2007 also calls on Parties to promote the selection of
alternatives to HCFCs that minimize environmental impacts, in particular impacts on climate.21
In 2016, the parties to the Montreal Protocol agreed to the Kigali Amendment,22 which will
globally phase down production and consumption of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). HFCs are
internationally manufactured fluorinated greenhouse gases used in all the same sectors as ODS
such as air conditioning, refrigeration, fire suppression, solvents, foam blowing agents, and
aerosols.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Obj ective 1.1, Improve Air Quality in EPA's FY 2018
- 2022 Strategic Plan. In carrying out the requirements of the CAA and the Montreal Protocol in
FY 2019, EPA will continue to meet its ODS import caps and work toward the gradual reduction
in production and consumption of ODS. This will likely require finalization of a notice-and-
comment rulemaking in FY 2019. To meet FY 2019 targets and out year targets, EPA will issue
allocations for HCFC production and import in accordance with the requirements established under
CAA Sections 605 and 606; manage information that industry identifies as Confidential Business
Information (CBI) under CAA Section 603; and implement current regulations concerning the
production, import, and export of ODS and maintenance of the tracking system used to collect the
information. EPA also will prepare and submit an annual report under Article 7 of the Montreal
Protocol on U.S. consumption and production of ODS.
CAA Section 612 requires continuous review of alternatives for ODS through EPA's Significant
New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program23 to find those that pose less overall risk to human
health and the environment and to promote a smooth transition to safer alternatives. Through these
evaluations, SNAP generates lists of acceptable and unacceptable substitutes for approximately 50
end uses across eight industrial sectors. EPA will act upon a number of submissions and petitions
in FY 2019 that expand the list of acceptable alternatives, particularly for end-uses where there is
an urgent need for more options. The schedule for other approvals will be adjusted at least until
FY 2019. Certain approvals adjusted for FY 2018 will be taken up with other pending approvals
in FY 2019, to the extent practicable, as EPA seeks to minimize the risk to the investment made
by companies in R&D and testing phases given that SNAP listings are critical to the
commercialization of many substitutes and alternative technologies in key sectors of use. Final
Agency action can include notices of acceptability listings as well as notice-and-comment
rulemaking. EPA also will continue to work towards ensuring the uptake of safer alternatives and
technologies, while supporting innovation, and ensuring adoption through support for changes to
industry codes and standards.
21 Montreal Protocol Decision X1X/6: Adjustments to the Montreal Protocol with regard to Annex C, Group I,
substances (hydrochlorofluorocarbons).
22Amendment to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, Kigali 15 October 2016,
https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/CN/2016/CN.872.2016-Eng.pdf.
23 For more information, see: http://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/index.html.
165
-------
In FY 2019, EPA will continue efforts under CAA Section 608 to reduce emissions of refrigerants
during the service, maintenance, repair and disposal of air conditioning and refrigeration
equipment. EPA will issue a final rule revisiting aspects of the extension of the Section 608
requirements to substitutes, including HFCs; and also will provide a minimal level of compliance
assistance for rules concerning servicing, maintenance, repair and disposal of air conditioning and
refrigeration appliances.
EPA will continue to support the CAA Section 609 motor vehicle air conditioning (MVAC)
servicing program to reduce emissions of refrigerants from MVAC systems. Where industry
consensus standards are available that EPA considers to be sufficient for protection of human
health and the environment, EPA may adopt the standards into its regulations through
incorporation by reference. EPA is aware of such standards developed by the Society of
Automotive Engineers (SAE) for recovery equipment for new alternatives and will engage with
the SAE and others on potential options.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to support implementation of the Montreal Protocol domestically
by ensuring U.S. interests are represented at Montreal Protocol meetings by providing technical
expertise. The Agency will provide technical expertise for the Montreal Protocol's Technology
and Economic Assessment Panel and its Technical Options Committees.
With the decline in allowable HCFC production, a significant stock of air conditioning and
refrigeration equipment that continues to use HCFCs will need access to recovered and
recycled/reclaimed HCFCs to ensure proper servicing. EPA reviews available market data to
ensure that future demand for virgin HCFCs can be satisfied under production and import caps.
EPA also will implement other provisions of the Montreal Protocol, including exemption
programs to allow for a continued smooth phase out of ODS.
Additionally, EPA will continue to work with federal and international agencies to stem illegal
imports of ODS in order to support a level playing field for companies that produce and import
ODS. EPA will continue data exchange with U.S. Customs and Border Protection and Homeland
Security Investigations on ODS importers and exporters for Customs to determine admissibility
and target illegal ODS shipments entering the United States as well as reviewing and approving
ODS imports flagged in the Automated Customs Environment.
Performance Measure Targets:
(S01) Remaining US Consumption of hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), chemicals
that deplete the Earth's protective ozone layer, measured in tons of Ozone Depleting
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
Potential (ODP).
1,520
1,520
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$364.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of base
workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce support,
and benefit costs.
166
-------
• (-$1,180.0/ -4.0 FTE) This program change is a reduction to the program resources related
to the following activities: development of outreach and compliance assistance materials;
adoption of SAE standards for recycling equipment for alternative refrigerants; support to
Customs and Border Protection at ports; and assistance to refrigeration and air-conditioning
technicians.
Statutory Authority:
Title VI of the Clean Air Act.
167
-------
Stratospheric Ozone: Multilateral Fund
Program Area: Clean Air
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
N,N
so.o
Total Budget Authority
$8,326.0
$8,677.0
$0.0
-$8,677.0
Program Project Description:
The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal Protocol) facilitates
a global phaseout of ozone-depleting substances (ODS). The United States implements its treaty
obligations primarily through Title VI of the Clean Air Act.
The Multilateral Fund for the Implementation of the Montreal Protocol (Multilateral Fund) was
created by the Parties to the Montreal Protocol to provide funds to enable developing countries to
comply with their Montreal Protocol obligations to phase out the use of ODS on an agreed
schedule. The United States and other developed countries contribute to the Multilateral Fund. The
U.S. contribution to the Multilateral Fund is split between EPA and the Department of State.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources for this program are proposed for elimination in FY 2019. EPA will continue domestic
ODS reduction work.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$8,677.0) This program change eliminates funding for the Stratospheric Ozone:
Multilateral Fund program.
Statutory Authority:
Title VI of the Clean Air Act.
168
-------
Brownfields
169
-------
Brownfields
Program Area: Brownfields
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Revitalize Land and Prevent Contamination
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Unvirinimcnliil Pru'^rum A- Manii^cmcnl
S25.4I1.X
S 25.4IV.lt
SlfiJM2.it
-S V.J J-.It
Total Budget Authority
$25,411.8
$25,419.0
$16,082.0
-$9,337.0
Total Workyears
141.2
149.8
92.6
-57.2
Program Project Description:
Brownfields sites are real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be
complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or
contaminant. Brownfields can be found in the heart of America's main streets and former
economic centers. The Brownfields program supports these efforts by awarding grants and
providing technical assistance to states, tribes, local communities, and other stakeholders to work
together to plan, inventory, assess, safely cleanup, and reuse brownfields. Approximately 129
million people (roughly 40 percent of the U.S. population) live within three miles of a Brownfields
site that receives EPA funding.24 As of the end of FY 2017, grants awarded by the program have
led to over 69,200 acres of idle land made ready for productive use and over 129,240 jobs and
$24.7 billion leveraged.25
This funding supports the operating expenses for the program. Operating activities include 1)
conducting the annual, high volume cooperative agreement competitions; 2) awarding new
cooperative agreements; 3) managing the ongoing cooperative agreement workload; 4) providing
technical assistance and ongoing support to grantees; 5) collaborating with other agency programs;
6) operating the Assessment Cleanup and Redevelopment Exchanges System (ACRES) online
grantee reporting tool; 7) assisting communities to explore land reuse opportunities under the Land
Revitalization program; 8) developing guidance and tools that clarify potential environmental
cleanup liabilities; and 9) potentially organizing National Brownfields Training Conference.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.3, Revitalize Land and Prevent
Contamination in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, the Brownfields program
will support the following activities:
24 U.S. EPA, Office of Land and Emergency Management Estimate 2017. Data collected includes: (1) site information as of the
end of FY16; and (2) census data from the 2011-2015 American Community Survey.
25 EPA's ACRES database.
170
-------
• Compete and Award New Cooperative Agreements: Review, select, and award an
estimated 355 new cooperative agreements which will lead to over 1,000 projects and
approximately $1.1 billion and 5,800 jobs leveraged.
• Oversight and Management of Existing Cooperative Agreements: Continue federal
fiduciary responsibility to manage approximately 900 existing brownfields cooperative
agreements in a reduced capacity while ensuring the terms and conditions of the
agreements are met, and provide limited technical assistance. Provide targeted
environmental oversight support to grantees (e.g., site eligibility determinations, review of
environmental site assessment and cleanup reports).
• Technical Assistance: Provide technical assistance to states, tribes, and local communities
in the form of research, training, and analysis. This can lead to cost effective
implementation of brownfields redevelopment projects by providing communities with the
knowledge necessary to understand market conditions, economic development and other
community revitalization strategies, and how cleanup and reuse can be catalyzed by small
businesses.
• Collaboration: The program will work collaboratively with our partners at the state, tribal,
and local level on innovative approaches to help achieve land reuse. It also will continue
to develop guidance and tools that clarify potential environmental cleanup liabilities,
thereby providing greater certainty for parties seeking to reuse these properties. The
program also can provide direct support to facilitate transactions for parties seeking to reuse
contaminated properties.
• Accomplishment Tracking: Support the maintenance of the ACRES online grantee
reporting tool. This enables grantees to track accomplishments and report on the number
of sites assessed and cleaned up, and the amount of dollars and jobs leveraged with
brownfields grants.
• Land Revitalization Program Support: Provide support for approximately two
communities as part of EPA's Land Revitalization program. The Land Revitalization
program supports communities in their efforts to restore contaminated lands into
sustainable community assets.
• National Brownfields Training Conference: EPA will explore options for hosting a
National Brownfields Training Conference in FY 2019 or FY 2020. This is the largest and
most comprehensive training conference in the nation focused on environmental
revitalization and economic redevelopment issues.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
171
-------
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$200.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefits costs.
• (-$9,537.0/ -57.2 FTE) This program change reduces funding for managing and closing out
assistance agreements, data collection analysis, and system enhancements.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), as
amended by the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act, §§ 101, 104,
107, 128; Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act,
§ 8001.
172
-------
Compliance
173
-------
Compliance Monitoring
Program Area: Compliance
Goal: Cooperative Federalism
Objective(s): Enhance Shared Accountability
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
s inn.Vxn
SSf) J'-/.O
Inland Oil Spill Programs
$145.2
$138.0
$0.0
-$138.0
Hazardous Substance Superfond
$1,028.8
$988.0
$988.0
$0.0
Total Budget Authority
$99,457.6
$102,101.0
$87,362.0
-$14,739.0
Total Workyears
506.4
538.9
428.7
-110.2
Program Project Description:
The Compliance Monitoring program is a key component of EPA's compliance assurance program
that allows the controlling regulatory authority to detect noncompliance and promote compliance
with the nation's environmental laws. Effective targeting of compliance monitoring plays a critical
role in achieving the goals EPA has set forth for protecting health and the environment. The states
and EPA use compliance monitoring tools and activities to identify whether regulated entities are
in compliance with environmental laws enacted by Congress, as well as applicable regulations and
permit conditions. In addition, compliance monitoring activities, such as inspections and
investigations, are conducted to determine whether conditions exist that may present imminent and
substantial endangerment to human health and the environment.
The Compliance Monitoring program promotes joint governance and the expanded use of
compliance assurance tools (such as compliance assistance) among state, tribal, local, and federal
partners. States, tribes, and EPA have policies/procedures on the appropriate use of the tools in our
compliance assurance tool box, with states taking the majority of actions in authorized programs.
Tools in the compliance monitoring program include:
• Compliance Assistance. EPA collaborates with state, local, federal, tribal, and industry
partners with the E-Enterprise Portal, a website which allows the states, the regulated
community, and EPA to transact business such as permitting and reporting, and provides
easy access to needed compliance assistance information. Also, EPA partners with third
party organizations and federal agencies to support our 17 existing web-based, sector-
specific Compliance Assistance Centers.
• Full Electronic Reporting with Compliance Assistance. EPA has an internet-accessible,
national enforcement and compliance data system, the Integrated Compliance Information
System (ICIS), which supports both the compliance monitoring and civil enforcement
programs. Currently, EPA and states are implementing the National Pollution Discharge
174
-------
Elimination System (NPDES) Electronic Reporting Rule through ICIS.26 Phase 1 of the
rule was implemented in FY 2017 for NPDES Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs),
including compliance assistance features such as electronic reminders to state and federal
permittees that may have missed their compliance monitoring report deadlines. More than
20 states currently use EPA's electronic reporting tool to collect DMRs and use these
electronic compliance assistance reminders. Further, ICIS also provides email reminders
to permittees that have an upcoming report due under their NPDES general permit.
• Smart Tools for Field Inspectors. These are software solutions to improve the effectiveness
and efficiency of how EPA and states conduct Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA) Subtitle C (hazardous waste) inspections.
• Compliance Training for EPA and States. To ensure the quality of compliance monitoring
activities, EPA develops national policies, updates inspection manuals, provides required
training for inspectors, and issues inspector credentials. EPA's National Enforcement
Training Institute (NETI) has provided online, e-learning courses for 2,500 EPA, state and
tribal inspectors, and has made available over 165 online training courses in the NETI e-
Learning Center for EPA and state, local, and tribal enforcement partners.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 2/Objective 2.1, Enhance Shared Accountability in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. Work in this program also supports the Agency Priority
Goal Increase Environmental Law Compliance Rate. Through FY 2019, EPA will increase
compliance by reducing the percentage of Clean Water Act (CWA) National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permittees in significant noncompliance with their permit limits to
21 percent from a baseline of 24 percent.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to streamline its compliance monitoring activities such as field
inspections, data tools, and assistance. EPA will focus principally on 1) those programs that are
not delegated to states ("direct implementation"), and 2) where EPA's expertise or unique role is
best suited to address the issue. This includes, but is not limited to, multi-state/multi-regional
matters, issues of national significance, and emergency situations. In addition, EPA will provide
some targeted oversight and support to state, local, and tribal programs. To accomplish this, the
Agency will prioritize work with states to develop methods that successfully leverage advances in
both monitoring and information technology. Also, the Agency will maintain accessibility to ICIS
for EPA, states, the public, and the tribes.
Also in FY 2019, the Agency expects to pilot the use of "informal" enforcement actions to address
less serious violations, especially where EPA is directly implementing the program. Informal
actions are when the government identifies in writing a violation by regulated entities and requests
that they correct the violations, but the written request is not independently enforceable.
26 For more information, refer to: https://www.epa.gov/compliance/npdes-ereporting.
175
-------
In addition, the Agency will continue to implement Phase 2 of the NPDES Electronic Reporting
Rule which covers the e-reporting rule permitting requirements for EPA and states on a prolonged
schedule. EPA will work with states to evaluate and prioritize the development of additional
electronic reporting tools that support states. EPA's centralized development of electronic
reporting tools saves the states significant resources in development.
Performance Measure Targets:
(432) Percentage of Clean Water Act National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permittees not in significant noncompliance with their permit
limits.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
76
79
(427) Number of regulatory sectors served by national web-based compliance
assistance centers.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
17
18
(428) Number of in-person and live webinar trainings provided to states to expand
capacity building.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
100
100
(409) Number of federal on-site compliance monitoring inspections and evaluations
and off-site compliance monitoring activities.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
10,000
10,000
(433) By FY 2018, develop a compliance rate pilot in a second program (in addition
to NPDES) and implement in FY 2019.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
Identify Pilot
Implement
Pilot
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$2,632.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$17,233.0/ -109.3 FTE) This program change reflects a recognition that states conduct
the vast majority of inspections, an EPA focus on direct implementation programs, and an
increased reliance on technology rather than on-site inspections to monitor compliance.
Statutory Authority:
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485
(codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute); Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships (MARPOL
Annex VI); Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act; Atomic Energy Act; Clean Air Act;
Certain Alaskan Cruise Ship Operations; Clean Water Act; Community Environmental Response
Facilitation Act; Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act; Energy Policy Act;
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act; Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries
176
-------
Act; Mercury-Containing and Rechargeable Battery Management Act; National Environmental
Policy Act; Noise Control Act; Oil Pollution Act; Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act; Residential
Lead-Based Paint Disclosure Program; Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; Safe Drinking
Water Act; Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act; Small Business Liability Relief
and Brownfields Revitalization Act; Toxic Substances Control Act; Uranium Mill Tailings
Radiation Control Act; North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation; La Paz
Agreement on US/Mexico Border Region.
177
-------
Enforcement
178
-------
Civil Enforcement
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Compliance with the Law
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
si
SI 'O.S-I'J.O
SI-I0.f>".0
-SJO.I ~2.ll
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
$584.7
$616.0
$589.0
-$27.0
Inland Oil Spill Programs
$2,342.8
$2,397.0
$2,219.0
-$178.0
Total Budget Authority
$175,237.1
$173,862.0
$143,485.0
-$30,377.0
Total Workyears
1,061.0
1,080.4
857.1
-223.3
Program Project Description:
The overall goal of EPA's Civil Enforcement program is to maximize compliance with the nation's
environmental laws and regulations to protect human health and the environment. EPA will seek
to strengthen environmental partnerships with its state and tribal partners, encourage regulated
entities to correct violations rapidly, ensure that violators do not realize an economic benefit from
noncompliance, and pursue enforcement to deter future violations.
The Agency works closely with the U.S. Department of Justice, states, tribal governments,
territories, and local agencies to ensure consistent and fair enforcement of all major environmental
statutes, distinct programs under those statutes, and numerous regulatory requirements under those
programs, which apply in various combinations to millions of regulated federal and private entities.
The Civil Enforcement program develops, litigates, and settles administrative and civil judicial
cases against serious violators of environmental laws.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.1, Compliance with the Law in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. Work in this program also supports the Agency Priority Goal
Increase Environmental Law Compliance Rate.
In FY 2019, EPA will refocus efforts toward areas with significant noncompliance issues and
where enforcement can address the most substantial impacts to human health and the environment.
Recognizing the role of states and tribes as the primary implementers where authorized by EPA to
implement the federal statutes, EPA will focus civil enforcement resources on direct
implementation responsibilities and the most significant violations, and assisting authorized states
and tribes in meeting national standards, such as by providing expertise and implementing
compliance monitoring and civil enforcement strategies that will ensure a level playing field. EPA
is responsible for direct implementation for programs that are not delegable or where a state or
tribe has not sought or obtained the authority to implement a particular program (or program
179
-------
component). Examples include the Clean Air Act (CAA) mobile source program, pesticide
labeling and registration under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act,
enforcement in Indian Country, enforcement of the federal Superfund cleanup program, and
enforcement of non-delegated portions of various other laws, including the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act, the Clean Water Act, and the CAA.
Even for states and tribes authorized to implement a program, EPA serves a critical role in
addressing serious national noncompliance problems, such as those affecting multiple states or
tribes, and in serving as a backstop for instances when a state or tribe does not address serious
noncompliance timely or appropriately. EPA also may assist a state or tribe in remedying
noncompliance problems when it is unable to address the problem because it lacks the capability
or resources, such as in actions against federal or state agencies. And for some serious violations,
the Agency and states or tribes may decide that the best approach is a joint enforcement action.
Further, EPA will take immediate action when there is an environmental emergency, such as an
oil spill or chemical accident. In addition, EPA ensures cleanup (corrective action) at RCRA
facilities. Closely coordinating with states, EPA can issue cleanup orders to RCRA facilities to
help meet the RCRA corrective action program's goals. EPA also will pursue enforcement actions
at federal facilities where significant violations are discovered and ensure that federal facilities are
held to the same standards as the private sector and will provide technical and scientific support to
states and tribes with authorized programs. The Agency also will carry out its statutory oversight
responsibilities and offer assistance to states in their implementation of delegated programs when
needed or in cases where the Agency maintains a unique expertise or capability.
Performance Measure Targets:
(426) Number of compliance assurance actions in accordance with EPA's civil
enforcement response policies.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
No Target
Established
4,000
(434) Millions of pounds of pollutants and waste reduced, treated, or eliminated
through concluded enforcement actions.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
325
325
(431) By FY 2018, identify one or two direct implementation programs that use
administrative and informal enforcement tools to pilot for reducing the time between
identification of a violation to correction. Also in FY 2018, gather data to establish
baselines against which to measure progress.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
Identify Pilot
Program(s)
and
Establish
Baselines
Implement
Pilot
(430) Average time to move EPA civil cases referred to the Department of Justice in
FY 2013 or later to settlement or having a complaint filed (years).
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
No Target
Established
3.0
180
-------
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$5,641.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs for existing FTE due to the adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$35,813.0/ -221.8 FTE) This program change reflects the fact that states are primary
implementers of our nation's environmental laws. EPA will focus on matters affecting
multiple states or tribes, serve as a backstop in instances when a state or tribe does not
address serious noncompliance timely or appropriately, and assist a state or tribe in
remedying noncompliance problems when it is unable to address the problem because it
lacks the capability or resources. This change includes a reduction in resources for cases
that do not meet these criteria.
Statutory Authority:
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485
(codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute); Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships (MARPOL
Annex VI); Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act; Atomic Energy Act; Clean Air Act;
Certain Alaskan Cruise Ship Operations; Clean Water Act; Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act; Energy Policy Act; Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act;
Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act; Mercury-Containing and Rechargeable Battery
Management Act; National Environmental Policy Act; Noise Control Act; Oil Pollution Act;
Residential Lead-Based Paint Disclosure Program; Resource Conservation and Recovery Act;
Safe Drinking Water Act; Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act; Small Business
Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act; Toxic Substances Control Act; Uranium Mill
Tailings Radiation Control Act; North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation; La
Paz Agreement on US/Mexico Border Region.
181
-------
Criminal Enforcement
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Compliance with the Law
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
s-is.njv.j
S-ZSJ.i.t.O
s -/i, nr.it
-S-I.220.U
Hazardous Substance Superfond
$6,815.3
$7,135.0
$7,135.0
$0.0
Total Budget Authority
$54,854.5
$52,468.0
$48,242.0
-$4,226.0
Total Workyears
237.9
268.6
209.6
-59.0
Program Project Description:
EPA's Criminal Enforcement program enforces the nation's environmental laws through targeted
investigation of criminal conduct, committed by individual and corporate defendants, that
threatens public health and the environment. EPA's criminal enforcement agents (Special Agents)
investigate violations of environmental statutes and associated violations of Title 18 of the United
States Code such as fraud, conspiracy, false statements, and obstruction of justice.
The agents are assisted in the Criminal Enforcement program by forensic scientists, attorneys,
technicians, engineers, and other experts. EPA's criminal enforcement attorneys provide legal and
policy support for all of the program's responsibilities, including forensics and expert witness
preparation, to ensure that program activities are carried out in accordance with legal requirements
and the policies of the Agency. These efforts support environmental crime prosecutions primarily
by the United States Attorneys and the Department of Justice's Environmental Crimes Section. In
FY 2017, the conviction rate for criminal defendants was 91 percent.27
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.1, Compliance with the Law in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to focus its resources on the most
egregious cases (e.g., significant human health, environmental, and deterrent impacts), while
balancing its overall case load across all environmental statutes. The Criminal Enforcement
program will increase its collaboration and coordination with the Civil Enforcement program to
ensure that EPA's Enforcement program identifies the most egregious cases and responds to them
as effectively as possible. The Agency will perform targeted investigations of violations of
environmental statutes and associated violations of Title 18 of the United States Code to protect
public health and the environment.
27 For additional information, refer to: http://www.epa.gov/enforcement/data-and-results.
182
-------
Performance Measure Targets:
(419) Percentage of criminal cases with individual defendants.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
75
75
(418) Percentage of criminal cases having the most significant health, environmental,
and deterrence impacts.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
65
65
(421) Percentage of conviction rate for criminal defendants.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
85
85
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$4,739.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$8,965.0/ -59.0 FTE) This program change reflects a focus on the most egregious cases
and increased coordination with the Civil Enforcement program, and a reduction in
resources for small cases that have limited deterrence value.
Statutory Authority:
Title 18 of the U.S.C.; 18 U.S.C. § 3063; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as
amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485 (codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute);
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; Clean Water Act; Safe Drinking Water Act; Clean Air
Act; Toxic Substances Control Act; Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act;
Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act; Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act; Ocean Dumping Act (i.e., MPRSA); Pollution Prosecution Act; Title 18 General
Federal Crimes (e.g., false statements, conspiracy); Powers of Environmental Protection Agency
(18 U.S.C. 3063).
183
-------
NEPA Implementation
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Cooperative Federalism
Objective(s): Enhance Shared Accountability
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcni
sn>.tm.2
S Ifi.lJWM
SU.-I'M.il
-S 2M-I.il
Total Budget Authority
$16,098.2
$16,130.0
$13,496.0
-$2,634.0
Total Workyears
107.8
104.8
80.5
-24.3
Program Project Description:
Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and as mandated by Section 309 of
the Clean Air Act, EPA's NEPA Implementation program coordinates the environmental review
of major federal actions. The NEPA Implementation program guides EPA's compliance with
NEPA, the National Historic Preservation Act, and other relevant statutes and Executive Orders.
The program also manages the official Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) filing system for all
federal EISs, in accordance with a Memorandum of Understanding with the Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ).28 Additionally, the program manages the review of Environmental
Impact Assessments of non-governmental activities in Antarctica, in accordance with the Antarctic
Science, Tourism and Conservation Act.
The program uses and promotes NEPAssist, a geographic information system (GIS) tool developed
to assist users (EPA, other federal agencies, and the public) with environmental reviews under
NEPA. Approximately 900 users visit the website each month and 83 percent are return visitors.
EPA also promotes e-NEPA, a web-based system for federal agencies to file EISs and to make
comments on EISs accessible to the public on a centralized public website.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 2/Objective 2.1, Enhance Shared Accountability in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will focus its reviews on areas where EPA
has statutory authority and expertise. EPA also will continue to work with OMB, CEQ, and other
federal agencies to evaluate ways to coordinate, streamline, and improve the NEPA process.
Additionally, EPA will continue to work with agencies as they implement the FAST-41 Act, which
sets requirements to streamline infrastructure permitting project reviews.29 EPA also will continue
implementing Executive Order 13766: "Expediting Environmental Reviews and Approvals for
High Priority Infrastructure Projects."30
28 Memorandum of Agreement No. 1 Between The Council on Environmental Quality and The Environmental Protection Agency,
October 1977.
29 For additional information, refer to: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsvs/pkg/PLAW-114publ94/pdf/PLAW-114publ94.pdf.
30 For additional information, refer to: https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/24/executive-order-expediting-
environmental-reviews-and-approvals-high.
184
-------
Performance Measure Targets:
FY 2018
FY 2019
(429) Percentage of early Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) engagement
Target
Target
60
70
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$873.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$3,507.0/ -24.3 FTE) This program change streamlines the NEPA Implementation
program. NEPA Implementation is proposed for transfer from the Office of Enforcement
and Compliance Assurance to the Office of Policy as the Agency continues to support this
program. This change will ensure staff are able to quickly elevate issues directly to the
Administrator for resolution and allow the Agency to expedite environmental reviews and
approvals of high-priority infrastructure projects, as directed by the President under
Executive Order 13766.31
Statutory Authority:
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); Clean Air Act, § 309; Antarctic Science, Tourism,
and Conservation Act; Clean Water Act, § 511(c); Endangered Species Act; National Historic
Preservation Act; Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act; Fishery Conservation and
Management Act; Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act; Fixing America's Surface Transportation
Act Title 41.
31 For additional information, refer to: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-expediting-
environmental-reviews-approvals-high-priority-infrastructure-projects/.
185
-------
Environmental Justice
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Cooperative Federalism
Objective(s): Increase Transparency and Public Participation
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
S0.-I0J.5
s (ijivi.t)
S2.000.0
-S-l.fiVI.O
Hazardous Substance Superfond
$732.9
$554.0
$0.0
-$554.0
Total Budget Authority
$7,134.4
$7,245.0
$2,000.0
-$5,245.0
Total Workyears
34.9
40.3
0.0
-40.3
Program Project Description:
The Environmental Justice program fosters environmental and public health in communities
disproportionately burdened by pollution by integrating and addressing issues of environmental
programs and collaboration with interagency partners to develop guidance documents and tools to
incorporate environmental justice considerations into decision making.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 2/Objective 2.2, Increase Transparency and Public
Participation in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will use $2 million
dedicated to the Environmental Justice program to support the Environmental Justice Small Grants
program to support community-based organizations; Environmental Justice Technical Assistance
for Communities to support the technical needs of low income, minority and tribal/indigenous
populations; and address the continued maintenance and enhancement of environmental justice
tools, such as EJSCREEN. This work will be accomplished within the Office of Policy. As cross-
cutting organization, the Office of Policy can better ensure integration for the Environmental
Justice program overall. This move will strengthen and complement the work already being done
by the Office of Community Revitalization (formerly the Office of Sustainable Communities)
within the Office of Policy, and provide better support to communities as they work to improve
health, protect the environment and grow their economies.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$289.0) This change to fixed and other costs is a decrease due to the recalculation of base
workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce support,
and benefit costs.
186
-------
• (-$4,402.0/ -36.8 FTE) This net program change reflects the proposed transfer of the
Environmental Justice program from the Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance into the Office of Policy. The Office of Policy can ensure integration across the
full range of EPA's programs. The budget request maintains support for financial
assistance grants to community-based organizations and technical assistance to low
income, minority, and tribal/indigenous populations.
Statutory Authority:
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485
(codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute); Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended.
187
-------
Geographic Programs
188
-------
Geographic Program: Chesapeake Bay
Program Area: Geographic Programs
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
SOfi. ~~*.5
S~ J.50-1.0
s~jrn.it
-so.\2o-i.o
Total Budget Authority
$66,773.5
$72,504.0
$7,300.0
-$65,204.0
Total Workyears
37.3
39.9
0.0
-39.9
Program Project Description:
The Chesapeake Bay Program is a voluntary partnership, initiated in 1983, that now includes the
Chesapeake Bay watershed states (Delaware, Maryland, New York, Virginia, Pennsylvania, and
West Virginia), the District of Columbia, the Chesapeake Bay Commission, and the federal
government. EPA represents the federal government on the partnership's Chesapeake Executive
Council (EC) and, under the authority of Section 117 of the Clean Water Act, works with the EC
to coordinate activities of the partnership. On June 16,2014, the Chesapeake Bay Program partners
signed the most recent Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement,32 which provides for the first time
the Bay's headwater states (Delaware, New York, and West Virginia) with full partnership in the
Bay program. The Agreement establishes 10 goals and 31 outcomes for sustainable fisheries, water
quality, vital habitats, climate change, toxic contaminants, and other areas.
EPA, the watershed jurisdictions, and other key federal agencies set two-year milestones for water
quality to support the Bay Total Maximum Daily Load and the jurisdictions' Watershed
Implementation Plans.33 The TMDL satisfies a requirement of the Clean Water Act and EPA
commitments under Court-approved consent decrees for Virginia and Washington, D.C. dating to
the late 1990s.34 The TMDL is designed to ensure all nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment pollution
control efforts needed to fully restore the Bay and its tidal rivers are in place by 2025.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.2, Provide Clean and Safe Water in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA is requesting $7.3 million for support of
state and local collection of water quality monitoring data and coordination of science, research,
and modeling.
32 The Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement (2014) available at
http://www.chesapeakebay.net/documents/FINAL Ches_Bay_Watershed_Agreement.withsignatures-HIres.pdf.
33 The federal milestones related to water quality in the Chesapeake Bay watershed are available at http://executiveorder.
chesapeakebay.net/EO_13508_Water_Quality_Milestones-2012-01-06.pdf. The jurisdictional milestones are available at
http://www.epa.gov/reg3wapd/tmdl/ChesapeakeBav/EnsuringResults.html.
34 The Chesapeake Bay TMDL available at http://www.epa.gov/cliesapeakebaytiiidl/.
189
-------
The $7.3 million requested in FY 2019 would support the following activities:
• Water quality monitoring ($5.2 million). This funding would leverage between $10-$12
million in combined federal, state, and local funds.
o Tidal and non-tidal monitoring ($4.8 million),
o Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) monitoring ($400 thousand).
• Provide facilitation to build capacity at the state level ($2.1 million).
o Coordinate modeling, decision support services, data collection, analysis, storage, and
access;
o Support information dissemination and transparency; and
o Provide consistency and efficiency in communications and data management.
The activities described above would help protect the important investment that federal, state and
local governments have made in providing clean and safe water. These activities also support the
Goal 3 Rule of Law and Process. Environmental results are measured through data collected by
the states and shared with the federal government. This information also will support measuring
progress toward existing Agency nutrient and sediment performance goals and measures as well
as other Chesapeake Bay Agreement outcome indicators.
In FY 2017, Chesapeake Bay Program partners surpassed their phosphorus- and sediment-
reducing goals. Nitrogen reductions, however, fell short of the target for the fifth year in a row,
due in large part to a gap in reported and implemented agricultural best management practices in
Pennsylvania.
By the end of FY 2018, the program expects to achieve 60 percent of its goals for implementing
nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment reduction actions to achieve final TMDL allocations, as
measured through the Partnership's Phase 5.3.2 Chesapeake Bay Watershed Model.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$65,204.0/ -39.9 FTE) This program change reduces funding for the Chesapeake Bay
Program. Remaining resources will support critical activities in water quality monitoring.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act, Section 117; Estuary Restoration Act of 2000, as amended; Chesapeake Bay
Accountability and Recovery Act of 2014; Clean Air Act of 1970; Consolidated and Further
Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015, P.L. 113-235.
190
-------
Geographic Program: Gulf of Mexico
Program Area: Geographic Programs
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
SJJVxtt
SS.-IS-I.O
so.o
-SS.-/S-U)
Total Budget Authority
$3,395.8
$8,484.0
$0.0
-$8,484.0
Total Workyears
12.0
14.3
0.0
-14.3
Program Project Description:
The efforts of EPA's Gulf of Mexico Program Office (GMPO) are dedicated to the protection,
restoration and enhancement of the water bodies and coastal environments associated with the
greater Gulf of Mexico region.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE have been eliminated for this program in FY 2019. EPA will encourage the
five Gulf of Mexico states to continue to make progress in restoring the Gulf of Mexico from
within core water programs.
Performance Measure Targets:
This proposed disinvestment means that the Agency will no longer publish measures associated
with this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$8,484.0/ -14.3 FTE) This program change eliminates the Gulf of Mexico program. This
change returns the responsibility for funding local environmental efforts and programs to
state and local entities.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act.
191
-------
Geographic Program: Lake Champlain
Program Area: Geographic Programs
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Unvirnnmenlal Prugram A- Management
S-/..W.W
S-IJM.I)
so.o
-S 4.MMM
Total Budget Authority
$4,395.0
$4,369.0
$0.0
-$4,369.0
Program Project Description:
EPA supports efforts to protect Lake Champlain through partnerships to implement the
"Opportunities for Action" management plan. The plan was developed to bring together people
with diverse interests in the lake to create a comprehensive pollution prevention, control, and
restoration plan for protecting the future of the Lake Champlain Basin.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources have been eliminated for this program in FY 2019. EPA will encourage New York and
Vermont to continue to make progress in restoring Lake Champlain from within core water
programs.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$4,369.0) This program change eliminates the Lake Champlain program. This change
returns the responsibility for funding local environmental efforts and programs to state and
local entities.
Statutory Authority:
1909 Boundary Waters Treaty; Clean Water Act.
192
-------
Geographic Program: Long Island Sound
Program Area: Geographic Programs
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
S". vxv.x
S',<)-!(>.<)
so.o
-S
Total Budget Authority
$7,989.8
$7,946.0
$0.0
-$7,946.0
Program Project Description:
EPA and the States of Connecticut and New York work in partnership to restore and protect Long
Island Sound. EPA assists states in implementing the Long Island Sound's Comprehensive
Conservation and Management Plan by coordinating the cleanup and restoration actions of the
Long Island Sound Study Management Conference.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources have been eliminated for this program in FY 2019. EPA will encourage Long Island
Sound states and local entities to continue to make progress in restoring the Sound from within
core water programs.
Performance Measure Targets:
This proposed disinvestment means that the Agency will no longer publish measures associated
with this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$7,946.0) This program change eliminates the Long Island Sound program. This change
returns the responsibility for funding local environmental efforts and programs to state and
local entities.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act.
193
-------
Geographic Program: Other
Program Area: Geographic Programs
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
SfiJV-/."
S -.3-13.0
so.o
-S 3-13.0
Total Budget Authority
$6,394.7
$7,343.0
$0.0
-$7,343.0
Total Workyears
3.8
4.9
0.0
-4.9
Program Project Description:
Under this program, the Agency develops and implements approaches to mitigate pollution for
specific and targeted geographic areas, including the Northwest Forest Program, Lake
Pontchartrain Basin Restoration Program, and the Southeast New England Coastal Watershed
Restoration Program.
Northwest Forest Program
The Northwest Forest Program supports interagency and intergovernmental efforts that coordinate
and leverage resources for water quality and drinking water efforts in seven35 western states.
Lake Pontchartrain Basin Restoration Program
The Lake Pontchartrain Basin Restoration Program, through a collaborative and voluntary effort,
strives to restore ecological health by developing and funding restoration projects within the
sixteen parishes in the basin.
Southeast New England Coastal Watershed Restoration Program (SNECWRP)
The Southeast New England Program serves as a hub to enable protection and restoration of the
coastal watersheds of Southeast New England, including the ecosystem services that sustain the
region's communities.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE have been eliminated for this program in FY 2019. EPA will encourage states
and local entities to continue to make progress in restoring these major aquatic ecosystems from
within core water programs.
35 California, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Washington.
194
-------
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$7,343.0 / -4.9 FTE) This program change eliminates the Geographic Other program.
This change returns the responsibility for funding local environmental efforts and programs
to state and local entities.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act.
195
-------
Geographic Program: Puget Sound
Program Area: Geographic Programs
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
S2~. V'l.V
s2~.sio.o
S 0.0
-S2'.S10.0
Total Budget Authority
$27,971.9
$27,810.0
$0.0
-$27,810.0
Total Workyears
6.6
6.0
0.0
-6.0
Program Project Description:
The Puget Sound Program works with partners to implement the Puget Sound Action Agenda, the
long-term plan for Puget Sound basin protection and restoration. In addition, the Puget Sound
Program funds assistance agreements with the federally recognized tribes in Puget Sound, Tribal
consortia, and the North West Indian Fisheries Commission.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE have been eliminated for this program in FY 2019. EPA will encourage state,
tribal, and local entities to continue to make progress in restoring the Puget Sound from within
core water programs.
Performance Measure Targets:
This proposed disinvestment means that the Agency will no longer publish measures associated
with this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$27,810.0/ -6.0 FTE) This program change eliminates the Puget Sound program. This
change returns the responsibility for funding local environmental efforts and programs to
state and local entities.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act.
196
-------
Geographic Program: San Francisco Bay
Program Area: Geographic Programs
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
N-/.-W."
S-/. ~.S'6.0
so.o
-.W.
Total Budget Authority
$4,493.7
$4,786.0
$0.0
-$4,786.0
Total Workyears
1.9
1.9
0.0
-1.9
Program Project Description:
EPA collaborates with agencies and non-governmental organizations to implement the seven-point
Bay Delta Action Plan (2012)36 designed to protect and restore water quality, aquatic life, and
ecosystem processes in the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. EPA assists the
State Water Resources Control Board with the comprehensive update of the Bay Delta Water
Quality Control Plan.37
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE have been eliminated for this program in FY 2019. EPA will encourage the
state of California and local entities to continue to make progress in restoring the San Francisco
Bay from within core water programs.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$4,786.0/ -1.9 FTE) This program change eliminates the San Francisco Bay program.
This change returns the responsibility for funding local environmental efforts and programs
to state and local entities.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act.
36 EPA Bay Delta Action Plan (2012). http://www2.epa.gov/sfbav-delta/bav-delta-action-plan.
37 State Water Board Bay Delta Water Quality Control Plan.
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water issues/programs/bav delta/.
197
-------
Geographic Program: South Florida
Program Area: Geographic Programs
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
S 1.U24.0
S ]. f,V2.U
Sil.l)
-SI.fiV2.ll
Total Budget Authority
$1,624.0
$1,692.0
$0.0
-$1,692.0
Total Workyears
1.1
1.4
0.0
-1.4
Program Project Description:
EPA's South Florida program coordinates restoration activities in South Florida, including the
Florida Keys.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE have been eliminated for this program in FY 2019. EPA will encourage state,
tribal, and local entities to continue to make progress in protecting and restoring sensitive aquatic
ecosystems in South Florida from within core water programs.
Performance Measure Targets:
This proposed disinvestment means that the Agency will no longer publish measures associated
with this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$1,692.0/ -1.4 FTE) This program change eliminates the South Florida program. This
change returns the responsibility for funding local environmental efforts and programs to
state and local entities.
Statutory Authority:
Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary and Protection Act of 1990; Clean Water Act; Water
Resources Development Act of 1996; Water Resources Development Act of 2000.
198
-------
Great Lakes Restoration
Program Area: Geographic Programs
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
S .W. ¦?«".«
s
S3 (1,000.0
-S 2f>~.Vf>3.0
Total Budget Authority
$353,207.0
$297,963.0
$30,000.0
-$267,963.0
Total Workyears
74.3
71.7
5.0
-66.7
Program Project Description:
The Great Lakes are the largest system of surface freshwater on Earth, containing 20 percent of
the world's surface freshwater and 95 percent of the United States' surface freshwater. The
watershed includes two nations, eight U.S. states, two Canadian provinces, and more than 35 tribes
and tribal organizations.
Through a coordinated interagency process led by EPA, this program establishes a Great Lakes
system-wide surveillance network to monitor the water quality of the Great Lakes.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.2, Provide Clean and Safe Water in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. EPA will support states and tribes through Great Lakes
system-wide monitoring for the improved collection, evaluation, management, and reporting of
Great Lakes environmental information. By supporting programs that measure and assess the
physical, biological, and chemical integrity of the Great Lakes, this program will link numerous
existing Great Lakes monitoring activities to improve the scientific basis for policy decisions by
environmental managers.
The Agency will partner with agencies involved in Great Lakes monitoring and natural resource
management including states and tribes and, as appropriate, federal agencies such as NOAA, BIA,
and USGS. This coordinated monitoring function is assigned to the federal government under
Section 118 of the Clean Water Act and under the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. It also
is a unique federal function because it involves coordination and collaboration among 8 states,
numerous local governments, 35 tribes and tribal organizations, and Canada. Increased state
involvement will embody cooperative federalism by better targeting resources to state and regional
needs. As appropriate, EPA can invest in state monitoring infrastructure that supports public
health, environmental benefits, and economic growth.
This work will measure and assess the overall results of activities that affect the environmental
condition of the Great Lakes. A successful monitoring system requires the ability to perform an
199
-------
overall assessment of the Great Lakes, particularly when it can be used to support environmental
management decisions that improve the environment and allow economic growth. Performance
can be assessed annually through the State of the Great Lakes report. The United States and
Canada, together with many partners have a suite of 9 indicators of ecosystem health, supported
by 44 sub-indicators to assess the state of the Great Lakes. Maintaining this annual assessment will
help Governments evaluate the effectiveness of existing programs, policies and practices and to
address, inform, and engage others. Objectives for ongoing activities in FY 2019 are listed below:
• Continuation and enhancement of the long-term trend monitoring that is needed to assess
Great Lakes environmental conditions. This includes monitoring for detection of invasive
species and for nutrients that contribute to harmful algal blooms.
• Building state monitoring capacity to participate in and lead regional collection, evaluation,
management, and reporting of Great Lakes environmental information.
• Enhancement coordination, and management of Great Lakes data systems for the benefit
of environmental decision makers and the public.
Numerous accomplishments under the GLRI in FY 2017 advanced priorities in the FY 2018-2022
Strategic Plan such as: working with partners to protect and restore wetlands; conducting
monitoring and assessment so we know the status of the nation's waters; enhancing shared
accountability; and increasing transparency and public participation. GLRI accomplishments
included:
• Since 2010, the Presque Isle (PA), Deer Lake (MI), and White Lake (MI) AOCs have been
delisted. In addition, federal agencies and their partners have completed the cleanup and
restoration actions necessary for delisting at seven additional AOCs, including three in FY
2017: River Raisin (MI), St. Marys River (MI), and Lower Menominee, (MI/WI).
• Since 2010, a total of 66 Beneficial Use Impairments (BUIs), at 24 AOCs in the eight Great
Lakes States, have been removed, more than six times the total number of BUIs removed
in the preceding 22 years. Eight BUIs were removed in FY 2017 at: Black River, OH (2);
St. Marys River, MI; Lower Menominee River, MI/WI (2); St. Clair River, MI (2); and
Rochester Embayment, NY.
• Since 2010, over 4 million cubic yards of contaminated sediment (over 51,000 in FY 2017)
has been remediated through GLRI-associated projects.
• Since 2010, GLRI partners implemented invasive species control activities on over 134,000
acres, more than 18,000 in FY 2017.
• GLRI has been central to efforts that keep self-sustaining populations of silver, bighead,
and black carp out of the Great Lakes.
• Since 2015, GLRI has implemented projects that have resulted in a projected reduction of
over 767,000 pounds of phosphorus (over 360,000 in FY 2017) which contributes to
harmful algal blooms around the Great Lakes in priority watersheds.
• Since 2010, more than 225,000 acres of habitat (over 40,000 in FY 2017), including coastal
wetlands, have been protected, restored, or enhanced.
• In FY 2017, EPA worked with 4 Federal Agencies and 5 States to develop Lake Erie
phosphorus reduction plans to meet a binational 40 percent phosphorus reduction target.
200
-------
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$1,012.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is a decrease due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$266,951.0/ -66.7 FTE) This program change reduces support for the Great Lakes
Program. This returns responsibility for local environmental efforts to state and local
entities.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act as amended, including references to Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement.
201
-------
Homeland Security
202
-------
Homeland Security: Communication and Information
Program Area: Homeland Security
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017 Actuals
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Unvirinimcnliil
Program &
Munugcmcnl
S3.-IS0.0
•U.S'3-1.0
S3 J 11.0
-S 323.0
Total Budget Authority
$3,480.0
$3,834.0
$3,511.0
-$323.0
Total Workyears
12.2
11.7
11.3
-0.4
Program Project Description:
This program supports EPA's coordination and communication activities related to homeland
security. The White House, Congress, and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have
defined responsibilities for EPA in the event of a homeland security incident through a series of
statutes, presidential directives, and national plans. The Office of Homeland Security (OHS) leads
and coordinates EPA's engagement with the White House and other federal departments and
agencies on the development of new homeland security policy and requirements. As EPA Federal
Intelligence Coordination Office (FICO), OHS coordinates analytic intelligence support capacity
across the Agency to meet EPA requirements and EPA whole-of-government obligations.
EPA uses both the Homeland Security Executive Steering Committee, composed of senior
executives from the program and regional offices, and the Homeland Security Collaborative
Network (HSCN), a cross-agency leadership group, to support its ability to implement EPA's
broad range of homeland security responsibilities, ensure consistent development and
implementation of homeland security policies and procedures, avoid duplication, and build a
network of partnerships.
Homeland security information technology efforts are closely coordinated with the agencywide
information security and infrastructure activities, which are managed in the Information Security
and Information Technology (IT)/Data Management programs. These IT support programs also
enable video contact among localities, EPA Headquarters, Regional offices, and laboratories in
emergency situations.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA's Homeland Security
Program will:
203
-------
• Ensure a coordinated approach to EPA's homeland security activities and resources that align
with government-wide homeland security priorities and requirements.
• Support federal, state, tribal, and local efforts to prevent, protect, mitigate, respond to, and
recover from natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other emergencies by providing
leadership and coordination across EPA's program offices and regions.
• Ensure appropriate Agency representation in various White House and other federal
homeland security policy activities.
• Focus on filling critical knowledge and technology gaps that may be essential for an effective
EPA response, including working with our interagency partners to define collective
capabilities and resources that may contribute to closing common homeland security gaps.
• Provide EPA end-users with relevant, accurate, reliable, objective, and timely intelligence
bearing on matters of environmental policy and regulation, domestic threats and
counterintelligence, where EPA functions to preserve or assist in the restoration of human
health and the environment.
• Continue phased implementation of Executive Order 13587 (,Structural Reforms to Improve
the Security of Classified Networks and the Responsible Sharing and Safeguarding of
Classified Information) to meet the main pillars of classified information protection with a
focus on the implementation of an Insider Threat Program (ITP) to address and mitigate
threats to national security.
• Track emerging national/homeland security issues, through close coordination with the U.S.
Intelligence Community, to anticipate and avoid crisis situations and target the Agency's
efforts proactively against threats to the United States.
EPA's FY 2019 resources support national cybersecurity efforts through monitoring across the
Agency's IT infrastructure to detect, remediate, and eradicate malicious software or Advanced
Persistent Threats (APT) from EPA's computer and data networks and through improved detection
capabilities. EPA will enhance internal Computer Security Incident Response Capability (CSIRC)
to ensure rapid identification and reporting of suspicious activity and will increase training and
awareness of cybersecurity threats. EPA's personnel are active participants in Government Forum
of Incident Response Teams (GFIRST), a DHS-led group of experts from incident response and
security response teams. Indicators and warnings are shared between EPA incident responders
and their cleared counterparts in other agencies and with the Intelligence Community.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
204
-------
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$181.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$171.0/ -0.4 FTE) This program change reduces resources for activities related to
communication, policies, and procedures to support and coordinate homeland security
efforts across the Agency.
• (-$333.0) This program change is a reduction to IT efforts coordinating homeland security
across the Agency. The Agency will refocus on core functions that improve foundational
capabilities and close gaps in IT security architecture.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA); Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), §§ 1001, 2001, 3001, 3005; Safe Drinking Water Act
(SDWA); Clean Water Act, §§ 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 107; Clean Air Act, §§ 102, 103, 104,
108; Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), §§ 201, 301, 401; Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), §§ 136a-136y; Bio Terrorism Act of 2002, §§ 303, 305, 306, 307;
Homeland Security Act of 2002; Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act; Defense
Against Weapons of Mass Destruction Act; Food Safety Modernization Act, § 208.
205
-------
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection
Program Area: Homeland Security
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
SVJfi.V
S V5(>M
SJ.2fiJ.lt
SJ0~.lt
Science & Technology
$9,950.4
$9,153.0
$5,216.0
-$3,937.0
Total Budget Authority
$10,887.3
$10,109.0
$6,479.0
-$3,630.0
Total Workyears
22.5
23.1
18.1
-5.0
Program Project Description:
This program supports EPA's efforts to coordinate and provide technical expertise to enhance the
protection of the nation's critical water infrastructure from terrorist threats and all-hazard events
through effective information sharing and dissemination. The program provides water systems
with current information on methods and strategies to build preparedness for natural and manmade
threats.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.2, Provide Clean and Safe Water in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will build capacity to identify and respond
to threats to critical national water infrastructure by:
• Providing timely information on contaminant properties, water treatment effectiveness,
detection technologies, analytical protocols, and laboratory capabilities;
• Supporting effective communication conduits to disseminate threat and incident
information and to serve as a clearinghouse for sensitive information;
• Promoting information sharing between the water sector and environmental professionals,
scientists, emergency services personnel, law enforcement, public health agencies, the
intelligence community, and technical assistance providers. Through this exchange, water
systems can obtain up-to-date information on current technologies in water security,
accurately assess their vulnerabilities to terror acts, and work cooperatively with public
health officials, first responders, and law enforcement officials to respond effectively in
the event of an emergency;
• Providing water utilities of all sizes access to a comprehensive range of important
materials, including the most updated information, tools, training, and protocols designed
to enhance the security, preparedness, and resiliency of the water sector; and
• Ensuring that water utilities receive timely and informative alerts about changes in the
homeland security advisory level or about regional and national trends in certain types of
water-related incidents. For example, should there be types of specific, water-related
206
-------
threats or incidents that are recurring, EPA, in coordination with DHS and other
appropriate agencies, needs to alert the utilities of the increasing multiple occurrences or
"trends" of these incidents.
Effective information sharing protocols allow the water sector not only to improve their
understanding of the latest water security and resiliency protocols and threats, but also to reduce
their risk by enhancing their ability to prepare for an emergency.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$9.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of base
workforce costs due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce support, and benefit
costs.
• (+$298.0/ +2.0 FTE) This program change reflects an increase to carry out EPA's mission
as the Sector-Specific Agency for drinking water and wastewater infrastructure security.
Funding is critical to protect water infrastructure from natural disasters and terrorist threats.
Statutory Authority:
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), §§ 1431-1435; Clean Water Act; Public Health Security and
Bioterrorism Emergency and Response Act of 2002; Emergency Planning and Community Right-
to-Know Act (EPCRA), §§ 301-305.
207
-------
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure
Program Area: Homeland Security
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
S-I.VIS.O
S5JJ0.lt
S-/,
-------
effort to implement enterprise-wide Physical Access Control Systems (PACS) in all facilities in
five years.
EPA's PIV Program ensures that the Agency is undertaking every effort to enhance safety,
security, and efficiency by more effectively controlling access into EPA-controlled physical space
and networks. It provides EPA the ability to produce and maintain secure and reliable forms of
identification as required per HSPD-12, for all EPA employees and contractors. EPA will begin
migrating the existing Agency PIV program to GSA's managed service USAccess, and expects
full implementation within two years of initiation. Participating in this shared service ensures that
EPA will be consistent with other government agencies and will be able to comply with new
legislation or GSA requirements timely and in a manner that does not diminish core activities.
EPA is complying with 5 CFR 1400, which requires that federal and non-federal positions are re-
designated for both risk and sensitivity and that personnel have appropriate background
investigations commensurate with their position's risk and sensitivity designation. EPA will
continue to manage the personnel security, suitability, fitness and NSI programs and conduct
background investigations following appropriate federal guidance, ensuring that personnel are
properly investigated for the positions they encumber and that classified material and activity is
properly handled. As federal guidelines and policies change or are introduced, the systems
supporting background investigations and the NSI program will be updated and enhanced as
needed.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$350.0) This program change reduces funding for physical security and preparedness
infrastructure. The Agency will focus on performing the highest priority annual facility
assessments.
Statutory Authority:
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004; Privacy Act of 1974; REAL ID Act
of 2005; Homeland Security Act of 2002; Americans with Disabilities Act; Reorganization Plan
No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485 (codified at Title 5, App.)
(EPA's organic statute).
209
-------
Information Exchange
210
-------
Children and Other Sensitive Populations: Agency Coordination
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Ensure Safety of Chemicals in the Marketplace
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017 Actuals
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Unvirinimcnliil
Program &
Munugcmcnf
N 6.20-1.0
S2JHS.0
-S4.4H()M
Total Budget Authority
$6,294.6
$6,504.0
$2,018.0
-$4,486.0
Total Workyears
19.2
21.8
6.9
-14.9
Program Project Description:
The program coordinates and advances the protection of children's environmental health across
EPA by: assisting with developing regulations; improving risk assessment and science policy;
implementing community-level programs; and tracking and communicating measures, indicators,
and progress on children's health. In addition, the Children's Health program is directed by EPA's
Policy on Evaluating Health Risks to Children, Executive Order 13045 Protection of Children's
Health from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks, EPA's memorandum EPA's Leadership
in Children's Environmental Health, and other existing guidance.38
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.4, Ensure Safety of Chemicals in the
Marketplace. In FY 2019, the Children's Health program will:
• Continue to serve as co-lead for the interagency efforts of the President's Task Force on
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks to Children alongside the Department of
Health and Human Services. This effort will focus on co-chairing the Senior Steering
Committee and implementing priority strategies, including the Key Federal Programs to
Reduce Childhood Lead Exposures and Eliminate Associated Health Impacts39
Implementation efforts associated with federal initiatives may be supported by other Task
Force agencies or EPA program offices.
• Identify both potential health benefits and/or health risks to children during the
development of Agency regulations and policies with targeted participation on regulatory
workgroups.
38 For more information: https://www.epa.gov/children/historv-childrens-environmentaI-health-protection-epa.
39 Key Federal Programs to Reduce Childhood Lead Exposures and Eliminate Associated Elealth Impacts Report:
https://ptfceh.niehs.nih.gov/features/assets/files/kev federal programs to reduce childhood lead exposures and eliminate ass
ociated health impactspresidents 508.pdf. New federal strategy to eliminate childhood lead exposure expected to be released in
FY2018.
211
-------
• Coordinate two in-person plenary meetings of the Children's Health Protection Advisory
Committee (CHPAC).40
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$262.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is a decrease due to the recalculation of
base workforce cost for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$4,224.0/ -14.9 FTE) This program change reflects a reduction in the Children's Health
program due to streamlining activities including: 1) the Pediatric Environmental Health
Specialty Units; 2) grants to state or local organizations; 3) IRIS reviews; 4) regionally-
selected community-based projects addressing local children's environmental health
issues; 5) indicators presented in America's Children and Environment and America's
Children: Key National Indicators of Weil-Being., and 6) other streamlined efforts.
Statutory Authority:
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); Safe Drinking Water Act (SDW); Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act; Federal Insecticide (CERCLA),
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); and the Food Quality Protection Act.
40 For more information: https://www.epa.gov/children/childrens-health-protection-advisorv-committee-chpac.
212
-------
Exchange Network
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Streamline and Modernize
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
Slfi.-ZSJ.S
sio.t's.n
S II.S-/.0
-s-i.
Hazardous Substance Superfond
$1,316.3
$1,319.0
$1,319.0
$0.0
Total Budget Authority
$17,800.1
$17,897.0
$13,103.0
-$4,794.0
Total Workyears
28.7
30.2
30.2
0.0
Program Project Description:
EPA's Environmental Information Exchange Network (EN) is a standards-based, secure approach
for EPA and its state, tribal and territorial partners to exchange and share environmental data over
the Internet. Capitalizing on advanced technology, data standards, open-source software, shared
and portal services for the E-Enterprise business strategy, and reusable tools and applications, the
EN offers its partners tremendous capabilities for managing and analyzing environmental data
more effectively and efficiently, leading to improved decision making.
The Central Data Exchange (CDX)41 is the largest component of the EN program and serves as
the point of entry on the EN for environmental data transactions with the Agency. CDX provides
a set of core shared services that promote a leaner and more cost-effective enterprise architecture
for the Agency by avoiding the creation of duplicative services. It also provides a set of value-
added features and services that enable faster and more efficient transactions for internal and
external clients of EPA, resulting in reduced burden.
CDX data exchange services are leveraged by EPA's programs, regions, states, tribes, territories
and other federal agencies to meet their different business needs. With CDX, a stakeholder can
submit data through one centralized point of access, exchange data with target systems using web
services and utilize publishing services to share information collected by EPA and other
stakeholders. By managing loosely connected and interoperable services, data exchange needs can
be met using one or all of the available services such as:
• User registration;
• External user identity management;
• Electronic signature;
• Encryption and transmission;
• Virtual exchange services (VES); and
• Data quality assurance.
41 For more information on the Central Data Exchange, please visit: http://www.epa.gov/cdx/.
213
-------
Working in conceit with CDX are EPA's System of Registries, which are centralized shared data
services to improve data quality in EPA, state, and tribal program data, while promoting burden
reduction for the reporting community. The following registries manage shared data centrally for
reuse by the following EN partners:
• Facility Registry Service (FRS);
• Substance Registry Services (SRS);
• Tribes;
• Laws and Regulations Services (LRS);
• Terminology Services (TS);
• Reusable Component Services (RCS);
• Environmental Dataset Gateway (EDG);
• Registry of EPA Applications, Models, and Databases (READ); and
• Data Element Registry Services (DERS)
These shared data services catalog entities routinely referenced by EPA and EN partners, from
commonly regulated facilities and substances to the current list of federally recognized tribes. They
identify the standard or official names for these assets, which when integrated into EPA and partner
applications fosters data consistency and data quality as well as enabling data integration. By
integrating these shared data services into their online reporting forms, EPA and its EN partners
make it easier for the reporting community to discover the correct information to submit, reducing
burden, which enables reuse by partner programs.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.4, Streamline and Modernize in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to support core functions for the
EN IT systems. The potential for burden reduction and savings from IT improvements are
significant. Schedules and plans for upgrades and modernization will be adjusted to align with
resources. As part of the E-Enterprise business strategy, EPA will continue to carry out the baseline
support for the following projects under the EN program: roll out of Federated Identity
Management system for EPA and its partners; promote existing shared facility and substance
identification services that improve quality and reduce burden on states and tribes; utilize current
services for EPA's Laws and Regulations registry, which will standardize identification of and
associations between regulations, laws, and EPA's programs; and deploying established reusable
electronic signature services to streamline Cross-Media Electronic Reporting Regulation
(CROMERR) compliance. Advancements in data transport services, such as Virtual Exchange
Services, will continue to provide cloud-based solutions for EPA's state and tribal partners.
Examples of important enhancements that could greatly streamline operations for states, tribes,
industry and the Agency include a tool that helps industry identify potentially applicable
regulations, and electronic filing capacity for imports and exports of environmentally sensitive
products through the DHS/US Customs system, which reduces processing time from days or weeks
to minutes or days.
214
-------
In FY 2019, EPA will:
• Support existing outreach activities to increase awareness of CROMERR services and the
savings to states and tribes from using these services; and
• Approve essential CROMERR applications from authorized programs that propose to use
EPA's shared CROMERR services and assist co-regulators with integrating these services
into their systems.
CROMERR activities are intended to assist states and tribes in the development activities
associated with establishing a point of presence, exchanging data on the Network, and supporting
local electronic reporting programs in a more cost effective way.
EPA will prioritize areas of support for the System of Registries and partner applications. Keeping
the information current in the registries requires constant maintenance and research. This includes:
• An adjusted schedule for priority updates to EPA's enterprise dataset registry, the
Environmental Dataset Gateway, to meet EPA's priority of improving data accessibility,
achieve compliance with Open Data Policy requirements (OMB M-13-13) and pursue the
establishment of an administrative dataset registry; and
• Maintaining the list of previously entered IT resources, on an adjusted schedule, through
its catalog of IT services (e.g., widgets, web services, reusable code). The Reusable
Component Services is a resource that enables EPA and its EN partners to reuse standard
system functions in whole or in part, thus saving money and time for states and tribal
governments and EPA.
EPA also will continue to work with the Department of Homeland Security's Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) to maintain systems that support the importation process of products that are of
dual interest to EPA and CBP. Due to the successful conclusion of the limited pilot test for
electronic reporting and processing of EPA-regulated imports for vehicles and engines, pesticides
and toxic substances, EPA will continue to support mission essential activities of the program in
FY 2019. Such electronic reporting will aid regional enforcement coordinators by automating what
is currently a manual review process and allow them to focus on key high-value monitoring and
targeting activities for noncompliant imports.
In FY 2019, the EN program will continue to be a pivotal component of the E-Enterprise for the
Environment strategy that supports business process change agencywide. E-Enterprise is a
transformative 21st century strategy - jointly governed by states, tribes, and EPA - that rethinks
how government agencies deliver environmental protection. Under this strategy, the Agency will
streamline its business processes and systems to reduce reporting burden on states and regulated
facilities, and improve the effectiveness and efficiency of environmental programs for EPA, states,
and tribes. In this context, the Agency will maintain the E-Enterprise Portal that transforms the EN
to a more open platform of services and make environmental data reporting, sharing and analysis
faster, simpler and less expensive.
215
-------
Performance Measure Targets:
(053) Number of states, tribes and territories able to exchange data with CDX
through nodes in real time, using standards and automated data-quality checking.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
110
115
(052) Number of major EPA environmental systems that use the CDX electronic
requirements enabling faster receipt, processing, and quality checking of data.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
85
90
(999) Number of active unique users from states, tribes, laboratories, regulated
facilities and other entities that electronically report environmental data to EPA
through CDX
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
100,000
110,000
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$583.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$5,377.0) This program change modifies the timeline to address required modifications
to the Exchange Network IT systems; streamlines quality assurance of registries; refocuses
modernization efforts; and reduces the collection and exchange of environmental data with
states, tribes, and regulated entities.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA); Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA); Clean Air Act (CAA); Clean Water Act
(CWA); Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide
Act (FIFRA); Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); Government Performance and
Results Act (GPRA); Government Management Reform Act (GMRA); Clinger-Cohen Act (CCA);
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA); Controlled Substances Act (CSA); The Privacy Act of 1974;
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
216
-------
Executive Management and Operations
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach
Goal: Cooperative Federalism
Objective(s): Enhance Shared Accountability
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
S-/6JVS.0
S3 V.-/.11.0
-S(>. <>(>'.()
Total Budget Authority
$47,207.3
$46,398.0
$39,431.0
-$6,967.0
Total Workyears
284.4
309.4
235.6
-73.8
Program Project Description:
This program supports various offices that provide direct executive and logistical support to EPA's
Administrator. In addition to the Administrator's Immediate Office (10), resources in this program
support the Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations (OCIR), Office of
Administrative and Executive Services, Office of the Executive Secretariat, the Office of Public
Affairs, and the Office of Public Engagement.
This program also supports EPA's Regional Administrators' offices. The program and regional
offices' activities link the Agency's engagement with outside entities, including: Congress, state
and local governments, nongovernmental organizations, national and community associations, and
the public. These activities include management, coordination, and establishing policy.
Within this program, key functions include: responding to congressional requests for information;
coordinating and providing outreach to state and local governments and rural communities; and
supporting press and other communications activities. This program also supports administrative
management services involving correspondence control and records management systems, human
resources management, budget formulation and execution, and information technology
management services.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 2/Objective 2.1, Enhance Shared Accountability in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, the IO will continue providing management,
leadership, and direction to all of EPA's programs and activities and develop the guidance
necessary to ensure achievement of the Agency's core statutory responsibilities. In FY 2019, IO
resources will primarily support critical needs for staff, including travel and workforce support.
OCIR serves as EPA's principal point of contact for Congress, regions, states, and local
governments and as the coordination point for interaction with other agency offices and officials
with these entities. OCIR is comprised of two main components: the Office of Congressional
Affairs (OCA) and the Office of Intergovernmental Relations (OIR). Interactions with Congress
217
-------
are managed out of the Office of Congressional Affairs, the staff of which is responsible for
specific programmatic areas of the Agency. The Office of Intergovernmental Relations manages
interactions with state and local governments and serves as the liaison for the Agency with national
associations for state and local officials. In FY 2017, OCIR managed over 700 letters from
members of Congress and governors, received over 140 Freedom of Information Act requests
(FOIAs), and prepared senior leadership for several hearings including the confirmation of
Administrator Pruitt.
In FY 2019, OCIR's OCA will prepare EPA officials for hearings, oversee responses to written
inquiries and oversight requests from members of Congress, and coordinate and provide technical
assistance and briefings on legislative areas of interest to members of Congress and their staff.
OIR will continue to inform state and local governments of regulatory and other EPA activities.
Additionally, OIR will lead the Agency's efforts to support productive working relationships with
states through a renewed focus on cooperative federalism.
The Office of Public Affairs (OPA) facilitates the exchange of information between EPA and the
public, media, Congress, and state and local governments; broadly communicates EPA's mission;
assists in public awareness of environmental issues; and informs EPA employees of important
issues that affect them. OPA generally responds to approximately 8.9 thousand media inquiries
annually, oversees the production of more than 300 videos annually, and manages more than 500
thousand webpages on EPA's website. In FY 2019, OPA will continue to inform the media of
agency initiatives and deliver timely, accurate information. The office will continue to update the
Agency's internet site to provide stakeholders with transparent, accurate, and comprehensive
information on EPA's activities and policies. OPA will continue using multimedia and new media
tools to provide stakeholders with information. The office also will work with EPA's programs to
improve employee communications and collaboration, update the Agency's intranet site, and use
other tools to provide agency information to employees.
As the central administrative management component of the Administrator's Office (AO), the
Office of Administrative and Executive Services (OAES) provides advice, tools, and assistance to
the AO's programmatic operations. In FY 2019, OAES will continue to conduct the following
activities: human resources management, budget and financial management, information
technology and security, and audit management.
The Office of the Executive Secretariat (OEX) manages the AO's correspondence, records
management, and FOIA activities. The OEX correspondence team processes correspondence for
the Administrator and Deputy Administrator and reviews and prepares documents for their
signature. The team also manages the Administrator's primary email account. Finally, OEX
operates the Correspondence Management System, which provides paperless workflow, tracking,
and records management capabilities to more than three thousand registered users agencywide. In
FY 2019, the OEX will maintain critical administrative support to the Administrator, Deputy
Administrator, senior agency officials, and staff in order to comply with the statutory and
regulatory requirements under the Federal Records Act (FRA), FOIA, and related statutes and
regulations. The OEX will continue in the development and acquisition of the next-generation
correspondence tracking tool and will implement the system agencywide.
218
-------
The Office of Public Engagement (OPE) in the Office of the Administrator advises the
Administrator and senior staff on activities surrounding different stakeholder groups. Also, OPE
generates and distributes outreach plans for most regulatory actions. Such plans often include:
meeting regularly with stakeholder groups to communicate the Administration's agenda at EPA,
providing advance notification communications to relevant stakeholder groups on upcoming
regulatory actions, facilitating in-state visits by the Administrator and/or senior staff to collect
regulatory feedback, communicating key dates to stakeholders pertaining to opportunities to
comment on EPA rulemakings, and hosting conference calls on regulatory topics with impacted
stakeholders.
Performance Measure Targets:
(STl) Number of grant commitments achieved by states, tribes, and local
communities.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
No Target
Established
TBD
(ST2) Number of alternative shared governance approaches to address state, tribal,
and local community reviews.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
No Target
Established
TBD
Work related to the results of measure Number of grant commitments achieved by states, tribes,
and local communities, is agencywide in scope. The lead office is Office of the Administrator.
Work related to the results of measure Number of alternative shared governance approaches to
address state, tribal, and local community reviews, is agencywide in scope. The lead office is
Office of the Administrator.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• ($3,626.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$10,593.0/ -73.8 FTE) This program change reflects EPA's efforts to focus on the core
legal requirements, federal-only and national efforts, provide support to states in
implementing environmental laws, and ease burden.
Statutory Authority:
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485
(codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute); Environmental Research, Development, and
Demonstration Authorization Act (ERDDAA).
219
-------
Small Business Ombudsman
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Create Consistency and Certainty
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
S 2.102.2
s2.1m.1t
S I.Vfo.H
-S115.0
Total Budget Authority
$2,102.2
$2,080.0
$1,965.0
-$115.0
Total Workyears
4.7
4.9
4.6
-0.3
Program Project Description:
EPA's Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization includes the Small Business
Ombudsman program, the Small Business Contracting program, and the Disadvantaged Business
Enterprise (DBE) program.
The Small Business Ombudsman program includes the Asbestos and Small Business Ombudsman
(ASBO)42, as well as the Small Business Advocacy Chair and other small business activities
located in the Office of Policy's Office of Regulatory Policy and Management.43 The program
provides a comprehensive suite of resources, networks, tools, and forums for education and
advocacy on behalf of small businesses and leads EPA's implementation of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA).
The ASBO serves as the Agency's principal advocate for small business regulatory issues through
its partnership with EPA Regional Small Business Liaisons, state Small Business Environmental
Assistance Programs (SBEAPs)44 nationwide, the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA)
Office of Advocacy, and hundreds of small business trade associations. These partnerships provide
the information and perspective EPA needs to help small businesses achieve their environmental
goals.
Overall, the core functions of the Small Business Ombudsman program include assisting EPA's
program offices with analysis and consideration of the impact of their regulatory actions on small
businesses; engaging small entity representatives, and other federal agencies in evaluating the
potential impacts of rules; operating and supporting the program's hotline and homepage; and
supporting internal and external small business activities. The program helps small businesses
learn about new actions and developments within EPA and helps the Agency learn about the
concerns and needs of small businesses.
42 For more information, https://www.epa.gov/resources-small-businesses/asbestos-small-business-ombudsman.
43 For more information, https://www.epa.g0v/aboutepa/about-off1ce-policv-op#ORPM.
44 For more information, https://nationalsbeap.org/.
220
-------
The Small Business Contracting program is mandated under Section 15(k) of the Small Business
Act, 15 U.S.C. § 644(k). As prescribed under that section, the program provides expertise in
ensuring small business prime and subcontract opportunities to expand the competitive supplier
base in furthering the Agency's mission. The program offers statutorily required counselling to
EPA's contracting community on all aspects of the acquisition cycle. It also affords statutorily
mandated advocacy and technical assistance to the various categories of small businesses,
including, disadvantaged businesses; certified small businesses located in Historically
Underutilized Business Zones (HUBZones); service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses
(SDVOSBs); and women-owned small businesses.
In accordance with the many statutory responsibilities required under Section 15(k), the Small
Business Contracting program provides expertise in conducting market research for EPA
acquisitions; works with acquisition officials to advise on the structure of procurements and to
revise solicitations to maximize small business participation; and performs contract bundling
reviews to ensure a pipeline of responsible small business suppliers to compete for the Agency's
procurements. In addition, the program processes unsolicited proposals to help the Agency identify
new and innovative ways to support the Agency's mission, and assists small businesses in
resolving payment issues regarding contract performance. It further provides a broad range of
training, outreach and technical assistance to small businesses seeking to do business with EPA.
The DBE program45 provides national outreach, education, and assistance to increase the
utilization of businesses owned and controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged
individuals in procurements funded under EPA financial assistance agreements. The DBE Program
implements the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 7601, which establishes a 10
percentDBE goal for Clean Air Act research projects, and Public Law 102-389, 42 U.S. C § 4370d,
which establishes an 8 percent DBE Goal for prime and subcontracts awarded in support of all
other authorized programs. Under the program, OSDBU negotiates DBE goals with each financial
assistance agreement recipient based on the availability of DBE certified firms. OSDBU closely
monitors each recipient's procurement activities to confirm compliance with the Good Faith Effort
requirements to meet the goals.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.2, Create Consistency and Certainty in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, the programs will:
• Improve environmental protection by working with EPA program offices and state
SBEAPs to share information and leverage resources, provide compliance assistance
resources and enhance the compliance assistance tool box available to the small business
community.
• The ASBO will continue to implement a new internal and external outreach program
focused on increasing outreach platforms for more effective public engagement.
45 For more information, www.epa.gov/resources-small-businesses/disadvantaged-business-enterprise-resources-and-training.
221
-------
• Serve as the Agency's point of contact for the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act46 by
coordinating efforts with the Agency's program offices to further reduce the information
collection burden for small businesses with fewer than 25 employees.
• Streamline the review process and analysis of forecasted and proposed EPA acquisitions
above the simplified acquisition threshold to ensure the maximum practicable contracting
opportunities for small business concerns, in accordance with Section 15 of the Small
Business Act.
• Support EPA's efforts to expand regulatory consistency and certainty by strengthening the
outreach and engagement efforts of the Agency's Small Business Advocacy Review Panel
process performed under Section 609 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act. The engagement will ensure appropriate dissemination of relevant
information and opportunity for public input to help build trust and create positive
environmental outcomes.
Additionally, OSDBU is currently exploring options to transfer the DBE program to another office
within EPA, in part as a result of a corrective action measure recommended in GAO Report, GAO-
17-675, entitled: Small Business Contracting: Actions Needed to Demonstrate and Better Review
Compliance with Select Requirements for Small Business Advocates.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently, there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$126.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is a decrease due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (+$11.0/ -0.3 FTE) With a limited change in resources, the Agency will prioritize activities
to ensure compliance with its statutory obligations under the Small Business act. This net
program change incorporates the statutory functions of the Small Minority Business
Assistance program project, under the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business
Utilization into this program.
Statutory Authority:
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); Clean Air Act; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat.
2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485 (codified at Title 5, App.); 42 U.S.C. § 7661f;
15 U.S.C § 644(k); 42 U.S.C. § 4370d and 7601 note.
46 For more information: https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/omb/inforeg/sbpra-hr327.pdf.
222
-------
State and Local Prevention and Preparedness
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Revitalize Land and Prevent Contamination
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
S N.-II3.I
S I5.2M.0
N 10.031.0
-S.\23S.O
Total Budget Authority
$14,413.1
$15,269.0
$10,031.0
-$5,238.0
Total Workyears
68.5
74.2
46.9
-27.3
Program Project Description:
The State and Local Prevention and Preparedness program establishes a structure composed of
federal, state, local, and tribal partners who work together with industry to protect emergency
responders, local communities, and property from chemical accident risks through advanced
technologies, community and facility engagement, and improved safety systems. This framework
provides the foundation for community emergency responders, facility hazard response planning,
and reduction of risk posed from chemical facilities.
Under Section 112(r) of the 1990 Clean Air Act, chemical facilities that store more than a certain
amount of listed extremely hazardous substances are required to implement a Risk Management
Plan (RMP) program. These facilities, known as RMP facilities, take preventive measures, report
data, mitigate and/or respond to chemical releases, and work with communities, response, and
planning groups to increase understanding of risks.47
The Emergency Planning and Community Right -to-Know Act (EPCRA) of 1986 was created to
help communities plan for chemical emergencies and to inform the public about chemicals in their
community. Under EPCRA, facilities are required to report about the chemicals they produce, use,
and store to federal, state, and local governments. States, tribes, and local governments use this
information to prepare communities from potential releases from these facilities through the
development of local emergency response plans.48
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.3, Revitalize Land and Prevent
Contamination. In FY 2019, the State and Local Prevention and Preparedness program will
perform the following activities:
• Inspect RMP and EPCRA facilities to ensure compliance with accident prevention and
preparedness regulations, work with facilities to reduce chemical risks and improve
47 For additional information, refer to: https://www.epa.gov/rmp.
48 For additional information, refer to: littps://www.epa.gov/epcra.
223
-------
chemical facility safety. There are approximately 12,500 chemical facilities that are subject
to the RMP regulations. Of these, approximately 1,900 facilities have been designated as
high-risk based upon their accident history, quantity of on-site dangerous chemicals stored,
and proximity to large residential populations. EPA prioritizes inspections at high-risk
facilities.
• Provide basic and advanced RMP and EPCRA inspector training for federal and state
inspectors.
• Maintain the national Central Data Exchange (CDX) RMP reporting center database,
which is the nation's premier source of information on chemical process risks and contains
hazard information on all RMP facilities. Industry electronically submits updated RMPs to
this secure database.
• Develop limited updates to the Computer-Aided Management of Emergency Operations
(CAMEO) software suite, i.e., the CAMEO Chemicals application, which will provide free
and publically available information for firefighting, first aid, and spill response activities.
• Complete reconsideration of the RMP Amendments final rule as a result of three petitions
for reconsideration requested under the Clean Air Act. Reconsideration may result in
further amendments to the final rule.
EPA is proposing to develop a new program that would authorize EPA to collect and use fees for
compliance assistance. This fee and service will be voluntary and EPA would conduct an on-site
walk through within one-year of the accepted request and provide a report to assist RMP facilities
in complying with EPA regulations. Authorizing language is proposed with this budget
submission.
Performance Measure Targets:
FY 2018
FY 2019
(CH2) Number of risk management plan inspections conducted.
Target
Target
175
175
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$689.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$5,927.0/ -27.3 FTE) This program change reduces resources for technical support and
outreach, and eliminates grant support for certified RMP inspectors in FY 2019.
224
-------
Statutory Authority:
The Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA); the Clean Air Act (C AA)
§ 112(r), as amended by the Chemical Safety Information, Site Security, and Fuels Regulatory
Relief Act.
225
-------
TRI / Right to Know
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Ensure Safety of Chemicals in the Marketplace
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
S J 2.550.}!
SNJS'.O
s -.-y,.o
Total Budget Authority
$12,556.8
$14,187.0
$7,726.0
-$6,461.0
Total Workyears
37.7
43.5
20.8
-22.7
Program Project Description:
EPA's success in carrying out its mission to protect human health and the environment is
contingent on collecting timely, high-quality, and relevant information. The Toxics Release
Inventory (TRI) program49 supports EPA's mission by annually publishing, for the public, release
and other waste management (e.g., recycling) and pollution prevention data on over 650 toxic
chemicals from approximately 20,000 industrial and federal facilities. The TRI Program is a
premiere source of toxic chemical release data for communities, non-governmental organizations,
industrial facilities, academia, and government agencies.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.4, Ensure Safety of Chemicals in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will focus on the collection of the chemical
release data and making the data available to governments and the public.
EPA's Office of Environmental Information will continue to provide reporting facilities with an
online reporting application, TRI-MEweb, to facilitate the electronic preparation and submission
of TRI reports through EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX). In addition, the TRI data collected
by EPA are shared with states who have an active node on CDX and are partners of the TRI Data
Exchange (TDX). EPA will continue to maintain the TDX used by states, tribes and territories.
OEI also will continue to support the TRIPS database, which is the repository for TRI data.
Maintaining the TRI data includes data quality activities and transmitting the data to the
Envirofacts web portal in support of the public's access to TRI data.
In FY 2019, the TRI program will continue to conduct approximately 600 data quality checks to
help ensure the accuracy and completeness of the reported data. The TRI program will continue to
publish the annual TRI National Analysis, including describing relevant trends in toxic chemical
releases and other waste management and innovative approaches by industry to reduce pollution.
Since electronic systems that collect and disseminate TRI data have already been largely
developed, operations and maintenance of TRI-MEweb, TRIPS, and its processes that contribute
49 Please see: http://www.epa.gov/tri/.
226
-------
to the annual TRI National Analysis will be reduced and streamlined while allowing the TRI
program to continue to meet statutory requirements for industry reporting and public access to TRI
data. This will be accomplished by leveraging the cloud environments and OEI enterprise
infrastructure and services. This includes optimizing search and data transfers within EnviroFacts,
the system that provides public access to the statutorily required data submitted by industry.
As required by the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), the
Agency will respond to EPCRA petitions regarding TRI within 180 days after receipt. Petitions
may request to add or delete chemicals or industry sectors on the TRI. The quantity and complexity
of petitions are unknown until submitted to the Agency.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$459.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$4,384.0/ -19.7 FTE) This program change eliminates funding for the TRI National
Training Conference, TRI University Challenge, TRI Tools (other than for operations and
maintenance), and other TRI communication initiatives, and reflects planned streamlining
of the TRI program as TRI information can increasingly be accessed remotely via databases
and web tools. This program change also reflects a reduction in contractual costs for
producing TRI annual reports as a result of the 2013 TRI Electronic Reporting Rule.
• (-$2,536.0/ -3.0 FTE) This program change reduces resources for operations and
maintenance for the OEI TRI tools in EnviroFacts, Data Processing Center operations,
Help Desk activities, and security upgrades. In addition, enhancements for TRI-MEweb
and TRIPS are eliminated.
Statutory Authority:
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), § 313; Pollution
Prevention Act of 1990 (PPA), § 6607.
227
-------
Tribal Capacity Building
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach
Goal: Cooperative Federalism
Objective(s): Enhance Shared Accountability
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiiiiwnlul Program A- Manugcmcni
S14. ~f>H.'
SN.-UX.O
SI2.fiSI.il
-SI.XI -.11
Total Budget Authority
$14,760.7
$14,448.0
$12,631.0
-$1,817.0
Total Workyears
86.3
87.9
72.0
-15.9
Program Project Description:
Under federal environmental statutes, EPA has responsibility for protecting human health and the
environment in Indian country. Under EPA's 1984 Indian Policy50, the Agency works with
federally recognized tribes (tribes) on a government-to-government basis in recognition of the
federal government's trust responsibility to tribes to implement federal environmental programs.
In the 1984 Indian Policy, the "EPA recognizes tribes as the primary parties for setting standards,
making environmental policy decisions, and managing programs for reservations consistent with
agency standards and regulations" and therefore, EPA assists tribes in developing the program to
make such decisions. In the absence of a program delegation to a tribe, EPA directly implements
the program.
EPA's American Indian Environmental program leads the agencywide efforts to ensure
environmental protection in Indian country. Please see http://www.epa.gov/tribal for more
information.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 2/Objective 2.1, Enhance Shared Accountability in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. Overall, the Agency has made steady progress towards
strengthening human health and environmental protection on tribal lands. The Agency will further
its priority of strengthening tribal partnerships and continue to work toward its goal of building
tribal capacity through a number of mechanisms in FY 2019. In addition, EPA continues the direct
implementation assessment effort to better understand EPA's direct implementation
responsibilities and activities on a program-by-program basis in Indian country.
Capacity Building: EPA will provide technical assistance to tribes developing and implementing
federal environmental programs through several means, including the "treatment in a manner
similar to a state" (TAS) process and the use of the Direct Implementation Tribal Cooperative
Agreement (DITCA) authority. EPA will provide technical and financial assistance to ensure
50 EPA Policy for the Administration of Environmental Programs on Indian Reservations available at
http://www.eDa.gov/tribalportal/pdf/indian-policv-84.Ddf.
228
-------
tribal governments have the opportunity to build the capacity to meaningfully participate and
engage in environmental protection activities. To date, EPA has approved 110 TAS program
delegations to tribes, including 12 with compliance and enforcement authority. EPA also has
entered into 49 DITCAs, with 19 active DITCAs in FY 2017.
Indian Environmental General Assistance Program (GAP) Capacity Building Support: GAP
grants to tribal governments help build the basic components of a tribal environmental program.
The Agency manages GAP grants according to its "Guidance on the Award and Management of
General Assistance Agreements for Tribes and Intertribal Consortia. "51 In FY 2019, EPA will
continue to implement this Guidance, planned to be modified in FY 2018, to build tribal capacity
and address environmental issues in Indian country. EPA's work in FY 2019 also will continue to
enhance EPA-Tribal partnerships supported by the framework for joint strategic planning set forth
in the 2013 Guidance.
The Agency is continuing a process to establish a performance information management system
to track the progress tribes achieve for developing and implementing environmental protection
programs in Indian Country. This effort builds on the 2013 (GAP) Guidance,52 which provides
measurable tribal capacity indicators within a national capacity development framework. In FY
2019, EPA will work with regional and tribal early adopters of the system to define, select,
complete, and report on indicators of capacity and other performance management information
relevant to tribal environmental conditions and the operation of tribal environmental programs.
Using an agile system development methodology, EPA will refine the system with early adopters
prior to broader deployment. Establishing the performance information management system is an
important component of EPA's efforts to track and measure tribal accomplishments through GAP.
GAP Online: In addition to the improved measurement scheme noted above, EPA will continue
to use GAP Online, an internet-based database that assists tribes and EPA in developing,
reviewing, and archiving GAP work plans and progress reports. EPA and tribes use the database
to negotiate plans and track progress with individual grantees. GAP Online creates an easily
accessible record to help mitigate challenges associated with relatively high rates of staff turnover
in many tribal environmental departments.
Tribal Consultation: In working with the tribes, EPA follows its "Policy on Consultation and
Coordination Policy with Indian Tribes53. The Consultation Policy builds on EPA's 1984 Indian
Policy and establishes clear agency standards for a consultation process promoting consistency
and coordination. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to support the Agency's web-based Tribal
Consultation Opportunities Tracking System (TCOTS), a publically accessible database used to
communicate upcoming and current EPA consultation opportunities to tribal governments. The
system provides a management, oversight, and reporting structure that helps ensure accountability
and transparency.
51 Please refer to: https://www.epa.gov/tribal/2013-guidance-award-and-management-general-assistance-agreements-tribes-and-
intertribal for further information.
52 Please refer to: http://www.epa.gov/tribalportal/GAP-guidance-final.pdf for further information.
53 Please refer to: http://www.epa.gov/tribalportal/pdf/cons-and-coord-with-indian-tribes-policv.pdf for further information.
229
-------
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$229.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$2,046.0/ -15.9 FTE) This net program change includes an increase for the Tribal GAP
performance management system, reductions in some tribal capacity building efforts, and
eliminates: grants to tribal colleges and universities; certain tribal small-grant programs;
contract support for assessing EPA's direct implementation responsibilities in Indian
country; and contract and staff support.
Statutory Authority:
Annual Appropriation Acts; Indian Environmental General Assistance Program Act; PPA; FIFRA;
CAA; TSCA; NEPA; CWA; SDWA; RCRA; CERCLA; NAFTA; MPRSA; Indoor Radon
Abatement Act; OP A; and additional authorities.
Work within this Tribal Capacity Building Program supports the above authorities, as well as
additional statutory authorities that influence environmental protection and affect human health
and environmental protection in Indian country.
230
-------
Environmental Education
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach
Goal: Cooperative Federalism
Objective(s): Increase Transparency and Public Participation
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
SS.VJOJJ
S S. 6-13.0
so.o
-SS, 0-1.1.0
Total Budget Authority
$8,930.9
$8,643.0
$0.0
-$8,643.0
Total Workyears
9.5
11.1
0.0
-11.1
Program Project Description:
The Environmental Education (EE) program provides guidance and financial support to both rural
and urban focused grassroots and nonprofit organizations, local educational institutions,
universities, community colleges and state and local environmental agencies. Financial support
from EE received by these entities is via the competitive grant process and cooperative agreements.
EE also administers the Presidential Environmental Education Awards Program.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources have been proposed for elimination for this program in FY 2019. EPA will continue to
find ways to streamline education activities and leverage funding outside the Agency for
environmental stewardship activities via existing cooperative agreements and at the state and local
level.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$8,643.0/ -11.1 FTE) This funding change proposes to eliminate the Environmental
Education program.
Statutory Authority:
National Environmental Education Act (NEEA); Clean Air Act, § 103; Clean Water Act, § 104;
Solid Waste Disposal Act (SWDA), § 8001; Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), § 1442; Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA), § 10; Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA), § 20.
231
-------
Small Minority Business Assistance
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Create Consistency and Certainty
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
s
SJ.5~J.lt
so.o
-s
Total Budget Authority
$1,704.6
$1,573.0
$0.0
-$1,573.0
Total Workyears
8.1
8.9
0.0
-8.9
Program Project Description:
EPA's Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization (OSDBU) manages the Agency's
Small Business Contracting and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) programs.
The Small Business Contracting program is mandated under Section 15(k) of the Small Business
Act, 15 U.S.C. § 644(k). The program provides expertise in expanding small business prime and
subcontracting opportunities. The program offers counselling to EPA's contracting community on
all aspects of the acquisition cycle. It also provides a range of advocacy, outreach and technical
assistance to the various categories of small businesses, including, disadvantaged and women-
owned small businesses; businesses located in Historically Underutilized Business Zones
(HUBZone); and service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses (SDVOSBs).
The DBE program provides national outreach, education and assistance to increase the utilization
of businesses owned and controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals in
procurements funded under EPA financial assistance agreements. Under the DBE program,
OSDBU issues the governing program eligibility and compliance requirements.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE for this program have been proposed for elimination for this program in
FY 2019. The Agency will integrate its resources for Small and Disadvantaged Business activities
under the Small Business Ombudsman program.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
232
-------
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$1,573.0/ -8.9 FTE) This funding change proposes to eliminate the Small Minority
Business Assistance program as part of the effort to streamline functions that can be
absorbed into other programs. Key portions of this program's activities will be shifted to
the Small Business Ombudsman program.
Statutory Authority:
15 U.S.C § 644(k); 42 U.S.C. § 4370d; Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Public Law 101-549
(codified at 42 U.S.C. § 7601 note).
233
-------
International Programs
234
-------
International Sources of Pollution
Program Area: International Programs
Goal: Cooperative Federalism
Objective(s): Enhance Shared Accountability
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017 Actuals
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Unvirinimcnliil
Program &
Munugcmcnl
ShJAHJ
SO.50/,.0
S-IJSS.O
-s:jis.o
Total Budget Authority
$6,338.3
$6,506.0
$4,188.0
-$2,318.0
Total Workyears
36.7
38.2
14.2
-24.0
Program Project Description:
To achieve our domestic environmental and human health objectives, the U.S. works with
international partners to address international sources of pollution, as well as the impacts of
pollution from the U.S. on other countries and the global environment. International sources of
pollution impacts air, water, food crops and food chains, and can accumulate in foods such as fish.
Achieving healthy environments, ecosystems, and communities provides the foundation for
economic development, food security, and sustainable growth.
EPA's work with international partners and organizations is essential to successfully addressing
transboundary pollution adversely impacting the U.S. Strengthening environmental protection
abroad so that it is on par with practices in the U.S. helps build a level playing field for U.S.
industry and promotes opportunities for U.S. technologies and innovation. EPA's international
programs also play an important role in fulfilling national security and foreign policy objectives.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 2/Objective 2.1, Enhance Shared Accountability in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to engage both bilaterally and
through multilateral institutions to improve international cooperation to prevent and address the
transboundary movement of pollution. Specifically, EPA will engage with key priority countries
like China to address air pollution that contributes significant pollution to the domestic and
international environment. For example, China is implementing national air quality monitoring,
planning, and control strategies with advice and lessons learned from the U.S. Environmental
policies adopted and implemented in China will improve competitiveness for U.S. businesses,
drive demand for US emissions control technologies, and expand exports of U.S. environmental
goods and services to China while improving air quality conditions in the United States.
EPA will maintain efforts to reduce environmental threats to U.S. citizens from global
contaminants impacting air, water, and food safety. In particular, EPA will continue technical and
policy assistance for global and regional efforts to address international sources of harmful
235
-------
pollutants, such as mercury. Since 70 percent of the mercury deposited in the U.S. comes from
global sources,54 both domestic efforts and international cooperation are important to address
mercury pollution. For example, EPA will continue to work with international partners and key
countries to fully implement obligations under the Minamata Convention on Mercury in order to
protect the U.S. population from mercury emissions originating in other countries from artisanal
and small-scale gold mining. EPA also will continue its participation in the North American
Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) which provides regional and international
leadership to advance environmental protection, human health and sustainable economic growth
in North America.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$387.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$2,705.0/ -24.0 FTE) This program change reflects a reduction to support reprioritization
of Agency activities. The program will focus efforts on highest priority international issues.
Statutory Authority:
In conjunction with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), § 102(2)(F): Clean Air Act,
§ 103(a); Clean Water Act, § 104(a)(l)-(2); Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), §§ 1442(a)(1),
8001(a)(1); Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), §§ 17(d), 20(a); Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA), § 10(a); Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act
(MPRSA), § 203(a)(1); E.O. 13547; E.O. 13689.
54 For more information, see: http://www.epa.gov/international/toxics/mercurv/mnegotiations.html and
www.mercurvconvention.org.
236
-------
Trade and Governance
Program Area: International Programs
Goal: Cooperative Federalism
Objective(s): Enhance Shared Accountability
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Unvirinimcnliil Pru'^rum A- Manii^cmcnl
s \—.n
so.o
Total Budget Authority
$5,857.8
$5,777.0
$0.0
-$5,777.0
Total Workyears
17.5
18.0
0.0
-18.0
Program Project Description:
EPA is a member of the Trade Policy Staff Committee (TPSC) and the Trade Policy Review Group
(TPRG) - interagency mechanisms that provide advice, guidance, and clearance to the Office of
the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) in the development of U.S. international trade and
investment policy. It is understood that trade influences the nature and scope of economic activity
and therefore the levels of pollutant emissions and natural resource use. EPA's role in trade
negotiations is to ensure that agreements have strong environmental provisions that are consistent
with the Administration's goal to protect the environment while not putting the U.S. at an
economic disadvantage.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE are proposed for elimination in FY 2019.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$5,777.0/ -18.0 FTE) This program change eliminates the Trade and Governance
program.
Statutory Authority:
In conjunction with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), § 102(2)(F): Clean Air Act,
§ 103(a); Clean Water Act, § 104(a)(1) -(2); Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), §§ 1442(a)(1),
8001(a)(1); Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), §§ 17(d), 20(a); Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA), § 10(a); Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act
(MPRSA), § 203(a)(1); E.O. 12915; E.O. 13141; E.O. 13277, as amended by E.O. 13346.
237
-------
US Mexico Border
Program Area: International Programs
Goal: Cooperative Federalism
Objective(s): Enhance Shared Accountability
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
S 2.S0-/.S
S 3,012.0
S 0.0
-S3.0I2.0
Total Budget Authority
$2,864.8
$3,012.0
$0.0
-$3,012.0
Total Workyears
13.7
14.7
0.0
-14.7
Program Project Description:
The two thousand-mile border between the United States and Mexico is one of the most complex
and dynamic regions in the world, where the benefits of international programs are perhaps most
apparent. This region accounts for three of the ten poorest counties in the U.S., with an
unemployment rate 250-300 percent higher than the rest of the United States.55 In addition, over
430 thousand of the 14 million people in the region live in 1,200 colonias,56 which are
unincorporated communities characterized by substandard housing and unsafe drinking water. The
1983 La Paz Agreement57 and the adoption of the Border Programs have gone a long way to protect
and improve the health and environmental conditions along a border that extends from the Gulf of
Mexico to the Pacific Ocean.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE are proposed for elimination in FY 2019.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$3,012.0/ -14.7 FTE) This program change eliminates the U.S. Mexico Border Program.
Projects historically funded along the two thousand mile border between the United States
and Mexico may be eligible for funding under the Clean Water and Drinking Water State
Revolving Funds.
55 http://hsc.unm.edu/communitv/toolkit/docs2/10.USMBHC-TheBorderAtAGlance.pdf
56 http://hsc.unm.edu/communitv/toolkit/docs2/10.USMBHC-TheBorderAtAGlance.pdf
57 https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-Q9/documents/lapazagreement.pdf
238
-------
Statutory Authority:
In conjunction with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), § 102(2)(F): Clean Air Act,
§ 103(a); Clean Water Act, § 104(a)(1) -(2); Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), §§ 1442(a)(1),
8001(a)(1); Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), §§ 17(d), 20(a); Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA), § 10(a); Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act
(MPRSA), § 203(a)(1).
239
-------
IT/ Data Management/ Security
240
-------
Information Security
Program Area: IT / Data Management / Security
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017 Actuals
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Unvirinimcnliil
Program &
Munugcmcnl
V). ~42.it
S/.?.
S-.013.0
Hazardous Substance
Superfiind
$654.9
$666.0
$5,186.0
$4,520.0
Total Budget Authority
$9,821.4
$7,408.0
$18,941.0
$11,533.0
Total Workyears
21.6
14.3
12.8
-1.5
Program Project Description:
Information is a valuable national resource and a strategic asset to EPA. It enables the Agency to
fulfill its mission to protect human health and the environment. The Agency's Information Security
program is designed to protect the confidentiality, availability and integrity of EPA's information
assets. The information protection strategy includes, but is not limited to:
• Policy, procedure and practice management;
• Information security awareness, training and education;
• Risk-based governance and oversight;
• Weakness remediation;
• Operational security management;
• Incident response and handling; and
• Federal Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA) compliance and reporting.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. Cybersecurity is a serious challenge to our
nation's security and economic prosperity. EPA will maintain continuous monitoring of security
controls in FY 2019. Effective information security requires vigilance and the ability to adapt to
new challenges every day. EPA will continue to manage information security risk and build upon
efforts to protect, defend and look to improve information security business processes to improve
efficiency and effectiveness.
In FY 2019, EPA will sustain some existing improvements. EPA expects to leverage the
Continuous Diagnostics and Mitigation (CDM) program to close existing gaps by improving audit
capabilities, ensuring accountability and adding protections directly associated with the
241
-------
information. The requested funding is essential to maintain the mandated CDM capabilities. To
realize these improvements, the Agency will need to sustain the tools and processes implemented
to date. The security architecture, associated processes, and expert personnel comprise an
ecosystem with cross dependencies, and the system is strongest when operating as a whole.
The CDM program, centrally managed by the Department of Homeland Security, provides tools
that will give near real-time awareness of EPA's networks and environments. CDM consists of
four implementation phases with an estimated cost of over $10 million in FY 2019 across all
appropriations once all capabilities are in place. Data from the individual agency dashboards across
the federal government will be aggregated into one federal-level dashboard maintained by the
CDM program, which allows DHS to monitor and respond to federal cybersecurity threats and
incidents much more quickly and efficiently. The Agency will continue to work with DHS to
implement future phases based on capacity. Costs of operating and maintaining CDM capabilities
are anticipated to increase significantly in FY 2019 as more capabilities come online. The Agency
will prioritize security capabilities based on an evaluation of evolving threats.
The Information Security program also will continue to detect and remediate the effects of
Advanced Persistent Threats to the Agency's information and information systems. The Agency
will continue to focus on training and user-awareness to foster desired behavior, asset definition
and management, compliance, incident management, knowledge and information management,
risk management and technology management. These efforts will strengthen the Agency's ability
to adequately protect information assets. The final result will be an information security program
that can rely on effective and efficient controls and processes to counter cybersecurity threats.
EPA will look to refine its Computer Security Incident Response Capability (CSIRC) processes to
support identification, response, alerting and reporting of suspicious activity. CSIRC's mission is
to protect EPA's information assets and respond to security incidents - actual and potential. This
includes detecting unauthorized attempts to access, destroy, or alter EPA's data and information
resources. CSIRC will maintain relationships with other federal agencies and law enforcement
entities, as needed, to support the Agency's mission. The incident response capability includes
components such as detection and analysis; forensics; and containment and eradication activities.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$172.0) This change to fixed and other costs is a decrease due to the recalculation of base
workforce costs for existing FTE.
• (+$5,185.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase needed for mandatory cyber
security requirements58, including CDM. Funding will be used to close existing gaps by
improving audit capabilities, ensuring accountability and adding protections directly
58 Including those found in Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014, and Federal Information Security
Cybersecurity Act of 2015.
242
-------
associated with the information. This change also supports CDM phase three which will
continue implementation in FY 2019.
• (+$2,273.0) This program change reflects an increase in funding needed to continue
operations and maintenance previously provided by DHS for mandatory protections
implemented in CDM phase one and two focusing on endpoint integrity, least privilege
and infrastructure integrity.
• (-$273.0/ -1.5 FTE) This program change reflects a reduction in the startup cybersecurity
related improvement activities funded in FY 2016.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Information Security Cybersecurity Act of 2015; Government Performance and Results
Act (GPRA); Government Management Reform Act (GMRA); Clinger-Cohen Act (CCA);
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA); the Privacy Act of 1974; Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA)Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA); Government Management Reform Act
(GMRA); Clinger-Cohen Act (CCA); Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA); the Privacy Act of 1974;
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
243
-------
IT / Data Management
Program Area: IT / Data Management / Security
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
SSJ.iSO.O
SSJJ -<).()
-s U.vixo
Science & Technology
$3,342.0
$3,068.0
$2,725.0
-$343.0
Hazardous Substance Superfond
$14,691.5
$13,720.0
$13,720.0
$0.0
Total Budget Authority
$100,613.5
$99,967.0
$85,709.0
-$14,258.0
Total Workyears
441.0
498.3
457.9
-40.4
Program Project Description:
The work performed under the Information Technology/Data Management (IT/DM) program
supports human health and environmental protection by providing critical IT infrastructure and
data management needed for:
1) Access to scientific, regulatory, policy, and guidance information needed by the Agency,
the regulated community, and the public;
2) Analytical support for interpreting and understanding environmental information;
3) Exchange and storage of data, analysis, and computation; and
4) Rapid, secure, and efficient communication.
These areas are then organized into the following functional areas: information analysis and
access; data management and collection; information technology and infrastructure; and geospatial
information and analysis. This program supports the maintenance of EPA's IT and Information
Management (IT/IM) services that enable citizens, regulated facilities, states, and other entities to
interact with EPA electronically to get the information they need on demand, to understand what
it means, and to submit and share environmental data with the least cost and burden. The program
also provides support to other agency IT development projects and essential technology to agency
staff, enabling them to conduct their work effectively and efficiently. In the context of the Federal
Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act (FITARA), EPA is bringing its IT acquisition,
portfolio review, and governance processes together to adopt practices that improve delivery of
capability to users, drive down lifecycle costs, and leverage shared services.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. EPA has progressively integrated new and
transformative approaches to the way IT is managed across the Agency. The goal of EPA's IT/DM
services is to enhance the power of information by delivering on demand data to the right people
244
-------
at the right time. In FY 2019, the program will strive to meet EPA's IT/IM service need while
continuously improving customer experiences to allow EPA, its partners, and the public to acquire,
generate, manage, use, and share information as a critical resource to protect human health and the
environment. To accomplish this, the program will focus available capacity on the following areas:
• Improve the way EPA supports and manages the lifecycle of information and information
products;
• Modernize EPA's IT/IM infrastructure, applications and services;
• Empower a mobile workforce using innovative and agile solutions; and
• Empower state and tribal partnerships using innovative and agile solutions.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to implement the E-Enterprise business strategy, a transformative
21st century strategy - jointly governed by states, tribes, and EPA - for modernizing government
agencies' delivery of services to support the protection of human health and the environment. EPA
is building on progress made using E-Enterprise for the Environment, a platform for transformative
change that operationalizes cooperative federalism principles. EPA's E-Enterprise partnership
with states and tribes modernizes the way we do the business of environmental protection. IT/DM
activities will continue to facilitate shared services and electronic transactions with the regulated
community and external partners who routinely conduct environmental business with EPA. The
Agency will use E-Enterprise to deliver streamlined processes as well as accessible, reliable
information and data that benefit co-regulators and the regulated community.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to implement its IT acquisition review process as part of the
implementation of federal Common Baseline Controls for FITARA. In addition, FITARA controls
include an established solid communication and engagement strategy for the CIO with the
Agency's programs and regional offices to ensure that their IT plans are well designed, directly
drive agency strategic objectives, and follow best practices. Lastly, the controls ensure the CIO
engages closely with key IT decision-makers across EPA and fosters plans to refresh IT skills
within the Agency.
In FY 2019, the following IT/DM activities will continue:
• Data Management and Collection: Data Management and Collection efforts include
support for a variety of essential information management. For example, the National
Records Management Program provides the framework within which program/regional
records activities are conducted. These national activities include providing regulations,
policies/procedures, coordination, and support to help fulfill EPA's statutory obligations
to maintain records. Records management activities will be prioritized to align with
available resources. Additionally, Discovery Services technology will continue to support
the search/collection of agency information needed to help respond to requests for
information from external stakeholders. EPA staff manage the agency's docket center and
information collection requests, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act. Since
October 2002, EPA has served as the managing partner of the interagency shared service
e-Rulemaking Program; however, in FY 2019 EPA will work with the Office of
Management and Budget and the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA)
towards transferring management services to the NARA/Office of the Federal Register.
245
-------
• Digital Services: The FY 2019 budget includes funding to continue modest transformation
of the Agency's digital services to make them more cost-effective for the agency to build
and maintain. This includes some support to develop cloud computing approaches for the
agency.
• Geospatial: In addition to meeting ongoing program needs, Geospatial information and
analysis play a critical role in the Agency's ability to respond rapidly and effectively in
times of emergency. In FY 2019, the Agency will continue to support the essential
capabilities of GeoPlatform, a shared technology enterprise for geospatial information and
analysis. By implementing geospatial data, applications and services, the Agency is able to
integrate and interpret multiple data sets and information sources to support environmental
decisions. During FY 2019, the Agency will continue to focus on Geoplatform data
services, dashboards, and story boards based on provided geographic information to
support programmatic analysis and decision making. It also will better inform the public
about EPA's use of grant funding to protect the environment and public health. In FY 2019,
EPA also will provide support to the Geoplatform to publish internal and public mapping
tools and make available a number of shareable maps, geodata services, and applications.
EPA will continue to play a role in both the Federal Geographic Data Committee and the
National Geospatial Platform, working with partner agencies to share geospatial
technology capabilities across government.
• Information Access and Analysis: In FY 2019, EPA will focus on providing core support
to agency infrastructure and utilizing tools that will harness the power of data across the
Agency to drive better environmental decision making. The Agency will pause efforts to
replace the data management functionality in the legacy EnviroFacts data warehouse. EPA
will provide partnership support to other agencies, states, tribes, and academic institutions
to propose innovative ways to use, analyze and visualize data.
In addition, the program will provide support for maintenance of E-Enterprise capabilities
and provide analysis of environmental information to the public and EPA's staff. The
program will continue to ensure compliance of EPA's public systems with Section 508 of
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
• Information Technology and Infrastructure: In FY 2019, the Agency will continue to
maintain essential information technology and infrastructure. The Agency will adjust the
schedule for replacement or upgrades to align with resources. EPA will continue to
maintain and provision: desktop computing equipment, network connectivity, e-mail and
collaboration tools, application hosting, remote access, telephone services, web and
network services, and other IT-related equipment. In FY 2019, the Agency will continue
efforts to consolidate EPA's data centers and computer rooms and to optimize operations
within EPA's remaining data centers.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
246
-------
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$1,336.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is a decrease due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs.
• (-$12,579.0/ -44.8 FTE) This program change reflects a reduction to enterprise IT
systems/tools and emergency response including shared services for Facility Registries,
Geographic Information System platform support for emergency response and reduced
support for regional libraries. It also modifies the timeline for development of new
technologies such as new assistive technology tools, ability to re-platform legacy
applications, and replace end of service IT equipment that provides basic workforce
support across the agency.
Statutory Authority:
Modernizing Government Technology (MGT) Act, Federal Information Security Management
Act; Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA);
Clean Air Act (CAA); Clean Water Act (CWA); Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); Federal
Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA); Safe
Drinking Water Act (SDWA); Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); Government
Performance and Results Act (GPRA); Government Management Reform Act (GMRA); Clinger-
Cohen Act (CCA); Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA); Freedom of Information Act (FOIA);
Controlled Substances Act (CSA).
247
-------
Legal/ Science/ Regulatory/ Economic Review
248
-------
Administrative Law
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Compliance with the Law
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017 Actuals
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Unvirinimcnliil
Program &
Munugcmcnl
NV.5.U y
S -IJflJ.lt
S -f.55~.il
S1-fi.lt
Total Budget Authority
$4,533.9
$4,381.0
$4,557.0
$176.0
Total Workyears
24.4
25.8
23.8
-2.0
Program Project Description:
This program supports EPA's Administrative Law Judges (ALJ) and the Environmental Appeals
Board (EAB). By adjudicating disputed matters, the ALJ furthers the Agency's mission to
protecting human health and the environment. The ALJ preside in hearings and issue initial
decisions in cases initiated by EPA's enforcement program concerning environmental, civil rights,
and government program fraud related violations. The Fifth Amendment of the Constitution of the
United States of America guarantees the regulated community the right to due process of the law.
The ALJ provides the constitutionally guaranteed legal process and review for hearings and issues
initial decisions in cases brought by the Agency's enforcement program against those accused of
violations under various environmental, civil rights, and anti-fraud statutes. The right of affected
persons to appeal those decisions is conferred by various statutes, regulations, and constitutional
due process rights. The ALJ also offers an opportunity for alternative dispute resolution.
The EAB is a four-member appellate tribunal established by regulation in 1992 to hear appeals
and issue final decisions in environmental adjudications (primarily enforcement and permit-
related) under all major environmental statutes that EPA administers. The EAB promotes the rule
of law and furthers the Agency's mission to protecting human health and the environment. The
EAB decides petitions for reimbursement under CERCLA 106(b), hears appeals of pesticide
licensing and cancellation proceedings under FIFRA, and serves as the final approving body for
proposed settlements of enforcement actions initiated at EPA headquarters. The EAB issues
decisions consistent with the APA and under the authority delegated by the Administrator and
pursuant to regulation.
The EAB adjudicates administrative appeals in a fair and timely manner in accord with the APA,
ensuring consistency in the application of legal requirements. The EAB also resolves disputes
efficiently, avoiding protracted federal court review. In over ninety percent of matters decided by
the EAB, no further appeal is taken to federal court, providing a final resolution to the dispute. The
EAB also offers an opportunity for alternative dispute resolution.
249
-------
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/ Objective 3.1, Compliance with the Law in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, the ALJ will convene formal hearings in the location
of the alleged violator or violation, as required by statute. In FY 2019, the ALJ will continue to
modernize its electronic filing and case management system to reduce mailing delays and costs.
In FY 2019, the EAB will continue to implement its streamlined procedures for adjudicating permit
appeals under all statutes, and will continue to expedite appeals in Clean Air Act New Source
Review cases and in FIFRA licensing proceedings.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$650.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$474.0/ -2.0 FTE) This change is a reduction of funds for managing an electronic filing
and case docketing system and for travel.
Statutory Authority:
Administrative Procedure Act (APA); Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as
amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485 (codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute);
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA); Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); Clean Water Act (CWA); Clean Air Act
(CAA); Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA); Solid Waste Disposal Act (SWDA); Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA); Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA); Marine Protection, Research, and
Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA); Mercury-Containing and Rechargeable Battery Management Act
(MCRBMA); the Act to Prevent Pollution From Ships (APPS).
250
-------
Civil Rights Program
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
SIO.Wl.'J
S v.ovv.o
-S U54M
Total Budget Authority
$10,101.9
$9,699.0
$8,545.0
-$1,154.0
Total Workyears
53.8
64.0
48.3
-15.7
Program Project Description:
The Civil Rights program enforces federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination by
recipients of federal financial assistance from EPA and also enforces federal civil rights laws that
promote equal employment opportunity and protect employees and applicants for employment
from discrimination. In addition, the program provides policy guidance and technical assistance to
external recipients and also internally on Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) and is responsible
for carrying out the following functions:
• External Civil Rights Compliance (Title VI) functions include the enforcement of several
civil rights laws, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, that prohibit
discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin (including limited-English
proficiency), disability, sex, and age, in programs or activities that receive federal financial
assistance from EPA. The Agency investigates and resolves external complaints, develops
policy, conducts compliance reviews, and provides technical assistance to recipients.
• Employment Complaints Resolution (Title VII) functions address complaints of
employment discrimination, including those filed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act
of 1964 and pursuant to Executive Order 13672 (July 21, 2014), alleging discrimination
based on race; color; religion; sex, including pregnancy, sex stereotyping, gender identity
or gender expression; national origin; sexual orientation; physical or mental disability; age;
protected genetic information; status as a parent; marital status; political affiliation; or
retaliation based on previous EEO activity, against EPA employees and applicants for EPA
employment.
• Affirmative Employment Analysis and Accountability (AEAA) functions provide
leadership, direction, and advice to managers and supervisors to assist them in carrying out
equal opportunity and civil rights responsibilities. In addition, the Civil Rights program
oversees EPA's continuing affirmative activities to promote EEO. The program also is
responsible for reporting under the EEO Commission's Management Directive 715 (MD-
251
-------
715),59 which provides guidelines for identifying triggers and conducting barrier analysis
within EPA's workforce.
• Reasonable Accommodation functions carry out EPA's responsibilities under the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which requires the Agency to provide reasonable
accommodation for individuals with disabilities, unless it would cause undue hardship for
the Agency.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. The Civil Rights program is developing
strategic plans for each of the functions, including specific goals, implementation steps, and
benchmarks that will serve as internal performance measures to ensure accountability for all of the
functions. In FY 2019, EPA will continue the strategic planning process with an emphasis on
process improvement, internal performance measures, technology resources, and strategic human
capital planning. These actions are consistent with measures called for in the EPA Report
"Developing a Model Civil Rights Program at the EPA."60
External Civil Rights, Including Title VI
In FY 2019, the program will continue to implement the External Compliance Program Strategic
Plan for FY 2015-2020 and support complaint docket management through investigations,
informal resolution agreements and mediation. Providing proactive reviews and technical
assistance to recipients, strategic policy development, and the program's workforce planning and
training will be prioritized. Specific initiatives may continue as resources are available, including:
• Deployment of a collaborative "State Empowerment Initiative" that would help enhance
effective civil rights programs related to environmental efforts at the state level; and
• Implementation of the program's Functional Competency Framework which strengthens
the Agency's workforce by promoting the development of a highly effective, performance-
based organization.
Title VII
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to prioritize its resources for the EEO programs by dedicating most
of its financial resources to the processing of discrimination complaints, including EEO
counseling, investigations, and drafting final Agency decisions. The program will focus on process
improvements to: 1) ensure prompt, effective, and efficient EEO complaint docket management;
2) enhance the proactive EEO compliance program through strategic policy and training
development, and the engagement of critical internal EPA partners; and 3) strengthen the Title VII
workforce through strategic human capital planning, training, and the use of organizational
59 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive 715, October 1, 2013.
60 For more information: http://intranet.epa.gov/civilrights/pdfs/training/ecfr-developing-a-model-civil-rights-program.pdf.
252
-------
development and technology resources to promote a forward looking organization. In addition, the
program will:
• Continue to train additional collateral-duty EEO Counselors by providing them with at
least 32 hours of mediation training and by training the available workforce. The EEO
Counselor is a mandatory function under federal regulations.
• Continue to execute timely investigations by identifying methods to further reduce, by an
additional 10 percent from the prior year's performance, the number of days that
complaints are under investigation to less than the regulatory 180 days.
• Continue to identify methods to reduce the number of days needed to issue final Agency
decisions to ensure compliance with the 60-day regulatory timeframe. In FY 2017, the
Office of Civil Rights improved regulatory compliance, and issued 32 decisions, which is
nearly three times the number issued in the prior two fiscal years. By December 22, 2017
with the assistance of Agency volunteers from program and regional offices, the Office of
Civil Rights had resolved 82 percent of the backlog of overdue decisions.
• Improve efficiency and effectiveness of the EEO process by identifying and revising EEO
complaint and other Agency forms. The Office of Civil Rights initiated and continues to
implement a Lean process to improve critical phases of the overall EEO process.
Affirmative Employment Analysis and Accountability (AEAA)
In FY 2019, the program will continue to focus on process improvement to: 1) ensure prompt,
effective, and efficient development of critical and required reports, such as MD-715; 2) enhance
the proactive Affirmative Employment function through development of strategic policy, and,
training and the engagement of critical internal EPA partners; and 3) strengthen the AEAA
workforce through strategic human capital planning, training, and the use of organizational
development and technology resources to promote a forward looking organization. Consistent with
this strategic approach, the program will continue to:
• Increase collaboration among program offices to ensure coordination of related EEO and
diversity and inclusion missions.
• Ensure integration of civil rights into EPA's strategic planning processes, organizational
assessments, operating plans, and other relevant reporting vehicles.
• Develop and implement activities, trainings, and educational events that assist EPA's
programs in these relevant areas.
• Develop a process for conducting periodic surveys/focus groups in collaboration with EPA
partners and through the Equal Employment Opportunity Officers, Program Management
Officers, and Deputy Civil Rights Officials to collect information on best practices to
ensure effective affirmative employment programs.
253
-------
• Provide effective support tools for managers and supervisors in carrying out their
responsibilities under MD-715 and the Diversity and Inclusion Strategic Plan.
• Ensure EPA-wide implementation of a critical activities and document management
system for AEAA.
Reasonable Accommodations (RA) Program
In FY 2019, the RA program will continue to focus on process and technology improvements to
ensure prompt, effective, and efficient RA request docket management. The program also will
enhance the proactive RA compliance function through development of strategic policy; training
and the engagement of critical internal EPA partners; and strengthen the RA program's workforce
through strategic human capital planning, training, and the use of organizational development and
technology resources to promote a forward looking organization. The program will continue to:
• Update and enhance the comprehensive, user-friendly electronic case, activity, and
document management system.
• Update reasonable accommodation processes and templates to improve the timeliness,
efficiency, and consistency of communications and to avoid release of sensitive personally
identifiable information.
• Assess, evaluate, and further develop the online training curriculum for reasonable
accommodation and Section 508 compliance.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,140.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$2,294.0/ -15.7 FTE) This program change reflects a reduction in the Civil Rights
program through the streamlining of support for the processing of investigations for Title
VI and Title VII complaints, enhancement of mandatory reporting, and improvements in
the overall management of complaints and reporting processes.
Statutory Authority:
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972; Section
504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, and Section 13 of the
Federal Water Act of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972; Title VII of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964; Equal Pay Act of 1963; Rehabilitation Act of 1973, §§ 501, 504, 505, 508; Americans
with Disabilities Act of 1990; ADA Amendments Act of2008; Age Discrimination in Employment
Act (ADEA) of 1967; Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA).
254
-------
Integrated Environmental Strategies
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Streamline and Modernize
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
S10.
SJ0.5fU.lf
s v.-ivfi.o
-SI. OS 5.0
Total Budget Authority
$10,732.3
$10,581.0
$9,496.0
-$1,085.0
Total Workyears
49.4
55.8
46.0
-9.8
Program Project Description:
The Integrated Environmental Strategies (IES) program advances the Agency's mission while
promoting economic growth from the national level to the community level and providing tools
and resources to transform EPA into a more effective organization. Nationally, IES is focused on
1) streamlining EPA's permitting processes and 2) using business process improvement
approaches more broadly. The intent is to increase EPA's efficiency and reduce unnecessary
burden on states and the regulated community. IES also collaborates with federal, state, and
municipal partners, communities, businesses, and other stakeholders to implement locally-led,
community-driven approaches to environmental protection through technical assistance, policy
analysis, and training.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.4, Streamline and Modernize in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. This program demonstrates new approaches to streamline and
reduce unnecessary burdens and to help communities meet their environmental and economic
needs. In FY 2019, the program will focus on permit streamlining, sector strategies, Lean, and
community-driven environmental protection.
Permit Streamlining
One way EPA implements its statutory authority is through various permitting programs. These
programs are based on a set of processes that vary across EPA program and regional offices. This
program focuses on streamlining EPA's permitting processes in support of the President's
Memorandum "Streamlining Permitting and Reducing Regulatory Burdens for Domestic
Manufacturing" and Executive Orders 13771, "Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs" and Executive Order 13777, "Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda."61 In FY 2019,
EPA also will strengthen its partnership with state permitting offices to streamline our review of
state-issued permits.
61 For more information: https://www.wfaitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-executive-order-reduciiig-regulation-
controtling-regulatory-costs/.
255
-------
Smart Sectors
In October 2017, EPA reinstituted a successful initiative to address information gaps between the
Agency and regulated entities in the largest sectors of our economy. This program will receive
input from industry associations, as well as individual businesses, to better inform the Agency's
policy work, especially with respect to regulatory reform and our own internal business processes.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue this effort to identify collaborative and innovative solutions to
environmental problems. This will lead to better-informed rulemakings, reduced unnecessary
burden on the regulated community, and increased transparency about environmental
performance.
Lean
EPA continually seeks to improve the quality, transparency, and speed of its business processes.
During the last several years, EPA has conducted more than 250 Lean projects across the Agency
to achieve this goal, reducing process times by about 50 percent on average. For example, an effort
to streamline cleanup decisions under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act succeeded in
cutting investigation times by at least five years. In FY 2019, this program will continue to support
the use of Lean tools across the Agency by providing access to process improvement experts,
identifying projects of high strategic value, measuring process improvements (e.g., time savings
and satisfaction rates), and expanding the transfer of successful approaches across EPA programs
and organizations. EPA also will continue implementation of an agencywide Lean management
system to institutionalize the benefits Lean can provide.
Community-Driven Environmental Protection
This program delivers technical assistance, training, and tools to economically distressed
communities and coordinates the Agency's work with communities to increase efficiency,
effectiveness, and accountability. In FY 2019, the IES program will continue to lead the existing
Cross-Agency Communities team, with particular focus on the new Administration's priorities,
such as leveraging private investment and aligning federal investments to maximize benefits to
communities.
Technical assistance and training is the cornerstone of EPA's cooperative approach to addressing
environmental challenges in communities, particularly communities that are economically
distressed. The objective is to help tribal, state, and local governments increase their capacity to
protect the environment while growing their economies, creating jobs, using public and private
sector investments, and other resources more efficiently. Where appropriate, EPA will partner with
other agencies to help achieve locally-led, community-driven approaches to protecting clean air,
land, and water, while at the same time supporting economic revitalization.
The program will continue analyses on emerging trends, innovative practices, and tools that
support clean air, land, and water outcomes. EPA will develop tools to help interested communities
incorporate innovative approaches to infrastructure and land development policies that deliver
multiple economic, community, and quality of life benefits while also managing stormwater,
reducing combined sewer overflows, improving local air quality, facilitating private investment in
Brownfield and Superfund site redevelopment, and achieving other environmental benefits.
256
-------
Performance Measure Targets:
(PEl) Percentage of permitting-related decisions issued within 6 months.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
No Target
Established
TBD
(OP1) Number of operational processes improved.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
25
50
(AD4) Cumulative number of state, tribal, and community partners that have
integrated data, models, information, and other decision-support tools developed by
EPA for climate resiliency into their planning processes.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
150
200
(AD5) Cumulative number of state, tribal, and community partners that have
incorporated climate resiliency into the implementation of their environmental
programs supported by major EPA financial mechanisms (grants, loans, contracts,
and technical assistance agreements.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
150
200
Work related to the results of measure Percentage of permitting-related decisions issued within 6
months, is agencywide in scope. The lead office is the Office of the Administrator.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,198.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs for existing FTE due to the adjustments in salary, essential
workforce support, and benefit costs.
• (-$2,283.0/ -9.8 FTE) This program change reflects a reduction in the Integrated
Environmental Strategies program through streamlining of the community work and
climate adaptation efforts within the IES program.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act (CWA), § 104(b)(3); Clean Air Act (CAA), § 103; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of
1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485 (codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's
organic statute).
257
-------
Legal Advice: Environmental Program
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Create Consistency and Certainty
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
S52.W). "
v/y/o'.w
S-l 2.2 V 2.0
-N
Hazardous Substance Superfond
$691.2
$577.0
$577.0
$0.0
Total Budget Authority
$53,580.9
$50,234.0
$42,869.0
-$7,365.0
Total Workyears
277.4
274.6
221.8
-52.8
Program Project Description:
This program provides legal representational services, legal counseling and legal support for all of
the Agency's environmental activities.62 The legal support provided by this program is essential
to the Agency's core mission. The personnel assigned to this program represent essential expertise
in these critical fields that the Agency relies on for all of its decisions and activities in furtherance
of its mission: to protect human health and the environment.
This program provides counsel on every major action the Agency takes. It plays a central role in
all statutory and regulatory interpretation of new and existing rules and all rule and guidance
development under EPA's environmental authorities. This program provides essential legal advice
for every petition response, every judicial response and every emergency response. When the
Agency acts to protect the public from pollutants or health-threatening chemicals in the air we
breathe, in the water we drink, or in the food we eat, this program provides counsel on the Agency's
authority to take that action; it then provides the advice and support necessary to finalize and
implement that action. When that action is challenged in court, this program defends it.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.2, Create Consistency and Certainty in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. This program provides legal representation in approximately
350 defensive judicial cases each year. It is projected that the number of cases in FY 2019 will
exceed this number. The program will continue to provide legal representation in judicial and
administrative litigation for core agency environmental programs and for agency priorities. The
program also will provide counseling outside of the litigation context in the highest priority issues
arising under all the legal environmental statutes administered by EPA.
62 Resources for legal services for Support programs are included in the Legal Advice: Support program.
258
-------
In FY 2019, the Agency will continue to focus on its core mission to apply the most effective
approaches by implementing EPA's environmental programs under the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA), Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST), Clean Air Act (CAA), Clean
Water Act (CWA), Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), Federal Insecticide Fungicide and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA), Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA),
and other authorities. This strategy will help ensure that human health and the environment are
protected and provided with clean air, water, and land, and safe chemicals and pesticides in the most
effective way.
Legal counseling resources also continue to be in high demand to support the Agency's response
to states seeking assistance developing or implementing environmental programs, industrial
facilities seeking permits that are required to undertake new economic activity, and citizens
seeking actions to protect local environmental quality, among other things. The program will
prioritize resources after supporting judicial and administrative litigation to counseling agency
clients on these matters.
The following examples illustrate this program's important role in implementing the Agency's
core mission:
• Played a substantial role in the promulgation of three TSCA final rules, a significant
guidance document, and the scoping documents for the first 10 chemical risk evaluations
under the amended TSCA, all by a very ambitious deadline and
• Provided critical legal support for implementing a Presidential Executive Order directing
EPA and the Army Corps to review and publish for notice and comment a proposed rule
rescinding or revising the definition of "Waters of the United States" under the Clean Water
Act.
Performance Measure Targets:
(RGl) Percentage of legal deadlines met by EPA.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
No Target
Established
TBD
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$2,864.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$10,229.0/ -58.3 FTE) This net program change is a reduction in FTE and non-pay
resources for lower priority activities as EPA will focus on litigation support for core
environmental programs.
• (+5.5 FTE) This program change reflects an increase in fee funded reimbursable FTE to
support planned TSCA fee workload.
259
-------
Statutory Authority:
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485
(codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute).
260
-------
Legal Advice: Support Program
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Unvirnnmental Prugram A- Management
SI-I.-/NV.'
s 15. r tut
S Ifi.-I5l.lt
SI.2SJ.lt
Total Budget Authority
$14,489.7
$15,170.0
$16,451.0
$1,281.0
Total Workyears
77.7
92.8
90.4
-2.4
Program Project Description:
This program provides legal representational services, legal counseling and legal support for all
activities necessary for EPA's operations.63 It provides legal counsel and support on issues
including, but not limited to: appropriations, claims, contracts, employment law, grants,
information law, intellectual property law, real property, and all aspects of civil rights law.
For example, if an EPA program office needs to know how to respond to a Freedom of Information
Act (FOIA) request, whether it may spend money on a certain activity, or what to do when a
plaintiff files a tort claim against the Agency, this program is the source of answers, options, and
advice. This program supports EPA in maintaining high ethical standards and in complying with
all laws and policies that govern the Agency's operations.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to address
and manage information requests, legal support for work under the Civil Rights Act, and
employment law. There also is an ongoing need for a high level of involvement in questions related
to contracts, grants, finance, appropriations, and employment.
In addition to the increase in employee and labor relations matters, litigation and appeals under the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) have continued to increase steadily in both number and
complexity. In FY 2019, EPA anticipates additional support to focus on responding to the
increased number of complex and challenging information requests. In FY 2019, EPA will work
to centralize our management of FOIA requests to achieve efficiencies in processing. While the
Agency will provide targeted counselling on the most complex and challenging FOIA requests, it
will redirect other counselling resources to litigation.
63 Resources for legal services to support Environmental programs are included in the Legal Advice: Environmental program.
261
-------
The following examples illustrate this program's important role in increasing transparency and
public participation:
• Partnered with the Office of Environmental Information to develop FOIA training
opportunities. More than 180 Agency FOIA professionals were trained to ensure that EPA
is effectively and efficiently responding to the public's FOIA requests. These training
opportunities are particularly critical given that the Agency expects to receive as many as
12,500 FOIA requests in FY 2018, which is about 2,000 requests more than received in FY
2016 and the most FOIA requests the Agency has received in at least 10 years.
Performance Measure Targets:
(FOl) Reduce the FOIA backlog.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
No Target
Established
TBD
(F02) Percentage of FOIA requests completed within statutory deadlines.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
No Target
Established
TBD
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continue Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$2,244.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$963.0/ -5.9 FTE) This program change is a reduction in FTE and non-pay resources for
lower priority activities. EPA will focus on counseling and legal advice to the highest
agency priorities and focus on litigation support.
• (+3.5 FTE) This program change is an increase in fee funded reimbursable FTE to support
planned TSCA fee workload.
Statutory Authority:
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485
(codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute).
262
-------
Regulatory/Economic-Management and Analysis
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Create Consistency and Certainty
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
SI5.-IVS.-I
S 15.011.0
SI 5.5.12.0
S 521.0
Total Budget Authority
$15,498.4
$15,011.0
$15,532.0
$521.0
Total Workyears
82.4
81.3
74.0
-7.3
Program Project Description:
The Regulatory/Economic, Management and Analysis program is responsible for reviewing
Agency regulations to ensure that they are developed in accordance with the governing statutes,
executive orders, and Agency commitments and are based on sound technical, economic and
policy assumptions. Further, the program ensures consistent and appropriate economic analysis of
regulatory actions, analyzes regulatory and non-regulatory approaches, and considers interactions
between regulations across different environmental media. The program establishes compliance
with Executive Order (EO) 13771 by ensuring that the costs and cost savings of EPA's actions are
fully and appropriately estimated. This program also ensures Agency regulations comply with
additional statutory and EO requirements, including the Congressional Review Act, the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act), and
EOs 12866 and 13563 regarding the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulatory review.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.2, Create Consistency and Certainty in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. The program assists the Administrator and senior agency
staff in implementing new regulatory policy priorities, including EO 13771 (Reducing Regulation
and Controlling Regulatory Costs), EO 13777 (Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda), EO
13783 (Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth), and EO 13790 (Promoting
Agriculture and Rural Prosperity in America).
In FY 2019, EPA will continue its efforts to assess, review, and improve its regulations while
considering costs and burdens to businesses, jobs, communities, government entities, and the
economy, and maximizing the net benefits to protect human health and the environment. Key
program activities planned include:
• Continue to manage EPA's implementation of EOs, including development and
management of the annual regulatory budget, analyzing potential areas of cost savings, and
maintaining a new website that provides information about deregulatory actions.
263
-------
• Continue to manage the costs of EPA's regulations, ensuring that the Agency complies
with its regulatory budget and ensuring that EPA continues to meet or exceed the goal of
repealing two regulations for each new regulation issued, pursuant to EO 13771.
• Review economic analyses prepared by EPA to ensure compliance with OMB Circular A-
4 on Regulatory Analysis, EO 12866, and other related requirements. Provide the
Administrator and the public with high-quality analysis of the costs, benefits, and impacts
on jobs, businesses, and communities to better inform decision-making and ensure
transparency about the consequences of regulation.64
• Update EPA's Guidelines for Preparing Economic Analyses to ensure that analyses
provide a complete accounting of the impacts of regulatory actions, including involuntary
unemployment and distributional consequences. Apply the best economy-wide modeling
tools to assess the economic effects of environmental regulatory options, including methods
designed to examine the distribution of regulatory burdens.
• Continue to develop EPA's semiannual unified Regulatory Agenda, while ensuring EPA
complies with requirements under EO 13771.
• Manage EPA's internal Action Development Process, and expand and upgrade regulatory
planning and tracking tools to facilitate timely decisions and coordination across programs.
• Serve as EPA's liaison with the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
within OMB.
• Serve as EPA's liaison with the Office of the Federal Register by reviewing, editing, and
submitting documents for publication so that the public, states, other agencies, and
Congress are informed about EPA's regulatory activities in a timely manner.
• Develop, in conjunction with other EPA programs (i.e., air, water, etc.), improved
analytical tools to advance EPA's risk assessment methods used in quantifying human
health effects.
Performance Measure Targets:
(RG5) Total incremental cost of all EO 13771 regulatory and deregulatory actions.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
-$40 Million
TBD
(RG3) Number of EO 13771 regulatory actions issued.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
No Target
Established
TBD
64 For more information: https://www.epa.gov/environmental-economics/guidelines-DreDaring-economic-analvses.
264
-------
(RG4) Number of EO 13771 deregulatory actions issued.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
No Target
Established
TBD
(RG2) Hours of unnecessary or duplicative reporting burden to the regulated
community eliminated.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
2,000,000
2,000,000
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$863.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$342.0/ -7.3 FTE) This net program change reflects a focus to implement regulatory
policy priorities and to assess, review, and improve the Agency's regulations and
underlying economic tools, in accordance with new Executive Orders.
Statutory Authority:
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485
(codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute).
265
-------
Science Advisory Board
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Prioritize Robust Science
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
$3,8211.3
S3. ~36.fl
S3. "<).<>
S-t3.ll
Total Budget Authority
$3,820.3
$3,736.0
$3,779.0
$43.0
Total Workyears
18.4
21.6
18.7
-2.9
Program Project Description:
Congress established EPA's Science Advisory Board in 1978, under the Environmental Research,
Development, and Demonstration Act, to advise the Administrator on a wide range of highly
visible and important scientific matters. The Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee was
established in 1977, under the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977, to provide independent advice
to EPA's Administrator on the technical bases for EPA's National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
The SAB and the CASAC, both statutorily-mandated chartered Federal Advisory Committees,
draw from a balanced range of non-EPA scientists and technical specialists from academia, states,
independent research institutions, and industry. This program provides management and technical
support to these advisory committees, which provide EPA's Administrator with independent
advice and objective scientific peer review on technical aspects of environmental issues, as well
as, the science used to establish criteria, standards, regulations, and research planning.65
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.3, Prioritize Robust Science in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. FY 2019 resource levels are an opportunity for EPA's SAB to
reprioritize activities. Authorizing legislation and scientific integrity mandate that each peer
review meets certain minimum standards for a successful independent review.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$904.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
65 For more information: "http://www.epa.gov/sab/. http://www.epa.gov/casac/"
266
-------
• (-$861.0/ -2.9 FTE) This program change reflects a reduction in the Science Advisory
Board program through streamlined support for conducting peer reviews, hosting meetings
to assess Integrated Risk Information System chemicals, and implementing business
process improvements to assure logistical support is provided to help the SAB and CASAC
adhere to the provisions of Federal Advisory Committee Act.
Statutory Authority:
Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration Authorization Act (ERDDAA);
Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA); Clean Air Act (CAA).
267
-------
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Goal: Cooperative Federalism
Objective(s): Enhance Shared Accountability
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
S 1.142.0
S 1.015.0
S 0.0
-s l.oixo
Hazardous Substance Superfond
$591.3
$667.0
$0.0
-$667.0
Total Budget Authority
$1,733.3
$1,682.0
$0.0
-$1,682.0
Total Workyears
7.5
6.7
0.0
-6.7
Program Project Description:
EPA's General Counsel and Regional Counsel Offices provide environmental Alternative Dispute
Resolution (ADR) services and workplace conflict prevention. EPA utilizes ADR as a method for
preventing or resolving conflicts prior to engaging in formal litigation. ADR includes the provision
of legal counsel, facilitation, mediation and consensus building advice and support. This program
oversees a strategically-sourced contract for these services that provides mediation, facilitation,
public involvement, training, and organizational development support to all headquarters and
regional programs.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE have been proposed for elimination for this program in FY 2019.
Performance Measures Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$1,015.0/ -5.3 FTE) This program change eliminates the centralization of the conflict
prevention and ADR program. Programs across the Agency may pursue ADR support
services and training individually.
Statutory Authority:
Administrative Dispute Resolution Act (ADRA) of 1996; Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1996;
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), §§ 111,
117, 122; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat.
485 (codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute).
268
-------
Regional Science and Technology
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Prioritize Robust Science
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Unvirnnmenlal Prugram A- Management
SIJVfi.2
S1,-IIKi.lt
so.o
-S l.-ilKi.l)
Total Budget Authority
$1,398.2
$1,406.0
$0.0
-$1,406.0
Total Workyears
3.7
2.0
0.0
-2.0
Program Project Description:
The Regional Science and Technology (RS&T) program provides assistance to programs
implementing the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; Toxic Substances Control Act; Clean
Water Act; Safe Drinking Water Act; Clean Air Act; and Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability Act. The RS&T program performs laboratory analysis,
field monitoring, and sampling investigations in order to provide credible scientific data on
environmental pollutants and conditions to agency decision makers.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE have been proposed for elimination for this program in FY 2019. The Agency
is working to establish a comprehensive enterprise-wide laboratory approach.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$1,406.0/ -2.0 FTE) This funding change proposes to eliminate the RS&T program. The
Agency is working to establish a comprehensive enterprise-wide laboratory approach.
Statutory Authorities:
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; Toxic Substances Control Act; Clean Water Act; Safe
Drinking Water Act; Clean Air Act; Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Act (CERCLA); Pollution Prevention Act; Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub.
L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485 (codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute).
269
-------
Operations and Administration
270
-------
Acquisition Management
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017 Actuals
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Unvirinimcnliil
Program &
Munugcmcnl
S J J. IN 2.0
yw.fiuu.o
S25MKM
-S
Leaking Underground
Storage Tanks
$144.7
$146.0
$138.0
-$8.0
Hazardous Substance
Superfond
$22,103.1
$21,296.0
$21,296.0
$0.0
Total Budget Authority
$53,289.8
$52,245.0
$46,872.0
-$5,373.0
Total Workyears
277.0
304.5
259.5
-45.0
Program Project Description:
Environmental Program and Management (EPM) resources in the Acquisition Management
program support EPA's contract activities, which coverplanning, awarding and administering
contracts for the Agency. Efforts include issuing acquisition policy and interpreting acquisition
regulations; administering training for contracting and program acquisition personnel; providing
advice and oversight to regional procurement offices; and providing information technology
improvements for acquisition.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to process
contract actions in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and guidance from the
Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP). With its contract expiring in FY 2019, EPA will
evaluate options for replacing EPA's Acquisition System (EAS) with a government-wide shared
service for contract writing system. EPA will target a strategic, government-wide solution that
leverages economies of scale using the shared knowledge and processes from other federal
agencies. The Agency will focus on a solution that reduces costs while increasing efficiency by
standardizing federal procurement planning, contract award, administration, and close-out
processes.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to implement Best-in-Class (BIC) solutions to identify pre-vetted,
government-wide contracts as part of the Agency's effort to utilize more mature, market-proven
acquisition vehicles.66 Through BIC solutions, EPA will leverage acquisition experts to optimize
66 For additional information, refer to: https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/memoranda/2017/M-17-
29.pdf Best-in-Class Mandatory Solution -Package Delivery Services.
271
-------
spending within the government-wide category management framework and increase the
transactional data available for agency level analysis of buying behaviors. In FY 2019, EPA also
will continue to maximize its Strategic Sourcing Program (SSP), thereby enhancing purchase
coordination, improving price uniformity and knowledge-sharing, and leveraging small business
capabilities to meet acquisition goals.
The SSP also allows the Agency to research, assess, and award contract vehicles that will
maximize time and resource savings. The SSP serves as a foundation for effective financial and
resource management because it simplifies the acquisition process and reduces costs. Long-term
implementation of the SSP can transform the Agency's acquisition process into a strategically
driven function, ensuring maximum value for every acquisition dollar spent. The Agency has
established a goal of obtaining at least five percent savings for all strategically sourced categories
of goods and services. Through FY 2017, EPA has saved approximately $10 million from strategic
sourcing initiatives focused on VoIP, laboratory supplies, print, cellular services, shipping, office
supplies, equipment maintenance, and software. In FY 2019, EPA anticipates between $4 and $4.5
million in savings. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to focus on implementing the Financial
Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act (FITARA) by:
• Avoiding vendor lock-in by competing contracts with multiple vendors or confining the
scope of the contract to a limited task; and
• Developing acquisition vehicles that support the Agency in FITARA implementation.
Performance Measure Targets:
(PRl) Percentage of contract actions processed within the Procurement Action Lead
Time (PALT) Standards.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
SA: 75%
CP: 65%
FAA: 80%
SA: 80%
CP: 70%
FAA: 85%
(PR2) Acquisition costs avoided through use of strategic sourcing.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
SA: Simplified Acquisition; CP: Competitive Proposals; FAA: Funding and Administrative Actions
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$727.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$6,092.0/ -30.0 FTE) This program change streamlines contractor support for: helpdesk
services for EPA's Acquisition System; the closeout of contracts; and the Defense Contract
Management Agency for Audit Services and the Virtual Acquisition Office (a source for
up-to-date government acquisition news, research, and analysis). This reduction also
eliminates funding for Contracts Management Assessment Program Reviews which enable
272
-------
the agency to self-identify and remedy internal weaknesses, and reduces the Agency's
training for its acquisition community.
Statutory Authority:
Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as
amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485 (codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute).
273
-------
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
S '3.003.2
S "l.-IVS.O
Sf>,S.f)J.\0
-S2.N5N.0
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
$373.2
$404.0
$420.0
$16.0
Hazardous Substance Superfund
$22,511.4
$21,345.0
$21,152.0
-$193.0
Total Budget Authority
$95,887.8
$93,242.0
$90,207.0
-$3,035.0
Total Workyears
450.5
493.4
430.6
-62.8
Program Project Description:
Activities under the Central Planning, Budgeting and Finance program support the management
of integrated planning, budgeting, financial management, performance and risk assessments and
reporting, and financial systems to ensure effective stewardship of resources. This includes
managing and supporting the Agency's performance management system consistent with the
Government Performance and Results Modernization Act of 2010 that involves: strategic planning
and accountability for environmental, fiscal, and managerial results; executing an Enterprise Risk
Management program to support effective and efficient mission delivery and decision making;
providing policy, systems, training, reports, and oversight essential for EPA's financial operations;
managing the agencywide Working Capital Fund; providing financial payment and support
services for EPA through three finance centers, as well as specialized fiscal and accounting
services for many of EPA programs; and managing the Agency's annual budget process. This
program also supports the Digital Accountability and Transparency (DATA) Act of 2014 and
Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act (FITARA) of 2015 requirements.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. EPA will continue to provide resource
stewardship to ensure that all agency programs operate with fiscal responsibility and management
integrity, financial services are efficiently and consistently delivered nationwide, and programs
demonstrate results. EPA will maintain key planning, budgeting, and financial management
activities. EPA will sustain basic operations and maintenance of core agency financial
management systems: Compass, PeoplePlus (Time and Attendance), Budget Formulation System,
and related financial reporting systems. In addition, the Agency is reviewing its financial systems
for efficiencies and effectiveness, identifying gaps, and targeting legacy systems for replacement.
EPA will continue to modernize and streamline business processes and operations to promote
transparency and efficiency. The program will apply Lean principles and leverage input from
274
-------
customer-focused councils, advisory groups and technical workgroups to continue improving as a
high performance organization. EPA will standardize and streamline internal business processes
and use additional federal and/or internal shared services when supported by business case
analysis.
In FY 2019, the program will continue to focus on core responsibilities in the areas of strategic
planning, performance assessment and reporting, and enterprise risk management; budget
preparation; financial reporting; and, transaction processing. As the Agency lead in designing and
implementing performance and risk management strategies that inform agency decision making
and advance mission results, the program will focus on driving progress toward the
Administrator's priorities by regularly assessing performance results against ambitious targets,
monitoring and mitigating risks, and adjusting strategies as needed. This includes convening
regular Performance Reviews to assess progress; promoting an increased use of data analytics and
evidence-based decision making practices; working collaboratively with agency programs to
assess and analyze performance and risk data; and providing technical assistance on agencywide
measures governance to enhance data quality. EPA also will continue to use the performance data
and other evidence to answer fundamental business questions and identify opportunities for service
improvements.
During FY 2019, EPA will focus on the Financial Management - Payment Processing
Modernization (PPM) project. The goal of PPM is to deliver a streamlined approach for the end-
to-end delivery of financial transactions from the commitment through the payment. Through
coordination across EPA, this project seeks to standardize the processing of financial transactions
and reduce the total number of electronic systems used for processing the financial activity
associated with contracts, grants, and interagency agreements. This approach will deliver an
integrated financial and acquisition/grants systems that meets user needs, supports data quality,
and enables data analytics. This project will reduce the IT costs, streamline business processes,
improve data reliability and security, and position the Agency to leverage additional federal/non-
federal financial services and systems capabilities.
The program will continue to support FITARA requirements in accordance with EPA's
Implementation Plan.67 The Chief Information Officer will continue to be engaged throughout the
budget planning process to ensure that IT needs are properly planned and resourced in accordance
with FITARA.
EPA is dedicated to reducing fraud, waste, and abuse and strengthening internal controls over
improper payments. Since the implementation of the Improper Payments Information Act of 2002,
EPA has reviewed, sampled, and monitored its payments to protect against erroneous payments.
The Agency's payment streams are consistently well under the government-wide threshold of 1.5
percent and $10 million of estimated improper payments. EPA conducts risk assessments in its
principal payment streams, including grants, contracts, commodities, payroll, travel, purchase
cards, and the Clean and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds. When overpayments are
identified, they are promptly recovered. EPA has expanded its risk assessments, performed
statistical sampling, set appropriate reduction/recovery targets, and implemented corrective action
plans. The Agency conducts these activities to reduce the potential for improper payments and
67 For more information: http://www.epa.gov/open/fitara-implementation-plan-and-chief-infoniiation-officer-assigiiment-pL
275
-------
ensure compliance with the Improper Payments Information Act, as amended by the Improper
Payments Elimination and Recovery Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-204) and the Improper Payments
Elimination and Recovery Act of 2012 (P.L. 112-248).
Performance Measure Targets:
(CF2) Number of agency administrative subsystems.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
24
22
(CF1) Number of administrative shared services.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
6
7
(CF3) Average cost per payment transaction.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
34.99
34.99
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,368.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation
of base essential workforce support costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary,
essential workforce support, and benefit costs.
• (-$6,864.0/ -50.0 FTE) This program change streamlines efforts in the areas of strategic
planning, budget preparation, financial reporting and transaction processing.
• (+$2,638.0) This program change is an increase that supports the Financial Management -
Payment Processing Modernization project. This project will reduce IT costs, streamline
business processes, improve the data reliability and security, and position the Agency to
leverage additional federal/non-federal financial services and systems capabilities.
Statutory Authority:
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485
(codified as Title 5 App.) (EPA's organic statute).
276
-------
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
yW5.fi'44.0
SM)0. 'JS.O
-N.\ ioo.o
Science & Technology
$64,642.7
$67,875.0
$68,834.0
$959.0
Building and Facilities
$26,065.5
$27,602.0
$33,377.0
$5,775.0
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
$502.2
$793.0
$773.0
-$20.0
Inland Oil Spill Programs
$376.2
$580.0
$665.0
$85.0
Hazardous Substance Superfiind
$69,651.3
$75,985.0
$74,144.0
-$1,841.0
Total Budget Authority
$455,235.8
$478,679.0
$478,531.0
-$148.0
Total Workyears
323.4
356.7
318.0
-38.7
Program Project Description:
Environmental Program and Management (EPM) resources in the Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations program fund the Agency's rent, utilities, and security. This program also supports
centralized administrative activities and support services, including health and safety,
environmental compliance and management, facilities maintenance and operations, space
planning, sustainable facilities and energy conservation planning and support, property
management, printing, mail, and transportation services. Funding is allocated for such services
among the major appropriations for the Agency.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to invest
to reconfigure EPA's workspaces, enabling the Agency to release office space and reduce long-
term rent costs, consistent with HR 4465,68 th q Federal Assets Sale and Transfer Act of 2016. EPA
is implementing a long-term space consolidation plan that will reduce the number of occupied
facilities, consolidate space within remaining facilities, and reduce square footage wherever
practical.
Between FY 2015 and FY 2019 EPA will have released over 850,000 square feet of space
nationwide, resulting in a cumulative annual rent avoidance of nearly $30 million across all
appropriations. These savings help offset EPA's escalating rent and security costs. Currently
planned consolidations through FY 2019 will allow EPA to release an estimated 306,000 square
68 For additional information, refer to: https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/4465. Federal Assets Sale and
Transfer Act of 2016.
277
-------
feet of space. For FY 2019, the Agency is requesting $157.89 million for rent, $8.83 million for
utilities, and $23.50 million for security in the EPM appropriation.
In FY 2019, the Agency will continue to explore opportunities to reconfigure EPA's workplaces
with the goal of reducing long-term rent costs. Through FY 2019, space consolidation (i.e.
releasing floors or portions of leased space) in Regions 2, 3, 6 and 8 will cumulatively release over
226,000 square feet and save approximately $7.8 million in rent. Space consolidation and
reconfiguration enables EPA to reduce its footprint to create a more efficient, collaborative, and
technologically sophisticated workplace. However, even if modifications are kept to a minimum,
each move requires initial B&F funding to achieve long-term cost avoidance.
At the requested resource levels, EPA will continue to manage lease agreements with GSA and
other private landlords, maintain EPA facilities, fleet, equipment, and fund costs associated with
utilities and building security needs. EPA also will meet regulatory Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) obligations and provide health and safety training to field staff
(e.g., inspections, monitoring, On-Scene Coordinators), and track capital equipment of $25
thousand or more.
Performance Measure Targets:
FY 2018
FY 2019
(FAl) Reduction in EPA Space (sq. ft. owned and leased).
Target
Target
241,000
65,000
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$3,839.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$6,284.0) This change to fixed and other costs rebalances funding proportions across
major appropriation accounts. This change also includes a decrease to other fixed costs
(e.g., utilities, security).
• (-$2,661.0/ -36.4 FTE) This net program change reflects a reduction in programs associated
with environmental management systems, comprehensive facility energy audits, re-
commissioning, and sustainable building design. Activities impacted in FY 2019 include:
• support for employee wellness and worklife initiatives such as federal cost sharing for
health wellness and CPR/AED training services, and libraries;
o preventative maintenance of facilities, equipment, and vehicle fleet;
o custodial services; and
o Agency's mail delivery services.
278
-------
Statutory Authority:
Federal Property and Administration Services Act; Public Building Act; Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act; Clean Water Act; Clean Air Act; Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act
(CERFA); Energy Policy Act of 2005; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as
amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485 (codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute).
279
-------
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
S.V. H
S25.-U0M
-N
Hazardous Substance Superfond
$2,997.4
$2,611.0
$2,611.0
$0.0
Total Budget Authority
$27,442.2
$28,027.0
$21,597.0
-$6,430.0
Total Workyears
152.4
161.2
115.7
-45.5
Program Project Description:
Environmental Program and Management (EPM) resources in the Financial Assistance Grants and
Interagency Agreement (IA) Management program support the management of grants and IAs,
and suspension and debarment activities. Grants comprise approximately 40 percent of EPA's
overall budget. Resources in this program ensure that EPA's management of grants and IAs meet
the highest fiduciary standards, that grant and IA funding produces measurable results for
environmental programs, and that the suspension and debarment program effectively protects the
government's business interest.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In accordance with the overarching 2016-
2020 EPA Grants Management Plan (GMP), and EPA's Strategic Plan, EPA will continue to
implement activities to achieve efficiencies while enhancing quality and accountability. EPA will
invest to modernize grant and IA IT systems by:
• Completing the migration away from aging Lotus Notes technology. For Grants, EPA is
evaluating a federal Centers of Excellence solution for comprehensive and cost-effective
grants management. EPA is targeting a platform that will streamline and standardize
Agency processes, using the shared knowledge from other cabinet level and independent
agencies. EPA is currently evaluating solutions based on their access to information,
services, and reporting while enhancing the overall user experience. For IAs, EPA will
integrate business solution using EPA's Interagency Document Online Tracking System
(1DOTS).
• Eliminating reliance on paper for records and improving records management. For Grants,
EPA will identify a solution that adopts electronic records management capabilities. For
IAs, EPA will integrate with the Agency's internal electronic records management tool
(ECMS) using Documentum technology.
280
-------
• Strengthening decision making with improved and standardized reporting capabilities. For
Grants, EPA will centralize common reporting tools and other capabilities through a
standardized platform. For IAs, EPA will consolidate technology and capabilities to
leverage the Agency's existing financial reporting system.
In addition to IT-related investments, the GMP focuses on reducing the administrative burden on
EPA and grants recipients, and on improving grants management procedures. Specifically, the
Agency will continue to: 1) fully implement the streamlining reforms in OMB's Uniform Grants
Guidance; 2) streamline EPA's grants management by ensuring policies conform to a new
comprehensive framework; 3) review, refine, and streamline Lean grants management processes;
and 4) Implement Lean recommendations for Intergovernmental Review (IR), which includes
reducing the number of programs that require IR, automating the IR process as much as possible,
and superseding/archiving EPA's IR policy. This will ensure that EPA is compliant with IR
requirements without placing additional burden on EPA staff and applicants.
EPA is a recognized leader in suspension and debarment. The Agency will continue to make
aggressive use of discretionary debarments and suspensions as well as statutory debarments under
the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act to protect the government's business interests. In FY 2019,
EPA will focus suspension and debarment activity to the most egregious violations. Congress and
federal courts have long recognized federal agencies' inherent authority and obligation to exclude
non-responsible parties from eligibility to receive government contracts and non-procurement
awards (for example: grants, cooperative agreements, loans, and loan guarantees). A number of
recent federal statutes, GAO reports, and OMB directives require that federal agencies administer
effective suspension and debarment programs in order to protect taxpayers from bad actors.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$643.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$5,962.0/ -43.1 FTE) This program change reflects expected efficiencies in the
processing of grant and IA awards, lower requested grant funding levels throughout the
Agency and a review of unliquidated obligations. EPA will target funds to core grant and
IA activities.
• (-$1,111.0) This program change is a decrease based on the Agency's shift to focusing on
core grants management operations, which include pre-award reviews; post-award
monitoring; compliance; administrative advanced monitoring reviews; management
effectiveness reviews; baseline monitoring; and audit follow-up activities on the highest
risk awards.
281
-------
Statutory Authority:
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485
(codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute); Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act;
Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act, § 2455.
282
-------
Human Resources Management
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
S5o.Mix.fi
S -I3.VMU)
S-IO.SOO.O
-s.i.inui
Hazardous Substance Superfiind
$5,380.1
$5,997.0
$5,497.0
-$500.0
Total Budget Authority
$55,988.9
$49,927.0
$46,357.0
-$3,570.0
Total Workyears
249.5
247.9
223.8
-24.1
Program Project Description:
Environmental Programs and Management (EPM) resources for the Human Resources (HR)
Management program support human capital activities throughout EPA. To help achieve its
mission and maximize employee productivity and job satisfaction, EPA continually works to
improve business processes for critical human capital functions including recruitment, hiring,
employee development, performance management, and workforce planning. EPM resources also
support overall federal advisory committee management under applicable statues and guidance.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. Effective workforce management is critical to EPA's ability
to accomplish its mission. EPA's efforts in HR enterprise risk management include attracting and
retaining a high-performing, diverse workforce; implementing training and development
programs; delivering employee services; streamlining HR processes; and strengthening
performance management, labor, and employee relations programs. EPA will continue to support
efforts that increase the quality of core operations, improve productivity, and achieve cost savings
in mission-support functions including human capital management.
In FY 2019, the Agency will continue to strengthen its performance management activities,
including implementing the Agency's 2017 performance management plan. EPA will procure and
deploy a learning management system through the Department of Interior's Interior Business
Center or the Office of Personnel Management. The system will assist in developing and delivering
management tools, targeting and providing timely and high-impact training that streamlines
administrative functions, leverages EPA's First Line Supervisors Advisory Group, and assists with
organizing mentoring on an as-needed basis.
EPA will continue to focus on delivering statutorily required services associated with the
Employee Counseling Assistance Program, the Federal Worker's Compensation Program, the
Drug-free Workplace Program, and Unemployment Compensation. Furthermore, the Agency will
283
-------
continue its focus on Labor and Employee Relations (LER) by administering and/or negotiating
national labor agreements and providing advice, guidance, and assistance to regional and local
level negotiations. EPA also will continue its efforts to strengthen managers' and supervisors'
institutional knowledge on LER related matters through training and outreach; provide advisory
and counseling support agencywide; and conduct analysis of human capital information to help
managers be more successful.
EPA's advisory committees, which operate as a catalyst for public participation in policy
development, implementation, and decision making, have proven effective in building consensus
among the agency's diverse external partners and stakeholders. The Agency will continue to
manage participation and collaboration to maximize the value these communities add to important
policy considerations. EPA also will modernize the advisory committee administrative processes
by implementing an electronic committee membership nomination and appointment process to
improve operational efficiency, effectiveness, accuracy, and timeliness.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,562.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$4,632.0/ -24.1 FTE) This program change reflects a reduction for:
o Operational support for the following HR programs being utilized agencywide: EPA's
Child Care Subsidies; the Agency's recruitment and diversity and inclusion activities;
EPA's Human Resources Council (HRC) and National Partnership Council (NPC); the
Leave Bank; and the Workplace Solutions,
o Enhancements and maintenance of EPA's HR IT Systems including HR Line of
Business (LoB), data management and analysis, troubleshooting, and change requests;
o Maintenance of EPA's University portal that provides online training and professional
development;
o Support for Federal Advisory Committees not mandated by statute; and
o Centrally-provided, non-mandatory training.
Statutory Authority:
Title 5 of the U.S.C.; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L.
98-80, 97 Stat. 485 (codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute).
284
-------
Workforce Reshaping
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
so.o
so.o
S
S 2.\5-IVM
Science & Technology
$0.0
$0.0
$5,994.0
$5,994.0
Total Budget Authority
$0.0
$0.0
$31,543.0
$31,543.0
Program Project Description:
Environmental Programs and Management (EPM) resources for the workforce reshaping program
support organizational restructuring efforts throughout the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. To help achieve its mission, EPA will develop, review and analyze mission requirements
and implement options to effectively align and redistribute the Agency's workforce based on
program priorities, resource reallocation, and technological advances.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. Effective workforce reshaping is critical to
EPA's ability to accomplish its mission. EPA will be examining our statutory functions and
processes to eliminate inefficiencies and streamline our processes. Primary criteria will include
effectiveness and accountability, as EPA is focused on greater value and real results. These
analyses will likely create a need to reshape the workforce. The Agency anticipates the need to
offer voluntary early out retirement authority (VERA) and voluntary separation incentive pay
(VSIP), and potentially relocation expenses, as part of the workforce reshaping effort.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$25,549.0) In support of the reprioritization of agency activities, this increase will
support:
o Voluntary early out retirement authority
o Voluntary separation incentive pay
o Workforce support costs for relocation of employees as we realign work assignments.
285
-------
Statutory Authority:
5 U.S.C. 8336(d)(2) includes the statutory VERA provisions for employees covered by the Civil
Service Retirement System. 5 U.S.C. 8414(b)(1)(B) includes the statutory VERA provisions for
employees covered by the Federal Employees Retirement System. Section 1313(b) of the Chief
Human Capital Officers Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-296, approved November 25, 2002)
authorized the VSIP option under regulations issued by OPM, as codified in sections 3521 to 3525
of title 5, United States Code (U.S.C.).
286
-------
Pesticides Licensing
287
-------
Pesticides: Protect Human Health from Pesticide Risk
Program Area: Pesticides Licensing
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Ensure Safety of Chemicals in the Marketplace
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017 Actuals
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Unvirinimcnliil
Program &
Munugcmcnl
S56.V1I.0
S
S 4.\V4V.V
-S'J, ~4 0
Science & Technology
$2,938.3
$3,090.0
$2,406.0
-$684.0
Total Budget Authority
$59,849.3
$58,786.0
$48,355.0
-$10,431.0
Total Workyears
413.6
418.7
416.5
-2.2
Program Project Description:
Under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of
1996 and the Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act of 201269 (or subsequent
legislation), EPA is charged with protecting people from the health risks that pesticide use can
pose. FIFRA requires EPA to register pesticide products before they are allowed to be marketed
for use in the United States. Registration is based on review of scientific data sufficient to
demonstrate that the product can perform its intended function without unreasonable adverse
effects on people or the environment.
The statutes above charge EPA with issuing pesticide registrations and setting tolerances
(maximum residue levels) for pesticides in food and animal feed and with periodically reviewing
the registrations and tolerances that the Agency issues, to ensure that public health is adequately
protected. The program addresses these requirements by conducting risk assessments using the
latest scientific methods for new and existing pesticides. Agency scientists examine the risks that
pesticides pose to human health through the diet and through exposure at work, at home, in school,
or at play. EPA's Pesticide Program also reduces the risks of disease by ensuring the efficacy of
public health pesticides (pesticides that control pests or bacteria that are a vector for disease or for
other recognized health protection uses). EPA encourages the development and use of safer
pesticides and educates pesticide users and the public in general through labeling as well as public
outreach.
Pesticide Registration and Tolerance Setting
69 Authority provided under the Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act of 2012 expired on September 30,2017.
Authority to continue to collect fees has been authorized by H.R. 601 - Continuing Appropriations Act, 2018, and subsequent
Continuing Resolutions through February 8, 2018.
288
-------
Under the FFDCA, if a pesticide is to be used in a manner that may result in pesticide residues in
food or animal feed, before it can be registered, EPA must establish a tolerance, or maximum legal
residue level or exemption from the requirement of a tolerance, for each affected food or feed
commodity. To establish a tolerance, EPA must find that the residues are "safe," which, under
FFDCA, means that there is a reasonable certainty of no harm to human health from aggregate
exposure to the pesticide residue in food and from all other exposure except occupational exposure.
The passage of FQPA in 1996, which amended both FIFRA and FFDCA, not only introduced this
stricter safety standard, it also mandated the consideration of a number of other factors including
cumulative and aggregate effects. When assessing a pesticide registration or tolerance, EPA must
consider the cumulative effects of related pesticides with a common mode of toxicity and the
potential for endocrine disruption effects, and apply an appropriate safety factor to ensure the
protection of infants and children as outlined below. In addition, EPA must include aggregate
exposure, including all dietary exposure, drinking water, and non-occupational exposures. All
these pesticide exposures from food, drinking water, and home and garden use must be considered
when determining allowable levels of pesticides in food. Since the passage of FQPA, EPA's risk
assessment process must incorporate a 10-fold safety factor (10X) for infants and children unless
reliable information in the database on the chemical indicates that it can be reduced or removed.
Under FQPA, even the limited, temporary use under an emergency exemption may not be allowed
without the establishment of a tolerance.
To comply with statutory mandates, EPA conducts risk assessments using the latest scientific
methods to determine the risks that pesticides pose to human health, including reviewing
comprehensive toxicity, residue chemistry, and other data submitted by pesticide manufacturers
(registrants) as required by EPA, and consulting public literature or other sources of supporting
information regarding the pesticide's effects or exposure. Toxicity data is used to identify the
hazard potential of a pesticide. Residue chemistry data is used to determine the identity and amount
of pesticide in or on food. The Agency reviews all data to make sure they were developed
according to standard practices within the discipline and EPA's test guidelines. In addition to
toxicity and residue chemistry data, EPA also may use other data to refine and make more realistic
exposure assessments for residues on food and exposure to workers, bystanders and people who
live, work, play, and go to school in treated areas. The result of these assessments could be the
need for label restrictions in certain areas to reduce the exposure to safe levels. Risk assessments
undergo an internal peer review, and regulatory decisions are posted on the Internet for review and
comment to ensure that these actions are transparent and stakeholders are engaged in decisions
affecting their health and environment. When complex scientific issues arise, the Agency consults
the FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel (http://www.epa.gov/scipolv/sap/) for independent scientific
advice.
Periodic Review of Registrations and Tolerances
Not only must EPA conduct risk assessments before the initial registration of each pesticide for
each use, but the FQPA amendments introduced the requirement that every pesticide registration
be reviewed at least every 15 years. This periodic review is accomplished through our Registration
Review Program.70 In the interest of efficiency and fairness and to facilitate the assessment of
70 For more information, see https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-reevaluation.
289
-------
cumulative exposures, the Agency reviews certain related pesticides (such as the pyrethroids and
pyrethrins, the neonicotinoids, or the fumigants) at the same time. Pesticide cases may be related
by chemical class or structure, mode of action, use, or for other reasons.
Ensuring Proper Use and Mitigating Risks of Pesticides through Labeling
Under FIFRA, it is illegal to use a registered pesticide in a manner inconsistent with the label
instructions and precautions. Therefore, EPA uses pesticide labels to indicate what uses are
appropriate in order to ensure that the pesticide does not cause unreasonable adverse effects on
human health or the environment, as determined by the risk assessment. EPA pesticide product
registrations include required labeling instructions and precautions. When risks are identified
during the initial registration or during registration review, the Agency may mitigate those risks
by requiring label changes, for example, requiring personal protective equipment for applicators,
or changing the application method or rate or the time when the treated area may be reentered.
Ensuring the proper use of pesticides prevents unnecessary pesticide exposure to the person
applying the pesticide and people working, living, or playing nearby. It also prevents excessive
residues in the food people eat and in animal feed.
Reducing Pesticide Risks to People through the Registration of Lower Risk Pesticides
To further protect human health, this program emphasizes the use of reduced risk methods of pest
control, including the use of reduced risk pesticides and helping growers and other pesticide users
learn about new, safer products and methods of using pesticides. EPA began promoting reduced
risk pesticides in 1993 by giving registration priority to pesticides that have lower toxicity to
humans and non-target organisms such as birds, fish, and plants; low potential for contaminating
groundwater; lower use rates; low pest resistance potential; and compatibility with Integrated Pest
Management (IPM).71 Biological pesticides and biotechnology often represent lower risk solutions
to pest problems.
Several other countries and international organizations also have instituted programs to facilitate
registering reduced risk pesticides. EPA works with the international scientific community and the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) member countries to register
new reduced risk pesticides and to establish related tolerances (maximum residue limits). Through
these efforts, EPA can help reduce risks to Americans from foods imported from other countries.
Protecting Workers from On-the-job Pesticide Risks
Millions of America's workers are exposed to pesticides in occupations such as agriculture, lawn
care, food preparation, and landscape maintenance. Protecting workers from potential effects of
pesticides is an important role of the pesticide program. Workers in several occupations may be
exposed to pesticides when they prepare pesticides for use, such as by mixing a concentrate with
water or loading the pesticide into application equipment; applying pesticides, such as in an
agricultural or commercial setting; or when they enter an area where pesticides have been applied
to perform allowed tasks such as picking crops.
71 See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Pesticides: Health and Safety, Reducing Pesticide Risk internet site:
http://www.eDa.gov/pesticides/health/reducing.htm.
290
-------
The Worker Protection Standard (WPS) and the certification and training rule are key elements of
EPA's strategy for reducing occupational exposure to agricultural pesticides. Following signature
of the revised rule, EPA immediately began an extensive schedule of trainings for state regulators
and state inspectors, because training our state co-regulators is a top priority. While resource
intensive, the Agency prioritized providing in-person training to states and regions to allow for
face-to-face dialogue on the new requirements in the final rule issued in 2015.
In FY 2016 and FY 2017, EPA provided guidance materials to assist states and agricultural
employers to understand the new WPS requirements that went into effect on January 2, 2017. In
early 2017, the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA) petitioned
EPA to extend the implementation date for the WPS to allow for additional time for EPA to work
with the states to ensure that sufficient materials were available to the agricultural community to
successfully implement the new requirements. After working with NASDA and the States and
Tribes to address their implementation issues, and in consideration of the regulatory burden
associated with making the rule changes to legally delay the rule, EPA decided not to delay the
implementation dates of the revised rule. Instead, EPA will focus on proposing revisions to
targeted sections of the WPS based on stakeholder input received since issuance of the rule.
In FY 2017, EPA solicited comments on regulations that may be appropriate for repeal,
replacement, or modification in keeping with Executive Order 13777, entitled "Enforcing the
Regulatory Reform Agenda." EPA also held a public meeting of the Pesticide Program Dialogue
Committee in May 2017 that included a session specifically devoted to receiving public feedback
on potential pesticide regulatory reform opportunities for EPA's Regulatory Reform Task Force to
consider. Although many commenters expressed their support for EPA's pesticide safety
regulations, EPA also received comments that suggested specific changes were needed to the
January 4, 2017, Certification of Pesticide Applicators final rule (amending the requirements at 40
CFR 171) and to the November 2, 2015, Worker Protection Standard final rule (which amended
the regulations at 40 CFR 170). EPA expects to publish separate Notices of Proposed Rulemaking
in FY 2018 to solicit public input on revisions to these rules." In FY 2019, EPA will work to
finalize those proposed rule revisions and develop implementation plans for rolling out the final
rules and necessary communications. EPA also will be planning numerous webinars and will
respond to stakeholder requests as it continues with implementation of those parts of the two rules
that are unaffected by the proposed revisions. For more information, see
https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-worker-safety/agricultural-worker-protection-standard-wps.
Preventing Disease through Public Health Pesticides
Antimicrobial pesticides play an important role in public health and safety by killing germs,
bacteria, viruses, fungi, protozoa, algae, and slime. Some of these products are used to sterilize
hard surfaces in hospitals. Chemical disinfection of hard, non-porous surfaces such as floors, bed
rails and tables is one component of the infection control systems in hospitals, food processing
operations, and other places where disease-causing microorganisms, such as bacteria and viruses,
may be present. In reviewing registrations for antimicrobials, EPA is required to ensure that
antimicrobials maintain their effectiveness.72 EPA's Antimicrobial Testing Program has been
testing hospital sterilants, disinfectants, and tuberculocides since 1991 to help ensure that products
72FIFRA section 3(h)(3), 7 U.S.C. 136a(h)(3).
291
-------
in the marketplace meet stringent efficacy standards. Other pesticides also protect public health,
such as insecticides and rodenticides that combat insects and other pests that carry diseases such
as West Nile virus, Lyme disease, and rabies.
Outreach and Education
Giving priority to reduced risk and Integrated Pest Management (IPM)-friendly pesticides are two
steps toward protecting human health. It is important for people using pesticides to be well
informed, to understand the importance of reading and following label directions and the
importance of proper disposal, and they also need to understand how to protect themselves from
pests that can transmit disease. The Pesticide Program invests in environmental education and
training efforts for growers, pesticide applicators, and workers, as well as the public in general.
EPA will continue to work to reduce the number and severity of pesticide exposure incidents by
developing effective communication, environmental education, and training programs.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.4, Ensure Safety of Chemicals in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will review and register new pesticides, new
uses for existing pesticides, and other registration requests in accordance with statutory
requirements. In addition, the Agency will be reviewing under the registration review program
pesticides that are already in the market against current scientific standards for human health. To
further advance EPA's work supporting environmental justice and children's health, EPA will
process these registration requests with special consideration for susceptible populations,
especially children. Specifically, EPA will focus on the foods commonly eaten by children in order
to reduce children's pesticide exposure where the science identifies potential concerns. EPA uses
data from various sources, including the Pesticide Data Program (PDP) and the National Health
and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), to assess children's potential risk from pesticides.
Pesticide registration actions focus on the evaluation of pesticide products before they enter the
market. EPA will review pesticide data and impose use restrictions and instructions needed to
ensure that pesticides used according to label directions also will not result in unreasonable risk.
During its pre-market review, EPA will consider human health and environmental concerns as
well as the pesticide's potential benefits.
In FY 2019, as part of the Agency implementation of a Lean Management System, the program,
in collaboration with stakeholders, will review business process and procedures to improve results
and drive efficiencies while sustaining quality environmental outcomes. Among other efforts, the
program will better leverage IT systems, such as the PRISM projects described below, which will
enhance approximately 150 business processes. Over time, similar efforts in other programs have
yielded significant results, including up to 40 percent reduction in business process steps or overall
reduced burden in delivering environmental benefits.
EPA will continue to emphasize the registration of reduced risk pesticides, including biopesticides,
in order to provide farmers and other pesticide users with new safer alternatives. In FY 2019, the
Agency, in collaboration with the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), will work to
ensure that minor use registrations receive appropriate support. EPA will ensure that needs are met
for reduced risk pesticides for minor use crops. Additionally, EPA will assist farmers and other
292
-------
pesticide users in learning about new, safer products and methods of using existing products
through workshops, demonstrations, small grants, and materials available on the website and in
print. EPA also will continue to support biotechnology efforts to educate the American public
about pesticides related water quality issues and standards.
During FY 2019, EPA will continue to review the registrations of existing pesticides and develop
work plans for pesticides entering the review pipeline. The priority will be toward reviewing those
pesticides where there is indication of a need to mitigate risk. The goal of the registration review
process is to review pesticide registrations every fifteen years to ensure that pesticides already in
the marketplace meet the most current scientific standards and to address concerns identified after
the original registration.73 The completion of the first round of these reviews is due in FY 2022.
This program, as mandated by statute, supports EPA's priorities including ensuring the safety of
chemicals and protecting America's waters.
For pesticides registered before October 1, 2007, EPA has a statutory mandate to make registration
review decisions by October 1, 2022. There are a total of 725 such cases. For each case, the steps
in this process include, in this order, opening dockets, developing work plans, completing risk
assessments, and making decisions regarding any risk management measures. It is important to
open dockets and develop work plans for as many cases as possible early in the process so that
there is time to complete the risk assessments and make decisions by the 2022 deadline. The
Agency met its obligations for opening dockets and completing work plans so it can now focus its
resources on completing risk assessments and making decisions to meet its statutory deadline by
2022. EPA completed the opening of all 725 dockets in 2017 and shifted the focus in FY 2019 to
continue analysis of these documents.
In FY 2019, the Agency will continue to work toward our commitment to environmental justice
and protection of children's health. Under the Food Quality Protection Act, EPA is statutorily
required to ensure that its regulatory decisions are protective of children's health and other
vulnerable subpopulations. EPA will continue to provide locally-based technical assistance and
guidance by partnering with states and tribes on implementation of pesticide decisions. Technical
assistance and outreach such as workshops, demonstration projects, briefings, and informational
meetings also will continue in areas including pesticide safety training and use of lower risk
pesticides.
EPA will continue to engage the public, the scientific community, and other stakeholders in its
policy development and implementation. This will encourage a reasonable transition for farmers
and others from the older, potentially more hazardous pesticides, to the newer pesticides that have
been registered using the latest available scientific information.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue ongoing work to implement improvements to the Pesticide
Registration Information System (PRISM). Work on PRISM and other areas will include
streamlining operations and merging compatible and related work areas in order to maximize
resources through management efficiencies and direct reporting improvements. The focus of the
project is to achieve paperwork burden reduction by converting paper-based processes into
73 See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Registration Review Internet site:
http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrdl/registration review/index.htm
293
-------
electronic processes for the Pesticide program's regulated entities, creating a streamlined
electronic workflow to support pesticide product registration and chemical review, and creating a
centralized repository of regulatory decisions and scientific information. Overall, the PRISM
project will streamline approximately 150 existing business processes.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$249.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$9,996.0/ -45.6 FTE) This program change reflects a reduction in funding for pesticide
program activities from annual appropriations with the intent to increase utilization of
pesticide user fee collections. Proposed legislative language accompanying the President's
Budget will expand EPA's scope of activities that can be funded with user fees.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA), §408.
294
-------
Pesticides: Protect the Environment from Pesticide Risk
Program Area: Pesticides Licensing
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Ensure Safety of Chemicals in the Marketplace
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
SJSJ02.0
N.W. ~2 '.()
-S V.5~.\0
Science & Technology
$2,046.2
$2,325.0
$2,122.0
-$203.0
Total Budget Authority
$38,701.1
$40,627.0
$30,849.0
-$9,778.0
Total Workyears
271.1
269.3
268.4
-0.9
Program Project Description:
The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) requires EPA to register a
pesticide if, among other things, when used in accordance with labeling and common practices,
the product "also will not generally cause unreasonable adverse effects on the environment." The
goal of this program is to protect the environment from the potential risks posed by pesticide use.
EPA must conduct risk assessments before the initial registration of each pesticide for each use, as
well as re-evaluate each pesticide at least every 15 years, as required by the Food Quality
Protection Act (FQPA). This periodic review is accomplished through EPA's Pesticide
Registration Review program.
In addition to FIFRA responsibilities, the Agency has distinct obligations under the Endangered
Species Act (ESA). These include ensuring that pesticide regulatory decisions also will not destroy
or adversely modify designated critical habitat or jeopardize the continued existence of species
listed as threatened or endangered by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) or National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) (jointly, the Services).
Assessing the Risks Pesticides Pose to the Environment
To accomplish the goals set out in the two statutes, EPA conducts ecological risk assessments74 to
determine what risks are posed by each pesticide to plants, animals, and ecosystems that are not
the targets of the pesticide and whether changes are necessary to protect the environment. EPA
has extensive authority to require the submission of data to support its scientific decisions and uses
the latest scientific methods to conduct these ecological risk assessments. The Agency requires
applicants for pesticide registration to conduct and submit a wide range of environmental
laboratory and field studies. These studies examine the ecological effects or toxicity of a pesticide
and its breakdown products on various terrestrial and aquatic animals and plants, and the chemical
fate and transport of the pesticide (how it behaves and where it enters the soil, air, and water).
EPA uses these and other data to prepare an environmental fate assessment and a hazard, or
74 https ://www. epa. gov/endangered-species
295
-------
ecological effects, assessment that interprets the relevant toxicity information for the pesticide and
its degradation products. Using environmental fate data and exposure models, EPA's scientists
estimate exposure of different animals and plants to pesticide residues in the environment. Finally,
these scientists integrate the toxicity information with the exposure data to determine the
ecological risk from the use of the pesticide, or whether it is safe for the environment and wildlife.
These processes are described more fully below.
Assessing Toxicity to Wildlife and Plants
Toxicology studies are carried out on plants and animals that have been chosen for testing because
they broadly represent non-target organisms (living things the pesticide is not intended to kill or
otherwise control). Animals and plants are exposed to different amounts of a pesticide to determine
short- and long-term responses to varying concentrations. Some of the impacts on animals EPA
evaluates are the short- and long-term effects of varying amounts of pesticide exposure to insects
and other invertebrates, fish, and birds. For plants, EPA scientists assess how poisonous a pesticide
is to plants, how the pesticide affects a seed's ability to germinate and emerge, as well as how
healthy and vigorous the plant grows to be. Toxicological testing and scientific measurements are
conducted under strict guidelines and approved methods.75 Exacting standards are necessary for
consistency in evaluations of pesticide safety and for comparisons among chemicals.
Determining the Environmental Fate of a Pesticide
After determining the toxicity of a pesticide, it is important to find out what happens to it in the
environment after it has been applied, and therefore, how it might affect the environment. Required
studies measure the interaction of pesticides with soils, air, sunlight, surface water and ground
water. Some of the basic questions that must be answered in these studies are: (1) How fast and by
what means does the pesticide degrade? (2) What are the breakdown chemicals? and (3) How
much of the pesticide or its breakdown chemicals will travel from the application site, and where
will they accumulate in the environment? These tests include how the pesticide breaks down in
water, soil, and light, how easily it evaporates in air and how quickly it travels through soil. EPA
uses these tests to develop estimates of pesticide concentrations in the environment. EPA scientists
evaluate the role of the drift of spray and dust from pesticide applications on pesticide residues
that can cause health and environmental effects and property damage.
Putting the Pieces Together
To evaluate a pesticide's environmental risks, EPA examines all of the toxicity and environmental
fate data together to determine what risks its use may pose to the environment. The process of
comparing toxicity information and the amount of the pesticide a given organism may be exposed
to in the environment is called risk assessment. A pesticide can be toxic at one exposure level, and
have little or no effect at another. Thus, the risk assessor's job is to determine the relationship
between possible exposure to a pesticide and the resulting harmful effects.
If the ecosystem will not be exposed to levels of a pesticide shown to cause problems, EPA
concludes that the pesticide is not likely to harm plants or wildlife. On the other hand, if the
75http://www.epa.gov/raf/publications/guidelines-ecological-risk-assessment.htmhttp
296
-------
ecosystem exposure levels are suspected or known to produce problems, the program will then
work to better understand and reduce the risks to acceptable levels. If the risk assessment indicates
a high likelihood of hazard to wildlife, the program may require additional testing, require that the
pesticide be applied only by specially-trained people (restricted use), or decide not to allow its use.
In addition, EPA may require monitoring of environmental conditions, such as effects on water
sources, or may require additional data from the registrant. Decisions on risk reduction measures
are based on a consideration of both pesticide risks and benefits.
The Agency reviews all data to make sure they were developed according to standard practices
within the discipline and EPA's test guidelines. Risk assessments are peer reviewed, and regulatory
decisions are posted on the Internet for review and comment to ensure that these actions are
transparent and stakeholders are engaged in decisions that affect their environment. When complex
scientific issues arise, the Agency consults the FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel
(http://www.epa.gov/scipolv/sap/) for independent scientific advice.
Risk Mitigation
To ensure unreasonable risks are avoided, EPA may impose risk mitigation measures such as
modifying use rates or application methods, restricting uses, or denying uses. In some regulatory
decisions, EPA may determine that uncertainties in the risk determination need to be reduced and
may subsequently require monitoring of environmental conditions, such as effects on water
sources or the development and submission of additional laboratory or field study data by the
pesticide registrant.
EPA's Pesticide Program has been actively engaged in a number of initiatives to help prevent
problems related to the drift of spray and dust from pesticide applications. These initiatives
include: broadening the understanding of the science and predictability of pesticide drift based on
many new studies; improving the clarity and enforceability of product label use directions and drift
restrictions; facilitating the use of drift-reducing application technologies and best management
practices to minimize drift; and promoting applicator education and training programs.
Ensuring Proper Pesticide Use through Labeling
Under FIFRA, it is illegal to use a registered pesticide in a manner inconsistent with the label
instructions and precautions. EPA uses pesticide labels to indicate what uses are appropriate and
to ensure that the pesticide is used at the application rates and according to the methods and timing
approved as a condition of registration. When EPA registers a pesticide product, it requires specific
labeling instructions and precautions. When risks are identified during the initial registration or
during registration review, the Agency may mitigate those risks by requiring label changes. For
example, EPA may require buffer zones around water sources to prevent contamination of water
or endangering aquatic plants and wildlife. Other examples are changing the application method,
or rate or timing of applications when pollinators are not present to prevent risks to pollinators
such as bees.
297
-------
Reducing Risk Through the Use of Safer Pesticides and Methods
To further protect the environment, the program76 emphasizes the use of reduced risk methods of
pest control, including the use of reduced risk pesticides and helping growers and other pesticide
users learn about new, safer products and methods of using pesticides. EPA began promoting
reduced risk pesticides in 1993 by giving registration priority to pesticides that have lower toxicity
to people and non-target organisms such as birds, fish, and plants; low potential for contaminating
groundwater; lower use rates; low pest resistance potential; and compatibility with Integrated Pest
Management (http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/ipm/). Biological pesticides and biotechnology often
represent lower risk solutions to pest problems.
Protecting Endangered Species
EPA is responsible for complying with the ESA. This presents a great challenge given that there
are approximately 1,200 active ingredients in more than 17,000 products - many of which have
multiple uses - and over 1,600 listed endangered species in the US with diverse biological
attributes, habitat requirements, and geographic range,.77 As part of EPA's determination of
whether a pesticide product may be registered for a particular use, the Agency assesses whether
listed endangered or threatened species or their designated critical habitat may be affected by use
of the product. Where risks are identified, EPA must work with the FWS and the NMFS in a
consultation78 process to ensure these new or existing pesticide registrations also will meet the
ESA standard. EPA's Endangered Species Protection Program (ESPP) helps promote the recovery
of listed species by determining whether pesticide use in a certain geographic area may affect any
listed species. If limitations on pesticide use are necessary to protect listed species in that area, the
information is communicated through Endangered Species Protection Bulletins. The goal of this
program is to carry out the Agency's responsibilities under FIFRA in compliance with the ESA,
without placing unnecessary burdens on agriculture and other pesticide users.
Minimizing Environmental Impacts through Outreach and Education
Through public outreach, the Agency continues to encourage the use of Integrated Pest
Management (IPM) and other practices to maximize the benefits pesticides can yield while
minimizing the impacts on the environment. The Agency develops and disseminates brochures,
provides education on potential benefits of IPM, and promotes outreach on the success of IPM to
encourage its use.79 To encourage responsible pesticide use that does not endanger the
environment, EPA reaches out to the public through the Internet and to workers and professional
pesticide applicators through worker training programs.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.4, Ensure Safety of Chemicals in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY2019, EPA's activities will involve increased efforts on
76 Reducing Pesticide Risk (http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/health/reducing.htm).
77 https://ecos.fws.gov/ecpQ/reports/box-score-report.
78 For additional information, see https://www.epa.gov/endangered-species/assessing-pesticides-under-endangered-species-act.
79 http://www.epa.gov/pesp/ipminschools/implementation.html.
298
-------
comprehensive risk assessments to protect the environment. For the 725 cases covering all
pesticides registered before October 1, 2007, EPA has a statutory mandate to make registration
review decisions by October 1, 2022. For each case, the steps in this process include, in this order
opening; dockets, developing work plans, completing risk assessments, and making decisions
regarding any risk management measures. It is important to open dockets and develop work plans
for as many cases as possible early in the process so that there is time to complete the risk
assessments and make decisions by the 2022 deadline. The Agency met its obligations for opening
dockets and completing work plans so it could now focus its resources on completing risk
assessments and making decisions in order to meet the statutory deadline by 2022. EPA completed
the opening of all 725 dockets in 2017 and shifted the focus to analysis of these documents in FY
2018. In working towards meeting 2022 deadline for registration review, EPA expects to complete
approximately 50 draft risk assessments during FY 2019. The draft risk assessments will be
published for public comments.
In FY 2019, as part of the Agency implementation of a Lean Management System, the program,
in collaboration with stakeholders, will review business process and procedures to improve results
and drive efficiencies while sustaining quality environmental outcomes. Among other efforts, the
program will better leverage IT systems, such as PRISM, which will enhance approximately 150
business processes. Over time, similar efforts in other programs have yielded significant results,
including up to 40 percent reduction in business process steps or overall reduced burden in
delivering environmental benefits.
The review of pesticides currently in the marketplace and implementation of decisions made as a
result of these reviews are a necessary element of meeting EPA's goals. However, attaining risk
reduction would be significantly hampered without availability of alternative products to these
pesticides for consumers. Consequently, the success of the Registration program in ensuring the
availability of effective alternative products plays a significant role in meeting the environmental
outcome of improved ecosystem protection. EPA also will continue to assist pesticide users in
learning about new, safer products and methods for using existing products. The Agency also will
continue encouraging the use of IPM tools.
Protection of Endangered Species
Under the ESA, federal agencies must ensure that the "actions" they authorize will not result in
jeopardy to species listed as endangered or threatened by the Services, or adversely modify
designated critical habitat. While EPA authorizes the sale, distribution, and use of pesticides
according to the product labeling the Agency also will do more comprehensive risk assessments
for registration activities that are protecting endangered species. During registration review, EPA
will support obtaining risk mitigation earlier in the process by encouraging registrants to agree to
changes in uses and applications of a pesticide that are beneficial to the protection of endangered
species prior to completion of EPA's consultations with FWS and NMFS. In FY 2019, pesticide
registration reviews are expected to contain comprehensive environmental assessments, including
determining potential endangered species impacts. This effort will continue to expand the
program's workload due to the necessity of issuing data call-ins and conducting additional
environmental assessments for pesticides already in the review pipeline.
299
-------
In FY 2019, in cooperation with the Services and the United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA), the Agency will continue to work toward improving compliance with the ESA. To this
end, the Agency continues to consider recommendations from the National Academy of Sciences
(NAS) National Research Council regarding scientific and technical issues related to the methods
and assumptions used by EPA and the Services to carry out their joint responsibilities under the
ESA and FIFRA. The four agencies jointly asked the NAS to identify approaches to: collect the
best available scientific data and information; consider sub-lethal, indirect and cumulative effects;
assess the effects of chemical mixtures and inert ingredients; use models to assist in analyzing the
effects of pesticide use; effectively incorporate uncertainties into the evaluations; and use
geospatial information and datasets in the course of these assessments. Since receiving the NAS
report, the agencies have developed shared scientific approaches, solicited input from
stakeholders, and presented those approaches to stakeholders. During FY 2019, EPA will continue
to improve the Biological Evaluations methodology and will apply the revised approaches to
selected pesticide risk assessments. These assessments will continue to improve the shared
scientific approaches for the Biological Evaluations.
EPA will continue to impose use limitations through appropriate label statements, referring
pesticide users to EPA-developed Endangered Species Protection Bulletins, which are available
on the Internet via Bulletins Live Two!*0 These bulletins also will, as appropriate, contain maps of
pesticide use limitation areas necessary to ensure protection of listed species and compliance with
the ESA. Any such limitations on a pesticide's use will be enforceable under the misuse provisions
of FIFRA. Bulletins are a critical mechanism for ensuring protection of listed species from
pesticide applications while minimizing the burden on agriculture and other pesticide users by
limiting pesticide use in the smallest geographic area necessary to protect the species. In FY 2019,
EPA will continue revising and updating Bulletins Live Two/ to provide a more interactive and
more geographically discrete platform for pesticide users to understand the use limitations
necessary to protect endangered or threatened species.
The Agency will continue to provide technical support for compliance with the requirements of
the ESA. In FY 2019, EPA will continue the integration of state-of-the-science models, knowledge
bases, and analytic processes to increase productivity and better address the challenge of potential
risks of specific pesticides to specific species. Interconnection of the various databases within the
program office also will provide improved support to the risk assessment process during
registration review by allowing risk assessors to more easily analyze complex scenarios relative to
endangered species.
Pollinator Protection
Bees play a critical role in ensuring the production of food. The USDA is leading the federal
government's effort to understand the causes of declining pollinator health and identify actions
that also will improve pollinator health. EPA is part of this effort and is focusing on the potential
role of pesticides. EPA's emphasis is to ensure that the pesticides used represent acceptable risks
to pollinators and that products are available for commercial bee keepers to manage pests that
impact pollinator health. EPA is working with pesticide registrants to change pesticide labels to
reduce acute exposure and ensure that pollinators are protected.
80https://www.epa.gov/endangered-species/endangered-species-protection-bulletins.
300
-------
EPA implemented a pollinator risk assessment framework to assess the potential effects that
pesticides may have on bees through the registration and registration review programs, in
cooperation with Canada and the California Department of Pesticide Regulation. In addition, EPA
is working with several other federal agencies, including USDA and DOI, to increase and improve
pollinator habitat. As a part of these activities, EPA also will continue to assess the effects of
pesticides, including neonicotinoids, on bee and other pollinator health and take action as
appropriate to protect pollinators, engage state and tribal agencies in the development of pollinator
protection plans, and expedite review of registration applications for new products targeting pests
harmful to pollinators. EPA also is working with seed companies to develop and implement
strategies to reduce the release of pesticide residues during the planting process of treated seed.
Other efforts include working with stakeholders to identify and consolidate Best Management
Practices (BMPs) for honey bee health and developing a web page of these BMPs with cooperation
from the National Integrated Pest Management Centers and the USDA. EPA is providing funds
to land grant universities to conduct research on alternative pest control methods and BMPs that
lower risks to bees while effectively controlling pests.
In 2014, EPA required changes to pesticide labels for four neonicotinoid insecticides to limit
applications to protect bees, as well as provide users of these products with more precise safety
information about bees, improving and clarifying the pollinator protection requirements for 240
approved pesticide labels. These changes were made to the pesticide labels for imidacloprid,
thiamethoxam, clothianidin, and dinotefuran. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to require the new
pollinator protection labeling for other outdoor foliar products that are acutely toxic and pose risk
to bees.81
Protection of Water Resources
Reduced concentration of pesticides in water sources is an indication of the effectiveness of EPA's
risk assessment, management, mitigation, and communication activities. Using monitoring data
collected under the U. S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Water Quality Assessment (NWQA)
program for urban watersheds, EPA will continue to monitor the impact of our regulatory decisions
for three priority chemicals - diazinon, chlorpyrifos, and carbaryl. In agricultural watersheds, the
program will monitor the impact of our regulatory decisions on azinphos-methyl and chlorpyrifos
and consider whether any additional action is necessary.82 These four organophosphate
insecticides most consistently exceeded EPA's aquatic life benchmarks for aquatic ecosystems83
during the last ten years of monitoring by the USGS NAWQA program. Overall trends since 2008
have shown reductions in pesticide exceedances due to mitigation implemented by EPA though
some limited exceedances have occurred in recent years. In FY 2019, the Agency will continue
to work with USGS to develop sampling plans and refine program goals. Water quality is a critical
endpoint for measuring exposure and risk to the environment and a measure of EPA's ability to
reduce exposure from these key pesticides of concern.
81 For additional information on EPA's role in pollinator protection see: http://www2.epa.gov/pollinator-protection/epa-actions-
protect-pollinators and http://www2.epa.gov/pollinator-Drotection/new-labeling-neonicotinoid-pesticides.
82Gilliom, R.J., et al. 2006. The Quality of Our Nation's Waters: Pesticides in the Nation's Streams and Ground Water, 1992-
2001. Reston, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1291, p 171. Available on the Internet at:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/2005/1291/.
83 http://www.epa.gov/oppefedl/ecorisk ders/aquatic life benchmark.htm.
301
-------
The most sensitive aquatic benchmarks for the chemicals are posted on the website:
http://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/aquatic-life-benchmarks-
pesti ci de-regi strati on.
Performance Measure Targets:
(091) Percentage of decisions (registration actions) completed on time (on or before
PRIA or negotiated due dates).
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
99
99
(FIKKA2) Number of FIFRA registration review draft risk assessments completed.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
70
72
(FIKKA1) Number of FIFRA decisions completed through pesticides registration
review.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
58
75
(PRIA2) Average number of days exceeding the PRIA decision timeframes for new
active ingredients where the original PRIA due date was not met.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
303
291
(PRIA1) Average number of days to complete PRIA decisions for new active
ingredients.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
643
631
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$1,551.0) This change to fixed and other costs is a decrease due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$8,024.0/ -31.8 FTE) This program change reflects the reduction of funding for pesticide
program activities from annual appropriations with the intent to increase utilization of
pesticide user fee collections. Proposed legislative language accompanying the President's
Budget will expand EPA's scope of activities that can be funded with user fees.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); Endangered Species Act (ESA).
302
-------
Pesticides: Realize the Value of Pesticide Availability
Program Area: Pesticides Licensing
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Ensure Safety of Chemicals in the Marketplace
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
S .\55-I.J
s (ijvi.o
S5.0S-/.0
-s i.iir.o
Science & Technology
$548.1
$571.0
$530.0
-$41.0
Total Budget Authority
$6,102.4
$6,762.0
$5,614.0
-$1,148.0
Total Workyears
34.9
46.5
46.3
-0.2
Program Project Description:
The primary federal law that governs how EPA oversees pesticide manufacture, distribution and
use in the United States is the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).
Originally enacted in 1947, this law has been significantly amended several times, most recently
by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA) and the Pesticide Registration Improvement
Extension Act of 2012 (or subsequent legislation). FIFRA requires that EPA register pesticides
based on a finding that they will not cause unreasonable adverse effects to people and the
environment, taking into account the economic, social, and environmental costs and benefits of
the use of any pesticide. Each time the law has been amended, while Congress has strengthened
the safety standards of the act, it continues to recognize the benefits of pesticides.
This program seeks to realize the value of pesticides that can be used safely to yield many benefits,
including: to generate the nation's abundant and wholesome food supply, to protect the public
from disease-carrying pests, to protect our environment from the introduction of invasive species
from other parts of the world, to kill viruses and bacteria in America's hospitals, and to protect the
nation's homes and schools from invasive insects, rodents, molds, and other unwelcome guests.
Addressing Special Local Needs
FIFRA Section 24(c), and EPA's implementing regulations give states the authority to issue their
own state-specific registrations under certain conditions, while EPA is responsible for overseeing
the general program. States may register a new end use product or an additional use of a federally
registered pesticide product if the following conditions exist:
• A Special Local Need - an existing or imminent pest problem within a state for which the
state lead agency, based on satisfactory supporting information, has determined that an
appropriate federally registered pesticide product is not sufficiently available.
• The additional use is covered by any necessary tolerances (maximum legal residue levels)
or other clearances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
303
-------
• Registration for the same use has not previously been denied, disapproved, suspended, or
canceled by EPA or voluntarily canceled by the registrant subsequent to issuance of a
notice of intent to cancel because of health or environmental concerns.
• Registration is in accord with the purposes of FIFRA.
These 24(c) registrations become federal registrations in 90 days unless EPA objects to them.
EPA's role is to ensure that each 24(c) registration meets the requirements of FIFRA.
Emergency, Quarantine, and Crisis Exemptions
FIFRA Section 18, and EPA's implementing regulations, authorize EPA, in the event of an
emergency, such as a severe pest infestation, to allow an unregistered use of a pesticide for a
limited time, if EPA determines that emergency conditions exist which require such an
exemption.84
An "Emergency Condition" is an urgent, non-routine situation that requires the use of a
pesticide(s). Emergency exemptions may be requested by any state or federal agency, but typically
come from state lead agricultural agencies. EPA also must establish any necessary tolerances to
cover pesticide residues in food, if applicable. Tolerances established for emergency exemption
uses are time-limited, corresponding to the time that commodities treated under the exemption
might be found in channels of trade. When needed, the program chemistry laboratory evaluates
pesticide residues on certain foods. These real-world residue monitoring data can be used to
accurately assess the risk and determine whether the acceptable risk level would be exceeded.
A second type of emergency exemption is allowed for "public health" emergencies. A state or
federal agency may request a public health emergency exemption to control a pest that will cause
a significant risk to human health. The third type of exemption, the "Quarantine" exemption, is
allowed to control the introduction or spread of an invasive pest species not previously known to
occur in the United States and its territories.
Finally, when the emergency is so immediate that there is not enough time to go through the normal
review for an exemption, following communication with clearance by EPA, a state or federal
agency may issue a "crisis exemption" allowing the unregistered use to proceed for up to 15 days.
During the consultation before the state or federal agency declares a crisis, EPA performs a review
to determine whether there are any apparent concerns, and whether the appropriate safety findings
required by FIFRA likely may be made. If EPA identifies concerns, the crisis exemption may not
be allowed unless those concerns can be resolved.
Meeting Agriculture's Needfor Safe, Effective Pest Control Products
With the passage of FQPA, Congress acknowledged the importance of and need for "reduced-risk
pesticides" and supported expedited agency review to help these pesticides reach the market sooner
and replace older and potentially riskier chemicals. The law defines a reduced risk pesticide as one
that "may reasonably be expected to accomplish one or more of the following: (1) reduces pesticide
84 http://www.epa.gov/opprd001/sectionl 8/
304
-------
risks to human health; (2) reduces pesticide risks to non-target organisms; (3) reduces the potential
for contamination of valued, environmental resources, or (4) broadens adoption of Integrated Pest
Management (IPM)85 or makes it more effective." EPA developed procedures and guidelines for
expedited review of applications for registration or amendments for a reduced risk pesticide. The
Agency expanded the reduced risk pesticide program to include consideration of new active
ingredients, new uses of active ingredients already deemed to be reduced risk, and amendments to
all uses deemed to be reduced risk. EPA gives priority to review of reduced risk pesticides and
works with the regulated community and user groups to refine review and registration procedures.
FIFRA 's Version of "Generic " Pesticides
FIFRA authorizes EPA to register products that are identical to or substantially similar to already
registered products (known as "me too" products). Applicants for these substantially similar
products may rely on, or "cite" (and offer to pay a fair share for) data already submitted by another
registrant. The entry of these new products into the market can cause price reductions resulting
from new competition and broader access to products. These price declines generate competition
that benefits farmers and other consumers.
"Minor Crops " - Addressing Growers' Needfor Pest Control
The FQPA amendments made special provisions for minor uses of pesticides. Minor uses of
pesticides are defined as uses for which pesticide product sales do not provide sufficient economic
incentive to justify the costs of developing and maintaining its registrations with EPA. "Minor"
crops include many fruits and vegetables. Minor uses also include use on commercially grown
flowers, trees and shrubs, certain applications to major crops such as wheat or corn where the pest
problem is not widespread, and many public health applications86.
Some minor uses have been lost through lack of registrant support during the reregi strati on
process, resulting in grower concerns that adequate pest control tools will no longer be available
for many minor crops. The agency works closely with the USDA's Inter-Regional Research
Project No. 4 (IR-4)87 to generate residue data for tolerances on minor crops in order to minimize
the burden of data generation for minor uses. EPA and the USDA operate early alert systems to
notify growers when a pesticide use for a minor crop is about to be canceled. EPA provides
advance public notice of a proposed cancellation to allow time for another registrant to consider
maintaining the pesticide use.
Meeting the Needfor Non-agricultural Pesticides
Farmers are not the only ones who need pesticides. Pest control also is needed in our homes,
schools, and workplaces. Pesticides control pests that spread disease like West Nile Virus, malaria
and rabies, to name a few. They disinfect our swimming pools and sanitize bathrooms; they combat
mold and are essential to sterilize surfaces in hospitals and other health care facilities.
85 http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/ipm.htm
86 http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/regulating/laws/fapa/fqpa accomplishments.htm
87 http://www.csrees.usda.gov/nea/pest/in focus/pesticides if minor.html
305
-------
Outreach and Education
The Agency will continue to encourage Integrated Pest Management (IPM), which emphasizes
minimizing the use of broad spectrum chemicals and maximizing the use of sanitation, biological
controls, and selective methods of application, and relies on pesticide users being well-informed
about the pest control options available and how to best use them. It is not enough to have pesticide
products registered to control pest infestations. Pesticide users need to know which pesticides to
use, how to use them, and how to maintain the site, so pests do not return. The Pesticide Program
is invested in outreach and training efforts for people who use pesticides and the public in general.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.4, Ensure Safety of Chemicals in the
Marketplace in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. During FY 2019, EPA will review and
register new pesticides, new uses for existing pesticides, and act on other registration requests in
accordance with FIFRA and FFDCA standards as well as PRIA timeframes. Many of these actions
will be for reduced-risk pesticides, which, once registered and used by consumers, will increase
benefits to society. Working together with the affected user communities, through IPM and related
activities, the Agency plans to accelerate the adoption of these lower-risk products.
EPA will continue to support implementation of other IPM-related activities. The Agency will
engage partners in the development of tools and informational brochures to promote IPM efforts
and to provide guidance to schools, farmers, other partners, and stakeholders.
Similarly, the Agency will continue its work-sharing efforts with its international partners.
Through these collaborative activities and resulting international registrations, international trade
barriers will be reduced. When nations with whom we trade accept imported crops treated with
newer, lower-risk pesticides, domestic users can more readily adopt these newer pesticides into
their crop protection programs. Work-sharing efforts also reduce the costs of registration to
governments by sharing the expenses.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to prioritize emergency exemptions. The economic benefit of the
Section 18 emergency exemptions program to growers is the avoidance of losses incurred in the
absence of pesticides exempted under FIFRA's emergency exemption provisions.
Performance Measure Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the Pesticides: Protect the Environment
from Pesticide Risk program under the EPM appropriation.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$74.0) This change to fixed and other costs is a decrease due to the recalculation of base
workforce costs due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
306
-------
• (-$1,033.0) This program change reflects a reduction in funding for pesticide program
activities from annual appropriations with the intent to increase utilization of pesticide user
fee collections. Proposed legislative language accompanying the President's Budget will
expand EPA's scope of activities that can be funded with user fees. This reduction
recognizes the adoption of some process improvements in the registration and registration
review processes and the completion of some upgrades to program IT systems.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA), §408.
307
-------
Science Policy and Biotechnology
Program Area: Pesticides Licensing
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Prioritize Robust Science
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
SI.210.0
S 1,-1-t/.O
S 0.0
-Sl.-I'V.O
Total Budget Authority
$1,210.0
$1,479.0
$0.0
-$1,479.0
Total Workyears
5.1
5.4
0.0
-5.4
Program Project Description:
The Science Policy and Biotechnology program provides scientific and policy expertise,
coordinates EPA's intra/interagency efforts, and facilitates information-sharing related to core
science policy issues concerning pesticides and toxic chemicals. In addition, the Science Policy
and Biotechnology program provides for independent, external scientific peer review through the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act Scientific Advisory Panel (FIFRA SAP), a
federal advisory committee and the newly-formed Science Advisory Committee on Chemicals
(SACC).
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE have been eliminated for this program in FY 2019. Statutory requirements will
be absorbed by the pesticides and toxics programs.
Performance Measure Targets:
This proposed disinvestment means that the Agency will no longer publish measures associated
with this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$1,479.0/ -5.4 FTE) This program change eliminates the Science Policy and
Biotechnology program. The science advisory committee oversight, including peer review,
required by FIFRA and TSCA, will be conducted by the pesticides and toxics program
offices.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetics
Act (FFDCA), §408; Toxic Substances Control Act.
308
-------
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
309
-------
RCRA: Corrective Action
Program Area: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Revitalize Land and Prevent Contamination
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017 Actuals
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Unvirinimcnliil
Program &
Munugcmcnl
Sjf>JS4.0
S.U.V44.0
-S4.(>4tU)
Total Budget Authority
$36,129.6
$36,584.0
$31,944.0
-$4,640.0
Total Workyears
204.7
205.4
172.0
-33.4
Program Project Description:
To reduce risks from exposure to toxics, EPA's Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
Corrective Action program ensures that contaminated facilities subject to RCRA are cleaned up
by the responsible party, returns contaminated property to productive use, and keeps costs from
being transferred to the largely taxpayer-funded Superfund program. Pursuant to EPA promulgated
regulations and administrative orders under RCRA, EPA will continue to direct financial assurance
funds set aside by members of the regulated community to ensure that the funds are used to meet
regulated entities' obligations and to protect taxpayers from having to pay the bill. Approximately
111 million Americans live within three miles of a RCRA corrective action facility (roughly 35
percent of the U.S. population),88 and the total area covered by these corrective action sites is
approximately 18 million acres.89
EPA works in close partnership with 44 states and one territory authorized to implement the
Corrective Action program90 to ensure that cleanups are protective of human health and the
environment. The Corrective Action program allows for the return of properties to beneficial use,
which benefits the surrounding communities, reduces liabilities for facilities, and allows facilities
to redirect resources to productive activites. The Agency provides program direction, leadership,
and support to its state partners. This includes specialized technical and program expertise, policy
development for effective program management, national program priority setting, measurement
and tracking, training and technical tools, and data collection/management/documentation. In
addition, through worksharing, the Agency serves as lead or support for a significant number of
complex and challenging cleanups in both non-authorized and authorized states.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
88 U.S. EPA, Office of Land and Emergency Response Estimate 2017. Data collected includes: (1) site information as of the end
of FY 2016 from RCRAInfo; and (2) census data from the 2011-2013 American Community Survey..
89 As compiled by RCRAInfo.
90 State implementation of the Corrective Action program is funded through the STAG Categorical Grant: Hazardous Waste
Financial Assistance and matching state contributions.
310
-------
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/ Objective 1.3, Revitalize Land and Prevent
Contamination in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. The program focuses its resources on
cleaning up 3,779 priority contaminated facilities (the "2020 Baseline"), which includes highly
contaminated and technically challenging sites. Currently, only 32 percent of the 2020 Baseline
facilities have completed final and permanent cleanups, leaving over 2,500 facilities still needing
oversight and technical support to reach final site-wide cleanup objectives. Additionally, the 2020
Baseline is a subset of a larger group of facilities with potential corrective action obligations under
the RCRA. The program's goals are to control human exposures, control migration of
contaminated groundwater, complete final cleanups for the 2020 Baseline facilities, and assess and
cleanup identified non-2020 Baseline facilities.
In FY 2019, EPA will:
• Prioritize and focus resources on those facilities that present the highest risk to human
health and the environment and implement actions to end or reduce these threats.
• Provide technical assistance to authorized states in the areas of site characterization,
sampling, remedy selection, and long-term stewardship at 2020 Baseline facilities.
• Prioritize and focus the program on completing site investigations to identify the most
significant threats, establish interim remedies to reduce and eliminate exposure, and select
and construct safe, effective long-term remedies that maintain the economic viability of
the operating facility.
• For high priority facilities, perform cleanup work under work-sharing agreements to assist
with facilities that have complex issues91 or special tasks (e.g, ecological risk
assessments).
• Continue to improve cleanup approaches and share best practices and cleanup innovations,
such as the use of the Lean RCRA FIRST92 toolbox developed to speed up and improve
cleanups by eliminating inefficiencies in key procedural steps.
• Maintain RCRAInfo, which is the primary data system that many states rely upon to
manage their RCRA permitting, corrective action, and hazardous waste generator
programs. RCRAInfo receives data from hazardous waste handlers for the National
Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report, which is mandated by RCRA Sections 3002
and 3004. The last biennial report showed there were 26,284 generators of over 33 million
tons of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo provides the only national-level RCRA hazardous
waste data and statistics to track the environmental progress of approximately 20,000
hazardous waste units at 6,600 facilities.
91 For example, vapor intrusion, wetlands contamination, or extensive groundwater issues.
92 For more information, visit: https://www.epa.gov/hw/toolbox-corrective-action-resource-conservation-and-recoverv-act-
facilities-investigation-remedv.
311
-------
Performance Measure Targets:
(CA2) Percentage of RCRA corrective action facilities with migration of
contaminated groundwater under control.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
88
89
(CA1) Percentage of RCRA corrective action facilities with human exposures to
toxins under control.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
94
95
(CA5) Percentage of RCRA corrective action facilities with final remedies
constructed.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
70
71
(CA6) Percentage of RCRA corrective action facilities with corrective action
performance standards attained.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
33
34
(RSRAU) Number of RCRA corrective action facilities made ready for anticipated
use.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
75
91
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$901.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$5,541.0/ -33.4 FTE) This program change modifies the timeline for initiating cleanups
and ongoing cleanups. EPA will prioritize resources on those facilities that present the
highest risk to human health and the environment.
Statutory Authority:
Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA),
§§ 3004, 3005, 8001.
312
-------
RCRA: Waste Management
Program Area: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Revitalize Land and Prevent Contamination
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
S5H\.2"M
SiS.-IJV.O
N -1 I.W.I)
-S If,.5 J 2.0
Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest System Fund
$4,915.4
$3,156.0
$0.0
-$3,156.0
Total Budget Authority
$63,192.4
$61,595.0
$41,907.0
-$19,688.0
Total Workyears
310.2
333.7
213.2
-120.5
Program Project Description:
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), established EPA's role as a federal leader
in the conservation and recovery of resources. Under RCRA, EPA sets national standards for
managing hazardous wastes and provides federal agencies, state, tribal, and local governments,
and industries with technical assistance on solid waste management, resource recovery, and
resource conservation. Approximately 60,000 facilities generate and safely manage hazardous
waste in the United States.93 Eighty percent of the U.S. population lives within three miles of one
of these facilities,94 making national standards and procedures for managing hazardous wastes a
necessity.
The Waste Management program safeguards the American people while facilitating commerce by
supporting an effective waste management infrastructure. Cradle-to-grave hazardous waste
management regulations help ensure safe management practices through the entire process of
generation, transportation, recycling, treatment, storage, and final disposal. The program increases
the capacity for proper hazardous waste management in states by providing grant funding and
technical support.
EPA and its state partners issue, update, maintain, and oversee RCRA controls for approximately
20,000 hazardous waste units (e.g., incinerators, landfills, and tanks) located at 6,600 treatment,
storage, and disposal facilities.95 Just as businesses innovate and grow, the waste management
challenges they face also evolve; this requires new direction and changes in the federal hazardous
waste program through updated regulations, guidance, and other tools.
EPA directly implements the entire RCRA program in Iowa and Alaska and provides leadership,
work-sharing, and support to the states and territories authorized to implement the permitting
93 Memorandum, February 18,2014, from Industrial Economics to EPA, Re: Analysis to Support Assessment of Economic Impacts
and Benefits under RCRA Programs: Key Scoping Assessment, Initial Findings and Summary of Available Data (Section 1), pages
5-11.
94 U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response Estimate. 2014. Data collected includes: (1) site information as of
the end of FY 2011 from RCRAInfo; and (2) census data from the 2007-2011 American Community Survey.
95 As compiled by RCRAInfo.
313
-------
program. Additionally, the Toxic Substances Control Act polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB)
cleanup and disposal program is implemented under the Waste Management program to reduce
PCB exposure from improper disposal, storage, and spills. The program reviews and approves
PCB cleanup, storage, and disposal activities. This federal authority is not delegated to state
programs. PCBs were banned in 1979, but legacy use and contamination still exists, and can still
be released into the environment from poorly maintained hazardous waste sites that contain them.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.3, Revitalize Land and Prevent
Contamination in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, the RCRA Waste
Management program will:
• Provide technical assistance to regions, states, and tribes regarding the development and
implementation of solid waste programs.
• Provide technical and implementation assistance, oversight, and support to facilities that
generate, treat, store, recycle and dispose of hazardous waste.
• Review and approve PCB cleanup, storage, and disposal activities to reduce exposures,
particularly in sensitive areas like schools and other public spaces. EPA will prioritize PCB
cleanup approvals and expedite high priority cleanups or address those unaddressed in a
timely fashion. Issuing PCB approvals is a federal responsibility, non-delegable to states.
• Managing the Waste Import Export Tracking System (WIETS) system, which provides for
the electronic submission of hazardous waste import and export notices. This saves
businesses time and effort and makes shipping hazardous waste across borders more
efficient. Managing hazardous waste imports and exports is a federal responsibility,
nondelegable to states.
• Provide technical hazardous waste management assistance to tribes to encourage
sustainable practices and reduce exposure to toxins from hazardous waste.96
• Directly implement the RCRA program in unauthorized states, on tribal lands, and other
unauthorized portions of state RCRA programs. Issue and update permits, including
continuing to improve permitting processes.
• Implement regulations to ensure protective management of coal combustion residuals
(CCR). In response to historic management practices, the Agency has promulgated
regulations specifying improved management and disposal practices to ensure people and
ecosystems are protected. The Agency will continue to work with our stakeholders through
technical assistance and guidance.
96 Of the 567 federally recognized tribes, as of September 30, 2016,224 have an integrated waste management plan.
314
-------
• Implement applicable provisions of the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation
Act of 2016, which enables states to submit for EPA approval state CCR permit programs.
The Agency will continue to work closely with state partners to review and make
determinations on State programs. Subject to appropriations, EPA will implement a permit
program for CCR disposal facilities on tribal lands as well as participating states.
Performance Measure Targets:
(HW4) Percentage of hazardous waste units with initial controls in place to prevent
release.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
45
48
(HW5) Number of renewals or clean-closures at permitted hazardous waste facilities.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
64
64
(PCB) Number of approvals issued for polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) cleanup,
storage and disposal activities.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
160
160
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$2,126.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$18,658.0/ -122.6 FTE) This program change reflects a focus on PCB cleanup and
hazardous waste disposal programs, while reducing technical assistance to stakeholders
regarding the development and implementation of solid waste management programs.
Statutory Authority:
Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA),
§§ 3004, 3005, 3024, 8001; Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), § 6.
315
-------
RCRA: Waste Minimization & Recycling
Program Area: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Revitalize Land and Prevent Contamination
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
S V,25-1.1
s v.i-ii.o
so.o
-VA/V/.W
Total Budget Authority
$9,254.1
$9,141.0
$0.0
-$9,141.0
Total Workyears
50.6
51.0
0.0
-51.0
Program Project Description:
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) established EPA's role as a federal leader
in the conservation and recovery of material. Charged to provide federal agencies, state, local
governments, and industries with technical assistance on solid waste management, resource
recovery, and resource conservation, EPA established the RCRA Waste Minimization program.
Through the RCRA Waste Minimization program, EPA collects, maintains, and shares
information on the market potential of energy and materials recovered from solid waste, including
information regarding the savings potential of conserving resources that go into the waste stream.97
As a result, industries are able to more efficiently conserve virgin resources, including natural
resources, fossil fuels, minerals, and precious metals.
Efforts in Sustainable Materials Management (SMM) seeks to efficiently and effectively minimize
environmental impacts throughout the full life cycle of materials—from raw materials extraction,
through transportation, processing, manufacturing, and use, as well as reuse, recycling, and
disposal. This approach highlights ways to reduce waste throughout the life-cycle and to use waste
materials as commodities to grow industries and associated jobs.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE have been proposed for elimination for this program in FY 2019. State and
local entities or industry groups may elect to continue promote reuse and recycling of materials
based on previous work supported by the program.
Performance Measure Targets:
The proposed disinvestment means that the Agency will no longer publish measures associated
with this program.
97 For additional information, refer to: https://www.epa.gov/smm.
316
-------
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$9,141.0/ -51.0 FTE) This funding change proposes to eliminate the RCRA Waste
Minimization and Recycling program in FY 2019. EPA will focus on core waste
management work.
Statutory Authority:
Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).
317
-------
Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
318
-------
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Review and Reduction
Program Area: Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Ensure Safety of Chemicals in the Marketplace
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017 Actuals
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Unvirinimcnliil
Program &
Munugcmcnl
Stfi.WxO
S5X.fi2fi.tt
-S.WJ.tt
Total Budget Authority
$64,329.5
$58,995.0
$58,626.0
-$369.0
Total Workyears
255.5
238.7
238.7
0.0
Program Project Description:
Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), as amended by the Frank R. Lautenberg
Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, EPA has significant responsibilities for ensuring that
chemicals in or entering commerce do not present unreasonable risks to human health or the
environment. These responsibilities are executed by the Agency through the Chemical Risk
Review and Reduction (CRRR) Program, which works to ensure the safety of:
• Existing chemicals (those already in use when TSCA was first enacted in 1976 and those
which have gone through review by the TSCA New Chemicals Program since),98 by
obtaining and evaluating chemical data and by taking regulatory action, where appropriate,
to prevent any unreasonable risk posed by their use; and
• New chemicals by reviewing and taking action on new chemical notices submitted by
industry, including Pre-Manufacture Notices (PMNs), to ensure that no unreasonable risk
will be posed by such chemicals upon their entry into U.S. commerce.
The new law, signed on June 22, 2016, substantially amended TSCA by providing EPA with
significant new authorities and obligations:
• Clear and enforceable deadlines. EPA is now required to systematically prioritize and
evaluate existing chemicals on a specific schedule, complete specified numbers of
chemical risk evaluations within specified time frames, complete risk management actions
within specified time frames where warranted by the findings of the evaluations, and
review and make determinations on Confidential Business Information (CBI) claims within
specified time frames, among other actions.
98 These include certain prevalent, high-risk chemicals known generally as "legacy chemicals" (e.g., PCBs, mercury), which were
previously covered in a separate Chemical Risk Management (CRM) budget justification. The CRM program area was combined
with Chemical Risk Review and Reduction effective FY 2015.
319
-------
• Requirement to address risks. EPA is required to take timely action to address risks
identified in the risk evaluations by applying by rule one or more of the requirements
specified in TSCA Section 6(a), which can include: prohibiting or otherwise restricting
the manufacture, processing or distribution in commerce of the chemical substance or
mixture for a particular use; limiting the amount of the substance or mixture that may be
manufactured, processed or distributed in commerce for a particular use; or imposing
requirements affecting labeling, recordkeeping or any manner of method of commercial
use or disposal of the substance or mixture; to the extent necessary so that the chemical
will no longer present an unreasonable risk.
• Increased transparency of chemical data while protecting legitimate confidential
information. EPA is required to review all chemical identity Confidential Business
Information (CBI) claims for certain types of submissions and for 25 percent of most other
CBI claims within 90 days of receipt.
• Requirement that EPA make an affirmative determination of safety on every new chemical.
Previously, new chemicals were reviewed in 90 days and were allowed to enter the
marketplace unless EPA made a specific determination that regulatory controls were
needed. Now, continuing with a mandated 90-day timeframe, an affirmative determination
must be made by EPA that a new chemical substance will present, may present, or is not
likely to present an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment; or that the
available information is insufficient to enable the Agency to make any of the above
determinations. Unless EPA determines that the substance is not likely to present
unreasonable risk, the Agency must issue an order or rule that imposes conditions sufficient
to protect against any such unreasonable risk before the chemical can enter the
marketplace.
In addition, the Act provided a sustainable source of funding for EPA to carry out its new
responsibilities. The Agency will now be able to collect user fees from chemical manufacturers
and processers to defray up to 25 percent of its costs for administering certain sections" of TSCA,
as amended.100 Fee levels may be adjusted on a recurring three-year basis for inflation and to
ensure that fees are sufficient to defray up to 25 percent of the costs to carry out certain sections
of TSCA, as amended.
A rule to implement the fee collection provisions of the new law will become effective and allow
EPA to begin collecting fees in FY 2019. The statute authorizes EPA to collect fees from chemical
manufacturers (including importers) and processors who:
• Are required to submit test data (TSCA section 4);
• Submit notification of or information related to intent to manufacture a new chemical or
significant new use of a chemical (TSCA section 5);
99 The costs of implementing TSCA (as amended) Sections 4, 5 and 6 are defrayable up to the statutory caps, as are the costs of
collecting, processing, reviewing and providing access to and protecting from disclosure, as appropriate, chemical information
under Section 14.
100 The authority to assess fees is conditioned on appropriations for the CRRR Program, excluding fees, being held at least equal
to the amount appropriated for FY 2014.
320
-------
• Manufacture or process a chemical substance that is subject to a risk evaluation (TSCA
section 6); or
• Request that EPA conduct risk evaluation on an existing chemical (TSCA section 6),
subject to the Agency's approval of the request.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.4, Ensure Safety of Chemicals in EPA's
FY 2018 -2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, the resources requested by EPA will support continued
implementation of the new TSCA law, with emphasis on the critical mandates and timelines
applicable to chemical testing, pre-market review of new chemicals, chemical risk evaluation and
management, review and determinations on incoming CBI claims and other statutory priorities. At
the same time, the Agency will continue to carry out ongoing base program activities.
To monitor and evaluate its progress on critical implementation activities, EPA has developed and
included in its FY 2018-2022 Strategic Plan three strategic measures and targets establishing
ambitious five-year performance goals. The Agency will use these metrics to determine whether
it is carrying out its core responsibilities under the new law in a timely manner. Through FY 2022,
EPA expects to complete all EPA-initiated risk evaluations and all associated risk management
actions for existing chemicals within statutory timelines. In addition, EPA plans to ramp up its
performance on reviewing new chemical notifications so that by FY 2022, EPA will be making all
final determinations within 180 days of receipt. EPA will maintain corresponding annual
performance measures and two-year Agency Priority Goals to keep track of its progress on a year-
to-year basis.
The Agency has already made considerable progress in carrying out work activities required under
the new law. Key achievements include:
• Commencing risk evaluations for an initial set of 10 priority chemicals and issuing scoping
documents on schedule;
• Finalizing several key framework rules needed to carry out provisions of the new TSCA
law (Inventory Rule, Risk Evaluation Process Rule, Prioritization Process Rule);
• Releasing guidance for external parties interested in submitting draft risk evaluations to
EPA for consideration;
• Completing reviews under the new law of more than 1,150 new chemical notifications101;
• Eliminating a backlog of more than 300 new chemical submissions that required re-review
under the new law;
• Publishing a list of five mercury compounds that are to be made subject to export
restrictions; and
• Conducting a series of public meetings and webinars to gather public input on TSCA
implementation activities.
Future implementation activities will build on the progress EPA has already made.
101 See https://www.epa.gov/reviewing-new-chemicals-under-toxic-substances-control-act-tsca/statistics-new-chemicals-
review#chart.
321
-------
Primary TSCA Implementation Activities - TSCA Sections 4, 5, 6, 8 and 14
The new law, amending several elements of TSCA, provided mandates and authorities to EPA for
implementation responsibilities in the following primary areas: mandatory requirement for EPA
to evaluate and manage existing chemicals with clear and enforceable deadlines;; new requirement
that EPA must make an affirmative finding on the safety of a new chemical or significant new use
of an existing chemical before it is allowed to be commercialized; and increased public
transparency for chemical information. This section describes activities associated with these
primary mandates and authorities.
Under TSCA Section 5, as amended, EPA is responsible for reviewing all new chemical
submissions to determine whether the chemicals may pose unreasonable risk to human health or
the environment if they were to enter U.S. commerce, and, when necessary, require restrictions or
testing prior to being allowed to be commercialized. Each year, EPA assesses and manages, as
necessary, the potential risks from approximately thousand new chemicals, including nanoscale
materials and products of biotechnology, prior to their entry into the marketplace.
The law's new requirements made significant changes to the new chemical review process. The
new law requires that an affirmative determination be made by EPA on whether or not a new
chemical substance will present, may present, or is not likely to present an unreasonable risk (or
that available information is insufficient to enable any of these determinations to be made) before
the chemical substance can proceed to the marketplace. Since enactment, the program has been
developing and implementing a process for administering affirmative determinations for both
intended and reasonably foreseen uses of new chemicals as well as findings of "insufficient
information to make a reasoned evaluation." As a result, the workload involved in new chemical
review has increased.
In FY 2019, the Agency expects to review over one thousand new chemical submissions, take
appropriate testing and risk management actions, including orders and Significant New Use Rules
(SNURS) where appropriate, and make affirmative determinations. The program also will evaluate
the data submitted under requirements of Section 5 Consent Orders and address the Notices of
Commencement (NOCs) submitted when a new chemical enters commerce. In FY 2019, the
Agency will continue to effectuate improvements to internal data and tracking systems to address
the new mandates under TSCA as amended.
Under TSCA Section 6, as amended, EPA is required to maintain an ambitious schedule for
initiating and completing chemical risk evaluations of existing chemicals. Where risks are
identified, timelines are delineated for initiating and completing regulatory actions to address those
risks.
• Risk Evaluations: On December 19, 2016, EPA identified the first 10 chemicals to undergo
risk evaluation under the new law (Designation of Ten Chemical Substances for Initial
Risk Evaluations Under the Toxic Substances Control Act, 81 FR 91927), triggering a
statutory deadline to issue documents identifying the scope of those evaluations within six
months and to complete the risk evaluations within three years. Scoping documents for all
322
-------
10 evaluations were released by EPA in June 2017. In FY 2019, the Agency will be
working to advance these risk evaluations through the draft, peer review/public comment
and final stages, with a goal of completion no later than December 2019.
For EPA-initiated risk evaluations beyond the first 10 chemicals noted above, EPA must
establish and implement a risk-based prioritization process to determine which chemicals
will be evaluated, identifying them as either "high" or "low" priority substances as set forth
in TSCA section 6(b)(1)(A). A high priority designation is required when EPA determines,
without consideration of cost or other non-risk factors, that the chemical may present an
unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment due to potential hazard and a route
of exposure, including to susceptible subpopulations [TSCA section 6(b)(1)(B)], High
priority designation triggers a requirement that EPA conduct a risk evaluation to determine
whether a chemical substance presents an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the
environment, without consideration of costs or other non-risk factors, including an
unreasonable risk to a potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulations [TSCA section
6(b)(4)(F)], The statute also expands the scope of EPA's risk evaluations to include
conditions of use of the chemical intended, known, or reasonably foreseen and requires
that they be completed within 3 years (with a possibility of 6-month extension) [TSCA
section 6(b)(4)(G)],
EPA is required to begin a risk evaluation for another chemical each time a risk evaluation
is completed such that EPA maintains the pace of 20 EPA-initiated risk evaluations
underway from the end of calendar year 2019 forward [TSCA section 6(b)(2)], The law
also directs the Agency to designate at least 20 chemicals, by the end of calendar year 2019,
as low-priority substances, for which risk evaluation is not warranted at this time; in FY
2019, the Agency will be working to finalize the identification of these low-priority
substances.
The law includes provisions allowing manufacturers to request EPA to conduct evaluations
of specific chemicals. EPA is required to undertake manufacturer-requested risk
evaluations that meet the Agency's acceptance criteria at levels up to 50 percent of the
number of EPA-initiated evaluations underway.
• Risk Management Actions: When unreasonable risks are identified through the risk
evaluations, EPA must finalize risk management actions to address the unreasonable risk
within two years, or up to four years if an extension is needed. Costs and availability of
alternatives will be considered when determining appropriate action to address risks.
Implementation must begin as quickly as possible, but no later than five years after the
final regulation in cases of bans or phase-outs of chemicals.
TSCA Section 6(h), establishes a fast-track process to address certain persistent, bioaccumulative,
and toxic (PBT) chemicals on the 2014 TSCA Work Plan. For these chemicals, unless a
manufacturer requests that they undergo a risk evaluation, a risk evaluation is not required, and
action to reduce exposure to the extent practicable must be proposed no later than three years after
enactment of the Lautenberg amendments (by June 2019) and finalized 18 months later. EPA
determined that seven chemicals met the PBT criteria set forth in the new law and subsequently
323
-------
received a request that two be evaluated under TSCA section 6. Risk evaluations for these two
chemicals will begin after the Fees rule becomes effective. EPA is continuing efforts to assess
exposure and use, in order to address any risks identified for the five remaining PBT chemicals
within the prescribed period mandated by the law.
The Agency typically receives and analyzes about 300 Substantial Risk Notifications submitted
by industry annually pursuant to Section 8(e), which requires EPA be notified immediately when
a company learns that a substance or mixture presents a substantial risk of injury to health or the
environment. EPA may use the information it receives in 8(e) notices in determining whether to
take further action.
TSCA Section 4, as amended, authorizes EPA to require testing of a chemical substance or mixture
by manufacturers (including importers). The 2016 TSCA amendments provided new test order and
consent agreement authorities which are designed to expedite the Agency's collection of testing
information for prioritizing and conducting chemical risk evaluations for new and existing
chemicals. In FY 2019, EPA may utilize these authorities to require testing on chemicals in
connection with the prioritization and risk evaluation processes, where such testing is needed. The
Agency will continue to review test data submitted from prior test rules, enforceable consent
agreements and test orders. As in past years, EPA will make use of Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
data in prioritizing chemicals for collection of testing information and evaluation of potential risks.
TSCA Section 4, as amended, also promotes the use of non-animal alternative testing
methodologies. The Agency will publish an Alternative Testing Methods Strategy by June 2018,
two years after the date of enactment, as required by the new law, and begin implementing the
strategy moving forward with implementation of the amended TSCA.
In addition, in FY 2019, EPA will continue to issue Significant New Use Rules (SNURs) for
existing chemicals where applicable. The Agency has the authority to monitor and control
significant new uses of existing chemical substances where such uses are no longer ongoing. With
a notification of a new use, the Agency initiates an evaluation focusing on the health and
environmental effects of the substance's significant new use.
Under Section 8 of TSCA, as amended, EPA is required to designate chemical substances on the
TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory as either "active" or "inactive" in U.S. commerce. To
facilitate this, EPA, as required by law, promulgated a rule one year after enactment requiring
industry to report chemical substances on the TSCA Inventory that were manufactured (including
any that were imported) for non-exempt commercial purposes during the ten-year time period prior
to enactment. Reporting began during the last quarter of FY 2017, with a 180-day timeline for
manufacturers, followed by additional time for processors. EPA will use notices received to
identify reported substances as active on the TSCA Inventory. Substances for which no notices are
received will be identified as inactive on the Inventory. EPA expects to publish the first TSCA
Inventory with active and inactive designations by the first quarter of FY 2019.
Section 8 of TSCA, as amended, also requires both manufacturers and processors to notify EPA
in the future when they anticipate re-introducing into U.S. commerce substances listed as inactive
324
-------
on the TSCA Inventory. This future reporting will commence after the publication of the TSCA
Inventory with active and inactive designations.
TSCA Section 14, as amended, makes significant changes to the CBI process. It establishes new
substantiation requirements for certain types of confidentiality (CBI) claims from submitters,
requires EPA to review and make determinations on most new CBI claims for the identity of
chemicals and a subset of other types of CBI claims, directs EPA to develop policies and
procedures for sharing TSCA CBI with states, tribes, health and medical professionals, first
responders and others; requires EPA to review CBI claims for chemical identity relating to active
chemical substances in commerce to determine if they are still warranted; and directs EPA to
establish guidance for structurally descriptive generic names that must be provided when specific
chemical identity is claimed as CBI. In addition, any CBI claim made for a chemical identity by
manufacturers or processors during reporting to establish the active TSCA Inventory must be
reviewed and determinations made no later than five years after the establishment of the active
inventory listing. In FY 2019, in follow-up to the initial list of the active inventory, the Agency
will finalize a rule on a plan to review claims to protect chemical identities. The current Inventory
has over 17 thousand chemicals on the confidential portion. In order to comply with these new
provisions, EPA is developing new or enhanced information systems to accommodate tracking of
CBI reviews and changes to electronic reporting applications.
Other TSCA Mandates and Activities
In April 2017, as required under Section 8 of TSCA, as amended, EPA published in the Federal
Register an inventory of supply, use and trade of mercury and mercury compounds in the U.S., to
be updated every three years. EPA expects to be engaged in this process during FY 2019. In
addition, by June 2018, the Agency must promulgate a rule establishing reporting requirements
for persons who manufacture or import mercury and mercury-added products, or intentionally use
mercury in a manufacturing process. In FY 2019, EPA will complete and maintain an electronic
reporting interface and database within the Central Data Exchange (CDX), EPA's electronic
reporting system, and conduct outreach to instruct potentially affected stakeholders on how to
report required information.
The Mercury Export Ban Act prohibits the export of certain specific mercury compounds. Section
12 of TSCA, as amended, directs EPA to publish a list of additional mercury compounds that will
be subject to export bans. The Agency completed this step in 2016. Every five years, the Agency
also must submit a report to Congress addressing any continuing export of those mercury
compounds, with recommendations as to whether further regulation is warranted.
Section 21 of TSCA, as amended, authorizes citizen petitions for the issuance, amendment or
repeal of certain actions (rules and orders) promulgated under TSCA: §4 (rules and orders
requiring chemical testing); §6 (rules imposing risk mitigation controls on chemicals); §8 (rules
requiring submission of information); §5 (orders affecting new chemical substances). Since
September 2007, 22 citizen petitions have been filed with EPA under this authority. The Agency
must grant or deny a Section 21 petition within 90 days; if EPA grants a petition, the requested
action must be initiated in a timely fashion.
325
-------
Other Business Lines in Support of TSCA Implementation
• Continuing enhancement of the TSCA Chemical Information System (CIS) to reduce
manual handling of data, increase internal EPA access to data relevant to chemical
assessments and expedite review of chemicals;
• Continuing integration of TSCA information management, e-Reporting and public access
systems with the Agency's E-Enterprise business strategy, leveraging the E-Enterprise
portal to provide better customer service for external users;
• Developing new tools for hazard and exposure identification assessment and
characterization, while improving existing tools to better assess risks from both new and
existing chemicals
• Maintaining and enhancing the functionality of ChemView and expanding the information
it makes available to the public to include newly completed chemical assessments, as well
as other new data reported to EPA under TSCA (e.g., Section 5 Pre-manufacture Notices
(PMNs), Section 12(b) data, and Section 8 (d), 8(e), and 8(c) submissions).
In FY 2019, the Agency will continue implementation of required TSCA activities not affected
by the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act amendments. These
activities include:
• Implementing regulations under the TSCA Title VI Formaldehyde Standards for
Composite Wood Products Act (Public Law 111-199). Title VI establishes national
emission standards for formaldehyde in new composite wood products;102
• Continuing to implement the Mercury Export Ban Act (MEBA);103 and providing
responses to any requests for exemption from applicable export prohibitions. Continuing
to carry out work necessary to support compliance with the Minimata Convention on
Mercury, to which the U.S. is a party.
• Providing firm and individual certifications for safe work practices for lead-based paint
abatement and renovation and repair efforts, as well as provide for operation and
maintenance of the online database (FLPP)104 that supports the processing of applications
for training providers, firms and individuals.
Performance Measure Targets:
(TSCA3) Percent of final TSCA new chemical determinations for Pre-Manufacture
Notices, Significant New Use Notices and Microbial Commercial Activity Notices
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
completed within statutory timelines.
65
80
102 See http://www2.epa.gov/formaldehvde/formaldehvde-emission-standards-composite-wood-products.
103 MEBA prohibits the export of elemental mercury as of January 1, 2013, among other requirements for EPA, DOE, and other
federal agencies.
104 See https://ssoprod.epa.gov/sso/isp/flppLogin.isp.
326
-------
(TSCA2) Number of TSCA risk management actions for existing chemicals
completed within statutory timelines.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
No Target
Established
5
(TSCA1) Number of final EPA-initiated TSCA risk evaluations completed within
statutory timelines.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
No Target
Established
1
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$381.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs due to adjustments in salary and benefit costs.
• (-$8,180.0/ -51.6 FTE) This program change shifts funding for 51.6 FTE from annual
appropriations to new TSCA user fee collections. Fee collections are expected to begin in
quarter one of FY 2019.
• (+51.6 FTE) This program change shifts 51.6 FTE to new TSCA fee collections from annual
appropriations.
• (-$315.0/ -2.0 FTE) This realignment of FTE from appropriated Chemical Risk Review
and Reduction FTE to TSCA user fee collections results in a decrease of 2.0 FTE with
associated payroll of $315.0. Resources have been realigned to the Office of Research and
Development's Chemical Safety and Sustainability research program's Computational
Toxicology (CompTox) program to support risk assessment and evaluation science that is
needed to address new TSCA requirements.
• (+$7,745.0/ +2.0 FTE) This program change provides funding to support implementation
of new responsibilities required by the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st
Century Act. This change also provides minimal resources and FTE to continue certain
activities from the Lead-based paint program. This includes associated payroll of $315.0.
Statutory Authority:
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), as amended by the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety
for the 21st Century Act (enacted June 2016).
327
-------
Endocrine Disruptors
Program Area: Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Ensure Safety of Chemicals in the Marketplace
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
SO.OOfi.-/
S~.502.lt
so.o
-S '.502.0
Total Budget Authority
$6,006.4
$7,502.0
$0.0
-$7,502.0
Total Workyears
6.6
8.9
0.0
-8.9
Program Project Description:
The Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP) was established in 1996 under authorities
contained in the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) and the Safe Drinking Water Act
(SDWA) amendments. Current activities within the EDSP include transitioning to the use of high
throughput screening (HTS) and computational toxicology (CompTox) tools to screen thousands
of chemicals for endocrine activity, establishing policies and procedures for screening and testing,
and evaluating data to ensure chemical safety by protecting public health and the environment
from endocrine disrupting chemicals.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE have been eliminated for this program in FY 2019. EPA will absorb the
remaining functions within the pesticides program using the currently available tiered testing
battery.
Performance Measure Targets:
This proposed disinvestment means that the Agency will no longer publish measures associated
with this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$7,502.0/ -8.9 FTE) This program change eliminates the Endocrine Disruptors program.
The ongoing functions of the program can be absorbed into the pesticides program.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), § 408(p); Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), §
1457.
328
-------
Pollution Prevention Program
Program Area: Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
Goal: Cooperative Federalism
Objective(s): Enhance Shared Accountability
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
S//..W./
S I2.1V-U)
so.o
-SI 2.1 >J-1.0
Total Budget Authority
$11,338.1
$12,194.0
$0.0
-$12,194.0
Total Workyears
45.9
58.1
0.0
-58.1
Program Project Description:
The Pollution Prevention (P2) program is a tool for advancing environmental stewardship and
sustainability by federal, state and tribal governments; businesses; communities and individuals.
The P2 program seeks to alleviate environmental problems by achieving reductions in the
generation of hazardous releases to air, water, and land; reductions in the use of hazardous
materials; reductions in the generation of greenhouse gases; and reductions in the use of water.
The P2 program also helps businesses and others reduce costs as a result of implementing these
preventative approaches.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE have been eliminated for this program in FY 2019. Based on previous
investments in P2 solutions made under this program project, partners are expected to be able to
continue to share best practices and pursue additional pollution prevention solutions.
Performance Measure Targets:
This proposed disinvestment means that the Agency will no longer publish measures associated
with this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$12,194.0/ -58.1 FTE) This program change eliminates the Pollution Prevention
program.
Statutory Authority:
Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 (PPA), §§ 6602-6610; Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), §
10.
329
-------
Toxic Substances: Lead Risk Reduction Program
Program Area: Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Ensure Safety of Chemicals in the Marketplace
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
si:.~so.v
sij.:oj.o
so.o
-SI.1.203.0
Total Budget Authority
$12,780.9
$13,203.0
$0.0
-$13,203.0
Total Workyears
68.7
72.8
0.0
-72.8
Program Project Description:
EPA is working to reduce the number of children with blood lead levels of five micrograms per
deciliter or higher through multiple programs.105 The Lead Risk Reduction program also has
worked to reduce the disparities in blood lead levels between low-income children and non-low-
income children.106
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE have been eliminated for this program in FY 2019. Lead paint certifications
will continue under Chemical Risk Review Reduction program. Other forms of lead exposure are
addressed through other targeted programs such as lead pipe replacement with the SRFs.
EPA will continue to provide firm and individual certifications for safe work practices for lead-
based paint abatement and renovation and repair efforts, as well as provide for operation and
maintenance of the online database (FLPP) that supports the processing of applications for training
providers, firms and individuals, through the Chemical Risk Review and Reduction program.
Performance Measure Targets:
This proposed disinvestment means that the Agency will no longer publish measures associated
with this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$13,203.0/ -72.8 FTE) This program change eliminates the Lead Risk Reduction
program. Firm and individual certifications for safe work practices for lead-based paint
105 Jacobs, D.E.; Clickner, R.P.; Zhou, J. Y.; Viet, S.M.; Marker, D.A.; Rogers, J.W.; Zeldin, D.C.; Broene, P.; and Friedman, W.
(2002). The prevalence of lead-based paint hazard in U.S. housing. Environmental Health Perspectives, 110(10): A599-A606.
106 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Fourth Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals, Updated
Tables, (September, 2012). Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and
330
-------
abatement and renovation and repair efforts will be funded through the Chemical Risk
Review and Reduction program.
Statutory Authority:
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), §§ 401-412.
331
-------
Underground Storage Tanks (LUST/UST)
332
-------
LUST / UST
Program Area: Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST)
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Revitalize Land and Prevent Contamination
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017 Actuals
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Unvirinimcnliil
Program &
Muiitigcinciil
SKUo-I.A
s ii.: ism
S 5.01x0
-Si. (>03.0
Leaking Underground
Storage Lanks
$9,554.5
$9,177.0
$6,452.0
-$2,725.0
Lotal Budget Authority
$20,208.8
$20,395.0
$12,067.0
-$8,328.0
Lotal Workyears
98.8
108.1
68.8
-39.3
Program Project Description:
Releases of petroleum from underground storage tanks (UST) can contaminate groundwater, the
drinking water source for many Americans. Environmental Program Management funding helps
prevent releases by providing states107 and tribes with technical assistance and guidance, and by
funding work that assists states and tribes.
EPA partners with tribes to maintain information on tribal USTs and is the primary implementer
of the UST program in Indian country. With few exceptions, tribes do not have independent UST
program resources. This funding supports direct implementation of UST program in Indian
country.
In 2005, Congress passed the Energy Policy Act which, along with other release prevention
measures, required states to inspect all facilities in their jurisdictions at least once every three years.
EPA has been supporting states in these efforts (and ensuring these requirements are met before
continuing to grant additional funding for this). A recent EPA study suggests that increased UST
compliance is a result of increasing inspection frequency prompted by the Act. EPA's statistical
model, using the State of Louisiana's UST data, showed a positive and statistically significant
effect of increased inspection frequency on facility compliance.108 This evidence supports the data
trends the agency has been witnessing: compliance rates are higher today than they were a decade
ago as a result of the three-year inspection requirement.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
107 States as referenced here also include the District of Columbia and five territories as described in the definition of state in the
Solid Waste Disposal Act.
108 Sullivan, K. A. and A. Kafle. Do more frequent inspections improve compliance? Evidence from underground storage tank
facilities in Louisiana. OCPA Working Paper No. 2017-05. May 2017. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-
06/documents/olem_ocpa working _paper do more_frequent_inspections improve coiiipliaiice.pdf".
333
-------
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.3, Revitalize Land and Prevent
Contamination in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. EPA, with its state and tribal partners,
works to prevent releases of contamination and in partnership with tribes, provides training,
compliance assistance, and inspection support to implement the 2015 underground storage tank
(UST) regulations in Indian country. In FY 2017, EPA developed an inspector training course and
an operator exam to be made available in FY 2018. These tools support the priorities included in
the FY 2018-2022 Strategic Plan.
In FY 2019, EPA will:
• Implement a targeted UST Tribal program, including inspections, enforcement,
compliance assistance, and data management.
• Continue to coordinate with state UST prevention programs.
• Provide technical assistance, compliance help, and expert consultation to state, tribal, and
stakeholders on both policy and technical matters. This support strives to strengthen our
network of federal, state, tribal, and local partners (specifically communities and people
living and working near UST sites) and assists implementation of the UST regulations.
• Provide guidance, training and assistance to the regulated community to improve
understanding and compliance.
• Work with states and tribes regarding UST compatibility with alternative fuels. Work in
this area is important given the national growth in biofuels and other emerging fuels, and
the significant findings regarding the increasing prevalence of corrosion of UST system
equipment containing ethanol or diesel fuels.109
Performance Measure Targets:
FY 2018
FY 2019
(114) Number of confirmed releases at UST facilities in Indian country.
Target
Target
11
11
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$375.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$5,978.0/ -27.2 FTE) This program change reflects a reduced workload due to the
proposed elimination of the LUST Prevention and the Categorical Grant Underground
Storage Tanks programs. With remaining resources, the program will continue to directly
implement a targeted compliance and release prevention program in Indian country and
109 See EPA website - www.epa.gov/ust/emerging-fuels-and-underground-storage-tanks-usts#tab-3.
334
-------
work with any state partners who choose to maintain an UST program after the elimination
of the federal grant funds.
Statutory Authority:
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, § 8001, 9001-9011.
335
-------
Water Ecosystems
336
-------
Wetlands
Program Area: Water: Ecosystems
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017 Actuals
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Unvirinimcnliil
Program &
Munugcmcnl
S2lf.V22.lt
S /
-,s
Total Budget Authority
$20,448.7
$20,922.0
$17,913.0
-$3,009.0
Total Workyears
133.0
137.3
115.0
-22.3
Program Project Description:
EPA's Wetlands Protection program has two primary components: the Clean Water Act (CWA)
Section 404 regulatory program and the state and tribal development program. Major activities of
the program include timely and efficient review of Section 404 permit applications submitted to
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) or authorized states; partnering with the USACE,
states and other stakeholders to improve compensatory mitigation effectiveness and availability of
credits; assisting in the development of state and tribal wetland protection programs under the
CWA; and providing technical assistance to the public on wetland management and legal
requirements.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.2, Provide Clean and Safe Water in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan.
Clean Water Act Section 404:
The USACE is responsible for managing the day-to-day permit processes nationwide under
Section 404 of the CWA. EPA provides input to the USACE as it develops proposed permits. EPA
and USACE will work together to evaluate options for improving efficiencies in federal CWA 404
permitting that would help reduce potential costs and delays, increase consistency and
predictability, and improve protection of public health and the environment.
EPA will continue carrying out its responsibilities as a member of the Gulf Coast Ecosystem
Restoration Council authorized under the RESTORE Act, and as a Natural Resource Damage
Assessment Trustee for the Deepwater Horizon oil spill under the Oil Pollution Act. With specific
regards to Section 404 of the CWA, the RESTORE Act, and OP A, EPA responsibilities include
timely, environmentally-sound, and compliant implementation of National Environmental Policy
Act review and associated permitting. Under NRDA, EPA is a cooperating or lead federal agency
for NEPA on all Trustee Implementation Group (TIG) restoration plans, and the appropriate level
337
-------
of NEPA analysis is integrated into the restoration plans. EPA's RESTORE responsibilities
include NEPA analysis for projects that EPA has been assigned by the Council.
Build State and Tribal Wetlands Program:
EPA will work with states and tribes to target the Wetlands Protection program funds to core
statutory requirements while providing states and tribes with the flexibility they need to best
address their particular priorities. This includes continued EPA assistance for states and tribes
interested in assuming administration of the CWA Section 404 program. EPA will continue to
administer Wetland Program Development Grants in support of state and tribal wetland programs,
with a focus on working more efficiently with states and tribes to achieve specific program
development outcomes.110
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$507.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$3,516.0/ -22.3 FTE) This program change reduces resources for the Wetlands program.
EPA will work with USACE, states, and tribes to increase consistency and predictability
in the Wetlands program as well as streamlining business processes.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act, § 404.
110 For more information, visit https://www.epa.gov/wetlandsor http://www.cfda.gov.
338
-------
National Estuary Program / Coastal Waterways
Program Area: Water: Ecosystems
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
N 2(>."').I
S 20.5-12.0
so.o
-.S 2(1.5-12.0
Total Budget Authority
$26,759.1
$26,542.0
$0.0
-$26,542.0
Total Workyears
34.3
43.6
0.0
-43.6
Program Project Description:
The National Estuary Program (NEP)/Coastal Waterways programs works to restore the physical,
chemical, and biological integrity of estuaries of national significance and coastal watersheds to
protect and restore water quality, habitat, and living resources.111
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE have been eliminated for this program in FY 2019.
Performance Measure Targets:
This proposed disinvestment means that the Agency will no longer publish measures associated
with this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$26,542.0/ -43.6 FTE) This program change eliminates the National Estuary
Program/Coastal Waterways programs. EPA will encourage states to continue this work
and continue to implement conservation management plans.
Statutory Authority:
Great Lakes Legacy Reauthorization Act of 2008; Clean Water Act, Section 320; Estuaries and
Clean Waters Act of 2000; Protection and Restoration Act of 1990; North American Wetlands
Conservation Act.
111 For more information, visit https://www.epa.gov/nep.
339
-------
Water: Human Health Protection
340
-------
Drinking Water Programs
Program Area: Water: Human Health Protection
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017 Actuals
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Unvirinimcnliil
Program &
Munugcmcnl
svt.v/
S Vh.200.0
SS0.5-/3.0
-S J 5.05-.0
Science & Technology
$3,517.0
$3,495.0
$3,595.0
$100.0
Total Budget Authority
$99,434.2
$99,695.0
$84,138.0
-$15,557.0
Total Workyears
505.3
522.7
443.3
-79.4
Program Project Description:
Safe drinking water is critical for protecting human health and the economic vitality of the nation.
Approximately 320 million Americans rely on the safety of tap water provided by public water
systems (PWSs) that are subject to national drinking water standards.112 EPA's Drinking Water
Program is based on a multiple-barrier and source-to-tap approach to protecting public health from
contaminants in drinking water. EPA protects public health through: (1) source water assessment
and protection; (2) promulgation of new or revised National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
(NPDWRs); (3) training, technical assistance, and financial assistance programs to enhance public
water system capacity to comply with regulations and provide safe drinking water; (4)
underground injection control (UIC) programs; (5) supporting implementation of NPDWRs by
state and tribal drinking water programs through regulatory, non-regulatory, and voluntary
programs and policies; and (6) providing states and tribes with resources and tools to support the
financing of water infrastructure improvements.113
In recent years, water contamination from harmful algal blooms on Lake Erie, and a chemical
storage tank leak on the Elk River that lead to "do not drink" and "do not use" advisories in Toledo,
OH and Charleston, WV, respectively, prevented access to safe drinking water for residents,
hospitals, schools, and businesses in these communities, causing economic impacts in the tens of
millions of dollars. The drinking water issues in Flint, Michigan and East Chicago, Indiana
highlighted the need for additional attention to lead in drinking water. In addition per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAs) such as Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA),
Perfluorooctanesufonic acid (PFOS) and Gen-X have been detected in drinking water systems and
there is increased demand for tools that can help communities across the country protect public
health and address these chemicals. These events highlight the importance of safe drinking water
112 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS/FED),
http://water.epa.gov/scitech/datait/databases/drink/sdwisfed/index.cfm.
113 For more information, please see https://www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water and https://www.cfda.gov.
341
-------
to public health and local economies, and in particular, the need to prioritize threats and protect
drinking water sources.
In FY 2017, 92.8 percent of the population served by Community Water Systems (CWSs) received
drinking water that met all applicable health-based drinking water standards. Ongoing compliance
challenges include violations related to the Lead and Copper, the revised Total Coliform, the Stage
2 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts, and the Nitrates Rules.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.2, Provide Clean and Safe Water in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will continue its core mission to protect
the public from contaminants in drinking water by: (1) developing new and revised drinking water
standards; (2) supporting states, tribes, and water systems in implementing standards; (3) enabling
financing of infrastructure projects while promoting partnerships and sustainable management of
drinking water systems; and (4) promoting source water protection and implementing the
underground injection control (UIC) program. In FY 2019, the Agency will continue to streamline
its business processes and systems to reduce reporting burden on states and regulated facilities,
and improve the effectiveness and efficiency of regulatory programs for EPA, states, and tribes.
Water Infrastructure
With the aging of the nation's critical water infrastructure and a growing need for investment, the
drinking water and wastewater sectors face a significant challenge to maintain and advance the
achievements attained in protecting public health and the environment. In FY 2019, EPA will
continue its robust funding of the nation's infrastructure. EPA will focus efforts to leverage and
encourage public and private collaborative efforts and investments in improving the Nation's water
infrastructure.
This program supports the policy and fiduciary oversight of the Drinking Water State Revolving
Fund (DWSRF) program, which provides low-interest loans to help finance drinking water
infrastructure improvements needed to achieve compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act
(SDWA). The program supports policies and outreach that help ensure the good financial condition
of the State Revolving Funds.
The FY 2019 budget continues to provide funding for the Environmental Finance program which
will help communities across the country improve their wastewater, drinking water, and
stormwater systems, particularly through innovative financing. EPA will continue to support
financing and construction of drinking water infrastructure and encourage public water systems to
adopt sustainable management practices by doing the following:
• Provide states with funds, through the DWSRF capitalization grants, for low-interest loans
to assist utilities with financing drinking water infrastructure needs and to support utility
compliance with SDWA standards;
• Provide non-infrastructure support for states to use the set-asides in the DWSRF to build
water system technical and managerial capacity;
342
-------
• Provide effective oversight of the DWSRF funds;
• Advise states on maintaining their capacity development and operator certification
programs to support compliance by public water systems with the SDWA and to enable
water systems, especially small systems, to meet statutory prerequisites for receiving
infrastructure financing;
• Encourage states to develop state-centric tools, in lieu of national tools, to assist water
systems with capacity development; and
• Continue to support close coordination between state infrastructure and PWSS programs.
Drinking Water Implementation
In FY 2019, the Agency will continue to work with states to implement requirements for all
NPDWRs to ensure that systems install, operate, and maintain appropriate levels of treatment and
effectively manage their distribution systems. In particular, EPA will continue to focus on working
with states to optimize corrosion control treatment and develop other strategies to minimize
exposure to lead. EPA also will continue to require states to report violations data at all public
water systems for all rules, including requirements to protect against Cryptosporidium, to control
disinfection byproducts and to implement the Revised Total Coliform Rule.
While most small systems consistently provide safe and reliable drinking water to their customers,
many small systems face challenges with aging infrastructure, complying with regulatory
requirements, workforce shortages and high staff turnover, increasing costs, and declining rate
bases. In FY 2017, small community water system violations made up 94 percent of overall
violations;114 and in Indian Country, 90.5 percent of the population served by CWSs received
drinking water that met all applicable health-based standards. EPA will continue to focus on small
systems by strengthening and targeting financial assistance, in coordination with state
infrastructure programs, to support rehabilitation of the nation's infrastructure.
Drinking water system partnerships provide opportunities to increase capacity by working together
to solve compliance challenges, share costs of operations and maintenance activities, and leverage
other resources. EPA's new website highlights ways partnerships can address these challenges,
leading to enhanced public health by working together and sharing information:
https://www.epa.gov/dwcapacitY/water-svstem-partnerships. The Agency will continue to
promote partnerships among water systems to build capacity and work with states and tribes, as
well as with utility associations, third-party technical assistance providers and other federal
partners, to promote the sustainability practices that are the foundation for building technical,
managerial, and financial capacity, known as Capacity Development.115
Key to addressing the most pressing public water system issues is being able to identify which
systems have the greatest need and then efficiently interacting with those systems. In FY 2019,
EPA will continue working with states to transition to the SDWIS Prime program management
and reporting tool. SDWIS Prime is a centralized infrastructure technology system that will replace
SDWIS State, currently used by the majority of state drinking water programs, and other systems
that are hosted and operated separately by each primacy agency. Benefits of this transition to
114 For more information, see: https://www.epa.gov/waterdata/drinking-water-tools.
115 For more information, see: http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/drink/pws/smallsvstems/index.cfm.
343
-------
SDWIS Prime include improvements in program efficiency and data quality, greater public access
to drinking water data, facilitation of electronic reporting, reductions in reporting burdens on
laboratories and water utilities, reductions in data management burden for states, and ultimately
reduction in public health risk.
In FY 2016, EPA released the Compliance Monitoring Data Portal (CMDP) enabling drinking
water utilities and laboratories to report drinking water data electronically to primacy agencies. In
FY 2017, EPA provided support for the first three primacy agencies to receive utility compliance
data electronically, and supported over twenty additional primacy agencies with testing CMDP
and preparation to move to the system. The portal increases data accuracy and completeness and,
once fully implemented, could decrease the overall reporting burden for primacy agencies by
hundreds of thousands of hours. Primacy agencies can use the portal-reported data to make more
informed decisions about water system compliance and focus their limited resources on preventing
and responding to public health problems. In FY 2018 and FY 2019, EPA will be assisting
additional primacy agencies in testing and utilizing CMDP to receive drinking water compliance
sampling data electronically.
In FY 2019, EPA also will conduct the following activities to facilitate compliance with rules:
• Oversee the national Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) program by administering
the PWSS grants to states and measuring program results based on state reporting of health-
based rule violations at public water systems for over 90 drinking water contaminants (i.e.,
microbial pathogens and disinfection byproducts, other chemicals, and radiological
contaminants);
• Offer training and technical assistance on a prioritized basis to states, tribes, and public
water systems for the Lead and Copper Rule (LCR);
• Directly implement the Aircraft Drinking Water Rule, designed to protect millions of
people who travel on approximately 5,700 aircraft in the U.S., if necessary to address
identified significant risks; and
• Directly implement the drinking water program where states and tribes do not have primacy
(e.g., Wyoming, the District of Columbia, and tribal lands), focused on actions that are
under court order or address significant identified risks.
Drinking Water Standards
To assure the American people that their water is safe to drink, EPA's drinking water regulatory
program monitors for a broad array of contaminants, evaluates whether contaminants are of public
health concern, and regulates contaminants when there is a meaningful opportunity for health risk
reduction for persons served by public water systems. In addition, EPA will work to reduce lead
risks by continuing to work on revisions to the LCR, and regulations to implement the Water
Infrastructure Improvement for the Nation Act and the Reduction of Lead in Drinking Water Act
(RLDWA). EPA will continue its communication with states, tribes, and communities, to
understand local perspectives on the quality of drinking water.
The Agency also will continue to evaluate and address drinking water risks in FY 2019, including:
344
-------
• Preparing regulatory decisions for perchlorate by October 2018 in accordance with a
consent decree.
• Evaluating recommendations from stakeholders to develop revisions to the LCR.
• Evaluating the public comments and any additional data received on the proposed rule that
makes changes to existing "lead free" regulations based on the 2011 RLDWA and the 2013
Community Fire Safety Act that prohibits the use and introduction into commerce of lead
pipes, plumbing fittings or fixtures, and solder and flux.116
• Collecting and analyzing health effects and occurrence data to assess contaminants on the
fourth contaminant candidate list (CCL 4), that includes PFOA, PFOS, and 1-4 Dioxane,
for regulatory determinations. Continued evaluation of these contaminants in FY 2019 is
critical for the Agency to publish preliminary determinations,
• Leading a cross-agency effort to address PFAs, which include PFOA, PFOS and GenX to
better understand the health impacts, the extent of occurrence in the environment and
exposures to PFAS and to develop tools for states, tribes and local communities.
• Providing support to and oversight of drinking water systems and laboratories as they
collect and analyze samples during the implementation of the fourth Unregulated
Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4). UCMR 4 requires monitoring for 30 chemical
contaminants between 2018 and 2020.
Source Water Protection
EPA will continue to partner with states, drinking water utilities, and other stakeholders to identify
and address current and potential sources of drinking water contamination. These efforts are
integral to the sustainable infrastructure effort because source water protection can reduce the need
for additional drinking water treatment and the associated additional infrastructure costs and
energy usage, while better protecting public health.
In FY 2019, the Agency will:
• Work with state, utility, and local stakeholder organizations to encourage continuing
engagement in the Source Water Collaborative,117 which works to leverage resources,
support efforts to assist communities in source water protection activities and projects, and
promote ongoing efforts to protect drinking water sources.
• Continue to support users of the existing data-layers of the Drinking Water Mapping
Application for Protecting Source Waters (DWMAPS)118 through EPA's geoplatform.
This online GIS-based application enables states, utilities and others to combine national
datasets previously integrated with DWMAPS with their own datasets, such as chemical
storage facilities and sensitive drinking water intakes, to evaluate threats to drinking water.
DWMAPS also allows users to leverage CWA data to analyze and coordinate water quality
assessments, impaired waters, and point source permit information to protect drinking
water sources.
116 For more information, see: https://www.epa.gov/dwstandardsregulationsAise-lead-free-pipes-fittings-fixtures-solder-and-fIux-
117 For more information, see: https://www.epa.gov/sourcewaterprotection/source-water-collaborative.
118 For more information, see: https://www.epa.gov/sourcewaterprotection/dwmaps.
345
-------
Underground Injection Control (UIC)
In order to safeguard current and future underground sources of drinking water from
contamination, the UIC program regulates the construction, operation, permitting, and closure of
injection wells that place fluids underground for storage, disposal, enhanced recovery of oil and
gas, and minerals recovery. The number of UIC wells, especially Class II oil- and gas-related wells,
has risen significantly in recent years, and this trend is expected to continue. Additionally, as
population growth, land use changes and drought exacerbate water supply challenges in many
areas of the country, management of water availability has become increasingly important in
providing safe and reliable drinking water to communities.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to provide technical support to states and tribes in making
permitting decisions, providing training for and oversight to implementation of underground
injection regulations, and directly implement the UIC regulations where EPA has primary
authority. Activities include:
• Working with the Ground Water Protection Council, Interstate Oil and Gas Compact
Commission, and the National Rural Water Association to identify best practices in oil and
gas development, such as reuse and recycling of produced water, that can help safeguard
public health, recognizing the important role that energy extraction, including natural gas
development plays in our energy future;
• Working with authorized state and tribal agencies in their efforts to effectively manage
Class II enhanced oil and gas recovery wells and oil and gas-related disposal wells in a
rapidly growing energy sector to protect underground sources of drinking water;
• Working towards transferring primary enforcement authority from EPA direct
implementation to state and tribal programs that apply for primacy.
• Reviewing, approving, and codifying state UIC program changes, such as updates to Class
V regulations in Oregon and Class V and Class II changes in Idaho.
• Promoting implementation of a nationally consistent and predictable approach to reviewing
and approving aquifer exemption requests;
• Working with the State of California to review and approve aquifer exemptions so that the
state program is consistent with the SDWA and UIC regulations. EPA approved six aquifer
exemptions in 2017, and will continue to review as they are submitted to EPA;
• Providing technical assistance, tools and strategies to states for improving implementation
of UIC programs, including approaches to reduce the number of earthquake events related
to underground injection activities; and
• Using national UIC data to assist with program oversight of state and EPA UIC programs.
Performance Measure Targets:
(DW-04) Percentage of the population in Indian Country served by community
water systems that receive drinking water that meets all applicable health-based
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
drinking water standards.
87
88
346
-------
(DW-03) Percentage of population served by CWSs that receive drinking water that
meets all applicable health-based drinking water standards through approaches
including effective treatment and source water protection.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
92
92
(DW-02) Number of community water systems without a sanitary survey within the
last three years (five years for outstanding performance).
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
4,473
4,373
(DW-01) Number of community water systems out of compliance with health-based
standards.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
3,510
3,420
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$2,122.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$17,779.0 / -77.3 FTE) This program change represents a reduction in the Drinking Water
Programs and streamlining activities. The program will continue to seek efficiencies in
operations and evaluate and prioritize resources across activities.
Statutory Authority:
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA); Clean Water Act.
347
-------
Beach / Fish Programs
Program Area: Water: Human Health Protection
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
SJJ6-UI
Sl.fiJS.O
so.o
-S U>3XM
Total Budget Authority
$1,364.0
$1,638.0
$0.0
-$1,638.0
Total Workyears
1.2
3.8
0.0
-3.8
Program Project Description:
The Fish component of the Beach/Fish Programs provides up-to-date-science, guidance, technical
assistance, and nationwide information to state, tribal, and federal agencies on the human health
risks associated with eating potentially contaminated locally caught fish.
The Beach component of the Beach/Fish Programs provides up-to-date science, guidance,
technical assistance and nationwide information to state, tribal, and federal agencies on the human
health risks of swimming in pathogen contaminated waters.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE have been eliminated for this program in FY 2019. The Agency will encourage
states to continue this work within ongoing core programs.
Performance Measure Targets:
This proposed disinvestment means that the Agency will no longer publish measures associated
with this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$1,638.0/ -3.8 FTE) This program change eliminates the Beach/Fish Programs, which is
a mature, well-established program with objectives that can continue to be implemented at
the local level.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act, § 104.
348
-------
Water Quality Protection
349
-------
Surface Water Protection
Program Area: Water Quality Protection
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017 Actuals
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Unvirinimcnliil
Program &
Munugcmcnl
SIVSJSV.-I
SIVK.NNfi.il
SI
-S2J.UJI.0
Total Budget Authority
$198,589.4
$198,886.0
$174,975.0
-$23,911.0
Total Workyears
994.1
1,015.9
937.1
-78.8
Program Project Description:
The Surface Water Protection program, under the Clean Water Act (CWA), directly supports
efforts to protect, improve, and restore the quality of our nation's rivers, lakes, and streams. EPA
works with states and tribes to make continued progress toward clean water goals.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.2, Provide Clean and Safe Water in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. EPA will work with states and tribes to target funds to core
requirements while providing states and tribes with flexibility to best address their particular
priorities for Surface Water Protection.
Program Implementation
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to provide scientific water quality criteria information, review and
approve state water quality standards, and review and approve state lists of impaired waters. Water
quality criteria and standards provide the scientific and regulatory foundation for water quality
protection programs under the CWA. EPA will continue to support state and tribal programs by
providing scientific water quality criteria information as required by CWA section 304. EPA also
will continue to support states and authorized tribes in adopting and implementing water quality
standards in accordance with the water quality standards regulation at 40 CFR part 131.
EPA will continue to establish or revise effluent guidelines as required under the CWA, including
the completion of annual reviews of industrial wastewater discharges, publishing preliminary
effluent limitation guideline plans for public review, and then final biennial plans informed by
public comment. As required under CWA Section 304(h), EPA will revise existing and adopt new
analytical test methods for measuring pollutants in wastewater to incorporate cheaper, safer, faster,
more sensitive and/or more accurate analytical test methods.
350
-------
EPA will work with states and other partners on Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) as
required by CWA section 303(d) and on other waterbody restoration plans for listed impaired
waterbodies. TMDLs focus on clearly defined environmental goals and establish a pollutant
budget, which is then implemented through local, state, and federal watershed plans and programs
to restore waters. EPA will work with states and tribes on their section 303(d) program and plans
and ensure they are effective. Support also will be provided to control nonpoint sources of pollution
and ensure the protection of high-quality waters.
EPA will continue working with states and tribes to support the National Aquatic Resource
Surveys (NARS) statistically representative monitoring of the condition of the nation's waters
which support CWA section 305(b). EPA will continue working with states and tribes to support
base water quality monitoring and priority enhancements that serve state and tribal CWA programs
in a cost-efficient and effective manner. EPA will continue supporting state and tribal water quality
data exchange and tools to maximize use of data from multiple organizations to support water
quality management decisions.
EPA and the Department of the Army are implementing the President's Executive Order directing
the Administrator of EPA and the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works to review the
2015 Clean Water Rule (CWR) and publish for notice and comment a proposed rule rescinding or
revising the rule, as appropriate and consistent with law. To date, the agencies have published a
proposed rule to rescind the definition of "Waters of the United States" promulgated in the CWR
and re-codify the previous definition in place prior to the rule. In addition, while the agencies
substantively reconsider the definition of "Waters of the United States," they have finalized a rule
which will have the effect of delaying any implementation of the 2015 Clean Water Rule for two
years.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to implement and support the core water quality programs that
control point source discharges through permitting and pretreatment programs. The National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program under the CWA works with states to
structure the permit program to better support comprehensive protection of water quality on a
watershed basis.
Infrastructure
EPA will continue its support of the nation's infrastructure. EPA will focus efforts to leverage and
encourage public and private collaborative efforts and investments in improving the Nation's water
infrastructure. This program supports the policy and fiduciary oversight of the Clean Water State
Revolving Fund Loan program, which provides low-interest loans to help finance wastewater
treatment facilities and other water quality projects. The program supports policies and outreach
that help ensure the good financial condition of the State Revolving Funds.
Part of this program supports the Clean Watershed Needs Survey (CWNS). The CWNS is an
assessment of the capital needs to meet the water quality goals set in the Clean Water Act.
351
-------
The FY 2019 budget supports funding for the Environmental Finance program which will help
communities across the country improve their wastewater and stormwater systems, particularly
through innovative financing.
Program Oversight/Accountability
States and tribes play a critical role in implementing the CWA. For programs where states and
tribes have primacy, the Agency will focus on providing oversight and assistance.
The Agency will continue to support states in electronically reporting 303(d) and 305(b)
assessment conclusions through the Assessment and TMDL Tracking Implementation System
(ATTAINS) to track improvements in impaired waters. This tool reduces burden on states to track
and report progress in meeting water quality standards in waters targeted for local action and
greatly improve evidence-based tracking of local actions to improve water quality. In addition, as
required under the CWA and Executive Orders 12866, 135638, and 13771, EPA will continue to
support cost-benefit analysis for CWA regulatory and deregulatory actions.
Performance Measure Targets:
(SWP-01) Reduction in the number of square miles of watershed with surface water
not meeting standards (cumulative).
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
No Target
Established
9,000
(NPDES-02) Percentage of high-priority EPA and state NPDES permits (including
tribal) that are issued in the fiscal year.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
80
80
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$4,255.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$28,166.0/ -78.8 FTE) This program change reduces Surface Water Protection program
resources, including the elimination of the WaterSense program and certain activities in
the Urban Waters program. EPA will focus remaining resources on statutory requirements
and highest priority work.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act; Clean Water Act; Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (Ocean
Dumping Act); Marine Debris Research, Prevention and Reduction Act of 2006; Marine Plastic
Pollution Research and Control Act of 1987.
352
-------
Marine Pollution
Program Area: Water Quality Protection
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
S U.M4.4
SI 0.102.0
S 0.0
-SI 0.102.0
Total Budget Authority
$11,694.4
$10,102.0
$0.0
-$10,102.0
Total Workyears
36.1
37.4
0.0
-37.4
Program Project Description:
EPA's Marine Pollution Program partners with other agencies, including the Department of
Defense, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and others to integrate
management of oceans and coasts. This program aims to: 1) ensure marine ecosystem protection;
2) manage ocean dumping of dredged material and limit and prevent disposal of wastes and other
materials in the ocean; 3) address emerging environmental threats to the marine and coastal water
quality; 4) protect sensitive marine habitats; and 5) gather data and undertake research to inform
policy and program decisions for protection of the marine and near coastal environment.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE have been eliminated for this program in FY 2019. EPA will seek opportunities
to continue to meet statutory mandates through the national water program.
Performance Measure Targets:
This proposed disinvestment means that the Agency will no longer publish measures associated
with this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$10,102.0/ -37.4 FTE) This program change eliminates the Marine Pollution program.
Other federal agencies may continue to support these efforts.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act; Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (Ocean Dumping Act);
Marine Debris Research, Prevention and Reduction Act of 2006; Marine Plastic Pollution
Research and Control Act of 1987.
353
-------
Indoor Air and Radiation
354
-------
Radiation: Response Preparedness
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017 Actuals
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
liiiviriinmcnlul
Program &
Munugcmcnl
S 2.54X1
S 2.5'X0
S 2.221.0
-SXi2.0
Science & Technology
$3,785.0
$3,658.0
$3,666.0
$8.0
Total Budget Authority
$6,328.1
$6,231.0
$5,887.0
-$344.0
Total Workyears
39.7
39.2
31.5
-7.7
Program Project Description:
EPA generates policy guidance and procedures for the Agency's radiological emergency
response under the National Response Framework (NRF) and the National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). The Agency maintains its own Radiological
Emergency Response Team (RERT) and is a member of the Federal Radiological Preparedness
Coordinating Committee (FRPCC) and the Federal Advisory Team for Environment, Food and
Health (the "A-Team"). EPA continues to respond to radiological emergencies, conducts essential
national and regional radiological response planning and training, and develops response
plans for radiological incidents or accidents.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.1, Improve Air Quality in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to evaluate its resources and
streamline activities across radiological emergency response activities and assets to focus on
essential preparedness work. The RERT will maintain essential readiness to support federal
radiological emergency response and recovery operations under the NRF and NCP. EPA will
design and conduct essential training and exercises to maintain the RERT's ability to fulfill
EPA's responsibilities and improve overall radiation response preparedness.119
Evaluation of Response Plans
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to work with interagency partners under the FRPCC to revise
federal radiation emergency response plans and develop radiological emergency response
protocols and standards as resources dictate. The Agency will continue to use guidance
addressing lessons learned from incidents and exercises to ensure the effective delivery of EPA
support in coordination with other federal and state response agencies.
119 For additional information see: https://www.epa.gov/radiation/radiological-emergencv-response-expertise-and-equipment.
355
-------
Coordinating Preparedness Efforts
EPA will continue essential planning and participation in international and federal table-top
and field exercises, including radiological anti-terrorism activities with the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC), the Department of Energy (DOE), the Department of Defense
(DOD), and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The Agency also will continue to
train state, local and federal officials; provide technical support on priority issues to federal
and state radiation, emergency management, solid waste and health programs responsible for
radiological emergency response; and develop preparedness programs.
Assessment
EPA will continue to develop and use both laboratory and field measurement methods;
procedures and quality systems to support expedited assessment; and characterization of areas
impacted with radiological contamination. These methods and procedures will support rapid
assessment and triage of impacted areas (including buildings, indoor environments and
infrastructure) and the development of cleanup strategies.
Performance Measure Targets:
(R35) Percentage level of readiness of radiation program personnel and assets to
support federal radiological emergency response and recovery operations.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
80
80
(R36) Average number of days before availability of quality assured ambient
radiation air monitoring data during an emergency.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
0.3
0.3
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$162.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of base
workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce support,
and benefit costs.
• (-$514.0/ -3.4 FTE) This program change is a reduction in the Radiation: Response
Preparedness program, decreasing technical support for stakeholders that are responsible
for radiological emergency response.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA);
Homeland Security Act of 2002; Atomic Energy Act of 1954; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970,
84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485 (codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's
organic statute); Clean Air Act; Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006
(PKEMRA); Public Health Service Act (PHSA); Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act; Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA).
356
-------
357
-------
Indoor Air: Radon Program
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
SJ.VXxV
S 3. II 5.0
so.o
-S3.1I.\0
Science & Technology
$145.0
$158.0
$0.0
-$158.0
Total Budget Authority
$3,130.9
$3,273.0
$0.0
-$3,273.0
Total Workyears
9.2
10.6
0.0
-10.6
Program Project Description:
Title III of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) authorizes EPA to undertake a variety of
activities to address the public health risk posed by exposure to indoor radon. Under the statute,
EPA studies the health effects of radon, assesses exposure levels, sets an action level, provides
technical assistance, and advises the public of steps they can take to reduce exposure. For over
30 years EPA's radon program has provided important guidance and significant funding to help
states establish their own programs.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE for this program are proposed for elimination in FY 2019. This is a mature
program where states have technical capacity to continue this work.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$3,115.0/ -10.6 FTE) This program change proposes to eliminate the Indoor Air: Radon
program.
Statutory Authority:
Title III of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); Title IV of the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA); Clean Air Act.
358
-------
Radiation: Protection
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
S "iSVA I
SS.tlV.O
S2.000.0
-vo/v.«
Science & Technology
$2,328.6
$1,996.0
$1,000.0
-$996.0
Hazardous Substance Superfund
$1,833.6
$1,972.0
$1,972.0
$0.0
Total Budget Authority
$11,942.3
$12,487.0
$4,972.0
-$7,515.0
Total Workyears
58.9
59.1
25.0
-34.1
Program Project Description:
EPA has general and specific duties to protect human health and the environment from harmful
and avoidable exposure to radiation under the Atomic Energy Act; Clean Air Act; Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act; Energy Policy Act; Nuclear Waste
Policy Act; Public Health Service Act; Safe Drinking Water Act; Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation
Control Act; Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Land Withdrawal Act; Marine Protection, Research, and
Sanctuaries Act; and Clean Water Act.
EPA's Radiation Protection Program carries out these responsibilities through its federal
guidance and standard-setting activities, including: regulatory oversight of radioactive waste
disposal standards at the Department of Energy's Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP);120 the
regulation of airborne radioactive emissions; and the development and determination of
appropriate methods to measure radioactive releases and exposures under Section 112 of the
Clean Air Act.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.1, Improve Air Quality in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. EPA will meet its statutory obligation to implement its regulatory
oversight responsibilities for Department of Energy (DOE) activities at the Waste Isolation
Pilot Plant (WIPP) facility, as mandated by Congress in the WIPP Land Withdrawal Act of
1992. EPA also will review and update regulation or guidance, as necessary.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
120 Additional information at: http://www.epa.gov/radiation/wipp/background.html.
359
-------
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$396.0) This change to fixed and other costs is a decrease due to the recalculation of base
workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce support,
and benefit costs.
• (-$6,123.0/ -26.8 FTE) This program change reduces support activities in the Radiation:
Protection program to focus Agency resources on priority activities, including
implementation of waste disposal standards at the WIPP.
Statutory Authority:
Atomic Energy Act of 1954; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by
Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485 (codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute); Clean Air Act;
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA); Energy
Policy Act of 1992; Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982; Public Health Service Act; Safe Drinking
Water Act; Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) of 1978; Waste Isolation
Pilot Plant Land Withdrawal Act of 1992; Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act; Clean
Water Act.
360
-------
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
/¦jiviroiniwnlul Program A- Manugcmcnl
SlJJttv.J
SI.\2-/2.0
so.o
-.S 1X2-12.1)
Science & Technology
$253.3
$144.0
$0.0
-$144.0
Total Budget Authority
$13,642.4
$13,386.0
$0.0
-$13,386.0
Total Workyears
38.6
40.7
0.0
-40.7
Program Project Description:
Title IV of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) authorizes EPA
to conduct and coordinate research on indoor air quality, develop and disseminate information,
and coordinate risk reduction efforts at the federal, state, and local levels. EPA utilizes a range of
strategies, including partnerships with non-governmental, professional, federal, state and local
organizations, to educate and prepare individuals, school districts, industry, the health care
community, and others to take action to reduce health risks from poor indoor air quality in homes,
schools, and other buildings.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE for this program are proposed for elimination in FY 2019. This is a mature
program where states have technical capacity to continue this work.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$13,242.0/ -39.1 FTE) This change proposes to eliminate funding for the Reduce Risks
from Indoor Air program.
Statutory Authority:
Title III of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); Title IV of the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA); Clean Air Act.
361
-------
Congressional Priorities
362
-------
Water Quality Research and Support Grants
Program Area: Congressional Priorities
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017 Actuals
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Unvirinimcnliil
Program &
Munugcmcnl
si 2. Mfi.it
S 12.01-1.0
sit.it
-SI2.hN.lt
Science & Technology
$7,803.4
$4,072.0
$0.0
-$4,072.0
Total Budget Authority
$20,491.4
$16,686.0
$0.0
-$16,686.0
Program Project Description:
The purpose of this program is to provide training and technical assistance for small public water
systems to help such systems achieve and maintain compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act
(SDWA) and to provide training and technical assistance for small publicly-owned wastewater
systems, communities served by onsite/decentralized wastewater systems, and private well owners
to improve water quality under the Clean Water Act (CWA).
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE have been eliminated for this program in FY 2019. States have the ability to
develop technical assistance plans for their water systems using Public Water System Supervision
funds and set-asides from the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF).
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$12,614.0) This funding change eliminates the Water Quality competitive grant program
since resources are available through other existing programs and states are best positioned
to develop technical assistance plans for their water systems.
Statutory Authority:
SDWA, 42 U.S.C. §300j-lc, Section 1442. CWA. 104(b)(3).
363
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Office of Inspector General
Resource Summary Table 365
Program Projects in IG 365
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations 366
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations 367
363
-------
364
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION: Inspector General
Resource Summary Table
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2019 Pres
FY 2018
Budget v.
FY 2017
Annualized
FY 2019
FY 2018
Actuals
CR
Pres Budget
Annualized CR
Inspector General
Budget Authority
$41,053.7
$41,207.0
$37,475.0
-$3,732.0
Total Workyears
219.0
268.0
201.4
-66.6
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the
Superfund account.
Bill Language: Inspector General
For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General in carrying out the provisions of the
Inspector General Act of1978, $37,475,000, to remain available until September 30, 2020.
Program Projects in IG
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Pro ject
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
$41,053.7
$41,207.0
$37,475.0
-$3,732.0
TOTAL IG
$41,053.7
$41,207.0
$37,475.0
-$3,732.0
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the Superfund
account.
365
-------
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
366
-------
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Program Area: Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Inspector (icncriil
S-I1.0H3. ~
s -ii.2ir.n
S3~.-I~xl>
-S.1. -J2.0
Hazardous Substance Superfund
$9,156.4
$8,718.0
$8,718.0
$0.0
Total Budget Authority
$50,210.1
$49,925.0
$46,193.0
-$3,732.0
Total Workyears
266.0
318.1
242.0
-76.1
Program Project Description:
EPA's Office of Inspector General (OIG) provides independent audit, program evaluation,
inspection and investigative services and products that fulfill the requirements of the Inspector
General Act, as amended, by identifying fraud, waste, and abuse in agency, grantee and contractor
operations, and by promoting economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in the operations of the
Agency's programs. Although the OIG is a part of EPA, to ensure its independence, as specified
in the IG Act (as amended), the OIG is funded with a separate appropriation within the Agency.
The OIG activities add value and enhance public trust and safety by providing the Agency, the
public, and Congress with independent analyses and recommendations that help EPA management
resolve risks and challenges, achieve opportunities for savings, and implement actions for
safeguarding EPA resources and accomplishing EPA's environmental goals. The OIG activities
also prevent and detect fraud in EPA's programs and operations, including financial fraud,
laboratory fraud, and cybercrime. The OIG consistently provides a significant positive return on
investment to the public in the form of recommendations for improvements in the delivery of
EPA's mission, reduction in operational and environmental risks, costs savings and recoveries,
and improvements in program efficiencies and integrity. The audit, program evaluation, inspection
and investigative services programs are directly supported through the OIG's management and
administrative functions of information technology, human resources, human capital, budget,
planning and performance, legal advice and counseling, report publishing and communications,
and congressional outreach.
In addition, EPA Inspector General was designated by Congress in 2004 to serve as the IG for the
U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB) and provides the full range of audit,
evaluation and investigative services specified by the Inspector General Act, as amended.
Specifically, the OIG conducts required audits of the CSB's financial statements and of CSB's
compliance with the Federal Information Security Management Act. In addition, the OIG performs
audits and evaluations of the CSB's programmatic and management activities and follow-up on
prior audit recommendations.
367
-------
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
EPA OIG assists the Agency in its efforts to reduce environmental and human health risks by
making recommendations to improve program operations; save taxpayer dollars; reduce the
potential for fraud, waste and abuse; respond to cybercrimes; and resolve previously identified
major management challenges and internal control weaknesses. In FY 2019, the OIG will continue
recommending improvements to operating efficiency, transparency, secured and trustworthy
systems, and the cost effective attainment of EPA's strategic goals and positive environmental
impacts. These recommendations include focus on the core mission of delivering real results to
provide Americans with clean air, land, and water.
OIG's plans are implemented through audits, evaluations, investigations, inspections, and follow-
up reviews in compliance with the Inspector General Act (as amended), the Generally Accepted
Government Accounting Standards, and the Quality Standards for Federal Offices of Inspector
General of the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency.
OIG conducts the following types of assignments focused on efficiency and program operations:
program performance, including a focus on the award and administration of grants and contracts;
statutorily mandated audits; financial reviews of grantees and contractors; and information
resources management. In addition, program performance evaluations will be conducted in the
areas of EPA's mission objectives for improving and protecting the environment and public health,
including: air; water; land cleanup and waste management; toxics, chemical management and
pollution prevention; and environmental research programs.
The investigative mission of the OIG continues to evolve in conducting criminal, civil, and
administrative investigations into fraud and serious misconduct within EPA programs and
operations that undermine the organization's integrity and public trust, or create an imminent risk
or danger. The OIG investigations are coordinated with the Department of Justice and other
federal, state, and local law enforcement entities. These investigations often lead to successful
prosecution and civil judgments wherein there is a recovery and repayment of financial losses.
Major areas of investigative focus include: financial fraud, program integrity, threats to the
Agency's resources, employee integrity, cybercrimes, and theft of intellectual or sensitive data.
A significant portion of audit resources will be devoted to statutorily mandated work assessing the
financial statements of EPA, as required by the Chief Financial Officers Act and the Accountability
of Tax Dollars Act of 2002, respectively. The OIG work also will include assessing the information
security practices of EPA as required by the Federal Information Security Management Act. The
OIG will examine the delivery and performance of national programs, as well as specific cross-
regional and single region or place based issues that represent a risk to public health and the
environment in response to stakeholder concerns.
368
-------
Based on prior work, cross-agency risk assessment, agency challenges, future priorities, and
extensive stakeholder input, the OIG will concentrate its resources on efforts in the following
strategic objectives and continuing or prospective assignment areas during FY 2019:
Sound and Economical Financial Management
Annual mandated improper payments audit
Internal controls, continuous assessment and risk management
Annual mandated financial statements audits
Audits of costs claimed by grantees and contractors
Grant and contract administration
Maximizing cost efficiencies and process improvement
Capital investments in information technology, equipment, facilities and other items
Technological changes create transformation opportunities
Annual mandated travel card program, including risk assessment
Annual mandated purchase card and convenience check program, including risk
assessment
Mandated Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) fees assessment in accordance with the
Digital Accountability and Transparency (DATA) Act
Efficiency and effectiveness of collection and payment processes
Efficient Processes and Use of Resources
• Management of Brownfields Program
• Partnering or coordination with other agencies to maximize efficiencies
Opportunities to reduce duplication, overlap and fragmentation within EPA
Grant, Interagency Agreement Grant, and Interagency Agreement Management
Efficiency and Effectiveness of Human Capital Management Programs
Ensuring the Integrity of EPA Information
Protection from advanced persistent threats to steal/modify data
Agency efforts to enhance its capability to respond to cyber-attacks
Cybersecurity/infrastructure development; and assessment of processes to ensure
protection and security of information systems from fraud, waste and abuse
File server security
Processes for Managing Background Investigations and Plan of Action and Milestones
Annual mandated audit of compliance with the Federal Information Security
Modernization Act
Oversight of Chief Information Officer's responsibilities under the Federal Information
Technology Acquisition Reform Act
Mandated readiness reviews of agency DATA act implementation efforts
Assessing Risk Management and Performance Measurement
• Implementation of Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act, Federal Information Security
Management Act and Government Performance and Results Act
• Disaster response and homeland security and emergency preparedness and response
• Construction grants and revolving loan funds awarded to states and territories
369
-------
• Review of contractor federal performance
• Assistance agreements related to cleanup and Brownfields
Assessing Program Integrity. Results. Oversight Enforcement
• Evaluation of the Management Audit Tracking System
• Evaluation of the Implementation of the Toxic Substances Control Act
• Oversight of Clean Water State Revolving Loan Funds
• Accessing EPA's policy, procedures, and internal controls to prevent or reduce improper
computer use
• Evaluations of EPA's programs and activities to protect human health and the environment
through progress toward air quality goals and compliance with requirements
• Evaluation of EPA's programs and adherence to requirements to protect and restore water
that sustains human health and the environment
• Evaluation of EPA's programs, activities, requirements and initiatives to protect human
health and the environment through hazardous waste cleanup, waste management, accident
prevention and emergency response
• Evaluations of EPA's programs and requirements to protect human health and the
environment from chemical risks, including implementation of the TSCA
• Evaluation of controls and processes in EPA's research and development programs that
support EPA's core mission to protect human health and the environment
Investigations
The Office of Investigations' (01) mission is to conduct criminal, civil, and administrative
investigations of fraud, waste and abuse and serious misconduct within EPA's programs, projects,
and resources. 01 investigations are worked in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Justice,
as well as state and local prosecutors, for criminal and civil litigation or with EPA management
for administrative action. 01 currently investigates the following: 1) fraudulent practices in
awarding, performing, and paying EPA contracts, grants, or other assistance agreements; 2)
program fraud or other acts that undermine the integrity of, or confidence in EPA programs, or
create an imminent environmental risk; 3) laboratory fraud relating to data, and false claims for
erroneous laboratory results that undermine the basis for decision-making, regulatory compliance,
or enforcement actions; 4) violent or criminal threats directed against EPA employees or facilities;
5) criminal conduct or serious administrative misconduct by EPA employees; and 6) intrusions
into and attacks against EPA's network supporting program data, as well as incidents of computer
misuse and theft of intellectual property or sensitive/proprietary data. Special attention will be
directed towards identifying the tactics, techniques, and procedures that are being utilized by
cybercriminals to obtain EPA information.
Finally, the 01 often makes observations or "lessons learned" for EPA's management to reduce
the Agency's vulnerability to criminal activity. The results of 01's investigations are published
and can serve as a deterrent to future misconduct. In addition, the 01's investigations provide
measurable results wherein recovery and restitution of financial losses are achieved and
administrative actions are taken to prevent those involved from further participation in any of
EPA's programs or operation.
370
-------
Follow-up and Policy/Regulatory Analysis
To further promote economy, efficiency and effectiveness, the OIG will conduct follow-up
reviews of agency responsiveness to the OIG's recommendations to determine if appropriate
actions have been taken and intended improvements have been achieved. This process will serve
as a means for keeping Congress and EPA leadership apprised of accomplishments and
opportunities for needed corrective actions, and facilitate greater accountability for results from
the OIG operations.
Additionally, as directed by the IG Act (as amended), the OIG also conducts reviews and analysis
of proposed and existing policies, rules, regulations and legislation to identify vulnerability to
waste, fraud and abuse. These reviews also consider possible duplication, gaps or conflicts with
existing authority, leading to recommendations for improvements in their structure, content and
application.
Performance Measure Targets:
(35C) Return on the annual dollar investment, as a percentage of the OIG budget,
from audits and investigations.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
160
160
(35B) Environmental and business recommendations or risks identified for
corrective action.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
460
460
(35A) Environmental and business actions taken for improved performance or risk
reduction.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
196
196
(35D) Criminal, civil, administrative, and fraud prevention actions.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
87
75
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$5,542.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support and benefit costs.
• (-$9,274.0/ -66.6 FTE) This program change is a reduction which will focus the amount of
audits, program evaluations and investigative case work on the highest priority work to
ensure the protection of critical environmental resources and the health and safety of the
American people.
Statutory Authority:
Inspector General Act, as amended; Inspector General Reform Act.
371
-------
Inspector General Reform Act:
The following information is provided pursuant to the requirements of the Inspector General
Reform Act:
• the aggregate budget request from the Inspector General for the operations of the OIG is
$62 million ($53 million Inspector General; $9 million Superfund Transfer);
• the aggregate President's Budget for the operations of the OIG is $46.2 million ($37.5
million Inspector General; $8.7 million Superfund Transfer);
• the portion of the aggregate President's Budget needed for training is $700 thousand ($574
thousand Inspector General; $126 thousand Superfund Transfer);
• the portion of the aggregate President's Budget needed to support the Council of the
Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency is $179 thousand ($143.2 thousand
Inspector General; $35.8 thousand Superfund Transfer).
"I certify as the Inspector General of the Environmental Protection Agency that the amount I have
requested for training satisfies all OIG training needs for FY 2019".
372
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Buildings and Facilities
Resource Summary Table 375
Program Projects in B&F 375
Homeland Security 376
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure 377
Operations and Administration 379
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 380
373
-------
374
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION: Building and Facilities
Resource Summary Table
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2019 Pres
FY 2018
Budget v.
FY 2017
Annualized
FY 2019
FY 2018
Actuals
CR
Pres Budget
Annualized CR
Building and Facilities
Budget Authority
$32,184.7
$34,233.0
$39,553.0
$5,320.0
Total Workyears
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Bill Language: Buildings and Facilities
For construction, repair, improvement, extension, alteration, and purchase offixed equipment or
facilities of, or for use by, the Environmental Protection Agency, $39,553,000, to remain available
until expended.
Program Projects in B&F
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Homeland Security
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA
Personnel and Infrastructure
$6,119.2
$6,631.0
$6,176.0
-$455.0
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
$26,065.5
$27,602.0
$33,377.0
$5,775.0
TOTAL B&F
$32,184.7
$34,233.0
$39,553.0
$5,320.0
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the Superfund
account.
375
-------
Homeland Security
376
-------
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure
Program Area: Homeland Security
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$4,918.0
$5,336.0
$4,986.0
-$350.0
Science & Technology
$438.0
$446.0
$500.0
$54.0
liuiliUnx anil l-'iicililies
S0.UV.2
S (i.l'fi.0
-S -155.0
Hazardous Substance Superfund
$1,306.2
$934.0
$934.0
$0.0
Total Budget Authority
$12,781.4
$13,347.0
$12,596.0
-$751.0
Total Workyears
5.9
12.2
12.2
0.0
Program Project Description:
This program supports the protection of federal employees, contractors, grantees, and private
citizens (occupants) who work within or visit EPA facilities. EPA occupies spaces nationwide.
EPA's buildings are a combination of headquarters and regional administrative offices, program
and research laboratories, and support facilities/warehouses. These facilities are either EPA
owned/leased or GSA owned/leased. This funding ensures federal mandates are met as they relate
to physical security and local emergency preparedness for our locations nationwide. These funds
support the physical security protection equipment and mechanisms required to protect occupants
during facility relocation (e.g., moves, new leases, consolidations, etc.), physical equipment
upgrades/modernization, or corrective actions required to address security vulnerabilities
identified during security assessments.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will ensure the following
security projects protect occupants and comply with federal mandates for physical security: (1)
relocation of Criminal Investigation Division offices in San Diego, Dallas, Philadelphia, Denver,
and Baton Rouge; (2) consolidation of the Corvallis, Willamette and Richmond labs; (3)
incorporate Helena office into the Region 8 Physical Access Controls System; (4) consolidate San
Francisco's COOP and Emergency Response equipment; (5) fund the first phase of the design of
the new entrance for Athens, Georgia; and (6) various closed circuit television and physical
security upgrades in response to vulnerabilities identified by previously conducted physical
security assessments.
377
-------
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$455.0) This program change will extend the schedule for moving the facility Physical
Access Control Systems to an enterprise ePAC solution.
Statutory Authority:
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004; Homeland Security Act of 2002;
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485
(codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute).
378
-------
Operations and Administration
379
-------
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$293,997.9
$305,844.0
$300,738.0
-$5,106.0
Science & Technology
$64,642.7
$67,875.0
$68,834.0
$959.0
liuiliUnx anil l-'iicililies
S
.s
1 *
1
S.\ "xt)
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
$502.2
$793.0
$773.0
-$20.0
Inland Oil Spill Programs
$376.2
$580.0
$665.0
$85.0
Hazardous Substance Superfund
$69,651.3
$75,985.0
$74,144.0
-$1,841.0
Total Budget Authority
$455,235.8
$478,679.0
$478,531.0
-$148.0
Total Workyears
323.4
356.7
318.0
-38.7
Program Project Description:
EPA's Buildings and Facilities (B&F) appropriation supports the design, construction, repair, and
improvement of EPA's federally owned and leased land and structures in accordance with
applicable codes and standards. Construction renovation and alteration projects costing more than
$150 thousand must use B&F funding.
B&F resources ensure that the Agency complies with various mandates and goals including: the
Energy Policy Act of 2005, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA), Executive
Order (EO) 13693,1 Planning for Federal Sustainability in the Next Decade, and regulatory
mandates associated with soil and water pesticides testing.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In accordance with the National Strategy for the Efficient
Use of Real Property 2015-2020 and HR 4465,2 th q Federal Assets Sale and Transfer Act of2016,
the Agency will continue to review its space needs. EPA is implementing a long-term space
consolidation plan that will reduce the number of occupied facilities, consolidate space within
remaining facilities, and reduce square footage wherever practical. B&F resources support facility-
related construction and the repair and improvement (R&I) of EPA's aging real estate inventory.
Good stewardship practices demand that the physical conditions, functionality, safety and health,
security, and research capabilities of the Agency's facilities are adequately maintained to ensure
1 For additional information, refer to: https://www.fedcenter.gov/programs/eol3693/.
2 For additional information, refer to: https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/4465. Federal Assets Sale and
Transfer Act of 2016.
380
-------
successful completion of EPA's mission requirements and goals. Timely repairs save resources in
the longer term.
Through master planning and nationwide efforts to use space more efficiently, EPA identifies B&F
projects to be conducted each fiscal year. Necessary projects usually exceed the amount of funding
available and nearly every project is important to the long-term condition or efficiency of the
buildings. Further, the need for B&F resources will continue to increase in order to comply with
GSA leasing practices requiring agencies to pay for B&F projects including sustainable features3
as tenant improvements (TI) or up front and ongoing project costs.
This requirement significantly increases TI cost for new leases at the same time that resources are
needed to consolidate space and move into new locations to reduce the Agency's footprint in
accordance with the Federal Asset Sale and Transfer Act of 2016.
In FY 2019, the Agency will continue to explore opportunities to reconfigure EPA's workplaces
with the goal of reducing long-term rent costs. During FY 2019, space consolidation (i.e. releasing
floors or portions of leased space) in Regions 2, 3, 6 and 8 will cumulatively release over 226,000
square feet and save approximately $7.8 million in rent. Space consolidation and reconfiguration
enables EPA to reduce its footprint to create a more efficient, collaborative, and technologically
sophisticated workplace. However, even if modifications are kept to a minimum, each move
requires B&F funding.
The FY 2019 request also includes resources for ongoing projects that will provide critical
maintenance for aging laboratory facilities and are key to ensuring that the Agency has access to
preeminent laboratory science. These projects maintain a safe workplace, provide for high quality
science, support agency priorities, and advance the Agency's mission. Delaying essential repairs
results in the deterioration of EPA's facilities, which increases long-term repair costs and presents
safety risks.
In line with the Laboratory Study completed in 2014, EPA will focus on facility repairs in those
laboratories that are critical to the Agency's mission. These labs will need infrastructure upgrades
to maintain an acceptable Facility Condition Index and to allow for potential future consolidations
from leased facilities.
In FY 2019, the Agency proposes to continue or initiate space optimization projects with the
potential for the greatest long-term cost and energy savings, including but not limited to the
following:
• Optimizing space at the Athens, GA laboratory. EPA continues its work to consolidate
employees in leased laboratory space into owned space. Prior to optimizing the Agency's
space footprint in Athens, however, EPA must first invest in the design for the optimized
layout. The EPA requests $4 million in FY 2019 for this design work, which must occur
prior to any space optimization work.
3 Many of these features are required by EISA or executive orders.
381
-------
• Willamette Consolidation to the Corvallis laboratory. Before EPA consolidates the
Willamette laboratory, the Agency is in the process of modifying swing space in Corvallis,
OR to accommodate employees from Willamette, OR while the main infrastructure
replacement project is underway. This project will reduce the space footprint by 20,918
rentable square feet.
• Grosse lie to the National Vehicle Fuel and Emissions laboratory. EPA will move staff
into the owned laboratory facility in Ann Arbor, Michigan. The Agency must modify space
at the Ann Arbor laboratory to accommodate staff from Grosse lie, MI. Release of the
Grosse lie facility will result in a space reduction of approximately 35,000 square feet.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue its phased approach to accomplish major B&F projects across the
country involving mechanical systems nearing the end of their useful life that also will ultimately
result in energy savings. A few examples are listed below.
• Replacement of air handlers at the Air and Radiation laboratory, Montgomery, AL,
Phase 3. This phase of the project will replace the air handler systems within the laboratory
and complete the infrastructure replacement project. The timeline for Phase 2 was
extended, moving Phase 3 into FY 2019. This investment, which will produce energy and
related resource savings, represents a major priority as it is necessary to maintain
operability at the Montgomery, AL laboratory.
• Implementation of Phase 2 of the Infrastructure Replacement Project at the Research
and Development laboratory in Corvallis, OR. Phase 2 construction will continue in FY
2019 to renovate the laboratory and consolidate a portion of the Region 9 laboratory's
functions. The laboratory renovation will result in a reduction in energy consumption,
which will lead to utility cost avoidance. New energy efficient equipment, procedures, and
methods will incorporate reliability, sustainability, and safety while meeting mission
requirements.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$5,775.0) This program change increases funding for the Agency's planned progress in
regional space optimization and laboratory upgrade projects in Athens, GA, Corvallis, OR
and Gross lie, MI.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Property and Administration Services Act; Public Building Act; Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act; Clean Water Act; Clean Air Act; Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act
382
-------
(CERFA); Energy Policy Act of 2005; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as
amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485 (codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute).
383
-------
384
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Hazardous Substance Superfund
Resource Summary Table 387
Program Projects in Superfund 387
Indoor Air and Radiation 390
Radiation: Protection 391
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations 392
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations 393
Compliance 397
Compliance Monitoring 398
Enforcement 400
Criminal Enforcement 401
Forensics Support 403
Superfund: Enforcement 405
Environmental Justice 408
Superfund: Federal Facilities Enforcement 410
Homeland Security 412
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and Recovery 413
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure 415
Information Exchange / Outreach 417
Exchange Network 418
IT/ Data Management/ Security 421
Information Security 422
IT / Data Management 425
Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review 429
Legal Advice: Environmental Program 430
Alternative Dispute Resolution 432
Operations and Administration 433
Acquisition Management 434
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance 437
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 440
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management 442
385
-------
Human Resources Management 444
Research: Sustainable Communities 446
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities 447
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability 450
Human Health Risk Assessment 451
Superfund Cleanup 455
Superfund: Emergency Response and Removal 456
Superfund: EPA Emergency Preparedness 459
Superfund: Federal Facilities 461
Superfund: Remedial 463
Superfund Special Accounts 466
Superfund Special Accounts 467
386
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION: Hazardous Substance Superfund
Resource Summary Table
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2019 Pres
FY 2018
Budget v.
FY 2017
Annualized
FY 2019
FY 2018
Actuals
CR
Pres Budget
Annualized CR
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Budget Authority
$1,144,699.4
$1,081,374.0
$1,088,830.0
$7,456.0
Total Workyears
2,643.4
2,663.6
2,590.6
-73.0
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the Superfund
account.
Bill Language: Hazardous Substance Superfund
For necessary expenses to carry out the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), including sections 111(c)(3), (c)(5), (c)(6), and (e)(4) (42
U.S.C. 9611), $1,088,830,000, to remain available until expended, consisting of such sums as are
available in the Trust Fund on September 30, 2018, as authorized by section 517(a) of the
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) and up to $1,088,830,000 as a
payment from general revenues to the Hazardous Substance Superfundfor purposes as authorized
by section 517(b) of SARA: Provided, That funds appropriated under this heading may be
allocated to other Federal agencies in accordance with section 111(a) of CERCLA: Provided
further, That of the funds appropriated under this heading, $8,718,000 shall be paid to the "Office
of Inspector General" appropriation to remain available until September 30, 2020, and
$17,398,000 shall be paid to the "Science and Technology" appropriation to remain available
until September 30, 2020.
Program Projects in Superfund
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Pro ject
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Indoor Air and Radiation
Radiation: Protection
$1,833.6
$1,972.0
$1,972.0
$0.0
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
$9,156.4
$8,718.0
$8,718.0
$0.0
Compliance
Compliance Monitoring
$1,028.8
$988.0
$988.0
$0.0
Enforcement
Criminal Enforcement
$6,815.3
$7,135.0
$7,135.0
$0.0
387
-------
Program Project
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Justice
$732.9
$554.0
$0.0
-$554.0
Forensics Support
$1,543.6
$1,097.0
$1,097.0
$0.0
Superfund: Enforcement
$153,706.0
$150,466.0
$150,466.0
$0.0
Superfund: Federal Facilities Enforcement
$5,594.9
$5,993.0
$5,993.0
$0.0
Subtotal, Enforcement
$168,392.7
$165,245.0
$164,691.0
-$554.0
Homeland Security
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response,
and Recovery
$33,899.4
$31,461.0
$31,752.0
$291.0
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA
Personnel and Infrastructure
$1,306.2
$934.0
$934.0
$0.0
Subtotal, Homeland Security
$35,205.6
$32,395.0
$32,686.0
$291.0
Information Exchange / Outreach
Exchange Network
$1,316.3
$1,319.0
$1,319.0
$0.0
IT / Data Management / Security
Information Security
$654.9
$666.0
$5,186.0
$4,520.0
IT / Data Management
$14,691.5
$13,720.0
$13,720.0
$0.0
Subtotal, IT / Data Management / Security
$15,346.4
$14,386.0
$18,906.0
$4,520.0
Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Alternative Dispute Resolution
$591.3
$667.0
$0.0
-$667.0
Legal Advice: Environmental Program
$691.2
$577.0
$577.0
$0.0
Subtotal, Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic
Review
$1,282.5
$1,244.0
$577.0
-$667.0
Operations and Administration
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
$22,511.4
$21,345.0
$21,152.0
-$193.0
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
$69,651.3
$75,985.0
$74,144.0
-$1,841.0
Acquisition Management
$22,103.1
$21,296.0
$21,296.0
$0.0
Human Resources Management
$5,380.1
$5,997.0
$5,497.0
-$500.0
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management
$2,997.4
$2,611.0
$2,611.0
$0.0
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
$122,643.3
$127,234.0
$124,700.0
-$2,534.0
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
$12,717.6
$11,385.0
$10,885.0
-$500.0
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Human Health Risk Assessment
$3,020.5
$2,805.0
$5,021.0
$2,216.0
Superfund Cleanup
388
-------
Program Project
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Superfund: Emergency Response and Removal
$198,324.0
$180,075.0
$181,306.0
$1,231.0
Superfund: EPA Emergency Preparedness
$7,174.6
$7,584.0
$7,584.0
$0.0
Superfund: Federal Facilities
$22,434.2
$20,982.0
$20,982.0
$0.0
Superfund: Remedial
$544,822.9
$505,042.0
$508,495.0
$3,453.0
Subtotal, Superfund Cleanup
$772,755.7
$713,683.0
$718,367.0
$4,684.0
TOTAL Superfund
$1,144,699.4
$1,081,374.0
$1,088,830.0
$7,456.0
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the Superfund
account.
389
-------
Indoor Air and Radiation
390
-------
Radiation: Protection
Program Area: Indoor Air and Radiation
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$7,780.1
$8,519.0
$2,000.0
-$6,519.0
Science & Technology
$2,328.6
$1,996.0
$1,000.0
-$996.0
Hazardous Substance Super/und
SJ.SJJ.fl
Sl.9'2.0
S 1.1'2.0
.S 0.0
Total Budget Authority
$11,942.3
$12,487.0
$4,972.0
-$7,515.0
Total Workyears
58.9
59.1
25.0
-34.1
Program Project Description:
This program addresses potential radiation risks found at some Superfund and hazardous waste
sites. Through this program, EPA ensures that Superfund site cleanup activities reduce and/or
mitigate the health and environmental risk of radiation to include support of removal actions as
needed.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.1, Improve Air Quality in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA's National Analytical Radiation Environmental
Laboratory (NAREL) in Montgomery, Alabama, and National Center for Radiation Field
Operations (NCRFO) in Las Vegas, Nevada, will continue to provide analytical and field support
to manage and mitigate radioactive releases and exposures. These two organizations provide
analytical and technical support for the characterization and cleanup of Superfund and Federal
Facility sites. Support focuses on providing high quality data to support agency decisions at sites
across the country.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• There is no change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA).
391
-------
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
392
-------
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Program Area: Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Inspector General
$41,053.7
$41,207.0
$37,475.0
-$3,732.0
Hazardous Substance Super/und
S,S. 'IS.O
S.S. -JS.0
StUI
Total Budget Authority
$50,210.1
$49,925.0
$46,193.0
-$3,732.0
Total Workyears
266.0
318.1
242.0
-76.1
Program Project Description:
EPA's Office of Inspector General (OIG) provides audit, program evaluation, investigative
services and products that fulfill the requirements of the Inspector General Act, as amended, by
identifying fraud, waste, and abuse in agency, grantee and contractor operations, and by promoting
economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in the operations of the Agency's Superfund program.
Although the OIG is a part of EPA, to ensure its independence, as specified in the IG Act (as
amended), the OIG is funded with a separate appropriation within the Agency. The OIG activities
add value and enhance public trust and safety by providing the Agency, the public, and Congress
with independent analyses and recommendations that help EPA management resolve risks and
challenges, achieve opportunities for savings, and implement actions for safeguarding EPA
resources and accomplishing EPA's environmental goals. The OIG activities also prevent and
detect fraud in EPA's programs and operations, including financial fraud, laboratory fraud, and
cybercrime. The OIG consistently provides a significant positive return on investment to the public
in the form of recommendations for improvements in the delivery of EPA's mission, reduction in
operational and environmental risks, costs savings and recoveries, and improvements in program
efficiencies and integrity. The audit, program evaluation, inspection and investigative services
programs are directly supported through the OIG's management and administrative functions of
information technology, human resources, human capital, budget, planning and performance, legal
advice and counseling, report publishing and communications, and congressional outreach.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
EPA's OIG will assist the Agency in its efforts to reduce environmental and human health risks
by making recommendations to improve Superfund program operations; save taxpayer dollars,
reduce the potential for fraud, waste and abuse; respond to cybercrimes; and resolve previously
identified major management challenges and internal control weaknesses. In FY 2019, the OIG
will continue recommending improvements to operating efficiency, transparency, secured and
trustworthy systems, and the cost effective attainment of EPA's strategic goals and positive
environmental impacts related to the Superfund program.
393
-------
The OIG's plans will continue to be implemented through audits, evaluations, investigations,
inspections, and follow-up reviews in compliance with the Inspector General Act (as amended),
applicable professional standards of the U. S. Comptroller General, and the Quality Standards for
Federal Offices of Inspector General of the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and
Efficiency.
The OIG will conduct the following types of assignments focused on efficiency and program
operations: program performance, including a focus on the award and administration of grants and
contracts; statutorily mandated audits; financial reviews of grantees and contractors; and
information resources management. In addition, program performance evaluations will be
conducted in the areas of EPA's mission objectives for improving and protecting the environment
and public health via reviews of Superfund and other land issues.
The investigative mission of the OIG continues to evolve in conducting criminal, civil, and
administrative investigations into fraud and serious misconduct within EPA's Superfund program
and operations that undermine the organization's integrity and public trust, or create an imminent
risk or danger. The OIG investigations are coordinated with the Department of Justice and other
federal, state, and local law enforcement entities. These investigations often lead to successful
prosecution and civil judgments wherein there is a recovery and repayment of financial losses.
Major areas of investigative focus include: financial fraud, program integrity, threats to the
Agency's resources, employee integrity, cybercrimes, and theft of intellectual or sensitive data.
Audits and Evaluations
The OIG audits and program evaluations and inspections related to Superfund will identify
program and management risks and determine if EPA is efficiently and effectively reducing human
health risks; taking effective enforcement actions; cleaning up hazardous waste; managing waste,
restoring previously polluted sites to appropriate uses; and ensuring long-term stewardship of
polluted sites. The OIG assignments will include: assessing the adequacy of internal controls in
EPA and its grantees and contractors to protect resources and achieve program results; project
management to ensure that EPA and its grantees and contractors have clear plans and
accountability for performance progress; enforcement to evaluate whether there is consistent,
adequate and appropriate application of the laws and regulations across jurisdictions with
coordination between federal, state, and local law enforcement activities; and grants and contracts
to verify that such awards are made based upon uniform risk assessment, and that grantees and
contractors perform with integrity.
The OIG will concentrate its resources on efforts in the following assignment areas:
• Human and Environmental Exposure from Superfund Site Contaminants.
• Optimization of Superfund financed clean-up remedies.
• EPA's progress in ensuring private party Superfund liabilities are adequately covered by
sufficient financial assurance mechanisms.
• EPA Progress Implementing Recommendations for Superfund Improvement in the 2017
Superfund Task Force Report.
394
-------
• Superfund portion of EPA's financial statement and FISMA audits to include sampling,
monitoring, communication and opportunities for cleanup efficiencies.
• Oversight of Superfund remedial activities under state contracts and assistance agreements.
• Assess the effectiveness of actions taken as a result of the 2017 Superfund Task Force
Report.
• The OIG also will evaluate ways to minimize fraud, waste, and abuse, with emphasis on
identifying opportunities for cost savings and reducing risk of resource loss,
while maximizing results achieved from Superfund contracts and assistance agreements.
Investigations
The Office of Investigations (01) mission is to conduct criminal, civil, and administrative
investigations of fraud, waste and abuse and serious misconduct within EPA's Superfund
Program. 01 investigations are worked in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Justice, as well
as state and local prosecutors, for criminal and civil litigation or with EPA management for
administrative action. 01 currently investigates the following: 1) fraudulent practices in awarding,
performing, and paying Superfund contracts, grants, or other assistance agreements; 2) program
fraud or other acts that undermine the integrity of, or confidence in the Superfund program and
create imminent environmental risks; 3) laboratory fraud relating to data, and false claims or
erroneous laboratory results that undermine the basis for decision-making, regulatory compliance,
or enforcement actions in the Superfund program; 4) violent or criminal threats directed against
Superfund program employees or facilities; 5) criminal conduct or serious administrative
misconduct by EPA employees involved in the Superfund program; and 6) intrusions into and
attacks against EPA's network supporting Superfund program data, as well as incidents of
computer misuse and theft of intellectual property or sensitive/proprietary Superfund data. Special
attention will be directed towards identifying the tactics, techniques, and procedures that are being
utilized by cybercriminals to obtain Superfund program information.
Finally, 01 often makes observations or "lessons learned" for EPA's management which works on
the Superfund program to reduce the Agency's vulnerability to criminal activity. The results of
01's investigations are published and can serve as a deterrent to future misconduct. In addition,
the 01's investigations provide measurable results wherein recovery and restitution of financial
losses are achieved and administrative actions are taken to prevent those involved from further
participation in any Superfund program or operation.
Follow-up and Policy/Regulatory Analysis
To further promote economy, efficiency and effectiveness, the OIG will conduct follow-up
reviews of agency responsiveness to the OIG recommendations for the Superfund program to
determine if appropriate actions have been taken, and intended improvements have been achieved.
This process will serve as a means to keep Congress and EPA leadership apprised of
accomplishments, and opportunities for needed corrective actions, and will facilitate greater
accountability for results from the OIG operations.
Additionally, as directed by the IG Act (as amended), the OIG also conducts reviews and analysis
of proposed and existing policies, rules, regulations and legislation pertaining to the Superfund
395
-------
program to identify vulnerability to waste, fraud and abuse. These reviews also consider possible
duplication, gaps or conflicts with existing authority, leading to recommendations for
improvements in their structure, content and application.
Performance Measure Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the Audits, Evaluations, and
Investigations program under the IG Appropriation.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-9.5 FTE) This program change is a reduction which will focus the amount of audits,
program evaluations, and investigative case work.
Statutory Authority:
Inspector General Act, as amended; Inspector General Reform Act; Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act § lll(k).
Inspector General Reform Act:
The following information is provided pursuant to the requirements of the Inspector General
Reform Act:
• the aggregate budget request from the Inspector General for the operations of the OIG is
$62 million ($53 million Inspector General; $9 million Superfund Transfer);
• the aggregate President's Budget for the operations of the OIG is $46.2 million ($37.5
million Inspector General; $8.7 million Superfund Transfer);
• the portion of the aggregate President's Budget needed for training is $700 thousand ($574
thousand Inspector General; $126 thousand Superfund Transfer);
• the portion of the aggregate President's Budget needed to support the Council of the
Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency is $179 thousand ($143.2 thousand
Inspector General; $35.8 thousand Superfund Transfer).
"I certify as the Inspector General of the Environmental Protection Agency that the amount I have
requested for training satisfies all OIG training needs for FY 2019".
396
-------
Compliance
397
-------
Compliance Monitoring
Program Area: Compliance
Goal: Cooperative Federalism
Objective(s): Enhance Shared Accountability
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$98,283.6
$100,975.0
$86,374.0
-$14,601.0
Inland Oil Spill Programs
$145.2
$138.0
$0.0
-$138.0
Hazardous Substance Super/und
SJ.02 ft. ft
svss.n
VAN\fi.0
StUI
Total Budget Authority
$99,457.6
$102,101.0
$87,362.0
-$14,739.0
Total Workyears
506.4
538.9
428.7
-110.2
Program Project Description:
The Compliance Monitoring program is a key component of EPA's compliance assurance program
that allows the controlling regulatory authority to detect noncompliance and promotes compliance
with the nation's environmental laws. The states and EPA use compliance monitoring tools and
activities to identify whether regulated entities are in compliance with environmental laws enacted
by Congress, as well as applicable regulations and permit conditions. In addition, compliance
monitoring activities, such as inspections and investigations, are conducted to determine whether
conditions exist that may present imminent and substantial endangerment to human health and the
environment. The program focuses on providing information and system support for monitoring
compliance with Superfund-related environmental regulations and contaminated site cleanup
agreements. The Agency also ensures the security and integrity of its compliance information
systems. Superfund-related regulatory enforcement program activities are tracked in the Agency's
Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS).
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 2/Objective 2.1, Enhance Shared Accountability in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to streamline its Superfund-
related compliance monitoring activities. EPA will support a variety of tools and activities for
states and EPA to identify the compliance status of regulated entities with environmental laws
enacted by Congress, as well as applicable regulations, permit conditions, and compliance with
Federal Facility Agreements. Additionally, EPA will conduct inspections and investigations to
evaluate the risk of imminent and substantial endangerment to human health and the environment.
Performance Measure Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the Compliance Monitoring program
under the EPM appropriation.
398
-------
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• There is no change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) as
amended; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat.
485 (codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute).
399
-------
Enforcement
400
-------
Criminal Enforcement
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Compliance with the Law
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$48,039.2
$45,333.0
$41,107.0
-$4,226.0
Hazardous Substance Super/und
so.fUx.i
S I.1.\0
s l.ixo
.S 0.0
Total Budget Authority
$54,854.5
$52,468.0
$48,242.0
-$4,226.0
Total Workyears
237.9
268.6
209.6
-59.0
Program Project Description:
The Criminal Enforcement program investigates and helps prosecute violations of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and
associated violations of Title 18 of the United States Code such as fraud, conspiracy, false
statements, and obstruction of justice. EPA's criminal enforcement agents (Special Agents) do this
through targeted investigation of criminal conduct, committed by individual and corporate
defendants, that threatens public health and the environment.
Within the Criminal Enforcement program, forensic scientists, attorneys, technicians, engineers,
and other program experts assist Special Agents. EPA's criminal enforcement attorneys provide
legal and policy support for all of the program's responsibilities, including forensics and expert
witness preparation, information law, and personnel law to ensure that program activities are
carried out in accordance with legal requirements and agency policies. These efforts support
environmental crimes prosecutions primarily by the United States Attorneys and the Department
of Justice's Environmental Crimes Section. In FY 2017, the conviction rate for criminal defendants
was 91 percent.1
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.1, Compliance with the Law in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to streamline its Criminal
Enforcement program and enforce environmental laws to correct noncompliance and promote
cleanup of contaminated sites. The Agency will perform targeted investigations of violations of
environmental statutes and associated violations of Title 18 of the United States Code to protect
public health and the environment. The program will focus its resources on the most egregious
cases (e.g., significant human health, environmental, and deterrent impacts), while balancing its
overall case load.
1 For additional information, refer to: http://www.epa.gov/enforcement/data-and-results.
401
-------
Performance Measure Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the Criminal Enforcement program
under the EPM appropriation.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• There is no change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) as
amended, §120; Title 18 of the U.S.C.
402
-------
Forensics Support
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Compliance with the Law
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Science & Technology
$13,228.8
$13,576.0
$10,486.0
-S3.090.0
Hazardous Substance Super/und
SIJ-l.lO
SI.O'J'.O
S J.OT.O
StUI
Total Budget Authority
$14,772.4
$14,673.0
$11,583.0
-$3,090.0
Total Workyears
73.6
80.3
52.1
-28.2
Program Project Description:
The Forensics Support program provides expert scientific and technical support for Superfund civil
and criminal enforcement cases, as well as technical expertise for agency compliance efforts.
EPA's National Enforcement Investigations Center (NEIC) is an environmental forensic center
accredited for both laboratory and field sampling operations that generate environmental data for
law enforcement purposes. It is fully accredited under International Standards Organization (ISO)
17025, the main standard used by testing and calibration laboratories, as recommended by the
National Academy of Sciences.2 The NEIC maintains a sophisticated chemistry laboratory and a
corps of highly trained inspectors and scientists with expertise across media. The NEIC works
closely with EPA's Criminal Investigation Division to provide technical support (e.g., sampling,
analysis, consultation and testimony) to criminal investigations. The NEIC also works closely with
EPA's Headquarters and Regional Offices to provide technical assistance, consultation, on-site
inspection, investigation, and case resolution services in support of the Agency's Superfund
Enforcement program.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 2/Objective 2.1, Enhance Shared Accountability in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, the NEIC will continue to streamline its
forensics work and identify enhancements to our sampling and analytical methods, using existing
technology. The program will continue to focus its work on collecting and analyzing materials in
order to attribute contamination to individual sources/facilities. In providing support for the
Superfund program, the Forensics Support program will coordinate its efforts with Superfund
support efforts of the Agency's Research and Development and the Office of Land and Emergency
Management programs. The Forensics Support program will continue to provide expert scientific
and technical support for EPA's criminal and civil enforcement efforts.
2 Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward, National Academy of Sciences, 2009, available at
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php7record id=12589.
403
-------
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-0.5 FTE) This program change reflects a focus on analyzing material to attribute it to
individual sources or facilities and a reduction in other lab support.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA);
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA); Reorganization Plan No. 3
of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485 (codified at Title 5, App.)
(EPA's organic statute).
404
-------
Superfund: Enforcement
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Compliance with the Law
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Hazardous Substance Supci jund
SI\\
SI 50.-/(>(>.()
S (U>
Total Budget Authority
$153,706.0
$150,466.0
$150,466.0
$0.0
Total Workyears
729.0
771.3
745.3
-26.0
Program Project Description:
The Superfund Enforcement program protects communities by ensuring that responsible parties
conduct cleanups, preserving federal dollars for sites where there are no viable contributing parties.
EPA's Superfund Enforcement program ensures prompt site cleanup and reuse by maximizing the
participation of liable and viable parties in performing and paying for cleanups. In both the
Superfund Remedial and Superfund Emergency Response and Removal programs, the Superfund
Enforcement program obtains potentially responsible parties' commitments to perform and pay
for cleanups through civil, judicial, and administrative site actions. The Superfund Enforcement
program works closely with the Superfund program and the Department of Justice (DOJ) to
combine litigation, legal, and technical skills to bring enforcement actions and address emerging
issues.
The Superfund Enforcement program:
• develops hazardous waste cleanup enforcement policies;
• provides guidance and tools that clarify potential environmental cleanup liability, with
specific attention to the cleanup, reuse and revitalization of contaminated properties;
• ensures that responsible parties cleanup sites to reduce direct human exposure to hazardous
substances, thereby providing long-term human health protections and making
contaminated properties available for reuse;
• negotiates cleanup agreements with Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) at hazardous
waste sites and, where negotiations fail, either initiates enforcement actions to require
cleanup or initiates cost recovery if EPA expends Superfund appropriated dollars to
remediate the sites; and
• addresses liability concerns of parties who want to cleanup and reuse Superfund sites.
EPA, through the Superfund Task Force, is working to improve and revitalize the Superfund
program to ensure that contaminated sites across the country are remediated to protect human
health and the environment and returned to beneficial use as expeditiously as possible. The
Superfund enforcement program is the lead for many of the Task Force's 42 recommendations and
will work to encourage and facilitate PRPs' expeditious and thorough cleanup of sites, create
405
-------
oversight efficiencies and promote the redevelopment and reuse of sites by encouraging PRPs to
invest in reuse outcomes. In addition, the enforcement program will work to encourage private
investment in the cleanup and reuse of sites by optimizing tools and realigning incentives to
encourage third-party investment. EPA also works to ensure that required legally enforceable
institutional controls and financial assurance requirements are in place at Superfund sites to ensure
the long-term protectiveness of Superfund cleanup remedies.
In FY 2017, EPA reached a settlement or took an enforcement action at 100 percent of non-
federally owned Superfund sites with viable, liable parties before the start of an FY 2017 remedial
action.3 In FY 2017, the Superfund Enforcement program secured private party commitments
exceeding $1.46 billion.
Special accounts are created when funds are received as part of a settlement to fund a site cleanup.
Funds received in settlements with PRPs are used to clean up the specific Superfund sites that were
the subject of the settlement agreement. Having the ability to use special accounts provides needed
cleanup dollars at many sites that otherwise may not have received funding absent EPA's
enforcement efforts. In FY 2017, EPA created 52 special accounts and collected $289.4 million
for response work.4 The Agency disbursed or obligated $340.3 million from special accounts for
response work (excluding reclassifications).
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.1, Compliance with the Law in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, the Agency will prioritize its efforts on the most
significant sites in terms of environmental impact (particularly those that may present an
immediate risk) and on increasing private party funding of cleanups. The Agency will continue its
efforts to establish special accounts to facilitate cleanup. As special account funds may only be
used for sites and uses specified in the settlement agreement, both special account resources and
annually appropriated resources are critical to the Superfund program to clean up Superfund sites.
DOJ support is statutorily mandated for settlements related to remedial action cleanups, most cost
recovery settlements, and is required for all judicial enforcement matters. DOJ's support will be
prioritized to negotiate and enter consent decrees with PRPs to perform remedial actions, to pursue
judicial actions to compel PRP cleanup, and to pursue judicial actions to recover monies spent in
cleaning up contaminated sites.
Cost Recovery Support
The Agency will streamline the financial management aspects of Superfund cost recovery and the
collection of related debt to the federal government. EPA's financial, programmatic, and legal
offices will continue to maintain the accounting and billing of Superfund oversight costs
attributable to responsible parties. These costs represent EPA's cost of overseeing Superfund site
cleanup efforts by responsible parties as stipulated in the terms of settlement agreements. In FY
2017, the Agency collected $232.3 million in cost recoveries, of which $49.4 million were returned
3 For additional information, refer to: https://www.epa.gov/enforcement/data-and-results.
4 In addition, in FY 2017, $38.5 million in interest was earned on the special account funds invested in the Superfund Trust Fund.
406
-------
to the Superfund Trust Fund and $182.9 million were deposited in site-specific, interest bearing
special accounts.
Performance Measure Targets:
FY 2018
FY 2019
(435) Number of potentially responsible party (PRP) and other party commitments
Target
Target
to perform or pay for cleanup and/or reuse of contaminated sites.
110
110
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-26.0 FTE) This program change reflects a focus on sites with significant risks and
securing private party funding for cleanups and a reduction in resources for Superfund cost
recovery, to be offset in part by streamlining those functions. Personnel cost reductions
associated with this shift in FTE are offset by fixed and other workforce cost increases in
the program.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) as
amended, §120.
407
-------
Environmental Justice
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Cooperative Federalism
Objective(s): Increase Transparency and Public Participation
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$6,401.5
$6,691.0
$2,000.0
-$4,691.0
HuzuriloH.s Substance Super/und
,S 'A 2. <)
S 55-1.0
so.o
-S 55-/.0
Total Budget Authority
$7,134.4
$7,245.0
$2,000.0
-$5,245.0
Total Workyears
34.9
40.3
0.0
-40.3
Program Project Description:
EPA's Environmental Justice program fosters environmental and public health and sustainability
in communities disproportionately burdened by pollution by integrating and addressing issues of
environmental justice in our programs and policies. The Superfund portion of the program focuses
on issues that affect low income and minority communities at or near Superfund sites. The
Environmental Justice program complements the Agency's community outreach and other work
done under the Superfund program at affected sites.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE are proposed for elimination for this program in FY 2019. EJ work impacting
the entire Agency will be incorporated into policy work within the Office of Policy, which is a part
of EPA's Office of the Administrator.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$554.0/ -3.5 FTE) This change proposes to eliminate Superfund funding for the
Environmental Justice program. Environmental Justice is proposed for transfer from the
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance to the Agency's Office of Policy which
will continue to support Environmental Justice efforts in EPA program offices. The Office
of Policy can ensure integration across the full range of EPA's programs.
408
-------
Statutory Authority:
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485
(codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute); Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended.
409
-------
Superfund: Federal Facilities Enforcement
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Compliance with the Law
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Hazardous Substance Supci jund
Sx'W.O
Sx'W.O
S (U>
Total Budget Authority
$5,594.9
$5,993.0
$5,993.0
$0.0
Total Workyears
30.6
40.9
37.4
-3.5
Program Project Description:
EPA's Superfund Federal Facilities Enforcement program ensures that sites where federal entities
are performing Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA) responses and/or CERCLA sites with federal ownership are monitored and that
appropriate enforcement responses are pursued. After years of service and operation, some federal
facilities contain environmental contamination such as hazardous wastes, unexploded ordnance,
radioactive wastes, or other toxic substances. Enforcement actions can facilitate cleanup and
potential redevelopment of these sites.
Pursuant to CERCLA Section 120, EPA must enter into Interagency Agreements, also commonly
referred to as Federal Facility Agreements (FFAs), with responsible federal entities to ensure
protective and timely cleanup of their National Priorities List (NPL) sites. The agreements provide
that EPA oversee the cleanups to ensure that they protect public health and the environment. These
FFAs govern cleanups at 174 federal facility Superfund sites, which include many of the Nation's
largest and most complex cleanup projects.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.1, Compliance with the Law in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will focus its resources on the highest priority
sites, particularly those that may present an imminent and/or substantial endangerment; negotiate
FFAs for federal facility sites on the NPL; monitor FFAs for compliance and resolve formal
disputes; take enforcement actions at priority sites; and implement the Superfund Task Force
recommendations to expedite cleanup and redevelopment of federal facility sites.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
410
-------
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-3.5 FTE) This program change reflects a focus on high priority sites and a greater reliance
on self-monitoring by other federal agencies at low priority sites.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) as
amended, §120.
411
-------
Homeland Security
412
-------
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and Recovery
Program Area: Homeland Security
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Revitalize Land and Prevent Contamination
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Science & Technology
$23,161.0
$23,298.0
$22,461.0
-$837.0
Hazardous Substance Super/und
S33.S'J'J.-I
S3l.-Hil.ll
S31. ~5 2.11
S2Vl.it
Total Budget Authority
$57,060.4
$54,759.0
$54,213.0
-$546.0
Total Workyears
128.9
127.4
127.1
-0.3
Program Project Description:
EPA leads or supports many aspects of preparing for and responding to a nationally significant
incident involving possible chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) agents.
The Homeland Security Preparedness, Response, and Recovery program implements a broad range
of activities for a variety of federal efforts, including national trainings; participation in national
interagency exercises with federal and state partners; support for headquarters and regional
Emergency Operations Centers; support for the Agency's continuity of operations devolution site
in EPA's Colorado office; enhancements for national information technology systems; secured
warehouse space for homeland security operations and storage; and laboratory analysis of
environmental samples and site decontamination projects. EPA's homeland security effort
develops these responsibilities through research and maintaining a level of expertise, training, and
preparedness specifically focused on threats associated with CBRN. This work is consistent with
the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) National Response Framework (NRF).
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.3, Revitalize Land and Prevent
Contamination in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, the Homeland Security
Preparedness, Response, and Recovery Program will:
• Participate with federal response partners (such as DHS, the Department of Defense, and
the Department of Justice) on select interagency workgroups;
• Operate the Airborne Spectral Photometric Environmental Collection Technology
(ASPECT) aircraft. ASPECT provides assistance to first responders by detecting chemical
and radiological vapors, plumes, and clouds with real-time data delivery;
• Maintain mobile lab capabilities with support of EPA's Portable High-Throughput
Integrated Identification Systems (PHILIS) units. PHILIS can be deployed to sites for high
volume, quick turnaround analyses of chemical and biological capacity and capability;
413
-------
• Provide expertise on environmental characterization, decontamination, and waste disposal
methods following the release of a CBRN agent;
• Participate in trainings and exercises on CBRN preparedness and response topics;
• Maintain operational support for the Emergency Management Portal and WebEOC
response systems;
• Develop more effective site characterization, decontamination, waste management, and
clearance strategies for site reoccupation for priority chemical, biological, and radiological
threats to reduce time and cost for remediation; and
• Continue development of sample collection protocols and analysis methods for inclusion
in the Selected Analytical Methods for Environmental Remediation and Recovery (SAM),
a compendium of methods and supporting sampling documents. The SAM provides
responders and Environmental Response Lab Networks the single best available sample
collection and analysis method.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$40.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of base
workforce costs due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce support, and benefit
costs.
• (+$251.0) This program change is an increase to research related to analysis of chemical
agents, decision support for chemical agent remediation, fate and transport of chemical,
biological, or radiological (CBR) agents in the environment as well as research related to
the treatment of decontamination wash water.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), §§ 104,
105, and 106; Clean Water Act; Oil Pollution Act; Homeland Security Act of 2002.
414
-------
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure
Program Area: Homeland Security
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$4,918.0
$5,336.0
$4,986.0
-$350.0
Science & Technology
$438.0
$446.0
$500.0
$54.0
Building and Facilities
$6,119.2
$6,631.0
$6,176.0
-$455.0
Hazardous Substance Super/und
S J Jiff). 2
S V.UM
S V.UM
StUI
Total Budget Authority
$12,781.4
$13,347.0
$12,596.0
-$751.0
Total Workyears
5.9
12.2
12.2
0.0
Program Project Description:
The federal government develops and maintains Continuity of Operations (COOP) plans and
procedures that provide for the continued performance of its essential functions. The Homeland
Security COOP program works with other government and non-government organizations to
ensure that Mission Essential Functions (MEFs) and Primary Mission Essential Functions
(PMEFs) continue to be performed during emergency situations. The Department of Homeland
Security/Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Federal Continuity Directive
(FCD)-l requires EPA to develop a continuity plan that ensures that its ability to accomplish its
MEFs from an alternate site, during a national disaster, continues and that the Agency be able to
do so with limited staffing and without access to resources available during normal activities.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will undertake the
following:
• Conduct selected annual reviews of regional COOP plans, PMEFs and MEFs, and make
updates as needed;
• Monitor the continuity programs across the Agency, focusing on testing, training, and
exercises as related to general COOP awareness and procedures; and
• Undergo a monthly evaluation of the headquarters COOP program, including Program
Plans and Procedures, Risk Management, Budgeting, and Essential Functions. Further,
FEMA performs an in-person biannual review of EPA's COOP program and provides the
results to the Administrator and to the Executive Office of the President.
415
-------
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• There is no change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), §§ 104,
105, 106; Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004; Homeland Security Act of
2002; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat.
485 (codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute).
416
-------
Information Exchange / Outreach
417
-------
Exchange Network
Program Area: Information Exchange / Outreach
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Streamline and Modernize
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$16,483.8
$16,578.0
$11,784.0
-$4,794.0
Hazardous Substance Super/und
Si J 10.3
SI.Mf.ll
S J.J 10.0
so.o
Total Budget Authority
$17,800.1
$17,897.0
$13,103.0
-$4,794.0
Total Workyears
28.7
30.2
30.2
0.0
Program Project Description:
EPA's Environmental Information Exchange Network (EN) is a standards-based, secure approach
for EPA and its state, tribal, and territorial partners to exchange and share environmental data over
the Internet. Previous provision of new technology and data standards, open-source software,
shared and portal services and reusable tools and applications have enabled EN partners to manage
and analyze environmental data more effectively and efficiently, leading to improved decision-
making.
The Central Data Exchange (CDX)5 is the largest component of the EN program and serves as the
point of entry on the EN for environmental data submissions to the Agency. CDX provides a set
of core shared services that promote a leaner and more cost-effective enterprise architecture for
the Agency by avoiding the creation of duplicative services. It also provides a set of value-added
features and services that enable faster and more efficient transactions for internal and external
clients of EPA, resulting in reduced burden.
CDX data exchange services are leveraged by EPA's programs, regions, states, tribes, territories
and other federal agencies to meet their different business needs. With CDX, a stakeholder can
submit data through one centralized point of access, exchange data with target systems using web
services and utilize publishing services to share information collected by EPA and other
stakeholders. By managing loosely connected and interoperable services, data exchange needs can
be met using one or all of the available services such as:
• User registration;
• External user identity management;
• Electronic signature;
• Encryption and transmission;
• Virtual exchange services (VES); and
• Data quality assurance.
5 For more information on the Central Data Exchange, please visit: http://www.epa.gov/cdx/.
418
-------
Working in conceit with CDX are EPA's System of Registries, which are centralized shared data
services to improve data quality in EPA, state, and tribal program data, while promoting burden
reduction for the reporting community. The following registries manage shared data centrally for
reuse by the following EN partners:
• Facility Registry Service (FRS);
• Substance Registry Services (SRS);
• Tribes;
• Laws and Regulations Services (LRS);
• Terminology Services (TS);
• Reusable Component Services (RCS);
• Environmental Dataset Gateway (EDG);
• Registry of EPA Applications, Models, and Databases (READ); and
• Data Element Registry Services (DERS).
These shared data services catalog EPA and EN partner assets, from commonly regulated facilities
and substances to the current list of federally recognized tribes. They identify the standard or
official names for these assets, which when integrated into EPA and partner applications fosters
data consistency and data quality as well as enabling data integration. By integrating these shared
data services into their online reporting forms, EPA and its EN partners make it easier for the
reporting community to discover the correct information to submit, reducing burden, which
enables reuse by partner programs.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.4, Streamline and Modernize in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to support core functions for the
Exchange Network IT systems. The potential for burden reduction and savings from IT
improvements are significant. Schedules and plans for upgrades and modernization will be
adjusted to align with resources. As part of the E-Enterprise business strategy, EPA will continue
to carry out the baseline support for the following projects under the Exchange Network program:
roll out of Federated Identity Management system for EPA and its partners; promote existing
shared facility and substance identification services that improve quality and reduce burden on
states and tribes; utilize current services for EPA's Laws and Regulations (LRS) registry, which
will standardize identification of and associations between regulations, laws, and EPA's programs;
and deploying established reusable electronic signature services to streamline Cross-Media
Electronic Reporting Regulation (CROMERR) compliance. Advancements in data transport
services, such as Virtual Exchange Services (VES), will continue to provide cloud-based solutions
for EPA's state and tribal partners. Examples of important enhancements that could greatly
streamline operations for states, tribes, industry and the Agency include a tool that helps industry
identify potentially applicable regulations, and electronic filing capacity for imports and exports
of environmentally sensitive products through the DHS/US Customs system, which reduces
processing time from days or weeks to minutes or days.
419
-------
In FY 2019, EPA will:
• Support existing outreach activities to increase awareness of CROMERR services and the
savings to states and tribes from using these services; and
• Approve essential CROMERR applications from authorized programs that propose to use
EPA's shared CROMERR services and assist co-regulators with integrating these services
into their systems.
CROMERR activities are intended to assist states and tribes in the development activities
associated with establishing a point of presence, exchanging data on the Network, and supporting
local electronic reporting programs in a more cost effective way.
Performance Measure Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the Exchange Network program under
the EPM appropriation.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• There is no change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA); Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA); Clean Air Act (CAA); Clean Water Act
(CWA); Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide
Act (FIFRA); Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); Government Performance and
Results Act (GPRA); Government Management Reform Act (GMRA); Clinger-Cohen Act (CCA);
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA); Controlled Substances Act (CSA); The Privacy Act of 1974;
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
420
-------
IT/ Data Management/ Security
421
-------
Information Security
Program Area: IT / Data Management / Security
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$9,166.5
$6,742.0
$13,755.0
$7,013.0
HuzuriloH.s Substance Super/und
VO-/. >>
SMiO.O
S -1.520.0
Total Budget Authority
$9,821.4
$7,408.0
$18,941.0
$11,533.0
Total Workyears
21.6
14.3
12.8
-1.5
Program Project Description:
Information is a valuable national resource and a strategic asset to EPA. It enables the Agency to
fulfill its mission to protect human health and the environment. The Agency's Information Security
program is designed to protect the confidentiality, availability and integrity of EPA's information
assets. The information protection strategy includes, but is not limited to:
• Policy, procedure and practice management;
• Information security awareness, training and education;
• Risk-based governance and oversight;
• Weakness remediation;
• Operational security management;
• Incident response and handling; and
• Federal Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA) compliance and reporting.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. Cybersecurity is a serious challenge to our
nation's security and economic prosperity. EPA will maintain continuous monitoring of security
controls in FY 2019 and address increasing security threats and risks. Effective information
security requires vigilance and the ability to adapt to new challenges every day. EPA will continue
to manage information security risk and build upon efforts to protect, defend and look to improve
information security business processes to improve efficiency and effectiveness.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to sustain some existing improvements. EPA expects to leverage
the Continuous Diagnostics and Mitigation (CDM) program to close existing gaps by improving
audit capabilities, ensuring accountability and adding protections directly associated with the
information. The requested funding is essential to maintain the mandated CDM capabilities. To
realize these improvements, the Agency will need to sustain the tools and processes implemented
422
-------
to date. The security architecture, associated processes, and expert personnel comprise an
ecosystem with cross dependencies, and the system is strongest when operating as a whole.
The CDM program, centrally managed by the Department of Homeland Security, provides tools
that will give near real-time awareness of EPA's networks and environments. CDM consists of
four implementation phases with an estimated cost of over $10 million in FY 2019 across all
appropriations once all capabilities are in place. Data from the individual agency dashboards across
the federal government will be aggregated into one federal-level dashboard maintained by the
CDM program, which allows DHS to monitor and respond to federal cybersecurity threats and
incidents much more quickly and efficiently. The Agency will continue to work with DHS to
implement future phases based on capacity. Costs of operating and maintaining CDM capabilities
are anticipated to increase significantly in FY 2019 as more capabilities come online. The Agency
will prioritize security capabilities based on an evaluation of evolving threats.
The Information Security program also will continue to detect and remediate the effects of
Advanced Persistent Threats to the Agency's information and information systems. The Agency
will continue to focus on training and user-awareness to foster desired behavior, asset definition
and management, compliance, incident management, knowledge and information management,
risk management and technology management. These efforts will strengthen the Agency's ability
to adequately protect information assets.
EPA will look to refine its Computer Security Incident Response Capability (CSIRC) processes to
support identification, response, alerting and reporting of suspicious activity. CSIRC's mission is
to protect EPA's information assets and respond to security incidents - actual and potential. This
includes detecting unauthorized attempts to access, destroy, or alter EPA's data and information
resources. CSIRC will maintain relationships with other federal agencies and law enforcement
entities, as needed, to support the Agency's mission. The incident response capability includes
components such as detection and analysis; forensics; and containment and eradication activities.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$2,505.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase needed for mandatory cyber
security requirements6, including CDM. Funding will be used to close existing gaps by
improving audit capabilities, ensuring accountability and adding protections directly
associated with the information. This change also supports CDM phase three which will
continue implementation in FY 2019.
• (+$2,015.0) This program change reflects an increase in funding needed to continue
operations and maintenance previously provided by DHS for mandatory protections
6 Including those found in Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014, and Federal Information Security
Cybersecurity Act of 2015.
423
-------
implemented in CDM phase one and two focusing on endpoint integrity, least privilege
and infrastructure integrity.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA); Government Performance and Results
Act (GPRA); Government Management Reform Act (GMRA); Clinger-Cohen Act (CCA);
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA); the Privacy Act of 1974; Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
424
-------
IT / Data Management
Program Area: IT / Data Management / Security
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$82,580.0
$83,179.0
$69,264.0
-$13,915.0
Science & Technology
$3,342.0
$3,068.0
$2,725.0
-$343.0
Hazardous Substance Super/und
S N.OVI.j
Sl.\ '20.0
SI J. '20.0
.S 0.0
Total Budget Authority
$100,613.5
$99,967.0
$85,709.0
-$14,258.0
Total Workyears
441.0
498.3
457.9
-40.4
Program Project Description:
The work performed under the Information Technology/Data Management (IT/DM) program is
partially funded by the Superfund appropriation. The program supports human health and the
environment by providing critical IT infrastructure and data management needed for:
1) Access to scientific, regulatory, policy and guidance information needed by the Agency,
the regulated community and the public;
2) Analytical support for interpreting and understanding environmental information;
3) Exchange and storage of data, analysis and computation; and
4) Rapid, secure and efficient communication.
These areas are then organized into the following functional areas: information analysis and
access; data management and collection; information technology and infrastructure; and geospatial
information and analysis. This program supports the maintenance of EPA's IT and Information
Management (IT/IM) services that enable citizens, regulated facilities, states and other entities to
interact with EPA electronically to get the information they need on demand, to understand what
it means, and to submit and share environmental data with the least cost and burden. The program
also provides support to other agency IT development projects and essential technology to agency
staff, enabling them to conduct their work in support of Superfund programs effectively and
efficiently. In the context of the Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act
(FITARA), EPA is bringing its IT acquisition, portfolio review, and governance processes together
to adopt practices that improve delivery of capability to users, drive down lifecycle costs, and
leverage shared services.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. EPA has progressively integrated new and
transformative approaches to the way IT is managed across the Agency. The goal of EPA's IT/DM
425
-------
services is to enhance the power of information by delivering on demand data to the right people
at the right time. In FY 2019, the program will strive to meet EPA's IT/IM service need while
continuously improving customer experiences to allow EPA, its partners and the public to acquire,
generate, manage, use and share information as a critical resource to protect human health and the
environment. To accomplish this, the program will focus available capacity on the following areas:
• Improve the way EPA supports and manages the lifecycle of information and information
products;
• Modernize EPA's IT/IM infrastructure, applications and services;
• Empower a mobile workforce using innovative and agile solutions; and
• Empower state and tribal partnerships using innovative and agile solutions.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to implement the E-Enterprise business strategy, a transformative
21st century strategy - jointly governed by states, tribes, and EPA - for modernizing government
agencies' delivery of services to support the protection of human health and the environment. EPA
is building on progress made using E-Enterprise for the Environment, a platform for transformative
change that operationalizes cooperative federalism principles. EPA's E-Enterprise partnership
with states and tribes modernizes the way we do the business of environmental protection. IT/DM
activities will continue to facilitate shared services and electronic transactions with the regulated
community and external partners who routinely conduct environmental business with EPA. The
Agency will use E-Enterprise to deliver streamlined processes as well as accessible, reliable
information and data that benefit co-regulators and the regulated community.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to implement its IT acquisition review process as part of the
implementation of federal Common Baseline Controls for FITARA. In addition, FITARA controls
include an established solid communication and engagement strategy for the CIO with the
Agency's programs and regional offices to ensure that their IT plans are well designed, directly
drive agency strategic objectives, and follow best practices. Lastly, the controls ensure the CIO
engages closely with key IT decision-makers across EPA and fosters plans to refresh IT skills
within the Agency.
In FY 2019, the following IT/DM activities will continue to be provided for the Superfund
program:
• Data Management and Collection: Data Management and Collection efforts include
support for a variety of essential information management. For example, the National
Records Management Program provides the framework within which program/regional
records activities are conducted. These national activities include providing regulations,
policies/procedures, coordination, and support to help fulfill EPA's statutory obligations
to maintain records. Records management activities will be prioritized to align with
available resources. Additionally, Discovery Services technology will continue to support
the search/collection of agency information needed to help respond to requests for
information from external stakeholders. Since October 2002, EPA has served as the
managing partner of the interagency shared service e-Rulemaking Program; however, in
FY 2019 EPA will work with the Office of Management and Budget and the National
426
-------
Archives and Records Administration (NARA) towards transferring management services
to the NARA/Office of the Federal Register.
• Digital Services: The FY 2019 budget includes funding to continue modest transformation
of EPA's digital services to make them more cost-effective for the Agency to build and
maintain. This includes some support to develop cloud computing approaches for the
Agency.
• Geospatial: In addition to meeting ongoing program needs, Geospatial information and
analysis play a critical role in the Agency's ability to respond rapidly and effectively in
times of emergency. In FY 2019, the Agency will continue to support the essential
capabilities of GeoPlatform, a shared technology enterprise for geospatial information and
analysis. By implementing geospatial data, applications and services, the Agency is able to
integrate and interpret multiple data sets and information sources to support environmental
decisions. During FY 2019, the Agency will continue to focus on Geoplatform data
services, dashboards and story boards based on provided geographic information to support
programmatic analysis and decision making. It also will better inform the public about
EPA's use of grant funding to protect the environment and public health. In FY 2019, EPA
also will provide support to the Geoplatform to publish internal and public mapping tools
and make available a number of shareable maps, geodata services, and applications. EPA
will continue to play a role in both the Federal Geographic Data Committee and the
National Geospatial Platform, working with partner agencies to share geospatial
technology capabilities across government.
• Information Access and Analysis: In FY 2019, EPA will focus on providing core support
to agency infrastructure and utilizing tools that will harness the power of data across the
Agency to drive better environmental decision making. The Agency will pause efforts to
replace the data management functionality in the legacy Envirofacts data warehouse. EPA
will provide partnership support to other agencies, states, tribes and academic institutions
to propose innovative ways to use, analyze and visualize data.
In addition, the program will provide support for maintenance of E-Enterprise capabilities
and will provide analysis of environmental information to the public and EPA's staff. The
program will continue to ensure compliance of EPA's public systems with Section 508 of
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
• Information Technology and Infrastructure: In FY 2019, the Agency will continue to
maintain essential information technology and infrastructure. The Agency will adjust the
schedule for replacement or upgrades to align with resources. EPA will continue to
maintain and provision: desktop computing equipment, network connectivity, e-mail and
collaboration tools, application hosting, remote access, telephone services, web and
network services, and other IT-related equipment. In FY 2019, the Agency will continue
efforts to consolidate EPA's data centers and computer rooms and to optimize operations
within EPA's remaining data centers.
427
-------
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-2.5 FTE) This program change reflects a reduction in support for enterprise IT
systems/tools and emergency response.
Statutory Authority:
Modernizing Government Technology (MGT) Act; Federal Information Security Management
Act (FISMA); Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA); Clean Air Act (CAA); Clean Water Act (CWA); Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA); Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); Food Quality Protection
Act (FQPA); Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA); Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA); Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA); Government Management Reform
Act (GMRA); Clinger-Cohen Act (CCA); Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA); Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA); Controlled Substances Act (CSA).
428
-------
Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
429
-------
Legal Advice: Environmental Program
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Create Consistency and Certainty
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$52,889.7
$49,657.0
$42,292.0
-$7,365.0
Hazardous Substance Super/und
SMI.2
Y"~.«
Y"~.«
StUI
Total Budget Authority
$53,580.9
$50,234.0
$42,869.0
-$7,365.0
Total Workyears
277.4
274.6
221.8
-52.8
Program Project Description:
This program provides legal representation, legal counseling and legal support for environmental
activities under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
(CERCLA). Funding supports legal advice needed in the Superfund program's extensive work
with Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) and other entities and landowners. For example, this
program provides legal analysis and advice to help inform EPA's decisions regarding the
assessment of certain contaminants at a given Superfund site under federal law, and a party's
potential liability under CERCLA.
This program supports EPA's Superfund work at thousands of sites spanning the wide array of
Superfund legal issues regarding removal and remedial cleanups costing billions of dollars. This
program is essential to providing the high quality legal work to ensure that EPA's decisions are
defensible and upheld by the courts against judicial challenges.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.2, Create Consistency and Certainty in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, the program will prioritize its legal support
capabilities to focus support on high profile and critical CERCLA cases for the Superfund
program. The program will work within available resources to support CERCLA activities, to
include analyzing defensibility of Agency actions, drafting significant portions of agency actions,
and participating in litigation in defense of agency actions.
This program is critical to the Superfund program in a multitude of ways. For example, in support
of Goal 1 of EPA's Strategic Plan (Deliver real results to provide Americans with clean air, land
and water) this program provides legal advice and counseling for final rules adding Superfund
sites to the National Priorities List.
The following examples illustrate this program's important role in implementing the Agency's
core priorities and mission.
430
-------
• Participated in and provided legal counsel on the Administrator's Superfund Initiative Task
Force including the development of the Task Force Report.
• Provided critical legal support and advice to the Superfund Remedial, Removal and
Enforcement programs on complex, high visibility, expensive Superfund cleanups, such as
Portland Harbor.
Performance Measure Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the Legal Advice: Environmental
Program under the EPM appropriation.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continue Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• There is no change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485
(codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute).
431
-------
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Program Area: Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Goal: Cooperative Federalism
Objective(s): Enhance Shared Accountability
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$1,142.0
$1,015.0
$0.0
-$1,015.0
Hazardous Substance Supci jund
S 5VJ.J
SMt'.O
so.o
-SMi'.O
Total Budget Authority
$1,733.3
$1,682.0
$0.0
-$1,682.0
Total Workyears
7.5
6.7
0.0
-6.7
Program Project Description:
EPA's General Counsel and Regional Counsel Offices provide environmental Alternative Dispute
Resolution (ADR) services and workplace conflict prevention. EPA utilizes ADR as a method for
preventing or resolving conflicts prior to engaging in formal litigation. ADR includes the provision
of legal counsel, facilitation, mediation and consensus building advice and support. This program
oversees a strategically-sourced contract for these services that provides mediation, facilitation,
public involvement, training, and organizational development support to all headquarters and
regional programs.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE are proposed for elimination for this program in FY 2019.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$667.0/ -1.4 FTE) This program change eliminates the centralization of the conflict
prevention and ADR program. Programs across the Agency may pursue ADR support
services and training individually.
Statutory Authority:
Administrative Dispute Resolution Act (ADRA) of 1996; Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1996;
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), §§ 111,
117, 122; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat.
485 (codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute).
432
-------
Operations and Administration
433
-------
Acquisition Management
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$31,042.0
$30,803.0
$25,438.0
-$5,365.0
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
$144.7
$146.0
$138.0
-$8.0
Hazardous Substance Superfund
S 22.10X1
.S 21.21(t.O
S 21.21(1.0
.S 0.0
Total Budget Authority
$53,289.8
$52,245.0
$46,872.0
-$5,373.0
Total Workyears
277.0
304.5
259.5
-45.0
Program Project Description:
Superfund resources in the Acquisition Management program support the Agency's contracts
activities for Superfund Emergency Response and Removal, Remedial, Emergency Preparedness,
and Federal Facilities Response programs. These resources enable the Agency to assess and
cleanup Superfund sites, as well as prepare and respond to natural disasters and terrorist incidents.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to process
contract actions in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and guidance from the
Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP). With its contract expiring in FY 2019, EPA will
evaluate options for replacing EPA's Acquisition System (EAS) with a government-wide shared
services contract writing system. EPA will target a strategic, government wide solution that
leverages economies of scale using the shared knowledge and processes from other federal
agencies. The Agency will focus on a solution that reduces costs while increasing efficiency by
standardizing federal procurement planning, contract award, administration, and close-out
processes.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to implement Best-in-Class (BIC) solutions to identify pre-vetted,
government-wide contracts as part of the Agency's effort to utilize more mature, market-proven
acquisition vehicles.7 Through BIC solutions, EPA will leverage acquisition experts to optimize
spending within the government-wide category management framework and increase the
transactional data available for agency level analysis of buying behaviors. In FY 2019, EPA also
will continue to maximize its Strategic Sourcing Program (SSP), thereby enhancing purchase
coordination, improving price uniformity and knowledge-sharing, and leveraging small business
capabilities to meet acquisition goals.
7 For additional information, refer to: https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/memoranda/2017/M-17-
29.pdf Best-in-Class Mandatory Solution -Package Delivery Services.
434
-------
The SSP also allows the Agency to research, assess, and award contract vehicles that
will maximize time and resource savings. The SSP serves as a foundation for effective financial
and resource management because it simplifies the acquisition process and reduces costs. Long-
term implementation of the SSP can transform the Agency's acquisition process into a strategically
driven function, ensuring maximum value for every acquisition dollar spent. The Agency has
established a goal of obtaining at least five percent savings for all strategically sourced categories
of goods and services. Through FY 2017, EPA has saved approximately $10 million from strategic
sourcing initiatives focused on VoIP, laboratory supplies, print, cellular services, shipping, office
supplies, equipment maintenance, and software. In FY 2019, EPA anticipates between $4 and $4.5
million in savings. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to focus on implementing the Financial
Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act (FITARA) by:
• Avoiding vendor lock-in by letting contracts with multiple vendors or confining the scope
of the contract to a limited task; and
• Developing acquisition vehicles that support the Agency in FITARA implementation.
In FY 2019, EPA also will continue supporting the Superfund Remedial Acquisition Framework
(RAF), which modifies EPA's existing approach for acquiring services to support the Superfund
Remedial program. In addition to providing a variety of acquisition tools for Superfund remedial
services, RAF aligns with government-wide directives, maximizes competition to realize cost
efficiency, strengthens the Agency's contract management processes, and helps to improve
efficiency across the Superfund Remedial program.
Performance Measure Targets:
(PRl) Percentage of contract actions processed within the Procurement Action Lead
Time (PALT) Standards.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
SA: 75%
CP: 65%
FAA: 80%
SA: 80%
CP: 70%
FAA: 85%
(PR2) Acquisition costs avoided through use of strategic sourcing.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
SA: Simplified Acquisitions; CP: Competitive Proposals; FAA: Funding and Administrative Actions
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-15.0 FTE) This net program change reflects a focus on essential activities (e.g.,
processing contractual actions, implementing BIC solutions, maximizing EPA's Strategic
Sourcing Program), and includes changes to fixed and other costs.
435
-------
Statutory Authority:
Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as
amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485 (codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute).
436
-------
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$73,003.2
$71,493.0
$68,635.0
-$2,858.0
T.c;i1\iimT iideiui'iiiiiul sionuc T;inKs
:
S404 0
S420 0
S1 <. 0
Hazardous Substance Supci jund
S 22.511.-/
S2l.J-l5.lt
S21.I52.I)
-S IVS.lt
Total Budget Authority
$95,887.8
$93,242.0
$90,207.0
-$3,035.0
Total Workyears
450.5
493.4
430.6
-62.8
Program Project Description:
EPA's financial management community maintains a strong partnership with the Superfund
program. EPA's Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) recognizes and supports this
continuing partnership by providing a full array of financial management support services and
systems necessary to pay Superfund bills and recoup cleanup and oversight costs for the Trust
Fund. EPA's OCFO manages Superfund activities under the Central Planning, Budgeting and
Finance program in support of integrated planning, budget formulation and execution, financial
management, performance and accountability processes, financial cost recovery, and the systems
to ensure effective stewardship of Superfund resources. This program supports the requirements
of the Digital Accountability and Transparency (DATA) Act of 2014 and the Federal Information
Technology Acquisition Reform Act (FITARA) of 2015.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. EPA will continue to provide resource
stewardship to ensure that all agency programs operate with fiscal responsibility and management
integrity, financial services are efficiently and consistently delivered nationwide, and programs
demonstrate results. EPA will continue to provide direction and support for the Superfund program
in financial management activities; implementing cost accounting requirements; financial payment
and support services; and Superfund-specific fiscal and accounting services. EPA will maintain
key planning, budgeting, and financial management activities. EPA will sustain basic operations
and maintenance of core agency financial management systems: Compass, PeoplePlus (Time and
Attendance), Budget Formulation System and related financial reporting systems.
EPA will continue to modernize and streamline business processes and operations to promote
transparency and efficiency. The program will apply Lean principles and leverage input from
customer-focused councils, advisory groups and technical workgroups to continue improving as a
437
-------
high performance organization. EPA will standardize and streamline internal business processes
and use additional federal and/or internal shared services when supported by business case
analysis.
In FY 2019, the program will continue to focus on core responsibilities in the areas of strategic
planning and budget preparation; financial reporting; transaction processing and Superfund Cost
Recovery. The program will continue to implement FITARA requirements in accordance with
EPA's Implementation Plan.8 The Chief Information Officer will continue to be engaged
throughout the budget planning process to ensure that IT needs are properly planned and resourced
in accordance with FITARA.
In FY 2019, the Agency will focus on the modernization of the Superfund Cost Recovery Package
Imaging and On-Line System (SCORPIOS) to improve EPA's ability to recover costs from
polluters. This necessary modernization will enhance EPA's ability to record and produce financial
documentation for cost recovery packages and better align with EPA's technology stack and
security standards and guidelines. In addition, investments will improve the ability of the Agency
to manage and retrieve supporting cost documentation at the site/regional level. As a result, EPA
will be able to support services necessary to: pay Superfund bills, recoup cleanup/ oversight costs
for the Trust Fund, and provide effective stewardship of resources. This effort will reduce licensing
costs and ongoing operations and maintenance costs.
EPA is dedicated to reducing fraud, waste, and abuse and strengthening internal controls over
improper payments. Since the implementation of the Improper Payments Information Act of 2002,
EPA has reviewed, sampled, and monitored its Superfund contract payments to protect against
erroneous payments. The Agency's payment streams are consistently well under the government-
wide threshold of 1.5 percent and $10 million of estimated improper payments. EPA conducts risk
assessments in its principal payment streams, including grants, contracts, commodities, payroll,
travel, and purchase cards. When overpayments are identified, they are promptly recovered. EPA
has expanded its risk assessments, performed statistical sampling, set appropriate
reduction/recovery targets, and implemented corrective action plans. The Agency conducts these
activities to reduce the potential for improper payments and ensure compliance with the Improper
Payments Information Act, as amended by the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act
of 2010 (P.L. 111-204) and the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act of 2012 (P.L.
112-248).
Performance Measure Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the Central Planning, Budgeting, and
Finance program under the EPM appropriation.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$193.0/ -12.1 FTE) This net program change streamlines efforts in the areas of strategic
planning, budget preparation, financial reporting and transaction processing, and includes
changes to fixed and other costs.
8 For more information: http://www.epa.gov/open/fitara-implementation-plan-and-chief-iiiforiiiation-ofTLcer-assignment-plan.
438
-------
Statutory Authority:
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485
(codified as Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute).
439
-------
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$293,997.9
$305,844.0
$300,738.0
-$5,106.0
Science & Technology
$64,642.7
$67,875.0
$68,834.0
$959.0
Building and Facilities
$26,065.5
$27,602.0
$33,377.0
$5,775.0
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
$502.2
$793.0
$773.0
-$20.0
Inland Oil Spill Programs
$376.2
$580.0
$665.0
$85.0
Hazardous Substance Superfund
.S~\'ANl\0
S'-1,1-1-1.1)
-.S I.X-fl.O
Total Budget Authority
$455,235.8
$478,679.0
$478,531.0
-$148.0
Total Workyears
323.4
356.7
318.0
-38.7
Program Project Description:
Superfund resources in the Facilities Infrastructure and Operations program fund the Agency's
rent, utilities, and security. This program also supports centralized administrative activities and
support services, including health and safety, environmental compliance and management,
facilities maintenance and operations, space planning, sustainable facilities and energy
conservation planning and support, property management, printing, mail, and transportation
services. Funding is allocated for such services among the major appropriations for the Agency.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to invest
to reconfigure EPA's workspaces, enabling the Agency to release office space and reduce long-
term rent costs, consistent with HR 4465,9 the Federal Assets Sale and Transfer Act of 2016.
Between FY 2015 and FY 2019 EPA will have released over 850,000 square feet of space
nationwide, resulting in a cumulative annual rent avoidance of nearly $30 million across all
appropriations. These savings help offset EPA's escalating rent and security costs. Currently
planned consolidations through 2019 will allow EPA to release an estimated 306,000 square feet
of space. For FY 2019, the Agency is requesting $46.53 million for rent, $2.22 million for utilities,
and $6.93 million for security in the Superfund appropriation.
9 For additional information, refer to: https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/4465. Federal Assets Sale and
Transfer Act of 2016.
440
-------
At the requested resource levels, EPA will continue to manage lease agreements with GSA and
other private landlords, maintain EPA facilities, fleet, equipment, and fund costs associated with
utilities and building security needs. EPA also will meet regulatory Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) obligations and provide health and safety training to field staff
(e.g., inspections, monitoring, On-Scene Coordinators), and track capital equipment of $25
thousand or more.
Performance Measure Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the Facilities Infrastructure and
Operations program under the EPM appropriation.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$954.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (+$5,008.0) This change to fixed and other costs rebalances funding proportions across
major appropriation accounts.
• (-$7,803.0/ -2.3 FTE) This program change reflects a reduction in programs associated
with environmental management systems, comprehensive facility energy audits, re-
commissioning, and sustainable building design, and reflects the net change in agency
activities in FY 2019 including:
o support for employee wellness and worklife initiatives such as federal cost sharing for
health wellness and CPR/AED training services, and libraries;
o preventative maintenance of facilities, equipment, and vehicle fleet;
o custodial services; and
o EPA's mail delivery services.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Property and Administration Services Act; Public Building Act; Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act; Clean Water Act; Clean Air Act; Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act
(CERFA); Energy Policy Act of 2005; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as
amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485 (codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute).
441
-------
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$24,444.8
$25,416.0
$18,986.0
-$6,430.0
Hazardous Substance Supci jund
S2.W.-I
S2.fill.it
s:.f,ii.it
sn.n
Total Budget Authority
$27,442.2
$28,027.0
$21,597.0
-$6,430.0
Total Workyears
152.4
161.2
115.7
-45.5
Program Project Description:
Superfund resources in the Financial Assistance Grants and Interagency Agreement (IA)
Management program support the management of grants and IAs, and suspension and debarment
activities. Resources in this program ensure that EPA's management of grants and IAs meets the
highest fiduciary standards, that grant and IA funding produces measurable results for
environmental programs, and that the suspension and debarment program effectively protects the
government's business interest. These objectives are critically important for the Superfund
program, as a substantial portion of the program is implemented through IAs with the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers and the Coast Guard.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In accordance with the overarching 2016-
2020 EPA Grants Management Plan (GMP), and EPA's Strategic Plan, EPA will continue to
implement activities to achieve efficiencies while enhancing quality and accountability. EPA will
invest to modernize grant and IA IT systems by:
• Completing the migration away from aging Lotus Notes technology. For Grants, EPA is
evaluating a federal Centers of Excellence solution for comprehensive and cost-effective
grants management. EPA is targeting a platform that will streamline and standardize
Agency processes, using the shared knowledge from other cabinet level and independent
agencies. EPA is currently evaluating solutions based on their access to information,
services, and reporting while enhancing the overall user experience. For IAs, EPA will
integrate business solution using EPA's Interagency Document Online Tracking System
(1DOTS).
• Eliminating reliance on paper for records and improving records management. For Grants,
EPA will identify a solution that adopts electronic records management capabilities. For
442
-------
IAs, EPA will integrate with the Agency's internal electronic records management tool
(ECMS) using Documentum technology.
• Strengthening decision making with improved and standardized reporting capabilities. For
Grants, EPA will centralize common reporting tools and other capabilities through a
standardized platform. For IAs, EPA will consolidate technology and capabilities to
leverage the Agency's existing financial reporting system.
In addition to IT-related investments, the GMP focuses on reducing the administrative burden on
EPA and grants recipients, and on improving grants management procedures. Specifically, the
Agency will continue to: 1) fully implement the streamlining reforms in OMB's Uniform Grants
Guidance; 2) streamline EPA's grants management by ensuring policies conform to a new
comprehensive framework; 3) review, refine, and streamline Lean grants management processes;
and 4) Implement Lean recommendations for Intergovernmental Review (IR), which includes
reducing the number of programs that require IR, automating the IR process as much as possible,
and superseding/archiving EPA's IR policy. This will ensure that EPA is compliant with IR
requirements without placing additional burden on EPA staff and applicants.
EPA is a recognized leader in suspension and debarment. The Agency will continue to make
aggressive use of discretionary debarments and suspensions as well as statutory debarments under
the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act to protect the government's business interests. In FY 2019,
EPA will focus suspension and debarment activity to the most egregious violations. Congress and
federal courts have long recognized federal agencies' inherent authority and obligation to exclude
non-responsible parties from eligibility to receive government contracts and non-procurement
awards (for example: grants, cooperative agreements, loans, and loan guarantees). A number of
recent federal statutes, GAO reports, and OMB directives require that federal agencies administer
effective suspension and debarment programs in order to protect taxpayers from bad actors.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-2.4 FTE) This program change reflects expected efficiencies in the processing of grant
and IA awards, lower requested grant funding levels throughout the Agency and a review
of unliquidated obligations. EPA will target funds to core grant and IA activities.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA);
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485
(codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute); Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act;
Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act, § 2455.
443
-------
Human Resources Management
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$50,608.8
$43,930.0
$40,860.0
-$3,070.0
Hazardous Substance Supci jund
S5JMKI
N \VV~.0
s.\-/v~.o
-S 500.0
Total Budget Authority
$55,988.9
$49,927.0
$46,357.0
-$3,570.0
Total Workyears
249.5
247.9
223.8
-24.1
Program Project Description:
Superfund resources for the Human Resources (HR) Management program support human capital
activities throughout EPA. As requirements and initiatives change, EPA continually evaluates and
improves the Superfund program's human resource functions in recruitment, hiring, and
workforce development to help the Agency achieve its mission and maximize employee
productivity and job satisfaction.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. Effective workforce management is critical to EPA's ability
to accomplish its mission. EPA's efforts in HR enterprise risk management include: attracting and
retaining a high-performing, diverse workforce; implementing training and development
programs; delivering employee services; streamlining HR processes; and strengthening
performance management, labor, and employee relations programs. EPA will continue to support
efforts that increase the quality of core operations, improve productivity, and achieve cost savings
in mission-support functions including human capital management.
In FY 2019, the Agency will continue to strengthen its performance management activities,
including implementing the Agency's performance management plan. EPA will procure and
deploy a learning management system through the Department of Interior's Interior Business
Center or the Office of Personnel Management. The system will assist in developing and delivering
management tools, targeting and providing timely and high-impact training that streamlines
administrative functions, leverages EPA's First Line Supervisors Advisory Group, and assists with
organizing mentoring on an as-needed basis.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
444
-------
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$500.0) This program change reflects a focus on core human capital activities (e.g.,
deliver employee services; streamline HR processes; and strengthen performance
management); modifies schedules for enhancements and/or maintenance of EPA's HR IT
Systems and EPA's University portal that provides online training and professional
development; and reduces centrally-provided, non-mandatory training.
Statutory Authority:
Title 5 of the U.S.C.; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L.
98-80, 97 Stat. 485 (codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute).
445
-------
Research: Sustainable Communities
446
-------
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Program Area: Research: Sustainable Communities
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Prioritize Robust Science
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Science & Technology
$142,429.1
$133,415.0
$52,549.0
-$80,866.0
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
$358.0
$318.0
$320.0
$2.0
Inland Oil Spill Programs
$65^ 4
$659.0
$516.0
-$143.0
Hazardous Substance Supci jund
S 12.T.U
SUJftxO
SW.SSi.O
-S500.0
Total Budget Authority
$156,158.1
$145,777.0
$64,270.0
-$81,507.0
Total Workyears
459.7
476.3
294.1
-182.2
Program Project Description:
This area of EPA's Sustainable and Healthy Communities (SHC) research program responds
directly to the Superfund law requirements for a comprehensive and coordinated Federal "program
of research, evaluation, testing, development, and demonstration of alternative or innovative
treatment technologies...which may be utilized in response actions to achieve more permanent
protection of human health and welfare and the environment."10
SHC's research under the Superfund appropriation provides federal, regional and community
decision-makers with: engineering tools, methods and information to assess current conditions at
Superfund sites; decision support tools to evaluate the implications of alternative remediation
approaches and technologies, and reuse of sites; the latest science to support policy development
and implementation; and, rapid access to technical support through EPA's Superfund Technical
Support Centers.
Recent accomplishments of the SHC program include:
• Superfund Engineering Technical Support Center (ETSC): While the volume changes
depending on site requirements, the ETSC typically addresses more than 300 requests each
fiscal year. These requests serviced both National Priorities List Superfund and Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) sites. The ETSC also prepared Engineering
Impact Papers on six critical topics of broad application to site remediation across the
U.S.11
• Superfund Groundwater Technical Support Center (GWTSC): The GWTSC consists
of a broad base of scientists and engineers who provide help with subsurface
10 42 U.S.C. § 9660(b).
11 For more information, see: fattps://www.epa.gov/supeifuiid/supeifuiid-teclniical-support-aiid-resource-ceiiters.
447
-------
contamination, contaminant fluxes from groundwater to other media, and ecosystem
restoration issues. The center services National Priorities List and RCRA sites, typically
responding to about 100 requests for assistance each fiscal year.12
• Workshops on Emerging Remediation Technologies and Approaches: The ETSC also
is collaborating with state and other federal partners to hold workshops on emerging
remediation technologies and approaches. For example, the ETSC worked with the State
of California, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the U.S. Geological
Survey to provide a phytoremediation workshop in the third quarter of FY 2017 for federal,
state and local stakeholders in Mountain View, CA.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.3, Prioritize Robust Science in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. EPA research personnel and associated support staff will analyze
existing research data on vapor intrusion, contaminated groundwater and sediments, and
innovative technologies for site characterization and remediation and publish scientific journal
articles to disseminate findings associated with the data.
Performance Measure Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the Sustainable and Healthy
Communities Program under the S&T appropriation.
EPA is reconstituting a subcommittee under ORD's Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) for
the SHC program to evaluate its performance and provide feedback to the Agency. The SHC
program will meet regularly with both the BOSC and Science Advisory Board (SAB) over the next
several years to seek their input on topics related to research program design, science quality,
innovation, relevance and impact. This includes advising EPA on its strategic research direction
midway through the 4-year cycle of Strategic Research Action Plans (StRAPs).
EPA collaborates with the National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation, Department
of Energy, U.S. Department of Agriculture and the White House's Office of Science and
Technology Policy to assess research performance. EPA's Office of Research and Development
(ORD's) state engagement program is designed to inform states about ORD's research programs
and role within EPA, and to enable ORD to better understand the science needs of state
environmental agencies. Key partners at the state level include the Environmental Council of the
States, with its Environmental Research Institute of the States and the Interstate Technology and
Regulatory Council, as well as state media associations such as the Association of State and
Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials. EPA supports the interagency Science and
Technology in America's Reinvestment, Measuring the Effect of Research on Innovation,
Competitiveness and Science (STAR METRICS) efforts.13
12 For more information, see: https://www.epa.gov/superfmcl/superfmd-teclmical-support-and-resource-centers.
13 STAR METRICS: https://www.starmetrics.nih.gov/.
448
-------
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$124.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is a decrease due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce support, and benefit
costs.
• (-$376.0) This program change streamlines the Agency's scientific and engineering
expertise provided to address environmental problems via the three Technical Support
Centers.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) §§ 102,
104(i), 105(a)(4), 311(c); Superfund Amendments Reauthorization Act of 1986, §§ 209(a), 403.
449
-------
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
450
-------
Human Health Risk Assessment
Program Area: Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Prioritize Robust Science
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Science & Technology
$40,506.5
$37,554.0
$22,267.0
-$15,287.0
Hazardous Substance Supci jund
S3.020.5
S2.fi'OxO
Si.021.0
N 2.210.0
Total Budget Authority
$43,527.0
$40,359.0
$27,288.0
-$13,071.0
Total Workyears
169.2
177.6
111.6
-66.0
Program Project Description:
EPA's Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) research program supports the risk assessment
needs of the Agency's Superfund programs and regional risk assessors by providing Provisional
Peer-Reviewed Toxicity Values (PPRTVs), rapid risk assessments to respond to emergent
scenarios, and technical guidance on their application. These assessment tools and activities
support risk-based management decisions at contaminated Superfund and hazardous waste sites.
Scientists in the HHRA program synthesize the available scientific information on the potential
health and environmental impacts of exposures to individual chemicals and chemical mixtures that
are in the environment to assist in the Agency's chemical safety work. Results include:
• Improvements in environmental and human health in the vicinity of Superfund sites;
• Reduction or reversal of damages to natural resources;
• Reduction of harm in emergency situations;
• Improved economic conditions and quality of life in communities affected by hazardous
waste sites;
• Improved environmental practices by industry;
• Advances in science and technology.
Priorities for PPRTV development are based on the needs of the Agency's Land and Emergency
Management program and are evaluated annually. Applying new data streams, read-across
approaches, and computational tools to enhance the supporting data/knowledge bases and
efficiency of derivation for PPRTV values are active areas of research in the HHRA program.
Lessons learned from this research will be leveraged and applied to other assessments in support
of TSCA implementation.
Communities near Superfund sites or in emergency situations are faced with an urgent need for
coordinated assistance to assess and address issues of environmental contamination. Additionally,
these communities are now presented with new sensing or monitoring information that are difficult
451
-------
to interpret and apply to decision making. The HHRA program develops approaches to respond to
these emerging, often crisis-level, environmental contamination issues with scientific information
that supports quick action, decisions and effective solutions. The HHRA program anticipates
developing new assessment approaches by means of an expanded product line to enhance rapid
response and screening capabilities and to augment toxicity value derivation procedures for health
assessments.
Recent accomplishments in the HHRA Research Program include:
• Completed 12 Provisional Peer-reviewed Toxicity Value (PPRTV) documents based on
needs and priorities of EPA's Superfund program.
• Fielded more than 40 requests for scientific support on human and ecological assessment
via the Superfund Health Risk Technical Support Center (STSC) and Ecological Risk
Assessment Support Center (ERASC).
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program supports Goal 3/Objective 3.3 to Prioritize Robust Science in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. The HHRA program's work in FY 2019 will focus explicitly on
efforts integral to achieving the Administrator's priorities and informing the Agency's
implementation of key environmental regulations. Examples of this work include:
• Portfolio of Chemical Evaluation Products: Assessments that support policy and
regulatory decisions for EPA's programs and regions, and state agencies, will be
consolidated into a portfolio of Chemical Evaluation products that optimize the application
of best available science and technology. These tailored 'fit-for-purpose' products will be
shaped for use by partners, including EPA's program and regional offices, states, and other
federal agencies.
• Linking Databases and Management Tools: HHRA will continue to collaborate with the
Chemical Safety for Sustainability (CSS) research program to link the architecture of
assessment databases and literature management tools, including Health and
Environmental Research Online (HERO), with the RapidTox Dashboard being developed
in CSS. This integration can be used to inform assessment development and fill gaps in
assessments, especially for data poor chemicals.
• Provisional Peer-reviewed Toxicity Values (PPRTV) Assessments: Provide additional
PPRTV assessments as prioritized by the Land and Emergency Management program to
support risk-based decision making at Superfund sites and hazardous waste sites, as
resources allow. This work improves EPA's ability to make decisions and address site
related environmental health problems.
• Rapid Risk Assessments: Continue essential technical assistance across EPA to provide
rapid risk assessments. This will combine problem formulation and state-of-the-art
exposure information and tools with hazard information, chiefly through the continued
452
-------
improvement of the derivation basis for PPRTVs for evaluating chemical specific
exposures at Superfund sites, and by evaluating case-specific information related to
emergent situations.
The Agency is currently reviewing the IRIS program to ensure it supports the Agency's highest
priority public health decision-making, and its role in supporting the TSCA program.
Performance Measure Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the Human Health Risk Assessment
program under the S&T appropriation.
EPA has established a standing subcommittee under EPA's Board of Scientific Counselors
(BOSC) for the Chemical Safety for Sustainability and Human Health Risk Assessment National
Research Programs that will be utilized to evaluate the HHRA program as part of its performance
and provide feedback to the Agency. EPA will meet regularly with the BOSC to seek their input
on topics related to research program design, science quality, innovation, relevance and impact.
This includes advising EPA on developing its strategic research direction and Strategic Research
Action Plans for FY 2019-2022.
ORD's state engagement program is designed to inform states about ORD's research programs
and role within EPA, and to enable ORD to better understand the science needs of state
environmental agencies. Key partners at the state level include the Environmental Council of the
States, with its Environmental Research Institute of the States and the Interstate Technology and
Regulatory Council, the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, as well as state media
associations such as the Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials.
EPA collaborates with several science agencies and the research community to assess our research
performance such as the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation, the
Department of Energy, and the United States Department of Agriculture. The Agency also will
work with the White House's Office of Science and Technology Policy. EPA supports the
interagency Science and Technology in America's Reinvestment—Measuring the Effect of
Research on Innovation, Competitiveness and Science (STAR METRICS) effort. This interagency
effort is helping EPA to more effectively measure the impact of federal science investments have
on society, the environment, and the economy.14
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$26.0) This change to fixed and other costs is a decrease due to the recalculation of base
workforce costs due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce support, and benefit
costs.
• (-$75.0/ -0.5 FTE) This program change decreases support for the Superfund Health Risk
Technical Support Center and the Ecological Risk Assessment Support Center.
14 STAR METRICS: https://www.starmetrics.nih.gov/.
453
-------
• (+$2,317.0/ +15.2 FTE) This rebalances resources from the S&T appropriation to the
Superfund appropriation for work related to IRIS Assessments.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA); Clean Air
Act (CAA) §§ 103, 108, 109, 112; Clean Water Act (CWA) §§ 101(a)(6), 104, 105; Federal
Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) § 3(c)(2)(A); Food Quality Protection Act
(FQPA); Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA); Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), §§
4(b)(1)(B), 4(b)(2)(B).
454
-------
Superfund Cleanup
455
-------
Superfund: Emergency Response and Removal
Program Area: Superfund Cleanup
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Revitalize Land and Prevent Contamination
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Hazardous Substance Supci jund
SJWJ2-I.II
si so.tr\n
SJXJJM.U
S 1.2M.H
Total Budget Authority
$198,324.0
$180,075.0
$181,306.0
$1,231.0
Total Workyears
279.7
244.7
244.7
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Emergency Response and Removal program (SF Removal) is the foundation of federal
emergency response to releases of hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants and is
essential to managing the associated risks. In the case of a national emergency, EPA is charged
with preventing limiting, mitigating, or containing chemical, oil, radiological, biological, or
hazardous materials released during and in the aftermath of an incident. Typical situations
requiring emergency response and removal actions vary greatly in size, nature, and location, and
include chemical releases, fires or explosions, natural disasters, and other threats to people from
exposure to hazardous substances. EPA's 24-hour-a-day response capability is a cornerstone
element of the National Contingency Plan.15 Further, this program is responsible for the Agency's
only Primary Mission Essential Function.
Over the last 10 years (FY 2007 - FY 2016), EPA completed or oversaw over 3,655 Superfund
removal actions across the country. SF Removal sites can be found in remote rural areas as well
as large urban settings. Approximately 11 million people live within three miles of 221 SF
Removal sites where EPA completed a removal action in FY 2016 - equal to about 3 percent of
the total US population.16 SF Removal cleanups vary in complexity and contain a wide variety of
contaminants including mercury, lead, and asbestos.17
The SF Removal program provides technical assistance and outreach to industry, states, tribes, and
local communities as part of the Agency's effort to ensure national safety and security for chemical
and oil responses. EPA trains, equips, and deploys resources in order to manage, contain, and
remove contaminants. These substances, until contained or removed, have the potential to
significantly damage property, endanger public health and have critical environmental impact on
communities.
15 For additional information, refer to: https://www.epa.gov/emergency-response/national-oil-and-hazardous-substances-
pollution-contingency-plan-ncp-overview.
16 U.S. EPA, Office of Land and Emergency Management Estimate 2017. Data collected includes (1) site information as of the
end of FY16 and (2) census data from the 2011-2015 American Community Survey.
17 Data from US EPA SEMS.
456
-------
Agency On-Scene Coordinators (OSCs) make up the core of the SF Removal program. These
trained and equipped EPA personnel respond to, assess, mitigate, and cleanup up environmental
releases regardless of the cause. States, local, and tribal communities rely upon the OSCs expertise
and support to deal with environmental emergencies that are beyond their capabilities and
resources. For example, in 2017, EPA deployed its National Incident Management Assistance Team
(N-IMAT) to help with the long-term strategic planning and response efforts that occurred for
Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, Maria, and the California Wildfires. For Hurricane Harvey, N-IMAT staff
were responsible for working with the Texas Immediate Disaster Case Management program,
developing health and safety plans for the cities of Houston and Corpus Christi. For Hurricanes Irma
and Maria, N-IMAT staff helped with long-term planning and response efforts that are still ongoing in
Puerto Rico and other parts of the Caribbean.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.3, Revitalize Land and Prevent
Contamination in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, the SF Removal program
will:
• Respond to, and provide technical assistance for, emergency responses, removal
assessments, and limited time critical response actions (non-emergency responses).
• Conduct and participate in selected multi-media training and exercises for emergency
responders. These events ensure readiness by focusing on necessary coordination and
consistency across the Agency, enhance specialized technical skills and expertise, and
strengthen partnerships with state, local, tribal, and other federal responders.
• Support the Environmental Response Team (ERT), which provides nationwide assistance
and consultation for emergency response actions, including unusual or complex incidents.
In such cases, the ERT supplies the OSC, or lead responder, with special equipment and
technical or logistical assistance.
• Continue to deploy its National Incident Management Assistance Team (N-IMAT) to set up
organizational systems that help with the long-term strategic planning and response efforts.
Performance Measure Targets:
FY 2018
FY 2019
(137) Number of Superfund removals completed.
Target
Target
175
175
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,231.0) This program change reflects an increase in funding to focus on sites which
pose an immediate threat to human health and the environment, and includes changes to
fixed and other costs.
457
-------
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Sections
104, 105, 106; Clean Water Act (CWA); and Oil Pollution Act (OPA).
458
-------
Superfund: EPA Emergency Preparedness
Program Area: Superfund Cleanup
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Revitalize Land and Prevent Contamination
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Hazardous Substance Supci jund
S'J'-l.r,
N ~.W.«
.S-JS-I.0
S (U>
Total Budget Authority
$7,174.6
$7,584.0
$7,584.0
$0.0
Total Workyears
34.1
37.4
37.4
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Superfund Emergency Preparedness program provides for EPA's engagement on the National
Response Team (NRT) and Regional Response Teams (RRT) where it ensures federal agencies
are prepared to respond to national incidents, threats, and major environmental emergencies. EPA
implements the Emergency Preparedness program in coordination with the Department of
Homeland Security and other federal agencies in order to deliver federal hazard assistance to state,
local, and tribal governments.
The Agency carries out its responsibility under multiple statutory authorities as well as the
National Response Framework (NRF), which provides the comprehensive federal structure for
managing national emergencies. EPA is the designated lead for the NRF's Oil and Hazardous
Materials Response Annex - Emergency Support Function #10 which covers responsibilities for
responding to releases of hazardous materials, oil, and other contaminants that are a threat to
human health and the environment. As such, the Agency participates and leads applicable
interagency committees and workgroups to develop national planning and implementation policies
at the operational level.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.3, Revitalize Land and Prevent
Contamination in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. EPA continuously works to improve its
management of emergency response assets to be better prepared to handle large unprecedented
incidents in order to increase cost effectiveness and avoid costly cleanup actions. The Superfund
Emergency Preparedness program participates in national and local exercises and drills,
coordinates with stakeholders to develop Area and Regional Contingency Plans (ACPs), and
provides technical assistance to industry, states, tribes, and local communities. Specific activities
include:
• Chair the NRT18 and co-chair the 13 RRTs. The NRT and RRTs are the only active
environmentally-focused interagency executive committees addressing oil and hazardous
18 For additional information, refer to: littps://www.iirt.org<
459
-------
substance emergencies. They serve as multi-agency coordination groups supporting
emergency responders when convened as incident specific teams.
• Participate in the development of limited, scenario-specific exercises and regional drills
designed to assess national emergency response management capabilities. These activities
will involve the RRTs, NRT, and/or principal level participants.
• Continue to implement the National Incident Management System (NIMS)19 which
provides the approach to manage incidents and works hand in hand with the NRF.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• There is no change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), §§ 104,
105, 106; Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act.
19 For additional information, refer to: http://www.fe111a.gov/11ational-i11cident-111a11agement-system.
460
-------
Superfund: Federal Facilities
Program Area: Superfund Cleanup
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Revitalize Land and Prevent Contamination
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Hazardous Substance Supci jund
S22.-f.U2
S2lt.VS2.lt
S 2lt.VS2.lt
Slt.lt
Total Budget Authority
$22,434.2
$20,982.0
$20,982.0
$0.0
Total Workyears
106.2
111.7
111.7
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Superfund Federal Facilities program oversees and provides technical assistance for the
protective and efficient cleanup and reuse of Federal Facility National Priorities List (NPL) sites,20
as mandated by law. Program responsibilities include: 1) inventorying and assessing potentially
contaminated sites; 2) implementing protective remedies; 3) facilitating early transfer of property;
and 4) ensuring ongoing protectiveness of completed cleanups. The program collaborates with
other federal agencies and states to target high priority sites, consider best practices, develop
solutions to problems caused by emerging contaminants, implement strategies to reach cleanup
completion, and bring contaminated land into beneficial reuse. Sixty-four of the 174 Federal
Facility NPL sites, have achieved Site-Wide Ready for Anticipated Use and over 375,000 acres
have been returned to beneficial use.
The work done by this program helps reduce public exposure to dangerous hazardous materials.
The Federal Facility NPL sites are among the largest in the Superfund program and can encompass
specialized environmental contaminants such as munitions and radiological waste, and emerging
contaminants such as per- and polyfluoralkyl substances (PFAS).21 The average size of a Federal
Facility NPL site is over 26,000 acres while the average size for private sites is over 5,000 acres.
The larger size of these facilities in combination with specialized contaminants can make the
investigation and cleanup work more challenging for the program. For example, Fort Wainwright
in AK is the largest Federal Facility NPL Site and the largest site in the Superfund program at
918,000 acres.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.3, Revitalize Land and Prevent
Contamination in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, the program will prioritize
the highest risk sites and oversee cleanups at Federal Facility NPL sites, with issues ranging from
hazardous substances in groundwater, munitions and explosives of concern, emerging
20 As of August 3, 2017, there are 174 Federal Facility sites on the NPL. Please see: https://www.epa. gov/superfund/superfi
national-priori ties-list-npl.
21 For additional information please visit, https://www.epa.gov/fedfac.
461
-------
contaminants, and contamination from legacy nuclear weapons development and energy research.
In FY 2019, the Federal Facilities program will focus on activities that bring human exposure and
groundwater migration under control.
In FY 2019, the program will update the Federal Agency Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket
(Docket). The Docket is updated semiannually and has over 2,300 facilities listed. Required by
Section 120(d) of CERCLA, EPA manages the Docket, which contains information reported by
federal facilities that manage hazardous waste or from which hazardous substances, pollutants, or
contaminants have been or may be released. The Docket 1) identifies all federal facilities that must
be evaluated through the site assessment process; 2) determines whether they pose a risk to human
health and the environment sufficient to warrant inclusion on the NPL; and 3) provides a
mechanism to make the information available to the public.
The program will collaborate with other federal agencies, state, local, and tribal partners to
encourage restoration of sites. EPA will work to simplify and expedite the review process to
transfer federal property for beneficial use or future economic development.
EPA will continue to strengthen oversight and assistance with Department of Energy (DOE) sites.
DOE estimates that the 16 remaining legacy Cold War sites will take decades to complete, due to
groundwater, soil, and waste processing. Similarly, EPA will continue to strengthen oversight and
technical assistance at Department of Defense's (DoD) military munitions response sites and
support DoD's development of new technologies to streamline cleanups. DoD's inventory includes
over 300 operable units containing munitions and explosives of concern that still require
investigation. These sites contain chemical and explosive compounds which require special
handling, storage, and disposal practices, as well as cleanup challenges.
EPA no longer receives resources from the DoD to support accelerated cleanup and reuse at Base
Realignment and Closure (BRAC) sites. EPA will continue oversight work at BRAC sites that are
on the NPL with appropriated resources, as needed.
Performance Measure Targets:
FY 2018
FY 2019
(FFl) Percentage of Superfund federal facility sites construction complete.
Target
Target
83
85
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• There is no change in program funding.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), § 120.
462
-------
Superfund: Remedial
Program Area: Superfund Cleanup
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Revitalize Land and Prevent Contamination
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Hazardous Substance Supci jund
S5-/-I.S22. V
S 51)5.11-12.0
S50H.4V5M
Total Budget Authority
$544,822.9
$505,042.0
$508,495.0
$3,453.0
Total Workyears
939.4
868.8
868.8
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Superfund Remedial program addresses many of the worst contaminated areas in the United
States by conducting investigations and then implementing long term cleanup remedies, as well as
overseeing response work conducted by potentially responsible parties (PRPs) at National
Priorities List (NPL) and Superfund Alternative Approach (SAA) sites. Response actions can take
from a few months for relatively straight-forward soil excavation or capping remedies to several
decades for complex, large area-wide groundwater, sediment, or mining site remedies.
Approximately 53 million, or 16 percent, of all Americans, live within three miles of Superfund
site. A study conducted by researchers at Columbia University, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, and University of California Berkeley found that Superfund cleanups reduce the
incidence of congenital anomalies by roughly 20-25 percent among infants born to mothers living
within 2,000 meters of a site.22 Birth defects avoided means improved human health for an entire
future generation. Ecosystems also are improved by addressing pollutants from contaminated sites
and protecting drinking water supplies and/or fishery habitats.
By addressing the human health and environmental risks posed by releases at NPL and SAA sites,
the Superfund Remedial program strengthens the economy and spurs economic growth by
returning Superfund sites to productive use. As of FY 2017, EPA data shows that at 487 Superfund
sites in reuse, approximately 6,622 businesses are generating $43.6 billion in sales and employ
more than 156,352 people who earn a combined income of $11.2 billion.23 While conducting
cleanup at NPL and SAA sites, Superfund remedial construction projects can have a direct impact
on enhancing our national infrastructure while addressing harmful exposures. Cleanup work under
the Superfund Remedial program also improves property values. A study conducted by researchers
at Duke University and University of Pittsburgh found that residential property values within three
22 Currie, Janet, Michael Greenstone, and Enrico Moretti. 2011. "Superfund Cleanups and Infant Health". American Economic
Review, 101(3): 435-441.
23 For more information on Redevelopment Economics and in depth case studies see www.epa. gov/superfund-redevelopment-
initiative/rede velopment-economic s- superfund-sites.
463
-------
miles of Superfund sites increased between 18.7 and 24.4 percent when sites were cleaned up and
deleted from the NPL.24
In FY 2017, the Administrator established the Superfund Task Force which identified forty-two
recommendations under five overarching goals:
• Expediting Cleanup and Remediation
• Re-Invigorating Responsible Party Cleanup and Reuse
• Encouraging Private Investment
• Promoting Redevelopment and Community Revitalization
• Engaging Partners and Stakeholders
Work to prioritize and reinvigorate the program by the task force has been initiated and will be
ongoing into the future. A first step in this effort was the recent release of a list of sites targeted
for immediate, intense action. The list will be updated continuously as identified issues are
resolved.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.3, Revitalize Land and Prevent
Contamination in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will prioritize resources
to execute its federal, non-delegable responsibility to clean up sites and protect human health and
the environment. The Superfund Remedial program endeavors to maximize the use of special
account resources collected from settlement agreements with PRPs for response actions at specific
sites. As special account funds may only be used for sites and uses specified in the settlement
agreement, both special account resources and annually appropriated resources are critical to clean
up Superfund sites. More than half of non-federal sites on the final NPL do not have an associated
special account and must rely on annually appropriated funds.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to implement recommendations from the Superfund Task Force to
expedite cleanup and remediation while continuing to encourage private investment, facilitate
reuse, promote redevelopment of Superfund sites, and build and strengthen partnerships. EPA will
prioritize ongoing fund-lead investigation, remedial design and construction projects to bring
human exposure and groundwater migration under control. EPA will continue its statutory
responsibility to provide oversight of PRP-lead activities at Superfund sites, consistent with legal
settlement documents, and five-year review activities required by law.
Performance Measure Targets:
FY 2018
FY 2019
(141) Number of Superfund sites with remedy construction completed.
Target
Target
11
11
24 Gamper-Rabindran, Shanti and Christopher Timmons. 2013. "Does cleanup of hazardous waste sites raise housing values?
Evidence of spatially localized benefits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 65(3): 345-360.
464
-------
(151) Number of Superfund sites with human exposures brought under control.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
8
8
(152) Number of Superfund sites with contaminated groundwater migration brought
under control.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
11
11
(S10) Number of Superfund sites made ready for anticipated use site-wide.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
51
51
(115) Number of Superfund remedial site assessments completed.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
650
580
(170) Number of remedial action projects completed at Superfund sites.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
95
95
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$3,453.0) This program change reflects an increase to prioritize resources on NPL sites
that present the highest risk to human health and the environment, and includes changes to
fixed and other costs.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA).
465
-------
Superfund Special Accounts
466
-------
SUPERFUND SPECIAL ACCOUNTS
Background
EPA has the authority to collect funds from parties to support Superfund investigations and
cleanups. Section 122(b)(3) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA) authorizes EPA to retain and use funds received pursuant to a settlement
agreement with a party to carry out the purpose of that agreement. Funds are deposited in
Superfund special accounts for cleanup at the sites designated in individually negotiated settlement
agreements. Through the use of special accounts, EPA ensures responsible parties pay for cleanup
so that annually appropriated resources from the Superfund Trust Fund are generally conserved
for sites where no viable or liable potentially responsible parties (PRPs) can be identified. Each
account is set up separately and distinctly and may only be used for the sites and uses outlined in
the settlement(s) with the party.
Special accounts are sub-accounts in the Superfund Trust Fund. Pursuant to the specific
agreements, which typically take the form of an Administrative Order on Consent or Consent
Decree, EPA uses special account funds to finance site-specific CERCLA response actions at the
site for which the account was established. Of the 1,342 Superfund sites listed as final on the
National Priorities List, more than half do not have special account funds available for use (as of
October 1, 2017). As special account funds may only be used for sites and uses specified in the
settlement agreement, both special account resources and annually appropriated resources are
critical to the Superfund program to clean up Superfund sites.
Special account funds are used to conduct many different site-specific CERCLA response actions,
including, but not limited to, investigations to determine the nature and extent of contamination
and the appropriate remedy, design, construction and implementation of the remedy, enforcement
activities, and post-construction activities. EPA also may provide special account funds as an
incentive to another PRP(s) who agrees to perform additional work beyond the PRP's allocated
share at the site, which EPA might otherwise have to conduct. Because response actions may take
many years, the full use of special account funds also may take many years. Pursuant to the
settlement agreement and in accordance with EPA policy, once site-specific work is complete and
site risks are addressed, special account funds may be used to reimburse EPA for site-specific costs
incurred using appropriated resources (i.e., reclassification), allowing the latter resources to be
allocated to other sites. Any remaining special account funds are transferred to the Superfund Trust
Fund, where they are available for future appropriation by Congress to further support response
work.
EPA, through the Superfund Task Force, is working to ensure that contaminated sites across the
country are remediated to protect human health and the environment and returned to beneficial use
as expeditiously as possible. Maximizing the use of special accounts to facilitate site cleanup
and/or redevelopment is one of the Task Force's recommendations we continue to work on.
467
-------
FY 2017 Special Account Activity
Since the inception of special accounts through the end of FY 2017, EPA has collected
approximately $6.8 billion from parties and earned more than $443 million in interest.25
Approximately 56 percent of the funds have been disbursed or obligated for response actions at
sites and plans have been developed to guide the future use of the remaining 44 percent of available
special account funds. In addition, at sites with no additional work planned or costs to be incurred
by EPA, EPA has transferred approximately $31.4 million to the Superfund Trust Fund. As of the
end of FY 2017, approximately $3.5 billion has been disbursed for site response actions and $548.8
million has been obligated but not yet disbursed.
The Agency continues to receive site-specific settlement funds that are placed in special accounts
each year, so progress on actual obligation and disbursement of funds may not be apparent upon
review solely of the cumulative available balance. In FY 2017, EPA deposited more than $289
million into special accounts and disbursed and obligated over $357 million from special accounts
(including reclassifications). At the end of FY 2017, the cumulative amount available in special
accounts was $3.21 billion.
Special accounts vary in size. A limited set represent the majority of the funds available. At the
end of FY 2017, 4 percent of open accounts had greater than $10 million available and hold more
than 71 percent of all available funds in open accounts. There are many accounts with lower
available balances. 72 percent of all open accounts have up to $1 million available and represent
only 6 percent of available funds in all open accounts.
The balance of more than $3.21 billion is not equivalent to an annual appropriation. The funds
collected under settlements are intended to finance future response work at particular sites for the
length of the project. EPA is carefully managing those funds that remain available for site response
work and develops plans to utilize the available balance. EPA will continue to plan the use of funds
received to conduct site-specific response activities, or reclassify and/or transfer excess funds to
the Superfund Trust Fund to make annually appropriated funds available for use at other Superfund
sites.
For some Superfund sites, although funds are readily available in a special account, remedial action
may take time to initiate and complete. This is due to site-specific conditions such as the specific
requirements for special account use set forth in the settlement agreement, the stage of site cleanup,
the viability of other responsible parties to conduct site cleanup, and the nature of the site
contamination. EPA has plans to spend approximately $1.3 billion of currently available special
account funds over the next 5 years, but funds also are planned much further into the future to
continue activities such as conducting five year reviews or remedy optimization where waste has
been left in place.
In FY 2017, EPA disbursed and obligated more than $340 million from special accounts
(excluding reclassifications) for response work at more than 700 Superfund sites. Some examples
include more than $125 million to support work at the New Bedford site in Massachusetts, more
than $ 18 million for the Commencement Bay, Near Shore/Tide Flats site in Washington, and more
25 The $443 million in interest earned represents the amount of interest that has been allocated to individual special accounts.
468
-------
than $17 million for the U.S. Smelter and Lead Refinery, Inc. (East Chicago) site in Indiana.
Without special account funds being available, appropriated funds would have been necessary for
these response actions to be funded. In other words, EPA was able to fund more than $340 million
in response work at sites in addition to the work funded through appropriated funds obligated or
disbursed in FY 2017.
The summary charts below provide additional information on the status of special accounts.
Exhibit 1 illustrates the cumulative status of open and closed accounts, FY 2017 program activity,
and planned multi-year uses of the available balance. Exhibit 2 provides the prior year (FY 2017),
current year (FY 2018), and estimated future budget year (FY 2019) activity for special accounts.
Exhibit 3 provides prior year data (FY 2017) by EPA Regional Offices to exhibit the geographic
use of the funds.
469
-------
Exhibit 1: Summary of FY 2017 Special Account Transactions
and Cumulative Multi-Year Plans for Using Available Special Account Funds
Account Stiilus1
Number of Accounts
Cumulative Open
1,037
Cumulative Closed
350
I'Y 2017 Specisil Account Aclmty
S in Thoiisiiiuls
Beginning Available Balance
$3,283,116.4
FY 2017 Activities
+ Receipts
$289,443.0
- Transfers to Superfund Trust Fund (Receipt Adjustment)
($2,293.7)
+ Net Interest Earned
($2,282.8)
- Net Change in Unliquidated Obligations
($84,170.6)
- Disbursements - For EPA Incurred Costs
($255,166.0)
- Disbursements - For Work Party Reimbursements under Final
Settlements
($979.9)
- Reclassifications
($16,810.7)
End of Fiscal Year (EOFY) Available Balance2
$3,210,855.5
\
ulli-Ycsir Phuis lor KOI Y 2017 A^iiliiblo liiihmcc*
S in Thoiisiiiuls
2017 EOFY Available Balance
$3,210,855.5
- Estimates for Future EPA Site Activities based on Current Site Plans4
$3,037,075.2
- Estimates for Potential Disbursement to Work Parties Identified in
Final Settlements5
$53,987.0
- Estimates for Reclassifications for FYs 2018-20206
$86,393.7
- Estimates for Transfers to Trust Fund for FYs 2018-20206
$31,663.8
- Available Balance to be Planned for Site-Specific Response7
$1,735.8
1 FY 2017 data is as of 10/01/2017. The Beginning Available Balance is as of 10/01/2016.
2 Numbers may not add due to rounding.
3Planning data were recorded in the Superfund Enterprise Management System (SEMS) as of 10/30/2017 in
reference to special account available balances as of 10/01/2017.
4 "Estimates for EPA Future Site Activities" includes all response actions that EPA may conduct or oversee in
the future, such as removal, remedial, enforcement, post-construction activities as well as allocation of funds
to facilitate a settlement to encourage PRPs to perform the cleanup. Planning data are multi-year and cannot
be used for annual comparisons.
5 "Estimates for Potential Disbursements to Work Parties Identified in Finalized Settlements" includes those
funds that have already been designated in a settlement document, such as a Consent Decree or Administrative
Order on Consent, to be available to a PRP for reimbursements but that have not yet been obligated.
6 "Reclassifications" and "Transfers to the Trust Fund" are estimated for three FYs only. These amounts are
only estimates and may change as EPA determines what funds are needed to complete site-specific response
activities.
7 These include resources received by EPA at the end of the fiscal year and will be assigned for site-specific
response activities.
470
-------
Exhibit 2: Actual and Estimated Special Account Transactions FY 2017 - FY 2019
I V 2017
I V 20IS
estimate
I V 2019
estimate
S in Thousands
Beginning Available Balance
$3,283,116.4
$3,210,855.5
$3,181,855.5
Receipts1
$289,443.0
$250,000.0
$250,000.0
Transfers to Trust Fund (Receipt Adjustment)2
($2,293.7)
($1,520.0)
($1,520.0)
Net Interest Earned3
($2,282.8)
$23,000.0
$24,000.0
Net Obligations2'4
($340,316.6)
($302,100.0)
($302,100.0)
Reclassifications2
r$16.810 7^
($26,380 0~>
f$26.380.0^
End of Year Available Balance5
$3,210,855.5
$3,181,855.5
$3,165,855.5
'The estimates for Receipts are in line with more typical years.
2The estimates for Transfers to Trust Fund, Net Obligations, and Reclassifications are based on a 3-year historical
average.
3Net interest earned projections for FY 2018 and FY 2019 are estimated utilizing economic assumptions for the FY
2019 President's Budget. At the end of FY 2015, the Agency worked with the Department of Treasury to create a
new point account for Superfund special accounts in the Superfund Trust Fund. In FY 2017, $38.5 million in interest
was earned on the special account funds invested in the Superfund Trust Fund. However, there has been a time lag
for those funds to be captured in the Agency's system and made available for use.
4Net Obligations reflect special account funds no longer available for obligation, excluding reclassifications and
receipts transferred to the Trust Fund.
5Numbers may not add due to rounding.
Exhibit 3: FY 2017 Special Account Transactions by EPA Regional Offices
$ in Thousands
Beginning
Available
Balance
Receipts
Transfers to
Trust Fund
(Receipt
Adjustment)
Net
Interest
Earned
Net
Obligations
Reclassifications
End of Year
Available
Balance2
Region 1
$337,247.2
$21,535.3
$0.0
$0.0
($133,921.0)
($6,803.2)
$218,058.4
Region 2
$481,554.8
$76,940.1
$0.0
$0.0
($40,018.5)
($1,960.6)
$516,516.0
Region 3
$114,392.6
$42,787.7
($348.1)
($0.4)
($8,776.4)
($3,187.0)
$144,868.5
Region 4
$68,240.5
$12,449.8
($1,405.2)
$0.0
($3,044.8)
$0.0
$76,240.6
Region 5
$391,565.3
$28,974.9
($539.8)
($2,283.6)
($34,740.0)
($1,580.3)
$381,396.7
Region 6
$79,883.7
$13,666.0
$0.0
$0.0
($4,576.7)
$0.0
$88,972.5
Region 7
$148,140.6
$7,821.4
$0.0
$1.3
$1,473.8
($308.8)
$157,127.8
Region 8
$215,310.5
$20,773.1
($0.6)
$0.0
($23,835.3)
($2,791.3)
$209,456.7
Region 9
$1,281,313.5
$26,739.1
$0.0
($0.2)
($24,677.0)
($179.5)
$1,283,195.4
Region 10
$165,467.9
$37,755.6
$0.0
$0.0
($68,200.7)
$0.0
$135,022.9
Total
$3,283,116.4
$289,443.0
($2,293.7)
($2,282.8)
($340,316.6)
($16,810.7)
$3,210,855.5
1 FY 2017 data is as of 10/01/2017. The Beginning Available Balance is as of 10/01/2016.
2 Numbers may not add due to rounding.
471
-------
472
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Resource Summary Table 475
Program Projects in LUST 475
Enforcement 477
Civil Enforcement 478
Operations and Administration 480
Acquisition Management 481
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance 482
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 484
Underground Storage Tanks (LUST/UST) 486
LUST / UST 487
LUST Cooperative Agreements 489
LUST Prevention 491
Research: Sustainable Communities 492
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities 493
473
-------
474
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Resource Summary Table
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2019 Pres
FY 2018
Budget v.
FY 2017
Annualized
FY 2019
FY 2018
Actuals
CR
Pres Budget
Annualized CR
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Budget Authority
$92,143.4
$91,317.0
$47,532.0
-$43,785.0
Total Workyears
48.5
54.1
40.7
-13.4
Bill Language: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund Program
For necessary expenses to carry out leaking underground storage tank cleanup activities
authorized by subtitle I of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, $47,532,000, to remain available until
expended, of which $47,532,000 shall be for carrying out leaking underground storage tank
cleanup activities authorized by section 9003(h) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act: Provided, That
the Administrator is authorized to use appropriations made available under this heading to
implement section 9013 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act to provide financial assistance to federally
recognized Indian tribes for the development and implementation of programs to manage
underground storage tanks.
Program Projects in LUST
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Enforcement
Civil Enforcement
$584.7
$616.0
$589.0
-$27.0
Operations and Administration
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
$373.2
$404.0
$420.0
$16.0
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
$502.2
$793.0
$773.0
-$20.0
Acquisition Management
$144.7
$146.0
$138.0
-$8.0
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
$1,020.1
$1,343.0
$1,331.0
-$12.0
Underground Storage Tanks (LUST /UST)
LUST/UST
$9,554.5
$9,177.0
$6,452.0
-$2,725.0
LUST Cooperative Agreements
$55,320.2
$54,666.0
$38,840.0
-$15,826.0
LUST Prevention
$25,305.9
$25,197.0
$0.0
-$25,197.0
Subtotal, Underground Storage Tanks (LUST /UST)
$90,180.6
$89,040.0
$45,292.0
-$43,748.0
475
-------
Program Project
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
$358.0
$318.0
$320.0
$2.0
TOTAL LUST
$92,143.4
$91,317.0
$47,532.0
-$43,785.0
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the Superfund
account.
476
-------
Enforcement
All
-------
Civil Enforcement
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Compliance with the Law
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
SI 72.309.6
$170,849.0
$140,677.0
-$30,172.0
/.caking I 'iiilirffromiil Sloru^c Tanks
S5S-I. '
S 5HVM
-SJ'.O
Inland Oil Spill Programs
$2,342.8
$2,397.0
$2,219.0
-$178.0
Total Budget Authority
$175,237.1
$173,862.0
$143,485.0
-$30,377.0
Total Workyears
1,061.0
1,080.4
857.1
-223.3
Program Project Description:
The Civil Enforcement program's goal is to ensure compliance with the nation's environmental
laws to protect human health and the environment. The program collaborates with the United
States Department of Justice, states, local agencies, and tribal governments to ensure consistent
and fair enforcement of environmental laws and regulations. The Civil Enforcement program
develops, litigates, and settles administrative and civil judicial cases against violators of
environmental laws.
To protect our nation's groundwater and drinking water from petroleum releases from
Underground Storage Tanks (UST), the Civil Enforcement program provides guidance, technical
assistance, and training to promote and enforce cleanups at sites with UST systems.1 The
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program uses its Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
(LUST) resources to oversee cleanups by responsible parties.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.1, Compliance with the Law in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will work with states and tribes on a case-by-
case basis to prioritize LUST enforcement goals for cleanup. The Agency will continue to provide
guidance, technical assistance, oversight, and training to enforce cleanups at LUST sites by
responsible parties.
Performance Measure Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the Civil Enforcement program under
the EPA appropriation.
1 For more information, refer to: www.epa.gov/swerustl/cat/index.htm.
478
-------
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$128.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$155.0/ -0.6 FTE) EPA will target funds to highest priority sites.
Statutory Authority:
Pollution Prevention Act; Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act; National
Environmental Policy Act; Atomic Energy Act; Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act;
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
479
-------
Operations and Administration
480
-------
Acquisition Management
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
S31.042.0
$30.803.0
$25,438.0
-$5,365.0
/.caking I 'iiilirffromiil Sloru^c Tanks
SN-I.'
Sl-IU.it
SIMi.t)
-SS.0
Hazardous Substance Superfund
$22,103.1
$21,296.0
$21,296.0
$0.0
Total Budget Authority
$53,289.8
$52,245.0
$46,872.0
-$5,373.0
Total Workyears
277.0
304.5
259.5
-45.0
Program Project Description:
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) resources in the Acquisition Management program
support the Agency's contract activities.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/ Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. Acquisition Management resources in
LUST support information technology needs and the training and development of EPA's
acquisition workforce.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to an adjustment in essential
workforce support.
• (-$9.0) This program change reflect a minimal reduction in contractual resources from
more effective business practices in the Acquisition Management program.
Statutory Authority:
Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as
amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485 (codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute).
481
-------
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$73,003.2
$71,493.0
$68,635.0
-$2,858.0
Leukine 1 'iitlir^roHiitl Sloniffi' Itinks
v?"?.r
S404.0
S -120.0
S/ 6.0
Hazardous Substance Superfund
$22,511.4
$21,345.0
$21,152.0
-$193.0
Total Budget Authority
$95,887.8
$93,242.0
$90,207.0
-$3,035.0
Total Workyears
450.5
493.4
430.6
-62.8
Program Project Description:
EPA's financial management community maintains a strong partnership with the Leaking
Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) program. Activities under the Central Planning, Budgeting
and Finance program support the management of integrated planning, budgeting, financial
management, performance and accountability processes, and systems to ensure effective
stewardship of LUST resources. This includes developing, managing, and supporting a
performance management system consistent with the Government Performance and Results
Modernization Act for the Agency that involves: strategic planning and accountability for
environmental, fiscal, and managerial results; providing policy, systems, training, reports, and
oversight essential for the financial operations of EPA; managing the agencywide Working Capital
Fund; providing financial payment and support services for EPA through three finance centers,
specialized fiscal and accounting services for the LUST programs; and managing the Agency's
annual budget process.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. EPA will continue to ensure sound financial
and budgetary management of the LUST program through the use of routine and ad hoc analysis,
statistical sampling, and other evaluation tools. Building on the work begun in previous years, EPA
will continue to monitor and strengthen internal controls with a focus on sensitive payments and
property. In addition, the Agency is reviewing its financial systems for efficiencies and
effectiveness, identifying gaps, and targeting legacy systems for replacement.
Performance Measure Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the Central Planning, Budgeting, and
Finance program under the EPM appropriation.
482
-------
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$90.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of base
workforce costs due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce support and benefit costs.
• (-$74.0/ -0.7 FTE) This net program change reduces ad hoc analyses as part of the LUST
financial management efforts.
Statutory Authority:
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485
(codified as Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute).
483
-------
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$293,997.9
$305,844.0
$300,738.0
-$5,106.0
Science & Technology
$64,642.7
$67,875.0
$68,834.0
$959.0
TCiiikliim ;md F;ici1ilics
s:<~.o02 0
$33,377.0
S.\ 5 0
Leukine 1 'iitlir^roHiitl Sloniffi' Itinks
S SO 2.2
S 'V.i.O
S "AO
-S20.0
Inland Oil Spill Programs
$376.2
$580.0
$665.0
$85.0
Hazardous Substance Superfund
$69,651.3
$75,985.0
$74,144.0
-$1,841.0
Total Budget Authority
$455,235.8
$478,679.0
$478,531.0
-$148.0
Total Workyears
323.4
356.7
318.0
-38.7
Program Project Description:
EPA's Facilities Infrastructure and Operations program in the Leaking Underground Storage Tank
(LUST) appropriation supports the Agency's rent, transit subsidy, and facilities management
services. Funding is allocated for such services among the major appropriations for the Agency.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. The Agency will continue to conduct rent
reviews and verify monthly billing statements for its lease agreements with the General Services
Administration and other private landlords. For FY 2019, EPA is requesting a total of $0.60 million
for rent in the LUST appropriation.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$12.0) This change to fixed and other costs is a decrease due to the recalculation of rent
and transit subsidy.
• (-$8.0) This program change is a decrease to basic operations and maintenance costs.
484
-------
Statutory Authority:
Federal Property and Administration Services Act; Public Building Act; Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act; Clean Water Act; Clean Air Act; Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act
(CERFA); Energy Policy Act of 2005; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as
amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485 (codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute).
485
-------
Underground Storage Tanks (LUST/UST)
486
-------
LUST / UST
Program Area: Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST)
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Revitalize Land and Prevent Contamination
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$10,654.3
$11,218.0
$5,615.0
-$5,603.0
Leukine 1 'iitlir^roHiitl Sloniffi' Itinks
SV.55-1.5
N VJ—.V
Sfi.Jj2.fl
-.N.\ '2x0
Total Budget Authority
$20,208.8
$20,395.0
$12,067.0
-$8,328.0
Total Workyears
98.8
108.1
68.8
-39.3
Program Project Description:
The Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) resources in the LUST/Underground Storage
Tank (UST) program ensures that petroleum contamination is properly assessed and cleaned up.
Under this program, EPA issues, monitors, and oversees LUST cleanup cooperative agreements
to states.2 EPA also provides technical assistance and training to states and tribes on how to
conduct cleanups and improve the efficiency of state programs. At the end of FY 2017,
approximately 68,000 LUST sites had not achieved cleanup completion.3
In addition, EPA has direct implementation authority and responsibilities in Indian country. In that
role, EPA oversees cleanups by responsible parties, conducts site assessments, remediates
contaminated water and soil, and provides alternative sources of drinking water when needed.
EPA's funding for Indian country is the primary source of money for these activities. With few
exceptions, tribes do not have independent program resources to pay for assessing and cleaning up
UST releases, and in many cases, there are no responsible parties available to pay for the cleanups
at sites in Indian country.
Cleaning up LUST sites protects people from exposure to contaminants such as benzene, a known
carcinogen, and makes land available for reuse. In 2016, EPA released a study called "Property
Value Study of High-Profile UST Release Sites." The purpose of the study was to determine the
impact of high-profile UST releases on housing prices. The study found that high profile UST
releases decrease nearby property values 3 to 6 percent. Then, once a cleanup is completed, nearby
property values rebound by a similar margin.4 In FY 2017, cleanups were completed at 8,775
LUST sites.
2 States as referenced here also include the District of Columbia and five territories as described in the definition of state in the
Solid Waste Disposal Act.
3 For more information, visit: http://www.epa. gov/ust/ust-performance-measures.
4Guignet, D.,R. Jenkins, M. Ranson, and P. Walsh. Do Housing Values Respond to Underground Storage Tank Releases? Evidence
from High-Profile Cases across the United States. NCEE Working Paper No. 2016-01. March 2016. For more information, visit:
https://vosemite.epa.gov/EE/epa/eed.nsf/WPNumber/2016-017opendocument.
487
-------
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.3, Revitalize Land and Prevent
Contamination in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will:
• Work with states and tribes within available resources to implement strategies to reduce the
number of sites that have not reached cleanup completion, and to address new releases as
they continue to be confirmed.
• Provide targeted training to states and tribes, such as remediation process optimization and
rapid site assessment techniques.
• Monitor the soundness of financial mechanisms, in particular insurance and state cleanup
funds that serve as financial assurance for LUST releases. EPA works with states to seek
ways to cover and control remediation costs.
• Provide support in Indian country for site assessments, investigations, and remediation of
high priority sites; enforcement against responsible parties; cleanup of soil and
groundwater; alternate water supplies; cost recovery against UST owners and operators;
oversight of responsible party lead cleanups; and technical expertise and assistance to
Tribal governments.
Performance Measure Targets:
FY 2018
FY 2019
(113) Number of LUST cleanups completed in Indian country that meet risk-based
Target
Target
standards for human exposure and groundwater migration.
16
16
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$439.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$3,164.0/ -12.1 FTE) This program change reflects a focus on cleaning up the highest
priority LUST sites in Indian country and a reduction in resources that provide subject
matter and technical expertise to states and tribes.
Statutory Authority:
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, § 8001, 9001-9014.
488
-------
LUST Cooperative Agreements
Program Area: Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST)
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Revitalize Land and Prevent Contamination
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Leukine 1 'iitlir^roHiitl Sloniffi' Itinks
S.\\J20.2
SH-I.(<(<(>.(>
SJS.S-/0.0
-Sli.SJfi.O
Total Budget Authority
$55,320.2
$54,666.0
$38,840.0
-$15,826.0
Program Project Description:
This funding is used to award cooperative agreements to states5 to implement the Leaking
Underground Storage Tank (LUST) program. The LUST program ensures that petroleum
contamination is properly assessed and cleaned up by providing states with funding to address
releases. LUST funding supports states in managing, overseeing, and enforcing cleanups at LUST
sites. This is achieved by focusing on increasing the efficiency of LUST cleanups nationwide,
leveraging private and state resources, and enabling community redevelopment. Cleaning up
LUST sites protects people from exposure to contaminants, and makes land available for reuse.
EPA's backlog study characterized the national inventory of sites that have not reached cleanup
completion. The study found that almost half of the releases were 15 years old or older, and that
groundwater was contaminated at 75 percent of these sites. Remediating groundwater
contamination is often more technically complex, takes longer, and is more expensive than
remediating soil contamination.6 Remediation costs average between $100,000 and $400,000 per
underground storage tank (UST) release, the cost increasing with the presence of groundwater
contamination. Potential adverse effects from chemicals such as benzene, methyl-tertiary-butyl-
ether (MTBE), alcohols, or lead scavengers in gasoline contribute to the importance of cleaning
up these contaminants and increase the cost of cleaning up these sites.7
In 2016, EPA released a study called "Property Value Study of High-Profile UST Release Sites."
The purpose of the study was to determine the impact of high-profile UST releases on housing
prices. The study found that high profile UST releases decrease nearby property values 3 to 6
percent. Once a cleanup is completed, nearby property values rebound by a similar margin.8
5 States as referenced here also include the District of Columbia and five territories as described in the definition of state in the
Solid Waste Disposal Act.
6 See The National LUST Cleanup Backlog: A Study Of Opportunities, September 2011, http://www.epa.gov/ust/national-lust-
cleanup-backlog-study-opportunities.
7 See Technologies for Treating MtBE and Other Fuel Oxygenates, May 2004, pages 2-6 and 2-7, https://clu-
in.org/download/remed/542r04009/542r04009.pdf.
8 Guignet, D., R. Jenkins, M. Ranson, and P. Walsh. Do Housing Values Respond to Underground Storage Tank Releases?
Evidence from High-Profile Cases across the United States. NCEE Working Paper No. 2016-01. March 2016.
https://vosemite.epa. gov/EE/sm/eed.nsf/WPNumber/2016-01 ?opendocument.
489
-------
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.3, Revitalize Land and Prevent
Contamination in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will:
• Work with states to implement strategies to reduce the backlog by targeting high priority
sites, considering best practices, and increasing redevelopment efforts. Approximately,
68,000 releases remain that have not reached cleanup completion. In addition, thousands
of new releases are discovered each year.9
• Provide resources to states to perform core cleanup work. Some states also may be able to
pursue other means to maximize the effectiveness or efficiency in protectively completing
cleanups and reducing their backlogs.
• Collaborate with states to develop and implement flexible, state-driven strategies to reduce
the number of remaining LUST sites that have not reached cleanup completion, and
leverage best practices and support management, guidance, and enforcement activities.
The Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 2005 requires that states receiving LUST Cooperative
Agreements funding meet certain release prevention requirements, such as inspecting every
facility at least once every three years. In FY 2019, EPA will factor state compliance with EPAct
requirements into LUST Cleanup Cooperative Agreement decisions.
Performance Measure Targets:
FY 2018
FY 2019
(112) Number of LUST cleanups completed that meet risk-based standards for
Target
Target
human exposure and groundwater migration.
11,200
11,200
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$15,826.0) This program change reflects a focus on cleaning up the highest priority sites.
Statutory Authority:
Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 2005; Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, § 9003(h)(7).
9 For more information, visit: http://www.epa.gov/ust/ust-Derformance-measures.
490
-------
LUST Prevention
Program Area: Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST)
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Revitalize Land and Prevent Contamination
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Leukine 1 'iitlir^roHiitl Sloniffi' Itinks
S 25.3II5.V
N 25. ft'.It
so.o
-.N 25. IV~.lt
Total Budget Authority
$25,305.9
$25,197.0
$0.0
-$25,197.0
Program Project Description:
The Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Prevention program works to ensure that
groundwater is protected from petroleum and associated chemicals leaking from underground
storage tanks (USTs), while the LUST Cooperative Agreement program provides funding to states
to assess and clean up LUST sites. This program has provided funding to states,10 tribes, and/or
intertribal consortia to inspect, prevent releases, ensure compliance with federal and state laws,
and enforce these laws for the 555,079 federally regulated active USTs. The Energy Policy Act
(EPAct) of 2005 requires EPA or states to inspect every UST once every three years.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources have been proposed for elimination for this program in FY 2019. States could elect to
maintain core program work with state resources rather than federal.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$25,197.0) This funding change proposes to eliminate the LUST Prevention grant
program.
Statutory Authority:
Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 2005; Solid Waste Disposal Act of 1976, as amended by the
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986, § 2007(f); Energy Policy Act, § 9011.
10 States as referenced here also include the District of Columbia and five territories as described in the definition of state in the
Solid Waste Disposal Act.
491
-------
Research: Sustainable Communities
492
-------
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Program Area: Research: Sustainable Communities
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Prioritize Robust Science
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Science & Technology
$142,429.1
$133,415.0
$52,549.0
-$80,866.0
/.caking I 'iiilirffromiil Sloru^c Tanks
S 358.0
S31 ft. 0
S3 2(1.(1
.S 2.0
Inland Oil Spill Programs
$653.4
$659.0
$516.0
-$143.0
Hazardous Substance Superfund
$12,717.6
$11,385.0
$10,885.0
-$500.0
Total Budget Authority
$156,158.1
$145,777.0
$64,270.0
-$81,507.0
Total Workyears
459.7
476.3
294.1
-182.2
Program Project Description:
EPA's Sustainable and Healthy Communities (SHC) research program under the Leaking
Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) appropriation provides federal, regional and community
decision-makers with tools, methods, and information to prevent and control pollution at LUST
sites. Specifically, this research enables decision-makers to better:
• Assess sites and evaluate the implications of alternative remediation techniques, policies,
and management actions to assess and cleanup leaks at fueling stations;
• Identify the environmental impacts and unintended consequences of existing and new
biofuels available in the marketplace; and
• Protect America's land and groundwater resources and drinking water supplies that could
be impacted by the nation's approximately 600 thousand underground fuel storage tanks.11
Recent accomplishments in this research area include:
• Developing Field Screening Methodology to Assess Petroleum Vapor Intrusion:
SHC has developed field screening methods to assist in the implementation of EPA's
guide for petroleum vapor intrusion. The screening methodology and software tool
provides site managers with an economical and practical approach for addressing
petroleum vapor intrusion in their site cleanup plans.
• Analyzing Three National Databases to Assess Variability in Fuel Composition. In
recent years, varying fuel composition has been associated with vapor and liquid releases
from underground storage tanks and corrosion of tank components. SHC's study increases
EPA's understanding on the fate and transport of contaminants from LUST sites and their
potential impact on groundwater contamination and vapor intrusion.
11 For more information, see: fattps://www. epa. gov/ust.
493
-------
• Estimating Site Densities of Private Domestic Wells (PDWs). PDWs are not subject to
the testing requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act and are therefore more
vulnerable to contamination (e.g., susceptible sub-populations). For public health and
planning purposes, it is important to determine the locations of high density PDW use.
The SHC program's research and information on PDWs assists states in triaging their
inspections to address potential vulnerabilities to communities that are reliant on these
drinking water supplies.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.3, Prioritize Robust Science in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. Specifically, this work will aim to characterize sites and
contaminants released from leaking underground storage tanks identified under the LUST trust
fund with an emphasis on assisting the Agency and the states in addressing the backlog of sites for
remediation. This research also will help communities remediate contaminated sites at an
accelerated pace and lower costs while reducing human health and ecological impacts. Resulting
methodologies and tools will help localities and states return properties to productive use, thus
supporting the Agency mission of protecting human health and the environment in the context of
communities. Such work is integral to achieving the Administrator's priority of revitalizing land
and preventing contamination.
EPA's scientists also will continue to work with its Underground Storage Tanks program to
deliver improved characterization and remediation methods for fuels released from leaking
underground storage tanks. Research will address contaminant plume elongation and the
associated risks to communities from the many underground storage tanks at fueling stations
located near residences and residential water supplies. This research will inform tool development
to assist communities, states, and tribes to determine what remediation is needed to protect local
ground water resources and reduce the potential for vapor intrusion into buildings. These tools
will ultimately reduce costs to communities while better protecting future drinking water
resources and preventing vapor intrusion. In FY 2019, EPA scientists plan to produce software
and user's guides for evaluating transport from released gasoline. These models will provide
technical guidance for LUST remediation efforts.
Performance Measure Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the Sustainable and Healthy
Communities Program under the S&T appropriation. EPA has a standing subcommittee under
ORD's Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) for the SHC program to evaluate its performance
and provide feedback to the Agency. The SHC program will meet regularly with both the BOSC
and Science Advisory Board over the next several years to seek their input on topics related to
research program design, science quality, innovation, relevance and impact. This includes
advising EPA on its strategic research direction midway through the 4-year cycle of Strategic
Research Action Plans (StRAPs).
494
-------
EPA collaborates with the National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation, Department
of Energy, U.S. Department of Agriculture and the White House's Office of Science and
Technology Policy to assess research performance. EPA's Office of Research and Development's
(ORD's) state engagement program is designed to inform states about ORD's research programs
and role within EPA, and to enable ORD to better understand the science needs of state
environmental agencies. Key partners at the state level include the Environmental Council of the
States, with its Environmental Research Institute of the States and the Interstate Technology and
Regulatory Council, as well as state media associations such as the Association of State and
Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials. EPA supports the interagency Science and
Technology in America's Reinvestment, Measuring the Effect of Research on Innovation,
Competitiveness and Science (STAR METRICS) efforts.12
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$7.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of base
workforce costs due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce support, and benefit
costs.
• (-$5.0) This program change decreases research to characterize and remediate
contaminated leaking underground storage tank sites.
Statutory Authority:
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, §§ 1002, 1006, 8001; Safe Drinking Water Act,
§ 1442.
12 STAR METRICS: https://wvyw.starmetrics.nih.gov,
495
-------
496
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Inland Oil Spill Programs
Resource Summary Table 499
Program Projects in Inland Oil Spill Programs 499
Compliance 500
Compliance Monitoring 501
Enforcement 503
Civil Enforcement 504
Oil 506
Oil Spill: Prevention, Preparedness and Response 507
Operations and Administration 510
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 511
Research: Sustainable Communities 513
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities 514
497
-------
498
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION: Inland Oil Spill Programs
Resource Summary Table
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2019 Pres
FY 2018
Budget v.
FY 2017
Annualized
FY 2019
FY 2018
Actuals
CR
Pres Budget
Annualized CR
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Budget Authority
$17,940.1
$18,085.0
$15,673.0
-$2,412.0
Total Workyears
92.4
98.3
75.7
-22.6
Bill Language: Inland Oil Spill Programs
For expenses necessary to carry out the Environmental Protection Agency's responsibilities under
the Oil Pollution Act of1990, $15,673,000, to be derivedfrom the Oil Spill Liability trust fund, to
remain available until expended.
Program Projects in Inland Oil Spill Programs
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Compliance
Compliance Monitoring
$145.2
$138.0
$0.0
-$138.0
Enforcement
Civil Enforcement
$2,342.8
$2,397.0
$2,219.0
-$178.0
Oil
Oil Spill: Prevention, Preparedness and Response
$14,422.5
$14,311.0
$12,273.0
-$2,038.0
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
$376.2
$580.0
$665.0
$85.0
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
$653.4
$659.0
$516.0
-$143.0
TOTAL Inland Oil Spill Programs
$17,940.1
$18,085.0
$15,673.0
$2,412.0
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the Superfund
account.
499
-------
Compliance
500
-------
Compliance Monitoring
Program Area: Compliance
Goal: Cooperative Federalism
Objective(s): Enhance Shared Accountability
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$98,283.6
$100,975.0
$86,374.0
-$14,601.0
Inliiml Oil Spill I'ro^rtim.s
S 1-15.2
SIJS.O
so.o
-SI3S.0
Hazardous Substance Superfund
$1,028.8
$988.0
$988.0
$0.0
Total Budget Authority
$99,457.6
$102,101.0
$87,362.0
-$14,739.0
Total Workyears
506.4
538.9
428.7
-110.2
Program Project Description:
The Compliance Monitoring program is a key component of EPA's compliance assurance program
that allows the Agency to detect noncompliance and promotes compliance with the nation's
environmental laws.
Under the Inland Oil Spills Trust Fund, EPA integrates the data from the Facility Response Plans
and Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure systems into EPA's Integrated Compliance
Information System. As a result of this data integration, EPA is able to focus compliance
monitoring resources on areas of highest risk and increase transparency to the public. It also
provides a more complete set of information for this program and improves data quality.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
The Compliance Monitoring program funded from the Inland Oil Spills Trust Fund is proposed to
be eliminated in FY 2019 due to streamlining of the program. The Agency's Office of Land and
Emergency Management will maintain this work.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$138.0/ -0.9 FTE) This change proposes to eliminate funding to the Compliance
Monitoring program under the Inland Oil Spills Trust Fund due to streamlining of the
program.
501
-------
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act; Oil Pollution Act; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended
by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485 (codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic authority).
502
-------
Enforcement
503
-------
Civil Enforcement
Program Area: Enforcement
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Compliance with the Law
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$172,309.6
$170,849.0
$140,677.0
-$30,172.0
T.c;i1\iimT iideiui'iiiiiul sionuc T;inKs
S584 "
S( .l ( . 0
S589 0
-S2" 0
Inland Oil Spill I'ro^rtim.s
S2J-I2.S
S2JT.lt
.S 2.2 JVM
-SIS. I)
Total Budget Authority
$175,237.1
$173,862.0
$143,485.0
-$30,377.0
Total Workyears
1,061.0
1,080.4
857.1
-223.3
Program Project Description:
The Civil Enforcement program's goal is to ensure compliance with the nation's environmental
laws to protect human health and the environment. The program collaborates with the United
States Department of Justice, states, local agencies, and tribal governments to ensure consistent
and fair enforcement of environmental laws and regulations. The Civil Enforcement program
develops, litigates, and settles administrative and civil judicial cases against violators of
environmental laws.
The Civil Enforcement program's enforcement of Section 311 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), as
amended by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA), is designed to ensure compliance with the
prohibition against oil and hazardous substance spills, as well as the oil spill prevention, response
planning, and other regulatory requirements. The Civil Enforcement program develops policies,
issues administrative orders or penalty actions, and refers civil judicial actions to the Department
of Justice to address spills, violations of spill prevention regulations, response planning regulations
and other violations (e.g., improper dispersant use or noncompliance with orders). The program
also assists in the recovery of cleanup costs expended by the government. The program provides
support for field investigations of spills, Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC),
Facility Response Plan (FRP) and other requirements.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.1, Compliance with the Law in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to streamline the Civil Enforcement
program, prioritize resources to achieve regulatory compliance, and address oil or hazardous
substance spills in violation of the statute and deter future spills. Civil Enforcement efforts will
focus on facilities where enforcement will promote deterrence, and confirm that spills are cleaned
up and mitigated. To increase deterrence, the Civil Enforcement program will coordinate with the
Criminal Enforcement program, as appropriate.
504
-------
Performance Measure Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the Civil Enforcement program under
the EPM appropriation.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$16.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (-$194.0/ -0.9 FTE) This program change reflects increased coordination with the Criminal
Enforcement program in carrying out enforcement of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990.
Statutory Authority:
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485
(codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic authority); Clean Water Act; Oil Pollution Act.
505
-------
Oil
506
-------
Oil Spill: Prevention, Preparedness and Response
Program Area: Oil
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Revitalize Land and Prevent Contamination
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Inliiml Oil Spill I'ro^rtim.s
S N.-I22.5
S N.3U.0
SI 2.2-3.0
-S 2.038.0
Total Budget Authority
$14,422.5
$14,311.0
$12,273.0
-$2,038.0
Total Workyears
78.0
83.1
62.3
-20.8
Program Project Description:
The Oil Spill Prevention, Preparedness and Response program protects the American people by
preventing, preparing for, responding to, and monitoring inland oil spills. EPA is the lead federal
responder for inland oil spills, including transportation related spills from pipelines, trucks,
railcars, and other transportation systems. In addition, the program may provide technical
assistance, assets, and outreach to industry, states, and local communities as part of the Agency's
effort to ensure national safety and security for chemical and oil incidents.1
There are approximately 540,000 Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC)
facilities, including a subset of 4,600 Facility Response Plan (FRP) facilities identified as high risk
due to their size and location. The Oil Pollution Act requires certain facilities that store and use oil
to prepare response plans that are reviewed by EPA to ensure availability of response resources in
the event of a discharge.
To minimize the potential impacts to human health and the environment, the Agency will target
facilities that pose the highest risk. The Agency currently inspects approximately .08 percent of
SPCC facilities per year. In FY 2017, EPA found that 82 percent of FRP facilities and 77 percent
of SPCC facilities inspected had inadequate prevention and response plans. Inspections are
essential in ensuring that facility staff is knowledgeable about prevention and response plans, and
quickly able to put these plans into action.
EPA is the lead federal response agency for oil spills occurring in inland waters. EPA receives all
spill notifications at the National Response Center and retains the responsibility to ensure that all
inland oil spills are responded to within 12 hours. EPA works closely with state and local first
responders on smaller spills and leads the response on larger spills. EPA accesses the Oil Spill
Liability Trust Fund, administered by the U.S. Coast Guard, to obtain reimbursement funds for
site specific oil spill response activities. In FY 2017 EPA responded to approximately 85 oil spills
across the nation.
1 For additional information, refer to: fattps://www.epa.gov/oil-spills-preveiitioii-aiid-preparediiess-regulatioiis.
507
-------
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.3, Revitalize Land and Prevent
Contamination in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, the Oil Spill Prevention,
Preparedness and Response program will:
• Inspect oil facilities to ensure compliance with preventive measures. Inspections involve
reviewing the facility's preparedness and response plans, discussing key aspects of these
plans with facility staff, and conducting unannounced exercises that test the facility
owner's ability to put these preparedness and response plans into action. EPA will focus
inspections at high risk FRP facilities.
• Maintain the National Contingency Plan's Subpart J product schedule, which identifies a
list of products that may be used to clean oil spills.
• Maintain the National Oil Database, which compiles data for the program. The database
manages information obtained from new and historical inspections and has streamlined the
process for assisting facilities with compliance and equip inspectors with more efficient
inspection processes.
• Deliver required annual oil spill inspector training to federal and state inspectors.
EPA is proposing to develop a new program that would authorize EPA to collect and use fees for
compliance assistance. This fee and service will be voluntary and EPA would conduct an on-site
walk through within one-year of the accepted request and provide a report to assist FRP and SPCC
facilities in complying with EPA regulations. Authorizing language is proposed with the budget
submission.
Performance Measure Targets:
(438) Number of inspections conducted at oil facilities subject to the Spill Prevention,
Control and Countermeasure regulation.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
410
410
(437) Number of inspections conducted at oil facilities subject to the Facility
Response Plan regulation.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
200
200
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$1,219.0) This net change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation
of base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
508
-------
• (-$3,257.0/ -20.8 FTE) This program change is a focus on SPCC and FRP facility
inspections on facilities that pose the highest risk. It also reduces specialized training
opportunities for Agency federal On Scene Coordinators and updates to regional Area
Contingency Plans.
Statutory Authority:
The Clean Water Act, § 311 and the Oil Pollution Act.
509
-------
Operations and Administration
510
-------
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Program Area: Operations and Administration
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$293,997.9
$305,844.0
$300,738.0
-$5,106.0
Science & Technology
$64,642.7
$67,875.0
$68,834.0
$959.0
Building and Facilities
$26,065.5
$27,602.0
$33,377.0
$5,775.0
T.c;il\iimT iidei'uiiiiiiid Sinniue T;inks
$502.2
$793.0
$773.0
-S20 0
Inland Oil Spill I'ro^rtim.s
stmui
Wo.«
Sttxfl
Hazardous Substance Superfund
$69,651.3
$75,985.0
$74,144.0
-$1,841.0
Total Budget Authority
$455,235.8
$478,679.0
$478,531.0
-$148.0
Total Workyears
323.4
356.7
318.0
-38.7
Program Project Description:
EPA's Facilities Infrastructure and Operations program in the Inland Oil Spill Response
appropriation supports the Agency's rent, transit subsidy, and facility operations. Funding is
allocated for such services among the major appropriations for the Agency.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.5, Improve Efficiency and
Effectiveness in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. The Agency will continue to conduct rent
reviews and verify monthly billing statements for its lease agreements with the General Services
Administration and other private landlords. For FY 2019, EPA is requesting $0,496 million for
rent in the Inland Oil Spills appropriation.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$78.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of rent
charged by appropriation, offset by a decrease in transit subsidy.
• (+$7.0) This program change is an increase for facility operations.
511
-------
Statutory Authority:
Federal Property and Administration Services Act; Public Building Act; Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act; Clean Water Act; Clean Air Act; Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act
(CERFA); Energy Policy Act of 2005; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as
amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485 (codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute).
512
-------
Research: Sustainable Communities
513
-------
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Program Area: Research: Sustainable Communities
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Prioritize Robust Science
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Science & Technology
$142,429.1
$133,415.0
$52,549.0
-$80,866.0
T.cakiimT iidciumuiid sioiauc Tanks
S"o8 0
S^IS 0
s^n 0
$2.0
Inland Oil Spill I'ro^rtim.s
Vo.i.v
s fo'J.o
St//>.()
-S N3.0
Hazardous Substance Superfund
$12,717.6
$11,385.0
$10,885.0
-$500.0
Total Budget Authority
$156,158.1
$145,777.0
$64,270.0
-$81,507.0
Total Workyears
459.7
476.3
294.1
-182.2
Program Project Description:
EPA is the lead federal on-scene coordinator for inland oil spills and provides technical
assistance, when needed, for coastal spills. EPA is therefore charged with responsibilities for oil
spill preparedness and response and associated research. EPA's research, planned in concert with
partner agencies (the U.S. Coast Guard, Department of the Interior, Department of
Transportation, and Department of Commerce) supports EPA's lead role in developing protocols
for testing spill response products and agents.
The Sustainable and Healthy Communities (SHC) research program for inland oil spills, funded
through the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund,2 provides federal, regional, state, tribal, and
community decision-makers with analysis and tools to protect human and ecosystem health from
the negative impacts of oil spills. EPA provides assistance to communities by supporting local
officials in their response to a spill. As a result of this research, responders can make better
decisions on approaches and methods to reduce the spread and impact of coastal and inland oil
spills, including pipeline and railway spills. Additionally, EPA's remediation expertise is
critical in addressing potential impacts to communities and their environmental resources
associated with pipeline and railway oil spills.
In support of these response efforts, EPA conducts research related to the Agency's National
Contingency Plan (NCP) Product Schedule.3 The NCP is used nationwide by emergency
responders and federal agencies in responding to oil spills. EPA's role is to develop and evaluate
response approaches involving bioremediation, dispersants, and other additives, and to assess
impacts to surface water and groundwater, especially as they affect drinking water supplies. EPA
relies on this research to provide testing procedures that inform cleanup decisions during an
emergency spill response.
2 For more information, see: http://www.uscg.mil/ccs/npfc/About NPFC/osltf.asp.
3 For more information, see: http://www2.epa.gov/emergencv-response/national-contingencv-plan-subpart-i
514
-------
Recent accomplishments in this research area include:
• Developing an Oil Surface Washing Agent Protocol: Surface Washing Agents (SWAs),
also known as shoreline cleaning agents, are listed in the NCP and can be used following
an oil spill event to enhance the removal of stranded oil from shoreline surfaces. EPA has
and will continue to develop a laboratory effectiveness test for SWA. The effectiveness
test will serve as a basis for proposed new listing criteria for the SWA products in the
NCP. A product derived from this protocol is slated for FY 2019.
• Providing the Land and Emergency Management Program with Information on
Biodegradability for Crude Oils and Dispersants: EPA's research results in this area
inform decision makers on how long surfactant chemicals can potentially persist in the
environment after use in responding to an oil spill, thus supporting the Agency's goal of
protecting communities. This information was delivered in the fourth quarter of 2017.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.3, Prioritize Robust Science in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. More specifically, SHC's FY 2019 research will focus explicitly
on conducting research to support regulatory activities and protocol development for the National
Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan and provide on-demand technical
support at federal-, tribal-, or state-managed cleanup sites, as well as assistance during
emergencies. The program conducts health, environmental engineering, and ecological research
and prepares planning and analysis tools for localities nationwide to use in facilitating regulatory
compliance and improving environmental and health outcomes.
Specific SHC activities in FY 2019 include:
• Developing or revising protocols to test oil spill control agents or products for listing on
the National Contingency Plan (NCP) Product Schedule and will conduct other research,
as needed by EPA's Emergency Management Program.
• Conducting studies on the effectiveness of bioremediation of petroleum-based oil,
vegetable oil, and biodiesel. Bioremediation is a treatment that uses naturally occurring
organisms to breakdown hazardous substances into less toxic or nontoxic substances
to improve clean up.
• Researching dispersants' performance and behavior in deep water and arctic spills, in
collaboration with the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Safety and Environmental
Enforcement (BSEE) and Canada's Department of Fisheries and Oceans.
EPA scientists will produce a report on surface washing agents, solidifiers, and oil herding agents
used in salt and freshwater responsive to Subpart J of the National Oil and Hazardous Substances
Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) during FY 2019. EPA also will expand research efforts
regarding oil biodegradation and the characterization of crude oil.
515
-------
Performance Measure Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the Sustainable and Healthy
Communities Program under the S&T appropriation. EPA is reconstituting a subcommittee under
the Office of Research and Development's (ORD) Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) for the
SHC program to evaluate its performance and provide feedback to the Agency. The SHC program
will meet regularly with both the BOSC and Science Advisory Board over the next several years
to seek their input on topics related to research program design, science quality, innovation,
relevance and impact. This includes advising EPA on its strategic research direction midway
through the 4-year cycle of Strategic Research Action Plans (StRAPs).
EPA collaborates with several science agencies and the research community to assess our research
performance. For example, EPA is partnering with National Institutes of Health, the National
Science Foundation, Department of Energy, and Department of Agriculture. ORD's state
engagement program is designed to inform states about ORD's research programs and role within
EPA, and to enable ORD to better understand the science needs of state environmental agencies.
Key partners at the state level include the Environmental Council of the States, with its
Environmental Research Institute of the States and the Interstate Technology and Regulatory
Council, as well as state media associations such as the Association of State and Territorial Solid
Waste Management Officials. The Agency also works with the White House's Office of Science
and Technology Policy and supports the interagency Science and Technology in America's
Reinvestment - Measuring the Effect of Research on Innovation, Competitiveness and Science
(STAR METRICS) effort.4
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$16.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of base
workforce costs due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce support, and benefit
costs.
• (-$159.0) This program change streamlines research to study the performance and behavior
of oil dispersants in deep water and arctic spills, as well as revised protocols for testing oil
spill control agents pursuant to the National Contingency Plan Product Schedule.
Statutory Authority:
Oil Pollution Act; Clean Water Act, §311.
4 STAR METRICS: https://www.starmetrics.nih.gov/.
516
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Resource Summary Table 520
Program Projects in STAG 522
Categorical Grants 525
Categorical Grant: Brownfields 526
Categorical Grant: Environmental Information 528
Categorical Grant: Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance 531
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Enforcement 533
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Program Implementation 535
Categorical Grant: Pollution Control (Sec. 106) 538
Categorical Grant: Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) 541
Categorical Grant: State and Local Air Quality Management 543
Categorical Grant: Toxics Substances Compliance 547
Categorical Grant: Tribal Air Quality Management 549
Categorical Grant: Tribal General Assistance Program 551
Categorical Grant: Underground Injection Control (UIC) 553
Categorical Grant: Wetlands Program Development 555
Categorical Grant: Beaches Protection 557
Categorical Grant: Lead 558
Categorical Grant: Multipurpose Grants 559
Categorical Grant: Nonpoint Source (Sec. 319) 561
Categorical Grant: Pollution Prevention 562
Categorical Grant: Radon 563
Categorical Grant: Underground Storage Tanks 564
State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG) 565
Brownfields Projects 566
Diesel Emissions Reduction Grant Program 569
Infrastructure Assistance: Clean Water SRF 571
Infrastructure Assistance: Drinking Water SRF 574
Infrastructure Assistance: Alaska Native Villages 579
Infrastructure Assistance: Mexico Border 582
Targeted Airshed Grants 583
GKM Water Monitoring 584
517
-------
518
-------
519
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION: State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Resource Summary Table
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019
Pres Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018
Annualized CR
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
Budget Authority
$3,557,752.4
$3,503,209.0
$2,929,467.0
-$573,742.0
Total Workyears
4.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
Bill Language: STAG
For environmental programs and infrastructure assistance, including capitalization grants for
State revolving funds and performance partnership grants, $2,929,467,000 to remain available
until expended, of which—
(1) $1,393,887,000 shall be for making capitalization grants for the Clean Water State Revolving
Funds under title VI of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act; and of which $863,233,000 shall
be for making capitalization grants for the Drinking Water State Revolving Funds under section
1452 of the Safe Drinking Water Act: Provided, That notwithstanding section 603(d)(7) of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, the limitation on the amounts in a State water pollution
control revolvingfund that may be used by a State to administer the fund shall not apply to amounts
included as principal in loans made by such fund in fiscal year 2019 and prior years where such
amounts represent costs of administering the fund to the extent that such amounts are or were
deemed reasonable by the Administrator, accounted for separately from other assets in the fund,
and used for eligible purposes of the fund, including administration:
Provided further, That for fiscal year 2019, notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (g)(1),
(h), and (I) of section 201 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, grants made under title II
of such Act for American Samoa, Guam, the commonwealth of the Northern Marianas, the United
States Virgin Islands, and the District of Columbia may also be made for the purpose of providing
assistance: (1) solely for facility plans, design activities, or plans, specifications, and estimates for
any proposed project for the construction of treatment works; and (2) for the construction, repair,
or replacement of privately owned treatment works serving one or more principal residences or
small commercial establishments:
Provided further, That for fiscal year 2019, notwithstanding the provisions of such subsections
(g)(1), (h), and (I) of section 201 and section 518(c) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
funds reserved by the Administrator for grants under section 518(c) of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act may also be used to provide assistance: (1) solely for facility plans, design activities,
or plans, specifications, and estimates for any proposed project for the construction of treatment
works; and (2) for the construction, repair, or replacement of privately owned treatment works
serving one or more principal residences or small commercial establishments:
520
-------
Provided further, That for fiscal year 2019, notwithstanding any provision of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act and regulations issued pursuant thereof, up to a total of $2,000,000 of the
funds reserved by the Administrator for grants under section 518(c) of such Act may also be used
for grants for training, technical assistance, and educational programs relating to the operation
and management of the treatment works specified in section 518(c) of such Act:
Providedfurther, That for fiscal year 2019, funds reserved under section 518(c) of such Act shall
be available for grants only to Indian tribes, as defined in section 518(h) of such Act and former
Indian reservations in Oklahoma (as determined by the Secretary of the Interior) and Native
Villages as defined in Public Law 92-203:
Provided further, That for fiscal year 2019, notwithstanding the limitation on amounts in section
518(c) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, up to a total of 2 percent of the funds
appropriated, or $30,000,000, whichever is greater, and notwithstanding the limitation on
amounts in section 1452(i) of the Safe Drinking Water Act, up to a total of 2 percent of the funds
appropriated, or $20,000,000, whichever is greater, for State Revolving Funds under such Acts
may be reserved by the Administrator for grants under section 518(c) and section 1452(i) of such
Acts:
Provided further, That for fiscal year 2019, notwithstanding the amounts specified in section
205(c) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, up to 1.5 percent of the aggregate funds
appropriated for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund program under the Act less any sums
reserved under section 518(c) of the Act, may be reserved by the Administrator for grants made
under title II of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act for American Samoa, Guam, the
Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas, and United States Virgin Islands:
Provided further, That for fiscal year 2019, notwithstanding the limitations on amounts specified
in section 1452(j) of the Safe Drinking Water Act, up to 1.5 percent of the funds appropriated for
the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund programs under the Safe Drinking Water Act may be
reserved by the Administrator for grants made under section 1452(j) of the Safe Drinking Water
Act:
Provided further, That notwithstanding 22 U.S.C. 1383(i)(3)(A), not less than 10 percent but not
more than 20 percent of the funds made available under this title to each State for Clean Water
State Revolving Fund capitalization grants and not less than 20 percent but not more than 30
percent of the funds made available under this title to each State for Drinking Water State
Revolving Fund capitalization grants shall be used by the State to provide additional subsidy to
eligible recipients in the form of forgiveness of principal, negative interest loans, or grants (or any
combination of these), and shall be so used by the State only where such funds are provided as
initial financing for an eligible recipient or to buy, refinance, or restructure the debt obligations
of eligible recipients only where such debt was incurred on or after the date of enactment of this
Act;
(2) $3,000,000 shall be for grants to the State of Alaska to address drinking water and wastewater
infrastructure of rural and Alaska Native Villages: Provided, That of these funds: (A) the State of
521
-------
Alaska shall provide a match of 25 percent; (B) no more than 5 percent of the funds may be used
for administrative and overheard expenses; and (C) the State of Alaska shall make awards
consistent with the Statewide priority list established in conjunction with the Agency and the U.S.
Department of Agriculture for all water, sewer, waste disposal, and similar projects carried out
by the State of Alaska that are funded under section 221 of the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act (33 U.S.C. 1301) or the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1921 et
seq.) which shall allocate not less than 25 percent of the funds provided for projects in regional
hub communities;
(3) $62,000,000 shall be to carry out section 104(k) of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), including grants, interagency
agreements, and associated program support costs: Provided, That not more than 25 percent of
the amount appropriated to carry out section 104(k) of CERCLA shall be used for site
characterization, assessment, and remediation of facilities described in section 101(39)(D)(ii)(II)
of CERCLA;
(4) $10,000,000 shall be for grants under title VII, subtitle G of the Energy Policy Act of 2005;
and
(5) $597,347,000 shall be for grants, including associated program support costs, to States,
federally recognized tribes, interstate agencies, tribal consortia, and air pollution control agencies
for multi-media or single media pollution prevention, control and abatement and related activities,
including activities pursuant to the provisions setforth under this heading in Public Law 104-134,
and for making grants under sections 103 and 105 of the Clean Air Act for particulate matter
monitoring and data collection activities subject to terms and conditions specified by the
Administrator, of which: $31,791,000 shall be for carrying out section 128 of CERCLA;
$6,422,000 shall be for Environmental Information Exchange Network grants, including
associated program support costs; $11,884, OOO1 of the funds available for grants under section
106 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act shall be for State participation in national- and
State-level statistical surveys of water resources and enhancements to State monitoring programs;
$27,000,000 shall be for Multipurpose Grants for the implementation of mandatory statutory
duties in delegated environmental programs.
Program Projects in STAG
(Dol
ars in Thousands)
Program Project
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
Infrastructure Assistance: Alaska
Native Villages
$20,083.7
$19,864.0
$3,000.0
-$16,864.0
1 The language in the fifth proviso corrects an error in the Budget Appendix that was not identified prior to typesetting of the
President's Budget. The proviso should read "$11,884,000 of the funds available for grants under section 106 of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act ..instead of "$153,683,000..as stated in the Appendix.
522
-------
Brownfields Projects
$88,370.2
$79,457.0
$62,000.0
-$17,457.0
Infrastructure Assistance: Clean Water
SRF
$1,380,738.8
$1,384,421.0
$1,393,887.0
$9,466.0
Infrastructure Assistance: Drinking
Water SRF
$944,392.1
$857,371.0
$863,233.0
$5,862.0
Infrastructure Assistance: Mexico
Border
$10,628.2
$9,932.0
$0.0
-$9,932.0
Diesel Emissions Reduction Grant
Program
$40,683.0
$59,593.0
$10,000.0
-$49,593.0
Targeted Airshed Grants
$19,818.1
$29,796.0
$0.0
-$29,796.0
GKM Water Monitoring
$105.5
$3,973.0
$0.0
-$3,973.0
Subtotal, State and Tribal Assistance
Grants (STAG)
$2,504,819.6
$2,444,407.0
$2,332,120.0
-$112,287.0
Categorical Grants
Categorical Grant: Nonpoint Source
(Sec. 319)
$169,771.6
$169,754.0
$0.0
-$169,754.0
Categorical Grant: Public Water
System Supervision (PWSS)
$101,125.8
$101,271.0
$67,892.0
-$33,379.0
Categorical Grant: State and Local Air
Quality Management
$214,180.6
$226,669.0
$151,961.0
-$74,708.0
Categorical Grant: Radon
$7,963.4
$7,996.0
$0.0
-$7,996.0
Categorical Grant: Pollution Control
(Sec. 106)
Monitoring Grants
$18,392.0
$17,727.0
$11,884.0
-$5,843.0
Categorical Grant: Pollution
Control (Sec. 106) (other activities)
$209,294.1
$211,512.0
$141,799.0
-$69,713.0
Subtotal, Categorical Grant: Pollution
Control (Sec. 106)
$227,686.1
$229,239.0
$153,683.0
-$75,556.0
Categorical Grant: Wetlands Program
Development
$15,867.0
$14,561.0
$9,762.0
-$4,799.0
Categorical Grant: Underground
Injection Control (UIC)
$10,572.3
$10,435.0
$6,995.0
-$3,440.0
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Program
Implementation
$12,402.4
$12,615.0
$8,457.0
-$4,158.0
Categorical Grant: Lead
$14,822.2
$13,954.0
$0.0
-$13,954.0
Categorical Grant: Hazardous Waste
Financial Assistance
$97,165.0
$99,016.0
$66,381.0
-$32,635.0
Categorical Grant: Pesticides
Enforcement
$17,687.1
$17,927.0
$10,531.0
-$7,396.0
Categorical Grant: Pollution
Prevention
$4,504.6
$4,733.0
$0.0
-$4,733.0
523
-------
Categorical Grant: Toxics Substances
Compliance
$4,938.3
$4,886.0
$3,276.0
-$1,610.0
Categorical Grant: Tribal General
Assistance Program
$68,186.0
$65,031.0
$44,233.0
-$20,798.0
Categorical Grant: Underground
Storage Tanks
$1,479.4
$1,488.0
$0.0
-$1,488.0
Categorical Grant: Tribal Air Quality
Management
$14,027.8
$12,742.0
$8,963.0
-$3,779.0
Categorical Grant: Environmental
Information
$9,289.3
$9,580.0
$6,422.0
-$3,158.0
Categorical Grant: Beaches Protection
$9,540.3
$9,484.0
$0.0
-$9,484.0
Categorical Grant: Brownfields
$46,994.9
$47,421.0
$31,791.0
-$15,630.0
Categorical Grant: Multipurpose Grants
$162.9
$0.0
$27,000.0
$27,000.0
Subtotal, Categorical Grants
$1,048,367.0
$1,058,802.0
$597,347.0
-$461,455.0
Congressional Priorities
Congressionally Mandated Projects
$4,565.8
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
TOTAL STAG
$3,557,752.4
$3,503,209.0
$2,929,467.0
-$573,742.0
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the Superfund
account.
524
-------
Categorical Grants
525
-------
Categorical Grant: Brownfields
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Revitalize Land and Prevent Contamination
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
S -Ifi.'t'N.'t
vt.vj/.w
sm.'vi.h
-S15.UMU)
Total Budget Authority
$46,994.9
$47,421.0
$31,791.0
-$15,630.0
Program Project Description:
EPA's Brownfields program is a successful model of the Agency working cooperatively with
states, tribes, local governments, and other agencies to help communities oversee, plan, assess, and
cleanup brownfield properties. State and Tribal Response programs address contaminated sites
that do not require federal action but need assessment and/or cleanup before they can be considered
ready for reuse. This program allocates funding to states and tribes to establish core capabilities
and enhance their response programs.
Approximately 129 million people (roughly 40 percent of the U.S. population) live within three
miles of a brownfields site that received EPA funding.2 Since its inception, the Brownfields
program has fostered a community-driven approach to the reuse of contaminated sites. As of the
end of 2017, the State and Tribal Response programs have leveraged more than 8,280 jobs and
$660 million in other funding. In FY 2017, EPA provided funding to 165 states, tribes, territories,
and the District of Columbia.3
This funding is a critical source for state and tribal partners to establish and grow their Brownfields
programs. Over 100 tribes have received Brownfields funding to build their programs, and
cumulatively cleaned up over 570 properties and made over 7,520 acres ready for reuse.
Addressing brownfields on tribal lands also has leveraged over 815 jobs and $85.4 million.4 One
recent example is with the Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe, located in Washington State. The tribe has
used Brownfields funding to complete a site inventory, conduct assessment activities, and assisted
in funding the cleanup of nearly 30 acres of critical salmon habitat which will help the tribe reclaim
its treaty-protected fishing areas.
In Delaware, a 2016 study indicated that the state Brownfields program, in conjunction with EPA
and other funding sources, has fully remediated 76 sites. The study also indicated that return of
investment for Delaware for the 76 fully remediated properties was $16.48 leveraged per dollar
21 U.S. EPA, Office of Land and Emergency Management Estimate 2017. Data collected includes: (1) site information as of the
end of FY16; and (2) census data from the 20011-2015 American Community Survey.
3 Data from U.S. EPA Assessment, Cleanup and Redevelopment Exchange System (ACRES).
4 Data from U.S. EPA ACRES.
526
-------
invested and that those sites also added 255 jobs and added approximately $3.7 million to the tax
coffers annually.5
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.3, Revitalize Land and Prevent
Contamination in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will allocate funding
support to approximately 170 state and tribal response programs. Grant supported State and Tribal
Response programs will oversee the cleanup at approximately 24,817 properties.
States and tribes may use categorical grant funding provided under this program in the following
ways:
• Conducting site-specific activities, such as assessments and cleanups at brownfields sites;6
• Developing mechanisms and resources to provide meaningful opportunities for public
participation;
• Developing mechanisms for approval of cleanup plans, and verification and certification
that cleanup efforts are complete;
• Creating an inventory of brownfields sites;
• Developing a public record;
• Developing oversight and enforcement authorities, or other mechanisms and resources;
• Purchasing environmental insurance;
• Developing state and tribal tracking and management systems for land use, institutional
and engineering controls; and
• Conducting public education and outreach efforts to ensure that tribal communities are
informed and able to participate in environmental decision-making.
Performance Measure Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the Brownfields Projects program under
the STAG appropriation.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$15,630.0) This program change reduces federal resources for cleanup oversight by states
and tribes. EPA will work with states and tribes to prioritize funds to establish core
capabilities, enhance their response programs, and identify program efficiencies.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as
amended by the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act, § 128.
5 Ratledge, Racca, Toth, and Borla 2016. "Economic Impact on Delaware's Economy: The Browiifield Progran
University of Delaware Center for Applied Demography & Survey Research.
6 For more information, see Brownfields State & Local Tribal Information.
527
-------
Categorical Grant: Environmental Information
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Rule of Law and Process
Objective(s): Streamline and Modernize
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
S9.2iW.3
SV.5MUI
so.-122.0
-S.i, HS.O
Total Budget Authority
$9,289.3
$9,580.0
$6,422.0
-$3,158.0
Program Project Description:
Funds provided under this categorical grant support the Environmental Information Exchange
Network (EN) which is a critical component of the Agency's data strategy. The EN is a standards-
based, secure approach for EPA and its state, tribal and territorial partners to exchange and share
environmental data over the Internet. Through its use of technology and data standards, open-
source software, shared services and reusable tools and applications, the EN, in tandem with the
Agency's E-Enterprise efforts, offers its partners tremendous potential for managing, accessing,
and analyzing environmental data more effectively and efficiently. As a part of E-Enterprise it is
a priority to further enhance portal compatibility and shared services provided by the EN. This
will lead to improved decision making and reduced regulatory burden by making data
more accessible, eliminating redundant data collection, resolving issues with data validation,
streamlining processes, and avoiding development and operational costs for redundant IT systems
and components.
EN grants provide funding to states, territories, federally recognized Indian tribes, and tribal
consortia to support their participation in the EN. These grants help EN partners acquire and
develop the hardware and software needed to connect to the EN; use the EN to collect, report and
access the data they need with greater efficiency; and integrate environmental data across
programs. In collaboration with EPA, the Environmental Council of the States (ECOS) agreed
upon the EN as the standard approach for EPA, state, tribe, and territorial data sharing. The grant
program has provided the funding to make this approach a reality.
EPA plays a critical role in program planning, management, and evaluation for the Exchange
Network. Specifically, EPA supports the Exchange Network and E-Enterprise governance which
oversees strategic planning, administers the Network's grant program (approximately 155 grants),
partners with tribes to expand tribal participation in the Exchange Network, and implements the
Cross-Media Electronic Reporting Regulation (CROMERR). EPA also conducts return on
investment analyses on specific electronic data exchange projects in partnership with programs
and Regional Offices.
528
-------
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 3/Objective 3.4, Streamline and Modernize in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, the Environmental Information programs and activities
will continue focus on state, local, and tribal partnerships in supporting government agencies'
delivery of environmental protection. Under this strategy, the Agency will continue implementing
its business processes and systems to reduce reporting burden on states and regulated facilities,
and improve the effectiveness and efficiency of environmental protection programs for EPA,
states, and tribes. EPA and states are making progress on implementing the E-Enterprise business
strategy and will adjust schedules and prioritization to align with capacity. EPA anticipates
awarding 15 EN grants in FY 2019 that will assist states, tribes, and territories to implement the
following activities which will be prioritized based on core requirements:
• Data Access and Availability: These activities create services and tools that make state or
tribal data available on demand to other partners. Providing data through web services and
application programming interfaces (APIs) helps facilitate the sharing of information with
the public, with private sector entities, and among state, tribal, and territorial agencies and
EPA. The development of an API and web services approach, in collaboration with
Exchange Network partners, advances the Network's goal of expanding access to
environmental data and enhancing inter- and intra-partner data sharing. Emphasis will be
placed on projects that develop web services, APIs, and tools that support access, analysis
and integration of environmental data. Grant activities may include mobile and desktop
applications, executive and program dashboards, and publishing environmental
information to public sites.
• New EPA Reporting Data Flows: Grant proj ects will support developing and implementing
new Exchange Network data flows that enable automated reporting to EPA systems
(e.g., e-Permitting orNPDES).
• Partner Data Sharing: These activities support the partners' ability to share cross-state,
cross-tribal or state-tribal data, such as institutional controls at contamination sites, data on
cleanup sites, and datasets of national significance to tribes (e.g., open dumps).
• Virtual Exchange Services (VES) support for states, tribes, and territories: This program
supports Exchange Network Partners transitioning from using individually-operated nodes
to leveraging EPA-hosted VES. Moving to VES supports the transition to a cloud-based
network infrastructure, which provides more cost-efficient ways for EN partners to manage
nodes, thereby decreasing development and operational costs (including licensing, server,
and administration costs). This new cloud-based model provides a simplified and
standardized development environment, creates greater economies of scale, and reduces
the administration burden on partners.
• Sharing CROMERR services and components: This supports state and tribal adoption and
implementation of a suite of Central Data Exchange (CDX) services that EPA has centrally
developed for CROMERR functions. Specific Shared Services include electronic signature
for submissions from regulated entities, Copy of Record management, and identity
529
-------
management within the registration process. States and tribes will use these services that
are centrally hosted by EPA, replacing individually developed system functions. The use
of shared services will reduce states and tribes' time to prepare and review applications
and develop systems, and the cost to develop, operate, and maintain CROMERR-compliant
e-reporting systems.
• Support for the EN program and E-Enterprise business strategy through a cooperative
agreement with ECOS under the associated program support cost authority (Public Law
113-76). This includes direct support to both EN and E-Enterprise joint governance, each
of which represents a cross-section of EPA, state, and tribal organizations. The cooperative
agreement assists state, tribal, and territorial organizations in fulfilling the missions of both
programs by providing programmatic, policy, technical, and administrative support;
promoting information-sharing amongst state/tribal/territorial/federal partners; enhancing
communication and outreach; and convening national user meetings.
The "National Environmental Information Exchange Network Grant Program Solicitation Notice"
sets forth the process for awarding grant funding to states, tribes, and territories.7 It is an annual
guidance document that describes eligibility requirements, the process for application preparation
and submission, evaluation criteria, award administration information, and post-award monitoring
procedures.
Performance Measure Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the Exchange Network program under
the EPM appropriation.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$3,158.0) This focuses funding for states and tribes to maintain existing tools, services
and core capabilities while providing flexibility to address particular priorities.
Statutory Authority:
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 84 Stat. 2086, as amended by Pub. L. 98-80, 97 Stat. 485
(codified at Title 5, App.) (EPA's organic statute); Appropriation Acts: FY 2002 (Public Law 107-
73), FY 2003 (Public Law 108-7), FY 2004 (Public Law 108-199), FY 2005 (Public Law 108-
447), FY 2006 (Public Law 109-54), FY 2007 (Public Law 110-5), FY 2008 (Public Law 110-
161), FY 2009 (Public Law 111-8), FY 2010 (Public Law 111-88), FY 2011 (Public Law 112-10),
FY 2012 (Public Law 112-74), FY 2013 (Public Law 113-6), FY 2014 (Public Law 113-76), FY
2015 (Public Law 113-235), FY 2016 (Public Law 114-113); and FY 2017 (Public Law 115-31).
7 Please see:https://www.epa.gov/exchangenetwork/exchange-network-grant-program.
530
-------
Categorical Grant: Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Revitalize Land and Prevent Contamination
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
S'J'JfixO
s'PJ.n K>.n
SOOJSI.O
-SJ 2.03x0
Total Budget Authority
$97,165.0
$99,016.0
$66,381.0
-$32,635.0
Program Project Description:
The Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance Grants help states8 implement the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Through RCRA, EPA and states protect human health
and the environment by minimizing waste generation, preventing the release of millions of tons of
hazardous wastes, and cleaning up land and water. Authorized states conduct the direct
implementation of permitting, corrective action, and enforcement components of the RCRA
hazardous waste management program.
This grant funding supports all 50 states and six territories. Currently, 48 states and two territories
are authorized to implement the RCRA program. In addition, EPA directly implements the RCRA
program in the states of Iowa and Alaska. To ensure statutory requirements are successful, EPA
partners with state and local governments, as well as American businesses and non-governmental
organizations, to significantly improve waste and material management practices.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.3, Revitalize Land and Prevent
Contamination in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, the Agency (and authorized
states) will:
• Issue and renew permits to a portion of the 6,600 hazardous waste treatment, storage and
disposal facilities. This includes working with industry, the public, and states to address
issues related to management of hazardous waste through development and application of
standards, permits, guidance, and training;
• Process permit modifications to keep pace with evolving business practices, technology,
market conditions, and cleanup decisions;
8 When appropriate, these grants also are used to support tribes in conducting hazardous waste work in Indian Country. For
additional information, refer to: https://www.epa.gov/tribal/solid-and-hazardous-waste-indian-countrv-resource-conservation-and-
recoverv-act-rcra.
531
-------
• Update controls to encourage facilities to modernize technological systems, expand waste
management capability, improve hazardous waste management practices, and make timely
cleanup decisions;
• Inspect facilities to ensure compliance and safety;
• Oversee cleanups at hazardous waste management facilities, and focus on completing
cleanup of the 3,779 priority 2020 Baseline facilities;
• Oversee cleanups at high priority contaminated hazardous waste management facilities and
return cleaned up property to productive use. This includes working with state partners to
ensure that responsible parties conduct effective and efficient cleanups that are protective
of human health and the environment, and reduce the burden on federal taxpayers;
• Draft implementation documents such as permits and orders, review site assessment plans
and results, review remedy selection documents, oversee remedy implementation, oversee
public participation, and track progress of cleanups; and
• Continue to improve cleanup approaches, share best practices and cleanup innovations,
such as RCRA FIRST,9 and address issues of emerging science.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$32,635.0) This program change modifies timelines for reaching cleanup milestones and
reviewing facility data, cleanup plans, and permit modifications. Assistance to tribal
communities also is curtailed. EPA will work with states and tribes to target funds to core
requirements while providing flexibility to address particular priorities.
Statutory Authority:
Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, § 3011.
9 For more information, visit: https://www.epa.gov/hw/toolbox-corrective-action-resource-conservation-and-recoverv-act-
facilities-investigation-remedy.
532
-------
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Enforcement
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Cooperative Federalism
Objective(s): Enhance Shared Accountability
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
.S/V«S'~ /
sr.vj'.n
SI 0 J.11.0
-S 'JV0M
Total Budget Authority
$17,687.1
$17,927.0
$10,531.0
-$7,396.0
Program Project Description:
The Pesticides Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Cooperative Agreement program
supports pesticide product and user compliance with provisions of the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) through cooperative agreements10 with states and tribes.
The cooperative agreements support state and tribal compliance and enforcement activities under
FIFRA. Enforcement and pesticides program cooperative agreement guidance is issued to focus
regional, state, and tribal efforts on the highest priorities.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 2/Objective 2.1, Enhance Shared Accountability in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will prioritize and award state and tribal
pesticides cooperative agreements for implementing the compliance monitoring and enforcement
provisions of FIFRA within our resource levels.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands)
• (-$7,396.0) This program change reflects EPA's efforts to work with states and tribes to
target funds to core requirements while providing flexibility to address particular priorities
such as: providing compliance assistance to the regulated community and providing
training for state and tribal inspectors.
10 For additional information, refer to: http://www2.epa.gov/compliance/federal-insecticide-fungicide-and-rodenticide-act-state-
and-tribal-assistance-grant.
533
-------
Statutory Authority:
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).
534
-------
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Program Implementation
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Ensure Safety of Chemicals in the Marketplace
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
S 12.-tD2.-l
.S 12.01x0
SS.-lf-.O
Total Budget Authority
$12,402.4
$12,615.0
$8,457.0
-$4,158.0
Program Project Description:
The purpose of the pesticide program implementation grants is to translate pesticide regulatory
decisions made at the national level into results at the local level. Under the pesticide statutes,
responsibility for ensuring proper pesticide use is in large part delegated to states and tribes. Grant
resources allow states and tribes to be more effective regulatory partners.
EPA's mission, as related to pesticides, is to protect human health and the environment from
pesticide risk and to realize the value of pesticide availability by considering the economic, social,
and environmental costs and benefits of the use of pesticides.11 The agency provides grants to
states, tribes and other partners, including universities, non-profit organizations, other federal
agencies, pesticide users, environmental groups, and other entities, as necessary, to assist in
strengthening and implementing EPA's pesticide programs. This STAG program focuses on areas
such as worker safety activities (including worker protection and certification and training of
pesticide applicators), protection of endangered species,12 protection of water resources from
pesticides, protection of pollinators, and promotion of environmental stewardship and Integrated
Pest Management related activities. These agency activities are achieved through implementation
of EPA statutes and regulatory actions by states and tribes.
EPA supports implementation of tribal pesticide programs through grants. Tribal program outreach
activities support tribal capacity to protect human health by reducing risks from pesticides in
Indian country. This task is challenging given that certain aspects of Native Americans' lifestyles,
such as subsistence fishing or consumption of plants that were not grown as food and possibly
exposed to pesticides, may increase exposure to some chemicals or create unique chemical
exposure scenarios. For additional information, please see http://www.epa.gov/pesticide-advisorv-
committees-and-regulatory-partners/tribal-pesticide-programs.
11 Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, as amended. Section 3(a), Requirement of Registration (7 U.S.C. 136a).
Available online at https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-federal-insecticide-fungicide-and-rodenticide-act.
12 The Endangered Species Act of 1973 sections 7(a) 1 and 7 (a)2; Federal Agency Actions and Consultations, as amended (16
U.S.C. 1536(a)). Available at U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered Species Act of 1973 internet site:
http://www.fws.gov/endangered/laws-policies/section-7.html.
535
-------
The agency also funds a multi-year grant in support of the State Federal Insecticide, Fungicide,
and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) Issues Research and Evaluation Group, which ensures the close
coordination of states and the EPA on pesticide issues.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program supports Goal 1/Objective 1.4, Ensure Safety of Chemicals in the Marketplace
in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan.
Worker Protection Standard and Certification and Training Program
Through the Certification and Training Program and the Worker Protection Standard, EPA protects
workers, pesticide applicators and handlers, employers, and the public from the potential risks
posed by pesticides in their work environments. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to provide
assistance and grants to implement the Certification and Training Program and Worker Protection
Standard, and to address changes to the federal regulations for these programs. In FY 2019, states,
territories and tribes will review and respond to the proposed changes to the Certification and
Training regulations and begin to assess what changes to their certification programs may be
needed when the changes to the Certification and Training rule are finalized. For worker
protection, the states, territories and tribes also will train their program and inspection staff on the
final revisions to the Worker Protection Standard, conduct outreach and training programs, and
plan for inspections under the new rule.13
Endangered Species Protection Program
The Endangered Species Protection Program (ESPP) protects federally listed, threatened or
endangered animals and plants whose populations are threatened by risks associated with pesticide
use.14 EPA complies with Endangered Species Act (ESA) requirements to ensure that its regulatory
decisions will not likely jeopardize the continued existence of species listed as endangered and
threatened, or destroy or adversely modify habitat designated as critical to those species' survival.
EPA will provide grants to states and tribes, as described above, for projects supporting
endangered species protection. Program implementation includes outreach, communication,
education related to use limitations, review and distribution of endangered species protection
bulletins, and mapping and development of endangered species protection plans. These activities
support the Agency's mission to protect the environment from pesticide risk.
Protection of Water Sources from Pesticide Exposure
Protecting the nation's water sources from possible pesticide contamination is another component
of EPA's environmental protection efforts. EPA provides funding, through cooperative
agreements, to states, tribes, and other partners to investigate and respond to water resource
contamination by pesticides. Stakeholders and partners, including states and tribes, are expected
to evaluate local pesticide uses that have the potential to contaminate water resources and take
13 See http://www.epa. gov/pesticide-'worker-safety/how-epa-protects-workers-pesticide-risk for more information.
14 http://www.epa.gov/oppfeadl/endanger/species-info.htm.
536
-------
steps to prevent or reduce contamination where pesticide concentrations approach or exceed levels
of concern.
Integrated Pest Management
Within available resources, EPA will continue to support risk reduction by providing assistance to
promote the use of safer alternatives to traditional chemical pest control methods including
Integrated Pest Management (IPM) techniques.15 EPA supports the development and evaluation
of new pest management technologies that contribute to reducing both health and environmental
risks from pesticide use.
Pollinator Health
EPA will continue to work with state and tribal agencies to promote the development of locally-
based plans to help improve pollinator health. State pollinator protection plans in place in several
states have been an effective communication and collaboration mechanism between stakeholders
at the local level that can lead to reduced pesticide exposure and protection of honey bees, while
maintaining the flexibility needed by growers. EPA believes that these plans, developed through a
robust stakeholder engagement process at the local level, serve as good models for enhanced local
communication and also can help accomplish EPA's overall goal of mitigating exposure of bees
to acutely toxic pesticides.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$4,158.0) This program change will streamline core activities, find efficiencies, and
leverage available resources. EPA will work with states and tribes to target funds to core
requirements while providing flexibility to address particular priorities.
Statutory Authority:
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA); Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996; Endangered Species Act (ESA).
15 For additional information, see http: //www.epa. gov/pesp/.
537
-------
Categorical Grant: Pollution Control (Sec. 106)
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
S22~.f>M.J
S22V.23VM
S
-.S '5,550.0
Total Budget Authority
$227,686.1
$229,239.0
$153,683.0
-$75,556.0
Program Project Description:
Section 106 of the Clean Water Act authorizes EPA to provide federal assistance to states
(including territories and the District of Columbia), tribes qualified under Clean Water Act Section
518(e), and interstate agencies to establish and maintain adequate programs for the prevention and
control of surface and groundwater pollution from point and nonpoint sources. Prevention and
control activities supported through these grants include providing National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permits, conducting ambient water quality monitoring and
assessment, listing impaired waters, developing water quality standards and Total Maximum Daily
Loads (TMDLs), surveillance, and enforcement.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.2, Provide Clean and Safe Water in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. The Section 106 Grant Program supports prevention and
control measures that improve water quality. In FY 2019, EPA will focus on core statutory
requirements while continuing to provide states and tribes with flexibility to best address their
particular priorities.
Monitoring and Assessment:
EPA is working with states to provide monitoring and assessment information to support multiple
Clean Water Act programs in a cost-efficient and effective manner. The goal is to have
scientifically defensible monitoring data that is needed to address priority problems at state,
national, and local levels and to track national water quality improvements over time.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue working with states and tribes to support their water quality
monitoring programs. Monitoring Initiative funds for states and tribes will support the National
Aquatic Resource Surveys (NARS) and the enhancement of state and tribal monitoring programs.
In FY 2019, the Monitoring Initiative will be funded at $11.9 million, with $5.5 million allocated
for participation in the NARS and $6.4 million for monitoring program priority enhancements.
Through the Monitoring and Assessment Partnership, EPA will work with states to develop and
apply innovative and efficient monitoring tools and techniques to optimize availability of high-
quality data to support priority Clean Water Act program needs.
538
-------
Review and Update Water Quality Standards:
States and authorized tribes will review and update their water quality standards as required by the
Clean Water Act and EPA regulation at 40 CFR part 131. The regulations place a focus on states
and tribes keeping water quality criteria in their standards up to date to reflect the latest science.
EPA will work with tribes that want to establish water quality standards.
Develop Total Maximum Daily Loads:
EPA will work with states and other partners to develop and implement TMDLs for Clean Water
Act 303(d) listed impaired waterbodies as a tool for meeting water quality restoration goals.
TMDLs focus on clearly defined environmental goals and establish a pollutant budget, which is
then implemented via permit requirements and through local, state, and federal watershed plans
and programs to restore waters. EPA will work with states to facilitate accurate, comprehensive,
and geo-referenced water quality assessment decisions made available to the public via the
Assessment Total Maximum Daily Load Tracking and Implementation System (e.g., ATTAINS).
In addition, EPA and states will implement a performance measure that looks more
comprehensively at the 303(d) program by measuring the extent of state priorities addressed by
TMDLs, alternative restoration plans, or protection plans.
Issue Permits:
The NPDES program requires point source dischargers to be permitted and pretreatment programs
to control discharges from industrial and other facilities to the nation's wastewater treatment
plants. EPA will work with states to balance competing priorities, identify opportunities to enhance
the integrity and effectiveness of NPDES permits, set schedules to address significant action items,
and map out program revisions.
Conducting Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement:
EPA will work with NPDES-authorized states to implement the 2014 Clean Water Act NPDES
Compliance Monitoring Strategy (CMS).16 The NPDES CMS establishes national goals for
allocation of inspection resources across all NPDES regulated entities in order to best protect water
quality.
EPA works with states on advanced technologies such as remote water monitoring sensors to
collect discharge data, to more efficiently identify problem areas. The Agency expects that these
technologies will improve EPA's and state's analytical capabilities and enhance the public's
knowledge about the quality of their environment.
Currently, EPA and states are implementing the NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule through the
Integrated Compliance Information System.17 Phase 1 of the rule was implemented in FY 2017
for NPDES Discharge Monitoring Reports, and Phase 2 will begin cooperatively with our state
partners in FY 2018. In FY 2019, EPA also will work with additional states in the development of
electronic reporting tools. For example, approximately 20 states currently use EPA's electronic
16 For more information, refer to: https://www.epa.gov/compliance/clean-water-act-national-pollutant-discharge-elimiiiation-
svstem-compliance-monitoring.
17
For more information, refer to: https://www.epa.gov/compliance/npdes-ereporting.
539
-------
reporting tool to collect DMRs. This saves the states a significant amount of resources in
development, and operations and maintenance costs.
Working with Tribal Water Pollution Control Programs:
In FY 2019, EPA will work with tribal programs on activities that address water quality and
pollution problems on tribal lands. Tribes will implement the Clean Water Act Section 106 Tribal
Guidance, which forms a framework for tribes to establish, implement, and expand their Water
Pollution Control Programs.
Performance Measure Targets:
(TMDL-01) Square miles associated with state priority waters addressed by a
TMDL, other restoration plan, or protection approach.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
35,000
50,000
(NPDES-01) Percentage of high-priority state NPDES permits that are issued in the
fiscal year.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
80
80
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$75,556.0) This program change reduces the Section 106 grants. EPA will work with
states and tribes to target funds to core requirements while providing flexibility to address
particular priorities.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act, § 106.
540
-------
Categorical Grant: Public Water System Supervision (PWSS)
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
SlOl.Ui.S
SIOI.J-1.0
v» ~.sv2.n
-SJJJ'V.O
Total Budget Authority
$101,125.8
$101,271.0
$67,892.0
-$33,379.0
Program Project Description:
The Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) program provides grants to states and tribes with
primary enforcement authority (primacy) to implement and enforce the National Primary Drinking
Water Regulations under the Safe Drinking Water Act. These grants support the safety of the
nation's drinking water resources. The states and some tribes are the primary implementers of the
national drinking water program and work with the public water systems within their jurisdiction
to protect public health by achieving and maintaining compliance with drinking water rules.
The National Primary Drinking Water Regulations set forth health-based standards, monitoring,
reporting and recordkeeping, sanitary survey, compliance tracking, and enforcement elements to
ensure that the nation's drinking water supplies do not pose adverse health risks. The PWSS
program supports the states' role in a federal/state partnership to ensure safe drinking water
supplies to the public. States use these grant funds to fund drinking water program personnel who:
• Provide technical assistance to owners and operators of public water systems;
• Conduct sanitary surveys (i.e., on-sight reviews conducted to determine and support a
facility's capacity to deliver safe drinking water) and other site visits;
• Respond to questions from the public;
• Train and certify public water system operators;
• Manage public water system data, facilitate electronic reporting of compliance monitoring
data, and submit that data into the Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS);
• Share sampling results with the public;
• Respond to violations;
• Certify laboratories;
• Conduct laboratory analyses; and
• Provide training and technical assistance to small system staff and management to build
water system technical, managerial, and financial capacity.
541
-------
Some states and tribes do not have primary enforcement authority. Funds allocated to the State of
Wyoming, the District of Columbia, and Indian tribes without primacy are used to support direct
implementation activities by EPA or for developmental grants to Indian tribes to develop capacity
for primacy.18
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.2, Provide Clean and Safe Water in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will work with states and tribes to target
funds to core statutory requirements while providing states and tribes with flexibility to best address
their particular priorities. In FY 2019, EPA will provide funds to support state and tribal efforts to
assist the most vulnerable water systems in meeting existing drinking water regulations and in working
to develop financial and managerial capacity needed to protect federal investments that remedy aging
or inadequate infrastructure (e.g., pipe replacement to prevent failures in distribution systems,
installation of treatment to remove harmful drinking water contaminants). EPA will encourage states
to use grant funds to focus, to the extent possible, on the most immediate challenges public water
systems are facing today.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$33,379.0) This program change reflects a reduction in the PWSS grants. EPA will work
with states and tribes to target funds to core requirements while providing flexibility to
address particular priorities.
Statutory Authority:
Safe Drinking Water Act, § 1443.
18 For more information, see: http://www.epa.gov/dwreginfo/public-water-svstem-supervision-pwss-grant-program
https://www.cfda. gov/index?s=program&mode=form&tab=stepl&id=cca066b833c552bdOc9ffDlle576c7f.
542
-------
Categorical Grant: State and Local Air Quality Management
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
S 2N.ISO.fi
S 22fi.fifi'UI
S I5I.V0UI
-.s'os.n
Total Budget Authority
$214,180.6
$226,669.0
$151,961.0
-$74,708.0
Program Project Description:
This program provides funding for state air programs, as implemented by multi-state, state, and
local air pollution control agencies. Section 103 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) provides EPA with
the authority to award grants to a variety of agencies, institutions, and organizations, including the
air pollution control agencies funded from the STAG appropriation, to conduct and promote
certain types of research, investigations, experiments, demonstrations, surveys, studies, and
training related to air pollution. Section 105 of the CAA provides EPA with the authority to award
grants to state and local air pollution control agencies to develop and implement continuing
environmental programs for the prevention and control of air pollution, for the implementation of
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) set to protect public health and the
environment, and for improving visibility in our national parks and wilderness areas (Class I
areas). The continuing activities funded under Section 105 include development and
implementation of emission reduction measures, development and operation of air quality
monitoring networks, and a number of other air program activities. Section 106 of the CAA
provides EPA with the authority to fund interstate air pollution transport commissions to develop
or carry out plans for designated air quality control regions.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.1, Improve Air Quality in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, states will continue to be responsible for State
Implementation Plans (SIPs), which provide a blueprint for the programs and activities that states
carry out to attain and maintain the NAAQS and comply with visibility obligations. There are
several events that trigger SIP obligations. For example, when EPA promulgates a new or revises
an existing NAAQS, affected states must update certain parts of their SIPs within three years. In
addition, whenever EPA completes a designation or reclassification of an area as nonattainment
for a particular pollutant, an affected state must update their SIP within three years or 18 months,
depending on the pollutant. In FY 2019, EPA anticipates state submission of infrastructure SIPs
for the ozone standards that were revised in 2015. Also, affected states will be completing
development or revision of attainment SIPs for areas designated nonattainment or reclassified to
"Serious" for the 2006 and/or 2012 fine particle (PM2.5) NAAQS; areas reclassified to "Serious"
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS; and areas designated nonattainment for the 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2)
543
-------
NAAQS. States also have SIP obligations associated with visibility requirements, among other
requirements identified in the CAA.
States will continue implementing the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the 2008 lead NAAQS, the
2010 1-hour nitrogen dioxide (NO2) NAAQS, and the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. As appropriate,
states also will continue implementing the previous PM2.5 and ozone NAAQS, including the 1997
annual and 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2012 annual PM2.5
NAAQS, and the 1-hour and 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS (through anti-backsliding requirements).
SIP preparation for some pollutants is complicated due to the regional nature of air pollution that
requires additional and more detailed modeling, refined emissions inventories, and greater
stakeholder involvement. In FY 2019, EPA will work with states to prioritize activities needed to
meet obligations for SIP development and in implementing their plans for the NAAQS and
regional haze, adjusting schedules, and identifying streamlining options.
States will continue to operate and maintain their monitoring networks to the extent possible,
balancing competing priorities. This is typically the largest part of a state's air program, supporting
the quality and availability of data that states are required to submit. In 2015, EPA finalized its
review of the ozone NAAQS monitoring requirements, and extended the ozone monitoring season
in 33 states and revised monitoring requirements for the Photochemical Assessment Monitoring
Stations (PAMS). Revised PAMS monitoring requirements are applicable at National Core
(NCore) network sites in Core-Based Statistical Areas (CBSAs) of 1 million population or more,
or at alternative locations approved by the regional offices. These sites are required to be
operational by June 2019. For purposes of implementing the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, states will
continue operating new monitoring networks in accordance with the requirements of the SO2
NAAQS Data Requirements Rule in certain locations in FY 2019.
The multi-pollutant monitoring site network (NCore) serves multiple objectives such as measuring
long-term trends of air pollution, validating models, and providing input to health and atmospheric
science studies. EPA will provide assistance to states to operate this network of approximately 80
stations across the nation that provide measurements for particles, including filter-based and
continuous mass for PM2.5; chemical speciation for PM2.5; and PM10 - PM2.5 mass. Stations also
measure gases such as carbon monoxide (CO), SO2, NO2, and ozone, and record basic
meteorology. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to work with states to support the operation of
monitoring sites in the near-road environment - a source of concentrated mobile source emissions.
Data collected from these monitoring sites implemented under phases 1 and 2 of the near-road
monitoring network requirements will be used to assess compliance with the NAAQS, support
public information based on the Air Quality Index (AQI), and support short- and long-term studies
of health impacts of near-road exposure.
In FY 2019, states with approved or delegated permitting programs will continue to implement
permitting requirements as part of their programs. EPA will continue to undertake actions, as
necessary, as a result of the Supreme Court's 2014 decision on EPA's Tailoring Rule as well as
the April 2015 D.C. Circuit Amended Judgment implementing the Supreme Court decision.
The development of a complete emission inventory is an important step in an air quality
management process. Emission inventories are used to help determine significant sources of air
544
-------
pollutants and establish emission trends over time, target regulatory actions, and estimate air
quality through dispersion and photo-chemical modeling. An emission inventory includes
estimates of the emissions from various pollution sources in a specific geographical area. In
FY 2019, states will continue to develop inventories and submit data to EPA under an adjusted
schedule for the next release of the National Emission Inventory (NEI). EPA plans to release the
2017 NEI in calendar year 2020.
This program supports state and local agency capabilities to provide air quality forecasts for ozone
and PM2.5 that provide the public with information they can use to make daily lifestyle decisions
to protect their health. This information allows people to take precautionary measures to avoid or
limit their exposure to unhealthy levels of air quality. In addition, many communities use forecasts
for initiating air quality "action" or "awareness" days, which seek voluntary participation from the
public to reduce pollution and improve local air quality. Data will be updated on an adjusted
schedule to allow for state and local agencies to provide important public health information to the
public.
This program also supports state and local efforts to characterize air toxics problems and take
measures to reduce health risks from air toxics, most often through implementation of EPA
regulations. For example, this funding supports enforcement of new and revised New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS) and Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT)
standards for major sources (and area sources) by delegated air agencies. This funding also
supports characterization work that includes collection and analysis of emissions data and
monitoring of ambient air toxics. In FY 2019, funds also will support the National Air Toxics
Trends Stations (NATTS), consisting of 27 air toxics monitoring sites operated and maintained by
state and local air pollution control agencies across the country, including the associated quality
assurance, data analysis, and methods support. States will balance the requirements of the different
components of their monitoring enterprise in FY 2019.
Under the visibility requirements of the CAA, in FY 2019 states will complete any remaining first
planning period obligations for regional haze, and work collaboratively to support SIP submissions
associated with the second planning period. In addition, states will be implementing control
measures required from their first planning period SIPs. Remaining first planning period
obligations include submittal of progress report SIP revisions to ensure that states are making
progress toward their visibility improvement goals. Comprehensive regional haze SIP revisions
are due in FY 2021.
EPA also proposes to transition the funding of the PM2.5 monitoring network from Section 103
authority of the CAA, which provides 100 percent federal funding, to Section 105 authority of
the CAA, which provides a maximum federal share of 60 percent.
Performance Measure Targets:
Work under this program supports performance results in the Federal Support for Air Quality
Management program under the EPM appropriation.
545
-------
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$74,708.0) This program change is a reduction to environmental state programs
responsible for carrying out air quality implementation activities. EPA will work with
states to target funds to core requirements while providing flexibility to address particular
state priorities. A major component of this program is air monitoring, which is used for
providing information to the public, states, and researchers; and states will refocus
resources to incorporate any new recommendations as a result of updated NAAQS
monitoring guidance.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Air Act, §§ 103, 105, 106.
546
-------
Categorical Grant: Toxics Substances Compliance
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Cooperative Federalism
Objective(s): Enhance Shared Accountability
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
S-/.V3S.3
S-I.SSO.O
S.i.J -(,.!)
-S1 J) 10.0
Total Budget Authority
$4,938.3
$4,886.0
$3,276.0
-$1,610.0
Program Project Description:
The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) program builds environmental partnerships19 with
states and tribes to strengthen their ability to address environmental and public health threats from
toxic substances. This state and tribal assistance grant is used to prevent or eliminate unreasonable
risks to health or the environment and to ensure compliance with toxic substance regulations. The
grants support inspection programs associated with the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response
Act, lead-based paint (§402(a), §406(b), and the Renovation, Repair and Painting rule), and
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 2/Objective 2.1, Enhanced Shared Accountability in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to award state and tribal
assistance grants to assist in the implementation of compliance and enforcement provisions of
TSCA.
Over the past two years, the Agency has consulted with its state partners in the development of a
new allocation formula for the TSCA State and Tribal Assistance Grants. EPA proposes
implementing the new formula in FY 2019, using a phased approach over three years (FY 2019-
FY 2021). This approach establishes a weighted formula that emphasizes lead-based paint,
maximizing environmental benefits and program performance. The new formula better aligns the
distribution of funding with the national program priorities including reducing risks from 1) lead
poisoning or elevated blood-lead levels, 2) exposure to asbestos, and 3) exposure to PCBs.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
19 For additional information, refer to: https://www.epa.gov/compliance/toxic-substances-compliance-monitoriiig-grant-
547
-------
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$1,610.0) This program change reflects EPA's planned work with states and tribes to
target funds to core requirements and priorities, such as reducing risks from lead-based
paint, while providing flexibility to address particular state and tribal priorities.
Statutory Authority:
Toxic Substances Control Act.
548
-------
Categorical Grant: Tribal Air Quality Management
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
S N.n2~.x
SI2. --I2.il
S S.VO.UI
- S.i, "<).<)
Total Budget Authority
$14,027.8
$12,742.0
$8,963.0
-$3,779.0
Program Project Description:
This program includes funding for tribal air pollution control agencies and/or tribes. Through
Clean Air Act (CAA) Section 105 grants, tribes may develop and implement programs for the
prevention and control of air pollution and implementation of national primary and secondary
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Through CAA Section 103 grants, tribal air
pollution control agencies or tribes, colleges, universities, and multi-tribe jurisdictional air
pollution control agencies may conduct and promote research, investigations, experiments,
demonstrations, surveys, studies, and training related to ambient or indoor air pollution in Indian
Country.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.1, Improve Air Quality in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. Tribes will assess environmental and public health conditions in
Indian Country by developing emission inventories and, where appropriate, siting and operating
air quality monitors. Tribes will continue to develop and implement air pollution control
programs for Indian Country to prevent; and address air quality concerns. EPA will continue to
fund organizations for the purpose of providing technical support, tools, and training for tribes to
build capacity to develop and implement programs at reduced levels. A key activity is to work
to reduce the number of days in violation of the NAAQS. This program supports the Agency's
priority of building strong partnerships with individual tribes and with the National Tribal Air
Association (NTAA), whose priorities include tribes' ability to collect and provide monitoring
data and to protect the health of their tribal members.
In FY 2019, EPA will continue to implement the Tribal New Source Review rule, under which
tribes may opt to take an active role in implementation by developing a Tribal Implementation
Plan, managing the program under EPA's authority, or by actively participating in the permit
review and outreach process.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
549
-------
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$3,779.0) This program change is a reduction in federal support for CAA grants to tribal
air pollution control agencies and/or tribes. The EPA will work with tribes to target funds
to core requirements, while providing flexibility to best address tribal priorities.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Air Act, §§ 103, 105.
550
-------
Categorical Grant: Tribal General Assistance Program
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Cooperative Federalism
Objective(s): Enhance Shared Accountability
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
SOS.ISO.O
.S (o.OM.O
S VV.J.UW
-.S20. 'VS.ff
Total Budget Authority
$68,186.0
$65,031.0
$44,233.0
-$20,798.0
Program Project Description:
In 1992, Congress established the Indian Environmental General Assistance Program (GAP)
which provides grants and technical assistance to tribes to cover the costs of planning, developing,
and establishing tribal environmental protection programs consistent with other applicable
provisions of law administered by EPA. EPA works collaboratively with tribal partners on
mutually identified envrionmental and health priorities to achieve these aims. Funding provided
under GAP is for the administrative, technical, legal, enforcement, communication, and outreach
capacities tribes need to effectively administer environmental regulatory programs that EPA may
delegate to tribes. Please see http ://www. epa. gov/aieo / gap .htm for more information.
Some uses of GAP funds include:
• Assessing the status of a tribe's environmental conditions;
• Developing appropriate environmental programs, codes and ordinances;
• Developing the capacity to administer environmental regulatory programs that EPA may
delegate to a tribe;
• Conducting public education and outreach efforts to ensure that tribal communities
(including non-members residing in Indian country) are informed and able to participate
in environmental decision-making;
• Promoting communication and coordination among federal, state, local, and tribal
environmental officials; and
• Promoting effective consultation activities on environmental actions and issues.
GAP supports tribal capacity development through financial assistance to approximately 520 tribal
governments and inter-tribal consortia. GAP has helped tribes receive 110 program delegations to
administer a variety of programs across a number of statutes, including the Clean Water Act, Safe
Drinking Water Act, and the Clean Air Act. Tribes also have developed their capacity to assist
EPA in implementing federal environmental programs in the absence of an EPA-approved tribal
program through Direct Implementation Tribal Cooperative Agreements (DITCAs). In FY 2017
there were 19 active DITCAs supporting EPA's direct implementation activities. Similarly, EPA
also has been able to certify 32 tribal employees as inspectors for various federal compliance
551
-------
programs. GAP also supports tribes with the development of their waste management programs
with over 220 tribes having Integrated Waste Management Plans.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 2/Objective 2.1, Enhance Shared Accountability in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, GAP grants will continue to assist tribal governments
in developing environmental protection program capacity to assess environmental conditions, use
relevant environmental information to improve long-range strategic environmental program
development planning, and develop environmental programs tailored to tribal needs consistent
with those long-range strategic plans.
The Agency's "Guidance on the Award and Management of General Assistance Agreements for
Tribes and Inter-Tribal Consortia"20 establishes an overall framework for tribes and EPA to
follow in developing tribal environmental program capacity under GAP. Specifically, the guidance
strengthens joint strategic planning through development and implementation of EPA-Tribal
Environmental Plans (ETEPs) to document long-range tribal environmental program development
priorities. These strategic planning documents inform funding decisions by linking ETEP goals to
annual GAP assistance agreement work plans and provide a mechanism to measure tribal progress
in meeting their program development goals. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to implement GAP
under this national framework, as modified during FY 2018, and maintain an emphasis on training
(internal and external) to support nationally consistent GAP guidance interpretation and
implementation. In supporting a strong GAP management framework (as referenced under Tribal
Capacity Program [EPM Appropriation]), EPA will continue a process to establish a performance
information management system to track the progress tribes achieve for developing and
implementing environmental protection programs in Indian Country.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$20,798.0) This program change reduces funding for tribes to develop the capacity to
implement environmental protection programs in Indian country. EPA will work with
tribes to target funds to core requirements while providing flexibility to address particular
priorities expressed in the ETEPs.
Statutory Authority:
Indian Environmental General Assistance Program Act.
20 http://www.epa.gov/tp/GAP-guidance-fmal.pdf.
552
-------
Categorical Grant: Underground Injection Control (UIC)
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
SIOJ'J.J
.s WMxO
-sj.-i-in.n
Total Budget Authority
$10,572.3
$10,435.0
$6,995.0
-$3,440.0
Program Project Description:
EPA's Underground Injection Control (UIC) grant program funds are allocated to federal, state,
and tribal government agencies that oversee underground injection activities to prevent
contamination of underground sources of drinking water from fluid injection, as established by the
Safe Drinking Water Act.
EPA regulates the construction, operation, permitting, and closure of injection wells used to place
fluids underground for storage or disposal. In FY 2019, EPA will provide financial assistance in
the form of grants to states and tribes that have primary enforcement authority (primacy) to
implement and manage UIC programs and ensure safe injection well operations that prevent
contamination of underground source of drinking water. Eligible Indian tribes that demonstrate an
intent to achieve primacy also may receive grants for the initial development of UIC programs and
be designated for "Treatment as a State" if their programs are approved. Where a jurisdiction does
not have primacy, EPA uses these funds for direct implementation of federal UIC requirements.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.2, Provide Clean and Safe Water in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. The UIC program manages more than 700,000 injection
wells21 across six well types to protect our groundwater resources. The requested funding supports
implementation of the UIC program. EPA directly implements UIC programs in eight states and
two territories and shares responsibility in seven states and two tribes. EPA also administers the
UIC programs for all other tribes and for Class VI wells in all states.22 EPA will continue its
support of state oil and gas programs as they implement the UIC Class II program or assume
responsibility for Class II programs.
21 As represented in calendar year 2015 annual inventory.
22 For more information, please visit:
https://www.cfda. gov/index?s=program&mode=form&tab=stepl&id=cl307f57fe8bec34fla65660eff495a8&cck=l&au=&ck=
http://water.epa.gov/type/groundwater/uic/index.cfm.
553
-------
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$3,440.0) This program change is a reduction in the UIC grants. EPA will work with
states and tribes to target funds to core statutory requirements while providing flexibility
to address particular priorities.
Statutory Authority:
Safe Drinking Water Act, § 1443.
554
-------
Categorical Grant: Wetlands Program Development
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
.S N.5(tU>
S<). '(>2.0
-S4. ~WM
Total Budget Authority
$15,867.0
$14,561.0
$9,762.0
-$4,799.0
Program Project Description:
The Wetland Program Development Grants (WPDGs) assist states, tribes, and local governments
to build or enhance their wetland protection and restoration programs. The program's grants are
used to develop new or refine existing state and tribal wetland programs in one or more of the
following areas: (1) monitoring and assessment; (2) voluntary restoration and protection; (3)
regulatory programs, including Section 401 certification and Section 404 assumption;23 and (4)
wetland water quality standards.
States and tribes develop program elements based on their goals and resources. The grants support
development of state and tribal wetland programs that further the goals of the Clean Water Act
and improve water quality in watersheds throughout the country. The grants are awarded on a
competitive basis under the authority of Section 104(b)(3) of the Clean Water Act. The grant
funding is split among EPA's 10 regions according to the number of states and territories per
region. Each region is required, by regulation, to compete the award of these funds to states, tribes,
local governments, interstate agencies, and inter-tribal consortia.24 In addition, EPA sets aside 10
percent of the appropriation for a grant competition specifically for tribes and inter-tribal consortia.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.2, Provide Clean and Safe Water in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. EPA will continue to assist states and tribes in strengthening
wetland protection through documenting stresses or improvements to wetland condition, providing
tools for wetland restoration and protection, and developing regulatory controls to avoid,
minimize, and compensate for wetland impacts.
23 State and Tribal assumption of Section 404 is an approach that can be useful in streamlining 404 permitting in coordination with
other environmental and land use planning regulations. When states or tribes assume administration of the federal regulatory
program, Section 404 permit applicants seek permits from the state or tribe rather than the federal government. States and tribes
are in many cases located closer to the proposed activities and are often more familiar with local resources, issues, and needs. Even
when a state assumes permitting under Section 404, the Corps of Engineers retains jurisdiction for a certain portion of waters under
the CWA as well as those waters subject to Section 10 of the River and Harbors Act for permits.
24For more information, see http://water. epa. gov/grants funding/wetlands/estp. cfm.
555
-------
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$4,799.0) This program change reduces the Wetland Program Development grants. EPA
will work with states and tribes to target funds to core requirements while providing
flexibility to address particular priorities.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act, § 104(b)(3).
556
-------
Categorical Grant: Beaches Protection
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
S9.5-HU
SV.-IS-U)
so.o
-VA-AW.«
Total Budget Authority
$9,540.3
$9,484.0
$0.0
-$9,484.0
Program Project Description:
EPA's Beaches Protection program awards grants to eligible coastal states, territories, and tribes
to monitor water quality at beaches and to notify the public, through beach advisories and closures,
when water quality exceeds applicable standards.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources have been eliminated for this program in FY 2019. EPA will encourage states to
continue beach monitoring and notification programs.
Performance Measure Targets:
This proposed disinvestment means that the Agency will no longer publish measures associated
with this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$9,484.0) This program change eliminates the Beaches Protection grant program, which
is a mature, well-established program supporting state beach monitoring and notification
programs that can continue to be implemented at the local level.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act; Beach Act of 2000.
557
-------
Categorical Grant: Lead
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Ensure Safety of Chemicals in the Marketplace
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
S/4.S22.2
.S 13.154.0
S 0.0
-.S 13.V54.0
Total Budget Authority
$14,822.2
$13,954.0
$0.0
-$13,954.0
Program Project Description:
EPA's Lead Paint Program is working to reduce the number of children with blood lead levels of
five micrograms per deciliter or higher. The Lead program also works to reduce the disparities in
blood lead levels between low-income children and non-low-income children.25 The Lead
Categorical Grant Program provides support to authorized states and tribal programs that
administer training and certification programs for lead professionals and contractors.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE have been eliminated for this program in FY 2019. Lead paint certification
will continue under the Chemical Risk Review Reduction program.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$13,954.0) This program change eliminates the Categorical Grant: Lead program.
Statutory Authority:
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), §§ 401-412.
25 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Fourth Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals, Updated Tables,
(September, 2012). Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
http://www.cdc.gov/exposurereport/.
558
-------
Categorical Grant: Multipurpose Grants
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Multiple
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
Sir, 2.'J
so.o
S 2'.000.0
S 2'.000.0
Total Budget Authority
$162.9
$0.0
$27,000.0
$27,000.0
Program Project Description:
EPA and its partners have made enormous progress in protecting air, water, and land resources.
The newly-proposed Multipurpose Grants program will differ from prior iterations by supporting
states, tribes, and territories in the implementation of mandatory statutory duties in environmental
programs delegated by EPA. Recognizing that environmental challenges differ due to variations
in geography, population density, and other factors, this program provides EPA's partners with
flexibility to target funds to their highest priority efforts to protect human health and the
environment.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports multiple objectives under Goal 1, Core Mission in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, these funds will support the implementation of
mandatory statutory duties delegated by EPA under pertinent environmental laws. States, tribes,
and territories will have the flexibility to apply the funds toward activities required in a broad array
of environmental statutes, depending on local needs and priorities. Results will be tracked as
required by the Environmental Results Order and could support critical work across multiple
environmental programs.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$27,000.0) Funding will enable states and tribes to target resources toward critical needs
in implementation of mandatory statutory programs.
559
-------
Statutory Authority:
Annual Appropriation Acts; GAP; PPA; FIFRA; CAA; TSCA; NEPA; CWA; SDWA; RCRA;
CERCLA; NAFIA; OAPCA; MPRSA; CRCA; Indoor Radon Abatement Act.
Note: EPA is currently seeking appropriations language to support this program: "Provided
further; That of the funds otherwise available under the heading State and Tribal Assistance
Grants; $27,000,000 shall be for multi-purpose grants for the implementation of mandatory
statutory duties in delegated environmental programs."
560
-------
Categorical Grant: Nonpoint Source (Sec. 319)
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
S
SIO'J. ~5-UI
so.o
-SIM. '5-t.D
Total Budget Authority
$169,771.6
$169,754.0
$0.0
-$169,754.0
Program Project Description:
Section 319 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) authorizes states, territories, and tribes to use a range
of tools to implement their Nonpoint Source Programs.26 Grants under Section 319 are provided
to states, territories, and tribes to help them implement their EPA approved Nonpoint Source
Management Programs.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources for this program have been eliminated in FY 2019. The Agency will continue to
coordinate with the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) on targeting funding where
appropriate to address nonpoint sources.
Performance Measure Targets:
This proposed disinvestment means that the Agency will no longer publish measures associated
with this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$169,754.0) This program change eliminates the Nonpoint Source grant program. There
are other sources of funding that support this type of work across government and the
Agency will partner with USD A to target their efforts.
Statutory Authority:
Clean Water Act, § 319.
26 For more information, see: https://www.cfda.gov.
561
-------
Categorical Grant: Pollution Prevention
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Cooperative Federalism
Objective(s): Enhance Shared Accountability
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
St ate mill Tribal Assistance (iranls
.S 4.5t)4.(>
S 4.
so.o
-S4. ~tt«
Total Budget Authority
$4,504.6
$4,733.0
$0.0
-$4,733.0
Program Project Description:
The Pollution Prevention (P2) Categorical Grants program augments the counterpart P2 program
under the Environmental Program and Management (EPM) account.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources and FTE have been eliminated for this program in FY 2019. Based on previous
investments in P2 solutions made under this program project, partners are expected to be able to
continue to share best practices and pursue additional pollution prevention solutions.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$4,733.0) This program change eliminates the Categorical Grant Pollution Prevention
program in FY 2019.
Statutory Authority:
Pollution Prevention Act of 1990; Toxic Substances Control Act.
562
-------
Categorical Grant: Radon
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
so.o
Total Budget Authority
$7,963.4
$7,996.0
$0.0
-$7,996.0
Program Project Description:
EPA's non-regulatory radon program promotes public action to reduce the health risk from indoor
radon. EPA has assisted states and tribes through technical support and the State Indoor Radon
Grants (SIRG) program, which provided categorical grants to develop, implement, and enhance
programs that assess and mitigate radon risk. For over 30 years, EPA's radon program has provided
important guidance and significant funding to help states establish their own programs, which are
now mature. EPA supplemented grant dollars with technical support to transfer "best practices"
among states that promote effective program implementation across the nation.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources for this program are proposed for elimination in FY 2019.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$7,996.0) This program change proposes to eliminate funding for the Categorical Grant:
Radon program.
Statutory Authority:
CAA Amendments of 1990; Radon Gas and Indoor Air Quality Research Act; Title IV of the
SARA of 1986; TSCA, Section 6, Titles II and Title III (15 U.S.C. 2605 and 2641-2671); and
IRAA, Section 306.
563
-------
Categorical Grant: Underground Storage Tanks
Program Area: Categorical Grants
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Revitalize Land and Prevent Contamination
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
s l.-I'V.-l
S1.-ISS.0
so.o
-SI.-ISS.0
Total Budget Authority
$1,479.4
$1,488.0
$0.0
-$1,488.0
Program Project Description:
Releases of petroleum from underground storage tanks (UST) can contaminate groundwater, the
drinking water source for many Americans. The State and Tribal Assistance Grant (STAG)
program provides funding to states27 to bring UST systems into compliance with release prevention
and release detection requirements.
STAG funds are used by states to fund such activities as: seeking state program approval to operate
the UST program in lieu of the federal program; approving specific technologies to detect leaks
from tanks; ensuring that tank owners and operators are complying with notification and other
requirements; ensuring equipment compatibility; conducting inspections; and implementing
operator training.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources have been proposed for elimination for this program in FY 2019. States could elect to
maintain core program work with state resources rather than federal.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$1,488.0) This funding change proposes to eliminate the Categorical Grant: Underground
Storage Tanks program.
Statutory Authority:
Solid Waste Disposal Act of 1976, as amended by the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986, § 2007(f); Energy Policy Act, § 9011.
27 States as referenced here also include the District of Columbia and five territories as described in the definition of state in the
Solid Waste Disposal Act.
564
-------
State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
565
-------
Brownfields Projects
Program Area: State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Revitalize Land and Prevent Contamination
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
State ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
SSSJ "0.2
S'V,
S02.000.0
-.S/
Total Budget Authority
$88,370.2
$79,457.0
$62,000.0
-$17,457.0
Program Project Description:
The Brownfields program awards grants and provides technical assistance to help states, tribes,
local communities, and other stakeholders involved in environmental revitalization and economic
redevelopment to work together to plan, inventory, assess, safely cleanup, and reuse brownfields.
Approximately 129 million people (roughly 40 percent of the U.S. population) live within three
miles of a brownfields site that received EPA funding.28 This idle land drags down property values
and can slow down a local economy. Brownfields redevelopment is a key to revitalizing main
streets, neighborhoods, and rural communities; increasing property values and creating jobs. Since
its inception, the Brownfields program has fostered a community-driven approach to reuse of
contaminated sites. As of the end of FY 2017, grants awarded by the program have led to over
69,200 acres of idle land made ready for productive use and over 129,240 jobs and $24.7 billion
leveraged.29 By awarding brownfields grants, EPA makes investments in communities so that they
can realize their own visions for land reuse, infrastructure development, economic growth, and job
creation.
Under this program, EPA will focus on core activities, providing funding for: 1) assessment
cooperative agreements and Targeted Brownfields Assessments (TBAs); 2) cleanup cooperative
agreements; and 3) research, training, and technical assistance to communities for brownfields-
related activities, including Land Revitalization.
A 2017 study found that housing property values increased 5 to 15.2 percent near brownfield sites
when cleanup was completed.30 Analysis of the data near 48 brownfields sites shows that an
estimated $29 to $97 million in additional tax revenue was generated for local governments in a
single year after cleanup. This is 2 to 7 times more than the $12.4 million EPA contributed to the
cleanup of those brownfields.31 In addition, based on historical data provided by the Assessment
1 U.S. EPA, Office of Land and Emergency Management Estimate 2017. Data collected includes: (1) site information as of the end
of FY16; and (2) census data from the 20011-2015 American Community Survey.
29 EPA's ACRES database.
30Haninger, K.,L. Ma, andC. Timmins. 2017. The Value of Brownfield Remediation. Journal of the Association of Environmental
and Resource Economists, 4(1): 197-241.
31 Sullivan, K. A. 2017. Brownfields Remediation: Impact on Local Residential Property Tax Revenue. Journal of Environmental
Assessment Policy and Management, 19(3).
566
-------
Cleanup and Redevelopment Exchanges System (ACRES) database, $1 of EPA's Brownfields
funding leverages between $16 and $17 in other public and private funding.32
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.3, Revitalize Land and Prevent
Contamination in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will build on current
work to revitalize communities across the country by providing financial and technical assistance
to assess, cleanup, and plan reuse at brownfields sites. The Brownfields program will continue to
foster federal, state, tribal, local, and public-private partnerships to return properties to productive
economic use. The activities described below will leverage approximately 5,270 jobs and
approximately $1 billion in other funding sources.33
• Funding will support at least 105 assessment cooperative agreements (estimated $26.8
million) that recipients may use to inventory, assess, and conduct cleanup and reuse
planning at brownfields sites, as authorized under CERCLA 104(k)(2). Approximately 630
site assessments will be completed under these agreements.
• EPA will provide $6.2 million for TBAs in up to 62 communities without access to other
assessment resources or those that lack the capacity to manage a brownfields assessment
grant. There is special emphasis for small and rural communities to submit requests for this
funding to ensure equal access to brownfields assessment resources. These assessments
will be performed through contracts and interagency agreements, as authorized by
CERCLA 104(k)(2).
• Funding will support approximately 58 direct cleanup cooperative agreements (estimated
$11.5 million) to enable eligible entities to clean up recipient owned properties as
authorized under CERCLA 104(k)(3).
• In FY 2019, the Agency will begin alternating the Environmental Workforce Development
& Job Training (EWDJT) competition to an every-other-year schedule.
• Funding also will support assessment and cleanup of abandoned underground storage tanks
and other petroleum contamination found on brownfields properties (estimated $15.5
million) for up to approximately 62 brownfields assessment cooperative agreements and
five cleanup cooperative agreements, as authorized under CERCLA 104(k)(2) and (3). The
Brownfields statute requires the program to select the highest ranked proposals. In order to
meet this requirement, EPA is requesting flexibility to use up to 25 percent of its CERCLA
104(k) funding to address petroleum contaminated sites versus the exact 25 percent
identified by statute. This flexibility will allow EPA to select the highest risk projects and
meet the demand of the communities applying for the various brownfields grants.
Hazardous substances account for approximately two-thirds of all brownfields funding
32 For more information, please visit www.epa.gov/biowiifidds.
33 U.S. EPA, Office of Land and Emergency Management Estimate. All estimates of outputs and outcomes are supported by the
data that is entered by cooperative agreement recipients via EPA's ACRES database.
567
-------
requests in the past three years, while the demand for petroleum funding hovers around
one-third.
• Funding also will support training, research, technical assistance cooperative agreements,
interagency agreements, and contracts to support states, tribes, and communities (estimated
$2.0 million) for both the Brownfields and Land Revitalization programs and other
assistance mechanisms, as authorized under CERCLA 104(k)(6).
• All estimates of outputs and outcomes are supported by the data that is entered by
cooperative agreement recipients via the ACRES database and analyzed by EPA.
Maintenance of ACRES, focus on the input of high quality data, and robust analysis
regarding program outcomes and performance will continue to be a priorities during FY
2019.
Performance Measure Targets:
(B32) Number of properties cleaned up using brownfields funding.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
130
130
(B30) Number of brownfields sites made ready for anticipated use.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
684
684
(B34) Jobs leveraged from brownfields activities.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
7,000
7,000
(B29) Number of brownfield properties assessed.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
1,300
1,300
(B37) Billions of dollars of cleanup and redevelopment funds leveraged at
brownfields sites.
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
1.1
1.1
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$17,457.0) This program change reflects a focus on assessment and direct cleanup grants,
while reducing TBAs and other program activities.
Statutory Authority:
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as
amended by the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act, §§ 101, 104,
107.
568
-------
Diesel Emissions Reduction Grant Program
Program Area: State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
S-I0.0S10
S5V. 5V.1.0
S 10.000.0
-.S -IV.5V3.0
Total Budget Authority
$40,683.0
$59,593.0
$10,000.0
-$49,593.0
Program Project Description:
The Diesel Emissions Reduction Act (DERA) Grant Program provides emission reductions
from existing diesel engines through engine retrofits, rebuilds, and replacements; switching to
cleaner fuels; idling reduction; and other clean diesel strategies. The DERA program was initially
authorized in Sections 791-797 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and reauthorized by the Diesel
Emission Reduction Act of 2010.
From goods movement to building construction to public transportation, diesel engines are the
modern-day workhorse of the American economy. Diesel engines are extremely efficient and
power nearly every major piece of machinery and equipment on farms, construction sites, in
ports, and on highways. As the Agency's heavy-duty highway and nonroad diesel engines
emissions standards came into effect in 2007 and 2008 respectively, new cleaner diesel engines
started to enter the nation's fleet. However, today there are still more than 10 million engines in
use that will continue to emit large amounts of nitrogen oxides and particulate matter. EPA's
DERA program promotes strategies to reduce these emissions and protect public health, by
working with manufacturers, fleet operators, air quality professionals, environmental and
community organizations, and state and local officials. While the DERA grants accelerate the
pace at which dirty engines are retired or retrofitted, pollution emissions from the legacy fleet
also will be reduced over time without additional DERA funding as portions of the fleet turnover
are replaced with new engines that meet modern emission standards. However, even with
attrition through fleet turnover, the Agency estimates that approximately one million old diesel
engines would still remain in use in 2030.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.1, Improve Air Quality in EPA's
FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to target its discretionary funding
to direct DERA grants and rebates to reduce diesel emissions in priority areas and areas of highly
concentrated diesel pollution with a primary focus on ports and school buses. EPA estimates that
about 39 million people in the U.S. currently live in close proximity to ports. These people can be
exposed to air pollution associated with emissions from diesel engines at ports including
particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, ozone, and air toxics, which can contribute to significant health
569
-------
problems—including premature mortality, increased hospital admissions for heart and lung
disease, increased cancer risk, and increased respiratory symptoms - especially for children, the
elderly, outdoor workers, and other sensitive populations.34 School buses provide the safest
transportation to and from school for more than 25 million American children every day. However,
diesel exhaust from these buses has a negative impact on human health, especially for children
who have a faster breathing rate than adults and whose lungs are not yet fully developed.
Using the formula outlined in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, eligible U.S. states and territories
receive 30 percent of the annual DERA appropriation for the establishment of clean diesel grant,
rebate and loan programs. The remaining DERA funding is split into two categories. The first
category allocates funds to a rebate program that was first established under DERA's 2010
reauthorization. Through the rebate mechanism, the Agency will more efficiently and precisely
target the awards toward improving children's health and turning over the nation's school bus
fleet. In addition, this rebate mechanism can be used to provide funding directly to private
fleets. The second category allocates funds toward national grants focusing on areas with poor
air quality, especially those impacted most severely by ports and goods movement. EPA also will
continue to track, assess, and report the results of DERA grants, such as numbers of engines,
emissions benefits, and cost-benefit information.35 Finally, EPA will continue to provide diesel
emission reduction technology verification and evaluation and provide that information to the
public.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$49,593.0) This program change is a reduction in the overall amount of DERA grant
funding, directing DERA grants and rebates to reduce diesel emissions in priority areas of
highly concentrated diesel pollution.
Statutory Authority:
Energy Policy Act of 2005, §§ 741, 791-797; Diesel Emissions Reduction Act of 2010.
34 EPA's National Port Strategy Assessment report of 2016, https://www.epa.gov/ports-iiiitiative/natioiial-port-
assessment.
' List of all grant awards under DERA can be found at https:/
cleandiesel/clean-diesel-national-grants.
570
-------
Infrastructure Assistance: Clean Water SRF
Program Area: State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
sljfil), ~Jfl.fl
S1JS-U2I.0
S/JVJ.tifi'.O
.S
Total Budget Authority
$1,380,738.8
$1,384,421.0
$1,393,887.0
$9,466.0
Total Workyears
3.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
The Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) program capitalizes state revolving loan funds
in all 50 states and Puerto Rico to finance infrastructure improvements for public wastewater
systems and projects to improve water quality. These funds directly support the Agency's goal to
ensure waters are clean through improved water infrastructure and sustainable management.
The CWSRF is the largest source of federal funds for states to provide loans and other forms of
assistance for water quality projects including construction of wastewater treatment facilities,
water and energy efficiency projects, green infrastructure projects, and agricultural best
management practices (BMPs). This program also includes a provision for set-aside funding for
tribes to address serious wastewater infrastructure needs and associated health impacts. It also
provides direct grant funding for the District of Columbia and territories. This federal investment
is designed to be used in concert with other sources of funds to address water quality needs.36
Additional tools, such as additional subsidization, are available to assist small and disadvantaged
communities. The CWSRF program is a key component EPA's efforts to achieve innovative
solutions to wastewater infrastructure needs, and realize economic and environmental benefits that
will continue to accrue for years in the future.
The revolving nature of the funds and substantial state contributions have greatly multiplied the
federal investment. EPA estimates that for every federal dollar contributed thus far the nation has
received close to three dollars of investment in water infrastructure.37 As of June 2017, the state
CWSRFs have provided over $126.1 billion in affordable financing for a wide variety of
wastewater infrastructure and other water quality projects.38 In the past year alone, nearly 1,500
assistance agreements went to communities of all sizes, funding over $7.4 billion in projects aimed
at treating wastewater, addressing stormwater runoff, tackling non-point source pollution, and
addressing a myriad of other environmental issues.39 The CWSRF program measures and tracks
36 See http://www.epa.gov/cwsrf for more information.
37 See https://www.epa.gov/sites/productioii/files/201.6-12/docuiiieiits/usl6.pdf for more information
38 Clean Water State Revolving Fund National Information Management System. US EPA, Office of Water, National Information
Management System Reports: Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF). Washington, DC (As of June 30, 2017).
39 Clean Water State Revolving Fund National Information Management System. US EPA, Office of Water, National Information
Management System Reports: Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF). Washington, DC (As of June 30, 2017).
571
-------
the average national rate at which available funds are loaned, assuring that the fund program
expeditiously supports EPA's water quality goals, as of June 30, 2017, over 98 percent of the
available funding has been committed to projects.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.2, Provide Clean and Safe Water in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. The Agency is requesting nearly $1,394 billion in FY 2019
to provide funding for critical wastewater infrastructure. In FY 2019, EPA requests nearly $2.3
billion for the Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds, combined. These funding
levels further infrastructure repair and replacement and would allow states, municipalities, and
private entities to continue to finance high priority infrastructure investments that protect human
health.
This federal investment will continue to enable progress toward the nation's clean water needs and
infrastructure priorities and will contribute to the long-term environmental goal of impaired
waterbodies attaining designated uses. EPA continues to work with states to meet several key
objectives, such as:
• Linking projects to environmental results;
• Targeting assistance to small and underserved communities with limited ability to repay
loans; and
• Ensuring the CWSRFs remain reliable sources of affordable funding.
EPA requests that 10-20 percent of the total CWSRF funds made available to each state be used
to provide additional subsidization to eligible recipients in the form of forgiveness of principal,
negative interest loans, or grants (or any combination of these).
In addition to capitalizing the CWSRF, a portion of the appropriation also will provide direct grants
to communities within the tribes and territories. These communities are in great need of assistance
given that their sanitation infrastructure lags behind the rest of the country causing significant
public health concerns. To ensure that sufficient resources are directed toward these communities
that face additional challenges, EPA continues to request a tribal set-aside of 2 percent, or $30
million, whichever is greatest, of the funds appropriated in FY 2019. EPA also continues to request
a territories set-aside of 1.5 percent of the funds appropriated from the CWSRF for American
Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of Northern Marianas, and the United States Virgin Islands.
EPA requests that up to $2 million of the tribal set-aside for training and technical assistance be
related to operation and management of tribal wastewater treatment works. EPA also requests the
ability to use the tribal and territorial set-asides to support planning and design of treatment works
and for the construction, repair, or replacement of privately owned decentralized wastewater
treatment systems serving one or more principal residences or small commercial establishments,
authority similar to that already available to states. Expanded support for planning and design will
protect the federal investment in wastewater infrastructure and ensure access to safe wastewater
treatment for tribes and territories that face significant challenges with sanitation infrastructure.
The ability for both the tribes and territories to construct, repair, or replace decentralized
572
-------
wastewater treatment systems will allow the flexibility that these communities require to provide
wastewater infrastructure that is appropriate for the communities' unique circumstances.
EPA will partner with states to ensure that the CWSRF continues to play an important role in
promoting efficient system-wide planning; improvements in technical, financial and managerial
capacity; and the design, construction and ongoing management of sustainable water
infrastructure. EPA also continues to support the national implementation of the CWSRF
American Iron and Steel (AIS) requirement. Through technical assistance, market analysis, and
stakeholder engagement, the AIS program administers the requirement for use of domestic iron
and steel products in water infrastructure projects.
Elsewhere in the FY 2019 budget, EPA requests $20 million for the Water Infrastructure Finance
and Innovation Act (WIFIA) program. Through WIFIA, EPA will make direct loans to regionally
or nationally significant water infrastructure projects. These combined investments, the SRFs and
WIFIA, further the Agency' s ongoing commitment to infrastructure repair and replacement. These
investments also will complement infrastructure funding requested through the President's
Infrastructure Initiative.
Performance Measure Targets:
FY 2018
FY 2019
(INFRA-03) Fund utilization rate for the CWSRF.
Target
Target
98
98
Work under the Infrastructure Assistance: Drinking Water State Revolving Fund, Infrastructure
Assistance: Clean Water State Revolving Fund, and the Water Infrastructure Finance and
Innovation program projects all support performance measure (INFRA-01) Number of non-federal
dollars leveraged by EPA water infrastructure finance programs (CWSRF, DWSRF and WIFIA).
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$9,466.0) This program change is an increase to state Clean Water SRF programs, which
EPA will apply based on the Clean Water Act formula. Combined investments in the two
SRFs, along with WIFIA, will promote water and wastewater infrastructure improvements.
Statutory Authority:
Title VI of the Clean Water Act; Title V of the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of
2014.
573
-------
Infrastructure Assistance: Drinking Water SRF
Program Area: State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
1
SHS~J~l.il
Total Budget Authority
$944,392.1
$857,371.0
$863,233.0
$5,862.0
Total Workyears
1.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
Program Project Description:
EPA's Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) is designed to assist public water systems
in financing the costs of drinking water infrastructure improvements needed to achieve or maintain
compliance with Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) requirements and to protect public health as
well as support state and local efforts to protect drinking water. The 2011 Drinking Water
Infrastructure Needs Survey and Assessment (D WINS A), conducted every four years, indicated a
20-year capital investment need of $384.2 billion for public water systems that are eligible to
receive funding from state DWSRF programs. The capital investment need, based on the 2011
survey included approximately 52,000 community water systems and 21,400 not-for-profit non-
community water systems (including schools and churches)40 The needs reflect costs for repairs
and replacement of leaking transmission pipes and deteriorated storage and treatment equipment,
as well as other projects required to protect public health and to ensure compliance with the
SDWA. The DWSRF can help communities replace lead service lines by providing principal
forgiveness and low interest loans, and maximizing the use of the DWSRF set-asides to fund
corrosion control studies when an action level exceedance is triggered.
To reduce public health risks and to help ensure safe and reliable delivery of drinking water
nationwide, EPA makes capitalization grants to states so that they can provide low-cost loans and
other assistance to eligible public water systems and maintain robust drinking water protection
programs. The program emphasizes that, in addition to maintaining the statutory focus on
addressing the greatest public health risks first, states can utilize set-asides to assist small systems
and those most in need on a per household basis according to state affordability criteria.
The DWSRF program provides communities access to critical low-cost financing and offers a
limited subsidy to help utilities address long-term needs associated with water infrastructure. Most
DWSRF assistance is offered in the form of loans which water utilities repay from the revenues
they generate through the rates they charge their customers for service. Water utilities in many
communities may need to evaluate the rate at which they invest in drinking water infrastructure
40 For more information, see: http://water.epa.gov/grants funding/dwsrf/upload/epa816rl 3006.pdf.
574
-------
repair and replacement to keep pace with their aging infrastructure, much of which may be
approaching the end of its useful life.41
To protect public health and wellbeing, utilities must provide continuous access to safe drinking
water. The delivery of safe drinking water is often taken for granted and is frequently undervalued,
which presents considerable challenges to the completion of infrastructure upgrades that are
necessary to protect public health. More than 151,000 public water systems42 provide drinking
water to the approximately 320 million persons in the U.S. More than 97 percent of these public
water systems serve fewer than 10,000 persons.43 While most small systems consistently provide
safe, reliable drinking water to their customers, many small systems are facing a number of
significant challenges in their ability to achieve and maintain system sustainability. EPA is
emphasizing attention to the needs of these small communities/systems while retaining state
flexibility in the management of their funds. EPA continues its small systems focus by working
closely with state programs to improve public water system sustainability and public health
protection for persons served by small water systems.
These approaches have resulted in high system compliance; 93 percent of community water
systems (CWSs) met all applicable health-based standards, surpassing the FY 2017 target of 90
percent. In addition, 90.5 percent of the Indian Country population received drinking water that
met all applicable health-based drinking water standards. Continuing this success in many small
systems will be a challenge, given aging infrastructure, difficulties in complying with regulatory
requirements, workforce shortages/high-turnover, increasing costs, and declining rate bases. In FY
2017, small community water system violations made up 94 percent44 of the overall violations
from all size systems.
State Set-Asides
States have considerable flexibility to tailor their DWSRF program to their unique circumstances.
This flexibility ensures that each state has the opportunity to carefully and strategically consider
how best to achieve the maximum public health protection. For example, states may set aside and
award funds for targeted activities that can help them implement and expand their drinking water
programs. The four DWSRF set-asides45 are: Small System Technical Assistance (up to 2 percent),
Administrative and Technical Assistance46 (up to 4 percent, $400,000 or l/5th percent of the current
valuation of the fund, whichever is greater), State Program Management (up to 10 percent), and
Local Assistance and Other State Programs (up to 15 percent). Taken together, approximately 31
percent of a state's DWSRF capitalization grant may be set aside for activities other than
infrastructure construction. These set asides enable states to improve water system operation and
management, emphasizing institutional capacity as a means of achieving sustainable water system
operations. Historically, the states have set aside an annual average of 16 percent of the funds
41 For more information, see: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-07/documents/eDa816rl30Q6.pdf
42 For more information, see: https://www.epa.gov/waterdata/drinking-water-tools
43 For more information, see: http://water.epa.gov/scitech/datait/databases/drink/sdwisfed/pivottables.cfm
44 https://www.epa.gov/waterdata/drinking-water-tools
45 https://www.epa.gOv/drinkingwatersrf/how-drinking-water-state-revolving-fund-works#tab-5
46 https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/612/text
575
-------
awarded to them for program development, of which 4 percent is used to administer the program;
however, over the past three years, states have increased their set-asides taken to around 20 percent.
The federal investment is designed to be used in concert with other sources of funds to address
drinking water infrastructure needs. States are required to provide a 20 percent match for their
capitalization grant. Some states elect to leverage their capitalization grants through the public
debt markets to enable the state to provide more assistance. These features, including state match
leveraging, and the revolving fund design of the program, have enabled the states to provide
assistance equal to 187 percent of the federal capitalization invested in the program since its
inception in 1997. In other words, for every one dollar the federal government invests in this
program, the states, in total, have been able to deliver $1.87 in assistance to water systems. In
addition, the DWSRF's rate of funds utilized (the cumulative dollar amount of loan agreements
divided by cumulative funds available for projects) was 96 percent in 2017, exceeding its target of
89 percent.
National Set-Asides
Prior to allotting funds to the states, EPA is required to reserve certain national level set-asides.47
Two million dollars must, by statute, be allocated to small systems monitoring for unregulated
contaminants to facilitate small water system compliance with the monitoring and reporting
requirements of the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation (UCMR). Historically, a
three-year sampling period occurs within each five-year monitoring cycle. During the sampling
period, fund utilization exceeds the annual appropriation of $2 million and the carry-over reserve
funds from non-sampling years become essential to complete the small system monitoring efforts.
EPA will reserve up to 2 percent, or $20 million, whichever is greater, of appropriated funds for
Indian tribes and Alaska Native Villages. These funds are awarded either directly to tribes or, on
behalf of tribes, to the Indian Health Service through interagency agreements. Additionally, EPA
will continue to set aside up to 1.5 percent for territories.48
In addition, the law49 requires that none of the funds made available by a Drinking Water State
Revolving Fund as authorized by Section 1452 of the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. 300j-
12) shall be used for a project for the construction, alteration, maintenance, or repair of a public
water system unless all of the iron and steel products used in the project are produced in the United
States. The Administrator may retain up to 0.25 percent of the funds appropriated in this Act for
the Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds for carrying out the provisions for
management and oversight of the requirements of this section.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.2, Provide Clean and Safe Water in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. For FY 2019, EPA requests $863 million for the DWSRF
47 Safe Drinking Water Act Sections 1452(i)(l), 1452(i)(2), 1452(j), and 1452(o), as amended.
48 For more information see:
https://www.cfda. gov/index?s=program&mode=form&tab=stepl&id=d33d92f2df290e0c2365599cb091D669
49 Continuing Appropriations Act 2018 and Supplemental Appropriations for Disaster Relief Requirements Act, 2017 (P.L. 115-
56), enacted September.
576
-------
to help finance critical infrastructure improvement projects to public drinking water systems. In
FY 2019, EPA requests nearly $2.3 billion for the Drinking Water and Clean Water State
Revolving Funds, combined. The budget provides robust funding for critical drinking and
wastewater infrastructure. These funding levels further the President's ongoing commitment to
infrastructure repair and replacement and would allow states, municipalities, and private entities
to continue to finance high priority infrastructure investments that protect human health. In
addition, these funds directly support the Agency's goal to ensure waters are clean through
improved water infrastructure and sustainable management to support drinking water.
The requested funding level reflects the documented needs for drinking water infrastructure and
the need to improve infrastructure in small communities and will help the programs reach more
communities due to the revolving nature of the funds. EPA will continue to foster its strong
partnership with the states to provide small system technical assistance, with a focus on rule
compliance, operational efficiencies, and system sustainability to ensure clean and safe water. In
FY 2019, EPA will continue its effort to build the capacity of local utilities and existing state
programs to expand their knowledge of the wide array of funding options available to meet future
infrastructure needs. The requested funding for this program will support critical infrastructure
investments to rebuild and enhance America's drinking water infrastructure.
In FY 2019, appropriated DWSRF funds will be allocated to the states in accordance with each
state's proportion of total drinking water infrastructure need based on the latest DWINSA. EPA
also has published data concerning the drinking water infrastructure needs of water systems
serving tribes and Alaskan Native Villages. Also, there is a statutory requirement that each state
and the District of Columbia receive no less than one percent of the allotment.
EPA will continue to work to target a significant portion of SRF assistance to small and
underserved communities with limited ability to repay loans. In FY 2019, EPA will work with
states to ensure not less than 20 and not more than 30 percent of a state's capitalization grant is
provided as additional subsidization. EPA encourages states to utilize subsidization to assist
disadvantaged communities and sustainability efforts.
As a result of EPA's efforts with states to fully utilize DWSRF funds available, unliquidated
obligations (ULOs) decreased by 69 percent, or approximately $1 billion, from FY 2012 to
FY 2017. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to work with states with higher ULOs to address
institutional obstacles in order to eliminate or minimize their ULO amounts.
In FY 2019, the DWSRF program will continue to implement the Clean Water and Drinking Water
Infrastructure Sustainability Policy that focuses on promoting system-wide planning that helps
align water infrastructure system goals; analyzing a range of infrastructure alternatives, including
energy efficient alternatives; and ensuring that systems have the financial capacity and rate
structures to construct, operate, maintain, and replace infrastructure over time. As part of that
strategy, the federal dollars provided through the State Revolving Funds also will act as a catalyst
for efficient system-wide planning, improvements in technical, financial and managerial capacity;
and the design, construction and ongoing management of sustainable water infrastructure.
577
-------
In FY 2019, EPA is continuing emphasis on strengthening small system technical, managerial and
financial capability through the implementation of the Capacity Development Program, the
Operator Certification Program, the Public Water System Supervision state grant program, and the
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund. The Capacity Development Program establishes a
framework within which states and water systems can work together to help these small systems
achieve the SDWA's public health protection objectives. The state Capacity Development
Programs are supported federally by the Public Water System Supervision state grant funds and
the set-asides established in the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund. Since the 1996
Amendments, states have implemented a variety of activities to assist small systems with their
compliance challenges and enhance their technical, managerial, and financial capacity.
In addition to the robust funding for critical drinking and wastewater infrastructure, EPA requests
$20 million for the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) program. Through
WIFIA, EPA will make direct loans to regionally or nationally significant water infrastructure
projects. These combined investments, the SRFs and WIFIA, further the Agency's ongoing
commitment to infrastructure repair and replacement.
Performance Measure Targets:
FY 2018
FY 2019
(INFRA-02) Fund utilization rate for the DWSRF.
Target
Target
96
97
Work under the Infrastructure Assistance: Drinking Water State Revolving Fund, Infrastructure
Assistance: Clean Water State Revolving Fund, and the Water Infrastructure Finance and
Innovation program projects all support performance measure (INFRA-01) Number of non-federal
dollars leveraged by EPA water infrastructure finance programs (CWSRF, DWSRF and WIFIA).
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$5,862.0) This program change reflects an increase in state Drinking Water SRF
programs, which EPA will apply based on the Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey
formula. Combined investments in the two SRFs, along with WIFIA, will promote water
and wastewater infrastructure improvements.
Statutory Authority:
Safe Drinking Water Act, § 1452.
578
-------
Infrastructure Assistance: Alaska Native Villages
Program Area: State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
S20.0S1 ~
S l
-------
While the gains in the program have been significant, ANV communities continue to trail behind
the non-Tribal/non-native population in the U.S. with access to water and sanitation. In Alaska,
5.1 percent of Native and Rural serviceable households1 are without complete indoor plumbing, a
much higher figure than the national average of 0.4 percent (US Census Survey 2012) of occupied
homes that lacked complete indoor plumbing.
The ANV program has shown significant progress (see Figure 1 below) documenting, since 2005,
the number of projects and ANV homes with increased access to safe water and sanitation (in
combination with other federal agencies). Over this period of time the ANV program contributed
about 35 percent (including the required State match) of all available funding from federal
agencies.
25,000
20,00)
1S.OOO
*5
I
E
I
10,000
5,000
Access to Drinking Water and Sanitation in Alaska Native Villages
by Year Dye to Federal Investment, in Coordination
With Other Federal Agencies
(I i,! !.; 'nl ll.it :Vr )
2005 200G 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Figure 1: Chart data source: Indian Health Service Sanitation Tracking and Reporting System
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.2, Provide Clean and Safe Water in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. The FY 2019 request of $3 million will provide water
services for additional homes and maintain the existing level of wastewater and drinking water
infrastructure that meets public health standards. Based on data from the past three years of funding
to the ANV program, $3 million in ANV funds would improve the drinking water and/or
wastewater services to about 350 homes in rural Alaska. Additionally, the FY 2019 request will
continue to support training, technical assistance, and educational programs that protect existing
federal investments in infrastructure by improving operation and maintenance of the systems.
In FY 2019, the Agency will continue to work with the State of Alaska to address sanitation
conditions and maximize the value of the federal investment in rural Alaska. EPA will continue to
580
-------
implement the Alaska Rural and Native Village "Management Controls Policy," adopted in June
2007, to ensure efficient use of funds by allocating them to projects that are ready to proceed or
progressing satisfactorily. The Agency has made great strides in implementing more focused and
intensive oversight of the ANV grant program through cost analyses, post-award monitoring, and
timely closeout of projects.
The State Revolving Funds are a source of infrastructure funding that can continue to fund water
system improvements in Alaska.
Performance Measure Targets:
(INFRA-04) Number of American Indian and Alaska Native homes provided access
to safe drinking water in coordination with other federal agencies (cumulative).
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
148,100
152,700
(INFRA-05) Number of American Indian and Alaska Native homes provided access
to basic sanitation in coordination with other federal agencies (cumulative).
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
105,764
110,464
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$16,864.0) This program change reduces support for the Alaska Rural and Native
Villages program. EPA estimates that this request level will improve the drinking water
and/or wastewater services to approximately 350 homes in rural Alaska. The State
Revolving Funds are an additional source of infrastructure funding that can continue to
fund water system improvements in Alaska.
Statutory Authority:
Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996, § 303; Clean Water Act, § 1263a.
581
-------
Infrastructure Assistance: Mexico Border
Program Area: State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
.SV.W.'.W
so.o
Total Budget Authority
$10,628.2
$9,932.0
$0.0
-$9,932.0
Program Project Description:
The U.S.-Mexico Border Water Infrastructure program supports the planning, design, and
construction of water and wastewater treatment facilities along the border with all projects
benefiting communities on the U.S. side of the border.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources are proposed for elimination for this program in FY 2019. The State Revolving Funds
are a source of infrastructure funding that can continue to fund water system improvements in U.S.
communities along the border.
Performance Measure Targets:
This proposed disinvestment means that the Agency will no longer publish measures associated
with this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$9,932.0) This program change proposes to eliminate the U.S.-Mexico Border Water
Infrastructure program. Other sources of funding are available to support these efforts in
U.S. communities along the border, most notably the Clean Water and Drinking Water
State Revolving Funds.
Statutory Authority:
Treaty entitled "Agreement between the United States of America and the United Mexican States
on Cooperation for the Protection and Improvement of the Environment in the Border Area,
August 14, 1983".
582
-------
Targeted Airshed Grants
Program Area: State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Improve Air Quality
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
S/'AiSViS'. /
.S 2 V,
so.o
-S29. '<>(>.()
Total Budget Authority
$19,818.1
$29,796.0
$0.0
-$29,796.0
Program Project Description:
In FY 2017, this program requested applications for approximately $30 million in competitive
grant funding to reduce air pollution in nonattainment areas that were ranked as the top five most
polluted areas relative to annual ozone or PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS); as well as the top five areas relative to the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. This program
assisted air control agencies in developing plans, conducting demonstrations, and implementing
projects in order to reduce air pollution in these nonattainment areas.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources for this program are proposed for elimination in FY 2019. States can continue to fund
emissions reduction activities through the EPA's core air grant programs and statutes.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$29,796.0) This program change proposes to eliminate the Targeted Airshed Grants
program.
Statutory Authority:
P-L. 115-31.
583
-------
GKM Water Monitoring
Program Area: State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Stulc ant! 1'ribul Assistance (irants
SI 0x5
so.o
-v*. <*"?.«
Total Budget Authority
$105.5
$3,973.0
$0.0
-$3,973.0
Program Project Description:
The Gold King Mine Water Monitoring program supports development and implementation of a
program for monitoring of rivers contaminated by the Gold King Mine Spill.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Resources have been eliminated for this program in FY 2019.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (-$3,973.0) This program change eliminates the Gold King Mine Water Monitoring
Program. There are other sources of funding that support water monitoring activities,
including Pollution Control (Section 106) program grants.
Statutory Authority:
Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act, Title IV, Section 5004(d); Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2017, P. L. 115-31; Clean Water Act, § 106.
584
-------
585
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Fund
Resource Summary Table 587
Program Projects in WIFIA 587
Water Quality Protection 588
Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation 589
585
-------
586
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION: Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Fund
Resource Summary Table
(Dollars in T
lousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019
Pres Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018
Annualized CR
Water Infrastructure Finance and
Innovation Fund
Budget Authority
$3,597.7
$12,932.0
$20,000.0
$7,068.0
Total Workyears
9.6
12.0
12.0
0.0
Bill Language: WIFIA
For the cost of direct loans and for the cost of guaranteed loans, as authorized by the Water
Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act of 2014, $17,000,000, to remain available until
expended: Provided, That such costs, including the cost of modifying such loans, shall be as
defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of1974: Providedfurther, That these funds
are available to subsidize gross obligations for the principal amount of direct loans, including
capitalized interest, and total loan principal, including capitalized interest, any part of which is to
be guaranteed, not to exceed $2,073,000,000.
In addition, fees authorized to be collected pursuant to sections 5029 and 5030 of the Water
Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act of 2014 shall be deposited in this account, to remain
available until expended, for the purposes provided in such sections.
In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the direct and guaranteed loan programs,
notwithstanding section 5033 of the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act of 2014,
$3,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2020.
Program Projects in WIFIA
[Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Water Quality Protection
Water Infrastructure Finance and
Innovation
$3,597.7
$12,932.0
$20,000.0
$7,068.0
TOTAL WIFIA
$3,597.7
$12,932.0
$20,000.0
$7,068.0
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the Superfund
account.
587
-------
Water Quality Protection
588
-------
Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation
Program Area: Water Quality Protection
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Provide Clean and Safe Water
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019
Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018
Annualized CR
11 (iter Infrastructure i'inance and
Innovation i'und*
$3,597.7
SI 2.932.0
S 20.000.0
S'OfuS.O
Total Budget Authority
$3,597.7
$12,932.0
$20,000.0
$7,068.0
Total Workyears
9.6
12.0
12.0
0.0
*The FY 2017 Appropriations Act (P.L. 115-31) provided the WIFIA program with $10 million; this funding
supplemented $20 million previously provided in FY 2017 by a Continuing Resolution (P.L. 114-254).
Program Project Description:
The Nation is facing the challenge of finding sustainable financing for aging water infrastructure.
Dependable, available drinking water and sanitation in communities relies on working, modern
infrastructure, but leaking water collection and distribution systems, and inadequate drinking water
and wastewater treatment continue to plague communities across the country. To help address this
priority, Congress enacted the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act of 2014 (WIFIA).1
The WIFIA program was designed to stimulate capital market investment, not supplant it, by
structuring WIFIA loans in a way that makes investment in projects attractive to market
participants. The WIFIA program directly supports the Agency's goal to ensure waters are clean
and safe through improved water infrastructure.
The WIFIA program is authorized to provide and service direct loans and loan guarantees to cover
up to 49 percent of eligible costs for drinking water and wastewater infrastructure projects of
regional or national significance. The WIFIA program is designed to offer credit assistance with
flexible terms in order to attract private participation, encourage new revenue streams for
infrastructure investment, and allow public agencies to get more projects done. The WIFIA
program requires a small appropriation compared to its potential loan volume. The first round of
selections for the $30 million from the FY 2017 appropriations has the potential, when combined
with other funding sources, to spur up to $5 billion in total infrastructure investment. With $20
million in FY 2019 appropriations, EPA could potentially provide up to $2 billion in credit
assistance, which could spur up to $4 billion in total infrastructure investment.2 This makes the
WIFIA program credit assistance a powerful new tool to help address a variety of water
infrastructure needs.
1 WIFIA is a subtitle within the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014 (WRRDA).
2 This approximation is based on estimated notional subsidy costs from FY17 projects. Actual subsidy cost will be determined
on a loan-by-loan basis.
589
-------
For the FY 2017 appropriated funds, EPA issued a Notice of Funding Availability on
January 10, 2017, requesting prospective borrowers to submit Letters of Interest (LOI). EPA
received 43 LOIs for direct loans by the April 10, 2017 deadline. On July 19, 2017, EPA
announced the 12 projects selected to continue with the application process.3 The selected projects
encompassed the broad range of project types that the WIFIA program can finance including
wastewater, drinking water, stormwater, and water recycling projects. Due diligence and
underwriting activities will continue into FY 2018 with the expectation that funds will be obligated
for water infrastructure projects in FY 2018.
Eligible assistance recipients include, amongst others, corporations and partnerships, municipal
entities, and State Revolving Fund (SRF) programs. The WIFIA program will complement the
existing SRF programs as an additional source of low-cost capital to help meet the United States'
growing water infrastructure needs and address key priorities. Entities with complex water and
wastewater projects are attracted to the WIFIA program and EPA will work to provide assistance
to a diverse set of projects.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.2, Provide Clean and Safe Water in
EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. The FY 2019 request of $20 million includes the funds
necessary to finance WIFIA drinking water and wastewater infrastructure projects (following the
requirements of the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 and OMB Circulars A-11 and A-129).
While the WIFIA program provides expansive project eligibilities, particular project attributes will
be emphasized in the project selection process. These attributes will be identified in the Notice of
Funding Availability, published after appropriations, and may include attributes such as the extent
of private financing, the ability to serve regions with significant water resource challenges, the
regional or national significance, the likelihood that the project can proceed at an earlier date due
to WIFIA financing, and the extent to which the project uses new or innovative approaches, among
others.
Of the total $20 million request to implement the WIFIA program, $3 million is for EPA's
management and operation administrative expenses, including contract support and associated
payroll for 12 FTE. The request level coupled with the fee expenditure authority allows EPA to
undertake the independent aspects of loan intake and origination; project technical evaluation,
including credit review, engineering feasibility review, and loan term negotiation; risk
management; portfolio management and surveillance; and loan servicing for an initial set of
projects. The funds associated with the management and operation of the program will be available
for two years.
The FY 2019 budget also includes authority to use fee revenue as outlined in Water Resources
Reform and Development Act (WRRDA), Sections 5029(a), 5030 (b), and 5030(c). EPA plans to
collect fees in FY 2019. Fee revenue is for the cost of contracting with expert services such as
financial advisory, legal advisory, and engineering firms. The WIFIA program fee expenditure
authority would be in addition to the $3 million request for management and operations
administrative expenses.
3 For more information: https://www.epa.gov/wifia/wifia-fy-2017-selected-projects-sutiimary-factsheets.
590
-------
Performance Measure Targets:
FY 2018
FY 2019
(INFRA-01) Billions of non-federal dollars leveraged by EPA water
Target
Target
infrastructure finance programs (CWSRF, DWSRF and WIFIA).
8
8
Work under the Infrastructure Assistance: Drinking Water State Revolving Fund, Infrastructure
Assistance: Clean Water State Revolving Fund, and the Water Infrastructure Finance and
Innovation program projects all support performance measure (INFRA-01) Number of non-federal
dollars leveraged by EPA water infrastructure finance programs (CWSRF, DWSRF and WIFIA).
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+$675.0) This change to fixed and other costs is an increase due to the recalculation of
base workforce costs for existing FTE due to adjustments in salary, essential workforce
support, and benefit costs.
• (+$6,393.0) This program change reflects an increase in the WIFIA program. This change
represents an increase to the amount of credit subsidy funding available to make loans
under this program.
Statutory Authority:
Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014, Title V, Subtitle C. Further Continuing
and Security Assistances Appropriations Act, 2017, P.L. 114-254.
591
-------
592
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest System Fund
Resource Summary Table 595
Program Projects in E-Manifest 595
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 596
RCRA: Waste Management 597
593
-------
594
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
APPROPRIATION: Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest System Fund
Resource Summary Table
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019
Pres Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018
Annualized CR
Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest
System Fund
Budget Authority
$4,915.4
$3,156.0
$.0
-$3,156.0
Total Workyears
8.0
7.9
10.0
2.1
Bill Language: E-Manifest
The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency is authorized to collect and obligate
fees in accordance with section 3024 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6939g) for fiscal
year 2019.
Note —This language is proposed under the FY 2019 Administrative Provisions.
Program Projects in E-Manifest
(Dollars in Thousands)
Program Project
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
RCRA: Waste Management
$4,915.4
$3,156.0
$0.0
-$3,156.0
TOTAL E-Manifest
$4,915.4
$3,156.0
$0.0
$3,156.0
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the
Superfund account.
595
-------
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
596
-------
RCRA: Waste Management
Program Area: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
Goal: Core Mission
Objective(s): Revitalize Land and Prevent Contamination
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2017
Actuals
FY 2018
Annualized
CR
FY 2019 Pres
Budget
FY 2019 Pres
Budget v.
FY 2018 Annualized
CR
Environmental Program & Management
$58,277.0
$58,439.0
$41,907.0
-$16,532.0
Hazardous II aslf illcclrnnic Manifest
Syslcm I 'und
S-I.VIx-l
S3.
so.o
-S3. 150.0
Total Budget Authority
$63,192.4
$61,595.0
$41,907.0
-$19,688.0
Total Workyears
310.2
333.7
213.2
-120.5
Program Project Description:
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) requires companies that ship hazardous
waste to track and report the estimated five million shipments each year. The Hazardous Waste
Electronic Manifest Establishment Act (e-Manifest Act, Public Law 112-195), enacted on October
5, 2012, required EPA to develop a fee-based electronic hazardous waste manifest system.
EPA estimates the e-Manifest system will reduce the burden associated with paper manifests by
between 300,000 and 700,000 hours, saving state and industry users more than $90 million
annually, once electronic manifests are widely adopted.1 The e-Manifest system will provide better
knowledge of waste generation and final disposition; enhanced access to manifest information;
and greater transparency for the public about hazardous waste shipments.
In FY 2014, Congress established the "Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest System Fund" to
carry out the activities necessary to implement the e-Manifest program, including system
development, fee collection authority, rulemaking, and advisory committee establishment. The
collected fees will support the continued development and operation of the program.
FY 2019 Activities and Performance Plan:
Work in this program directly supports Goal 1/Objective 1.3, Revitalize Land and Prevent
Contamination in EPA's FY 2018 - 2022 Strategic Plan. In FY 2019, EPA will operate the e-
Manifest system and the Agency anticipates collecting and depositing approximately $39 million
in e-Manifest user fees into the Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest System Fund. Fees will be
utilized for the operation of the system and necessary program expenses. The authority to collect
and spend fees requires authorization from Congress in annual appropriations bills.
1 From a 2009 programmatic estimate, cited in Hazardous Waste Management System; Modification of the Hazardous Waste
Manifest System; Electronic Manifests; Final Rule, 40 CFR § 260,262, 263,264, 265, and 271.
597
-------
In FY 2019, EPA plans to perform the following key activities:
• Operate the e-Manifest system and have it accept both electronic and paper manifests;
• Continue to provide outreach to stakeholders on the e-Manifest system;
• Implement appropriate accounting and financial reporting interfaces needed to collect and
manage user fees, manage and adjust fees as appropriate, and comply with the auditing
requirements of the Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest Act;
• Continue to hold periodic meetings of the e-Manifest Advisory Board, consisting of state
and industry stakeholders and IT experts, to provide input on system operation and
implementation of the user fee regulation; and
• Continue to develop and enhance the e-Manifest system software to expand capabilities,
improve user acceptance, and enhance overall program efficiencies.
Performance Measure Targets:
Currently there are no performance measures specific to this program.
FY 2019 Change from FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution (Dollars in Thousands):
• (+10.0 FTE) This program change reflects the total number of reimbursable FTE that will
support and enhance the e-Manifest program in FY 2019.
• (-$3,156.0/ -7.9 FTE) This program change shifts funding for the program from annual
appropriations to e-Manifest user fee collections. Fee collections are expected to begin in
quarter four of FY 2018 and will be fully fee-funded in FY 2019.
Statutory Authority:
Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and the
Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest Establishment Act, 42 United States Code 6901 et seq. -
Sections 3004, 3005, 3024, 8001.
598
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Performance Measures
Performance Measures 601
599
-------
600
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
Objective 1.1 - Improve Air Quality: Work with states and tribes to accurately measure air quality and ensure that more Americans are
living and working in areas that meet high air quality standards.
Strategic Measure - By September 30,2022, reduce the number of nonattainment areas to 1011.
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM NA1) Number of Nonattainment Areas.
155
138
Additional Information: For this measure, nonattainment areas are areas that EPA has determined do not meet a primary or secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS), or that contribute to air quality in a nearby area that does not meet a non-revoked primary or secondary NAAQS. Focusing efforts on reducing the number of
nonattainment areas will help ensure that states and EPA, in the spirit of cooperative federalism, prioritize taking timely and necessary actions to improve air quality in
nonattainment areas through the implementation of permanent and enforceable pollution control measures, so that states can submit, and EPA can approve, redesignation
requests for areas once they attain a NAAQS. This measure tracks the status of the baseline of 166 areas that were designated nonattainment and listed in 40 CFR Part 81 as of
the end of FY 2017. Areas designated nonattainment after October 1, 2017 are not included in baseline. For multi-state nonattaimnent areas, all state portions of the area must be
redesignated to attainment for the area to be removed from the list of nonattaimnent areas.
(PM NA2) Percent of U.S. Population Living in Nonattainment Areas.
36
34
Additional Information: The percent of the U.S. population living in a nonattaimnent area represents the number of people out of the total U.S. population living in an area that
is designated nonattaimnent for at least one of the NAAQS. If an area is designated nonattaimnent for multiple NAAQS, the population residing in the area is counted only once.
For example, the Los Angeles area is currently nonattaimnent for five NAAQS, but the population living in the area is counted only once. This measure tracks population living
in areas that remain in nonattaimnent from the baseline population of 37 percent living in nonattaimnent areas and listed in 40 CFR Part 81 as of the end of FY 2017. Areas
designated nonattaimnent after October 1, 2017 are not included in the baseline. The data source for this measure is EPA's own "Summary Nonattaimnent Area Population
Exposure Report," available on the EPA's Green Book website (https://www.epa.gov/green-book), which groups nonattaimnent areas by geographic locations and estimates the
total population for nonattainment areas for a single NAAQS, and across all NAAQS. The percent of the estimated population for nonattaimnent areas and across all NAAQS is
compared to the U.S. population based on the 2010 census.
(PM DV) Percent of measured air quality improvement in counties not meeting the NAAQS from the 2016 baseline.
Additional Information: This measure shows progress in reducing pollutant concentrations in counties not meeting one or more NAAQS relative to the 2016 calculated
baseline. The measure is presented as the aggregate percent change in design value concentrations - a statistic that describes the air quality status of a given location relative to
the NAAQS - since the baseline year. The aggregate percent change is weighted by the number of counties violating for each pollutant so more weight is given to pollutants
with more violating counties. All counties met the NAAQS for carbon monoxide and nitrogen dioxide in 2016, so those two pollutants are not considered in this measure. The
other criteria pollutants (ozone, PM2.5, PM10, sulfur dioxide, and lead) are part of this measure. For ozone and PM2.5, targets are based on predictions of future year
concentrations resulting from the Community Multi-Scale Air Quality model which estimates the impact of existing and future control strategies. For the other pollutants
(PM10. sulfur dioxide, and lead), such modeling predictions are unavailable. Therefore, targets for those pollutants are based a regression curve using historical data. The results
1 The baseline is 166 nonattainment areas as of 10/1/2017.
601
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget
February 12,2018
for this measure are updated annually based on design values computed from actual monitored concentrations. Counties are used for this measure to provide finer resolution in
the air quality data.
(PM SIP) Number of SIPs acted on by the regional offices.
150
175
Additional Information: The Clean Air Act (CAA) requires states to develop a general plan to attain and maintain the NAAQS in all areas of the country and a specific plan to
attain the standards for each area designated nonattainment for a NAAQS. These plans, known as State Implementation Plans (SIPs), are developed by state and local air quality
management agencies and submitted to EPA for approval. SIPs vary in type and complexity. The CAA requires EPA to review SIP submittals consistent with applicable
requirements, and to take action on submissions within 18 months of receipt (EPA has up to six months to determine whether submissions are complete, and 12 months to act
upon completed submissions) before they are considered backlogged. Each year, EPA identifies the number of active SIPs, current and backlogged, and considers a range of
anticipated incoming SIPs for that year. The number of SIPs changes year to year depending on actions taken in the prior year as well as new SIP submittals. The estimated
number of actions will also vary year to year depending on the status of EPA rulemakings, state priorities for which SIPs they want acted on, and potential new SIPs or SIP
revisions. As of October 1, 2017, there were 346 backlogged SIPs. The targets for this measure are annual (non-cumulative) numbers.
(PM M92) Cumulative percentage reduction in the number of days with Air Quality Index (AQI) values over 100 since 2003, weighted
by population and AQI value.
67
70
Additional Information: The AQI is an index for reporting daily air quality. An AQI value of 100 generally corresponds to the NAAQS for each of the five pollutants (o/one.
particulate matter, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen dioxide) included in the index. When AQI values are above 100, air quality is considered to be unhealthy for
certain sensitive groups of people and then for everyone as AQI values get higher. This measure assigns more weight to higher AQI values and counties with more people.
Because ozone and PM2.5 typically account for the vast majority of AQI values above 100, this measure largely tracks changes in those two pollutants. The targets for this
measure are based on a regression curve using historical data. Refreshed data are included in the calculation of FY 2018 and FY 2019 targets. The results are updated annually
based on the actual monitored concentrations.
(PM CRT) Number of certificates of conformity issued that demonstrate that the respective engine, vehicle, equipment, component, or
system conforms to all of the applicable emission requirements and may be entered into commerce.
5,200
5,275
Additional Information: The CAA requires that engines, vehicles, equipment, components, or systems receive a certificate of conformity which demonstrates compliance with
the applicable requirements prior to introduction to U.S. commerce. This measure is the number of these certificates issued in a given year. EPA reviews all submitted requests
and issues certificates of conformity when the manufacturer has demonstrated compliance with all applicable requirements. This measure illustrates EPA's annual certification
workload. The number of certification requests is dictated by the product planning of manufacturers and will fluctuate from year to year.
(PM NOX) Ozone Season emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) from electric power generation sources (tons).
590,000
580,000
Additional Information: The EPA operates seven nationwide and/or multi-state Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs that help address air pollutants from large stationary
sources. This measure tracks the annual ozone season nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions (in tons) from sources in four of those programs: an annual NOx trading program and two
ozone season NOx trading programs operated by EPA on behalf of 27 states in the eastern U.S. under Title I of the Clean Air Act, as well as a national NOx emissions reduction
program for the power sector operated by EPA under Title IV of the Clean Air Act, the Acid Rain Program.
Nitrogen oxides (NOx) are precursors for fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and ground-level ozone (03). Researchers have associated PM2.5 and 03 exposure with adverse
health effects in toxicological, clinical, and epidemiological studies. Lowering exposure to PM2.5 and 03 contributes to human health benefits. The ozone season corresponds to
the warm summer months when ozone formation is highest (May 1 - September 30). Reductions in NOx emissions during the ozone season help areas attain ozone standards.
602
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
2015 is the baseline of actual emissions established with the implementation of the Cross-State Air Pollution Update Rule. In 2015, sources in EPA's nitrogen oxide (NOx)
trading programs emitted 616,689 tons of NOx during ozone season.
Other Core Work supporting Objective 1.1.
Performance Measures
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM G18) Percentage of Annual Greenhouse Gas Emission Reports verified by EPA before publication.
65
65
Additional Information: The GHG Reporting Program has 41 sectors that include more than 8,000 facilities and suppliers. Both facilities and suppliers are required to report
their data annually by March 31st. After submission of the data, the agency conducts a verification review that lasts approximately 150 days and includes a combination of
electronic checks, staff review, and follow-up with facilities to identify any reporting errors and have them corrected before publication. The 150-day period includes 60 days
for EPA to review reports and identify potential data quality issues, 75 days for reporters to resolve these issues, and 15 days for EPA to review responses or resubmitted
reports. EPA typically publishes the data by October 1st each year (see: https://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting).
(PM S01) Remaining US Consumption of hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), chemicals that deplete the Earth's protective ozone layer,
measured in tons of Ozone Depleting Potential (ODP).
1,520
1,520
Additional Information: The base of comparison for assessing progress is the domestic consumption cap of Class II HCFCs as set by the Parties to the Montreal Protocol. Each
ozone-depleting substance is weighted based on the damage it does to the stratospheric ozone layer or, its ozone-depletion potential (ODP). Beginning on January 1, 1996, the
cap was set at the sum of 2.8% of the domestic ODP-weighted consumption of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) in 1989 plus the ODP-weighted level of HCFCs in 1989 (a total of
15,240 tons). As defined by the Montreal Protocol, the amount of consumption equals the amount of production plus imports minus exports.
(PM R35) Percentage level of readiness of radiation program personnel and assets to support federal radiological emergency response
and recovery operations.
80
80
Additional Information: Level of readiness of radiation personnel and assets based on preparedness metrics such as exercise and drill performance, training completed,
procedures developed, and equipment maintained. The maximum level of readiness is 100% and is dependent upon an annual evaluation of specific criteria that identify
progress in six categories: 1) RadNet; 2) Field Support; 3) Analytical Support; 4) Public Information; 5) Data Management; and 6) Science Team.
(PM R36) Average number of days before availability of quality assured ambient radiation air monitoring data during an emergency.
0.3
0.3
Additional Information: EPA's RadNet system lias more than 130 radiation air monitors in 50 states. RadNet runs 24 hours a day, 7 days a week collecting near-real-time
measurements of gamma radiation. Over time, RadNet sample testing and monitoring results demonstrate the normal background levels of enviromnental radiation. In
emergencies, EPA provides quality assured data as quickly as possible. In 2005, the average time between collection and availability of data for release by EPA during
emergency operations was 2.5 days.
603
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
Objective 1.2 - Provide for Clean and Safe Water: Ensure waters are clean through improved water infrastructure and, in partnership
with states and tribes, sustainably manage programs to support drinking water, aquatic ecosystems, and recreational, economic, and
subsistence activities.
Strategic Measure - By September 30,2022, reduce the number of community water systems out of compliance with health-based standards to 2,7002.
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM DW-01) Number of community water systems out of compliance with health-based standards.
3,510
3,420
Additional Information: This measure tracks community water systems (CWSs) out of compliance with the health-based National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
(Maximum Contaminant Level or treatment technique) that overlap any part of the year. A CWS is a public water system that supplies water to the same population year-round.
There are approximately 50,000 CWSs. Data are derived from the Safe Drinking Water Information System Federal Data Warehouse (SDWIS-FED), which contains
information about violations of the NPDWRs by public water systems as reported to EPA by the primacy agencies (states and tribes with EPA-delegated enforcement
responsibility).
(PM DW-02) Number of community water systems without a sanitary survey within the last three years (five years for outstanding
performance).
4,473
4,373
Additional Information: A sanitary survey is an on-site review of the water sources, facilities, equipment, operation, and maintenance of a public water system for the purpose
of evaluating the adequacy of the facilities for producing and distributing safe drinking water. The Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (IESWTR) and the Ground
Water Rule (GWR) require primacy agencies to conduct a sanitary survey of each CWS at least once every three years (or every five years for CWSs with outstanding
performance).
(PM DW-03) Percentage of population served by CWSs that receive drinking water that meets all applicable health-based drinking
water standards through approaches including effective treatment and source water protection.
92
92
Additional Information: This measure tracks violations from currently CWSs that overlap any part of the year. Data are derived from SDWIS-FED.
(PM DW-04) Percentage of the population in Indian Country served by community water systems that receive drinking water that meets
all applicable health-based drinking water standards.
87
Additional Information: This measure tracks violations from currently open and closed CWSs in Indian country that overlap any part of the year. Data are derived from
SDWIS-FED.
2 Baseline is 3,600 community water systems out of compliance with health-based standards as of FY 2017.
604
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
Strategic Measure - By September 30, 2022, increase by $40 billion the non-federal dollars leveraged by EPA water infrastructure finance programs
(CWSRF, DWSRF and WIFIA)3.
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PMINFRA-01) Billions of non-federal dollars leveraged by EPA water infrastructure finance programs (CWSRF, DWSRF and
WIFIA).
Additional Information: Combined, the three primary water infrastructure programs. Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF), Clean Water State Revolving Fund
(CWSRF), and Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) program, represent the largest federal source of funds to address this critical component of our
nation's drinking water and clean water infrastructure. Non-federal dollars are loans made from recycled loan repayments, bond proceeds, state match, and interest earnings.
Baseline is $32 billion in non-federal dollars leveraged from the DWSRF and CWSRF between FY 2013 and FY 2017. The baseline does not include WIFIA leveraged dollars.
(PM INFRA-02) Fund utilization rate for the DWSRF.
96
97
Additional Information: The fund utilization rate shows how many dollars of assistance were provided for each dollar made available for projects. It measures all funds (federal
and non-federal) signed into loans against all funds (federal and non-federal) made available for projects.
(PM INFRA-03) Fund utilization rate for the CWSRF.
98
98
Additional Information: The fund utilization rate shows how many dollars of assistance were provided for each dollar made available for projects. It measures all funds (federal
and non-federal) signed into loans against all funds (federal and non-federal) made available for projects. Data are collected annually from all 51 state CWSRF programs (50
states and Puerto Rico), reported by municipal and other facility operators, and EPA's regional staff to the National Information Management System (NIMS) database. In FY
2002, the fund utilization rate was 91 percent.
(PM INFRA-04) Number of American Indian and Alaska Native homes provided access to safe drinking water in coordination with
other federal agencies (cumulative).
148,100
152,700
Additional Information: This measure tracks the number of homes with access to potable water from data obtained from the Indian Health Service's (IHS) Project Data System
(PDS). There was a total of 400,096 American Indian and Alaska Native homes as of January 1, 2017.
(PM INFRA-05) Number of American Indian and Alaska Native homes provided access to basic sanitation in coordination with other
federal agencies (cumulative).
105,764
110,464
Additional Information: This measure tracks the number of homes provided access to basic sanitation (wastewater treatment service) from data obtained from IHS's PDS.
There was a total of 400,096 American Indian and Alaska Native homes as of January 1, 2017.
3 Baseline is $32 billion in non-federal dollars leveraged from the CWSRF and DWSRF between FY 2013 and FY 2017 (i.e., loans made from recycled loan repayments, bond proceeds, state match,
and interest earnings). The baseline does not include WIFIA leveraged dollars because the program's first loans are anticipated to close in FY 2018.
605
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
Strategic Measure - By September 30,2022, reduce the number of square miles of watershed with surface water not meeting standards by 37,000
square miles4.
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM SWP-01) Reduction in the number of square miles of watershed with surface water not meeting standards (cumulative).
No Target
Established
9,000
Additional Information: This measure will track the progress of water quality standards attainment in waters previously identified as impaired in the Integrated Report as of
October 1, 2018. Progress will be evident by a positive trend in previously impaired waters attaining water quality standards. Water quality standards attaimnent means that 1)
the impairments have been effectively removed by corrective actions (i.e. restoration efforts) and 2) the waterbody now either fully supports the use or meets the water quality
criterion for that particular pollutant or stressor for which it had been impaired. Data will be tracked in the Assessment and Total Maximum Daily Load Tracking and
Implementation System (ATTAINS). States will submit to EPA their Integrated Report which will include information on the status of their waters, and state geospatial data
will be used to calculate the measure. No result will be reported in FY 2018. Draft baseline: 464,020 square miles of watershed with surface water not meeting standards.
(PM TMDL-01) Square miles associated with state priority waters addressed by a TMDL, other restoration plan, or protection
approach.
35,000
50,000
Additional Information: This measure tracks state priority waters projected to have a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL), alternative restoration or protection plan in place.
EPA, states and tribes cooperatively developed A Long-Term Vision for Assessment, Restoration and Protection under the Clean Water Act
Section 303(d) Program, which encourages focused attention on priority waters and acknowledges that states have flexibility in using available tools - TMDLs,
alternative restoration plans, and protection approaches - to restore and protect water quality. The goal is to have 100% of priority waters with plans approved or accepted by
2022. Data are tracked in ATTAINS. In 2017, there were 100,275 square miles of state priority waters.
(PM NPDES-01) Percentage of high-priority state NPDES permits that are issued in the fiscal year.
80
80
Additional Information: Results are calculated by dividing the number of high-priority National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits issued during the
current fiscal year by the total number of permits selected by states as high-priority for that fiscal year. High-priority permits are those in need of reissuance that have been
identified by states as environmentally or programmatically significant. Data are derived from EPA's Permit Management Oversight System (PMOS) database, which
incorporates data from EPA's NPDES Database, and the Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS-NPDES).
(PM NPDES-02) Percentage of high-priority EPA and state NPDES permits (including tribal) that are issued in the fiscal year.
80
80
Additional Information: Results are calculated by dividing the number of high-priority National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits issued during the
current fiscal year to the total number of permits selected as high-priority for the current fiscal year. High-priority permits are those in need of reissuance that have been
identified by states and EPA Regions as environmentally or programmatically significant. Data are derived from EPA's Permit Management Oversight System (PMOS)
database, which incorporates data from EPA's NPDES Database, and the Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS-NPDES).
' Draft baseline is 464,020 square miles of impaired waters as of 9/2017, to be updated in 10/2018.
606
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget
February 12,2018
Objective 1.3 - Revitalize Land and Prevent Contamination: Provide better leadership and management to properly clean up
contaminated sites to revitalize and return the land back to communities.
Strategic Measure - By September 30, 2022, make 255 additional Superfund sites ready for anticipated use (RAU) site-wide5.
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM S10) Number of Superfund sites made ready for anticipated use site-wide.
51
51
Additional Information: The sitewide ready for anticipated use (SWRAU) measure tracks EPA's progress in cleaning up and preparing Superfund sites for reuse, while
ensuring human health and enviromnental protection. It measures the number of construction complete National Priorities List (NPL) or Superfund Alternative Approach (SAA)
sites for which all cleanup goals in the Record(s) of Decision (ROD) or other remedy decision document(s) have been achieved for media that may affect current and reasonably
anticipated future land uses of the site, so that there are no unacceptable risks; and that all institutional or other controls required in the ROD or other remedy decision
document(s) have been put in place. The SWRAU determination is made directly in Superfund Enterprise Management System (SEMS) once it is determined that the site meets
all required criteria and has been approved as such by appropriate EPA regional personnel. The universe of sites tracked for this performance measure includes final and deleted
NPL sites and, since FY 2014, non-NPL sites with SAA agreements. Through FY 2017, EPA ensured that a total of 836 sites, including 828 final and deleted sites and 8 non-
NPL sites with SAA agreements in place, met the criteria to be determined SWRAU. As of the end of FY 2017, there were 1,342 sites on the NPL and 51 non-NPL sites with
active SAA agreements.
(PM 115) Number of Superfund remedial site assessments completed.
650
580
Additional Information: This measure tracks the number of screening-level assessments at sites submitted to the Superfund program for potential placement on the National
Priorities List. The measure includes the number of site assessment reports completed at non-federal sites by EPA and its state and tribal partners, and the number of EPA
reviews of site assessment reports completed by other federal agencies at federal facility sites. Assessment data are tracked in SEMS. Assessment results are used to determine
whether cleanup may be warranted under a Superfund managed or monitored program. The SEMS active site inventory included approximately 1,750 sites that needed one or
more assessments at the beginning of FY 2018, plus around 300 new sites are assessed each year for potential inclusion in this inventory.
(PM 170) Number of remedial action projects completed at Superfund sites.
95
95
Additional Information: This performance measure augments the construction completion measure and documents the completion of a discrete scope of activities supporting a
Superfund cleanup. The measure demonstrates incremental progress in reducing risk to human health and the enviromnent at Superfund cleanups. Multiple remedial action
projects may be necessary prior to achieving site-wide construction completion. Regional remedial action project completion (RAPC) data are tracked in SEMS. The universe of
sites tracked for this performance measure includes final and deleted NPL sites and, since FY 2014, non-NPL sites with a Superfund Alternative Agreement.
(PM 141) Number of Superfund sites with remedy construction completed.
11
11
Additional Information: This performance measure tracks site-wide completion of physical construction of all cleanup actions, including actions to address all immediate
threats and to bring all long-term threats under control. EPA regional offices document construction completion (CC) in a Preliminary Close Out Report (PCOR) which is
' By the end of FY 2017, 836 Superfund sites had been made RAU site-wide.
607
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
reviewed by EPA headquarters. The PCOR signature date is entered in SEMS by the region and EPA headquarters enters the achievement of the CC in SEMS. The universe of
sites tracked for this performance measure includes final and deleted NPL sites and, since FY 2014, non-NPL sites with Superfund Alternative Agreements.
(PM 151) Number of Superfund sites with human exposures brought under control.
Additional Information: This performance measure documents progress achieved in controlling unacceptable human exposures to contamination at sites and denotes a site-wide
accomplishment. Human exposure determinations for sites can change over time as conditions across portions (operable units) of a site change. EPA regional offices enter
human exposure determinations and supporting data into SEMS. It is important to note that this performance measure is a net accomplishment as sites can shift between human
exposure under control to human exposure not under control or human exposure insufficient data. The change in status often occurs when a previously unknown exposure
pathway (e.g., vapor intrusion) or contaminant is discovered and a reasonable expectation exists that people could be exposed or there is insufficient data to make such a
determination until further investigation takes place. The universe of sites tracked for this performance measure includes final and deleted National Priorities List (NPL) sites
and since FY 2014, non-NPL sites with Superfund Alternative Approach agreements. Through FY 2017, EPA ensured that a total of 1,475 sites, including 1,439 final and
deleted NPL sites and 36 non-NPL sites with SAA agreements in place, met the criteria to be determined human exposure under control.
(PM 152) Number of Superfund sites with contaminated groundwater migration brought under control.
11
11
Additional Information: This performance measure documents whether groundwater contamination is below protective, risk-based levels or, if not, whether the migration of
contaminated groundwater is stabilized and there is no unacceptable discharge to surface water. This performance measure denotes a site-wide accomplishment and also reflects
a net accomplishment as sites can shift between groundwater migration under control to groundwater migration not under control or to groundwater migration insufficient data
determinations. Monitoring is conducted to confirm that affected groundwater remains in the original area of contamination. The change in status often occurs when data from a
remedial investigation indicate that contaminated groundwater migration is occurring at a site. Regions enter groundwater migration determinations and supporting data into
SEMS. The universe of sites tracked for this performance measure includes final and deleted NPL sites and, since FY 2014, non-NPL sites with Superfund Alternative
Approach agreements. Through FY 2017, EPA ensured that a total of 1,169 sites, including 1,143 final and deleted NPL sites and 26 sites with SAA agreements in place, met
the criteria to be determined groundwater migration under control.
(PM 137) Number of Superfund removals completed.
175
175
Additional Information: This measure is a tabulation of Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) removal-related hazardous
waste cleanups, known as Superfund removal actions, including those that are Superfund-lead and Potentially Responsible Party (PRP)-lead. There is no pre-established
universe of removal sites, as removal actions occur after a release has occurred. Data are tracked in SEMS.
(PM FF1) Percentage of Superfund federal facility sites construction complete.
83
85
Additional Information: This performance measure represents the percent construction complete of the 174 federal facility Superfund NPL sites. The measure is calculated in
SEMS using data from the 2,276 operable units (OUs) at federal facilities. The measure is calculated based on the average of three factors: (1) percentage of OUs construction
complete; (2) percentage of actions within an OU complete: and (3) percentage complete of the planned duration of those actions. The number of OUs being addressed has
increased recently as a result of site discovery, the Military Munitions Response program and emerging contaminants. The addition of OUs leads to a growing denominator, thus
reducing the overall percentage result reported.
608
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
Strategic Measure - By September 30, 2022, make 3,420 additional brownfields sites RAU6
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM B30) Number of brownfields sites made ready for anticipated use.
684
684
Additional Information: This performance measure tracks the number of properties/sites benefiting from EPA brownfields funding that have been assessed and determined not
to require cleanup, or where cleanup has been completed and institutional controls are in place if required, as reported by cooperative agreement recipients into the Assessment,
Cleanup and Redevelopment Exchange System (ACRES) database. This activity is expected to result in additional sites available for productive reuse, while also helping to
quantify the impact of funding from EPA's brownfields program.
(PM B29) Number of brownfield properties assessed.
1,300
1,300
Additional Information: This performance measure tracks the number of properties that have been environmentally assessed for the first time using EPA brownfields funding,
as reported by cooperative agreement recipients into the Assessment, Cleanup and Redevelopment Exchange System (ACRES) database. This activity will result in identifying
which brownfields are ready to be redeveloped for productive reuse, and which brownfields need to be cleaned up to a regulatory risk-based standard prior to redevelopment.
(PM B32) Number of properties cleaned up using brownfields funding.
130
130
Additional Information: This performance measure tracks the number of properties that have been cleaned up to a regulatory risk based standard using EPA brownfields
funding, as reported by cooperative agreement recipients into the Assessment, Cleanup and Redevelopment Exchange System (ACRES) database. This typically occurs under
one of two conditions: (1) a clean or no further action letter (or its equivalent) has been issued by the state or tribe under its voluntary response program (or its equivalent) for
cleanup activities at the property; or (2) the cooperative agreement recipient or property owner, upon the recommendation of an enviromnental professional, has determined and
documented that on-property work is finished. Ongoing operation and maintenance activities or monitoring may continue after a cleanup completion designation lias been made.
(PM B34) Jobs leveraged from brownfields activities.
7,000
7,000
Additional Information: This performance measure tracks the number of cleanup and redevelopment jobs leveraged by assessment or cleanup activities conducted with EPA
brownfields funding, as reported by cooperative agreement recipients at a specific property into the Assessment, Cleanup and Redevelopment Exchange System (ACRES)
database. These are actual numbers reported by recipients that are based on jobs resulting from enviromnental work at the site or the redevelopment of the site.
(PM B37) Billions of dollars of cleanup and redevelopment funds leveraged at brownfields sites.
1.1
1.1
Additional Information: This performance measure tracks the number of additional dollars leveraged by assessment or cleanup activities conducted with EPA brownfields
funding, as reported by cooperative agreement recipients at a specific property into the Assessment, Cleanup and Redevelopment Exchange System (ACRES) database.
3 By the end of FY 2017, 5,993 brownfields properties/sites had been made RAU.
609
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
Strategic Measure - By September 30, 2022, make 536 additional Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) corrective action facilities RAU7.
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM RSRAU) Number of RCRA corrective action facilities made ready for anticipated use.
75
91
Additional Information: This performance measure tracks the number of RCRA corrective action facilities made ready for anticipated use (RAU). To be determined RAU,
facilities must meet the following criteria: human exposure under control, final cleanup goals achieved for media that would impact the anticipated use, and if needed, controls
in place to ensure long-term protectiveness. The universe for this measure are the 3,779 facilities subject to RCRA corrective action. Information will be entered into RCRAInfo
by authorized states and/or EPA regional offices overseeing cleanups. This measure is a latter step in the progression toward completing facility cleanup.
(PM CA1) Percentage of RCRA corrective action facilities with human exposures to toxins under control.
94
95
Additional Information: This performance measure tracks the percentage of RCRA corrective action facilities that have met the RCRA enviromnental indicator for human
exposure under control. The universe is the agency's list of 3,779 high priority facilities. Information will be entered into RCRAInfo by authorized states and/or EPA regional
offices overseeing cleanups. This measure is an early step in the progression toward completing facility cleanup.
(PM CA2) Percentage of RCRA corrective action facilities with migration of contaminated groundwater under control.
89
Additional Information: This performance measure tracks the percentage of RCRA corrective action facilities that have met the RCRA enviromnental indicator for
groundwater migration under control. The universe is the agency's list of 3,779 high priority facilities. Information will be entered into RCRAInfo by authorized states and/or
EPA regional offices overseeing cleanups. This measure is an early step in the progression toward completing facility cleanup.
(PM CA5) Percentage of RCRA corrective action facilities with final remedies constructed.
70
71
Additional Information: This performance measure tracks the percentage of RCRA corrective action facilities with final remedies constructed. The universe is the agency's list
of 3,779 high priority facilities. Information will be entered into RCRAInfo by authorized states and/or EPA regional offices overseeing cleanups. This measure is mid-term step
in the progression toward completing facility cleanup.
(PM CA6) Percentage of RCRA corrective action facilities with corrective action performance standards attained.
33
34
Additional Information: The performance measure tracks the percentage of RCRA corrective action facilities with have met final corrective action standards. Facilities at this
milestone may still require long-term controls to ensure protectiveness. The universe is the agency's list of 3,779 high priority facilities. Information will be entered into
RCRAInfo by authorized states and/or EPA regional offices overseeing cleanups. This measure is a late step in the progression towards completing facility cleanup.
(PM HW5) Number of renewals or clean-closures at permitted hazardous waste facilities.
64
64
Additional Information: This performance measure tracks RCRA hazardous waste permit renewals or clean-closures in the universe of permitted facilities using EPA's
RCRAInfo system. This does not include all permit maintenance since permit modifications cannot be projected and are not included. Maintaining updated permits ensures that
permitted facilities have consistent and protective standards to prevent release; proper standards for waste management can protect human health, prevent land
' By the end of FY 2017,1,232 RCRA corrective action facilities had been made RAU site-wide.
610
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
contamination/degradation and other releases, and avoid future cleanups and associated substantial costs. At the end of FY 2017, 1,081 (81 percent) of a universe of 1,340
permitted facilities had up-to-date permits.
(PM HW4) Percentage of hazardous waste units with initial controls in place to prevent release.
45
48
Additional Information: This performance measure tracks the facilities that need an initial permit or other initial control. This goal tracks the percentage of those units that have
been permitted, clean-closed, or otherwise had initial controls to prevent release (using EPA's RCRAInfo system). Issuance of controls decreases the risk of future releases and
enhances protection of human health and the enviromnent. At the end of FY 2017, 208 (42 percent) of 500 facilities in need of controls had initial controls (baseline of facilities
in need of controls was assessed in 2014).
Strategic Measure - By September 30, 2022, complete 56,000 additional leaking underground storage tank (LUST) cleanups that meet risk-based
standards for human exposure and groundwater migration8.
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM 112) Number of LUST cleanups completed that meet risk-based standards for human exposure and groundwater migration.
11,200
11,200
Additional Information: This performance measure tracks the number of petroleum-contaminated sites where the states, tribes and EPA have completed cleanup activities. The
states and EPA regional offices report the number of cleanups completed within the reporting period (every 6 months based on the fiscal year). The state totals and the EPA
regional totals of cleanups completed in Indian country are added together to determine the national number of cleanups completed for the reporting period and the fiscal year.
EPA uses the LUST4 database to track progress. The universe totals of confirmed releases pending cleanup will change over time as releases are found and cleanups are
completed.
(PM 113) Number of LUST cleanups completed in Indian country that meet risk-based standards for human exposure and groundwater
migration.
16
16
Additional Information: This performance measure tracks the number of petroleum-contaminated sites in Indian country where EPA has completed cleanup activities. EPA
regional offices report the number of cleanups completed within the reporting period (every 6 months based on the fiscal year). The EPA regional totals of cleanups completed
in Indian country determine the national number of cleanups completed for the reporting period and the fiscal year. EPA uses the LUST4 database to track progress. The
universe totals of confirmed releases pending cleanup will change over time as releases are found and cleanups are completed.
(PM 114) Number of confirmed releases at UST facilities in Indian country.
11
11
Additional Information: This measure tracks the number of new confirmed releases at underground storage (UST) facilities in Indian country. This measure has a direct relation
to releases needing to be cleaned up ("backlog" of cleanup sites). EPA regional offices report the number of confirmed releases within the reporting period (every 6 months
based on the fiscal year). EPA uses the LUST4 database to track progress. The universe totals will change over time as releases are found and confirmed.
5 By the end of FY 2017, 469,898 LUST cleanups had been completed.
611
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
Other Core Work supporting Objective 1.3.
Performance Measures
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM PCB) Number of approvals issued for polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) cleanup, storage and disposal activities.
160
160
Additional Information: This performance measure tracks the number of PCB approvals under TSCA Section 761. The approvals are issued by EPA and tracked by EPA
regional offices and headquarters. There is no universe for the number of approvals because facilities choose to submit approvals, as needed. PCB permit approval activities are
not delegated to the states.
(PM 438) Number of inspections conducted at oil facilities subject to the Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure regulation.
410
410
Additional Information: This performance measure tracks the number of EPA inspections occurring at Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) facilities. There
are approximately 540,000 facilities in the SPCC universe. Data are tracked in the EPA's Oil database.
(PM 437) Number of inspections conducted at oil facilities subject to the Facility Response Plan regulation.
200
200
Additional Information: This performance measure tracks the number of EPA inspections occurring at Facility Response Plan (FRP) facilities across the country. There are
approximately 4,600 facilities in the FRP universe. Data are tracked in the EPA's Oil Database.
(PM CH2) Number of risk management plan inspections conducted.
175
175
Additional Information: The Risk Management Plan (RMP) program implements section 112(r) of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. The RMP program requires facilities
(approximately 12,500) that use extremely hazardous substances to develop a Risk Management Plan. The information required from facilities under the RMP program helps
local fire, police, and emergency response personnel prepare for and respond to chemical emergencies. Data are tracked in the EPA's RMP database.
612
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
Objective 1.4 - Ensure Safety of Chemicals in the Marketplace: Effectively implement the Toxic Substances Control Act, and the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, to ensure new and existing chemicals and pesticides are reviewed for their potential risks to
human health and the environment and actions are taken when necessary.
Strategic Measure - By September 30, 2022, complete all EPA-initiated TSCA risk evaluations for existing chemicals in accordance with statutory
timelines9.
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM TSCA1) Number of final EPA-initiated TSCA risk evaluations completed within statutory timelines.
No Target
Established
1
Additional Information: This measure tracks new risk evaluation activity under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), as amended in 2016 by the Frank R. Lautenberg
Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act. The risk evaluation process is the second step, following prioritization and before risk management, in EPA's existing chemical
process under the TSCA, as amended by the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act. The purpose of risk evaluation is to determine whether a chemical
substance presents an unreasonable risk to health or the enviromnent, under the conditions of use. As part of this process, EPA must evaluate both hazard and exposure, and
ensure decisions are based on the weight-of-scientific-evidence. To count toward the target, an evaluation must be completed within three years. Accordingly, the deadline for
the first 10 risk evaluations, which were commenced on December 19, 2016, is December 19, 2019. While work is already underway, no target is established for FY 2018. A
risk evaluation is considered complete when the final risk evaluation is published in the Federal Register.
Strategic Measure - By September 30, 2022, complete all TSCA risk management actions for existing chemicals in accordance with statutory
timelines10.
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM TSCA2) Number of TSCA risk management actions for existing chemicals completed within statutory timelines.
No Target
Established
Additional Information: This measure tracks new risk management actions - proposed and final rules - undertaken as a result of risk evaluations conducted under TSCA and
for certain Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic (PBT) chemicals. Statute requires EPA to propose rules under TSCA Section 6 for PBT chemicals by June 21, 2019, with
final rules to be issued by December 21, 2020. For risk management actions following identification of unreasonable risk to human health or the enviromnent in a risk
evaluation, final risk management actions must be completed within two years. While the statute allows for a two-year extension, this measure tracks the performance against
the initial deadline only. The first new risk management actions (proposed rules) for PBT chemicals under amended TSCA are expected to be completed in FY 2019. While
9 There is no baseline for this measure, as the program is operating under new statutory authority.
10 There is no baseline for this measure, as the program is operating under new statutory authority.
613
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
work is already underway, no target is established for FY 2018. This measure does not include risk management actions for chemical substances for which risk assessments
were completed prior to enactment of the Lautenberg Act.
Strategic Measure - By September 30, 2022, complete all TSCA pre-manufacture notice final determinations in accordance with statutory timelines11.
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM TSCA3) Percent of final TSCA new chemical determinations for Pre-Manufacture Notices, Significant New Use Notices and
Microbial Commercial Activity Notices completed within statutory timelines.
65
80
Additional Information: This measure tracks a subset of EPA's new chemicals review activity under TSCA, as amended by the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st
Century Act - the review of Pre-Manufacture Notices, Significant New Use Notices and Microbial Commercial Activity Notices (but not new chemicals reviews covered by
exemptions). EPA conducts these reviews prior to approving new chemicals or microbial substances in commerce, or new uses for existing chemicals that are subject to a
Significant New Use Rule, to determine whether the chemical substance or significant new use presents an unreasonable risk to human health or the enviromnent. Statute
requires that 100% of these new chemical reviews be completed within 90 days. While the statute allows for an extension of up to 90 days, this measure tracks performance
against the initial 90-day deadline only. EPA anticipates a steady increase in performance, increasing from the 11.7% actual in FY 2017, to 80% by FY 2019, and 100% by FY
2022.
Strategic Measure - By September 30, 2022, complete all cases of Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)-mandated decisions for
the pesticides registration review program12.
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM FIFRA1) Number of FIFRA decisions completed through pesticides registration review.
58
75
Additional Information: Through the Pesticide Registration Review program. EPA is reviewing each registered pesticide every 15 years to determine whether it still meets the
FIFRA standard for registration. FIFRA requires that all pesticides intended for use in the United States be registered (licensed) by the EPA to ensure that they do not cause
"unreasonable adverse effects on man or the enviromnent." FIFRA defines unreasonable adverse effects as "any unreasonable risk to man or the enviromnent, taking into
account the economic, social, and environmental costs and benefits of the use of any pesticide." By law, the EPA must complete the first 15-year cycle of registration review by
October 1, 2022. As of FY 2017, 251 decisions of a known universe of 725 cases were completed.
(PM FIFRA2) Number of FIFRA registration review draft risk assessments completed.
70
72
Additional Information: Through the Pesticide Registration Review program. EPA is reviewing each registered pesticide every 15 years to determine whether it still meets the
FIFRA standard for registration. FIFRA requires that all pesticides intended for use in the United States be registered (licensed) by the EPA to ensure that they do not cause
11 Baseline is 11.7% of determinations made within 90 days in FY 2017.
12 Baseline is 251 decisions completed by the close ofFY 2017 out of the known universe of725.
614
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget
February 12,2018
"unreasonable adverse effects on man or the environment." FIFRA defines unreasonable adverse effects as "any unreasonable risk to man or the environment taking into
account the economic, social, and environmental costs and benefits of the use of any pesticide." By law, the EPA must complete the first 15-year cycle of registration review by
October 1, 2022. As of FY 2017, 364 draft risk assessments of a known universe of 725 cases were completed.
Strategic Measure - By September 30, 2022, reduce the Pesticide Registration Improvement Act (PRIA) registration decision timeframe by an average
of 60 days.13
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM PRIA1) Average number of days to complete PRIA decisions for new active ingredients.
643
631
Additional Information: To expedite the review and licensing of pesticides new active ingredients, EPA will reduce the incidence of PRIA negotiations, improve meeting the
timeframes specified in PRIA, and expedite the overall processing of reduced risk pesticides. The baseline is an average timeframe of 655 days (range: 93-2,086 days) for PRIA
decisions for 68 new active ingredients completed in FY 2015-2017. There are 36 different PRIA categories that relate to new active ingredients, with statutory time frames
ranging from 7-24 months. Data are tracked and maintained internally by EPA.
(PM PRIA2) Average number of days exceeding the PRIA decision timeframes for new active ingredients where the original PRIA due
date was not met.
303
291
Additional Information: To expedite the review and licensing of pesticides new active ingredients, EPA will reduce the incidence of PRIA negotiations, improve meeting the
timeframes specified in PRIA, and expedite the overall processing of reduced risk pesticides. The baseline is an average of 316 days exceeding the PRIA decision timeframes in
the statute (range: 15-1,538 days) for 42 new active ingredients completed in FY 2015-2017.
(PM 091) Percentage of decisions (registration actions) completed on time (on or before PRIA or negotiated due dates).
99
99
Additional Information: The average of decisions completed on-time from FY 2014-2016 was 94%. More information on PRIA can be found on https ://www.epa. gov/pria-
fees/pria-overview-and-historv. Whereas PM PRIA1 and PM PRIA2 measure performance for new active ingredient decisions only, this measure relates to all PRIA categories
described in the fee tables in FIFRA section 33(b)(3). Additionally, FIFRA section 33(f)(5) allows that EPA and the applicant may mutually agree to extend a decision time review period.
Decisions completed on or before the negotiated due date but after the original PRIA due date are still considered "on-time" under this measure.
13 Baseline is an average timeframe of 655 days (range: 93-2,086 days) for PRIA decisions for 68 new active ingredients completed in FY 2015-2017.
615
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
GOAL 2 - COOPERATIVE FEDERALISM: REBALANCE THE POWER BETWEEN WASHINGTON AND THE STATES TO
CREATE TANGIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
Objective 2.1 - Enhance Shared Accountability: Improve environmental protection through shared governance and enhanced
collaboration with state, tribal, local, and federal partners using the full range of compliance assurance tools.
Strategic Measure - By September 30, 2022, increase the number of grant commitments achieved by states, tribes, and local communities14.
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM ST1) Number of grant commitments achieved by states, tribes, and local communities.
No Target
Established
TBD
Additional Information: Grant commitments are tasks that are jointly negotiated by EPA and the state, tribal, or local grant recipient. For this measure, EPA is only looking at
grant commitments in Performance Partnership Grants (PPGs) - a financial tool that allows states and tribes to combine separate "streams" of categorical grant funding, from
across 20 eligible categorical grants, into one multi-program grant with a single budget. The baseline, universe (number of commitments contained in PPGs) and 2019 target
will be determined in FY 2018. No target is established for FY 2018, but results will be reported.
Strategic Measure - By September 30, 2022, increase the use of alternative shared governance approaches to address state, tribal, and local community
reviews15.
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM ST2) Number of alternative shared governance approaches to address state, tribal, and local community reviews.
No Target
Established
TBD
Additional Information: EPA will work with states and tribes to find alternative approaches to shared governance, seeking to provide flexibility and streamline oversight of
state and tribal programs. Shared governance is the concept where management of federal enviromnental programs is shared with state, tribal, or local governments. The Agency
will pilot new approaches to oversight (e.g., permit reviews) where we have the legal flexibility to do so and streamline those processes by which EPA reviews and approves
state and tribal actions. An alternative shared governance approach is any change to an EPA oversight or review process, made to reflect the shared governance concept. EPA
will use Lean management system tools to identify areas where EPA and states, tribes, and local governments can streamline current oversight activities. The baseline and FY
2019 target will be determined in FY 2018. No target is established for FY 2018, but results will be reported.
14 Baseline will be determined in FY 2018.
15 Baseline will be determined in FY 2018.
616
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
Other Core Work supporting Objective 2.1.
Performance Measures
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM 409) Number of federal on-site compliance monitoring inspections and evaluations and off-site compliance monitoring activities.
10,000
10,000
Additional Information: This measure includes new data elements, such as off-site compliance monitoring activities (e.g., record reviews), not previously tracked or counted,
and reflects a recognition that states conduct the vast majority of inspections and an EPA focus on direct implementation programs.
(PM 426) Number of compliance assurance actions in accordance with EPA's civil enforcement response policies.
No Target
Established
4,000
Additional Information: This measure includes both EPA's formal civil enforcement action conclusions and informal enforcement actions. Definitions of formal and informal
enforcement vary depending on the statute but formal actions are generally used to address more serious violations while informal actions are for less serious violations. An
example of a formal enforcement action is a judicial action. An example of an informal enforcement action is a warning letter. No target is established for FY 2018, but results
will be reported.
(PM 427) Number of regulatory sectors served by national web-based compliance assistance centers.
17
18
Additional Information: As of FY 2017, EPA has 17 national web-based compliance assistance centers, providing access to information through web sites, telephone assistance
lines, and e-mail discussion groups so that businesses, colleges and universities, tribes, local governments and federal facilities can understand and comply with enviromnental
requirements and save money through pollution prevention techniques. These centers serve regulatory sectors, or facilities with similar operations, processes or practices that are
subject to a similar set of regulatory requirements.
(PM 428) Number of in-person and live webinar trainings provided to states to expand capacity building.
100
100
Additional Information: In FY 2017, EPA conducted approximately 90 in-person and live webinar trainings in order to grow infrastructure and leadership necessary for states
to implement enviromnental enforcement programs. The FY 2018 and 2019 targets for this measure aim to maintain this level of activity.
(PM 429) Percentage of early Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) engagement
60
70
Additional Information: This measure tracks projects on which EPA submits comments on the Draft EIS to the Lead Agency within 45 days of the public comment period or
with Lead Agency authorized extension, as a percentage of the total number of comment letters issued. EPA is charged under Section 309 of the Clean Air Act to review the
EIS's of other federal agencies and to comment on the adequacy and the acceptability of the enviromnental impacts of the proposed action. EPA participation may involve
meeting with the Lead Agency in person or by phone, or providing written comments with recommendations to mitigate impacts of the proposed project or improve the
development of the National Enviromnental Policy Act (NEPA) analysis. Early engagement by stakeholders in the NEPA process can support process efficiencies and improved
project outcomes.
(PM AD4) Cumulative number of state, tribal, and community partners that have integrated data, models, information, and other
decision-support tools developed by EPA for climate resiliency into their planning processes.
150
200
617
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
Additional Information: A key goal of EPA's work on climate resiliency is to build and strengthen the capacity of states, tribes, and local communities to anticipate, prepare,
and adapt to a changing climate. This measure focuses on providing the tools, training, technical assistance, data, models, and other information they need to build their adaptive
capacity.
(PM AD5) Cumulative number of state, tribal, and community partners that have incorporated climate resiliency into the
implementation of their environmental programs supported by major EPA financial mechanisms (grants, loans, contracts, and technical
assistance agreements).
150
200
Additional Information: This measure focuses on supporting climate-resilient investments across the nation.
618
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
Objective 2.2 - Increase Transparency and Public Participation: Listen to and collaborate with impacted stakeholders and provide
effective platforms for public participation and meaningful engagement.
Strategic Measure - By September 30,2022, eliminate the backlog and meet statutory deadlines for responding to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
requests16.
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM FOl) Reduce the FOIA backlog.
No Target
Established
TBD
Additional Information: EPA will focus on reducing the FOIA backlog the Agency has built up over the years, and enhancing the FOIA process - which gives the public the
right to make requests for federal agency records. The complexity and volume of electronic documents required to be searched, collected, and reviewed has increased over time.
The Agency will ensure that it can support the timely searching and collection of electronically-stored information for purposes of responding to FOIA requests and other
information needs in a cost-effective, sustainable manner. This should not only help the Agency provide the public with the information requested, but also reduce the fees and
lawsuits the Agency incurs from missing FOIA response deadlines. The specific measure, baseline and FY 2019 target will be determined in FY 2018. No target is established
for FY 2018, but results will be reported.
(PM F02) Percentage of FOIA requests completed within statutory deadlines.
No Target
Established
TBD
Additional Information: The baseline and FY 2019 target will be determined in FY 2018. No target is established for FY 2018, but results will be reported.
16 Baseline will be determined in FY 2018.
619
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
GOAL 3 - RULE OF LAW AND PROCESS: ADMINISTER THE LAW AS CONGRESS INTENDED, TO REFOCUS THE AGENCY
ON ITS STATUTORY OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE LAW.
Objective 3.1 - Compliance with the Law: Timely enforce environmental laws to increase compliance rates and promote cleanup of
contaminated sites through the use of all of EPA's compliance assurance tools, especially enforcement actions to address environmental
violations.
Strategic Measure - By September 30, 2022, reduce the average time from violation identification to correction17.
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM 430) Average time to move EPA civil cases referred to the Department of Justice in FY 2013 or later to settlement or having a
complaint filed (years).
No Target
Established
3.0
Additional Information: This measure is calculated, for the civil judicial referrals settled during a given year, as the average time from the date of referral to the Department of
Justice to settlement or having a complaint filed. Cases included in this measure are those referred in FY 2013 or later. Data for this measure are tracked in EPA's Integrated
Compliance Information System. From FY 2010 through FY 2017, the average time to move EPA civil judicial referrals to settlement or having a complaint filed was 3.2 years.
No target is established for FY 2018, but results will be reported.
(PM 431) By FY 2018, identify one or two direct implementation programs that use administrative and informal enforcement tools to
pilot for reducing the time between identification of a violation to correction. Also in FY 2018, gather data to establish baselines against
which to measure progress.
Identify
Pilot
Program(s)
and
Establish
Baselines
Implement
Pilot
Additional Information: Informal enforcement tools may include Notices of Violation (NOV), Notices of Noncompliance, and violation letters.
Strategic Measure - By September 30, 2022, increase the environmental law compliance rate18.
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM 432) Percentage of Clean Water Act National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permittees not in significant
noncompliance with their permit limits.
76
79
17 Baseline will be determined in FY 2018.
18 This concept will be piloted by focusing initially on increasing the percentage of Clean Water Act (CWA) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permittees not in significant
noncompliance with their permit limits to 88% from a baseline of 76% from Q4 FY 2016 to Q3 FY 2017. Other program areas may be included in this strategic measure during the FY 2018-2022
timeframe.
620
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
Additional Information: From Q4 FY 2016 - Q3 FY 2017, the percentage of permittees not in significant noncompliance with their permit limits was 76.0%. This is based on
annual significant noncompliance (SNC)/Category 1 noncompliance rate among individually permitted major and non-major (minor) NPDES permittees for which EPA has
highly reliable data. Major and minor permittees that were in SNC/Category 1 noncompliance at any time during the one-year period are counted in the percentage denominator.
No reduction from baseline is expected in FY 2018. SNC/Category 1 noncompliance are a specific type of violation, the severity of which are classified based on duration,
severity, and type of violation. For more information, see: https://echo.epa.gov/help/facilitv-searcli/npdes-program-search-criteria-help
(PM 433) By FY 2018, develop a compliance rate pilot in a second program (in addition to NPDES) and implement in FY 2019.
Identify
Pilot
Implement
Pilot
Other Core Work supporting Objective 3.1.
Performance Measures
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM 434) Millions of pounds of pollutants and waste reduced, treated, or eliminated through concluded enforcement actions.
325
325
Additional Information: This measure combines enviromnental benefits from pounds of air, water, hazardous and non-hazardous waste, and toxics/pesticides pollutants
reduced, treated, or eliminated through concluded enforcement actions. Prior to FY 2018, pounds of pollutants reduced, treated, or eliminated for different media were tracked
using separate measures.
(PM 435) Number of potentially responsible party (PRP) and other party commitments to perform or pay for cleanup and/or reuse of
contaminated sites.
110
110
Additional Information: EPA is reinvigorating efforts to secure PRP commitments to perform timely, high quality cleanup by reducing oversight costs for PRPs that perform
timely, high quality work; increasing PRP and Agency personnel adherence to project deadlines; utilizing enforcement authorities to get work underway quickly and to keep
work on schedule; and streamlining the dispute resolution process. PRPs and other parties made an average of 100 commitments to perform or pay for cleanup and/or reuse of
contaminated sites from FY 2013 to FY 2016.
(PM 418) Percentage of criminal cases having the most significant health, environmental, and deterrence impacts.
65
65
Additional Information: The mission of EPA's Criminal Enforcement Program is to investigate, help prosecute, and thereby deter the most egregious enviromnental offenders.
The criminal program collects data on a variety of case attributes to evaluate the range, complexity, and quality of our national docket. In 2010, the program developed a case
selection methodology to ensure the identification, investigation, and prosecution of cases with significant enviromnental, human health, and deterrence impact. The data
elements used in this tiering methodology include information about human health and enviromnental impacts, the nature of the pollutant and the release, and the profile and
compliance history of the subject(s). Since instituting the tiering system, the percentage of "higher tier" cases lias steadily risen. There are valuable cases which do not fit into
the higher tiered criteria. Tiering parallels U.S. sentencing guidelines for criminal cases.
(PM 419) Percentage of criminal cases with individual defendants.
75
75
621
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
Additional Information: During the early years of EPA's criminal program, organizational defendants made up approximately 70% of the total defendants charged and
individual defendants made up the remaining 30%. By FY 2017, these figures had greatly changed: 90% of cases had an individual charged and 10% were cases where only an
organizational defendant(s) was charged.
(PM 421) Percentage of conviction rate for criminal defendants.
85
85
Additional Information: While case outcomes fluctuate based on their specific characteristics, as well as the prosecutorial and sentencing decisions made by the U.S.
Department of Justice and the federal courts, EPA's Criminal Enforcement Program has maintained a historically high conviction rate for defendants charged with
environmental crimes.
622
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
Objective 3.2 - Create Consistency and Certainty: Outline exactly what is expected of the regulated community to ensure good
stewardship and positive environmental outcomes.
Strategic Measure - By September 30, 2022, meet 100% of legal deadlines imposed on EPA.
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM RG1) Percentage of legal deadlines met by EPA.
No Target
Established
TBD
Additional Information: This measure tracks progress toward EPA meeting its statutory, regulatory, and court-ordered deadlines. EPA is reinvigorating its approach to
regulatory development and prioritizing meeting legal deadlines to ensure that expectations for the regulated community and the public are clear and comprehensive and that
Agency can achieve its core mission in a manner that is defensible and consistent with its authorities. The baseline and FY 2019 target will be determined in FY 2018. No target
is established for FY 2018, but results will be reported.
Strategic Measure - By September 30, 2022, eliminate unnecessary or duplicative reporting burdens to the regulated community by 10,000,000 hours19.
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM RG2) Hours of unnecessary or duplicative reporting burden to the regulated community eliminated.
2,000,000
2,000,000
Additional Information: EPA will develop a process of continuous improvement for managing the paperwork burden on regulated entities associated with EPA's Information
Collection Rules, and reduce the burden where possible with a goal of eliminating 2,000,000 hours of unnecessary or duplicative reporting per year toward the goal of
10,000,000 hours by the end of FY 2022. Annual increments represent permanent changes in reporting burden. The data are tracked in OMB's RegInfo.gov database.
Other Core Work supporting Objective 3.2.
Performance Measures
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM RG3) Number of EO 13771 regulatory actions issued.
No Target
Established
TBD
Additional Information: This measure is an OMB requirement based on the Presidential Memorandum M-17-23. The FY 2019 target will be determined in FY 2018. No target
is established for FY 2018, but results will be reported. In FY 2017 EPA issued one EO 13771 regulatory action.
19 Baseline is estimated at 173,849,665 information collection and reporting hours.
623
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
(PM RG4) Number of EO 13771 deregulatory actions issued.
No Target
Established
TBD
Additional Information: This measure is an OMB requirement based on the Presidential Memorandum M-17-23. The FY 2019 target will be determined in FY 2018. No target
is established for FY 2018, but results will be reported. In FY 2017, EPA issued 16 EO 13771 deregulatory actions.
(PM RG5) Total incremental cost of all EO 13771 regulatory and deregulatory actions.
-$40 Million
TBD
Additional Information: This measure is an OMB requirement based on the Presidential Memorandum M-17-23. In FY 2017, the total incremental cost of all EO 13771
regulatory and deregulatory actions was -$21.5 million. The incremental cost values are annualized values applying a 7 percent discount rate and using 2016 dollars.
624
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
Objective 3.3 - Prioritize Robust Science: Refocus the EPA's robust research and scientific analysis to inform policy making.
Strategic Measure - By September 30, 2022, increase the number of research products meeting customer needs .
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM RD1) Number of Office of Research and Development (ORD) research products meeting customer needs.
No Target
Established
TBD
Additional Information: A research product is a deliverable that results from a specific research project or task. Research products may require translation or synthesis before
integration into an output ready for partner use. Working with its partners, each program develops a list of planned research products and their associated outputs. The list
reflects high priority products the program plans to complete by the end of each fiscal year. A research product qualifies as "meeting customer needs" based on a scoring system
that takes account of usability, product quality, and timeliness. Baseline and FY 2019 target will be determined in FY 2018. No target is established for FY 2018, but results will
be reported.
(PM AC1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Air and Energy research program.
100
100
Additional Information: A research product is a deliverable that results from a specific research project or task. Research products may require translation or synthesis before
integration into an output ready for partner use. Working with its partners, each program develops a list of planned research products and their associated outputs. The list
reflects high priority products the program plans to complete by the end of each fiscal year. The estimated completion date is based on when the output is needed for partner use
and when the research products must be transformed into the output. The actual product completion date is self-reported.
(PM AC2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients for use in improving air quality.
100
100
Additional Information: Research outputs result from the translation or synthesis of one or more research products into the format compatible with the partner's decision needs.
Delivery of a research output means that the output is transferred to ORD's research partner ready for the intended partner use. EPA identifies and describes the planned outputs
in the program's Research Program Strategic Plan. To ensure research products are responsive to partners' needs, ORD has a formalized process for developing and modifying
program activities, including engagement with partners when making modifications.
(PM CS1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Chemical Safety for Sustainability research program.
100
100
Additional Information: A research product is a deliverable that results from a specific research project or task. Research products may require translation or synthesis before
integration into an output ready for partner use. Working with its partners, each program develops a list of planned research products and their associated outputs. The list
reflects high priority products the program plans to complete by the end of each fiscal year. The estimated completion date is based on when the output is needed for partner use
and when the research products are needed to be transformed into the output. The actual product completion date is self-reported.
(PM CS2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients and partners to improve their capability to advance the
environmentally sustainable development, use, and assessment of chemicals.
100
100
20 Baseline will be determined in FY 2018.
625
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
Additional Information: Research outputs result from the translation or synthesis of one or more research products into the format compatible with the partner's decision needs.
Delivery of a research output means that the output is transferred to ORD's research partner ready for the intended partner use. EPA identifies and describes the planned outputs
in the program's Research Program Strategic Plan. To ensure research products are responsive to partners' needs, ORD has a formalized process for developing and modifying
program activities, including engagement with partners when making modifications.
(PM HC1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Sustainable and Healthy Communities research program.
100
100
Additional Information: A research product is a deliverable that results from a specific research project or task. Research products may require translation or synthesis before
integration into an output ready for partner use. Working with its partners, each program develops a list of planned research products and their associated outputs. The list
reflects high priority products the program plans to complete by the end of each fiscal year. The estimated completion date is based on when the output is needed for partner use
and when the research products must be transformed into the output. The actual product completion date is self-reported.
(PM HC2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients, partners, and stakeholders for use in pursuing their
sustainability goals.
100
100
Additional Information: Research outputs result from the translation or synthesis of one or more research products into the format compatible with the partner's decision needs.
Delivery of a research output means that the output is transferred to ORD's research partner ready for the intended partner use. EPA identifies and describes the planned outputs
in the program's Research Program Strategic Plan. To ensure research products are responsive to partners' needs, ORD has a formalized process for developing and modifying
program activities, including engagement with partners when making modifications.
(PM HS1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Homeland Security research program.
100
100
Additional Information: A research product is a deliverable that results from a specific research project or task. Research products may require translation or synthesis before
integration into an output ready for partner use. Working with its partners, each program develops a list of planned research products and their associated outputs. The list
reflects high priority products the program plans to complete by the end of each fiscal year. The estimated completion date is based on when the output is needed for partner use
and when the research products must be transformed into the output. The actual product completion date is self-reported.
(PM HS2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients and partners to improve their capabilities to respond to
contamination resulting from homeland security events and related disasters.
100
100
Additional Information: Research outputs result from the translation or synthesis of one or more research products into the format compatible with the partner's decision needs.
Delivery of a research output means that the output is transferred to ORD's research partner ready for the intended partner use. EPA identifies and describes the planned outputs
in the program's Research Program Strategic Plan. To ensure research products are responsive to partners' needs, ORD has a formalized process for developing and modifying
program activities, including engagement with partners when making modifications.
(PM RA1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Human Health Risk Assessment research program.
100
100
Additional Information: A research product is a deliverable that results from a specific research project or task. Research products may require translation or synthesis before
integration into an output ready for partner use. Working with its partners, each program develops a list of planned research products and their associated outputs. The list
reflects high priority products the program plans to complete by the end of each fiscal year. The estimated completion date is based on when the output is needed for partner use
and when the research products must be transformed into the output. The actual product completion date is self-reported.
(PM RA2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients and partners for use in informing human health decisions.
100
100
626
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
Additional Information: Research outputs result from the translation or synthesis of one or more research products into the format compatible with the partner's decision needs.
Delivery of a research output means that the output is transferred to ORD's research partner ready for the intended partner use. EPA identifies and describes the planned outputs
in the program's Research Program Strategic Plan. To ensure research products are responsive to partners' needs, ORD has a formalized process for developing and modifying
program activities, including engagement with partners when making modifications.
(PM RA8) Annual progress score for finalizing IRIS health assessments, Provisional Peer-Reviewed Toxicity Values, and Integrated
Science Assessments.
Additional Information: The annual score is based on the relative weighting of each chemical using a 3-tier system that includes client interest, complexity of science, and level
of effort required. Points are scored by multiplying the weight of each assessment by the number of milestones completed in the assessment process. To support policy and
regulatory decisions for EPA's programs and regions, as well as state, tribal, and local agencies, ORD aligns its resources with priority chemicals and product needs. In addition
to the critical needs of Superfund, water, air, and children's health, ORD has sharpened its focus on the new TSCA law, and has been providing the needed scientific support to
meet its expedited timelines.
(PM SW1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Safe and Sustainable Water Resources research program.
100
100
Additional Information: A research product is a deliverable that results from a specific research project or task. Research products may require translation or synthesis before
integration into an output ready for partner use. Working with its partners, each program develops a list of planned research products and their associated outputs. The list
reflects high priority products the program plans to complete by the end of each fiscal year. The estimated completion date is based on when the output is needed for partner use
and when the research products are needed to be transformed into the output. The actual product completion date is self-reported.
(PM SW2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients and partners to improve the Agency's capability to ensure clean
and adequate supplies of water that support human well-being and resilient aquatic ecosystems.
100
100
Additional Information: Research outputs result from the translation or synthesis of one or more research products into the format compatible with the partner's decision needs.
Delivery of a research output means that the output is transferred to ORD's research partner ready for the intended partner use. EPA identifies and describes the planned outputs
in the program's Research Program Strategic Plan. To ensure research products are responsive to partners' needs, ORD has a formalized process for developing and modifying
program activities, including engagement with partners when making modifications.
(PM RD2) Number of peer-reviewed journal articles with datasets cleared for publication.
336
336
Additional Information: This measure tracks the progress towards EPA's efforts to increase public access to scientific data and publications. These journal articles are among
the products of EPA research and scientific development and the publications, along with their underlying data, are peer reviewed and made publically available in accordance
with ongoing open data efforts.
627
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
Objective 3.4 - Streamline and Modernize: Issue permits more quickly and modernize our permitting and reporting systems.
Strategic Measure - By September 30, 2022, reach all permitting-related decisions within 6 months.
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM PE1) Percentage of permitting-related decisions issued within 6 months.
No Target
Established
TBD
Additional Information: EPA will improve the efficiency and effectiveness of federal permitting programs through several mechanisms, which include conducting a series of
targeted Lean business process improvement events on EPA-issued permits and implementing the results of those events. EPA is scheduled to conduct the first round of Lean
events for key permitting programs in January 2018. EPA will also collect system-wide data on permit status, backlog and throughput. Following the Lean events and other
efforts, EPA will target and track improvements in permitting processes by gathering, analyzing and using agency-wide data to track results and collect best practices. In
addition, EPA will systematically review and amend any internal policies and procedures related to permitting that could be streamlined, as appropriate, to further improve the
efficiency and effectiveness of federal permitting programs. Permit decisions include approval or denial actions for a new, renewed or modified permit. Time to issue a permit
(also known as lead time) is calculated from the date a permit application is received to the date of a permit issuance or denial action. The baseline and FY 2019 target will be
determined in FY 2018. No target is established for FY 2018, but results will be reported.
Other Core Work supporting Objective 3.4.
Performance Measures
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM 052) Number of major EPA environmental systems that use the CDX electronic requirements enabling faster receipt, processing,
and quality checking of data.
85
90
Additional Information: The Central Data Exchange (CDX) program began in FY 2001 to enable states, tribes and others to send enviromnental data to EPA through a
centralized electronic process. The CDX program estimates its results as the net of new systems using CDX services (increase) and retirement of older systems that are being
phased out (decrease). As a result, these results may increase or decrease in subsequent years. The unit of measure "system" is defined as the number of data flows/exchanges
that occur through CDX by EPA program offices, states and tribes. There are 16 Vehicle Engine Regulation (VERIFY) data flows/exchanges that occur in CDX. Each serves a
different need and is counted individually. Because CDX is used for these 16 unique needs, separate systems have not been developed to fulfill this need; rather, the one CDX
solution serves them all.
(PM 053) Number of states, tribes and territories able to exchange data with CDX through nodes in real time, using standards and
automated data-quality checking.
110
115
Additional Information: Users are defined for this measure as the total number of physical and virtual nodes in production and test.
(PM 999) Number of active unique users from states, tribes, laboratories, regulated facilities and other entities that electronically report
environmental data to EPA through CDX.
100,000
110,000
628
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
Additional Information: To calculate unique users of the CDX system, CDX takes all users whose accounts have been active in the last two years and eliminates duplicate
registrations under the same email address. Because many EPA regulations require periodic reporting, i.e., once every two, three or five years, a two-year span was utilized to
capture the majority of users without overstating their "active" status.
629
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
Objective 3.5 - Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness: Provide proper leadership and internal operations management to ensure that the
Agency is fulfilling its mission.
Strategic Measure - By September 30, 2022, reduce unused office and warehouse space by 850,641 square feet21.
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM FA1) Reduction in EPA Space (sq. ft. owned and leased).
241,000
65,000
Additional Information: This measure tracks usable square feet of office and warehouse space released with data collected from EPA facility manager notifications, and reports
generated when there is a modification to an Occupancy Agreement. Space consolidation efforts will result in EPA becoming a more efficient and effective agency by reducing
lease, utility, security and other facility management costs, which will enable the agency to direct resources to core enviromnental work.
Strategic Measure - By September 30, 2022, reduce procurement processing times by achieving 100% of procurement action lead times (PALT)22.
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM PR1) Percentage of contract actions processed within the Procurement Action Lead Time (PALT) Standards.
SA: 75%
CP: 65%
FAA: 80%
SA: 80%
CP: 70%
FAA: 85%
Additional Information: This measure tracks the timeliness of the agency's processing of contract actions for Simplified Acquisitions (SA), Competitive Proposals (CP), and
Funding and Administrative Actions (FAA) with data collected from the EPA Acquisition System (EAS) and information from EPA contract officer representatives (CORs) and
contract officers (COs). Timeliness is measured in processing days from the time the procurement request (PR) is released in EAS to the date the contract is awarded. PALT
Standards are outlined in Section 7.1.1 of the EPA Acquisition Guide. As a result of these efforts, EPA will become a more efficient and effective agency by reducing
processing time and costs.
(PM PR2) Acquisition costs avoided through use of strategic sourcing.
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
Additional Information: This measure tracks the agency's avoided acquisition costs through use of the strategic sourcing program (SSP) with data collected from EPA's spend-
save tool. Avoided costs achieved by SSP contract vehicles result in EPA becoming a more efficient and effective agency by reducing expenditures, processing time and labor,
which will enable the agency to direct resources to core enviromnental work. In FY 2017, EPA obligated $1,556 billion in contracts.
21 Baseline is 5,264,846 square feet as of FY 2017.
22 Baseline for FY 2017 is under development.
630
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
Strategic Measure - By September 30, 2022, improve 250 operational processes.
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM OP1) Number of operational processes improved.
25
50
Additional Information: EPA will apply Lean principles to improve the efficiency and cost effectiveness of its operations. An operational process is a sequence of activities that
results in the delivery of a service. An operational process is counted as improved following a completed Lean/Kaizen event that meets a three-part test: (1) the work of the
process has been standardized; (2) the Lean/Kaizen event is followed by accountability through the use of visual management; and (3) performance has improved. Targets are
annual.
Strategic Measure - By September 30, 2022, increase enterprise adoption of shared services by four .
Performance Measures that support this strategic measure
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM CF1) Number of administrative shared services.
Additional Information: EPA will use additional federal and/or internal shared services when supported by business case analysis. Enterprise adoption of shared services will
ensure consistency and scalability in tools and services, enabling the agency to standardize internal operational processes, control costs, and improve data quality. The five
administrative shared services in place as of the end of FY 2017 were: IBC (HR/payroll), Concur (travel). Compass (core financial management), human resources shared
service centers, and finance centers. This measure is cumulative. EPA is targeting the adoption of one additional shared service per year.
(PM CF2) Number of agency administrative subsystems.
24
22
Additional Information: Reducing the number of agency and Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) administrative system interfaces will allow EPA users to more
easily input and access data and standardize reporting along with moving the payment processing to a federal shared service provider. This will have a positive impact on
streamlining operational processes and drive the integration of financial transactions across multiple administrative systems; reducing manual entry and improving data quality.
The focus is currently on establishing an integrated end-to-end delivery of financial transactions for contracts, grants, and interagency agreements into Compass. In FY 2017, the
Agency had 26 administrative subsystems.
(PM CF3) Average cost per payment transaction.
$34.99
$34.99
Additional Information: Measuring the current financial payment processing and information technology system costs will allow EPA to monitor its progress toward the target
of reducing the cost of contract and Simplified Acquisition Purchasing (SAP) transactions to the estimated cost level of an agency-wide shared service solution. Data are tracked
in the Agency's Compass system. In FY 2017, the cost per payment transaction was $38.28. Various operational/process improvement efforts and IT system modernization
project planning are underway to achieve cost reductions.
23 Baseline is 5 administrative systems/operations shared services in FY 2017.
631
-------
Performance Measures
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Budget - February 12, 2018
Other Core Work supporting Objective 3.5.
Performance Measures
FY 2018
Target
FY 2019
Target
(PM 35A) Environmental and business actions taken for improved performance or risk reduction.
196
196
Additional Information: This measure captures implemented corrective actions taken by the agency based on Office of the Inspector General (OIG) recommendations to
improve EPA programs and/or processes. Results are typically from prior years and may fluctuate depending on the agency's ability to complete agreed-upon corrective actions.
The target for this measure is developed by taking the actual performance for two or three fiscal years and adjusted to reflect any significant changes in priorities.
(PM 35B) Environmental and business recommendations or risks identified for corrective action.
460
460
Additional Information: This measure captures the number of OIG outputs (recommendations for improvement, outreach activities to plan and promote OIG work,
congressional testimonies delivered, best practices identified, and risks identified). One key activity during an OIG audit/evaluation is identifying risks to EPA operations and
programs. Risk identification is based on federal standards for internal control. Internal control is a process for assuring achievement of an organization's objectives in
operational effectiveness and efficiency, reliable reporting, and compliance with laws, regulations and policies. Ultimately effective internal controls assure that operations run
efficiently and effectively. The target reflects the average of actual performance for two or three fiscal years, adjusted to reflect any significant changes in priorities.
(PM 35C) Return on the annual dollar investment, as a percentage of the OIG budget, from audits and investigations.
160
160
Additional Information: Results under this measure identify the potential return on investment and do not include actual recoveries. The OIG's role is to question costs and
identify cost efficiencies and funds put to better use (recommended efficiencies). The target reflects the average of actual performance for two or three fiscal years, adjusted to
reflect any significant changes in priorities and removing reports from the average calculation with massive recommended efficiencies in excess of $200M. The reports excluded
from the average are: FY2012-$372M; FY2014-$230M; FY2015-$571M; FY2016-$886M; andFY2017-$774M.
(PM 35D) Criminal, civil, administrative, and fraud prevention actions.
87
75
Additional Information: This measure captures criminal, civil, and administrative actions as a result of OIG investigations on fraud, waste and abuse. To a large extent, results
are influenced by factors outside the control of OIG (judges, juries, etc.).
632
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Program Performance and Assessment
Introduction 635
Goal 1-5 Performance Array 642
Research Performance Array 727
Enabling Support Programs Performance Array 736
Cross-Agency Strategies 740
633
-------
634
-------
FY 2017 Annual Performance Report
Introduction
EPA's FY 2017 Annual Performance Report (APR) presents the environmental and program
performance results the Agency achieved in FY 2017 against the annual budget performance
measures and targets established in its FY 2017 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional
Justification. In compliance with requirements of the Government Performance and Results Act
Modernization Act of 2010 (GPRAMA) and Office of Management and Budget implementing
guidance, EPA's FY 2017 APR presents the last year of reporting progress toward the goals,
strategic objectives, and cross-agency strategies established in the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic
Plan. As illustrated in the performance management framework figure below, EPA analyzes
annual performance results and progress toward longer-term strategic objectives, as an integral
part of formulating and justifying Agency resource requests.
EPA's Performance Management Framework
FY 2018-2022 EPA Strategic
Plan
FY 2018-2019 Agency
Priority Goals
Strategic Foresight
A
FY 2019 EPA Annual
Performance Plan and Budget
FY 2018-2019 Agency Priority
Goal Action Plans
FY 2017 Annual Performance
Report
Program Evaluations
Performance Progress Reviews
Strategic
Planning
Annual Planning
and Budgeting
Assessment
and Reporting
(Accountability)
Operations
and Execution
FY 2016-2017 National
Program Manager
Guidance
FY 2017 Regional
Performance
Commitments/Annual
Commitment System [ACS)
FY 2017 EPA and
State/Tribal Grant Work
Plans
Organization of the FY 2017 APR
This Program Performance and Assessment section (Tab 14) serves as the primary component of
EPA's FY 2017 APR. Following this Introduction, it provides a detailed performance measure
data table, which is organized by strategic goal along with associated strategic objectives and
annual budget performance measures. The table summarizes long-term progress toward each
strategic objective and presents results, explanations and additional information for annual budget
635
-------
performance measures. Each strategic goal is introduced by a Goal-at-a-Glance overview, which
provides high-level FY 2017 results and funding information. This section also includes a summary
of progress longer term under EPA's cross-agency strategies.
Performance results from FY 2017 are also integrated in the FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan
and Congressional Justification formulated under the new FY 2018-2022 EPA Strategic Plan.
Please also refer to EPA's FY 2017 Agency Financial Report (AFR) for information on financial
performance results.
Performance Management in FY 2017
During FY 2017, EPA implemented a number of initiatives to further strengthen its performance
management. Notable efforts included:
Development of the FY2018-2022 EPA Strategic Plan. In FY 2017, EPA initiated development
of its FY 2018-2022 Strategic Plan to set the Agency's direction for the next four years and
advance the Administrator's priorities - refocusing the Agency on its core mission, restoring
power to state and tribal partners through cooperative federalism, and leading the Agency through
improved processes and toward its statutory obligations under the law. The Plan provides the
foundation for greater efficiency and effectiveness, with the goal of accelerating progress in
protecting human health and the environment. From a suite of 27 strategic measures highlighting
areas in which the Agency wants to make the most progress, EPA has chosen nine for particular
attention as the basis for six Agency Priority Goals - air quality attainment, Superfund and
brownfields, Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) implementation, leveraging resources for
infrastructure projects, streamlined permitting, and compliance with the law. EPA will issue its
new Strategic Plan in final in February 2018.
Completion of Enterprise Risk Assessments Under the FY 2018-2022 EPA Strategic Plan.
Following updates to OMB Circular A-123, EPA continues to integrate risk-based decision making
into its planning, budgeting, and program management. In FY 2017, the Agency deployed a new
risk assessment tool to engage senior leaders in evaluating risks to achieving the goals and
objectives in the FY 2018-2022 EPA Strategic Plan. In FY 2017, senior leaders identified 114
risks, including 27 significant risks, with potential impacts on progress toward Agency strategic
objectives. They then ranked the 27 significant risks and identified the top three enterprise risks.
The Agency will develop strategies to mitigate the enterprise risks, and use risk information to
inform annual planning and budget decisions.
Second Year of the FY 2016-2017 National Program Manager (NPM) Guidance. EPA
completed the second year of the first 2-year NPM Guidance, advancing the approach developed
by the joint NPM Guidance/National Environmental Performance Partnership System (NEPPS)
Workgroup. The purpose of the two-year Guidance is to strengthen early, more meaningful state
and tribal engagement, and increase flexibilities for EPA regions, states, and tribes while
streamlining the workload associated with joint planning activities. The second year of work was
guided by the FY 2017 Exceptions-based Addendums to the FY 2016-2017 NPM Guidances, which
incorporated significant changes important to EPA, states, and tribes that were identified after
release of the FY 2016-2017 NPM Guidance, using criteria developed in a workgroup by EPA and
636
-------
the states. NPM Guidances and related material are publically available on EPA's NPM Guidances
website (https://www.epa.gov/planandbudget/national-program-manager-guidances).
Completed Implementation of FY 2016-2017 Agency Priority Goals (APGs). APGs focus
Agency attention on areas where leadership wants to accomplish near-term achievements or
results. In FY 2017, EPA completed work on five FY 2016-2017 APGs developed in conjunction
with the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan. At the end of the two-year period culminating in FY
2017, the Agency achieved goals it set for two APGs, and achieved mixed results for the other
three APGs, as described below.
• Advance resilience in the nation's water infrastructure, while protecting public health
and the environment, particularly in high-risk and vulnerable communities. By
September 30, 2017, EPA will provide technical assistance and other tools to 75 urban
communities to advance green infrastructure planning and implementation efforts to
increase local climate resilience and water quality protections in stormwater
infrastructure. EPA will also provide tools and training for 5000 operators of small water
utilities to improve resilience in drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater systems.
Trainings will be targeted based on regional threats, such as drought andflooding.
In FY 2016 and FY 2017, EPA provided technical assistance and tools to 125 urban
communities to advance green infrastructure planning and implementation efforts,
exceeding its target of 75. The Agency also provided tools and training to more than 10,700
small water utility operators and decision officials to improve resilience in drinking water,
wastewater, and stormwater systems, greatly exceeding its cumulative target of 5,000.
• Clean up contaminated sites to enhance the livability and economic vitality of
communities. By September 30, 2017, an additional 18,600 sites will be made ready for
anticipated use (RAU) protecting Americans' health and the environment, one community
at a time:
In FY 2016 and FY 2017, EPA delivered more than 19,000 sites ready for anticipated use,
exceeding its target of 18,600. While the Brownfields, Superfund, and Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) programs narrowly missed their cleanup targets,
the Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) program contributed to the overall
success in meeting the APG target.
• Assess and reduce risks posed by chemicals and promote the use of safer chemicals in
commerce. By September 30, 2017, the EPA will complete more than 3,400 assessments
of pesticides and other commercially available chemicals to evaluate risks they may pose
to human health and the environment:
In FY 2016 and FY 2017, EPA completed more than 3,200 assessments of pesticides and
other commercially available chemicals, slightly missing its target of 3,400. The Agency
faced challenges in completing assessments of Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) New
Chemicals Section 5 notices, and in processing the Pesticide Registration Improvement
Act (PRIA) registrant submissions. The 2016 TSCA amendments made significant changes
637
-------
to the new chemical review process and required re-review of approximately 300
submissions nearing completion when the law was enacted, delaying completions in many
cases. In addition, the large number of new requirements and timelines for existing
chemical risk evaluation established under the TSCA amendments, combined with lower
numbers of TSCA Section 5 notices and PRIA registrant submissions than were expected,
contributed to the missed target.
• Strengthen environmental protection through business process improvements
enabled by joint governance and technology. By September 30, 2017, reduce burden by
one million hours, add five new functionalities to the E-Enterprise Portal, and begin
development on two projects selected through E-Enterprise Leadership Council joint
governance:
EPA added over 20 new functionalities to the E-Enterprise Portal and saved stakeholders
nearly 889,000 hours of burden through business process improvements. EPA fell slightly
short of its target to reduce stakeholder burden by 1 million hours, as it was partially reliant
on a modernization of the Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS Prime) that
could not be put into production before the end of FY 2017. However, deployment of
SDWIS Prime in FY 2018 is estimated to save an additional 867,000 hours of burden per
year in FY 2019 once full adoption and implementation are complete.
• Reduce greenhouse gas emissions from cars and trucks. Through September 30, 2017,
EPA, in coordination with Department of Transportation's fuel economy and fuel
consumption standards programs, will implement vehicle and commercial truck
greenhouse gas standards with a focus on industry compliance to ensure the significant
reductions in greenhouse gases and oil consumption called for under the standards are
realized. The light-duty and heavy-duty standards for model years 2012-2025 are projected
to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by more than 6.3 billion metric tons and reduce
U.S. oil consumption by more than 12.5 billion barrels over the lifetime of the affected
vehicles and commercial trucks.:
All manufacturers are in compliance with existing GHG standards for model year 2016 and
are also expected to be in compliance with existing GHG standards for model year 2017.
Additionally, EPA completed 261 confirmatory tests in FY 2016 and FY 2017 to validate
emissions data submitted by manufacturers for light-duty vehicles, surpassing its goal of
160-200 confirmatory tests (See: https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-
and-engines/greenhouse-gas-ghg-emission-standards-light-dutv-vehicles).
Evidence and Evaluation
Summaries of program evaluations completed during FY 2017 and other evidence use are available
at https://www.epa.gov/planandbudget/results. Program evaluations and other evidence help
provide the information EPA needs to ensure that its programs are meeting their intended
outcomes. By assessing how well a program is working, a program evaluation can help EPA
identify activities that benefit human health and the environment, provide the roadmap needed to
replicate successes, and identify areas needing improvement. This is particularly important for
fostering transparency and accountability.
638
-------
FY 2017 Performance Data
In the Agency's FY 2017 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification, EPA
committed to 184 annual performance measures/targets in support of the goals and objectives in
the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan. This APR describes the final year of progress toward that
Strategic Plan. These performance measures/targets and EPA's results are presented in the detailed
performance measure table following this introduction, along with explanations of results and
additional information about these measures.
FY 2017 Performance Measure Results
As of December 31, 2017, data are available for
143 of the 184 FY 2017 budget performance
measures/targets.1 Working with state and local
governments, tribes, federal agencies, businesses,
and industry leaders, the Agency met 99 of the
performance measures, representing 69 percent
of the performance measures for which data are
currently available.
The Agency missed 44 of its FY 2017
performance measures/targets. As an integral part
of its performance management process, EPA
will continue to regularly review its performance,
analyze results, and adjust FY 2018 and FY 2019
programmatic approaches and targets as appropriate.
EPA's FY 2017 Performance Results
(Total measures = 134)
Data Pending
41
(22%}
Targets Not Met
44 I
(2496) /
Targets Met
99
(54*)
Because final end-of-year data for some measures are not yet available, EPA is not able to report
on 41 of its 184 performance measures. Often environmental results do not become apparent within
a fiscal year, and assessment is a longer-term effort. Extensive quality assurance/quality control
processes can also delay the reporting of performance data. EPA relies heavily on performance
data obtained from state, tribal, and local agencies, all of which require time to collect and review
for quality. Data lags may also result when reporting cycles do not correspond with the federal
fiscal year on which this report is based, for example, data which are reported biennially.
Additional FY 2017 results will be available in the Agency's FY 2018 APR, which will be included
in the FY 2020 Annual Performance Plan and the "Program Performance and Assessment" section
of the FY 2020 Congressional Justification.
1 Of EPA's 184 FY 2017 performance measures, 25 measures fall under the Agency's enabling and support programs (including
the Offices of Administration and Resources Management, Environmental Information, and Inspector General) and the Office of
Research and Development. These measures are not reflected in the "Goal-at-a Glance" summaries which follow for each of
EPA's five strategic goals.
639
-------
Previous Fiscal Year Data Now Available
EPA can now report FY 2016 data that became available in FY 2017. In summary, final
performance results became available for 23 of the 32 FY 2016 performance measures for which
we lacked data at the end of FY 2016. Of these 23 performance measures, EPA met 16 and did not
meet 7 of the Agency's targets. Data remain unavailable for 9 measures.2
Verification/Validation of Performance Data
The Agency develops Data Quality Records (DQRs) to present validation/verification information
for selected performance measures and information systems, consistent with guidance from the
Office of Management and Budget. A DQR documents the management controls, responsibilities,
quality procedures, and other metadata associated with the data lifecycle for individual
performance measures, and is intended to enhance the transparency, objectivity, and usefulness of
the performance result. EPA's program offices choose the measures for which to develop DQRs,
consistent with the Agency's goal to document quality procedures associated with a broad range
of budget measures. Each DQR can be considered current as of the most recent date for which the
Agency has published results for the performance measure. All of EPA's current DQRs are
available in PDF format at the following URL: https://www.epa.gov/planandbudget/results.
Please note the PDF file may include DQRs that reference supporting documents, which are
available upon request by sending an email with the name of the document and DQR to
OCFOINFO@epa.gov. The email should indicate the measure number and text associated with
the DQR, and the filename shown underneath the icon for the attachment.
2 Performance Measure G02: Million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTC02E) of greenhouse gas reductions in the
buildings sector; Performance Measure G16: Million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTC02E) of greenhouse gas
reductions in the industry sector; Performance Measure SMI: Tons of materials and products offsetting use of virgin resources
through sustainable materials management; Performance Measure J11: Reduction in moderate to severe exposure incidents
associated with organophosphates and carbamate insecticides in the general population; Performance Measure 008: Percent of
children (aged 1-5 years) with blood lead levels (>5 ug/dl); Performance Measure 10D: Percent difference in the geometric mean
blood level in low-income children 1-5 years old as compared to the geometric mean for non-low income children 1-5 years old;
Performance Measure D6A: Reduction in concentration of PFOA in serum in the general population; Performance Measure 012:
Percent reduction of children's exposure to rodenticides; and Performance Measure 143: Percentage of agricultural acres treated
with reduced-risk pesticides.
640
-------
r.. s< 1111 Phi 11
kcliuliiliii iifilitr I'll'A \ Per(«< fnwnci"
I j1!*.ni k> ihe iclmhlin .ttiJ i:tl" slid fvrlnmui'k'f ilf^s ree-i^i let! 11 tic U.S.
I nvitt'iiirvrul PrwciEm Vvnw}% HsmI Yc,»r 2lM? Amai! IVrf'vmi.nii.v lU-fvri Ilcc.niH*
mij'rvvcmiMM' in human Iwulslt jiiJ lhc i>m »i<'iuriciit nui; ihU IvihivivJ imnWiii.iK*h apjurcrt. iIkic
•h'hIii Iv vkltys kmuvn Ik' .wiimis v\v* li,»«.c t,iVcn.m*i a'MilS wt i\m HR-innrc 'VWrl:.,r; H\, v,c
L'lriri.H ;u,ni jc te-,uU'- JjIj in] wmti tit" our (wnnniiiniLj mej ,tiin.s I'm ll-.K k-;m ilnjj >c.ir, \\ ik'ji
|\ «ihl\ I'mw.jut. ui* pniir.iU'kl Iran! (iifa in prujire-.t ou'r linn\ Wc ;iImi icfWf
11r.il p%r1nnnjnc.- ic^ulls l"rJ wv-ftiiis >e;-r> thl j\jrliihleiii IA' 2MJ7.
m
1 J'nfll!
-.'rivr
Dote
W *su A-, i. XW » M*ii Ciuil I |II|A * \V*Mlis,r,«nv IH' :'i Wi « ik«:5 « J-%%; ,inj-l (,t»i
-'f -it If. •(•'J * • T S ' !Li Slut -li I
641
-------
Goal 1-5 Performance Array
Goal 1 at a Glance
ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
Reduce greenhouse gas emissions and develop adaptation strategies to address climate
change and protect and improve air quality.
FY 2017 Performance Measures
FY 2017 Performance Measures
Met: 12 Not Met: 2 Data Unavailable: 16
(Total Measures: 30)
FY M17 OHiartiom*
Taking Action on Climate Change
and Improving Air Quality,. $1,091,160
~ Protecting America's Waters; $4196.956
^ Clean ng Up Communities
anc Advancing Sastsinab e Deveopmer:, $3,530,571
Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals
anc Preventing Pollution, $745,419
~ Enforcing Environmental Laws. $779,531
| |
Oajed3ve2 Objective 3 Oajedawe 4
Ot>.«ctr»e i Oajectitfel Otjecfeve 3 Gajednve 4
FY 2016 Performance Measures
Ob>£cfcve 1 O^jectik'e 2 Qtjectfve 3 Gajec£ive4
Strategic Objective Overview
FY 2D 16 Obligations*
% of Goal 1 Funds
Objective 1.1: Address Climate Change,
Minimize the threats posed by climate change by reducing greenhouse gas
emissions and takinf actions that helpto protect human health and help
communities and ecosystems become more sustainable and resilient to the
effects of climate change.
$213,042
19.5%
Objective 1.2: Improve Air Quality.
Achieve and maintain health- and welfare-based air pollution standards and
reduce risk from toxic air polluta nts and indoor air contaminants.
£822,242
75.4%
Objective 1.3: Restore and Protect the Ozone Layer.
Restore and prefect the Earth's stratospheric ozone layer and protect the public
from harmful effects of ultraviolet radiation.
$17,001
1.6%
Objective 1.4 Minimize Exposure to Radiation.
Minimize releases of radioactive material and be prepared to minimize exposure
through response and recovery actions should unavoidable releases occur.
$3B,B75
3.5%
Goal l Total
$1,091,160
100,0%
•All figures in tfiousands
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
642
-------
FY 2017 EPA Programs and Activities Contributing to Goal 1
Acid Rain Program
Air Toxics
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs
Clean Air Research
Climate Partnership Programs
Indoor Air Quality and Radon Programs
Mobile Sources
National Ambient Air Quality Standards Development and Implementation
New Source Performance Standards
New Source Review
Radiation Protection and Emergency Response Programs
Regional Haze
Stratospheric Ozone Layer Protection Program
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
643
-------
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
Reduce greenhouse gas emissions and develop adaptation strategies to address climate change, and protect and improve air quality
Objective 1 - Address Climate Change: Minimize the threats posed by climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and taking actions that help to
protect human health and help communities and ecosystems become more sustainable and resilient to the effects of climate change.
Summary of progress toward strategic objective:
EPA made progress under this objective by developing greenhouse gas (GHG) programs to curb emissions and working with state and local agencies to permit
larger industrial sources of GHG emissions. In addition, EPA built upon its successful partnerships in the consumer products, buildings, industry, homes,
power, and transportation sectors. Performance highlights include:
• Through FY 2015, EPA worked with the consumer products, building, industrial, homes, power, and transportation sectors to avoid emissions of 994
million metric tons of carbon dioxide (C02) equivalent of GHG reductions.
• EPA achieved its FY 2016-2017 Agency Priority Goal for GHG vehicle standards by completing the planned activities and milestones such as testing
vehicles and issuing certificates of vehicle conformity.
• Annually, EPA published comprehensive GHG data from over 8,000 of the largest facilities and suppliers in the U.S., accounting for about half of total
U.S. GHG emissions through EPA's GHG Reporting Program, providing data for policy, business, and regulatory decisions.
Challenges:
Overall, U.S. GHG emissions in FY 2015 were 11.5% below FY 2005 levels. This trend can be attributed to multiple factors, including year-to-year changes in
weather and other changes in the electric power sector (See: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks). Through
EPA-led efforts including the GHG Reporting Program and Clean Air Markets Program Data, EPA learned more about the sources and emissions of GHGs.
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
(1) Address
Climate Change
(PM G02) Million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTC02E) of greenhouse gas reductions in the buildings sector.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
168.7
182.6
196.2
188.0
201.1
210.4
MMTC02e
Actual
221.9
254.2
242.4
273.9
Data Avail
12/2018
Data Avail
12/2019
Explanation of Results: GHG emissions reductions from EPA's buildings sector programs continue to exceed programmatic targets.
(PM G06) Million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTC02E) of greenhouse gas reductions in the transportation sector through EPA's
SmartWay partnership program.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
28.0
33.0
61
70
76
82
MMTC02e
Actual
38.9
51.6
61.7
72.8
84
92.1
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
644
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: The results show that in FY 2017, SmartWay helped avoid 8.1 million metric tons of C02 for a cumulative reduction of 92.1
MMTC02E since program inception. The results reflect the efforts of partners to continuously improve the efficiency of their goods movement
operations.
Additional Information: SmartWay's emissions reductions are estimated by comparing the emissions performance of trucks in SmartWay with modeled
estimates of national truck emissions, which is only one component of SmartWay. In 2004, there were 0.7 million metric tons of carbon dioxide
equivalent reductions from the SmartWay program. From 2004 to 2014, EPA projected forward from the 2004 baseline assuming no impact on GHG
emissions from U.S. climate change programs. Beginning in 2014, heavy-duty vehicles subject to the Phase 1 Greenhouse Gas rule began to gradually
penetrate the national fleet, raising the emissions performance of the national fleet, and reducing the difference between the emissions performance of
SmartWay truck carrier partners and the national fleet. Activities by SmartWay's rail, barge, and shipper partners are not captured in these estimates.
(PM G16) Million metric tons of carbon equivalent
(MMTC02E) of greenhouse gas reductions in the industry sector.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
372.9
421.9
461.8
540.3
676
702.7
Actual
378.1
637.9
669.3
653
Data Avail
12/2018
Data Avail
12/2019
MMTC02e
Explanation of Results: GHG emissions reductions from EPA's industrial sector programs continue to exceed programmatic targets.
Additional Information: Combined, energy, agriculture, waste, manufacturing and other industrial sectors generate more than a third of the nation's
annual GHG emissions. Industrial sector emissions are produced either from a process itself, from the energy consumed during the process, or to produce
electricity. EPA only reports results from those programs that are active in the reporting year.
(PM G18) Percentage of Annual Greenhouse Gas Emission Reports verified by EPA before publication.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
93
95
95
95
95
Actual
96
98
97
97
96
Percent
Additional Information: The GHG Reporting Program, established in 2009, has 41 sectors that include more than 8,000 facilities and suppliers. Both
facilities and suppliers are required to report their data annually by March 31. After submission of the data, the Agency conducts a verification review
that lasts approximately 150 days and includes a combination of electronic checks, staff review, and follow-up with facilities to identify any reporting
errors and have them corrected before publication. The 150-day period includes 60 days for EPA to review reports and identify potential data quality
issues, 75 days for reporters to resolve these issues, and 15 days for EPA to review responses or resubmitted reports. EPA typically publishes the data by
October 1 each year (see: httt>s://www.et>a.eov/eheret>ortine).
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
645
-------
(PM AD4) Cumulative number of state, tribal, and community partners that have integrated climate change data, models, information, and
other decision-support tools developed by EPA for climate resiliency into their planning processes.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
50
120
Actual
50
Data Avail
12/2018
Number of Partners
Additional Information: A key goal of EPA's work on climate resiliency is to build and strengthen the capacity of states, tribes, and local communities
to anticipate, prepare, and adapt to a changing climate. This measure focuses on providing the tools, training, technical assistance, data, models, and other
information they need to build their adaptive capacity.
(PM AD5) Cumulative number of state, tribal, and community partners that have incorporated climate resiliency into the implementation of
their environmental programs supported by major EPA financial mechanisms (grants, loans, contracts, and technical assistance agreements).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
50
100
Actual
50
Data Avail
12/2018
Number of Partners
Additional Information: This measure focuses on supporting climate-resilient investments across the nation.
(PM AD6) Cumulative number of EPA-developed training programs that incorporate climate resiliency planning for EPA staff, state, tribal,
and community partners (includes programmatic and cross-programmatic trainings).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
3
4
Number
Actual
5
5
Explanation of Results: EPA has completed the following training modules: (1) Introductory Climate Adaptation Training for EPA staff; (2) Office of
Land and Emergency Management Climate Change Adaptation Training for EPA staff; (3) Climate Adaptation Training for Local Governments; (4)
Training on Understanding Climate Change Impacts on Water Resources; and (5) Office of Land and Emergency Management Climate Change
Adaptation Training for the public.
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
646
-------
Objective 2 - Improve Air Quality: Achieve and maintain health- and welfare-based air pollution standards and reduce risk from toxic air pollutants and
indoor air contaminants.
Summary of progress toward strategic objective:
Under this objective EPA, together with its implementation partners, made progress to improve air quality by designing, developing, and implementing national
programs that delivered significant reductions in harmful air pollutants. These actions include setting health-based ambient air quality standards grounded in
scientific research, and setting fuel and engine standards that improve air quality in communities across the United States. Performance highlights include:
• National ambient concentrations of criteria pollutants continued to show steady improvement. From FY 2003 to FY 2016, for example, population-
weighted ambient concentrations of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and ozone decreased 37% and 20%, respectively. In addition, the number of days
when the ozone standard was exceeded in nonattainment areas and the number of days when the Air Quality Index is considered to be unhealthy for
sensitive groups of people is trending downward. Cleaner air prevents tens of thousands of premature deaths, reduces heart attacks and hospital visits,
alleviates hundreds of thousands of asthma attacks among children and sensitive populations, and prevents millions of lost school and work days. (See:
https://www.epa.gov/air-trends)
• EPA's Acid Rain and Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) programs continued to make significant progress in reducing emissions from applicable
sources. Under these two programs, in 2016, S02 emissions fell by 33% from 2015 levels, from 2.2 to 1.5 million tons, and annual NOX emissions fell
13%, from 1.4 to 1.2 million tons. Ozone season NOX emissions fell 10% from 2015 levels, from 0.62 million tons to 0.55 million tons. (See:
https://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/clean-air-markets-progress)
• EPA is making steady progress to fulfill its commitment to clear the existing State Implementation Plan (SIP) backlog as of October 1, 2013 and manage
the timely review of all other SIPs consistent with Clean Air Act deadlines by working closely with state and local air agencies. In FY 2017, EPA took
action on 385 SIPs, 211 of which were in the backlog.
• EPA equipped health, housing, environmental and health insurance programs to effectively support delivery, infrastructure and sustainable financing of
environmental asthma interventions in homes and schools. The results reflect a combination of EPA supported technical training and Non-Governmental
Organization partnerships. (See: https://www.epa.gov/asthma)
Challenges:
Priorities must be balanced to ensure progress on statutorily required work and court ordered deadlines. Many state, local, and tribal air agencies are finding it
more and more challenging to deliver environmental and public health protection.
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
(1) Reduce
Criteria
Pollutants and
Regional Haze
(PM M9) Cumulative percentage reduction in population-weighted ambient concentration of ozone in monitored counties from 2003 baseline.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
13
15
16
16
17
19
Percent Reduction
Actual
13
15
18
21
20
Data Avail
12/2018
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
647
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: The FY 2016 results show national ozone concentrations have decreased at a rate consistent with the estimated impacts of
existing and future control strategies, continuing the trend of long-term improvement. The actual changes in this metric can vary from one year to the
next because meteorology plays a significant role in ozone formation.
Additional Information: This measure shows progress in reducing ambient ozone concentrations from the 2003 baseline (population-weighted national
average of 0.090 ppm). Consistent with the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone, it is based on a three-year average
concentration. The measure assigns more weight to counties with more people by weighting each county's ozone concentration by its population. The
targets for this measure are based on predictions of future year concentrations resulting from the Community Multi-Scale Air Quality model which
estimates the impact of existing and future control strategies. The actuals are updated annually based on the actual monitored ozone concentrations.
(PM M92) Cumulative percentage reduction in the number of days with Air Quality Index (AQI) values over 100 since 2003, weighted by
population and AQI value.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
50
80
80
80
81
83
Actual
73
74
79
82
82
Data Avail
12/2018
Percent Reduction
Explanation of Results: The FY 2016 results are largely driven by national ozone and PM 2.5 concentrations which have decreased at a rate consistent
with the estimated impacts of existing and future control strategies, continuing the trend of long-term improvement. The actual changes in this measure
can vary from one year to the next because meteorology plays a significant role in ozone and PM 2.5 formation.
Additional Information: This measure shows progress in reducing the number of "unhealthy" air quality days based on the Air Quality Index (AQI)
relative to the 2003 baseline. The AQI is an index for reporting daily air quality. An AQI value of 100 generally corresponds to the NAAQS for each of
the five pollutants included in the index. When AQI values are above 100, air quality is considered to be unhealthy for certain sensitive groups of people
and then for everyone as AQI values get higher. This measure assigns more weight to higher AQI values and counties with more people. Because ozone
and PM2.5 typically account for the vast majority of AQI values above 100, this measure largely tracks changes in those two pollutants. The targets for
this measure are based on a regression curve using historical data. The actuals are updated annually based on the actual monitored concentrations.
(PM MM9) Cumulative percentage reduction in the average number of days during the ozone season that the ozone standard is exceeded in non-
attainment areas, weighted by population.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
45
50
50
50
68
70
Actual
54
59
67
76
75
Data Avail
12/2018
Percent Reduction
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
648
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: The FY 2016 results show national ozone concentrations have decreased at a rate consistent with the estimated impacts of
existing and future control strategies, continuing the trend of long-term improvement. The actual changes in this measure can vary from one year to the
next because meteorology plays a significant role in ozone formation.
Additional Information: This measure shows progress in reducing the number of exceedance days in the 1997 ozone nonattaimnent areas relative to the
2003 baseline. Consistent with the NAAQS for ozone, it is based on a three-year average. The measure assigns more weight to nonattaimnent areas with
more people by weighting each nonattaimnent area's exceedance count by its population. The targets for this measure are based on a regression curve
using historical data. The actuals are updated annually based on the actual monitored concentrations.
(PM N35) Limit the increase of Carbon Monoxide (CO) emissions from mobile sources compared to a 2000 baseline.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
2.02
2.19
2.36
2.53
2.70
2.87
Million Tons
Actual
2.02
2.19
2.36
2.53
2.70
2.87
Emitted
Explanation of Results: This measure is an indicator of estimated reductions with aligmnent between target and actuals.
Additional Information: As of 2010, the few areas in the U.S. that had active issues with local levels of CO had controlled their levels to or below EPA's
NAAQS for CO. These areas have all been re-designated to attainment with a CAA maintenance plan (i.e., known as "maintenance areas"). In 2000, CO
emissions from mobile sources were 79.2 million tons using the 2000 Mobile6 inventory.
(PM 033) Cumulative millions of tons of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) reduced
since 2000 from mobile sources.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
2.05
2.23
2.4
2.57
2.74
2.91
Million Tons
Actual
2.05
2.23
2.4
2.57
2.74
2.91
Reduced
Explanation of Results: This measure is an indicator of estimated reductions with aligmnent between target and actuals.
Additional Information: Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) react in the atmosphere to form ozone and particulate matter, both of which are criteria
pollutants for which EPA establishes NAAQS. In addition, some VOCs are air toxics (such as benzene) or react in the atmosphere to form ozone and
particulate matter, both of which are criteria pollutants for which EPA establishes NAAQS. Reducing VOC emissions from mobile sources reduces the
atmospheric concentrations and resulting health and environmental effects of these pollutants. EPA has reduced VOC emissions from mobile sources
through its emissions standards promulgated since 2000 which apply to mobile sources including on-road cars and trucks, nonroad engines and
equipment (such as lawn and garden equipment), locomotives, and marine engines. VOC emissions will continue to fall over time as new, cleaner
vehicles and engines enter the fleet. In 2000, VOCs emissions from mobile sources were 7.7 million tons using the 2000 Mobile6 inventory.
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
649
-------
(PM 034) Cumulative millions of tons of Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) reduced since 2000 from mobile sources.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
4.07
4.41
4.74
5.08
5.42
5.76
Million Tons
Reduced
Actual
4.07
4.41
4.74
5.08
5.42
5.76
Explanation of Results: This measure is an indicator of estimated reductions with aligmnent between target and actuals.
Additional Information: Nitrogen oxides (NOx) react in the atmosphere to form ozone, particulate matter, and N02, all of which are criteria pollutants
for which EPA establishes NAAQS. Reducing NOx emissions from mobile sources reduces the atmospheric concentrations and resulting health and
enviromnental effects of these pollutants as well as the ecosystem effects associated with nitrogen deposition to water bodies. EPA, in cooperation with
its partners and manufacturers, has reduced NOx emissions from mobile sources including on-road cars and trucks, nonroad engines and equipment (such
as construction, fanning, and lawn and garden equipment), locomotives, aircraft, and marine vessels. NOx emissions will continue to fall over time as
new, cleaner vehicles and engines enter the fleet. In 2000, NOx emissions from mobile sources were 11.8 million tons using the 2000 Mobile6 inventory.
(PM M91) Cumulative percentage reduction in population-weighted ambient concentration of fine particulate matter (PM-2.5) in all monitored
counties from 2003 baseline.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
16
20
28
29
31
32
Percent Reduction
Actual
26
29
29
32
37
Data Avail
12/2018
Explanation of Results: The FY 2016 results show national PM 2.5 concentrations have decreased at a rate consistent with the estimated impacts of
existing and future control strategies, continuing the trend of long-term improvement. The actual changes in results can vary from one year to the next
because meteorology plays a significant role in PM 2.5 formation.
Additional Information: This measure shows progress in reducing ambient PM 2.5 concentrations with respect to the 2003 baseline (population-
weighted national average of 14.1 ug/m3). Consistent with the NAAQS for PM 2.5, it is based on a three-year average concentration. Reducing emissions
of PM 2.5 results in decreases in atmospheric concentrations of inhalable fine particles, which in turn lowers the risk of premature mortality, hospital
admissions for heart and lung disease, and respiratory symptoms. The measure assigns more weight to counties with more people by weighting each
county's PM 2.5 concentration by its population. The targets for this measure are based on predictions of future year concentrations resulting from the
Community Multi-Scale Air Quality model which estimates the impact of existing and future control strategies. The actuals are updated annually based
on the actual monitored concentrations.
(PM P34) Cumulative tons of PM-2.5 reduced since 2000 from mobile sources.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
146,921
159,164
171,407
183,651
195,895
208,138
Tons Reduced
Actual
146,921
159,164
171,407
183,651
195,895
208,138
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
650
-------
Explanation of Results: This measure is an indicator of estimated reductions with aligmnent between target and actuals.
Additional Information: EPA, in cooperation with its partners and manufacturers, has reduced PM 2.5 emissions from mobile sources including on-road
cars and trucks, nonroad engines and equipment (such as construction and fanning equipment), locomotives, and marine vessels. PM 2.5 emissions will
continue to fall over time as the new, cleaner vehicles and engines enter the fleet. In 2000, PM 2.5 emissions from mobile sources were 510,550 tons
using the 2000 Mobile6 inventory.
(PM A01) Annual emissions of sulfur dioxide (S02) from electric power generation sources.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
6,000,000
6,000,000
6,000,000
6,000,000
5,000,000
5,000,000
Actual
3,319,000
3,210,365
3,122,921
2,231,970
1,487,542
Data Avail
04/2018
Tons Emitted
Explanation of Results: Actual emissions have consistently been lower than the targets due to a number of factors including use of the large and growing
bank of acid rain program allowances and uncertainty regarding market dynamics related to the mix of fuels and power generation sources in the future.
Additional Information: The baseline in 1980 is 17.4 million tons of S02 emissions from electric utility sources. This inventory was developed by the
National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP) and is used as the basis for reduction in Title IV of the 1990 Clean Air Act (CAA)
Amendments. Statutory S02 emissions capped in 2010 at 8.95 million tons, approximately 8.5 million tons below 1980 emissions level. Targets for this
measure through 2010 were based on implementation of the nationwide Acid Rain Program (ARP) alone whereas the (lower) target of 6 million tons for
FYs 2011-2015 recognized implementation of the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) Programs in eastern states in combination with ARP. The updated
FY 2016 and 2017 targets are based on the ARP and newly established S02 budgets under the Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR), which began
implementation in January 2015. The FY 2016 and FY 2017 targets incorporate the following assumptions: 1) CSAPR states emit at the full assurance
provision level allowed under the rule; 2) sources in non-CSAPR states would continue to emit at historical levels; and 3) potential use of banked ARP
allowances.
(PM MM6) Total number of backlogged SIPs remaining.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
No Target
No Target
No Target
300-400
100-200
Number of
Actual
699
649
557
322
360
Backlogged SIPs
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
651
-------
Explanation of Results: In FY 2017, EPA took action on 385 SIPs, 211 of which were backlogged. A new SIP-focused IT system currently under
development is expected to improve SIP processing efficiency in FY 2018 and beyond.
Additional Information: The CAA requires states to develop a general plan to attain and maintain the NAAQS in all areas of the country and a specific
plan to attain the standards for each area designated nonattaimnent for a NAAQS. These plans, known as State Implementation Plans (SIPs), are
developed by state and local air quality management agencies and submitted to EPA for approval. SIPs vary in their complexity with more complex SIPs
requiring more effort from EPA to act on them. Each year EPA identifies the baseline of total active SIPs, current and backlogged, and considers a range
of anticipated incoming SIPs for that year. EPA then estimates the total number of SIP actions it will take in the upcoming year. The SIP baseline
changes year to year depending on actions taken in the prior year. The estimated number of actions will also vary year to year depending on the status of
EPA rulemakings, state priorities for which SIPs they want acted on, and potential new SIPs or SIP revisions. Targets are presented as a range to reflect
this variability.
(PM MM7) Cumulative Percent of State Implementation Plans (SIPs)
removed from the historical backlog.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
0
20
40
60
84
Cumulative
Actual
0
25
48
65
93
Percentage
Removed
Explanation of Results: In FY 2017, EPA took action on 385 SIPs, 211 of which were backlogged. A new SIP-focused IT system currently under
development is expected to improve EPA review and tracking of SIP submittals and EPA action on SIPs in FY 2018 and beyond. EPA will continue to
receive new SIPs such as 2015 ozone NAAQS infrastructure SIPs, ozone attaimnent plans, and S02 attainment plans. In addition, a portion of the
submittals remaining in the backlog have particularly complex policy, technical and legal issues which contributes to the time it takes EPA to develop an
approvable and defensible action on those submittals.
Additional Information: The CAA requires states to develop a general plan to attain and maintain the NAAQS in all areas of the country and a specific
plan to attain the standards for each area designated nonattaimnent for a NAAQS. SIPs are developed by state and local air quality management agencies
and submitted to EPA for approval. SIPs vary in their complexity with more complex SIPs requiring more effort from EPA to act on them. Each year
through regional SIP Management Plans, EPA identifies the baseline of total active SIPs, current and backlogged, and considers a range of anticipated
incoming SIPs for that year. EPA then estimates the total number of SIP actions it will take in the upcoming year. The SIP baseline changes year to year
depending on actions taken in the prior year and the number of incoming SIPs. The estimated number of actions will also vary year to year depending on
the status of EPA rulemakings, state priorities for which SIPs they want acted on, and the complexity of the priority SIPs. Targets are presented as a
range to reflect this variability.
(PM M94) Percent of major NSR permits issued within one year of receiving a complete permit application.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
78
78
78
78
78
78
Actual
80
90
59
80
87
Data Avail
04/2018
Percent
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
652
-------
Explanation of Results: Most of the completed permit applications involved activities that could be addressed within the one year timeframe. Only the
most complicated permits took longer than one year to issue. Permitting authorities (state and local air agencies) continue to issue timely permits.
Additional Information: New Source Review (NSR) requires stationary sources to obtain permits before they start construction. NSR permits are usually
issued by state or local air pollution control agencies; EPA issues permits in some cases (such as in Indian country). States that issue permits are not
required by law to report all major source permitting actions to an EPA administered database. EPA calculates the annual percentage based only on the
states that choose to report and occasionally the state reports lag by 12 months or more from the end of each reporting year. This measure shows progress
against the CAA requirement that NSR prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) permits are issued within one year of determination of complete
application.
(PM M95) Percent of significant Title V operating
jermit revisions issued within 18 months of receiving a complete permit application.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
100
100
88
88
88
88
Percent
Actual
86
91
91
88
93
Data Avail
12/2018
Explanation of Results: Most significant revisions to Title V permits are less complex than newly issued permits because revisions address only a subset
of applicable requirements. Performance for this measure has historically been in the 80-90% range with only the most difficult of significant Title V
permit revisions taking longer than 18 months to issue.
Additional Information: Stationary Source operating permits issued under Title V of the CAA are legally enforceable documents that permitting
authorities issue to air pollution sources after the source has begun to operate and must be renewed every five years. Title V permits are usually issued by
state or local air pollution control agencies; EPA issues the permit in some cases (such as in Indian country). Additionally, when a source (or facility)
undergoes a major or "significant" revision to its operations that affects emissions, a revision to the Title V operating permit must be sent to the
permitting agency for review. This measures tracks timeliness of significant permit revision issuance within 18 months.
(PM M96) Percent of new Title V operating permits issued within 18 months of receivin
g a complete permit application.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
99
99
75
75
75
75
Percent
Actual
76
60
59
67
61
Data Avail
12/2018
Explanation of Results: The FY 2016 target was not met. The majority of Title V permits are issued by state air agencies and it is difficult to estimate
targets for state work. The variation in actual performance is partly attributable to the increasing complexity of permits.
Additional Information: Operating permits are legally enforceable documents that permitting authorities issue to air pollution sources after the source
has begun to operate. Usually, Title V permits are issued by state or local air pollution control agencies; EPA issues the permit in limited cases. Title V
permits must be renewed every five years. When a new source (or facility) begins operations and has the potential to emit air pollution beyond a certain
threshold, a new Title V operating permit must be sent to the permitting agency for review.
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
653
-------
(PM 001) Cumulative percentage reduction in tons
of toxicity-weighted (for cancer risk) emissions of air toxics from 1993 baseline.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
37
42
42
42
41
41
Actual
45
45
40
40
40
Data Avail
12/2020
Percent Reduction
Explanation of Results: The FY 2014-2016 results are slightly below their target. The increases in toxicity weighted (for cancer risk) emissions over the
FY 2011-2014 values are largely attributable to a change in the toxicity (nearly 60 times more potent) for ethylene oxide based on a new Integrated Risk
Information System (IRIS) value released in December 2016. The non-weighted total air toxic emissions continue to decrease. In 2011, the National
Emissions Inventory (NEI) showed a reduction from 1990 emissions of 61% and in 2014, the emissions are down 66% from 1990 levels.
(2) Reduce Air
Additional Information: The toxicity-weighted emission inventory utilizes the NEI for air toxics along with EPA's compendium of cancer and non-
cancer health risk criteria to develop a risk metric that can be tabulated on an annual basis. Air toxics emissions data are revised every three years. The
out-year targets are based on expected emissions derived from the 2011 NEI inventory and adjusted for expected air toxic reductions from proposed or
anticipated national air toxic rules. Targets also incorporate population and industry growth estimates, which result in increased air toxic emissions over
time. Further, targets are also adjusted based on health benchmark changes resulting from updated science.
Toxics
(PM 002) Cumulative percentage reduction in tons
of toxicity-weighted (for non-cancer risk) emissions of air toxics from 1993 baseline.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
59
59
59
58
57
57
Actual
55
55
51
51
51
Data Avail
12/2020
Percent Reduction
Explanation of Results: The FY 2014-2016 results are below their target. The increases in toxicity weighted (for non-cancer risk) emissions over the FY
2011-2014 values primarily pertain to changes to emissions factors for nonroad mobile sources leading to increased acrolein emissions. The non-
weighted total air toxic emissions continue to decrease. In 2011, the NEI showed a reduction from 1990 emissions of 61% and in 2014, the emissions are
down 66% from 1990 levels.
Additional Information: The toxicity-weighted emission inventory utilizes the NEI for air toxics along with EPA's compendium of cancer and non-
cancer health risk criteria to develop a risk metric that can be tabulated on an annual basis. Air toxics emissions data are revised every three years. The
out-year targets are based on expected emissions estimates derived from the 2011 NEI inventory and adjusted for expected air toxic reductions from
proposed or anticipated national air toxic rules. Targets also incorporate population and industry growth estimates, which result in increased air toxic
emissions over time. Further, targets are also adjusted based on health benclunark changes resulting from updated science.
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
654
-------
(PM R50) Percentage of existing homes with an operating radon mitigation system compared to the estimated number of homes at or above
EPA's 4pCi/L action level.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
13.3
13.9
13.9
14.9
14.9
14.9
Percent
Actual
14.1
15
15.9
16.9
17.4
18.2
Explanation of Results: Prior to FY 2014, results derived from voluntary reporting of mitigation fan sale data by the radon fan manufacturing industry
that is no longer available. FY 2014-2017 results are estimated using historical mitigation fan sale data and trends in the housing market.
Additional Information: Radon is the leading cause of lung cancer in nonsmokers and the second leading cause overall (smokers and nonsmokers).
About one in 15 U.S. homes have radon above EPA's action level.
(PM R51) Percentage of all new
single-family homes (SFH) in high radon potential areas built with radon
reducing features.
(4) Reduce
Exposure to
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
36.0
37.5
37.5
40.5
40.5
40.5
Indoor Air
Pollutants
Actual
44.6
38.9
44.1
42.4
49
Data Avail
10/2018
Percent
Explanation of Results: Results are derived from the Home Innovation Research Lab's Annual Builder Practices Survey. This measure shows that the
percentage of homes being built in radon areas with radon-resistant features has been relatively steady and consistently exceeded EPA projections. The
results were achieved through progress by leading state programs; increased action on radon, through the National Radon Action Plan expanded from the
Federal Radon Action Plan; and through an increased awareness and interest in healthy homes.
Additional Information: Radon is the leading cause of lung cancer in nonsmokers and 2nd leading cause overall (smokers and nonsmokers). Areas with
the highest radon potential (Zone 1 on EPA radon map) have a predicted average indoor radon screening level greater than 4 pCi/L.
(PM R19) Cumulative number of programs supporting the delivery, infrastructure, and sustainable financing of environmental asthma
interventions at home and school.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
300
600
Programs
Actual
563
884
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
655
-------
Explanation of Results: The results reflect a combination of EPA supported technical training (e.g., webinars, stakeholder training events, etc.) and
funded NGO partnerships (focused on tribes, school-based health centers, health insurance plans, and states).
Additional Information: The FY 2015 baseline for this new initiative is zero. Through this effort, EPA is equipping health, housing, environmental, and
health insurance programs to support delivery, infrastructure and sustainable financing of environmental asthma interventions at home and school.
Environmental pollutants in homes can cause and exacerbate asthma. Further evidence indicates that investment in home interventions will improve
health outcomes and reduce and/or shift health care costs from medical treatment to secondary prevention.
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
656
-------
Objective 3 - Restore and Protect the Ozone Layer: Restore and protect the earth's stratospheric ozone layer and protect the public from the harmful effects
of ultraviolet (UV) radiation.
Summary of progress toward strategic objective:
EPA made progress under this objective through domestic commitments and leadership in international efforts to restore and protect the ozone layer. The
natural layer of ozone in the stratosphere shields and protects the Earth's surface from the sun's harmful ultraviolet (UV) rays, which can lead to more cases of
skin cancer, cataracts and other health problems. Stratospheric ozone depletion is the result of a complex set of circumstances and chemistry. All nations
recognized by the United Nations have ratified the Montreal Protocol and continue to phase out the production of chemicals that deplete the ozone layer while
transitioning to ozone-friendly alternatives.
In FY 2016, hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) consumption (production and import) were well below levels required by the Montreal Protocol, showing that
the U.S. continues to outperform international commitments and is on track to meet future obligations. Under the Montreal Protocol and the Clean Air Act, total
U.S. HCFC production and consumption is capped, and will be completely phased out by 2030. The results are achieved primarily through EPA rulemakings
that establish limits on the amount of HCFCs that can be produced and imported in a given year. Additionally, reviewing and listing alternatives for HCFCs
under the Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program, as well as regulations establishing refrigerant management, labeling, and other requirements,
have supported this transition. Importantly, industry innovation in developing new alternatives to meet the needs of consumers and industry sectors continues to
be critical as the U.S. adopts and promotes these new alternatives in the transition from ozone-depleting substances (OPS).
Challenges:
Implementing an allocation plan that both supports a steady phase out of ODS and meets the needs of a diverse group of stakeholders is complex and continues
to pose challenges. As the amount of ODS produced declines, the demands for flexibility and specific, tailored solutions to unique situations grow. EPA
manages ongoing exemption programs to allow low-quantity continued production of ODS in areas of critical need.
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
(1) Reduce
Consumption of
Ozone-Depleting
Substances
(PM SOI) Remaining US Consumption of hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), chemicals that deplete the Earth's protective ozone layer,
measured in tons of Ozone Depleting Potential (ODP).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
<3,700
<3,700
<3,700
<1,520
<1,520
<1,520
ODP Tons
Actual
1,450
1,640
1,374
584
486
Data Avail
12/2018
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
657
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: FY 2016 results show that the U.S. continues to outperform international commitments under the Montreal Protocol, and is on
track to meet future obligations. The results are achieved primarily through limits achieved by EPA in cooperation with industry on the amount of HCFCs
that can be produced and imported in a given calendar year. Additionally, actions reviewing and listing alternatives for HCFCs under EPA's SNAP, as
well as regulations establishing refrigerant management, labeling, and other requirements, have supported this transition. Additionally, industry
innovation in developing new alternatives to meet the needs of consumers and industry sectors continue to be critical as the U.S. adopts and promotes
these new alternatives in the transition from ODS.
Additional Information: The base of comparison for assessing progress is the domestic consumption cap of Class II HCFCs as set by the Parties to the
Montreal Protocol. Each ODS is weighted based on the damage it does to the stratospheric ozone - this is, its ozone-depletion potential (ODP). Beginning
on January 1, 1996, the cap was set at the sum of 2.8% of the domestic ODP-weighted consumption of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) in 1989 plus the
ODP-weighted level of HCFCs in 1989 (a total of 15,240 tons). Consumption equals production plus import minus export.
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY 658
-------
Objective 4 - Minimize Exposure to Radiation: Minimize releases of radioactive material and be prepared to minimize exposure through response and
recovery actions should unavoidable releases occur.
Summary of progress toward strategic objective:
EPA made progress under this objective by maintaining a high level of readiness to support federal radiological emergency response and recovery operations.
In addition, EPA's regulatory and non-regulatory activities supported our mission to protect human health and the environment by minimizing unnecessary
exposures to radiation, including operating and maintaining RadNet and developing protective rules and guidance documents. Performance highlights include:
• EPA continued to demonstrate a high level of radiological emergency response readiness, scoring 96% in FY 2017 for the level of readiness.
• EPA made improvements to RadNet that increased the number of air monitors installed from 135 to 139 and increased the average percentage of
operational monitors from 80% in March 2011 to over 90% in FY 2017 (monitors are taken down and brought back up for maintenance and/or repair on a
routine basis). EPA also deployed dose rate meters on more than 20% of the RadNet monitors. Improvements in data processing, review, and quality
assurance processes have reduced the time that data are in the review process and are thus available for release during emergencies in less time.
Challenges:
Maintaining scientific, technical, and policy expertise in the radiation field continues to be a challenge across the federal government and in organizations
requiring this specialized expertise. Unlike many other science, technology, and mathematics fields that are growing, health physics is a unique field of
expertise that was born in the Atomic Age in the 1940s. As that original workforce ages, the nation is experiencing a shortage of professionals in the field of
radiation protection, nuclear power, and radiobiology.
Responding to radiation incidents is complex and requires coordination of assets across all levels of government. EPA has built working relationships in the
National Response Framework (NRF), which provides context for how the response community works together and how response efforts relate to other parts of
national preparedness.
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
(1) Prepare for
Radiological
Emergencies
(PM R35) Level of readiness of radiation program personnel and assets to support federal radiological emergency response and recovery
operations.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
90
90
93
93
93
93
Percent
Actual
92
99
94
93
95
96
Explanation of Results: The Core National Approach to Response (NAR) process currently measures select aspects of EPA's radiological emergency
response program and shows a continued high radiological emergency response readiness within EPA.
Additional Information: The level of readiness is measured as the percentage of response team members and assets that meet scenario-based response
criteria.
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
659
-------
(PM R36) Average time before availability of quality assured ambient
radiation air monitoring data during an emergency.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.3
0.3
0.3
Days
Actual
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.1
0.1
Explanation of Results: Over time, improvements in data processing and review processes have reduced the time that data are in the review process and
are thus available for release in less time.
Additional Information: In 2005, the average time between collection and availability of data for release by EPA during emergency operations was 2.5
days.
(PM R37) Time to approve site changes affecting waste characterization at DOE waste generator sites to ensure safe disposal of transuranic
radioactive waste at WIPP.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
70
70
70
70
70
70
Days
Actual
73
64
66
67
65
73
Explanation of Results: In FY 2017, EPA made a unique legal determination about the classification of nuclear waste within the Department of Energy
(DOE) complex as either spent nuclear fuel or transuranic waste, and then made a determination about its disposition based on that regulatory analysis.
Given the complexity of this issue, including legal issues, more time was required for EPA and DOE to come to resolution and as a result, the target was
missed.
GOAL 1: ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE AND IMPROVING AIR QUALITY
660
-------
Goal 2 at a Glance
PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
Protect and restore waters to ensure that drinking water is safe and sustainabiy man-
aged, and that aquatic ecosystems sustain fish, plants, wildlife, and other biota, as well
as economic, recreational, and subsistence activities.
FY 2017 Performance Measures
Met: 31 Not Met: 16 Data Unavailable: 7
(Total Measures: 54)
FY MUOHi gstion;*
Takirg Action on Climate Charge
anci I Tiproving Air Quality j 1,091.160
~ Protecting America's Waters, $4,196,956
^ Cleaning Up Con-iTiur¦.'rrtts
aid Advancing Sustainable Deveoprnent, $3,530,571
Enpjrirg the Sanetv of Chemicals
anc Preventing Pollution, $749419
~ Enforcing Environmental Laws; $779,531
FY 2017 Performance Measures
I Mvt'lM!
| Ms* AM
Objective 1
Objectve 2
Strategic Objective Overview
FY 2016 Obligations*
X of Goal 2 Funds
Objective 2.1: Protect Human Health.
Achieve and maintain standards and guidelines protective of human health in
drinking water supplies, fish, shellfish, and recreational waters, and protect and
sustainabty' manage d rinking water resources.
51,343.235
32.1%
Objective 2,2: Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems.
Protect, restore and sustain the quality of rivers, lakes, streams, and weiiands on
a watershed basis, and sustainablv manage and protect coastal and ocean
resources and ecosystems.
52,643.721
67.9%
Goal 2 Total
$4,196,956
100.0%
•All figures in thousands
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
661
-------
FY 2016 EPA Programs and Activities Contributing to Goal 2
Beach Program
Coastal and Ocean Programs
Chesapeake Bay
Children's Health Protection
Clean Water State Revolving Fund
Columbia River Estuary Partnership
Commission for Environmental Cooperation
Drinking Water and Ground Water Protection
Programs
Drinking Water Research
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund
Effluent Guidelines
Fish Consumption Advisories
Great Lakes
Gulf of Mexico
Human Health and Ecosystem Protection
Research
Human Health Risk Assessment
Long Island Sound
Mercury Research
National Environmental Monitoring Initiative
National Estuary Program/Coastal Waterways
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System
Nonpoint Source Pollution Control
Other Geographic Programs (including Lake
Pontchartrain and Northwest Forest),
Lake Champlain, San Francisco Bay Delta
Estuary, South Florida
Persistent Organic Pollutants
Puget Sound
Surface Water Protection Program
Sustainable Infrastructure Program
Total Maximum Daily Loads
Underground Injection Control Program
U.S.-Mexico Border
Wastewater Management
WaterSense
Water Monitoring
Water Quality Research
Water Quality Standards and Criteria
Watershed Management
Wetlands Marine Pollution
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
662
-------
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
Protect and restore waters to ensure that drinking water is safe and sustainably managed, and that aquatic ecosystems sustain fish, plants, wildlife, and other biota,
as well as economic, recreational, and subsistence activities.
Objective 1 - Protect Human Health: Achieve and maintain standards and guidelines protective of human health in drinking water supplies, fish, shellfish,
and recreational waters, and protect and sustainably manage drinking water resources.
Summary of progress toward strategic objective:
EPA has made significant progress towards this strategic objective by protecting and preserving our nation's drinking and recreational waters. In FY 2017, the
Drinking Water program provided 92.8% (284.8 million) of the nation's population served by community water systems with drinking water that met
standards. This year, EPA continued to work with states by releasing a data portal which improves the efficiency and accuracy with which water systems report
data. EPA also worked with a variety of stakeholders to conduct resilience workshops to better characterize risk, determine vulnerable assets, identify
mitigation strategies and implement recommendations.
EPA has advanced in the realms of resiliency and reporting while simultaneously supporting states in crisis. This year EPA conducted activities to support
states on Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) compliance including working with EPA's Region 5 office to disperse $100M in Drinking Water State Revolving Funds
(DWSRF) funding to Flint, Michigan. This effort will enable Flint to accelerate and expand its work to replace lead service lines and make other critical
infrastructure improvements. Further, EPA released the "LCR Requirements for Optimal Corrosion Control Treatment for Large Drinking Water Systems" and
the "Clarification of Recommended Tap Sampling Procedures for the Purposes of the LCR" to help drinking water systems reduce lead levels. EPA also
continues to manage the Headquarters Emergency Operation Center (EOC) Water Desk in response to Hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria, working closely
with Regional EOC staff in tracking impacts to water and wastewater plant operations and conveying this information to DHS's National Infrastructure
Coordination Center.
Challenges:
While EPA has made strides in protecting human health, the Agency still faces challenges in drinking water protection. One such challenge is states' capacity
to implement and oversee new and existing drinking water rules and keep up with emerging concerns. State programs continue to balance numerous issues
while addressing contaminant challenges outside the bounds of routine work plan activities, including lead contamination, natural disaster response and
emerging chemicals, particularly Per- and Polvfluoroalkvlated substances (PFAS). PFAS chemicals have been detected at sites across the country, often in
drinking water causing substantial concerns about the effects of PFAS on public health.
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
(1) Water Safe to
Drink
(PM aa) Percent of population served by CWSs that will receive drinking water that meets all applicable health-based drinking water standards
through approaches including effective treatment and source water protection.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
91
92
92
92
92
92
Percent
Actual
94.7
92
93
91
91.2
92.8
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
663
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Additional Information: In FY 2005, 89 percent of the population served by community water systems received drinking water that met applicable
drinking water standards.
(PM ape) Fund utilization rate for the DWSRF.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
89
89
89
89
89
89
Percent
Actual
90
91
92
94
95
96
Explanation of Results: The utilization rate has consistently increased over the last few years. From FY 2014 - FY 2017 states signed a record amount of
funds into new loans. This resulted from EPA and state implementation of the FY 2014 Unliquidated Obligation (ULO) Strategy, which led many states
to develop agile cash flow models to more accurately balance fund inflows and outflows.
Additional Information: In FY 2005, 89 percent of the population served by community water systems received drinking water that met applicable
drinking water standards.
(PM aph) Percent of community water systems that have undergone a sanitary survey within the past three years (five years for outstanding
performance or those ground water systems approved by the primacy agency to provide 4-log treatment of viruses).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
95
95
83
79
79
85
Percent
Actual
89
93
87
90.8
91.2
90.8
Additional Information: In FY 2007, 92 percent of community water systems had undergone a sanitary survey. Prior to FY 2007, this measure tracked
states rather than community water systems in compliance with this regulation. Starting in FY 2014, this measure includes ground water systems in
addition to surface water systems. Ground water systems that have been approved by the primacy agency to provide 4-log treatment of viruses or have
outstanding performance based on prior sanitary surveys may have sanitary surveys conducted no less than every five years (per 40 CFR
142.16(o)(2)(iii)). Because the universe is larger, the targets starting in FY 2014 have been adjusted accordingly.
(PM apm) Percent of community water systems that meets all applicable health-based standards through approaches including effective
treatment and source water protection.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
90
90
90
90
90
90
Percent
Actual
91
91
91
90
90.4
93
Additional Information: In FY 2005, 89 percent of community water systems met all applicable health-based drinking water standards.
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
664
-------
(PM aps) Percent of Classes I, II and III salt solution mining wells that have lost mechanical integrity and are returned to compliance within 180
days, thereby reducing the potential to endanger underground sources of drinking water.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
90
85
85
85
85
85
Actual
85
89
89
88
86
Data Avail
03/2018
Percent
Additional Information: There is no fixed point that can be used as a baseline for this measure, since the activity that we are monitoring - "Mechanical
Integrity Loss" - has not yet occurred. The universe of wells losing mechanical integrity is not static.
(PM apt) Number of Class V motor vehicle waste disposal wells (MVWDW) and large capacity cesspools (LCC) [approximately 23,640 in FY
20101 that are closed or permitted (cumulative).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
20,840
25,225
25,225
25,225
27,783
28,390
Wells
Actual
25,225
26,027
26,560
27,383
28,187
28,134
Explanation of Results: The target was missed due to an error in the FY 2015 reporting which led the program to establish an artificially high target for
FY 2017. The error has since been resolved.
Additional Information: FY 2012 was the first year of reporting for the measure. EPA is finding fewer and fewer wells suitable for closure or that have
not already been permitted.
(PM dw2) Percent of person months during which community water systems provide drinking water that meets all applicable health-based
standards.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
95
95
95
95
95
95
Actual
97.8
96.9
97
96
96
96.1
Percent
Additional Information: "Person months" for each community water system are calculated as the number of months with any health-based violation
multiplied by the retail population served. In FY 2005, community water systems provided drinking water that met all applicable health-based drinking
water standards during 95 percent of "person months."
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
665
-------
(PM pil) Percent of population in each of the U.S. Pacific Island Territories (served by community water systems) that meets all applicable
health-based drinking water standards, measured on a four-quarter rolling average basis.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
80
82
80
80
80
80
Percent
Actual
80
81
98
97.7
82.1
82
Additional Information: In FY 2005, 95 percent of the population in American Samoa, 10 percent in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands (CNMI) and 80 percent in Guam were served by Community Water Systems (CWSs) that received drinking water that met all applicable health-
based standards.
(PM E) Percent of the population in Indian Country served by community water systems that receive drinking water that meets all applicable
health-based drinking water standards.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
87
87
87
87
87
87
Percent
Actual
84
77
89
88
88
90.5
Additional Information: In FY 2005, 86 percent of the population served by community water systems received drinking water that met applicable
drinking water standards.
(2) Fish and
Shellfish Safe to
Eat
(PM fsl) Percent of women of childbearing age having mercury levels in blood above the level of concern.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
4.9
No Target
Established
4.9
No Target
Established
2.3
No Target
Established
Percent
Actual
2.8
Biennial
2.1
Biennial
3.3
Biennial
Explanation of Results: There are no statistical differences between the FY 2016 result and previous years' percentages that were reported.
Additional Information: In 1999-2000, 7.8 percent of women of childbearing age had mercury levels in blood above the level of concern.
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
666
-------
Objective 2 - Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems: Protect, restore, and sustain the quality of rivers, lakes, streams, and wetlands on a
watershed basis, and sustainably manage and protect coastal and ocean resources and ecosystems.
Summary of progress toward strategic objective:
EPA has made progress toward protecting and restoring watersheds and aquatic ecosystems through restoration efforts across the country. This year, EPA
began work on reviewing and potentially revising the definition of "Waters of the United States" and collaborated with the Department of Defense (DoD) to
publish the Uniform National Discharge Standards Rule which will establish distinct discharge performance standards for vessels of the Armed Forces. EPA
also made progress on critical actions such as the Analytical Methods Update Rule and Dental Mercury rule. Further, EPA drafted criteria and implementation
materials regarding toxic algal blooms and fish consumption to protect human health and the environment.
EPA also made significant progress in water quality improvement in various water bodies through implementation of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs).
To date, the EPA and states have developed over 74,000 TMDLs that address over 78,000 causes of impairments. The Long Island Sound reached a major
environmental milestone in FY 2017 by attaining the waste load allocations of the nitrogen TMDL, an annual reduction of 44 million pounds of nitrogen in the
watershed. Similarly, Vermont adopted a phosphorus reduction plan to reduce phosphorus entering Lake Champlain. EPA has been working with Vermont to
provide technical and financial assistance to support their efforts through stabilizing streambanks, issuing new wastewater and stormwater permits, and working
with farmers, town officials and foresters to implement new land management practices. In FY 2017, Chesapeake Bay was also on track to meet phosphorus
and sediment reduction goals set by the 2010 TMDL. Results of the 2014 to 2016 assessment period estimate that water quality in Chesapeake Bay and its tidal
tributaries improved by 5% from the previous assessment period.
EPA, along with state managers, continue to prioritize impaired waters and have improved conditions such that 4,162 waterbodies (identified by states in 2002
as not attaining standards) fully meet water quality standards as of FY 2017. EPA played a large role in the Puget Sound Pollution Identification and Correction
programs which contributed to the openings of several large shellfish bed areas in Puget Sound and improved water quality in terms of nutrients, sediments, and
temperature. EPA also worked to protect and restore aquatic ecosystems through the National Estuary Program, restoring 52,257 acres of habitat. Restoration
success stories also include Georgia's Piscola Creek, which has been listed as impaired for oxygen since 2000 and as of FY 2017 meets its water quality
standard for dissolved oxygen after the installation of 9,811 acres of agricultural conservation practices. Finally, in FY 2017, EPA progressed toward improved
water quality in tribal areas by holding its first Wetland Program Development Grant Tribal set-aside competition, awarding 17 grants to tribes.
Challenges:
EPA and the states still face a variety of challenges in water quality protection. The rate at which new waters are listed for water quality impairments exceeds
the pace at which restored waters are removed from the list. Additionally, multiple hurricanes damaged aquatic ecosystems and affected EPA's restoration and
protection efforts.. While EPA successfully protected and/or restored 52,000 acres, the Agency was still 48,000 below the target.
EPA continues to provide financial and technical assistance to states to support their efforts to reduce nutrient pollution, which continues to be a challenge
affecting many streams, rivers, lakes, bays and coastal waters. EPA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture are collaborating through the National Water
Quality Initiative to accelerate conservation practices to control nutrients, sediment and pathogens, and provide additional funding, technical assistance, and
direction to states to increase rate of implementation of conservation practices that control these pollutants.
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
667
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
(PM L) Number of water body segments identified by states in 2002 as not attaining standards, where water quality standards are now fully
attained (cumulative).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
3,324
3,727
3,829
4,016
4,082
4,089
Segments
Actual
3,527
3,679
3,866
3,944
4,009
4,162
Explanation of Results: Beginning in FY 2019, EPA will be using a new approach for measuring local improvements in water quality. The goal is to
provide a consistent method for measuring progress. This new approach will enable EPA to more effectively track water quality outcomes from
investments in protection and restoration.
(1) Improve
Additional Information: In FY 2002, 39,798 water bodies were identified by states and tribes as not meeting water quality standards. Water bodies
where mercury is among multiple pollutants causing impairment may be counted toward this target when all pollutants but mercury attain standards but
must be identified as still needing restoration for mercury; In FY 2002, 1,703 impaired water bodies were impaired by multiple pollutants, including
mercury, and 6,501 were impaired by mercury alone.
Water Quality on
a Watershed
(PM bpb) Fund utilization rate for the CWSRF.
Basis
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
94.5
94.5
94.5
94.5
95
95
Percent
Actual
98
97
98
98
98
98
Additional Information: In FY 2002, the fund utilization rate was 91 percent. It is calculated using data collected annually from all 51 state CWSRF
programs (50 states and Puerto Rico).
(PM bpf) Estimated annual reduction in millions of pounds of phosphorus from nonpoint sources to water bodies (Section 319 funded projects
only).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
Actual
4.4
3.5
2.7
2.1
2.6
Data Avail
03/2018
Pounds (Million)
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
668
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: (FY 2016 Results) In FY 2016, an estimated 2.6 million pounds of phosphorus originating from nonpoint sources were
prevented from entering waterbodies. This load reduction failed to meet the FY 2016 target of 4.5 million pounds. Over the past six fiscal years, the
program has only succeeded in reaching the phosphorus target in one of those years. There are several reasons for missing this target load reduction,
including: (1) phosphorus loadings vary greatly from year to year based on weather patterns; and (2) state priorities could have shifted to watersheds
where phosphorus is not a key/target pollutant.
(FY 2017 Results) EPA collects this information in its Grants Reporting and Tracking System (GRTS) for Section 319-funded on-the-ground
implementation projects that will reduce phosphorus-loads to waterbodies. States are not required to enter this information into GRTS until after one full
year of project implementation, so that field data can be collected to support the model calculations. Results are reported in GRTS by mid-February for
the past 12 months. Therefore, FY 2017 results will be available March 2018.
Additional Information: In 2005, there was a reduction of 558,000 lbs. of phosphorus from nonpoint sources.
(PM bpg) Estimated annual reduction in million pounds of nitrogen from nonpoint sources to water bodies (Section 319 funded projects only).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
8.5
9.1
9.1
9.1
9.1
9.1
Actual
9
10.4
11.3
9.6
12.7
Data Avail
03/2018
Pounds (Million)
Explanation of Results: EPA collects this information in GRTS for Section 319-funded on-the-ground implementation projects that will reduce nitrogen-
loads to waterbodies. States are not required to enter this information into GRTS until after one full year of project implementation, so that field data can
be collected to support the model calculations. Results are reported in GRTS by mid-February for the past 12 months. Therefore, FY 2017 results will be
available March 2018.
Additional Information: In 2005, there was a reduction of 3.7 million lbs. of nitrogen from nonpoint sources.
(PM bph) Estimated annual reduction in thousands of tons of sediment from nonpoint sources to water bodies (Section 319 funded projects
only).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
700
1,100
1,200
1,200
1,200
1,200
Actual
1,100
1,169
1,674
897
900
Data Avail
03/2018
Tons (Thousand)
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
669
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: (FY 2016 Results) In FY 2016, an estimated 900,000 tons of sediment-siltation originating from nonpoint sources were
prevented from entering waterbodies. This load reduction failed to meet the FY 2016 target of 1.2 million tons. This fiscal year marks the second
consecutive year the program has missed the sedimentation-siltation target. There are several reasons for missing this target load reduction, including: (1)
sediment-siltation loadings vary greatly from year to year based on weather patterns; and (2) state priorities could have shifted to watersheds where
sediment-siltation loadings is not a key/target pollutant.
(FY 2017 Results) EPA collects this information inGRTS for Section 319-funded on-the-ground implementation projects that will reduce sediment-loads
to waterbodies. States are not required to enter this information into GRTS until after one full year of project implementation, so that field data can be
collected to support the model calculations. Results are reported in GRTS by mid-February for the past 12 months. Therefore, FY 2017 results will be
available March 2018.
Additional Information: In 2005, there was a reduction of 1.68 million tons of sediment from nonpoint sources.
(PM bpl) Percent of high-priority state NPDES permits that are issued in the fiscal year.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
100
80
80
80
80
80
Actual
130
55
80
82
80
77.7
Percent
Explanation of Results: States issued 467 priority permits within the fiscal year (467/601 = 77.7%). In many cases, significant progress was made
toward issuing these remaining priority permits, but they did not get finalized before the end of the fiscal year. Some of these were finalized soon after
the end of the fiscal year, while some others were carried over as priority permits for FY 2018. Timing for the issuance for these priority permits can be
hard to predict as they are often the permits with the most complex technical issues, significant interest from the public, or involvement of other agencies.
Additional Information: Priority Permits are permits in need of reissuance that have been identified by states as environmentally or programmatically
significant. The annual universe of Priority Permits includes the number of permits selected as priority, from which a subset will be issued in the current
fiscal year. In 2005, 104% of the designated priority permits were issued in the fiscal year. Starting in FY 2013, results can no longer exceed 100%
issuance due to an adjustment of the measure definition, and the targets were revised accordingly. The universe used to calculate percentage results
changed from the number of permits committed to issuance in the current fiscal year to the total number of permits selected as priority.
(PM bpv) Percent of high-priority EPA and state NPDES permits (including tribal) that
are issued in the fiscal year.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
100
80
80
80
80
80
Percent
Actual
128
55
77
81
78
74.3
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
670
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: Regions and states issued 508 priority permits within the fiscal year (508/683 = 74.3%), 38 permits below the goal of 80%. In
many cases, significant progress was made toward issuing these remaining priority permits, but they did not get finalized before the end of the fiscal year.
Some of these were finalized soon after the end of the fiscal year, while some others were carried over as priority permits for FY 2018. Timing for the
issuance for these priority permits can be hard to predict as they are often the permits with the most complex technical issues, significant interest from the
public, or involvement of other agencies. Some Regions have seen an increase in the amount of staff time required to issue permits. In part, this has been
due to lengthy processes to complete consultations related to the Endangered Species Act, National Historic Preservation Act, and Coastal Zone
Management Act, as well as tribal consultations and obtaining state or tribal water quality certifications under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA). Additionally, some Regions are dealing with increasing work outside of issuing permits, such as supporting and negotiating appeals resolution,
defending other lawsuits, modifying permits, designing adaptive management monitoring programs for permitting, conducting water monitoring to have
the data to support allocations and Water Quality-based Effluent Limitations (WQBELs) in permits, and responding to requests from permittees and
states. Overall, issuing permits has become more difficult and the level of scrutiny from the public is increasing..
Additional Information: Priority Permits are permits in need of reissuance that have been identified by states or EPA Regions as environmentally or
programmatically significant. The annual universe of Priority Permits includes the number of permits selected as priority, from which a subset will be
issued in the current fiscal year. In 2005, 104% of the designated priority permits were issued in the fiscal year. Starting in FY 2013, results can no longer
exceed 100% issuance due to an adjustment of the measure definition, and the targets were revised accordingly. The universe used to calculate percentage
results changed from the number of permits committed to issuance in the current fiscal year to the total number of permits selected as priority.
(PM bpw) Percent of states and territories that, within the preceding 3-year period, submitted new or revised water quality criteria acceptable
to the EPA that reflect new scientific information from the EPA or sources not considered in previous standards.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
64.3
64.3
66.1
67.9
67.9
73.2
Percent
Actual
69.6
58.9
51.8
64.3
69.6
67.9
Explanation of Results: EPA and states may face significant challenges because of the technical complexity of adopting new numeric water quality
criteria for pollutants such as nutrients and toxic pollutants and keeping them up to date. EPA expects continued improvement in coming years as states
come into compliance with EPA's 2015 regulatory requirement for states to conduct more thorough triennial reviews of their standards.
Additional Information: In FY 2004, 70% of states and territories submitted acceptable water quality criteria reflecting new scientific information.
(PM bpx) Percent of areas associated with state-identified priority waters that are addressed by an EPA-approved TMDL or accepted plan or
approach designed to achieve or maintain water quality standards.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
8
8
31
Actual
Data Not
Reported
9
14
Percent
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
671
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: EPA continues to implement the Water Quality Framework to streamline assessment and reporting under the Clean Water Act
Section 303(d) Program by using consistent methods in national and state-level surveys along with state site-specific assessment conclusions to provide a
more complete picture of our nation's water quality and to demonstrate progress in water quality restoration. The Program saw regular dialogue among
states and territories, across Clean Water Act Programs, and among various stakeholders about how best to develop plans for addressing impaired and
healthy waters to demonstrate progress over time in achieving enviromnental results. This performance measure was the first one to transition to using
the Assessment and Total Maximum Daily Load Tracking and Implementation System (ATTAINS) database as the data source and the catchment area as
the unit of measure to report results. In spite of widespread impacts to staffing and resources, as well as a significant reduction in court-supervised
deadlines, states continue making progress to achieve or maintain water quality standards. EPA continues to work across programs to ensure that states
have robust and realistic long-term priorities that result in Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) and alternatives that are more successful in achieving
water quality goals, and protection approaches.
Additional Information: The measure provides the extent of priority areas identified by each state that have been addressed by EPA-approved Total
Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) or alternative restoration approaches for impaired waters, or protection approaches for high quality waters, at the
beginning of the year when the baseline is established. A TMDL is a technical plan for reducing pollutants to a body of water in order to attain water
quality standards. The terms "approved" and "established" refer to the completion and approval of the TMDL itself. The universe for the measure is all
watershed areas corresponding to priority waters identified by each state.
(PM wq2)
Remove the specific causes of water body impairment identified by states in 2002 (cumulative).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
10,161
11,634
12,134
12,788
12,990
13,110
Causes
Actual
11,134
11,754
12,288
12,640
12,910
13,140
Explanation of Results: Beginning in FY 2019, EPA will be using a new approach for measuring local improvements in water quality. The goal is to
provide a consistent method for measuring progress. This new approach will enable EPA to more effectively track water quality outcomes from
investments in protection and restoration.
Additional Information: In FY 2002, an estimate of 69,677 specific causes of water body impairments were identified by states.
(PM uwl) Number of urban water pro jects initiated addressing water
quality issues in the community.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
3
10
30
22
49
25
Projects
Actual
46
9
65
28
48
24
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
672
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: The initiated awards target is an estimate based on past awards. The actual awards made depends on a variety of factors
including the quality of proposed projects and, for the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation grants, the interest of the funding partners. EPA awarded
fewer grants in FY 2017 primarily because of the interest of the funding partners.
Additional Information: This measure tracks progress in grants that help communities access, improve, and benefit from their urban waters and
surrounding land. Projects are initiated under the Five-Star and Urban Waters Restoration Program managed by the National Fish and Wildlife
Foundation (sub-grants with EPA and leveraged public and private funds). Projects under both programs advance water quality improvement and EPA
investments are consistent with CWA Section 104(b)(3) authority.
(PM uw2) Number of urban water projects completed addressing water quality issues in the community (cumulative).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
61
78
175
Projects
Actual
60
110
158
Explanation of Results: EPA did not achieve 65 completions in FY 2017 to reach a cumulative number of 175, in part because some grantees requested
extensions for unforeseen reasons. The number of projects completed can vary widely because it is comprised of two grant programs with different
targeted project schedules.
Additional Information: Results include completed Urban Waters Small Grants and grants funded in part by EPA through the Five Star and Urban
Waters Restoration Program managed by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation.
(PM wq3) Improve water quality conditions in impaired watersheds nationwide using the watershed approach (cumulative).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
312
370
408
446
484
519
Watersheds
Actual
332
376
411
450
485
509
Explanation of Results: The target was missed due to: (1) Meeting standards in a single waterbody segment impaired by multiple pollutants is more
difficult than if just one or a few pollutants are impairing the single segment; (2) Many of the impairments which remain in waters identified in 2002
require many years before restoration strategies accomplish full recovery of the waterbody segments. Beginning in FY 2019, EPA will no longer be
reporting on this measure. EPA is switching to a new approach for measuring local improvements in water quality. The goal is to provide a consistent
method for measuring progress. This new approach will enable EPA to more effectively track water quality outcomes from investments in protection and
restoration.
Additional Information: In FY 2002, there were zero watersheds improved of an estimated 4,800 impaired watershed of focus having 1 or more water
bodies impaired. The watershed boundaries for this measure are those established at the "12-digit" scale by the U.S. Geological Survey. Watersheds at
this scale average 22 square miles in size. "Improved" means that that one or more of the impairment causes identified in FY 2002 are removed for at
least 40 percent of the impaired water bodies or impaired miles/acres, or there is significant watershed-wide improvement, as demonstrated by valid
scientific information, in one or more water quality parameters associated with the impairments.
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
673
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
(PM Opb) Percent of serviceable rural Alaska homes with access to drinking water supply and wastewater disposal.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
93
93
93.5
92.5
93
93.5
Percent
Actual
91
91
94.4
94.6
93.5
Data Avail
03/2018
Explanation of Results: Data is calculated by the State of Alaska after the Alaska construction season ends in late Fall, and is usually available the
following March.
Additional Information: In 2003, 77 percent of serviceable rural Alaska homes had access to drinking water supply and wastewater disposal.
(2) Improve
Coastal and
Ocean Waters
(PM sf3) At least seventy-five percent of the monitored stations in the near shore and coastal waters of the Florida Keys National Marine
Sanctuary will maintain Chlorophyll a(CHLA) levels at less than or equal to 0.35 ug 1-1 and light clarity (Kd) levels at less than or equal to 0.20
m-1.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
75
75
75
75
75
75
Percent
Actual
CHLA: 70.9; KD:
72.5
>75 (CHLA:
84.5; KD: 80.4)
CHLA = 86.0;
Kd = 87.2
CHLA = 82.0;
Kd = 77.3
CHLA = 70.9;
Kd = 78.5
CHLA = 76.2%;
Kd = 75.9%
Explanation of Results: Water column turbidity (cloudiness) has declined throughout the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary during the last 22
years. The decline in turbidity increases the clarity and the amount of light (Kd) able to penetrate which is beneficial to corals, seagrass, and
algae. Chlorophyll (CHLA) levels have remained relatively consistent throughout the Sanctuary with the exception of a decline at the reef tract sites.
Additional Information: In 2005, total water quality was at CHLA < 0.2 ug/1, light attenuation < 0.13/meter.
(PM sf4) At least seventy-five percent of the monitored stations in the near shore and coastal waters of the Florida Keys National Marine
Sanctuary will maintain dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN) levels at less than or equal to 0.75 uM and total phosphorus (TP) levels at less than
or equal to 0.25 uM.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
75
75
75
75
75
75
Percent
Actual
DIN: 81; TP: 89.5
<75 (DIN: 60.0;
TP: 82.3)
DIN=72.6;
TP=87.6
DIN=61.7;
TP=78.3
DIN = 70.8; TP
= 89.1
<75
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
674
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: DIN = 62.2%; TP = 89.1%. Beginning in 1996, the EPA-supported Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Water Quality
Monitoring Program funded quarterly monitoring to 155 stations in the Sanctuary. Budget reductions ($530K to $350K) in FY 2011 reduced the
monitoring stations to the current 112. The FY 2014-2018 targets were calculated using baseline data collected from 1995 - 2005 at 155 stations. To
accommodate the funding reduction, the decision was made to drop the expensive, difficult to reach Dry Tortugas and reef tract stations at the western
end of the Sanctuary. The sites dropped were in areas not heavily affected by human activities and of good water quality. The remaining stations are
nearer to shore and potentially exposed to increased land-based sources of pollution.
Additional Information: In 2005, total water quality was at CHLA < 0.2 ug/1, light attenuation < 0.13/meter.
(PM sf6) The number of Everglades Stormwater Treatment Areas (STAs) with the annual total phosphorus (TP) outflow less than or the same
as the five-year annual average TP outflow, working towards the long-term goal of meeting the 10 parts per billion annual geometric mean.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
3
3
3
Stormwater
Actual
4
4
1
Treatment Areas
Explanation of Results: The South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) is under a NPDES consent order negotiated with EPA that requires
them to expand the Stormwater Treatment Areas (STAs) systems. Once all the projects are completed (cost $800M), all five STAs are expected to
discharge at the 10 parts per billion water quality standards.
Additional Information: This was a new measure for FY 2015. The baseline period is the most recent five years. The 5-year baseline takes into account
variability due to climatic conditions including extremely wet or dry years which are common in South Florida. For FY 2015, the 5-year baseline, 2010 to
2015, was 36 parts per billion (ppb) for STA-1E, 35 ppb for STA-1W, 21 ppb for STA-2, 17 ppb for STA-3/4, and 54 ppb for STA-5/6. The universe is 5
STAs.
(PM co5) Percent of active dredged material ocean dumping sites that will have achieved environmentally acceptable conditions (as reflected in
each site's management plan).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
95
95
95
95
95
95
Percent
Actual
97
96
95
95
97
98
Explanation of Results: In FY 2017, 69 sites had achieved environmentally acceptable conditions (69/71=97%).Environmentally acceptable conditions
for each of the ocean dumping sites is defined in the site's management plan and is measured through on-site monitoring. In 2017, two of our sites were
not meeting the conditions as described in their individual site management plans. At the Gulfport West Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site
(ODMDS), the northern portion of the site exceeds the minimum depth limitation. At the Miami ODMDS, sampling had identified elevated levels of
PCBs.
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
675
-------
(PM 202) Acres protected or restored in National Estuary Program study areas.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
100,000
100,000
100,000
100,000
100,000
100,000
Acres
Actual
114,575
127,594
93,557
111,584
70,462
52,257
Explanation of Results: Factors contributing to the number of acres protected and restored each year by the National Estuary Programs (NEPs) and their
partners are numerous and complex making it difficult to accurately forecast with any degree of certainty. Some of the challenges that resulted in missing
our target include:
1) delays in funding, increased cost, permits, or contracts. The costs to design and implement restoration projects are increasing and require more time to
find and leverage the necessary finances to bring a project to fruition. Protection efforts involving real estate transactions often have legal issues that need
to be carefully and responsibly worked through taking a long time to complete.
2) timing to pull together multiple partners and coordinate implementing activities. Some NEPs are working on fairly large restoration projects (over
1,000 acres) which take more time and effort to design, get various enviromnental clearances which can require going through a complicated and
expensive process involving: technical analysis, hydrologic & hydraulics systems performance analysis, geotechnical analysis. National Enviromnental
Policy Act (NEPA), real estate requirements, permitting, etc., and then implementation.
3) weather-related events. A number of NEPs were hit by hurricanes this Fall including San Juan Bay, Charlotte Harbor, Coastal Bend Bays and
Galveston Bay. The hurricanes affected the ability of the NEPs to report because their offices were closed and without power. NEP staff homes and cars
were flooded so they were not able to come into the offices and report.
Additional Information: A total of 1,640,463 acres of habitat were protected or restored from FY 2002-2017.
(PM 4E) In partnership with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, states, and tribes, achieve no net loss of wetlands each year under the Clean
Water Act Section 404 regulatory program. ("No net loss" of wetlands is based on requirements for mitigation in CWA 404 permits and not the
actual mitigation attained.)
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
No Net Loss
No Net Loss
No Net Loss
No Net Loss
No Net Loss
No Net Loss
Acres
(3) Increase
Actual
No Net Loss
No Net Loss
No Net Loss
No Net Loss
No Net Loss
No Net Loss
Wetlands
Additional Information: EPA receives data for this measure from the Annv Corps of Engineers (ACE).
(PM 4G) Number of acres restored and improved under the 5-Star, NEP, 319, and great water body programs (cumulative).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
170,000
190,000
220,000
230,000
290,000
305,000
Acres
Actual
180,000
207,000
221,000
275,555
291,055
301,463
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
676
-------
Explanation of Results: The results for this measure primarily come from the NEP habitat acres. The EPA missed its target for protecting and restoring
the NEP habitat acres primarily because of response to the Hurricanes Maria and Irma, delays in funding, and timing to pull together multiple partners
and coordinate implementing activities.
Additional Information: This measure describes the wetland acres restored through only EPA programs. Information on the national status of wetland
gains and losses regardless of the cause is provided every five years by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). The most recent report (U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, Status and Trends of Wetlands in the Conterminous United States 2004 to 2009: http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Status-And-Trends-
2009/index.html) noted an annual net loss of 13,800 acres.
(PM 625) Areas of Concern Beneficial Use Impairments removed (cumulative).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
33
41
46
60
65
72
Actual
33
41
52
60
65
73
BUIs
Explanation of Results: Beneficial Use Impairments (BUIs) were removed at: Black River, OH (2); St. Marys, MI; Lower Menominee River, MI/WI (2);
St. Clair River, MI (2); and Rochester Embayment, NY.
Additional Information: Results from this measure are achieved through Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) funding as well as other non-GLRI
federal and/or state funding. Universe is 255. Reviews of this measure conducted during the preparation of GLRI Action Plan II in FY 2014 identified
overstatements of the number of beneficial use impairments removed. The cumulative results shown above are two less than were achieved through FY
2012 and FY 2013. Corrected results are shown from FY 2014 onward.
(4) Great Lakes
(PM 626) Number of Areas of Concern in the Great Lakes where all management actions necessary for delisting have been implemented
(cumulative).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
3
4
5
8
9
11
AOCs
Actual
2
3
7
7
8
11
Explanation of Results: Areas of Concern (AOC) Management Actions were completed at the River Raisin, MI (12/5/2016), St. Marys River, MI
(8/28/2017), and Lower Menominee, MI/WI (5/17/2017).
Additional Information: Universe of 31. Results from this measure are achieved through GLRI funding as well as other non-GLRI federal and/or state
funding.
(PM 628) Number of acres controlled by GLRI-funded projects (cumulative).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
15,500
34,000
38,000
94,500
110,000
120,000
Acres
Actual
31,474
35,924
84,500
101,392
115,889
134,856
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
677
-------
Additional Information: There were zero acres managed for populations of invasive species controlled to a target level in 2005.
(PM 629) Number of GLRI-funded Great Lakes rapid responses or exercises conducted.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
8
14
9
8
8
8
Responses/Exercis
es
Actual
15
7
8
21
11
25
Explanation of Results: The 8 Great Lakes States have committed to conducting annual training exercises, but prioritize activities to respond to
detections of new invasive species. In FY 2017, multiple state agencies and others completed 25 actual responses.
Additional Information: There were zero multi-agency rapid response plans established, mock exercises to practice responses carried out under those
plans, and/or actual response actions in 2005.
(PM 638) Projected phosphorus reductions from GLRI-funded projects in targeted watersheds (measured in pounds).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
130,000
310,000
525,000
Pounds
Actual
160,117
402,943
767,864
Additional Information: Cumulative measure of average annual projected reduction, starting in FY 2015.
(PM 639) Projected volume of untreated urban runoff captured or treated by GLRI-funded projects (cumulative).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
30
70
120
Gallons (millions)
Actual
37
116
239
Explanation of Results: GLRI agencies have learned more about which management practices work best and have used opportunities to implement
projects with these best management practices, yielding better results than originally projected.
Additional Information: Cumulative measure of average annual projected reduction, starting in FY 2015.
(PM 640) Number of miles of Great Lakes tributaries reopened by GLRI-funded projects (cumulative).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
2,200
4,200
4,900
Miles
Actual
3,855
4,615
4,967
Additional Information: As of October 1, 2014, 3,475 miles of tributaries were reopened by GLRI-funded projects. Universe: N/A.
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
678
-------
(PM 641) Number of miles of Great Lakes shoreline and riparian corridors protected, restored, and enhanced by GLRI-funded projects
(cumulative).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
75
350
725
Miles
Actual
313
662
947
Explanation of Results: Agencies continued to accelerate projects to protect, restore, and/or enhance targeted coastal habitats and key river corridors in
the Great Lakes. Significant achievements were realized in small tributaries and shorelines addressing invasive or nuisance species resulting in greater
miles than expected.
Additional Information: As of October 1, 2014, 3,475 miles of tributaries were reopened by GLRI-funded projects. Universe: N/A.
(PM 642) Number of acres of Great Lakes coastal wetlands protected, restored, and enhanced by GLRI-funded pro jects (cumulative).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
7,000
15,000
30,000
Acres
Actual
7,033
17,540
24,306
Explanation of Results: In addition to significant on-the-ground restoration, significant planning and design activities were initiated in order to greatly
accelerate acres of coastal wetlands to be restored in FY 2018 and FY 2019. Acreage from several projects that were delayed in FY 2017 are expected to
be realized in FY 2018.
Additional Information: As of October 1, 2014, there were zero miles of wetlands known to have been protected, restored, and enhanced by GLRI-
funded projects. Universe is 260,000 acres.
(PM 643) Number of acres of other habitats in the Great Lakes basin
jrotected, restored, and enhanced by GLRI-funded pro jects (cumulative).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
127,000
167,000
187,000
Acres
Actual
146,815
167,218
201,075
Additional Information: As of October 1, 2013, there were 117,000 acres of other habitats protected, restored, and enhanced by GLRI-funded projects.
Universe is 1,290,000 acres.
(5) Chesapeake
Bay
(PM cb6) Percent of goal achieved for implementing nitrogen reduction actions to achieve the final TMDL allocations, as measured through the
phase 5.3 watershed model.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
15
22.5
30
37.5
45
52.5
Percent
Actual
21
25
27
21
31
33
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
679
-------
Explanation of Results: The nitrogen measure is well below the target value principally due to the lack of new implementation of Best Management
Practices (BMPs) in Pennsylvania, particularly in the agricultural sector. The remaining six watershed jurisdictions are either on the right trajectory to
achieve their 2017 targets (DC, VA, WV) or less than a million pounds above their 2017 reduction target (DE, MD, NY). Pennsylvania is currently 18
million pounds above their 2017 reduction target and 34 million pounds above their 2025 goal. Among jurisdictions, about 55% of the needed nitrogen
load reductions to achieve the basinwide 2015 target are from PA and the state's Watershed Implementation Plan calls for 71% of the state reductions to
come from agriculture. The Chesapeake Bay watershed portion of Pennsylvania is at 9% of their needed load reductions when they should be at 53% of
the total TMDL reductions. PA's efforts have not been enough over several years to improve the rate of load reductions. Monitoring trends are levelling
out and it will likely take many years for PA to make adequate progress to meet targets. Historic improving water quality trends in Susquehanna River's
nitrogen loads being delivered to Chesapeake Bay have been leveling off for several years. EPA and the United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA) have been working together to provide more funding, technical assistance, and direction to Pennsylvania to increase rate of implementation of
practices to reduce nitrogen. EPA has also increased its oversight of Pennsylvania's programs and the use of federal actions in the agriculture and
urban/suburban sectors.
Additional Information: As of October 1, 2013, there were 117,000 acres of other habitats protected, restored, and enhanced by GLRI-funded projects.
Universe is 1,290,000 acres.
(PM cb7) Percent of goal achieved for implementing phosphorus reduction actions to achieve final TMDL allocations, as measured through the
phase 5.3 watershed model.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
15
22.5
30
37.5
45
52.5
Percent
Actual
19
27
43
71
81
81
Additional Information: In FY 2010 (the baseline year), zero percent of the goal was achieved.
(PM cb8) Percent of goal achieved for implementing sediment reduction actions to achieve final TMDL allocations, as measured through the
phase 5.3 watershed model.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
15
22.5
30
37.5
45
52.5
Percent
Actual
30
32
37
25
48
57
Additional Information: In FY 2010 (the baseline year), zero percent of the goal was achieved.
(PM xg2) Restore, enhance, or protect a cumulative number of acres of important coastal and marine habitats.
(6) Gulf of Mexico
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
30,600
30,600
30,600
30,800
30,800
31,426
Acres
Actual
30,248
30,306
30,319
30,574
31,276
31,554
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
680
-------
Additional Information: The Gulf of Mexico program counts acres once projects are in place and results are recognized. As of FY 2008 (the baseline year), 25,515 acres
were restored, enhanced, or protected in the Gulf of Mexico.
(PM xg3) Improve and/or restore water and habitat quality to meet water quality standards in watersheds throughout the five Gulf States and
the Mississippi River Basin.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
2
2
Watersheds (12
digit HUC)
Actual
2
2
Additional Information: New measure replaced PM xgl in FY 2016. The measure tracks improved and/or restored watershed annually. A 12-digit
Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) watershed counts as having an improvement when there is a five percent or more positive change in at least one water
quality parameter. Water quality parameter(s) appropriate to the 12-digit HUC watershed include dissolved oxygen, temperature, pH, turbidity, total
suspended solids, salinity, chlorophyll, freshwater inflow, oil/grease, floatables, nutrients, and invasive species.
(PM li5) Percent of goal achieved in reducing trade-equalized (TE) point source nitrogen discharges to Long Island Sound from the 1999
baseline of 59,146 TE lbs/day.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
74
76
85
91.5
95
100
Actual
83
88
94
99.8
111
Data Avail
03/2018
Percent
(7) Long Island
Sound
Explanation of Results: Nitrogen discharge data is collected by the states of New York and Connecticut on a calendar year basis from the 106 treatment
plants discharging to Long Island Sound. December data is reported with a 30-day lag time and that data is reviewed for quality assurance and confirmed
then entered into EPA's Discharge Monitoring Report system by the states in early March. Full calendar year data is required in order to capture seasonal
variations in processing nitrogen through biological means. Temperature variations (fall/winter vs spring/summer) and precipitation levels affect the
ability of the treatment plant operators to control nitrogen discharges.
Additional Information: The 2000 TMDL baseline is 59,146 Trade-Equalized (TE) pounds/day. The ongoing TMDL target is 22,774 TE pounds/day.
The Long Island Sound Nitrogen TMDL is an enforceable document with a 15-year implementation timetable that completed in 2014. There are no
annual targets in the TMDL. The 'annual targets' in the strategic plan are for presentation purposes only and are estimates based on the 15-year total
nitrogen reduction target. New York City and Westchester County Sewage Treatment Plants (STPs) are under Consent Orders that extended their TMDL
compliance deadline to 2017. EPA monitored these for compliance, as well as Connecticut STPs for anti-backsliding compliance with their final TMDL
limits, or as renegotiated with EPA.
(PM li8) Restore, protect or enhance acres of coastal habitat from the 2010 baseline of 2,975 acres.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
218
420
410
135
95.8
398
Acres
Actual
537
336
410
1,678
532
669
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
681
-------
Explanation of Results: A major 100-acre coastal forest project completed in the Bronx, NY accounted for much of the greater-than-expected
accomplishment.
Additional Information: EPA revised this measure in FY 2012 to measure acres instead of percent of goal achieved. EPA established annual targets with
partners to measure annual progress. Out-year estimates are based on continued state progress, feasibility, and funding for habitat restoration projects.
(PM li9) Reopen miles of river and stream corridors to diadromous fish passage from the 2010 baseline of 17.7 river miles by removal of dams
and barriers or by installation of bypass structures.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
28
75
1.5
30
76.95
30
Miles
Actual
72.3
56
21.6
0
50
22
Explanation of Results: Four projects forecast to be completed in FY 2017 have incurred delays in design review, logistics, or state and federal
permitting: 1) Noroton River fishway (4.7 miles), 2) Heminway Pond Dam Removal (1.7 miles), 3) Flock Process Dam Removal (3.5 miles), and 4)
Blackledge River Dam Removal (2 miles). These account for the shortfall. The first two projects will be completed by the end of calendar year 2017 or
early in 2018.
Additional Information: EPA revised this measure in FY 2012 to report river miles instead of percent of goal achieved. EPA established annual targets
with partners to measure annual progress. Out-year estimates are based on continued state progress, feasibility, and funding for fish passage and bypass
projects.
(PM psl) Improve water quality and enable the lifting of harvest restrictions in acres of shellfish bed growing areas impacted by degrading or
declining water quality (cumulative).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
3,878
7,758
4,000
4,700
4,750
6,350
Acres
Actual
2,489
3,203
3,249
3,277
3,887
5,083
(8) Puget Sound
Basin
Explanation of Results: The annual Puget Sound shellfish performance measure is a cumulative measure that aggregates the net gain in acres that are
upgraded to approved status minus any loss of currently approved acres. In FY 2017, there were 1,935 acres that were upgraded to "approved" status due
to improvements to water quality. However, there were 739 acres downgraded to "conditional" status due to recurrence of bacterial pollution
predominantly from nonpoint source pollution contributing to missing our target.
Additional Information: The annual Puget Sound shellfish performance measure is a cumulative measure that aggregates the net gain in acres that are
upgraded to approved status minus any loss of currently approved acres. Federal state, local, and tribal partners work together to protect Puget Sound's
approximately 143,000 acres of approved shellfish harvest beds, and improve its approximately 10,000 acres of potentially recoverable shellfish beds, by
ensuring that adjacent water quality and safe harvesting conditions are preserved.
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
682
-------
(PM ps3) Protect or restore acres or shoreline miles of aquatic habitats including: estuaries, floodplains, marine and freshwater shorelines,
riparian areas, stream habitats, and associated wetlands (cumulative).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
19,063
31,818
33,818
43,006
45,500
48,000
Acres
Actual
23,818
30,128
41,006
43,002
45,360
49,752
Additional Information: The protection and restoration of habitat is one of the three priority areas for the Puget Sound Program. These activities
supported salmon recovery goals of viable, harvestable populations of this tribal treaty protected resource. In FY 2008, 4,413 acres (cumulative) of
tidally- and seasonally-influenced estuarine wetlands were restored. Between FY 2008 - FY 2017 49,752 acres have been protected and/or restored.
(PM 4pg) Loading of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) removed (million pounds/year) from the U.S.-Mexico border area since 2003
(cumulative).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
115
121.5
137.3
141.1
150.3
151.9
Million
Actual
119
128.3
131
142.9
151.8
152
Pounds/Y ear
Additional Information: As of FY 2003, zero pounds of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) had been removed.
(PM xb2) Number of additional homes provided safe drinking water in the U.S.-Mexico border area that lacked access to safe drinking water in
2003.
(9) U.S.-Mexico
Border
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
1,000
3,000
1,700
600
500
1,500
Homes
Environmental
Health
Actual
5,185
3,400
1,468
878
3,700
1,599
Additional Information: "Additional homes" represents the number of existing households that are provided access (i.e., connected) to safe drinking
water as a result of Border Enviromnent Infrastructure Fund (BEIF)-supported projects. The known universe is the number of existing households in the
U.S.-Mexico border area lacking access to safe drinking water in FY 2003 (98,515 homes). The known universe was calculated from U.S. Census and the
Mexican National Water Commission (CONAGUA) sources. This measure was modified from cumulative to annual beginning in FY 2012 to better
capture annual program progress.
(PM xb3) Number of additional homes provided adequate wastewater sanitation in the U.S.-Mexico border area that lacked access to
wastewater sanitation in 2003.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
10,500
27,000
39,500
40,750
40,720
450
Homes
Actual
31,092
25,695
12,756
44,070
45,000
495
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
683
-------
Additional Information: "Additional homes" represents the number of existing households that are provided access (i.e., connected) to adequate
wastewater sanitation as a result of Border Environment Infrastructure Fund (BEIF)-supported projects. The known universe is the number of existing
households in the U.S.-Mexico border area lacking access to adequate wastewater sanitation services in FY 2003 (690,723). The known universe of
unconnected homes was calculated from U.S. Census and the Mexican National Water Commission (CONAGUA) sources. This measure was modified
from cumulative to annual beginning in FY 2012 to better capture annual program progress.
GOAL 2: PROTECTING AMERICA'S WATERS
684
-------
Goal 3 at a Glance
CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Clean up communities, advance sustainable development, and protect disproportionately
impacted low-income and minority communities. Prevent releases of harmful substances
and clean up and restore contaminated areas.
FY
Met: 19
2017 Performance Measures
Not Met: 11 Data Unavailable: 2
(Total Measures: 32)
FY 2017 OHigationi*
Taking Action on CTimarte Change
and Improving Air Quality. Si.091.160
~ Protecting America's Waters, >4.196,956
^ Cleaning Up Communities
and Advancing Sustainable Development, $3,530,571
Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals
and Pneverrthg Ptjllution. $749,419
~ Enforcing Emt'irw-merSal Laws, $779,531
FY 2017 Perf ormance Measures
20
15
I Mb) iM'
I haMc;!
5m
Objective 1 Objective 2 Dbfecsive 3 Objective 4
Strategic Objective Overview
FY 2016 Obligations*
% of Goal 3 Funds
objective 3,1: Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities,
Support sustainable, resilient, and livable communities by working with local,
state, tribal, and federal partners to promote smart growth, emergency
preparedness and recovery planntrg, redevelopment and reuse of contaminated
and formerly contaminated sites, and the equitable distribution of
environmental benefits.
S435,934
13. B%
Objective 3.2: Preserve Land.
Conserve resources and prevent land contamination by reducing waste
generation and toxicity, promoting proper management of waste and petroteum
products, and increasing sustainable materials management.
Si,236,617
36.7%
Objective 33: Restore Land,
Prepare for and respond to accidental or intentional releases of contaminants
and clean up and restore polluted sites for reuse.
51,655,377
46.9%
Objective 3A: Strengthen human Health and Environmental Protection in
1 ndian Country.
Directly implement federal environmental programs in Indian Country and
support federal program delegation to tribes. Provide tribes with technical
assistance and support capacity development for the establishment and
implementation of sustainable environmental programs in Indian Country.
S92,643
2.6%
Goal 3 Total
$3,530,571
100.0%
*AII figures in thousands
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
685
-------
FY 2016 EPA Programs and Activities Contributing to Goal 3
Brownfields and Land Revitalization
Environmental Response Laboratory Network
Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse
Global Change Research
Homeland Security
Homeland Security Research
Human Health and Ecosystem Protection Research
Human Health Risk Assessment
Leaking USTs
National Environmental Monitoring Initiative
Oil Spill Prevention Preparedness and Response
RCRA Corrective Action
RCRA Waste Management
RCRA Waste Minimization and Recycling
Research Fellowships
Risk Management Program
Sector Grant Program
Smart Growth
State and Local Prevention and Preparedness
Superfund Emergency Preparedness
Superfund Emergency Response and Removal
Superfund Enforcement
Superfund Remedial
Tribal Capacity-Building
Tribal General Assistance Program
UST Prevention and Compliance
U.S.-Mexico Border
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
686
-------
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Clean up communities, advance sustainable development, and protect disproportionately impacted low-income and minority communities. Prevent releases of
harmful substances and clean up and restore contaminated areas
Objective 1 - Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities: Support sustainable, resilient, and livable communities by working with local, state, tribal,
and federal partners to promote smart growth, emergency preparedness and recovery planning, brownfield redevelopment, and the equitable distribution of
environmental benefits.
Summary of progress toward strategic objective:
EPA continued to make progress under this objective. The Brownfields program showed strong results in FY 2017, including more than 8,400 jobs created and
$1.7 billion leveraged from public and private sources (more than recent years). As of the end of FY 2017, cumulatively Brownfields federal funding has
leveraged more than 124,072 jobs and raised $26.47 billion from both public and private sources, advancing environmental and human health protection while
stimulating economic development by returning sites to productive use. Data from local governments near 48 brownfield sites show that these entities collected
an estimated total of $29 to $97 million in additional taxes in a single year after cleanup (two to seven times the $12.4 million EPA contribution).
Challenges:
Challenges include meeting the demand for Brownfields assistance, and making sure the funds from Brownfields revolving loan funds are available for
additional projects. In addition, EPA inspects less than 4% of the universe of risk management facilities and expects this low inspection rate to continue.
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
(PM B29) Brownfield properties assessed.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
1,200
1,200
1,200
1,300
1,400
1,400
Properties
Actual
1,444
1,528
1,659
1,320
1,392
1,419
(2) Assess and
Explanation of Results: EPA narrowly met the FY 2017 target as EPA regions continue to work through several years of backlogged work packages and
additional assessments are reported from earlier work.
Clean Up
Brownfields
Additional Information: This measure tracks the number of properties that have been cleaned up to a regulatory risk based standard using EPA
Brownfields funding, as reported by cooperative agreement recipients. EPA awards competitive grants to communities to assess, clean up, and reuse of
Brownfields properties that are contaminated or perceived to be contaminated.
(PM B32) Number of properties
cleaned up using Brownfields funding.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
120
120
120
120
130
130
Properties
Actual
120
122
132
150
136
137
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
687
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Additional Information: This measure tracks the number of properties that have been cleaned up to a regulatory risk based standard using EPA
Brownfields funding, as reported by cooperative agreement recipients.
(PM B33) Acres of Brownfields
jroperties made ready for reuse.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
3,000
3,000
3,000
4,000
5,500
5,500
Acres
Actual
3,314
4,644
6,389
7,817
7,354
5,677
Explanation of Results: Acres made ready for reuse varies from year-to-year as there is no programmatic control over the size of any particular
brownfield site. Acreage levels fluctuate greatly from year to year, but loosely correlate with the number of anticipated cleanups and assessments.
Additional Information: This measure tracks the number of acres associated with properties benefiting from EPA Brownfields funding that have been
assessed and determined not to require cleanup, or where cleanup has been completed and institutional controls are in place if required, as reported by
cooperative agreement recipients.
(PM B34) Jobs leveraged from Brownfields activities.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
5,000
5,000
5,000
5,000
7,000
7,000
Jobs
Actual
5,593
10,141
12,376
11,229
9,661
8,472
Explanation of Results: Jobs leveraged varies from year-to-year as it is dependent on the final use of the brownfield sites. The relatively large
accomplishment numbers in FYs: 2013, 2014, and 2015 were due to improved reporting and several very large projects. Likewise, FY 2017 result still
exceeded the target and this is because it is difficult to predict the result due to the variety of factors that play a role in the redevelopment of a brownfield
site, such as larger development projects producing more jobs than anticipated, and data cleanup efforts in all of the regions resulting in the reporting of
more jobs.
Additional Information: This measure tracks the number of cleanup and redevelopment jobs leveraged by assessment or cleanup activities conducted
with EPA Brownfields funding, as reported by cooperative agreement recipients at a specific property.
(PM B37) Billions of dollars of cleanup and redevelopment funds leveraged at Brownfields sites.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.1
Dollars (Billions)
Actual
1.2
1.54
1.29
1.71
1.47
1.7
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
688
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: Target was significantly exceeded due to larger development projects in FY 2017, as well as data cleanup in the EPA Regions.
Specifically, due to the difficulty of predicting the annual dollars leveraged accomplishment level, economic impacts vary greatly and are impacted by
many factors beyond a brownfield site cleanup.
Additional Information: This measure tracks the number of additional dollars leveraged by assessment or cleanup activities conducted with EPA
Brownfields funding, as reported by cooperative agreement recipients at a specific property.
(3) Reduce
Chemical Risks at
Facilities and in
Communities
(PM CH2) Number of risk management plan inspections conducted.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
530
500
460
460
460
460
Inspections
Actual
652
539
466
376
343
397
Explanation of Results: Competing priorities make it difficult for EPA regions to set higher targets for conducting inspections. Between FY 2000 and
FY 2017, more than 9,297 RMP inspections were completed. Of the 397 RMP facility inspections completed in FY 2017, close to 40 percent were
conducted at high-risk facilities, detennined by factors such as nearby population and accident history.
Additional Information: The Risk Management Plan (RMP) Rule implements Section 112(r) of the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments. RMP requires
facilities (approximately 12,700) that use extremely hazardous substances to develop a Risk Management Plan. The information required from facilities
under RMP helps local fire, police, and emergency response personnel prepare for and respond to chemical emergencies.
Objective 2 - Preserve Land: Conserve resources and prevent land contamination by reducing waste generation and toxicity, promoting proper management
of waste and petroleum products, and increasing sustainable materials management.
Summary of progress toward strategic objective:
EPA made steady progress under this objective. By FY 2017, 71.6% of underground storage tank (UST) facilities are in significant operational compliance with
leak detection and release prevention requirements. The Agency reviewed more than 30 draft state Underground Storage Tank (UST) regulations. In FY 2017,
EPA issued new or updated controls for 151 hazardous waste facilities, significantly exceeding the goal of 115 through efficiency improvements and better
training for staff. A total of 9,037,319 tons of virgin materials were offset through Sustainable Materials Management in FY 2014 (most recent data).
Participants in the Federal Green Challenge improved efficiency in materials management, saving more than $17 million across natural gas, fuel oil, paper
purchasing, water, and municipal solid waste categories. The Food Recovery Challenge participants worked on preventing and diverting over 740,000 tons of
food from entering landfills in 2016.
Challenges:
Challenges include the 2.5 billion tons of solid, industrial, and hazardous wastes produced each year; potential health and environmental risks from sudden
releases at older waste management units and UST sites, due to aging infrastructure, emerging contaminants or new technologies, and units closed pre-RCRA
that are not covered by current requirements; and constrained ability to engage in international waste issues such as toxic wastes being moved across borders
and different standards being applied to treat and dispose of wastes. Numbers of UST facilities in significant operational compliance with leak detection and
release prevention requirements, and UST releases, have remained level in recent years.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
689
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
(PM SMI) Tons of materials and products offsetting use of virgin resources through sustainable materials
management.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
8,549,502
8,501,537
8,603,033
9,346,830
9,450,000
9,550,000
Actual
9,002,588
8,795,750
9,037,319
Data Avail
05/2018
Data Avail
11/2018
Data Avail
05/2019
Tons
(1) Waste
Generation and
Additional Information: As part of its sustainable materials management program, EPA promotes three national strategies: The Federal Green
Challenge, the Electronics Challenge, and the Food Recovery Challenge. These strategies are focused on using less environmentally intensive and toxic
materials and employing downstream solutions, like reuse and recycling, to conserve resources for future generations. EPA is working with other federal
agencies, state and tribal governments, and non-governmental organizations to promote sustainability goals through these and other initiatives.
Recycling
(PM MW8) Number of tribes covered by an integrated solid waste management plan.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
3
3
10
10
10
10
Tribes
Actual
13
26
20
16
15
12
Explanation of Results: As of the end of September 2017, 236 of 574 federally-recognized tribes were covered by an integrated waste management plan.
Additional Information: Tribal integrated waste management plans help to ensure that solid wastes are managed appropriately, preventing contamination
and recovering resources to the maximum extent possible. These plans are developed with direct tribal funding as well as funds from EPA and other
federal agencies. EPA also offers technical assistance to tribes, such as that provided through tribal circuit riders.
(PM HWO) Number of hazardous waste facilities with new or updated
controls.
(2) Minimize
Releases of
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
100
100
100
110
115
115
Facilities
Hazardous Waste
and Petroleum
Products
Actual
117
114
129
120
111
151
Explanation of Results: The target was significantly exceeded through efficiency improvements and better training for new staff.
Additional Information: Initial and updated controls for hazardous waste facilities are essential to maintaining protective standards, operating conditions,
and up to date equipment for the safe management of hazardous wastes.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
690
-------
(PM PCB) Number of approvals issued for polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) cleanup, storage and disposal
activities.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
150
200
200
200
Approvals
Actual
254
218
182
190
Explanation of Results: EPA relies on past performance to predict future workload. EPA did not receive enough applications to meet the target in FY
2017. EPA issued 1,815 approvals between FY 2008 and FY 2017.
Additional Information: This measure tracks all approvals issued by EPA under Section 761 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for PCBs.
Approvals are initiated by the individual/company and submitted to EPA for review. EPA does not have any way to identify all the PCB approval needs
in a given year and relies mainly on historical information to estimate the upcoming "workload" for approvals in setting targets.
(PM ST6) Increase the percentage of UST facilities that are in significant operational compliance (SOC) with both release detection and release
prevention requirements by 0.5% over the previous year's target.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
66.5
67
70
70.5
71
71.5
Percent
Actual
71.3
71.6
72.5
72.6
72.5
71.6
Explanation of Results: In FY 2017, there were 93,228 on-site inspections of USTs.
Additional Information: The Energy Policy Act of 2005 requires states and EPA to inspect all USTs every three years.
(PM ST1) Reduce the number of confirmed releases at UST facilities to five percent (5%) fewer than the prior year's target.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
<8,120
<7,715
<7,330
<6,965
<6,615
<6,285
Releases
Actual
5,674
6,128
6,847
6,830
5,582
5,678
Explanation of Results: Confirmed releases continued a long-term downward trend, after a temporary increase in releases reported in one state (New
Jersey) from FY 2013 through FY 2015. There was a slight increase in the number of confirmed releases in FY 2017 because New Jersey again reported
a higher number of confirmed releases while the rest of the nation continued to decrease.
Additional Information: The UST prevention program works to ensure that underground sources of drinking water (groundwater) are protected from
petroleum and associated chemicals leaking from USTs. There are 555,079 federally regulated USTs in the United States at approximately 200,000
facilities.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
691
-------
Objective 3 - Restore Land: Prepare for and respond to accidental or intentional releases of contaminants and clean up and restore polluted sites for reuse.
Summary of progress toward strategic objective:
EPA made steady progress under this objective. In FY 2017, the Agency convened a Superfund Task Force that identified 42 recommendations to streamline
and improve the Superfund process. The recommendations address: expediting the cleanup and remediation process; reducing financial burden on all parties
involved in the entire cleanup process; encouraging private investment; promoting redevelopment and community revitalization; and building and strengthening
partnerships. Cleanup programs remediate contaminated land so it can be safely reused or continue to be used, creating more resilient, healthy, and vibrant
communities. More than 94% of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Corrective Action (RCRA CA) sites have eliminated unacceptable human exposure
to contaminants, and an additional 9,400 sites were made ready for anticipated use (RAU), which contributed to the FY 2016-2017 Agency Priority Goal
(APG). Consistent with the Task Force recommendations, EPA brought 24 Superfund sites with human exposures brought under control, significantly
exceeding the FY 2017 target.
In response to Hurricane Harvey, EPA deployed Airborne Spectral Photometric Environmental Collection Technology (ASPECT) and Portable High-
throughput Integrated Laboratory Identification System (PHILIS). ASPECT provided over 100 hours of aerial pollution release screening over 28 missions;
PHILIS completed over 600 impact analyses, processing over 2,500 samples from Texas NPL sites. Also in FY 2017, the Agency oversaw responses to
drinking water contamination with Per- and Polyfluoroalkylated Substances (PFAS) at Federal Facility National Priorities List (NPL) sites with impacts on
more than 25,000 people.
Challenges:
As more sites are cleaned up, some remaining sites are larger, more complex, and technically challenging, and may be subject to construction contract delays
and other remedy implementation issues. Newly detected exposure pathways and emerging contaminants also complicate site investigations and remediation
efforts, five year reviews, and ultimately affect project schedules when additional site work is required. Moreover, some exposure pathways, such as fish tissue
contamination, can take many years to fully remediate and therefore can impede sites from reaching the Human Exposure Under Control milestone.
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
(1) Emergency
Preparedness and
Response
(PM CI) Score on annual Core NAR.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
70
72
75
80
82
83
Percent
Actual
75.8
82.2
78.3
70.9
64.7
Data Avail
03/2018
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
692
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: The Core National Approach Response (NAR) evaluation score is derived from a combination of response readiness exercises at
the regional level to identify strengths and gaps in response readiness. These exercises are designed to evaluate Regional standard operating procedures.
Emergency Operations Center, procedures, equipment knowledge, area planning, coordination/outreach. With redesign of the Core NAR evaluations, the
result lias been decreasing during recent fiscal years. Reporting is delayed due to evaluation of complex data from all EPA regions. Beginning in FY
2014, EPA redesigned the evaluation to focus on a performance based approach, which resulted in lower results. With redesign of the Core NAR
evaluations, the result has been decreasing during recent fiscal years.
Additional Information: The Core NAR score reported for this measure is based upon the combination of two scores, one which measures day-to-day
response readiness and another that measures national preparedness for chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear incidents. The maximum score is
100. Beginning in FY 2014, the Core NAR evaluation lias taken place after the end of the fiscal year in order to capture a more complete picture of
response readiness. Results are reported in the following year.
(PM 137) Number of Superfund removals completed.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
275
275
275
Removals
Actual
278
226
255
Explanation of Results: Target was missed due to difficulty in predicting how many threats will arise in a year. EPA quickly responds when these events
take place. In recent years there has been a trend toward fewer removals due to factors including a shift in resources toward large time critical removals
that cannot be listed on the National Priorities List (NPL).
Additional Information: Implemented in FY 2015, this measure combined the retired Superfund-lead (PM 132) and Potentially Responsible Party
(PRP)-lead removals with EPA oversight (PM 135) measures. EPA continues to internally track results for both Superfund-lead and PRP-lead removals
with Agency oversight.
(PM 337) Percentage of all Federal Response Plan (FRP) inspected facilities found to be
non-compliant which are brought into compliance.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
35
40
50
60
60
60
Percent
Actual
73
78
79
79
82
82
Explanation of Results: This measure tracks FRP facilities that have been inspected and brought into compliance since FY 2010. From FY 2010 to FY
2017, 1,003 facilities were brought into compliance. In FY 2017, EPA brought 131 non-compliant facilities into compliance.
Additional Information: The FRP rule requires certain facilities (approximately 4,500) to submit a response plan and prepare to respond to a worst case
oil discharge or threat of a discharge. Oil spills in these facilities have a greater potential than typical Spill Prevention, Control and Countenneasures
(SPCC) facilities to cause harm to human health and the enviromnent.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
693
-------
(PM 338) Percentage of all Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) inspected facilities found to be non-compliant which are
brought into compliance.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
35
40
50
60
60
60
Percent
Actual
63
69
72
74
78
77
Explanation of Results: Percentages are artificially high and do not capture the declining rate of SPCC inspections conducted. This measure tracks SPCC
facilities that have been inspected and brought into compliance since FY 2010. From FY 2010 to FY 2017, 2,867 facilities were brought into compliance
out of a total of 3,724 facilities that were found to be out of compliance.
Additional Information: The SPCC rule helps facilities (approximately 540,000) prevent a discharge of oil into waters or adjoining shorelines. Oil spills
at certain high-risk SPCC facilities have a greater potential than non-high risk SPCC to cause harm to human health and the enviromnent.
(PM 115) Number of Superfund remedial site assessments completed.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
900
650
700
850
675
675
Assessments
Actual
1,151
772
794
869
703
747
Explanation of Results: Through FY 2017, EPA and its state and tribal partners completed a cumulative total of 95,341 remedial site assessments.
Additional Information: Remedial site assessments collect site data to determine if cleanup attention may be needed at a potential hazardous waste site.
Multiple and progressively more complex assessments may be required to make this determination at a site.
(2) Clean Up
Contaminated
(PM 151) Number of Superfund sites with human exposures brought under control.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Land
Target
10
10
10
9
9
9
Sites
Actual
13
14
9
10
12
24
Explanation of Results: Through FY 2017, EPA ensured that 1,439 final and deleted NPL sites, and 36 non-NPL sites with Superfund Alternative
Approach (SAA) agreements in place, met the criteria to be determined human exposure under control. EPA significantly exceeded the FY 2017 target
due to factors including remedial investigations concluding ahead of schedule, Five-Year reviews concluding in favorable outcomes, remedial
investigations sites previously determined as "Insufficient Data," changing to "Under Control," and the Superfund Task Force effort that has heightened
focus on bringing additional sites "Under Control."
Additional Information: This measure documents human health protection by measuring progress achieved in controlling unacceptable human exposures
at Superfund sites. Beginning in FY 2014, performance results have included non-NPL Superfund Alternative Approach (SAA) sites.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
694
-------
(PM CA1) Percentage of RCRA corrective action facilities with human exposures to toxins under control.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
81
85
87
90
92
94
Percent
Actual
81
85
87
90
92
94
Explanation of Results: Through FY 2017, EPA achieved human exposures under control at 94 percent of RCRA corrective action facilities (3,534 out
of 3,779 facilities).
Additional Information: There are a total of 3,779 corrective action facilities in the priority 2020 corrective action universe. EPA is continually assessing
the priority facilities and every three years makes necessary modifications to the priority baseline, in conjunction with the EPA Strategic Plan cycle.
(PM CA2) Percentage of RCRA corrective action facilities with migration of contaminated groundwater under control.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
69
73
77
80
84
88
Percent
Actual
72
76
79
82
84
87
Explanation of Results: Through FY 2017, EPA achieved groundwater contamination under control at 87 percent of RCRA corrective action facilities
(3,276 out of 3,779 facilities). EPA missed the FY 2017 target due to a variety of challenges, including the complexity of remaining sites, emerging
contaminants, and changing screening/toxicity values.
Additional Information: There are a total of 3,779 corrective action facilities in the priority 2020 corrective action universe. EPA is continually assessing
the priority facilities and every four years makes necessary modifications to the priority baseline, in conjunction with the EPA Strategic Plan cycle. Safe
drinking water and the protection of ground water are Agency priorities.
(PM CA5) Percentage of RCRA corrective action facilities with final remedies constructed.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
46
51
55
60
64
69
Percent
Actual
47
51
56
60
64
67
Explanation of Results: Through FY 2017, EPA achieved final remedies at 67 percent of RCRA corrective action facilities (2,547 out of 3,779
facilities). The target was missed because the remaining sites tend to be larger, more complex, and technically challenging.
Additional Information: There are a total of 3,779 corrective action facilities in the priority 2020 corrective action universe. EPA is continually assessing
the priority facilities and every three years makes necessary modifications to the priority baseline, in conjunction with the EPA Strategic Plan cycle.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
695
-------
(PM CA6) Percentage of RCRA
corrective action facilities with corrective action performance standards attained.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
21
24
30
32
Percent
Actual
24
28
31
34
Explanation of Results: Through FY 2017, EPA achieved the goal of performance standards attained (these are the cleanup standards required to ensure
protection of human health and the enviromnent at an individual facility) at 34 percent of RCRA corrective action facilities (1,271 out of 3,779 facilities).
Additional Information: There are a total of 3,779 corrective action facilities in the priority 2020 corrective action universe. EPA is continually assessing
the priority facilities and every three years makes necessary modifications to the priority baseline, in conjunction with the EPA Strategic Plan cycle.
(PM 111) Percentage of confirmed releases pending cleanup completion at LUST facilities.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
No Target
Established
No Target
Established
15
14
13
12
Percent
Actual
16
15
14
14
13
13
Explanation of Results: As of the end of FY 2017, 538,193 releases have been reported, 468,898 (or 87 percent) of which have been cleaned up. As the
backlog gets smaller, the remaining cleanups tend to be those which are more complex and time-consuming.
(PM 112) Number of LUST cleanups completed that meet risk-based standards for human exposure and groundwater migration.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
11,250
10,100
9,000
8,600
8,600
8,600
Cleanups
Actual
10,927
11,582
10,393
9,869
8,977
8,775
Explanation of Results: The performance trend reflects a variety of challenges, including the complexity of remaining sites, an increased state workload,
a decrease in available state resources and the increasing costs of cleanups.
Additional Information: A 2017 EPA study found that high profile UST releases decrease nearby property values by 2%-6%. Once cleanup is
completed, nearby property values rebound by a similar margin.
(PM 113) Number of LUST cleanups completed that meet risk-based standards for human exposure and groundwater migration in Indian
country.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
42
42
37
30
26
26
Cleanups
Actual
47
18
26
32
30
21
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
696
-------
Explanation of Results: A large percentage of the remaining sites are more complex, which has led to the slowdown of number of cleanups completed in
Indian Country. Through FY 2017, EPA completed a cumulative total of 1,149 leaking underground storage tank cleanups in Indian country, out of a
universe of approximately 1,412 confirmed releases. This is a subset of the national total of 469,898 leaking underground storage tanks cleanups
completed. As of the end of FY 2017, there were 263 Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) cleanups remaining to be completed in Indian country.
(PM 141) Number of Superfund sites with remedy construction completed.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
22
19
15
13
13
13
Completions
Actual
22
14
8
14
13
10
Explanation of Results: Through FY 2017, EPA completed construction at 1,195 final and deleted NPL sites and 13 non-NPL sites with SAA
agreements in place. The pool of candidates sites is shrinking and the remaining projects tend to be large, more complex, and technically challenging. In
addition, cleanup projects are also subject to construction, contract, and other remedy implementation delays.
Additional Information: A construction completion Superfund site has completed physical construction of all cleanup actions. Beginning in FY 2014,
performance results have included non-NPL Superfund Alternative Approach (SAA) sites.
(PM 152) Number of Superfund sites with contaminated groundwater migration brought under control.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
15
15
15
13
13
13
Sites
Actual
18
18
11
15
17
14
Explanation of Results: Through FY 2017, EPA ensured that 1,143 final and deleted NPL sites, and 26 sites with SAA agreements in place, met the
criteria to be determined Groundwater Migration Under Control.
Additional Information: Bringing groundwater migration under control ensures that contamination is below protective, risk-based levels or that, where
the migration is stabilized, there is no acceptable discharge to surface water. Beginning in FY 2014, performance results have included non-NPL
Superfund Alternative Approach (SAA) sites.
(PM 170) Number of remedial action projects com
)leted at Superfund sites.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
130
115
115
105
105
105
Projects
Actual
142
121
115
104
105
97
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
697
-------
Explanation of Results: From FY 2011 through FY 2017, EPA completed 801 remedial action projects at final and deleted NPL sites and 15 remedial
action projects at non-NPL sites with SAA agreements in place. EPA missed the target because the remaining remedial action projects that tend to be
larger, more complex, and technically challenging, and are also subject to construction contract delays, bad weather, and other remedy implementation
issues. EPA will continue to focus both funds and personnel resources on completing construction projects to protect human health and the enviromnent.
Additional Information: A remedial action project completion at a Superfund site refers to the construction or implementation of a discrete scope of
activities supporting Superfund site cleanup. Beginning in FY 2014, performance results have included non-NPL Superfund Alternative Approach (SAA)
sites.
(PM FF1) Percentage of Superfund federal facility
sites construction complete.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
86
87
88
85
Actual
84
84
84
85
Percent
Explanation of Results: Through FY 2017, construction lias been completed at 79 sites out of the total Federal Facility NPL Universe of 174 sites which
contain 2,225 Operable Units.
Additional Information: This measure is based on the average of three specific factors: 1) Operable unit (OU) percent complete; 2) Total cleanup actions
percent complete; and 3) Duration of cleanup actions percent complete.
(PM S10) Number of Superfund sites made ready for anticipated use site-wide.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
65
60
55
45
45
45
Sites
Actual
66
56
45
45
41
43
Explanation of Results: Through FY 2017, EPA ensured that 828 final and deleted NPL sites, and 8 non-NPL sites with SAA agreements in place, met
the criteria to be determined site-wide ready for anticipated use. Meeting this target frequently requires working with entities outside of EPA to perform
tasks and consent to actions outside the Agency's control including implementation of Institutional Controls and 5-year reviews to identify any potential
issues that are not consistent with human exposure under control criteria, emerging contaminants, or vapor intrusion issues. EPA plans to implement the
recommendations of the Superfund Task Force in FY 2018 to improve results.
Additional Information: This measure reflects the importance of considering future land use as part of the cleanup process by tracking the number of
sites meeting the following criteria: All aspects of the cleanup are in place and have been achieved for any media that may affect current and reasonably
anticipated future land uses, so that there are no unacceptable risks; all land use restrictions or other controls required as part of the cleanup are in place;
and sites are final or deleted NPL sites, or non-NPL Superfund Alternative Approach (SAA) sites, that have reached the construction completion
milestone. SAA sites were included in performance results beginning in FY 2014.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
698
-------
Objective 4 - Strengthen Human Health and Environmental Protection in Indian Country: Directly implement federal environmental programs in Indian
country and support federal program delegation to tribes. Provide tribes with technical assistance and support capacity development for the establishment and
implementation of sustainable environmental programs in Indian country.
Summary of progress toward strategic objective:
EPA is conducting a multi-pronged direct implementation assessment to ensure that environmental regulatory programs are as effective in Indian country as
they are outside of Indian country. Efforts continue in three identified areas: 1) increasing consistency and access to tribal data in Agency data systems though
use of the tribal identifier code or equivalent; 2) use of EPA-Tribal Environmental Plans (ETEPs) by all EPA offices to align tribal and EPA priorities through
EPA-tribal joint planning; and 3) making EPA direct implementation programs more effective through individual program assessments. The Agency is
conducting the first DI program assessment, for the Resource Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA) Subtitle C Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facilities
(TSDFs) program.
EPA is on track to meet the long-term goal of an ETEP for each applicable tribe. ETEPs are being developed to identify the sphere of regulated entities per
tribe, define mutual roles and responsibilities for program implementation, and document each tribe's intermediate and long-term goals for developing,
establishing and implementing environmental protection programs.
Challenges:
Only a small number of programs have been delegated to tribes, and a much smaller number of tribes have received compliance and enforcement authority in
those delegations. As of the end of FY 2017, although EPA has approved 112 non-grant treatment in a manner similar to a state (TAS) applications for certain
parts of EPA statutes for 82 tribes, only 12 individual tribal programs include compliance and enforcement authority. As a result, EPA directly implements the
vast majority of federal environmental in Indian country. EPA direct implementation faces multiple challenges:
• limited information for decision-making,
• competing demands and priorities to implement more than nine major federal environmental statutes for 567 federally recognized tribes,
• tribal diversity (population, culture, geography, economic development, expertise, income, priorities), and
• unique legal and policy issues associated with federal, tribal, and state law.
These factors may increase the risk of failure to adequately understand, prevent or address harms in Indian country through programs under EPA regulatory
authority. In addition, with only limited or inadequate data to fully, uniformly and successfully assess the extent of EPA direct implementation activities and
tribal delegated programs, EPA risks inefficient use and possible misallocation of limited resources.
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
(1) Improve
Human Health
and the
Environment in
Indian Country
(PM 5PQ) Percent of Tribes imj
jlementing federal regulatory environmental programs in Indian country.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
22
24
25
25
25
25
Percent
Actual
21
19
19
20
20
23
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
699
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: Challenges include tribal diversity (population, culture, geography, income, economic development, program management
expertise, priorities, etc.); unique legal and policy issues with federal, tribal and state law; and competing demands and priorities. Opportunities include
the Indian Enviromnental General Assistance Program (GAP) Performance Management System currently under development, which will assess the
progress of GAP grant funding to encourage development of tribal capacity to implement federal enviromnental programs in Indian country.
Additional Information: There are 572 tribal entities, including tribes and inter-tribal consortia, that are eligible for GAP funding.
(PM 5PR) Percent of Tribes conducting EPA approved environmental monitoring and assessment activities in Indian country.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
54
57
58
58
58
58
Percent
Actual
54
56.5
31
36
54
66
Additional Information: There are 572 tribal entities, including tribes and inter-tribal consortia, that are eligible for GAP funding.
GOAL 3: CLEANING UP COMMUNITIES AND ADVANCING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
700
-------
Goal 4 at a Glance
ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
Reduce the risk and increase the safety of chemicals and prevent pollution at the source.
FY 2017 Performance Measures
Met: 11 Not Met: 3 Data Unavailable: 14
(Total Measures: 28)
FY 2017 Obligations*
lakirg Action on CEmate Charge
snc I farming Air Quality. $1,091,160
~ Protecting America's Waters, S4,196S&6
^ Clean ng Up Commurrties
anii AdvardrgSustainabe Development, $3,530371
Ensunng the Safety of Chemicals
and Preventing Pollution, $749^419
~ Errforc ng Environmental Laws, 3779.531
FY 2017 Performance Measures
20
15
~ v«iw?
m Ha w* . v;
10 r,
3m
Objective 1
Objective 2
Strategic Objective Overview
FY 2016 Obligations"
H of Goaf 4 Funds
Objective 4.1: Ensure Chemical Safety.
Reduce the risk a nd increase the safety of chemicals that enter our products, our
environment and our bodies.
S697,BM>
93.1%
Objective 4.2: Promote Pollution Prevention,
Conserve and protect natural resources by promoting pollution prevention and
the adoption of other sustainablity practices try companies, communities,
governmental orpniiations, and individuals.
$51r5BO
6.9%
Goal 4 Total
5749,419
100.0%
*AJI figures in thousands
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
701
-------
FY 2016 EPA Programs and Activities Contributing to Goal 4
Chemical Risk Review and Reduction
Chemical Safety and Sustainability Research
Endocrine Disruptors
Lead Risk Reduction and Lead Categorical Grant Programs
International Sources of Pollution
Pesticides Program Implementation Categorical Grant Program
Pollution Prevention
Pollution Prevention Categorical Grant Programs
Protect Human Health from Pesticide Risk
Protect the Environment from Pesticide Risk
Realize the Value of Pesticide Availability
Science Policy Biotechnology
Toxics Release Inventory
Trade and Governance
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
702
-------
GOAL 4: ENSURING Till SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION
Reduce the risk and increase the safety of chemicals and prevent pollution at the source
Objective 1 - Ensure Chemical Safety: Reduce the risk and increase the safety of chemicals that enter our products, our environment and our bodies.
Summary of progress toward strategic objective:
Pesticide Registration and Registration Review ensure that pesticides now available and coming to market meet current safety standards. EPA has achieved
significant results within this objective by placing special emphasis on completing all docket openings and accelerating the pace of development of final
pesticide review work plans to meet the objectives of the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan and statutorily mandated deadlines. Progress includes reductions
since 2008 of 33% in the number of exposures of children to rodenticides and 34% in moderate to severe exposure incidents to carbamates and
organophosphates. The pesticide program is on track to meet all strategic targets and most performance measures. The program continues to meet or exceed
targets for the registration goal under the Pesticide Registration Improvement Act (PRIA) which includes comprehensive risk assessment, while also exceeding
the risk assessment targets under registration review. Moving forward, the program will continue to look for efficiencies with partners and stakeholders to
maintain an aggressive rate of progress in meeting targets, goals and objectives, while protecting human health and the environment.
EPA continues to make progress toward reducing the risk and ensuring the safety of other commercial chemicals. Since June 2016, when the Frank R.
Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act was enacted, amending the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), EPA has focused its efforts on timely
and successful implementation of the new law's requirements. In FY 2017, EPA finalized three "framework" rules pertaining to the chemical risk evaluation
process, prioritization of chemicals for evaluation, and reporting by industry of active/inactive chemicals. EPA also issued scoping documents for the initial 10
chemicals under evaluation, guidance for external parties on submitting draft evaluations, and a statutory interpretation on upfront substantiation of confidential
business information (CBI) claims. EPA finalized rules on nanoscale materials and formaldehyde exposure from composite wood products, published proposed
risk management requirements for 3 chemicals assessed prior to the new law (TCE, NMP, methylene chloride), completed existing and new chemical
Significant New Uses Rules (SNURs), and released additions to the Mercury Export Ban and an initial mercury inventory report.
Challenges:
EPA faces continuing challenges in addressing the extensive new requirements of the TSCA amendments, many involving technical complexity and requiring
adherence to high scientific standards.
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
(1) Protect
Human Health
from Chemical
Risks
(PM Jll) Reduction in moderate to severe exposure incidents associated with organophosphates and carbamate insecticides in the general
population.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
10
15
25
30
30
30
Percent
Actual
20
25
27
34
Data Avail
10/2018
Data Avail
10/2019
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION 703
-------
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: The overall downward trend continues as a result of past regulatory actions. Within year fluctuations are to be anticipated. The
calculation for this measure is (American Association of Poison Control Centers (AAPCC) incident count from Jan 2008 - Dec 2008) minus (AAPCC
incident count from Jan 2015 - Dec 2015) / (AAPCC incident count from Jan 2008 - Dec 2008). Result - 108 / 316 = 0.34 or 34%.
Additional Information: Percent reduction to moderate to severe exposure incidents are calculated from 2008 data (316 exposure incidents) as reported
in the American Association of Poison Control Centers' National Poisoning Data System (NPDS) for organophosphates and carbamate pesticides. Two-
year reporting lag.
(PM 008) Percent of children (a
ged 1-5 years) with blood lead levels (>5 ug/dl).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
1.5
No Target
Established
1.0
No Target
Established
1.0
No Target
Established
Percent
Actual
2.1
Biennial
1.2
Biennial
Data Avail
10/2018
Biennial
Explanation of Results: No reporting; biennial year.
Additional Information: Data released by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) from the National Health and Nutritional Evaluation Survey
(NHANES) for the 2007-2010 sampling period showed that an estimated 2.6% of children ages 1-5 had elevated blood lead levels (5 ug/dl or greater).
Background information is available on EPA's website at www.epa.gov/lead. Data for this measure are reported biennially.
(PM 10D) Percent difference in the geometric mean blood level in low-income children 1-5 years old as compared to the geometric mean for non-
low income children 1-5 years old.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
13
No Target
Established
20
No Target
Established
25
No Target
Established
Percent
Actual
34.8
Biennial
34.0
Biennial
Data Avail
10/2018
Biennial
Explanation of Results: No reporting; biennial year.
Additional Information: Data released by the CDC from the NHANES for the 2007-2010 sampling period showed that the estimated difference in the
geometric mean blood level in low-income children 1-5 years old as compared to the geometric mean for non-low income children 1-5 years old was
28.4%. Data for this measure are reported biennially.
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION 704
-------
(PM D6A)
Reduction in concentration of PFOA in serum in the general population.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
1
No Target
Established
25
No Target
Established
41
No Target
Established
Percent Reduction
Actual
32
Biennial
37
Biennial
Data Avail
10/2018
Biennial
Explanation of Results: The Agency has taken a range of voluntary and regulatory actions to address concerns with Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA).
One of these actions is the 2010/2015 PFOA Stewardship Program that was launched in 2006 with the eight major companies in the industry committing
to work toward eliminating emissions and product content of PFOA by 2015. All of the participating companies in the voluntary program have met the
PFOA Stewardship Program goals. As a result of these actions, blood concentrations of PFOA have been decreasing, as evidenced by NHANES reports.
The FY 2014 result demonstrates that EPA has substantially exceeded the long-term target for reduction in PFOA concentrations in blood serum in the
general population.
Additional Information: Data for this measure were derived from Centers for Disease Control's National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey
(NHANES) on PFOA concentration in the general population. The geometric mean concentration in serum as determined from 2009-2010 sampling data
is 3.07 |ig/L. Data for this measure were reported biennially. Perfluoroalkyl substances, including PFOA, are a class of mamnade chemicals that are very
persistent in the enviromnent and in the human body. As a result, people may become exposed to these chemicals manufactured months or years in the
past. Because they have been used in an array of consumer products, most people have been exposed to these chemicals. Studies indicate that PFOA can
cause reproductive and developmental liver, kidney and immunological effects in laboratory animals and humans. In addition, PFOA has caused tumors
in animal studies.
(PM E01) Number of chemicals for which Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP) decisions have been completed
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
5
20
59
0
0
1,000
Chemicals
Actual
1
0
3
54
1
1,812
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION 705
-------
Explanation of Results: EPA now has 1,812 estrogen bioactivity scores for chemicals in the EDSP chemical universe. The estrogenic bioactivity scores
are calculated using the Office of Research and Development's ToxCast data and the validated ToxCast "ER Model" for bioactivity. The estrogenic
bioactivity scores are publicly available at https://actor.epa.gov/edsp21/. EPA is currently communicating these decisions to stakeholders.
Additional Information: These chemicals have the potential to interact with the estrogen, androgen, steroidogenesis and/or thyroid systems. The EDSP
lias a universe of chemicals of approximately 10,000 chemicals that is described at: https://www.epa.gov/endocrine-disruption/endocrine-disruptor-
screening-program-edsp-universe-chemicals. Tier 1 screening determines whether a chemical has the potential to interact with the endocrine system and
requires more thorough testing. Tier 2 testing is conducted to rule out bioactivity for chemicals that show more potential for endocrine bioactivity. If a
chemical is determined to indeed have endocrine bioactivity after completing EDSP Tier 2 testing, EPA would most likely conduct a complete risk
assessment and risk mitigation exercise for that chemical. High throughput screening (HTS) and computational toxicology (CompTox) tools for Estrogen
Receptor (ER) are now used as alternatives to the Tier 1 assays. Implementing HTS and CompTox methods allows EPA to screen a greater number of
chemicals, while also reducing animal use. This measure tracks the number of chemicals with screening level decisions based on integrated scientific
reviews of: 1) Tier 1 assays; 2) other scientifically-relevant information (e.g., CFR158 data, published literature, high throughput endocrine activity and
exposure information); and 3) decisions based on other information that determines whether further endocrine-related testing is necessary for a chemical
(e.g., regulatory status of the chemical). EDSP decisions for a chemical can range from determining potential to interact with the estrogen, androgen,
steroidogenesis and/or thyroid hormone systems to otherwise determining whether further endocrine related testing is necessary. Fifteen decisions were
completed through FY 2012. In FY 2015, EPA published a Federal Register Notice incorporating Toxicity ForeCaster (ToxCast) data for more than
1,800 chemicals that, combined with additional data, could be used to complete the screening decisions.
(PM 012) Percent reduction of children's exposure
to rodenticides.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
5
5
10
25
25
25
Actual
17
24
25
33
Data Avail
10/2018
Data Avail
10/2019
Percent
Explanation of Results: The overall downward trend continues, the result of past regulatory actions. The calculation for this measure is (AAPCC
incident count from Jan 2008 - Dec 2008) minus (AAPCC incident count from Jan 2015 - Dec 2015) / (AAPCC incident count from Jan 2008 - Dec
2008). Result for 2015 is 3, 849 / 11,674 = 0.33 or 33%.
Additional Information: Percent reduction of the total number of confirmed and likely rodenticide exposures to children is calculated from 2008 data
(11,674 rodenticide exposures to children) from the Poison Control Centers' National Poison Data System. Two-year reporting lag.
(PM RA1) Annual number of chemicals for which risk assessments are finalized through EPA's TSCA Existing Chemicals Program.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
3
7
12
0
Chemicals
Actual
4
1
0
0
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION 706
-------
Explanation of Results: This measure is discontinued after FY 2017 as it measures progress against a list of chemicals developed under the previous
TSCA law. In June 2016, Congress passed amendments to TSCA, establishing, among other tilings, a new plan for assessing existing chemicals. The
program is currently making the changes needed to implement the new law, which requires each risk evaluation to be completed within three and one half
years. In addition, the scope of each assessment is broadened to include all commercial uses of the chemical rather than only certain specific uses as
determined by EPA. In FY 2017, risk evaluations commenced for the first ten chemicals under the new law, and the statutory deadline for completing
scoping documents within six months was met for all ten chemicals.
Additional Information: The universe for this measure comprises TSCA Work Plan Chemicals and related/similar chemicals under the previous TSCA
law. Zero chemicals had completed risk assessments through FY 2013. All five of the chemicals for which the five risk assessments were completed in
FY 2014 and FY 2015 are from the list of 67 TSCA Work Plan Chemicals that was refreshed in October 2014. Background information is available on
EPA's website at www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-TSCA.
(PM 009) Cumulative number of active certified Renovation Repair and Painting firms
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
140,000
140,000
138,000
145,000
96,000
97,000
Finns
Actual
126,323
133,587
139,702
108,623
90,970
89,998
Explanation of Results: FY 2017 target not met. In large part this reflects the fact that EPA's Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting Program is reaching
the end of the first 5-year cycle of initial certifications and firms have to decide whether to recertify. To date only about 25% of firms have sought
recertification. The reasons may include a decision to leave the industry, a shift in business emphasis to new home construction or a lack of local demand
for lead safe renovation services. On the other hand, some new renovation firms do continue to emerge and seek certification. The Agency is not aware of
an acute shortage of certified lead renovation firms, but that is due in part to lower than expected demand. Within limits of funding and authority, EPA
will continue to promote the benefits to consumers of using lead-safe certified renovation firms.
Additional Information: Finns can become certified directly through EPA (tracked through Federal Lead-based Paint Program (FLPP)) or through an
authorized state program (tracked through grant reports). FY 2010 was the first year that firms submitted applications to EPA to become certified.
Background information is available on EPA's website at www.epa.gov/lead/renovation-repair-and-painting-program.
(PM 011) Number of Product Reregistration Decisions
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
1,200
1,200
900
600
550
600
Decisions
Actual
1,255
709
292
562
306
255
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION 707
-------
Explanation of Results: EPA continued to face constraints on resources, including hiring constraints and Pesticide Registration Improvement Act (PRIA)
science reviews taking precedence over reviewing reregistration submissions. By FY 2017, a total of 20,605 product registration decisions were made.
Additional Information: By FY 2012, a total of 18,208 product re-registrations decisions were made according to internal tracking as part of the product
reregistration process. The product reregistration universe is 24,975. Product reregistration is for products that are already registered and therefore
available in the market. Missing the target will delay labeling and use changes EPA has prescribed (typically toward more restrictive use) but will have
little effect on a product's market availability. Additional information is available on https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-reevaluation/reregistration-and-
other-review-programs-predating-pesticide-registration#Product.
(PM 091) Percent of decisions completed on time (on or before PRIA or negotiated due date).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
99
99
97.0
96
96
97
Actual
99.1
98.8
85
98.4
99
99
Percent
Explanation of Results: The calculation for this measure is based on 18 late completions out of 2,021 PRIA decisions completed in FY 2017.
Additional Information: Annual average percentage of decisions completed on time from FY 2010-2012 was 99.0% according to EPA internal data.
More information on PRIA can be found on https://www.epa.gov/pria-fees/pria-overview-and-liistory.
(PM 10A) Annual percentage of lead-based paint certification and refund applications that require less than 20 days of EPA effort to process.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
95
95
95
95
95
95
Actual
97
99
100
99
99
100
Percent
Explanation of Results: In FY 2017, EPA processed all 1,746 lead-based paint certification and refund applications within 20 days of receipt. Continued
exceedance of this target reflects years of concerted and successful efforts to expedite handling of abatement individual certification and refund
applications, ensuring that homeowners will have access to a sufficient pool of qualified abatement professionals to perform lead inspections, risk
assessments and abatement work.
Additional Information: Data are obtained from Federal Lead Based Paint Program (FLPP) information system. Lead-based paint certification and
refund applications are applications received by EPA from firms for certification to perform lead-based paint activities or renovation repair and painting
work; or from individuals for certification as risk assessor, inspector, abatement supervisor or abatement worker. In addition, EPA receives accreditation
applications from training providers to provide training in lead-based paint disciplines and for renovator and dust sampling technician work. Applications
for refunds of certification fees are sometimes received by EPA from these same sources (for example, if an application was mistakenly sent twice or an
incorrect discipline requested).
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION 708
-------
(PM 143) Percentage of agricultural acres treated with reduced-risk pesticides.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
22
22.5
22.5
22.5
22.5
22.5
Actual
22.5
23
23
22
Data Avail
10/2018
Data Avail
10/2019
Percent
Explanation of Results: FY 2015 result due to a relatively small revision (7 million acres) in the usage estimates for conventional and reduced risk acre
treatments. FY 2015 result calculation - 406 million agricultural reduced risk acre treatments /1,821 million total agricultural acre treatments.
Additional Information: Percentage of acres treated with reduced-risk pesticides was 22% of total acreage in FY 2011 when the reduced-risk pesticide
acre-treatments was 315 million and total (all pesticides) was 1,444 million acre-treatments. Each year's total acre-treatments, as reported by USDA
National Agricultural Statistic Service and private marketing research data sources, serve as the basis for computing the percentage of acre-treatments
using reduced risk pesticides. Acre-treatments count the total number of pesticide treatments each acre receives each year. Results are reported the end of
the calendar year and have a one-year reporting data lag. Most reduced-risk acre treatments are Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) corn and cotton and the use of
glyphosate and others in field crops. Bt corn is a variant of maize that has been genetically altered to express one or more proteins from the bacterium Bt
(a built in pesticide).
(PM 164) Number of pesticide registration review dockets opened.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
70
72
73
73
66
25
Dockets
Actual
79
77
75
84
88
25
Explanation of Results: All 725 pesticide cases currently going through registration review have completed their docket opening milestones.
Additional Information: Bv FY 2012, a total of 376 chemical case work dockets were opened according to EPA internal data.
(PM 230) Number of pesticide registration review final work plans completed.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
70
72
73
73
75
40
Work Plans
Actual
70
79
81
89
78
41
Explanation of Results: A total of 695 final work plans of a universe of 725 for pesticide cases currently going through registration review were
completed according to EPA internal data (program has completed all final work plans).
Additional Information: By FY 2012, a total of 327 final work plans for registered pesticides
were completed according to EPA internal data.
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION 709
-------
(PM 247) Percent of new chemicals or organisms introduced into commerce that do not pose unreasonable risks to workers, consumers, or the
environment.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
100
100
100
100
100
100
Percent
Actual
100
100
95
96
99
Data Avail
10/2018
Explanation of Results: Measure subject to one-year reporting lag due to the need for completion and review of the annual contractor report.
Additional Information: Percent of new chemicals or organisms introduced into commerce that do not pose unreasonable risks to workers, consumers, or
the environment was 97 percent over the period FY 2009-2012, as determined by averaging the annual performance results for this measure. Data
obtained from the annual report, "Study Comparing Premanufacture Notices (PMNs)/Low Volume Exemptions (LVEs) to Related 8(e) Chemicals."
Results are calculated by comparing Section 8(e) notices received in the fiscal year to previously reviewed PMNs. If a risk identified in a new Section
8(e) notice would not have been identified and mitigated by the review, then the program has not met the performance target. Approximately 30 Section
8(e) notices submitted annually are compared to previous PMNs for purposes of determining the annual performance result for this measure. Background
information is available onEPA's website at www.epa.gov/reviewing-new-chemicals-under-toxic-substances-control-act-tsca.
(PM 998) EPA's TRI program will work with partners to conduct data quality checks to enhance accuracy and reliability of environmental data.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
500
500
600
600
600
Quality Checks
Actual
600
600
600
775
1,090
Explanation of Results: In FY 2017, EPA augmented its usual data quality check procedures by running a comparison of Toxics Release Inventory
(TRI) data with Risk Management Program (RMP) data for reporting years 2012-2015. Unexpectedly, a very large number of facilities (approximately
1,000) with potential data quality issues were identified through this comparison, and as a result, the FY 2017 target of 600 data quality checks was
significantly exceeded.
Additional Information: TRI data checks improve the accuracy and reliability of enviromnental data. More than 21,000 facilities report to EPA's TRI
Program annually. The universe of facilities subject to the TRI reporting requirements includes all federal facilities (pursuant to Executive Order) that
meet the applicability criteria described in part 372, subpart B of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations and, with some exceptions and/or
limitations, facilities that are classified within (under) any of the specific North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes that
correspond to Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes: 10, 20-39, 4911, 4931, 4939, 4953, 5169, 5171, and 7389.
(PM C19) Percentage of CBI claims for chemical identity in health and safety studies reviewed and challenged, as appropriate, as they are
submitted.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
100
100
100
100
100
100
Percent
Actual
100
100
100
100
100
N/A
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION 710
-------
Explanation of Results: The TSCA amendments of June 2016 included significant new requirements relating to Confidential Business Information (CBI)
review for both EPA and submitters. Upon enactment of the new CBI requirements, EPA discontinued the prior CBI review activities reflected in this
measure and began implementation of the new CBI requirements. In response to the new TSCA law's stringent new requirements for substantiation of
CBI claims, EPA gave submitters additional time to substantiate claims submitted between June 22, 2016 and March 21,2017; as a result, the Agency
was not able to complete its review of all FY 2017 CBI cases by the end of the fiscal year. Additionally, because the new law no longer requires EPA to
distinguish between CBI cases with health and safety studies and those without them, EPA is unable to track and report CBI review data in a manner that
conforms to the specific wording of this measure. Thus, CBI review outputs for FY 2017 cannot be meaningfully compared to prior year results, given
the significant differences between the old and new requirements. In FY 2017, EPA received 845 cases with CBI claims for chemical identity (with or
without health and safety studies), completed review of 481 of these and is continuing review of the other 364 cases.
Additional Information: Effective CBI review ensures that incoming claims are approved only where warranted and that all non-CBI data from health
and safety studies are made available to the public. Approximately 500 TSCA CBI claims are submitted per year for chemical identity, which potentially
contain health and safety studies.
(PM E07) Annual number of EDSP Tier 1 screening assays for which validated alternatives have been developed, based on high throughput
assays and computational models.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
2
2
Assays and Tools
Actual
3
0
Explanation of Results: The availability of the two additional validated alternatives to the traditional EDSP Tier 1 screening assays were delayed due to
the rescheduled July 2017 Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act Scientific Advisory Panel (FIFRA SAP) meeting. The FIFRA SAP
meeting is an important step in the validation of the alternative assays.
Additional Information: In FY 2014, there were zero (of the 11) Tier 1 assays for which validated alternatives had been developed, based on high
throughput assays and computational models.
(PM 268) Percent of selected urban watersheds that exceed EPA aquatic life benchmark maximum concentrations for three key pesticides of
concern (diazinon, chlorpyrifos and carbaryl).
(2) Protect
Ecosystems from
Chemical Risks
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
5,0, 10
No Target
Established
0, 0,0
No Target
Established
0, 0,0
No Target
Established
Percent
Actual
0, 0,9
Biennial
7, 0,0
Biennial
0,0,9
Biennial
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION 711
-------
Explanation of Results: No reporting; Biennial year.
Additional Information: Urban watersheds are sampled by the USGS National Water Quality Assessment (NAWQA) program. Data for this measure are
reported biennially. The number of sampling and the sampling points in USGS data were constantly changing year to year, depending on their funding.
Results from previous reports showed that the exceedances were at different monitoring sites. Starting in FY 2015, the Agency is using data from 10
specified urban sites from the USGS national monitoring sites in the future to provide consistency in data reporting. The monitoring sites were selected
based on history of monitoring results, and anticipated consistency in reporting from these national sampling sites. The 10 selected Urban Streams in
National Network sites are: Norwalk River at Winnipauk, CT; Accotink Creek near Annandale, VA; Swift Creek near Apex, NC; Sope Creek near
Marietta, GA; Clinton River at Sterling Heights, MI; Shingle Creek at Minneapolis, MN; Cherry Creek at Denver, CO; White Rock Creek at Dallas, TX;
Little Cottonwood Creek at Salt Lake City, UT; Fanno Creek at Durham, OR. The exceedances are calculated based on the number of exceedances
divided by the total number of watersheds. The USGS NAWQA sites selected are the best long term source of surface water monitoring data for a large
number of pesticides and their degradates, with consistent QA procedures for both sampling and lab analysis, low detection limits, and have been used by
EPA for risk assessment work for over the last 15 years. The most sensitive aquatic benchmark for the chemical are posted on the website:
http://www.epa.gov/oppefedl/ecorisk ders/aquatic life benchmark.htm: Diazinon: 0.105 ug/L; Chlorpyrifos: 0.040 ug/L; Carbaryl: 0.5 ug/L.
(PM 269) Percent of selected agricultural watersheds that exceed EPA aquatic life benchmark maximum concentrations for two key pesticides of
concern (azinphos-methyl and chlorpyrifos).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
0, 10
No Target
Established
0,0
No Target
Established
0,0
No Target
Established
Percent
Actual
7, 7
Biennial
0,0
Biennial
0,0
Biennial
Explanation of Results: No reporting; Biennial year.
Additional Information: Agricultural watersheds are sampled by the USGS National Water Quality Assessment (NAWQA) program. Data for this
measure are reported biennially. The number of sampling and the sampling points in USGS data were constantly changing year to year, depending on
their funding. Results from previous reports showed that the exceedances were at different monitoring sites. Starting in FY 2015, the Agency is using
data from 10 specified agricultural sites from the USGS national monitoring sites in the future to provide consistency in data reporting. The monitoring
sites were selected based on history of monitoring results, and anticipated consistency in reporting from these national sampling sites. The 10 selected
Agricultural Streams in National Network sites are: Canajoharie Creek near Canajoharie, NY; Contentnea Creek at Hookerton NC; South Fork Iowa
River near New Providence, IA; Maple Creek near Nickerson, NE; Bogue Phalia near Leland, MS; Orestimba Creek near Crows Landing, CA; Granger
Drain at Granger, WA; Rock Creek at Twin Falls, ID; Zollner Creek near Mt. Angel, OR; Sugar Creek at New Palestine, IN. The exceedances are
calculated based on the number of exceedances divided by the total number of watersheds. The USGS NAWQA sites selected are the best long term
source of surface water monitoring data for a large number of pesticides and their degradates, with consistent QA procedures for both sampling and lab
analysis, low detection limits, and have been used by EPA for risk assessment work for over the last 15 years. The most sensitive aquatic benclunark for
the chemical are posted on the website: http://www.epa.gov/oppefedl/ecorisk_ders/aquatic_life_benclunark.htm: Malathion=0.035 ug/L; Methomyl=0.7
ug/L.
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION 712
-------
(PM 240) Maintain timeliness of FIFRA Section 18
Emergency Exemption Decisions
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
45
45
45
45
45
45
Days
Actual
43
27
44
45
48
40
Explanation of Results: The 45-day annual target is an historical average. The end-of-year measure reduction was attributed to Section 18 cases
involving multiple renewals, re-certifications, and crisis exemptions that allowed for shorter turnaround times.
Additional Information: Section 18 of FIFRA authorizes EPA to allow an unregistered use of a pesticide for a limited time if it is determined that an
emergency condition exists (i.e. a serious pest problem which jeopardizes production of agricultural goods or public health). Average number of days for
Section 18 decisions from FY 2009-2012 was 46 days, according to EPA internal data.
(PM 276) Percent of registration review chemicals with identified endangered species concerns, for which EPA obtains any mitigation of risk
prior to consultation with DOC and DOI.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
5
5
15
5
5
65
Percent
Actual
0
0
0
65
80
97
Explanation of Results: The program anticipated exceeding the target based on empirical data from Q1 of FY 2017 which indicated an increasing trend
in the percentage of registration review chemicals with identified endangered species concerns for which EPA obtains any mitigation prior to consultation
with the Services (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries Service).
The numbers are increasing as we are in the stage of registration review where more interim decisions are being made. (The number of registration
review chemicals for which the ecological risk assessment and/or effects determination identifies endangered species concerns and for which mitigation
of risk is obtained prior to consultation with the Services within a given reporting year) / (The total number of registration review chemicals for which the
ecological risk assessment and/or effects determination identifies endangered species concerns within the same reporting year) x 100 for FY 2017 is:
(38/39)*100 = 97.
Additional Information: The data are tracked internally by EPA. The data are obtained from ecological risk assessments and effects determinations
prepared to support a registration review case. Any mitigation of risk refers to label changes that are intended to reduce the enviromnental exposure and
associated risk of pesticides to listed species and/or their designated critical habitat. This may include such mitigation measures as reduction in the
pesticide application rate and/or frequency of application, changes to the timing of application, spray drift, buffers or more geographically specific
mitigation measures via EPA's Bulletins Live! Two web-based tool in specific areas where listed species and/or critical habitat are known to co-occur
with potential pesticide use based on labeled registered uses.
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION 713
-------
Objective 2 - Promote Pollution Prevention: Conserve and protect natural resources by promoting pollution prevention and the adoption of other
sustainability practices by companies, communities, governmental organizations, and individuals
Summary of progress toward strategic objective:
EPA continued to make better than expected progress in its Safer Choice Program, recognizing 226 additional products brought under the Safer Choice label in
FY 2017, nearly double the target, and meeting the target for chemicals added to the Safer Chemical Ingredients List. Following a multi-stakeholder pilot, EPA
assessed and recommended product environmental performance standards and ecolabels for federal procurement covering 21 product categories from
computers to cleaners to carpeting. Additionally, EPA conducted more than 1,131 facility assessments of small and medium-sized businesses through the
Energy, Environment and Economy (E3) Initiative and the Green Suppliers Network (GSN) Program. In FY 2016 (data became available in FY 2017), EPA
reached a new high in achieving cost savings through pollution prevention efforts, helping businesses and governments save over $842 million.
Challenges:
EPA continues to explore options for more fully capturing the environmental benefits of pollution prevention activities through performance measures. Recent
progress includes surveying consumers to assess recognition and impact (purchasing influence) of the Safer Choice Products label introduced in 2015. While
the survey showed progress (76% of consumers responded that they would use the Safer Choice label to inform purchasing decisions; 83% and 86% for parents
and millennials respectively), the Agency continues work to draw on such information as well as actual purchasing/sales data to support its analysis (see
Measure PM P2X below).
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
(1) Promote
Pollution
Prevention
(PM 264) Pounds of hazardous materials reduced through pollution prevention.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
88.7
71.6
23.4
204.2
214.2
214.2
Pounds (Millions)
Actual
214.9
231.5
190.3
205.2
283.1
Data Avail
10/2018
Explanation of Results: EPA's consistent record of exceeding annual targets for this measure reflects successful implementation of the P2 grant program
and positive experience in developing product standards for electronics. Grant-based technical assistance to businesses stays up to date on effective
"greening" operations and measurement of impacts; Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEAT) product standards and registered
products maintain a steady increase as sales data continue to rise.
Additional Information: There is a one-year data lag. From FY 2008 through FY 2012, 1,437 million pounds were reduced—after removing 626 million
pounds in reported results that should not be expected to continue in future years due to: 1) atypical results, and 2) increased quality assurance standards
for the results that come from states and other grant recipients. For FY 2016, EPA reported "recurring results" of an additional 76 million pounds of
hazardous materials reduced. "Recurring results" are benefits produced in prior years that continue to deliver benefits over multiple years. By presenting
solely new annual results for GPRA perfonnance targets and results, the targets and results show a clearer alignment to the actual budget request and
enacted levels. Within the P2 Program, there is not a fixed standard number of years that results will recur; rather, each P2 activity has a recurring results
formula specific to the type of results and activities. Background information also is available on EPA's website at www.epa.gov/p2.
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION 714
-------
(PM 297) Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (MTC02Eq) reduced or offset through pollution prevention.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
1.74
1.46
1.0
2.0
2.2
2.2
MTC02Eq
(Millions)
Actual
3.9
3.4
3.0
3.16
4.32
Data Avail
10/2018
Explanation of Results: EPA's consistent record of exceeding annual targets for this measure reflects successful implementation of the P2 grant program
and positive experience in developing product standards for electronics. Grant-based technical assistance to businesses stays up to date on effective
"greening" operations and measurement of impacts; EPEAT product standards and registered products maintain a steady increase as sales data continue
to rise.
Additional Information: There is a one-year data lag. From FY 2008 through FY 2012, 11.1 Million Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent
(MMTC02e) were reduced—after removing 3.5 MMTC02e in reported results that should not be expected to continue in future years due to: 1) atypical
results, and 2) increased quality assurance standards for the results that come from states and other grant recipients. For FY 2016, EPA reported
"recurring results" of an additional 2.6 MMTC02e reduced. "Recurring results" are benefits produced in prior years that continue to deliver benefits over
multiple years. By presenting solely new annual results for GPRA performance targets and results, the targets and results show a clearer aligmnent to the
actual budget request and enacted levels. Within the P2 Program, there is not a fixed standard number of years that results will recur; rather, each P2
activity has a recurring results formula specific to the type of results and activities. Background information also is available on EPA's website at
www.epa.gov/p2.
(PM 262) Gallons of water reduced through pollution prevention.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
785
771
932
1,156
1,390
1,390
Actual
1,175
936
1,618
1,433
1,036
Data Avail
10/2018
Gallons (Millions)
Explanation of Results: Performance on this measure declined in FY 2016 toward the low end of the six-year range (FY 2011-2016). P2 implementation
steps vary from year to year in programmatic impact and consequently affect relative performance among the four P2 outcome measures.
Additional Information: There is a one-year data lag. From FY 2008 through FY 2012, 6.9 billion gallons were reduced—after removing 24 billion
gallons in reported results that should not be expected to continue in future years due to: 1) atypical results, and 2) increased quality assurance standards
for the results that come from states and other grant recipients. For FY 2016, EPA reported "recurring results" of an additional 3.9 billion gallons of water
reduced. "Recurring results" are benefits produced in prior years that continue to deliver benefits over multiple years. By presenting solely new annual
results for GPRA performance targets and results, the targets and results show a clearer aligmnent to the actual budget request and enacted levels. Within
the P2 Program, there is not a fixed standard number of years that results will recur; rather, each P2 activity has a recurring results formula specific to the
type of results and activities. Background information also is available on EPA's website at www.epa.gov/p2.
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION 715
-------
(PM 263) Business, institutional
and government costs reduced through pollution prevention.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
196.9
195.6
133.3
362.6
445.6
445.6
Dollars Saved
(Millions)
Actual
737.4
594.9
587.5
609
842.3
Data Avail
10/2018
Explanation of Results: EPA's consistent record of exceeding annual targets for this measure reflects successful implementation of the P2 grant program
and positive experience in developing product standards for electronics. Grant-based technical assistance to businesses stays up to date on effective
"greening" operations and measurement of impacts; EPEAT product standards and registered products maintain a steady increase as sales data continue
to rise.
Additional Information: There is a one-year data lag. From FY 2008 through FY 2012, $1.85 billion were saved—after removing $231 million in
reported results that should not be expected to continue in future years due to: 1) atypical results, and 2) increased quality assurance standards for the
results that come from states and other grant recipients. For FY 2016, EPA reported "recurring results" of an additional $277 million dollars saved.
"Recurring results" are benefits produced in prior years that continue to deliver benefits over multiple years. By presenting solely new annual results for
GPRA performance targets and results, the targets and results show a clearer aligmnent to the actual budget request and enacted levels. Within the P2
Program, there is not a fixed standard number of years that results will recur; rather, each P2 activity has a recurring results formula specific to the type of
results and activities. Background information also is available on EPA's website at www.epa.gov/p2.
(PM P2X) Annual Number of Additional Products
Recognized by the Safer Choice program
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
375
100
125
Product
Actual
101
248
226
Explanation of Results: The increase in safer products, similar to last year's total, can be attributed to continued strong interest in the program among
corporate partners and the value they place in the Safer Choice label.
Additional Information: Approximately 2,500 safer chemical products were recognized in FY 2013 by the Safer Choice Program. The number of
products placed on the Safer Choice Products list in FY 2014 was 171. The total number of products certified is affected by consolidation in the industry
and other factors that would make it less useful as a measure of performance. The Safer Choice program is also in the process of developing data and
other market research on actual purchasing, to track changes (increases) in volume and aggregate value of purchases of Safer Choice labeled products, in
particular product sectors, relative to growth/changes in overall purchasing for that market segment (e.g., laundry detergents, all-purpose cleaners). Early
indications are that Safer Choice may be performing well in product category markets where Safer Choice products are available. More information about
the Safer Choice program, including currently recognized products and the criteria manufacturers must meet to be recognized, is available at
www.epa.gov/saferchoice.
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION 716
-------
(PM P2Y) Annual Number of Additional Chemicals Added to the Safer Chemical Ingredients List
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
100
100
100
Chemicals
Actual
77
100
100
Additional Information: Approximately 600 chemicals were on the Safer Chemical Ingredients List in FY 2013 under the Safer Choice Program. The
number of products placed on the Safer Chemicals Ingredients List in FY 2014 was 49. The total number of chemicals on the Safer Chemicals
Ingredients List is affected by consolidation in the industry and other factors that would make it less useful as a measure of performance. More
information about the Safer Chemical Ingredients List, including currently listed chemicals and criteria for listing, is available at
http ://www2. epa. gov/saferchoice/safer-ingredients.
GOAL 4: ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CHEMICALS AND PREVENTING POLLUTION 717
-------
Goal 5 at a Glance
PROTECTING HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT BY ENFORCING LAWS
AND ASSURING COMPLIANCE
Prefect human health and the environment through vigorous and targeted civil and crim-
inal enforcement. Use Next Generation Compliance strategies and tools to improve com-
pliance with environmental laws.
FY 2017 Performance Measures
Met: 7 Not Met: S Data Unavailable: 0 15
(Total Measures: 15)
12
FY 2017 Obligation;-
Takirf Action on CSiTnate Change "
and I Tiproline Air Qualety. Si,091.160
~ Protecting Arnerinfr Waters, S4,196,'956 g,
p Ctean ng Up ComTunrbea
and Advancing Sjstainabe [>eveiopn-jer,:1 $3r53CL571
EnsurirgtheSa^tYO^Cherricals
anc Preventing PolltSion, SyAS.-llS
~ Enforcing Environ men tnJ Law, $779,531 0
FY 2017 Performance Measures
~ v«iw<
~ 'I (S?
~ " trj \ r
-
s«
-
7m
i
Objective 1
Strategic Otjf ective Overview
FY 2016 Obligations*
St of Goal 5 Funds
Objective 5.1: Enforce Envirofinrental Laws to Achieve Compliance,
Pursue vigorous civil and cnminal enforcement that targets the most serious
water, air, and chemical hazards in communities to achieve compliance. Assure
strong, consistent and effective enforcement of federai environmental laws
nationwide. Use Next Generation Compliance strategies and tools to improve
compliance and reduce pollution.
S779.53I
100. OH
Goaf 5 Total
$779,531
100.0%
•All figures m thousands
GOAL 5: PROTECTING HUMAN' HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENTL BY ENFORCING THE LAWS
718
-------
FY 2016 EPA Programs and Activities Contributing to Goal 5
Compliance Assistance Program
Economic Decision Sciences Research
Environmental Justice
Environmental Technology Verification Program, Monitoring and Enforcement Program
National Center for Environmental Innovation
National Partnership for Environmental Priorities
Pesticide Enforcement Grant Program
RCRA Corrective Action
Sector Grant Program
Superfund Enforcement
Sustainability Research
Sustainable Materials Management
Toxic Substances Compliance Grant Program
GOAL 5: PROTECTING HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT BY ENFORCING THE LAWS
719
-------
GOAL 5: PROTECTING HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT BY ENFORCING LAWS AND ASSURING COMPLIANCE
Protect human health and the environment through vigorous and targeted civil and criminal enforcement. Use Next Generation Compliance strategies
and tools to improve compliance with environmental laws.
Objective 1 - Enforce Environmental Laws to Achieve Compliance: Pursue vigorous civil and criminal enforcement that targets the most serious water, air,
and chemical hazards in communities to achieve compliance. Assure strong, consistent, and effective enforcement of federal environmental laws nationwide.
Use Next Generation Compliance strategies and tools to improve compliance and reduce pollution.
Summary of progress toward strategic objective:
In FY 2017, EPA - in cooperation with its state, tribal, and local partners - made steady progress towards its objective of pursuing the most serious water, air,
and chemical hazards within communities. EPA achieves such progress by focusing on the highest impact environmental problems through the National
Enforcement Initiatives (NEIs), other national priorities (e.g., drinking water, Superfund, etc.), and Regional enforcement priorities. EPA's actions compel
facilities to clean up contaminated sites and install pollution control technologies, resulting in health and environmental benefits. Specifically, in FY 2017, EPA
met and/or exceeded 7 of its 15 annual performance metrics. Notably, the Agency's Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA) and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) corrective action cases resulted in approximately 400 million cubic yards of total
contaminated soil and water to be cleaned up, and concluded enforcement actions led to the reduction, treatment, or elimination of 10.9 million pounds of toxic
and pesticide pollutants. EPA's focused case work on the most significant violations led to a record settlement against Volkswagen for violations of the Clean
Air Act that resulted in approximately $17.6B in remedies and $4.3B in civil and criminal penalties. The Agency also achieved a record settlement against two
affiliated subsidiaries of Freeport-McMorRan Inc.. that provides for the cleanup of 94 abandoned uranium mines on the Navajo Nation, valued at over $600
million, the 8th largest settlement for the Superfund enforcement program to date.
EPA's criminal enforcement program also made strong progress in FY 2017, with a criminal conviction rate of 89 percent. Also in FY 2017, significant cases
often were tied to individual conduct, and that conduct resulted in 153 years of incarceration, $2.8 billion in fines to be paid by individuals and corporations,
$147 million in restitution, and $3 million in court ordered environmental projects. As part of EPA's commitment to protect vulnerable communities from
environmental crimes, in FY 2017 the Agency's work directly led to the sentencing of several defendants, including a former Cleveland Housing Network
official, for bribery, kickbacks, and illegal abatement of lead-based paint in low-income housing. Aside from this progress however, some of the Agency's FY
2017 enforcement program measures faced challenges, contributing to missed targets for the number of federal inspections and evaluations, civil judicial and
administrative cases initiated and concluded, and pounds of air, water, and hazardous waste pollutants reduced.
In addition to enforcement, EPA also used other effective compliance assurance tools to promote compliance, and worked to enhance state and tribal
partnerships in furtherance of cooperative federalism. For example, EPA, with the Environmental Council of the States (ECOS), launched a workgroup to
strengthen state-EPA compliance assurance work. The Agency also sought to engage partners and stakeholders to reinvigorate Superfund cleanups by
developing (and now implementing) 42 EPA Task Force recommendations to accelerate the cleanup and reuse of Superfund sites. Furthermore, EPA's 17
virtual compliance assistance web sites, designed to help businesses, colleges and universities, local governments, tribes and federal facilities understand and
comply with environmental requirements and save money through pollution prevention techniques, had more than 2 million visits in FY 2017. In addition, EPA
partnered with a number of states to address a variety of serious RCRA, Clean Water Act (CWA), and Clean Air Act (CAA) violations throughout FY 2017 and
ultimately split penalties from enforcement cases with many co-plaintiff states, including Louisiana (Innophos: $1.4M), West Virginia (Pikewood: $1.8M), and
Texas (Vopak: $2.5M. and City of Tyler: $563.000).
GOAL 5: PROTECTING HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT BY ENFORCING THE LAWS
720
-------
Challenges:
Aside from this progress however, funding challenges, combined with normal year-to-year variability in results obtained from enforcement case conclusions,
affected some of the Agency's FY 2017 enforcement program measures, contributing to missed targets for eight of the EPA's Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance's (OECA's) 15 annual performance metrics. Competing priorities have contributed to delays in data system modernizations, adoption of
advanced monitoring, and has hindered EPA's progress on E-discovery.
Advanced monitoring technology and information technology are rapidly evolving, and advances in these fields offer great opportunities for improving the
ability of EPA, states, and tribes to ensure compliance. EPA, states, and tribes face challenges in keeping up with the rapid pace of change in these
technologies, especially when experiencing resource constraints. The Agency will continue to collaborate with ECOS and state associations to maximize the
use of these technologies and modernize programs. For example, EPA will work with states and academics to pilot and evaluate innovative compliance
methods (ECOS Resolution 17-2). EPA will work with states to integrate advanced pollution monitoring and information technology into Agency work.
Program Area
Performance Measures and Data
(1) Maintain
Enforcement
Presence
(PM 409) Number of federal inspections and evaluations.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
19,000
17,000
17,000
15,500
15,500
14,000
Inspections/Evaluat
ions
Actual
20,000
18,000
16,000
15,400
13,500
11,800
Explanation of Results: Inspections are an integral part of EPA's enforcement and compliance assurance program. They are an important tool for
officially assessing compliance with environmental requirements. EPA is prioritizing the most significant inspections and evaluations and that has caused
the overall number of federal inspections to decrease. EPA also conducts off-site evaluations of facilities that are not historically counted as part of this
measure.
(PM 410) Number of civil judicial and administrative enforcement cases initiated.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
3,300
3,200
3,200
2,700
2,700
2,700
Cases
Actual
3,000
2,400
2,300
2,400
2,400
1,900
Explanation of Results: EPA continued to pursue larger more complex, risk-based enforcement cases. This strategy leads to significant environmental
and health gains, but generally lower numbers of cases overall. These enforcement actions are initiated when the regulated community does not comply
with environmental laws, or cleanup is required for the protection of public health and the environment.
GOAL 5: PROTECTING HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT BY ENFORCING THE LAWS
721
-------
(PM 411) Number of civil judicial and administrative enforcement cases concluded.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
3,200
3,000
2,800
2,400
2,400
2,400
Cases
Actual
3,000
2,500
2,300
2,400
2,400
2,000
Explanation of Results: EPA continued to pursue larger more complex, risk-based enforcement cases. This strategy leads to significant enviromnental
and health gains, but generally lower numbers of cases overall.
(PM 412) Percentage of open consent decrees reviewed for overall compliance status.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
100
100
100
100
100
100
Percent
Actual
91
91
100
99
100
100
(PM 078) Percentage of all Superfund statute of limitations cases addressed at sites with unaddressed past Superfund costs equal to or greater
than $500,000.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
100
100
100
100
100
100
Percent
Actual
100
100
100
100
100
98
Explanation of Results: The FY 2017 result is slightly lower than the target due to past costs not being addressed before the statute of limitations (SOL)
at one Superfund site. The sole liable party at the site was determined by the Region to have an inability to pay EPA's unreimbursed past costs, so these
past costs were written off as unrecoverable. Although the costs were written off after the SOL expired, there was no loss to the Fund due to the
responsible parties' inability to pay, which is documented in the site file.
(PM 285) Percentage of Superfund sites having viable, liable responsible parties other than the federal government where EPA reaches a
settlement or takes an enforcement action before starting a remedial action.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
99
99
99
99
99
99
Percent
Actual
100
100
100
100
100
100
Additional Information: EPA's enforcement program is based on the "polluter pays" principle, which provides that a party responsible for the pollution
pays for cleaning it up. The enforcement program applies this principle to preserve taxpayer dollars and the scarce resources of the Superfund trust fund
to address truly abandoned and orphaned sites, which helps to make a visible difference in communities around the country by maximizing Superfund
cleanups. EPA enforcement works to ensure that a settlement is reached or an enforcement action is taken at sites with liable, viable responsible parties
prior to the start of new remedial cleanup work at Superfund sites (excluding federal facilities).
GOAL 5: PROTECTING HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT BY ENFORCING THE LAWS
722
-------
(2) Support
Addressing
Climate Change
and Improving
Air Quality
(PM 400) Millions of pounds of air pollutants reduced, treated, or eliminated through concluded enforcement actions.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
480
450
350
310
310
240
Million Pounds
Actual
250
610
140
430
240
70
Explanation of Results: Results for this measure are highly variable from year to year because they are driven by a small number of very large cases.
This results in substantial variability from year to year.
Additional Information: As OECA continues to make progress addressing large air pollution violators, such as utilities, OECA's annual enforcement
actions comprise cases with significant public health impacts but a smaller number of pounds of pollution. We are increasingly focused on large sources
of air toxics, where even small emissions reductions can have significant health benefits. We would therefore expect to see pounds reduced results go
down in future years, as a combined result of success in addressing the largest sources and a greater focus on toxic air pollutants.
(3) Support
Protecting
America's Waters
(PM 402) Millions of pounds of water pollutants reduced, treated, or eliminated through concluded enforcement actions.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
320
320
280
250
250
200
Million Pounds
Actual
500
660
340
90
70
130
Explanation of Results: Results for this measure are highly variable from year to year because they are driven by a small number of very large cases.
This results in substantial variability from year to year.
Additional Information: As we complete work on compliance agreements with the largest cities and begin to address non-compliance in smaller cities,
the total pounds of pollution achieved per case is expected to decline. This reduction will be a combined result of addressing some of the largest and most
serious violations and putting those dischargers on a path to remediation, as well as our focus on other sources of water pollution that are smaller in
number of pounds but very important to protecting water quality.
(4) Support
Cleaning Up
Communities and
Advancing
Sustainable
Development
(PM 405) Millions of pounds of hazardous and non-hazardous wastes reduced, treated, or eliminated through concluded enforcement actions.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
6,500
6,000
5,000
2,400
2,400
2,000
Million Pounds
Actual
4,400
150
700
500
61,900
250
GOAL 5: PROTECTING HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT BY ENFORCING THE LAWS
723
-------
Explanation of Results: Hazardous: 245 M lbs. Non-Hazardous: 1 M lbs. The results for this measure are driven by a small number of very large cases
and, therefore, can cause significant fluctuations in the results from year to year. For example, in FY 2016 over 98% of the total 61.9 billion pounds of
hazardous and non-hazardous waste reduced, treated, or eliminated came from one case - Mosaic (61.7). Given the types of cases that are nearing
completion, OECA's shift in focus is expected to result in many fewer millions of pounds of pollution reduced overall.
Additional Information: Prior to FY 2016, this measure only included hazardous waste. Beginning in FY 2016, this measure reports (separately) both
hazardous and non-hazardous waste subtotals addressed and remediated through EPA enforcement actions. Non-hazardous waste subtotals were
previously included in PM 404.
(PM 417) Millions of cubic yards of contaminated soil and groundwater media EPA has obtained commitments to clean up as a result of
concluded CERCLA and RCRA corrective action enforcement actions.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
300
275
225
200
200
200
Million Cubic
Actual
400
750
900
70
190
400
Yards
Explanation of Results: Results for this measure are highly variable from year to year because they are driven by a small number of very large cases.
The significant exceedance of this measure's target in FY 2017 is primarily the result of three very large concluded CERCLA cases: Omega Chemical
Co. (200M), Shieldalloy Metallurgical Corp. (119M), and Letterkenny Army Depot (85M).
Additional Information: Contaminated groundwater media, as defined for the Superfund and RCRA corrective action programs, is the volume of
physical aquifer (both soil and water) that will be addressed by the response action. The results for this measure are usually driven by a small number of
very large cases, which can cause a significant fluctuation in results from year to year depending on the types of cases concluded in any given year.
(PM 404) Millions of pounds of toxic and pesticide
jollutants reduced,
treated, or eliminated through concluded enforcement actions.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
(5) Support
Ensuring the
Target
3.8
3.0
2.5
2.3
2.3
2.3
Million Pounds
Actual
1,400
4.6
41
10
13
10.9
Safety of
Chemicals and
Preventing
Pollution
Explanation of Results: Results for this measure are highly variable from year to year because they are driven by a small number of very large cases.
The significant exceedance of this measure's target in FY 2017 is primarily the result of a few very large concluded cases including ECCO USA (1.7M),
Inc., Dow Agrosciences LLC (1.1M), and Fabco Industries, Inc. (800K).
Additional Information: Prior to FY 2016, this measure included non-hazardous wastes. Beginning in FY 2016, non-hazardous wastes addressed and
remediated through EPA enforcement actions, which have been reported as part of this measure, are reported as part of PM 405. The results for this
measure are usually driven by a small number of very large enforcement cases, which yielded the majority of the pounds addressed and can cause
significant fluctuations in results from year to year, depending on the types of cases concluded in any given year.
GOAL 5: PROTECTING HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT BY ENFORCING THE LAWS
724
-------
(PM 418) Percentage of criminal cases having the most significant health, environmental, and deterrence impacts.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
43
43
43
45
45
45
Percent
Actual
45
44
48
62
68
72
Additional Information: The mission of EPA's Criminal Enforcement Program is to investigate, help prosecute, and thereby deter the most egregious
enviromnental offenders. The criminal program collects data on a variety of case attributes to evaluate the range, complexity, and quality of our national
docket. In 2010, the program developed a case selection methodology to ensure the identification, investigation, and prosecution of cases with significant
enviromnental, human health, and deterrence impact. The data elements used in this tier methodology include information about the human health and
enviromnental impacts, the nature of the pollutant and the release, and the profile and compliance history of the subject(s). Since instituting the tiering
system, the percentage of "higher tier" cases has steadily risen.
(PM 419) Percentage of criminal cases with individual defendants.
(6) Enhance
Strategic
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
75
75
75
75
75
75
Percent
Deterrence
through Criminal
Enforcement
Actual
70
80
87
83
85
90
Additional Information: During the early years of EPA's criminal program, organizational defendants made up approximately 70% of the total
defendants charged and individual defendants made up the remaining 30%. By FY 2017, these figures had greatly changed: 90% of cases had an
individual charged and 10% were cases where only an organizational defendant(s) was charged.
(PM 420) Percentage of criminal cases with charges filed.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
40
40
40
45
45
45
Percent
Actual
44
38
39
38
37
43
Explanation of Results: EPA's Criminal Enforcement Program has emphasized focusing on more significant cases, which by nature are more complex,
lengthy investigations. In the past four years, results for PM 420 have ranged from 37 to 43 percent. During that same period, three factors contributed to
significant changes in the open case docket: (1) The number of case-carrying agents declined resulting in fewer cases being opened each year; (2) With
the implementation of PM 418 (the case tiering measure), EPA has increased the percentage of criminal cases having the most significant health,
enviromnental, and deterrence impacts (going from 44% to 72% in that same period); (3) As a result, the criminal docket went from over 700 open cases
to 410 (down from 475 in 2016).
GOAL 5: PROTECTING HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT BY ENFORCING THE LAWS
725
-------
(PM 421) Percentage of conviction rate for criminal defendants.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
85
85
85
85
85
85
Percent
Actual
95
94
95
92
94
91
Additional Information: While case outcomes fluctuate based on their specific characteristics, as well as the prosecutorial and sentencing decisions made
by the U.S. Department of Justice and the federal courts, EPA's Criminal Enforcement Program has maintained a historically high conviction rate for
defendants charged with enviromnental crimes.
GOAL 5: PROTECTING HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT BY ENFORCING THE LAWS
726
-------
Research Performance Array
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
Performance Measures and Data
(PM AC1) Percentage of planned research products com
)leted on time by Air, Climate, and Energy research program.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
100
100
100
100
100
100
Percent
Actual
100
92
87
87
100
100
Explanation of Results: In FY 2017, the Office of Research and Development's (ORD's) Air, Climate and Energy (ACE) research program completed 100% (11 of 11) of its
high-priority research products as planned. Included among these products are 27 Federal Reference Method and Federal Equivalent Method designations and modifications.
These designations serve as key support to states and localities working towards National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) attainment. In addition, ORD supported
community level air quality planning by releasing work on the role community characteristics and enviromnental justice factors play in the relationship between criteria air
pollutants and public health events. These products, as well as other ACE products, provide key data and tools needed by individuals, communities, and governmental agencies to
prevent and reduce emissions of pollutants, assess effects associated with pollutants and climate change, and make informed decisions to protect public health.
Additional Information: A research product is "a deliverable that results from a specific research project or task. Research products may require translation or synthesis before
integration into an output ready for partner use." This secondary performance measure tracks the timely completion of research products. Working with its partners, each program
develops a list of planned research products and their associated outputs. The list reflects high priority products the program plans to complete by the end of each fiscal year. The
estimated completion date is based on when the output is needed for partner use and when the research products must be transformed into the output. The actual product
completion date is self-reported. The program strives to complete 100% of its planned products each year so that it can best meet EPA and other partners' needs.
(PM AC2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients for use in
taking action on climate change or improving air quality.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
100
100
100
100
100
100
Actual
77
83
92
74
85
100
Percent
RESEARCH
727
-------
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: In FY 2017, ORD's ACE research program completed 100% (6 of 6) of its research outputs. Among these outputs were a series of grantee webinars that
focused on disseminating research results, collecting publication and bibliographical information, and synthesizing research results to more effectively transmit scientific findings
to partners and stakeholders. In addition, ORD rolled out an updated version of the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system, including improved
capabilities for modeling aerosol composition, atmospheric chemistry, scale interactions, and diagnostic analysis. CMAQ uses state-of-the-science air quality modeling
techniques to provide near and long-term data to inform NAAQS policymaking. These projects further support EPA's mission of protecting human health and the enviromnent by
furthering public outreach, supplementing the regulatory monitoring network to explore local-scale pollution trends, and increasing data available for research purposes.
Additional Information: Research outputs result from the translation or synthesis of one or more research products into the format compatible with the partner's decision needs.
"Delivery of a research output" means that the output is transferred to ORD's research partner ready for the intended partner use. EPA identifies and describes the planned outputs
in the program's Research Program Strategic Plan. At the end of the fiscal year, the program reports on its success in meeting its planned annual outputs. The program strives to
complete 100% of its planned outputs each year so that it can best meet EPA and other partners' needs. To ensure the ambitiousness of its annual output measures, ORD has better
formalized the process for developing and modifying program outputs, including requiring that ORD programs engage partners when making modifications. Involving partners in
this process helps to ensure the ambitiousness of outputs on the basis of partner utility.
(PM CS1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Chemical Safety for Sustainability research program.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
100
100
100
100
100
100
Actual
Percent
100
100
100
100
100
100
Explanation of Results: In FY 2017, ORD's Chemical Safety for Sustainability (CSS) research program completed 100% (15 of 15) of its high-priority research products as
planned. Among these products were a series of publications, models and datasets to continue the development of advanced Human Exposure Modeling techniques. This work
focused on capturing population variability in consumer product and household exposure sources, which will be used to support decision makers in both Agency and Regional air
and chemical programs. ORD also enhanced collaboration and impact for CSS and Predictive Toxicology efforts by promoting interdisciplinary research between EPA scientists
and grantees on virtual tissue modeling and computational toxicology. These and other CSS products provide toxicological data and tools needed by individuals, communities,
and governmental agencies to prevent and reduce chemical exposure, assess effects associated with pollutants, and make informed decisions to protect public health.
Additional Information: A research product is "a deliverable that results from a specific research project or task. Research products may require translation or synthesis before
integration into an output ready for partner use." This secondary performance measure tracks the timely completion of research products. Working with its partners, each program
develops a list of planned research products and their associated outputs. The list reflects high priority products the program plans to complete by the end of each fiscal year. The
estimated completion date is based on when the output is needed for partner use and when the research products are needed to be transformed into the output. The actual product
completion date is self-reported. The program strives to complete 100% of its planned products each year so that it can best meet EPA and other partners' needs.
(PM CS2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients and partners to improve their capability to advance the environmentally sustainable
development, use, and assessment of chemicals.
Target
Actual
FY 2012
100
50
FY 2013
100
100
FY 2014
100
100
FY 2015
100
100
FY 2016
100
100
FY 2017
100
100
Unit
Percent
RESEARCH
728
-------
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: In FY 2017, ORD's CSS research program completed 100% (3 of 3) of its research outputs as planned. These outputs included the demonstration of
novel approaches for combining data and models through application in a variety of decision contexts to inform specific EPA chemical evaluation objectives. This output
provides examples that enable the EPA to integrate data from any variety of legacy and novel data sources using innovations in computational science and "big data" approaches
to make more informed decisions. This and other CSS research outputs empower individuals, communities, and governmental agencies to better evaluate potential risks from
chemical exposure and to make more informed, more timely decisions about chemicals with impacts on public health and the enviromnent.
Additional Information: Research outputs result from the translation or synthesis of one or more research products into the format compatible with the partner's decision needs.
"Delivery of a research output" means that the output is transferred to ORD's research partner ready for the intended partner use. EPA identifies and describes the planned outputs
in the program's Research Program Strategic Plan. At the end of the fiscal year, the program reports on its success in meeting its planned annual outputs. The program strives to
complete 100% of its planned outputs each year so that it can best meet EPA and other partners' needs. To ensure the ambitiousness of its annual output measures, ORD has better
formalized the process for developing and modifying program outputs, including requiring that ORD programs engage partners when making modifications. Involving partners in
this process helps to ensure the ambitiousness of outputs on the basis of partner utility.
(PM HC1) Percentage of planned research products com
)leted on time by the Sustainable and Healthy Communities research program.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
100
100
100
100
100
100
Actual
Percent
100
83
81
100
100
100
Explanation of Results: In FY 2017, ORD's Sustainable and Healthy Communities (SHC) research program completed 100% (16 of 16) of its high-priority research products as
planned. Included among these products was the release of the Decision Analysis for a Sustainable Enviromnent, Economy, and Society (DASEES) tool. This tool provides an
enviromnent where communities can build common understanding of complex problems, and then create and evaluate management alternatives through a multi-objective
decision analysis. The tool serves as an integrative framework for combined assessment of enviromnental, economic, and social aspects of a decision problem where there is
uncertainty or risk. This product, as well as other SHC products, provides tools and methods that help protect public health at a community level, communicate community
environmental risks, and protect the enviromnent.
Additional Information: A research product is "a deliverable that results from a specific research project or task." Research products may require translation or synthesis before
integration into an output ready for partner use. This secondary performance measure tracks the timely completion of research products. Working with its partners, each program
develops a list of planned research products and their associated outputs. The list reflects high priority products the program plans to complete by the end of each fiscal year. The
estimated completion date is based on when the output is needed for partner use and when the research products must be transformed into the output. The actual product
completion date is self-reported. The program strives to complete 100% of its planned products each year so that it can best meet EPA and other partners' needs.
(PM HC2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients, partners, and stakeholders for use in pursuing their sustainability goals.
' FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017
Target
Actual
100
50
100
68
100
100
100
50
100
92
100
100
Unit
Percent
RESEARCH
729
-------
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: One output was delayed from an FY 17 delivery to FY18. All other outputs are on schedule.
Additional Information: Research outputs result from the translation or synthesis of one or more research products into the format compatible with the partner's decision needs.
"Delivery of a research output" means that the output is transferred to ORD's research partner ready for the intended partner use. EPA identifies and describes the planned outputs
in the program's Research Program Strategic Plan. At the end of the fiscal year, the program reports on its success in meeting its planned annual outputs. The program strives to
complete 100% of its planned outputs each year so that it can best meet EPA and other partners' needs. To ensure the ambitiousness of its annual output measures, ORD has better
formalized the process for developing and modifying program outputs, including requiring that ORD programs engage partners when making modifications. Involving partners in
this process helps to ensure the ambitiousness of outputs on the basis of partner utility.
(PM HS1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Homeland Security research program.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
100
100
100
100
100
100
Actual
100
100
100
100
100
100
Percent
Explanation of Results: In FY 2017, ORD's Homeland Security Research Program (HSRP) completed 100% (4 of 4) of its high-priority research products as planned. Included
among these products was a collaboration with the Department of Defense and Department of Homeland Security to advance underground transportation system
decontaminations after biological attacks. In addition, ORD completed a pilot scale demonstration of mobile water device treatments for biological agents, which will increase
treatment capacity in the event of biological contamination incidents. These products, as well as other HSRP products, supports EPA's mission by providing the data and tools
necessary to prepare our communities for the threats of disasters including biological, chemical and radiological attacks.
Additional Information: A research product is "a deliverable that results from a specific research project or task." Research products may require translation or synthesis before
integration into an output ready for partner use. This secondary performance measure tracks the timely completion of research products. Working with its partners, each program
develops a list of planned research products and their associated outputs. The list reflects high priority products the program plans to complete by the end of each fiscal year. The
estimated completion date is based on when the output is needed for partner use and when the research products must be transformed into the output. The actual product
completion date is self-reported. The program strives to complete 100% of its planned products each year so that it can best meet EPA and other partners' needs.
(PM HS2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients and partners to improve their capabilities to respond to contamination resulting from homeland
security events and related disasters.
Target
Actual
FY 2012
100
78
FY 2013
100
100
FY 2014
100
100
FY 2015
100
100
FY 2016
100
100
FY 2017
100
100
Unit
Percent
RESEARCH
730
-------
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: In FY 2017, ORD's HSRP completed 100% (8 of 8) of its research outputs as planned. Included among these outputs is the Water Network Tool for
Resilience (WNTR), which is a new software tool designed to help water utilities measure and improve the resilience of their drinking water systems to disasters. In addition to
this, operating procedures were developed to help manufacturers bring to market commercially available robotic cleaners designed to sample Bacillus anthracis (anthrax) spores.
These and other HSRP outputs continue to support EPA's ability to respond to potential attacks on our water systems and other potential impacts to human health.
Additional Information: Research outputs result from the translation or synthesis of one or more research products into the format compatible with the partner's decision needs.
"Delivery of a research output" means that the output is transferred to ORD's research partner ready for the intended partner use. EPA identifies and describes the planned outputs
in the program's Research Program Strategic Plan. At the end of the fiscal year, the program reports on its success in meeting its planned annual outputs. The program strives to
complete 100% of its planned outputs each year so that it can best meet EPA and other partners' needs. To ensure the ambitiousness of its annual output measures, ORD has better
formalized the process for developing and modifying program outputs, including requiring that ORD programs engage partners when making modifications. Involving partners in
this process helps to ensure the ambitiousness of outputs on the basis of partner utility.
(PM RA1) Percentage of planned research products com
)leted on time by the Human Health Risk Assessment research program.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
100
100
100
100
100
100
Actual
100
80
45
68
85
Percent
Explanation of Results: In FY 2017, ORD's Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) Research Program completed 85% (11 of 13) of its high priority research products as
planned. The Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) pipeline was delayed, and a decision was made to sunset two products. As an alternative, new, more relevant and
responsive replacement products were proposed. Key assessment products completed for HHRA include three IRIS Assessment Plans (nitrate/nitrite, chloroform, and
ethylbenzene) and two external review drafts for IRIS assessments (ethyl tert-butyl ether, tert-butanol). Several Integrated Science Assessment (ISA) key products were
completed as planned including the second draft ISA for Oxides of Sulfur - Health Criteria, the ISA chapter in the Final Integrated Review Plan (IRP) for the Secondary NAAQS
for ecological effects of oxides of nitrogen, oxides of sulfur, and particulate matter, and the ISA chapter in the Draft IRP to support the primary and secondary NAAQS for
particulate matter. These and other HHRA products are needed by individuals, communities, and governmental agencies to improve risk analyses, better inform regulatory
decisions, and protect human health and the enviromnent.
Additional Information: A research product is "a deliverable that results from a specific research project or task." Research products may require translation or synthesis before
integration into an output ready for partner use. This secondary performance measure tracks the timely completion of research products. Working with its partners, each program
develops a list of planned research products and their associated outputs. The list reflects high priority products the program plans to complete by the end of each fiscal year. The
estimated completion date is based on when the output is needed for partner use and when the research products must be transformed into the output. The actual product
completion date is self-reported. The program strives to complete 100% of its planned products each year so that it can best meet EPA and other partners' needs.
(PM RA2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients and partners for use in informing human health decisions.
Target
Actual
FY 2012
100
38
FY 2013
100
100
FY 2014
100
67
FY 2015
100
60
FY 2016
100
67
FY 2017
100
100
Unit
Percent
RESEARCH
731
-------
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: In FY 2017, ORD's HHRA Research Program completed 100% (2 of 2) of its research outputs as planned. The outputs included release of two final
IRIS assessments, IRIS Evaluation of the Inhalation Carcinogenicity of Ethylene Oxide and the IRIS Assessment of Benzo[a]pyrene. These IRIS assessments support policy and
regulatory decisions for EPA's programs and regions, and state and other federal agencies by providing hazard identification and dose-response assessments. HHRA also
completed 12 Provisional Peer-Reviewed Toxicity Value (PPRTV) assessments, which are used by EPA's Superfund program and regional decision-makers to characterize the
contamination of a Superfund site and when making site-specific clean-up decisions, such as when to pursue monitoring and remediation for a contaminant of concern.
Additional Information: Research outputs result from the translation or synthesis of one or more research products into the format compatible with the partner's decision needs.
"Delivery of a research output" means that the output is transferred to ORD's research partner ready for the intended partner use. EPA identifies and describes the planned outputs
in the program's Research Program Strategic Plan. At the end of the fiscal year, the program reports on its success in meeting its planned annual outputs. The program strives to
complete 100% of its planned outputs each year so that it can best meet EPA and other partners' needs. To ensure the ambitiousness of its annual output measures, ORD has better
formalized the process for developing and modifying program outputs, including requiring that ORD programs engage partners when making modifications. Involving partners in
this process helps to ensure the ambitiousness of outputs on the basis of partner utility.
(PM RA6) Number of regulatory decisions in which decision-makers used HHRA peer-reviewed assessments (IRIS, PPRTVs, exposure assessments and other
assessments)
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
20
20
20
20
20
Number
Actual
140
100
100
100
120
Explanation of Results: In FY 2017, ORD's HHRA Research Program significantly exceeded its goal for this measure by continuing its efforts to develop efficient, high quality,
and translatable assessments that are useful and relevant to program managers. HHRA peer-reviewed assessments are used by EPA program and regional offices to inform critical
decisions to protect human health. For example, PPRTV assessments are used by EPA's Superfund program and regional decision makers to characterize the contamination of a
Superfund site and when making site-specific cleanup decisions. These assessments advance science and technology to help improve the health and quality of life in communities
affected by hazardous waste sites and improve industry enviromnental practices.
Additional Information: The measure calculates the number of Agency regulatory decisions for which clients use HHRA peer-reviewed health assessments. The measure is
calculated by reviewing regulatory decisions and Records of Decision (ROD) made by EPA, determining how many quantitative health assessment values were used in these
EPA program decisions, and what percentage of these values had been developed by the HHRA Program. This measure was piloted in FY 2013 and FY 2014 and was based on
available information for FY 2010 that is unlikely to be reproducible and has since been calculated using data collected from the Superfund Enterprise Management System and
EPA regulatory docket information collected from Regulations.gov.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
50
50
40
40
40
40
Score
Actual
8
17
30
7
4
11
RESEARCH
732
-------
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: In FY 2017, ORD's HHRA Research Program achieved a score of 11 for draft IRIS assessments. Though the target was not met, key assessment
products completed for HHRA include three IRIS Assessment Plans (nitrate/nitrite, chloroform, and ethylbenzene) and two external review drafts for IRIS assessments (ethyl
tert-butyl ether, tert-butanol). In FY 2017, the IRIS pipeline was placed on hold while new EPA and ORD leadership was being appointed. In addition to this, the implementation
of NAS and Government Accountability Office (GAO) recommendations, notably development and application of systematic review methodologies, introduced competing
priorities that contributed to the challenges in meeting this goal. The scoring method used for this measure was developed many years ago and does not reflect significant IRIS
programmatic changes that began in 2011. IRIS assessments evaluate potential health effects that may result from exposure to environmental contaminants, such as chemicals in
drinking water, pollutants in air, and contaminants in soil.
Additional Information: At the end of the fiscal year, the program reports on its success in meeting its planned annual outputs. Points are scored by multiplying the weight of
each assessment by the number of milestones completed in the assessment process. The program targets represent a steady and timely completion of draft assessments throughout
each fiscal year. Near-term targets are based on the large volume of ongoing assessments that have not been released in draft due to the change in the process for external review.
In 2011, the National Research Council (NRC) made several recommendations to EPA for improving the development of IRIS assessments, which EPA lias made progress on
that has subsequently been recognized by NRC. To increase its transparency, accessibility, and efficiency, EPA is using a new document structure for draft assessments, including
an Executive Summary presenting major conclusions, a description of methods used to develop the assessment, distinct sections on Hazard Identification and Dose-Response
Analysis, and more tables and figures to clearly present data. To better support policy and regulatory decisions for EPA's programs and regions, as well as state agencies, IRIS is
reconfirming their priority chemicals and product needs, and aligning those with appropriate allocation of resources. In addition to Superfund, water, air, and children's health
drivers. IRIS lias sharpened its focus on the new Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) law, and has been providing the needed scientific support to meet its expedited timelines.
(PM RA8) Annual progress score for finalizing IRIS health assessments.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
20
20
15
15
15
15
Score
Actual
17
8
0
5
5
4
RESEARCH
733
-------
Performance Measures and Data
Explanation of Results: In FY 2017, ORD's HHRA Research Program achieved a score of 4 for final IRIS assessments. In FY 2017, the IRIS pipeline was placed on hold while
new EPA and ORD leadership was being appointed. In addition to this, the implementation of NAS and GAO recommendations, notably development and application of
systematic review methodologies, introduced competing priorities that contributed to the challenges in meeting this goal. Though the target was not met, key assessments for
ethylene oxide and benzo[a]pyrene were both posted as final. Now final, these IRIS assessments that identify potential health hazards and evaluate dose-response resulting from
exposure to ethylene oxide or benzo[a]pyrene in drinking water, air, and soil will be used by EPA's program and regional offices to inform decisions under an array of
enviromnental laws (e.g.. Clean Air Act; Safe Drinking Water Act; Comprehensive Enviromnental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act).
Additional Information: This measure tracks the program's ability to make progress in finalizing and releasing IRIS assessments. The annual score, tracked cumulatively
throughout the year, is based on the relative weighting of each chemical. Chemicals are weighted using a 3-tier system that includes client interest, complexity of science, and
level of effort required. Points are scored by multiplying the weight of each assessment by the number of milestones completed in the assessment process. The program targets
represent a steady and timely completion of final assessments throughout each fiscal year. Near-term targets are based on the large volume of ongoing assessments that have not
been finalized due to the change in the process for external review and completion. This measure will be assessed as rolling average. In 2011, the NRC made several
recommendations to EPA for improving the development of IRIS assessments. EPA has made progress in implementing these recommendations; accordingly, the NRC 2014
report commended EPA's efforts to modernize IRIS. To increase its transparency, accessibility, and efficiency, EPA is using a new document structure for draft assessments,
including an Executive Summary presenting major conclusions, a description of methods used to develop the assessment, distinct sections on Hazard Identification and Dose-
Response Analysis, and more tables and figures to clearly present data. To better support policy and regulatory decisions for EPA's programs and regions, as well as state
agencies, IRIS is reconfirming their priority chemicals and product needs, and aligning those with appropriate allocation of resources. In addition to Superfund, water, air, and
children's health drivers. IRIS has sharpened its focus on the new TSCA law, and has been providing the needed scientific support to meet its expedited timelines.
(PM SW1) Percentage of planned research products completed on time by the Safe and Sustainable Water Resources research program.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
100
100
100
100
100
100
Actual
86
70
90
100
100
100
Percent
Explanation of Results: In FY 2017, ORD's Safe and Sustainable Water Resources (SSWR) research program completed 100% (7 of 7) of its planned high priority products.
Among these products was a years-long collaboration with the Office of Water to explore the use of a Multi-Metric Marine Biotic Index (M-AMBI) that has been tested for
nationwide use for coastal benthic zone assessments. The use of a single, standard index will allow for more consistent assessments and comparisons of coastal zones. ORD also
optimized Harmful Algal Bloom mitigation strategies by initiating a series of bench-scale engineering trials and full-scale sampling campaigns. These products, as other SSWR
products, provide the data and tools needed by individuals, communities, and governmental agencies to promote water conservation safeguard our water resources from ongoing
threats, and protect public health.
Additional Information: A research product is "a deliverable that results from a specific research project or task." Research products may require translation or synthesis before
integration into an output ready for partner use. This secondary performance measure tracks the timely completion of research products. Working with its partners, each program
develops a list of planned research products and their associated outputs. The list reflects high priority products the program plans to complete by the end of each fiscal year. The
estimated completion date is based on when the output is needed for partner use and when the research products are needed to be transformed into the output. The actual product
completion date is self-reported. The program strives to complete 100% of its planned products each year so that it can best meet EPA and other partners' needs.
RESEARCH
734
-------
Performance Measures and Data
(PM SW2) Percentage of planned research outputs delivered to clients and partners to improve the Agency's capability to ensure clean and adequate supplies of water
that support human well-being and resilient aquatic ecosystems.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
100
100
100
100
100
100
Percent
Actual
50
100
100
100
100
100
Explanation of Results: In FY 2017, ORD's SSWR research program completed 100% (1 of 1) of its planned outputs. This output was a synthesis of the science on groundwater
quality impacts around uranium in-situ recovery sites. This synthesis report will provide decision makers with key information on protecting groundwater while developing
energy and mineral resources. This synthesis work, as well as other SSWR research, provides the science and innovative technologies that the Agency and the nation need to
maintain drinking water resources and systems, as well as to protect the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the nation's waters.
Additional Information: Research outputs result from the translation or synthesis of one or more research products into the format compatible with the partner's decision needs.
"Delivery of a research output" means that the output is transferred to ORD's research partner ready for the intended partner use. EPA identifies and describes the planned outputs
in the program's Research Program Strategic Plan. At the end of the fiscal year, the program reports on its success in meeting its planned annual outputs. The program strives to
complete 100% of its planned outputs each year so that it can best meet EPA and other partners' needs. To ensure the ambitiousness of its annual output measures, ORD has better
formalized the process for developing and modifying program outputs, including requiring that ORD programs engage partners when making modifications. Involving partners in
this process helps to ensure the ambitiousness of outputs on the basis of partner utility.
RESEARCH
735
-------
Enabling Support Programs Performance Array
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION AND RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
Performance Measures and Data
(PM 009) No reduction in percentage of certified acquisition staff (1102).
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
335 /80
323 / 80
85
85
85
85
Number/ Percent
Actual
323/85
285 / 85
93
95
93
95
Explanation of Results: As of October 1, 2017, there were 265 acquisition (1102) staff onboard, of which 251 (95%) were certified. Certification
ensures that acquisition staff are properly trained and qualified.
(PM 010) Reduction in Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Scopes 1 & 2 emissions below 2008 baseline.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
6.4
12.2
16.3
16.3
20.1
23.0
Percent
Actual
54.1
57.4
59.5
63
60.2
Data Avail
2018
Additional Information: See EPA's FY 2016 Stratesic Sustainabilitv Performance Plan rase 4 at httt>s://www.era.sov/sites/r>roduction/files/2016-
09/documcnts/cDa 2016 stratesic sustainabilitv Dcrformancc olan.odf.
(PM 098) Reduction in energy consumption below 2003 baseline.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
21
24
27
27
32.5
35
Percent
Actual
23.7
25.6
28.9
32.7
34.6
Data Avail
2018
Additional Information: See EPA's FY 2016 Stratesic Sustainabilitv Performance Plan oasc 4 at httt>s://www.era.sov/sites/r>roduction/files/2016-
09/documcnts/cDa 2016 stratesic sustainabilitv Dcrformancc olan.odf.
ENABLING SUPPORT PROGRAMS
736
-------
OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION
Performance Measures and Data
(PM 052) Number of major EPA environmental systems that use the CDX electronic requirements enabling faster receipt, processing, and
quality checking of data.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
67
75
80
77
80
90
Systems
Actual
68
73
89
107
125
174
Explanation of Results: The 39% spike in flows is indicative of EPA's shift towards cooperative federalism. The Office of Enforcement and Compliance
(OECA) rolled out its Network Discharge Monitoring Report System (NETDMR) to Regions, States and Tribes, creating 38 unique CDX flows.
Additional Information: The Central Data Exchange (CDX) program began in FY 2001 to enable states, tribes and others to send enviromnental data to
EPA through a centralized electronic process. The CDX program estimates its results as the net of new systems using CDX services (increase) and
retirement of older systems that are being phased out (decrease). As a result, these results may increase or decrease in subsequent years. The unit of
measure "system" is defined as the number of data flows/exchanges that occur through CDX by EPA program offices, states and tribes. There are 16
Vehicle Engine Regulation (VERIFY) data flows/exchanges that occur in CDX. Each serves a different need and is counted individually. Because CDX
is used for these 16 unique needs, separate systems have not been developed to fulfill this need; rather, the one CDX solution serves them all.
(PM 053) States, tribes and territories will be able to exchange data with CDX through nodes in real time, using standards and automated data-
quality checking.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
80
95
98
103
140
140
Users
Actual
92
97
102
104
140
157
Additional Information: Users are defined for this measure as the total number of physical and virtual nodes in production and test.
(PM 999) Total number of active unique users from states, tribes, laboratories, regulated facilities and other entities that electronically report
environmental data to EPA through CDX.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
58,000
70,000
75,000
84,000
90,000
100,000
Users
Actual
65,238
79,818
96,000
85,894
116,636
116,837
Additional Information: To calculate unique users of the CDX system, CDX takes all users whose accounts have been active in the last two years and
eliminates duplicate registrations under the same email address. Because many EPA regulations require periodic reporting, i.e., once every two, three or
five years, a two-year span was utilized to capture the majority of users without overstating their "active" status.
ENABLING SUPPORT PROGRAMS
737
-------
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
Performance Measures and Data
(PM 35A) Environmental and business actions taken for improved performance or risk reduction.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
334
307
248
268
274
274
Actions
Actual
216
215
324
296
285
204
Explanation of Results: Due to the manner in which audits are planned, a significant number of the reports issued by the Office of the Inspector General
(OIG) in FY 2017 were issued within the last three months of the Fiscal Year. As a result, the Agency did not have sufficient time to initiate or complete
corrective actions related to OIG recommendations.
Additional Information: This measure captures implemented corrective actions taken by the Agency based on OIG recommendations to improve EPA
programs and/or processes. Results are typically from prior years and may fluctuate depending on the Agency's ability to complete agreed-upon
corrective actions. The target for this measure is developed by taking the actual performance for two or three fiscal years and adjusted to reflect any
significant changes in priorities.
(PM 35B) Environmental and business recommendations or risks identified for corrective action.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
903
786
687
967
1,094
1,094
Recommendations
Actual
1,242
1,003
944
1,110
1,127
1150
Additional Information: This measure captures the number of OIG outputs (recommendations for improvement, outreach activities to plan and promote
OIG work, congressional testimonies delivered, best practices identified, and risks identified). One key activity during an OIG audit/evaluation is
identifying risks to EPA operations and programs. Risk identification is based on federal standards for internal control. Internal control is a process for
assuring achievement of an organization's objectives in operational effectiveness and efficiency, reliable reporting, and compliance with laws, regulations
and policies. Ultimately effective internal controls assure that operations run efficiently and effectively. The target reflects the average of actual
performance for two or three fiscal years, adjusted to reflect any significant changes in priorities.
(PM 35C) Return on the annual dollar investment, as a percentage of the OIG budget, from audits and investigations.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
110
125
132
220
220
220
Percent
Actual
743
248
734
1,656
2,098
722
ENABLING SUPPORT PROGRAMS
738
-------
Performance Measures and Data
Additional Information: Results under this measure identify the potential return on investment and do not include actual recoveries. The OIG's role is to
question costs and identify cost efficiencies and funds put to better use (recommended efficiencies). The target reflects the average of actual performance
for two or three fiscal years, adjusted to reflect any significant changes in priorities. In FY 2012 and FY 2014 the OIG issued a single report with usually
high recommended efficiencies (FY 2012-$372M; FY 2014-$230M). These were excluded from the average calculations given that reports with massive
ROI do not materialize every year.
(PM 35D) Criminal, civil, administrative, and fraud prevention actions.
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
FY 2017
Unit
Target
85
90
125
175
145
145
Actions
Actual
152
256
213
304
181
298
Additional Information: This measure captures criminal, civil, and administrative actions as a result of OIG investigations on fraud, waste and abuse. To
a large extent, results are influenced by factors outside the control of OIG (judges, juries, etc.).
ENABLING SUPPORT PROGRAMS
739
-------
Cross-Agency Strategies
The table below summarizes progress that the Environmental Protection Agency has achieved
under the cross-agency strategies (CAS) established in the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan.
Working to Make a Visible Difference in Communities - Align community-based activities
to provide seamless assistance to communities, both urban and rural, while maximizing
efficiency and results. Expand support of community efforts to build healthy, sustainable,
green neighborhoods and reduce and prevent harmful exposures and health risks to children
and underserved, overburdened communities.
EPA has held seventeen webinars to date highlighting EPA University and other outreach
activities that support community-based work. Five of those webinars took place in FY 2017
and highlighted various topics (e.g., equitable development, resilient design, community-
university partnerships, public health). One in-person full day training on equitable
development was conducted for EPA staff. The Communities CAS also developed and piloted
a Resource Request Platform that is now ready to be used in FY 2018to enable regions and
program offices to match available resources from National Program Managers in support of
high-need communities identified by the regional offices. This Platform is more user-friendly
than the interim resource matching process EPA used in FY 2017 and improves cross-agency
coordination, maximizing the impact of government resources.
Launching a New Era of State, Tribal, Local, and International Partnerships -
Strengthen partnerships with states, tribes, local governments, and the global community that
are central to the success of the national environmental protection program through
consultation, collaboration, and shared accountability. Modernize the EPA-state relationship,
including revitalizing the National Environmental Performance Partnership System and jointly
pursuing E-Enterprise, a transformative approach to make environmental information and data
more accessible, efficient, and evidence-based through advances in monitoring, reporting, and
information technology.
As of FY 2017, EPA has finalized 319 EPA-Tribal Environmental Plans (ETEPs) - jointly
developed documents outlining how the EPA and the tribe will work together to implement
programs on tribal lands - with more than 100 additional ETEPs in progress. Over the past
four years, EPA and tribes have maintained steady focus on ETEP development. EPA also
completed the development of a model lead paint law in collaboration with United Nations
Environment Program as well as key industry, government and NGO stakeholders. The
Partnerships Cross-Agency Strategy augmented Agency efforts to implement E.O. 13777,
"Enforcing the Regulatory Agenda," by briefing representatives of seventeen national
intergovernmental associations, eight governors' offices, several state attorneys general, state
regulatory agencies, county officials and mayors, all to inform the efforts of EPA's Regulatory
Reform Task Force as it identifies regulation and policy candidates for revision, repeal or
replacement. The Partnerships CAS also worked with state, local, and tribal partners through
the support of E-Enterprise and developed a Shared Services strategy in September 2017
which is currently being implemented to integrate shared information technology services.
740
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Appendix
Coordination with Other Federal Agencies 743
Environmental Programs 743
Internal Operations Programs 767
Major Management Challenges 774
EPA User Fee Programs 778
Working Capital Fund 782
Acronyms for Statutory Authority 784
FY 2019 STAG Categorical Program Grants 788
Program Projects by Program Area 803
Eliminated Programs 813
Expected Benefits of E-Government Initiatives 819
FY 2019 Administrator's Priorities 824
Proposed FY 2019 Administrative Provisions 825
Attorney Fee and Cost Payments Obligated in FY 2017 Under Equal Access for Justice
Act (EAJA) 830
Fiscal Year 2019: Consolidations, Realignments, or Other Transfers of Resources 831
Physicians' Comparability Allowance (PCA) Worksheet for BY 2019 832
FY 2019 IT Resource Statements 833
IG's Comments on the FY 2019 President's Budget 835
EPA Budget by National Program Manager and Major Office 837
Reform Plan 841
Seeking Organizational Efficiencies 845
741
-------
742
-------
Coordination with Other Federal Agencies
Environmental Programs
Air and Radiation Programs
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) Implementation
EPA cooperates with other federal, state, tribal and local agencies to achieve goals related to
ground level ozone and particulate matter (PM), and to ensure the actions of other agencies are
compatible with state plans for attaining and maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS). EPA works closely with the Department of Agriculture (USDA), the
Department of the Interior (DOI), and the Department of Defense (DOD) on issues such as
prescribed burning at silviculture and agricultural operations. EPA, the Department of
Transportation (DOT) and the Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) also work with state and local
agencies to integrate transportation and air quality plans, reduce traffic congestion, and promote
livable communities.
To improve EPA's understanding of environmental issues related to the agricultural sector, EPA
has worked closely with the USDA and others to improve air quality while supporting a sustainable
agricultural sector.
Regional Haze
EPA works with the DOI, National Park Service (NPS), and U.S. Forest Service (USFS) in
implementing its regional haze program and operating the Interagency Monitoring of Protected
Visual Environments (IMPROVE) visibility monitoring network. The operation and analysis of
data produced by this air monitoring system is an example of the close coordination of efforts
between EPA and state and tribal governments. EPA also consults with the DOI's Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) on potential endangered species issues.
Air Quality Assessment, Modeling, and Forecasting
For pollution assessments and transport, EPA works with the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA) on technology transfer using satellite imagery. EPA further distributes
NASA satellite products and NOAA air quality forecast products to states, local agencies and tribes
to provide a better understanding of daily air quality and to assist with air quality forecasting. EPA
works with NASA to develop a better understanding of PM formation using satellite data. EPA
also has worked with the Department of the Army on advancing emission measurement technology
and with NOAA for meteorological support for our modeling and monitoring efforts. EPA collects
real-time ozone and PM measurements from state and local agencies, which are used by both
NOAA and EPA to improve and verify Air Quality Forecast models.
EPA's AIRNow program (the national real-time Air Quality Index reporting and forecasting
system) works with the National Weather Service (NWS) to coordinate NOAA air quality forecast
743
-------
guidance with state and local agencies for air quality forecasting efforts and to render the NOAA
model output in EPA Air Quality Index (AQI), which helps people determine appropriate air
quality protective behaviors. In wildfire situations, EPA and the USFS work closely with states to
deploy monitors and report monitoring information and other conditions on AIRNow. EPA also
has worked with USFS by providing new science on the impacts of smoke on health to inform
smoke management practices and intervention strategies to reduce health impacts. The AIRNow
program also has collaborated with the NPS and the USFS in collecting air quality monitoring
observations, in addition to observations from over 130 state, local and tribal air agencies. AIRNow
also collaborates with NASA in a project to incorporate satellite data with air quality observations.
EPA, the USD A, and the DOI established a collaborative framework to address issues pertaining
to wildland fire and air quality. The agreement recognizes the key roles of each agency, as well as
opportunities for collaboration. For example, the partnership explains that the agencies seek to
reduce the impact of emissions from wildfires, especially catastrophic wildfires, and the impact of
those emissions on air quality. In addition, the partnership highlights opportunities for enhancing
coordination among the agencies through information sharing and consultation, collaboration on
tools and information resources, and working together to collaborate with state and other partners,
among other goals.
Mobile Sources
EPA works with the DOT's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) on the
coordinated national program establishing standards to improve fuel efficiency and reduce GHG
emissions for light-duty vehicles. Specifically, EPA, in coordination with the DOT's fuel economy
and fuel consumption standards programs, implements vehicle and commercial truck greenhouse
gas standards with a focus on industry compliance to ensure the standards are realized.
To address criteria pollutant emissions (such as nitrogen oxide [NOx] and PM) from marine and
aircraft sources, EPA works collaboratively with the International Maritime Organization (IMO)
and International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), as well as with other federal agencies, such
as the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). EPA also
collaborates with the USCG in the implementation of Emission Control Area (ECA) around the
United States, and with Mexico and Canada in the North American Commission for Environmental
Cooperation (CEC) to evaluate the benefits of establishing a Mexican ECA.
To better understand the sources and causes of mobile source pollution, EPA works with the DOE
and DOT to fund applied research projects including transportation modeling projects. EPA also
has worked closely with the DOE on refinery cost modeling analyses to support clean fuel
programs. EPA also coordinates with the DOE's Energy Information Administration (EIA)
regarding fuel supply during emergency situations. For mobile sources program outreach, the
Agency has participated in a collaborative effort with DOT's Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to educate the public about the impacts of
transportation choices on traffic congestion, air quality, and human health. This community-based
public education initiative also includes the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
EPA also has worked with FHWA to develop and deliver training on modeling emissions from
cars and trucks and with other federal agencies, such as the USCG, on air emission issues. Other
programs targeted to reduce air toxics from mobile sources are coordinated with the DOT. These
744
-------
partnerships can involve policy assessments and toxic emission reduction strategies in different
regions of the country. EPA has worked with the DOE, DOT and other agencies, as needed, on the
requirements of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and the Energy Independence and Security Act of
2007, such as the Renewable Fuel Standard. EPA also has worked with other agencies on biofuel
topics through the Biomass Research and Development Institute.
To develop air pollutant emission factors and emission estimation algorithms for aircraft, ground
equipment, and military vehicles, EPA partners with the DOD. This partnership provides for the
joint undertaking of air-monitoring/emission factor research and regulatory implementation.
Air Toxics
EPA works closely with other health agencies such as the CDC, the National Institute of
Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and
Health (NIOSH) on health risk characterization for both toxic and criteria air pollutants. EPA also
contributes air quality data to the CDC's Environmental Public Health Tracking Program, which
is made publicly available and used by state and local public health agencies.
Addressing Transboundary Air Pollution
In developing regional and international air quality programs and projects, and in working on
regional agreements, EPA has worked with the Department of State (DOS), NOAA, NASA, DOE,
USD A, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB), as well as with regional organizations. In addition, EPA has partnered with other
organizations and countries worldwide, including the United Nations Environment Programme
(UNEP), the European Union (EU), the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD), the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), the CEC, Canada,
Mexico, China, and Japan.
EPA partners with environment and public health officials and provides technical assistance
through UNEP to facilitate the development of air quality management strategies to other major
emitters and/or to key regional or sub-regional groupings of countries.
Stratospheric Ozone
EPA works closely with the DOS and other federal agencies in international negotiations among
Parties to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer and in developing
the implementing regulations. The environmental goal of the Montreal Protocol is to protect the
ozone layer and, the ozone depleting substances (ODS) it controls also are significant greenhouse
gases. EPA has worked on several multinational environmental agreements working closely with
the DOS and other federal agencies, including the OMB, Office of Science Technology and Policy
(OSTP), Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), USD A, Food and Drug Administration (FDA),
Department of Commerce, NOAA and NASA.
EPA works with other agencies, including the Office of the United States Trade Representative
(USTR) and the Department of Commerce (DOC), to analyze potential trade implications in
745
-------
stratospheric protection regulations that affect imports and exports. EPA has coordinated efforts
with the Department of Justice (DO J), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Department of
Treasury (U.S. Treasury) and other agencies to curb the illegal importation of ODS.
EPA has had discussions with the DOD, U.S. General Services Administration (GSA), and NASA
to assist in the effective transition from ODS.
EPA has worked with USD A and the DOS to facilitate research, development and adoption of
alternatives to methyl bromide. EPA also has consulted with USDA on domestic methyl bromide
needs.
EPA has coordinated with NASA and NOAA to monitor the state of the stratospheric ozone layer
and to collect, analyze, and disseminate Ultraviolet (UV) data.
EPA has coordinated with the Small Business Administration (SBA) to ensure that proposed rules
are developed in accordance with the Small Business Regulatory Flexibility Act (SBREFA).
Radiation and Radiation Preparedness and Response
EPA works primarily with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), DOE, and the DHS on
multiple radiation-related issues. EPA has ongoing planning and guidance discussions with DHS
on general emergency response activities, including exercises responding to nuclear related
incidents. As the regulator of DOE's Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) facility, EPA is charged
with coordinating oversight activities with DOE to ensure the facility is operating in compliance
with EPA regulations. EPA is a member of the Interagency Radiation Source Protection and
Security Task Force, established in the Energy Policy Act, to improve the security of domestic
radioactive sources. EPA also is a working member of the interagency Nuclear Government
Coordinating Council (NGCC), which coordinates across government and the private sector on
issues related to security, communications and emergency management within the nuclear sector.
For emergency preparedness purposes, EPA coordinates closely with other federal agencies
through the Federal Radiological Preparedness Coordinating Committee and the Advisory Team
for Environment, Food and Health which provides federal scientific advice and recommendations
to state and local decision makers such as governors and mayors during a radiological emergency.
EPA has participated in planning and implementing table-top and field exercises including
radiological anti-terrorism activities, with the NRC, DOE, DOD, Department of Health and
Human Services (DHHS) and DHS.
EPA is a charter member and co-chairs the Interagency Steering Committee on Radiation
Standards (ISCORS) which was created at the direction of Congress. Through quarterly meetings
and the activities of its six subcommittees, member agencies are kept informed of cross-cutting
issues related to radiation protection, radioactive waste management, and emergency preparedness
and response. ISCORS also helps coordinate U.S. responses to radiation-related issues
internationally.
746
-------
During radiological emergencies EPA would work with expert members of the International
Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA). Additionally, EPA would work with OECD's Nuclear Energy
Agency (NEA) on two committees: the NEA Radioactive Waste Management Committee
(RWMC) and the Committee on Radiation Protection and Public Health (CRPPH) as necessary
during the response and remediation including those incidents involving significant waste issues.
Through participation on the CRPPH and its working groups, EPA has been successful in bringing
a U.S. perspective to international radiation protection policy, and benefits from having other
countries' perspectives.
Research
EPA has continued to strengthen interactions with other agencies, including NOAA, DOE, USD A,
NIH and FHWA to improve understanding and develop sustainable approaches to manage risks
from air pollution. For example, EPA has worked with NOAA and NASA to relate satellite-based
air quality data to ambient monitoring.
Water Programs
Collaboration with Public and Private Partners on Water Infrastructure Preparedness, Response
and Recovery
EPA has coordinated with other federal agencies, primarily the DHS, CDC, FDA and DOD, on
biological, chemical, and radiological contaminants of high concern, and how to detect and
respond to their presence in drinking water and wastewater systems. A close linkage with the
Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Intelligence Analysis Directorate in DHS, particularly
with respect to ensuring the timely dissemination of threat information through existing
communication networks, will be continued. The Agency is strengthening its working
relationships with the Water Research Foundation, the Water Environment Research Foundation,
and other research institutions to increase our knowledge on technologies to detect contaminants,
monitoring protocols and techniques, and treatment effectiveness.
EPA has worked with the ACE and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to refine
coordination processes among federal partners engaged in providing emergency response support
to the water sector. These efforts will include refining existing standard operating procedures,
participating in cross-agency training opportunities, and planning multi-stakeholder water sector
emergency response exercises. EPA will be determining how ACE, FEMA and the Agency are to
clarify their roles and responsibilities under the National Disaster Recovery Framework. In
addition, EPA has continued to work with FEMA and ACE, as well as other agencies, on the
Federal Interagency Floodplain Management Task Force with regard to water resources and
floodplain management.
Executive Order 13636 on Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity directs EPA to
coordinate with DHS and the Department of Commerce in developing implementation guidance
on cybersecurity practices for water systems. EPA intends to harness the extensive cybersecurity
capabilities of DHS in carrying out its responsibilities under this mandate.
747
-------
Geologic Sequestration
EPA has coordinated with federal agencies to ensure safe and effective implementation of
regulations to protect underground sources of drinking water during geologic sequestration
activities, as well as plan and obtain research-related data and coordinate regulatory activities.
Specifically, EPA has coordinated with the DOE, the USGS, and Internal Revenue Service (IRS)
to ensure that Safe Drinking Water Act regulations for geologic sequestration sites are
appropriately coordinated with efforts to deploy projects, map geologic sequestration capacity,
provide tax incentives for CO2 sequestration, and manage the movement of CO2 from capture
facilities to geologic sequestration sites.
Drinking Water Programs
EPA and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) have established an Interagency Agreement to
coordinate activities and information exchange in the areas of unregulated contaminants
occurrence, the environmental relationships affecting contaminant occurrence, protection area
delineation methodology, and analytical methods. This collaborative effort has improved the
quality of information to support risk management decision-making at all levels of government,
generated valuable new data, and eliminated potential redundancies.
EPA and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are updating a Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) first established in 1978 to coordinate the authorities and programs of the two agencies
with respect to oversight of drinking water on interstate conveyance carriers (e.g., aircraft, trains).
The updates to the MOU are in response to EPA's Aircraft Drinking Water Rule (ADWR)
promulgated on October 19, 2009. Coordination will include sharing information on sample results
indicating microbial contamination, inspections and enforcement actions; working together when
water quality events occur that could impact the quality of water boarded onto aircraft, and other
activities to ensure that a safe and reliable supply of drinking water is provided to passengers and
crew. In addition, EPA scientists are collaborating with FDA scientists to evaluate the health
effects of perchlorate exposure. Along with the aforementioned activities, EPA and the CDC also
meet quarterly to discuss cross-cutting issues related to drinking water contaminants and potential
public health concerns.
EPA's Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water also has collaborated with Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) to develop strategies to decrease drinking water lead exposure in homes. The
partnership shares information, leverages funding and reviews processes to facilitate better-
informed decisions and coordinate investments.
Sustainable Rural Drinking and Wastewater Systems
EPA and USD A work together to increase the sustainability of rural drinking water and wastewater
systems to ensure the protection of public health, water quality, and sustainable communities. The
two agencies have worked to facilitate coordinated funding for infrastructure projects that aid in
the compliance of national drinking water and clean water regulations. EPA will continue to
collaborate with the USDA to provide assistance to small rural drinking water systems that struggle
748
-------
to comply with drinking water regulations and/or lack an adequate governance structure to keep
the system operating sustainably.
National Water Sector Workforce Development: Department of Veterans Affairs
EPA and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment
(VR&E) Service jointly promoted activities that will help advance and improve employment
opportunities for Veterans with disabilities while supporting the development of a trained and
competent workforce for the Water Sector. Key objectives of this collaborative effort are to: (1)
educate those involved with transitioning veterans to civilian careers about the water and
wastewater industries; (2) promote Water Sector career opportunities to veterans; (3) educate
utilities about Veterans Affairs programs and connect them with veterans, and (4) promote state
program collaboration (particularly operator certification programs) with local VA counselors.
Tribal Access Coordination
EPA, and the USD A, HUD, DHHS, Indian Health Service (IHS), and DOI have worked together
to maintain and improve coordination in delivering water and wastewater infrastructure services
and financial assistance to American Indian communities. The agencies work together to increase
the number of American Indian homes provided access to safe drinking water.
Source Water Protection and Harmful Algal Blooms
EPA has coordinated with other federal agencies, including with the USDA (Natural Resource
Conservation Service [NRCS] and USFS) and the USGS, to support federal, state and local
implementation of source water protection actions. In addition, EPA has coordinated with the
Homeland Security Infrastructure Program (HSIP) of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency
(NGA) to integrate their data on national and defense-critical infrastructure into source water
protection analyses such as identifying potential contributors to harmful algal blooms (HABs) and
chemical spill response. To further combat harmful algal blooms, the Harmful Algal Bloom and
Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 2014 (HABHRCA 2014, P.L. 113-124)
emphasizes the mandate to advance the scientific understanding and ability to detect, predict,
control, mitigate, and respond to harmful algal blooms and hypoxia. This legislation established
the Interagency Working Group on HABHRCA (IWG-HABHRCA). It tasked the group with
coordinating and convening Federal agencies to discuss HAB and hypoxia events in the United
States, and to develop action plans, reports, and assessments of these situations. The Working
Group is co-chaired by EPA and NOAA and also includes the: FDA, National Institute of Food
and Agriculture, CDC, ACE, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, U.S. Navy, National Science
Foundation (NSF), USGS and NIEHS.
Data Availability, Outreach, and Technical Assistance
EPA has coordinated with USGS, USDA (including the USFS, NRCS, Cooperative State
Research, Education, and Extension Service, Rural Utilities Service), CDC, DOT, DOD, DOE,
DOI (including the NPS and Bureaus of Indian Affairs [BIA], Land Management, and
Reclamation), IHS, and the Tennessee Valley Authority to make federal environmental data more
available to states and the public. In addition, EPA has collaborated with the other federal agencies,
749
-------
states and industry associations to establish a National Ground Water Monitoring Network with
states to provide a fuller set of ground water data nationally through a single portal. Data helps to
address national and regional issues related to water use, adaptation, and food and energy
production.
Water Technology and Innovation
Many departments within the Federal family have led or supported work to catalyze the role of
Technology and Innovation in work for Clean and Safe Water.
A sample of EPA collaborations include:
• DOS to advise on efficient and innovative water infrastructure design at U.S. Embassies;
• DOE in researching opportunities to address the Food-Water-Energy Nexus, as well as
research focused on optimally targeting resources to water/wastewater utilities with the
greatest needs;
• Bureau of Reclamation to support Technology Challenges in order to catalyze the
development of low-cost, high-performance water sensors;
• NOAA in the development of the National Water Data Center;
• The interagency National Drought Resilience Partnership, to fast-track solutions to long-
term drought;
• NSF (and DOE, as well as non-federal entities) in the development of the National Testbed
Network ("FAST Network"), to test water technologies and provide crucial information to
local decision-makers;
• FEMA to research innovative stormwater control approaches to mitigate urban flooding;
• NASA in assessing emerging water treatment technologies; and,
• Department of the Army in assessing emerging water service technologies.
Watersheds
Protecting and restoring watersheds will depend largely on the direct involvement of many federal
agencies, including EPA, as well as state, tribal, and local governments who manage the multitude
of programs necessary to address water quality on a watershed basis. Federal agency involvement
will include the USDA (including the NRCS, USFS, and the Agriculture Research Service) with
a special focus on the National Water Quality Initiative, DOI (including the Bureau of Land
Management, Office of Surface Mining, USGS, FWS, and BIA), NOAA, DOT, DOD (including
the U.S. Navy and ACE), and FEMA (integrating local hazard mitigation and water quality
actions). At the state level, agencies involved in watershed management typically include
departments of natural resources or the environment, public health agencies, and forestry and
recreation agencies. Locally, numerous agencies are involved, including regional planning entities
such as councils of governments, as well as local departments of environment, health, and
recreation who frequently have strong interests in watershed projects.
750
-------
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program
Since inception of the NPDES program under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), EPA
and the authorized states have developed relationships with various federal agencies to implement
pollution controls for point sources. EPA has worked with the FWS and NMFS on consultation
for protection of endangered species. EPA has worked with the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation on National Historic Preservation Act implementation. EPA and the states rely on
monitoring data from the USGS to help inform pollution control decisions. The Agency also has
worked closely with the SBA and the OMB to ensure that regulatory programs are fair and
reasonable. The Agency has coordinated with NOAA on efforts to ensure that NPDES programs
support coastal and national estuary efforts and with the DOI on mining issues. The Agency also
has coordinated with the FHWA to reduce the impacts of storm water from roads.
Clean Water State Revolving Fund
EPA's State Revolving Fund program has worked with, as appropriate, the HUD and the USD A
to foster collaboration on jointly funded infrastructure projects. In many states, coordination
committees have been established with representatives from the three programs.
In implementation of the Indian set-aside grant program under Title VI of the CWA, EPA has
worked closely with the Indian Health Service to administer grant funds to the various Indian
tribes, including determination of the priority ranking system for the various wastewater needs in
Indian Country. EPA and the USDA Office of Rural Development have partnered to provide
coordinated financial and technical assistance to tribes.
Federal Agency Partnerships on Impaired Waters Restoration Planning
The federal government owns about 30 percent of the land in the United States and administers
over 90 percent of these public lands through four agencies: the USFS, FWS, NPS, and Bureau of
Land Management. In managing these extensive public lands, federal agencies have a substantial
influence on the protection and restoration of many waters of the United States. Land management
agencies' focus on water issues has increased significantly, with the USFS, FWS, and Bureau of
Land Management (BLM) all initiating new water quality and watershed protection efforts. EPA
has been conducting joint national assessments with these agencies to enhance watershed
protection and quantify restoration needs on federal lands. EPA's joint national assessments of
FWS and USFS properties already have documented the extent and type of impaired waters within
and near these agencies' lands, developed geographic information system (GIS) databases,
reported national summary statistics, and developed interactive reference products (on any scale,
local to national), accessible to staff throughout the agencies. The USFS has worked with EPA on
designating the third national update of the co-occurrence of impaired waters and National Forest
lands. These assessments already have influenced the agencies in positive ways. The USFS and
the FWS have performance measures that involve impaired waters. The USFS used their national
assessment data to institute improvements in a national monitoring and Best Management
Practices training program as well as develop a watershed condition framework for proactively
implementing restoration on priority National Forest and Grassland watersheds. Also, under a
Memorandum of Agreement between EPA and the USFS, numerous aquatic restoration projects
751
-------
are being carried out. The Fish and Wildlife Service is using their national assessment data to
inform agency planning on water conservation, quality, and quantity monitoring and management
in the National Wildlife Refuge System, and also is using the assessment in National Fish
Hatcheries System planning and their Contaminants Program. EPA assessments and datasets are
making significant contributions to the government-wide National Fish Habitat Action Partnership
national assessment of fish habitat condition and the restoration and protection efforts of 17
regional Fish Habitat Partnerships.
Monitoring and Assessment of Nation's Waters
EPA has worked with federal, state, and tribal partners to strengthen water monitoring programs
to support a range of management needs and to develop tools to improve how we manage and
share water data and report environmental results. EPA's Monitoring and Assessment Partnership
is a forum for EPA, states, tribes and interstate organizations to collaborate on key program
directions for assessing the condition of the nation's waters in a nationally consistent and
representative manner. EPA is co-chair, along with the USGS, of the National Water Quality
Monitoring Council, a national forum for scientific discussion of strategies and technologies to
improve water quality monitoring and data sharing. The council membership includes other federal
agencies, state and tribal agencies, non-governmental organizations, academic institutions, and the
private sector.
Under an MOU, EPA and the USGS developed and are now operating the national Water Data
Portal, a web portal serving data from the USGS and EPA ambient water quality data warehouses
in a common format through the internet. EPA has an Interagency Agreement with the USGS for
the development of NHDPlus version 2, which is complete for the lower 48 states. EPA also has
collaborated with the USGS and NOAA, NPS, USDA, FWS, BLM, and the USFS on
implementation, analysis and/or interpretation of the results of the National Aquatic Resource
Surveys, an EPA, state and tribal partnership to assess and report on the condition of the nation's
waters and changes over time using nationally consistent and regionally relevant methods.
Wetlands
EPA, and the FWS, ACE, NOAA, USGS, USDA's NRCS, USFS and FHWA have coordinated
on a range of wetlands activities. These activities include: studying and reporting on wetlands
trends in the United States, diagnosing causes of coastal wetland loss, statistically surveying the
condition of the nation's wetlands, and developing methods for better protecting wetland function.
Additionally, EPA and the ACE have worked very closely together in implementing the regulatory
program under the CWA Section 404. Under the regulatory program, the agencies have
coordinated closely on overall implementation of the permitting decisions made annually under
Section 404 of the CWA. The agencies also have coordinated closely on policy development,
training, development of technical tools for field use, litigation, and implementing the Executive
Order on Infrastructure Permitting. EPA also works with the FWS and NOAA on regulatory
matters involving permits. EPA and the ACE are committed to achieving the goal of no net loss
of wetlands under the CWA Section 404 program.
752
-------
Natural Resources Damage Assessment and the Restore Council
The 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill injured the Gulf of Mexico's natural resources. The EPA
works in partnership with fellow federal and state trustees and their representatives to support the
ongoing Natural Resources Damage Assessment and the Restore Council (Gulf Coast Ecosystem
Restoration Council). Partners include NOAA, DOI and USD A.
Research
While EPA is the federal agency mandated to ensure safe drinking water, other federal and non-
federal entities conduct research that complements EPA's research on priority contaminants in
drinking water. For example, the CDC and NIEHS conduct health effects and exposure research.
The FDA also performs research on children's risks.
Many of these research activities have been conducted in collaboration with EPA scientists. The
private sector, particularly the water treatment industry, is conducting research in such areas as
analytical methods, treatment technologies, and the development and maintenance of water
resources. Cooperative research efforts have been ongoing with the American Water Works
Association, Water Research Foundation, and other stakeholders to coordinate drinking water
research. EPA has worked with the USGS to evaluate performance of newly developed methods
for measuring microbes in potential drinking water sources.
EPA has developed joint research initiatives with the NOAA and USGS for linking monitoring
data and field study information with available toxicity data and assessment models for developing
sediment criteria.
Homeland Security
The HSRP also has consulted with the Water Sector and Government Coordinating Councils of
Department of Homeland Security's Critical Infrastructure Partnership Advisory Council to
understand the needs of the water sector and provide the latest research to the community. Other
critical stakeholders, like the America Water Works Association and Association of State and
Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials also can benefit from research. HSRP also has
worked with state and local emergency response personnel and public health and environmental
agencies to better understand their needs and build relationships, which can enable the quick
deployment of research products.
Land and Emergency Management Programs
Brownfields
EPA's Brownfields and Land Revitalization Programs have been key participants in the HUD-
DOT-EPA Sustainable Communities Partnership to promote livability and sustainable
development. The Brownfields program also has partnered with the Department of Labor and
NIEHS to support environmental workforce development and fund job training and placement
programs in brownfield communities. The Brownfields and Land Revitalization programs have
753
-------
worked with the USDA, HHS, and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
(ATSDR) to identify ways in which federal programs can increase food access in all communities
and ensure access to quality health care. Improved access to healthy food and health care services
can catalyze redevelopment that contributes to healthier and more sustainable communities. The
Brownfields and Land Revitalization programs also have partnered with the NPS and its River and
Trails Program to support Groundwork USA and individual Groundwork teams in their efforts to
engage youth in community revitalization. EPA has led the Brownfields Federal Partnership,
which includes more than 20 federal agencies dedicated to the cleanup and redevelopment of
brownfields properties. Partner agencies have worked together to prevent, assess, safely clean up,
and redevelop brownfields.
EPA has provided support to other federal agencies, such as USDA, for activities including jointly
delivering technical assistance to rural Appalachian communities and proposing language that
supports both economic development and better environmental outcomes in grant solicitations and
other guidance documents. This assistance has helped these agencies and the communities they
work with protect the environment and increase resilience through their community development
programs, policies, regulations, and resources, while meeting their core agency objectives.
Economically Distressed Communities
EPA has brought expertise on the importance of downtown revitalization, the use of green
infrastructure strategies, green demolition, and sustainable development strategies to the federal
government to help economically distressed communities. EPA's work has positively impacted
the work of the HUD, DOT, DOC, DHHS, DHS, DOJ, Small Business Administration (SBA),
Department of Labor (DOL), and many other agencies and departments.
Research
Research in ecosystems protection has been coordinated government-wide through the Committee
on Environment, Natural Resources, and Sustainability (CENRS). EPA has actively participated
in the CENRS and all work is fully consistent with, and complementary to, other Committee
member activities. EPA scientists have staffed two CENRS Subcommittees: the Subcommittee on
Ecological Systems (SES) and the Subcommittee on Water Availability and Quality (SWAQ).
EPA has initiated discussions within the SES on the subject of ecosystem goods and services
(EGS) and potential EGS collaborations are being explored with the USGS and with the USFS.
Within SWAQ, the Safe and Sustainable Water Resources (SSWR) research program has
contributed to an initiative for a comprehensive census of water availability and quality, including
the use of Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program methods and ongoing surveys
(National Aquatic Surveys) as data sources. In addition, EPA has taken a lead role with USGS in
preparing a SWAQ document outlining new challenges for integrated management of water
resources, including strategic needs for monitoring and modeling methods, and identifying water
requirements needed to support the ecological integrity of aquatic ecosystems.
Consistent with the broad scope of EPA's ecosystem research efforts, EPA has had complementary
and joint programs with the USFS, USGS, USDA, NOAA, BLM, non-government organizations
(NGOs), and many others specifically to minimize duplication, maximize scope, and maintain a
754
-------
real time information flow. For example, all of these organizations have worked together to
produce the National Land Cover Data used by all landscape ecologists nationally. Each has
contributed funding, services, and research to this uniquely successful effort.
EPA has expended substantial effort coordinating its research with other federal agencies,
including work with DOD in its Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program
(SERDP) and the Environmental Security Technology Certification Program, DOE, and its Office
of Health and Environmental Research. EPA also has conducted collaborative laboratory research
with DOD, DOE, DOI (particularly the USGS), and NASA to improve characterization and risk
management options for dealing with subsurface contamination.
The agency has worked with NIEHS, which manages a large basic research program focusing on
Superfund issues, to advance fundamental Superfund research. ATSDR also has provided critical
health-based information to assist EPA in making effective cleanup decisions. EPA has worked
with these agencies on collaborative projects, information exchange, and identification of research
issues and has a MOU with each agency. EPA, and the ACE and U.S. Navy signed a MOU to
increase collaboration and coordination in contaminated sediments research. Additionally, the
Interstate Technology Regulatory Council (ITRC) has been an effective forum for coordinating
federal and state activities and for defining continuing research needs through its teams on topics
including permeable reactive barriers, radionuclides, and Brownfields. EPA has developed a
MOU1 with several other agencies (such as the DOE, DOD, NRC, USGS, NOAA, and USD A) for
multi-media modeling research and development.
Other research efforts involving coordination include the unique controlled-spill field research
facility designed in cooperation with the Bureau of Reclamation. Geophysical research
experiments and development of software for subsurface characterization and detection of
contaminants have been conducted with the USGS and DOE's Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory.
EPA has coordinated with DOD's SERDP in an ongoing partnership, especially in the areas of
sustainability research and of incorporating materials lifecycle analysis into the manufacturing
process for weapons and military equipment. EPA has collaborated with the Army as part of their
Net Zero Initiative, to develop and demonstrate innovative waste technologies to accomplish the
Army's goal of net zero energy, water, and waste by 2020.
Several federal agencies sponsor research on variability and susceptibility in risks from exposure
to environmental contaminants. EPA has collaborated with a number of the Institutes within the
NIH and CDC. For example, the NIEHS conducts multi-disciplinary biomedical research
programs, prevention and intervention efforts, and communication strategies. The NIEHS program
includes an effort to study the effects of chemicals, including pesticides and other toxics, on
children. EPA has collaborated with NIEHS in supporting the Centers for Children's
Environmental Health and Disease Prevention, which study whether and how environmental
factors play a role in children's health and with the National Institute on Child Health and Human
Development (NICHD) on the development and implementation of the National Children's Study.
1 For more information, please go to: Interagency Steering Committee on Multimedia Environmental Models MOU, at:
http://www.iscmem.org/Memorandum.htm.
755
-------
Additionally, EPA, the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD),
NIEHS, and NICHD co-fund the Centers of Excellence for Research on Environmental Health
Disparities. This funding has broadened research on disadvantaged communities and the impacts
of greater exposures of ambient hazards.
Superfund Remedial Program
The Superfund Remedial program has coordinated with several other federal agencies, such as the
ATSDR and NIEHS, in providing numerous Superfund related services in order to accomplish the
program's mission.
The ACE substantially contributes to Superfund site cleanups by providing a wide range of
technical, management and acquisition support functions to implement or oversee responsible
party Superfund project implementation for the remedial and removal programs. Most notably,
this federal partner has the technical design and construction expertise and contracting capability
needed to assist EPA regional Superfund programs in implementing complex Superfund remedial
action projects.
This Agency also provides technical on-site support to regional offices in the enforcement
oversight of numerous construction projects performed by private Potentially Responsible Parties.
Superfund Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Program
The Superfund Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse program has coordinated with federal
agencies, states, tribes, state associations, and others to implement its statutory responsibilities to
ensure protective and efficient cleanup and reuse of federally contaminated land on the National
Priorities List (NPL). In addition, EPA recently convened a Superfund Task Force (SFTF) that
identified recommendations to streamline and improve the Superfund process. Successful
implementation of these recommendations requires strengthening partnerships and increasing
engagement with stakeholders such as Other Federal Agencies (OFAs).
For the past two years, EPA has participated in a dialogue with the Environmental Council of the
States (ECOS) and DOE. The purpose of the DOE/EPA/ECOS Dialogue is to improve/enhance
ongoing working relationships among senior leaders involved in the cleanup of DOE
Environmental Management sites. The Dialogue is an example of how each agency can advance
the cleanup at DOE sites and foster an understanding of challenges and successes at the national
level.
The program has facilitated early transfer of property and provided technical and regulatory
oversight at federal facilities to ensure human health and the environment are protected. The
program has worked with federal partners to target high priority sites, to consider best practices to
develop innovative solutions to emerging and unique contaminants, and implement strategies to
address the remaining Federal Facility Superfund sites that have not reached cleanup completion.
To ensure the long-term protectiveness of remedies, the Agency will continue monitoring,
overseeing progress, and improving the quality and consistency of five-year reviews being
756
-------
conducted at federal facility NPL sites where waste has been left in place and land use is restricted.
Five-year reviews are required under Section 121(c) of CERCLA, and EPA's role is to concur or
make its own independent protectiveness finding. EPA has worked collaboratively with DOD,
DOE and DOI, through a Federal Workgroup, to improve the technical quality, timeliness, and
cost of the five-year review reports and to ensure that the community is aware of the protectiveness
of the remedy. The workgroup assesses the use of best management practices and evaluate trend
data to improve the five-year review process.
EPA has participated with other federal agencies on the Federal Mining Dialogue (FMD). The
FMD is a cooperative initiative among federal environmental and land management agencies. It
provides a national level forum for federal agencies to identify and discuss lessons learned and
technical mining impact issues associated with the cleanup and reuse of abandoned and inactive
hard rock and abandoned uranium mines across the country. EPA Abandoned Mine Lands
Program has coordinated through the agency's National Mining Team (NMT). EPA's NMT has
representatives on each of the FMD workgroups: Data Standards, Best Practices, Cost Recovery
and Watershed Strategy.
EPA also has participated with other federal agencies on the Munitions Response Dialogue
(MRD). The MRD is a multi-agency dialogue with EPA, DOD, Federal Land Managers and states
to identify and discuss issues arising from munitions site cleanups throughout the country.
EPA partners with the DOD research and development programs (SERDP and ESTCP) munitions
management track which develops technologies that further munitions cleanups at Superfund sites.
EPA and DOD have participated on the Intergovernmental Data Quality Task Force (IDQTF). The
IDQTF was established to address real and perceived inconsistencies and deficiencies in quality
control for laboratory data within and across governmental organizations which result in greater
costs, time delays, and an increase in the potential for risks. The task force is working to ensure
that environmental data are of known and documented quality, and suitable for their intended uses.
The Superfund Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse program has developed and implemented
innovative technologies, processes and collaboration efforts. By working in concert with other
federal agencies, EPA has promoted the advancement of cleanup technologies, expansion of
contaminated land reuse to support renewable energy projects, and multiple initiatives to support
sustainability. These projects not only help support the Agency's goal to cleanup communities, but
they also facilitate the introduction of innovative solutions to both the public and private sector.
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
Poly chlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) Programs
The RCRA Corrective Action program has coordinated closely with other federal agencies,
primarily the DOD and DOE, which have many sites in the corrective action universe. An agency
top priority is to assist federal facilities meet the RCRA Corrective Action program's goals of
investigating and cleaning up hazardous releases remains. EPA also has coordinated with other
agencies, primarily DOD, on cleanup and disposal issues posed by polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs) under the authority of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
757
-------
Emergency Preparedness and Response
EPA plays a major role in reducing the risks that accidental and intentional releases of harmful
substances and oil pose to human health and the environment. EPA implements the Emergency
Preparedness program in coordination with the DHS through the USCG acting as the chair for the
National Response Team and co-chair for each Regional Response Team. These teams, which
have member participation from other key federal agencies, deliver federal assistance to state,
local, and tribal governments to plan for and respond to natural disasters and other major
environmental incidents. This requires coordination with many federal, state, and local agencies.
The Agency participates with other federal agencies to develop national planning and
implementation policies at the operational level.
The National Response Framework (NRF), under the direction of the DHS, provides for the
delivery of federal assistance to states to help them deal with the consequences of terrorist events,
acts of malfeasance, as well as natural and other significant disasters. EPA has maintained the lead
responsibility for the NRF's Emergency Support Function #10 covering inland hazardous
materials and petroleum releases and participates in the Federal Emergency Support Function
Leaders Group which addresses NRF planning and implementation at the operational level. As an
example of the NRF functionality, EPA closely collaborated with DHS, FEMA, and other federal
agencies in responding to the FY 2017 hurricane season and the wildfires in California.
EPA has coordinated its preparedness activities with DHS, FEMA, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, and other federal agencies, states and local governments. EPA will continue to
clarify its roles and responsibilities to ensure that Agency security programs are consistent with
the national homeland security strategy.
EPA also has worked with FEMA on hazard mitigation and recovery through a Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA). This MOA has allowed EPA and FEMA to collaborate on policies, as well as
with other agencies like NOAA, HUD and DOT, to expand efforts to deliver targeted assistance
to communities recovering from natural disasters.
Oil Spills
Under the Oil Spill Program, EPA has provided assistance to agencies such as FWS and the USCG
work in coordination to address oil spills nationwide. EPA also has provided assistance to agencies
with judicial referrals when enforcement of violations becomes necessary. In addition, EPA and
the USCG work in coordination to address oil spills nationwide.
Homeland Security
Homeland Security research has been conducted in collaboration with numerous agencies,
leveraging funding across multiple programs to produce synergistic results. EPA's Homeland
Security Research Program has worked closely with the DHS to assure that EPA, in its role as a
lead agency responsible for cleanup during a Stafford Act declaration under ESF-10 and as the
lead agency for water infrastructure, has the science to back decisions. Recognizing that the DOD
has significant expertise and facilities related to biological and chemical warfare agents, EPA has
758
-------
worked closely with the Edgewood Chemical and Biological Center (ECBC), the Technical
Support Working Group, the ACE, U.S. Air Force, and other DOD organizations to address areas
of mutual interest and concern related to both cleanup and water infrastructure protection. To
identify and support these collaborations, EPA has participated in a tri-agency research partnership
(Technical Coordination Working Group - TCWG) with the DOD and DHS that focuses on
chemical and biological defense needs and gaps as they relate to homeland security. TCWG
activities include: information sharing, joint science and technology research projects and
complementing policies. These efforts have improved the preparedness of the U.S. domestic
authorities to detect, deter, protect against, respond to, and recover from chemical or biological
attack. In conducting biological agent research, EPA also has collaborated with the CDC. The
program also has conducted joint research with USDA and DOI focusing on addressing homeland
security threats at the intersection of the environment/public health and agriculture/natural
resources. EPA has worked with DOE to access and conduct research at the DOE's National
Laboratories specialized research facilities.
Strengthen Human Health and Environmental Protection in Indian Country
EPA has a long history of working with other federal agencies to address shared environmental
and human health concerns. EPA, and the DOI, DHHS, USDA and HUD, have worked through
several MOUs as partners to improve infrastructure on tribal lands.
All five federal partners renewed their commitment to the Infrastructure Task Force in 2013 by
signing an MOU to continue federal coordination in delivering services to tribal communities. The
Infrastructure Task Force has built on prior partner successes, including improved access to
funding and reduced administrative burden for tribal communities through the review and
streamlining of Agency policies, regulations, and directives as well as improved coordination of
technical assistance to water service providers and solid waste managers through regular
coordination meetings and web-based tools.
Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention Programs
EPA has coordinated with and used information from many federal departments and agencies, as
well as many state departments/agencies and international organizations, in efforts to protect
America's health and environment from unacceptable risks from pesticides and toxic chemicals.
EPA's activities include collaboration with individual government organizations on specific
technical or regulatory issues and more broadly with groups of organizations on a range of issues.
Many of these activities are described below.
To fulfill EPA's responsibilities for regulating the sale and use of pesticides, the Agency has used
a range of outreach and coordination approaches for pesticide users and other stakeholders,
government agencies, and the general public. Outreach and coordination activities through field
programs have been essential to effective implementation of regulatory decisions governing the
sale and use of pesticides. Coordination activities have protected workers and the environment,
including pollinators and other non-target species, provided training for pesticide applicators,
promoted integrated pest management and environmental stewardship, supported compliance
through EPA's regional offices and those of the states and tribes, and promoted international
cooperation.
759
-------
EPA's coordination with the Departments of Agriculture, Defense, Energy and Interior, and state
lead agencies for pesticides, has supported the Certification and Training program for pesticide
applicators who use the riskiest pesticides. States also play an important role in developing and
implementing Worker Protection programs and are involved in numerous special projects and
investigations, including emergency response efforts. EPA's regional offices have provided
technical guidance and assistance to the states and tribes in the implementation of all pesticide
program activities.
EPA also supports the USDA's Cooperative Extension Service, which designs and delivers
specialized training for various groups, including applicators of restricted use pesticides, by
providing funding and developing training manuals. Such training has included instructing private
and commercial applicators on the proper use of personal protective equipment and application
equipment calibration, handling spill and injury situations, farm family safety, preventing pesticide
spray drift, and pesticide and container disposal. Other specialized training has been provided to
public works employees on grounds maintenance, to pest control operators on proper insect
identification, and on weed control for agribusiness.
EPA has relied on data from HHS and USD A to supplement data from the pesticide industry to
help the Agency assess the potential risks of pesticides in the diets of adults and children. EPA
relies on food consumption data developed by HHS as part of their NHANES (National Health
and Nutrition Survey) survey as a major component of EPA's dietary risk assessment for
pesticides. EPA also relies on pesticide residue (concentration) data in food commodities generated
by USDA in its Pesticide Data Program to improve its dietary risk assessment of pesticides. These
data and those from other sources, including FDA, have helped EPA achieve its mission of
protecting human health. These data sources have served as a showcase for federal cooperation on
pesticide and food safety issues. Other collaborative efforts have included developing and
validating methods to analyze domestic and imported food samples for chemicals of concern, such
as carcinogens and neurotoxins. The Agency also has coordinated with the National Toxicology
Program (NTP), CDC, ATSDR, and NIEHS on a variety of technical and communication issues
and is a member of the federal Interagency Risk Assessment Consortium (IRAC), a group of more
than a dozen federal agencies involved in risk assessment which meets quarterly to share ideas and
coordinate thinking
While EPA is responsible for making pesticide registration and tolerance decisions, primary
responsibility for FIFRA-related pesticide enforcement activities rests with the states. Under
FFDCA, the FDA enforces tolerances for pesticide residues in most foods and the USDA enforces
tolerances for meat, poultry, and some egg products. These joint efforts protect Americans from
unhealthy pesticide residue levels.
In addition to a focus on protecting humans from pesticide risks, EPA has been engaged with other
government agencies on many important environmental issues. The Agency has collaborated
extensively with the USDA, the FWS, and NMFS on developing methods for assessing potential
risks to endangered and threatened species and in developing approaches to mitigate unacceptable
risks. EPA also has worked with USDA and many other federal agencies, state agencies, and other
entities to address risks to honey bees and other pollinators that are critical to our environment and
the production of food crops.
760
-------
EPA has worked to promote improved health and environmental protection domestically and when
feasible in other countries. This includes coordination not only with other countries, but also with
international organizations, such as the CEC. EPA has cooperated with governments in other
countries bilaterally or through treaties or other formal agreements and is an active participant in
committees and discussions involving the OECD, Codex Alimentarus/Joint Meeting on Pesticide
Residues (JMPR), NAFTA, and APEC.
EPA has developed a strong network of government, private sector and non-governmental partners
working to achieve reductions in global mercury use and emissions, particularly when adverse
U.S. impacts would be likely. EPA has worked closely with DOS in leading the technical and
policy engagement for the United States in the Minamata Convention on Mercury. EPA provided
the impetus for UNEP's Global Mercury Partnership, and the Agency has worked with developing
and other developed countries in the context of that program. In addition to the DOS, EPA has
collaborated closely with several federal agencies including DOE and USGS. EPA supported the
Global Mercury Partnership and sharing of information through the Arctic Council on reducing
releases of mercury that disproportionally impact indigenous arctic communities.
EPA has collaborated with the DOD, DHS, USD A, FDA, and other federal, tribal and state
organizations on a variety of technical and policy homeland security issues. These issues focus on
protecting the public and food and agriculture sectors from threats associated with use of chemical
and biological agents. EPA has collaborated with these organizations on research pertaining to
effective disinfectants for high threat microorganisms, planning for response to various potential
incidents, training and development of policies and guidelines. EPA has continued to partner with
the OSHA, NIOSH, and Consumer Product Safety Commission on risk assessment and risk
mitigation activities.
One of the Agency's most valuable resources on pesticide issues has been the Pesticide Program
Dialogue Committee (PPDC), a representative Federal Advisory Committee, which brings
together a broad cross-section of knowledgeable individuals from organizations representing
divergent views to discuss pesticide regulatory, policy, and implementation issues. The PPDC
consists of members from federal and state government agencies, industry/trade associations,
pesticide user and commodity groups, consumer and environmental/public interest groups, and
others. The PPDC has provided a structured environment for meaningful information exchanges
and consensus building discussions, keeping the public involved in decisions that affect them.
Dialogue with outside groups is essential if the Agency is to remain responsive to the needs of the
affected public, growers, and industry organizations.
To effectively participate in international agreements on chemicals (e.g., persistent organic
pollutants [POPs], mercury and heavy metals), EPA has continued to coordinate with other federal
agencies and external stakeholders, such as Congressional staff, industry and environmental
groups. Similarly, the Agency typically coordinates with the NTP, ATSDR, NIEHS, and the CPSC
on matters relating to OECD test guideline harmonization.
As part of EPA's chemical safety program, the Agency is implementing the TSCA, as amended
by the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, signed into law on June 22,
2016. EPA will continue to conduct existing chemical prioritization and risk evaluation efforts
761
-------
under the provisions of TSCA, as amended, and address any unreasonable risks identified through
such evaluations. With many new technical requirements and deadlines in place, EPA intends to
monitor its progress closely through a suite of five-year strategic and annual measures and targets
addressing the agency's core responsibilities to conduct risk evaluations, risk management actions
and new chemical reviews within the timeframes set by the statute.
In 2016, following enactment of the new law, the Agency established a Senior Leaders Forum to
share information with other federal agencies on its implementation of prioritization, risk
evaluations and risk management mandates, including data sharing regarding chemical uses and
conditions of use, exposures and hazards. Participants include the HUD, DOD, CDC, ATSDR,
OSHA, MSHA, NIOSH and CPSC. These ongoing exchanges on chemicals of common interest
foster improved communication and coordination on scientific, health, and regulatory issues and
foster and facilitate the new requirement for consulting with relevant Federal Agencies, codified
in the final TSCA Risk Evaluation rule (40 CFR 702.39).
In implementing TSCA as amended, EPA also has been seeking input from other federal agencies
to help inform the Agency's efforts through the interagency Committee on Toxicity Assessment
(CTA). EPA's discussions with the CTA and other federal agencies help to inform and keep current
the federal network on cross-agency technical understandings and support the senior leader
discussions.
EPA is committed to fulfilment of all of EPA's Indian Policies and adhering to the Chemical Safety
and Pollution Prevention Program's Tribal Strategic Plan. The program has participated in EPA's
meetings with the National Tribal Operations Committee (NTOC) and other tribal engagement
groups on a wide variety of related activities and actions that impact tribal governments, lands,
and communities. EPA is continuing to discuss with tribes any issues relating to implementation
of the 2016 TSCA amendments. In addition, the National Tribal Toxics Council (NTTC) provides
tribes with an opportunity for offering advice on the development of EPA chemical management
programs that affect tribes, policies, and activities. EPA has met with the NTTC in person twice
per year and conducts monthly teleconferences with its members.
Research
EPA's Toxicity Forecaster (ToxCast™) is part of an ongoing multi-agency effort under the Tox21
collaboration MOU. Tox21 has pooled chemical research, data and screening tools from multiple
federal agencies including EPA, the NIH and FDA. ToxCast™ has utilized existing resources to
develop faster, more thorough predictions of how chemicals will affect human and environmental
health. Tox21 and ToxCast™ are currently screening nearly 10,000 environmental chemicals for
potential toxicity in high-throughput screening assays at the NIH National Center for Advancing
Translational Sciences (NCATS). EPA also has an agreement to provide NCATS funding to
support the effort.
EPA recently announced the public release of chemical screening data on 1,800 chemicals that
was gathered through advanced techniques, including robotics and high-throughput screening, as
part of the ongoing Tox21 federal collaboration to improve chemical screening.
762
-------
Health Canada and EPA have collaborated to explore approaches for using new data streams to
assess chemicals for potential risks to human health. Health Canada is currently under a regulatory
mandate to develop Chemical Management Plan 3 (CMP3). The chemicals in CMP3 include
chemicals lacking traditional toxicity data. Health Canada is working with EPA's Chemical Safety
for Sustainability (CSS) program to determine how to use high-throughput screening data and
other types of non-traditional chemical data to help fill the data gaps for the chemicals in CMP3.
EPA has coordinated its nanotechnology research with other federal agencies through the National
Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI),2 which is managed under the Subcommittee on Nanoscale
Science, Engineering and Technology (NSET) of the NSTC Committee on Technology (CoT).
EPA has collaborated with many federal agencies in the development of a government-wide
approach to nanotechnology research through the Committee on Environment, Natural Resources,
and Sustainability Charter (CENRS) at the OSTP. EPA and the CPSC have collaborated to develop
protocols to assess the potential release of nanomaterials from consumer products; develop
credible rules for consumer product testing to evaluate exposure; and determine potential public
health impacts of nanomaterial used in consumer products.
EPA has coordinated its research on endocrine disruptors with other federal agencies through the
interagency working group on endocrine disruptors under the auspices of the Toxics and Risk
Subcommittee of the CENRS. EPA has coordinated its biotechnology research through the
interagency biotechnology research working group and the agricultural biotechnology risk analysis
working group of the Biotechnology Subcommittee of NSTC's Committee on Science.
EPA has consulted extensively with other federal agencies about the science of individual
Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) assessments, as well as improvements to the IRIS
program, through an interagency working group including public health agencies (e.g., CDC,
AT SDR, NIOSH, and NIEHS), many other agencies (e.g., DOD, NASA, SBA, DOT, DOE, DOI,
etc.), and White House offices (e.g., OMB, OSTP, and CEQ). EPA also has coordinated with
ATSDR through a memorandum of understanding on the development of toxicological reviews
and toxicology profiles, respectively. In addition, EPA has contracted with the National Academy
of Sciences' National Research Council (NRC) on very difficult and complex human health risk
assessments through consultation or review. Most recently, EPA convened an interagency working
group, co-chaired by EPA and the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), to review the IRIS Program's progress and
enhancements following the 2014 NAS report recommendations. The working group includes
relevant executive branch stakeholders, such as SBA, HHS, DOE, DOD, and CPSC. The NRC is
currently working towards convening a public meeting and independently reviewing the progress
of the IRIS program's implementations of the latest NRC recommendations.
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Programs
The Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program has coordinated closely with the DOJ on
all civil and criminal environmental enforcement matters. In addition, the program has coordinated
with other agencies on specific environmental issues as described herein.
2 For more information, see http://www.nano.gov.
763
-------
The Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program has coordinated with the Chemical Safety
and Hazard Investigation Board, OSHA, and ATSDR in preventing and responding to accidental
releases and endangerment situations. Additionally, the program has coordinated with the BIA and
the Indian Health Service on issues relative to compliance with environmental laws in Indian
country. Furthermore, the program has coordinated with the SBA on the implementation of the
SBREFA. The program also has shared information with the IRS on cases that require defendants
to pay civil penalties, thereby assisting the IRS in assuring compliance with tax laws. In addition,
it has collaborated with the SBA to maintain current environmental compliance information at
Business.gov, a website initiated as an e-government initiative in 2004, to help small businesses
comply with government regulations. Coordination also has occurred with the ACE on wetlands
issues.
The USDA's NRCS has had a major role in determining whether areas on agricultural lands meet
the definition of wetlands for purposes of the Food Security Act and civil enforcement works with
them as necessary. EPA's Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program also has coordinated
with USD A on the regulation of animal feeding operations and on food safety issues arising from
the misuse of pesticides and shares joint jurisdiction with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC)
on pesticide labeling and advertising. EPA has worked with Customs and Border Protection on
implementing the secure International Trade Data System across all federal agencies and on
pesticide imports and on hazardous waste and Cathode Ray Tube exports, as well as on a variety
of other import/export issues under the various statutes (e.g., imports of vehicles and engines).
EPA and the FDA share jurisdiction over general-purpose disinfectants used on non-critical
surfaces and some dental and medical equipment surfaces. EPA and FDA also have collaborated
and shared information on Good Laboratory Program inspections to avoid duplication of
inspections and maximize efficient use of limited resources. The Agency has entered into an
agreement with the HUD concerning enforcement of the TSCA lead-based paint notification
requirements. The Agency has coordinated with the USCG under the Act to Prevent Pollution from
Ships, and on discharges of pollutant from ships and oil spills under the CWA. The Enforcement
and Compliance Assurance Program also works with the DOI on CWA permit enforcement on the
Outer Continental Shelf, as well as both the Interior and Transportation Departments on CWA
requirements for offshore facilities.
EPA's Criminal Enforcement Program, FBI, Customs, DOL, U.S. Treasury, USCG, DOI andDOJ
and with international, state, tribal, and local law enforcement organizations in the investigation
and prosecution of environmental crimes. EPA also has actively worked with DOJ to establish task
forces that bring together federal, state, tribal, and local law enforcement organizations to address
environmental crimes. In addition, the program has an Interagency Agreement with the DHS to
provide specialized criminal environmental training to federal, state, local, and tribal law
enforcement personnel at the Federal Law Enforcement Center (FLETC) in Glynco, Georgia.
Executive Order 12088 on Federal Compliance with Pollution Control Standards, directs EPA to
monitor compliance by federal agencies with all environmental laws. The Federal Facility
Enforcement program has coordinated with other federal agencies, states, local and tribal
governments to ensure compliance by federal agencies with all environmental laws. EPA works
through the Federal Facilities Environmental Stewardship and Compliance Assistance Center
764
-------
(www.fedcenter. gov), which is now governed by a board of more than a dozen contributing federal
agencies. EPA also partners with other federal agencies to identify ways to expedite cleanup of
Superfund sites and prevent and address regulatory compliance issues. For example, EPA meets
quarterly with the DOD on general compliance matters and participates in a periodic Dialogue
with the DOE on cleanup matters.
The Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program has collaborated closely with the states and
tribes. States perform the vast majority of inspections, direct compliance assistance and
enforcement actions for many of EPA's environmental programs. The core federal environmental
statutes envision a partnership between EPA and the states and tribes under which EPA develops
national standards and policies and the states and tribes implement the program under authority by
EPA. If a state or tribe does not seek approval of a program, EPA must implement that program in
that state or Indian country. Historically, the level of state approvals has increased as programs
mature and state capacity expands. Nearly all states are authorized for the core water, air, and
hazardous waste programs. EPA, however, directly implements the majority of federal
environmental programs in Indian country while actively working with tribes to develop their
capacity to administer environmental programs and to enable tribes that choose to implement
federal environmental laws and programs for their lands. EPA has coordinated with states and
tribes on training, compliance assistance, capacity building, and enforcement. EPA has worked to
enhance the network of state and tribal compliance assistance providers.
EPA has worked directly with Canada and Mexico bilaterally and in the Trilateral CEC. EPA's
border activities require close coordination with the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection,
FWS, DOJ, DOS, and the States of Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas. EPA is the lead
agency and coordinates U.S. participation in the CEC. EPA has worked with the NOAA, FWS and
USGS on CEC projects to promote biodiversity cooperation and with the USTRto reduce potential
trade and environmental impacts such as invasive species.
The Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program, together with EPA's International
program, has provided training and capacity building to foreign governments to improve their
compliance and enforcement programs. This support has helped create a level playing field for
U.S. businesses engaged in global competition, helped other countries improve their
environmental conditions, and ensured U.S. compliance with obligations for environmental
cooperation as outlined in various free trade agreements. In support of these activities, EPA has
worked closely with DOS, U.S. Embassies, USAID, USTR, DOJ, USFS, DOI and the International
Law Enforcement Academies. EPA also has participated in the OECD Mutual Acceptance of Data
program, designed to garner international recognition of testing data in support of pesticides and
chemical registrations.
765
-------
Superfund Enforcement
The Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program has coordinated with other federal agencies
in their use of CERCLA enforcement authority. This includes the coordinated use of CERCLA
enforcement authority at individual hazardous waste sites that are located on both nonfederal land
(EPA jurisdiction) and federal lands (other agency jurisdiction). As required by Executive Order
13016 amending Executive Order 12580, EPA also reviews and concurs on the use of CERCLA
Section 106 authority by other departments and agencies.
EPA also coordinates with Natural Resource Trustees (DOI, USDA, DOC, DOE and DOD) to
ensure that appropriate and timely notices, required under CERCLA, are sent to the Natural
Resource Trustees notifying them of potential damages to natural resources. EPA also coordinates
with Natural Resource Trustees on natural resource damage assessments, investigations, and
planning of response activities under Section 104 of CERCLA. When an enforcement action is
initiated at a site where hazardous substances are found to have caused damages to natural
resources, EPA coordinates with the Natural Resource Trustees by including them, where
appropriate, in negotiations with potentially responsible parties concerning the releases that have
caused those damages.
The DOJ also has provided assistance to EPA with judicial referrals seeking recovery of response
costs incurred by the U.S., injunctive relief to implement response actions, or enforcement of other
CERCLA requirements.
Under Executive Order 12580, EPA's Superfund Federal Facilities Enforcement program has
assisted federal agencies in complying with CERCLA, and ensured that: (1) all federal facility
sites on the National Priorities List have interagency agreements, also known as Federal Facility
Agreements (FFAs) with enforceable cleanup schedules; (2) FFAs are monitored for compliance;
(3) federal sites are transferred to new owners in an environmentally responsible manner; and (4)
compliance assistance is available to the extent possible. This program also ensures that federal
agencies comply with Superfund cleanup obligations "in the same manner and to the same extent"
as private entities. To enable the cleanup and reuse of such sites, the Federal Facilities Enforcement
Program also has coordinated creative solutions that help restore facilities so they can once again
serve an important role in the economy and welfare of local communities, and the country.
766
-------
Coordination with Other Federal Agencies
Internal Operations Programs
Office of the Administrator (OA)
The OA supports the leadership of Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) programs and
activities to protect human health and safeguard the air, water, and land upon which life depends.
Several program responsibilities include congressional and intergovernmental relations, regulatory
management and economic analysis, program evaluation, intelligence coordination, the Science
Advisory Board, children's health, the small business program, environmental training, and
outreach.
EPA's Office of Policy (OP) interacts with a number of federal agencies during its rulemaking
activities. Per governing statutes and agency priorities, OP submits "significant" regulatory actions
to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for interagency review prior to signature and
publication in the Federal Register. In addition, OP coordinates EPA's review of other agency's
regulatory actions submitted to OMB for review. Under the Congressional Review Act, rules are
submitted to each House of Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. OP
reviews, edits, tracks, and submits regulatory actions and other documents that are published by
the Office of the Federal Register. For regulations that may have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities, OP collaborates extensively with the Small Business
Administration and OMB. Finally, OP also leads EPA's review of draft Executive Orders and
Presidential Memoranda.
From time to time, OP collaborates with other federal regulatory and natural resource agencies
(e.g., the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Department of Energy (DOE),
Department of the Interior (DOI), and the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
to collect economic data used in the conduct of economic cost-benefit analyses of environmental
regulations and policies and to foster improved interdisciplinary research and reporting of
economic information. This is achieved in several ways, such as representing EPA on interagency
workgroups or committees tasked with measuring the economic costs and benefits of federal
policies and programs.
OP supports interagency, government-wide efforts that do not fall within the scope of any single
program office. For example, OP is a key participant in government-wide discussions on the
application of sustainable purchasing practices in federal acquisitions. In this effort, OP has
partnered with acquisition leaders in the USDA, the Department of Defense (DOD), the DOE, the
Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS), the General Services Administration (GSA), the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (NASA), and others to ensure that federal spending meets or exceeds federal
sustainability requirements. This network of federal procurement professionals is seeking to
integrate sustainability into purchasing in a way that makes the process simpler and more effective
for all involved.
767
-------
The Administrator of EPA and the Secretary of the HHS co-chair the President's Task Force on
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks to Children. The Task Force comprises head of 17
federal departments, agencies and White House offices. A senior staff steering committee, co-
chaired by the Director of EPA's Office of Children's Health Protection (OCHP), coordinates
interagency cooperation on Task Force priority areas. As part of this effort, the program may
coordinate with other related agencies to improve federal government-wide support in
implementing children's health legislative mandates and children's health outreach. This may
include providing children's environmental health expertise on interagency activities and
coordinating expertise from program offices.
Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO)
OCFO makes active contributions to standing interagency management committees, including the
Chief Financial Officers Council, focusing on improving resources management and
accountability throughout the federal government. OCFO actively participates on the Performance
Improvement Council, which coordinates and develops strategic plans, performance plans, and
performance reports as required by law. In addition, OCFO participates in numerous OMB-led E-
Government initiatives such as the Financial Management and Budget Formulation and Execution
Lines of Business and has interagency agreements with the DOI's Interior Business Center (IBC)
for processing agency payroll.
OCFO provides government-to-government employee relocation services via interagency
agreements through EPA's Federal Employee Relocation Center (FERC) as a Working Capital
Fund (WCF) activity. EPA-FERC provides "one-stop shop" domestic and international relocation
services to other federal agencies to increase operational efficiency and save the government
money. EPA-FERC currently provides relocation services internally to all EPA regions and
program offices, and externally to the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), Department
of Labor (DOL), Office of Personnel Management (OPM), United States Patent and Trademark
Office (USPTO), Health & Human Services (HHS) and the United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA).
OCFO participates with the Bureau of Census in maintaining the Federal Assistance Awards Data
System. OCFO also coordinates appropriately with Congress and other federal agencies, such as
the Department of Treasury, the Government Accountability Office (GAO), and GSA.
OCFO also supports EPA's Deputy Administrator as the Agency's representative on the
President's Management Council. The President's Management Council oversees developing and
implementing Cross-Agency Priority (CAP) goals. CAP goals are designed to overcome barriers
and achieve better performance than one agency can achieve on its own. EPA will continue its
work supporting the CAP goals.
Office of Administration and Resources Management (OARM)
OARM is committed to working with federal partners that focus on improving management and
accountability throughout the federal government. OARM provides leadership and expertise to
government-wide activities in various areas of human resources, grants management, contracts
768
-------
management, suspension and debarment, and homeland security. These activities include specific
collaboration efforts with federal agencies and departments through:
• Chief Human Capital Officers, a group of senior leaders that discuss human capital
initiatives across the federal government.
• The Legislative and Policy Committee, a committee comprised of other federal agency
representatives who assist the OPM in developing plans and policies for training and
development across the government.
• The Chief Acquisition Officers Council, the principal interagency forum for monitoring
and improving the federal acquisition system. The Council also is focused on promoting
the President's specific initiatives and policies in all aspects of the acquisition system.
• The Award Committee for E-Government (E-Gov), which provides strategic vision for the
portfolio of systems/federal wide supporting both federal acquisition and financial
assistance. Support also is provided to the associated functional community groups,
including the Procurement Committee for E-Gov, the Financial Assistance Committee for
E-Gov, and the Intergovernmental Transaction Working Group.
• The Interagency Suspension and Debarment Committee (ISDC), a representative
committee of federal agency leaders in suspension and debarment. The Committee
facilitates lead agency coordination, serves as a forum to discuss current suspension and
debarment related issues, and assists in developing unified federal policy. Besides actively
participating in the ISDC, OARM: 1) provides instructors for the National Suspension and
Debarment Training Program offered through the Federal Law Enforcement Training
Center, and 2) supports the development of coursework and training on the suspension and
debarment process for the Inspector General Academy and the Council of the Inspectors
General on Integrity and Efficiency.
• The Financial Management Line of Business (FMLoB), which has been expanded to also
encompass the Grants Management Line of Business. The combined FMLoB, with the
Department of Treasury as the managing partner, will more closely align the financial
assistance and financial management communities around effective and efficient
management of funds. OARM also participates in the Grants.gov Users' Group, as well as
the Federal Demonstration Partnership which is designed to reduce the administrative
burdens associated with research grants.
• The Partnership for Sustainable Communities initiative, a collaborative effort with the
Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Transportation,
improves the alignment and delivery of grant resources to communities designated under
certain environmental programs. It also helps identify cases in the program that may
warrant consideration of suspension and debarment.
• The Interagency Committee on Federal Advisory Committee Management (Committee
Management Officer Council), which provides leadership and coordination on federal
769
-------
advisory committee issues and promotes effective and efficient committee operations
government-wide. In addition to serving on the Council, OARM works with the GSA
Committee Management Secretariat to establish and renew advisory committees, conduct
annual reviews of advisory committee activities and accomplishments, maintain committee
information in a publicly accessible online database, and develop committee management
regulations, guidance, and training. Further, OARM participates on the GSA Federal
Advisory Committee Act (FACA) Attorney Council Interagency Workgroup to keep
abreast of developments in the statutory language, case law, interpretation and
implementation of the FACA.
• The Interagency Security Committee (ISC) is the leading organization for nonmilitary
federal departments and agencies in establishing policies for the security and protection of
Federal facilities, developing security standards and ensuring compliance with those
standards. OARM participates in the ISC as a primary member and in sub-committees and
workgroups in order to facilitate EPA's compliance with ISC standards for facilities
nationwide.
• The Office of Personnel Management Background Investigations Stakeholder Group
(BISG) is a collaborative organization that is derived from the Intelligence Reform and
Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004. The BISG is comprised of senior security officials
across the federal government who are responsible for the submission, adjudication and/or
oversight of personnel security programs. OARM works with this group regularly to
discuss topics regarding back ground investigations, focusing on standardizing and
improving EPA's personnel security program.
In addition, throughout FY 2018 and FY 2019, OARM will continue working with the DOI's IBC,
which is an OPM and OMB approved Human Resources Line of Business shared service center.
IBC offers HR transactional processing, compensation management and payroll processing,
benefits administration, time and attendance, HR reporting, talent acquisition systems, and talent
management systems. OARM also continues its charter membership on the OPM HR Line of
Business Multi Agency Executive Strategy Committee (MAESC), providing advice and
recommendations to the Director of OPM as well as additional government-wide executive
leadership, for the implementation of the HR Line of Business vision, goals, and objectives.
OARM also is working with OMB, GSA, DHS, and Department of Commerce's National Institute
of Standards and Technology to continue to implement the Smart Card program.
Office of Environmental Information (OEI)
To support EPA's overall mission, OEI collaborates with a number of other federal agencies,
states, and tribal governments on a variety of initiatives, including making government more
efficient and transparent, protecting human health and the environment, and assisting in homeland
security. OEI is primarily involved in the information technology (IT), information management
(IM), and information security aspects of the projects on which it collaborates.
The Chief Information Officer (CIO) Council: The CIO Council is the principal interagency
forum for improving practices in the design, modernization, use, sharing, and performance of
770
-------
federal information resources. The Council develops recommendations for IT/IM policies,
procedures, and standards; identifies opportunities to share information resources; and assesses
and addresses the needs of the federal IT workforce.
eRulemaking: The eRulemaking Program's mission encompasses two areas: to improve public
access, participation in, and understanding of the rulemaking process; and to improve the
efficiency and effectiveness of agency partners' notice and comment process when promulgating
regulations. The eRulemaking Program maintains a public website, fattp://www.regulations,gov/.
which enables the general public to access and submit comments on various documents that are
published in the Federal Register, including proposed regulations and agency-specific notices. The
Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) is the agency side of Regulations.gov. FDMS
enables agencies to administer public submissions regarding regulatory and other documents
posted by the agencies on the Regulations.gov website. The increased public access to the
agencies' regulatory process enables a more informed public to provide supporting
technical/legal/economic analyses to strengthen the agencies' rulemaking vehicles. The PMO,
located at EPA, coordinates the operations of the eRulemaking Program through its 40 partner
departments and independent agencies (comprising more than 178 agencies, boards, commissions,
and offices). The administrative committee structure works with the PMO on day-to-day
operations, ongoing enhancements and long-range planning for program development. These
committees and boards (the Executive Steering Committee and the Advisory Board) have
representative members from each partner agency and deal with contracts, budget, website
improvements, improved public access, records management, and a host of other regulatory
concerns that were formally only agency-specific in nature. Coordination and leadership from the
OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, and partner agencies allows for a more
uniform and consistent presentation of rulemaking dockets across government. This coordination
is further demonstrated by the fact that more than 90 percent of all federal rules promulgated
annually are managed through the eRulemaking Program. In FY 2019, EPA will work with the
Office of Management and Budget and the National Archives and Records Administration towards
transferring management services to the Office of the Federal Register.
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA): EPA serves as the lead for the FOIAonline, a multi-agency
solution that enables EPA and partner agencies to meet their responsibilities under FOIA while
creating a repository of publicly released FOIA records for reuse. Partner agencies include, but are
not limited to, Department of Commerce, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of
Defense, Small Business Administration, and Department of Justice. Through FOIAonline, the
public has the ability to submit and track requests, search and download requests and responsive
records, correspond with processing staff, and file appeals. Agency users are provided with a
secure, login-access website to receive and store requests, assign and process requests (and refer
to other agencies), post responses online, produce the annual FOIA report to the Department of
Justice, and manage records electronically.
The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Improvement Act of 2016 directed the Office of
Management and Budget and the Department of Justice (DOJ) to build a consolidated online
request portal that allows a member of the public to submit a request for records to any agency
from a single website. DOJ is managing the development and maintenance of the National FOIA
Portal. EPA and other federal agencies will be expected to contribute to this effort.
771
-------
The National Environmental Information Exchange Network (EN): EPA's EN Program and
the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) are coordinating on using the Automated
Commercial Environment (ACE) system. This coordination will lead to automated processing of
over 2.8 million EPA-related electronic filings needed to clear legitimate imports and exports at
the ports. With the move from paper filings to electronic filings combined with automated
processing through ACE, filing time can be reduced from weeks/days to minutes/day. This
significant processing improvement directly impacts the movement of goods into commerce and
the economy while helping to ensure compliance with environmental and CBP laws and
regulations. It also helps the US Government keep pace with the speed of business.
The EN also is coordinating with multiple agencies via the Broadband Interagency Working Group
chaired by the National Transportation and Information Agency to increase broadband access.
Access to broadband is critical to fully participating in the EN and is of particular concern for
tribes who often lack this access. EPA will participle on current and future workgroups to
implement Presidential actions to promote the use of broadband in rural America. This includes
tribal lands. EPA is currently represented on the workgroup, Leveraging Federal Assets (co-
chaired by DOI and GSA).
Automated Commercial Environment/International Trade Data System (ACE/ITDS): ITDS
is the electronic information exchange capability, or "single window," through which businesses
will transmit data required by participating agencies for the import or export of cargo. ACE is the
system built by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to ensure that its customs officers and other
federal agencies have the information they need to decide how to handle goods and merchandise
being shipped into or out of the United States. It also will be the way those agencies provide CBP
with information about potential imports/exports. ITDS eliminates the need, burden and cost of
paper reporting. It also allows importers and exporters to report the same information to multiple
federal agencies with a single submission, and facilitates movement of cargo by automating
processing of the import and exports. ITDS provides the capability for industry to consolidate
reporting for commodities regulated by multiple agencies. For these consolidated reports, the
industry filers will receive the appropriate status response when their filings meet each agency's
reporting requirements. Once all agency reporting requirements have been met, filers can receive
a coordinated single U.S. government response to proceed into the commerce of the United States.
EPA has the responsibility and legal authority to make sure pesticides, toxic chemicals, vehicles
and engines, ozone-depleting substances, and other commodities entering and hazardous waste
exiting the country meet its human health and environmental standards. EPA's ongoing
collaboration with CBP on the ACE/ITDS effort will improve the efficiency of processing these
shipments through information exchange between EPA and CBP and automated processing of
electronic filings. As resources permit, EPA will continue to work with CBP towards the goal to
automate the current manual paper review process for admissibility so that importers and brokers
(referred to collectively as Trade) can know before these commodities are loaded onto an airplane,
truck, train, or ship if their shipment meets EPA's reporting requirements. As a result of this
automated review, trade can greatly lower its cost of doing business and customs officers at our
nation's ports will have the information on whether shipments comply with our environmental
regulations.
772
-------
Geospatial Information: EPA works with DOI, NOAA, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), NASA,
USD A, and DHS on developing and implementing geospatial approaches to support various
business areas. It also works with 25 additional federal agencies through the activities of the federal
Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) and the OMB Geospatial Line of Business (Geo LoB), for
which EPA leads several key initiatives. EPA also participates in the FGDC Steering Committee
and Executive Committee. A key component of this work is developing and implementing the
National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) and the National GeoPlatform. The key objective of
the NSDI is to make a comprehensive array of national spatial data - data that portrays features
associated with a location or tagged with geographic information and can be attached to and
portrayed on maps - easily accessible to both governmental and public stakeholders. Use of this
data, in tandem with analytical applications, supports several key EPA and government-wide
business areas. These include ensuring that human health and environmental conditions are
represented in the appropriate contexts for targeting and decision making; enabling the assessment,
protection and remediation of environmental conditions; and aiding emergency first responders
and other homeland security activities. EPA supports geospatial initiatives through efforts such as
EPA's Geospatial Platform, EPA's Environmental Dataset Gateway, the National Environmental
Information Exchange Network, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Assist, EPA
Metadata Editor, Facilities Registry System (FRS) Web Services, and My Environment. EPA also
works closely with its state, tribal, and international partners in a collaboration that enables
consistent implementation of data acquisition and development, standards, and technologies
supporting the efficient and cost effective sharing and use of geographically-based data and
services.
Office of the Inspector General (OIG)
EPA's Inspector General is a member of the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and
Efficiency (CIGIE), an organization comprised of federal Inspectors General (IGs), GAO, and the
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The CIGIE coordinates and improves the way IGs conduct
audits, investigations, and internal operations. The CIGIE also promotes joint projects of
government-wide interest and reports annually to the President on the collective performance of
the IG community. EPA's OIG coordinates criminal investigative activities with other law
enforcement organizations such as the FBI, Secret Service, and DOJ. In addition, the OIG
participates with various inter-governmental audit forums and professional associations to
exchange information, share best practices, and obtain or provide training. The OIG also promotes
collaboration among EPA's partners and stakeholders in its participation of Hurricane Sandy
Oversight and its outreach activities. Additionally, EPA's OIG initiates and participates in
collaborative audits, program evaluations, and investigations with OIGs of agencies with an
environmental mission such as the DOI, USDA, as well as other federal, state, and local law
enforcement agencies as prescribed by the IG Act, as amended. As required by the IG Act, EPA's
OIG coordinates and shares information with the GAO. EPA's OIG currently serves as the
Inspector General of the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigations Board (CSB). EPA's
OIG will continue to perform its duties with respect to CSB until otherwise directed.
773
-------
Major Management Challenges
Introduction
The Reports Consolidation Act of 2000 requires the Inspector General to identify the most serious
management challenges facing EPA, briefly assess the Agency's progress in addressing them, and
report annually.
EPA has established procedures for addressing its major management challenges. EPA managers
use audits, reviews, and program evaluations conducted internally and by the Office of Inspector
General (OIG), the Government Accountability Office (GAO), and the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) to assess program effectiveness and identify potential management issues. The
Agency recognizes that management challenges, if not addressed adequately, may prevent the
Agency from effectively meeting its mission. EPA remains committed to addressing all
management issues in a timely manner and to the fullest extent of its authority.
The following discussion summarizes each of the FY 2017 management challenges identified by
EPA's OIG and presents the Agency's response.
1. Improved Oversight of States, Territories and Tribes Authorized to Accomplish
Environmental Goals
Summary of Challenge: The OIG believes that EPA's oversight of states authorized to implement
environmental programs under several statutes remains a key management challenge. The OIG
notes that while progress has been made, challenges remain throughout Agency programs and
many recommendations have not been fully implemented.
Agency Response: The Agency continues to make state oversight an Agency priority and to
improve oversight practices to ensure consistency. Some examples of the efforts the Agency has
taken to address OIG's concerns include:
• Established the State Program Health and Integrity Workgroup. This inter-agency
workgroup, which began in FY 2012, composed of EPA's national program offices for air,
enforcement and water, gathers and analyzes information on oversight of state practices,
identifies gaps and develops solutions.
• Reviewed a minimum of 2 percent of Title V permits issued by states and conducted at
least one evaluation per region of a state, local, or tribal Title V permitting program.
• Completed draft guidance documents on program evaluation and fee oversight, which are
scheduled to be finalized and issued in the Fall of 2017.
• Published the revised underground storage tank regulations (July 2015), which addressed
state program approval and provided states who currently have SPA three years from the
rule's effective date to submit their application for reinstatement.
• Working with the states to have revised Memorandums of Agreements to reflect program
changes from the 2005 Energy Policy Act by October 2018.
• Established a state-EPA workgroup to take action on the financial indicators developed in
response to recommendations concerning State Revolving Fund oversight. The Agency
774
-------
believes that a range of financial indicators will provide stakeholders with a complete
understanding of the financial sustainability of the Drinking Water State Revolving Funds
and Clean Water State Revolving Funds.
• Improved collaboration and coordination with states in implementing Safe Drinking Water
Act regulation for Public Water Systems and Underground Injection Control regulations
regarding hydraulic fracturing activities. For example, the Agency coordinates with states
where use of diesel fuels in hydraulic fracturing has been reported and evaluates any
information regarding injection of diesel fuels for hydraulic fracturing on a case by case
basis.
• Progress will be assessed beginning in FY 2018 with two new performance indicators
("Number of grant commitments achieved by states, tribes, and local communities"; and
"Number of alternative shared governance approaches to address state, tribal, and local
community reviews") under the FY 2018-2022 EPA Strategic Plan Goal 2/Objective 2.1,
Enhance Shared Accountability.
Responsible Agency Official: Robin Richardson, Principal Deputy Associate Administrator,
Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations.
2. Enhancing Information Technology Security to Combat Cyber Threats
Summary of Challenge: The OIG acknowledges that the Agency continues to initiate actions to
further strengthen or improve its information security program. However, long-standing
challenges that stem from the lack of corrective actions taken by management to resolve audit
findings and emerging issues the Agency faces in managing contractors raises questions about the
effectiveness of EPA 's information security program.
Agency Response: The Agency is committed to protecting its information and technology assets.
EPA understands the prevalence and complexity of the ever-growing cyber security attacks and is
aware of the potential impact to the Agency's mission if information assets are compromised. The
Agency has established and implemented adequate processes for tracking audit recommendations
and the status of corrective actions that will help address concerns associated with this
management challenge.
The Agency is developing a process to train EPA Contract Officer Representatives on their
responsibilities for monitoring the contractors to ensure they meet specified EPA information
security responsibilities. This includes:
• Monitoring contractors that operate information systems on behalf of EPA to ensure they
perform the mandated information security assessments.
• Ensuring that contractors with significant information security responsibilities complete
role-based training.
Additionally, the Agency has developed standard contract clauses to help ensure contractors
implement and follow EPA and federal information security directives, including requiring
contractors to complete role-based training. The Agency plans to use a checklist to guide the
inclusion of pertinent clauses in all applicable contracts. The Agency plans to oversee the inclusion
775
-------
of the clauses during the Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act reviews and
will develop and implement a method to review existing contracts to ensure the clauses are
included, as appropriate. The Agency plans to implement the inclusion of standard contract clauses
by the end of the first quarter of FY 2018.
The Agency will make every effort to complete corrective actions for all open recommendations
by the originally agreed-upon completion dates, where feasible, by utilizing and refining processes
already in place.
Responsible Agency Official: Robert McKinney, Acting Director, Office of Information Security
and Privacy and Senior Agency Information Security Officer
3. EPA Needs to Improve Its Workload Analysis to Accomplish Its Mission Efficiently and
Effectively
Summary of Challenge: Over the years, in general and program-specific audits, the IG
recommended that the EPA attempt to quantify its overall and program-specific workload to help
prioritize resources. Although the IG recognizes challenges in accurately quantifying EPA's
highly variable, non-linear, and multi-year work, in many reviews the IG has continued to
recommend attempting to quantify FTE workloads. The EPA believes that quantifying workload
using detailed, static FTE models is not a cost effective method to prioritize resources or to inform
continuing efforts to improve EPA programs and processes. To better support process
improvement efforts, the Agency uses a variety of targeted trend, macro-level, and / or operational
workload analyses designed to provide actionable, current and salient management information.
A. Agency Response: As the OIG acknowledges, the Agency faces continuing challenges
managing programs with fewer resources as well as measuring the EPA's variable workload. The
Agency believes that workload analysis provides valuable insights when focused on informing
efforts to improve current work process rather than attempting to estimate how many FTE a
program theoretically needs. OCFO found that detailed FTE models 1) quickly became out-of-
date due to changing regulations, requirements, and systems, 2) did not generate actionable data,
and 3) were overly sensitive to relatively small input changes.
Especially important is the fact that detailed FTE models capture the work as it is currently
performed. EPA is putting into place an organized methodology for improving business processes
across the full range of agency activities. EPA's Lean Management System (ELMS) initiative aims
to help deliver more customer value and improve mission outcomes. Targeted efforts will support
these continuous improvement efforts by allowing the agency to efficiently reanalyze processes
after improvement efforts have been implemented. Traditional FTE models can hamper these
efforts by focusing on precisely calculating resource levels rather than on identifying improvement
opportunities.
In a parallel effort, in the 2018 budget process, agency leadership identified critical statutory
obligations and key stakeholders (particularly states and tribes) needs to inform prioritizing efforts
within declining overall resource levels. Specific process improvement workload analyses have
776
-------
informed targeted efforts and have included funds control, IT security, fee processing and grants
project officer analyses. Given the Agency's continuing use of workload analysis tools and the
new agency-wide ELMS methodology, the Agency does not believe that workload analysis
represents an agency-level weakness.
B. Agency's Strategy: The EPA Lean Management System will create an overarching structure
for ongoing process improvement. At the same time, a wide variety of workload analytical tools,
including trend, macro-level workload reviews and targeted analyses of specific processes to
efficiently provide critical insights into difficult budget decisions. The EPA workload analysis
guidance (contained in EPA's Funds Control Manual, per the IG's recommendation) discusses
several workload tools that EPA programs can use to help manage their program, operations, and
resources. (The Funds Control Manual is currently under review by OMB.)
C. Agency Activities: Over the last few years, as discussed above, the EPA used workload
analyses to inform budget decision process and to examine task-driven functions. Task-specific
targeted analyses of current operations examined how much time managers and staff invest in each
function's major components. These analyses helped the EPA identify major challenges and
opportunities, target streamlining and Lean efforts, clarify guidance, prioritize training, and
structure other support efforts and initiatives. Specific analyses included:
• Grants and Interagency Agreement Officers - I-GET (Interagency Agreement and
Grants Officer Estimator Tool)
• Project officers - POET (Project Officer Estimator Tool)
• IT security officers (Information Security Task Force (ISTF) analyses of ISO
(Information Security Officer) duties
• Funds Control Officers (FCOs) - FCO workload review
• Fee-related duties - Existing and new fees workload review
The Agency plans to continue to use these tools in concert with ELMS and other process
improvement efforts and as one factor to inform budget decisions.
Responsible Agency Official: Carol Terris, Director, Office of Budget
777
-------
EPA User Fee Programs
In FY 2019, EPA will have several user fee programs in operation. These user fee programs and
proposals are as follows below.
Current Fees: Pesticides
Fees authorized by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act of 1988, as amended
by Public Law 112-177 Pesticide Registration Improvement Renewal Act (PRIA-3), were set to
expire on September 30,2017, but have been extended, by continuing resolution, through February
8, 2018. The bill pending in the Senate extends authority through September 30, 2020. The version
passed in the House extends authority for 7 years through fiscal year 2023, and the two versions
would need to be reconciled.
• Pesticides Maintenance Fee (7 U.S.C. §136a-l(i))
The Maintenance Fee provides funding for the Reregi strati on and Registration Review programs
and a certain percentage supports the processing of applications involving inert ingredients and
expedited processing of similar applications, such as fast track amendments. Assuming the passage
of PRIA-4, in FY 2019, EPA expects to collect approximately $31.0 million from this fee program.
PRIA-4 legislation is still pending Congressional authorization; if PRIA-4 is not enacted or PRIA
3 is not extended, EPA will not be authorized to collect new maintenance fees.
• Enhanced Registration Services (7 U.S.C. §136w-8(b))
Entities seeking to register pesticides for use in the United States pay a fee at the time the
registration action request is submitted to EPA, setting specific timeframes for the registration
decision service. This process has introduced new pesticides to the market more quickly. Assuming
the passage of PRIA-4, in FY 2019, EPA expects to collect approximately $17 million from this
fee program.
If PRIA-4 is not enacted in FY 2018, and PRIA-3 not extended, under the sunset provisions of
PRIA-3, EPA would collect 60 percent of fee amounts for applications submitted in FY 2018, and
30 percent of fee amounts for applications submitted in FY 2019.
Current Fees: Other
• Pre-Manufacturing Notification Fee
The Pre-Manufacturing Notification (PMN) fees are collected for the review and processing of
various types of new chemical pre-manufacturing notifications submitted to EPA by the chemical
industry. These fees are paid at the time of submission of Section 5 Notices for review by EPA's
Toxic Substances program. PMN fees are authorized by the Toxic Substances Control Act. Fees
collected for this activity are currently deposited in the U.S. Treasury. EPA estimates that no fees
will be collected under the current PMN Fee in FY 2019. On June 22, 2016, the "Frank R.
778
-------
Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act" (P.L. 114-182) was signed into law,
amending numerous sections of the (TSCA), including providing authority for establishment of a
new, broader TSCA User Fee to replace the current PMN Fee, and for the fee revenues to be
deposited in an account for direct use by EPA. The rule to require these revised fees is expected to
be finalized in late FY 2018.
• Lead Accreditation and Certification Fee
Title IV, Section 402(a)(3) mandates the development of a schedule of fees to cover the costs of
administering and enforcing the standards and regulations for persons operating lead training
programs accredited under the Section 402/404 rule and for lead-based paint contractors certified
under this rule. The training programs ensure that lead paint abatement and renovation
professionals are properly trained and certified. Fees collected for this activity are deposited in the
U.S. Treasury. EPA estimates that $4.6 million will be deposited in FY 2019.
• Motor Vehicle and Engine Compliance Program Fee
This fee is authorized by the Clean Air Act of 1990 and is administered by the Office of
Transportation and Air Quality. Fee collections for manufactures of light-duty vehicles, light- and
heavy-duty trucks, and motorcycles began in August 1992. In 2004, EPA promulgated a rule that
updated existing fees and established fees for newly-regulated vehicles and engines. The fees
established for new compliance programs also are paid by manufacturers of heavy-duty and non-
road vehicles and engines, including large diesel and gas equipment (earthmovers, tractors,
forklifts, compressors, etc.), handheld and non-handheld utility engines (chainsaws, weed-
whackers, leaf-blowers, lawnmowers, tillers, etc.), marine (boat motors, watercraft, jet-skis),
locomotive, aircraft and recreational vehicles (off-road motorcycles, all-terrain vehicles,
snowmobiles) for in-use testing and certification. In 2009, EPA added fees for evaporative
emissions requirements for non-road engines. EPA intends to apply certification fees to additional
industry sectors as new programs are developed. In FY 2019, EPA expects to collect
approximately $22.8 million from this fee program based upon a projection of the original
rulemaking cost study adjusted for inflation. EPA is not authorized to expend these collected funds.
• WIFIA Program Fees
The FY 2019 Budget requests authorization for the Administrator to collect and obligate fees
established in accordance with Title V, Subtitle C, Sections 5029 and 5030, of Public Law 113-
121, the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014. These funds shall be deposited
in the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Program Account and remain available until
expended. WIFIA fee regulations were promulgated in FY 2017. Fee revenue is for the cost of
contracting with expert services such as financial advisory, legal advisory, and engineering firms.
The requested WIFIA program fee expenditure authority would be in addition to the $3 million
request for administrative and operations expenses. Fee revenue does not take the place of the
request for WIFIA administration. The appropriated administrative level and the anticipated fee
revenue are both needed to successfully implement the WIFIA program. In FY 2019, EPA
estimates that upward of $3 million in WIFIA fees could be collected.
779
-------
Fee Proposals: Other
• ENERGY STAR
The Budget includes a proposal to authorize the EPA to administer the ENERGY STAR program
through the collection of user fees. By administering the ENERGY STAR program through the
collection of user fees, the EPA would continue to provide a trusted resource for consumers and
businesses who want to purchase products that save them money and help protect the environment.
Product manufacturers who seek to label their products under the program would pay a modest fee
that would support EPA's work to set voluntary energy efficiency standards and to process
applications. Through an upfront FY 2019 appropriation of $46 million to ensure continuous
operation of the ENERGY STAR program, fee collections would begin after EPA undertakes a
rulemaking process to determine which products would be covered by fees and the level of fees,
and to ensure that a fee system would not discourage manufacturers from participating in the
program or result in a loss of environmental benefits. The fee collections would provide funding to
cover the upfront appropriation, and continued expenses to develop, operate, and maintain the
ENERGY STAR program.
• Service Fees for the Administration of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA Fees
Rule)
On June 22, 2016, the "Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act" (P.L. 114-
182) was signed into law, amending numerous sections of the (TSCA). The amendments provide
authority to the Agency to establish fees for certain activities under Sections 4, 5 and 6 of TSCA,
as amended, to defray 25 percent of the costs of administering these Sections and Section 14. The
amendments removed the previous cap that the Agency may charge for pre-manufacturing
notification reviews. Fees collected under the TSCA Fees Rule will be deposited in the TSCA
Service Fee Fund for use by the EPA. This fee structure, once finalized, will replace the existing
Pre-Manufacturing Notification Fees.
• FIFRA and PRIA Fee Spending Restrictions
Current statutory language in the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
and (PRIA) restricts what activities EPA can fund from collections deposited in the Reregi strati on
and Expedited Processing Revolving Fund and PRIA Fund. The FY 2019 President's Budget
carries forward the proposed statutory language from the FY 2018 President's Budget. EPA
understands that the passage of PRIA-4 may change the need for this proposal and will work with
OMB and Congress to address this.
• Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest
The Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest Establishment Act (Public Law 112-195) provides EPA
with the authority to establish a program to finance, develop, and operate a system for the
electronic submission of hazardous waste manifests supported by user fees. In accordance with the
Act, EPA established the e-Manifest program. EPA finalized the user fee rule, Hazardous Waste
780
-------
Management System: User Fees for the Electronic Hazardous Waste Manifest System and
Amendments to Manifest Regulations, in December 2017.
In FY 2019, EPA will operate the e-Manifest system and the Agency anticipates collecting and
depositing approximately $43 million in e-Manifest user fees into the Hazardous Waste Electronic
Manifest System Fund. Based upon authority to collect and spend e-Manifest fees provided by
Congress in annual appropriations bills, the fees will be utilized for the operation of the system
and necessary program expenses. Fees will fully support the e-Manifest program, including future
development costs.
The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency is authorized to collect and obligate
fees in accordance with section 3024 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6939g) for fiscal
year 2019.
• Oil Spill: Prevention, Preparedness, and Response
The FY 2019 Budget requests authorization for the Administrator to collect and obligate fees to
provide compliance assistance services for owners or operators of a non-transportation related
onshore or offshore facility located landward of the coastline required to prepare and submit Spill
Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plans or Facility Response Plans under section 31 l(j) of
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. There are approximately 4,600 FRP facilities and over
540,000 SPCC facilities. Allowing these facilities to voluntarily request and pay for a service
whereby EPA conducts an on-site, walk-through of the facility will help expand awareness and
understanding of accident prevention processes, improve the safety of industrial operations, and
reduce inadvertent regulatory compliance violations. These fees will be deposited in the Inland Oil
Spill Programs account and remain available until expended for the expenses of providing
compliance assistance services. These fees are discretionary and the proposed language is included
in the Administrative Provisions section. When the Agency receives Congressional authorization,
the Administrator will establish procedures for making and accepting a facility's request for
voluntary assistance.
• State and Local Prevention and Preparedness
The FY 2019 Budget requests authorization for the Administrator to collect and obligate fees to
provide compliance assistance services for owners or operators of a stationary source required to
prepare and submit a Risk Management Plan under Section 112(r)(7) of the Clean Air Act. There
are close to 12,500 RMP facilities. Allowing these facilities to voluntarily request and pay for a
service whereby EPA conducts an on-site, walk-through of the facility will help expand awareness
and understanding of accident prevention processes, improve the safety of industrial operations,
and reduce inadvertent regulatory compliance violations. These fees will be deposited in the
Environmental Programs and Management account and remain available until September 30, 2020
for the expenses of providing compliance assistance services. These fees are discretionary and the
proposed language is included in the Administrative Provisions section. When the Agency receives
Congressional authorization, the Administrator will establish procedures for making and accepting
a facility's request for voluntary assistance.
781
-------
Working Capital Fund
In FY 2019, the Agency will be in its 23rd year of operation of the Working Capital Fund (WCF).
It is a revolving fund, authorized by law to finance a cycle of operations, where the costs of goods
and services provided are charged to users on a fee-for-service basis. The funds received are
available without fiscal year limitation, to continue operations and to replace capital equipment.
EPA's WCF was implemented under the authority of Section 403 of the Government Management
Reform Act of 1994 and the EPA's FY 1997 Appropriations Act. Permanent WCF authority was
contained in the Agency's FY 1998 Appropriations Act.
EPAs Chief Financial Officer (CFO) initiated the WCF in FY 1997 as part of an effort to: (1) be
accountable to Agency offices, the Office of Management and Budget, and Congress; (2) increase
the efficiency of the administrative services provided to program offices; and (3) increase customer
service and responsiveness. The Agency has a WCF Board which provides policy and planning
oversight and advises the CFO regarding the WCF financial position. The Board, chaired by the
Associate Chief Financial Officer, is comprised of twenty-three voting members from the program
and regional offices.
In FY 2019, there will be eleven Agency activities provided under the WCF. These are the
Agency's information technology, telecommunications operations, data services, and innovation
fellowship activities managed by the Office of Environmental Information; Agency postage costs,
Cincinnati voice services, certain minor facilities alterations costing less than $150,000 per project,
and background investigations managed by the Office of Administration and Resource
Management; financial and administrative systems, employee relocations, and a budget
formulation system managed by the Office of the Chief Financial Officer; the Agency's continuity
of operations site, managed by the Office of Land and Emergency Management; and regional
information technology service and support managed by Region 8. A new activity for the Research
Triangle Park operations and maintenance service, previously discussed as an addition in FY 2018
but subsequently delayed, has been proposed for addition in FY 2019.
In FY 2019, the RTP facility operations and maintenance service is being proposed to begin
operations within the WCF. A total of $3.3 million is estimated to be shifted to the WCF,
commensurate with what is being spent for FY 2018. These funds will cover preventative
maintenance inspections, repairs, and service calls.
The Agency's FY 2019 budget request includes resources for these eleven activities in each
National Program Manager's submission, totaling approximately $255 million. These estimated
resources may be adjusted during the year to incorporate any program office's additional service
needs during the operating year. To the extent that these increases are subject to Congressional
reprogramming notifications, the Agency will comply with all applicable requirements. In FY
2019, the Agency will continue to perform relocation services for other federal agencies in an
effort to deliver high quality services external to EPA, which will result in lower costs to EPA
customers.
In FY 2018, the Agency reduced its overall working capital fund budget due to budget constraints.
These constraints have continued in FY 2019 with minor increases and decreases due to several
IT improvements, including increased cloud computing, cyber security requirements, continuous
782
-------
diagnostic and mitigation program implementation, and bandwidth enhancements. Other funding
shifts have been included in the FY 2019 WCF plan that relate to the necessary
telecommunications and computer support needed by every employee. As part of an overall review
and rebalancing of these costs, funds have been shifted across programs to reflect FTE changes as
well.
783
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
Acronyms for Statutory Authority
The following is not an exhaustive list of statutory authorities, but includes those commonly
referred to by acronym in this document.
ADA: Americans with Disabilities Act
ADEA: Age Discrimination in Employment Act
AEA: Atomic Energy Act, as amended, and Reorganization Plan #3
AHERA: Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act
AHPA: Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act
APA: Administrative Procedures Act
ARRA: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
ASHAA: Asbestos in Schools Hazard Abatement Act
ASTCA: Antarctic Science, Tourism, and Conservation Act
BEACH Act of 2000: Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health Act
BRERA: Brownfields Revitalization and Environmental Restoration Act
CAA: Clean Air Act
CAAA: Clean Air Act Amendments
CAIR: Clean Air Interstate Rule
CCA: dinger Cohen Act
CCAA: Canadian Clean Air Act
CEPA: Canadian Environmental Protection Act
CERCLA: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (1980)
CFOA: Chief Financial Officers Act
CFR: Code of Federal Regulations
CICA: Competition in Contracting Act
CRA: Civil Rights Act
CSA: Computer Security Act
CWA: Clean Water Act (1972)
CWAP: Clean Water Action Plan
CWPPR: Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection, and Restoration Act of 1990
CWSRF: Clean Water State Revolving Fund
CZARA: Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments
784
-------
CZMA: Coastal Zone Management Act
DPA: Deepwater Ports Act
DREAA: Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act
DWSRF: Drinking Water State Revolving Fund
ECRA: Economic Cleanup Responsibility Act
EFOIA: Electronic Freedom of Information Act
EISA: Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
EPAct: Energy Policy Act of 2005
EPAA: Environmental Programs Assistance Act
EPAAR: Environmental Protection Agency Acquisition Regulation
EPCA: Energy Policy and Conservation Act
EPCRA: Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act (1986)
ERD&DAA: Environmental Research, Development and Demonstration Authorization Act
ESA: Endangered Species Act
ESECA: Energy Supply and Environmental Coordination Act
FACA: Federal Advisory Committee Act
FAIR: Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act
FASA: Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act (1994)
FCMA: Fishery Conservation and Management Act
FEPCA: Federal Environmental Pesticide Control Act; enacted as amendments to FIFRA.
FFDCA: Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
FGCAA: Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act
FIFRA: Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (1972)
FLPMA: Federal Land Policy and Management Act
FMFIA: Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act (1982)
FOIA: Freedom of Information Act
FPA: Federal Pesticide Act
FPAS: Federal Property and Administration Services Act
FPR: Federal Procurement Regulation
FQPA: Food Quality Protection Act (1996)
FRA: Federal Register Act
FSA: Food Security Act
FSMA: Food Safety Modernization Act
785
-------
FTTA: Federal Technology Transfer Act
FUA: Fuel Use Act
FWCA: Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act
FWPCA: Federal Water Pollution and Control Act (aka CWA)
GISRA: Government Information Security Reform Act
GMRA: Government Management Reform Act
GPRA: Government Performance and Results Act (1993)
HMTA: Hazardous Materials Transportation Act
HSWA: Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984
IGA: Inspector General Act
IPA: Intergovernmental Personnel Act
IPIA: Improper Payments Information Act
ISTEA: Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act
ITMRA: Information Technology Management Reform Act of 1996-aka Clinger/Cohen Act
LPA-US/MX-BR: 1983 La Paz Agreement on US/Mexico Border Region
MPPRCA: Marine Plastic Pollution, Research and Control Act of 1987
MPRSA: Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act
NAAEC: North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation
NAAQS: National Ambient Air Quality Standard
NAWCA: North American Wetlands Conservation Act
NEPA: National Environmental Policy Act
NHPA: National Historic Preservation Act
NIPDWR: National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations
NISA: National Invasive Species Act of 1996
ODA: Ocean Dumping Act
OMTR: Open Market Trading Rule
OPA: Oil Pollution Act of 1990
OWBPA: Older Workers Benefit Protection Act
PBA: Public Building Act
PFCRA: Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act
PHSA: Public Health Service Act
PLIRRA: Pollution Liability Insurance and Risk Retention Act
PPA: Pollution Prevention Act
786
-------
PR: Privacy Act
PRA: Paperwork Reduction Act
PRIA: Pesticide Registration Improvement Act
PRIEA: Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act of 2012 (known as PRIA 3)
PRIRA: Pesticide Registration Improvement Renewal Act
QCA: Quiet Communities Act
RCRA: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976
RFA: Regulatory Flexibility Act
RICO: Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act
RLBPHRA: Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act
SARA: Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986
SBLRBRERA: Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization and
Environmental Restoration Act
SBREFA: Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
SDWA: Safe Drinking Water Act
SICEA: Steel Industry Compliance Extension Act
SMCRA: Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act
SPA: Shore Protection Act of 1988
SWDA: Solid Waste Disposal Act
SWTR: Surface Water Treatment Rule
TCA: Tribal Cooperative Agreement
TSCA: Toxic Substances Control Act
UMRA: Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
UMTRLWA: Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Land Withdrawal Act
USC: United States Code
USTCA: Underground Storage Tank Compliance Act
WQA: Water Quality Act of 1987
WRDA: Water Resources Development Act
WSRA: Wild and Scenic Rivers Act
WWWQA: Wet Weather Water Quality Act of 2000
787
-------
FY 2019 STAG Categorical Program Grants
Statutory Authority and Eligible Uses
(Dollars in Thousands)
(ii;iiil Title
Sl;iliiliH'\
\|||Iki|'I|ICs
~ imhle
Recipients
~ imhle I scs
n :ui<>
(m;il ()h|ecti\ e
l'Y 2017
Actual Dollars
(XI000)
l'Y 2017
I ¦ nacled I hilars-'
(XI000)
l'Y 2018
Annualized CR
Dollars
(XI000)
l'Y 2019
President's
Request
(XI000)
State and Local
Air Quality
Management
CAA, Section
103
Air pollution
control agencies
as defined in
Section 302(b)
of the CAA
S/L monitoring
and data
collection
activities in
support of the
PM2.5 monitoring
network and
associated
program costs.
Goal 1,
Obj. 1.1
$36,995.0
$41,875.0
$41,591.0
$29,313.0
State and Local
Air Quality
Management
CAA, Section
103
Air pollution
control agencies
as defined in
Section 302(b)
of the CAA
S/L monitoring
and data
collection
activities in
support of air
toxics
monitoring.
Goal 1,
Obj. 1.1
$5,660.3
$6,858.0
$6,811.0
$6,271.0
State and Local
Air Quality
Management
CAA, Section
103
Air pollution
control agencies
as defined in
Section 302(b)
of the CAA
S/L monitoring
procurement
activities in
support of the
NAAQS.
Goal 1,
Obj. 1.1
$2,834.0
$4,278.0
$4,249.0
$2,780.0
3 Does not reflect STAG rescissions.
788
-------
(ii;iiil Tillc
Sl;iliiliH'\
\ii|IkiiiIics
~ imhle
KccipiCllls
~ imhlc I scs
iy :oi«j
(m;il ()h|ecli\ c
l'Y 2017
Actual Dollars
(XI000)
l'Y 2017
Pnacled Dollar-
(XI000)
l'Y 2018
Annualized CR
Dollars
(XI000)
l'Y 2019
President's
Request
(XI000)
State and Local
Air Quality
Management
CAA, Sections
103,105,106
Air pollution
control agencies
as defined in
Section 302(b) of
the CAA; Multi-
jurisdictional
organizations
(non-profit
organizations
whose boards of
directors or
membership is
made up of CAA
Section 302(b)
agency officers
and whose
mission is to
support the
continuing
environmental
programs of the
States); Interstate
air quality control
region designated
pursuant to
Section 107 of the
CAA or of
implementing
Section 176A, or
Section 184
NOTE: only the
Ozone Transport
Commission is
eligible.
Carrying out the
traditional
prevention and
control programs
required by the
CAA and
associated
program support
costs, including all
monitoring
activities,
including PM 2.5
monitoring and
associated
program costs
(Section 103
and/or 105);
Coordinating or
facilitating a
multi-
jurisdictional
approach to
carrying out the
traditional
prevention and
control programs
required by the
CAA (Sections
103 and 106);
Supporting
training for CAA
Section 302(b) air
pollution control
agency staff
(Sections 103 and
105); Supporting
research,
investigative, and
demonstration
projects (Section
103).
Goal 1,
Obj. 1.1
$168,225.3
Section 105
grants
$466.0
Section 106
grants
Total:
$214,180.6
$174,569.0
Section 105
grants
$639.0
Section 106
grants
Total:
$228,219.0
$173,383.0
Section 105
grants
$635.0
Section 106
grants
Total:
$226,669.0
$113,177.0
Section 105
grants
$420.0
Section 106
grants
Total:
$151,961.0
789
-------
(ii;iiil Tillc
Sl;iliiliH'\
\|||Iki|'I|ICs
~ imhle
Recipients
~ imhlc I scs
n :ui<>
(m;il ()h|ecli\ e
l'Y 2017
Actual Dollars
(XI000)
l'Y 2017
Knacled Dollars-'
(XI000)
l'Y 2018
Annualized CR
Dollars
(XI000)
l'Y 2019
President's
Request
(XI000)
Tribal Air Quality
Management
CAA, Sections
103 and 105;
Tribal
Cooperative
Agreements
(TCA) in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
Tribes;
Intertribal
Consortia;
State/Tribal
College or
University
Conducting air
quality
assessment
activities to
determine a
Tribe's need to
develop a CAA
program;
Carrying out the
traditional
prevention and
control programs
required by the
CAA and
associated
program costs;
Supporting CAA
training for
Federally-
recognized
Tribes.
Goal 1,
Obj. 1.1
$10,027.8
Section 103
grants
$8,829.0
Section 103
grants
$8,769.0
Section 103
grants
$6,163.0
Section 103
grants
$4,000.0
Section 105
grants
Total:
$14,027.8
$4,000.0
Section 105
grants
Total:
$12,829.0
$3,973.0
Section 105
grants
Total:
$12,742.0
$2,800.0
Section 105
grants
Total:
$8,963.0
Radon
TSCA,
State Agencies,
Assist in the
N/A
$7,963.4
$8,051.0
$7,996.0
$0.0
Sections 10 and
Tribes,
development and
306
Intertribal
implementation
Consortia
of programs for
the assessment
and mitigation of
radon.
790
-------
(ii;iiil Tillc
Sl;iliiliH'\
\|||Iki|'I|ICs
~ imhle
KccipiCllls
~ mihlc I scs
n :ui<>
(m;il ()h|ecli\ c
l'Y 2017
Actual Dollars
(XI000)
l'Y 2017
Enacted Dollars-'
(XI000)
l'Y 2018
Annualized CR
Dollars
(XI000)
l'Y 2019
President's
Request
(XI000)
Multipurpose
Grants
P.L. 114-113,
Annual
Appropriations
Act
State Agencies,
Tribes
Implementation
of mandatory
statutory duties
delegated by
EPA under
pertinent
environmental
laws.
Goal 1
Obj. Multiple
$162.9
$0.0
$0.0
$27,000.0
Water Pollution
Control (Section
106)
FWPCA, as
amended,
Section 106;
TCA in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia,
Interstate
Agencies
Develop and
carry out surface
and ground water
pollution control
programs,
including
NPDES permits,
TMDLs, WQ
standards,
monitoring, and
NPS control
activities.
Goal 1,
Obj. 1.2
$227,686.1
$230,806.0
$229,239.0
$153,683.0
791
-------
Grant Title
Statutory
Authorities
Eligible
Recipients
Eligible Uses
l'Y 2019
Goal/Objective
l'Y 2017
Actual Dollars
(XI000)
l'Y 2017
Lnacted Dollars7,
(XI000)
l'Y 2018
Annualized CR
Dollars
(XI000)
l'Y 2019
President's
Request
(XI000)
Nonpoint
Source (NPS -
Section 319)
FWPCA, as
amended,
Section 319(h);
TCA in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
Implement
EPA-approved
State and Tribal
nonpoint source
management
programs and
fund priority
projects as
selected by the
state.
N/A
$169,771.6
$170,915.0
$169,754.0
$0.0
Wetlands
Program
Development
FWPCA, as
amended,
Section 104
(b)(3); TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
States, Local
Governments,
Tribes,
Interstate
Organizations,
Intertribal
Consortia,
Non-Profit
Organizations
To develop new
wetland
programs or
enhance existing
programs for the
protection,
management,
and restoration
of wetland
resources.
Goal 1,
Obj. 1.2
$15,867.0
$14,661.0
$14,561.0
$9,762.0
Gold King
Mine - Water
Monitoring
WIIN, Section
5004(d);Water
Quality Program
States, Tribes,
and Local
Governments
Water quality
monitoring of
rivers
contaminated by
the Gold King
Mine release.
N/A
$105.5
$4,000.0
$3,973.0
$0.0
792
-------
Grant Title
Statutory
Authorities
1 Eligible
Recipients
Eligible Uses
l'Y 2010
Goal/Objective
l'Y 2017
Actual Dollars
(XI000)
l'Y 2017
Knacted Dollars7,
(XI000)
l'Y 2018
Annualized CR
Dollars
(XI000)
l'Y 2011)
President's
Request
(XI000)
Public Water
System
Supervision
(PWSS)
SDWA,
Section 1443(a);
TCA in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
Assistance to
implement and
enforce National
Primary
Drinking Water
Regulations to
ensure the safety
of the Nation's
drinking water
resources and to
protect public
health.
Goal 1,
Obj. 1.2
$101,125.8
$101,963.0
$101,271.0
$67,892.0
Underground
Injection
Control (UIC)
SDWA, Section
1443(b); TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
Implement and
enforce
regulations that
protect
underground
sources of
drinking water
by controlling
Class I-V
underground
injection wells.
Goal 1,
Obj. 1.2
$10,572.3
$10,506.0
$10,435.0
$6,995.0
793
-------
Grant Title
Statutory
Authorities
Eligible
Recipients
Eligible Uses
l 'Y 2019
Goal/Objective
FY 2017
Actual Dollars
(XI000)
FY 2017
Enacted Dollars7,
(XI000)
FY 2018
Annualized CR
Dollars
(XI000)
FY 2019
President's
Request
(XI000)
Beaches
BEACH Act of
States, Tribes,
Develop and
N/A
$9,540.3
$9,549.0
$9,484.0
$0.0
Protection
2000; TCA in
Intertribal
implement
annual
Consortia,
programs for
Appropriations
Local
monitoring and
Acts.
Governments
notification of
conditions for
coastal
recreation
waters adjacent
to beaches or
similar points of
access that are
used by the
public.
Hazardous
Waste
Financial
Assistance
RCRA,
Section 3011;
FY 1999
Appropriations
Act (P.L. 105-
276); TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
Development &
Implementation
of Hazardous
Waste Programs
Goal 1,
Obj. 1.3
$97,165.0
$99,693.0
$99,016.0
$66,381.0
794
-------
Grant Title
Statutory
Authorities
Eligible
Recipients
Eligible Uses
l'Y 2019
Goal/Objective
l'Y 2017
Actual Dollars
(XI000)
l'Y 2017
Enacted Dollars7,
(XI000)
l'Y 2018
Annualized CR
Dollars
(XI000)
l'Y 2019
President's
Request
(XI000)
Brownfields
CERCLA, as
amended by the
Small Business
Liability Relief
and Brownfields
Revitalization
Act, Section
128(a) (42 U.S.C.
9628); GMRA
(1990)a; FGCAA.
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
Establish and
enhance state
and tribal
response
programs which
will timely
survey and
inventory
brownfields
sites; develop
oversight and
enforcement
authorities to
ensure response
actions are
protective of
human health
and the
environment;
develop ways
for communities
to provide
meaningful
opportunities for
public
participation;
and develop
mechanisms for
approval of a
cleanup plan
and verification
and certification
that cleanup is
complete.
Goal 1,
Obj. 1.3
$46,994.9
$47,745.0
$47,421.0
$31,791.0
795
-------
Grant Title
Statutory
Authorities
Eligible
Recipients
Eligible Uses
l'Y 2019
Goal/Objective
l'Y 2017
Actual Dollars
(XI000)
l'Y 2017
Enacted Dollars7,
(XI000)
l'Y 2018
Annualized CR
Dollars
(XI000)
l'Y 2019
President's
Request
(XI000)
Underground
Storage Tanks
(UST)
SWDA, Section
2007(f), 42
U.S.C.
6916(f)(2); EPAct
of 2005, Title XV
- Ethanol and
Motor Fuels,
Subtitle B -
Underground
Storage Tank
Compliance,
Sections 1521-
1533, P.L. 109-
58, 42 U.S.C.
15801.
States
Provide funding
for States'
underground
storage tanks
and to support
direct UST
implementation
programs.
N/A
$1,479.4
$1,498.0
$1,488.0
$0.0
796
-------
Grant Title
Statutory
Authorities
Eligible
Recipients
Eligible Uses
FY 2019
Goal/Objective
FY 2017
Actual Dollars
(XI000)
FY 2017
Enacted Dollars7,
(XI000)
FY 2018
Annualized CR
Dollars
(XI000)
FY 2019
President's
Request
(XI000)
Pesticides
Program
Implementation
FIFRA, Sections
20 and 23; the
FY 1999
Appropriations
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
Implement the
following
programs
through grants
Goal 1,
Obj. 1.4
$12,012.4
- States formula
$11,423.0
- States formula
$11,346.0
- States formula
$7,350.0
- States formula
Act (P.L. 105-
276); FY 2000
Appropriations
Act (P.L. 106-
74); TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
to States, Tribes,
partners, and
supporters for
implementation
of pesticide
programs,
including:
Certification and
Training
(C&T),Worker
Protection;
Endangered
Species
Protection
Program (ESPP)
Field Activities;
Pesticides in
Water; and
Tribal
Programs.
$390.0
HQ Programs:
- Tribal
-PREP
- School IPM
$1,278.0
EIQ Programs:
- Tribal
-PREP
- School IPM
$1,269.0
EIQ Programs:
- Tribal
-PREP
- Pollinator
Protection
$1,107.0
EIQ Programs:
- Tribal
-PREP
- Pollinator
Protection
Total: $12,402.4
Total: $12,701.0
Total: $12,615.0
Total: $8,457.0
797
-------
Grant Title
Statutory
Authorities
Eligible
Recipients
Eligible Uses
l 'Y 2019
Goal/Objective
FY 2017
Actual Dollars
(XI000)
FY 2017
Fnacted Dollars7,
(XI000)
FY 2018
Annualized CR
Dollars
(XI000)
FY 2011)
President's
Request
(XI000)
Lead
TSCA, Section
404(g); FY 2000
Appropriations
Act (P.L. 106-
74); TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
Provide
assistance to
states,
territories, the
District of
Columbia, and
tribes to develop
and implement
authorized lead-
based paint
abatement
programs and
authorized
Renovation,
Repair, and
Painting (RRP)
programs. The
EPA directly
implements
these programs
in all areas of
the country that
are not
authorized to do
so, and will
continue to
operate the
Federal Lead-
based Paint
Program
Database
(FLPP) of
trained and
certified lead-
based paint
professionals.
N/A
$12,265.6
404(g) State/
Tribal
Certification
$12,372.0
404(g) State/
Tribal
Certification
$12,287.0
404(g) State/
Tribal
Certification
$0.0
404(g) State/
Tribal
Certification
$2,556.6
404(g) Direct
Implementation
Total:
$14,822.2
$1,677.0
404(g) Direct
Implementation
Total:
$14,049.0
$1,667.0
404(g) Direct
Implementation
Total:
$13,954.0
$0.0
404(g) Direct
Implementation
Total:
$0.0
798
-------
Grant Title
Statutory
Authorities
Eligible
Recipients
Eligible Uses
l 'Y 2019
Goal/Objective
FY 2017
Actual Dollars
(XI000)
FY 2017
Enacted Dollars7,
(XI000)
FY 2018
Annualized CR
Dollars
(XI000)
FY 2019
President's
Request
(XI000)
Toxic
Substances
Compliance
TSCA, Sections
28(a) and 404(g);
TCA in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
States,
federally
recognized
Indian Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia, and
Territories of
the U.S.
Assist in
developing,
maintaining, and
implementing
compliance
monitoring
programs for
PCBs, asbestos,
and Lead Based
Paint. In
addition,
enforcement
actions by: 1)
the Lead Based
Paint program
and 2) States
that obtained a
"waiver" under
the Asbestos
program.
Goal 2,
Obj.2.1
$4,938.3
$4,919.0
$4,886.0
$3,276.0
Pesticide
Enforcement
FIFRA
§ 23(a)(1); FY
2000
Appropriations
Act (P.L. 106-
74); TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
States,
Federally
recognized
Indian Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia, and
Territories of
the U.S.
Assist with
implementation
of cooperative
pesticide
enforcement
programs.
Goal 2,
Obj.2.1
$17,687.1
$18,050.0
$17,927.0
$10,531.0
799
-------
Grant Title
Statutory
Authorities
Eligible
Recipients
Eligible Uses
FY 2019
Goal/Objective
FY 2017
Actual Dollars
(XI000)
FY 2017
Enacted Dollars7,
(XI000)
FY 2018
Annualized CR
Dollars
(XI000)
FY 2019
President's
Request
(XI000)
National
Environmental
Information
Exchange
Network
(NEIEN, aka
"the Exchange
Network")
Consolidated
Appropriations
Act 2016; P.L.I 14-
113 EPA Annual
appropriations;
Paperwork
Reduction Act
Section 3520.
The E-
Government Act
of 2002 (Pub.L.
107-347,
116 Stat. 2899,44
U.S.C. § 101, H.R.
2458/S. 803)
As appropriate,
CAA, Section 103;
CWA, Section
104; RCRA,
Section 8001;
FIFRA, Section
20; TSCA,
Sections 10 and
28; MPRSA,
Section 203;
SDWA, Section
1442; Indian
Environmental
General Assistance
Program Act of
1992, as amended;
Pollution
Prevention Act of
1990, Section
6605
States, U.S.
Territories,
Federally
Recognized
Tribes and
Native
Villages,
Interstate
Agencies,
Tribal
Consortia,
Other
Agencies with
Related
Environmental
Information
Activities.
Helps States,
U.S. Territories,
Tribes, and
intertribal
consortia
develop the
information
management
and technology
(IM/IT)
capabilities they
need to
participate in the
Exchange
Network, to
continue and
expand data-
sharing
programs, and to
improve access
to
environmental
information.
Goal 3,
Obj. 3.4
$9,289.3
$9,646.0
$9,580.0
$6,422.0
800
-------
Grant Title
Statutory
Authorities
Eligible
Recipients
Eligible Uses
l 'Y 2019
Goal/Objective
FY 2017
Actual Dollars
(XI000)
FY 2017
Enacted Dollars7,
(XI000)
FY 2018
Annualized CR
Dollars
(XI000)
FY 2019
President's
Request
(XI000)
Pollution
Prevention
Pollution
Prevention Act of
1990, Section
6605; TSCA
Section 10; FY
2000
Appropriations
Act (P.L. 106-
74); TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
Provides
assistance to
States and State
entities (i.e.,
colleges and
universities) and
Federally-
recognized
Tribes and
intertribal
consortia to
deliver pollution
prevention
technical
assistance to
small and
medium-sized
businesses. A
goal of the
program is to
assist businesses
and industries
with identifying
improved
environmental
strategies and
solutions for
reducing waste
at the source.
N/A
$4,504.6
$4,765.0
$4,733.0
$0.0
Tribal General
Assistance
Program
Indian
Environmental
General
Assistance
Program Act (42
U.S.C. 4368b);
TCA in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
Tribal
Governments,
Intertribal
Consortia
Plan and
develop Tribal
environmental
protection
programs.
Goal 2,
Obj.2.1
$68,186.0
$65,476.0
$65,031.0
$44,233.0
801
-------
802
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2019 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Program Projects by Program Area
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
n 2111" Wluah
n 2IIIS
Vnmiiili/cil ( K
n 201') I'iv-
Uncivil
n 2im*j
Iillll
-------
W 201S W 201«) Pros
V\ 201" Wlunh Viiiniiili/t'd ( K Uii(l«*rl
subtotal, Pesticides Licensing a»5,532.0 a>5,98t).U a»5,U58.U
Research: Air and Energy
Research: Air and Energy $90,076.2 $91,282.0 $30,711.0
Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources $104,687.6 $105,535.0 $67,261.0
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities $142,429.1 $133,415.0 $52,549.0
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Human Health Risk Assessment $40,506.5 $37,554.0 $22,267.0
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Endocrine Disruptors $15,497.0 $16,142.0 $10,006.0
Computational Toxicology $21,790.5 $21,266.0 $17,213.0
Research. Chemical Safety and Q $3
Sustainability (other activities)
Subtotal, Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability $89,192.6 $88,514.0 $61,737.0
Subtotal, Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability $129,699.1 $126,068.0 $84,004.0
Water: Human Health Protection
Drinking Water Programs $3,517.0 $3,495.0 $3,595.0
Congressional Priorities
Water Quality Research and Support Grants $7,803.4 $4,072.0 $0.0
Total, Science & Technology $723,576.4 $708,975.0 $448,965.0
Environmental Program & Management
Clean Air
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs
Atmospheric Protection Program
Federal Stationary Source Regulations
Federal Support for Air Quality Management
Stratospheric Ozone: Domestic Programs
Stratospheric Ozone: Multilateral Fund
Subtotal, Clean Air
Indoor Air and Radiation
Indoor Air: Radon Program
Radiation: Protection
$15,236.6 $16,060.0 $12,574.0
$89,143.7 $94,788.0 $13,542.0
$20,282.9 $21,736.0 $16,898.0
$127,113.4 $125,387.0 $96,097.0
$4,709.1 $4,606.0 $3,790.0
$8,326.0 $8,677.0 $0.0
$264,811.7 $271,254.0 $142,901.0
$2,985.9 $3,115.0 $0.0
$7,780.1 $8,519.0 $2,000.0
n 2019 I'iv*
liud
-------
Rndinlion: Response Preparednes:
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air
Subtotal, Indoor Air and Radiation
n 2IIIS
M 2111" Wllhil- Viiniiiili/t'd ( l\
$2,543.1
$13,389.1
$26,698.2
$2,573.0
$13,242.0
$27,449.0
n 201') I'iv-
Uncivil
$2,221.0
$0.0
$4,221.0
n 20l9l,iv*
liud
-------
TR1 Right lo Know
Tribal - Capacity Building
Executive Management and Operations
Environmental Education
Exchange Network
Small Minority Business Assistance
Small Business Ombudsman
Children and Other Sensitive Populations: Agency
Coordination
Subtotal, Information Exchange / Outreach
International Programs
US Mexico Border
International Sources of Pollution
Trade and Governance
Subtotal, International Programs
IT / Data Management / Security
Information Security
IT / Data Management
Subtotal, IT / Data Management / Security
n 2111" Wluah
SI 2,556.8
$14,760.7
$47,207.3
$8,930.9
$16,483.8
$1,704.6
$2,102.2
$6,294.6
$124,454.0
$2,864.8
$6,338.3
$5,857.8
$15,060.9
$9,166.5
$82,580.0
$91,746.5
n 20IS
Vnmiiili/cil ( K
$14,187.0
$14,448.0
$46,398.0
$8,643.0
$16,578.0
$1,573.0
$2,080.0
$6,504.0
$125,680.0
$3,012.0
$6,506.0
$5,777.0
$15,295.0
$6,742.0
$83,179.0
$89,921.0
Operations and Administration
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Acquisition Management
Human Resources Management
Financial Assistance Grants /1 AG Management
Workforce Reshaping
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
$73,003.2
$293,997.9
$31,042.0
$50,608.8
$24,444.8
$0.0
$473,096.7
$71,493.0
$305,844.0
$30,803.0
$43,930.0
$25,416.0
$0.0
$477,486.0
n 201') I'ivx
Uncivil
$12,631.0
$39,431.0
$0.0
$11,784.0
$0.0
$1,965.0
$2,018.0
$85,586.0
$0.0
$4,188.0
$0.0
$4,188.0
$13,755.0
$69,264.0
$83,019.0
$68,635.0
$300,738.0
$25,438.0
$40,860.0
$18,986.0
$25,549.0
$480,206.0
n 20I9I,iv*
liud
-------
Pesticides Licensing
Science Policy and Biotechnology
Pesticides: Protect Human Health from Pesticide Risk
Pesticides: Protect the Environment from Pesticide Risk
Pesticides: Realize the Value of Pesticide Availability
Subtotal, Pesticides Licensing
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
RCRA: Corrective Action
RCRA: Waste Management
RCRA: Waste Minimization & Recycling
Subtotal, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA)
Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
Endocrine Disruptors
Pollution Prevention Program
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Review and
Reduction
Toxic Substances: Lead Risk Reduction Program
Subtotal, Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST)
LUST/UST
n 2111" Wluah
$1,210.0
$56,911.0
$36,654.9
$5,554.3
$100,330.2
$36,129.6
$58,277.0
$9,254.1
$103,660.7
$6,006.4
$11,338.1
$64,329.5
$12,780.9
$94,454.9
$10,654.3
n 201s
Vmiiiali/cd ( U
$1,479.0
$55,696.0
$38,302.0
$6,191.0
$101,668.0
$36,584.0
$58,439.0
$9,141.0
$104,164.0
$7,502.0
$12,194.0
$58,995.0
$13,203.0
$91,894.0
$11,218.0
n 20I-) I'll*
liudgcl
$0.0
$45,949.0
$28,727.0
$5,084.0
$79,760.0
$31,944.0
$41,907.0
$0.0
$73,851.0
$0.0
$0.0
$58,626.0
$0.0
$58,626.0
$5,615.0
n 2019 1'IVS
liud
-------
Total, Environmental Program & Management
n 2IIIS
M 2111" Wllhil- Vniniiili/ril ( K
$2,639,159.5 $2,602,009.0
n 20I9I,iv*
lillll
-------
Information Exchange / Outreach
Exchange Network
IT / Data Management / Security
Information Security
IT / Data Management
Subtotal, IT / Data Management / Security
Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Legal Advice: Environmental Program
Subtotal, Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Operations and Administration
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Acquisition Management
Human Resources Management
Financial Assistance Grants /1 AG Management
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Human Health Risk Assessment
n 2111" Wluah
$1,316.3
$654.9
$14,691.5
$15,346.4
$591.3
$691.2
$1,282.5
$22,511.4
$69,651.3
$22,103.1
$5,380.1
$2,997.4
$122,643.3
$12,717.6
$3,020.5
n 2iiis
Vnmiiili/t'd ( K
$1,319.0
$666.0
$13,720.0
$14,386.0
$667.0
$577.0
$1,244.0
$21,345.0
$75,985.0
$21,296.0
$5,997.0
$2,611.0
$127,234.0
$11,385.0
n 2om,ivx
liud
-------
n 2ois
n 20I-) I'll*
n 201" Wluah
Viiniiiili/t'd ( K
Uncivil
l'acililies InfraslrucUire and Operations
$502.2
$793.0
$773.0
Acquisition Management
$144.7
$146.0
$138.0
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
$1,020.1
$1,343.0
$1,331.0
Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST)
LUST/UST
$9,554.5
$9,177.0
$6,452.0
LUST Cooperative Agreements
$55,320.2
$54,666.0
$38,840.0
LUST Prevention
$25,305.9
$25,197.0
$0.0
Subtotal, Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST)
$90,180.6
$89,040.0
$45,292.0
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
$358.0
$318.0
$320.0
Total, Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
$92,143.4
$91,317.0
$47,532.0
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Compliance
Compliance Monitoring
$145.2
$138.0
$0.0
Enforcement
Civil Enforcement
$2,342.8
$2,397.0
$2,219.0
Oil
Oil Spill: Prevention, Preparedness and Response
$14,422.5
$14,311.0
$12,273.0
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
$376.2
$580.0
$665.0
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
$653.4
$659.0
$516.0
Total, Inland Oil Spill Programs
$17,940.1
$18,085.0
$15,673.0
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
Infrastructure Assistance: Alaska Native Villages
$20,083.7
$19,864.0
$3,000.0
Brownfields Projects
$88,370.2
$79,457.0
$62,000.0
Infrastructure Assistance: Clean Water SRF
$1,380,738.8
$1,384,421.0
$1,393,887.0
Infrastructure Assistance: Drinking Water SRF
$944,392.1
$857,371.0
$863,233.0
Infrastructure Assistance: Mexico Border
$10,628.2
$9,932.0
$0.0
Diesel Emissions Reduction Grant Program
$40,683.0
$59,593.0
$10,000.0
Targeted Airshed Grants
$19,818.1
$29,796.0
$0.0
n zom'iv-
lillll
-------
(JKM Water Monitoring
Subtotal, State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
n 201" Wluah
S105.5
$2,504,819.6
n 20IS
Viiiiiiiili/ctl ( U
$2,444,407.0
W 2019 |»ivs
lillri Ut'l
$2,332,120.0
W 2019 |»ivs
Umliicl \.
W 201S
Viniiiiili/i'tl ( U
$112,287.0
Categorical Grants
Categorical Grant: Nonpoint Source (Sec. 319)
Categorical Grant: Public Water System Supervision
(PWSS)
Categorical Grant: State and Local Air Quality
Management
Categorical Grant: Radon
Categorical Grant: Pollution Control (Sec. 106)
Monitoring Grants
Categorical Grant: Pollution Control (Sec.
106) (other activities)
Subtotal, Categorical Grant: Pollution Control (Sec.
106)
Categorical Grant: Wetlands Program Development
Categorical Grant: Underground Injection Control
(UIC)
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Program Implementation
Categorical Grant: Lead
Categorical Grant: Hazardous Waste Financial
Assistance
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Enforcement
Categorical Grant: Pollution Prevention
Categorical Grant: Toxics Substances Compliance
Categorical Grant: Tribal General Assistance Program
Categorical Grant: Underground Storage Tanks
Categorical Grant: Tribal Air Quality Management
Categorical Grant: Environmental Information
Categorical Grant: Beaches Protection
Categorical Grant: Brownfields
Categorical Grant: Multipurpose Grants
Subtotal, Categorical Grants
$169,771.6
$101,125.8
$214,180.6
$7,963.4
$18,392.0
$209,294.1
$227,686.1
$15,867.0
$10,572.3
$12,402.4
$14,822.2
$97,165.0
$17,687.1
$4,504.6
$4,938.3
$68,186.0
$1,479.4
$14,027.8
$9,289.3
$9,540.3
$46,994.9
$162.9
$1,048,367.0
$169,754.0
$101,271.0
$226,669.0
$7,996.0
$17,727.0
$211,512.0
$229,239.0
$14,561.0
$10,435.0
$12,615.0
$13,954.0
$99,016.0
$17,927.0
$4,733.0
$4,886.0
$65,031.0
$1,488.0
$12,742.0
$9,580.0
$9,484.0
$47,421.0
$0.0
$1,058,802.0
$0.0
$67,892.0
$151,961.0
$0.0
$11,884.0
$141,799.0
$153,683.0
$9,762.0
$6,995.0
$8,457.0
$0.0
$66,381.0
$10,531.0
$0.0
$3,276.0
$44,233.0
$0.0
$8,963.0
$6,422.0
$0.0
$31,791.0
$27,000.0
$597,347.0
-$169,754.0
-$33,379.0
-$74,708.0
-$7,996.0
-$5,843.0
-$69,713.0
-$75,556.0
-$4,799.0
-$3,440.0
-$4,158.0
-$13,954.0
-$32,635.0
-$7,396.0
-$4,733.0
-$1,610.0
-$20,798.0
-$1,488.0
-$3,779.0
-$3,158.0
-$9,484.0
-$15,630.0
$27,000.0
$461,455.0
Congressional Priorities
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Total, State and Tribal Assistance Grants
$4,565.8
$3,557,752.4
$0.0
$3,503,209.0
$0.0
$2,929,467.0
$0.0
-$573,742.0
Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest System Fund
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
RCRA: Waste Management
$4,915.4
$3,156.0
-$3,156.0
811
-------
n 2IU" Winnie
n 2IIIS
Viimiiili/ril ( l\
n 201') I'iv-
Uncivil
n 2I»1*J
Iillll
-------
Eliminated Programs
Eliminated Program Projects
Alternative Dispute Resolution (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $1,682 M, 6.7 FTE)
This program provides alternative dispute resolution (ADR) services to EPA Headquarters, EPA
Regional Offices, and external stakeholders. This elimination of funding reflects the
centralization of conflict prevention and ADR program. Programs across the Agency may pursue
ADR support services and training individually.
Beach / Fish Programs (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $1,638 M, 3.8 FTE)
This program provides science, guidance, technical assistance and nationwide information to state,
Tribal, and federal agencies on the human health risks associated with eating locally caught
fish/shellfish or wildlife with excessive levels of contaminants, as well as beach monitoring and
notification programs. The Agency will encourage states to continue this work within ongoing
core programs.
Categorical Grant: Beaches Protection (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $9,484 M, 0.0 FTE)
Grants authorized under the BEACH Act support continued development and implementation of
coastal recreational water monitoring and public notification programs. After over 17 years of
technical guidance and financial support, state and local governments now have the technical
expertise and procedures to continue beach monitoring without federal support.
Categorical Grant: Lead (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $13,954 M, 0.0 FTE)
The program provides support to authorized state and tribal programs that administer training and
certification programs for lead paint professionals and contractors. Lead paint certification will
continue under the Chemical Risk Review Reduction program.
Categorical Grant: Nonpoint Source (Sec. 319) (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $169,754 M,
0.0 FTE)
This program provides grants to assist states and tribes in implementing approved elements of
Nonpoint Source Programs including: regulatory and non-regulatory programs, technical
assistance, financial assistance, education, training, technology transfers, and demonstration
projects. The Agency will continue to coordinate with the United States Department of Agriculture
to target funding where appropriate to address nonpoint sources.
Categorical Grant: Pollution Prevention (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $4,733 M, 0.0 FTE)
The Pollution Prevention (P2) program is a tool for advancing environmental stewardship by
federal, state and tribal governments, businesses, communities and individuals. In FY 2019, EPA
will focus its resources on core statutory environmental work.
Categorical Grant: Radon (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $7,996 M, 0.0 FTE)
The program provides funding for the development of state radon programs and disseminates
public information and educational materials. The program also provides information on
equipment training, data storage and management, and toll-free hotlines. For over 30 years EPA's
radon program has provided important guidance and significant funding to help states establish
813
-------
their own programs. States could elect to maintain core program work by using state resources
rather than using federal resources.
Categorical Grant: Underground Storage Tanks (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $1,488 M, 0.0 FTE)
The program provides funding for petroleum and hazardous substance release prevention and
detection activities including: compliance assistance, state program approvals, and technical
equipment reviews and approvals. States could elect to maintain core program work with state
resources rather than federal.
Endocrine Disruptors (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $7,502 M, 8.9 FTE)
The program develops and validates scientific test methods for the routine, ongoing evaluation of
pesticides and other chemicals to determine their potential interference with normal endocrine
system function. The program recently developed and validated some tier 1 and tier 2 testing
approaches for endocrine disruption. The ongoing functions of the program will be absorbed into
the pesticides program using the currently available tiered testing.
Environmental Education (EE) (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $8,643 M, 11.1 FTE)
This program promotes delivery of environmental education through science-based methodologies
that promote public engagement. In recognition of the significant guidance and financial support
the EE program has provided to non-profit organizations, local education agencies, universities,
community colleges, and state and local environmental agencies, funding for some of the
environmental stewardship activities could be leveraged at the state or local level.
Geographic Program: Gulf of Mexico (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $8,484 M, 14.3 FTE)
The program is a partnership of the five Gulf states, Gulf coastal communities, citizens,
nongovernmental organizations, and federal agencies working together to initiate cooperative
actions by public and private organizations to achieve specific environmental results. EPA will
encourage the five Gulf of Mexico states to continue to make progress in restoring the Gulf of
Mexico from within core water programs.
Geographic Program: Lake Champlain (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $4,369 M, 0.0 FTE)
The program creates a pollution prevention, control, and restoration plan for protecting the Lake
Champlain Basin. EPA will encourage New York and Vermont to continue to make progress in
restoring Lake Champlain from within core water programs.
Geographic Program: Long Island Sound (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $7,946 M, 0.0 FTE)
The program supports the implementation of the Comprehensive Conservation and Management
Plan for the Long Island Sound National Estuary Program. EPA will encourage Long Island Sound
states and local entities to continue to make progress in restoring the Sound from within core water
programs.
Geographic Program: Other (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $7,343 M, 4.9 FTE)
The program provides funding to develop and implement community-based approaches to mitigate
diffuse sources of pollution and cumulative risk for geographic areas including: Lake
Pontchartrain, Southern New England Estuary (SNEE), and the Northwest Forest Program. EPA
814
-------
will encourage states and local entities to continue to make progress in restoring these aquatic
ecosystems from within core water programs.
Geographic Program: Puget Sound (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $27,810 M, 6.0 FTE)
The program works to protect and restore the Puget Sound, focusing on environmental activities
consistent with the State of Washington's 2020 Puget Sound Action Agenda. EPA will encourage
state, tribal, and local entities to continue to make progress in restoring the Puget Sound from
within core water programs.
Geographic Program: San Francisco Bay (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $4,786 M, 1.9 FTE)
The program is aimed at protecting and restoring water quality and ecological health of the San
Francisco Bay estuary through partnerships, interagency coordination, and project grants. EPA
will encourage the state of California and local entities to continue to make progress in restoring
the San Francisco Bay from within core water programs.
Geographic Program: South Florida (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $1,692 M, 1.4 FTE)
The program leads special initiatives and planning activities in the South Florida region, which
includes the Everglades and Florida Keys coral reef ecosystem. EPA will encourage state, tribal,
and local entities to continue to make progress in protecting and restoring sensitive aquatic
ecosystems in South Florida from within core water programs.
Gold King Mine Water Monitoring (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $3,973 M, 0.0 FTE)
This non-recurring program provided grants that supported the development and implementation
of a program for monitoring of rivers contaminated by the Gold King Mine Spill. The Agency will
continue coordinating with the involved states and tribes from within core water programs.
Indoor Air: Radon Program (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $3,273 M, 10.6 FTE)
Within this program, EPA studies the health effects of radon, assesses exposure levels, sets an
action level, provides technical assistance, and advises the public of steps they can take to reduce
exposure to radon. For over 30 years EPA's radon program has provided important guidance and
significant funding to help states establish their own programs. This is a mature program where
states have technical capacity to continue this work.
Infrastructure Assistance: Mexico Border (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $9,932 M, 0.0 FTE)
The program provides for the planning, design, and construction of water and wastewater treatment
facilities along the U.S. Mexico border. The State Revolving Funds are a source of infrastructure
funding that can continue to fund water system improvements in U.S. communities along the
border.
LUST Prevention (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $25,197 M, 0.0 FTE)
The program provides resources to states, tribes, territories, and intertribal consortia for their
Underground Storage Tank (UST) programs, with a focus on inspections, enforcement,
development of leak prevention regulations, and other program infrastructure. States could elect
to maintain core program work with state resources rather than federal.
815
-------
Marine Pollution (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $10,102 M, 37.4 FTE)
The program funds the implementation of regulatory and support activities relating to ocean
discharges and related marine ecosystem protection activities. EPA will continue to meet statutory
mandates through the core national water program.
National Estuary Program / Coastal Waterways (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $26,542 M,
43.6 FTE)
The program works to restore the physical, chemical, and biological integrity of estuaries and
coastal watersheds. EPA will encourage states to continue this work and continue to implement
conservation management plans.
Pollution Prevention Program (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $12,194 M, 58.1 FTE)
The program promotes environmentally sound business practices and the development of safer
(green) chemicals, technologies, and processes. Partners can continue the best practices that have
been shared through this program and continue efforts aimed at reducing pollution.
RCRA: Waste Minimization & Recycling (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $9,141 M, 51.0 FTE)
The program establishes a framework for redirecting materials away from disposal and towards
beneficial uses, such as composting food waste, increasing the recycling of electronics, and
reducing waste from federal facilities. EPA will focus its resources on core environmental work.
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $13,386 M, 40.7 FTE)
This program addresses indoor environmental asthma triggers, such as secondhand smoke, dust
mites, mold, cockroaches and other pests, household pets, and combustion byproducts through a
variety of outreach, education, training and guidance activities. This is a mature program where
states have technical capacity to continue this work.
Regional Science and Technology (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $1,406 M, 2.0 FTE)
The program supplies laboratory analysis, field monitoring and sampling, and builds tribal
capacity for environmental monitoring and assessment. Central approach will be replaced with ad
hoc efforts.
Science Policy and Biotechnology (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $1,479 M, 5.4 FTE)
The Scientific Advisory Panel (SAP) organizes and conducts reviews (typically six to ten each
year) by independent, outside scientific experts of science documents, science policies, and/or
science programs that relate to EPA's pesticide and toxic program activities. Statutory
requirements will be absorbed by the pesticides and toxics programs.
Small Minority Business Assistance (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $1,573 M, 8.9 FTE)
This program provides technical assistance to small businesses, headquarters, and regional office
employees to ensure that small minority businesses and minority academic institutions receive a
fair share of EPA's procurement dollars and grants, where applicable. The Agency will integrate
its resources for Small and Disadvantaged Business activities under the Small Business
Ombudsman program.
816
-------
Stratospheric Ozone: Multilateral Fund (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $8,677 M, 0.0 FTE)
This program promotes international compliance with the Montreal Protocol by financing the
incremental cost of converting existing industries in developing countries to cost-effective ozone
friendly technology. EPA will continue domestic ozone-depleting substances reduction work.
Targeted Airshed Grants (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $29,796 M, 0.0 FTE)
This program offers competitive grants to reduce air pollution in the top five most polluted
nonattainment areas relative to annual ozone or PM2.5. This program is regional in nature, and
affected states can continue to fund work through EPA's core air grant programs and statutes.
Toxic Substances: Lead Risk Reduction Program (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $13,203 M,
72.8 FTE)
The program addresses exposure to lead from lead-based paint through regulations, certification,
and training programs and public outreach efforts. Lead paint certifications will continue under
Chemical Risk Review Reduction program. Other forms of lead exposure are addressed through
other targeted programs such as the State Revolving Funds to replace lead pipes.
Trade and Governance (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $5,777 M, 18.0 FTE)
This program promotes trade related activities focused on sustaining environmental protection. In
FY 2019 EPA will focus its resources on core statutory work.
U.S. Mexico Border (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $3,012 M, 14.7 FTE)
The program addresses environmental protection of the U.S Mexico border in partnership with the
ten (10) Border States, U.S. Tribal government, and the Government of Mexico. The State
Revolving Funds are a source of infrastructure funding that can continue to fund water system
improvements in U.S. communities along the border. In FY 2019, EPA will continue to engage
both bilaterally and through multilateral institutions to improve international cooperation to
prevent and address the transboundary movement of pollution.
Water Quality Research and Support Grants (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $16,686 M, 0.0 FTE)
The program focuses on the development and application of water quality criteria, the
implementation of watershed management approaches, and the application of technological
options to restore and protect water bodies. States have the ability to develop technical assistance
plans for their water systems using Public Water System Supervision funds and set-asides from
the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF).
Eliminated Sub-Program Projects
Atmospheric Protection Program (FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution: Estimated
$66,000 M)
The following voluntary climate-related partnership programs are proposed for elimination:
AgSTAR, Center for Corporate Climate Leadership, Coalbed Methane Outreach Program,
Combined Heat & Power Partnership, Global Methane Initiative, GreenChill Partnership, Green
Power Partnership, Landfill Methane Outreach Program, Natural Gas STAR, Responsible
Appliance Disposal Program, SF6 Reduction Partnership for Electric Power Systems, SmartWay,
State and Local Climate Energy Program, and Voluntary Aluminum Industrial Partnership. (Note:
817
-------
The FY 2019 President's Budget includes a proposal to authorize the EPA to administer the
ENERGY STAR program through the collection of user fees.)
Global Change Research (Research: AE) (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $16,520 M, 48.5 FTE)
The program develops scientific information that supports policy makers, stakeholders, and
society-at-large as they respond to climate change. This elimination prioritizes activities that
support decision-making related to core environmental statutory requirements.
STAR Research Grants (Research: AE, CSS, SSWR, SHC) (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $28,284
M, 0.0 FTE)
The Science to Achieve Results, or STAR, funds research grants and graduate fellowships in
environmental science and engineering disciplines through a competitive solicitation process and
independent peer review. EPA will prioritize activities that support decision-making related to core
environmental statutory requirements, as opposed to extramural activities.
WaterSense (Surface Water Protection) (FY 2018 Annualized CR: $3,079 M, 8.0 FTE)
WaterSense is a voluntary partnership program to label water-efficient products as a resource for
helping to reduce water use.
818
-------
Expected Benefits of E-Government Initiatives
eRulemaking
The eRulemaking Line of Business is designed to enhance public access and participation in the
regulatory process through electronic systems; reduce the burden on citizens and businesses in
finding relevant regulations and commenting on proposed rulemaking actions; consolidate
redundant docket systems; and improve agency regulatory processes and the timeliness of
regulatory decisions. EPA is currently the managing partner for this Line of Business; however, in
FY2019 EPA will work with the Office of Management and Budget and the National Archives
and Records Administration (NARA) towards transferring management services to the
NARA/Office of the Federal Register.
The eRulemaking program's Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) currently supports
more than 178 federal entities including all Cabinet-level Departments and independent
rulemaking agencies, which collectively promulgate approximately 90 percent of all federal
regulations each year. FDMS has simplified the public's participation in the rulemaking process
and made EPA's rulemaking business processes more accessible as well as transparent. FDMS
provides EPA's approximately 1,372 active users with a secure, centralized electronic repository
for managing agency rulemaking development via distributed management of data and robust role-
based user access. EPA posts regulatory and non-regulatory documents in Regulations.gov for
public viewing, downloading, bookmarking, email notification and commenting. Overall, EPA
currently provides public access to 1,078,121 documents in Regulations.gov.
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Service Fee
(in thousands)
2017
020-99-99-99-99-0060-24
$1,000.0
2018
020-99-99-99-99-0060-24
$1,000.0
2019
020-99-99-99-99-0060-24
$1,000.0
Geospatial Line of Business
The Geospatial Line of Business is an intergovernmental project to improve the ability of the
public and government to use geospatial information to support the business of government and
facilitate decision-making. This initiative will reduce costs and improve agency operations in
several areas.
With the implementation of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure Strategic Plan, the geospatial
data sets known as National Geospatial Data Assets (NDGA) and associated analytical services
have become available on the National Geospatial Platform. These additional datasets and services
are easily accessible by federal agencies, their partners, and stakeholders. EPA uses the National
Geospatial Platform to obtain data and services for internal analytical purposes as well as to publish
outward-facing geospatial capabilities to the public.
While the Department of the Interior is the managing partner, EPA continues to be a leader in
developing the vision and operational plans for the implementation of OMB guidance on
Coordination of Geographic Information and Related Spatial Data Activities and the National
Geospatial Platform which incorporates many national geospatial data and analytical services for
819
-------
federal agencies, their partners, and stakeholders. EPA is expected to contribute to the operation
of the National Geospatial Platform in FY 2019. The intent is to reduce base costs by providing an
opportunity for EPA and other agencies to share approaches on procurement consolidation and
include shared services for hosting geospatial data, services and applications.
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
2017
020-99-99-99-99-3100-24
$225.0
2018
020-99-99-99-99-3100-24
$225.0
2019
020-99-99-99-99-3100-24
$225.0
USA Jobs
U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) USA Jobs simplifies the process of locating and
applying for federal jobs. USA Jobs is a standard job announcement and resume builder website.
It is the one-stop for federal job seekers to search for and apply to positions on-line. This integrated
process benefits citizens by providing a more efficient process to locate and apply for jobs, and
assists federal agencies in hiring top talent in a competitive marketplace. The OPM USA Jobs
initiative has increased job seeker satisfaction with the federal job application process and is
helping the Agency to locate highly-qualified candidates and improve response times to applicants.
The Agency is required to integrate with USA Jobs, to eliminate the need for applicants to maintain
multiple user IDs to apply for federal jobs across agencies. The vacancy announcement format has
been improved for easier readability. The system can maintain up to five resumes per applicant,
which allows them to create and store resumes tailored to specific skills. In addition, USA Jobs
has a notification feature that keeps applicants updated on the current status of the application, and
provides a link to the Agency's website for detailed information. This self-help USA Jobs feature
allows applicants to obtain up-to-date information on the status of their application upon request.
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
2017
020-99-99-99-99-1218-24
$116.0
2018
020-99-99-99-99-1218-24
$125.0
2019
020-99-99-99-99-1218-24
$129.0
Financial Management Line of Business
The Financial Management Line of Business (FM LoB) is a multi-agency effort whose goals
include: achieving process improvements and cost savings in the acquisition, development,
implementation, and operation of financial management systems. By incorporating the same FM
LoB-standard processes as those used by central agency systems, interfaces among financial
systems will be streamlined and the quality of information available for decision-making will be
improved.
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
2017
020-99-99-99-99-1100-24
$96.0
2018
020-99-99-99-99-1100-24
$96.0
2019
020-99-99-99-99-1100-24
$96.0
820
-------
Grants.gov
The Grants.gov initiative benefits EPA and its grant programs by providing a single location to
publish grant opportunities and application packages, and by providing a single site for the grants
community to apply for grants using common forms, processes and systems. EPA believes that the
central site raises the visibility of its grants opportunities to a wider diversity of applicants.
The grants community benefits from savings in postal costs, paper and envelopes. Applicants save
time in searching for agency grant opportunities and in learning the application systems of various
agencies. In order to streamline the application process, EPA offers Grants.gov application
packages for mandatory State grants (i.e., Continuing Environmental Program Grants).
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
2017
020-99-99-99-99-0160-24
$217.0
2018
020-99-99-99-99-0160-24
$307.0
2019
020-99-99-99-99-0160-24
$276.0
Budget Formulation and Execution Line of Business
The Budget Formulation and Execution Line of Business (BFELoB) allows EPA and other
agencies to access budget-related benefits and services. The Agency has the option to implement
LoB-sponsored tools, training and services.
EPA has benefited from the BFELoB by sharing valuable information on how systems and
software being developed by the LoB have enhanced work processes. This effort has created a
government-only capability for electronic collaboration (Wiki) in which the Budget Community
website allows EPA to share budget information internally, with OMB, and with other federal
agencies. The Agency also made contributions to the Human Capital Workgroup, participating in
development of on-line training modules for budget activities - a valuable resource to all agency
budget staff. The LoB has developed the capability to have secure, virtual on-line meetings where
participants can view budget-related presentations from their workspace and participate in the
discussion through a conference line. The LoB provides regularly scheduled symposia as an
additional forum for EPA budget employees.
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
2017
020-99-99-99-99-3200-24
$110.0
2018
020-99-99-99-99-3200-24
$110.0
2019
020-99-99-99-99-3200-24
$110.0
Human Resources Line of Business
The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) Human Resources Line of Business (HR LoB)
provides the federal government the infrastructure to support pay-for-performance systems,
modernized HR systems, and the core functionality necessary for the strategic management of
human capital.
821
-------
The OPM HR LoB offers common solutions that will enable federal departments and agencies to
work more effectively, and provide managers and executives across the federal government an
improved means to meet strategic objectives. EPA will benefit by supporting an effective program
management activity which evaluates provider performance, customer satisfaction, and
compliance with program goals, on an ongoing basis.
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
2017
020-99-99-99-99-1200-24
$65.0
2018
020-99-99-99-99-1200-24
$68.0
2019
020-99-99-99-99-1200-24
$68.0
Integrated Acquisition Environment
The Integrated Acquisition Environment (IAE) is currently comprised of nine government-wide
automated applications and/or databases that have contributed to streamlining the acquisition
business process across the government. In FY 2012, GSA began the process of consolidating the
systems into one central repository called the System for Award Management (SAM). Until the
consolidation is complete, EPA continues to leverage the usefulness of some of these systems via
electronic linkages between EPA's acquisition system and the IAE shared systems. Other IAE
systems are not linked directly to EPA's acquisition system, but benefit the Agency's contracting
staff and vendor community as stand-alone resources.
EPA's acquisition system uses data provided by SAM to replace internally maintained vendor
data. Contracting officers can download vendor-provided representation and certification
information electronically via SAM as well, which allows vendors to submit this information once
rather than separately for every contract proposal. Contracting officers are able to access the
Excluded Parties List (EPLS) via SAM to identify vendors that are debarred from receiving
contract awards.
Contracting officers also can link to the Wage Determination Online (WDOL) to obtain
information required under the Service Contract Act and the Davis-Bacon Act. EPA's acquisition
system links to the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) for submission of contract actions
at the time of award. FPDS provides public access to government-wide contract information. The
Electronic Subcontracting Reporting System (eSRS) supports vendor submission of
subcontracting data for contracts identified as requiring this information. EPA submits synopses
of procurement opportunities over $25,000 to the Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) website,
where the information is accessible to the public. Vendors use this website to identify business
opportunities in federal contracting.
Further, the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) requires agencies to
unambiguously identify contract, grant, and loan recipients and determine parent/child relationship
and address information. The FFATA taskforce determined that using both the Dun and Bradstreet
(D&B) DUNS Number (standard identifier for all business lines) and Central Contractor
Registration (CCR, the single point of entry for data collection and dissemination) are the most
appropriate ways to accomplish this. This fee will pay for EPA's use of this service in the course
822
-------
of reporting grants and/or loans. Funds also may be used to consolidate disparate contract and
grant systems into the new SAM.
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Service Fee
(in thousands)
2017
020-99-99-99-99-0230-24
$857.0
2018
020-99-99-99-99-0230-24
$874.0
2019
020-99-99-99-99-0230-24
$944.0
Federal PKI Bridge
Federal Public Key Infrastructure (FPKI) provides the government with a common infrastructure
to administer digital certificates and public-private key pairs, including the ability to issue,
maintain, and revoke public key certificates. FPKI leverages a security technique called Public
Key Cryptography to authenticate users and data, protect the integrity of transmitted data, and
ensure non-repudiation and confidentiality.
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
2017
020-99-99-99-99-0090-24
$30.0
2018
020-99-99-99-99-0090-24
$32.0
2019
020-99-99-99-99-0090-24
$93.0
Freedom of Information Act Portal
The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Improvement Act of 2016 directed the Office of
Management and Budget and the Department of Justice (DOJ) to build a consolidated online
request portal that allows a member of the public to submit a request for records to any agency
from a single website. DOJ is managing the development and maintenance of this National FOIA
Portal. EPA and other federal agencies were asked to contribute to this effort. In FY 2019, EPA's
contribution is $34K.
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
2017
020-99-99-99-99-xxxx-24
$0.0
2018
020-99-99-99-99-xxxx-24
$0.0
2019
020-99-99-99-99-xxxx-24
$34.0
823
-------
FY 2019 Administrator's Priorities
Funding for the Administrator's priorities are allocated by program project in the FY 2019
President's Budget with a total of $2,375 million in the Environmental and Program Management
Account and $125 thousand in the Science and Technology Account.
These funds, which are set aside for the Administrator's priorities, are used to address unforeseen
issues that may arise during the year. These funds are used by the Administrator to support critical
unplanned issues and the amounts shown in the below table will be reallocated as needed, in
accordance with reprogramming limits.
FY 2019 President's Budget Funding for Administrator's Priorities
Dollars in
Appropriation
Program Project
Thousands
EPM
Acquisition Management
$150
EPM
Brownfields
$25
EPM
Civil Enforcement
$150
EPM
Civil Rights / Title VI Compliance
$75
EPM
Compliance Monitoring
$100
EPM
Criminal Enforcement
$145
EPM
Drinking Water Programs
$100
EPM
Exchange Network
$75
EPM
Federal Stationary Source Regulations
$100
EPM
Federal Support for Air Quality Management
$130
EPM
Human Resources Management
$25
EPM
International Sources of Pollution
$50
EPM
IT / Data Management
$175
EPM
Legal Advice: Environmental Program
$100
EPM
Legal Advice: Support Program
$75
EPM
NEPA Implementation
$100
EPM
Pesticides: Protect Human Health from Pesticide Risk
$150
EPM
Pesticides: Protect the Environment from Pesticide Risk
$150
EPM
Pesticides: Realize the Value of Pesticide Availability
$100
EPM
RCRA: Waste Management
$25
EPM
Science Advisory Board
$100
EPM
State and Local Prevention and Preparedness
$100
EPM
Surface Water Protection
$50
EPM
TRI / Right to Know
$75
EPM
Tribal - Capacity Building
$50
S&T
Federal Support for Air Quality Management
$25
S&T
Research: Air and Energy
$50
S&T
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
$50
Total
$2,500
824
-------
Proposed FY 2019 Administrative Provisions
To further clarify proposed Administrative Provisions that involve more than a simple annual
extension or propose a modification to an existing provision, the following information is
provided.
Establishment of Authority for Energy Star Fee Collection and Use
The Budget includes a proposal to authorize the EPA to administer the ENERGY STAR program
through the collection of user fees. Fee collections would begin after EPA undertakes a rulemaking
process to determine which products would be covered by fees and the level of fees and to ensure
that a fee system would not discourage manufacturers from participating in the program or result
in a loss of environmental benefits. The fee collections would provide funding to cover an upfront
appropriation, and continued expenses to develop, operate, and maintain the ENERGY STAR
program. The legislative proposal to authorize collection and spending of the fees is as follows:
Section 131 of The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §6294A, is
amended by inserting after paragraph (d):
"(e) User Fees
(1) In General
In accordance with paragraph (a), the Administrator may prescribe by regulation, for
application in fiscal year 2019 and in subsequent fiscal years, reasonable fees as the
Administrator determines to be necessary to defray costs incurred for entities that
participate in the ENERGY STAR program. The regulation will ensure that the fee
imposed on each entity is sufficient and not more than reasonably necessary to cover
a proportional share of ENERGY STAR program costs incurred in operating and
maintaining the Energy Star program, including collection and processing fees. The
Administrator shall amend this regulation periodically so as to ensure that the schedule
of fees covers such program costs.
(2) Collection of Fees. The Administrator shall prescribe procedures to collect the
fees.
(3) Availability of Fees.
(A) Such fees shall be collected and available for ENERGY STAR program
administration functions performed by the Agency in an amount and to the extent
provided in advance in appropriations acts. "
Petroleum Set-Aside for Brownfields Projects Grants
Per the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017 (P.L. 115-31), EPA appreciates the flexibility to
use no more than 25 percent of its CERCLA Section 104 (k) funding to address petroleum
contaminated sites. In FY 2019, EPA continues to request the flexibility to use up to 25 percent of
its CERCLA 104 (k) funding to address petroleum contaminated sites versus an exact 25 percent
identified by statute. Current statutory language requires that exactly 25 percent of Brownfields
Projects grants be provided for petroleum cleanups. The proposed language gives the Agency more
825
-------
flexibility to award grants to the highest-ranking proposals, regardless of the type of funding
requested, while still setting aside money for petroleum cleanups.
$62,000,000 shall be to carry out section 104(h) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended, including grants, interagency
agreements, and associated program support costs: Provided, That not more than 25 percent of
the amount appropriated to carry out section 104(h) of CERCLA shall be used for site
characterization, assessment, and remediation of facilities described in section 101(39)(D)(ii)(II)
ofCERCLA.
Issuing Grants for PM2.5 Monitoring Network under Clean Air Act Sections 103 and 105
Per the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017 (P.L. 115-31), EPA is directed to use Section 103
of the Clean Air Act to provide grants to states for the PM2.5 monitoring network. Accordingly,
EPA continues to issue grants to states for the network exclusively under Section 103. EPA
requests the flexibility to use both Sections 103 and 105 authorities under the Clean Air Act to
issue grants to states for the PM2.5 monitoring network.
X shall be for grants, including associated program support costs, to states, federally recognized
tribes, interstate agencies, Tribal consortia, and air pollution control agencies for multi-media or
single media pollution prevention, control and abatement, and related activities, including
activities pursuant to the provisions set forth under this heading in Public Law 104-134, and for
making grants under Sections 103 and 105 of the Clean Air Act for particulate matter monitoring
and data collection activities subject to terms and conditions specified by the Administrator.
Current statutory language directs EPA to issue grants in support of the PM2.5 monitoring under
Section 103 of the Clean Air Act. However, given the maturity of the PM2.5 monitoring network,
it is appropriate for EPA to provide grants to states to fund the network under Section 105 of the
Clean Air Act. The PM2.5 monitoring network is a continuing activity in support of air quality
management, which aligns with authorized activities under Section 105, whereas Section 103 is
intended to fund research, demonstration, and other similar activities. The proposed language gives
the Agency more flexibility to award grants under Section 103 and 105 authorities. The Clean Air
Act Section 105 authority provides for cost-sharing between EPA and the states with up to 60
percent of costs provided by EPA.
FIFRA and PRIA Fee Spending Restrictions
Current statutory language in the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
and Pesticide Registration Improvement Act (PRIA) restricts what activities EPA can fund from
collections deposited in the Reregistration and Expedited Processing Revolving Fund and PRIA
Fund. The FY 2019 President's Budget carries forward the proposed statutory language from the
FY 2018 President's Budget to clarify the Agency's authority to utilize resources in the Funds, to
review existing pesticide registrations for their compliance with current FIFRA standards, and to
ensure market access for pesticide registrants. Specifically, fees collected would be available for
the following activities as they relate to pesticide licensing: processing and review of data
submitted in association with a registration; information submitted pursuant to Section 6(a)(2) of
826
-------
FIFRA; supplemental distributor labels, transfers of registrations and data compensation rights,
additional uses registered by states under Section 24(c) of FIFRA; data compensation petitions,
review of minor amendments and notifications; laboratory support and audits; administrative
support; development of policy and guidance; rulemaking support; information collection
activities; and the portions of salaries related to work in these areas.
The proposed statutory language would ease spending restrictions related to both the FIFRA
pesticide maintenance fees and the PRIA registration fees. Since the FIFRA fees are mandatory,
separate language has been prepared that will be transmitted at a later date. EPA understands that
the passage of PRIA-4 may change the need for this proposal. The PRIA fees are discretionary and
the accompanying proposed language is as follows:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in addition to the activities specified in section 33 of
the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, andRodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 U.S.C. 136w-8), fees collected
in this and prior fiscal years under such section shall be available for the following activities as
they relate to pesticide licensing: processing and review of data submitted in association with a
registration;, information submitted pursuant to section 6(a)(2) of FIFRA; supplemental
distributor labels, transfers of registrations and data compensation rights; additional uses
registered by States under section 24(c) of FIFRA; data compensation petitions, review of minor
amendments, and notifications; laboratory support and audits; administrative support;
development of policy and guidance; rulemaking support; information collection activities; and
the portions of salaries related to work in these areas.
Service Fees for the Administration of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA Fees Rule)
On June 22, 2016, the "Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act" (P.L. 114-
182) was signed into law, amending numerous sections of the (TSCA). The amendments provide
authority to the Agency to establish fees for certain activities under Sections 4, 5, and 6 of TSCA,
as amended, to defray 25 percent of the costs of administering these Sections and Section 14. The
amendments removed the previous cap that the Agency may charge for pre-manufacturing
notification reviews. Fees collected under the TSCA Fees Rule will be deposited in the TSCA
Service Fee Fund for use by the EPA. This fee structure, once finalized, will replace the existing
Pre-Manufacturing Notification Fees. The legislative proposal to authorize collection and
spending of the fees is as follows:
The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency is authorized to collect and obligate
fees in accordance with Section 26(b) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 2625(b)) for
Fiscal Year 2019.
Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest
The Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest Establishment Act (Public Law 112-195) provides EPA
with the authority to establish a program to finance, develop, and operate a system for the
electronic submission of hazardous waste manifests supported by user fees. In FY 2019, EPA will
operate the e-Manifest system and the Agency anticipates collecting and depositing approximately
$39 million in e-Manifest user fees into the Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest System Fund.
827
-------
Based upon authority to collect and spend e-Manifest fees provided by Congress in annual
appropriations bills, the fees will be utilized for the operation of the system and necessary program
expenses. Fees will fully support the e-Manifest program, including future development costs. The
legislative proposal to authorize collection and spending of the fees is as follows:
The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency is authorized to collect and obligate
fees in accordance with section 3024 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6939g) for fiscal
year 2019.
Oil and Chemical Facility Compliance Assistance
The FY 2019 Budget requests authorization for the Administrator to collect and obligate fees to
provide compliance assistance services for facilities who are required to prepare and submit Spill
Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plans or Facility Response Plans under section 31 l(j) of
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act and for facilities who are required to prepare and submit
a Risk Management Plan under Section 112(r)(7) of the Clean Air Act. These fees are discretionary
and would start in FY 2019 after the Agency establishes procedures for making and accepting a
facility's request for voluntary assistance. The fees are offsetting collections and would provide
for necessary expenses, including the development, operation, and maintenance of this voluntary
compliance assistance service.
The legislative proposals to authorize collection and spending of the fees are as follows:
• Oil Spill: Prevention, Preparedness, and Response
The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency may collectfees to provide compliance
assistance services for owners and operators of a non-transportation related onshore or offshore
facility located landward of the coastline required to prepare and submit Spill Prevention Control
and Countermeasure Plans or Facility Response Plans under section 31 l(j) of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 132 l(j)): Provided, That fees collected for compliance assistance
services pursuant to the authority provided in this paragraph by the Administrator in fiscal year
2019 shall be deposited in the Inland Oil Spill Programs account and shall remain available until
expendedfor the expenses of providing compliance assistance services: Providedfurther, That the
amount of such fees shall be based on the amount of compliance assistance services provided by
the agency: Providedfurther, That the owner or operator of a non-transportation related onshore
or offshore facility located landward of the coastline required to prepare and submit a Spill
Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan or a Facility Response Plan under section 31 l(j) of
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1321(j))may request that the Administrator
conduct an on-site walk-through of the facility to assist the owner or operator in complying with
such section: Provided further, That the walk-through shall be conducted within one year of an
accepted request: Providedfurther, That the Administrator may establish procedures for making
and accepting such a request: Provided further, That observations, findings, conclusions, and
recommendations made by the Administrator when conducting an on-site walk-through, including
any report after an on-site walk-through, shall not in any private action or suit for damages or
bodily injury, or in any action under section 505 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33
828
-------
U.S.C. 1365), be used or admitted as evidence: Providedfurther, That the Administrator may, by
guidance, establish policies for the use of such evidence in actions under the Act.
• State and Local Prevention and Preparedness
The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency may collectfees to provide compliance
assistance services for owners or operators of a stationary source required to prepare and submit
a Risk Management Plan under section 112(r)(7) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7412(r)(7)):
Provided, That fees collected for compliance assistance services pursuant to the authority
provided in this paragraph by the Administrator in fiscal year 2019 shall be deposited in the
Environmental Programs and Management account and shall remain available until September
30, 2020for the expenses of providing compliance assistance services: Providedfurther, That the
amount of such fees shall be based on the amount of compliance assistance services provided by
the agency: Provided further, That the owner or operator of a stationary source required to
prepare and submit, or that has prepared and submitted, a Risk Management Plan under section
112(r)(7) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7412(r)(7)) may request that the Administrator conduct
an on-site walk-through of the stationary source to assist the owner or operator in complying with
such section: Provided further, That the walk-through shall be conducted within one year of an
accepted request: Providedfurther, That the Administrator may establish procedures for making
and accepting such a request: Providedfurther, That the observations, findings, conclusions, and
recommendations made by the Administrator when conducting an on-site walk-through, including
any report after an on-site walk-through, shall not in any private action or suit for damages or
bodily injury, or in any action under section 304 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S. C. 7604), be used or
admitted as evidence: Provided further, That the Administrator may, by guidance, establish
policies for the use of such evidence in actions under the Act.
829
-------
Attorney Fee and Cost Payments Obligated in FY 2017 Under Equal Access for Justice Act (EAJA)
as a Result of Defensive Environmental Litigations under Environmental Statutes
l);ikol'
l-'imil I'l l'
ii^ivinunl
or iiiiii'l
disposition
C;isi- ViilU-
Ciiuii
C;isi-
NiiihIkt
.lllil»i-
C;isi-
Disposition
Ainoiiiil ol'
l-Vl-s ;ilnl/ol'
Cosls P;ii(l
Si ill I'll" ol'
l-'lliuls
\\ :is
;iiiioiiiil
iU'^oli;ili'(l
III' I'lllll'l
onli-ivir.'
Ki'i'ipii'iiis
NllllllV or(';isi-
6/27/2017
Pollinator
Stewardship
Council;
American
Honey
Producers
Association;
National
Honey Bee
Advisory
Board;
American
Beekeeping
Federation;
Thomas R.
Smith; Bret L
Adee; Jeffrey
S. Anderson v.
EPA
United
States
Court of
Appeals
for the
Ninth
Circuit
13-72346
Appellate
Commission
er, Peter L.
Shaw
Court
Ordered
$287,850.88
EPA
Appropriations
Court
Ordered
after
litigation of
fees
Earthjustice
Petitioners challenged the
registration of pesticide active
ingredient sulfoxaflor due to its
risk to honeybees.
830
-------
Fiscal Year 2019: Consolidations, Realignments, or Other Transfers of Resources
This table shows consolidations, realignments, or other transfers of resources and personnel from one program/project to another in
order to clearly illustrate a transfer of FY 2019 resources (Dollars in Thousands).
Pro»riim/ Project
Tolill l uiul
Tr;insl'crrcd
I" 1*0111:
in:
Triinsl'erred
I" 1*0111:
l oliil I'uiul
TriinsfciTcd
To:
in:
Triinsl'erred
To:
Purpose
LPM. Toxic Subslanccs.
Chemical Risk Review and
Reduction
(-")
This realignment of 1'TL from ihc Ol'licc of
Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention's
Chemical Risk Review and Reduction program to
the Office of Research and Development's
Chemical Safety and Sustainability research
program's Computational Toxicology (CompTox)
program is to support risk assessment and
evaluation science to support new TSCA
requirements.
S&T: Research: Chemical
Safety and Sustainability
2.0
831
-------
Physicians' Comparability Allowance (PCA) Worksheet for BY 2019
Environmental Protection Agency
Table 1
PY 2017
(Actual)
CY 2018
(Estimates)
BY 2019
(Estimates)
1) Number of Physicians Receiving PCAs
4
4
4
2) Number of Physicians with One-Year PCA Agreements
3) Number of Physicians with Multi-Year PCA Agreements
4
4
4
4) Average Annual PCA Physician Pay (without PCA payment)
$143,326
$144,759
$144,759
5) Average Annual PCA Payment
$24,419
$24,419
$24,419
6) Number of Physicians
Receiving PCAs by Category
(non-add)
Category I Clinical Position
Category II Research Position
4
4
4
Category III Occupational Health
Category IV-A Disability Evaluation
Category IV-B Health and Medical Admin.
7) If applicable, list and explain the necessity of any additional physician categories designated by your agency
(for categories other than I through IV-B). Provide the number of PCA agreements per additional category
for the PY, CYandBY.
EPA expects no additional categories to be applicable in the foreseeable future.
8) Provide the maximum annual PCA amount paid to each category of physician in your agency and explain
the reasoning for these amounts by category.
The maximum allowance being paid to a Category II Research Position is $29,900.
9) Explain the recruitment and retention problem(s) for each category of physician in your agency (this should
demonstrate that a current need continues to persist).
(.Please include any staffing data to support your explanation, such as number and duration of unfilled positions and number of
accessions and separations per fiscal year.)
Historically, the number of EPA Research Physicians is between four and six positions. This small population
experiences modest turnover. The value of the physicians' comparability allowance to EPA is as a retention tool.
10) Explain the degree to which recruitment and retention problems were alleviated in your agency through the
use of PCAs in the prior fiscal year.
(.Please include any staffing data to support your explanation, such as number and duration of unfilled positions and number of
accessions and separations per fiscal year.)
We are told regularly that absent the allowance, some EPA research physicians would seek employment at federal
agencies that provide the allowance.
11) Provide any additional information that may be useful in planning PCA staffing levels and amounts in your
agency.
An agency with a very small number of physician positions and a low turn-over rate among them still needs the
allowance authority to maintain the stability of the small population. Those who opt for federal employment in
opposition to private sector employment still want the maximum pay available in the federal sector. Were it not for
the PCA, EPA would regularly lose some of its physicians to other federal agencies that offer the allowance,
requiring EPA to refill vacant positions. Turn-over statistics should be viewed in this light.
832
-------
FY 2019 IT Resource Statements
| OMB Requirement
EPA Statement
Signature/Date
A statement from the CIO indicating the
extent to which the C(0 has reviewed and
had significant input in approving IT
investments Included in this budget request.
For example, if the CIO has reviewed and
approved all the Investments from
bureau/component/Operating
Division/Mode A, B, and C, but not D, then
the statement must identify that the CIO
reviewed and approved Investments from
bureau/component/Operating
Division/Mode A, B, and C.
The Deputy CIO had significant input in
approving IT investments operated by the
Office of Environmental Information. In
addition, he has reviewed the topline budget
numbers for the entire Agency's IT
investments portfolio with a focus on
toplines by CPIC level, by appropriation, by
program, and on new and eliminated
investments. In addition, the Deputy CIO
reviewed significant changes that have been
made to the major, non standard, and
standard investments since the initial BY19
submission.
>/w«• I
Dr. Steven Fine
Deputy Chief Information Officer
A statement from the Chief Financial Officer
(CFO) and CIO identifying the extent to
which the CIO had a significant role in
reviewing planned IT support for major
programs and significant increases and
decreases in IT resources reflected in this
budget.
For the FY19 Passback, the Acting CIO
provided input to the CFO on IT budget
concerns/priorities: Cybersecurity Support, 1
Exchange Network/Central Data
Exchange/Toxic Release Inventory
maintenance support; Shared Services/IT
Modernization initiative (for both financial
and mission systems); and e-Discovery
support. The Passback provided additional
support for Cybersecurity and for financial
shared services/modernization.
'/Wi«r
David Bloom
Deputy Chief Financial Officer
^ J/Wy/
Dr. Steven Fine
Deputy Chief Information Officer
833
-------
OMB Requirement
An update of the CI0*s common baseline
rating for Element D (CIO reviews and
approves major IT investment portion of the
budget.)
1, Incomplete - Agency has not
started development of a plan
describing the changes It wilt make
to ensure that all baseline FITARA
responsibilities are In place.
2, Partially addressed- Agency it
working to develop 9 plan describing
the changes it will make to ensure
that all baseline FITARA
responsibilities are In place.
3, Fully implemented - Agency has
developed and Implemented ifs
plan to ensure that all common
baseline FITARA responsibilities are
in place.
The extent to which the CIO and certify the
use of incremental development. For
example, if the CIO can certify that all the
Investments from
boreau/component/operating divisions A, B,
and C but not 0—are using incremental
development practices, then the statement
must identify that the CIO certifies that
investments from A, B, and C are using
incremental development practices.
EPA Statement
We rate this as a 2, partially addressed, as the
compressed budget submission schedules for
FY18 and FY19 have not allowed the CIO to
engage in formulation as envisioned in the
FITARA implementation plan.
Signature/Date
David Bloom
Deputy Chief Financial Officer
Q-4-
EC 4^
Dr. Steven Fine
Deputy Chief Information Officer
i
tPA has one major investment that has been
certified as employing incremental
development practices. tPA's activities in
migration to Agile to data have focused on
standing up support structures to assist IT
projects In migrating to Agile methodologies.
This includes a fellowship program to bring in
Agile e* pe rts and a Oevelope i*1 s G u I Id. In
addition, Agile development methodologies
arp discussed, as appropriate, at FITARA
acquisition reviews and IT Portfolio Reviews
EPA is planning to publi&h FITARA policy that
will clarify the certification process,
Dr. Steven Fine
Deputy Chief Information Officer
834
-------
IG's Comments on the FY 2019 President's Budget
1 ]-« -i IUIR
I hti HiMuuxitk \lick ,\iuH
Director
l ihe P-esuk-'m
Wviviiir^um. D.t' 2 ISK'5
I>u:jt V!' N'jK ,mo\:
As»>«marc (mm*. rhsrlawpcuvr tiocral Ac?rt" lk»7N. asamomVd. T S.t* npp >. ^
|tK;viiit!s thill.
lr m.-iMniiuinji » pw[\sc>l bullet in the "'rcy-Jay jit a|ipiitval, the licud
cfl.ib'i^hmcq* or iir-iijr»k\l S" vilm! r-irK -ik'H .-ih 'tide- . d); miv uimrwni'i ci* ijjc
.ificx.eil Imp. dor C'ciht.s with rctpcct s^Hje
."Tu." jinliscnl _ir-si 11' Y S Ml*' s * MjinilYjm chulcrmii; i"t>r the I' S. I'nvMuimK'nUl
tJro:cci"nn A^cnc}. 's^i-PA'm rtftlce or ln >t icciMiij-h'-li its igLucj
hvchiji •,! nii^ifin, Th,; Ulltcc tvf Maru^ufier.: and Hiui(u:t KiX'Hj :a|iiw nvs tar I Y 2»>l K Aiii:iutl»/tfi]
C'iin:tnuit.j- RvMitiitwii a> Uw tuM'. in,- ;ln* I'Y JO!*J mhpmsiui), A httJyc: u: t;ib level v>,.HAl de%iahili/.;;
t'!ic utG oJ have mi iHiiaeJiite i^uIac iir.pticl or, slii. ! Jff ]"•» jvnJiic;»'H ea.{ucil>. A.i siich, I K' thitti pt'ifoiitiira" ill-' dtilich i r'tiif nltk e hc'ii. Ihj, n-,i;nJa;on, ("Hi.' respf--r.Mbili!r4-i> e\p;K!lt v
required In !eJcai Its*..
I hcO|(i'« i*rfc ii),ni4yv*t*r»^; iim]-. t'ut rcprcsen" a
¦lubinaiiis.jt ¦".<"ill,i- id ihc ('Ur,*t hKhtv ;<< ^rudittc a pn»u^r return sui mKsnwn! ta luspftvci*-. 1 ui'licr.
ihc i Hti's irarkla't'ry auJi"^ Uid i.iVL^;t,L-it:jixK> tint c-LTr'artneJ hi ;iriV oll'vr cr'"r\ wb.hi:i iho L I'A. A*
.•mlnrA'h wipwvs 4;k» to li.it.tctl i^.Aiavs inxaic oii «tajct»!»:ahk fi>t In the iprr.y .u c 11 ihc
ta.kf.is>i!is,* tincstniL*),!.
I urgently and respectfully request iboi the OMB reeopriase tfce wturk ihe EPA OlCf has done in restiaping
the workforce, and Ihc greater vulnerability to Ihc agency that any reduction of DIG funding would
create, along with Ihe less of return on tswestBKirt it would represent, I also request that tfte OIG'#
budget request of S62 twltiM, which is coosisleiit with my FY 2017 request, be recofiMzed. if" not, as
835
-------
jHVWikJ >-\i ll-L' l.*iV|ni;iri Ck;ittjl Act. 1 uqu-tsl ihul :,1c«c LMiimtsri1:^ It? iirduikd i:, CuivsiuiMitiy Ihi:
l':c^iic:il"s Ht;d|jcl !r- CueiiUVS1*.
If you or your staff have any questions, or would litaMn «wi i,t «Uh . jvi. mj iv»4i nx
at (202} 56G-0S47 .>« • 1
Sincerely,
,» ¦ .. ¦ I ¦¦¦ ¦¦ ,
¦Arttair A, ElSins It, ** * ~
l\; tvpc'iji.-' 0; (ieiteta! i-n lnlivrsty j;su I ffkiciiH
Miifihv'w /, v'upu d i i-'fici;;! t ;«xim;L I:P.N
[Ja\;d Hlwm. Lk'PUh 1"niel t-in;ind;il Ollia'r H'i\
836
-------
EPA Budget by National Program Manager and Major Office
Dollars in Thousands
FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution
FY 2019 President's Budget
NPM Major Office
Pav ($10 Non-Pav ($10 Total ($10 FTE
Pav ($10 Non-Pav ($10 Total ($10 FTE
OA
Immediate Office
$4,724.0
$688.3
$5,412.3
23.8
$2,739.3
$524.0
$3,263.3
17.1
Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations
$5,700.1
$539.5
$6,239.5
51.6
$6,370.9
$206.0
$6,576.9
40.3
Office of Public Affairs
$5,969.7
$414.5
$6,384.2
38.9
$4,827.3
$147.0
$4,974.3
30.5
Office of Public Engagement
$1,844.2
$89.0
$1,933.2
12.0
$1,900.3
$53.0
$1,953.3
12.0
Office of Policy
$23,816.6
$4,336.1
$28,152.7
140.9
$26,478.6
$3,799.0
$30,277.6
139.0
Children's Health Protection
$2,430.6
$3,016.0
$5,446.6
15.4
$902.4
$539.0
$1,441.4
4.9
Environmental Education
$918.1
$6,176.9
$7,095.0
6.1
o
o
$2,000.0
$2,000.0
-
Office of Civil Rights
$3,388.8
$919.8
$4,308.5
24.6
$3,145.9
$346.0
$3,491.9
18.5
Executive Secretariat
$2,244.1
$144.2
$2,388.4
14.6
$1,741.0
$42.0
$1,783.0
11.0
Executive Services
$2,905.7
$313.7
$3,219.3
18.9
$2,360.7
$161.0
$2,521.7
14.9
Homeland Security
$1,951.5
$473.7
$2,425.2
9.7
$2,023.6
$305.0
$2,328.6
9.3
Science Advisory Board
$3,102.1
$741.4
$3,843.5
21.6
$3,674.2
$104.0
$3,778.2
18.7
Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization
$1,650.8
$1,184.4
$2,835.2
11.3
$465.6
$650.0
$1,115.6
2.4
Regional Resources
$26,579.9
$3,487.5
$30,067.4
190.9
$31,504.3
$2,504.0
$34,008.3
199.5
TOTAL
$87,226.0
$22,525.0
$109,751.0
580.3
$88,134.0
$11,380.0
$99,514.0
518.1
OAR
Immediate Office
$8,803.3
$11,533.8
$20,337.1
62.5
$7,253.0
$5,422.3
$12,675.3
42.7
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
$50,839.4
$17,735.6
$68,575.0
359.6
$38,654.1
$8,640.7
$47,294.8
240.7
Office of Atmospheric Programs
$36,715.9
$71,896.4
$108,612.3
228.7
$20,434.4
$12,488.4
$32,922.8
117.4
Office of Transportation and Air Quality
$51,951.7
$49,389.3
$101,341.0
343.2
$48,438.7
$25,297.9
$73,736.6
296.7
Office of Radiation and Indoor Air
$22,972.8
$14,818.9
$37,791.7
149.8
$10,863.9
$5,033.2
$15,897.0
67.0
Regional Resources
$85,510.9
$341,406.0
$426,916.9
604.8
$62,069.9
$174,944.5
$237,014.4
405.3
TOTAL
$256,794.0
$506,780.0
$763,574.0
1,748.6
$187,714.0
$231,827.0
$419,541.0
1,169.8
OARM
Immediate Office
$7,017.7
$23,538.6
$30,556.3
45.0
$8,383.0
$23,113.5
$31,496.5
37.0
Administrative Law Judges
$1,903.6
$197.5
$2,101.2
13.5
$2,364.5
$35.0
$2,399.5
12.5
Environmental Appeals Board
$2,038.8
$205.6
$2,244.4
12.3
$2,139.1
$27.0
$2,166.1
11.3
Office of Acquisition Management
$30,502.0
$10,015.5
$40,517.5
216.0
$24,042.8
$6,974.7
$31,017.5
158.8
Office of Administration
$19,244.5
$322,630.9
$341,875.4
97.8
$17,755.8
$324,296.4
$342,052.3
85.6
Office of Human Resources
$20,390.1
$5,906.2
$26,296.3
100.9
$19,578.3
$6,703.4
$26,281.7
88.6
Office of Grants & Debarment
$10,827.9
$4,375.0
$15,202.9
73.0
$7,889.0
$4,296.7
$12,185.8
49.0
OARM RTP
$9,429.0
$30,672.2
$40,101.2
84.9
$9,151.4
$31,954.3
$41,105.8
78.9
OARM Cincinnati Office
$9,720.4
$20,623.6
$30,344.0
76.7
$9,686.5
$17,102.9
$26,789.4
70.5
Regional Resources
$52,361.1
$40,348.8
$92,709.9
358.2
$43,273.5
$37,007.9
$80,281.4
267.0
TOTAL
$163,435.0
$458,514.0
$621,949.0
1,078.3
$144,264.0
$451,512.0
$595,776.0
859.2
* The Total Agency Resources do not include increases specified in the FY 2019 Budget Addendum.
837
-------
FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution
FY 2019 President's Budget
NPM Major Office
Pay (Sl<) Non-Pay (Sl<) Total (SK) FTE
Pay ($l<) Non-Pay ($l<) Total ($l<) FTE
OCFO
Immediate Office
$1,557.9
$2,219.1
$3,777.0
11.4
$1,744.8
$541.4
$2,286.1
11.4
Office of Budget
$5,876.1
$2,844.1
$8,720.2
43.0
$5,815.8
$1,740.3
$7,556.1
38.0
Office of Planning, Analysis and Accountability
$3,416.4
$538.2
$3,954.6
25.0
$3,290.5
$348.7
$3,639.2
21.5
Office of Technology Solutions
$5,876.1
$23,182.8
$29,058.8
43.0
$6,045.3
$27,230.3
$33,275.6
39.5
Office of Resource and Information Management
$1,639.8
$1,544.5
$3,184.3
12.0
$1,377.4
$839.2
$2,216.6
9.0
Office of the Controller
$22,916.8
$2,202.1
$25,118.9
167.7
$18,426.9
$1,982.7
$20,409.6
120.4
OCFO eEnterprise
$669.1
$298.4
$967.5
4.0
$708.1
$299.9
$1,007.9
3.5
Regional Resources
$28,104.9
$1,691.8
$29,796.7
215.7
$24,324.3
$1,237.6
$25,561.9
168.2
TOTAL
$70,057.0
$34,521.0
$104,578.0
521.8
$61,733.0
$34,220.0
$95,953.0
411.5
OCSPP
Immediate Office
$5,752.0
$2,065.7
$7,817.7
35.8
$5,715.8
$771.8
$6,487.6
30.5
Office of Pesticide Programs
$75,291.9
$14,934.0
$90,225.9
490.9
$67,232.7
$3,148.7
$70,381.4
410.9
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
$48,889.4
$30,344.2
$79,233.6
311.1
$31,153.2
$29,833.5
$60,986.6
192.7
Office of Science Coordination and Policy
$2,847.0
$6,477.3
$9,324.3
19.0
$862.1
$13.1
$875.2
4.9
Regional Resources
$20,763.7
$31,120.8
$51,884.5
154.2
$11,142.2
$8,233.9
$19,376.2
75.7
TOTAL
$153,544.0
$84,942.0
$238,486.0
1,011.0
$116,106.0
$42,001.0
$158,107.0
714.7
OECA
Immediate Office
$7,761.9
$2,112.9
$9,874.8
48.8
$6,362.1
$1,381.2
$7,743.2
36.3
Office of Civil Enforcement
$22,697.3
$4,193.6
$26,890.9
128.9
$18,933.8
$4,402.6
$23,336.4
98.9
Office of Criminal Enforcement, Forensics, and Training
$57,660.0
$7,327.2
$64,987.2
330.5
$47,898.0
$9,738.7
$57,636.6
240.1
Office of Compliance
$20,870.9
$15,393.0
$36,263.9
132.0
$18,291.5
$27,540.6
$45,832.1
103.8
Office of Environmental Justice
$3,050.3
$1,690.7
$4,741.1
21.0
o
o
JsCt
o
o
JsCt
$0.0
Office of Federal Activities
$3,983.0
$825.2
$4,808.3
23.6
o
o
JsCt
o
o
JsCt
$0.0
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
$2,358.8
$627.7
$2,986.5
14.7
$1,659.8
$564.6
$2,224.4
10.0
Office of Site Remediation Enforcement
$11,400.7
$27,271.4
$38,672.1
68.8
$8,085.3
$12,891.2
$20,976.4
42.9
Regional Resources
$310,471.0
$42,908.2
$353,379.2
2,118.4
$238,625.6
$14,142.3
$252,767.9
1,509.7
TOTAL
$440,254.0
$102,350.0
$542,604.0
2,886.7
$339,856.0
$70,661.0
$410,517.0
2,041.7
OEI
Office of the Chief Information Officer
$2,533.1
$4,218.5
$6,751.6
16.1
$2,793.6
$1,422.5
$4,216.1
12.8
Office of Business Operations & Services
$6,149.2
$2,119.8
$8,269.0
38.4
$5,179.3
$2,028.4
$7,207.7
31.8
Office of Digital Services & Technical Architecture
$4,349.1
$2,621.1
$6,970.2
26.9
$3,943.6
$1,730.5
$5,674.1
21.7
Office of Enterprise Information Programs
$7,307.4
$7,508.7
$14,816.1
48.0
$6,628.5
$5,767.3
$12,395.8
38.4
Office of Information Management
$10,711.9
$34,068.4
$44,780.3
64.8
$10,246.8
$20,870.4
$31,117.2
56.5
Office of Customer Advocacy, Policy & Portfolio Management
$6,067.9
$3,167.6
$9,235.6
36.7
$5,059.5
$2,179.9
$7,239.4
29.9
Office of Information Security & Privacy
$2,557.1
$5,865.1
$8,422.2
15.3
$2,258.8
$17,178.6
$19,437.5
13.9
Office of Information Technology Operations
$847.4
$3,664.9
$4,512.3
4.6
$1,845.9
$2,501.0
$4,346.9
10.0
Regional Resources
$22,164.9
$17,074.9
$39,239.8
153.4
$19,120.0
$12,054.3
$31,174.3
126.2
TOTAL
$62,688.0
$80,309.0
$142,997.0
404.2
$57,076.0
$65,733.0
$122,809.0
341.2
* The Total Agency Resources do not include increases specified in the FY 2019 Budget Addendum.
838
-------
FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution
FY 2019 President's Budget
NPM Major Office
Pay (Sl<) Non-Pay (Sl<) Total (SK) FTE
Pay ($l<) Non-Pay ($l<) Total ($l<) FTE
OGC
Immediate Office
$2,316.9
$30.0
$2,346.9
12.8
$1,603.6
$46.0
$1,649.6
8.7
Air and Radiation Law Office
$9,255.5
$7.0
$9,262.5
50.3
$6,267.7
$17.0
$6,284.7
33.8
Pesticides and Toxic Substances Law Office
$3,755.7
$6.0
$3,761.7
20.4
$3,282.5
$16.0
$3,298.5
17.7
Solid Waste and Emergency Response Law Office
$2,557.2
$25.0
$2,582.2
13.7
$1,966.3
$25.0
$1,991.3
10.4
Water Law Office
$3,683.6
$10.0
$3,693.6
20.0
$3,227.3
$10.0
$3,237.3
17.4
Civil Rights - Title VI
$1,797.2
$187.1
$1,984.3
12.0
$1,488.0
$300.0
$1,788.0
9.0
Other Legal Support
$15,924.8
$1,559.6
$17,484.4
100.6
$16,472.0
$2,195.0
$18,667.0
96.0
Regional Resources
$27,538.2
$768.3
$28,306.5
158.0
$23,787.6
$953.0
$24,740.6
118.4
TOTAL
$66,829.0
$2,593.0
$69,422.0
387.8
$58,095.0
$3,562.0
$61,657.0
311.4
OIG
Immediate Office
$827.1
$50.0
$877.1
4.4
$647.7
$157.0
$804.7
3.0
Office of Audit
$12,953.2
$789.4
$13,742.6
92.3
$10,143.5
$588.6
$10,732.1
61.9
Office of Congressional, Public Affairs and Management
$3,051.0
$174.8
$3,225.8
19.1
$2,389.2
$65.1
$2,454.3
12.8
Office of Chief of Staff
$6,583.9
$500.3
$7,084.2
43.4
$5,155.8
$1,932.0
$7,087.8
29.1
Office of Investigations
$10,887.4
$711.9
$11,599.3
66.6
$8,525.8
$1,279.5
$9,805.3
44.7
Office of Program Evaluation
$12,624.4
$771.6
$13,396.0
92.3
$9,886.0
$611.8
$10,497.8
61.9
TOTAL
$46,927.0
$2,998.0
$49,925.0
318.1
$36,748.0
$4,634.0
$41,382.0
213.4
OITA
Immediate Office
$1,107.1
$46.3
$1,153.4
6.0
$377.7
$46.3
$423.9
2.0
Office of Regional and Bilateral Affairs
$3,457.7
$2,796.3
$6,254.0
23.7
$907.9
$1,086.1
$1,994.1
5.0
Office of Global Affairs and Policy
$2,880.4
$304.0
$3,184.4
18.6
$907.9
$85.5
$993.4
5.0
Office of Management and International Services
$1,807.4
$912.0
$2,719.4
13.0
$730.8
$623.5
$1,354.3
4.0
American Indian Environmental Office
$2,931.3
$730.8
$3,662.1
19.0
$2,574.4
$1,149.6
$3,749.1
14.3
Regional Resources
$11,311.1
$66,489.6
$77,800.7
78.5
$8,741.2
$44,589.0
$53,305.2
55.9
TOTAL
$23,495.0
$71,279.0
$94,774.0
158.8
$14,240.0
$47,580.0
$61,820.0
86.2
OLEM
Immediate Office
$7,770.8
$4,981.4
$12,752.2
45.2
$10,138.9
$3,561.3
$13,700.2
29.2
Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Office
$2,198.2
$805.2
$3,003.4
13.2
$2,204.0
$799.3
$3,003.3
12.5
Office of Communication, Partnership, and Analysis
$2,467.5
$1,504.4
$3,971.9
15.3
$1,958.7
$998.4
$2,957.1
10.7
Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation
$24,542.5
$69,023.5
$93,566.0
147.0
$22,520.9
$36,023.3
$58,544.2
132.0
Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery
$25,697.7
$10,526.0
$36,223.6
166.9
$15,715.5
$6,588.4
$22,304.0
95.5
Office of Underground Storage Tanks
$4,161.2
$2,692.8
$6,853.9
25.5
$2,899.0
$261.1
$3,160.1
16.3
Office of Brownfields and Land Revitalization
$3,082.1
$12,306.5
$15,388.6
19.5
$2,120.9
$11,129.1
$13,250.0
12.1
Office of Emergency Management
$11,932.9
$28,693.1
$40,626.0
70.1
$9,867.5
$22,336.2
$32,203.8
55.1
Regional Resources
$264,479.2
$755,706.2
$1,020,185.4
1,814.8
$224,299.5
$457,860.9
$682,160.4
1,472.1
TOTAL
$346,332.0
$886,239.0
$1,232,571.0
2,317.5
$291,725.0
$539,558.0
$831,283.0
1,835.5
* The Total Agency Resources do not include increases specified in the FY 2019 Budget Addendum.
839
-------
FY 2018 Annualized Continuing Resolution
FY 2019 President's Budget
NPM Major Office
Pay ($K) Non-Pay (SK) Total (SK) FTE
Pay ($K) Non-Pay ($K) Total ($K) FTE
ORD
ORD Headquarters
548,553.8
$55,515.0
$104,068.8
310.3
$33,276.4
$40,168.0
$73,444.4
203.4
National Center for Environmental Research
$8,445.6
$42,132.7
$50,578.3
52.7
$638.5
$1,909.0
$2,547.5
3.9
National Exposure Research Laboratory
$48,809.9
$30,772.5
$79,582.4
310.8
$33,581.2
$11,198.0
$44,779.2
205.4
National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory
$67,699.0
$48,246.9
$115,945.9
473.7
$52,198.9
$18,870.0
$71,068.9
319.0
National Homeland Security Research Center
$7,175.1
$10,267.5
$17,442.6
43.7
$4,408.3
$3,720.0
$8,128.3
27.0
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
$40,602.4
$26,450.7
$67,053.1
278.0
$29,332.0
$10,359.0
$39,691.0
179.6
Office of the Science Advisor
$3,345.4
$3,508.7
$6,854.2
18.0
$2,078.6
$1,226.0
$3,304.6
12.7
National Center for Computational Toxicology
$5,306.3
$9,042.5
$14,348.7
35.5
$4,368.0
$2,505.0
$6,873.0
24.7
National Center for Environmental Assessment
$26,928.5
$12,276.5
$39,205.0
181.2
$16,605.2
$3,020.0
$19,625.2
99.3
TOTAL
$256,866.0
$238,213.0
$495,079.0
1,703.9
$176,487.0
$92,975.0
$269,462.0
1,075.0
OW
Immediate Office
$10,854.1
$5,721.6
$16,575.7
66.0
$10,144.2
$3,688.3
$13,832.6
59.1
Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
$26,112.0
$37,032.4
$63,144.4
166.0
$23,936.3
$18,977.7
$42,914.0
146.8
Office of Science and Technology
$17,915.9
$15,923.5
$33,839.4
113.3
$17,468.5
$9,505.9
$26,974.4
101.5
Office of Wastewater Management
$18,810.9
$27,842.8
$46,653.7
123.0
$19,738.0
$24,707.3
$44,445.3
115.6
Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds
$18,258.3
$22,481.3
$40,739.6
114.1
$12,691.1
$36,484.3
$49,175.4
73.2
Regional Resources
$190,646.8
$3,239,187.5
$3,429,834.4
1,343.4
$156,840.9
$2,140,456.4
$2,297,297.3
1,039.3
TOTAL
$282,598.0
$3,348,189.0
$3,630,787.0
1,925.8
$240,819.0
$2,233,820.0
$2,474,639.0
1,535.5
Subtotal Acencv Resources
$2,257,045.0 $5,839,452.0 $8,096,497.0 15,042.8
$1,812,997.0 $3,829,463.0 $5,642,460.0 11,113.2
Less Rescission of Prior Year Funds
($90,348.0)
($220,460.0)
Reimbursable FTE
365.3
587.6
Total Agency Resources
$2,257,045.0 $5,839,452.0 $8,006,149.0 15,408.1
$1,812,997.0 $3,829,463.0 $5,422,000.0 11,700.8
* The Total Agency Resources do not include increases specified in the FY 2019 Budget Addendum.
840
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Reform Plan
EPA's reform plan represents a series of projects that EPA will complete to implement the goals
of Executive Order 13781: Comprehensive Plan for Reorganizing the Executive Branch. The
deployment of a Lean Management System will serve as the foundation for EPA's reforms,
allowing us to manage all of our programs more effectively. The Administrator's focus on
cooperative federalism is core to our reform agenda. We will focus on our relationship with states
and tribes, empowering them to deliver environmental protection more efficiently, by tailoring our
oversight activities, providing additional flexibility in how they spend funds, and reviewing
permits and State Implementation Plans more quickly. We also will focus on providing better
service to our external customers (by streamlining permitting processes, reducing mandatory
reporting burden, aligning our infrastructure investments, and responding to Freedom of
Information Act requests in timely manner), as well as our internal customers (by speeding up
procurement). Our plan also examines the Agency's physical footprint and proposes ways to
realize cost savings. While we did not project savings (or upfront costs) from these reforms in our
FY 2019 President's Budget, we do expect to include these impacts in future submissions, once
our plans are finalized.
Deploying a Lean Management System
EPA will deploy a Lean Management System (LMS) that is designed to routinely monitor,
evaluate, and assess our general operations and ensure progress in meeting our reform agenda
objectives. Successful implementation of the LMS will improve the paradigm for how EPA
responds to performance issues that commonly impact our ability to meet strategic goals,
objectives, and expectations. EPA will revamp our performance measures to ensure they reflect
value to the American People, stakeholders, and customers. The key elements of the LMS include
developing cascading performance measures, instituting monthly and quarterly performance
reviews, and establishing a culture of continuous improvement. This concept naturally creates
transparency and accountability at all levels of the Agency.
Speeding up Environmental Permitting
For many stakeholders, EPA and States take longer than is actually necessary to issue
environmental permits, even when EPA is meeting statutory or regulatory deadlines. EPA will
improve the efficiency and effectiveness of federal permitting programs through several
mechanisms, which include conducting targeted Lean business process improvement events on
EPA-issued permit processes and implementing the results of those events. As part of this process,
EPA will collect system-wide data on permit status, backlog and throughput. Following the Lean
events, EPA will target and track improvements in permitting processes by gathering, analyzing
and using agencywide data to track results and collect best practices. In addition, EPA will
systematically review and amend any internal policies and procedures related to permitting that
could be streamlined, as appropriate, to further improve the efficiency and effectiveness of federal
permitting programs.
841
-------
Reducing Unnecessary Industry Reporting Burdens
The intent of a reform effort on reporting and record keeping burden is to provide greater
awareness of the paperwork burden we place on regulated entities, develop a process for managing
that burden for continuous improvement, and reducing burden where possible. A positive trend
would be reduction in EPA's overall Information Collection Request (ICR) burden. This effort
will review and analyze our current process for developing and renewing ICRs as well as
conducting Lean events around specific ICRs to determine burden reduction opportunities and
how to accomplish them.
Maximizing Infrastructure Investments
EPA lacks a process for identifying opportunities to link its various infrastructure and community
assistance program resources to spur similar, non-Agency investments with the goal of enhancing
the collective impact those resources have in communities where current infrastructure funding
levels are insufficient to address deficiencies adversely impacting human health, environmental
protection, and economic development. EPA needs to reimagine EPA infrastructure and
community assistance programs (e.g., the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, Drinking Water
State Revolving Fund, Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act, Environmental Justice,
Community Revitalization, and Brownfields Area-Wide Planning grant programs) to better align
EPA investments with each other and with other investments in pursuit of economic revitalization
and improved environmental outcomes. In doing so, EPA must determine how best to serve
disadvantaged communities, maximize leveraging of private investment to improve the economy,
and protect public health and the environment.
Examining EPA Field Presence
The Agency has many different organizational and locational field presence models that are
currently in place. For example, some regions have smaller field offices in close proximity to its
stakeholders and customers along with the main regional offices, while others work mainly out of
a single regional office. Some are organized by environmental media (.e.g, land, air, and water),
while others are organized by lines of business. Some functions currently performed in regional
offices benefit from close proximity to customers or a particular geographic location, while others
could be performed as successfully or more efficiently centrally. Our mission support programs
also have satellite sites in several locations across the country. Understanding why offices are
where they are, what functions they perform, and how they are organized, will help the Agency
make informed decisions about the most effective models to deliver and support its mission and
better support our stakeholders and customers.
Tailoring State Oversight
The EPA recognizes the need to improve the EPA/state relationship to make the best use of limited
EPA/state resources. This involves being more strategic about when and how state oversight
activities are conducted. Together with its stakeholders, the EPA is undertaking an effort to
develop a comprehensive system designed to evaluate state and local implementation of federal
environmental programs. The intent is to help states maintain strong performance and ensure a
level playing field, by using a systematic method to evaluate state environmental programs which
will include, allocating resources effectively and targeting assistance where needed while adding
value to the States as the customer of the oversight function. The effort involves understanding
842
-------
current practices, and engaging stakeholders, followed by defining and launching a revised
oversight approach.
Improving Management of EPA Laboratories
There are several drivers for managing and operating EPA's laboratory enterprise in a more
strategic, corporate, and efficient manner, including recent reports by the Government
Accountability Office and the National Academy of Sciences. While EPA has recognized these
drivers, our efforts to date have not been transformational. The current EPA laboratory enterprise
is operated as distinct Regional, Program, and Research laboratories, which, in FY 2016, included
30 laboratory facilities that occupied 3.4 million total square feet and employed over 4,000 federal
and non-federal staff at an annual cost of $658 million. This project starts with the identification
and implementation of an enterprise-wide framework to manage laboratory capabilities and
capacity to meet the scientific demands associated with achieving the Agency's mission.
Institution of this framework will increase the efficiency and effectiveness of Agency laboratory
operations and break down corporate barriers to provide a more resilient and agile laboratory
infrastructure that will position the Agency to be responsive to a wide variety scientific and
technical needs, while also responding to the realities of operating at reduced resource levels.
Enhancing Human Resources (HR) Shared Services Centers
EPA delivers HR support to its workforce through a variety of organizations and support models,
both centralized, through three HR Shared Service Centers, and decentralized, with HR resources
embedded in organizations. In order to provide the most cost-effective service to employees and
managers, EPA will examine our HR service model to determine if efficiency can be obtained
through realigning organizations, streamlining management layers and examining the facility
footprint. The goal would be to improve customer service, provide more consistent HR advice,
and foster increased confidence from customers.
Speeding Up the EPA Acquisition Process
Annually, EPA spends nearly $1.5 billion and processes an average of 15,000 procurement actions
on contracts to deliver our mission and program objectives. In FY 2016, EPA identified acquisition
management as an Agency enterprise risk because the process to award contracts was negatively
impacted and slowed by insufficient planning, backlog of work, and absence of experienced staff.
For example, there is no consistent agencywide look at the acquisition planning process and no
mechanism to measure how long this process takes from the identification of the customer's need
to the development and submission of a finished procurement request package. Additionally,
multiple contracts have historically been issued for the same services, creating unnecessary work.
To most effectively acquire the supplies and services needed to meet our mission objectives, EPA
needs to analyze and improve our systems and processes and the organizational alignment of the
acquisition function.
843
-------
Eliminate the State Implementation Plan (SIP) Backlog
The State Implementation Plan project seeks to identify and implement process improvements that
will enable EPA to routinely take action on SIPs for meeting National Ambient Air Quality
Standards within the Clean Air Act deadline of 18 months, and to eliminate the current backlog of
SIP actions. Over 200 SIPs are submitted to EPA for approval each year. There is currently a
backlog of over 350 SIPs, despite robust efforts that have reduced the backlog by 49 percent in
recent years. Improving the timeliness of EPA's process for taking actions on SIPs will reduce the
risk of deadline suits that impact the Agency's ability to prioritize actions consistent with the needs
of state partners and air quality improvement goals. This effort will consider the need to make
progress on both new and backlogged SIPs, as well as variability in the number and complexity of
SIP actions across the country, among other factors.
Speeding Up Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Responses
Under EPA's decentralized approach for processing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests,
offices implement EPA FOIA procedures in different ways. This adds a layer of complexity to
many of the requests EPA currently receives. For instance, in the past several years the number of
FOIA requests that involve more than one office or region has increased significantly. Or a
requester makes the identical or similar requests to multiple regions or offices. Such requests
require coordination among offices to ensure consistency. At the same time, the complexity and
volume of documents required to be searched for, collected and reviewed has multiplied
dramatically. The Agency's current decentralized approach for processing FOIA requests puts a
significant burden on Agency staff. Furthermore, the decentralized approach contributes to a lack
of consistency in record searches, final responses, and metrics, which are reported to the
Department of Justice. To address these and other challenges, EPA staff are evaluating the
Agency's approach for processing FOIA requests and will implement agencywide changes. The
goal of these changes will be to improve compliance with statutory requirements, reduce the
overall burden to EPA staff for processing FOIA requests, improve the consistency of responses,
and increase public satisfaction with the EPA FOIA process; thereby, reducing the Agency's
exposure to appeals and lawsuits under FOIA.
Increasing Flexibility in State and Tribal Assistance
EPA, states, and tribes are not getting the full efficiency and effectiveness benefits inherent in
Performance Partnership Grants (PPG) as evidenced by the FY2017 utilization rates of 49.8
percent (states) and 55.4 percent (tribes) of eligible categorical grant funds managed through PPGs.
The PPG program allows states and tribes who receive multiple grants from EPA to combine
funding from 20 eligible categorical grants into one multi-program grant with a single budget,
utilize flexibilities, direct resources to the highest needs, and shift work across programs, all with
reduced reporting requirements and administrative burdens. Through outreach and coordination
with states, tribes, and internal customers, EPA will identify barriers and improvements to PPG
utilization and flexibilities. Possible improvements include rigorous evaluation of and changes to
program requirements and implementation, policy-level changes, and training on the duality of
PPG flexibility and accountability.
844
-------
Seeking Organizational Efficiencies
Although not a formal Reform Plan project as part of Executive Order 13781, the Agency is
continuing to review its organizational structure to identify efficiencies and to optimize effort in
priority areas. In addition, some Reform efforts involve organizational adjustments to better
support the priority work. These ongoing efforts will continue in tandem with other process and
program restructuring to focus on core business functions, consolidate and streamline functions,
and also potentially to fill gaps that are identified through the implementation of the Lean
Management System. Both small reorganizations and larger ones will result, along with informal
internal realignments. There is a nexus with some Reform projects but these efforts are not
expected to impact resources significantly and do not impact the budget structure presented for FY
2019.
Several reorganizations were initiated or proposed in FY 2018:
• Consolidating the FOIA policy and procedural staff with the legal oversight staff is
expected to increase the effectiveness and visibility of the Agency's FOIA program.
• Consolidating NEPA work into the Office of Policy, which will support our commitment
to streamline the permitting processes by ensuring the ability to quickly elevate and resolve
issues which will help expedite reviews and approvals.
• The Agency's transboundary waste program will consolidate into the larger RCRA
program, creating programmatic efficiencies.
• Shifting Environmental Justice work to the Office of Policy will raise the profile and allow
for better coordination across Agency programs as well as with federal partners to ensure
community needs are reflected in our actions and investments.
• Combining the Office of Environmental Information with the Office of Administration and
Resources Management is a larger effort which will create efficiencies through housing
much of the infrastructure support for the agency in one entity.
845
------- |